If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Future of GA
Many pilots I know seem to think that this new TSA rule is just the
beginning of things to come. Look at the trend. Mayor Daley succeeded after a long battle, then the proposal by Mr. Weiner, and now this. People have been trying to get rid of general aviation for quite some time, and they are starting to have success. Many TFR's have now become permament. There is some talk about banning all part-91 operations from class B airspace. The old timers tell me that today's kids are not interested in aviation, because they have taken the fun out of flying. How much fun is it for a kid to learn about complex airspaces, TFR's and military interceptions? That paints a gloomy picture for aviation. The optimist in me tells me that things will turn around. What do you think? Is GA on a inevitable decline, or will it turn around and start to take an even important role in our lives? Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
. 5... Many pilots I know seem to think that this new TSA rule is just the beginning of things to come. Beginning? Seems to me it's the middle of things to come. [...] What do you think? Is GA on a inevitable decline, or will it turn around and start to take an even important role in our lives? I hope your optimist is right. I personally don't believe it. History has few (if any) examples of rules and restrictions being relaxed. Government always exerts greater and greater power over the people, and it's nearly impossible to get it to relinquish its grip. The only thing I'm not really all that sure of is whether I'll live long enough to see the inevitable revolution. It might not happen that soon, probably as much as 300-500 years in the future. But I think it's definitely going to happen some day. It always does. Pete |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Count me as an optimist-slash-realist.
On the optimist side: Two weeks ago I flew the Hudson River Corridor. After 9/11, who would have thought we'd ever see that again? And it's not as if there's been any kind of sustained public outcry to close it. This, for me, is the canary in the coalmine. If the ban-GA forces can't push us out of this, they're sure as heck not going to pull it off anywhere else. Likewise, the whole Sport Pilot/LSA scene is the best news in, oh, a couple of decades? Finally here's something that addresses the two biggest problems GA faces today: it takes too long to earn a useful license, and airplanes cost too much. This will help increase the number of certificated pilots, and the proportion of pilots who actually stay active. On the realist side: The cost of operating a real x-country plane is only going to increase. Minijets like the eclipse may bring private jet charter within the reach of a hundred thousand more people but they won't make it cheaper to fly around in a Skylane or Bonanza. Avgas prices in the $4-$5 range are going to have people giving light twins away in a decade or so, assuming we can even still buy 100LL. Cirrus, Cessna, and the other leading manufacturers should really be trying to move towards either JET-A diesels or engines that can run mogas. Continental and Lycoming likewise ought to really be thinking a bit more about their future here. If all the engines out there today turn to pumpkins, they are not going to be selling a lot of parts. Likewise, we may see the FAA enforce RNP standards that would require much of the fleet to carry out costly upgrades, not unlike RVSM. As I understand, AOPA is advocating for FAA/NASA to support the development of portable ADS-B systems not unlike today's portable GPS receivers, targeting $2500 as the critical price level. What we need to do is come up with a way to install and certify equipment like this at lower cost. We are drawing closer to the point at which our and the FAA's interests on this will intersect. If there is a way to get traffic, a moving map, terrain-avoidance, and precision navigation, installed, for less than $5000, then it will be adopted very quickly throughout the GA fleet voluntarily. This will simplify and enhance the ongoing push to modernize the air traffic system. As for bringing young people into flying, I wouldn't worry so much. The desire to fly arrives for most of us like a vocation, and I think it's something of a constant in humanity. All we need to do is remove as many obstacles as we can, and good things will follow. GA will always I think be with us in some form. I obviously hope it will be something more diverse and attainable than what we currently see in Europe, but I'm not concerned that the only way to get into the air in a decade or two will be in a Southwest people tube. -cwk. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
As for bringing young people into flying, I wouldn't worry so much.
