AOPA claim 70% drop out rate
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540,
If you are right...
Why are helicopter schools struggling to get students, except possibly in the south-east of England and Southern Ireland, the areas with money, perhaps? Elsewhere we have modern machines, people love trial lessons, but the only reason ever given for not taking it up is "I can't afford it".
Why aren't women attracted to the helicopter scene? I ak them, when their husbands, boyfriends etc come for trial lessons..."Why don't you have a go". The answer, almost universally... "Oh no, I couldn't". An increase in women's self-confidence has not come about with time moving on, or not to any huge extent. Unfortunate (and to me, incomprehensible) but true.
Why are the majority of new helicopter students still over 40? And telling me they couldn't afford it when they were younger?
Why do most of them still want to learn on one of our fairly old and somewhat uncomfortable R22s, when we have two new and comfortable R44s, one fuel-injected. And why is the R22 what most of them are planning on buying. Could it be...the expense?
The helicopter social scene - or parts of it - are pretty cool - fly into nice hotels etc. So why aren't women and young men flocking to it in droves?
Sorry mate, but you're over-simplifying a rather complex issue.
If you are right...
Why are helicopter schools struggling to get students, except possibly in the south-east of England and Southern Ireland, the areas with money, perhaps? Elsewhere we have modern machines, people love trial lessons, but the only reason ever given for not taking it up is "I can't afford it".
Why aren't women attracted to the helicopter scene? I ak them, when their husbands, boyfriends etc come for trial lessons..."Why don't you have a go". The answer, almost universally... "Oh no, I couldn't". An increase in women's self-confidence has not come about with time moving on, or not to any huge extent. Unfortunate (and to me, incomprehensible) but true.
Why are the majority of new helicopter students still over 40? And telling me they couldn't afford it when they were younger?
Why do most of them still want to learn on one of our fairly old and somewhat uncomfortable R22s, when we have two new and comfortable R44s, one fuel-injected. And why is the R22 what most of them are planning on buying. Could it be...the expense?
The helicopter social scene - or parts of it - are pretty cool - fly into nice hotels etc. So why aren't women and young men flocking to it in droves?
Sorry mate, but you're over-simplifying a rather complex issue.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirly I never pretended to write an exhaustive treatise on "why" (even if I knew "why") but anyway I think helis are a world with different variables.
My involvement with helis has been only very peripheral but they seem to have the following characteristics which differ a lot from fixed wing GA
1) They shake and rattle like hell and generally feel like they aren't going to make the trip - unless you are looking at a £1M+ turbine job
2) They have much more utility value (than FW) for short (under 200nm) trips, and they can land more or less anywhere, but are no good for real touring due to low speed, poor range and no autopilots.
3) There is no IFR capability, the IR(H) is hard, and (unlike FW) not many of the pilots are willing to fly VFR in IMC. This leads to scud running as the solution to all weather issues.
4) They are very tiring to fly any distance
5) They cost about 2x more than FW, and this ratio holds at the turbine level of both activities too.
I think it's a very different market. There is a considerable fun element for local sightseeing trips but the utility value hangs almost entirely on getting value out of short quick trips, and IMHO most normal people would soon get fed up with flying to nice hotels for a 4 course meal. France is only just doable.
It looks a strictly "local pleasure flight" type of market, and beyond that the utility value hangs on the punter having a business of just the right type which needs short notice travel in the 100-200nm radius and there is a helipad nearby.
A lot of single high earning men like to play with helis, at the £300/hour level, the way that those types of men like to play with jet-skis and powerboats etc etc, but few women are into macho hobbies like that. I don't think it's a female confidence issue.
At the top of the market, twin IFR capable turbines, it's very different but one could say the same about exec jets - no shortage of money at the very top, ever. And not many owners fly it themselves.
My involvement with helis has been only very peripheral but they seem to have the following characteristics which differ a lot from fixed wing GA
1) They shake and rattle like hell and generally feel like they aren't going to make the trip - unless you are looking at a £1M+ turbine job
2) They have much more utility value (than FW) for short (under 200nm) trips, and they can land more or less anywhere, but are no good for real touring due to low speed, poor range and no autopilots.
3) There is no IFR capability, the IR(H) is hard, and (unlike FW) not many of the pilots are willing to fly VFR in IMC. This leads to scud running as the solution to all weather issues.
4) They are very tiring to fly any distance
5) They cost about 2x more than FW, and this ratio holds at the turbine level of both activities too.
