Does LSA really make flying cheaper?

[drseti]

In reality it means that there will be virtually no new UL pilots

Alex, I strongly suspect this is not an unintended consequence, but rather an objective of FAA all along. Part 103 was not very popular with the higher-ups. They couldn't kill it, but they could improve it out of existence.

[acensor]

... ity it means that there will be virtually no new UL pilots

Alex, I strongly suspect this is not an unintended consequence, but rather an objective of FAA all along. Part 103 was not very popular with the higher-ups. They couldn't kill it, but they could improve it out of existence.

I love your phrase 'improve it out of existance.'

I'm not a great fan of conspiracy theories, but I wouldn't rule that out.
FAA consists of many people...so it could be a mix of views and motives,

A bit of a counter to your "FAA wanted to kill UL" theory is they did sign off on the BFI and UL-trainer concept for IIRR more than two decades, and they did turn an extremely blind eye on fat-ULs for a long time. You'd think if there was strong desire to kill UL they'd have been cracking down... Such as catching a few fat UL pilots and really making an example of them. They would have been in their rights to fine a fat-UL pilot tens of thousands of dollars by racking up all the multiple violations that flying an unlicensed unregistered aircraft that violated probably dozens of regs, and with no pilot license to boot.
The only particular case I read of of of FAA types confronting a owner of a fat-UL they essentially told him "go get it certified."

The UL community is a bit to blame having lobbied hard for being able to legally fly craft weighing more than 254 pounds. Again, though some benefitted (the approx 2000 UL pilots who were allowed to and did credit their logged UL hours toward their SP certifications) I bet most who pushed hardest didn't realize they were playing a role in seriously clamping the door shut into UL flying.

My own quasi-conspiracy theory <g> involves the CFI community.
Many GA pilots and CFIs were, often with reason, down on the idea of having folks buzzing into their traffic patterns at slow speeds and with quite possibly no training and no radio. And perhaps CFIs were hoping the SP license would bring a welcome influx of new paying students.

Regardless or the motives and the players, might you agree the result is a real damper on UL , which used to be the easiest door into flying?

[bshort]

"....Add that to the alarming dropping number of new pilots each year....the last "hey-day" for GA was in 1980...and after that, all hell broke loose and we're now down to around the same number of active pilots that we had during the early 1940s..something of like 300-400k. GA will NEVER recover until something is done about costs....

The more each day goes by, I wonder...are the good times really over? They are in Europe...good luck flying over there. Heck, even Australia, land of the outback, has killed aviation. We're the last breed here in the US...we need to stick together. Frankly, I'm just shocked at the number of new pilots each year....and don't get me started on the age bracket of when people start flying....it just does not look good at all for GA in the future."


-----
I used to fly hang-gliders in the 70s.
Had some informal hours at controls of friends' GA aircraft.

With the comming of the Sport Pilot rule thought that was my doorway into flying. For many of the reasons others listed here, it wasn't.
For example, after 5-hours dual CFI time at a LSA training center I had to travel 600 miles to get to and pay for lodging realized that the "$3500" typical estimate was going to be a LOT more than that. Also realized that after I got back home to near Medford, OR I would have a useless certification as within 150 miles of me there's not a single LSA available for rent nor any flying club with an LSA. So unless I purchased an LSA (read "have $15,00 to $120,000 in lose change sitting around") I'd never fly.

So I decided to investigate flying Ultralight 103.
Lots of aircraft available.
Fewer than before because some of the fat ultralights have been N-numbered as LSA's but still plenty.

Some are fat illegal ULs, which if purchased leaves the pilot in a pretty awkward place.
But even ignoring that, the bigger problem in that now, since LSA rules, it's impossible to get UL training.
No more Basic Flight instructors, no more two seat UL trainers.

There USED to be about 6 ultralight instructors in this area. One could get UL training in a two-seater for about $50 per hour total cost (plane plus instructor. 10 hours was usually OK to get you to the point where you could safely land and fly and know not to fly a lefthand pattern into a right-hand-pattern-airstrip, etc.

They all found the option of getting their two seater ElSA certified and getting a Sport Pilot CFI certification too onerous and dropped out. Particularly after they discovered that despite doing that after Jan 2010 their ELSA could no longer be used for training anyway.

