After a while flying small aeroplanes, I think I observe (in general - there are exceptions) 4 types of person who take up flying.
1) Those aiming for an airline career. These days, there are many of them. I can't figure out why, as the job of commercial pilot is not what it was either money-wise, lifestyle wise, or status-wise. And it's never been more expensive; no more Hamble, these days they pay their own way racking up mega debts for a job that doesn't pay all that well any more and anyway, is not particularly intellectually demanding.
2) The flash rich gits who fancy it because they think it'll be 'socially advantagious' to let a pilot's licence 'accidentally' fall from the wallet onto the bar. These rarely make the grade, and drop out early, many before they even qualify. Because they lack the determination that comes from committment. They go back to flash cars instead. I suspect the Pilot Shops are aimed at this group.
3) Those that have that total commitment just love 3-dimensional freedom, and knew it would only ever be a matter of time before they got to pilot an aeroplane. For these, the frustrations of tech aeroplanes, poor wx etc are simply accepted as reality. These are the enthusiasts, the backbone of fun flying, and their numbers are diminishing.
4) The hard-headed types who use a small aeroplane (of neccessity a sophisticated de-iced multi) as a transport tool rather than for fun; which isn't to say they don't find great enjoyment and fulfillment in doing it. There aren't many of these.
Pilot training may be expensive, but these days the cost of a modular training course is on par with going to university, so I'm not sure that financially it's such a poor move. If you get a job.
For me, part of the interest in flying is the mix of knowledge about aerodynamics, meteorology, aircraft systems etc... There's certainly a lot there to attract the people Prof Baron-Cohen calls ' 'systematisers' and the high proportion of computer bods in aviation seems to reflect that. Many pilots seem to have backgrounds in science or engineering.
The other fascinating thing about aviation is how many outright crooks there seem to be around. Some of the recent scandals on PPRune are, to my mind, extraordinary.
I know a lot of people who are a mix of Vince's #3 and #4 and I am too.
It's only if you climb high enough up the food chain to buy a TBM or a King Air that you probably cannot enjoy local sightseeing trips anymore, and then you become a pure #4. Or, as some do, get sick of "running an airline" (as one of them put it to me) and suddenly give it all up and take up sailing, or whatever.
I see plenty of #4s where I am hangared (they maintain TBMs and King Airs, etc) but the type is rare on the piston GA scene - much as the Cessna 400 adverts like to think so 
Yeah... many crooks around. I think many are attracted to the swashbuckling aspect of aviation. They probably watched too many Bogart films with DC3s in them. I've met a few of these...
But there are many crooks in maintenance too and yet very few people in GA maintenance have even a PPL. I think they are able to exist because so few aircraft owners get involved in what gets done to the plane, which creates a perfect environment. The introduction of the SR20/22 has opened up yet more avenues for "silly billing" because relatively fewer of those owners get involved and most just pay up. One has the same problem with cars but car maintenance has become very regularised nowadays and generally you get a reasonable job done unless you go to a real back street cowboy.
I would consider myself as #3 and #4 mixture, but I don't think it is possible to lose #3. If you do it is time to give up.
#4 is a subset of #3. At least everyone I know who I would class as being in #4.
Even if you do get to use a light plane as serious transport, once everything is added up, it is very rarely less costly, less time consuming or more practical than just taking the airlines so something has to make up for these factors - and that's the enjoyment of doing it yourself and being more self-reliant (another pilot personality trait).
Since I've a VFR-only plane I don't fit into category #4 but I sometimes fly somewhere not for the sake of it, but for actual transportation too. Actually, I do have exactly one use-case where flying a light plane is actually cheaper, more practical and less time consuming - it's when I need to carry too much stuff that's practical to take on an airline, but not enough that it'll overload a light aircraft - because the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company (ferry) charges are so outrageously high, it can actually be cheaper to fly a light aircraft where there's an airfield sufficiently close to my final destination than to put the car on the ferry.
As a microlight pilot who only tends to mix at smaller GA fields and micro strips I guess it's natural that I only encounter type 3. Within this grouping though there are many diverse characters, from the ebullient to the quiet studious type. The thing that they have in common is the smile and aura of content after a flight
I won’t either, about the article that is.
However, the woman who wrote it is Jolie Lucas, also known as “mooneygirl”, a very special person in the aviation world indeed. She is one of the founders of the Mooney Ambassadors as well as the group working to save and protect Oceano Airport in California (her homebase). She is an accomplished psychoteraphist who founded a counceling clinic which she runs today. Learnt to fly very early on and owns a Mooney M20E called Maggie, a dog called Mooney and three children plus her husband Mitch Latting, who owns a Mooney Ovation. She works for and has been reckognized at AOPA for her service to General Aviation. She is certainly one person I do listen to or rather read whatever she produces with great attention.
If you read beyond that article on her blog, you might get the idea.
She certainly is one great aviation person and lives the dream both on a personal level as well as through her charitable work for AOPA, the Mooney community as well as the “friends of Oceano Airport” . GA can certainly do with more people like her.
My Mum was a great aviator. Her airmanship was impeccable and laid some very good foundations for my flying. She learnt in the early sixties and was dogged by the male chauvinism that still exists today judging by some comments that get written on various forums. She proved them all wrong and gained all the ratings a private pilot could and won a few trophies to boot. She never allowed outside pressures to influence her go no go decisions and trust me, my Father used to bully her to try get her to fly when the odds were stacked against a successful outcome. It was a standing joke in our family that had he gained his licence (he had started to learn to fly gyrocopters) then he would have killed himself or us at some point. Many a male felt her fury which always amused me. She never had the need to validate herself in spite of the male dominated environment of her time which seems to be the case with male pilots (more so when around women pilots), not all male pilots, but again reading other forums it is pretty evident that a large chunk of them post to beat their own drum. Not really evident on your forums Peter. Seems a really nice bunch of contributors here if I may say so.
ANYHOW, I apologise in advance if the above has no bearing on the article in question. I only skim read it and will read it properly later.
Russia and China boasted frontline women fast jet pilots since Korea? Women may have a slightly higher tolerance to positive G – size and distance of heart relative/from brain?
Apologies if recycling an urban myth!
