What can be done???

[Powerin]

and there lies part of the problem. There is no doubt that the Drifter would have been less expensive than the Foxbat, to purchase and operate!Frank.

Perhaps...but I also think it is an indicator that purchase price and running cost is not necessarily the biggest part of owning and hiring out an aircraft. I may be wrong, but I haven't seen many CFIs driving around in BMWs. I don't get the feeling there is big money to be made in hiring or training with any sort of aircraft.

 

 

[M61A1]

In 2000, I had a Drifter on line at a flying school, the insurance costs then were ridiculous, I imagine 14 years later, they're even worse. If there is some way to reduce those costs, do we think training cost will be lowered, or will schools pocket the difference?

 

The club environment at Clifton seems to work well, they have club owned aircraft, and club maintainers that do it for the love, but if I understand correctly, CASA and RAA are about to end lower maintenance costs by forcing biennial condition reports on all aircraft. In this case I am told that an L2 with any vested interest in the aircraft will not be able to do the report, so there goes club maintenance . I'm told that CASA is pushing this because of a recommendation from a coroners report. I think it rather pointless, given that training aircraft are already L2 maintained, and very few of our fatalities are occurring during training.

 

There are Drifters and Thrusters out there, but people seem to want to train in the ones that look like "real" aeroplanes.

 

The club environment seems to offer the lowest cost monetarily, but a high cost in time and involvement, a lot people don't want to get all tied up with other responsibilities. If a way can be found to lower insurance costs, the cost could be even lower, maybe that could tip people enough to accept some more club type responsibility as worthwhile.

 

The instructors out there will hate this, but the cost will never improve while recreational flying is a "business", it was meant to done for the "love", and should stay that way.

 

 

[PA.]

Adelaide Air Sports at Strathalbyn use rag and tube flying machines. http://www.airsports.com.au/index.htm

 

 

[ianwells]

I learnt to fly in a drifter with Wayne fisher. Previously had been for tifs in a lightwing and a low wing Technam, but after a tif with Wayne in his drifter at Lismore I decided to learn with him because it was WAY MUCH MORE FUN than the proper aircraft. The cost of the lessons wasn't very different and had no effect on my choice. Perhaps we need to put the fun back into flying and show people what ultralight flying is about. We need more instuctors like Wayne and Fari to spread the word.

 

Cheers and Fun Flying

 

Ian

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

When the GFC hit i thought that it would slow the growth of the more expensive types down and cause a swing back to traditional types. But we weathered the storm a little to well. In the USA their economy fell on its face LSA slowed right down and they saw a strong swing back towards 103 types. Many that had been hanging in the rafters were rebuilt and put back into service. Sales of PPGs also increased. So maybe being a little to cashed up is a problem.

 

 

[PA.]

First World problems Ozzie.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

You've said that a few dozen times Ozzie, just a one liner with no explanation.How about explaining what the impediments are to building/buying a Drifter/Thruster type aircraft today?

Ask Rob Thompson - he purchased the strut-braced Drifter back from China after they purchased it from Jim Fenton (Austflight), and found they did not have a market for it. To Rob's chagrin, it simply did not sell. A Drifter looks simple, but in reality it has around nine times the parts count of a Jabiru; this makes it more costly to build than it looks. And it's a more costly airframe to maintain. Nobody is going to manufacture the things as an act of charity; if they aren't a marketable proposition, nobody will market them. It's that simple.

One of the things RAA people constantly overlook is that the manufacturer has to make a dollar in order to exist. He has to keep on making a dollar, to continue to exist so you can buy spares from him when you need them. Therefore, buying the cheapest import you can find is not necessarily a smart move.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Have to put a ban on two seaters. If we only had single seaters then we would have twice as many aircraft flying as all the klingons that keep bludging rides would have to buy their own.

 

 

[planesmaker]

We can still fly reasonably inexpensively if you are prepared to build and fly your own 95.10. I am afraid we are stuck with quasi GA training with GA prices however building and owning can still be done on a fun budget. I have said for many years that AUF / RAA were re inventing GA and unfortunately it is so. Wish we had never heard of LSA! My 2 cents. Tom

 

 

[dazza 38]

Have to put a ban on two seaters. If we only had single seaters then we would have twice as many aircraft flying as all the klingons that keep bludging rides would have to buy their own.

A pioneer flightstar would be s nice single seater i reckon

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

E Spyder version be nicer.

 

 

[Powerin]

We can still fly reasonably inexpensively if you are prepared to build and fly your own 95.10. I am afraid we are stuck with quasi GA training with GA prices however building and owning can still be done on a fun budget. I have said for many years that AUF / RAA were re inventing GA and unfortunately it is so. Wish we had never heard of LSA! My 2 cents. Tom

You can call it quasi all you like....but the fact is they are not GA prices. Why do you think LSA is as popular as it is?

