writes:

One factor that makes flying a bit unattractive is that a simple PPL
does not have a lot of utility and is not the equivalent of a driving
license in the sky. Sometimes it is sold that way though. When I took
my first intro flight in Northern CA, the instructor tried to sell me
the idea that once I get my PPL, I would be free as a bird and could
fly to on a whim to Tahoe for skiing!

What prevents it?

I think that the PPL kind of
flying is more of a sport than anything else like mountaineering or
skydiving or even gliding and maybe needs to be marketed as such. It
just so happens that on some nice days it can be used as a means of
transport but this cannot be the main reason for getting a PPL.

Ah, I see what you mean. Certainly a PPL is not at all useful for
transportation except under extremely specific conditions. Anyone presenting
it otherwise is pretty much lying.

It's also arguable that there are way too many separate ratings and
restrictions. A license to drive a Volkswagen also entitles you to drive a
van or a Porsche; why can't a license to fly one small plane allow you to fly
any small plane? If you're too unskilled to drive a Porsche, that's your
problem--why shouldn't it be the same for aircraft?

Here again, you could make a distinction for commercial pilots, just as
drivers of large commercial vehicles often need a special driver's license.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.