What GA needs

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Agreed but now we have LSA so that doesn't have to be an issue for
the average recreational pilot.

LSA is so restrictive that it's uninteresting to many potential
pilots. And the existence of LSA demonstrates that the normal PPL is
too draconian in its requirements. Flying an LSA doesn't make you
any more fit to fly.


Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it authorizes
would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.



Please give us an example of the excessive requirements? And the
average recreational pilot (which is what this thread is about)
isn't going to be flying retracts.

Why not?



Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack of need
for it in recreational GA flying.


Well, now you are getting into the professional side of things but
you are once again wrong. I'm sure some of the doctors and lawyers
around here will jump in on this one.

I'm not talking about professional pilots, even private pilots have
this problem.

So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot ticket are on
par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it authorizes
would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that would make
flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in a circle.

Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack of need
for it in recreational GA flying.

In other words, time, expense, and difficulty, QED.

So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot ticket are on
par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

They are certainly on a par with becoming a lawyer, which (surprisingly) isn't
that difficult in the U.S. They are comparable to becoming a doctor as well,
depending on how far you want to go.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it
authorizes would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that
would make flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in
a circle.

The current crop of S-LSA aircraft are capable of turning a 5.5 hour car
trip into a 2 hour trip with a wonderful view.



Because of the additional cost of the aircraft and the general lack
of need for it in recreational GA flying.

In other words, time, expense, and difficulty, QED.

As anything gets more complex it gets more expensive. VWs cost less than
Corvetts.



So it is your stance that the requirements for a private pilot
ticket are on par with the requirements to be a lawyer or doctor?

They are certainly on a par with becoming a lawyer, which
(surprisingly) isn't that difficult in the U.S. They are comparable
to becoming a doctor as well, depending on how far you want to go.

Let's look and see. http://www.ilrg.com/schools/analysis/ That site has a
link to the to 51 top law schools on a cost/benefit ranking. Number 51
University of CT. Shows a THREE YEAR TOTAL COST of $103,182 & number 1
Univ. of GA was $45K.

How is that "on par" with getting a PP-SEL rating?

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The current crop of S-LSA aircraft are capable of turning a 5.5 hour car
trip into a 2 hour trip with a wonderful view.

I don't like to travel.

Let's look and see. http://www.ilrg.com/schools/analysis/ That site has a
link to the to 51 top law schools on a cost/benefit ranking. Number 51
University of CT. Shows a THREE YEAR TOTAL COST of $103,182 & number 1
Univ. of GA was $45K.

How is that "on par" with getting a PP-SEL rating?

How much do the top flight schools cost? And a top aircraft? And hours of
study equivalent to those required for a law degree?

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The current crop of S-LSA aircraft are capable of turning a 5.5 hour
car trip into a 2 hour trip with a wonderful view.

I don't like to travel.

Let's look and see. http://www.ilrg.com/schools/analysis/ That site
has a link to the to 51 top law schools on a cost/benefit ranking.
Number 51 University of CT. Shows a THREE YEAR TOTAL COST of $103,182
& number 1 Univ. of GA was $45K.

How is that "on par" with getting a PP-SEL rating?

How much do the top flight schools cost?


Doesn't matter, if they were fifty cents an hour you wouldn't be able to
afford it.


And a top aircraft? And
hours of study equivalent to those required for a law degree?


You're an idiot.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The current crop of S-LSA aircraft are capable of turning a 5.5 hour
car trip into a 2 hour trip with a wonderful view.

I don't like to travel.

Let's look and see. http://www.ilrg.com/schools/analysis/ That site
has a link to the to 51 top law schools on a cost/benefit ranking.
Number 51 University of CT. Shows a THREE YEAR TOTAL COST of
$103,182 & number 1 Univ. of GA was $45K.

How is that "on par" with getting a PP-SEL rating?

How much do the top flight schools cost? And a top aircraft? And
hours of study equivalent to those required for a law degree?

$4-8k in a brand new 172. The written can be passed in a weekend.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

$4-8k in a brand new 172.

A Cessna 172 is hardly a top aircraft.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

$4-8k in a brand new 172.

A Cessna 172 is hardly a top aircraft.


You are an idiot. Why do you think it is the most produced lightplane of
all time?



It's a million times the airplane you have, fjukkktard



Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:
Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it
authorizes would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that
would make flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in
a circle.

The pilot licensing process is not restricting you, lack of money is
restricting you. You have champain dreams on a tap water budget. Your desire
to (as you said) fly a King Air under IFR in and out of IMC is shared by
almost everyone. Your distain for recreational VFR flying is however shared
by almost no one in this newsgroup. And many pilots look upon the licensing
steps as challenges met and experience earned. You choose to skip past all
that, run to the head of the line, and expound on flying "experience" you've
never had.

There is one way that the licensing process is restrictive in a very good
way: It protects the safety of the public. It places legal and functional
hurdles before those with "too much money & too little judgement", although
it leaves wiggle room (Kennedy, Munson, Lidle). And most importantly it
gives the public comfort that the person sitting at the front of the metal
tube has met the minimum standards to pilot them to a safe destination.

And you seem to want to bypass all that, stand with the people who have
walked that road, and insist upon being taken as an expert. Not here, not
ever!

Mike Isaksen writes:

The pilot licensing process is not restricting you, lack of money is
restricting you.

Both are. I have a strong aversion to useless bureaucracy and credentialism,
and aviation is rife with both. But it is also true that I have no money.

Your desire to (as you said) fly a King Air under IFR in and out of IMC is shared by
almost everyone.

A Baron is very different from a King Air. I'm only interested in the Baron.
If I want to fly something bigger, I'll fly a Boeing jet.

Your distain for recreational VFR flying is however shared by almost no
one in this newsgroup.

Because most people in this newsgroup are hobbyists who like recreational VFR
flying. Many of them probably don't even know the names of all the
instruments on a typical Baron panel.

And many pilots look upon the licensing steps as challenges met and experience
earned.

I look upon them as a waste of time. Some people enjoy jumping through hoops;
I don't.

There is one way that the licensing process is restrictive in a very good
way: It protects the safety of the public. It places legal and functional
hurdles before those with "too much money & too little judgement", although
it leaves wiggle room (Kennedy, Munson, Lidle). And most importantly it
gives the public comfort that the person sitting at the front of the metal
tube has met the minimum standards to pilot them to a safe destination.

Then why are there so many GA accidents?

And you seem to want to bypass all that, stand with the people who have
walked that road, and insist upon being taken as an expert. Not here, not
ever!

I learned long ago that those who feel they must "pay their dues" spend their
entire lives being trampled by those who know better.