I still struggle to understand this animosity some have towards LSA or larger ultralights. It's a bit like blaming the Holden Commodore for the demise of the original VW beetle...and then going on to say people have too much money so we should ban Commodores and make everyone drive BMWs. But if they can't afford that they should buy an old VW beetle.

 

If pilots really wanted to fly 95.10s they would. There's absolutely nothing stopping them....except for the fact that, despite the low cost, the demand is getting less, and less manufacturers can afford to make planes that people don't buy. Back in the day any ultralight pilot worth their salt would build their own anyway. Why doesn't that happen much anymore?

 

Time marches on and perhaps the 95.10 aeroplane will go the way of the steam locomotive or the horse and sulky limited to those who have the time and motivation to build and fly their own. That would be a terrible shame...but it's not the fault of those of us who want to fly something faster and more substantial but still can't afford GA.

 

 

[cscotthendry]

In the UK (and Europe too I think) flying schools are allowed to use kit aircraft. The kits have to be constructed and inspected to fairly stringent rules. But surely this would help to bring costs down somewhat.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

In the UK (and Europe too I think) flying schools are allowed to use kit aircraft. The kits have to be constructed and inspected to fairly stringent rules. But surely this would help to bring costs down somewhat.

Not true in the UK Scott - schools have to use factory built aircraft AFAIK

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[pylon500]

Just a clarification on pricing when dealing with engine use/cost..

 

Lightwing example;

 

GR582 replacement engine cost ~$6000, replacement rate -every 300 hours.

 

GR912 replacement engine cost ~$20000, replacement rate -every 2000 hours.

 

Result, by the time you replace the first life 912, you have replaced 6 582's!!

 

That's $36000 worth of engines.

 

This is why bean counters like GR912's, even though the aircraft is now heavier, not balanced as well and a bit different on the ground.

 

Note Some customer values may differ to those stated above

 

 

[kgwilson]

You can call it quasi all you like....but the fact is they are not GA prices. Why do you think LSA is as popular as it is?I still struggle to understand this animosity some have towards LSA or larger ultralights. It's a bit like blaming the Holden Commodore for the demise of the original VW beetle...and then going on to say people have too much money so we should ban Commodores and make everyone drive BMWs. But if they can't afford that they should buy an old VW beetle.

 

If pilots really wanted to fly 95.10s they would. There's absolutely nothing stopping them....except for the fact that, despite the low cost, the demand is getting less, and less manufacturers can afford to make planes that people don't buy. Back in the day any ultralight pilot worth their salt would build their own anyway. Why doesn't that happen much anymore?

 

Time marches on and perhaps the 95.10 aeroplane will go the way of the steam locomotive or the horse and sulky limited to those who have the time and motivation to build and fly their own. That would be a terrible shame...but it's not the fault of those of us who want to fly something faster and more substantial but still can't afford GA.

I agree. If the demand was there there would be a good supply of 95.10s. With modern materials etc it seems aviation has evolved twice & it is only regulation that has got in the way. Most of the top end ultralights & LSAs have much better performance that the GA machines of 20 or 30 years ago. The only problem is regulation which means they must only have 2 seats or be registered GA. Now the RPL is finally a reality, builders like me have a choice of registering experimental GA or RA & fly with a drivers licence medical in either category.

 

It would be better for GA & LSA/RA all to be in the same group IMHO & on the same register as they are in NZ. The trouble is that CASA has outsourced to RA-Aus & changing now would be pretty hard.

 

The rag & tube back to basics aficionados need to promote & develop & gain a following if that is at all possible. Come up with some new innovative & cheap to produce designs with simple cheap reliable engines & you never know, there may be lots of new keen to learn wannabe pilots who can only afford $50.00 to $80.00 an hour or whatever. The question is this "Is that demand there or is it just nostalgia from those who long for days gone by".

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Part 103 (sub 254lb with 5USgal.s of gas) in the US is doing well.

 

 

[Powerin]

Part 103 (sub 254lb with 5USgal.s of gas) in the US is doing well.

Going to become a dealer and import some Belites or Air-bikes FT?

 

 

[mnewbery]

I have no solution. Yet. From the beginning to the late 80's (?) EAA published tip of the month for home builders. This made sense when people had the time, context and need for such things as building Leeon Davis' DA-11. Now we buy new, pay for servicing and replace (or cease activity) when beyond economical repair.

 

The only people with a shed full of tools are tradies and retirees. Your mechanic doesn't do wood in his spare time any more than your dentist does millinery in hers. They contract it out. Until it becomes too expensive then they stop rather than learning to do it themselves.