I think it's a very different market. There is a considerable fun element for local sightseeing trips but the utility value hangs almost entirely on getting value out of short quick trips, and IMHO most normal people would soon get fed up with flying to nice hotels for a 4 course meal. France is only just doable.
It looks a strictly "local pleasure flight" type of market, and beyond that the utility value hangs on the punter having a business of just the right type which needs short notice travel in the 100-200nm radius and there is a helipad nearby.
A lot of single high earning men like to play with helis, at the £300/hour level, the way that those types of men like to play with jet-skis and powerboats etc etc, but few women are into macho hobbies like that. I don't think it's a female confidence issue.
At the top of the market, twin IFR capable turbines, it's very different but one could say the same about exec jets - no shortage of money at the very top, ever. And not many owners fly it themselves.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Blood? Yes. Young? as old as I feel today.
Yep. IO540 seems (to me) to have summed up why I didn't go flying until recently (if 3 axis Microlight is called flying round here). He may still have a point.
20 years ago, I tried the Ce**na trail flight route and yes, sitting in a damp phone box smelling of something not completely unlike pee whilst an engine that probably got built around the same time as I was born was "fired" up - adding oil smoke and petrol fumes to the mix - seemed somewhat less than aspirational to my idealistic 30 year old mind.
Then I found out that smells, heat and bouncy air made me less than enthusiastic about the actual flying, although I was proud enough to not actually throw up whilst in the air.
Plus the seats didn't adjust and my legs were too short without cushions and the windscreen misted up and..... well, imagine a flying Ford Popular. You know, the side-valve model...with no heater..or wipers...or brakes and with no front seats, just some foam extending the back ones forward - oh and a bonnet which slopes upwards, blocking the important bits of the view.
Now 20 years later I am learning to fly something smaller and younger. Granted the engine is out of a ski-doo but it has overhead valves and new fangled water cooling - allegedly.
On the downside the seats still don't adjust but the designer was smaller. And while I'm at it the heater is like the one on my old VW Beetle but the exhaust is stainless steel so it "probably won't crack" - but just in case it does there is a little white dot stuck to the dashboard or whatever it's called and look, it's a muddy grey colour. Hmm. (Note to self, will it turn black faster than I turn green?)
But relax fella, this is all by design, that lack of creature comforts is to do with the fact that two up, the aeroplane in question is illegal with more than a teacup of fuel in the tank unless I lose weight some weight.
Seriously. 20 years ago I was more aspirational and I needed to be able to see the payoff at the outset - sadly the advantages and the glamour of those wee smells and that 1950's technology just passed me by.
Now, 20 years later I think I am better able to do things which don't make sense to my head. I don't need to see the future but in any case things have moved on...slowly.
It is a long standing ambition after all.
20 years ago, I tried the Ce**na trail flight route and yes, sitting in a damp phone box smelling of something not completely unlike pee whilst an engine that probably got built around the same time as I was born was "fired" up - adding oil smoke and petrol fumes to the mix - seemed somewhat less than aspirational to my idealistic 30 year old mind.
Then I found out that smells, heat and bouncy air made me less than enthusiastic about the actual flying, although I was proud enough to not actually throw up whilst in the air.
Plus the seats didn't adjust and my legs were too short without cushions and the windscreen misted up and..... well, imagine a flying Ford Popular. You know, the side-valve model...with no heater..or wipers...or brakes and with no front seats, just some foam extending the back ones forward - oh and a bonnet which slopes upwards, blocking the important bits of the view.
Now 20 years later I am learning to fly something smaller and younger. Granted the engine is out of a ski-doo but it has overhead valves and new fangled water cooling - allegedly.
On the downside the seats still don't adjust but the designer was smaller. And while I'm at it the heater is like the one on my old VW Beetle but the exhaust is stainless steel so it "probably won't crack" - but just in case it does there is a little white dot stuck to the dashboard or whatever it's called and look, it's a muddy grey colour. Hmm. (Note to self, will it turn black faster than I turn green?)
But relax fella, this is all by design, that lack of creature comforts is to do with the fact that two up, the aeroplane in question is illegal with more than a teacup of fuel in the tank unless I lose weight some weight.
Seriously. 20 years ago I was more aspirational and I needed to be able to see the payoff at the outset - sadly the advantages and the glamour of those wee smells and that 1950's technology just passed me by.
