CriticalMass wrote in message ...
C Kingsbury wrote:

That is a situation the vast majority of renters NEVER have an
opportunity to enjoy. Most FBOs I've ever rented from in my 30+ years
of flying had nothing but ragged out beaters on the ramp. You were very
fortunate to have such a rich fleet from which to choose.

That's the plus side to being in a large metorpolitan area. The
downside is cost- $90+/hr for a basic Warrior/172, more for
newer/bigger.

I can count 'em on one hand. I fly as a hobby, not for business. I can
always pick when I fly. Trips don't get canceled, they just get
postponed, and it's not a problem.

Again, I think you have to figure in geography here. Even in the
Northeast there are relatively few true IFR-only days, but there are a
lot of MVFR days where the prognosis for what's going to happen is
unclear. As a VFR pilot you lose a lot of those days, and that can be
30%+ of the time in Spring and summer.

For me, .... the number of days where thunderstorms are an issue has been
pretty limited.

Well, that's anecdotal, isn't it? For others, it's a much bigger risk
factor. But, the point made was, T-storms and ice are show-stoppers for
us bottom feeders in the aviation food chain. The point stands.

People in Atlanta don't put snow tires on their cars. Ever see what
happens when it snows there? The point is that there's a lot of
"gentleman's IFR" or safer-flying-IFR-than-MVFR weather up here that
you don't need a big powerful plane with 100k in avionics to use the
system to your advantage. I agree completely that it's not true
everywhere. Down South you have to think a lot more about dodging the
boomers, out West MEAs and such are an issue, and around here ice can
easily ground you, but most of the time it's not a factor. Light scud
and thin low overcasts often are. These are conditions that make IFR
in a 172 useful, and that's why probably half or more of the planes
and pilots at my field are rated and equipped.

Well, it appears most VFR pilots don't really stay current, .....So, VFR flying isn't very
useful either.

Depends on your definition of "useful". I'll agree that any pilot who
can't be bothered to stay proficient in the type of flying he does is
not doing anyone any favors. But that's a side issue.

My definition of useful is mission accomplishment. I'm not looking for
95% dispatch reliability, I'm just looking for not being stuck 200
miles away for 4-5 days because of low ceilings and little else.
That's 5 months of the year around here.

Best,
-cwk.