At last, the truth...

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 09:17:48 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Jose" wrote

I don't mean that way. I mean, maybe one day you'll wake up and realize
you just don't love aviation any more. You like it... it's handy...
but...

And none of your reasons will apply.

Nope. Not Jay. I'll put money on it. This could be a rather lengthy
wager, though. g

It never ends. Even the lust.

Mike Weller

Jay Honeck wrote:

Now George, we've been over this before. If you had been open to moving to
a more GA friendly part of the country, you, too, could have lived 30
seconds from your plane. You opted instead to remain in the congested
eastern part of the US, for purely economic reasons.

I opted to remain here because family considerations make it impossible for
Elisabeth to move and I wish to remain married. I have no intention of posting
the details.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Huh? I did not snip anything. Your whole post was quoted in my reply.
Besides, I did not imply that you were questioning my statements. I was
simply clairfying why your numbers were different from mine.

Jay Honeck wrote:
My vision will continue to deteriorate. My blood pressure -- recently
brought under control through weight loss -- will continue its inexorable
upward climb. There will be no escaping the final defeat, and my flying
*will* cease.

You mean you would let a little thing like not having a current medical
stop you from flying? Damn... Must be a Yankee thing... In Texas, we
have a RIGHT to fly and don't need no stinkin' *license*... Our RIGHT
to fly is a sub-clause of the 2nd Amendment and as such was guaranteed
by Samuel Colt...

One observation about the Saturday traffic getting into the field.

My son and I took our time and didn't arrive until about 11am. Traffic was
nuts. From the time we left Hwy 41, until the time we parked, it took over
30 minutes. And we got lucky. We entered the line to park in the Red lot,
and they were vectoring most cars further south, luckily a few cars were
leaving the Red lot and they let a few of us in. Then it was packed again
and everybody continued south towards the brown lot.

On the flip side of that coin, the lines at the ticket counters were
non-existent. Both Wednesday and Saturday there was no waiting and several
open windows. And from my accounts it was NOT because the volunteers were
extra speedy or efficient. God bless them, but on Wednesday the lady that
waited on me didn't know what NAFI was, I actually had to point to where she
entered the membership number on the screen, and it was the only other
option available other than EAA #. That, I thought weird. On Saturday a
very nice man with a thick German accent helped us, and for the life of him,
he couldn't punch the correct buttons on the computer. He may have been
distracted by the young teenage blonde that was aimlessly wandering around
in the booth with next to nothing on, but I honestly had to make sure that I
hadn't bought 6 tickets instead of just 2. I took it all in stride,
thankfull that they are so generous with their time.

Jim



"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
I'll argue that from two observations. First, not once in the last 33
years
have I seen the parking lots at the dorms with a single open space after
about 9:30 in the evening. This year they were at least 1/3 empty every
night.

Second, the traffic to get onto the field in the morning was nowhere
NEAR
as
congested as any other year.

Either they have stopped driving to Oshkosh or there were fewer people;
I
suspect the latter.

Nah, they have finally realized that it is cooler to camp on the field.
Wake up and smell the coffee! vbg

Really, I don't know about the daily attendance. It seemed to me to be
about the same, or up a very small amount. I do feel, without a doubt,
that
the Saturday attendance watching the air show, was the biggest I have ever
seen, by a large amount, say 75% more than other
Saturday shows. The amount of homebuilts in the homebuilt showplane and
homebuilt camping area was the largest ever. (according to registration
totals)

Perhaps that is the key, the "watching the show" part. Maybe there was
almost nobody at the booths. I can't say; I was watching the show,
especially White Knight and Spaceship One.
--
Jim in NC

God, that is SOO bad...

Yes, but I've seen it happen more than once. We had a local female
pilot on the field whose husband (or maybe live-in boyfriend) didn't
fly. He's long gone. She's racking up a bunch of twin time, hoping to
fly for a living. The onwer of the twin is getting a divorce. He's
her future ex-husband, don't you see...

