Will more people fly themselves now?

There are quite a few pilots who post here.

Some trips are “too long” to drive, but “not long enough” to put up with the new delays. There have been “races” between commercial airliners flying at 500+ knots and GA aircraft flying at about 140 or 150 knots, and the trip took less time in the GA aircraft. In a jet, the passengers must go to the large commercial airport, check in, wait to board, wait to taxi, wait to take off, etc. If they are going to a place that’s not serviced directly by the airline they would have to rent a car and drive to their destination or change planes so that they could get closer to their destinations. You could catch a commuter flight from L.A. to San Francisco about 380 miles), which is (I’m guessing) about a 45 minute flight. But there are the ground delays I’ve mentioned. In a Cessna 182 it would take (guessing again) about 3 hours, but depending how close you live to an airport it might actually be faster since you would not have to wait. Just preflight, load and go. (And file a flight plan if you want to or are not flying VFR.) I don’t know if there are direct flights to, say Eureka; but if not you would have to change planes at SFO if you flew commercially (more waiting), but not if you flew yourself. And your baggage would never get lost.

  1. Given that commercial air travel will become less convenient, do you think that General Aviation will get a boost?

  2. If #1 is true, will more new GA aircraft be built resulting in lower prices for used aircraft?

A recent issue of The Atlantic covered this very question recently:

There is a lot of discussion about the economics of air travel and suggestions about how to handle the increasingly dangerous load on large commercial airliners and hub airports.

I hope that we’ll see an adjustment to the industry along these lines. It’s way overdue. When I lived in the LA area, it was well worth it to me to pay extra to fly out of Burbank or Santa Barbara if it meant I could avoid LAX.

Of course, at this point, I’d be happy to get Ravendriver back in the air. I hope this ban on non-emergency VFR aircraft doesn’t last much longer. The guys at the flight schools I know of are are looking at very hard times after only a week of shut-down.

It seems to me it could go either way - General Aviation could get a big bump up or down, depending on public mood and how the chips fall.

There’s been a good deal of talk about creating a bigger system of air taxi service to take the pressure off of big airport “hub” aviation. I think this would be great for many reasons, but the problem is to make a small plane that is fast, but also cost effective. There are a few plans in the works that I’ve read about in the aviation magazines.

On the other hand, I’m afraid GA may suffer from increased security. Now I’m all in favor of tighter security for commerical aviation, but I don’t think it’s much of a problem for GA.

It’s true that small planes are the way to go for those short to intermediate trips. I recently flew a Piper Warrior to a small town about 200 miles from here. Doing that by commercial aviation would have been as much of a hassle as driving it. I’d love to see expanded air taxi service for this kind of thing. There are lots of great airports that aren’t busy at all, just BEGGING for increases in traffic.

Heh, if I could, I would. Most of my problems with flying stem from the fact that I am not the one in control. Well, control issues coupled with a fear of heights and enclosed places. So hell yeah, if I could fly myself, I would.

Did anyone besides me read the thread title and flash back to those old airline commercials?
“I’m Debbie - fly me!”

Hmmmm…

No hijackers, no screaming babies, no lengthy check-in, no delays due to adverse weather(except where you’re actually flying), no drunken violent idiots, go whenever you’re ready… Sounds great.

RoboDude: Well, you do have to worry more about weather. Even instrument pilots will often elect not to fly if the weather is too bad. Commercial airlines can fly above a lot of the weather; GA can’t.

“The Superior Pilot uses his superior judgement to avoid situations that would require his superior skill.”

lucie: I printed off the Atlantic Monthly article and skimmed over it. It seemed to focus on the Cirrus airplane and the Williams engine. The problem with the piston-powered Cirrus and the jet-powered Eclipse is that they’re still pretty expensive.

Most of the GA aircraft out there are slow, piston-powered “Spam cans”. But for short distances they are still faster than flying commercially. And a mid-'70s Cessna 172 selss for about the same price as a new SUV. (Most airplanes in the GA fleet are over 20 years old. They last longer than cars.)

Grok: I suppose it could go either way, depending on security. But I would hope the AOPA would fight any flight restrictions, as they successfully have in the past, because the attack did not involve GA aircraft. The thing about security is that it is aimed at the passengers. Pilots should not be affected.

