Flying in the USA vs. Europe

[Jay Honeck]

As many of you know, I'm currently on a "barnstorming tour" around the
Eastern half of America, flying wherever the weather is best, and
enjoying the scenery along the way. Since Sunday we've flown from
Iowa City, IA to First Flight (Kill Devil Hills, NC), to Ocracoke
Island, to Beaufort, NC, to Huntsville, Alabama, to Memphis,
Tennessee. We'll be flying home tomorrow, completing a relatively
simple VFR flight of 1977 miles.

Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
Europe:

London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
Austria
Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain

During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
the Eastern Seaboard.

Considering that our current flight has been almost effortless, with
minimal contact with air traffic control (VFR flight following, and,
of course, interaction with control towers at larger airfields), with
no landing fees, only a couple of parking fees, and the highest price
per gallon of avgas paid (thus far) pegged at $4.10 per gallon, it
really is a truism that you simply can't beat GA flying in the good
ol' U.S. of A.

It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
(Presently in Memphis, TN)
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Mxsmanic]

Jay Honeck writes:

> Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
> on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
> expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
> Europe:
>
> London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
> Austria
> Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
> Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain

Not particularly stunning to me. It's just simple geography.

> During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
> with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
> Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
> the Eastern Seaboard.

Nothing surprising about that, either. Every country in Europe has its own
rules for flight, often loosely based on ICAO rules, but still with enough
complications to make flight vastly more complicated in Europe.

> Considering that our current flight has been almost effortless, with
> minimal contact with air traffic control (VFR flight following, and,
> of course, interaction with control towers at larger airfields), with
> no landing fees, only a couple of parking fees, and the highest price
> per gallon of avgas paid (thus far) pegged at $4.10 per gallon, it
> really is a truism that you simply can't beat GA flying in the good
> ol' U.S. of A.

It's mainly just a fortuitous consequence of the size of the country.

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

[Tony]

Its size is one of the advantages of living in the United States,
instead of one that's not quite twice the size of Colorado (and
getting one's kicks out of simulated flying here)..



.. e size of, say, . On Mar 15, 10:34 pm, Mxsmanic >
wrote:
> Jay Honeck writes:
> > Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
> > on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
> > expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
> > Europe:
>
> > London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
> > Austria
> > Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
> > Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain
>
> Not particularly stunning to me. It's just simple geography.
>
> > During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
> > with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
> > Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
> > the Eastern Seaboard.
>
> Nothing surprising about that, either. Every country in Europe has its own
> rules for flight, often loosely based on ICAO rules, but still with enough
> complications to make flight vastly more complicated in Europe.
>
> > Considering that our current flight has been almost effortless, with
> > minimal contact with air traffic control (VFR flight following, and,
> > of course, interaction with control towers at larger airfields), with
> > no landing fees, only a couple of parking fees, and the highest price
> > per gallon of avgas paid (thus far) pegged at $4.10 per gallon, it
> > really is a truism that you simply can't beat GA flying in the good
> > ol' U.S. of A.
>
> It's mainly just a fortuitous consequence of the size of the country.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Chris]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> As many of you know, I'm currently on a "barnstorming tour" around the
> Eastern half of America, flying wherever the weather is best, and
> enjoying the scenery along the way. Since Sunday we've flown from
> Iowa City, IA to First Flight (Kill Devil Hills, NC), to Ocracoke
> Island, to Beaufort, NC, to Huntsville, Alabama, to Memphis,
> Tennessee. We'll be flying home tomorrow, completing a relatively
> simple VFR flight of 1977 miles.
>
> Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
> on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
> expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
> Europe:
>
> London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
> Austria
> Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
> Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain
>
> During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
> with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
> Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
> the Eastern Seaboard.
>
> Considering that our current flight has been almost effortless, with
> minimal contact with air traffic control (VFR flight following, and,
> of course, interaction with control towers at larger airfields), with
> no landing fees, only a couple of parking fees, and the highest price
> per gallon of avgas paid (thus far) pegged at $4.10 per gallon, it
> really is a truism that you simply can't beat GA flying in the good
> ol' U.S. of A.
>
> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
> flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
> standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?

Well for a start, it would require considerably more planning but bank on
avgas costing in the region of $9 a gallon.

The particular issues would be understanding the different airspace rules.

Leaving somewhere around London, you would need to avoid the London TMA
which is class A from the surface around Heathrow and with a base of 2500'
for a considerable distance after that.

First thing would be to perhaps land ay Lydd and top off the tanks and get
duty free gas but it will cost you $20 to do so. You can clear customs
there. Then across the English Channel to say Le Touquet in France. Must
give them 2 hours notice so customs will be ready again. Get there over for
lunchtime and you may have to wait. About $15 to land.

This is when you really need to study the map. Lots of restricted airspace
(for the French airforce) and many airfields, the problem being that only
French is spoken at them.

France is where you get class E airspace for the first time (there is non in
England).

If you choose the charts from each country you will find that they are all a
bit different. Jeppesen do a Europe wide set with a same look but the are
crap.

Again as you mosey round Paris there is loads of low level class A to avoid,
so its off over Germany.

Here you will need to ensure you have a noise certificate. No certificate
then the landing fees will be more than if you have a certificate.

and so it goes on...

As far as talking to ATC is concerned, the European ATC have better English
accents than many places in the US where frankly they could be speaking a
foreign language. But they are strict on correct RT.

Affirmative is not allowed, a-ffirm is the correct term, (avoids confusion
with negative)

It only gets better and such trips are often done. It makes flying more of a
challenge but more interesting.

[Stefan]

Jay Honeck schrieb:
> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
> flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
> standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?

I would refuse to be called your brother, but to answer your question:

If you fly IFR, it's no deal at all. Just file your flight plan and go.

If you (as me) fly purely VFR, a bit more preparation is needed, but
it's not frightening at all. Granted, you can't just hop in your plane
and leave, such a flight needs some preparation. For me, this is a main
part of the fun: I go to other places which are actually different, and
I expect them to be so. Culture is different, rules are different,
language is different, food is different, people are different...
There's just no point in travelling when everything is the same.

European countries adhere to the ICAO rules, but each country has its
particularities. You could go the hard core route and wade through all
the AIPs of those contries. Nearly nobody does this. (I'm one of those
rare maniacs who do, but I'm somewhat particular in this.) Most just buy
(besides the maps, of course) the Jeppesen Bottlang of those countries,
an essential for such a flight. It not only contains all the VACs, but
all those particularities are nicely listed on three pages per country.
Read them, accept them, adhere to them. No big deal at all. Your
described flight would have taken maybe three days to prepare for a
first timer, and not more than your flight in the USA if you already
know the rules of the countries involved.

Actually, it's a basic mindset. US Americans often expect the whole
world to be the same as it is at home, more or less. If something is
different, then it's a hassle. Europeans on the other hand grow up in a
world which is a patchwork of small countries, each with its
particularities. They take the differences as ganted. Actually, it's
this what makes living in Europe interesting. I admit that this is
grossly oversimplified, but you get the idea.


As to the financial question: Yes, flying in Europe is a lot more
expensive. Take a factor of 2 as a rough estimate.

Stefan

[Thomas Borchert]

Chris,

no offense meant, but I fail to see the impact of the "problems" you make of a simple long-distance
trip.

> bank on
> avgas costing in the region of $9 a gallon.

That's the way it is in Europe, no matter how far you fly.

> Leaving somewhere around London, you would need to avoid the London TMA
> which is class A from the surface around Heathrow and with a base of 2500'
> for a considerable distance after that.

So what? It's on the map. Class A is a non-VFR space everywhere in the world. And the basic process of
avoiding airspace can be found everywhere, too.

> First thing would be to perhaps land ay Lydd and top off the tanks and get
> duty free gas but it will cost you $20 to do so.

There's a landing fee. Another fact of flying in Europe, no matter how far.

> You can clear customs
> there. Then across the English Channel to say Le Touquet in France. Must
> give them 2 hours notice so customs will be ready again.

So you do that. Or you chose an airport with 24H customs. You're crossing a border, coming from a
country refusing to sign the Schengen accord. What do you expect?

> This is when you really need to study the map. Lots of restricted airspace
> (for the French airforce) and many airfields, the problem being that only
> French is spoken at them.

Ah. Just try English. It's a non-issue. And the restricted airspace cn mostly be crossed after talking
to a controller.

