State of GA

Well guys, hate to break it to you, but that flight school over here in Renton that I speak so highly of currently has about 1/4 to 1/3 female students.

What!!?? You mean they let girls fly airplanes??? The real kind of girls with vaginas? Say it ain't so!! If they let this spread, aviation will be lost to us forever!

Please, please don't ever teach them how to shoot a gun!! If they end up at shooting ranges, well it's game over I guess... :cryin:
 
Our local skydiving operation has three extremely attractive women pilots/chute packers.

It has not hurt their business. :)
 
Extremely attractive woman chute packer.

I like the sound of that. :thumbsup:
 
Gen Xer here. Heard the same "lazy bones, slacker" complaints about my generation, too. I had the chance to teach some college courses back a few years, and my observation is this: There will always be a percentage of the population that are engaged, and the rest along for the ride. That's never going to change. My guess is that it's probably remained constant for most of "surplus civilization" through the ages.

But lets look at the cost side of the equation, and I can only go with what I know:

A private ticket in 1987-90 was probably around $3000-3500. 152s were $40/hr and 172s. At my airport, they were less expensive if you joined "the club". But using that number, 152s should run around $83/hr and $100/hr in today's dollars.

Let's assume that your PVT cost $3000 in 1987. That same money is about $6500 today. The actual number today is nearly, but not quite, twice that amount.

Career students, zero to hero (PVT-CFII/MEI) could expect to pay around $15-18k, or around $30-32k. Prices to day start $60k and up.

One other data point. In 1975, a reasonably equipped 182 was around $32k new (assuming reasonable avionics for the time, and "options", like fueling steps and the like). That same 182 SHOULD cost $141k today, but is closer to 3.5 times that price (albiet with much nicer avionics and the fueling steps are free). Most other aircraft were/are on the same ballistic price arc, which really started in 1982-83.

As one would expect, with such high prices, volume is low. As a comparason, a 1975 Camaro with the nice trim package (V8) and AC was $4500, which is $20k today, which today might not even get you the bottom rung model.

OTOH, lets look at the demand side: Back in 1985, you had just witnessed the transition from the single family provider to where both parents worked. I'm a child of the 70s. Dad worked, mom stayed home. Upper Middling house (by the standard of the day), meant 2000 square feet for parents and 4 kids, a couple of used cars. Not much in the way of ancillary costs beyond food and shelter. Electric, water, house payment. One TV. Eating out was a rare event. No cable bill, no cell phone bill (let alone 6), no intrawebz, no new SUVs in the driveway, no hockey coach or dance lessons.

I played little league, which had a nominal fee. Most of us went to state school, which beyond living expenses, was only marginally more expensive than the local Community College. Private College was only nominally more expensive.

My dad ran his own business. There were people doing better with less work (Drs, successful lawyers), but most of their homes and ours were only different by degrees, and not by orders of magnitude. Many people had defined benefit retirements, which required no contribution on their part, and health insurance was also provided by the employer, or available at a nominal cost (albeit the benefits were more limited than what we now see...a case of 'if you build it, they will come').

So what, Richman, what's your point? Get to it.

There is a lot of stuff about GA today that is strikingly common from 1928, 38, 48 etc. Anyone can read back issues of Flying Magazine on Google Books all the way back to 1926. To do so is to see the shock of familiarity: Pesky federal regulators, expensive equipment, ads crying about a pilot shortage and what not.

That said, people today are dying the financial death of a thousand cuts.

Every dollar spent on a hobby is a dollar less saved for retirement (which was previously covered). The transition from paid retirement to self saving is probably one of the slickest deals ever perpetrated on the American public and an unending boon to the financial services industry...free money every two weeks artificially inflate stock values tremendously.

People have to pay for insurance for overpriced medical care....they face financial ruin should they not do so, and get REALLY sick. The stampede into this care causes the providers to spiral the prices up...what are you going to do, say no?

TV/Radio/Intrawebs convince us daily of what we really need. Peer pressure causes us to force our children to expensive hobbies. College, like medical care, has spiraled in cost because people say "you HAVE to do it!".

Both parents are required to work, meaning more meals are purchased, not made.

"They" even figured out a way to separate the public from their normal equity reserve...the value of their home. I can almost hear the conversation when they came up with this: "Well Bob, the American public has a vast amount of money saved in their home....how can we extract that money and get a cut?".

Every time you turn around, it's a death by factions. Both in income and expenses.

