What GA needs

On Sep 12, 1:31 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:
Some things can only be simplified down so much. Basic flying has been
simplified from 40 required hours to 20. That's pretty damn good and I
really don't see how you could get it any shorter without taking everything
away that makes it worth while to do.

There's a huge amount of red tape that has little to do with actually flying
that gets in the way for all but the most dedicated.

Eh? All I had to do to get in to flight school was show up with a
check in my hand. The third class medical doesn't do much more than
make sure you won't have a heart attack or seizure at 5,000 feet, and
I never got the idea that flight instruction was more complex than it
needed to be. Yeah, it was hard, in my limited experience, but flying
is complex. There's weather to consider, navigation from a completely
different perspective, and that pesky third dimension...

I'm not really sure what you're talking about here. Could you give an
example?

-JTD

Jeff Dougherty writes:

Eh? All I had to do to get in to flight school was show up with a
check in my hand.

Getting in is just the beginning.

The third class medical doesn't do much more than make sure you
won't have a heart attack or seizure at 5,000 feet ...

The medicals are excessively restrictive--reminiscent of military
requirements--and archaic, disqualifying some conditions that are generally
harmless while accepting others that can often be dangerous. They are also
unnecessarily repetitive.

Red tape is abundant in certification as well, with special procedures just
for having retractable gear, excessive currency requirements, heavy
regulation, and so on.

It's easier to become a lawyer than it is to become a pilot, and in some
respects it's easier to become a doctor as well.

On Sep 12, 1:06 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

It's easier to become a lawyer than it is to become a pilot, and in some
respects it's easier to become a doctor as well.

An amazingly stupid statement, even without any background in any of
these fields..

F--

Mxsmanic wrote:
Getting in is just the beginning.

The third class medical doesn't do much more than make sure you
won't have a heart attack or seizure at 5,000 feet ...

The medicals are excessively restrictive--reminiscent of military
requirements--and archaic, disqualifying some conditions that are
generally harmless while accepting others that can often be
dangerous. They are also unnecessarily repetitive.


Agreed but now we have LSA so that doesn't have to be an issue for the
average recreational pilot.


Red tape is abundant in certification as well, with special
procedures just for having retractable gear, excessive currency
requirements, heavy regulation, and so on.

Please give us an example of the excessive requirements? And the average
recreational pilot (which is what this thread is about) isn't going to be
flying retracts.



It's easier to become a lawyer than it is to become a pilot, and in
some respects it's easier to become a doctor as well.

Well, now you are getting into the professional side of things but you are
once again wrong. I'm sure some of the doctors and lawyers around here will
jump in on this one.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Agreed but now we have LSA so that doesn't have to be an issue for the
average recreational pilot.

LSA is so restrictive that it's uninteresting to many potential pilots. And
the existence of LSA demonstrates that the normal PPL is too draconian in its
requirements. Flying an LSA doesn't make you any more fit to fly.

Please give us an example of the excessive requirements? And the average
recreational pilot (which is what this thread is about) isn't going to be
flying retracts.

Why not?

Well, now you are getting into the professional side of things but you are
once again wrong. I'm sure some of the doctors and lawyers around here will
jump in on this one.

I'm not talking about professional pilots, even private pilots have this
problem.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Agreed but now we have LSA so that doesn't have to be an issue for
the average recreational pilot.

LSA is so restrictive that it's uninteresting to many potential
pilots. And the existence of LSA demonstrates that the normal PPL is
too draconian in its requirements. Flying an LSA doesn't make you
any more fit to fly.


Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it authorizes
would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.



Please give us an example of the excessive requirements? And the
average recreational pilot (which is what this thread is about)
isn't going to be flying retracts.

Why not?



Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack of need
for it in recreational GA flying.


Well, now you are getting into the professional side of things but
you are once again wrong. I'm sure some of the doctors and lawyers
around here will jump in on this one.

I'm not talking about professional pilots, even private pilots have
this problem.

So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot ticket are on
par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it authorizes
would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that would make
flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in a circle.

Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack of need
for it in recreational GA flying.

In other words, time, expense, and difficulty, QED.

So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot ticket are on
par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

They are certainly on a par with becoming a lawyer, which (surprisingly) isn't
that difficult in the U.S. They are comparable to becoming a doctor as well,
depending on how far you want to go.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it
authorizes would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that
would make flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in
a circle.

The current crop of S-LSA aircraft are capable of turning a 5.5 hour car
trip into a 2 hour trip with a wonderful view.



Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack
of need for it in recreational GA flying.