> France is where you get class E airspace for the first time (there is non in
> England).

So? How does that complicate your flying there?

> If you choose the charts from each country you will find that they are all a
> bit different. Jeppesen do a Europe wide set with a same look but the are
> crap.

I beg to differ. I use them regularly for my flying.

> Again as you mosey round Paris there is loads of low level class A to avoid,
> so its off over Germany.

Again: Are we pretending there's no airspace in the US? At least we don't have a King-like president
bringing his restricted airspace wherever he travels on a whim.

> Here you will need to ensure you have a noise certificate. No certificate
> then the landing fees will be more than if you have a certificate.

A money thing. And we know flying is more expensive in Europe...

> As far as talking to ATC is concerned, the European ATC have better English
> accents than many places in the US where frankly they could be speaking a
> foreign language.

Yup.

> Affirmative is not allowed, a-ffirm is the correct term, (avoids confusion
> with negative)

That's ICAO standard.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
> flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
> standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?
>

What are you trying to get at? We all know flying is more expensive
here. That's the same for short and long flights.

Other than that, crossing borders just requires a little more planning,
filing a flight plan and possibly a requirement to land at a select
airport of entry. The differences in rules from country to country, if
they apply, are often minimal - and they are spelled out in detail in
the Jeppesen charts you'd have to get anyway. So you read up on that.
Oh, if you avoid the UK, that saves you a lot of trouble, since they
are not as integral a part of the EU as most countries in continental
Europe.

That's all. No big deal.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Denny]

Jay, there are counties in Texas bigger than countries in Europe...

denny

[[email protected]]

On Mar 16, 2:31 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> As many of you know, I'm currently on a "barnstorming tour" around the
> Eastern half of America, flying wherever the weather is best, and
> enjoying the scenery along the way. Since Sunday we've flown from
> Iowa City, IA to First Flight (Kill Devil Hills, NC), to Ocracoke
> Island, to Beaufort, NC, to Huntsville, Alabama, to Memphis,
> Tennessee. We'll be flying home tomorrow, completing a relatively
> simple VFR flight of 1977 miles.
>
> Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
> on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
> expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
> Europe:
>
> London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
> Austria
> Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
> Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain
>
> During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
> with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
> Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
> the Eastern Seaboard.
>
> Considering that our current flight has been almost effortless, with
> minimal contact with air traffic control (VFR flight following, and,
> of course, interaction with control towers at larger airfields), with
> no landing fees, only a couple of parking fees, and the highest price
> per gallon of avgas paid (thus far) pegged at $4.10 per gallon, it
> really is a truism that you simply can't beat GA flying in the good
> ol' U.S. of A.
>
> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
> flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
> standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> (Presently in Memphis, TN)
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

As others already have mentioned, it is just more expensive and it
takes somewhat more preperation.
Looking at your European route, some mountain flying lessons are
needed, you will be in the Alps.

-Kees.

BTW On a world map continental Europe appears to be larger than
continental US.

[FLAV8R]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message ...
> Other than that, crossing borders just requires a little more planning,
> filing a flight plan and possibly a requirement to land at a select
> airport of entry. The differences in rules from country to country, if
> they apply, are often minimal - and they are spelled out in detail in
> the Jeppesen charts you'd have to get anyway. So you read up on that.
> Oh, if you avoid the UK, that saves you a lot of trouble, since they
> are not as integral a part of the EU as most countries in continental
> Europe.
>
> That's all. No big deal.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>
I think that many pilots here in the US that live far from borders think of
it as a hassle to fly past them. Just as some pilots think it is a major
issue to fly over water. But try flying in the State of Florida, for one
we are surrounded by water and we have an international crossing
on all sides but one. And we are not talking about a major distance.

For example: Bahamas are only 45 miles away and they have landing
requirements and customs decals that must be purchased prior to leaving
the mainland. The Bahamian government understands that many
pilots on the mainland feel it would be too difficult to visit them that
they have created a free DVD that you can get from their website that
explains how easy it is to come to their country.

On the other coast of Florida you have Mexico that you
can fly to and they also have customs to deal with, but it has been
a non-issue on the trips we have made. If anything, returning to the
US has been where the really travel issues have started.

Oh and let me not forget that if you travel south out of Florida just
90 miles you'll be shot down no questions asked.
I think it is all up to what your accustom to, I have friends that don't
fly to south Florida because of all the restricted airspace and class
B airports in that area, but it has never been an issue for those that
do it day in and day out.

And to my fellow US Pilots: How often do you get to log a destination
that does not start with a K?
Does your log book even use the four letter ICAO?
Or has travel been so limited to US destinations only that there is
no need to differentiate?

TTFN - (not an airport code)

David

[Jay Honeck]

> Well for a start, it would require considerably more planning but bank on
> avgas costing in the region of $9 a gallon.

That alone would eliminate any possibility of making this trip. After
paying $2.30 per gallon at home (car gas), I have found paying $4+ per
gallon to be ghastly.

Too bad -- I would love to do a similar "barnstorming tour" of Europe,
someday...
--
Jay Honeck
Currently Memphis, TN
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Actually, it's a basic mindset. US Americans often expect the whole
> world to be the same as it is at home, more or less. If something is
> different, then it's a hassle.

Actually, this is a basic stereotype of America.

On this little trip alone we have shown our kids so many different
cultures, it's astounding that they are all contained within one
country. From the West Virginians (who spoke little, but when they
did speak we couldn't understand a single word) to the island folks on
Ocracoke (now THERE is a different lifestyle, living on a spit of land
in the Atlantic) to the warm and friendly southerners in South
Carolina, to the black people who volunteered to watch our car for us
on Beale Street (in exchange for beer money), to the incredibly funny
Elvis look-alikes from the Ukraine (yes, there were several of them --
and they were on the Sun Records tour with us), to the somber black
folks at the National Civil Rights Museum (the motel where Martin
Luther King, Jr. was killed), we have seen and interacted with so many
cultures, from so many places.

And, although we see many cultures routinely at the hotel, it's always
more fun to be on THEIR turf, eating THEIR food, and soaking up THEIR
history. Traveling around America, especially in a light plane, where
you can change venues so quickly, is truly a marvelous education.

> As to the financial question: Yes, flying in Europe is a lot more
> expensive. Take a factor of 2 as a rough estimate.

That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
to ever be able to afford it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, there are counties in Texas bigger than countries in Europe...

Yeah, I wish we could've seen some of them! Now that we're flying
home, later this morning, Texas is FINALLY coming out of the heavy
storms that have plagued them all week.

Next time they are in a drought, I should sell them my services. All
I need to do is plan a flight to Texas, and the heavens open up!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Denny wrote:
> Jay, there are counties in Texas bigger than countries in Europe...
>
> denny

Funny that you say that. I was having dinner with a British friend who is
over here working for a time at the HQ of the company he works for in
London.

He had finally gotten out of our the 20K population metro area and explored
the surrounding area. He in a very British way made a comment that some of
our very small towns call themselves things like Junction CITY yet they were
mere villages by European standards.

I took this opportunity to remind him that some of the things they call
countries in Europe would barely qualify as states in the US and many of
them are the size our counties.

[Larry Dighera]

On 16 Mar 2007 06:44:45 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote
in . com>:

>but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
>isn't as appealing as flying a light plane.

Agreed. But Europe's high-speed trains are a far superior experience
to airline travel; no standing in line, fast, room to walk about,
roomy seats, a club car, no waiting for baggage...

[Stefan]

Jay Honeck schrieb:

> Actually, this is a basic stereotype of America.

I know, that's why I stated that I'm aware of my simplification (on both
sides!).

[Ross]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Denny wrote:
>
>>Jay, there are counties in Texas bigger than countries in Europe...
>>
>>denny
>
>
> Funny that you say that. I was having dinner with a British friend who is
> over here working for a time at the HQ of the company he works for in
> London.
>
> He had finally gotten out of our the 20K population metro area and explored
> the surrounding area. He in a very British way made a comment that some of
> our very small towns call themselves things like Junction CITY yet they were
> mere villages by European standards.
>
> I took this opportunity to remind him that some of the things they call
> countries in Europe would barely qualify as states in the US and many of
> them are the size our counties.
>
>

I spent some time in the UK in the '80s & '90s on business. I took the
opportunity for rent a Warrior and fly the southern English coats. What,
at that time, I would have paid around $ 50.00/hour was $180.00 an hour
with the exchange rate. I had a blast though and a beautiful day.

