The Average UK GA PPL?

[Rod1]

I have the impression that the following fits this but I could be completely wrong!

15 to 20 hours per year
VFR / Day only
Rents club aircraft or has a share in something relatively simple.

Anyone know of any official sources which would prove or disprove this? I remember reading some time ago that 15% of PPL’s go on to do an IMC, but that most do not keep it current for long.

Rod1

[Dark Helmet]

Certainly seems to fit me!

[IO540]

15 to 20 hours per year
VFR / Day only
Rents club aircraft or has a share in something relatively simple.

Sounds plausible.

The problem with averages is not knowing the standard deviation ;) The average of 0 and 10 is 5 allright but everybody knows it's meaningless.

Most surveys of GA that purport to show how many tens of thousands of active aircraft are there like to lump in everything right down to parachutes with lawn mowers on the back, but in reality 99% of those people rarely venture too far away from the hilltop off which they launched (I know, they do it where I live). I wouldn't call that "GA".

You can dig out license issue etc stats on the CAA website. We have discussed this here before. There isn't data on there to work out the active PPL population; possibly it is missing intentionally. One can have a go, by making some reasonable assumptions about the average age at which people get their PPL (which is on the website) and the age at which they either pack it in, or fail their medical. There is some extra info in the latest CAA survey of GA.

Renters are sure to fly few hours on average - many do just the 12 min. I know a fair few that do close to zero; they need to fly with an examiner to renew every 2yrs. Group owners will be flying more. Outright owners will be flying the most; I do 150hrs/year and I know a fair few (who are not on the internet, BTW) that do 300+ hrs/year. Most IRs are owners. Most GA business flights are done by owners.

No matter how you look at it, there is a vast spread of activities which makes any generalisation hard.

Reading your posts elsewhere, you can build a supporting case for ultralights taking over GA and that may well happen but if it does it will kill off most GA airfields, which will confine flying to private strips, a bit like fishing going on from private fishing clubs with exclusive right for that lake and absolutely no new members unless vetted by the local masonic lodge. OK if you are into that sort of thing; very poor enroute visibility due to having one's nose buried up everybody else's back end ;)

[tonyhalsall]

Does not fit me or virtually any of the PPL's I know......
We have our own pilot operated lights and so virtually everyone has a current night rating and half are IMC. The ones that are not are flying permit aircraft singing the praises and wishing they would at least allow night flight....
I own, I fly 350-500hrs per year, night and IR.

And would you say in answer to the original question that this is average for a privately funded PPL?

500 hours a year at around £100 / hour equates to £50,000 in cold cash - nice one Bose. I would not say that anyone in the remotely average PPL bracket can write off that amount of cash for pleasure.
I would estimate that between £2,000 and £5,000 is what most PPL's budget annually for flying. Flying paragliders would give you a much higher hourly useage for the same budget as opposed to using the budget to stay current in an expensive SEP (or Twin) - group ownership of SEP's and Permit also give more utilisation hours for your £.

[Whirlygig]

Where do you get £100 an hour from!
I believe that's roughly what it costs per hour to hire an aeroplane!

I would suggest that the average/typical/median/modal PPL does not own/operate their own aircraft. I also read somewhere (but I can't find the reference) that a not insignificant number of pilots pretty much give up flying once they have their PPL; presumably these should also be factored in.

Cheers

Whirls

[tonyhalsall]

OK - £25,000 a year then. That is still £2,000 / month off the bottom end of your payslip or balance sheet after tax and you will most certainly be in a minority to be able to afford that as readily disposable income.
There is an incorrect perception that flying is a rich mans hobby and certainly if you can blow £2,000 / month on it then you fit the perception and I am sure that I am not alone in saying that I envy you and I don't think that you are typical.
I would say that I am pretty average - I earn a reasonable income but I have a mortgage and I have children both of my own and those of my new partner and I have child support payments not to mention the time committments associated with work and family. I reckon that 25 hours is about average because it enables pleasure flying to fit in financially and time wise with all of my other committments.
Ironically this year I may well achieve 40 hours but this will be the highest number of hours in one year that I have ever achieved and it is not cost this year which will limit me, just time to fit flying in around everything else.

[Mike Cross]

you can build a supporting case for ultralights taking over GA and that may well happen but if it does it will kill off most GA airfields, which will confine flying to private strips

IMHO it's inevitable that the luxury of flying off vast expanses of (usually ex-mil) hard runway at low cost will go. The traditional 3 runway layout uses up a lot of real estate. Those that are suitable are gradually being taken over by the expansion of the LOCO's into regional airports and those that are not are under pressure to be redeveloped to provide greater returns for their owners.
A 2 runway layout like Popham or a single runway layout like Old Sarum or Sandown uses up a lot less space.

Those who choose to fly a/c that need runway lighting, paved runways and approach aids will find their choices limited to developed a/d that have commercial traffic to help pay. Those who don't need such things will vote with their wallets and move to places with less grandiose ideas.
I'm no great fan of ultralights. They exist as a class only because the regulators have created the classification, some indeed are available in versions that fall into more than one class. If an aeroplane is airworthy it is airworthy. The airframe, the air through which it flies, and the powerplant that pulls it along don't behave differently depending on whether it is on a Permit or C of A, whether there's a built-up area underneath, whether it's dark outside or whether the pilot is flying by reference to instruments.

Having re-read that paragraph I'll rephrase it. I'm no great fan of paring away a structure simply to force it under an artificially imposed weight limit. While paring the weight down inevitably improves performance it also results in structures that may have little margin of strength above the absolute minimum called for.

Mike

[nigelisom]

I fly a complex SEP as part of a non capital group, have a current night qualification and am just about to embark on an IMCR. I seem to average about 70 hours a year and only rarely land at the same place I have taken off from. I would dearly love to find the time/money to do a CPL/IR and then an FI course one day.
How average does that make me?
Nigel

[tonyhalsall]

Nice post Mike,

I too am surprised at how as a nation generally we passionately support our own corners whilst also having a need to pigeon hole or 'name' something or someone who is different.

In aviation this manifests itself horrendously with bloody minded spats between the PFA and the BMAA and between supporters of Permit Vs Cof A aircraft. It is almost laughable really and we probably would laugh if the displayed mentality was clothed in an 'Irish' joke.

For goodness sake man has dreamed of flying like a bird as long as mankind has existed - for millions of years - and it is only in the last hundred years that this dream has been realised. Even now precious few of us fly and we ought to be grateful to have the privilige to do so. Why are we not bound together to maintain our flying priviliges? Why are we not accepting of others rights to fly in the way that suits them? Why are we not grateful that technology has advanced to such a degree that ultra light weight aircraft can now achieve the same performance at a fraction of the cost than forty years ago? Why do we not all join together and celebrate the joy of being able to fly in whatever manner is of our own choosing? Why are we not pooling our combined voices and talents to stop the CAA from regulating the owner/pilots out of existance in the same way that the manufacturing industry was regulated out of existance.

just a little off topic rant - sorry.

[Airbus38]

We all know that if you hold a licence you do as much flying as you can afford, both financially and due to time constraints.

Based on how much time you do fly, however, I am interested to know how that time is spent? Without finger-pointing, criticising or accusing, as this is not the point of my question, I would be interested to hear whether people who do around the minimum time per year to keep valid practise any kind of emergency drills/PFLs, EFATOs etc.?

I would also like to put this question out to those who do more hours per year aswell (bose etc.) - for example, does anybody discipline themselves to fly an hour in every x number of hours/months with another qualified pilot who can simulate emergency situations unheralded? If so, what kind of things do you practise? How many times? How much added value do you get out of such flights?

I know that revalidations probably include this type of stuff, but I think it would be really interesting to see different people's viewpoints on how often they practise these things over the course of the year. I ask because it's the kind of thing that isn't set in stone, and so there is no requirement (per se) to do anything of the kind, but clearly not doing so is potentially reckless, and lots of people (I hope) will have opinions on this.

Thoughts on this very much appreciated, just something I wonder about from time to time!

A38

[Rod1]

Nice post Tony.

OK, so to summarize. We have a number who agree with my suggestion and a number who say they are not themselves average, but nobody has proposed an alternative!

I am not average; I do 80 – 100 hours a year including small amounts of IMC and increasingly occasional Night. Aircraft owner, Beginnings of learning formation flying ex aerobatic pilot, mostly do long distance touring. My limiting factor is time rather than mony, I have a Wife and two kids!

Total flying budget £4500.

Rod1

[tonyhalsall]

When I had a PFA Streak Shadow I very regularly practised all manner of emergencies and PFL's and felt hugely confident and comptant to deal with anything other than catastrophic airframe failure.
I am still getting to know my new steed (Eurostar) and so whilst I have practiced emergency drills I am nowhere near as confident as I would like to be. For example, I am unable to approach the stall comfortably in the Eurostar and always have a knot in my stomach as the ASI nudges downwards below 40 mph - whereas in the Streak I would fling it into the stall.

It helps that I choose to fly very simple aircraft with non complex systems and also choose not to venture out in anything other than good VFR conditions. My drills are simple and the chances of over stressing and forgetting vital actions is minimal

[Alvin Steele]

15 to 20 hours per year
VFR / Day only
Rents club aircraft


Yep.......that'd be about right:cool:

[IO540]

OK, so to summarize. We have a number who agree with my suggestion and a number who say they are not themselves average, but nobody has proposed an alternative!

An alternative to what?

There are loads of different aircraft types. If you want to fly VFR in fair weather, the permit/ultralight stuff is fine. If you need to go places or need more utility value, then you need to push (much) further in terms of qualifications and training and budgets and get your IR and a decent IFR plane. If you like aeros you get into yet something else.

I am sorry to agree (but I do) with Mike Cross's suggestion that GA airfields will eventually close. Still, a lot depends on how successful the newcomers like DA40/DA42/SR22 are. They aren't cheap but they are much more capable (both legally and practically) and - contrary to what the low-end owners are preaching - there is plenty of money around. The fact that the GA scene is very poor in attracting affluent individuals right now does not mean this will always be the case. There is still time to turn things around: lots of GPS approaches into grass airfields without ATC, that would be a very good start in giving GA utility value.

[Rod1]

IO540

You are right; it was not a very clear post.

I suggested the average PPL would do;

15 to 20 hours per year
VFR / Day only
Rents club aircraft or has a share in something relatively simple.

No alternatives have been proposed, and quite a few agree so I assume I was reasonably close.

Rod1

[Adrian N]

Well my answer....
I revalidate ME/IR by test done each year so get time with an Instructor for that.

Bosey,

How many times have you had to revalidate your IR since you got it in June 2006?

Just asking.

[dublinpilot]

Must be 10 charaters long

[IO540]

Rod1

I fail to see what you are trying to prove here.

What is to be gained by establishing some kind of average value for these parameters?

As I have said, there is a wide range of flying going on, and working out an average is meaningless.

If anything it would be utterly depressing. I mean, how long do you think it will be before a 15 hour/year pilot renting the typical piece of flying scrap metal is going to say to himself (literally or subconsciously) :

"this hobby is such a huge hassle, it costs me so much money to do the 15hrs, I get so little in return for it, I have such poor currency that I can't go anywhere, nobody but absolute anoraks wants to fly with me in the piece of crap that I can get, a lot of people politely refuse to fly with me because they are horrified at going up with a 15hr pilot (**), there is close to zero crumpet hanging around this scene AND/OR my wife/gf can't see the point of me doing this since I never take her anywhere nice... I might just chuck it in and put the £1500 towards an upmarket gym membership and an upmarket tennis club membership (both of which will provide much better scenery)"

??