Now, 20 years later I think I am better able to do things which don't make sense to my head. I don't need to see the future but in any case things have moved on...slowly.
It is a long standing ambition after all.
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost
Just one thing. Yes, money is a huge issue, plus the availability (or lack of) of aircraft for you to take away for the weekend.
Biggest barrier to my flying ? Got the cash, it's the wx. Unless I book to fly EVERY weekend, ideally both days, then I loose lots of days due to wx. Giving every weekend to flying is impracticle, with family commitments \ DIY etc etc.
So that's your attrition rate. If you are not significantly moneyed, don't have an IR or can't commit every weekend, then the amount of flying open to you, is pretty minimal.
Hence it's easier to use that cash to go for long city breaks away and luxury holidays, rather than a £300 round trip to somewhere it would've cost you £30 in petrol to get to (and would've got you there reliably).
Biggest barrier to my flying ? Got the cash, it's the wx. Unless I book to fly EVERY weekend, ideally both days, then I loose lots of days due to wx. Giving every weekend to flying is impracticle, with family commitments \ DIY etc etc.
So that's your attrition rate. If you are not significantly moneyed, don't have an IR or can't commit every weekend, then the amount of flying open to you, is pretty minimal.
Hence it's easier to use that cash to go for long city breaks away and luxury holidays, rather than a £300 round trip to somewhere it would've cost you £30 in petrol to get to (and would've got you there reliably).
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't going to put salary figures on this because last time I did I got severely jumped on by a certain GA "sub-constituency" but now that others have done it for me...
The "absolute highest earners" are not £50k. They are on £100k+ and many businessmen are on £200k-£500k. These are the people with turboprops and jets. They are the ones driving £80k+ cars, of which you probably see a few per minute on the M25.
But even much further down the "machinery" scale the costs are still amazingly high. An old piston twin, say a 1970 Aztec, can easily cost you £20k a year just in maintenance, and somebody with any sort of family will need to be on £100k to even barely afford that, and do some flying as well (at some 30 USG/hour of avgas plus IFR route charges).
Somebody on £50k with a home to run will be only just able to fly something like a PA28, maybe 50hrs/year.
I don't think many people under £100k are seriously playing with helicopters, and the huge majority of £100k earners will be male.
For fixed wing, the only way for someone on say £25k to do any flying is through a syndicate and even then it will be on a minimal currency. Unless they fly a microlight type or similar, but then you don't get most of the utility value for various reasons.
With helicopters, the figures are going to be twice as bad. I see a lot of them at my airfield and I see the people who fly them.
With both rotary and fixed wing, one can escape much of the limitations but only through the application of a huge amount of cash (turbines). This kind of cash is beyond 99% of FW GA and is beyond perhaps 80% of rotary GA. The remaining 20% of heli users are seriously rich people who get tremendous value from zooming along in virtually any weather, from anywhere to anywhere including their back garden.
The "absolute highest earners" are not £50k. They are on £100k+ and many businessmen are on £200k-£500k. These are the people with turboprops and jets. They are the ones driving £80k+ cars, of which you probably see a few per minute on the M25.
But even much further down the "machinery" scale the costs are still amazingly high. An old piston twin, say a 1970 Aztec, can easily cost you £20k a year just in maintenance, and somebody with any sort of family will need to be on £100k to even barely afford that, and do some flying as well (at some 30 USG/hour of avgas plus IFR route charges).
Somebody on £50k with a home to run will be only just able to fly something like a PA28, maybe 50hrs/year.
I don't think many people under £100k are seriously playing with helicopters, and the huge majority of £100k earners will be male.
For fixed wing, the only way for someone on say £25k to do any flying is through a syndicate and even then it will be on a minimal currency. Unless they fly a microlight type or similar, but then you don't get most of the utility value for various reasons.
With helicopters, the figures are going to be twice as bad. I see a lot of them at my airfield and I see the people who fly them.
With both rotary and fixed wing, one can escape much of the limitations but only through the application of a huge amount of cash (turbines). This kind of cash is beyond 99% of FW GA and is beyond perhaps 80% of rotary GA. The remaining 20% of heli users are seriously rich people who get tremendous value from zooming along in virtually any weather, from anywhere to anywhere including their back garden.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Ang on. What happened to wanting to fly just for the sheer joy of 3-dimensional freedom? Not transport, not touring, just 'aviating'
IO540 is no doubt correct with his financial analysys of who can afford what, but there are loads of people at the bottom of his scale on relatively low salaries who have an absolute ball most weekends in group-owned aeroplanes like J3 Cubs, Citabrias, Tipsy Nippers and other PFA types. They bimble about looking at the view, dropping into farm strips, or enjoying simple aeros all for a similar cost to running a small car.
