As we are having that conversation about the decline of GA and how it is seen in the US and Europe I thought that I might add a bit of personal experience. It is way too early for a full account. I plan on doing that when I can look back 12 months of ownership and touring Europe for non-pleasure flights.
I’ve also put “170 – 200 TAS” in the title in order to distinguish this from all the other kinds of GA – ranging from homebuild, micro/ultralight to business jet.
So far I’ve used my own aircraft, a 2007 Cirrus SR22 turbo-normalized with Avidyne R9 avionics, for about 140 hours since I took delivery of it in April of this year. Most flights in the beginning were rather short (below 2 hours) starting at or going back to Kassel EDVK. Recently, due to our relocation to there, the number of longer flights (between 3 and 4 hours) has increased. By now I have logged about 18 flights starting at or going back to Sabadell LELL. There have also been 6 night flights – either 100% at night or flights with a night landing. Flying IFR to an airport equipped with lights you stop caring about whether you arrive with daylight or not.
There has been a good amount of actual IMC including one recent night landing with some icing. As I’ve flown 98% of the 140 hours IFR I don’t really feel a difference between day, night or IMC. It’s just the same process and procedures and I try to focus on just that.
My overall impression is that the utility value of that platform is outstanding. It is no cheap way of traveling but then travel is never really cheap and comfortable. It is either the one or the other. Using the aircraft has been a “I want to go and do it” operation so far. With one exception (low cloud; I talked about it here and since gained more experience) I have not resorted to other means of transportation due to weather. That might change due to icing or other bad weather. The cold season is just starting.
What is very helpful for the utility value is the fact that one is really proficient and flying is not different from taking the car. I have a huge need for travel so what other people may drive day in and day out I can fly week in and week out. That provides a feeling on my end which appears – to me – similar to that of an airline pilot. The other difference is that I have to act as my own OPS and everything department besides the pure flying part. So far I’ve learned a great deal about the operational stuff and I’m thankful for all the information and advice provided here on EuroGA.
In between I opted to take the airline out of Barcelona and travel from Frankfurt to Kassel by high speed train. Never ever do I intent to repeat that. I arrived tired and annoyed by all the hassle one has to endure using these means of transportation. I paid 600 € for it round-trip and would have paid 900 € in AVGAS and fees. Obviously the comparison should be done with a fully flexible and refundable ticket for the airline part but that’s the numbers I have. It is not worth it!
When you have to travel almost every week for work it is quite healthy to just sit a while at FL170 or so where you can enjoy the scenery and breath pure O2. You do arrive relaxed and nobody pushes you around or makes you adhere to somebody else’s schedule. It’s the best way to deal with being away from home for work. The same goes for picking out a decent hotel instead of trying to save on the wrong end.
On the last few flights without PAX I went for FL200 and high speed cruise at 200 TAS. That is even better and adds to the fun part without costing more. After all I have a turbo-normalized engine and can as well use it. The only negative part was the OAT of -36C but I learned how to deal with that by now.
To anyone thinking about getting an aircraft for personal business travel I can say: go for it. Make sure you have a capable platform, stay IFR proficient and fly several hours every week. Going IFR through many different FIRs internationally with all their own little differences is also a good experience. I enjoy the sequence of Buenos Dias, Bonjour, Guten Tag, Moin Moin :-) Then one should be equipped well for many situations and it becomes a tool that contributes as well to personal well-being. Having something like the parachute (CAPS) removes the worries about low bad WX and night flights – at least for me.
So I am a happy customer of the concept of GA and its utility value. It works for me.
I agree. An aircraft in the soeed range has good value for European travel.
You are particularly right about the proficiency thing. Fly a lot and you will be more confident doing challenging flights. Doing that you will again raise despatch rates, fly more and be more prificient.
I have never really flown A to B for work reasons, and envy your situation. Very few people have the perfect “business case” for flying A to B in Europe like you do.
For example: I have never been really confident about night flying (which has little to do with the engine failure scenario). So I do it very little. Which has robbed me of the confidence in doing it. Which reduces the utility factor.
