GA pilots of the future...
 

A very respected PPRuNer and I dined last night, and enjoyed another great conversation. During our discussion, we both lamented the changes and priorities in pilot training. New pilots have less opportunity for hands and feet, rag wing taildragger type flying, and more glass cockpit, go fast[er], automation oriented flying. As I thought about what he was saying, I more and more realized that the notion I have of a new pilot yearning to hand prop their aircraft, then taxi out through the grass, with only a minimal VFR panel in front of them, was dying. My fellow PPRuNer drove the point home further by predicting the future of commercial passenger transport as also relying less on "pilots", and more on automation. whi needs to learn the old ways now?

Will the "flying club" as we know it now only be a thing of history in decades to come? Will our ranks not be filled in from beneath with eager new pilots wanting to learn flying of old? Will they just sit the night before, and program a flight plan, then walk out to a plane with no controls, but just a slot to load a memory card, load the flight plan, and they are just along for the ride?

I tend to divide recreational pilots into two types: rag and tube pilots who tend to have day jobs in the airline world, and mini-airliner pilots whose day jobs are in IT. A simplification, but there's some truth in it.

Whatever their numbers, when fully automated mini-airliners do become available, only rag and tube pilots will remain. And only then to the extent that airspace permits.

I think a big reduction is inevitable as we draw away from the era of heroic aviation. Also, demographics dictates that people of my age and younger have far less disposable income, and I gather other hobbies such as sailing and golf are in similar decline.

Like so many things it all comes down to disposable income. Step back 40 years and there were no IT people in aviation, the major source then was the motor trade.

The statistics are not good, look at the CAA website and you can see the number of licence issues across the board, has dropped by 75% in 21 years!

The cost of becoming an instructor has now risen to the point where its difficult to recover the cost, the cost of moving on to instrument and ME instruction is prohibitive, which means there is no natural route to commercial instruction any more.

With the continued pressure on airfields from developers and the environmental lobby, one wonders if GA will survive the next 21 years!

GA in this country is looking down the barrel of a demographic disaster - the population of pilots is growing ever older, and fewer and fewer young people are coming in at grass routes level. The training scene, and the club scene, revolves around C of A machinery which, courtesy of EASA and the CAA (who seem convinced that these aircraft need the same regulatory environment as commercial aircraft), are expensive, old, and for the most part pretty tatty.

Ab initio training on LAA aircraft is possible, but until recently involved buying into an aircraft, which most young people can't afford.

Thanks to years of gold-plating by the CAA and EASA there are now 9 written exams necessary for just a mere PPL - for many young people who have had a belly full of school and want a change, why would you pay good money to sit in the fly-blown classroom of a flying club for more of the same?

In addition, the route into the commercial world is now expensive and uncertain - why spend £120,000 on a frozen ATPL and little guarantee of a job, when the same money could buy you the training to be a commercial lawyer?

I've offered to take innumerable young people flying, but for the most part it just looks like too much trouble to them - now that you can plug in your Xbox or Playstation and be instantly pretty good at Grand Theft Auto III, why would you bother? The final nail in the coffin is that the average flying club's clubroom tends to look like a drop-in centre for pensioners, and most young people wouldn't be seen dead there.

Something has to change, and we need to wake up and smell the coffee about this, as the supply of pilots into the British commercial aircraft industry is going to become like the supply of coal - there plenty of it here, but we now have to source it all from overseas.

Perhaps it isn't JUST the disposable income - but also the fact that companies nowadays seem to expect you to work 24/7 in addition to the lack of rise of income. I rarely work less than 60 hours per week, neither does anyone in my immediate circle. A good friend of mine is currently learning at North Wealds, and he cannot dedicate more than half a day a week to his learning as a result of the pressure forcing him to work very long hours.

I think that the ever increasing cost of flying far beyond normal inflation is also something to do with it. Avgas often at £1.70+ a litre (in the UK) often €2.50+ a litre in Europe (and thanks to Brexit et Al. that's currently £2.27 a litre excluding transaction fees). Touring suddenly becomes less affordable, and to spend £10k+ to learn to fly, just to go within 50nm of your home airfield quickly gets boring (which I have found is an important factor for the decline of pilots staying current).