No-one in their right senses flys a club spamcan for this kind of flying - not for long, anyway. You'd die of boredom while rapidly emtying your wallet.
I'm not in the least interested in 'touring' (boring starightand level for hours? no thanks!). I love aeroplanes of character, aeroplanes that handle well, that are fun just to fly for flying's sake, and which are aerobatic. For the last 29 years have had a share in a dH Chipmunk, and that presses all the aviation buttons for me.
I don't care that it has no heater
I don't care that it's noisy
I don't care that it has no storage space
I don't care that I have to crawl under it after every flight wiping the oil off (OK, I do, but I'm prepared to put up with that)
I don't care that it only has a 90knt cruise
It is ALWAYS fun just to get airbourne in it. It blatters ans shakes and 'talks to you' through the stick and rudder. It is the sweetest handling flying machine you could wish to strap on. It does lovely, graceful, 'Sunday Afternoon' aeros, and is always a challenge to land perfectly (but relatively forgiving of mistakes). It gets into and out of farm strips with ease. It generates interest wherever it goes. It looks like a little Spitfire.
It oozes character. And it is affordable.
If today's generation isn't turned on by any of the above.... the loss is truly theirs.
SSD
IO540 is no doubt correct with his financial analysys of who can afford what, but there are loads of people at the bottom of his scale on relatively low salaries who have an absolute ball most weekends in group-owned aeroplanes like J3 Cubs, Citabrias, Tipsy Nippers and other PFA types. They bimble about looking at the view, dropping into farm strips, or enjoying simple aeros all for a similar cost to running a small car.
No-one in their right senses flys a club spamcan for this kind of flying - not for long, anyway. You'd die of boredom while rapidly emtying your wallet.
I'm not in the least interested in 'touring' (boring starightand level for hours? no thanks!). I love aeroplanes of character, aeroplanes that handle well, that are fun just to fly for flying's sake, and which are aerobatic. For the last 29 years have had a share in a dH Chipmunk, and that presses all the aviation buttons for me.
I don't care that it has no heater
I don't care that it's noisy
I don't care that it has no storage space
I don't care that I have to crawl under it after every flight wiping the oil off (OK, I do, but I'm prepared to put up with that)
I don't care that it only has a 90knt cruise
It is ALWAYS fun just to get airbourne in it. It blatters ans shakes and 'talks to you' through the stick and rudder. It is the sweetest handling flying machine you could wish to strap on. It does lovely, graceful, 'Sunday Afternoon' aeros, and is always a challenge to land perfectly (but relatively forgiving of mistakes). It gets into and out of farm strips with ease. It generates interest wherever it goes. It looks like a little Spitfire.
It oozes character. And it is affordable.
If today's generation isn't turned on by any of the above.... the loss is truly theirs.
SSD
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: France
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost every GA airfield I have flown into in the last five years revels in being filthy, costly, and ugly. There's something approaching delight in the way that flying clubs embrace dirty portakabins and furniture which a charity would condemn to the skip.
Yes, PA28s and C152s are appalling aircraft to fly, and people who train on DHC1s might keep flying much longer, but the sheer discomfort - and delight in discomfort - which UK GA thrives on, explain the whole thing for me.
Yes, PA28s and C152s are appalling aircraft to fly, and people who train on DHC1s might keep flying much longer, but the sheer discomfort - and delight in discomfort - which UK GA thrives on, explain the whole thing for me.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but the sheer discomfort - and delight in discomfort - which UK GA thrives on, explain the whole thing for me.
I flew a very nice to fly PFA type recently (a tandem) and the freezing draught coming in through the holes would have frozen my b011ocks off on any significant flight.
IO540 is no doubt correct with his financial analysys of who can afford what, but there are loads of people at the bottom of his scale on relatively low salaries who have an absolute ball most weekends in group-owned aeroplanes like J3 Cubs, Citabrias, Tipsy Nippers and other PFA types. They bimble about looking at the view, dropping into farm strips, or enjoying simple aeros all for a similar cost to running a small car.