Seriously, there really aren't a lot of female pilots, and most of the
ones you see are career-track. A female general aviator is a true
rarity. If you're a man who insists on only marrying someone who
shares your passion for flight, odds are you will be staying single.

I'm sitting here, racking my brain, trying to think of ANY
non-career-track female pilots I ever met who were not already married
or otherwise somewhat permanently attached to a male pilot. I'm
thinking there were maybe half a dozen at most, and none are still
available.

Michael

It's similar to the metrics used for website visitors. If you hit the
website 3 times in a day or refresh the page 3 times, are you three
visitors? Of course not. However, there are many ways to identify "unique"
visitors and it sounds like that's the crux of the issue with OSH
attendance. They're only supporting metrics. The primary indicators are new
pilot certificates, first-time medicals (i.e. students), aircraft sales, and
avgas sales.

I believe we'll see a decline for some time. We'll only see a significant
increase when a fundamental change in the way aircraft are flown (such as
full-blown SATS goodies) is in full swing making the task of flying much
more forgiving of mistakes. For many, that's a big part of the reward--a
sense of accomplishment.

Marco Leon

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"TaxSrv" wrote

It's not impossible. They use convention management
software which was a finalist in Microsoft's annual world
Windows competition, with awards handed out by Gates himself
at COMDEX. I'll assume that the simplest thing that
software does is tally up the number of daily tickets sold.
Then just add the freebie tickets given out, like to media
and exhibitors, for total attendance.

All well and good, but how do they handle the weekly passes? Are they
added
to the total, as new attendees? Do they assume that the holder of a
weekly
pass is there each and every day? If so, that could be a big source of
error, since some buy a weekly pass (it is cheaper to do that, if you are
going to be there for say, 4 days, compared to buying 4 daily passes) and
only stay for 4 days.

In my eyes, counting people over and over, for each day is misleading. if
they say 700,000 people, a bunch (400,000 perhaps?) are counted over for
each day. It doesn't seem right.

You know what, though? I don't care in the least bit, what their count
is.
It is still a bunch of people, looking at some really cool airplanes, and
airplane stuff. Nothing else comes close. (IMHO)

Oshkosh (AirVenture) ROCKS, BIG TIME!
--
Jim (hooked - hook, line and sinker) in NC




Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Michael wrote:
I'm sitting here, racking my brain, trying to think of ANY
non-career-track female pilots I ever met who were not already married
or otherwise somewhat permanently attached to a male pilot. I'm
thinking there were maybe half a dozen at most, and none are still
available.


Michael,
Your post reminded me of a story told by Rick Durden. He met a single
female pilot at an aviation event and heard her making this comment:

"The odds are good, but the goods are odd" ;-)


Hai Longworth

"Michael" wrote:
I'm sitting here, racking my brain, trying to think of ANY
non-career-track female pilots I ever met who were not already married
or otherwise somewhat permanently attached to a male pilot. I'm
thinking there were maybe half a dozen at most, and none are still
available.

Nice job of blanket generalizing and stereotyping, assuming/presuming!
Hope the Women in Aviation group never gets ahold of you! There are
several of us who do NOT fit the stereotypes you described above. There
are several of us who did not pursue a pilot license to become an Airbus
Captain *or* to give us an way to find a male pilot to "attach"
ourselves to. Another common insulting misconception among women who are
fearful or disinterested in flying is that those of us that *aren't*
fearful and who *are* interested are only after their husbands.

Why is it *so* unbelievable to so many people that a woman can be just
as passionate about *flying* as a man can be -- just for the love of
FLYING, not to get to the airlines or to find a husband?

wrote:

Why is it *so* unbelievable to so many people that a woman can be just
as passionate about *flying* as a man can be -- just for the love of
FLYING, not to get to the airlines or to find a husband?

It's not unbelievable; I know such a woman.

That's it: one.

Is it so unbelievable to you that women, for whatever reasons, are
*generally* less disposed to be interested than men in flying just for
the love of it? If you are, you should be proud of being such a special
person, IMO.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM