Did I miss the Era of GA? [Archive]

Howard Nelson

March 15th 07, 02:34 PM

Other than cost SEL IFR and VFR flying is not that different than when I
started in 1976. Better avionics degrades map/compass/vor navigational
skills but I don't see many other differences.

As for cost when I started in 1976 my rental was a 3 year old IFR equipped
C177RG which was $25/hr wet and C150s were $15/hr wet. Instructor $12/hr (at
least that hasn't changed). :)

Today I spend about $15/hr for insurance. $50/hr fuel. Other costs
hanger/annual/reserve and occassional maint make up the rest.

So if cost (within reason) is not a problem then I would suggest starting
your training.

Howard
"Google Madness" > wrote in message
news:p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06...
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many
of
> the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some
people
> out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
>
http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks
>
>
>

Gig 601XL Builder

March 15th 07, 02:49 PM

Google Madness wrote:
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh
> on it saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and
> future of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses
> many of the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously
> considering scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to
> hear from some people out there if the situation is not really as bad
> as this sounds.
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-
> aviation/
> Thanks

There have been doomsday predictors for GA predictors since the early 80's.
In some ways they have all been right in other ways they have all been
wrong.

Let's look at the blog you posted.

1. The end to Avgas: I've been hearing this for years. But every week the
truck still shows up at the airport and dumps a load of 100ll. If he stops
I'll start bringing my own Mogas. If I get to the point that I can't find it
without Ethanol in it I'm OK because the plane I'm building will run ion it
if I have to.

2. (In)Security: We are currently in a war. This war is probably going to go
on a while but there has never been an attack with GA aircraft. Yes there
are more security procedures but they really aren't effecting that many of
us. Part of me thinks the best thing that could happen is some terrorist
slams a 150 into the side of a nuke plant. The outcome would show that there
isn't a threat from light aircraft.

3. Airport closures:Yes airports have closed. More will but there are still
lots of them out there.

4. Maintenance: Airplanes have never been cheap to buy or operate. Yet I'm
building a plane that is capable of carrying me and a passenger with full
fuel and a little over 100 Lbs. of baggage for 4 hours at 135 mph while
burning 5 gph. The nice part of building is I'll be able to work on it
myself.

5.User fees: The numbers he quoted are significantly higher than any plan
I've seen legitimately put forward. The plan being debated now is to raise
the tax on Avgas 50 cents a gallon which will increase my cost by around
$2.50/hour. So, if I fly 100 hours/year the cost will average out to around
$0.68 per day. I can live with that and should I decide I can't I'll switch
to Mogas. There are some user fees being promoted that would charge you at
the largest airports but as I said there are plenty of airports out there.

Now some positive things happening in GA.

1.We have access to technology that you couldn't have seen in F-15 years 20
years ago.

2.The FAA with a lot of pushing from EAA and AOPA have created the LSA
license and aircraft certification standard that will allow you to buy a
brand new 2 place aircraft comparable to the one I'm building for less than
$100K. Take a 16 hour course and you will even be able to work on you own
LSA aircraft.

3. The homebuilt industry is at an all time high. There are 1000's of people
building planes that out perform in one way or another anything that has
been built by Cessna or Piper.

You didn't mention why you wanted to fly but if it is for business, travel,
or just punching holes in the sky there are lots of options and they aren't
going away anytime soon.

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

March 15th 07, 03:03 PM

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:47:01 GMT, "Google Madness" > wrote in <p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06>:

> ... Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
>follow my dream of having my PPL. ...

Speaking as an outsider (I fly RC aircraft, not manned),
I'd say start working on the PPL now and keep at it until
you personally decide that it's not worth the time and
effort. "Who knows what tomorrow will bring?"

Live in the now. If you've got the time, money, and
inclination now, go for it!

And keep us posted on your progress ...

Marty

--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Bill Watson

March 15th 07, 03:05 PM

I remember feeling more than a bit anxious about whether GA and private
aircraft ownership would ever be something I could pursue when I grew
up. Seemed like the golden age of flight was behind me.

That was back in the late 60s and I was an early teen flying models.

Then came the gas crisis and things looked even bleaker.

Since then, all I've done is fly. With GPS, composites, kit-builts,
personal jets, LSA, globalization, responsible regulation, and
increasing national wealth, it seems the golden age is now. And
probably will be tomorrow.

If you want to fly, you may have to make some adjustments. Living in
the southeast lowers the cost - living in NYC makes flying a challenge.
You have to train more, there are more aircraft, and more regs but
there are LSAs too. You can still fly across the country with or
without engaging our outstanding ATC system - but you can't show
passengers the White House, soar over Camp David or gawk at one of
Cheney's bunkers. Airports are closing everyday and new homes are being
built, especially in NJ. But airports are being built, expanded, and
replaced here in NC. The FBOs may all be turning into jetports for
kero crowd, but the coffee is better, the rental cars more available,
and security sure beats the other side of the airport. New aircraft are
more expensive than ever but there are more homebuilt kits than ever
before and they can perform as well or better than the factory jobs.

Options abound. It's not getting cheaper but it is getting better.

My dream now is to fly my 200mph kitbuilt into Cuba, legally. I bet
I'll do it.

Google Madness wrote:
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
> the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
> out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks
>
>
>

Jay Honeck

March 15th 07, 03:21 PM

> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.

Read my posts about "Beale Street Rocks" and "Flying to Texas" to see
the vast and amazing possibilities that await every private pilot in
the year 2007.

My family (wife and two kids) has flown from coast-to-coast, all VFR,
for 12 years without ever having to ask permission or pay any fees.
We've had literally thousands of airports to choose from along the
way, most of them staffed by friendly, welcoming people.

A vast continent awaits discovery by air. Don't whine about it --
just go do it.

Make your own "Era of GA". I am, and it's absolutely fantastic!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
(Presently in Memphis, TN)
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[email protected]

March 15th 07, 03:53 PM

I got my PP-ASEL last year in New Jersey. There are two reasons why
you should go ahead and do it:

1. You haven't missed the boat. There is still plenty of fun to be had
at reasonable costs. I have flown over New York City and Boston a
bunch of times, I have flown from Boston to Maine for the weekend, I
have flown to the Hamptons for lunch and returned by starlight. When I
went on vacation in Hawaii I rented a plane and flew all over the Big
Island. And that's just a few things I've done, in a few months,
without even flying that regularly. Even living up here in the
northeast winter, I haven't had to cancel for weather many times. And
if I take 3 passengers with me, which I normally do, the cost is under
$30 / hour per person, all in. I rent from clubs (one in Boston and
one in NYC) which is incredibly easy to organize - a 1 hour checkout
with a club instructor and you're cleared to rent their planes.

It is true that there are some worrying trends in GA, but look at the
ever-increasing hassles of scheduled commercial flights.

2. The training itself is fun. If you have a decent instructor, going
through the training is a fun and rewarding experience. And the
feeling you get when you pass the checkride is unbelievable.

One piece of advice - do the training quickly. Clear out some time so
you can get it all done, from start to finish, in a handful of months.
If you do it this way it is easier and cheaper, and you are less
likely to encounter frustrations along the way. I did it in 10 weeks
by taking a week off to get started (during which I did 15 hours), and
then flying about 15 more half days on weekends over the remaining 9
weeks. I would thoroghly recommend this method - I passed easily in
just over the 40 hour minimum.

Have fun, and let us know how you get on.

Tom

Ken Finney

March 15th 07, 04:08 PM

"Google Madness" > wrote in message
news:p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06...
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many
> of the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some
> people out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks
>

Yes, you did. But that doesn't mean we can't create another one. GA for
many years has been playing "rope-a-dope", now it's time to get off the
ropes and start fighting. The Sport Pilot/Light Sport Aircraft initiative
is great opportunity to do that. Rather than get a PPL, maybe you should
consider a SPL. Get involved, join an EAA chapter and/or AOPA. Go to
Oshkosh, and you'll never doubt the future of GA again!

[email protected]

March 15th 07, 04:16 PM

Avgas: $3.00 (if you're lucky)
Aviation Insurance: $850/yr (if you're lucky)

If someone asks if you are a pilot, you can say...(and this is the
best part)

"Yes, yes I am"

Priceless!

(to paraphrase a credit card company)

-Ryan in Madison, WI
-

Darkwing

March 15th 07, 04:43 PM

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:KxcKh.4470$8o1.1674@trndny01...
> "Google Madness" > wrote in message
> news:p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06...
>> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
>> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on
>> it saying it was too much money.
>> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
>> follow my dream of having my PPL.
>> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
>> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>>
>> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many
>> of the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously
>> considering scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear
>> from some people out there if the situation is not really as bad as this
>> sounds.
>
> If you're concerned, don't buy a plane.
>
> There's no good reason not to start training. Flight training is still
> flying. It's all good stuff.
>
> How would you feel if GA actually does go away in ten years and you have
> to say to yourself, I could have........
>

Since I played MSFS when I was a kid the default was always Meigs Field and
I am only 150 miles southeast of Chicago. I decided that I was going to fly
to Meigs after I got my Private just to bring my dream full circle. Well I
got my private about a month after King Daley plowed up Meigs Field. So I
guess the moral of the story is that there is no time like the present.

-----------------------------------------
DW

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

March 15th 07, 05:13 PM

The plain simple truth of it is that flying in the GA environment in the
United States post 9-11 is still available and pleasurable, while at the
same time being much more difficult to deal with than it used to be.
I would say in all honesty that the rewards are there and can still be
achieved, but the price tag is higher now and the path a bit more strewn
with pot holes.
Bottom line is as its always been. Before diving in to something that
will cost this much money and require this much effort, simply step back
and take a long look at your finances, and especially your motivation.
If you have the time and money, and you can deal with general aviation
as it exists in the post 9-11 world, by all means go for it.
Like anything else in life, its a matter of intelligent and well thought
out choice.
Dudley Henriques

Google Madness wrote:
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
> the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
> out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks
>
>
>

Bob Fry

March 15th 07, 05:36 PM

1 year from now you'll be 1 year older. Or dead maybe, but let's not
go there.