StepTurn - am I wrong in thinking that it is quite difficult to find somewhere to learn on older types / taildraggers? I have always wanted to fly vintage aeroplanes such as Tiger Moths, PT-19s, Norseman, Waco....etc... But every single time I inquired, the market was very much more leaning towards "scenic flights" with an instructor. It seems very difficult to get access to a vintage plane, and be able to fly it solo after learning the differences, and proving your competences. I am sure that this is for good reason, but this to me is prohibitive to spending thousands upon thousands of pounds to get the differences required to then be told, well now you can fly it with an instructor. The only place that I have come across the ability to do this was in Wanaka, NZ - where I decided to do a substantial amount of mountain training instead of learning to fly a new type.

Scary thought - would you need a pilot if there were no controls and everything was completely automated? What happens when the sensors ice over in freezing rain? What happens when the plane has some emergency? Or worse - electrical failure?

In this, at least, EASA are blameless - all that the Regulation mandates is 120 questions, it makes no mention of the number of examinations. The fact that, in the UK, there are 9 separate exams is entirely down to the CAA.

Learning to fly in in this country needs to change.

You wouldn't learn to drive in a 30 year old car, but you would often have to learn to fly in an old relic.

For some this is part of the charm,but for others it's a joke, and an expensive one.

Equally, navigating using a compass and stopwatch have their place, but how many PPLs have GPS??

There will always be a demand, but I agree that it's on the wane.

No idea what you are worried about.

There will be a teenager geek wannabe in a tin hut controlling your flight with his play station controller and of course he will be well equipped with a handheld GPS just incase all else fails.

I guess he/she will be logging it P1 as well, especially after their parents have paid all that money to get their licence.

Why not pay the Tiger Club a visit - you can fly Super Cub, Druine Turbulent and Tiger Moth (plus a CAP 10 if you want some downside-up fun).

The Tiger Club, Sport Aviation, Aerobatics, formation flying. air racing, air races. display flying

OC619

Given that it takes the CAA 6 weeks to process a licence application, that's probably just as well....... :p

Am I right in assuming that the yoof of today can learn on LAA aircraft and build and maintain hours on LAA thereafter to count towards a commercial licence? Or does only CofA count?

abgd I was in IT but deffo a rag & tube pilot.

Grass fields, tailwheels, strips, aerobatics are for me what flying is about, and I count myself lucky to have flown lots of interesting types over the 30+ years I was active in the air.

A Chipmunk was my main toy for all of those decades bar about 3 years of Yak52 part-ownership. Along the way came L4 Cub, Citabria, Super Cub, Tiger Moth, Stampe, and several other interesting machines, all of which I have fond memories of.

There were of course the C150s I did the PPL on, the C172 and 205 I did parachute dropping in and took friends for rides when the single pax seat of the interesting aeroplanes wasn't enough and other unmemorable types such as PA38s and 28s.

I guess I was lucky to have done my PPL at a grass field where access these wonderful machines was possible. I'm sure there still such places but probably far fewer than there was in 1978 when I started.

It seems much of GA today is a feeder for the commercial aviation industry, and grass strips, aeros, wind in the hair, tailwheels, and stick & rudder skills have taken a back seat in favor of nosewheels, glass cockpits, and electronic gizmos.

It's enough to make ya weep!

Yes, it is more difficult than simply flying the more common tricycle GA aircraft. That's an unfortunate reality, for certified aircraft, simple taildraggers are not in demand. Perhaps our next generation of pilot need to be inspired to demand them! You can learn to fly in a Cub, Chipmunk or Tiger Moth, and still carry those learned skills onward to the commercial industry, they'll actually be a little sharper. While flying a Twin Otter years ago, the check pilot observed that I must fly tailwheel a lot, as I used the pedals! Sadly, many new pilots have to travel farther to find these less common types - it's worth the effort!

Lots of exams and questions: The purpose of the exams is to assure that the information required to be taught was retained by the student. This is partly a test of the student, and also partly a test of the teacher. I dislike exams as much as the next person (and struggle with them), but they are a necessary measure of the overall effectiveness of the teaching environment. No one here is advocating for less qualified pilots.