That leads precious little money or time to spend on a hobby that has gotten exponentially more expensive.

Richman
 
Last edited:
Gen Xer here. Heard the same "lazy bones, slacker" complaints about my generation, too...

...That leads precious little money or time to spend on a hobby that has gotten exponentially more expensive.

Richman

Wrong. The only problem is young boys are too girly. They're too skeert to fly.;)
 
Richman... Gen Xer here myself, and what you said is totally true. It's absolutely everywhere. GE doesn't make enough money on light bulbs so they go to congress and outlaw cheap bulbs instead your paying $10 for fluorescents that don't work half the time and then find out there's weird components like "ballasts" in your roof that are the real failure so you have to call an electrician to fix a light fixture. It's madness, and it's not just that. It's unilever and nestle operating as oligarchies which cuts the size of everything you buy from 32 oz to 30 to 28 and on and on.

Your 401k wants to charge you .5% to manage your money, I mean really what the **** do they actually do other than give money to the execs to get the 401k contract and the middle class is more and more beleaguered. It's outrageous and the problem is that Republicans and Democrats are all totally in on it, but because 1/3 of us is fighting one culture war and the other 1/3 is fighting the other side in the culture war, the politicians are laughing all the way to the bank. But most vote for one party or another because "war on women" or "marriage is one man one woman" and we all suffer. Instead of they all are crooks and need to be broken up. People of the same trade seldom meet together whether for merriment or diversion but the conversation turns to a conspiracy against the public. And that includes politicians.
 
Richman... Gen Xer here myself, and what you said is totally true. It's absolutely everywhere. GE doesn't make enough money on light bulbs so they go to congress and outlaw cheap bulbs instead your paying $10 for fluorescents that don't work half the time and then find out there's weird components like "ballasts" in your roof that are the real failure so you have to call an electrician to fix a light fixture. It's madness, and it's not just that. It's unilever and nestle operating as oligarchies which cuts the size of everything you buy from 32 oz to 30 to 28 and on and on.

Your 401k wants to charge you .5% to manage your money, I mean really what the **** do they actually do other than give money to the execs to get the 401k contract and the middle class is more and more beleaguered. It's outrageous and the problem is that Republicans and Democrats are all totally in on it, but because 1/3 of us is fighting one culture war and the other 1/3 is fighting the other side in the culture war, the politicians are laughing all the way to the bank. But most vote for one party or another because "war on women" or "marriage is one man one woman" and we all suffer. Instead of they all are crooks and need to be broken up. People of the same trade seldom meet together whether for merriment or diversion but the conversation turns to a conspiracy against the public. And that includes politicians.

I understand your rage against the politicians, but against business? They are just predictably performing, exactly as human nature dictates, inside the framework that the bureaucrats design and allow.

If people don't like what GE does, they don't have to buy GE light bulbs at all. People simply don't have that kind of choice with government services.
 
It's the corruption in the process that offends me, incandescents were outlawed because there was no money in it. Nestlé and Unilever are not in any real competition but the government does not crack down on their anti competitive practices because they are corrupted. I can't buy light bulbs from businesses other than the majors because they outlawed the products that were cheap to make with low barriers to entry. Merrill Lynch and the major financials gamble with money and when they win they get 95% of the winnings and when they lose you and I get hit with the loss. The weird thing is, you'd probably never guess of these two parties which party I reliably vote for.

The middle class is getting squeezed because that's where the money is. I bought an expensive tv 10 years ago, but it's stopped working because the tv manufacturer used cheap capacitors from a foreign supplier, the expectation us pay $500 for TV repair, or buy a new tv to keep the GDP number up, just buy the new TV and put it on credit. I bought new capacitors for $4 and fixed the tv. It's worked great for the last 5 years.
 
It's the corruption in the process that offends me, incandescents were outlawed because there was no money in it. Nestlé and Unilever are not in any real competition but the government does not crack down on their anti competitive practices because they are corrupted. I can't buy light bulbs from businesses other than the majors because they outlawed the products that were cheap to make with low barriers to entry. Merrill Lynch and the major financials gamble with money and when they win they get 95% of the winnings and when they lose you and I get hit with the loss. The weird thing is, you'd probably never guess of these two parties which party I reliably vote for.

The middle class is getting squeezed because that's where the money is. I bought an expensive tv 10 years ago, but it's stopped working because the tv manufacturer used cheap capacitors from a foreign supplier, the expectation us pay $500 for TV repair, or buy a new tv to keep the GDP number up, just buy the new TV and put it on credit. I bought new capacitors for $4 and fixed the tv. It's worked great for the last 5 years.