I also drove and took trains to different parts of the country. Do not
discount trains. You see and meet lots of people that way. It is also
fun. You do not necessarily have to fly.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[James Sleeman]

> We'll be flying home tomorrow, completing a relatively
> simple VFR flight of 1977 miles.
....
> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what
> this flight in Europe would entail

Heh, at least Europe and America have the option of such flights,
imagine living here in New Zealand, our country is only about 1000
miles tip to toe and about 250 at it's widest.

There was a news item here a few days ago about a pilot who had just
completed a landing at every listed airfield in the country. I bet
anybody in the US simply couldn't imagine that being possible.

Of course, if we want to actually cross a border we have to overfly
hundreds of miles of open cold and mostly empty ocean just to get to
Norfolk Island (and for the brave, some more hundreds of miles to get
to Lord Howe, and some more hundreds of miles after that to get to
Australia).

In short, we are a bloody long way away from everywhere.

[Jay Honeck]

> There was a news item here a few days ago about a pilot who had just
> completed a landing at every listed airfield in the country. I bet
> anybody in the US simply couldn't imagine that being possible.

That IS amazing.

Mary and I have been actively trying to land at every airport in IOWA
-- a relatively small state, by US standards -- for 10 years. I think
we've hit a little more than half of them.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Mar 16, 5:41 am, Stefan > wrote:
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>
> > It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
> > flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
> > standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?
>
> I would refuse to be called your brother, but to answer your question:
>
> If you fly IFR, it's no deal at all. Just file your flight plan and go.
>

Just curious. What is involved in getting an IFR clearance in Europe?
Are "GPS direct" as common as they are here? Over here, if I file from
the FBO lounge, by the time I start the airplane my clearance is
usually available.

[Thomas Borchert]

Andrew,

> What is involved in getting an IFR clearance in Europe?
> Are "GPS direct" as common as they are here?

You'll be sorry you asked ;-)

Getting directs is very common. Filing directs is extremely uncommon.

Your flight plan has to be accepted by Eurocontrol's Central Flight
Management Unit CFMU. In order to be accepted by their computer, it has
to adhere to all route restrictions applicable on that day. It can be
extremely convoluted to find an acceptable route on a longer flight, but
it is quite easy on shorter flights. Mostly, directs are not allowed
between points farther apart than 40 or 50 nm. Also, some airports
and/or routes have flow restrictions and require slots. Then there's
enroute user fees for any aircraft with an MTOW of 2 metric tons or
greater.

There is only one prohibitively expensive flight planning software
taking all the restrictions (remember, they are time dependent) into
account while generating automatic routes - and a website run by flight
simulator enthusiasts that generates mostly valid flightplans for free
(ah, the irony!). With a little tweaking, those work great.

The acceptable flight plans can be very complex and convoluted, however,
you'll never fly them as filed and often get directs. The fact that each
EU country still insists on having their own ATC doesn't help much,
either.

CFMU has a website where you can test if your flight plan conforms to
the CMFU rules in advance. Very helpful. If it gets accepted there,
it'll work.

You have to file an hour in advance.

Other than that, it's easy.

However, many countries in Europe have more peculiarities: Some have no
IFR approaches in Class G airspace, some don't allow IAPs without an
official observer present at the field. This makes the number of fields
with IAPs much smaller than in the US.

The IR is still very useful since the weather isn't that great in
central Europe.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Mar 16, 9:44 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Actually, it's a basic mindset. US Americans often expect the whole
> > world to be the same as it is at home, more or less. If something is
> > different, then it's a hassle.
>
> Actually, this is a basic stereotype of America.
>
> On this little trip alone we have shown our kids so many different
> cultures, it's astounding that they are all contained within one
> country. From the West Virginians (who spoke little, but when they
> did speak we couldn't understand a single word) to the island folks on
> Ocracoke (now THERE is a different lifestyle, living on a spit of land
> in the Atlantic) to the warm and friendly southerners in South
> Carolina, to the black people who volunteered to watch our car for us
> on Beale Street (in exchange for beer money), to the incredibly funny
> Elvis look-alikes from the Ukraine (yes, there were several of them --
> and they were on the Sun Records tour with us), to the somber black
> folks at the National Civil Rights Museum (the motel where Martin
> Luther King, Jr. was killed), we have seen and interacted with so many
> cultures, from so many places.
>
> And, although we see many cultures routinely at the hotel, it's always
> more fun to be on THEIR turf, eating THEIR food, and soaking up THEIR
> history. Traveling around America, especially in a light plane, where
> you can change venues so quickly, is truly a marvelous education.
>
> > As to the financial question: Yes, flying in Europe is a lot more
> > expensive. Take a factor of 2 as a rough estimate.
>
> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
> to ever be able to afford it.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Jay,

Having grown up in a small island nation, it always amazed me that I
can fly in the U.S. for 5 hours in an airline and still be speaking
the same language, deal in the same currency and eat more or less the
same food. You can even shop at the same store, eat at the same
restaurant and sleep at the same hotel.

If you travelled 2500 miles in Europe or Asia you will cover vast
distances in terms of language, religion, politics, currency and
cuisine. The cultural diversity you encounter in the U.S in the same
distance pales in comparison.

There is great truth in what the other poster said about Americans
expecting the whole world to be the same. I have traveled in Europe
and Asia, and you can spot an American easily because they are the
ones who insist on speaking English, have specific eating and sleeping
criteria. Most of the other travelers (particularly Europeans) had no
qualms about staying at local hostels, eating at roadside restaurants
and chatting with the locals in their language. I found American
tourists were typically older, had more money, and were traveling in
groups or charted bus tours and typically seen around major tourist
attractions. Europeans, Canadians and Australians were much younger,
and were traveling off the beaten path.

However, the cultural uniformity across the U.S. is also our strength.
This is what allows us to function as a whole without conflict achieve
economic strength. This is also why flying is so much better here.

[Thomas Borchert]

Thomas,

> Mostly, directs are not allowed
> between points farther apart than 40 or 50 nm.
>

I should be clear: Filing such directs is not allowed. You'll fly much
longer directs.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Ross]

James Sleeman wrote:
>>We'll be flying home tomorrow, completing a relatively
>>simple VFR flight of 1977 miles.
>
> ...
>
>>It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what
>>this flight in Europe would entail
>
>
> Heh, at least Europe and America have the option of such flights,
> imagine living here in New Zealand, our country is only about 1000
> miles tip to toe and about 250 at it's widest.
>
> There was a news item here a few days ago about a pilot who had just
> completed a landing at every listed airfield in the country. I bet
> anybody in the US simply couldn't imagine that being possible.
>
> Of course, if we want to actually cross a border we have to overfly
> hundreds of miles of open cold and mostly empty ocean just to get to
> Norfolk Island (and for the brave, some more hundreds of miles to get
> to Lord Howe, and some more hundreds of miles after that to get to
> Australia).
>
> In short, we are a bloody long way away from everywhere.
>

I have always wanted to visit your country. I got close in '87 to
Sydney. Then for my 60th birthday my wife was going to plan a trip there
but it got too expensive, so we went to the Balkins. I'll get there
sometime.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Jim Stewart]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

> There is great truth in what the other poster said about Americans
> expecting the whole world to be the same. I have traveled in Europe
> and Asia, and you can spot an American easily because they are the
> ones who insist on speaking English, have specific eating and sleeping
> criteria. Most of the other travelers (particularly Europeans) had no
> qualms about staying at local hostels, eating at roadside restaurants
> and chatting with the locals in their language. I found American
> tourists were typically older, had more money, and were traveling in
> groups or charted bus tours and typically seen around major tourist
> attractions. Europeans, Canadians and Australians were much younger,
> and were traveling off the beaten path.

I think this is changing with many of our
youth. My daughter has no problem with
grabbing a backpack and sleeping bag and
heading out on a new adventure with minimal
planning and organization. Many college
age students do this and hopefully they will
turn into middle-aged people that are more
flexable.