When a prospective pilot inquires about learning to fly, and hopefully flies a trial lesson, are we the industry "selling" the romance of flying well enough? Or are we drawing attention to all the fancy avionics in the basic trainers, and how it's pretending to be a mini airliner? Sell the basics with a promise of growth. Students and new pilots, the instruments you must have to fly a GA airplane in day VFR are: Airspeed, altimeter, turn and bank/turn coordinator, compass, tachometer, oil pressure and temperature, and fuel quantity, and maybe an ammeter. If you are flying with an aircraft equipped with more than that, you're paying for more than you need for the first 20 hours of light training, and distracting yourself from the real fun and learning. There will be plenty of time for fancy equipment later. If you are flying in conditions which require more, your instructor got it wrong that flight. Don't let a complex industry tell you that you need more in the early stages.

Hoping that "next generation" pilots to be are reading this, if you want to fly the broad choice of types available now, you're going to have to demonstrate that there is still a viable life for these aircraft in the GA world. There will always be the outliers, who have a passion, and will do anything for their type. The warbird group are a good example. But, as the number of people and aircraft diminish, the cost goes way up. New pilots, go out and find different types to fly, you will enjoy it, be a better pilot for it, and sustain an industry you might want to have retained in the future. Owners of unusual types, take them to the fly ins, and inspire people with them!

Despite the great chat with my fellow PPRuNer, I hang on the hope that "everything old is new again", and out industry will circle back to make simple airplanes mainstream available, without compromising quality and durability.

Coasting on this will see our pastime wain, and mostly be found by new pilots in grainy old youtube videos, and maybe books. We need to re-invigorate ourselves.....

Perhaps younger people think of the current generation as reckless idiots?

- fly a plane with fuel gauges that don't work because of poor engineering
- fly an engine where the mixture is always wrong when it doesn't block itself with ice. Who would want to fly that?
- imagine, they kept busting airspace because their compass rotated in the wrong direction 10 degree an hour!

I won't be so sure young people are wrong - remember, we fly and present utter junk to them and expect them to take to it. Next time you're bring up someone up in a Cessna or Piper twice their age with broken plastic and home made labels saying 'Autopilot U/S since 1980' imagine the impression it leaves.

The next generation is usually the wiser one, not us. We need to improve the cosmetics and optics of our aircraft.

At our Club we offer for training either the PA28 or the Ikarus C42 or flexwing Quik. We explain the benefits and costs of each type. People are invited to have a taster in each type to see what they'd like to do. Cost is obviously hugely different between the types, but doesn't seem to be a deciding factor, more it's the type of aircraft people are more comfortable in. Incidentally, our prices for SEP training on the PA28 haven't changed for the last 4 years, so are relatively cheaper now.
We've got people learning on all the above fleet from all walks of life, but mostly people of modest incomes who really want to fly.
We give hundreds of local people rides in our aircraft every year, in the guise of Trial Lessons. Passing few of these ever do much more flying, though we do have plenty of repeat business, which means that they enjoy the experience we offer.
The thing that stops us doing much more than we do already is, of course, the weather. There's no doubt in my mind that weather patterns have changed in the last 20 years, call it Global Warming, Climate Change or whatever you like. Aviation has probably contributed to this so we've bitten ourselves in the rear - maybe it's karma.
TOO

Might I offer my take on why few people take on the adventure of pilot training? Visibility.

I simply don't think GA enters into the mind of the average youngster. Beyond commercial aviation, by which I mean the airliners ferrying them from one major location to another, I don't think they have any real concept of what GA is and that they might in fact be able to take to the skies without years of study and uniform.

GA is pretty hidden. I only came to notice it when switching jobs which involved me designing Flight Simulators! Now I'm training for my PPL.

I don't think the weather is any worse - or better - now than it was back in 1978, or any year since.

It's always been pretty iffy for VFR in UK, and I guess it always will be. That's part of the challenge; part of the fun.

VORTIME - I couldn't disagree more. Either you are in love with flight or you are not. If broken plastic trim and old technology puts you off, you are not.

When I read these threads I thank god I'm in the US and also an EAA member. My 15 year old is learning to fly in a J3 and we are building a Waiex together. The statistics are bleak but it is far from hopeless.
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/a...468C493410.jpg

Waiex project: skip to the end of the thread if it is too long.
http://sonexbuilders.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=578
Engine:
http://sonexbuilders.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3232

I'd also add he is learning to drive in a 17 year old car with a manual transmission and crank windows.