One has to be positive to move forward in this (or any other) business. Yes most PPLs fly few hours and are as tight as the proverbial but if one believes that will never change, where will that get us? Light/Permit aircraft is a good answer for many but the ownership costs are perhaps half of CofA and that isn't enough of a difference to make a big difference, in a game that requires this much long term commitment. The key is in improving what people get out of it. If the "scene" is crap (like it is in so many respects) then even £5/hour flying won't interest very many.


(**) actual reaction today, among a meeting of a number of non-flyers asking me the minimum and likely average PPL hours

[Genghis the Engineer]

Firstly can we get rid of this horrible foreign term "ultralight", it doesn't exist anywhere in UK aviation, and outside the UK it means something different in pretty much every country that you visit.


Secondly, Mike - sorry but I think that you are oversimplifying things enormously. Aviation has huge numbers of distinctions,e.g.

Amateur built PtF
Historic PtF
Type Approved PtF
Private CofA
Public CofA
(and these last two can be divided into normal, utility and often aerobatic)

Then we have more divisions:

Microlight
VLA
Up to 2000lb (PFA)
Up to 5,700 kg (part 23)
Up to 7,000 kg (light)

And that's just single engine.


Then we have licencing:

NPPL (PPC, M, SEP, TMG)
ICAO non-JAR PPL
JAR-PPL
BCPL (any of those left)
CPL
fATPL
ATPL

Then we can rate then: IMC, night, IR, ME, Tailwheel, VP, complex....



All of these assorted categories get treated differently. Whilst one could sensibly argue that the whole thing is far too damned complicated (and I'd almost certainly agree with you), the general approach is that the more potential for public/passenger risk, the greater the regulation.

Microlights at one end then (and I'd agree that they are still just another aeroplane) are at the lowest end of speed/energy/mass/pax/overflight permissions, and so they get the lightest touch treatment. Fair enough, but that's no reason to feel aggrieved at their existence, any more than at Bose-X's enormous number of hours each year - he pays for it in cash, regular tests, and so-on.

Me?, I'm just not flying enough this year and am not a typical anything, but usually manage 70-100 hours each year.

G

[MIKECR]

Had my PPL since 2001 and have averaged 50 - 60 hours per year. Probably just over half of my annual hours are glider towing, the other half I've had to pay for(member of a 172 syndicate until just recently).

[Adrian N]

And how many times has he told us he has an IR and flys airways, since June 2006? :O
I'm not sure if it's more or less than the number of times he told us he had an IR and flew airways before June 2006! :)
Like here in Oct 2003. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1031703&postcount=5&highlight=IR) or again here in 2004. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1448832&postcount=5&highlight=instrument rated)

Bit of a shame really.

[tonyhalsall]

So are we being taken in by yet another internet Charlaton troll??

Oh my God - not again - how totally f*****g sad some people are.

what is the point.

My God look how many posts he's made !! Surely it's not just one big fabrication? Makes you want to give up posting doesn't it.

[Airbus38]

"Jealous or just a simple DAY/VFR Pilot...... :P"

Everybody deep down only wants to fly DAY/VFR, surely you must know that?! What make such people so simple?

[IO540]

Not sure why pick on somebody for flying airways before they got an IR. Loads of people do that. They just make sure there is an IR in the RHS. Also, which IR? Some people have more than one IR but need different planes for exercising the privileges of each one ;)

[tonyhalsall]

Bose
Please tell me/us what you do? I am not trying to catch you out - I just want to restore my faith in bulletin boards and I don't want to believe I have been taken in by a troll and I dearly want to know that you are genuine.
What aircraft do you fly? where do you fly from? How did you get your 500 hours ME? Surely that was not less than £100/hour to get?
I want to believe you are a lottery winner, or just plainly a very wealthy person who does not need to work much to fund a significant amount of flying.
After reading this thread last nght I was really annoyed but this morning I just want to know if you are for real - I am, and I like to think that I communicate with equally real people.

[IO540]

There are a lot of 500hr/year private pilots. You need your own plane, an IR, money, and time. Most of them fly on business.

[Adrian N]

just a simple DAY/VFR Pilot...... :P

Spot on! :ok: And I've never pretended to be anything else.;)

Not sure why pick on somebody for flying airways before they got an IR.Loads of people do that. They just make sure there is an IR in the RHS. Also, which IR? Some people have more than one IR

Sure, but very few write "I am an instrument rated pilot" before they have even a single IR. Even when they do subsequently get an IR (which is a huge achievement for any private pilot), I find it impossible to read subsequent claims about experience and currency without remembering the original exaggeration.

[Rod1]

IO540

The drop out rate of PPL’s is, as we know, very high. If my guess on the average is roughly correct, then I agree, more will drop out. It is necessary to understand the problem in order to start to design a fix to improve the situation. I was using the BBS to see if my base assumption was reasonable and get some amusement from the progression.:)

I would guess that in order to fly the average hours, buy maps, do check rides etc an expenditure of 2k, possibly slightly more is likely, pa.

I used to know two retired gents who would fly min hours a year under the old rules. Both would turn up and do check rides in a 4 seater with the other in the back. They would then fly 5 hours each P1 with the other in the aircraft. As soon as both had the 5 hours, normally 1 to 2 weeks, both would vanish to the next year. During the 5 hours each they would practice all aspects of the basic PPL. They kept this up for many years, but JAR finished them off, along with many others.