I've spent months in Japan living on the
economy and a week in a construction camp
in the Sierra Madres. Not to mention some
military time in Germany. I've used about
every kind of toilet in the world and not
complained. That must count for something (:

[Ken Finney]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Jay,
>
>> It would be an interesting (if frightening) exercise to see what this
>> flight in Europe would entail, from a financial as well as technical
>> standpoint. Can any or our European brethren take a whack at it?
>>
>
> What are you trying to get at? We all know flying is more expensive
> here. That's the same for short and long flights.
>

< snip >

I think all Jay was trying to do was learn. We Americans tend to be
dreadfully ignorant, but at least some of us want to learn and enjoy
learning. ;^)

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
<...>
>> As to the financial question: Yes, flying in Europe is a lot more
>> expensive. Take a factor of 2 as a rough estimate.
>
> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
> to ever be able to afford it.

Yes, unless you are independantly wealthy, there is no way to actually spend
any significant time in Europe.

On the other hand, there are a lot of good computer resources to let you
simulate your travel - without all the inconvienances. You could even buy a
European scenery add on for your msfs and it will be just like actually
flying all over Europe - except, of course, for the cost.

Shouldn't take long before your kids would actualy be more knowledgeable
than anyone who actually attempts to live there in person on a limted
budget.

:-}

--
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.

[Matt Whiting]

Larry Dighera wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2007 06:44:45 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote
> in . com>:
>
>> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
>> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane.
>
> Agreed. But Europe's high-speed trains are a far superior experience
> to airline travel; no standing in line, fast, room to walk about,
> roomy seats, a club car, no waiting for baggage...

I agree. I had never ridden a passenger train prior to living in
England for several months. My wife and I took a train from Chester to
London and back and it was great. We paid a little extra for first
class (still pretty reasonable) and had an entire car to ourselves on
the way down (the coach cars were PACKED) and had one other couple in
our car on the return. Very nice ride and very relaxing.

Not as much fun as flying to be sure, but certainly something different
to experience and is something you should consider.

Matt

[Nils Rostedt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> Well for a start, it would require considerably more planning but bank on
>> avgas costing in the region of $9 a gallon.
>
> That alone would eliminate any possibility of making this trip. After
> paying $2.30 per gallon at home (car gas), I have found paying $4+ per
> gallon to be ghastly.
>
> Too bad -- I would love to do a similar "barnstorming tour" of Europe,
> someday...
> --

Just a thought... the diesel fleet is growing, maybe there are some DA40
TDI's or re-engined C172s for hire?
Granted, the Thielert has fewer horsepower than you're accustomed to, but
fuel cost should be somewhere around $4/gallon.

[Sylvain]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
> to ever be able to afford it.

well, you might compromise a bit; trains to actually go places (remember
that i) shorter distances and higher density of population make it
quite a practical mode of transportation more often than not faster than
flying the airlines -- and without the hassle; and ii) trains in Europe
go reasonably fast; and iii) you might be able to buy passes
in USA providing you with significant discounts); and flying a light
plane in places that are not completely GA hostile, e.g., in UK where you
can rent/fly a G- registered aircraft with your FAA certificate, no
extra paperwork; you might want to explore what's available in ex- Eastern
Europe countries as well.

--Sylvain

[Borat]

"Sylvain" > wrote in message
t...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
>> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
>> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
>> to ever be able to afford it.
>
> well, you might compromise a bit; trains to actually go places (remember
> that i) shorter distances and higher density of population make it
> quite a practical mode of transportation more often than not faster than
> flying the airlines -- and without the hassle; and ii) trains in Europe
> go reasonably fast; and iii) you might be able to buy passes
> in USA providing you with significant discounts); and flying a light
> plane in places that are not completely GA hostile, e.g., in UK where you
> can rent/fly a G- registered aircraft with your FAA certificate, no
> extra paperwork;

Some of the other countries will require a licence validation and generally
to fly a locally registered aircraft with the FAA certificate, it is
normally restricted to day VFR only.

However you have full privileges when you fly an N reg (if you can rent one)
but the price would make your eyes water.

For getting around Europe public transport and the trains are by far the
most effective and cheap way and that can be backed up with car hire.

Travelling by light aircraft isolates you from most of the experience of
being in Europe namely the people, the sights etc and if you took a rental
plane from London to Milan and had to leave it there because of weather then
you would be sorry.

There are certain things that are expensive here relatively but then the
European salaries compensate. It is too bad the dollar is such a lush at the
moment.

In August 2001 when I was in Las Vegas the rate of exchange was $1.30 to £1.
In Jan when on vacation in Florida it was $1.98 to £1.
I had a job spending it all and ended up bring a fair bit back. The same has
happened with the Euro.

[Gregg Germain]

Jay Honeck wrote:

*snip*

> Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently enjoying
> on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as for the same
> expenditure of time we could easily have flown the following route in
> Europe:
>
> London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
> Austria
> Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
> Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain
>
> During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
> with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
> Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
> the Eastern Seaboard.

Jay,

What a great idea to try..and very interesting results.

And yeah it would be interesting to know what that equivalent European
flight would entail.

Gregg

[Jay Honeck]

> Granted, the Thielert has fewer horsepower than you're accustomed to, but
> fuel cost should be somewhere around $4/gallon.

Really? Jet-A fuel is only (never thought I'd say THAT) $4 per gallon
in Europe?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> What a great idea to try..and very interesting results.

Someday...maybe. From Borchert's descriptions, it sounds like flying
in Europe is what flying in America would be like if ATC were run by
the Iowa Division of Motor Vehicles...

;-)

(Having just paid $900 to the DMV for another one of those stupid blue
"Lodging" signs out on the freeway, I feel qualified to comment on
what a rip-off that department is. But I digress...)

We just got home. The tale of the tape: 2008 miles, covering 15 (of
the 48) mainland United States.

Actually, we got routed around the (very active) Lindbergh MOA in
Missouri, so add another 50 miles to that total...!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G. Sylvester]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>I have traveled in Europe
> and Asia, and you can spot an American easily because they are the
> ones who insist on speaking English...

actually English is the universal language...at least for now in Europe
and South America. Even in the depths of Russia (KUF) many people, but
far from a lot, spoke English. Strangely, I just saw one of our
customers I met in Russia in Las Vegas at my company's training center.
Small world.

gerald

[G. Sylvester]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
> to ever be able to afford it.

The public transportation found in Europe is dreadfully missing in the
US. Most of that is caused by the much larger geography outside of
major cities. Even major cities like Los Angeles, is horrendous with
virtually no public transportation. Back to Europe, in 'northern'
europe (anything north of Austria roughly) has greatly trains. the
south has good trains but tend to be more unreliable. In general, the
south, just like in the US, are more laid back so schedules aren't so
closely adhered to. Nonetheless, still great. Trains are absolutely the
best way to go.

when I lived in Munich, I went up with a friend of a friend. Had a
beautiful flight from Augsburg to Rosenheim to Salzburg. The flying was
nice but his piloting was HORRENDOUS including busting the MUC class B
because he got completely lost even with a G430. At the time I had
solo'd and then moved there 2 days later only to finish a couple of
years later. A couple of years later my friend went up with this guy
again and had a "very scary" experience in the pattern. Doesn't
surprise me.

Gerald

[Jay Honeck]

>The flying was
> nice but his piloting was HORRENDOUS including busting the MUC class B
> because he got completely lost even with a G430.


How *can* you get lost with a Garmin 430? Or any GPS, for that
matter?

It would take a concerted effort to get lost with a moving-map in the
panel...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G. Sylvester]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> How *can* you get lost with a Garmin 430? Or any GPS, for that
> matter?
>
> It would take a concerted effort to get lost with a moving-map in the
> panel...

He also didnt' want to check the fuel after fueling up as someone else
just brought the club plane back. He also couldn't find his checklist.
Fortunately he found it during the run up. Not sure if he used it...at
least from my 18 hours of training at the time he got most of the
important GUMPS stuff. From the back seat, I saw some trees wiz by our
wings, I saw how low we were going into Rosenheim. And his radio calls
going into Salzburg (he had no idea where he was). And the radio calls
coming out of Salburg. And then when flying from Salzburg back to
Augsburg ATC said "Cessna xxxxx, if you are flying to Augsburg, you
might want to make a right 90 degree turn." And worst of all, he
smelled bad. Real bad.

the time my friend got scared with him, he was flying over the Alps with
about 600 lbs of people plus fuel so they were probably close to MGTOW
in a 180 hp 172SP up around 10000 feet during the summer. That doesn't
leave much room for error.