Also most people can't spend whole weekends on flying as a social activity. It's a bit like sailing - it takes over your life. The people that do this are very dedicated but the source of newcomers to the activity is pretty tight. I knew a whole lot of these types when I used to windsurf at a certain lake, managed by a very tight sailing club. The participants are either single men, or whole families.
Underneath all this, the PPL training sausage machine grinds away happily, churning out some 3000 new PPLs every year, most of which never get anywhere. But the schools don't mind - it's not their business mandate to turn out pilots, never mind ones who get value out of it. If every PPL student was made to sit down at the outset and had the options explained to him, relative to his means (money and time), bit like you sit down with an IFA advising you on your investments
most would leave immediately.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shaggy Sheep Driver, I'm with you 100% on this one except for me it's a Yak52 and a super-cub.
With aeroplanes like those (and Stampes and Jungmans and plenty of others), who could possibly tire of aviating?
SSD
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know I've always wondered if there might be some mileage in setting up a club to teach PPL completely on 'traditional' types. The Super Cub is the plane I'd have in mind simply because it's cheaper to run than the Chipmunk for example but the J3 and Tigermoth would also be ideal.
I know a few clubs that offer that, the Tiger Club at Cambridge and Clacton Aero club as well but they are few and far between. They are so much better than beaten up old PA28s/C152s.
Do it in something like the Aviat Husky and you could teach the IMC rating and IR as well as farmstrip flying, it would be great.
I know a few clubs that offer that, the Tiger Club at Cambridge and Clacton Aero club as well but they are few and far between. They are so much better than beaten up old PA28s/C152s.
Do it in something like the Aviat Husky and you could teach the IMC rating and IR as well as farmstrip flying, it would be great.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also most people can't spend whole weekends on flying as a social activity. It's a bit like sailing - it takes over your life. The people that do this are very dedicated but the source of newcomers to the activity is pretty tight. I knew a whole lot of these types when I used to windsurf at a certain lake, managed by a very tight sailing club. The participants are either single men, or whole families.
I fly the Chippy for up to a few hours every 3 weeks or so on average, with the occasional longer stint. Not a big time comittment - I have lots of other stuff in my life.
Underneath all this, the PPL training sausage machine grinds away happily, churning out some 3000 new PPLs every year, most of which never get anywhere. But the schools don't mind - it's not their business mandate to turn out pilots, never mind ones who get value out of it. If every PPL student was made to sit down at the outset and had the options explained to him, relative to his means (money and time), bit like you sit down with an IFA advising you on your investments most would leave immediately.
Luckily, insted of the 'IFA' I read Bach's 'A Gift of Wings' which inspired me. It lead to two of the best things I ever did in my life - learn to fly and then buy into the Chippy.
I think the UK flying school business is these days a feeder to the airlines, too many of the instructors are low-hours hour-builders with no interest in flying for its own sake. In 1979 when I did my PPL, most of the instructors were real enthusiasts, with tailwheel and aeros experience.
That's denied to most new trainees these days. No wonder they give up.
SSD
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Underneath all this, the PPL training sausage machine grinds away happily, churning out some 3000 new PPLs every year, most of which never get anywhere.
They've got their PPL, which is exactly what they set out to do, and next they're going to do climbing or diving or whatever's next on their list of things to achieve.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why so few women?
Interesting thread.
Why are so few women interested in flying?
Well, here is my theory...
Little girls (usually) like to play nicely with dolls.
Little boys (usually) like to dissect worms and take things to bits.
(Source: simple observation over 41 years. (NB there are exceptions.))
Add into this the dangerous, smelly, rotting (usually bitterly cold) + dirty environment that GA inhabits coupled with the prospect of being harrassed by oil stained anorakky aero-bores and most of the girls would rather be shopping. (So Scooter-girl tells me...)
Maybe they have a point?
SB
Why are so few women interested in flying?
Well, here is my theory...
Little girls (usually) like to play nicely with dolls.
Little boys (usually) like to dissect worms and take things to bits.
(Source: simple observation over 41 years. (NB there are exceptions.))
Add into this the dangerous, smelly, rotting (usually bitterly cold) + dirty environment that GA inhabits coupled with the prospect of being harrassed by oil stained anorakky aero-bores and most of the girls would rather be shopping. (So Scooter-girl tells me...)
Maybe they have a point?
SB
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: England
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
continuing the challenge
Having followed this thread I have to agree that many people's flying slows down due to the three Ps- running out of people to take, places to go or pennies to pay for it.