So, not a single possibility, at ANY hourly price exists for UL training within hundreds of miles of here.
Legally anyone can buy a part 103 new or used UL, strap into it, and take off with no training whatever.
In reality it means that there will be virtually no new UL pilots (and did you know that per my contact at EAA as many as 2000 of the approximately 4000 present sport pilots are UL pilots who got their experience on ULs and got their time grandfathered into credit toward their Sport Pilot training?) except maybe a few skilled or stupid enough to strap into a UL with no training?

As I said, whatever the pros and cons of Sport Pilot, it has seriously impacted UL flying a low cost high availability route into flying. Doubt we will ever again see the robust UL activity we saw in the 90's.

Had I in 2005 seen the handwriting on the wall I'd have gotten my UL training then before the door slammed shut.

On net it appears to me that LSA failed to open the door to more pilots and, given that it has virtually shut the door on UL, has actually reduced accessibility. The main beneficiaries are the many private pilots I know of who use the Sport Pilot rule to be able to continue flying when they are concerned about passing their medical. Most of those are actually safe pilots, but in a few cases I'm sure it will mean that someone who medically really should NOT be flying is flying. Yet another unintended negative consequence of the Sport Pilot certification.

Classic case, IMO, or a will intended initiative gone wrong because of the devil-is-in-the-details principle.

My two cents.
Alex

I agree with you that the general quoted price is almost always higher. If, as an instructor, I said "ahh your looking at 8K" I would say "see ya." LSA's for rent are few and far between. They really are. I'm pushing the part 103 PPC idea around now. The money pit is deep enough as it is.

[drseti]

"ahh your looking at 8K" I would say "see ya."

Yes, the reality is, flying ain't cheap. Along your lines, I tell my prospective students, "ahh you're looking at $5k," which is a realistic figure for SP, for the average student at my flight school. (Some go higher; a few go lower; nobody gets licensed in the FAA minimum hours.) None has yet said "see ya," but about half drop out before getting licensed. I can't say how many ran out of money, but the completion rate is disappointingly low, throughout the whole industry. Cost most likely contributes to that.

[NCPilot]

People are scared of living. I can't get several of my co-workers to go flying. They'd sooner get shot in the face than take their chances in the air. I think it's a combination of a fear-based society and poor science education.

I'll agree with that, entirely. I'm a college student, and typical college students really do some crazy/stupid things. I've got friends who say "sure, I'll go". The minute you give them a time to show up at the airport, they ALWAYS have some excuse.

I know how that is, the only family member I can get to fly with me is my dad, my mom, brother, sister-in-law and niece/nephew won't fly with me.

I think the idea that small airplanes are death traps can also be seen in the general public. They'd rather fly in a big airliner than a small GA/SP aircraft, even though they're built to the same standard.

LSA actually fit my mission profile, I fly solo about 99% of the time, and I am a rec. flyer that flies on Sunday, and maybe go on a few XC trips, so it doesn't really make any sense for me to fly a Piper Cherokee 180 when all I'm doing is either working on my piloting skills, poking holes in the skies or going on weekend trips.

LSA fits my mission profile at half the cost.

[drseti]

if I were to read the club rules by the letter, the 12hrs can't be averaged.

I can't speak for your club, Brian, but my rental agreement at http://avsport.org/docs/rental.pdf reads, in part:

5. Any renter renting AvSport aircraft for a full day or longer will be charged for a minimum of 3 hours of flight time per day.

My intention is simply that, since you're taking a revenue-producing plane out of circulation, I need to be compensated enough to cover my fixed expenses. So, if you're gone four days, you pay for (4 * 3) = 12 hours of Hobbs time. So, you can fly six hours to your vacation destination one day, stay over three nights, fly six hours home on the fourth day, and end up paying only for the time you're actually flying.

What we who rent aircraft try to avoid is having you fly to a vacation destination, stay there a week, fly home, and only pay for a couple of hours of flying, while denying other customers the use of the plane. We wouldn't stay in business very long at that rate. Note that Hertz generally charges you by the day when you rent a car, not by the mile.

[acensor]

"......I agree with you that the general quoted price is almost always higher. If, as an instructor, I said "ahh your looking at 8K" I would say "see ya." LSA's for rent are few and far between. They really are. I'm pushing the part 103 PPC idea around now. The money pit is deep enough as it is."

Pardon my ignorance. I know what "part 103" is, but what's "PPC?"

And what did you mean your pushing the part 103 PPC idea around?

Some other way of getting pilots into UL flying?
As I pointed out it looks to me that ways of getting any UL training are now far and few between and pretty expensive (compared to pre 2004) as it requires access to at least a Sport Pilot Instructor and an SLSA (as ELSAs can't be use as trainers.)