GA is suffering like many other sports and pastimes. One of the culprits is the PlayStation and its ilk, as suggested by wsmempson above. We are offered instant gratification (but not satisfaction) by modern life. Cinema, theme parks, YouTube all give you a thrill with no effort. But the way GA is set up means it requires a great deal of input before you obtain much in the way of satisfaction. I still remember when I was initially learning to glide. There was so much going on that I didn't have time to enjoy it. Sports requiring the development of skills and techniques before you can participate will also be suffering from the same problems. Yet those that allow you progress at your own pace are doing well, like cycling.

So if GA is to survive, it will have to find a way of giving satisfaction in the early days. Then once you have people enjoying what they are doing, they might be be prepared to put more into it.

PM

Balls. There are plenty of young people interested in and investing the time in aviation.

Off the top of my head, I can name ten students aged 14-20 who were at my UK flying school in the last year. And very enthusiastic and hard working they were too!

When you consider the formidable challenges, not just financial but also economic and political their generation faces, their perseverance in funding licenses and training becomes even more impressive. Not one of them would turn down a spare seat going. And not one of them said "nah, I'll just play on my XPlayStationBox".

I think that new technology will bring massive disruption to private aviation as it currently operates. Drone technology is eminently scaleable so I see no reason why in say, twenty/twenty five years, there won't be multi-rotor, highly automation assisted vehicles available. In the same way that firmware in current professional drones limits altitude and access to danger areas, so firmware will manage navigation of multiple vehicles. Not saying it will be as much fun but technology will always win.

> When I read these threads I thank god I'm in the US

+1 for this. I lived for 38 years in England, then 10 years in France. I loved the idea of learning to fly but it was too expensive and too impractical. Then I moved to the US and had my PPL in less than a year. It's much cheaper here for sure, but also much more accessible and most of all, the regulation is much more sensible.

Nine exams! That's crazy! There's one one-hour FAA written test for PPL, and another one for CPL. That's it. No specific requirement for ground school, if (like me) you prefer to sit at home and read books, that's fine, whatever works. Is anyone really going to argue that US pilots are less safe because they haven't done all these exams?

My friends in the flight training business here say they are as busy as ever. Though there are definitely fewer aircraft on my home field (Palo Alto, near San Francisco). Most training aircraft are pre-1986 172s, with a sprinkling of PA28s, newer Cessnas, and the odd SR20. So that is much the same as UK.

On a slight thread drift, I used to fly model aircraft and many times offered to demonstrate to a younger person. More often than not the request was to "crash it mister" and otherwise they had little interest at all. When flying full sized aircraft the offer of a "joyride" solicited little interest in many young people but perhaps it was me!

I got thinking about my responsibility as an old guy in aviation, and challenged myself today. See "Newbie Challenge" thread.....

Hobbit - What is the problem them? Not having spare cash is one, but that has always been the case. I could only just about afford of gliding when I started and power flying was well beyond my reach. No, the problem is people don't want to do it which in turn has reduced the places where you can, which in turn...

Until private flying manages to re-invent and re-sell itself its decline will continue.

PM

I always wanted to fly and couldn't afford it until my fifties. I fly a stick and rag taildragger and work in IT (sort of.) Half of my colleagues are nonplussed but the youngsters reckon it must be really cool to have one's own 'plane.
I would have started learning to fly at the age of probably three if I could have afforded it. Tatty Cessna or PA28? Wouldn't have put me off. Fifteen minutes in a scruffy Auster at age fifteen was life changing (I knew it would be.) Few youngsters learn to fly. Apart from WW2, it has always been so. Good job we are all going to live so much longer then because it is a fact that real aviators don't discriminate, they fly whatever they can get their hands on, young or old. For the price of a decent light aircraft (£15,000, say,) You can buy some pretty vivid motor cars and that is where the kids are putting their money. It costs a lot to learn to drive a car as well but it is a far more useful skill.
You fly because you want to.