This will soon be Spin Zone fodder, but there are a lot more things at play here WRT the death of the middle class than just Big Business and government corruption.

Throw in unions, women doubling the workforce (and thereby halving its value), and good, old fashioned laziness have whip-sawed the Middle Class.

Don't forget, our incredible wealth after WWII was largely due to one thing: Our industries hadn't been bombed out of existence. When you're the only tractor plant left standing, guess what? You sell a bajillion tractors.

Somehow, some way, this stroke of historic luck was twisted into a paradigm that said "We deserve this." -- and the unions were emboldened to demand more, and more, and more...

...until they priced themselves right out of the world labor market. Capital always flows to the lowest costs, and when the war-torn Japanese said "We will do it for less!", who could blame them? And their factories started churning, as ours began to struggle.

And so it goes. At some point, we may have to accept the fact that the 1940s, 50s, and 60s were a halcyon era of American prosperity that was built more on the luck of the victors than on anything inherently "American".

In other words, we may have to accept a somewhat diminished future, by comparison to our glorious recent past. The real question, in my mind, is "How much diminished?".
 
Wrong. The only problem is young boys are too girly. They're too skeert to fly.;)
Besides which, it seems that people are trying to sell it both ways. It's safe, but also a thrill seeker sport. Maybe it appears too boring to thrill-seekers. I'm pretty sure it appears too procedural, at least once they are introduced to what they will need to learn.
 
You are right about it quickly moving away from the question of the state of GA, if I may say and move on... You are right about the causes being multilayered and every one you mentioned is true and correct, perhaps then this issue is a disease in the culture, one where people do not "walk with their eyes turned skyward;" but instead, for once you gave tasted a smartphone you will walk with your eyes turned downward for the petty fulfillment of a Facebook post and 15 likes from people you cared way too much about when you were 16.
 
I don't want to get this "spin zoned", because I think this is a valuable topic.

That said, like Gov98, I'm not some nut-fudge fringer or prepper...But the entire game is rigged UNLESS you pay attention and are selective with what you do. But this is nothing new...it was like this in the day of the British, the times of the "Trusts" and it's true today. The most important thing to realize that the media is NOT your friend....on any side. What they do today is nothing more than "journalism by press release". Every player in the game and every story has an agenda behind it, and that objective is almost always to get you to make some kind of financial move...swap your funds in your 401k (fees), take out an equity loan for that new boat (interest & fees) or make you feel guilty about your carbon footprint, so you buy an expensive LED bulb (high margins). All carefully calculated to separate you from your money.

Even the simplest of tasks are made to seem complex, so that you enlist only "qualified service personnel using factory parts". I had the compressor seize up in my car. The A/C place wanted more than the car was worth to fix it. A couple of C-notes at RockAuto, a skinned knuckle or two, and a $90 purge and fill, and I was back in business at a fraction of the cost, and I'm hardly Mr. Fixit.

If you can resist the Jedi Mind Trick, you should be able to do OK.

Lets go back to the "State of GA". I've long postulated that the VERY high price of GA is a compounding effect. Look at all the parts and components in your typical GA aircraft.

Speaking VERY generically, if each component has an "aviation tax" (for whatever reason....like insurance, certification costs, whatever you want to assign to the huge markup in costs), and it takes 10 components to go into an assembly, and there are 10 assemblies (each with their own "tax") that go into a module, and 10 modules (again, each "taxed") that go into an airplane (which has one final "tax" added), you can see that the compounding effect of the "aviation tax" rapidly increases the price.

There's no other way to explain why a fully depreciated design, like a 172, that is built out of 1950s technology using completely garden variety materials & techniques, should cost $400k.

Until you can break that "tax" chain, GA will remain very expensive.

Still, it seemed under control until after 9/11. Before that time, even if you exclude the price of fuel (which was cheap...heck, I remember paying $0.95/gal for unleaded in 2001), it was still sort-of-kind-of reasonable in the overall scheme of things.

After 9/11, costs went on this weird ballistic arc and never recovered. It started with insurance, and just seemed to spread to everything else. Everyone turned into a great big chicken. Clubs & rental outfits dried up, and vast numbers of airplanes just seemed to vanish.

Richman
 
Last edited:
I don't want to get this "spin zoned", because I think this is a valuable topic.