All we need to do is remove as many obstacles as we can, and good things will follow. I see this as a duty, not a choice. If, through our business, or Civil Air Patrol, or AOPA, or Friends of Iowa City Airport, or EAA's Young Eagles I can convince kids in my area that aviation IS possible for the common person, I will have succeeded. The surest way to a bright GA future is to have droves of people clamoring to fly their own planes. As pilots, it is our duty to show the way. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article O6ted.235899$wV.141418@attbi_s54,
As for bringing young people into flying, I wouldn't worry so much. All we need to do is remove as many obstacles as we can, and good things will follow. I see this as a duty, not a choice. If, through our business, or Civil Air Patrol, or AOPA, or Friends of Iowa City Airport, or EAA's Young Eagles I can convince kids in my area that aviation IS possible for the common person, I will have succeeded. I think a lot of it has to do with just being able to see other young poeple that are pilots. I got my PPL when I was 25 and a full time graduate student (ie. student loans ^_^). But people were impressed not only that I 'was a pilot' but that I could afford to fly. They just assumed that it was 'only a hobby of the rich.' It's sort of like Golf and Tiger Woods. I actually think that most kids and still in love with aviation, but it's not something that they think of every actually doing. And part of that is because aviation is not really assessable for most people, unless you have a family member or friend that flys, odds are you'll never get the chance to go up in a GA plane. IMHO it's that early exposure and seeing other people making it work that's really needed to help GA grow. As an aside, CSI and all the Law & Order spin offs of caused all of the forensic scientice programs in this nation to grow like mad. GA needs something similar. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:48:38 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
wrote: On the realist side: The cost of operating a real x-country plane is only going to increase. Minijets like the eclipse may bring private jet charter within the reach of a hundred thousand more people but they won't make it cheaper to fly around in a Skylane or Bonanza. Avgas prices in the $4-$5 range are going to have people giving light twins away in a decade or so, assuming we can even still buy 100LL. Cirrus, Cessna, and the other leading manufacturers should really be trying to move towards either JET-A diesels or engines that can run mogas. Continental and Lycoming likewise ought to really be thinking a bit more about their future here. If all the engines out there today turn to pumpkins, they are not going to be selling a lot of parts. I agree, cost of fuel is placing a massive pressure on GA. Avgas is already well over $3.00 at most of the larger airports, and still seems to be climbing. If it hits $5.00, the direct operating cost of any light twin is going to be $100/hr. The big twins closer to $200/hr. That will put it out of the reach of most private individuals. This (amongst many other factors) are already affecting the twin market. The costs to run a light twin are astronomical (consider the following): 1. Acquistion costs $150k = (which is really an incredible deal) 2. Direct operating costs $60/hr 3. Hangar = $500/month 4. Insurance = $400/month 5. Maintenance = ???, but you can expect $500/month So flying 150 hrs per year costs: $ 9,000 fuel + oil $ 6,000 hangar $ 5,000 insurance $ 6,000 maintenance ----------------------------------- $26, 000 / year Plus the owner of a twin has to be prepared to shell out massive bucks at any time. This limits ownership to a fiscally elite portion of the population (or businesses that use the plane). On the bright side, there is innovation in the airframe and engine marketplace, and this will help to offset the rising costs elsewhere in the system. Lancair, Diamond, and Cirrus make planes that get better mpg than existing singles. The bad news, they still use the same Lyc or Cont engines with roughly the same BSFC as our Pipers and Cessnas. Their efficiencies are gained through low drag airframes. There is development in the fuel efficient diesels that burn cheaper Jet-A, but most of these diesels (and their associated STCs) are priced well above the cost of a brand new Lycoming. Pilots and aircraft owners tend to be conservative with airplane expenditures, and few are willing to pay $40k for an engine with minimal history, few mechanics know how to fix, and an unknown future. I think the GA population will continue to embrace Lyc and Cont until 100LL prices are painful, but will be forced to fly less because of rising fuel costs. -Nathan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:48:38 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
wrote: Two weeks ago I flew the Hudson River Corridor. Could you outline the procedures you used to do this? I haven't done it in about 10 years and would like to once again. Used to be 123.05 was river traffic and you just reported major landmarks. Is anything different now? Do I need a sqwak from Newark? Can you still circle the Lady? TIA for any response. z |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"zatatime" wrote in message
... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 05:48:38 GMT, "C Kingsbury" wrote: Two weeks ago I flew the Hudson River Corridor. Could you outline the procedures you used to do this? I haven't done it in about 10 years and would like to once again. Used to be 123.05 was river traffic and you just reported major landmarks. Is anything different now? Nope. The traffic freq (not mandatory, just recommended) is noted on the TAC. Do I need a sqwak from Newark? Nope, not if you stay below the Class B. Can you still circle the Lady? Yup. For awhile, there was a 1-mile-radius TFR around the statue, but no longer. The Hudson Corridor is back to normal--except for the possibility of ballgames at stadiums that are within 3nm of the river. Then you have to beware of the general stadium TFR (unless you're on a Class B clearance; then you're ok). --Gary TIA for any response. z |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Gary Drescher wrote:
TFR (unless you're on a Class B clearance; then you're ok). Yes? I didn't know this. I thought part 91 was prohibited in these Bush TFRs. I'd not expect ATC to be making that distinction; rather, it's our job. No? - Andrew |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Recently, Peter Duniho posted:
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message Many pilots I know seem to think that this new TSA rule is just the beginning of things to come. Beginning? Seems to me it's the middle of things to come. One can only hope. Otherwise, it would get intolerably worse by the time it gets to the "real" middle. The only thing I'm not really all that sure of is whether I'll live long enough to see the inevitable revolution. It might not happen that soon, probably as much as 300-500 years in the future. But I think it's definitely going to happen some day. It always does. Well, there *are* ways to guarantee that you'll live long enough to see the inevitable revolution... Neil |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Future Electronic Attack Aircraft | Mike P. | Military Aviation | 1 | April 22nd 04 01:30 AM |
Message To America's Students: The War, The Draft, Your Future | ~ LITTLE HITLER ~ | Military Aviation | 0 | April 11th 04 11:59 PM |
Future military fighters and guns - yes or no ? | championsleeper | Military Aviation | 77 | March 3rd 04 04:11 AM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |
UNMANNED, THE WAY OF THE FUTURE | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 11 | November 28th 03 05:02 PM |