What GA needs

As a member of the younger generation (I'm 24), I can only speak from
personal experience. I'm under no illusions that I can speak for my
entire generation. :-)

Some background: I was That Kid At The Airport Fence. When I was
young, I used to beg my dad to take me to the local private airport so
I could watch the planes take off and land. I memorized
configurations so that I could tell a Cessna from a Piper from a
Mooney, and I still remember jumping out of bed one morning (*not* a
common thing when I was a youngin, as my parents would attest) and
dashing around the house excited at the news that Piper was going to
restart production of GA aircraft. Did the EAA Young Eagles,
discovery flights, the whole bit.

Despite that, my stay in flight school after I got out of college was
short and abortive. I took about 10 hours worth of lessons before I
stopped. Some of the reasons for why I stopped had to do with timing-
it was fall and I was starting a premedical program that didn't leave
me enough time to devote to aviation. The one that's perhaps of more
general interest, though, was cost. I've been gainfully employed ever
since leaving college and making what I would consider a decent salary
for a recent grad, but what I realized after about six weeks of flying
lessons was that finishing my private and keeping up a decent level of
proficiency was probably going to be more than I could afford.
Getting the PPL would be pretty expensive, but if I was going to feel
comfortable in the air I knew I would also have to rent and fly on a
pretty regular basis- I had done enough reading to know that getting
rusty, especially in a new pilot, could be deadly.

Now, yes, people of my generation do manage to pay for $150 sneakers
and multi-thousand home stereos. I suppose I could as well if I were
so inclined. But flying seemed to almost be on another order of
magnitude- the FBO where I trained rented Cessna 152s for $90 an hour
wet. At this stage in my life, that doesn't work out to a whole lot
of proficiency flights. I ended up calculating the cost of finishing
my PPL to be around $5000-6000, which is roughly twice what I spent on
my current car.

(And yes, a smarter move would have been to calculate this all out
beforehand. I thought I might squeeze through in the minimum
time...and in the end, I really really wanted to believe this was
something I was going to be able to afford, and I ignored questions
like "What if I take more than the minimum?" or "How am I going to
keep current?".)

Now, part of this is just where I am in my life, and where a lot of my
generation is as well- we're just out of college, and since the world
doesn't come delivered to your door we're not making the big bucks
just yet. At the same time, though, I can't help thinking that if
aviation were a bit more affordable it might be easier to draw in
younger folks who are in relatively lower-paying ($35-40K/year) jobs.
I can only speak from my own personal experience here, but the math
would have been very different for me if there had been an aircraft
available for, say, $60-75/hour wet rate. It would have made the PPL
less expensive, and it would also have made it easier for me to afford
currency. In my individual case it might or might not have made a
difference, but it would have lowered the barrier.

(Reducing the hours of instruction needed to gain the PPL would also
lower the barrier, but I'm not convinced that's the best way to
proceed. I had just enough training to realize how hard flying really
is, and I know that I would have needed at least 40 hours to be
comfortable with all of the PPL tasks. Lowering entry barriers is
nice and all, but I don't think that compromising standards is the way
to do it. And I say that as an unsuccessful flight student.)

Obviously, the pilot community can't just wave magic wands and make
cheaper aircraft appear. I had high hopes when the LSA category was
announced that cheaper aircraft might be in the offing, even if their
operating regime was more restrictred, but so far I've been
disappointed in the results. Most of the LSA I've seen announced have
been in the same $100-150K range as new-build GA aircraft, without any
real price reductions over what was available pre-LSA.

So what's the point of my ramblings? I'd say that based on my
personal experience a cheaper airplane is more likely to pull younger
people to GA than a pretty one. Composite bodies are pretty and I
like a nice interior as well as the next man, but I'd gladly perch on
a bicycle seat and fly the ugliest plane in the sky if it was cheaper
to rent than the next one over. If the community could successfully
lobby for a cheap, VFR plane that could lower the cost of renting and
serve as a "gateway" into flying, I believe that would do a great deal
towards attracting new pilots.