That said, like Gov98, I'm not some nut-fudge fringer or prepper...But the entire game is rigged UNLESS you pay attention and are selective with what you do. But this is nothing new...it was like this in the day of the British, the times of the "Trusts" and it's true today. The most important thing to realize that the media is NOT your friend....on any side. What they do today is nothing more than "journalism by press release". Every player in the game and every story has an agenda behind it, and that objective is almost always to get you to make some kind of financial move...swap your funds in your 401k (fees), take out an equity loan for that new boat (interest & fees) or make you feel guilty about your carbon footprint, so you buy an expensive LED bulb (high margins). All carefully calculated to separate you from your money.

Even the simplest of tasks are made to seem complex, so that you enlist only "qualified service personnel using factory parts". I had the compressor seize up in my car. The A/C place wanted more than the car was worth to fix it. A couple of C-notes at RockAuto, a skinned knuckle or two, and a $90 purge and fill, and I was back in business at a fraction of the cost, and I'm hardly Mr. Fixit.

If you can resist the Jedi Mind Trick, you should be able to do OK.

Lets go back to the "State of GA". I've long postulated that the VERY high price of GA is a compounding effect. Look at all the parts and components in your typical GA aircraft.

Speaking VERY generically, if each component has an "aviation tax" (for whatever reason....like insurance, certification costs, whatever you want to assign to the huge markup in costs), and it takes 10 components to go into an assembly, and there are 10 assemblies (each with their own "tax") that go into a module, and 10 modules (again, each "taxed") that go into an airplane (which has one final "tax" added), you can see that the compounding effect of the "aviation tax" rapidly increases the price.

There's no other way to explain why a fully depreciated design, like a 172, that is built out of 1950s technology using completely garden variety materials & techniques, should cost $400k.

Until you can break that "tax" chain, GA will remain very expensive.

Still, it seemed under control until after 9/11. Before that time, even if you exclude the price of fuel (which was cheap...heck, I remember paying $0.95/gal for unleaded in 2001), it was still sort-of-kind-of reasonable in the overall scheme of things.

After 9/11, costs went on this weird ballistic arc and never recovered. It started with insurance, and just seemed to spread to everything else. Everyone turned into a great big chicken. Clubs & rental outfits dried up, and vast numbers of airplanes just seemed to vanish.

Richman

This is just my opinion!

If the media just wanted us to buy, buy, buy. they would actually be PROMOTING Airplanes. They would advertise how efficient they are and how you can get to point A and B faster. But they don't, they mention how dangerous they are and they want you to believe that they all "Fall out of the sky"? Why do they do that? Airplanes aren't safe by any means but riding a motorcycle or driving a car, (Especially here in Florida) is just as dangerous. The media doesn't promote the dangers in that because they want you to go out to buy stuff in your car, (Most people in the U.S.A. drive to the supermarket). Most things that are on the news is fear based and they lump Airplanes in the mix.
 
This is just my opinion!

If the media just wanted us to buy, buy, buy. they would actually be PROMOTING Airplanes. They would advertise how efficient they are and how you can get to point A and B faster. But they don't, they mention how dangerous they are and they want you to believe that they all "Fall out of the sky"? Why do they do that? Airplanes aren't safe by any means but riding a motorcycle or driving a car, (Especially here in Florida) is just as dangerous. The media doesn't promote the dangers in that because they want you to go out to buy stuff in your car, (Most people in the U.S.A. drive to the supermarket). Most things that are on the news is fear based and they lump Airplanes in the mix.

But they're not more efficient and faster. I'm a pilot and I love to fly. I've done the math over and over and (admittedly I live next to a major airplane hub at Orlando International) there is a very small ring from about 300-500 miles where, IF there is not a major airport, I can get there faster by C-172. But I'll still have to rent a car when i get there. And I've spent roughly $100/hour for the plane & fuel.

I flew to the Keys a few years ago to pick my daughter up form Sea Camp. I took my wife and we went a day early. It was a fantastic trip that we still talk about. It cost me > $500 for the plane & fuel. It took 2 hours each way instead of ~5 by car. I spent ~$80 on the rental car. (Lodging, food etc. is a wash-I'd have bought it either way.) Instead of $80 in fuel for my car. Now the time and enjoyment was worth it, that time.

If I wanted to go to Jacksonville, That's 2 hours by car-door to door. By plane it's 1 hour in the air, but still 2 hours door-to-door. And I'd have to rent a car. And it'll cost ~$100 for the airplane & fuel.