I spoke to a flight school owner once who had one wall covered in first solo shirt tails and the other wall held certificates marking the completion of a PPL. The difference was about 4:1. We spoke about the reasons why only a quarter of the people who go solo go on to complete their licence, money was one factor, workload was another with the demands of the studying putting some people off and for others it was simply that going solo was such an achievement they were happy with that. The cross country solo was another point where he shed customers as that was also considered a high point.
I wonder if a newly qualified PPL upon completion of the course and having their licence issued sometimes doesnt feel ready for the responsibility of going further afield and taking family up with them. I have seen clubs who offer advanced PPLs and also structured hour building where even though holding a PPL they get to do zone transits and long cross countrys with an instructor rather than being expected to find their own challenges with new and harder flights. These kinds of stepping stones give people a new challenge to aim for and a purpose to continue flying and importantly continue learning. I have watched people hour building for their CPL doing the same short hop 50 times, no real challenge and i wonder what thrill they get from flying that way and how long they will remain motivated.
My passion for flight is similar to shaggy sheep's, it's how flying makes you feel. i dont own a house or a car as i sold them to follow my dream of flying but soon i will own a share in a chipmunk and i feel like i finally have my priorites right! I have given up trying to justify giving up a well paid job and security to follow my dream, most of you on here will understand it completely and if you have to explain to someone how it feels to fly they may will never 'get it'. One of my biggest thrills in flying was when i landed after taking my best friend up for an open cockpit flight in a 1929 Travelair 4000 and she burst into tears from the sheer exhilaration and said 'now i understand why you do it'.
I only have 300 hours in my log book but it includes the Travelair a Yak 52, Chipmunk, Percival Prentice, Tiger Moths a Beech 18 and Pitts. I have tailwheel and aeros experience, microlights and gliders and don't think i will ever get over the thrill of being in the air. I have worked alongside Integrated ATPL students who are so focused on the left hand seat of an Airbus that they have never experienced the thrill of a loop or roll or have realised what the 'footrests' are for. Royal Kuwait sponsored students upon the completion of their ATPL studies are required to complete a short aerobatics course- imagine if this was compulsory for all newly licensed commercial pilots! Maybe then the BAeA wouldn't be wondering how to attract new blood into the sport.
The trouble as i see it, having flown in the states which seems far more forgiving and welcoming, is that low houred pilots over here are scared of CAS issues and that limits what they do, sticking to what is considered safe/familiar and local which soon becomes dull. The spare seats thread on here is a great way to help find a flying buddy who can help stretch your skills and imagination gently.
Secondly and its this position i find myself in, i long to instruct, to stay at the grass roots of GA, i want to give something back and to encourage others the way i was but if i ever want to afford a house and car again and not sleep in the hangar with the Chipmunk i may need to move into a different part of aviation- something that pays more. That, combined with instructors who are instructing as a stepping stone, is damaging GA, the affordability of becoming and remaining a career instructor is hard to justify and people have to move away from it, reluctantly.
And before i crawl back into my cardboard box, could we please stop saying there are no interesting women in aviation?
I have a whole collection of books ranging from Amelia Earheart and Amy Johnson to Polly Vascher that will prove there always have been interesting women in aviation. I am even contemplating starting up an Old Girls Network.
Keep enjoying the thrill, and may your Log Book become a Love Story.
Looptheloop.
I spoke to a flight school owner once who had one wall covered in first solo shirt tails and the other wall held certificates marking the completion of a PPL. The difference was about 4:1. We spoke about the reasons why only a quarter of the people who go solo go on to complete their licence, money was one factor, workload was another with the demands of the studying putting some people off and for others it was simply that going solo was such an achievement they were happy with that. The cross country solo was another point where he shed customers as that was also considered a high point.
I wonder if a newly qualified PPL upon completion of the course and having their licence issued sometimes doesnt feel ready for the responsibility of going further afield and taking family up with them. I have seen clubs who offer advanced PPLs and also structured hour building where even though holding a PPL they get to do zone transits and long cross countrys with an instructor rather than being expected to find their own challenges with new and harder flights. These kinds of stepping stones give people a new challenge to aim for and a purpose to continue flying and importantly continue learning. I have watched people hour building for their CPL doing the same short hop 50 times, no real challenge and i wonder what thrill they get from flying that way and how long they will remain motivated.
