How much longer?

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I work in education, and in recent years I
have graduated many people with doctorate and masters degrees in high-
tech areas whom I would consider frighteningly incompetent.

That's something of a self-indictment, isn't it? In what manner do you work
in education, "graduate" many "incompetents," and not have any culpability
in the matter?

I'm not so sure, however, that even you aren't part of the phenomenon -
no offense meant or implied, just making a non-judgmental observation.
After all, how many of those 235 horses your Dakota (?) has do you
really need? Wouldn't an Archer do 99 percent of your missions? And
with a much lower fuel bill?

None taken. You are absolutely correct.

Which is why we're looking at entering a six-way partnership (flying club,
actually) on a 1946 Ercoupe. 85 horses, 2 seats, 4 gph. The Pathfinder
(immediate predecessor to the Dakota) is an awesome plane for hauling a
family in style -- and we'll certainly keep it -- but Atlas burns 25 gph at
takeoff, which makes buzzing down to a pancake breakfast something you tend
to think twice about nowadays.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:GXVJj.107598$yE1.37839@attbi_s21:

I'm not so sure, however, that even you aren't part of the phenomenon
- no offense meant or implied, just making a non-judgmental
observation. After all, how many of those 235 horses your Dakota (?)
has do you really need? Wouldn't an Archer do 99 percent of your
missions? And with a much lower fuel bill?

None taken. You are absolutely correct.

Which is why we're looking at entering a six-way partnership (flying
club, actually) on a 1946 Ercoupe. 85 horses, 2 seats, 4 gph. The
Pathfinder (immediate predecessor to the Dakota) is an awesome plane
for hauling a family in style -- and we'll certainly keep it -- but
Atlas burns 25 gph at takeoff, which makes buzzing down to a pancake
breakfast something you tend to think twice about nowadays.


You are an idiot. I will fly as long as there is air. Gasoline be
damned. I started without it and I'll finish withour if needs be.





Bertie

On Apr 4, 8:47*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
With Avgas topping five bucks a gallon, I find myself asking: How much more
will it take before GA is completely unaffordable? * At what price point
will all the current "weekend pilots" be driven from the market?

JH, I know you dont like me responding to your posts but for the sake
of discussion I might add some perspective. I started flying at 14 and
I am mid 40ies now so I have been at this for some time. The one thing
that has been consistent in those 30 years is listening to complaints
about the cost of flying. I have been ask what it costs to own and
operate my airplanes and I allways tell people that I dont keep track
of it and even if it cost twice as much I would still fly because it
is worth it to me. I think it is more about getting the most out of
your flying and not so much worrying about the cost. There have been
plenty of " Weekend Pilots" who get bored and quit but for pilots who
challenge themselves with things like long XCs, advanced ratings,
aerobatics, etc., the cost will be less of an issue.


Example: While on our trip back from Florida a couple of weeks ago, we paid
$5.20 per gallon in St. Louis. *Since we needed 60 gallons, we paid over
$300 for a single tank of gas -- something I *never* thought I'd see.

This is a shocker, but I would bet that for alot of people on this
list they never thought they would see the wages they are making
either. Ive read that the average american works less minutes for a
gallon of gas now than in the 70s


That price has more than doubled in just the last few years, and there
appears to be no end in sight. *So the question is: How much higher must gas
go up before *you* hang up your headphones for the last time? * Anyone care
to predict what year the last personal flights will occur in America?
--

I think the higher energy costs will foster better effeciency in
airframes and engines. Look at Diamond, Cirrus, and Columbia/Cessna. I
flew a 600 mile delivery flight on a kitplane I built and I trued at a
buck twenty on 3.9 gals/hr (With two adults and full bagage). Try that
with a 152. The first jet airliner I flew would carry 148 pax at .80
at 11000 lbs/hr (In cruise). The one I currently fly hauls 178 sheep
at .78 at under 7000 lbs/hr. These increases in efficiency have
trickled down to biz jets and larger GA and I dont think it will be
long before we see it at the sport pilot level. My prediction is that
we will go to OSH in a few years and see all manner of advancements in
technology.
Frank

"F. Baum" wrote ...
My prediction is that we will go to OSH in a few years and see
all manner of advancements in technology.

Frank,
I agree that tech advancements will continue to flood into aviation, but I
also think our GA pilot numbers will continue to shrink steadily.

I am most surprised by the feedback I got to a general question I posted a
few weeks back about club aircraft usage:

* ...25 (flying and named on insur policy) members per airplane
* would have seemed unmanageable 10 or 20 years ago. My club
* meetings turned into tirates when we first considered going from
* 10 to 12 per plane. Now I'm seeing member flying hours per year
* in the single digits, and a club almost needs 20 members per just
* to keep operational hours on the planes above 250 per year.
*
* What are you guys seeing as the recent numbers coming in from
* the clubs?
* a. Recent and past "hours per member per year"?
* b. Recent and past "hours per plane per year"?

I only got back 7 replies, but the trend was identical. Take away the
members actively seeking a rating and the avg was less than 12 hobbs hours
per year per member. Two different guys responded that more than half their
club members paid their dues but did not fly a single hour in 2007. The
other feedback I got was that most new members are coming in after selling
their own planes, or getting out of small partnerships.

Ten years ago the trend I saw was club members getting together and leaving
to buy their own airplane.

Jim Logajan wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I work in education, and in recent years I
have graduated many people with doctorate and masters degrees in high-
tech areas whom I would consider frighteningly incompetent.