There was a Slingsby Motor Tutor with a current permit on Afors yesterday seeking offers of £2k.
That would give a youngster a lot of fun for the price of an old british 250 "classic" motorbike these days and no red blooded aviator could do anything less than love it and learn from it.
If we are similarly relics from a bygone age I for one won't beat myself or anybody else up about it. If flying is to go the way of the cine camera, typewriter and chemical photography, so be it. It was always exclusive; many who could afford it hadn't the drive necessary to get a licence.


More fool them.

m.Berger - I think you are describing the attribute of maturity. As one gets older, your tastes change. You also learn to appreciate that you have to invest in something before you can expect a return. Too many people in our modern society expect to eat bread before they have planted any wheat.

PM

I agree, the civvy FTO I'm a member of is very busy, mostly with youngsters and the one's I've met are keen as mustard. They aren't flying new stuff either. As m.berger says, if you are an aviation nut you will fly anything that gets air between your feet and the ground.

I remember about 1980 I met a chap I'd been working with in '78 when I did my PPL (I'd moved on to a new career, he hadn't). Back in the late '70s when we were working together and I was flying he'd told me he was going to do his PPL, so at our later meeting I asked him if he had indeed done the PPL.

He told he hadn't because he'd decided he couldn't afford it. He went on to tell me that instead, he'd bought some state of the art PCs (this was 1980!) and flight sim s/w. You can imagine how basic a flight sim system was, even on the best hardware, in 1980.

His state of the art PCs and associated s/w had, on my further questioning, cost about twice what I'd paid for my PPL! And by 1982 they would be worth the square root of eff all. Which taught me that.... He wanted to be a flight simmer more than he wanted to fly. By at least twice as much.

Lots of people 'quite fancy' the idea of flying. Many are dreamers, and it isn't the cost that's holding them back. It's the commitment. It's easier to buy a PC and some s/w than to buckle down and do the licence. You need the LOVE of flight to give you the COMMITMENT to do it. The dreamers don't have that and will take the easy route, even if that costs more.

Well, yes... Some people seem to be born with the love to fly - I was, and as a child, watching the Thunderbirds and Joe 90, reinforced that. I could not not fly. Since I first could fly, I always have.

But for other people, some inspiration may be beneficial. Perhaps the people who are confident about their ability to safely fly a computer based simulator need some inspiration and encouragement to become confident that they can fly a real plane too. Perhaps when they experience the tactile and spatial sensations which only actual flight can provide.

My colleague reminded me that many of the "new" pilots are aiming at flying airliners = glass cockpit, which is catered to well by computer flight simulators. But, you just cannot simulate the gentle and satisfying sensation of a mainwheel brushing the grass just before touchdown, or feeling the aileron forces increase and decrease during an well controlled slip. Those are joy of flying feelings.

Feeling the plane fly, and knowing that you are doing it, is a very satisfying element of piloting, which in my opinion are being surrendered to watching it fly on advanced displays - because they are installed. These advanced displays are easily modeled on computers, the feeling of flying is not. I've flown glass cockpit aircraft, with synthetic vision, and AoA, and realized that I was not referencing them hours on end during flying, I was watching out the windshield, and feeling the controls. I figure that about 5% of my flying time is in aircraft equipped with an auto pilot, and less than 10% of that 5% was actually using the autopilot. Yet 10% of my flying time is in aircraft, which if equipped with a nav system at all, had only one VOR reciever, with lots of those aircraft not even having an electrical system - and they were the most fun to fly!

Somehow, I hope, we can inspire new pilots with the joy of simple flying. They can go on to fancy aircraft later....

I agree shaggy.


Having done some basic maths, the cost of renting a simple puddle hopper in the south has gone up by about 3.5% p/a since I did my ppl in the earl 90's. that's hardly excessive.


It was always bee expensive, in England at any rate, so its a question of whether someone feels that cost is justified.

The only way to justify it would be if it offered a sense of any one of the following:
Adventure, freedom, excitement, challenge, satisfaction, achievement or romance.
If it doesn't, get a pulse.

If you take the average GA airfield anywhere in the UK at first glance one could well believe that most GA pilots will be dead in 20 years time.

Why? Partly because many young(er) people don't actually see flying the average spam can as particularly exciting or adventurous and many of those that might do simply don't see it as value at £150/hr. Could we cost share? Oh we just managed to come around to that idea and yet even having done so many still suck their teeth at the idea, believing that life imprisonment surely follows.

What about aerobatics?! Oh no spinning is surely operation certain death!!!???

Maybe some inspirational youtube flying clips??? Hmm once more life imprisonment follows after an incorrect/unauthorised Go-Pro mount was found... Maybe it was but 499ft was spotted on an altimeter over a dishevelled barn somewhere.

What about some exciting new types to stir up the passion??? Nope nothing to see and if anyone dares to step forward then thankfully regulation will smash them in the face before going bust.

How about the adoption of technology? I mean after all navigation must surely have moved on from the Low Level navigation techniques shown in a 1940's film from France to Glos.?? Well it has but despite the obvious downsides to such techniques (such as the increasing issues of airspace infringements) we still want you to use the stopwatch, compass and mental math... the error plus twice the error.. err what was it again... opps mind that 737..

Still look on the bright side at least the CAA have recognised the age problem and we can all self-cert our medicals until we err, die.

No we can't, as is becoming increasingly apparent.

Can't it be simpler? (Just a whine)
 

I don't understand why the paperwork side of things has to be as complicated in Europe as it is. "In the country listed in my passport" you don't have the situation of "I am a current ATPL but my PPL/LAPL/SEP has expired. I'd love to take up fun flying again..."

In that other country, each certificate contains the privileges of all lower ones: ATP > CP > PP > LS. None of them ever expire. There's no rating tracked independently of the certificate itself. There are no minimum hours per year or every second year...

Compare a PPL with a LAPL. In month 1 of 24, Mr. LAPL flies 11 hours. In month 23 of 24 he does three touch and goes with an instructor. Assuming he doesn't break anything, he's good for the next two years. If Mr. PPL flies 500 hours in months 1-12 and nothing in months 13-23, he has to fly with an examiner because none of HIS hours took place in the last 12 months. However, both can bimble around in a 172 in the same airspace...

If someone goes the modular route PPL to CPL to APTL, how many written tests is that? 3x7? 3x9? (Rhetorical, the real answer doesn't matter.) The country that puts the most pilots in the air would require four written tests (1 each: PP, IFR, CP, ATP). You could even then throw in private/commercial glider and single engine ATP w/ no more written tests. I "only" had to do two written tests to get an independent German license using my FAA* paper as a core. They were almost 100 Euro each! Seventy questions about weather won't prove you know any more about weather than the right 10 questions...

One flight review resets everything. The 90-day rule and hopefully common sense help with currency for people with multiple categories/classes.

Terry


*Not Fleet Air Arm. I tried hard not to mention "my country of origin" though it's no secret. I very much like living, working, and travelling in Europe and the UK. I dislike "US vs. Europe" discussions, because different does not generally equate to better or worse. I just find it frustrating trying to keep European paper alive when the "other" is so easy. I can't imagine the pain involved in getting a European license from scratch!

Then that's partly the fault of those of us who are established in the pastime. There is one certainty about flying: Either you are, or you are not. Once you are flying, there are thousands of different ways to do it. Each has its merits and not so attractive aspects. WE have to sell the merits of each kind of flying, without letting the less attractive aspects seem to prevail.

There's no point in complaining that you can't take the door off the G1000 C182S to hang out taking photos at 60 MPH on a calm night. And worrying about why a Tiger Moth is a poor IFR platform is kind of pointless. The Twin Comanche is a poor choice for aerobatics, but then loading up the Pitts with a week's baggage, for a holiday to off shore islands may not be a good choice either.

Happily, I still see young people out on bicycles (often when I'm out on mine). They are not driving their Jaguar or Range Rover (that day, anyway). So as a bicycle will provide predictable transportation and fun, so will a simple airplane - it is up to us, those who really appreciate simple airplanes to sell them to the next generation of pilots - because they are flying.

GA will always be around, as people will always want to fly.

Unlike most things however, learning to fly doesn't seem to have really come on from the 80s. Whilst that has a niche appeal, it's not hard to see why it's declined.

Equally, given there are the sausage factories for the commercial guys, I think the authorities would be quite happy if private flying waned.

OC619 - Tiger Club - I had no idea that even existed in the UK! I will fly down there and see what it's all about. (still 2 hours drive from central London - but sounds like it is worth the trip!)