(And yes, I will be back in flight school. Have to get that pesky
medical school and residency out of the way first, but no matter how
long it takes, I will be back.)

"Jeff Dougherty" wrote in message
oups.com...

Now, yes, people of my generation do manage to pay for $150 sneakers
and multi-thousand home stereos. I suppose I could as well if I were
so inclined.

Exactly. Your inclinations run (no pun about sneakers intended) in a
different direction.

Hmm...

(And yes, I will be back in flight school. Have to get that pesky
medical school and residency out of the way first, but no matter how
long it takes, I will be back.)

I'd say that your goals are rather more challenging than most of your peers.
That MAY be a factor. Costs may also be a factor, but I'd wager it was a
strong combination of both in your case.

When you're back, we'll be here waiting to hear from you.

On Sep 12, 1:17 pm, Jeff Dougherty
wrote:

to rent than the next one over. If the community could successfully
lobby for a cheap, VFR plane that could lower the cost of renting and
serve as a "gateway" into flying, I believe that would do a great deal
towards attracting new pilots.

It's called a US-Legal ultralight. Or LSA like an X-Air H or RANS S6
for a little more $ and comfort.

You sound like the kind of person who would really get a kick out of
flying even first generation ultralghts, it really is getting right
back to basics, stick, rudder, and not a whole lot else to get between
you and the art of flying.

On Sep 12, 12:40 am, James Sleeman wrote:
On Sep 12, 1:17 pm, Jeff Dougherty
wrote:



to rent than the next one over. If the community could successfully
lobby for a cheap, VFR plane that could lower the cost of renting and
serve as a "gateway" into flying, I believe that would do a great deal
towards attracting new pilots.

It's called a US-Legal ultralight. Or LSA like an X-Air H or RANS S6
for a little more $ and comfort.

You sound like the kind of person who would really get a kick out of
flying even first generation ultralghts, it really is getting right
back to basics, stick, rudder, and not a whole lot else to get between
you and the art of flying.

I think I would, actually. When I fly, it will likely be under light-
sport rules since all I anticipate really wanting to do is drill some
plane-shaped holes in the sky and take in the view.

My concern is for the next generation of rental aircraft. The cheap
LSA and ultralights that you cited all seem to be flying under the
experimental rules, which I believe don't allow an aircraft to be
rented or used for any commercial purpose including instruction for
hire. (If I've misread the FARs, please correct me as IANAP) There
doesn't seem to be anything coming along to replace the Cessna 150 on
the flight school and rental lineup, and that's what worries me.

-JTD

Jeff Dougherty wrote:
On Sep 12, 12:40 am, James Sleeman wrote:
On Sep 12, 1:17 pm, Jeff Dougherty
wrote:



to rent than the next one over. If the community could successfully
lobby for a cheap, VFR plane that could lower the cost of renting
and serve as a "gateway" into flying, I believe that would do a
great deal towards attracting new pilots.

It's called a US-Legal ultralight. Or LSA like an X-Air H or RANS S6
for a little more $ and comfort.

You sound like the kind of person who would really get a kick out of
flying even first generation ultralghts, it really is getting right
back to basics, stick, rudder, and not a whole lot else to get
between you and the art of flying.

I think I would, actually. When I fly, it will likely be under light-
sport rules since all I anticipate really wanting to do is drill some
plane-shaped holes in the sky and take in the view.

My concern is for the next generation of rental aircraft. The cheap
LSA and ultralights that you cited all seem to be flying under the
experimental rules, which I believe don't allow an aircraft to be
rented or used for any commercial purpose including instruction for
hire. (If I've misread the FARs, please correct me as IANAP) There
doesn't seem to be anything coming along to replace the Cessna 150 on
the flight school and rental lineup, and that's what worries me.

-JTD

You are half right. the S-LSA aircraft can be rented indeed Cessna
themselves have just started taking orders on the 162 Skycatcher.

Also, for at least a while the E-LSA (the ******* children of Experimental
and S-LSA) can be rented.

Check out sportpilot.org for more info.