That's something of a self-indictment, isn't it? In what manner do you work
in education, "graduate" many "incompetents," and not have any culpability
in the matter?


So you "Graduated Many People" in "High Technology" who are
"Frighteningly Incompetent"??

You must work at a Guvment School right?

Great Job Comrade. Thanks for your wonderful example of our
****ed away tax dollars at work

No wonder America is going to hell in a hand basket

John,

I am interested in learning what the total cost of ownership is in
Germany/Europe for a single engine GA airplane.

All cost in USD, estimates for, say, an IFR-equipped mid-80s PA28 Archer or
a TB-10 Tobago with a Garmin 430 and an S-TEC 50 flown by a group of 5
pilots.

Insurance
6000 to 7000

Maintenance+Annual+prop reserve (6 years)+database updates: 3400

Hangarage (can be much higher in places, especially at big city airports
with IFR approaches - and obviously cheaper with outside parking):
3900

Variable operating costs per hour:
Fuel: 75 (we lower that by flying to Denmark as much as we can, where Avgas
is much cheaper)
50 and 100 hour checks, engine reserve, paint reserve, reserve: 87

Taxes and fees
Each landing is at least 10 dollars (at homebase in Germany), up to 150 and
more at large airports.

Cost of certificates and registrations
any and all other costs that add up annually
Included in the above

With about 150 hours flown per year, that ends up being about 260 bucks per
hour excluding landing fees and capital costs for buying the plane (no
loans or anything on it). That would be considered normal to low for a
"youngish" IFR-equipped aircraft here. If you want to rent it, add at least
50 bucks. Non-IFR can be cheaper since the annual required check of each
radio is 150 USD alone per radio, for example.

Normal rental fees for your average beat-up C172N or P are 220 to 260 USD.
Clubs are cheaper. A 172S with a G1000 at our home base rents for (are you
sitting down?) 380 USD.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"F. Baum" wrote in message
...
On Apr 4, 8:47 pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
JH With Avgas topping five bucks a gallon, I find myself asking: How much
more
JH will it take before GA is completely unaffordable? At what price point
JH will all the current "weekend pilots" be driven from the market?

FB I am mid 40ies now so I have been at this for some time. The one thing
FB that has been consistent in those 30 years is listening to complaints
FB about the cost of flying. I have been ask what it costs to own and
FB operate my airplanes and I allways tell people that I dont keep track
FB of it and even if it cost twice as much I would still fly because it
FB is worth it to me. I think it is more about getting the most out of

Economies change. It's not so much the cost as it is the value. Flying no
matter what it costs only works as long as you can still put food on the
table.

I'm getting ready to fly to SnF and somone asked me how much it will cost.
My answer was: about the same cost as a first class ticket but a little
slower and a little more cost than driving my Suburban but about twice as
fast. That's for me flying solo.

For this kind of a trip, the question is go or not to go. Once I decide to
go, flying myself is a viable option that is not totally out of line.

I think weekend trips and family vacations fall in this same category. The
question is go or not to go. Flying yourself versus commercial or driving
have different costs and different tradeoffs but flying yourself is not the
clear looser. However, it's a larger expense and people tend to plan for and
save up for these kinds of trips.

Burger runs, brunch runs and just puttering around pose a different
question. Clearly, the purpose is to fly. Those kinds of flights will never
be justifiable and will diminish as people have less time and less
disposable income.

The problem with flying is that the more frequent, shorter, harder to
justify flights are necessary to keep skills up. There is a definite
threshold where you have to have enough time and money to keep the basic
skills up so that the occasional, justifiable trip is possible.

Parents that are properly engaged with their kids and well enough off want
to do things to pull their kids into the real world. Weekend trips to
explore the world are an important part of their children's development.
Those trips take time and cost money.

Again, the question is go or no-go. Once a decision is made to take the
family away for the weekend, flying is not that unaffordable.

As pilots, I think that we can do a lot more to support each other. If I fly
once a month or less because I can't afford to fly more frequently, my
skills are rusty everytime I get in the plane. But, if I fly with others
several other times a month, the whole experience helps keep my skills and
attitude up.

Heading to the airport alone? Call up a fellow pilot and invite him along.
It's more fun and cheaper for all.
------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

On Apr 4, 9:47*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
With Avgas topping five bucks a gallon, I find myself asking: How much more
will it take before GA is completely unaffordable? * At what price point
will all the current "weekend pilots" be driven from the market?

Example: While on our trip back from Florida a couple of weeks ago, we paid
$5.20 per gallon in St. Louis. *Since we needed 60 gallons, we paid over
$300 for a single tank of gas -- something I *never* thought I'd see.

That price has more than doubled in just the last few years, and there
appears to be no end in sight. *So the question is: How much higher must gas
go up before *you* hang up your headphones for the last time? * Anyone care
to predict what year the last personal flights will occur in America?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Well that's still only 2 bucks more than auto gas.

$2 more for fuel compared to a car is a small price compared to the
rest of the expenses of owning a plane.

If gas reaches $10 a gallon before the rest of the economy catches up
to that inflation everything will come to a grinding halt and the
masses won't have food in their grocery stores. Aviation will be far
down on the list of your concerns.

Thomas Borchert schrieb:
A 172S with a G1000 at our home base rents for (are you
sitting down?) 380 USD.

good writeup; but you have to consider that the USD - EUR exchange
changed dramatically over the last 5 or so years. So the 380USD today
where about 200USD back then in about 2002 (hopefully calculated correct).

#m