In other words, time, expense, and difficulty, QED.

As anything gets more complex it gets more expensive. VWs cost less than
Corvetts.



So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot
ticket are on par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

They are certainly on a par with becoming a lawyer, which
(surprisingly) isn't that difficult in the U.S. They are comparable
to becoming a doctor as well, depending on how far you want to go.

Let's look and see. http://www.ilrg.com/schools/analysis/ That site has a
link to the to 51 top law schools on a cost/benefit ranking. Number 51
University of CT. Shows a THREE YEAR TOTAL COST of $103,182 & number 1
Univ. of GA was $45K.

How is that "on par" with getting a PP-SEL rating?

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

It's easier to become a lawyer than it is to become a pilot, and in some
respects it's easier to become a doctor as well.

Once again, a brand new high water mark for illustrating your complete
ignorance and incompetance with regard to all three persuits.

You fancy yourself such a genius, yet you can't comtemplate the rigors of
something as simple as getting a private pilots license. You're an ingorant,
arrogant moron. Thanks for a new example to remind us just how little you
understand.

On Sep 12, 1:06 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Jeff Dougherty writes:
Eh? All I had to do to get in to flight school was show up with a
check in my hand.

Getting in is just the beginning.

Believe me, I know. After all, I didn't finish. :-) And I did go to
college, where getting in wasn't even the beginning of the work I had
to do.

The third class medical doesn't do much more than make sure you
won't have a heart attack or seizure at 5,000 feet ...

The medicals are excessively restrictive--reminiscent of military
requirements--and archaic, disqualifying some conditions that are generally
harmless while accepting others that can often be dangerous. They are also
unnecessarily repetitive.

We could argue about whether or not certain conditions should be
automatically disqualifying for quite some time. I have a few pet
peeves there myself. However, according to statistics at
http://aviationmedicine.com/articles...e&articleID=19,
only 1.5% of those seeking medical certificates in 1998 (the last year
they had available) were denied one, and that included applicants who
didn't fill out the forms completely or include the appropriate
documentation. When you take those away, there were about 800 denials
out of about 450,000 applications. It doesn't sound like getting a
medical is all that restrictive.

And has been pointed out, if you don't think you can get one, fly as a
sport pilot. It's what I'll probably do.

Red tape is abundant in certification as well, with special procedures just
for having retractable gear, excessive currency requirements, heavy
regulation, and so on.

I'm afraid that I can't really say much to these unless you're more
specific. As far as I know, once you have the PPL you can fly any
single engine landplane without retractable gear or a variable pitch
prop. There are enough gear-up landings each year that some
retractable-gear training certainly seems to be a good idea, and I
don't think anyone would argue that seaplanes and multiengine
airplanes shouldn't have their own training requirements.

Currency requirements? The only requirement for a VFR private pilot
is a checkride once every two years, requiring you to pay for a couple
hours of an instructor's time. It's every six months for IFR, but
only if you haven't logged a certain amount of instrument time. How
could those requirements be profitably reduced without compromising
safety? (Sure, it's more often if you're an ATP, but that doesn't
really apply to recreational GA)

As for "heavy regulation"...well, any amount of regulation can be
claimed to be heavy. Unless you're more specific about which regs you
consider unnecessarily burdensome, I can't really offer
counterpoints.

It's easier to become a lawyer than it is to become a pilot, and in some
respects it's easier to become a doctor as well.

Er. As a current applicant for medical school, I've gone through a
year of premed coursework (after finishing a bio major at a liberal
arts college), followed by a yearlong application process that
involves a lot of paperwork and some not inconsiderable fees to get me
the chance to fly at my own expense somewhere for an interview, after
which the school might or might not admit me. I've definitely spent
more than 90 hours on the application process, and my total bill
probably won't come out to be much less than a PPL once I'm done
interviewing all over creation. (With the amount of flying I need to
do soon, I'll have my multiengine pax rating in no time! ;~) ) It's
taken two years on top of the four I spent in college, a lot of money
and skull sweat...

....and that's just to get *into* medical school. When/if I start,
I'll then do four years worth of intensive coursework, followed by at
least three years of residency pulling 80-100 hour weeks. Followed by
a licensing process that will look at my health at least as closely as
an FAA medical.

(And oh yeah, I'll be paying for it all too, at about $40K a year.
Debt, here I come!)

The above is not a complaint by any means. I can't wait to get in and
start my journey towards being a physician, and I knew what the rules
of the game were when I started the process. But in consideration of
the above, I would be interested to know what part of becoming a
doctor you consider easier than becoming a private pilot.

-JTD