GA will still be around 1 year from now. I and hundreds of thousands
of pilots in the US and other countries will still be flying and
enjoying it. Will you be one of them? That's up to you. Since money
isn't the issue so much, do you have something better to do with your
time? Let's suppose GA collapses a year after you get your license,
well, so what, you learned a skill you wanted to for a lifetime.

Don't wait any longer and reach old age with regrets.

THE CLOCK IS WOUND BUT ONCE

In a hangar at the airport
Where a brooding pilot blinks,
Deeply graven is the message--
It is later than you think.

The clock of life is wound but once,
And no man has the power
To tell just when the hands will stop
At late or early hour.

Now is the time you own;
The past's a golden link.
Go flying now, my brother--
It's later than you think.
--
As the light changed from red to green to yellow and back to red
again, I sat there thinking about life. Was it nothing more than
a bunch of honking and yelling? Sometimes it seemed that way.
- Jack Handey

Jim Burns[_2_]

March 15th 07, 05:44 PM

The "Era of GA" is what YOU make it. Go out and do it! You will NOT regret
it. I know no other recreation that offers so much education, freedom, and
satisfaction.

After our last flight I was curious as to how many hours I had flown during
the past 12 months, often used as a gauge of a pilots or airplane owners
activity. What I had failed to do was to pay attention to all the places
that I'd visited, the experiences I'd had, and the adventures that made all
of it so enjoyable. THESE are the reasons that I fly and what GA brings
me... the friendships, the experiences, and the advetures that I would not
find nor have the time to find in other activities.

Just off the top of my head I can bring up some great memories from the past
years trips (seperate) flights from Wisconsin to:
Las Vegas, NV
Rantoul, IL
Iowa City, IA (several)
Grand Rapids, MI (several)
Detroit, MI
Louisville, KY
Nashville, TN
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
and our latest from Wisconsin to Key West FL and back.

I'm sure I would have driven to Grand Rapids, MI a few times as my wife's
family lives there. I'm sure that I would have taken one or two of the
remaining trips by flying commercial for a family vacation. I'm equally
sure that the rest would never have been considered if I weren't a pilot nor
had reliable access to an airplane.

Make GA what YOU want to make it.

Jim

Peter R.

March 15th 07, 06:40 PM

On 3/15/2007 9:47:05 AM, "Google Madness" wrote:

> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.

You have many excellent responses already, so I will only point out that you
are certainly smart for asking that question.

--
Peter

Montblack

March 15th 07, 07:01 PM

("Jim Burns" wrote)
[snips]
> After our last flight I was curious as to how many hours I had flown
> during the past 12 months...
>
> Just off the top of my head I can bring up some great memories from the
> past years trips (seperate) flights from Wisconsin to:
> Las Vegas, NV
> Rantoul, IL
> Iowa City, IA (several)
> Grand Rapids, MI (several)
> Detroit, MI
> Louisville, KY
> Nashville, TN
> Ft. Lauderdale, FL
> and our latest from Wisconsin to Key West FL and back.

"What am I, chopped liver?" :-)

Saturday it's back to being Irish-Catholic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corned_beef
Mmm ...corned beef

<http://www.alexisparkinn.com/Photogallery2/2006-5_Anoka-Flight-Montblack-Burns/sTailView%205-06.jpg>

May 5th, 2006
GW Museum
(ANE) Anoka County-Blaine Airport, MN

http://skyvector.com/#19-117-3-1525-583
12 o'clock, @ 16 nm, on the Class B (MSP) sectional

http://66.226.83.248/ap/02455
Photo taken the following month

From STE (Wis) to ANE (Minn)
160.6 nautical miles WNW
Initial true course: 284

Montblack <g>

"Let me tell you the one thing I have against Moses. He took us forty years
into the desert in order to bring us to the one place in the Middle East
that has no oil!"
-- Golda Meir

"My father never lived to see his dream come true of an all-Yiddish-speaking
Canada."
-- David Steinberg

Mxsmanic

March 15th 07, 07:10 PM

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

> 2. (In)Security: We are currently in a war.

The United States is not currently at war.

> 2.The FAA with a lot of pushing from EAA and AOPA have created the LSA
> license and aircraft certification standard that will allow you to buy a
> brand new 2 place aircraft comparable to the one I'm building for less than
> $100K. Take a 16 hour course and you will even be able to work on you own
> LSA aircraft.

Of course, you can't do much with it. And if you want an LSA because you
failed the medical for a regular PPL, you're out of luck (that's a really
bizarre rule).

> 3. The homebuilt industry is at an all time high. There are 1000's of people
> building planes that out perform in one way or another anything that has
> been built by Cessna or Piper.

This assumes that a homebuilt would satisfy your particular interest in
aviation.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Gig 601XL Builder

March 15th 07, 07:40 PM

To the Google Maddness, the original poster,

Please excuse this interruption to what has been a very good thread. You
see, Mxsmanic is a fat troll expat American that lives in Paris. He has no
personal life other than to play on MS Flight Simulater and then come in
here and act like he is an expert in all things aviation. He also is only
capable of earning less than $700 per month.

Please don't allow him to sway you in any way or in any way discourage you
from asking further advise in this forum. At last count you had received 16
on topic answers so one out of 17 ain't bad. Every group on USENET has at
least one of these as do most communities in the real world. Now I'm going
to break my rule a reply to the troll only to clear up any possible
incorrect info for you.

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder writes:
>
>> 2. (In)Security: We are currently in a war.
>
> The United States is not currently at war.
>
>> 2.The FAA with a lot of pushing from EAA and AOPA have created the
>> LSA license and aircraft certification standard that will allow you
>> to buy a brand new 2 place aircraft comparable to the one I'm
>> building for less than $100K. Take a 16 hour course and you will
>> even be able to work on you own LSA aircraft.
>
> Of course, you can't do much with it. And if you want an LSA because
> you failed the medical for a regular PPL, you're out of luck (that's
> a really bizarre rule).
>

A pilot with a private certificate can do anything in an LSA airplane they
could do in a normally certified one. Including IFR and Class B airspace if
the aircraft is suitably equipped.

A pilot that has only an LSA certificate is under some limitations. No night
flight and my only fly aircraft with two seats that have a max gross weight
of 1340 lbs. Also, it has the benefit of not requiring a 3rd class medical.
Other limitations and information on the Light Sport rules can be found at
http://www.sportpilot.org/

>> 3. The homebuilt industry is at an all time high. There are 1000's
>> of people building planes that out perform in one way or another
>> anything that has been built by Cessna or Piper.
>
> This assumes that a homebuilt would satisfy your particular interest
> in aviation.

Since the homebuilt market includes everything from low and slow single seat
aircraft to composite 4 and 6 place cross country speed demons I'm quite
sure there is a plane that you might not want to build but at least dream
about.

Jim Burns[_2_]

March 15th 07, 08:27 PM

....and another great reason for flying is the ability to meet some great
people that you would have otherwise never met, most of whom I have found to
be the most giving and generous people I've ever encountered.

>You? chopped liver? that would be a lot of chopped liver. Sorry, not even
after lent. Gimme a beer and a corned beef sandwich.

Jim
( 50% Irish and married on St. Patrick's day so I can remember)

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe

March 15th 07, 09:09 PM

"Google Madness" > wrote in message
news:p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06...
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in.

If you want to fly, fly. If not, people seem to find it easy to come up
with excuses.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Morgans[_2_]

March 15th 07, 09:52 PM

"Bill Watson" > wrote

> My dream now is to fly my 200mph kitbuilt into Cuba, legally. I bet I'll
> do it.

What'cha building, Bill?
--
Jim in NC

kontiki

March 15th 07, 10:40 PM

Depressing talk/rumor/inuendo is the M.O. of the the anti-freedom,
anti-business and anti-capitalism crowd. They want you to be depressed,
sad and fell guilty... to give up your dreams of anything that requires
more than a candle-worth of energy.

Basically they want you to just be happy living in a tent with
candles while they, of course, continue live in their Beverly Hills
mansions and fly around in their own private learjets.

Screw 'em and go for your dream. You only live once. A vibrant economy
is fed by people that go for their dreams.

Good Luck!

kontiki

March 15th 07, 10:41 PM

Gary wrote:

> But instead, I dove in and got my PP-ASEL a few months ago. I'm
> having a blast.
>
> I've dabbled in fishing, diving, skiing, and a host of other
> activities long enough to know that the single phrase you're likely to
> hear most often is: "You should have been here yesterday!" (or last
> week, or last year, or a decade ago). Well, maybe so. But I'm
> here today, and it's not half bad.
>

Excellent! You sir, are a true American. Would that there could be more
like you.

Semper Fi

Larry Dighera

March 15th 07, 11:37 PM

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:47:01 GMT, "Google Madness"
> wrote in <p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06>:

>Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
>Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
>saying it was too much money.
>Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
>follow my dream of having my PPL.
>But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
>of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
>Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
>the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
>scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
>out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
>http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
>Thanks
>

While I can understand your desire to get some feedback from those
currently enjoying the joy of flight before committing the not
insubstantial time and resources required to obtain your airmans
certificate, if you would let their input, or indeed that of your
wife, stand in the path to your dream, you may not have the requisite
'fire in your belly' to make a good airman. The path to an airmans
certificate is expensive, and donning the responsibilities of becoming
a 'pilot in command' is, or should be, a life-changing event.

Becoming a responsible airman is not really at all akin to becoming a
licensed motorist. And it's not possible to be a dilettante airman;
it requires constant exercise of your right to fly, almost weekly, so
it's a good thing you can now financially afford it; hopefully you
have a burning interest and the requisite empty spot in your life
waiting to be filled with flying activity. But remember, your flight
decisions will affect the lives of you and your passengers, and those
over whom you fly, as well as us, the pilot community.

You will have to MASTER several disciplines to achieve the status of
pilot. You will not only need the motor skills necessary to control
the aircraft, you'll need to acquire mastery of the fundamentals of
meteorology to read mother nature's ever churning skies, mastery
pilotage, dead reckoning and several types of radio navigation,
mastery of voluminous aviation regulation details, mastery of radio
communication techniques and operation, mastery of a myriad of
aircraft systems, how to effectively employ cockpit resource
management, and most importantly, you'll need to learn how to be a
CAPTAIN capable of abandoning your pride when safety demands that you
make a socially unpopular decision and sticking to it in the face of
what will feel like overwhelming social pressure.