Yup, just scary.

Gerald

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> What a great idea to try..and very interesting results.
>
> Someday...maybe. From Borchert's descriptions, it sounds like flying
> in Europe is what flying in America would be like if ATC were run by
> the Iowa Division of Motor Vehicles...
>
> ;-)
>
> (Having just paid $900 to the DMV for another one of those stupid blue
> "Lodging" signs out on the freeway, I feel qualified to comment on
> what a rip-off that department is. But I digress...)
>
> We just got home. The tale of the tape: 2008 miles, covering 15 (of
> the 48) mainland United States.
>
> Actually, we got routed around the (very active) Lindbergh MOA in
> Missouri, so add another 50 miles to that total...!
>

Be ready to weep for me then.
I just got did my FAA IR currency with a couple of approaches to Cambridge
UK. Three times round the hold, an NDB approach and miss followed by
another hold and an ILS approach with a full stop landing cost me £47 or $92
inc tax. The landing itself cost $39 and was "discounted" as an incentive
to use the airport for approaches.

In another two months I will have to go through the same again to remain
current. Mind you I might drop of to Calais in France where its cheaper at
the airport but its an 80 minutes flying away so by the time you have been
there and back over the Channel its has cost the same.

[Jay Honeck]

> Be ready to weep for me then.
> I just got did my FAA IR currency with a couple of approaches to Cambridge
> UK. Three times round the hold, an NDB approach and miss followed by
> another hold and an ILS approach with a full stop landing cost me £47 or $92
> inc tax. The landing itself cost $39 and was "discounted" as an incentive
> to use the airport for approaches.

Your post should be reproduced by AOPA in ever pilot forum in
America. Nothing more graphically illustrates what we might be facing
here in the US if we don't nip the initiative in the bud.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Be ready to weep for me then.
> I just got did my FAA IR currency with a couple of approaches to Cambridge
> UK. Three times round the hold, an NDB approach and miss followed by
> another hold and an ILS approach with a full stop landing cost me £47 or
> $92
> inc tax. The landing itself cost $39 and was "discounted" as an incentive
> to use the airport for approaches.

Your post should be reproduced by AOPA in ever pilot forum in
America. Nothing more graphically illustrates what we might be facing
here in the US if we don't nip the initiative in the bud.

The issue is that the airport is privately owned not subsidized by federal,
state or city taxpayers and has to make a profit to keep going. The ATC are
employees of the airport, not civil servants paid out of taxes.

The airport has a contract to service C130s for the RAF but are not allowed
to cross subsidize the GA activity. That would be a wrong use of taxpayers
money.

You don't run your business at a loss so why should the airport run at a
loss?

[Jay Honeck]

> The issue is that the airport is privately owned not subsidized by federal,
> state or city taxpayers and has to make a profit to keep going. The ATC are
> employees of the airport, not civil servants paid out of taxes.

In America, most airports are owned by the local government, no
different than the city roads. After all, a runway is nothing but a
road for airplanes, and is often the "front door" to the city.

Most airports in America are not staffed by civil servants, but rather
are contracted out to private FBOs who pay a monthly lease to the
government for the right to operate there. They may also pay a
percentage of income as part of their lease.

Thanks goodness, I might add. I shudder to think what our airport
would be like with "civil servants" running the show...

> The airport has a contract to service C130s for the RAF but are not allowed
> to cross subsidize the GA activity. That would be a wrong use of taxpayers
> money.

If the airport is truly privately built and owned, I have no problem
with them charging landing and parking fees. They are running the
airport as a *business* -- not a public service -- and that's a HUGE
difference.

Of course, running it that way is about as stupid as toll roads.
Intelligent, enlightened people simply raise the gas tax a nickel
rather than stop 16 lanes of traffic to collect fifty cents.

Your country (rather like Chicago) has decided to have it *both* ways
-- they charge a "toll" AND charge hugely absurd gas taxes -- to the
detriment of all. This is NOT a model for America to copy.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> The issue is that the airport is privately owned not subsidized by
>> federal,
>> state or city taxpayers and has to make a profit to keep going. The ATC
>> are
>> employees of the airport, not civil servants paid out of taxes.
>
> In America, most airports are owned by the local government, no
> different than the city roads. After all, a runway is nothing but a
> road for airplanes, and is often the "front door" to the city.
>
> Most airports in America are not staffed by civil servants, but rather
> are contracted out to private FBOs who pay a monthly lease to the
> government for the right to operate there. They may also pay a
> percentage of income as part of their lease.
>
> Thanks goodness, I might add. I shudder to think what our airport
> would be like with "civil servants" running the show...
>
>> The airport has a contract to service C130s for the RAF but are not
>> allowed
>> to cross subsidize the GA activity. That would be a wrong use of
>> taxpayers
>> money.
>
> If the airport is truly privately built and owned, I have no problem
> with them charging landing and parking fees. They are running the
> airport as a *business* -- not a public service -- and that's a HUGE
> difference.
>
> Of course, running it that way is about as stupid as toll roads.
> Intelligent, enlightened people simply raise the gas tax a nickel
> rather than stop 16 lanes of traffic to collect fifty cents.
>
All aviation in this country is run as a business, airports, airlines and
the ATC. The fact is our airlines are profitable as are the airports which
is more than can be said about the US airlines despite their vast subsidies
from the tax payer. They do this by serving the mass of the public. They do
it pretty well when the equivalent of the whole country goes abroad at least
once a year.
GA is not a public service, For us, GA is not a sensible or cost effective
means of transportation when there are far better alternatives around.

There are a lot of people who have weekend homes in Spain, Croatia, France,
Slovenia where you can travel in new modern airliners for about $200 round
trip from all around the UK. Who needs their own aircraft as a means of
transport.

If many people are honest GA (in particular single engine piston) is a crap
means of transportation. What people want is the experience of doing the
flying. Going from A to B is the excuse. Whatever we pay over the odds for
that wherever we are. Its all relative.

I have a business trip to Glasgow planned for the end of next month. I am
thinking about flying myself, it is 290nm and altogether it is going to take
about 3.5 hours to get there and the same coming back. It is going to cost
me in my Pa 28 about £ 65 an hour or $120 an hour in funny money. Landing
fees at a small airport near Glasgow will be £10.

My secretary booked me flights just in case it is not possible to fly up and
the fare including taxes came to £65.

I can go to Dubrovnik in Croatia for £100 in the same period too.

One just needs to stop kidding oneself about why we fly.

The guys in their Citation Jets etc - they can afford to pay for what they
get - why shed any tears for them.

[BDS]

"Borat" > wrote

> If many people are honest GA (in particular single engine piston) is a
crap
> means of transportation.

For me, sometimes the airlines are a better choice, sometimes driving, and
sometimes GA. There is no clear winner for every case - it depends on the
trip. Furthermore, it doesn't always boil down to what the trip costs -
sometimes time is more important than money. Beyond that, there is also the
issue of what you can easily take with you on the airlines versus in your
own aircraft.

Sometimes it even works out that those of us flying our tiny tin can
airplanes can land, refuel, and take off again while the airlines are stuck
circling and/or waiting on the ground. I just love it when that happens.

I bet that there are about 100,000 people at the KPHL airport over this past
weekend who might have a different opinion on how nice and convenient having
the airlines as their only choice of transportation is.

BDS

[Jay Honeck]

> All aviation in this country is run as a business, airports, airlines and
> the ATC. The fact is our airlines are profitable as are the airports which
> is more than can be said about the US airlines despite their vast subsidies
> from the tax payer.

Our airports are immensely profitable. Our little local airport
(publically owned) costs around $180K per year in direct taxpayer
subsidies from the City. In turn, it brings $5.5 million dollars
annually into the city and surrounding communities.

If only all of my investments were so good!

Our airlines are only unprofitable due to government meddling. If
they would simpy allow one or two of the majors to go bankrupt and
fold, the whole system would come back into balance, and all would be
well. By artificially propping up bad airlines with loans and
subsidies, NONE of them can be profitable.

This is one case where America is more socialist than Europe -- with
predictably bad results.

> GA is not a public service, For us, GA is not a sensible or cost effective
> means of transportation

Horse hockey. GA is not a sensible or cost-effective mode of
transportation in your country ONLY because it has been taxed out of
existence. When the cost of avgas is more than 60% tax, you, my
friend, are being royally screwed.