[bshort]

As a recreational flyer as well, I don't travel far. I just like to get up, feel the wind, look around and take a few photos. My intentions with SP were never to take trips to Vegas or some other destination.

PPC is a powered parachute. There are several ppc's out there with 503's that still make weight. Of course you are bound by the rules of 103, but for getting out and piddling around your area (which I like) then it should fit the bill just fine.

I just need to face some facts. I will most likely never own an SLSA fixed wing craft. I could swing it sure, but I'd be walking to the store and living in a shoe box. The reality for me is that if ownership of my own flying machine is to happen, a PPC is more likely to happen.

You can still be trained in an e-lsa. It happpens everyday. Challenger II training, PPC training, etc. I believe you're supposed to have a LODA, but they still train without.

[drseti]

what's "PPC?"

Powered parachute.

[NCPilot]

The only way I'll be able to afford an LSA is if I build a kit, which I plan on doing. I know I can finance the aircraft, but to be honest I would much rather own the aircraft outright, that'll cut down on the cost of it and I won't feel pressured to make payment on it every month.

[acensor]

There are several ppc's out there with 503's that still make weight. Of course you are bound by the rules of 103, but for getting out and piddling around your area (which I like) then it should fit the bill just fine. .......

..........You can still be trained in an e-lsa. It happpens everyday. Challenger II training, PPC training, etc. I believe you're supposed to have a LODA, but they still train without.

I agree that it's still _POSSIBLE_ to get some UL training today, but much harder to find and much more expensive than before the Sport Pilot LSA rules killed the two-seat UL trainer and the BFI UL instructor off.

Yes, you can legally train in an ELSA if you own it. But a CFI or Sport Pilot Instructor can not train you in his ELSA (all Challenger II's etc are ELSAs.)
Typical FAA convoluted rules that leave us out in the cold.
Is someone who wants to get UL training to fly, say a Challenger single seat UL going to first buy a two seat Challenger LSA to train in?

And surely you don't consider training in a Challenger II suitable training for someone who's going to fly a part 103 PPC?

Equally relevant: My situation is not unusual. Let's say I _am_ determined to get UL training in a two-seat UL-like SLA the two closest location are about 500 miles from me.
And after paying for travel, overnight lodging, for say 3 days, food, I'd then be paying $125 per hour (aircraft plus trainer -- remember now I'm paying CFI-level, not BFI-level trainer fees) for about 10+ hours -- $1200+ on top of my own logistics costs.
AND I would not even have my own UL there to be able to get any ground monitered solo in it.
Carefully arrange all the costs and shedule to go there for a 3 day weekend and get two days of bad cross winds after arriving and you're back almost to square one.

In short, UL traiing is now much more expensive and inconvenient than the situation before LSA rules, where I had a choice of about 8 local instructors at under $50 per hour plane+trainer, on our own mutually convenient schedule around our schedules and the weather.

[bshort]

Good points! Affordable UL training has ceased to exist. With the creation of SP, UL was (for the most part) eliminated. In reality, SP is just a way for medically disqualified pilots to fly. The training and rental fees are the same, just spread out over a wider area.

The creation of SP was touted as "allowing more to enjoy the experience of flight." I believe it really priced more out by decimating UL. My .02 ramble.

[NCPilot]

It does suck that SP has killed UL. flying a UL does look like fun. One of the problems I'm seeing right now with SP is lack of rental fleet. There is a guy who teaches out of his SportCruiser here in my town, but I don't know if he rents it out. Until the SP rental fleet grows to the same size as GA rental fleet is, many people may feel like it's better to just get the PPL, and rent GA aircrafts until they can afford their own LSA.

[rsteele]

The only way I'll be able to afford an LSA is if I build a kit, which I plan on doing. I know I can finance the aircraft, but to be honest I would much rather own the aircraft outright, that'll cut down on the cost of it and I won't feel pressured to make payment on it every month.

You can save a bundle buying a "used kit". That is one that someone started and didn't complete. Just make sure you can replace pieces that are missing or damaged. It may require getting different partial kits from different individuals.

Ron

[drseti]

It does suck that SP has killed UL. flying a UL does look like fun. One of the problems I'm seeing right now with SP is lack of rental fleet.

I have one student who trained with me in the SportStar, got his SP license, and now uses it to fly his own N-numbered ultralight. The only caveat is that he trained in a plane with a Vh > 87 knots, so he needed a logbook endorsement to fly his UL with a Vh < 87.