In addition, you'll need reasonably good health over the entire time
you exercise your right to ply the skies. Indeed, it is this last
factor that is the sole limiting factor in the use of your airmans
certificate; it doesn't expire periodically like a driver's license.
But you will have to demonstrate your flight skills every two years.

So while the cost of gasoline is rising daily, and security issues can
be frustrating to some extent, unlike the days of 1987, it is your
openness to changing your mental attitude toward flight and the
responsibilities of being a pilot in command, as well as your
commitment of time and money to constant on-going practice of your
flight skills that are the true barriers to becoming an airman and
continuing to fly through the subsequent years.

If you have what it takes, do it. If you lack TOTAL commitment, don't
waste your time.

Larry Dighera

March 15th 07, 11:44 PM

On 15 Mar 2007 09:16:15 -0700, wrote in
. com>:

>
>If someone asks if you are a pilot, you can say...(and this is the
>best part)
>
>"Yes, yes I am"
>
>Priceless!

If you require the reflection of another person to validate your
aviation experience, you aren't doing it right.

The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.

Dana M. Hague

March 16th 07, 12:02 AM

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:49:47 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote:

>2.The FAA with a lot of pushing from EAA and AOPA have created the LSA
>license and aircraft certification standard that will allow you to buy a
>brand new 2 place aircraft comparable to the one I'm building for less than
>$100K. Take a 16 hour course and you will even be able to work on you own
>LSA aircraft.

$100K (or even $50K) is still WAY out of reach of most people
(including me!) However, you can still buy a used T-Craft or Aeronca
for under $20K, which is a lot more realistic to most people, There
are also a lot of new aircraft in that price range, straddling the
blurry line between GA/LSA and ultralight... aircraft just about as
capable (depending on the model) as the T-Crafts and Aeroncas... but
NEW.

A lot of people (mainly ultralight pilots) are finding nothing good
about SP/LSA, and I agree that it just about completely missed its
original target (which was the absorbtion of "fat" ultralights). I'll
bet that before too long, though, most primary flight training will be
in new LSA aircraft, as the current fleet of C-150's and similar
aircraft ages.

-Dana
--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drink wet cement, and get completely stoned!

Bill Watson

March 16th 07, 12:43 AM

Morgans wrote:
> "Bill Watson" > wrote
>
>> My dream now is to fly my 200mph kitbuilt into Cuba, legally. I bet I'll
>> do it.
>
> What'cha building, Bill?

An RV10. I've completed the Emp kit (tail feathers and tailcone) and
moving on to the quickbuild wings. A long way to go but a lot of
satisfying progress towards a very impressive machine.

Bill 'Mauledriver' Watson

BDS

March 16th 07, 12:45 AM

"Dana M. Hague" <d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote

> A lot of people (mainly ultralight pilots) are finding nothing good
> about SP/LSA, and I agree that it just about completely missed its
> original target (which was the absorbtion of "fat" ultralights).

But it did absorb the so-called "fat" ultralights - they can now be
certified as LSA which only require a sport pilot license to fly. Before
SP/LSA they were technically aircraft that required a recreational or
private license to fly, so the rules have been relaxed quite a bit.

The problem is that unlicensed ultralight pilots were illegally flying these
aircraft which clearly didn't fit the Part 103 definition of an ultralight,
and they were hoping that the SP/LSA initiative would include a
re-definition of what an ultralight was. But that was never promised. In
fact, I believe the FAA specifically said that that was not being
considered.

Ultralight pilots are "finding nothing good about SP/LSA" because they will
no longer be able to operate outside of the CFRs without being noticed. I'm
not so sure that this is a bad thing.

BDS

Don Tuite

March 16th 07, 01:03 AM

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:44:46 GMT, Larry Dighera >
wrote:

>The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
>from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
>a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.

Larry's saying it's fun.

What you want to do is log onto eaa.com, and find a nearby chapter and
go to one of their meetings. If that bunch seems wrong for any
reason, try some more eaa groups. Eventually you'll find some folks
whose interest in building airplanes and whose bank accounts align
with yours. Let them explain the various ways of complying with the
51% rule.

At the same time, yYou're also likely fo find independent CFIs in the
chapter who can help you keep primary-training costs in the mid four
figures.

Gas at $10 a gallon is cheap if you're not paying $120/hour for minor
wrenching and you're not paying Cessna's or Garmin's liability
insurance.

Don

C J Campbell[_1_]

March 16th 07, 01:49 AM

On 2007-03-15 06:47:01 -0700, "Google Madness" > said:

> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
> the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
> out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks

Most of the stuff coming from AOPA should be printed with a black border.

People forget that there was a time when GA was not allowed above
10,000 feet, and there was a move to ban it completely in order to
prevent the Commies from using little airplanes to attack the US with
nukes.

Largely due to the efforts of AOPA, the bad old days are the bad old
days. However, we have to always be on our toes lest we see a return of
those times.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Mxsmanic

March 16th 07, 02:16 AM

BDS writes:

> Ultralight pilots are "finding nothing good about SP/LSA" because they will
> no longer be able to operate outside of the CFRs without being noticed. I'm
> not so sure that this is a bad thing.

I'm not sure that it's a good thing, either. What problems were they causing
in the past?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 16th 07, 02:18 AM

Larry Dighera writes:

> If you require the reflection of another person to validate your
> aviation experience, you aren't doing it right.

The law requires it, unfortunately.

> The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
> from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
> a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.

Best not to mention the utility of aviation as a mode of transport, at least
with respect to small GA aircraft.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 16th 07, 02:20 AM

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> writes:

> If you want to fly, fly. If not, people seem to find it easy to come up
> with excuses.

That's not quite the way it works. There's a cost/benefit relationship to
consider. The cost of flying is extremely high, so much so that only the most
fanatically interested parties can justify investing in it, even if they have
the resources. Lowering the cost and other obstacles would bring more people
into aviation. Raising them will drive more people out of aviation. It's not
a simple yes/no relationship.

The same is true for any other leisure activity. Aviation just happens to be
way up on the cost scale compared to many other activities, which is one
reason why it is not widely practiced.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 16th 07, 02:21 AM

kontiki writes:

> Basically they want you to just be happy living in a tent with
> candles while they, of course, continue live in their Beverly Hills
> mansions and fly around in their own private learjets.

It is worth noting, however, that most of them have someone else flying their
Learjets, since they are not licensed pilots.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 16th 07, 02:31 AM

Larry Dighera writes:

> While I can understand your desire to get some feedback from those
> currently enjoying the joy of flight before committing the not
> insubstantial time and resources required to obtain your airmans
> certificate, if you would let their input, or indeed that of your
> wife, stand in the path to your dream, you may not have the requisite
> 'fire in your belly' to make a good airman.

Why must one have "fire in the belly" in order to be entitled to fly? Is it a
hazing ritual, or is it a hobby?

There may be some justification for certain qualifications to be required when
one is doing something that directly affects others, such as flying a
commercial airliner. It's difficult to see any justification for this when
one is doing something as a hobby that affects essentially no one else.

Suggesting that someone needs arbitrary qualifications or must overcome
arbitrary hurdles in the latter case is simple elitism.

> The path to an airmans
> certificate is expensive, and donning the responsibilities of becoming
> a 'pilot in command' is, or should be, a life-changing event.

What responsibilities? If you are flying on your own, they are practically
nil, not any greater than riding your own motorcycle.

> Becoming a responsible airman is not really at all akin to becoming a
> licensed motorist.

Sure it is, fundamentally. But many artificial barriers exist in order to
ensure that only certain people are allowed to join the club. A lot of
aviators do _not_ want other people to fly, as this would lessen the ego trip
they get themselves out of flying. The idea of anyone being able to do it
bothers them. And just about anyone _could_ do it, if the artificial barriers
were removed. It's not that difficult.

> And it's not possible to be a dilettante airman; it requires constant
> exercise of your right to fly, almost weekly ...

See above. More of the treehouse-club effect.

> You will have to MASTER several disciplines to achieve the status of
> pilot.

No, you won't. All you have to do is pass the tests. If pilots _mastered_
the skills that are supposedly represented by the tests, they would have no
accidents due to pilot error.

> You will not only need the motor skills necessary to control
> the aircraft ...

Which anyone who can ride a bicycle or roller-skate already has.

> ... you'll need to acquire mastery of the fundamentals of
> meteorology to read mother nature's ever churning skies ...

Fundamentals is an overstatement. I'm sure many meteorologists would agree.
And many pilots barely manage that, as accidents regularly prove.

> mastery pilotage, dead reckoning and several types of radio navigation,
> mastery of voluminous aviation regulation details, mastery of radio
> communication techniques and operation, mastery of a myriad of
> aircraft systems, how to effectively employ cockpit resource
> management, and most importantly, you'll need to learn how to be a
> CAPTAIN capable of abandoning your pride when safety demands that you
> make a socially unpopular decision and sticking to it in the face of
> what will feel like overwhelming social pressure.

Pride seems to be the predominant characteristic under discussion here.

Maybe some people should become doctors instead of pilots. From the way you
write about it, becoming a doctor sounds a lot easier.

> In addition, you'll need reasonably good health over the entire time
> you exercise your right to ply the skies.

More like robust health (far in excess of what would actually be required to
fly), thanks to archaic rules and more of the treehouse-club mentality.

> If you have what it takes, do it. If you lack TOTAL commitment, don't
> waste your time.

In other words, if someone isn't as fanatic as you think they should be, you
want them to stay out of the club.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

James Sleeman

March 16th 07, 02:33 AM

Don't really want to reply to an MX post, but for the benefit of the
original poster:

> Of course, you can't do much with it. And if you want an LSA because you

"I'm doing this for the fun, fly the good days, and work to pay for it
on the bad".

You can have just as much fun in Day VFR as Night or IFR, infact, I
expect that most people don't really WANT to fly in IFR, or even
marginal VFR conditions anyway, and nobody HAS to fly anywhere,
anytime.