Unless your time is very valuable, it's just not cost effective. And it's often not faster. It's not faster than driving if it's closer than ~150 miles. (There are a few exceptions, check out getting from Orlando to Cedar Key by car-4 hours!).

If it's more than 700 miles, it's faster by commercial. And usually quite a bit cheaper. Not to mention more reliable.

I still choose to travel by flying myself places because I enjoy it. But it's not efficient in money and often not efficient in time. Don't oversell it-it backfires.

John
 
But they're not more efficient and faster. I'm a pilot and I love to fly. I've done the math over and over and (admittedly I live next to a major airplane hub at Orlando International) there is a very small ring from about 300-500 miles where, IF there is not a major airport, I can get there faster by C-172. But I'll still have to rent a car when i get there. And I've spent roughly $100/hour for the plane & fuel.

I flew to the Keys a few years ago to pick my daughter up form Sea Camp. I took my wife and we went a day early. It was a fantastic trip that we still talk about. It cost me > $500 for the plane & fuel. It took 2 hours each way instead of ~5 by car. I spent ~$80 on the rental car. (Lodging, food etc. is a wash-I'd have bought it either way.) Instead of $80 in fuel for my car. Now the time and enjoyment was worth it, that time.

If I wanted to go to Jacksonville, That's 2 hours by car-door to door. By plane it's 1 hour in the air, but still 2 hours door-to-door. And I'd have to rent a car. And it'll cost ~$100 for the airplane & fuel.

Unless your time is very valuable, it's just not cost effective. And it's often not faster. It's not faster than driving if it's closer than ~150 miles. (There are a few exceptions, check out getting from Orlando to Cedar Key by car-4 hours!).

If it's more than 700 miles, it's faster by commercial. And usually quite a bit cheaper. Not to mention more reliable.

I still choose to travel by flying myself places because I enjoy it. But it's not efficient in money and often not efficient in time. Don't oversell it-it backfires.

John

I agree with you!

How on earth do you get to Key West in 5 hours from Orlando? I've done that trip many, many, many times. Orlando's traffic is legendary and if you have the misses, (If your wife is anything like mine) she is not going to want to sit in a car for 6 hours straight, food breaks, bathroom breaks will frequent. With an airplane you can get there in 2 hours from Tampa very "doable" plus a place like Key West you don't really need to rent a car you can park your airplane and walk it's not too far at all to walk places or rent a scooter, (The beach is right across the street from the airport) if you need to get around faster. Or you could make it a day trip and hang out at the beach and fly back home at night.

Your right:

0-100 Miles: Car

100-600 Miles: Your own airplane, (Some places commercial doesn't fly or is limited)

600+ Miles: Commercial
 
I agree with you!

How on earth do you get to Key West in 5 hours from Orlando? [snip]

I didn't say Key West. I said "the keys". In fact it was Marathon which google maps say is 5:47 from my house. I can usually beat google maps times (barring bad traffic) and my Mrs. is a great traveler, so food/bathroom breaks etc. are usually minimal.

I'd say even 100-200 is really hard to beat the car times door to door. It takes me 1/2 hour to get to the airport from my house. Add in pre-flight and ground time and it's a minima of 45 minute and usually more like an hour before I can get in the air.

John
 
I didn't say Key West. I said "the keys". In fact it was Marathon which google maps say is 5:47 from my house. I can usually beat google maps times (barring bad traffic) and my Mrs. is a great traveler, so food/bathroom breaks etc. are usually minimal.

I'd say even 100-200 is really hard to beat the car times door to door. It takes me 1/2 hour to get to the airport from my house. Add in pre-flight and ground time and it's a minima of 45 minute and usually more like an hour before I can get in the air.

John


Ahhh....My bad!

I guess I was looking for Key West because there and Bahia is where I frequent the most. Sorry about that. :redface:
 
But they're not more efficient and faster. I'm a pilot and I love to fly. I've done the math over and over and (admittedly I live next to a major airplane hub at Orlando International) there is a very small ring from about 300-500 miles where, IF there is not a major airport, I can get there faster by C-172. But I'll still have to rent a car when i get there. And I've spent roughly $100/hour for the plane & fuel.

This is the truth. However, for some that have a regular need to travel to some odd ball part of the country not served well by the airlines, GA can be a lot faster and cost competitive. To use your native state of FL as an example, if a couple lived in Palatka near the airport, (28J) and had a second home in, or near Marathon (KMTH) then flying themselves will likely be the fastest way there.