My passion for flight is similar to shaggy sheep's, it's how flying makes you feel. i dont own a house or a car as i sold them to follow my dream of flying but soon i will own a share in a chipmunk and i feel like i finally have my priorites right! I have given up trying to justify giving up a well paid job and security to follow my dream, most of you on here will understand it completely and if you have to explain to someone how it feels to fly they may will never 'get it'. One of my biggest thrills in flying was when i landed after taking my best friend up for an open cockpit flight in a 1929 Travelair 4000 and she burst into tears from the sheer exhilaration and said 'now i understand why you do it'.
I only have 300 hours in my log book but it includes the Travelair a Yak 52, Chipmunk, Percival Prentice, Tiger Moths a Beech 18 and Pitts. I have tailwheel and aeros experience, microlights and gliders and don't think i will ever get over the thrill of being in the air. I have worked alongside Integrated ATPL students who are so focused on the left hand seat of an Airbus that they have never experienced the thrill of a loop or roll or have realised what the 'footrests' are for. Royal Kuwait sponsored students upon the completion of their ATPL studies are required to complete a short aerobatics course- imagine if this was compulsory for all newly licensed commercial pilots! Maybe then the BAeA wouldn't be wondering how to attract new blood into the sport.
The trouble as i see it, having flown in the states which seems far more forgiving and welcoming, is that low houred pilots over here are scared of CAS issues and that limits what they do, sticking to what is considered safe/familiar and local which soon becomes dull. The spare seats thread on here is a great way to help find a flying buddy who can help stretch your skills and imagination gently.
Secondly and its this position i find myself in, i long to instruct, to stay at the grass roots of GA, i want to give something back and to encourage others the way i was but if i ever want to afford a house and car again and not sleep in the hangar with the Chipmunk i may need to move into a different part of aviation- something that pays more. That, combined with instructors who are instructing as a stepping stone, is damaging GA, the affordability of becoming and remaining a career instructor is hard to justify and people have to move away from it, reluctantly.
And before i crawl back into my cardboard box, could we please stop saying there are no interesting women in aviation?
I have a whole collection of books ranging from Amelia Earheart and Amy Johnson to Polly Vascher that will prove there always have been interesting women in aviation. I am even contemplating starting up an Old Girls Network. Keep enjoying the thrill, and may your Log Book become a Love Story.
Looptheloop.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid I find this thread depressing, and I'm perfectly happy with my flying, after a few years in gliders and a recently minted PPL! Apparently I'm going to be fed up of it all in 2-3 years time
But then that's the nature of internet forums - always contentious and opinionated one way or another, rarely balanced. Maybe I'll just see how it goes Fortunately i'm (temporarily?) in Aus, the rates are cheaper, my PPL cost less 'cos I could count gliding hours unlike at home (UK), the weathers ok (not as good as you might think.. but).
For my part I've finished up playing with spamcans precisely because of the waste-of-time factor in gliding, and to go places. For pure flying, the glider is still my preference, but powered offers me better value for *time*.
I also snowboard, windsurf, sail, and a few other things, very few of which have many female participants. Based on past girlfriends, I'm inclined to think that girls are (in general) more inclined towards having a go at many different things, and less likely to be goal oriented excel-at-something type personalities. Let's face it, getting (even) a PPL requires tenacity.. If you want to meet girls, take up dancing (not kididng!) Got bullied into trying it several years ago and haven't looked back
And I'm not sure I'd be too happy about a cross-chanel checkride either. But I'd want some help with the planning; My personal approach is to have a notebook prepped with a script for the flight (and the odd contingency) - expect to be on this frequency here, talk to this person for that and so on.
Lastly, on the cats: I suggest napalm - where cats are concerned, overkill is never enough
But then that's the nature of internet forums - always contentious and opinionated one way or another, rarely balanced. Maybe I'll just see how it goes
Fortunately i'm (temporarily?) in Aus, the rates are cheaper, my PPL cost less 'cos I could count gliding hours unlike at home (UK), the weathers ok (not as good as you might think.. but).For my part I've finished up playing with spamcans precisely because of the waste-of-time factor in gliding, and to go places. For pure flying, the glider is still my preference, but powered offers me better value for *time*.
I also snowboard, windsurf, sail, and a few other things, very few of which have many female participants. Based on past girlfriends, I'm inclined to think that girls are (in general) more inclined towards having a go at many different things, and less likely to be goal oriented excel-at-something type personalities. Let's face it, getting (even) a PPL requires tenacity.. If you want to meet girls, take up dancing (not kididng!) Got bullied into trying it several years ago and haven't looked back
And I'm not sure I'd be too happy about a cross-chanel checkride either. But I'd want some help with the planning; My personal approach is to have a notebook prepped with a script for the flight (and the odd contingency) - expect to be on this frequency here, talk to this person for that and so on.
