Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73

Thread: What really "killed" General Aviation

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    49
    Your premise that Cost of GA has remained constant is flawed. Attached are two charts that show it has grown far faster than inflation and the cost of automobiles.

    There are 4 factors that has killed GA:
    1. Cost. This is made more challenging because the economies of scale are not working in this industry. When you only sell less than 600 GA (non-jet) aircraft a year and only have 30,000 active aircraft in the US active; you are going to have a very expensive ecosystem.
    2. Tort and Liability: The summary awards agains GA industry has caused the premiums for GA businesses to approach 50% of the costs. Each component has to factor their tort cost in to their products and services. They have to apply their fixed cost to each unit sold. This makes for very expensive units.
    3. Government regulation. It is intersting to compare the Boating industry to the GA industry. One is regulated at the federal level by the USCG; the other by the FAA. The FAA applies the same methology and oversight to GA that they do to Commerical aircraft and airlines. Notice the USCG does not. If the boating industry; which kills 6x more people every year than GA were regulated like GA; it would die also.
    4. The press has sensationalized all the tragedies of GA and has scared the public. This has impacted insurance companies as well. There are very few major companies that will allow their employees to use their personal aircraft like they do person automobiles. If that one factor were change; it could go a long way in reviving GA as many individuals would use a GA aircraft to do their jobs rather than airlines. And that is why it will never happen, because the airlines have had a systematic approach to killing the charter and personal aircraft business for 50 years.

    I think GA has a strong case of instituational descrimation and will require protection to survive now. The economies of scale are now killing it. Cost of fuel is going up, cost of products and services keep going up. Only Corporations will be able to use GA as it still can be a business deduction. Most individuals will not be able to use it in the future.

    Name:  Cost of Certification.jpg
Views: 655
Size:  47.7 KBName:  GAMA Chart.JPG
Views: 733
Size:  80.8 KB

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I think your charts aren't comparing apples the way I am, and actually prove my point when we agree to terms.

    It's not that your points aren't valid, it's just that I did a poor job of articulating my idea of General Aviation (which is a pretty broad area to talk about).

    I was thinking in terms of Joe Six Pack (and Guy Glass Panel) and his bog standard single reciprocating engine, fixed gear four seat airplane. Let's take the Cessna 172 and its new replacement, the Skyhawk.

    A new car runs about 40-50K. Oddly enough, one can buy a elder 172 (or similar) in good condition for about that as well.

    A new house runs about 200-300K.* How much is a new Skyhawk? 275K, according to the Cessna website.

    I think the chart you provided with the 450K average for a GA aircraft has some turbos and upper end stuff messing up the averages.

    Now I'm with you on saying aviation is expensive. But aviation has always been expensive.

    Where we'll find common ground really quickly in regards to insurance and tort mucking things up is rentals. 130 bucks an hour wet for a C172? Really? Wow. Heck, the Champ I rent is 110 an hour. Why so much? Insurance on a taildragger is crazy high - the owner (who I trust) says he has to rent it for 100 hours a year to just break even.

    The dirty secret is that he could charge more and get it, as he's about the only guy with a rentable tail dragger in the state.

    The other cost that's gone up is training. Forget the days of being a hangar sweeper and plane washer in trade for lessons; we live in an era where young men are viewed with the suspicion that they're just looking to steal by pilots and as terrorists by the authorities. Both are overhyped, IMHO.

    I kept pretty close records on how much my Sport Pilot license cost. Soup to peanuts, from gas to and from the airport, books, EAA and AOPA membership, written test, 28 hours of flight time with a fantastic CFI in a rented CTLS and check ride cost me $5,280. That's a chunk of change, and thankfully I did my research and had come up with a financial plan on how to cover it before my first lesson. Throw on top of it another 1100 for taildragger training and it shows that one really has to want to be a pilot in order to be a pilot (at least for someone of moderate means).

    And this comes back to my original point - that thanks to a great Interstate system and cheap commercial fares, there really is no compelling need for the average Joe to fly himself anywhere.

    If we could wave a magic wand and cut the cost of flying by half it still wouldn't compete with the highway system for convenience and cost.

    * House price based on the flying demographic, which trends more affluent than the median average American. Me, I'm an outlier - we could trade our house for a Skycatcher.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Ylinen View Post
    Your premise that Cost of GA has remained constant is flawed. Attached are two charts that show it has grown far faster than inflation and the cost of automobiles.

