Is this the death of GA

kontiki wrote in news:fI%vj.4819$7d1.1067
@news01.roc.ny:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15


Wow... only three years after the battle of Hastings.


Ooops 1969

On Feb 23, 3:44 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
" wrote :



It's true that aviation costs have increased, but the price of
everything has increased as the value of money changes over time
(always less value per unit)

Aviation has never been "cheap."

$5.00 2008 dollars equals 81 cents in 1967 dollars. (
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/)

So $25/ hour rental for an airplane in 1975 should be $104 in today's
dollars.

Which is about right.

When my father flew in the late 60s and early 70s, he paid $25/ hour
(wet) for a Cherokee 140 as a member of a club ($25/month dues).

Then he was paying over twice what he would have at an FBO.

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15

Bertie

True.

But, this was in Jersey (Caldwell) where everything is always far more
expensive for the dubious privilege of experiencing it in New Jersey.

Everybody hates New Jersey -- but somebody has to live there.

Dan

" wrote in
:

On Feb 23, 3:44 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
" wrote
innews:b73e40b0-849e-4e59-9b72-

m:



It's true that aviation costs have increased, but the price of
everything has increased as the value of money changes over time
(always less value per unit)

Aviation has never been "cheap."

$5.00 2008 dollars equals 81 cents in 1967 dollars. (
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/)

So $25/ hour rental for an airplane in 1975 should be $104 in
today's dollars.

Which is about right.

When my father flew in the late 60s and early 70s, he paid $25/
hour (wet) for a Cherokee 140 as a member of a club ($25/month
dues).

Then he was paying over twice what he would have at an FBO.

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15

Bertie

True.

But, this was in Jersey (Caldwell) where everything is always far more
expensive for the dubious privilege of experiencing it in New Jersey.

Everybody hates New Jersey -- but somebody has to live there.

This was also in New Jersey... A cherokee wouldn't have hit 25 an hour
until the late seventies at least.





Bertie

On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:44:05 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15


How much would Caesar have paid to rent?

B A R R Y wrote in
:

On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:44:05 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15


How much would Caesar have paid to rent?


Groan!


bertie

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:44:05 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

In 1069 a Cessna 150 was 8-10 an hour and a cherokee was 12-15


How much would Caesar have paid to rent?

Wouldn't Caesar have been over 1100 years old in 1069. The Holy Roman Empire
Aviation Administration probably would have pulled his ticket by then. Or
maybe you mean Augustus. He WAS a few years younger. :-)

writes:

When my father flew in the late 60s and early 70s, he paid $25/ hour
(wet) for a Cherokee 140 as a member of a club ($25/month dues).

He also bought a new 1969 Ford Galaxie 500 for $1900. (2 doors, 302
V-8, foam green with Landau vinyl roof -- sweet)

Of course he was proud to earn $200+/week.

So if he earned $104,000 a year today, the cost of aviation would be about the
same for him.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

When my father flew in the late 60s and early 70s, he paid $25/ hour
(wet) for a Cherokee 140 as a member of a club ($25/month dues).

He also bought a new 1969 Ford Galaxie 500 for $1900. (2 doors, 302
V-8, foam green with Landau vinyl roof -- sweet)

Of course he was proud to earn $200+/week.

So if he earned $104,000 a year today, the cost of aviation would be
about the same for him.



What's it to you? You don't fly.


Bertie

Tough to find which post in this long thread to correctly reply to, my
apologies.

But I do have some thoughts...

Disposable income aside, I believe that this is the death of old-school GA,
and it is the birth of 21st century GA.

Airplanes that burn 8 GPH, 14 GPH and especially old twins burning 28GPH
(or more) are going to probably be dead except for the well-off hobbyists
who love then and can still afford to fly them. I was just at an AOPA town
hall the other night and one of the older pilots (aren't we mostly all old?)
in the room remarked that his biggest problem in GA was paying $400 to
refill the tanks of his B55 Baron after a flight!

I think that operating cost is the big issue for our older airplanes, newer
airplanes such as Cirrus, Diamonds, etc are going to look more and more
appealing, these are the future. Now - envision these with REALLY
efficient new technology engines, not Lycomings or Continentals... and
environmentally sound low-carbon engines, and this is the future of GA.

Usually I fly alone or with one other person. I rent these days. The
model year 2000 Diamond DA-20 I rent goes 150mph at 5.5 GPH. This would
be an OK airplane to own in the 21st century. You can buy them used
$100k.

Get used to it. Our old airplanes might still be worth a little more year
after year, but they aren't worth a fraction of the price of new, capable,
more efficient modern GA airplanes.

Thanks, and this just an opinion,

I drive a Prius. This probably puts my comments in perspective. :-)

Lee McGee


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

When my father flew in the late 60s and early 70s, he paid $25/ hour
(wet) for a Cherokee 140 as a member of a club ($25/month dues).

He also bought a new 1969 Ford Galaxie 500 for $1900. (2 doors, 302
V-8, foam green with Landau vinyl roof -- sweet)

Of course he was proud to earn $200+/week.

So if he earned $104,000 a year today, the cost of aviation would be about
the
same for him.

On Feb 23, 9:01 pm, "Lee McGee" wrote:

I think that operating cost is the big issue for our older airplanes, newer
airplanes such as Cirrus, Diamonds, etc are going to look more and more
appealing, these are the future. Now - envision these with REALLY
efficient new technology engines, not Lycomings or Continentals... and
environmentally sound low-carbon engines, and this is the future of GA.


I drive a Prius. This probably puts my comments in perspective. :-)

I'm with you on all but the "low-carbon."

Biggest crock of shinola ever foisted upon humanity since Milli
Vanilli.

And before you call me a "oil company lackey," understand that I don't
care if the engine's powered by mouse turds.

Thus, I see Al Gore as a huge source of potential energy.


Dan