FormerHangie
En-Route
I've noticed that too.. If cost were the main issue, then the Sonex would be the dominant homebuilt, not the RV.
Those days are gone and are not coming back. Aviation is commonplace these days.
If the amount of training required were what was holding people back, I would think that recreational pilot and sport pilot would be popular. Instead, there are something like 400 new sport pilot ratings issued in the average year.
Ultralights had their boom time, and it fizzled. Immediate gratification and aviation don't mix well, you do need a reasonable amount of training to not hurt yourself. I flew hanggilders for five years, I don't think there are more than about 7,000 rated hang and paraglider pilots in the US, even though you can get to flying solo at altitude in 8 to 10 days of training, and for less than $1500.
I get the impression that there are many of us here who think the only thing that's limiting aviation's popularity is that the word isn't getting out. I don't think that is correct. It's been my observation is that the overwhelming majority of people aren't interested in aviation at all, and no amount of promotion will make them so.
People have different motivations for flying. I've always been interested, so I got my license as a young adult. Once I got the ticket, I found I didn't have any real use for it, and drifted out. I think it's a neat means of travel, but to just fly around the local area and practice landings didn't hold my attention. Do any of you read "Air Facts Journal"? In one part of his blog, long time Flying magazine editor Richard Collins explains his reason for hanging up his headset. For him, the attraction was to fly the airplane cross country in all kinds of weather, and when he felt he was no longer able to do that, he stopped flying altogether. If I had somewhere to go with the airplane, I'd still be power flying, but since I don't, I'm not likely to go back to it.
I do think that the limiting factor in the popularity of private aviation, in addition to the cost, is that most people have no real use for it. While I do realize that there are some pilots who really enjoy flying locally, I don't think there are all that many, if there were, then I think ultralight flying would still be popular. I do think the attraction for most of us is to use the airplane to go somewhere. There are a number of problems with trying to use a light aircraft for transportation: the weather isn't always cooperative, it's expensive, and any potential passengers may not be too interested in flying.
New Year's Eve a couple of years ago, my family and I went from Atlanta to Nashville to a football game. It's about 250 miles, and we'd only be on the ground for a few hours, so that's a good trip to use a light single. It's about a 3:45 in a car, so let's compare that to a Skyhawk: it's about 30 minutes to the nearest airport, then another 10 minutes in the rental office, say another 10 minutes for a walkaround, five minutes to get everyone aboard, 10 minutes to warm the engine, five minutes to taxi, maybe 15 minutes for takeoff and climb, around two hours enroute, say 20 minutes in the terminal area and approach, five minutes to taxi, maybe 15 minutes to get the airplane tied down and have some fuel arranged, then a 20 minute taxi ride to the stadium. Add all that up and you have three hours point to point.
So, maybe I would enjoy that. Would the other three members of my family? I'm thinking not. It's winter, so the car's a little chilly when we get in, but it warms up in a few minutes. Our Odyssey is roomy and quiet, the airplane is neither. I'd have to get them out of the car and load them into a cold airplane, and then issue everyone headsets. We'd be flying over the Appalachians in a single engined airplane in the winter. And on this particular day, there's a complication: It's solid overcast and there's even a few flurries in Nashville. Now I don't know whether or not I could have gotten on top on that day, but I dare say my passengers wouldn't much care to fly in cloud. It doesn't matter because I've never been instrument rated and so could not have made the trip. On that day, you might need a FIKI equipped plane anyway. Since we already have the car, the incremental cost of driving 500 miles would be about $150 for fuel, depreciation, and maintenance. Five hours in a 172SP would be $750 - $1000, and would only save an hour and a half at most. Since we'd be depending on a taxi to get us back to the airport, we might be stuck at the stadium for a while on the return trip.
I do realize there are some people who could get more utility out of the airplane. Light aircraft are at their best on missions between 200 and 600 miles, particularly if there is good ground transportation at the airport. People who have the money and time for a vacation home and an airplane could put the airplane to good use, as would the manufacturer's rep who travels regionally, visits clients regularly, stays at that client for an extended time, and clears enough income to pay for the airplane. And, of course, operators of aviation themed hospitality businesses who live on islands.
Problem is, that's not many people.
so much for "entry level". And the places that I've applied where I do meet the criteria they're looking for, I either can't get a hold of anyone, don't get a reply, or get a call back saying they chose someone else over me. 
my goal has been "get a better job" instead of "fly X hours by X date". I'd prefer to be able to have enough to get my instrument and commercial in one go with a small emergency windfall left over in my savings in case of life emergencies. Right now I'm at the emergencies level plus what comes in per check. Looking to find another part time job to fill in the gaps.