Rod1

[Whirlybird]

how long do you think it will be before a 15 hour/year pilot renting the typical piece of flying scrap metal is going to say to himself (literally or subconsciously) : "this hobby is such a huge hassle, it costs me so much money to do the 15hrs, I get so little in return for it, I have such poor currency that I can't go anywhere, nobody but absolute anoraks wants to fly with me in the piece of crap that I can get, a lot of people politely refuse to fly with me because they are horrified at going up with a 15hr pilot (**), there is close to zero crumpet hanging around this scene AND/OR my wife/gf can't see the point of me doing this since I never take her anywhere nice... I might just chuck it in and put the £1500 towards an upmarket gym membership and an upmarket tennis club membership (both of which will provide much better scenery)"

Hmmmm.... The people I know who fly that amount say (literally or subconsciously), something like this: "This hobby costs me more than I can afford, and I wish I could be more current and fly to some places further away. But I just love getting airborne! I fly a C152 because it's cheap and forgiving and what I can hire, and I spend all week at my boring job just looking forward to being able to fly at the weekend, even if I only do half an hour of circuits. My friends aren't that interested in flying with me, and my wife thinks I'm crazy, but it gives her a chance to go shopping alone, and I have the company of my fellow aviation addicts at the club. I suppose I really ought to chuck it in, take my wife nice places, and get a gym membership to keep fit. But my wife seems happy the way things are, and I hate the gym and I'd never fit in with the toffee-nosed snobs at my local one. And for me, nothing, but nothing, beats the sheer joy of slipping the surly bonds of earth and being on my own up there in the wide blue yonder where nothing and nobody can touch me. I've felt that way all my life and I think I always will".

Everyone is different. You don't have to agree with someone's point of view to understand and respect it. Does yet another thread have to turn into "there are those who do my sort of flying, and the stupid ignorant fools who'll probably give up anyway".

[S205-18F]

Hi folks I am reasonably new to flying and have flown around 60 hours in the past year since gaining my license. Some of the time has been on my own due to being off at odd times (mid week) and the rest has been with friends etc. Both my son and my wife have never been in my plane "dont see the point" but she doesnt complain at the costs involved. I have recently purchased a PFA type single seater and reduced costs even further to the point I fly several times a week only limited by weather/light.

What is typical I suppose is the small percentage of people who have dreamt of gaining a license and on achieving their goal stop and file it away as just something else ticked off their list of things to do in life!

[IO540]

WB

Not sure how you concluded

You don't have to agree with someone's point of view to understand and respect it. Does yet another thread have to turn into "there are those who do my sort of flying, and the stupid ignorant fools who'll probably give up anyway".

from what I wrote. Obviously I was writing tongue in cheek (as I do so frequently); everybody knows that not everybody is into gyms and tennis or whatever.

The "slight" problem that you are left with is how to explain the PPL churn rate.

My main point is that it is driven not by cost (i.e. budget shortage) but by a lack of return.

But we have done this one to death before...

[Flyin'Dutch']

Spot on! :ok: And I've never pretended to be anything else.;)



Sure, but very few write "I am an instrument rated pilot" before they have even a single IR. Even when they do subsequently get an IR (which is a huge achievement for any private pilot), I find it impossible to read subsequent claims about experience and currency without remembering the original exaggeration.

Adrian,

The unfortunate truth is that some people use either a poetic licence or just post blatant untruths on these internet forums.

Why?

I would love to know that too.......

[tonyhalsall]

Ah well Bose,
At least we have established one thing.....
You are far from average !!
:ok:

[Adrian N]

I own a Reims rocket 172 and share a Senecca....
Adrian, Well I was going to answer you but I can't be arsed.......:p :cool: But lets see the IMC holders start screaming when you tell them they are not Instrument rated.....

Predictable response. Having been an IMC holder for many years, I would assume that anyone who told me they were "instrument rated" had a full IR, particularly if the sentence before "I am an instrument rated pilot" said "... when you are ready to expand the envelope, then consider the IMC." You implied that you had an IR, but at the time you didn't. The day before you posted that you said "I can't be bothered to file and fly airways for short trips" (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1447968&postcount=4) - why did you say that when you weren't allowed to fly airways for any sort of trip?

A lot of what you say is sensible, and people who've flown with you say you're a good pilot. There's no doubt that you are experienced and current, but what you say would carry a lot more weight if you hadn't made so many misleading posts in the past.

BTW, do you own the Reims Rocket outright? Just asking, again. ;)

[Airbus38]

Bose, without knowing either yourself or adrian, I just want to point out that in Oct '03 as adrian linked earlier you specifically said:

"I only went from the IMC to IR to allow class A and non UK flight and there is nothing wrong with the IMC otherwise. Take it from me there is nothing different between the instrument skills on an IMC and the instrument skills on an IR..."

Don't really want to get any further involved in this, but it just seems that your last argument there is made a little weaker, because you clearly made the distinction there that it was an IR you had, and NOT an IMC.

[BlueRobin]

I would think quite a number of PPLs fall into the 20hr p.a. day VFR bracket by time, money and inclination.
Bose just likes to http://www.xpdite.net/forum/Smileys/smilies_smf/fishing.gif

[Adrian N]

I'm as uninterested in the financing as I am in what sort of car you drive!

I own a Reims rocket 172 and share a Senecca.

Most people would probably have said "I own a share in a Reims rocket 172 and a Seneca" (assuming they were sure about the Seneca, of course. ;) ). But then most people would find discussion of their misleading posting (or worse) to be embarassing rather than ego-boosting.

Anyway, this seems like a suitable point to stop the thread drift. Apologies in advance if I pick you up on any future inconsistencies! :)

[tonyhalsall]

And for me, nothing, but nothing, beats the sheer joy of slipping the surly bonds of earth and being on my own up there in the wide blue yonder where nothing and nobody can touch me. I've felt that way all my life and I think I always will".

Spot On !!!

[Whirlybird]

IO540,

Not sure how you concluded
"You don't have to agree with someone's point of view to understand and respect it. Does yet another thread have to turn into "there are those who do my sort of flying, and the stupid ignorant fools who'll probably give up anyway". from what I wrote.