    There are 4 factors that has killed GA:
    1. Cost. This is made more challenging because the economies of scale are not working in this industry. When you only sell less than 600 GA (non-jet) aircraft a year and only have 30,000 active aircraft in the US active; you are going to have a very expensive ecosystem.
    2. Tort and Liability: The summary awards agains GA industry has caused the premiums for GA businesses to approach 50% of the costs. Each component has to factor their tort cost in to their products and services. They have to apply their fixed cost to each unit sold. This makes for very expensive units.
    3. Government regulation. It is intersting to compare the Boating industry to the GA industry. One is regulated at the federal level by the USCG; the other by the FAA. The FAA applies the same methology and oversight to GA that they do to Commerical aircraft and airlines. Notice the USCG does not. If the boating industry; which kills 6x more people every year than GA were regulated like GA; it would die also.
    4. The press has sensationalized all the tragedies of GA and has scared the public. This has impacted insurance companies as well. There are very few major companies that will allow their employees to use their personal aircraft like they do person automobiles. If that one factor were change; it could go a long way in reviving GA as many individuals would use a GA aircraft to do their jobs rather than airlines. And that is why it will never happen, because the airlines have had a systematic approach to killing the charter and personal aircraft business for 50 years.

    I think GA has a strong case of instituational descrimation and will require protection to survive now. The economies of scale are now killing it. Cost of fuel is going up, cost of products and services keep going up. Only Corporations will be able to use GA as it still can be a business deduction. Most individuals will not be able to use it in the future.

    Name:  Cost of Certification.jpg
Views: 655
Size:  47.7 KBName:  GAMA Chart.JPG
Views: 733
Size:  80.8 KB
    You make very good points on the challenges of future air transportation. It will be a slow transformation as ground transportation gridlock and cost of infrastructure repair will force a transition to air travel as the solution to complement the mass transportation required in high density population areas.
    I am in contact with the DOT about mass production of my Verticraft as part of the future of transportation. Tort reform and excessive regulations as well as reducing air pollution and eliminating our dependence
    on foreign energy sources will be discussed.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    184
    Lawyers.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post

    "Darned Interstates."
    I think this is a big part of the problem - also, along a similar line of thought, "darn jet airliners". Back in the late 40s, a brand new Bonanza could compete pretty handily against a DC-3 airliner in terms of speed, range, reliability, and weather handling capability. (Everyone was bouncing around down low those days.)

    Even in the 50s & early 60s, faster GA planes were close in speed and range to the piston powered airliners of the day, though pressurization was making the airliners more immune to weather.

    Once jets made coast-to-coast travel quick, safe, and more immune to weather, it became harder to "compete" with the airlines for a given itinerary, though I imagine it was still often cheaper to go GA. After 1978 with airline deregulation, though, it became impossible to compete on cost.

    I love to fly and do so whenever I can. But if you look at a "typical" mission - say traveling from here in NC to my sister-in-law's place in Chicago, which we do several times a year - it's cheaper, safer, faster, and more reliable to go by commercial airline. (Of course, we still go by GA but that's because of the passion of flying, not by any hard-headed analysis.)

    So, I agree with your premise that GA got squeezed at the bottom (for shorter trips) by the interstate and improvements in cars. I also contend it got squeezed at the "top" (longer trips) by jets and cheap airfares.

  6. #16
    Dana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    927
    Good point about the Interstates, never thought about that before. It's not always true, though... when I bought my first plane (a 1941 T-Craft, in the mid 1980s), I did a lot of weekend trips from my home on the Jersey shore to my parents in upstate NY... 2.5 hours by car (yes, on the interstate) if there was no traffic, or 1.5 hours by air (not counting the 20 minute drive to the airport at each end). Of course I had to be careful about weather for the return trip, but for a 2 day weekend I never got stuck.

    Interestingly, when the Interstates were built, there were serious proposals to use the machinery already on site to lay down airstrips every 100 miles or so along the highway, perhaps at rest areas... think of all the nice little airports we would have today, convenient to ground transportation, if that had happened!

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    282

    Frame of Reference

    IMHO, airplanes were never designed to be recreational toys to play around in. Heck, even the trade names for the Cessna 180/185/190/195s were "Businessliners". And for good reason; they were designed to make the world smaller (and the potential radius of a business larger).

    It all depends on your mission ... and you have to make it sure it makes sense (and cents). For me, Wichita to KC is best driven ... most times. Wichita to Chicago is a coin toss depending on the payload, time at destination and etc. Wichita to Russell, KS to KC Downtown in a weekend is hands down an airplane mission. My airport is in the backyard. The cars and airplane (C172) are in the same building ... the garage. (BTW, my house cost is the same as all the other houses in the area ... not all residential airparks are luxurious).

    Cars in the early 1900s were luxuries but have now become commonplace. Why shouldn't airplanes do the same? Most people use their cars for transportation (boring), but some do it for the romance (look at all the great custom car shows!). Why can't airplanes do the same? -Ron

  8. #18
    DBurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    17
    The solution to gridlock isn't mass production of air vehicles, or anything else. It's what you're doing right now--communicating instantly around the world over the Internet. The Internet--and the way society changes to use it--are at the same level of development the airplane was in 1914. Wait a bit.