I suspect a couple like that would have to drive their car from Palatka to Daytona Beach, or Orlando, or maybe even up to Jacksonville to get to an airline that would take them to Miami. Then they have to pay for parking on the car. If they don't plan their trips months in advance, the airline tickets aren't going to be cheap, likely they will spend around $700-800 for the two of them round trip. Once they get to Miami, they have to rent a car and drive down to Marathon.

In this case, flying their own plane is cost competitive with airline travel at a fraction the time required for this trip. However, driving their own car Palatka direct Marathon is likely still the cheapest, but longest time. Without their own airplane, I suspect this couple won't be visiting Marathon very often.

Of course this is wealthy people problems. Most middle class Americans don't have second homes and if they do, they don't have the cash to keep a private plane, or pay for the airline trip either. They suck it up and drive.

The second group of people that GA gives them an advantage is the rare person who can use an airplane for business. For example, sales people can effectively cover a much wider area than could ever be achieved by car. This allows the company to only employ one salesman rather then two or three. The cost of the plane is well worth it.

Of course these are exceptions to the rule and the vast majority can't justify owning, or even renting an airplane for any reason other than we just want to. Most just don't have the extra money for fun, recreation, or personal education.
 
I'm 6+48 from Apopka, FL to the Key West Airport driving. I'm 2+33 via a C-172 with a real routing (around the Bravo, direct to RSW, direct MTH and then along the keys to the airport)

It's 410 sm each way driving. So figure $225 to drive, based on the government rate of 55 cents per mile. I'm paying $110 per hour to rent the plane. $286 to rent the plane.
 
Last edited:
I'm 6+48 from Apopka, FL to the Key West Airport driving. I'm 2+33 via a C-172 with a real routing (around the Bravo, direct to RSW, direct MTH and then along the keys to the airport)

It's 410 sm each way driving. So figure $225 to drive, based on the government rate of 55 cents per mile. I'm paying $110 per hour to rent the plane. $286 to rent the plane.

Include tolls too round trip.
 
I'll fly 1500 miles and bleed money to keep the TSA's grubby paws off my junk.

That last commercial trip we had was like something out of an Orwellian novel.

It ranked right up there with some of the most unpleasant experiences in my life. The trip would have been great other than the terminals were nightmarish and you could say it ruined the trip from an enjoyment perspective.
 
I live on the coast of Texas, and own a small business.

This means I cannot be gone for long, and I cannot be far away, timewise. If the ***** hits the fan, WRT my business, I've got to be back, pronto.

Nothing -- NOTHING -- can replace GA for me. I can zip to San Antonio, Austin, Houston, Brownsville, Galveston and even Dallas for lunch, and be back by dinner. If a staff member doesn't show up, or there is some sort of emergency, I can be back, quickly.

Without GA we would be completely bound to the island, or unable to return. Either option would be unacceptable.

In a state the size of Texas, GA is a Godsend.
 
I live on the coast of Texas, and own a small business.

This means I cannot be gone for long, and I cannot be far away, timewise. If the ***** hits the fan, WRT my business, I've got to be back, pronto.

Nothing -- NOTHING -- can replace GA for me. I can zip to San Antonio, Austin, Houston, Brownsville, Galveston and even Dallas for lunch, and be back by dinner. If a staff member doesn't show up, or there is some sort of emergency, I can be back, quickly.

Without GA we would be completely bound to the island, or unable to return. Either option would be unacceptable.

In a state the size of Texas, GA is a Godsend.

So for you, not living next to a major hub, and having a business that requires you to travel ASAP (primarily to return) means the opportunity cost of car travel is to expensive. Makes sense. But your situation is far from common.

I get tired of hearing how cost & time efficient small airplanes are simply because it's not true. Unless you have specific situations where travel by other means is hard (maybe that's why small airplanes are so popular in Alaska :yes: ) or the time cost is prohibitive. That's simply not true for most folks.

I love to fly. I'm glad I became a pilot. I look for reasons to fly. I wish I'd done it earlier. I hope to own an airplane someday. But it's not cost or time effective for me in most cases. It's just not.

John
 
Yep. A lot of pilots on these boards just don't seem to get that prices for services vary a lot from area to area. Anywhere along either coast of the country is pricey. In the middle of the country it is more affordable. Funny thing is, the guys in the middle of the country that have such low prices, seem to think their prices are standard everywhere.