Not sure I can explain....but I'll try.

Firstly, it wasn't aimed just at you. I felt like quite a few people were saying that their sort of flying was the only one that counted.

However, I guess I'm just a bit tired of your constant refrain - people give up flying because school aircraft are crap and the people in flying clubs are all anoraks. How many more times are you going to post something to that effect? We all heard you the first time...and the tenth...and the hundredth. And I for one am sick of being called an anorak, even if only by implication. I disagree with you, I've rarely seen any evidence that you're right, but frankly, I'm tired of the whole argument. As you said,But we have done this one to death before... Yes, we have, so please give it a rest.

[baldwinm]

Tony,

check your pm's

Thanks

[IO540]

WB

If one refrained from saying something that has been said before, most of pprune would shut down. All that would be left would be the main forum that dissects the most recent airliner crash.

Every other GA forum would shut down also.

If you don't want repetition, what I suggest you do (when you see somebody asking something that was answered previously) is dig out the previous thread(s), post the URL to it, and then you can save everybody else having to spend time typing up replies.

We will just have to disagree about the anoraks. Anyway, can one have a female anorak? :)

[Holdposition]

Them that shout from the rooftops are least heard!!!!!

[rustle]

Them that shout from the rooftops are least heard!!!!!


WTF? :confused:

[Adrian N]

Well smart arse, there is a difference between who OWNS something and who you may SHARE it with. My finance's are none of your business.

I don't recall showing any interest in your finances, which I'm sure are very sound. I'm just trying to interpret what you say, to help avoid any mis-understandings (like the one about the IR you claimed to have but didn't!)

There's a difference between owning something, and owning part of something. In aviation the latter is generally called "sharing". You said that you own a 172, share a Seneca, and have access to other aircraft. Most people will have interpreted that as 100% ownership of the 172, and part ownership of the Seneca. But that wouldn't be a correct interpretation.

I couldn't give a toss if you can afford to own both of them outright, and others besides. But as has happened before, you imply something that is not correct.

I suggest if you want to get into a fight with me you come and do it in person.:ok:
I haven't had a fight since I was about 6 years old, so I suspect you'd win!

[tonyhalsall]

Tony,
check your pm's
Thanks

I did and replied...... maybe it didn't go??
Just sent you an email via Pprune and in case you don't get that you can email me with my full name @hotmail.com
Regards
Tony

[Flyin'Dutch']

Steve/Bose

I think you're a bit off the mark here.

Someone pulls you up on inconsistencies that you have posted in your posts.

Initially you then try to boast your way out of it but when that fails you write:

I suggest if you want to get into a fight with me you come and do it in person.

What is that supposed to mean?

:ouch:

That you will give someone a trashing if they have the audicity to query what you write?

Come on, I would have expected better from you.

[S205-18F]

I think this thread has gone off track a little!!! Please kiss and make up kids life is too short to keep this up:ok:

[tangovictor]

I think this thread has gone off track a little!!! Please kiss and make up kids life is too short to keep this up:ok:

I agree, and am surprised that someone hasn't brought, it to an end
Rod's original post, seems to have been highjacked for sniping at each other or at groups of aviators.

[Adrian N]

Bose-x,

I re-read all my posts, and can't find any attacks. They say that you're a good, experienced, current pilot who talks a lot of sense, but that you exaggerate repeatedly. I've edited out one sentence that was a bit facetious.

I strongly suggest that you delete your rather childish comment.

[Monocock]

Bose-X

You say that you are sometimes rather blunt. So am I.

I think you are being rather arrogant in this thread to be perfectly honest. Its not the fact that you have such toys at your disposal that seems to be anoying a certain person here, it's the way you are flaunting your success that is making him irritated by you.

Was there really any need to go into detail about your successful financial involvement in blue-chip companies? I think not. Sometimes when you feel like you are ahead it is best to become quieter as there will be plenty out there who will take the smallest thing you say as showing off. Unfortunately, on this occasion, you have bared all, shown your hand, and in my opinion deserve the grief that you have received.

Those who are successful and achieve great things normally retain them by adopting a more level headed attitude towards life. I, unlike you, am still trying to achieve great things. I hope one day I am successful and only time will tell if I am. One thing I can be sure of though is that if I do strike gold, i'll keep my gob shut and let those closest to me enjoy my good fortunes with me without rubbing the noses of others in it as I pass.

P.S Can I have a go in your Seneca?

[funflier44]

I suppose I fall into the average PPL category.

Been flying for many years about 800 hours of various flying but now settle for about 35 -40 hours a year in 172 or similar all paid for and costs about £3500 a year. Or that is what I tell the Boss!

I did have an IR but gave it up sometime ago, I like to fly for fun now and yes I suppose that is nice VMC days flying VFR.

Yes I may be unadventurous but I've had my fun and scarey bits and hopefully gained some experience to aviod them but you never know when the next one will hit you.

When it stops being fun and enjoyable then I know it is time to stop.

Ff44

[Flyin'Dutch']

Monocock wrote:
Its not the fact that you have such toys at your disposal that seems to be anoying a certain person here, it's the way you are flaunting your success that is making him irritated by you.

Can of course not talk for Adrian but think it is more the 'inaccuracies' of claims that got up his nose.

Have to say that those in general are the thing that hack me off mostly on internet forums too. The overinflated claims, half-truths and often blatant lies that some people post.

As you say most very successful people just keep stumm and can show amazing humbleness.

Few of those on here too. I am sure you too know who they are....

But then we did establish that Steve was not average.

:}

Steve I think that your comments are unsavoury and that you should take them off.

[Flyin'Dutch']

You hijacked an entire thread to have a pop at me. Remove your comments and I will remove mine and we can continue to lock horns via PM.

Steve,

I think those remarks you made will have to go.

