What GA needs

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:
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.

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

I learned long ago that those people you decribe as "those who know better"
tend to be charlatans and frequently get caught in the woes they sow (ie the
dot com boys).
I do not try to emulate those people.

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.

Mxsmanic wrote:
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.


While many of us who have become certified pilots will from time to time
bitch about the FAA and certain hoops we have to jump through only a true
idiot would think that just anyone should be allowed to hop in a Baron
without some level of certification.



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.


You set your minimum so high because you KNOW you will never be able to
attain it and it lets you off the hook to yourself for never attaining
anything.





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

And since you obviously know better who have you been able to trample on?

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

$4-8k in a brand new 172.

A Cessna 172 is hardly a top aircraft.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

You set your minimum so high because you KNOW you will never be able to
attain it and it lets you off the hook to yourself for never attaining
anything.

I don't consider it especially high. It's just the aircraft I fly in
simulation. Naturally I'd like to fly the same thing in real life, without
stepping down to anything more primitive. The Baron doesn't seem particularly
difficult to fly, although perhaps it would seem so to someone who has only
flown small single-engine Cessnas.

And since you obviously know better who have you been able to trample on?

I haven't trampled on anyone, but I've irritated quite a few by skipping the
"paying your dues" part in some cases. I suppose the irritated ones are still
"paying their dues" somewhere, hoping that they will magically be promoted
automatically at some point despite their willingness to be eternal clerks.

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 in
:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

You set your minimum so high because you KNOW you will never be able
to attain it and it lets you off the hook to yourself for never
attaining anything.

I don't consider it especially high. It's just the aircraft I fly in
simulation.


You don't fly in similation, you sit in front of a computer.

Fjukkwit


bertie