One thing I would like to see is a change in the licenses. Instead of a grey piece of paper I’d like to see a plastic card with a photo, similar to drivers licenses. The photo would be on the left side, the pilot information would be from the middle to the right, on the top half of the license, and the ratings and limitations would be below that. Maybe a nice DoT/FAA logo in the backgroud and possibly the same logo as a hologram. I don’t know that I would require them to be displayed while on the airport (it might be a little overkill if you’re taking off from a grass strip somewhere).

The FAA could subcontract the new licenses to places like Sporty’s or AOPA who can sell them at or near cost. Not really sure how that would work. Maybe you would send your temporary license and two photos to the contractor and they would send you your official one? Like going to the P.O. to get a passport?

Flying always has been and always will be expensive; but during the 1970s (when I was too young to fly, dammit!) flying seemed to be a lot less expensive than it is now. (I started a thread on the subject a while ago, but I don’t remember if in today’s dollars and economy flying takes a higher or lower percentage of the average income.)

For that matter, I haven’t heard of a single act of terrorism being commited with a light plane. Has something like that ever happened?

A man tried to crash into the White House a few years ago in a single-engine aircraft. Recently a man (probably) committed suicide by crashing into his own house. But I don’t think these justify a lock-down of small airports.

I’m not sure about the future of aviation for the average flyer, but I’ve heard a lot of talk about how this tragedy is going to push larger corporate entities into smaller corporate jets and chartered flights for regular business travel.

pcubed: I’m all for corporate jets, but if I were a financial officer for a company I’d be hard pressed to justify the expense. A Cessna Citation or a LearJet costs four or five million dollars. A Gulfstream, I think, costs about twice that. (Note, I’m going on very vague memory here, as I don’t follow corporate aviation.) Then there are the salaries for the pilots and actual operating costs.

Fortunately, fractional ownership has become popular in the last few years. A company buys, say, 1/5 of an airplane and timeshares it with other owners. We might see more of this already popular program in the future.

One thing bothers me about security in a corporate jet. Security. The pilots may be drawn from a pool, or there may be a subcontractor supplying them. You wouldn’t necessarily “know” your pilot. Baggage handling for corporate flights would not have the security of airline flights, so if someone really wants to get you, they can. And it would be easier to get a hijacker on board since the checkpoints would not be as stringent as airlines.

Getting off the subject of corporate flights and turning to costs, and keeping in mind that I woud like to see more General Aviation aircraft flying, even a Cessna is more expensive than flying commercially. Let’s say you own your own Cessna 172, you live in Los Hideous, and you want to fly to Las Vegas. It’s a bit over 200 miles and you’re flying at 120 knots or so. There’s cliimbout and landing, so it will take you about two hours to fly there from here. A 172 rents for about $75/hour, so let’s assume the actual cost per hour (fuel, oil, insurance, tiedown and maintenance) is $50. That’s a $400 round trip vs. about $100 on a commercial flight. Four times more expensive in the Cessna and flight time is longer.

On the other hand, you don’t have to go to LAX. Just pop over to SMO or VNY (wherever you keep your plane). No paying for parking, no lines, no baggage check, no queues at the x-ray, no sitting around waiting to board, and so on. There goes your time savings on the jet! Also, the Cessna has four seats. If you take three of your friends with you the cost of the trip in the Cessna falls to $100 per person, round trip. And the scenery is better as you fly over the fascinating desert and look out of the large windows. And it’s more fun.

There are thousands of GA airports that are being under-used. I think (hope) that a greater interest in personal flying would stimulate new aircraft sales and reduce the price of the used (and rapidly aging) aircraft market. Making the used fleet less expensive would, I think, attract more people to General Aviation. When I was a kid we’d go out to MYF in San Diego and watch the airplanes take off and land. If more people fly, then there will be more to see and more kids hanging around airports. Kids who will grow up thinking, “I wish I could do that!” Which means more pilots, which means more aircraft… Sounds good for the economy and good for the consumer. And demand might stimulate the design of more efficient engines and airframes. [Ren]Joy![/Ren]

You bring to mind a discussion we had in the office the other day… The horror of what the passengers went through in their final moments helped add to the national anquish. The impact upon the commercial aviation industry is enormous. Both these were icing on the cake to the terrorists. But their main objective was to take out the buildings. This can still be accomplished with a rented plane and a cargo of explosives. I hope something is done to address this still lingering threat.

There’s a small airport in the city (sort of) that’s basically closed down.

That is sad, because that airfield has hosted some truly amazing airshows…complete with Russian MIG!

Kim “RIP Owens Field”