You either take them off, or they will be taken off by the moderators as they don't want to be seen to facilitating defamation of Adrian's character, or you pay the bill in court.

That is the way this cookie will crumble.

As I said before I am not sure why you got so inflamed for someone having a bit of a random pop at some of your previous claims, after all they were 'ad lib' interpretations of the facts, n'est ce pas?

[BRL]

Guys. I suggest you delete your own posts as you see fit to at this time. I won't do it myself, I will leave it to you to decide what goes.

Come on now, you guys are better than this...... :)

[Flyin'Dutch']

Maybe so Frank. A quick pop I would have lived with as you know I am thick skinned and some of my trawls deserve it. But having a whole thread hijacked to attack me is unjustified. Either his comments go or the whole thread goes, until then they are my views of him and just as his views of me stay so do they.

Steve,

You can not write those sort of things about someone on this forum just because they have a pop about claims about ratings and experience and them asking about who owns what.

I understand from what you have written on here before yourself that nothing that what Adrian claims is factually incorrect.

What you write though is both insulting and has no basis in facts.

That is not only uncouth but will also land you in deep water.

Not to take them off would be foolhardy.

Your physical punch maybe harder, the pain from continuing your stance will be severe and all yours.

[BRL]

I have been in touch with both involved via PM's and now it is up to them to do their bit.

I will give it a few hours and if nothing is done I will remove all irrelevent posts.

I can't be fairer than that.

[Flyin'Dutch']

BRL

I don't want to teach you how to suck eggs but the only thing that needs removing is that what is defamatory, in this case what Steve posted.

[BRL]

I believe I arlready have done. (Post 55.)

[stiknruda]

No, leave it all I say - come on, there's no Eastenders on terrestrial television on a Wednesday evening.

Knowing Bose X, I'd have him down as the the suave one from the pop band. Adrian, I see as either the young pretender, Shawn - Tiff's brother - or more possibly a Phil clone.

You guys have made my day.

MORE P U H L E E ZE!:E :E

[Monocock]

Knowing Bose X, I'd have him down as the the suave one from the pop band

Pete Doherty is most definitely not suave....:}

[dublinpilot]

My comment at the begning of this thread was said in jest.

I was on a cpd course all day today, so haven't seen what Bose has said (he appears to have deleted what he said), but from what's left, it seems this thread has all gone very nasty.

I don't like where it's gone, and don't want to be a part of it, so have deleted my earlier post.

Appologies to Bose-X for the part that I played.

dp

[stiknruda]

Dublin Pilot - you are just too good to be true!! :E :E :E :E :E

Real life can be quite rumbustious - esp with some of the egos around here!!:cool:

[tiggermoth]

I found the question in this topic a really good one. It's basically a "What on earth do people do with a PPL?". I've wondered that myself.

(Ignoring the 'sour' bits in the middle)

As it's winter, I wonder really what *can* be done this time of year. As my local field is Barton (on grass) I wonder if people resign themselves to not flying becasue either it's just rained (airfield soggy) or it's about to rain (airfield will be soggy) or it's frosty (aeroplane is stuck to the ground - ...okay, not exactly..) then failing all that, it's not VMC.

(Thinking about it theis whole topic is a bit like passing one's driving test and wondering what everybody else might be doing!)

My aspirations (at the moment) is getting some share in something (like a Piper Warrior or similar low wing 4 seater) and try going up two or three times a month. Having said that I'd expect not to go up due to weather some of that time. Also, if I went up too often I'd be missing out with the fun I could be having going away for weekends with my lovely wife. (I know too that my 'flying money' would have to be balanced with justification with other things too which she would like - fair enough).

I'm lucky in having flexibility in what I do, so I'd expect to take off the odd 'CAVOK' day and go up for a couple of hours midweek too, but not too often so that I wouldn't let people down.

These are but my aspirations, and I hope that I don't get put off by the few, or be suckered into the idea that it just isn't fun, or priced out by clubs, checkrides and endless IMC weather.

Will I go for IMC rating? Probably, more for that want of learning and to be a better pilot - I don't think I'd choose to go up if I knew it would be IMC, it's best to have it as a reserve.

T.

[Whirlybird]

Bose has indeed deleted everything he posted. A little extreme, perhaps. But anyway, to get this thread back on some sort of track....

I spent the first couple of winters after I got my PPL fretting about how little flying I managed to do. I think it's inevitable really in this country - short days, poor weather. I finally realised it doesn't have to be a problem. Do other things in the winter, and save the flying money. Once spring comes along, all you'll need is a short flight with an instructor to get current again. It's not that big a deal

Use the winter to plan what to do with your 20 hours a year, if that's all you can afford in time and/or money. Some ideas....

1) Instead of a short flight every week over the same area, do a longer one every couple of weeks, and go to a different airfield each time. In most areas of the country, there are an awful lot of airfields an hour or so from your starting point.

2) Get a flying buddy and do the above, flying one leg each. Half the cost, half the work, twice the fun, and you can do it twice as often.

3) Get a new rating - IMC, night, taildragger etc. Do it because you want to, not necessarily because you'll use it.

4) Take a weekend away flying, or a few days. If you can, and are confident enough, go to Ireland or the continent. But even just flying around the mainland UK will do. There's something very different about touring, never knowing where you'll end up staying. It becomes an adventure!

5) Fly something new - helicopter, microlight, seaplane, glider. Just try it to see what it's like.

6) Enter a competition - Dawn to Dusk, Top Nav, one of the air rallies. Or see if you can't get to navigate for someone in an air race (I must try that one sometime!)

I'm sure some other people can think of loads more.

Just remember, whatever some people on here might think, flying 20 hours a year doesn't make you a bad pilot, or mean that you're doomed to boredom and giving up. It just means you need to make every hour count. But you do that already, don't you? :ok:

[Rod1]

May I thank a few people?