And, don't forget, GA includes "Flight for Life" helicopters, business
charter flights, pilot training, and sight-seeing flights, in addition
to our little jaunts around the country. Your taxes are killing a
lot more than weekend hobby pilots.

> There are a lot of people who have weekend homes in Spain, Croatia, France,
> Slovenia where you can travel in new modern airliners for about $200 round
> trip from all around the UK. Who needs their own aircraft as a means of
> transport.

Folks who can afford weekend homes in Spain are probably not thrilled
with public transportation any more than the rest of us, and probably
less so. In this country, many pilots fly their own planes to their
vacation homes, because it is more a comfortable and faster mode of
transportation.

Flying the airlines is worse than riding a bus nowadays. No one in
their right mind would choose it over GA, if only they knew how to
make GA work for them. In that regard, we are the lucky few -- and
it's our duty to educate the masses.

> If many people are honest GA (in particular single engine piston) is a crap
> means of transportation. What people want is the experience of doing the
> flying. Going from A to B is the excuse. Whatever we pay over the odds for
> that wherever we are. Its all relative.

While there is a nugget of truth in that (flying IS the journey, after
all), I dare you to complete my recent trip to the East Coast (West
Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Missouri) and
back in any airline. The journey simply could not be done in anything
BUT a GA plane, because airlines don't go where we wanted to go.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Martin Hotze]

Jay Honeck schrieb:


> Horse hockey. GA is not a sensible or cost-effective mode of
> transportation in your country ONLY because it has been taxed out of
> existence. When the cost of avgas is more than 60% tax, you, my
> friend, are being royally screwed.

these taxes apply to all types of gas we have. we chose our own
government, I bet we would kick their asses if we are too ****ed.

> And, don't forget, GA includes "Flight for Life" helicopters, business
> charter flights, pilot training, and sight-seeing flights, in addition
> to our little jaunts around the country. Your taxes are killing a
> lot more than weekend hobby pilots.


we have rescue helicopters etc.


> Folks who can afford weekend homes in Spain are probably not thrilled
> with public transportation any more than the rest of us, and probably


what is so special 'bout a weekend home in Spain? and don't copy your
sentiments of public transport in the US on any other country in the
world - it won't fit.

> less so. In this country, many pilots fly their own planes to their
> vacation homes, because it is more a comfortable and faster mode of
> transportation.
>
> Flying the airlines is worse than riding a bus nowadays. No one in


in the US, maybe. For sure it became painful because of more
restrictions (terrorism *dooohhh*).

> their right mind would choose it over GA, if only they knew how to


having the possibility to fly one way for less than EUR 100,- (sometimes
even only for EUR 20,-) from one corner of Europe to the other there is
almost no need for *private* GA (but for pleasure, of course).

#m
--
I am not a terrorist <http://www.casualdisobedience.com/>

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-03-17, Borat > wrote:
> Be ready to weep for me then.
> I just got did my FAA IR currency with a couple of approaches to Cambridge
> UK. Three times round the hold, an NDB approach and miss followed by
> another hold and an ILS approach with a full stop landing cost me £47 or $92
> inc tax. The landing itself cost $39 and was "discounted" as an incentive
> to use the airport for approaches.

What are you flying? (Is it >2 tonnes?)
I've done the same at our local airport and it didn't cost anything
(Ronaldsway, IOM)

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Ross]

Borat wrote:
snip
>
> All aviation in this country is run as a business, airports, airlines and
> the ATC. The fact is our airlines are profitable as are the airports which
> is more than can be said about the US airlines despite their vast subsidies
> from the tax payer. They do this by serving the mass of the public. They do
> it pretty well when the equivalent of the whole country goes abroad at least
> once a year.
> GA is not a public service, For us, GA is not a sensible or cost effective
> means of transportation when there are far better alternatives around.
>
> There are a lot of people who have weekend homes in Spain, Croatia, France,
> Slovenia where you can travel in new modern airliners for about $200 round
> trip from all around the UK. Who needs their own aircraft as a means of
> transport.
>
> If many people are honest GA (in particular single engine piston) is a crap
> means of transportation. What people want is the experience of doing the
> flying. Going from A to B is the excuse. Whatever we pay over the odds for
> that wherever we are. Its all relative.
>
> I have a business trip to Glasgow planned for the end of next month. I am
> thinking about flying myself, it is 290nm and altogether it is going to take
> about 3.5 hours to get there and the same coming back. It is going to cost
> me in my Pa 28 about £ 65 an hour or $120 an hour in funny money. Landing
> fees at a small airport near Glasgow will be £10.
>
> My secretary booked me flights just in case it is not possible to fly up and
> the fare including taxes came to £65.
>
> I can go to Dubrovnik in Croatia for £100 in the same period too.
>
> One just needs to stop kidding oneself about why we fly.
>
> The guys in their Citation Jets etc - they can afford to pay for what they
> get - why shed any tears for them.
>
>
>
Wow, airfare in the UK have really come down then. When I looked into
travel in and around the UK the fares were terribly high. This was in
the early '90 when I was traveling to the UK for business.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:

By artificially propping up bad airlines with loans and
> subsidies, NONE of them can be profitable.

None? Better check your numbers again. UPS and Fedex are almost always
profitable. Southwest always is too. Northwest and United are now
profitable and I believe Continental and America West/US Air are too.




>
> Flying the airlines is worse than riding a bus nowadays. No one in
> their right mind would choose it over GA, if only they knew how to
> make GA work for them. In that regard, we are the lucky few -- and
> it's our duty to educate the masses.



>
>
> While there is a nugget of truth in that (flying IS the journey, after
> all),


Depends on the mission. We went to SW Florida for a week at the end of
February. Flying is not the journey in this case but rather a means to
a vacation. I'm not going to **** away four of seven days flying from
here to there and constantly worry about the weather. GA has its uses,
but this ain't one of them.

[Jim Stewart]

G. Sylvester wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>> I have traveled in Europe
>> and Asia, and you can spot an American easily because they are the
>> ones who insist on speaking English...
>
>
> actually English is the universal language...at least for now in Europe
> and South America. Even in the depths of Russia (KUF) many people, but
> far from a lot, spoke English. Strangely, I just saw one of our
> customers I met in Russia in Las Vegas at my company's training center.
> Small world.

But the trick is to at least *try* to speak
the language of the country that you are in.

In Japan, even though most people have had
at least 3 years of english in public school,
strangers are reluctant to speak english for
fear of sounding silly or making a mistake.
To get them to use english, all you have to
do is show them how badly you speak japanese.

[Borat]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2007-03-17, Borat > wrote:
>> Be ready to weep for me then.
>> I just got did my FAA IR currency with a couple of approaches to
>> Cambridge
>> UK. Three times round the hold, an NDB approach and miss followed by
>> another hold and an ILS approach with a full stop landing cost me £47 or
>> $92
>> inc tax. The landing itself cost $39 and was "discounted" as an
>> incentive
>> to use the airport for approaches.
>
> What are you flying? (Is it >2 tonnes?)
> I've done the same at our local airport and it didn't cost anything
> (Ronaldsway, IOM)

a meagre Pa 28. But then the IOM has a different approach than the big
island. I know the DTI minister and he was telling me about the plans the
island has to do with aviation (M reg) it has with shipping.

Flying from north of London to get free approaches at Ronaldsway is just not
worth it. I always do an instrument approach into Le Touquet because they
cost peanuts.