A guy could shop around for better pricing, but when it comes to training, proximity to where you live is paramount. You're better off paying more for the close by instruction than you are saving some money and traveling for lessons. The reason why is you'll get done faster and enjoy it more.

Some will suggest moving where it's cheap, but you have to have the income to pay the ridiculously high cost of aviation. The pay is best on the coasts in general. Those that have a high income and live in the middle of the country have it well.

All true
 
I love to fly period. Not for travel but just pure enjoyment of leaving earth for a while. Expensive yes but I make it work and the family has everything they need and then some. I'm afraid to own my airplane. There seems to be a lot of responsibilities. I'm bad at maintaining my Cars.
 
So for you, not living next to a major hub, and having a business that requires you to travel ASAP (primarily to return) means the opportunity cost of car travel is to expensive. Makes sense. But your situation is far from common.

This is true. His situation is not very common. This is why we don't have very many people buying and flying airplanes. People can do their own personal math and it doesn't add up.

For a very small group of people, owning and operating an airplane is actually beneficial and profitable for them because of the time efficiencies earn them money. Others like Jay, can afford and do use GA as a luxury to travel. Others just like to fly and pay a lot to do so.

This is all great, but as a percentage of the American population, we are tiny. We are tiny for one reason. For most, the math just doesn't add up.
 
This is true. His situation is not very common. This is why we don't have very many people buying and flying airplanes. People can do their own personal math and it doesn't add up.

For a very small group of people, owning and operating an airplane is actually beneficial and profitable for them because of the time efficiencies earn them money. Others like Jay, can afford and do use GA as a luxury to travel. Others just like to fly and pay a lot to do so.

This is all great, but as a percentage of the American population, we are tiny. We are tiny for one reason. For most, the math just doesn't add up.
Agree, to a point.

HOWEVER, there are segments of aviation that are not cost prohibitive. Example: Get three guys together to buy an old Ercoupe (or Cessna 150) and your up-front costs will be less than the cost of a used Harley.

I know, because I did it. Burning car gas, our costs were miniscule.

Despite this, those affordable segments of GA aren't doing any better than the more expensive segments.

So it's not all cost. There's a marketing flaw here, somewhere. We just aren't getting the word out to young people about GA.
 
I read quite a few posts about the complaints of AOPA and I wanted to ask. Isn't AOPA responsible for the promotion of GA? Other than pilots who else is responsible?


People buy things they don't need all the time. I know quite a few people who buy pickup trucks and don't use the back, I know someone who has a four door sedan and very rarely uses the back....(Me) :eek: My point is if people love it they will buy, especially if they have the means.
 
Agree, to a point.

HOWEVER, there are segments of aviation that are not cost prohibitive. Example: Get three guys together to buy an old Ercoupe (or Cessna 150) and your up-front costs will be less than the cost of a used Harley.

I know, because I did it. Burning car gas, our costs were miniscule.

Despite this, those affordable segments of GA aren't doing any better than the more expensive segments.

So it's not all cost. There's a marketing flaw here, somewhere. We just aren't getting the word out to young people about GA.

Aviation has no popular culture heroes like previous generations did. Sure, we have aviation celebrities like Sean Tucker and Patti Wagstaff who are well known to those of us already drawn to flying, but these days there is no one on the level of Charles Lindbergh, Jimmy Doolittle or Chuck Yeager to inspire youth. I can't even think of any fictional heroes coming out of Hollywood or TV land like there were even in my generation. I had Top Gun and Black Sheep Squadron - both kind of hokey, but both had real heroes and real airplanes!
 
Agree, to a point.

HOWEVER, there are segments of aviation that are not cost prohibitive. Example: Get three guys together to buy an old Ercoupe (or Cessna 150) and your up-front costs will be less than the cost of a used Harley.

I know, because I did it. Burning car gas, our costs were miniscule.

Despite this, those affordable segments of GA aren't doing any better than the more expensive segments.

So it's not all cost. There's a marketing flaw here, somewhere. We just aren't getting the word out to young people about GA.

Well, the premise was value and efficiency for travel not merely cost. I agree that there are very affordable (at least as affordable as boating, for example) ways to fly. (Assuming you already have your certificate. Frankly that cost is a very steep barrier to entry for many.)

But if you want to use the pane to travel and travel faster than by car, the Ercoupe (as cool as they are-I really liked yours) is not a great cross country traveling machine for even a couple. And faster than a car? only in still air if you have to take circuitous route.