Lastly, on the cats: I suggest napalm - where cats are concerned, overkill is never enough
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think scooter boy has it exactly right about girls in general It is also a genetic male thing to get focused intensely on one thing.
Yes but I am certain many expected the PPL would be more useful. As it stands, most new pilots find it utterly daunting to use it for real.
This can be addressed by mentoring (by experienced PPLs) but this raises difficult airfield-political issues because all the time the school "thinks" th student has any money left they regard him as "theirs" and want him to spend his money with *them* and not (perhaps) contributing to somebody's PPL cost sharing scheme
One could avoid that situation by structuring the training to be mostly real flying, rather than the circuit bashing which most students really hate and which just gets you sweating like a pig due to the stress, but the result would be a much more expensive PPL.
I know a few owner/pilots who did their FAA IR by "renting" an instructor and flying with him around Europe, airways, with him being legal PIC obviously, and after a few months of this you have done all you need to know AND enjoyed it all.
Some work is being done in the USA in a similar vein, where the student is taken through an integrated "ab initio PPL/IR" course using entirely scenario-based (i.e. real flying) training, in something like 50-60 hours only total time, and the results are reportedly excellent. This doesn't suprise me at all because IMHO most of the intense stuff (like flying circuits while doing the radio) doesn't really sink in because the student is totally stressed out and overloaded. One needs enroute sections to settle down and absorb the stuff.
Only if you limit yourself to burger runs and sightseeing
It is also a genetic male thing to get focused intensely on one thing.
They've got their PPL, which is exactly what they set out to do, and next they're going to do climbing or diving or whatever's next on their list of things to achieve.
This can be addressed by mentoring (by experienced PPLs) but this raises difficult airfield-political issues because all the time the school "thinks" th student has any money left they regard him as "theirs" and want him to spend his money with *them* and not (perhaps) contributing to somebody's PPL cost sharing scheme
One could avoid that situation by structuring the training to be mostly real flying, rather than the circuit bashing which most students really hate and which just gets you sweating like a pig due to the stress, but the result would be a much more expensive PPL.
I know a few owner/pilots who did their FAA IR by "renting" an instructor and flying with him around Europe, airways, with him being legal PIC obviously, and after a few months of this you have done all you need to know AND enjoyed it all.
Some work is being done in the USA in a similar vein, where the student is taken through an integrated "ab initio PPL/IR" course using entirely scenario-based (i.e. real flying) training, in something like 50-60 hours only total time, and the results are reportedly excellent. This doesn't suprise me at all because IMHO most of the intense stuff (like flying circuits while doing the radio) doesn't really sink in because the student is totally stressed out and overloaded. One needs enroute sections to settle down and absorb the stuff.
I'm afraid I find this thread depressing, and I'm perfectly happy with my flying, after a few years in gliders and a recently minted PPL! Apparently I'm going to be fed up of it all in 2-3 years time
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm inclined to think that girls are (in general) more inclined towards having a go at many different things, and less likely to be goal oriented excel-at-something type personalities.
Could be why I (a) usually fail at really excelling, and (b) am invariably broke and have no time.
could we please stop saying there are no interesting women in aviation?
There aren't. There aren't too many of their male equivalents either. But there are less of ANY types of women in aviation, because only 6% of PPLs are female, and 2-3% of commercial pilots. Those figures are virtually the same over the most of the world, and have been the same for years and years. Why? That's a topic for a whole new thread. 
Over the Christmas break I met up with a friend, a PPL who used to fly. He's given up! I asked him why. He said that he had always intended to give up at some point!!! It was something he wanted to learn how to do, but having got his PPL, it was too expensive and time-consuming, and required too much effort to be something he wanted to do on his time off. He also, interestingly, said he'd be happy to cost-share with me at any time and come as a passenger; he liked the idea of getting airborne without the work and responsibility.
Anecdotal I know, but there you have one possible reason. On a weekend, after a hard week, you can step outside for a walk, leap in the car and go for a spin, head out to the shops with no plan, get in your sailing dinghy and mess about, get on your horse and head for the hills. But you can't ever go flying without lots of preparation. Which means all of us - even IO540 - are to some extent....anoraks.