LSA (Ultralight/Microlight in other countries) is "where it's at"
presently in terms of advancement and development in recreational
aviation. To see that you only have to look at the large number of
new aircraft being designed with such specifications, and the teeny
numbers of new certified recreational aircraft being designed.

The US is only really just getting it's feet wet with that now, it's
been this way for a good number of years in the rest of the world.

> failed the medical for a regular PPL, you're out of luck (that's a really bizarre rule).

Yes, that is a bizarre rule, no argument.

Dave[_3_]

March 16th 07, 02:43 AM

Regardles of how you/we view the past..

I am reminded of a story....

An elderly farmer was asked "when was the best time to plant an apple
tree?"

He replied.. " 'bout 10 years ago"

Then he was asked. "Well then, when is the next best time to plant
the apple tree?"

To which he replied.. "Right now"

We lost a good guy here this week, cancer... friend for 35yrs..and a
former pilot..... only a bit older than I...

...over to you.....

Dave

'On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:47:01 GMT, "Google Madness"
> wrote:

>Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
>Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
>saying it was too much money.
>Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
>follow my dream of having my PPL.
>But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
>of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
>Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
>the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
>scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
>out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
>http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
>Thanks
>
>

Morgans[_2_]

March 16th 07, 02:50 AM

>> What'cha building, Bill?
>
> An RV10. I've completed the Emp kit (tail feathers and tailcone) and
> moving on to the quickbuild wings. A long way to go but a lot of
> satisfying progress towards a very impressive machine.

Good luck, and stick-to-it.

With as many RV's as are out there, you can't be far off the mark! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[email protected]

March 16th 07, 04:03 AM

> >If someone asks if you are a pilot, you can say...(and this is the
> >best part)
>
> >"Yes, yes I am"
>
> >Priceless!
>
> If you require the reflection of another person to validate your
> aviation experience, you aren't doing it right.
>
> The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
> from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
> a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.

Man, you just can't enjoy a light moment can you...? I'm trying to be
positive for the guy. And it was also a play on a popular commercial,
your total lack of a sense of humor is quite depressing around these
parts. It's one of those little intangibles that seperates us out from
our earth-bound breatheren. And I certainly didn't need anyone else's
reflection or validation when I pulled out my 172 and flew around the
pattern today just for hell of it.

Jay Honeck

March 16th 07, 03:24 PM

> Man, you just can't enjoy a light moment can you...? I'm trying to be
> positive for the guy. And it was also a play on a popular commercial,
> your total lack of a sense of humor is quite depressing around these
> parts.

Ryan, you are dealing with Larry -- the only known pilot who could
take offense at my offering free beer (and food) to our fellow pilots
on their way to Oshkosh, simply because it's, well, beer.

I know you already knew this, but you're looking for humor in the
wrong place.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera

March 16th 07, 04:05 PM

On 16 Mar 2007 08:24:28 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote
in om>:

>who could
>take offense at my offering free beer (and food) to our fellow pilots
>on their way to Oshkosh, simply because it's, well, beer.

Your memory is failing.

This is your article that sparked my requital:

From: "Jay Honeck" >
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Oshkosh Bound? Free Beer in Iowa!
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.217.229.103
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:13:08 GMT

Yes, for those pilots who are hot, tired, thirsty, and en route to
Oshkosh on Sunday, July 27th, Mary and I are holding our First
Annual Fly-In Pool Party at the Alexis Park Inn & Suites in Iowa
City, IA.!

Plug in "IOW" on your GPS, and high-tail it on in -- your flight
into OSH on Monday will be that much shorter (we're just 80
minutes from OSH in our Pathfinder), you'll arrived [sic] more
refreshed -- and, besides, where the heck ELSE are you gonna get
free beer en route to the Big Show, anyway? ;)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993

I said it before*, and I'll say it again:

It was the 'en route' aspect of your 'free beer' advertisement
with which I took issue. Public perception of airmen might be
diminished by the thought of pilots enjoying intoxicating liquor
en route to Air Venture. This is a worldwide public forum after
all.

But you knew that was my motivation, or are you becoming forgetful?

*
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting/msg/88dd431c52728f53?dmode=source

Montblack

March 16th 07, 04:07 PM

wrote)
> Man, you just can't enjoy a light moment can you...? I'm trying to be
> positive for the guy. And it was also a play on a popular commercial, your
> total lack of a sense of humor is quite depressing around these parts.
> It's one of those little intangibles that seperates us out from our
> earth-bound breatheren.

You missed the boat on this one, Ryan. Larry was being whimsical, but it's
often a subtle whimsy with Larry.

.....more subtle.

.....more.

.....getting closer.

....a little more subtle.

.....more.

....almost there.

Montblack-comedy

Bill Watson

March 16th 07, 04:34 PM

Morgans wrote:
>>> What'cha building, Bill?
>> An RV10. I've completed the Emp kit (tail feathers and tailcone) and
>> moving on to the quickbuild wings. A long way to go but a lot of
>> satisfying progress towards a very impressive machine.
>
> Good luck, and stick-to-it.
>
> With as many RV's as are out there, you can't be far off the mark! <g>
I'm pounding away...

There are a lot of RVs out there and that's one reason I'm building
one... good design and kit producing proficiency are pluses in my book.

Don't know if you follow the homebuilding thing and RVs in particular
but the RV10 is a different beast from most. The single digit RVs are
all fun flyers - fast, acrobatic, efficient. Great single person CC too
with an occasional passenger and matching tooth brushes. But not what
I'm after...

The RV10 is their first CC cruiser - 260HP, 4 seats, 1000lbs useful,
200mph, non-acro. A lot of transportation grade airplane for the
kit-built crowd. Quickbuild wings and fuse reduce the build time
substantially and there are a lot of 'pro' builders offering services
too. We're going to see a lot of these around soon. The people who
can't quite bite into a Cirrus (or a Lancair) are going to be chasing
this one.

Can you tell I'm excited?

Bill 'pound pound' Watson
aka Mauledriver

Dana M. Hague

March 16th 07, 11:08 PM

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:45:53 GMT, "BDS" > wrote:

>But it did absorb the so-called "fat" ultralights - they can now be
>certified as LSA which only require a sport pilot license to fly...

Yes, and not necessarily a bad thing... but now they're finding just
how much money and hassle that is going to involve (compared to the
relative freedom of Part 103). Also some owners are having a hell of
a time geting their grandfathered aircraft inspected before the
deadline, because there just aren't enough inspectors.

However, the industry (and media) focus is not on the absorbed
ultralights, but on the [expensive] LSA aircraft which have more in
common with the GA aircraft than ultralights.

>...they were hoping that the SP/LSA initiative would include a
>re-definition of what an ultralight was. But that was never promised. In
>fact, I believe the FAA specifically said that that was not being
>considered.

No, and that IS a good thing. Part 103 never would been created in
this day and age, and any attempt to rewrite 103 would doubtless
result in a LOT less freedom.

>Ultralight pilots are "finding nothing good about SP/LSA" because they will
>no longer be able to operate outside of the CFRs without being noticed. I'm
>not so sure that this is a bad thing.

No, it's not bad... and actually may well lead to a revitalization of
"true" ultralights, for all the pilots who don't want to deal with the
hassles of registration, licensing, etc., for whatever reason.

I've had a PPL for 30 years... but at the moment I'm flying
ultralights because it's just so much simpler-- and not all that
different from buzzing around the local area in the T-Craft I used to
own.

-Dana

--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beware of strange faces and dark dingy places,
Be careful while bending the law.....

B A R R Y

March 16th 07, 11:51 PM

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:08:52 -0400, Dana M. Hague
<d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote:
>
>I've had a PPL for 30 years... but at the moment I'm flying
>ultralights because it's just so much simpler-- and not all that
>different from buzzing around the local area in the T-Craft I used to
>own.

Dana,

If you're up for flying a Sundowner one of these days...

barry at bburke dot com and I'll shoot you a phone number!

You can leave the Gremlin at home and I'll pick you up in Chester.

Jay Honeck

March 17th 07, 01:44 AM

> But you knew that was my motivation, or are you becoming forgetful?

Ah, yes, Larry, I actually *had* forgotten how you split the moral
hairs of the meaning of "en route". However, I suspect the rest of
the audience knew that my post didn't mean that pilots should get
loaded (on the house) and then go fly into the busiest airspace in the
world.

I refuse to believe that airmen are idiots, despite occasional
evidence to the contrary.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera

March 17th 07, 01:59 AM

On 16 Mar 2007 18:44:50 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote
in . com>:

>I actually *had* forgotten

Any idea what's causing you to become forgetful?

Jay Honeck

March 17th 07, 02:04 AM

> >I actually *had* forgotten
>
> Any idea what's causing you to become forgetful?

Not enough beer? :-)

Today, it might be vacation fatigue. 2000+ miles of GA flying (not
that "programmed flying" the big guys do) in just 4 days, with lots of
touristy stuff in the "between days" has me pretty beat.

Not that I'm complaining, mind you... ;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera

March 17th 07, 05:01 AM

On 16 Mar 2007 19:04:14 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote
in . com>:

>2000+ miles of GA flying (not
>that "programmed flying" the big guys do) in just 4 days, with lots of
>touristy stuff in the "between days" has me pretty beat.

There aren't many other light singles that will take a family of four
and baggage without exceeding weight and balance. That Cherokee is a
mighty workhorse.

I found that on long legs at high altitude, mild hypoxia insidiously
impacted my abilities just when I needed them most, at the approach
and landing phases of flight. I started carrying a small oxygen
bottle just to sharpen up when it was necessary. Have you got one of
these? http://www.mhoxygen.com/index.phtml?nav_id=23&news_id=13

Blueskies

March 17th 07, 12:41 PM

"Google Madness" > wrote in message news:p7cKh.3341$I56.128@trnddc06...
: Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
: Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
: saying it was too much money.
: Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
: follow my dream of having my PPL.
: But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
: of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
:
: Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
: the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
: scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
: out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
:
: http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
:
: Thanks
:
:

I learned to fly in the mid 70's and flew for a while as a CFI and com pilot, oh the passion! After so many hours and so
many layoffs, I found a 'real' job and did not fly again for 24 years. A couple of years ago my wife finally prodded me
back, and it is great. GA is not dead and the freedoms we enjoy here in the USA are like no where else on earth. Raise
your flag and fly! You will regret it if you don't, and have adventures like no other when you do!

