Aircraft ownership - how can we dispel the rich toy myth?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you want to? Be glad you can afford it and just cox a snook at the naysayers.
But for that to happen people must feel it's an attainable hobby.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because I'm worried about the future of GA
I think aircraft ownership is the ticket that could halt this.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know which world you live in. I can assure you that in many of the council flats in my ward the description that would be applied to anyone who could spend twenty-two thousand pounds on toys!!!! would include "rich".
My definition of rich is someone with no worries about paying the bills & a LARGE amount of disposable cash on a continuous basis.
The only way I consider myself rich is that at my age I can still put my socks on standing up. I don't have or need a bus pass cos I can still crawl under tha Xreg second hand car & fix it when necessary.
There are plenty who can spend 22K on drugs or booze or political "expenses".
Rich, my ass.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of things are perception! Fox hunting was banned as it was seen as a sport of the "landed gentry" The upper classes! Fishing was not that was seen as a pastime of the masses.
You only have to see the stream of Caravans or motorhomes some costing in excess of a small aircraft to realise how strange these perceptions can be.
The media like to portray aviation as the sport of the mega wealthy.
Local MP flying to work in a clapped out 30 yr old mooney becomes Local MP using private jet. etc.
Part of the problem is political especially in Europe. On the roads you can have police, you can have all manner of speed devices to regulate and control.
In the sky its different. While its regulated there is only a certain amount of control and government dont like that.
Once in the air you have freedom of movement and god knows what you may see from your lofty viewing point
Pace
You only have to see the stream of Caravans or motorhomes some costing in excess of a small aircraft to realise how strange these perceptions can be.
The media like to portray aviation as the sport of the mega wealthy.
Local MP flying to work in a clapped out 30 yr old mooney becomes Local MP using private jet. etc.
Part of the problem is political especially in Europe. On the roads you can have police, you can have all manner of speed devices to regulate and control.
In the sky its different. While its regulated there is only a certain amount of control and government dont like that.
Once in the air you have freedom of movement and god knows what you may see from your lofty viewing point
Pace
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this world everything is relative. Yes, you have the cars, the house, the plane, however, there will always be someone who has ''MORE''. More is also relative
I have knocked my pan in for years, lost the lot, I mean everything, at one stage, then dusted myself down and started to build it again. When others 'look in' they see what they see, they do not care how you got it, nor what pain may have been endured to get it. The power of envy, and how misplaced that can be
I stopped trying to justify years ago, my family I think are the worst - I thought they may have been pleased for me, nope.
I just enjoy, along with the stress that I may lose it all again tomorrow!!!
I have knocked my pan in for years, lost the lot, I mean everything, at one stage, then dusted myself down and started to build it again. When others 'look in' they see what they see, they do not care how you got it, nor what pain may have been endured to get it. The power of envy, and how misplaced that can be
I stopped trying to justify years ago, my family I think are the worst - I thought they may have been pleased for me, nope.
I just enjoy, along with the stress that I may lose it all again tomorrow!!!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I've decided to fight this and try my best to educate people from now on, and maybe also promote aircraft ownership and flying in the meantime. It's not that expensive compared to other things, even though the prices have gone through the roof. Or maybe I'm wrong in fighting it? Maybe I should embrace the "posh" cachet and revel in its exclusivity?
How do you justify it or argue it as an aircraft owner when that inevitable discussion comes up?
How do you justify it or argue it as an aircraft owner when that inevitable discussion comes up?
As for the inevitabel discussion - it is by no means 'inevitable' - only if you make it! I find I get on with people much better if I simly do not mention the aircraft. So I would suggest that as your starting point. If however you want to tell the world you own an aircraft - then you have to accept the consequences - people will presume a significant level of 'disposable' income and probably treat you accordingly.
I was in the butchers two weekends ago and somehow the Euro lottery winners came up. The middle aged chap (a butcher) serving me was baffled as to why they actually did the lottery - 'because they already owned their own house'. Which tells you a lot about wealth, its lack of distribution and the perceptions which result from it. Telling this chap there are people who have a huge amount more than him but they do not regard themselves as 'rich' is going to cut little ice.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Retford, UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't bother trying to justify it either - my family all think its an absurd luxury despite explanations of the reasonable cost. I do think the same prejudice would apply to a yacht though.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Essex, Innit
Age: 55
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't this an economic utility theory type discussion from another angle, whereby one person's measure of another being rich is their being able to afford to spend a substantial (relative to the observer) amount of money on a discretionary activity (relative to the observer) that has no tangible or intangible benefits (relative to the observer)? 
If a person cannot be "educated"
into valuing the act of flying or owning an aircraft then they're not going to value the act of "throwing money away" on such a past time & may well view someone who does do this as having more money than is "fair" (see rich).