The problem with the “fly a lot” part is that you need a MISSION. It makes little sense to fly across Europe once a week for training. I am really always trying to find reasons to use the plane, but since my destination is possible only with good VFR conditions … i have to drive many times.
It’s great when you have such a good reason to use the plane! Envy!! ;-)
For the winter I’ll try to do a longer flight at least once every two weeks, that’s the only way I can stay, … somewhat … in shape. But it’s clear that the kind of flying you do is a big advantage. If you do that for two or three years you will have a LOT of experience!
(I am grounded anyway … ALT 1 failure yesterday … )
Sorry to hear about the ALT1 failure.
Having a reason or a mission is key. I didn’t have one for 17 years and didn’t fly at all. It took a while to get over the itch …
At the moment I am trying to get a permission from either Kbely Military base or the Vodochody airport north of Prague to use their ILS, GPS approach and airport every week … i might fly more IFR then. Then I only have to get out of my VFR field :-) Prague itself is ridiculous, too expensive.
I am afraid your homebase will always restrict your despatch rate enormously, at the between October and March.
To be honest, I think it’s totally ashaming that in 2015 (almost 2016) airports like Landshut, but also Freiburg, Koblenz, Bonn, Hildesheim, Leer, Mainz, Reichelsheim, etc. have no GPS instrument approaches.
Yes, I think so too. I designed one for myself, but of course that’s a VFR procedure I would never use in IMC. … Straubing, EDMS, 12 flight minutes away in the SR22 has a nice LPV …
BTW: What do you think, could I take off VFR in EDML, hop over to EDMS and use their Missed Approach to become IFR? I’ve never tried that …. I could do the same backwards. It’s really not THAT many days where our field is completely fogged in .. . but it’s many with a 1000 ft ceiling… which is fine for EDMS to EDML …
boscomantico wrote:
To be honest, I think it’s totally ashaming that in 2015 (almost 2016) airports like Landshut, but also Freiburg, Koblenz, Bonn, Hildesheim, Leer, Mainz, Reichelsheim, etc. have no GPS instrument approaches.
I fully agree, those and many more. I do hope that with the introduction of LPV this will eventually change. But it’s politics… that makes it a lot more difficult.
Flyer59 wrote:
BTW: What do you think, could I take off VFR in EDML, hop over to EDMS and use their Missed Approach to become IFR?
Wouldn’t it be better to use their SIDs? That should be legal, as long as you can get it to work in “the system”.
Stephan, I couldn’t agree more. GA travel is not just useful for our business, it is essential – how else could we collect, repair and return a hunting rifle to a forest ranger on the island of Arran or a gamekeeper at Bushmills (Northern Ireland) within 12 hours? Only by helicopter or bushplane.
A friend of mine with a diving company used his Cessna as a marketing tool. He would fly along the coast looking for new marine civil engineering worksites, and whenever he spotted a new one he would take a photo and then pay them a visit. He picked up a lot of work that way.
Whenever there’s a ferry crossing involved, GA is likely to beat any other means of travel into a cocked hat.
I might argue about the need for 170-200 kt TAS though. Perhaps counterintuitively, slower aeroplanes can be quicker door-to-door.
For example, a friend who lives close by (3 miles as the crow flies, but 20 minutes by country road) invited me for an IFR day trip to Gloucester EGBJ to have a service on his Bonanza which he keeps in a hangar at Carlisle (another 55 minutes by road). The Bo was comfy and fast, almost like a Cirrus?, and we had a late breakfast at the airport restaurant while the mechanics were working. Then it dawned on me that if I had flown direct from my home airstrip at the Maule’s leisurely 110 kts, I would have been tucking into coffee and “full English” at EGBJ before the Bo had completed power checks at EGNC.
Longer distances and having a proper airport closer to one’s home and destination will change the math, but even for a 700 nm trip to Megève LFHM or for hauling a year’s supply of wine from Arbois, there is no faster way for me than by MauleAir.
In short, an aircraft which cruises, and stalls, slowly enough to use any ULM strip or hayfield may get door to door quicker than a much faster SEP or jet.