Dan D.

Jay Honeck

March 17th 07, 12:55 PM

> There aren't many other light singles that will take a family of four
> and baggage without exceeding weight and balance. That Cherokee is a
> mighty workhorse.

At every fuel stop, the line guys were amazed that I wanted all four
tanks topped off, after seeing the gang (and stuff) that came out of
Atlas. After watching one poor Bonanza driver in Myrtle Beach trying
to figure out how to keep his beautiful steed inside the envelope with
three people and fuel, I spent the rest of the journey counting my
blessings.

That guy may get their quicker -- but he'll have to make two trips to
carry what I can haul in one!

> I found that on long legs at high altitude, mild hypoxia insidiously
> impacted my abilities just when I needed them most, at the approach
> and landing phases of flight. I started carrying a small oxygen
> bottle just to sharpen up when it was necessary. Have you got one of
> these? http://www.mhoxygen.com/index.phtml?nav_id=23&news_id=13

Nope, but it's a good idea. On this trip, after spending 4 hours at
8500 feet, I felt just fine -- until I tried to compute how far out I
would have to start my descent in order to reach pattern altitude
properly. Suddenly I realized that mild hypoxia had robbed me of my
(already normally challenged) math skills.

It took greater-than-normal concentration to come up with the answer
-- which alerted me to be very careful with my other decisions. (Yet
another advantage of a two-pilot cockpit. I can tell Mary to keep an
eye on what I'm doing, just in case.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Blueskies

March 17th 07, 01:08 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message ups.com...
:
: Nope, but it's a good idea. On this trip, after spending 4 hours at
: 8500 feet, I felt just fine -- until I tried to compute how far out I
: would have to start my descent in order to reach pattern altitude
: properly. Suddenly I realized that mild hypoxia had robbed me of my
: (already normally challenged) math skills.
:
: It took greater-than-normal concentration to come up with the answer
: -- which alerted me to be very careful with my other decisions. (Yet
: another advantage of a two-pilot cockpit. I can tell Mary to keep an
: eye on what I'm doing, just in case.)
: --
: Jay Honeck
: Iowa City, IA
: Pathfinder N56993
: www.AlexisParkInn.com
: "Your Aviation Destination"
:

You coulda used the Lowarance 2000 to do it for you...I suppose the 496 has the calcs available also?

Gene Seibel

March 17th 07, 07:51 PM

On Mar 15, 7:47 am, "Google Madness" > wrote:
> Twenty years ago I almost got into flying, I'd even taken my Discovery
> Flight and was all set to dive in. Then my wife-to-be put the kabosh on it
> saying it was too much money.
> Now money isn't so much an issue anymore and I'm all set once again to
> follow my dream of having my PPL.
> But, I've heard so many depressing things about the state of ( and future
> of ) GA I'm wondering if the era of GA has passed me by.
>
> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many of
> the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some people
> out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-av...
>
> Thanks

Either you want to fly or you don't. You decide.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

fred

March 17th 07, 11:55 PM

Is the era of GA over?

I started learning to fly about 4 months ago. I'm about 10 hours from
my practical test (winter weather in the northeast teaches one
patience).

In my perspective, flying is a challenge and an adventure. I'm
doing this because it is fun. And because it can be done .
I'm not convinced flying a practical or rational thing to do.

I'm not doing this because I hope to get a job in aviation (I have a
job).
Perhaps it is an obsession I had to defer 25 years ago after I took my
first rides in a small plane (I couldn't afford to pursue it as a
student);
perhaps I need a new hobby now that the kids are off to college.
Maybe it's my mid-life crisis (motorcyles are too dangerous;
motorboats
are too expensive).
I don't question my motives; I'm just having a great time.

There were years I skiied every week; there were years I golfed nearly
every day; this summer I may be flying the skies of New England when
the
weather is VFR and the winds are low.

The era of GA is just beginning.

Fred

john smith

March 18th 07, 12:44 AM

In article om>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Nope, but it's a good idea. On this trip, after spending 4 hours at
> 8500 feet, I felt just fine -- until I tried to compute how far out I
> would have to start my descent in order to reach pattern altitude
> properly. Suddenly I realized that mild hypoxia had robbed me of my
> (already normally challenged) math skills.
> It took greater-than-normal concentration to come up with the answer
> -- which alerted me to be very careful with my other decisions. (Yet
> another advantage of a two-pilot cockpit. I can tell Mary to keep an
> eye on what I'm doing, just in case.)

And you were dehydrated because you didn't drink enough water!
Several of us here continue to warn you, and you just won't listen to us.
Buy some piddle packs at the sporting goods store, carry an empty gallon
antifreeze jug, whatever you need, but start drinking water on those
long legs. :-))

Scott

March 18th 07, 03:59 AM

On 17 Mar 2007 16:55:28 -0700, in rec.aviation.student, "fred"
> wrote:

>perhaps I need a new hobby now that the kids are off to college.
>Maybe it's my mid-life crisis (motorcyles are too dangerous;
>motorboats >are too expensive).

Hmm...so what does it mean if I'm riding my motorcycle to the airport where
I take flying lessons? I don't own a boat...but my wife does....

I very much like the idea that today is the best of all possible days, aside
from yesterday, to take up aviation. If I can just figure out how to pay
for it....

-Scott

Tim

March 18th 07, 04:07 AM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>
>>If you require the reflection of another person to validate your
>>aviation experience, you aren't doing it right.
>
>
> The law requires it, unfortunately.
>
>
>>The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
>>from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
>>a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.
>
>
> Best not to mention the utility of aviation as a mode of transport, at least
> with respect to small GA aircraft.
>

Are you kidding me? Just because you don't think it is a good mode of
transportation does not mean it isn't so. Many people use it as a
hobby. Others use GA for transportation.

I fly to my vacation home in Vermont from Long Island. That trip in a
car takes about 7 hours without traffic (NY city area and Albany). In a
plane I can be there in 4 hours door to door. Saving 6 hours round trip
(approx 40% savings in time) is wonderful. I value my time. However, I
can see where someone who is unemployed, does not participate in the
real world, and plays games and simulations for hours on end would not
consider saving time to be a useful aspect of flying.

The costs are not so bad either. It is marginally more expensive to
fly, since I don't have to pay tolls over all the bridges, for a ferry
and for the interstate highway when I fly.

Tim

March 18th 07, 04:24 AM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>
>>While I can understand your desire to get some feedback from those
>>currently enjoying the joy of flight before committing the not
>>insubstantial time and resources required to obtain your airmans
>>certificate, if you would let their input, or indeed that of your
>>wife, stand in the path to your dream, you may not have the requisite
>>'fire in your belly' to make a good airman.
>
>
> Why must one have "fire in the belly" in order to be entitled to fly? Is it a
> hazing ritual, or is it a hobby?
>
> There may be some justification for certain qualifications to be required when
> one is doing something that directly affects others, such as flying a
> commercial airliner. It's difficult to see any justification for this when
> one is doing something as a hobby that affects essentially no one else.
>
> Suggesting that someone needs arbitrary qualifications or must overcome
> arbitrary hurdles in the latter case is simple elitism.
>
>
>>The path to an airmans
>>certificate is expensive, and donning the responsibilities of becoming
>>a 'pilot in command' is, or should be, a life-changing event.
>
>
> What responsibilities? If you are flying on your own, they are practically
> nil, not any greater than riding your own motorcycle.
>
>
>>Becoming a responsible airman is not really at all akin to becoming a
>>licensed motorist.
>
>
> Sure it is, fundamentally. But many artificial barriers exist in order to
> ensure that only certain people are allowed to join the club. A lot of
> aviators do _not_ want other people to fly, as this would lessen the ego trip
> they get themselves out of flying. The idea of anyone being able to do it
> bothers them. And just about anyone _could_ do it, if the artificial barriers
> were removed. It's not that difficult.
>
>
>>And it's not possible to be a dilettante airman; it requires constant
>>exercise of your right to fly, almost weekly ...
>
>
> See above. More of the treehouse-club effect.
>
>
>>You will have to MASTER several disciplines to achieve the status of
>>pilot.
>
>
> No, you won't. All you have to do is pass the tests. If pilots _mastered_
> the skills that are supposedly represented by the tests, they would have no
> accidents due to pilot error.
>
>
>>You will not only need the motor skills necessary to control
>>the aircraft ...
>
>
> Which anyone who can ride a bicycle or roller-skate already has.
>
>
>>... you'll need to acquire mastery of the fundamentals of
>>meteorology to read mother nature's ever churning skies ...
>
>
> Fundamentals is an overstatement. I'm sure many meteorologists would agree.
> And many pilots barely manage that, as accidents regularly prove.
>
>
>>mastery pilotage, dead reckoning and several types of radio navigation,
>>mastery of voluminous aviation regulation details, mastery of radio
>>communication techniques and operation, mastery of a myriad of
>>aircraft systems, how to effectively employ cockpit resource
>>management, and most importantly, you'll need to learn how to be a
>>CAPTAIN capable of abandoning your pride when safety demands that you
>>make a socially unpopular decision and sticking to it in the face of
>>what will feel like overwhelming social pressure.
>
>
> Pride seems to be the predominant characteristic under discussion here.
>
> Maybe some people should become doctors instead of pilots. From the way you
> write about it, becoming a doctor sounds a lot easier.
>
>
>>In addition, you'll need reasonably good health over the entire time
>>you exercise your right to ply the skies.
>
>
> More like robust health (far in excess of what would actually be required to
> fly), thanks to archaic rules and more of the treehouse-club mentality.
>
>
>>If you have what it takes, do it. If you lack TOTAL commitment, don't
>>waste your time.
>
>
> In other words, if someone isn't as fanatic as you think they should be, you
> want them to stay out of the club.
>

There may be some in the community who feel more special because they
fly, but that is not the norm. If so, it is not unique to pilots.
However, that has not been my experience. I think your view is skewed
because you feel ostracized by those whom you belittle and whom you
think you are better than because yo have 10000 hours in barons and 747s
and they have just a few hundred hours in old cessnas with old analog
radio tuners and no autopilots...