There is also a side discussion to be had about where the middle ground between being poor & rich sits & what would define that but this of course varies wildly within & across national borders.
GA Flying isn't necessarily for the rich but a certain level of disposable income is undeniably required to practice it as a hobby.
It is an activity that can certainly be viewed, if not as elitist then as something of an exclusive past time (you can't, or at least shouldn't, just pitch up & take a plane out by yourself without sufficient training & licensing
) which is fundamentally different to owning a boat / jet ski / exec car / large pile of drugs 
.
That's my twopennorth & please don't get me started on the differences in the availability of decent occupational pensions in the days when everyone expected to die relatively early on to these days of living forever.
Regards all, enq.
If a person cannot be "educated"
into valuing the act of flying or owning an aircraft then they're not going to value the act of "throwing money away" on such a past time & may well view someone who does do this as having more money than is "fair" (see rich).There is also a side discussion to be had about where the middle ground between being poor & rich sits & what would define that but this of course varies wildly within & across national borders.
GA Flying isn't necessarily for the rich but a certain level of disposable income is undeniably required to practice it as a hobby.
It is an activity that can certainly be viewed, if not as elitist then as something of an exclusive past time (you can't, or at least shouldn't, just pitch up & take a plane out by yourself without sufficient training & licensing
) which is fundamentally different to owning a boat / jet ski / exec car / large pile of drugs .That's my twopennorth & please don't get me started on the differences in the availability of decent occupational pensions in the days when everyone expected to die relatively early on to these days of living forever.
Regards all, enq.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The average salery is skewed up by the really high earners. In 2009 the median (half earn more than you, half less) was just £20,801, across all employee jobs.
BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Just what is a big salary?
BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Just what is a big salary?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point was exactly that - you can be an aircraft owner even on £28K in yearly salary or even £20K at a push. Certainly won't be a Cirrus or a Corvalis, but a Jodel or similar permit to fly machine. And you might not be able to fly it more than 50hrs a year. But it's flying and owning. And all the freedoms that come with that. Entirely doable.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Lichfield, UK
Age: 40
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest id be proud to own an aircraft, and i wouldnt frankly give a dam what other people think. I would of worked hard to get my license etc so showing it off, who cares.
There only jealous
There only jealous
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can do a lot of flying on a gross income of 25k, if you live a relatively simple life, don't go out much, don't have anyone to support, live in a cheap flat or with your parents, etc.
However, the UK is not as bad jealousy-wise as some other places. I know a pilot in Germany who bought a very nice IFR tourer which came M-reg. It was on M-reg only because the previous owner actually lived there. If you don't live there, you have to be a turboprop or bigger to be able to go onto M-reg.
So M-reg on a ~ 1500kg plane is a priceless registration, as both maintenance and pilot licensing are based on FAA papers, it avoids the need for a trust, avoids any occasional anti-American prejudice around airports (or in certain obvious countries), etc. And the IOM is in the European VAT system so you get a cert of free circ.
But this German pilot immediately transferred it to D-reg. Cost him thousands, obviously, and loads of hassle. When I asked him why, he said that in Germany people think you are fiddling your tax if you have a foreign reg plane.
I doubt any other country in the world has such a high level of population compliance - except possibly Japan.
However, the UK is not as bad jealousy-wise as some other places. I know a pilot in Germany who bought a very nice IFR tourer which came M-reg. It was on M-reg only because the previous owner actually lived there. If you don't live there, you have to be a turboprop or bigger to be able to go onto M-reg.
So M-reg on a ~ 1500kg plane is a priceless registration, as both maintenance and pilot licensing are based on FAA papers, it avoids the need for a trust, avoids any occasional anti-American prejudice around airports (or in certain obvious countries), etc. And the IOM is in the European VAT system so you get a cert of free circ.
But this German pilot immediately transferred it to D-reg. Cost him thousands, obviously, and loads of hassle. When I asked him why, he said that in Germany people think you are fiddling your tax if you have a foreign reg plane.
I doubt any other country in the world has such a high level of population compliance - except possibly Japan.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you don't live there, you have to be a turboprop or bigger to be able to go onto M-reg.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silvaire
But with aircraft its not about just buying the aircraft its all the other fixed and running costs as well as pilot legality and currency.
So not really comparable to an E type Jag?
But this isnt the point its why are aircraft seen as a rich mans toy while many equally expensive pastimes are not?
I would suggest its because aircraft were seen as the sole domain of wealthy people and hence probably more to do with the idle rich pasttime in the same way as they were involved in fox hunting.
You could equally ask why if a small aircraft comes down it makes local or national press while if a Caravan crashes on the motorway no one knows about it.
Why that?
