In 1979, the general aviation companies shipped over 17,000 new aircraft. Things then fell off a cliff and within five years, Cessna had stopped making single-engined airplanes. Beech, Piper and Mooney made very few. Mooney went through a series of bankruptcies.
There were several factors.
First off, between 1973 and 1979, the price of gasoline nearly quadrupled.
Second, in 1979, the depreciation rules changed. Before then, people who had enough money that they needed tax shelters bought airplanes and leased them to Fixed-Base Operators (the outfits at airports who sold, rented and fixed airplanes and sold fuel). In the 1970s, a four year-old airplane on a rental flight line was considered to be ancient. The airplanes over three years-old were sold on the used market, which kept the cost of used airplanes fairly reasonable. Now, it is not unusual to find airplanes approaching 40 years-old for rent.
Third, there were some pretty hefty wins for the plaintiffs in lawsuits. Some were insane, alleging that airplanes 30 and 40 years-old were unsafe. Cessna refused to make new single-engined airplanes, stating that the liability insurance premium was at least one third of the cost of a new aircraft. (Federal law was changed in the mid 1990s to limit liability to 18 years and Cessna went back into production on three models of piston airplane, the 172, the 182 and the 206.)
Fourth, and often most ignored, the young boys who had been around to see the Golden Age of aviation, to read the pulp magazines about the Thompson Trophy races, who were agog at the tales of the aces of the Great War, who read the news coverage of Charles Lindbergh's flight to Paris and who saw Lindbergh on his flights around the U.S. in the Spirit of St. Louis after his historic flight, those fellows began to age out of flying. Their younger brothers, who had been in the war, were not as enamored of flying. Their children were even less so, especially as flying had begun to lose its romance and travel by airline became more and more like riding a livestock car. The youngest of the "boomers", "generation x" and the "echo-boomers", if they were at all interested in flying, discovered flight simulation.
If you go to a general aviation airport now and observe the pilots, it looks like an AARP festival. There are still people in their 40s or younger who are flying, but not in the numbers it would take to replace the active pilots over time.
Go to Google Earth sometime and, in the "fly to" box, enter "KBED". 20 years ago, there were many more tiedowns and many more airplanes there. 30 years ago, there was a waiting list to tie down at many airports where now there are empty places. At KCGF, on the west (left) side of the airport, you can see a black asphalt tiedown area with maybe eight airplanes in an area that could once hold fifty or more.
General aviation may not be dead, but it is a pale shadow of what it once was, and it all began to fall apart thirty years ago.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
We have a "new" flight school who just moved into our Class C airport from an untowered airport 40nm NW. They've brought with them a fleet of Cessnas that are about the sorriest pieces of crap I've ever seen. These are 1960's and (very) early 1970's aircraft, and many of them only have one operational radio. So, instead of just keying up radio #2 to get the ATIS code while still Rx/Tx on #1, they go off frequency completely. There have been several instances where I've had to climb/descend or turn IFR aircraft because these Cessnas just drop off the frequency and won't take traffic calls. A little maneuvering's a lot better than a TCAS resolution advisory any day.
One problem is the costs of general aviation have continued to go up. Way back in the days immediately after WWII you could get war surplus small trainers for ridiculously low prices, for the price of a used car almost, and tons of people learned how to fly because it was cheap and inexpensive. These people then went on to be the first real general aviation generation. But now I go look for a Cessna 182 and 40 year old planes are going for above $60K. And forget new ones, talking $300K+ there. That's more expensive than most people's houses. There's just no way to justify it unless you have a pressing need that simply cannot be filled in some other way, light planes have become expensive toys that are owned either by the wealthy, or by obsessives who are willing to spend half their life maintaining their aircraft or working for money to have someone else maintain it (an inevitable result of having a 50 year old plane).
So it all boils down to simple economics, in the end. You need a car to survive in this car-centric society. You need a place to live. You don't need a plane. So people make the rational decision and don't learn to fly because, well, it just isn't rational, the costs of buying and flying a light general aviation plane are far, far higher than jumping into a cattlecar and going someplace.
And let's not forget the poor performance of modern general aviation aircraft compared to jet airliners for long distance travel. Unlike in the period after WWII where airliners were not much faster than general aviation aircraft, airliners are now much faster than general aviation planes. A 737, one of Boeing's cheap cattlecar models, cruises at 500mph. A Mooney is considered "hot" and the top of the line model that'll set you back half a mill cruises at 275 mph, and most general aviation planes cruise around 175-185mph.