What would you say to someone who said he knew Paris better than most
Parisians, yet had never been there. THis person watched videos of the
Eifel tower, read about the Louvre, ate french bread from the local
bakery from his local town in the USA. He/she also had "conversations"
in french with his computer language tutor program. He/she even took
lessons in how to surrender and hold his/her hands up so he/she would be
more French. Does that help you see how your claims are viewed by
pilots? Perhaps not.

Getting a certificate in the US is a challenge and if that is the goal
it should be understood that it will take a lot of motivation. There
are many factors that inhibit achieving the goal - outside of money and
skill/learning. Contrary to what you might think it is not a bunch of
hazing rituals or secret handshakes. The process of taking lessons,
dealing with cancelations due to weather, instructors, maintenance,
shceduling, etc wears one down and makes getting a pilot certificate
more an acheivement of persistence than one of skill or talent or
learning. It is not hard to fly. Most people can learn to do it.

Most people though have false notions that it is overly complicated, too
expensive or something that is too dangerous.

I've never met a pilot who wasn't thrilled to meet other pilots or who
disuaded others about learning to fly. On the contrary - all the
members of this "elitist club" (that you like to call it) usually go out
of their way to introduce others to the joy and fun of flying and will
mentor, give free flights, teach, talk about it or do anything else to
promote this passion of theirs.

Jay Honeck

March 18th 07, 11:59 AM

> You coulda used the Lowarance 2000 to do it for you...I suppose the 496 has the calcs available also?

I know, but it's the kind of simple math that I *should* be able to do
in my head.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

March 18th 07, 12:01 PM

> And you were dehydrated because you didn't drink enough water!
> Several of us here continue to warn you, and you just won't listen to us.
> Buy some piddle packs at the sporting goods store, carry an empty gallon
> antifreeze jug, whatever you need, but start drinking water on those
> long legs. :-))

I'll bet my 13 year old daughter would LOVE that...NOT.

We did carry water on this trip, and sipped from it occasionally. I
may have been mildly dehydrated, but I wasn't thirsty.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

March 18th 07, 12:07 PM

> There were years I skiied every week; there were years I golfed nearly
> every day; this summer I may be flying the skies of New England when
> the
> weather is VFR and the winds are low.
>
> The era of GA is just beginning.

Well said, Fred. As long as we can keep the damned gummint out of our
way, we Americans are still free to make our own "Era of GA"...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 02:16 PM

Tim writes:

> Are you kidding me? Just because you don't think it is a good mode of
> transportation does not mean it isn't so. Many people use it as a
> hobby. Others use GA for transportation.

It's pretty to demonstrate its impracticality. I'm not sure why so many
pilots feel they must prove that their flying has practical value, and isn't
simply a hobby that they find enjoyable.

It's a bit like golfers trying to prove that their sport is better exercise
than a purpose-designed program.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 02:16 PM

john smith writes:

> And you were dehydrated because you didn't drink enough water!

Hypoxia is _far_ more likely to cause the symptoms described than dehydration.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 02:17 PM

Jay Honeck writes:

> We did carry water on this trip, and sipped from it occasionally. I
> may have been mildly dehydrated, but I wasn't thirsty.

If you're not thirsty, you're not dehydrated.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 02:22 PM

Tim writes:

> There may be some in the community who feel more special because they
> fly, but that is not the norm.

Perhaps the abnormal ones are strangely attracted ot USENET, then.

Actually, however, the USENET syndrome is not unique to pilots. It's much
more closely associated with IQ than occupation.

> However, that has not been my experience. I think your view is skewed
> because you feel ostracized by those whom you belittle and whom you
> think you are better than because yo have 10000 hours in barons and 747s
> and they have just a few hundred hours in old cessnas with old analog
> radio tuners and no autopilots...

It makes no difference to me; I'm a veteran of USENET, and the chattering of a
few parrots causes me no stress.

> What would you say to someone who said he knew Paris better than most
> Parisians, yet had never been there.

I'd find it hard to believe based on the assertion alone, but it's certainly
possible that he might be right.

> THis person watched videos of the Eifel tower, read about the Louvre,
> ate french bread from the local bakery from his local town in the USA.
> He/she also had "conversations" in french with his computer language
> tutor program.

All of those would certain improve his knowledge of Paris, and there are
Parisians who would already know less than he if he were to do that.

> He/she even took lessons in how to surrender and hold his/her hands
> up so he/she would be more French.

I don't see the connection.

> It is not hard to fly. Most people can learn to do it.

Agreed. The obstacles actually have nothing to do with flying per se.

> Most people though have false notions that it is overly complicated, too
> expensive or something that is too dangerous.

It is indeed very expensive, very time-consuming, and involves a tremendous
amount of red tape and many odd conditions. These are the many reasons why
there are not more pilots.

> I've never met a pilot who wasn't thrilled to meet other pilots or who
> disuaded others about learning to fly. On the contrary - all the
> members of this "elitist club" (that you like to call it) usually go out
> of their way to introduce others to the joy and fun of flying and will
> mentor, give free flights, teach, talk about it or do anything else to
> promote this passion of theirs.

Not so. They dislike simulation.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 02:23 PM

Gene Seibel writes:

> Either you want to fly or you don't. You decide.

Unfortunately, when confronted with an attitude like that, most people
immediately decide that they don't want to.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Tim

March 18th 07, 03:08 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Tim writes:
>
>
>>Are you kidding me? Just because you don't think it is a good mode of
>>transportation does not mean it isn't so. Many people use it as a
>>hobby. Others use GA for transportation.
>
>
> It's pretty to demonstrate its impracticality. I'm not sure why so many
> pilots feel they must prove that their flying has practical value, and isn't
> simply a hobby that they find enjoyable.
>
> It's a bit like golfers trying to prove that their sport is better exercise
> than a purpose-designed program.
>

Many people demonstrate its practicality day after day. Most pilots
though who don't own their own planes cannot ever make it practical to
fly for transportation. THose of us who do own can make claims that it
does. Your opinion on the matter is moot since you have never been in a
GA aircraft and have probably never been to an uncontrolled airport nor
seen what operations are like at those airports.

Alaskan commerce and life as it exists today would not be able to
function without GA.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Tim

March 18th 07, 03:13 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Jay Honeck writes:
>
>
>>We did carry water on this trip, and sipped from it occasionally. I
>>may have been mildly dehydrated, but I wasn't thirsty.
>
>
> If you're not thirsty, you're not dehydrated.
>

Are you a doctor or a sports physiologist? Where did you get that load
of crap?

Tim

March 18th 07, 03:24 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
>>He/she even took lessons in how to surrender and hold his/her hands
>>up so he/she would be more French.
>
>
> I don't see the connection.

I guess your humor skills are lacking.

>
>
>
>>Most people though have false notions that it is overly complicated, too
>>expensive or something that is too dangerous.
>
>
> It is indeed very expensive, very time-consuming, and involves a tremendous
> amount of red tape and many odd conditions. These are the many reasons why
> there are not more pilots.

It is no more expensive that other hobbies or activities. It takes
about 70 hours of flight training to get a private pilot certificate.
If one triples that number to add ground school and flight time we get
280 hours total for study and flight time. That does not seem like an
inordinate amount of time to spend over the course of a year -
especially if one were to say, fly 2 hours per weekend and study an hour
per night reading. How much time do you spend sitting at your
computer reading newsgroups and playing games? Most people can fit it
into their schedule. It is a matter of priorities.

As for expense - again, it is a matter of priorities. If one forgoes
new/leased cars and instead takes flying lessons it is quite accessible.

>
>
>>I've never met a pilot who wasn't thrilled to meet other pilots or who
>>disuaded others about learning to fly. On the contrary - all the
>>members of this "elitist club" (that you like to call it) usually go out
>>of their way to introduce others to the joy and fun of flying and will
>>mentor, give free flights, teach, talk about it or do anything else to
>>promote this passion of theirs.
>
>
> Not so. They dislike simulation.

I see no correlation between simulation and real flying. I think your
experience is unique. Perhaps the reluctance of real pilots to welcome
you has little to do with your chosen way to spend time (simming/gaming)
than it is your clear and often rudely stated discussions about how GA
is useless and the pilots of GA aircraft are stupid, ignorant, filthy
rich, macho/testosterone filled babies with huge egos.

Most pilots I have met do not match the view you have of them.

Larry Dighera

March 18th 07, 04:05 PM

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:44:44 -0400, john smith > wrote
in >:

>And you were dehydrated because you didn't drink enough water!

I don't fly without a 1.5 ltr bottle of water. It's essential.

Andrew Gideon

March 18th 07, 07:23 PM

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:37:18 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

> Becoming a responsible airman is not really at all akin to becoming a
> licensed motorist.

Why not? I don't mean what is, but what should be. I've seen some awful
drivers. Shouldn't the bar be higher than it is?

How often, just to a couple of common examples, do driving instructors
check on a student's handling of distractions? Or deal with the concept
of "personal minimums"?

Shouldn't they?

- Andrew

john smith

March 18th 07, 07:39 PM

In article . com>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> I know, but it's the kind of simple math that I *should* be able to do
> in my head.

Cruise altitude - target altitude = altitude loss

9,500 - 2,000 = 7,500

altitude loss/500fpm = minutes or [altitude loss/1,000] x 2

7,500/500 = 15 minutes or 7.5 x 2 = 15 minutes

minutes x miles per minute = miles

15 x 1.5 = 22.5nm 15 x 2 = 30nm 15 x 2.5 = 37.5nm 15 x 3 = 45nm

90 kts = 1.5 nm/m
120 kts = 2.0 nm/m
150 kts = 2.5 nm/m
180 kts = 3.0 nm/m

Andrew Gideon

March 18th 07, 07:46 PM

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:07:45 -0400, Tim wrote:

> Saving 6 hours round trip (approx
> 40% savings in time) is wonderful.

Some people get interested when they hear I'm a pilot, but only because
it's an oddity. On the other hand, when I describe my wife and I taking a
quick lunch on Nantucket (or some other attractive multi-hour drive), and
then playing with our son on the beach, the interest picks up.

