NY Times Story on Pilot Population Decline

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 14:49:09 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 23:11:26 -0400, "Roger (K8RI)"
wrote in
:

[Detailed financial and hours-worked historical analysis refuting the
notion of the more recent increase in working hours and lower salaries
as a possible cause of the decline in aviation entrants snipped]

I think the most important item is missing from this analysis. The
article also noted that the current generation appears to have an
aversion to risk and the general population views general aviation
right in there with Bungee jumping or jumping the Grand Canyon with a
motorcycle. IOW the conclusion which he stated in the article was we
may be, in general, raising a generation of cowards who want to be
protected and shy away from pursuits associated with risk.

Just stop and think of how many people you know have made remarks
about either how risky flying is, or how they worry about you flying.
How many have had to give up flying due to girlfriend, wife, or
family?

There is no question that fear plays a role in flying whether it's
airline or personal, with the latter provoking a response several
orders of magnitude greater than the latter. However, I doubt that
there are studies that show an _increase_ in cowardice in GenX. I
sure hope it's not true. Did you find any supporting information for
that notion that you can cite?

The only place I've seen it stated in that fashion, or manner was the
article. OTOH today people do *seem* to want to be protected more
than in the past with government responding with "feel good"
legislation. There have been a number of articles about today's
society being much more sensitive to, and emotionally affected by
disasters, much of which has been attributed to instant news and
saturation about such events. We've had larger school disasters such
as the Bath School disaster (Bath Michigan 1921) and larger terrorist
actions (Black Wall Street 1927- death toll of over 3,000) than in
recent times. However that terrorist action was domestic rather than
foreign.

Each generation has believed they lived in a time of heightened danger
and fear. I grew up with "the bomb". Today we have international
terrorism which causes me very little worry. I'd gladly accept a bit
more risk for the return of the freedoms we had prior to 9/11.

Larry Dighera writes:

There is no question that fear plays a role in flying whether it's
airline or personal, with the latter provoking a response several
orders of magnitude greater than the latter. However, I doubt that
there are studies that show an _increase_ in cowardice in GenX. I
sure hope it's not true. Did you find any supporting information for
that notion that you can cite?

For decades, there has been a general increase in fear in the population,
driven principally by news media, and by government collusion with those
media. People are more fearful of everything nowadays than they have ever
been in the past (in U.S. history), and the trend is accelerating.

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

On 4/28/2007 10:57 AM Mxsmanic jumped down, turned around, and wrote:

For decades, there has been a general increase in fear in the population,
driven principally by news media, and by government collusion with those
media. People are more fearful of everything nowadays than they have ever
been in the past (in U.S. history), and the trend is accelerating.

Whatever. What does this have to do with aviation?

You claim to come here to discuss aviation. Why do you lie so much?
--
dgs

On Apr 26, 2:28 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:53:18 -0400, "Marco Leon"
wrote in :

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/26/fa...=1&oref=slogin

The number of student pilots is down by about a third since 1990,
from 129,000 to 88,000. The number of private pilots is down from
299,000 to 236,000, according to statistics kept by the Federal
Aviation Administration. And they are aging.

Some longtime private pilots fear that an industry is withering,
and a bit of Americana is slipping away, along with a bit of
freedom and joy. And it is happening in part because of lack of
interest; Walter Mitty doesn't want to fly anymore.


Maybe one reason there are fewer pilots now is that the pilots who
learned to fly in World War II have been leaving us in the last 17
years. The war exposed a lot of men (and some women) to flying, and
many of them continued to fly after the war. In 1990 many of those
pilots would have been in their 60s.

What we need is a way to expose people to flying like the war did.
Hopefully the Young Eagles program will help with that.

"Phil" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 26, 2:28 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:

Maybe one reason there are fewer pilots now is that the pilots who
learned to fly in World War II have been leaving us in the last 17
years. The war exposed a lot of men (and some women) to flying, and
many of them continued to fly after the war. In 1990 many of those
pilots would have been in their 60s.


I think that is a contributing factor, but I also think the whole world
turning to recreation through electronic gadgets is a big part of the pie as
well. I know several pilots that were very active 20 years ago, that now
spend those same dollars on home entertainment, and progressively larger
belts as well.

Maxwell writes:

I think that is a contributing factor, but I also think the whole world
turning to recreation through electronic gadgets is a big part of the pie as
well. I know several pilots that were very active 20 years ago, that now
spend those same dollars on home entertainment, and progressively larger
belts as well.

More bang for the buck, essentially.

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

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

More bang for the buck, essentially.


Hardly, considering the amount they spend. You could have a very active log
book with the kind of money most people choose to spend on electronics. It's
just a simple matter of choices and ambition.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:53:18 -0400, "Marco Leon"
wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/26/fa...=1&oref=slogin

One thing that story has wrong is that there are no $100k airplanes to
support Sport Pilots.

The LSA industry certainly appears to be booming. Every flying
magazine I get has a new LSA listed each month. Most of the LSAs are
~$100k.

Nathan Young writes:

The LSA industry certainly appears to be booming. Every flying
magazine I get has a new LSA listed each month. Most of the LSAs are
~$100k.

Flying magazines are perhaps not very objective sources of information.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
Nathan Young writes:

The LSA industry certainly appears to be booming. Every flying
magazine I get has a new LSA listed each month. Most of the LSAs are
~$100k.

Flying magazines are perhaps not very objective sources of information.

So all those ads are false advertising?

Quick, call the Feds.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.