What GA needs

Dave J writes:

The reason I think that's remotely relevant is simply because the
people who are going to learn to fly are, well, the above averages,
and they really do have more pressure on their time than in the past.

No, the people who are going to learn to fly are those with a very intense
interest in flying. They may or may not be above average. Usually they will
be average.

Matt Barrow writes:

Around here, a two year old 172 goes for $105, wet.

So that's still only 1.5 hours for the cost of a pair of expensive sneakers.
The sneakers will last for months or years; once that 1.5 hours of flying time
is gone, there's nothing.

You know, I _think_ you just showed the attitude that may be behind the
dearth of new students.

It's a pretty reasonable attitude. It's not rational to throw money out the
window. Everyone wants value for his dollar.

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:04:09 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote:

Matt Barrow writes:

Around here, a two year old 172 goes for $105, wet.

So that's still only 1.5 hours for the cost of a pair of expensive sneakers.
The sneakers will last for months or years; once that 1.5 hours of flying time
is gone, there's nothing.


Might as well kill yourself now, then, because the rest of your life is
just going to cost more money.




randall g =%^) PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RG
http://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:
http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam: http://www.katkam.ca

Dave J wrote:

Snip


But I struggle to find time and cash to keep this hobby up. Lately, I
have rediscovered digital photography. I can't help but notice that it
also is a skill and craft, with plenty of technical stuff to nail
down, and even at its most expensive, it's a lot cheaper than
aviation. And my wife does not worry about me getting killed taking
photos. There's an appeal to that.

-- dave j




Just be careful of what you take pictures of....
--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

On Sep 11, 9:49 am, Ross wrote:

Just be careful of what you take pictures of....

Ah, yes, there's always the possibility of getting killed as a
consequence of having taken certain pictures.

-- dave j

"Matt Barrow" wrote

The newer 172s and 182s are a good foundation, and even their costs are
minor for a generation that thinks nothing of $150 sneakers, a $20000
Honda Civic with fart mufflers, $300 a wheel rims and other trim
"features".

I think you are way off base, with that.

$150 shoes are not a large part of monthly income. $20000 cars are getting
towards a large part, but a car is a necessity. The tastes direct them
towards fart mufflers, but a newer car is going to cost that much.

How much income is going to be left over, for an average person. Could they
take a hit for another $20000 airplane? Doubtful, but possible.

How about one twice as much. Doubtful to slim, to none.

The real rub is that there are few (what people consider a real airplane)
airplanes out there at $40000. That is plain out of reach, for most kids,
or young people starting a family. It just can't be done.

Airplanes are out of reach. Until that primary fact changes, (I don't think
it is going to) GA has little chance.
--
Jim in NC

On Sep 10, 7:43 pm, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Possibly our own Mxmaniac is more representative of the current generation
than we realize.

By the way, cheap intergenerational shots don't help to bring in new
customers, either!

-- dave j

As I look at a high-school parking lot, there's so many cars I and
friends in "my day" would not be seen dead in. If this translates to
airplanes, yoots today may not be interested in this kind of
machinery. It's even true for older people, where so many SUVs have
zero styling, and few convertibles or sport models available and sold
in high numbers.

F--

wrote in message
ups.com...
As I look at a high-school parking lot, there's so many cars I and
friends in "my day" would not be seen dead in. If this translates to
airplanes, yoots today may not be interested in this kind of
machinery. It's even true for older people, where so many SUVs have
zero styling, and few convertibles or sport models available and sold
in high numbers.

I notice quite a few built-up and re-built cars such as Honda Civic,
Mitsubishi Eclipse's and the like, rather akin to my day of tricked out
Mustangs and Camero's.

"Dave J" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Sep 10, 7:43 pm, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Possibly our own Mxmaniac is more representative of the current
generation
than we realize.

By the way, cheap intergenerational shots don't help to bring in new
customers, either!

With MX, there is no such thing as a Cheap Shot, intergenerational or
otherwise. Even his peers in terms of age disdain and ridicule him.

I think many, if not most, here don't want such a mentally defective lout in
the REAL air with us.