Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

List of reasons to learn/keep flying privately?

One of the main reasons was so that someone day when I am on my death bed, I won't think "I wonder what that would have been like?". No regrets.

I have never been one of those people that saw flying as being magical, but I always wanted to be able to fly. As a 7 year old I always wanted to be a fast jet pilot in the RAF, but astigmatism kicked that into touch. I wrote off the possibility and didn't even pursue it. Then suddenly realised one day I had enough money to learn, and thought "Why not!"

I too was, and still am pretty appalled by the yester-year state of hardware and the attitude which is content with that, but I am sure time will kick it out of me. I'm also appalled at some of the things that I hear that are tolerated in GA that would never be tolerated in other areas of life. Fortunately none of it has happened to me - I just get to hear some stories.

Just finished my skills test, still parts of me are amazed I passed. Very tentatively thinking of getting a share in a plane without getting mugged in the process, which with low experience, sounds like it is easy to do. In the meantime, doing some more training with some different people, making sure I keep improving. Tailwheels, aeros and perhaps some touring.

I want to try and see all the British ones if I can. I have recently had to cancel a number of attempts to take a day off work due to weather to see G-BOAF at Bristol Filton before it closes down and moves elsewhere (Kemble maybe). The only one I dont know how one can get access to is the one hidden away in Heathrow somewhere. After that, I will come and check out G-BOAC.

Good to see you are saving the best for last!

AF hasn't been open to the public for some time now, and the one at Heathrow never was and won't be as long as it's at Heathrow, and has no interior (that went to DG at Brooklands!).

DG never flew in airline service, only with BA staff as pax. It wasn't a production standard machine.

Not only is ours in first class condition (being indoors and well cared for) but it's the only one visitors can visit the flight deck and sit in the P1 seat!

Let me know when you're coming.

Barton is my spiritual home.

Good to see you are saving the best for last!

Actually I would concede that is the best. I just realised its the one in the link below which I saw in the 'Get Concorde Flying Again' Facebook group. Incidentally if you are on FaceBook, this is an excellent group and it reguarly has interesting pics and video footage added.



Nice to see another Concorde enthusiast :-) PS, if you ever go to Brooklands, its worth paying to do the FlightSim. It's only 15 mins but you sit next to a real Concorde captain and have some great fun.

Hi PA. I have been to Brooklands and Gordon showed me around the then 'being restored' sim, before allowing me into DG's P1 seat and demonstrating various alarms they have activated (we do similar on our Nimrod tours at MAN!).

I have met many of the Concorde crews (Captains, P2s, and FEs) at MAN. A couple of years ago they had a reunion at AC, but often they just drop in and they are always interesting to chat to and glean a bit more 'inside info' from!

With the help of a couple of BA engineers we got ground power onto AC last year several times (I was there for each one, including the first!) and she 'came to life!'. It would be good if we could do that as part of our tours, and hopefully one day not to far off, we will!

Edit - just checked out your video. As Ricky makes his speech about "I just hope she remembers how to do it" before the Ground Power switch is hit for the first time in 8 years, that's me behind him, sitting in the P1 seat!

Barton is my spiritual home.

the yester-year state of hardware and the attitude which is content with that

When I bought my 1975 C150 in 1987, it seemed really "new" compared to so many other 150s around (in the context of 150 production stopping in 1977, and 152's stopping in 1982, I think). Yeah, Now I realize that it's not "new" anymore. But, I can fix it! It's all simple, and easily understood. I can figure out where all the electrons flow. I have a 3 year old VW, and I can't figure out anything other than changing a wheel, and lubricating door hinges. I kinda long for my 1981 VW Scirocco back, I understood its electrons well, and the gas pedal was connected to the engine!

We are presently rebuilding a 1977 182 for a client in Scandinavia. It will have a new everything, other than the completely gone over original airframe. The new engine and prop cost more than the flying plane I ferried back, as does the avionics package by itself, and the amphibious floats by themselves - the plane is the cheapest part! Aside from means of construction, it won't be yester-year state of hardware any more. But I agree that is the certainly not the norm.