But that's just the practical side. My wife and I SCUBA too. There's
just something about that third dimension that we're not meant to ignore.

On the other hand, some people are happy being flatlanders and it's wrong
of us to judge that. But it is irksome how some people use their own
fear and limits as justification to try to impose those upon others.

Is the era of GA over? No, far from it. But we are under attack by
small-minded people that fear anyone that doesn't live from fear. Perhaps
fear makes people easier to control (ie. vote for me or you'll be nuked by
imaginary WMD)? Perhaps some people just cannot stand those that do what
they cannot?

I don't know. But from reading here, I gather that this attack of the
small-minded isn't new. It is our job to stand and fly despite this. To
do otherwise is to surrender to tyranny and mediocrity.

How fortunate that it's also terrific fun and providing some very
practical benefits.

- Andrew

Jim Logajan

March 18th 07, 07:58 PM

Tim > wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> If you're not thirsty, you're not dehydrated.
>
> Are you a doctor or a sports physiologist? Where did you get that load
> of crap?

I think he made the mistake of inverting the causality in the statement "If
you are thirsty then you are dehydrated," which appears to be generally
accepted as far as I can tell. Mxsmanic appears to have made a classic
blunder in logic: that "If A then B" implies "If B then A." Of course it
doesn't.

While it appears to be true that by the time you experience thirst you are
dehydrated, there appears to be some physiologic lag time after other
dehydration symptoms have occurred but before thirst kicks in. So it
appears there is a period of time in which you may be dehydrated but are
not yet thirsty.

Of course sometimes I get a dry mouth working in dusty environments and
really need a drink of water. I'd call that being thirsty in a colloquial
sense, though it may not match the physiologic meaning.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 08:53 PM

Tim writes:

> Are you a doctor or a sports physiologist?

Neither.

> Where did you get that load of crap?

From medical textbooks.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 08:55 PM

Jim Logajan writes:

> I think he made the mistake of inverting the causality in the statement "If
> you are thirsty then you are dehydrated," which appears to be generally
> accepted as far as I can tell.

So is the inverse. Thirst is a reliable indicator of dehydration. An absence
of thirst is a reliable indicator of proper hydration.

> While it appears to be true that by the time you experience thirst you are
> dehydrated, there appears to be some physiologic lag time after other
> dehydration symptoms have occurred but before thirst kicks in.

Only in extraordinarily acute dehydration, which is not a type of dehydration
that occurs when flying an aircraft.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 08:58 PM

Tim writes:

> It is no more expensive that other hobbies or activities.

The number of other hobbies and activities that are orders of magnitude less
expensive than flying is too great to allow them all to be enumerated here.

> It takes about 70 hours of flight training to get a private pilot certificate.

It takes a pencil and a piece of charcoal to practice art as a hobby.

> I see no correlation between simulation and real flying.

I see no correlation between flying tin cans and flying any other type of
aircraft. But perhaps we're both wrong.

> Perhaps the reluctance of real pilots to welcome
> you has little to do with your chosen way to spend time (simming/gaming)
> than it is your clear and often rudely stated discussions about how GA
> is useless and the pilots of GA aircraft are stupid, ignorant, filthy
> rich, macho/testosterone filled babies with huge egos.

Their reluctance is directly connected to their emotions. Unfortunately, some
of those emotions are indeed correlated with stupidity, ignorance, and
testosterone, although the correlation is not terribly high.

> Most pilots I have met do not match the view you have of them.

Most of those pilots don't start threads five times a week discussing me here
in this newsgroup.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jay Honeck

March 18th 07, 09:42 PM

> > I know, but it's the kind of simple math that I *should* be able to do
> > in my head.
>
> Cruise altitude - target altitude = altitude loss
>
> 9,500 - 2,000 = 7,500
>
> altitude loss/500fpm = minutes or [altitude loss/1,000] x 2
>
> 7,500/500 = 15 minutes or 7.5 x 2 = 15 minutes

Right -- and when I'm not hypoxic, that's easy stuff.

:-)

The rest of what you showed is really unnecessary, as both GPS's show
a steady count-down in minutes till arrival...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Tim

March 18th 07, 10:51 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Tim writes:
>
>
>>Are you a doctor or a sports physiologist?
>
>
> Neither.

I thought not.

>
>
>>Where did you get that load of crap?
>
>
> From medical textbooks.
>

I would look for new medical textbooks.
I have experienced dehydration. I was diagnosed as such by doctors. I
was not thirsty. I was given IV fluids. Fixed the dehydration.

You're wrong on this one. Thirst is an indicator, but it is not true
that dehydration must always include a symptom of thirst.

Tim

March 18th 07, 11:00 PM

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Tim writes:
>
>
>>It is no more expensive that other hobbies or activities.
>
>
> The number of other hobbies and activities that are orders of magnitude less
> expensive than flying is too great to allow them all to be enumerated here.
>
>
>>It takes about 70 hours of flight training to get a private pilot certificate.
>
>
> It takes a pencil and a piece of charcoal to practice art as a hobby.
>
>
>>I see no correlation between simulation and real flying.
>
>
> I see no correlation between flying tin cans and flying any other type of
> aircraft. But perhaps we're both wrong.
>
>
>>Perhaps the reluctance of real pilots to welcome
>>you has little to do with your chosen way to spend time (simming/gaming)
>>than it is your clear and often rudely stated discussions about how GA
>>is useless and the pilots of GA aircraft are stupid, ignorant, filthy
>>rich, macho/testosterone filled babies with huge egos.
>
>
> Their reluctance is directly connected to their emotions. Unfortunately, some
> of those emotions are indeed correlated with stupidity, ignorance, and
> testosterone, although the correlation is not terribly high.
>
>
>>Most pilots I have met do not match the view you have of them.
>
>
> Most of those pilots don't start threads five times a week discussing me here
> in this newsgroup.
>

Why do you bother to post to this newsgroup if you already know more
than GA pilots and don't ever wish to fly in a real plane? This is
clearly a GA newsgroup. You are wasting your time on here.

You are a topic of discussion because you seem to be unique in the
readership by holding yourself out as someone who knows more than others
but has not ever take a GA flight and who has no intention of ever doing
so. Your "knowledge" of flying is all theoretical and so narrowly
focused. You cannot ever seem to acknowledge that others have different
opinions and actually can fly small airplane and it is practical for
them. You also insult so many people by insisting that plane ownership
and GA is for the spoiled rich and those with more money than brains.
That is not the case, but you cling to the notion that flying is the
most expensive pastime around. You are dead wrong. Glider flying is
one clear example. There are many glider clubs in the US that use
volunteers for tows and instruction. The cost of getting a pilot
certificate in that case is below $2000. Many people do it.

Never once have I seen you concede that you were/are wrong on any point.
Do you purposely try to frustrate people? I think so. I think you
enjoy trying to control people's emotions because you clearly have too
much time on your hands and no "real" life to speak of - your life is
lived from your chair in front of your computer.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 11:54 PM

Tim writes:

> I would look for new medical textbooks.

Because they disagree with some stranger on a newsgroup? No, I don't think
so.

> I have experienced dehydration.

So have I. But I've also studied it.

> You're wrong on this one.

How do you know?

> Thirst is an indicator, but it is not true
> that dehydration must always include a symptom of thirst.

Unless it is extremely acute, thirst is a reliable indicator of dehydration.
If it were not, then people would die regularly of dehydration, since they'd
have no incentive to rehydrate.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic

March 18th 07, 11:56 PM

Tim writes:

> Why do you bother to post to this newsgroup if you already know more
> than GA pilots and don't ever wish to fly in a real plane?

Some people here know more than I do about certain questions I have in the
domain of aviation. Granted, it's hard to sort through the noise sometimes,
as the most vocal posters are often the most wrong as well, but there are
occasional nuggets of useful information.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Morgans[_2_]

March 19th 07, 12:08 AM

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Tim writes:
>
>> I would look for new medical textbooks.
>
> Because they disagree with some stranger on a newsgroup? No, I don't
> think
> so.
>
>> I have experienced dehydration.
>
> So have I. But I've also studied it.

Book title, and page number (or at least chapter title) please.

Oh, I know, you can't be bothered, you don't have the book any more, yada,
yada, yada.
--
Jim in NC

BucFan

March 19th 07, 10:17 PM

> Here's one article, like many others that I've read, that expresses many
> of the issues that sounds so dismal for GA. I'm now seriously considering
> scrapping the idea of a PPL once again but I'd like to hear from some
> people out there if the situation is not really as bad as this sounds.
>
> http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/2007/01/26/threats-to-general-aviation/
>
> Thanks
>

There is always a reason not to do something if you look hard enough. You
could also fall down the stairs tomorrow.

I say if you want to fly, start the training. If you do not like it after
you start, quit and do something else. You will never know unless you try!!

John

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 08:57 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Gene Seibel writes:
>
>> Either you want to fly or you don't. You decide.
>
> Unfortunately, when confronted with an attitude like that, most people
> immediately decide that they don't want to.
>

Good, more room for me.

Thanskfully you're one of those that doesn't fly...

bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 08:59 AM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Gig 601XL Builder writes:
>
>> 2. (In)Security: We are currently in a war.
>
> The United States is not currently at war.
>
>> 2.The FAA with a lot of pushing from EAA and AOPA have created the
>> LSA license and aircraft certification standard that will allow you
>> to buy a brand new 2 place aircraft comparable to the one I'm
>> building for less than $100K. Take a 16 hour course and you will even
>> be able to work on you own LSA aircraft.
>
> Of course, you can't do much with it. And if you want an LSA because
> you failed the medical for a regular PPL, you're out of luck (that's a
> really bizarre rule).
>

no, it isn't, you just can't understand it..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 07:34 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>> While I can understand your desire to get some feedback from those
>> currently enjoying the joy of flight before committing the not
>> insubstantial time and resources required to obtain your airmans
>> certificate, if you would let their input, or indeed that of your
>> wife, stand in the path to your dream, you may not have the requisite
>> 'fire in your belly' to make a good airman.
>
> Why must one have "fire in the belly" in order to be entitled to fly?
> Is it a hazing ritual, or is it a hobby?

let me guess, you don't fly...