In short, general aviation cannot justify itself in any meaningful way at its current costs for the vast majority of people, even as a hobby. As a result people choose less expensive hobbies. Not a failure of a spirit of adventure... just a matter of dollars and cents. It's just too freakin' expensive to get into general aviation today for any but a small fanatical minority to do it.
GA is not dead, but it will soon only be a rich man's game.
My flight instructor in '90 wanted, of course, to be an ATP. He worked hard, and his experience climbed and climbed, and each time he interviewed or talked to those who did, the requirements climbed just faster than his experience.
And back then, the papers had stories about the airlines clamoring for pilots. But they didn't want "pilots," they wanted retired servicemen with 40k hours in heavies.
I'm guessing the flow of fresh pilots from the ranks of GA will soon dry up.
The airline pilots will be happy about the near eradication of the little traffic, and the general public will feel themselves safer.
At least I've still got flight sims.
(KBED's in my back yard. I learned at Tew-Mac.)
Nangleator, I remember Tew-Mac. There were some interesting wind currents there.
(Tew-Mac, as you know, is long gone.)
Yeah, it tore me up to see buildings where there used to be runway. Tore me up again to read about the former owner passing away. I wish I could have made Warren's funeral. I might have seen some friendly, old faces.
Runway 3/21 was 26 feet wide, and was only lighted about a third of the length. Landing on 21, the unlighted end, at night was simply a matter of descending into a black hole and hoping the first thing you'd see was the numbers and not branches.
The winds did make things interesting, as did the runway dimensions. I got my multi-engine rating there in the Grumman Cougar in very hot weather.
Badtux: I agree wholeheartedly. I learned to fly by bartering design and video production services in exchange for flight hours. I could have never afforded it on my own at all.
Since I moved away from that flight school, I haven't been pilot-in-command of an airplane in over two years. Why? It's just too darn expensive and I couldn't justify it.
Lately, however, I've been wanting to get back in the air. I did some research on the local flight schools. Of course, now all the flight schools' rental rates are $50-60 more per hour than they were two years ago. Just to get my biennial flight review done - which would be about three hours of ground school and a couple hours of flight time since I've been out of the cockpit so long - would set me back at least $400.
In this economy, on my income, and with all the things my wife and I want to do - take our first real vacation in two years, travel, fix up our house, etc. - flying is ridiculously far down the list. I love it. There's no better, more wonderful feeling than taking to the sky under your own power. But life has priorities, and strapping on a Cessna isn't one of them.
And that makes me sad.
BT/WP, Flying is expensive, no doubt. Unless one is wealthy, flying a standard-class airplane, even a Cessna 150, requires giving up other things. Sometimes a lot of other things.
N, when I did my second tailwheel transition in a L-4 at LWM, we shot a number of landings at Tew-Mac because there was a good crosswind and it was a bit of a challenge.
From Google Earth, it appears to be that a crappy housing development and a cheezy golf-course replaced the airport.
It does seem GA is now populated by the people ( like me ) who could not live without it. We all set our own priorities, and for me, flying is pretty near the top.
There's no better, more wonderful feeling than taking to the sky under your own power. But life has priorities, and strapping on a Cessna isn't one of them.
That makes me sad too, WickedPenguin. When I was poor, I flew only gliders. It has attractions and challenges all its own, but it is really flying, and much cheaper. Granted it's harder to take your friends along - it tends to be a solitary obsession - but it's a glorious thing.
...there's no sensation, compares with this. Suspended animation, state of bliss. Tongue-tied and twisted ...
Sailplanes can do it. The problem for me is that there is not a glider base within under an hour's drive. That makes for a long day.
LSAs haven't filled the gap, as a decent LSA is usually north of $100K and, at that price, you can go for a standard-class aircraft. (The only real reason for LSA is to get away from having to have a 3rd-Class medical.)
Hmm. How far is it to the nearest one?
http://www.ssa.org/sport/wheretofly.asp
My glider is 45 minutes away, which is about as close to the MSP class Bravo I'd want it.
Since gliding tends to be an all day - or most of the day - activity, that works out OK for me. It's not like you go hop in a glider for a flight after work... It's a weekend activity.
Sarah, nearest one is far enough away that it would almost be quicker to fly there.
Post a Comment