Our society enables regulators to require "certification" of most aircraft. Litigators and insurers are seeming to require more and more certification, of a more rigorous nature. I think this is because pilots and passengers don't want to fly in "unsafe spam cans", so depend upon the regulator to oversee their safety, and conformance to a standard for the aircraft. It's a lot easier for a regulator to regulate, than to understand that they do not need to...

So, for my other plane, I elected it out of the fully certified system, and I maintain it myself. It too was built in 1975, one of 38. It is very yester-year, slow and lumpy state of the art, but it is fun! I am very content with manual flaps and landing gear - very economical to keep operating.

I delight in seeing the smile of each of my family members, when I taxi out of the water up a remote beach in the Teal, or loop and roll them in the 150, or just bimble around on a beautiful evening.

I delight in the freedom to travel the country as I like, and make it seem just a little smaller....

I'm very content to be safely airborne, state of the art is still just airborne.....

Home runway, in central Ontario, Canada, Canada

Er, loop them in the 150?

Swanborough Farm (UK), Shoreham EGKA, Soysambu (Kenya), Kenya

Er, loop them in the 150?

I'd guess it's a 150 aerobat.

Barton is my spiritual home.

But, I can fix it! It's all simple, and easily understood. I can figure out where all the electrons flow. I have a 3 year old VW, and I can't figure out anything other than changing a wheel, and lubricating door hinges. I kinda long for my 1981 VW Scirocco back, I understood its electrons well, and the gas pedal was connected to the engine!

Oh I totally get it. I had a 1984 VW Polo. It was a breeze to work on, cheap parts and all possible because it was simple.

So, take an aircraft component. Aircraft engines are about as simple as engines come....so they must be cheap...right? Erm...not really.

To put things into perspective, a 560hp BMW S63 V10 engine (probably one of the most advanced piston engines in the world) is approximately half the cost of a very basic Lycosaurus. And is probably made in smaller numbers. And that's for the cost of an uncertified Lyco engine (although I think the cost of certification is moot given it was probably done 50 years ago when the engine was still a long way from state of the art).

As I say, with time and more money, I'm sure I'll stop caring. But does anyone honestly buy a standard aircraft engine and think "Wow, that's a fair price!"

A bit back we bought a brand new Vedeneyev M14P for a Yak I had a share in. That's a 9-cylinder geared, supecharged radial, beautifully engineered. It came with all accessories (mags, carb, air pump, air distributor etc etc) and even a new engine mount. Cost about £10K IIRC.

Barton is my spiritual home.

I don't think the retail price of a lot of stuff in GA bears much of a relationship to what it costs to make it and put it on the shelf in the factory.

The biggest factor is claimed to be the recovery of certification costs but most most things we buy are very old and those costs have been covered a long time ago. Product liability insurance is similarly a load of bunk.

I think the biggest item is that most of the players are big old firms with large fixed costs. They don't make many new engines nowadays - probably 1/10 of the production levels in the 1960s but the companies have not shrunk their staffing etc by 90%.

My dealings with some of them suggest that they are packed with guys close to retirement age, not doing anything productive other than the very occassional marginal innovation (like replacing an o-ring with one of a different material).

The topic of car engines comes up often. I don't think there is any car engine which would make the required ~100% power for the duration of the climb (say half an hour, if turbocharged) and then cruise at 65%-75% for several hours, and still have a fair chance of making 2000hrs.

Car engines are very reliable because they spend most of their time at 10%-30% of max power, and are water cooled. However I've had two total losses of coolant in the last 15 years... and one loss of an alternator which caused the engine to eventually stop.

Every attempt at using car engines in aviation has been an abysmal failure, and that arguably includes Diamond on whose latest product the jury is still out IMHO and will be for a few more years before one can say anything definitive long-term.

There is very little inherently wrong with the Lyco engines. They have certain weak spots e.g. the camshaft which doesn't get good lube because it is at the very top (but there is a 3rd party replacement which is hollow and has its own oil feed; not sure how far the paperwork on that one got) and at a more basic level their metal is quite thin (to keep weight down) and thus the engine cannot withstand rapid thermal cycling. But these are not big issues, assuming intelligent operation.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top