John
 
People don't buy airplanes, because you can't go down to the dealer on Saturday, pick one out, and go fly.

First most dealers have no inventory. None are even open on Sat. Many don't want to talk about training, just sell aircraft.

The final blow is when you find one that will help, they point to some old POS 150 and say you need to fly this around for about a year. THEN we'll put you in something a little better.

The wife says, "Hell NO!!!!"

Soooooo… they leave, go down to the boat dealer, buy a Sea Ray, and they're on the water that afternoon. Done deal.
 
Agree, to a point.

HOWEVER, there are segments of aviation that are not cost prohibitive. Example: Get three guys together to buy an old Ercoupe (or Cessna 150) and your up-front costs will be less than the cost of a used Harley.

I know, because I did it. Burning car gas, our costs were miniscule.

Despite this, those affordable segments of GA aren't doing any better than the more expensive segments.

So it's not all cost. There's a marketing flaw here, somewhere. We just aren't getting the word out to young people about GA.

When I say people do the math, I don't only mean just can they afford it, or will it save them money. Often times the equation looks more like a ratio. It's the ratio of cost over fun and when the numbers are run, many decide that the "fun ratio" is better on the side of the Harley even though the cash outlay may be similar. Share a ratty old plane that has limited utility with two other guys that has on going fixed expenses and requirements, or own your own Harley that sits in the garage and costs you pretty much nothing after purchase? It's a personal decision that can't be made entirely with a calculator.
 
Yep. And the whole family is having fun, not just Dad.

In my situation,

I would pick flying over boating any day of the week and I like to go out on the boat.

It's not cheap to keep a boat either and forget about trying to go someplace in a hurry. It's not economical or sensible either yet people buy them all the time and leave them stuck in the marina.
 
What about ultralight-style flying like Part 103 fixed-wing ultralights, paragliders, hang gliders, and trikes? Those are cheap to buy and I am also curious how much money does it take to operate a Part 103 fixed-wing ultralight per hour.

This is why I believe we should bring back 2 seat fat ultralights (no I don't mean flying under Sport Pilot regulations). If fat ultralights are regulated also under Part 103 again like they were before and not only just for training purposes, a person technically could in my books take a passenger up for a ride with no training required, although as stated in the regs, training is highly recommended, most likely cheaper than sport pilot training I think. This could bring out the fun that has immediate gratification to it.
 
This is why I believe we should bring back 2 seat fat ultralights (no I don't mean flying under Sport Pilot regulations). If fat ultralights are regulated also under Part 103 again like they were before and not only just for training purposes, a person technically could in my books take a passenger up for a ride with no training required, although as stated in the regs, training is highly recommended, most likely cheaper than sport pilot training I think. This could bring out the fun that has immediate gratification to it.

This exactly what Part 103 was designed not to do. It is supposed to be a solo, personal flying experience with the only risk being to yourself. The last thing the FAA, or most of society wants, is self taught, untrained people taking ignorant innocents for a ride. The instant gratification is supposed to come from you flying the airplane through the air, not giving a ride to someone. Way too much "Hey, watch this!".

Having said that, I think there may have been middle ground where the FAA could have gone. I think a license for the two place "fat" ultralight could have been developed. Basically a stripped down Sport pilot license focused on just flying the airplane and the safety issues involved with that type of plane. No cross country, no radios and airspace, no weather, just stick and rudder and how to not kill yourself. That way, the passenger can have some level of assurance that the pilot has at least been looked over before by someone with experience and has been vetted.

Just an idea and a moot point. They did what they did.
 
What about ultralight-style flying like Part 103 fixed-wing ultralights, paragliders, hang gliders, and trikes? Those are cheap to buy and I am also curious how much money does it take to operate a Part 103 fixed-wing ultralight per hour.

The Backyard flyer uses 1.7-2 GPH of pump gas. @ $3.5/gal that sounds like $7/hour. Add an oil and filter per year, and a cond inspection I would say that runs maybe $500/year max. Figure in 500 hours between ohaul, and ohaul costs ~$500 if you do your own, this is about as cheap as you can get.

So, let's figure 50 hours per year for a UL hourly works out to:

7 - gas
10 - annual/oil/filter
1 - ohaul reserve
---
18/hour all in for 50 hours/year. Sadly, can't get the fam on the Backyard Flyer, so mom and kids have to sit and watch, or get their own.
 
Come to think of it, I've never heard anyone say " I bought my plane to save money." :lol:
 
Back
Top