[Borat]

"Ross" > wrote in message
...
> Borat wrote:
> snip
>>
>> All aviation in this country is run as a business, airports, airlines and
>> the ATC. The fact is our airlines are profitable as are the airports
>> which is more than can be said about the US airlines despite their vast
>> subsidies from the tax payer. They do this by serving the mass of the
>> public. They do it pretty well when the equivalent of the whole country
>> goes abroad at least once a year.
>> GA is not a public service, For us, GA is not a sensible or cost
>> effective means of transportation when there are far better alternatives
>> around.
>>
>> There are a lot of people who have weekend homes in Spain, Croatia,
>> France, Slovenia where you can travel in new modern airliners for about
>> $200 round trip from all around the UK. Who needs their own aircraft as a
>> means of transport.
>>
>> If many people are honest GA (in particular single engine piston) is a
>> crap means of transportation. What people want is the experience of doing
>> the flying. Going from A to B is the excuse. Whatever we pay over the
>> odds for that wherever we are. Its all relative.
>>
>> I have a business trip to Glasgow planned for the end of next month. I am
>> thinking about flying myself, it is 290nm and altogether it is going to
>> take about 3.5 hours to get there and the same coming back. It is going
>> to cost me in my Pa 28 about £ 65 an hour or $120 an hour in funny money.
>> Landing fees at a small airport near Glasgow will be £10.
>>
>> My secretary booked me flights just in case it is not possible to fly up
>> and the fare including taxes came to £65.
>>
>> I can go to Dubrovnik in Croatia for £100 in the same period too.
>>
>> One just needs to stop kidding oneself about why we fly.
>>
>> The guys in their Citation Jets etc - they can afford to pay for what
>> they get - why shed any tears for them.
>>
>>
>>
> Wow, airfare in the UK have really come down then. When I looked into
> travel in and around the UK the fares were terribly high. This was in the
> early '90 when I was traveling to the UK for business.

The effect of competition and the Brits desire for air travel.
The most popular trips:
Women going to Dublin for hen nights
Men going of to the Baltic states, Prague, Budapest for a stag night where
the beer is cheap.

[Borat]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> G. Sylvester wrote:
>> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>>
>>> I have traveled in Europe
>>> and Asia, and you can spot an American easily because they are the
>>> ones who insist on speaking English...
>>
>>
>> actually English is the universal language...at least for now in Europe
>> and South America. Even in the depths of Russia (KUF) many people, but
>> far from a lot, spoke English. Strangely, I just saw one of our
>> customers I met in Russia in Las Vegas at my company's training center.
>> Small world.
>
> But the trick is to at least *try* to speak
> the language of the country that you are in.
>
> In Japan, even though most people have had
> at least 3 years of english in public school,
> strangers are reluctant to speak english for
> fear of sounding silly or making a mistake.
> To get them to use english, all you have to
> do is show them how badly you speak japanese.

even the French will warm to you if you attempt French first. They love
their language so much they will willingly speak in English to you to
prevent anymore desecration.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Jay Honeck writes:
>
>> Just for fun, I have overlaid the flight plan we're currently
>> enjoying on a map of Europe. The results are stunning, to me, as
>> for the same expenditure of time we could easily have flown the
>> following route in Europe:
>>
>> London, United Kingdom (completely over-flying Germany) to Vienna,
>> Austria
>> Vienna, Austria to Milan, Italy
>> Milan, Italy to Madrid, Spain
>
> Not particularly stunning to me. It's just simple geography.
>
>> During this flight we would have overflown nine (or more) countries,
>> with all the complications inherent with that task, covering much of
>> Europe. By comparison, this flight in America has barely scratched
>> the Eastern Seaboard.
>
> Nothing surprising about that, either. Every country in Europe has
> its own rules for flight, often loosely based on ICAO rules, but still
> with enough complications to make flight vastly more complicated in
> Europe.
>

You're an idiot, no doubt about it..


Bertie

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-03-19, Borat > wrote:
> a meagre Pa 28. But then the IOM has a different approach than the big
> island. I know the DTI minister and he was telling me about the plans the
> island has to do with aviation (M reg) it has with shipping.

It's utterly pointless - you're stuck with the same overbearing
maintenance rules as the G register, therefore anyone wanting to
re-register will still just register with the US instead, so
unfortunately the M register is really nothing more than a bit of
national vanity as it stands. It would become truly useful if they could
simply take the US 14 CFR and make it the Manx ANO, but the UK would
revoke our M register arrangement if that were to happen in an instant.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>Actually, it's a basic mindset. US Americans often expect the whole
>>world to be the same as it is at home, more or less. If something is
>>different, then it's a hassle.
>
>
> Actually, this is a basic stereotype of America.
>
> On this little trip alone we have shown our kids so many different
> cultures, it's astounding that they are all contained within one
> country. From the West Virginians (who spoke little, but when they
> did speak we couldn't understand a single word) to the island folks on
> Ocracoke (now THERE is a different lifestyle, living on a spit of land
> in the Atlantic) to the warm and friendly southerners in South
> Carolina, to the black people who volunteered to watch our car for us
> on Beale Street (in exchange for beer money), to the incredibly funny
> Elvis look-alikes from the Ukraine (yes, there were several of them --
> and they were on the Sun Records tour with us), to the somber black
> folks at the National Civil Rights Museum (the motel where Martin
> Luther King, Jr. was killed), we have seen and interacted with so many
> cultures, from so many places.
>
> And, although we see many cultures routinely at the hotel, it's always
> more fun to be on THEIR turf, eating THEIR food, and soaking up THEIR
> history. Traveling around America, especially in a light plane, where
> you can change venues so quickly, is truly a marvelous education.
>
>
>>As to the financial question: Yes, flying in Europe is a lot more
>>expensive. Take a factor of 2 as a rough estimate.
>
>
> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
> to ever be able to afford it.

Odd, our docent training this month was given by a curator who
specializes in commercial aviation and he thinks Europe is much better
equiped with high-speed rail and that high-speed rail will win out over
aircraft for short <500 mile trips. With urban center to center trains
that travel over 150 MPH it's hard to imagine not doing that. No
driving to the airport, etc. Once in a while my sister will fly from NY
to DC if she can't deal with the drive and I'm not sure it saves her any
time.

Margy
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Don Tuite]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:18:20 -0400, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

Jay:
>>
>> That is so frustrating. We want to show our kids our European roots,
>> but the thought of riding a train -- even a very nice train -- just
>> isn't as appealing as flying a light plane. I just don't see any way
>> to ever be able to afford it.

Margie:
>Odd, our docent training this month was given by a curator who
>specializes in commercial aviation and he thinks Europe is much better
>equiped with high-speed rail and that high-speed rail will win out over
>aircraft for short <500 mile trips. With urban center to center trains
>that travel over 150 MPH it's hard to imagine not doing that. No
>driving to the airport, etc. Once in a while my sister will fly from NY
>to DC if she can't deal with the drive and I'm not sure it saves her any
>time.
>
My only recent experience is with Zurich, Luzern and Wien, and I gotta
say that RR terminals in the middle of town, trains that leave and
arrive exactly on time, tasty snacks, including decent beer, and
picture-window views of magnificent scenery make for a pleasant
experience. And Zurich has a regular train station at the airport..
Really nice. I hate the way the parking lot moguls in the US have
managed to make connecting with mass transit at the airports a royal
PITA in most places.

OTOH, taking the train in Britain is out of the question. For the
short hop from Reading to Swansea (to catch the overnight ferry to
Cork, the train would have cost hundreds of dollars more for three
people than we wound up paying for a nice bus. Of course later hops
from Cork to Leeds to Edinburgh were downright cheap, but there's
obviously some shell game going on there.

Don

[Jay Honeck]

> My only recent experience is with Zurich, Luzern and Wien, and I gotta
> say that RR terminals in the middle of town, trains that leave and
> arrive exactly on time, tasty snacks, including decent beer,

Okay, you got me there. If they serve good beer on the trains, that
would make an otherwise stultifyingly boring journey kinda fun.

But it still ain't flying.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Denny]

> Odd, our docent training this month was given by a curator who
> specializes in commercial aviation and he thinks Europe is much better
> equiped with high-speed rail and that high-speed rail will win out over
> aircraft for short <500 mile trips. With urban center to center trains
> that travel over 150 MPH it's hard to imagine not doing that. No
> driving to the airport, etc. Once in a while my sister will fly from NY
> to DC if she can't deal with the drive and I'm not sure it saves her any
> time.
>
> Margy
>
>
>
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> >www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Margy,
While he is right, EU is not a good model... First, much of the
population density is compacted into relatively small geographic areas
easily connected by a few rails... Second, public transportation is
government funded, as is most everything, by usurious taxation
rates...
The entire island of Britain is what, 600 miles long and 200 miles
wide, and comprises 3 entire countries!! Jeez, a handfull of counties
in California will match that....
OTOH if I want to go from Hemlock Michigan to Helena Montana I
strongly suspect it will be a cold day in a very hot place before I
find high speed public transportation available, at any rate of
taxation... Besides Fat Albert can haul me there in a few hours at a
<mostly> reasonable price for fuel...

denny

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-03-22, Denny > wrote:
> The entire island of Britain is what, 600 miles long and 200 miles
> wide, and comprises 3 entire countries!! Jeez, a handfull of counties
> in California will match that....