Firstly, the people who tried to help answer the question I posed. I have posted an idea on the PFA site, and have had some positive feedback from an influential person from PFA world to say it is interesting. I hope we can do something to keep some of the pilots in the system that would ordinarily drop out, which will be good for us all.

Secondly, the sub plot. This turned into one of the most amusing threads I have ever read, thank you for the entertainment. Fortunately I copied most of it before BRL (quite rightly) stepped in,

Thirdly, to Whirlybird and a few others for restoring my faith in humanity after all the c**p. Are you up at the hill this weekend? If you are I will buy you a coffee.

Rod1

[Flyin'Dutch']

Rod1 wrote:
I used to know two retired gents who would fly min hours a year under the old rules. Both would turn up and do check rides in a 4 seater with the other in the back. They would then fly 5 hours each P1 with the other in the aircraft. As soon as both had the 5 hours, normally 1 to 2 weeks, both would vanish to the next year. During the 5 hours each they would practice all aspects of the basic PPL. They kept this up for many years, but JAR finished them off, along with many others.

Rod1

Rod,

That is not the fault of JAR but that of a poor understanding of the rules.

They could have done a checkride with an examiner and then do their 5 hours each for the same expenditure.

FD

[Whirlybird]

Rod1,

"The hill"? As in Tatenhill? I'm supposed to be instructing there on Saturday morning. But then, I was supposed to be at Sheffield today, and with winds forecast of 18G32, my day's been cancelled. :{ And there's a humongous low pressure system moving this way, so it'll probably be getting worse over the weekend. :{ :{ :{ However, if I am there I'll certainly take you up on that coffee. :ok:

[Flyin'Dutch']

BRL, if you think I'm advertising, I suppose you're right. I'll delete that last paragraph if you really, really, really want me to

You are and should know better.

[tonyhalsall]

I think the point about this thread that Rod was looking at was 'value for money.'
We are all different people and live our lives in a way that is right for us and not for other people. The same is true in flying and if we did not enjoy what we did then we would pack it in - this, I think, is where Rod is heading.
I think I am fairly typical (edit - in the reasons why I lapsed) in as much as once I had achieved my PPL aged 26 I just about stayed current for five years, lapsed the next four years, re-validated, just about stayed current and finally lapsed again two years after that in my late thirties because I felt that I was achieving nothing other than keeping what I already had and spending £100 in cash each time I went to the airport (Blackpool).
A couple of years later I stumbled across a private flying strip and was introduced to a whole new world of Permit flying and despite the fact that hiring was not possible - the fun and thrill and minimal expense of Permit aircraft gave me a buzz which I retain to this day - 8 years on !
Personally I believe that most PPLs lapse because the box was ticked and the way forward seems a bit foggy and the PFA and BMAA need to be broadcasting far and wide that if you just want to fly for fun then you can achieve much more for your money in the Permit world.
This is not detracting from those who get their buzz from flying fast and complex aircraft in marginal conditions or at night the Permit world will never satisfy those aspirations. I believe the Permit Associations should be targetting those who are lapsing and losing the will/motivation to continue flying through any combination of financial, family or work issues or just because the renting of Club aircraft is no longer giving any feeling of self satisfaction at the end of a cross country.

Rod seems to have ascertained that a typical PPL budgets between £2,000 - £5,000 a year on flying depending on his/her family and work committments. It will be interesting to see some calculations (based on broad generalisations I know) to compare how that budget can be spent to provide a better and more satidfying flying experience - IF - your thing is just 'flying for fun.'

[Whirlybird]

OK, FD, fair enough; it's gone.

[rustle]

Rod seems to have ascertained that a typical PPL budgets between £2,000 - £5,000 a year on flying depending on his/her family and work committments.

How has this been "ascertained"? (Or did you mean guessed?)

There hasn't been a question on here or on FLYER about how much anyone spends on flying per annum, nor could I easily find such a question on the PFA bulletin board. So how has it been ascertained?

WTF is a typical PPL? A student? An owner? A hirer? A PFA member? An aeros god? I don't understand what a "typical" something is when there are so many variants that nothing is "typical" at all.

What's the real agenda here chaps? :hmm:

[Rod1]

Hi Rustle,

The original post was an educated guess; it seems to be about right from the comments above. If you assume a hire rate of £100 solo and £120 dual plus maps etc then you are looking at about £2000 - £2500. It is not important if it is more, but any plan must work for this range.

If you have a look over on the PFA site you will see what I have in mind. If the PFA back the idea (which is looking ok at the moment) then an effort will be made create a” low hour PPL support package” to encourage these VFR / Day pilots that it is possible to do a lot more, and join an active support network, for the money available. This I hope will get the PFA more members and the flying community more pilots, by keeping some of the ones which would have dropped out.

Tony did this all by himself and he is typical of the people we could help. The problem is most such pilots do not know the options exist which is why we need to up the profile in a professional way. It will require a lot of volunteers and a lot of time but we might just make a difference. None of this is aimed at doing any damage to the rights of IR pilots.

Would you like to help?

Rod1

[Flyin'Dutch']

Rod1

Could you post a link to the specific PFA page.

Had a look as I wanted to put a link up here but can not see it so quickly.

Thanks

FD

[Rod1]

http://www.pfa.org.uk/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000708

Rod1

[IO540]

Rod

I am still not clear about why you asked the original question.

The subject of why people give up, and what can be done to improve things, has beed discussed here a lot before, and it generated very long threads. My recollection is that there is a lot less agreement on the former than on the latter, but it's rather academic since very little can be done about the latter, in the UK climate (by "climate" I don't necessarily mean just weather; I am including attitudes also).

There is IMHO little point in establishing averages, for reasons I already gave. There are too many diverse groups, operating diverse plane types in diverse circumstances (including very different levels of security and future-proofing) and unsuprisingly having diverse attitudes.