    As for GA for routine business travel, that's doing better than ever. Cessna has just announced another bizjet for the business/wealthy class. The rest of us poor folks fly in the current state-of-the-art: the jetliner.

    If this discussion is about using a V-tailed Bonanza for routine travel, well, that idea IMO was a non-starter long before the Interstate highway system came into full bloom. Remember the 'two planes in every garage' thing right after WWII? How did that work out?

    Mass transit is about convenience and cost. Mostly convenience. If someone can pay $2 to buy a ticket for a bus, wait 5 min at the curb, and get off 20 minutes later after 8 stops, or pay $10 in gas and parking to make the same trip in a car, at their convenience, in the same time through traffic, only those who can't afford the car will ride the bus. For proof: see any mass transit system worldwide. Or see China. The only time mass transit ever works is in locations where the car is so inconvenient that the train/bus/subway/light rail is simpler, easier and more pleasant. Light GA is not that convenient, and unless there's a technological revolution in design, never will be.

    GA as we're discussing here is more like riding a motorcycle down those fancy Interstates. You do it because you enjoy it, not because it makes sense most of the time. There's more noise. Handling is trickier. You need more skill--doing something stupid will hurt you more. You have limited baggage load, and you have to watch where you put it. The weather is always a factor. Sure, you're faster than the sled drivers, can zip into tight parking spots, and impress the ladies with your leather (flight) jacket. But when the wife calls on the cell and wants you to pick the kids up, well... And of course your Mom thinks you're nuts. Bonanza/172-style transportation makes as much sense for general transportation as giving everyone a Kawasaki Ninja. That's what the market told the industry dreamers after WWII.

    For a short period of time in the '60s and '70s 4-place GA did fairly well, when jetliners were new and ticket prices were high. However, most of the places the GA business guys wanted to fly were to the same big cities the jetliners wanted to fly, and as the airspace got busier it got more complicated and regulated, the price of admission went up for the GA folks and down for the jetliner passengers, and the convenience of light GA vanished.

    As for the current state of light GA, it is about cost. However, you've got to look at it in reverse. Flying has always been expensive. The SSA put back issues of Soaring magazine up on their website for members, and I've been perusing them. There are articles lamenting the cost of flying, the death of soaring as a sport, etc. etc back in 1970. However, I can buy a better used sailplane today, in real dollar terms, than I could have bought new back in 1970 (if my parents would have let me). Sure, the new ships today are huge bucks, but on a relative basis, the used ships I can buy today were big bucks back in 1970 when they were new. What's changed is society. In 1970 many families did quite well on one income. Today time seems harder to find, there are more choices for your discretionary income, and even two-income families struggle to get by. The planes aren't more expensive--the pilots are poorer. The only reason light GA survives at all is because it has become primarily a recreational activity for the remaining population of GA pilots, and most folks will spend what it takes to have fun.

    At least that's my two cents. And worth every penny
    Last edited by DBurr; 10-07-2011 at 02:07 AM.

  9. #19
    Dana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    927
    It's all about cost/benefit ratio. For most people, the benefits of GA to transportation are not enough to justify the cost. By "cost" I mean not just money, but the time and effort in learning to fly, and doing the ancillary things required to fly. This is the mistake the aircraft companies made in the late 1940s. Even taking the cost of learning to fly out (there were thousands of pilots already trained during the war), it still didn't make sense. If you're using the plane for recreation, then it's better, because it's harder to put a value to the benefit of the recreation... it's not always a logical decision. Once you're a pilot and/or own a plane, then you might use it for transportation, because it's already paid for via the recreation benefits. This is the same whether it's a plane, a motorcycle, or a sports car (in ascending levels of utility). But if you don't buy it for fun, you won't buy it for transportation (except in rare cases).

  10. #20
    Alll the above are very valid points and while I agree, I think with most people, the amount of discretionary income had dwindled to the point that they just find it much easier to spend it on something else that is less complicated and less filled with regulations. The joy of flying is getting less and less of a fun passtime due to over regulation. What fun is it when a person has to plan, check for TFR's, etc. ever single time they just want to fly someplace? Granted I live in the boonies and fly from my own strip but I have gotten to the point I rarely fly into bigger cities due to I just don't want to deal with all the airspace rules and regulations. I see a lot of guys in the local area that have stated this exact reason they are giving up flying.....sick and tired of worrying about busting some stupid rule that has been implimented.
    TSA is another issue. I have had friends out for a joyride and upon landing have had Border Patrol/Sheriff drive up and ask them questions. These guys were on floats and had been fishing up close to the Canadian border. I believe there are UAV's flying out of Grand Forks, ND watching everyones moves and a few overzealous Border Patrol agents. Even had a younger BP officer drive onto a private strip recently and started asking all of us if we knew of any 'farm strips' in the are that he could check out.
    Okay, time to quit ranting!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •