That’s downright stereotypically German behaviour
Well, I did end up marrying a German 
There was a time when I had three substantial mortgages on three properties, in the period when my income had risen enough (which mitigates cash flow risk) but I still had years to recover from a significant setback. Now I’m much closer to needing to spend my own money, not just wage income, so my risk is ramped down again and I’ve been building cash reserve. The latter aspect is why I don’t buy an expensive plane when I could. Maybe later, but it’s against my ‘religion’ to be in a position where I’m taking significant long term financial risk to own a toy now.
172driver wrote:
Hardly any meaningful x-country trips. Most flying is local or to nearby destinations that barely qualify for the FAA definition of a x-country (50nm). I don’t think this is driven by economics, as most of the new entrants have high paying jobs in tech, but probably are rather time-poor.
Same here. When I come back from a trip with the family and am about to write the airplane log I always take the time and look through the log to see when was the last time that someone used the backseats in the plane. Usually that’s me. The majority of the other non-training flights are 40 minutes a to A flights or A to B to the handful of airfields in the vicinity.
Whenever I said this – e.g. here – everyone disagreed. Now chickens are coming home to roost. The “low barrier to entry” community carries on while much else has dropped out, but since the “low barrier to entry” community “institutionally discouraged” people to do anything “adventurous”, we are now seeing the result. I once airmailed EuroGA leaflets to some 100+ aeroclubs in the GA-busy countries, and it was stunningly obvious from subsequent data that nearly all got binned; should not have surprised me since EuroGA is largely about doing a bit more than driving 50nm down the road. In reality we need both but the level of activity in aeroclubs (or schools – whatever name you choose) is no guide to who will be doing GA in the longer term and going places.
where you at any time have to be able to write a check for $100K
You need to always be able to write a check/cheque for an engine overhaul, so a bit more than 100k with a TP; an IO540, done in the US, is probably ~40k.
Ownership is still worth it though 
You could buy a Jetprop I can’t think of a greater financial punishment than an old turboprop
AFAIR you were claiming that pilots actively get discouraged from doing more than simple local trips. I don’t feel that. In reality it is quite the opposite. Members get encouraged to do more than just leaving the traffic pattern for 20 minutes before coming back. My club (and so have many others) even has a plane suited for longer trips but most of the time it stands its tyres flat in the hangar. But of course access to a plane is not enough. When the family doesn’t want to travel in a 40 year old airplane and doesn’t want to let the father (or in 5% of the cases the mother) off the hook for a whole weekend then this is what we get.
It doesn’t have to be “actively”. The whole environment isn’t conducive to being “adventurous”.
Peter wrote:
Whenever I said this – e.g. here – everyone disagreed. Now chickens are coming home to roost. The “low barrier to entry” community carries on while much else has dropped out, but since the “low barrier to entry” community “institutionally discouraged” people to do anything “adventurous”, we are now seeing the result.
I still disagree. My club certainly does not discourage “adventurous” things, even implicitly. On the contrary, we expressly encourage it. E.g. this year we arranged a club flight with 2 aircraft to AERO Friedrichshafen – a 16 hour trip. That is not to say that I’m satisfied. I wish more of our members would make longer trips.
So far this year we’ve flown almost exactly as many hours as we did at the same time of year pre-pandemic (2019) and we have more students now than last year. Of course, the situation may look completely different in half a year’s time, but right now we don’t see any such signs.
Your aeroclub sounds good, and no doubt benefits from your broader perspective as an IR holder who also knows how this GA business works. Clearly this is not common.
Peter wrote:
The “low barrier to entry” community carries on while much else has dropped out, but since the “low barrier to entry” community “institutionally discouraged” people to do anything “adventurous”, we are now seeing the result
I’m not sure exactly what that is supposed to mean. You mean we should raise the bar? What bar, and why? What people can afford is ULs and experimentals. The other alternative is some ancient certified aircraft. The price point of a new “touring” Cirrus/Diamond is way above what any normal person can afford, thus those aircraft constitute nothing but a niche within an already small niche. They aren’t relevant for the community as a whole.
I don’t think this has anything to do with the decline though. People from all parts of the specter simply fly less for some reason. I’m a lot at ENMO (Meråker). Each year there used to be lots of foreigners coming by, flying. All sorts of aircraft. In later years, this has almost stopped. Yet it is a perfect stop for a night over or more. Lodging, fishing, hiking. I will make a separate post about it (if it isn’t considered unwanted advertising).
IMO, what we are seeing is the end result of an endless series of small bureaucratic needle pokes. It’s just too much fuzz costing too much time and money. More and more people find it isn’t worth the effort. Those who are left are:
The first category tends to end up like instructors and all other kinds of “specialist” flying/aircraft stuff, whatever they feel like at any point in time.
The second category have no problems. Throwing money at problems have a tendency to solve them.
What is lacking are all those who would very much like to “use” their PPL for something, but simply cannot defend the use of money and time and bureaucratically created grief to do it. Flying has always been expensive, but the additional time and grief needed to satisfy the bureaucracy, is something that has gradually grown out of all proportions. Just too many buts and ifs and nonsense.
This has created a new fourth category of people. They aren’t actively flying in any relevant sense of the word, but haven’t really given up either. They are made possible because of the club structure in most of Europe. Good or bad? Mostly bad because they “normalize” non-participating participation (in lack of a better explanation ). A relevant point here is that most of those people cannot exist in the UL scene, or in the experimental scene. There they would be forced to make a choice: Either get yourself an aircraft and fly, or find something else to do.
I didn’t say any bar should be raised – GA should be inclusive – but I have already said all I can say on the topic
IMO, what we are seeing is the end result of an endless series of small bureaucratic needle pokes. It’s just too much fuzz costing too much time and money.
Yep. It appears to me the main issue in Europe is the airspace/regulatory environment that makes it difficult and annoying to travel widely in almost any kind of simple, accessible and enjoyable plane that one can easily own… as opposed to highly controlled IFR (for airspace access only) or controlled VFR in a relatively ‘truck’ like, complex aircraft that is more challenging to own and not really all that fun to fly. Other than the much higher expense, there just aren’t that many people who are interested in that kind of ownership experience, nor a highly regulated and somewhat monotonous kind of flying where the destination is the reward but you can today get there more easily by other means. Even driving (or in my case motorcycling) is easier in Continental Europe, where distances are relatively short and a simple plane could otherwise do a lot of traveling if it were not for obstructive and non-supportive government and bureaucracy.
If I understand correctly, European GA travel regulation
wasn’t a lot different in the past, on paper and if you forget the intraschengen CV-19 travel idiocy that is hopefully gone for good. However advancements in communication and IT today have allowed governments to obsessively pile on enforcement of process to the point where to most people it’s just a bit silly to get involved. Flying places is supposed to enjoyable, not a surrogate job for those who aren’t already fully occupied.