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 07:34 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Tim writes:
>
>> There may be some in the community who feel more special because they
>> fly, but that is not the norm.
>
> Perhaps the abnormal ones are strangely attracted ot USENET, then.
>
> Actually, however, the USENET syndrome is not unique to pilots. It's
> much more closely associated with IQ than occupation.
>

Bwawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahhwhahwhahhwhahwha hwhahhwhahwhahhwhahwhh
ahwhahwhha!

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 07:35 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Tim writes:
>
>> Why do you bother to post to this newsgroup if you already know more
>> than GA pilots and don't ever wish to fly in a real plane?
>
> Some people here know more than I do about certain questions I have in
> the domain of aviation.

Bwawhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhhahwhah!

I have a six month old puppy downstairs that knows more than you about
aviation!

bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 20th 07, 07:39 PM

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>> If you require the reflection of another person to validate your
>> aviation experience, you aren't doing it right.
>
> The law requires it, unfortunately.
>
>> The joy of dwelling in the third dimension and beholding the sights
>> from a lofty vantage point, not to mention the utility of aviation as
>> a mode of transport, are the true reasons for becoming a pilot.
>
> Best not to mention the utility of aviation as a mode of transport, at
> least with respect to small GA aircraft.

Again, clueless beyond belief..

Bertie

Tom L.

March 21st 07, 01:21 AM

On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:55:12 +0100, Mxsmanic >
wrote:

> Thirst is a reliable indicator of dehydration.

Yes.

> An absence
>of thirst is a reliable indicator of proper hydration.

No.

>
>> While it appears to be true that by the time you experience thirst you are
>> dehydrated, there appears to be some physiologic lag time after other
>> dehydration symptoms have occurred but before thirst kicks in.
>
>Only in extraordinarily acute dehydration, which is not a type of dehydration
>that occurs when flying an aircraft.

Check out the three articles below. The third one is more technical
and explains the delay between dehydration and thirst.

From personal experience: I used to live in humid areas (Europe and
East Coast of the US) and never felt any simptomps of dehydration
there besides thirst. Now I spend most of my time in the West and
Southwest US and sometimes have a particular headache that goes away
immediately after drinking some fluids. This is more likely to happen
when the air is dry and especially if I'm at higher elevation, e.g.
while flying. I do not experience thirst, the headache is my first
indicator of dehydration.

More knowledgeable people wrote this:
http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/hydration/a/022504.htm
http://www.detrick.army.mil/tenants/ih/ehhot.cfm
http://www.water.org.uk/home/water-for-health/medical-facts/dehydration

- Tom

Mxsmanic

March 21st 07, 10:13 AM

Tom L. writes:

> Check out the three articles below. The third one is more technical
> and explains the delay between dehydration and thirst.

Sports and the military have nothing to do with aviation. I've already
explained the distinction of acute dehydration; but that does not occur in
pilots, as a general rule.

Additionally, of the three references, only one is even moderately trustworthy
(the Army link), and even that must be taken with a grain of salt. Anyone can
write for About.com or a random association. And one cannot be sure who is
writing for the Army, unfortunately.

Finally, these references don't even support your assertions to begin with.

> From personal experience: I used to live in humid areas (Europe and
> East Coast of the US) and never felt any simptomps of dehydration
> there besides thirst.

That's because you were not significantly dehydrated. Thirst is one of the
earliest and most reliable indicators.

> Now I spend most of my time in the West and
> Southwest US and sometimes have a particular headache that goes away
> immediately after drinking some fluids. This is more likely to happen
> when the air is dry and especially if I'm at higher elevation, e.g.
> while flying. I do not experience thirst, the headache is my first
> indicator of dehydration.

You may be better hydrated than you are when thirsty.

Dehydration is extremely difficult to quantify. Whenever anyone says that you
are 1.5 litres low or anything as specific as that, you can usually assume
that he doesn't know what he's talking about. It's pretty much impossible to
prove that someone is properly hydrated or mildly dehydrated; only severe
dehydration produces unambiguous clinical signs.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Larry Dighera

March 21st 07, 02:51 PM

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:35:26 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
> wrote in
>:

>
>Bwawhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhhahwhah!
>
>I have a six month old puppy downstairs that knows more than you about
>aviation!
>
>
>
>bertie

While I may sympathize with your sentiment, I find the "CB" ambiance
of your attack posts repugnant, and unbecoming an airman. Show a
little dignity, man. Please.

Or better yet, take it to e-mail, so that it doesn't reflect poorly on
the face the participants of this newsgroup show the world.

Newps

March 21st 07, 05:34 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:35:26 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
> > wrote in
> >:
>
>
>>Bwawhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhhahwhah!
>>
>>I have a six month old puppy downstairs that knows more than you about
>>aviation!
>>
>>
>>
>>bertie
>
>
>
> While I may sympathize with your sentiment, I find the "CB" ambiance
> of your attack posts repugnant, and unbecoming an airman. Show a
> little dignity, man. Please.
>
> Or better yet, take it to e-mail, so that it doesn't reflect poorly on
> the face the participants of this newsgroup show the world.

There are a gazillion newsgroups, the world doesn't see any of it. Fire
for effect.

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 21st 07, 06:39 PM

Larry Dighera > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:35:26 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
> > wrote in
> >:
>
>>
>>Bwawhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhhahwhah!
>>
>>I have a six month old puppy downstairs that knows more than you about
>>aviation!
>>
>>
>>
>>bertie
>
>
> While I may sympathize with your sentiment, I find the "CB" ambiance
> of your attack posts repugnant, and unbecoming an airman. Show a
> little dignity, man. Please.
>
> Or better yet, take it to e-mail, so that it doesn't reflect poorly on
> the face the participants of this newsgroup show the world.
>

Not gonna happen Larry..

Bertie

Larry Dighera

March 22nd 07, 01:45 PM

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:34:06 -0600, Newps > wrote
in >:

>There are a gazillion newsgroups,

Well, a few tens of thousands any way.

>the world doesn't see any of it.

Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but upon what do you base that
opinion?

Newps

March 22nd 07, 09:53 PM

Larry Dighera wrote:

>>the world doesn't see any of it.
>
>
> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but upon what do you base that
> opinion?

There's maybe 50 people here. Even if there are several times that that
never post, highly unlikely, this group, as any group, is irrelavant.

Jim Logajan

March 22nd 07, 10:49 PM

Newps > wrote:
> Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>>>the world doesn't see any of it.
>>
>>
>> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but upon what do you base that
>> opinion?
>
> There's maybe 50 people here. Even if there are several times that that
> never post, highly unlikely, this group, as any group, is irrelavant.

Your estimate is _way_ low. According to this site:

http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/ReportCard.aspx

there were 850 distinct posters to this group so far this year. And there
were 2264 distinct posters to this group in 2006. It would take an awful
lot of duplicate handles to reduce the count of distinct people to the 50
range.

And Google Groups alone counts 1088 people subscribed to the group via its
interface to Usenet:

http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&sel=16823835,16823723&expand=1

And the count of lurkers who only read is unknown - though I've heard
ratios of anywhere from about 5-to-1 to 50-to-1 for other groups where
someone tried to make estimates (presumably by running stats on NNTP
traffic or in the old days, maybe via root scans of people's .newsrc?)

In fact it should be possible to get a ballpark estimate of the lurker-to-
active ratio by counting the number of distinct posters who posted from
google.com and dividing the 1088 number by that count.

Therefore it seems reasonable to claim that there are several thousand
people who read this newsgroup. It might even reach into the ten thousand
range.

Larry Dighera

March 22nd 07, 10:51 PM

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:53:03 -0600, Newps > wrote
in >:

>
>
>Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>>>the world doesn't see any of it.
>>
>>
>> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but upon what do you base that
>> opinion?
>
>
>
>There's maybe 50 people here. Even if there are several times that that
>never post, highly unlikely, this group, as any group, is irrelavant.

Irrelevant to whom?

The newsgroup is as relevant as the information, and to some extent
opinion, contributed. Or do you mean to imply that you consider the
newsgroup irrelevant due to minimal public exposure to its content,
perhaps more properly termed insignificant?

I would expect it reasonable to guess that 90% or the readership of
rec.aviation.piloting are solely readers, and don't post articles. 500
still isn't a large number of participants in this forum. But when
you consider that it's gatewayed via http to many more web sites on
the WWW, and further consider the fact that all the content of the
newsgroup is archived on-line for decades, what gets posted to
rec.aviation.piloting sees considerably more exposure over the years
than you might expect.

You're a regular contributor to rec.aviation.piloting. Google your
posting alias, and see how many hits you get (Results 1 - 100 of about
31,500 for newps. (0.26 seconds) . Then report back.

Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]

March 23rd 07, 02:31 AM

Jim Logajan > wrote in
:

> Newps > wrote:
>> Larry Dighera wrote:
>>
>>>>the world doesn't see any of it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but upon what do you base that
>>> opinion?
>>
>> There's maybe 50 people here. Even if there are several times that
>> that never post, highly unlikely, this group, as any group, is
>> irrelavant.
>
> Your estimate is _way_ low. According to this site:
>
> http://netscan.research.microsoft.com/ReportCard.aspx
>
> there were 850 distinct posters to this group so far this year. And
> there were 2264 distinct posters to this group in 2006. It would take
> an awful lot of duplicate handles to reduce the count of distinct
> people to the 50 range.
>
> And Google Groups alone counts 1088 people subscribed to the group via
> its interface to Usenet:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&sel=16823835,16823723
&expand=
> 1
>
> And the count of lurkers who only read is unknown - though I've heard
> ratios of anywhere from about 5-to-1 to 50-to-1 for other groups where
> someone tried to make estimates (presumably by running stats on NNTP
> traffic or in the old days, maybe via root scans of people's .newsrc?)
>
> In fact it should be possible to get a ballpark estimate of the
> lurker-to- active ratio by counting the number of distinct posters who
> posted from google.com and dividing the 1088 number by that count.
>
> Therefore it seems reasonable to claim that there are several thousand
> people who read this newsgroup. It might even reach into the ten
> thousand range.
>
whoo hoo!

Bertie