Pittsextra - I think you're right, aviation does play a massive part in the motivation of younger people. But aviation and GENERAL aviation are completely mutually exclusive in terms of industry. I don't think many people know about general aviation, or their possibilities. None of my friends (most of them in the mid-late twenties) have any concept of general aviation, until I attempt to impart some of my passion for general aviation. Then they are stunned by the relative costs (generally fuel alone scares them). When I do take them up, they do love it, and really thoroughly enjoy it, asking when they can go up again for another trip somewhere. Very few are prepared to spend the time, effort, and money required to achieve it. And the few that have done, either stopped their training after a few hours (due to time & costs implications) or are financially limited to 1 hour a month (where naturally the more "adventurous" flights are out of reach). Not in my group of friends - but - I see more and more people ready to spend £150+ for at least "a night out in town" every week, and very little willing to sacrifice these outings for a day of expensive (in both time and financial setbacks) disappointment, renting a car to arrive at the airfield to realise that their lesson is cancelled for the third week in a row due to the unpredictable weather on the day, and them having to leave the house more than an hour and a half before the lesson.

It took me just under a year to get my licence, spending every whole weekend at the airfield and a couple of evenings a week doing exam-work / prep work. All that whilst working over 50 hours a week is a challenge. My friends didn't see me often, my family didn't see me often, my girlfriend although understanding and also passionate about aviation did make me feel the strain of the time implications required to achieve my goal. You need to make a lot of sacrifices to be able to achieve the PPL.

Perhaps if I was successful and in my mid fifties, with a well paid 35-40 hour a week job, no more mortgage on the house, no more student loan repayments, no more kids' school tuition fees to pay - perhaps this would suddenly be much more accessible.

Civvy & Thing - Are these youngsters you talk about going into General Aviation? Or are they looking at progressing to the heavy metals? There are schools full of "younger people" training on both modular and integrated ATPL courses, but most of these do make me feel as though their passion is not with general aviation, they see the spam cans as a means to an end. Their goal being a career in commercial aviation transport, and not for the enjoyment of the spam-cans. Now - that's not to mean that after a few years in commercial aviation that they won't decide to buy/fly an old bird in their spare time.

I think perhaps, the £300+ round-trip to the Isle of Wight for 3 people in a spam-can for lunch; Is often seen comparatively in terms of costs by non general-aviation people as relative to going down to Spain on an EasyJet flight for the weekend. (which may only cost you a further £50 each including hotel if you book in advance / special deals). Although I, like many of you here know the incredible experience of freedom, and incredible sights that you see along the way, in terms of "adventurousness" it could be construed as comparable to the untrained eye.

This in my mind, would inevitably limit the number of younger people becoming involved in General Aviation - BUT - this is not to mean that older, fifties ish people may not become smitten with general aviation, and get involved! Just the uptake age would be slightly older. Perhaps the focus should be on this age group rather than the people who can't even afford the deposit on their house, or the repayments on their various loans / mortgages.

Not just Wanaka, there is access to traditional types right across NZ. I live in the North Island and I can get access to a Super Cub, a Stearman, Harvards and a Chipmunk all within about an hours drive.

Shame I can't fit into the Cub or Chippie. :O

Where are you in the North Island? I miss NZ so much... It was such an incredible journey being out there for 3 months, flying just over 45 hours in various types and terrain!

The low flying zones, the mountain flying, the freedom, and the ease of flying around from most places was such a breath of fresh air!! I flew quite a bit out there, but one trip outlining the freedom was from NZNE to NZKT, nobody on frequency on the way, did a touch and go then went all around the northland before stopping at NZKK (again nobody on any frequency on the way - a lovely deserted "mini-airport" with lounge and checkin facilities. [we called it the lego airport]) for a spot of (very late) lunch before picking up some fuel (chatting to a local instructor) and doing a sunset flight down to NZNE (where I heard 2 commercial operators talking to one another about who was going to beat who back to the airfield arguing who was flying the faster plane). Although I did plan it in advance, there was no need to, I could have changed my plans at any time, didn't faff around controlled airspace requesting transits every 2 minutes... Or skirting around the Heathrow / Gatwick zones, then crossing Farnborough, then requesting MATZ penetration / transit with the military air bases...

I cannot wait to go back to NZ.