They aren't "real" countries (as in sovereign nations), though - they
are all part of the UK. Wales has considerably less autonomy than a US
state. Scotland has more autonomy, but probably still a little
less than a US state.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Borat]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:18:20 -0400, Margy Natalie >
> wrote:
>
>>
> My only recent experience is with Zurich, Luzern and Wien, and I gotta
> say that RR terminals in the middle of town, trains that leave and
> arrive exactly on time, tasty snacks, including decent beer, and
> picture-window views of magnificent scenery make for a pleasant
> experience. And Zurich has a regular train station at the airport..
> Really nice. I hate the way the parking lot moguls in the US have
> managed to make connecting with mass transit at the airports a royal
> PITA in most places.
>
> OTOH, taking the train in Britain is out of the question. For the
> short hop from Reading to Swansea (to catch the overnight ferry to
> Cork, the train would have cost hundreds of dollars more for three
> people than we wound up paying for a nice bus. Of course later hops
> from Cork to Leeds to Edinburgh were downright cheap, but there's
> obviously some shell game going on there.
>
> Don

The ferry to Cork - wow Ok if you want to take a car but NOT the way to go
by train. Better to fly to Cork which would cost about $100 per person
return.

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>> My only recent experience is with Zurich, Luzern and Wien, and I gotta
>> say that RR terminals in the middle of town, trains that leave and
>> arrive exactly on time, tasty snacks, including decent beer,
>
> Okay, you got me there. If they serve good beer on the trains, that
> would make an otherwise stultifyingly boring journey kinda fun.

The train from Zurich would be anything but boring and far less terrifying
that trying to fly a Pa28 out of the mountains.

The beer is better by a mile, certainly better that the half frozen gnats
**** you have coming out of Milwaukee

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-03-24, Borat > wrote:
> The train from Zurich would be anything but boring and far less terrifying
> that trying to fly a Pa28 out of the mountains.

If you exercise good judgement, flying out of the mountains should not
be a terrifying experience. If it is, you're doing it wrong.

I flew an 85hp Cessna 140 across the Sierra Nevadas in 2002. With proper
planning, it can be done without absurd levels of risk or terror.

> The beer is better by a mile, certainly better that the half frozen gnats
> **** you have coming out of Milwaukee

I wager there's probably some good beer coming out of Milwaukee, but it
won't be the mass produced beer. Mass produced beer is almost always
pretty intolerable, whoever makes it - because it's made to be bland and
not offend anyone. If you think American beer is all gnat's ****, you've
been drinking the wrong American beer!

However, I disagree with Jay's comment that trains are stultifyingly
boring - they aren't at all. I really enjoy travelling by train.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Jay Honeck]

> I wager there's probably some good beer coming out of Milwaukee, but it
> won't be the mass produced beer.

www.sprecherbrewery.com

Best beer in the world, IMHO. (And I've made it a point to try them
all, although I fear that by the time many foreign brews make it to
the US, they are a mere shadow of themselves, thanks to mishandling.)

Sprecher was even better before they pasteurized it, but they were
unable to expand their reach much beyond Wisconsin without doing so.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> although I fear that by the time many foreign brews make it to
> the US, they are a mere shadow of themselves

If the beer won't come to Mohammed...

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Honeck]

> If the beer won't come to Mohammed...

Yeah, that's in our "want-to-dos" for the future...a beer tour of
Germany!

Alas, we haven't finished seeing even 50% of the US lower 48, let
alone Alaska and Canada. We have driven, ridden, or flown through/
over much of it, but not had time to spend any quality time in many
areas.

So many places to see, so little time...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Borat]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2007-03-24, Borat > wrote:
.. If you think American beer is all gnat's ****, you've
> been drinking the wrong American beer!

My favourite American beer is a nice bit of Moose Drool, which I first
sampled in Missoula, Montana and it went down well after a hard days flying.

>
> However, I disagree with Jay's comment that trains are stultifyingly
> boring - they aren't at all. I really enjoy travelling by train.
>

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> I wager there's probably some good beer coming out of Milwaukee, but it
>> won't be the mass produced beer.
>
> www.sprecherbrewery.com
>
> Best beer in the world, IMHO. (And I've made it a point to try them
> all, although I fear that by the time many foreign brews make it to
> the US, they are a mere shadow of themselves, thanks to mishandling.)
>
> Sprecher was even better before they pasteurized it, but they were
> unable to expand their reach much beyond Wisconsin without doing so.

German beer then.

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> If the beer won't come to Mohammed...
>
> Yeah, that's in our "want-to-dos" for the future...a beer tour of
> Germany!
>
That's about the only thing worth doing in Belgium a beer tour. Beers at 16%
alcohol can be found. Its one of the few places you can get drunk on beer
without having to go to the toilet in the process.

Other than beer (& diamonds) , Belgium's best attribute is that it does not
take long to drive through.

[Sylvain]

Borat wrote:
> Other than beer (& diamonds) , Belgium's best attribute is that it does
> not take long to drive through.

you should have slowed down a bit, you would have realized that they make
the best chocolate in the world... (that said the beer is indeed worth
the detour; that's one thing I really miss now that I live in USA:
good beer; actually I would even settle for half way drinkable if it
were available, but it ain't -- and no, imported beer in bottles doesn't
cut it either, I have my standards...)

--Sylvain

[Steve Foley]

"Sylvain" > wrote in message
t...
> actually I would even settle for half way drinkable if it
> were available, but it ain't -- and no, imported beer in bottles doesn't
> cut it either, I have my standards...)
>
> --Sylvain

How about imported beer in barrels?

[Borat]

"Sylvain" > wrote in message
t...
> Borat wrote:
>> Other than beer (& diamonds) , Belgium's best attribute is that it does
>> not take long to drive through.
>
> you should have slowed down a bit, you would have realized that they make
> the best chocolate in the world... (that said the beer is indeed worth

Yes, the chocolates are good but then I don't eat chocolate

[Borat]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:jiVNh.21220$Ht2.1757@trnddc06...
> "Sylvain" > wrote in message
> t...
>> actually I would even settle for half way drinkable if it
>> were available, but it ain't -- and no, imported beer in bottles
>> doesn't
>> cut it either, I have my standards...)
>>
>> --Sylvain
>
> How about imported beer in barrels?

Most beers don't travel well especially beer in barrels and especially beer
that has not been pasteurised. That kills any further fermentation.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Sylvain > wrote:

[snip]
> good beer; actually I would even settle for half way drinkable if it
> were available, but it ain't -- and no, imported beer in bottles doesn't
> cut it either, I have my standards...)

have you tried homebrew?

--
Bob Noel
(gave up looking for a particular sig the lawyer will hate)

[Thomas Borchert]

Borat,

> Its one of the few places you can get drunk on beer
> without having to go to the toilet in the process.
>

Some people really strive for the worthy goals in life...

Jeeze!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Honeck]

> > Its one of the few places you can get drunk on beer
> > without having to go to the toilet in the process.
>
> Some people really strive for the worthy goals in life...
>
> Jeeze!

Yeah, I was offended, too.

After all, that's what green chartreuse and tequila are for...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Stefan]

Jay Honeck schrieb:
>>> Its one of the few places you can get drunk on beer
>>> without having to go to the toilet in the process.
>> Some people really strive for the worthy goals in life...
>>
>> Jeeze!
>
> Yeah, I was offended, too.
>
> After all, that's what green chartreuse [tequila snipped] are for...

Now *this* is offending. Or just plain ignorant.

Stefan

[Borat]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Borat,
>
>> Its one of the few places you can get drunk on beer
>> without having to go to the toilet in the process.
>>
>
> Some people really strive for the worthy goals in life...
>
> Jeeze!

There are times when even going for a leak is a waste of good drinking time.

[Borat]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>> My only recent experience is with Zurich, Luzern and Wien, and I gotta
>> say that RR terminals in the middle of town, trains that leave and
>> arrive exactly on time, tasty snacks, including decent beer,
>
> Okay, you got me there. If they serve good beer on the trains, that
> would make an otherwise stultifyingly boring journey kinda fun.
>
> But it still ain't flying.

I don't think a train journey like this would be boring

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6521295.stm

another reason why GA is not worth a fart in Europe as a meaningful form of
mass travel