IMO GA has never reached a critical mass. Not in the industrial sense of the word where a certain amount of individual activity is needed from a certain minimum number of individuals to tip the scale towards mass production of stuff and services. In many ways that is a strength, not a weakness, but it (combined with the sheer complexity) makes the price of the ticket to enter high compared to other activities.
People try to minimize the cost, and so we see a development of GA towards homebuilding/experimental and UL. The only way to reduce cost is to spend more spare time on non flying activities and to share resources. The strength is that GA survives without the usual mass market incentives, even if it’s only one single person left. It only needs access, and a legal system that assures that access. Without that legal assurance, it surely will die. It’s a bit depressing to read the “other” thread how the GA in the UK is being gradually denied that access in the name of “safety”.
Looking at the Cessna 195 demographic you are now seeing the population of owners hanging up their headset, exceeding the next set of owner/operators able to fly and manage these classic round engine tailwheel businessliners. The same might apply to the Beech 18.
Peter wrote:
When flying reaches a certain level of hassle, people give up. It’s just like any other hobby
That’s right. Even within the US where flying and aircraft ownership are generally a fraction of the hassle, the new airspace based ADS-B OUT requirement has been a huge pain in the butt for many flying in urban areas who need to comply. My still-incomplete experience with new 1090ES transponder installation on a simple $35K certified aircraft has given me pause to consider ‘do I really want to continue this?" Then when you’re finished the result is $4K gone to facilitate FAA recording every flight I make forever (by N-number) for their own purposes – most of which are adverse to my interests.
I think if I have to go through this or anything similar again the answer will be no, or at least to go Experimental (RV etc) at three times the capital cost compared with my certified plane, but less hassles. In relation to the intrinsically simple nature of my activity, its just been a ridiculous series of nonsense: buy and install the transponder and GPS antenna (the simple part) then coordinate an A&P + A&P IA (two people) to generate two detailed 337s and logbook entries: one for the transponder referencing an STC for a completely different aircraft type (per FAA policy that frankly makes them look stupid), then another based on AC 43.13 for installation of the antenna and the structural reinforcement, then trying to find somebody with a repair station number who will return calls to do a VFR transponder check (local avionics shops are currently loaded up with this nonsense), then a flight test and running the FAA website to get a Performance Report for the IA who then completes the 337s, then make sure he actually mails them… and on and on seemingly ad infinitum. Can you imagine anybody going through this for any other spare time activity, for fun? Given those hassles I couldn’t be bothered with the additional process to get the $500 FAA incentive, my time and the saving in brain damage is worth more.
A friend who just got back from Oshkosh in his RV discussed ADS-B status with a number of people and told me that most of the RV guys had done it, because its relatively easy for them to do so on an Experimental category plane, but that to his surprise many of those with certified planes based elsewhere have decided the better solution is to in future avoid the affected ‘Mode C Veil’ airspace areas.
Maoraigh now they just need to work on the Piper version :)
https://www.insidehook.com/article/vehicles/shanghai-customs-honda-cub-conversion
If the registration of petrol cars stops, AND the production of avgas stops, there will be no affordable fuel for normal use. The distribution network will quickly disappear when electric cars become the majority. Petrol stations are high volume, low margin operations.
Even at 78, it’s possible lack of fuel might end my flying rather than medical reasons.
I think what will really hit UK GA hard is extra CAS in the south east – Farnborough, Biggin, etc.
Together with the new CAA policy of 100% enforcement so many will get squeezed that many will give up and the rest will turn off their transponders which will in turn make the CAA drive through a TMZ.
The same can happen in any country where there is a lot of GA in a tight space. I doubt any other CAA will be quite as aggressive as the UK one, however.
When flying reaches a certain level of hassle, people give up. It’s just like any other hobby. All that will remain will be a few IR holders who fly mostly long trips, and grass strip flyers based in parts where the airspace is not restrictive.
Bathman wrote:
There are no instructors local to him
If I wanted to get converted into something more exotic than I am used to, I don’t know if I would be just looking for a formal instructor. I can think of 3 instructors out of maybe 20 I might go to over here. On the other side, there are some that can’t even open the flying club hangar door on their own they are that dim. Getting a seriously handy PPL/CPL to fly in the new aircraft with you, and learn from how they fly would be another way of doing it. There are guys who don’t instruct formally who could put an airplane through the eye of a needle. When I want to learn about a new type, I don’t think who what instructor will I get. I think who actually knows their stuff about this kind of airplane and go fly with them. If they are an instructor, great, if not I don’t really care.
Your friend might have found this the straw that broke the camels back, but there are many solutions to his dilemma.
RobertL18C wrote:
the growth of ULM/Experimental/Homebuilt seems the trend in the USA, despite having much superior, and accessible, airport infrastructure.
The current US ‘off airport’ flying trend is on the same level as people driving 4WD vehicles off road as a hobby, i.e. it doesn’t mean much in relation to the condition of the paved (road/runway) infrastructure and like Jeeps the planes are mainly parked on pavement, based at FAA funded paved airports. The trend does have something to do with increased numbers of Super Cub-type planes now being factory produced as the main tangible result of US LSA regulations.
Experimental RV type planes are mainly a result of people buying into a less regulated ownership experience – less regulatory infrastructure without any interest in less physical infrastructure. The factory built LSA Cubs can be converted to Experimentals (E-LSA) by their owners, for the same reason.
“Almost as bad as an airfield closing is one that becomes ‘based aircraft only’, like Cambridge is becoming”
Sameone that come 5 years latter on change.org with “counting on your support to save us from closure plans”…
alioth wrote:
An airfield that stops accepting visitors is as destructive to the network effect as an airfield that closes altogether.
And the halfway house to that is the UK’s national sport – demanding PPR’s for all and sundry for no apparent reason.