Pace
But with aircraft its not about just buying the aircraft its all the other fixed and running costs as well as pilot legality and currency.
So not really comparable to an E type Jag?
But this isnt the point its why are aircraft seen as a rich mans toy while many equally expensive pastimes are not?
I would suggest its because aircraft were seen as the sole domain of wealthy people and hence probably more to do with the idle rich pasttime in the same way as they were involved in fox hunting.
You could equally ask why if a small aircraft comes down it makes local or national press while if a Caravan crashes on the motorway no one knows about it.
Why that?
Pace
Hi Adam,
sorry saw this thread only today, so I'll try to refer to your original post first and foremost. However, also some of the answers are interesting if not surprising.
I'd say you've just quoted the single most dangerous issue for General Aviation that is out there and that is threatening to destroy us as a whole.
Well, at least in Europe talking about those is not wise either 
Yes, but the difference is that owning a car is something almost everyone does. And while the press and the envy mob can to an extent differentiate between the 15 year old family van and an S4 or similar, they totally fail to do so with airplanes, because they first of all don't have the faintest idea, nor do they want to have an idea but they want to have a target to vent their own failings and frustrations at.
No, you are absolutely right. And I'd say the same to the other owners who have answered here about keeping quiet. That is what did get us into the mess we are in. People keep it hushed up in fear of reprecussions. Why? Are we doing something illegal? Are we hiding "dirty money" in our airplanes? Are we all already conditioned and intimidated to the extent that we ourselfs believe that owning a plane is actually something asocial and bad? Sometimes I get this idea. And it could not be further from the truth.
Justify is an ugly word in this regard, as personally I see no reason for the need of a justification. We are free people in a more or less free society, so why the hell do we have to justify anything? What gives anyone the RIGHT to ACCUSE us, to force us into justification?
How do I argue the case? Well, up front honest and straight forward figures. That is how. No other way really helps.
People need to realize that today the average privately owned 4 seater costs less than a middle class car, sometimes starting at less than ANY new car at all. For what I paid for my aircraft, I could not have bought any new car and not a lot of used ones either. If one browses planecheck or other such sites, aircraft ownership can start at less than £15'000 for fairly decent airplanes, reliable travellers such as Cherokee 180's, 140's, Cessna 172's or vintage Mooneys such as mine.
Further, one needs to put the cost of the actual flying in relation to the use of the car everyone has. In my case, with a 140 kt / 8 GPH airplane, this will show that a flight over a given distance will burn LESS fuel and cost LESS money than if I were to drive the same route. I've argued this many times with some ready calculated routes. Driving what in the air is a 200 NM leg, will amount to a road distance of up to 1.5-2.0 times the distance, depending on terrain and roads. My standard route is actually some 300 NM long if driven by car, but 180 NM by plane. I fly 1:20 to reach my route, buring some 12 USG, the flight will cost some £250 in our money. If I apply the set rate per mile for the use of my car, as the tax office allows me to deduct for work purposes, this trip will set me back £320, one way. Plus, it will take me 4-5 hours depending on traffic, meaning I need to spend the night. Also, I will burn more fuel.
Proving this, by showing honest and straightforward figures, shuts up a good quantity of naggers. Letting them sit in the cabin of 1950's creature comforts shuts up some more. They can see the difference between a Mooney short body and their Renault Scenic bloody quick, thank you very much. Luxury? Not really.
I do believe that it should be the goal and foremost priority of many organisations and every single owner to be an ambassador for GA, out of pure self preservation. Seeing that people like EASA and other governmental money chargers have long abided by the prejudice that all aircraft owners are filthy rich has brought us the horrible charges and over the top taxation that we have to live with today. We have shut up about them, in fear they would grow worse if we didn't, for far too long.
So Adam, thanks for asking the question and thanks for making the effort. Do it. All of you. Every single owner and pilot out there, if you have any sort of self preserving conciousness left, do NOT shut up about your flying but speak your mind. Have numbers ready. Be willing to fight. Otherwise, they will eventually prove us right and GA will start from Citations up beacuse envy and petty nagging will have killed the rest off.
Best regards
AN2 Driver
sorry saw this thread only today, so I'll try to refer to your original post first and foremost. However, also some of the answers are interesting if not surprising.
As a pretty brand new aircraft owner I've come to almost avoid telling people I own an aircraft in this short period. The reaction is always the same, perhaps best summed up by my dear mum "Have you gone nuts? Who do you think you are? You're not rich. You're always trying to be posh!"
How did it come to this? How come owning a clapped out 152, or a Jodel, is seen as "trying to be posh, rich boys toys" but buying an Audi S4, BMW, or owning a boat, or going on vacation, or riding motorcycles, doesn't?
