A light aircraft is not a means to travel, when weather is the least concern for any other mode of transport.
Light aircraft: a rapid means of locomotion for those not in a hurry...
Mine, alas, is strictly a toy in spite of great ambitions of business flying.
In my early aviation "career" (a term I use rather loosely!), I had a C-150 based in Alexandria, Ontario and a girlfriend (now my wife) based in Kingston, Ontario.
A few interesting observations: one, in a stiff headwind I could just about keep up with the trucks (sorry, lorries) on the 401. The Turbo Train would blast by me however, as would some of the scofflaws on the road.
Second, once I flew out on a weekend to see her. Unfortunately the weather went sour by the end of the weekend. I had to leave the plane there, and take the train home (with connection in Montreal, very long...). I paid for a week's parking for the plane, and two train fares (home and back to fetch the plane). Daily parking is a lot more expensive than annual tie-down fees, per day. I paid something like $21 for parking (this was in 1982), plus I forget how much for train fare. And it was a royal PITA.
Third, airports are not always conveniently located. Kingston airport for instance was maybe 15 min. from my GF's apartment. Throw in a half hour to drive to the plane and another half hour to prep it, fuel it and file a flight plan, and 15 min. at the other end to park it and tie it down, and I've just burned up 1h30 min. The drive to Kingston was about 3 hours by car at reasonable speeds (i.e. one that won't get you arrested). The plane, with no headwind, would just about do 100 mph, and the car averaged about 55 mph. The road there was relatively straight. So the plane would take just under an hour and a half of flying, plus an hour and a half of all the other stuff... result is that door to door, the car was just about as quick. Throw in a headwind and all bets are off...
Still no better way to put a smile on my face than a couple of hours aloft though
