Almost saw someone crash

If you live in the south, maybe. If you live in the northern states or
Canada, a boat spends most of the year in drydock or the driveway.

Yep. I'm from a city with a strong maritime tradition (Racine, WI), and
boating is a huge part of the local economy...

....for about 15 weeks per year. The other 37 weeks, these giant
party-barges are shrink-wrapped in giant blue cocoons, and stacked on shore
like toys.

We've got friends with a 42 foot, ocean-going yacht, docked in Racine. It's
gorgeous, cost as much as a new Bonanza, burns an incredible amount of gas,
and goes no where. To me, it's the dumbest possible purchase.

Of course, they think our plane is absurd... ;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

David Megginson wrote:

If you live in the south, maybe. If you live in the northern states or
Canada, a boat spends most of the year in drydock or the driveway.

And I think it was Jay who was recently complaining about the aircraft owners who
treat their aircraft the same way.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

If you live in the south, maybe. If you live in the northern states or
Canada, a boat spends most of the year in drydock or the driveway.

And I think it was Jay who was recently complaining about the aircraft
owners who
treat their aircraft the same way.

Yep, there is a subset of aircraft owners who simply hang up the keys after
Thanksgiving, and don't pick them up again until Easter.

To me, this is totally absurd, bad for the planes, and probably unsafe.
Flying ain't like driving a boat, and IMHO they are missing the very best
flying by avoiding the cold weather months.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Martin Hotze wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Everything is relative. Compared to golfing in Scotland, or owning a
42
foot yacht, flying is DIRT cheap. Compared to bowling, it's pretty
spendy.


what do you know about the costs of golfing in Scotland?

If you live 4,000 miles away, it's quite expensive to stay in a hotel,
airfares etc. to go golfing in Scotland, especially on a frequent basis.

Even for me, flying is cheaper than regular golfing holidays in
Scotland. Good job I don't play golf really!

Combine the costs. Fly yourself to Scotland. Play golf. Each then only
costs a small amount. The flying only costs "fuel for flight - airfare to
get
there" as you'd have spent the rest on the airfare anyway. The golf only
costs the amount for the round itself as you'd have paid for the flying trip
anyway. See? Justified.

Paul

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...
They've figured out that boats are cheaper, you can throw parties on them,
and you
can attract bikini-clad young ladies. For what a C-152 costs, you can buy
one big
enough to sleep on. If nothing else, you can go fishing. Best of all, the
FAA is not
involved.

A much better deal if you're single and in your 20s. Or maybe if you're
just single.
:-)

Hmm. Sell my plane and get a boat? Nah. I'll stay single and fly!

Paul

In article , G.R. Patterson III wrote:
[boats]
A much better deal if you're single and in your 20s. Or maybe if you're
just single.

I started to learn to fly aged 24, in the late 1990s (and still single).

The main difficulty with boats, when it boils down to it, is that they
just don't fly very well.

Light aircraft might be the wrong venue to start younger people off as
it's too expensive. A glider site with a winch might be better (although
you have to be pretty keen on flying). We've got 3 under 18s at our
glider club right now, and our club's total membership is under 20
members. Winch launched gliders are a pretty economical way to start
flying.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith wrote
In article 5SGtc.58$3x.29@attbi_s54, Jay Honeck wrote:
Either way you cut it, if you took the amount you'd put into buying a new
2004 Toyota, you could buy a really nice little Cessna 150 and fly the pants
off it

... especially when you consider the depreciation on that Toyota, which
you just don't have with a C150 of the same price.

Sorry guys, but this is nonsense.

Sure, the brand new Toyota is going to cost about as much (maybe a bit
more) than that decades-old C-150. The insurance is going to be about
the same too - in fact, the C-150 insurance may be a bit cheaper.
That's where the similarities end.

The Toyota is going to have a warranty that covers you for 5 years.
Your maintenance expenses for those 5 years are going to be about $100
a year, assuming you do none of the work yourself. On the plane, if
you do none of the work yourself and fly 10,000+ miles a year, like
you will on the Toyota, you're looking at $2000 a year for maintenance
- minimum.

The Toyota depreciates - but so does your C-150. Every hour you fly
is about $5 of engine depreciation. Your avionics depreciate, your
paint depreciates, your engine depreciates, and even your airframe
depreciates (albeit slowly) - how much do you think a C-150 with
12,000+ hours is worth?

The Toyota (a small one providing only somewhat better comfort than a
C-150, rather than a larger one providing dramatically better comfort)
is going to get 40+ mpg. The C-150 will be lucky to get 15, and the
gas costs more.

Finally, you NEED that Toyota (or equivalent) unless you live
someplace like New York City (where the cheapest tiedown in reasonable
driving distance is $250/month) and the C-150 is discretionary.

Michael

Finally, you NEED that Toyota (or equivalent) unless you live
someplace like New York City (where the cheapest tiedown in reasonable
driving distance is $250/month) and the C-150 is discretionary.

Here's where your logic falters: You don't NEED a *new* Toyota.

I drive a '95 Nissan pickup that cost me $1800. I put a fuel transfer tank
in the back that allows me to safely transfer and dispense filtered auto gas
into my '74 Cherokee Pathfinder (235). (See it at
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/fuel_truck.htm )

At a savings of one dollar per gallon (versus avgas), my pickup (AKA: "The
Mighty Grape") has more than paid for itself. In fact, I've now saved over
$1200 in gas expense alone, beyond the cost of the truck, simply by burning
car gas. And the plane runs better.

AND I get to drive the truck back and forth to work every day.

Now, if I were to buy a nice new Lexus (or the equivalent), I could EASILY
spend more per month than I am now spending on flying, just on the monthly
loan payment, insurance, and gas. Throw in an expensive hobby like golf,
and you've got the lifestyle of many of my neighbors -- all of whom think I
must be a millionaire because I own my own airplane.

Do the math. It's pretty easy to see that private flying is well within the
means of many millions of Americans who simply think it's beyond their
reach.

Spread the gospel! :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

[snip]

Do the math. It's pretty easy to see that private flying is well within the
means of many millions of Americans who simply think it's beyond their
reach.

Spread the gospel! :-)

Hell, no! I've seen the way most of them drive! :-)



--
Remove "2PLANES" to reply.

Hell, no! I've seen the way most of them drive! :-)

Ah, now we're into a different vein. The question is now: "SHOULD we be
trying to grow general aviation?"

Which is a totally different question than "Is it affordable?", but the
answer is still a resounding "Yes!"

If we don't try to grow it, in 25 years there won't *be* any general
aviation left to save...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"