what_next wrote:
The hourly rate is always going to be attractive compared to the one which results from owning. To this day, I have yet to see a single exception of this “rule”. With the exception of aircraft owned by self-flying entrepreneurs who can deduct some of the cost involved from their taxes.
Peter wrote:
I find that rental pilots tend to drop out of flying rather readily, due to the minimal commitment involved.
That’s a valid point. But what does it mean for the future of GA? The millenial generation has a tendency for lower commitment to time-consuming activities than any generation before. Recreational GA in general but aircraft ownership are so much hassle that I cannot see many of my generation and those even younger (I was born mid-1980s) taking it up for that reason alone. Maybe worth a separate topic to discuss, how to get younger people interested in this passion of ours…
Indeed; various past threads on why people give up etc etc and a much shorter attention span / desire for more immediate gratification seem to be some of the bigger reasons. Homebuilts are a good way to go (and many past threads in the Non Certified section) but it’s really for the mechanically minded and a lot of the cost savings derive from not accounting for your time; if you aren’t that way it will be a disaster unless you have somebody doing it for you.
AdamFrisch wrote:
As an owner, if an O-ring leaks a little, or there’s a PTT button that’s a little sticky, well, that’s not something you need to deal with immediately.
I can’t see how putting stuff on the “hold item list” (as the commercial world would call it) might lower the cost of flying. It needs to be fixed anyway, the cost is there the moment it breaks.
MedEwok wrote:
he millenial generation has a tendency for lower commitment to time-consuming activities than any generation before.
I don’t think that’s true in the slightest. I think the “time consuming activities” people do have simply changed.
One thing that must be considered (at least in Britain) is that to get a job that pays enough to fly you generally need a university degree, and today – and for the last 20 odd years – getting a university degree will saddle you with two decades of debt that will be piled on all the other costs you’re lumbered with – the grossly inflated costs of housing for instance, and the costs of starting a family. This puts even owning a modest aircraft out of reach. It also used to be the case the wife was left to be the “home maker” but now more families the man and woman are equals and must share responsibility for home making/child rearing.
For homebuilding you certainly require a DIY mentality and some ability along with 2000 spare hours at least. I have a colleague with an almost superhuman work capacity.
I was working as an orthopaedic surgeon 50 hour weeks, but had the benefit of having built one before, so I knew what I had to do. I worked on the plane averaging around 20 hours all weekends and averaged 3 hours in the evening during the week. My neighbors learned to love the sound of the 11 PM rivet gun staccato. I did all the IFR instrument panel, but had it painted by somebody else. I did have the benefit of some El Dorado 12 year rum to keep me focused.
I loved building, but could not have taken it if it were to be a multi-year project. It is indeed pretty satisfying to look around the plane as you cross vast expanses of the US sitting comfortably thousands of feet above the ground and think to yourself, “I built this!”
Simon
alioth wrote:
It also used to be the case the wife was left to be the “home maker” but now more families the man and woman are equals and must share responsibility for home making/child rearing.
For me personally this is highly relevant. I could fly a lot more if my wife didn’t expect me to help with the kids and the household.
During my PPL training she was particularly bothered by the fact that for one hour of flying I was at the airfield for roughly two hours or more. When I initially told her PPL training required 45 flight hours she really expected me to be out of the house for 45 hours, not more.
Hence I think if you are an owner and need to put in all those extra hours for maintenance and bureaucracy that you don’t need to as a renter,it makes renting more attractive because you get more actual flying done per hour away from home.
I think Medewok your last para matches well with my post #6 above. A huge factor in how much time is wasted, and no doubt a huge factor in why some people are so delighted to chuck it all in, is the airport-political and maintenance scenery. The reality, as I know really well, is that if you get these things well sorted, the sun shines and the birds sing… well most of the time. You drive to the airport and jump into a plane which is all working, no INOP stickers, nobody else has been f——g it (or doing hard landings with “her”, which is arguably worse 
), your junk is where you left it, all the knobs are set as you left them, all the dodgy-DIY-approach user waypoints are still there, you have a great flight even if it just around the block, you land, park it, leave it for the friendly fire crew to put away in the hangar, and you drive home. Just like when renting but the plane is 100x better plus you know nobody else has been f——g it 
MedEwok wrote:
For me personally this is highly relevant. I could fly a lot more if my wife didn’t expect me to help with the kids and the household.
During my PPL training she was particularly bothered by the fact that for one hour of flying I was at the airfield for roughly two hours or more. When I initially told her PPL training required 45 flight hours she really expected me to be out of the house for 45 hours, not more.
Golf numbers are substantially down, and I have always suspected this is a significant part of the reason, although the courses do better during the week for those who can take a day off work to play so it is not perceived as coming out of “home time”. I guess the same could be said about pilot training.
Peter, I fully agree with you on all that. I guess what I am trying to say is that the future generation of potential pilots and owners is even less inclined to tolerate any hassle generated by the “airport political and maintenance scenery” as you put it than current owners do.
I’m still aiming for buying and owning in the long-term, but it needs to be as hassle-free as possible or I’ll go back to renting or give up entirely. Reading EuroGA has unfortunately had the side effect of making me quite aware of all the bullsh*t going on in GA, about which I knew almost nothing when starting my PPL. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