A few random comments on recent posts:

JAA has been blamed for the decline in new PPL issue numbers (evidence: CAA website) in recent years but IMHO this is bogus. And as FD points out, you don't need to do any flying. If somebody had to stop flying under JAA, it probably means he felt he would have had no chance of passing a check flight. Biannual flights are a good thing IMHO and the FAA (under which 75% of the known GA universe flies) has had them for many years. In fact I can't see what JAA has done to significantly increase costs.

IFR isn't about flying in marginal weather or in the dark. IFR is all about being able to fly in glorious warm sunshine, above the clouds, when those forced to go VFR are stuck between the clouds and the hills, scud running in often cr*p visibility and having to divert because they can't continue. The enroute strategy under IFR is to always avoid IMC, not least because it brings icing and makes passengers puke up. The IMC Rating gives you a part of this great capability, but only a part because one cannot go into Class A and one does not get any kind of whole-route clearance.

None of this is aimed at doing any damage to the rights of IR pilots

But the two are linked. If you own a 1910 Bentley and drive it 10 times a year on sunny Sundays, you are benefitting from all the other drivers supporting the road system. Strip flyers tend to think that the rest of GA can vanish and it won't affect them, but it will because this is a tightly regulated sphere and everything is wrapped up together. If you deregulate VFR into some sort of low level NPPL system, you can be sure that IFR capability will be sacrificed on the altar of the regulatory bartering between different nations, or even within a single regulatory body. This will strip out practically all utility value out of GA and eventually the activity will be confined to a few bearded pilots flying out of their freehold farm strips. This type of flying attracts very little public interest which will in turn isolate GA further from those who would actually like to get into it. It will kill off flight training which will cause the whole scene to die out as fast as those (often already elderly) participants leave flying due to age related issues. So maintaining GA airfields, IFR facilities, and VFR+IFR training facilities is vital to all - much as those flying off farm strips might think they are invincible.

[Rod1]

IO540,

I think there is a difference between us on what flying a permit aircraft is all about. You view it as something which happens on private strips, and some of it does. I am based on a licensed airfield which has about as many permit types as C of A types. Increasing the permit types by 5% would make no difference at all to airfield operations.

I am only one person and I know from experience that there are very few people fighting the GA corner. All I am attempting to do is reduce the high drop out rate by a small amount. If 10% of the pilots that give up each year can be saved and persuaded to join the PFA and carry on flying then I think the PFA would be very happy and we would have achieved something worthwile.

I do not think that the above will reduce the number of IR rated pilots by any at all. It is possible that the onerous financial burden on such pilots will grow to such an extent that you would need a £25000 budget to support your chosen type of flying, but again what I am planning will make no difference as the change in total numbers will be too small.

As far as I am concerned all Pilots are Pilots, it does not mater if you are talking the world aerobatic champion or a guy with a micro, all are important. If the right to fly IFR was threatened I would be supportive. The IR group have very good representation and long may that continue.

It is hard to understand why trying to help pilots in a small practical way threaten so many egos. I can understand if you own a gas guzzling dinosaur which you have invested huge money in and it is depreciating at an astonishing rate why people would be upset, but I do not have any control over this.

Tony has been in the position that my target group is in. Did his flying career cause the end of IFR flight as we know it??

One last point. If the PFA grows and gains more power with our European masters what do you think will be on the agenda. Night and IFR in suitable aircraft would have to be high on the list. In the US may permit aircraft are flown in IMC, and those same designs are in use in the UK. We will then have the possibility of IFR flight at a price that your ordinary Joe can afford. This would be a good thing, right?

Rod1

[IO540]

I must be going thick but I think you need to spell out exactly what you are proposing.

Everybody wants GA to prosper and egos are nothing to do with that.

Real IFR will always be expensive; I doubt anybody does IFR at the European airways level for less than £10,000/year (which could be the total cost of operating a group shared aircraft). This group will always be small but not because of the cost; it will be small because flying at this level involves the constant pushing of so many rocks up mountains.

Improvements suggested in the past have included:

Training from non-licensed airfields (according to a CAA survey, most flying schools did not actually object to this)

Allowing experienced PPLs to train (most schools would object vigorously)

Schools to embrace experienced PPLs, to be used as mentors for students but more particularly fresh PPL holders (would not go down well with most instructors)

Modernisation of the training syllabus, with GPS and modern weather services, to enable a fresh PPL to do something more than a local burger run (lots of objections to this one)

Modernisation of the GA fleet, to attract more affluent and more modern customers (opposition from traditional pilots, and anyway who is going to pay for it?)

An interesting thing would be to examine why for example Greece has such a near-dead GA scene, despite fantastic weather and utility value (all those small islands). In fact GA is relatively (to the UK) dead in most of Europe.

[rustle]

http://www.pfa.org.uk/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000708

Rod1

Got to admit when I read that thread I thought it was more to do with getting people to join the PFA than anything else...

The first thing making me think that being the title: "How do we get more pilot members?"

Obviously from my point of view AOPA, PPL-IR and CPA fulfil my needs :)

[shortstripper]

So maintaining GA airfields, IFR facilities, and VFR+IFR training facilities is vital to all - much as those flying off farm strips might think they are invincible.

What makes you think strip owners have the view that they are invincible? or that they don't support the rest of GA as best they can??? I'm sure few strip owners think that at all? Why else do they guard their privacy so rigorously if they felt invincible? I for one feel very threatened at the moment with talk of Mode S, local council anti airfield policies, EASA changes ect ect. I do all that I can to promote GA and support any appeal put out to lobby. Financially I admit I cannot do much to support GA as a whole, but at least I am here, doing what I can, in my own little way. It's better that the likes of me are at least flying and supporting, rather than being lost to GA by being priced out.

SS