They certainly won't cost any less as a hobby. An Audi S4 costs about twice as much to buy as my Aero Commander did. The payments, service and insurance would probably not be far off what I pay for flying 100hrs a year.
So I've decided to fight this and try my best to educate people from now on, and maybe also promote aircraft ownership and flying in the meantime. It's not that expensive compared to other things, even though the prices have gone through the roof. Or maybe I'm wrong in fighting it? Maybe I should embrace the "posh" cachet and revel in its exclusivity?
How do you justify it or argue it as an aircraft owner when that inevitable discussion comes up?
How do I argue the case? Well, up front honest and straight forward figures. That is how. No other way really helps.
People need to realize that today the average privately owned 4 seater costs less than a middle class car, sometimes starting at less than ANY new car at all. For what I paid for my aircraft, I could not have bought any new car and not a lot of used ones either. If one browses planecheck or other such sites, aircraft ownership can start at less than £15'000 for fairly decent airplanes, reliable travellers such as Cherokee 180's, 140's, Cessna 172's or vintage Mooneys such as mine.
Further, one needs to put the cost of the actual flying in relation to the use of the car everyone has. In my case, with a 140 kt / 8 GPH airplane, this will show that a flight over a given distance will burn LESS fuel and cost LESS money than if I were to drive the same route. I've argued this many times with some ready calculated routes. Driving what in the air is a 200 NM leg, will amount to a road distance of up to 1.5-2.0 times the distance, depending on terrain and roads. My standard route is actually some 300 NM long if driven by car, but 180 NM by plane. I fly 1:20 to reach my route, buring some 12 USG, the flight will cost some £250 in our money. If I apply the set rate per mile for the use of my car, as the tax office allows me to deduct for work purposes, this trip will set me back £320, one way. Plus, it will take me 4-5 hours depending on traffic, meaning I need to spend the night. Also, I will burn more fuel.
Proving this, by showing honest and straightforward figures, shuts up a good quantity of naggers. Letting them sit in the cabin of 1950's creature comforts shuts up some more. They can see the difference between a Mooney short body and their Renault Scenic bloody quick, thank you very much. Luxury? Not really.
I do believe that it should be the goal and foremost priority of many organisations and every single owner to be an ambassador for GA, out of pure self preservation. Seeing that people like EASA and other governmental money chargers have long abided by the prejudice that all aircraft owners are filthy rich has brought us the horrible charges and over the top taxation that we have to live with today. We have shut up about them, in fear they would grow worse if we didn't, for far too long.
So Adam, thanks for asking the question and thanks for making the effort. Do it. All of you. Every single owner and pilot out there, if you have any sort of self preserving conciousness left, do NOT shut up about your flying but speak your mind. Have numbers ready. Be willing to fight. Otherwise, they will eventually prove us right and GA will start from Citations up beacuse envy and petty nagging will have killed the rest off.
Best regards
AN2 Driver
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<snip>
Yes, but the difference is that owning a car is something almost everyone does.
<snip>
People need to realize that today the average privately owned 4 seater costs less than a middle class car, sometimes starting at less than ANY new car at all. For what I paid for my aircraft, I could not have bought any new car and not a lot of used ones either. If one browses planecheck or other such sites, aircraft ownership can start at less than £15'000 for fairly decent airplanes, reliable travellers such as Cherokee 180's, 140's, Cessna 172's or vintage Mooneys such as mine.
Further, one needs to put the cost of the actual flying in relation to the use of the car everyone has. In my case, with a 140 kt / 8 GPH airplane, this will show that a flight over a given distance will burn LESS fuel and cost LESS money than if I were to drive the same route. I've argued this many times with some ready calculated routes.
<snip>
Yes, but the difference is that owning a car is something almost everyone does.
<snip>
People need to realize that today the average privately owned 4 seater costs less than a middle class car, sometimes starting at less than ANY new car at all. For what I paid for my aircraft, I could not have bought any new car and not a lot of used ones either. If one browses planecheck or other such sites, aircraft ownership can start at less than £15'000 for fairly decent airplanes, reliable travellers such as Cherokee 180's, 140's, Cessna 172's or vintage Mooneys such as mine.
Further, one needs to put the cost of the actual flying in relation to the use of the car everyone has. In my case, with a 140 kt / 8 GPH airplane, this will show that a flight over a given distance will burn LESS fuel and cost LESS money than if I were to drive the same route. I've argued this many times with some ready calculated routes.
<snip>
And arguing the case of a plane as transport - when you get to the nearest airport to where you really want to be, what then? Taxis? Most airfields (except the large expensive commertical ones) seem to be no-where near any public transport, plus anything saved by flying would rapidly get eroded by getting from the airfield to where you really want to be, unless you are putting a cycle in somewhere.