 

So, paying $100/hr labour for a LAME might make sense on a new $399k Cessna but the same LAME will charge $100/hr for a busted a$$ C150 Aerobat I could probably learn to fix myself. If I had time. Which I don't and I'd rather spend that time flying.

 

Time for a change. Aviation is beginning to feel like joining the clergy. Give up everything else in your life, or else.

 

Structural reform is the thing we are looking for and it works like this. Pick a number like $80/hr then decide what fits inside that box. If you don't like it, innovate. Sometimes the motivation is positive, sometimes it's negative.

 

More to come...

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Going to become a dealer and import some Belites or Air-bikes FT?

I would love too, there is certainly a market there for this sort of flying.

 

 

[robinsm]

I believe there are still flying schools using Gazelles, lightwings, NZ Waikato use an Xair. Don't give up yet, there are some out there.

 

 

[Oscar]

This seems to be another reprise of a hoary old argument that's been going around for yonks.

 

RAA evolved from the AUF and the HORSCOT enquiry was the chief motivator for that. The reason for the HORSCOT enquiry was the safety record of ultralight aviation, with the single-seater, ludicrously light weight and height (and to a degree, I suspect also) area restrictions that applied. The AUF fought for better aircraft and more sensible restrictions on use, so that (for a start) actual flight training could be accomplished using 2-seat aircraft.

 

The quid pro quo for heavier, more capable and less restricted aircraft was quite obviously going to be more regulation. That is a sine qua non of our society. As soon as you move from the 'If I want to kill myself, it's my damn business' of having an unregistered paddock-basher on your own place to interacting with public space, you have to accept greater regulation. (and let's not get into the philosophical argument of whether one has the right to even kill oneself in private without doing harm to others, since Church, State and the medical profession will all call your right invalid. Oh, and be sure you've done your BAS before you take leave of the mortal coil.)

 

RAA-class aircraft in Australia (and we rather led the way there) evolved along with the new regime, with manufacturers such as Lightwing, Jabiru, Skyfox et al. coming into being. These are all competent aircraft with varying degrees of capability and safety far removed from a plastic chair suspended under an umbrella powered by a chainsaw engine. You can go places in them and carry more than a copy of your will in your back pocket to assist those who have to recover your body.

 

The market success of these aircraft says quite simply that there are people who wanted the greater capability, safety etc. That's human nature for you. The goggomobile - a cheap and nasty but basically capable means of transporting people across the terrain, is no more and there are no modern equivalents. If there were a market for it, I imagine BMW would still make the Isetta 600, but it seems to be doing ok with a range of cars that start, (I think) from around $50k and go to what - $250k +?)

 

Perhaps it is time for a break-away group to secede from the RAA and go back to the string-and-glad-wrap days. Good luck to you; having done an extensive rebuild on a Thruster and found, to my horror, that it featured componentry that I would not put in a Mirror dinghy, I shan't be joining you. I support the right of the individual to do as he or she pleases as longs as it harms nobody else - and for that reason, I would rather see this class of (using the term loosely) aircraft entirely distinguished from RAA. Perhaps that itself should be inverted, and the 450kg+, two-seater aircraft be re-designated as 'Light Aviation', so that the safety record of one class of aircraft can be classed as 'Recreational' and live with the possibility of being lumped as a 'Dangerous Recreational Activity' with the regulatory freedom, restricted areas of operation and insurance negation that will likely result.

 

Perhaps, if CASA can be induced to accept some changes in thinking, the RPL plus an RAA-style owner-maintenance regime can sort out the anomalies of the wide disparity in types and cost of small aircraft. That might break the apparent nexus of having to have minimal aircraft and competent aircraft forced to share one bed.

 

 

[robinsm]

My Xair, purchased as a kit, then purchased a motor, instruments etc cost me all up (built it myself, 19.. registered and then trained in it as the builder after the 25hrs had been flown off, made for very affordable flying.) cost me about 28K all up. Resale seems to be about 17 - 20k so relatively cheap flying. Who the hell has 100,000 plus to spend on an rec aircraft. I would be too worried about scratching it. I can go aanywhere they can go, albeit slower but then it is RECREATIONAL flying, not business flying. I do it for relaxation not ulcers.

 

 

[Tagati]

G'Day everyone I have read through this thread and thought I might add my 2 bob. Firstly I am an outsider. I'm a 40yo man who has a deep desire to fly. Always have. I'm also broke. So I do a LOT of looking and trying to work out the cheapest and most accessible way I can fulfil my dream of flight. OK so. I have established my un credibility and you all know I am talking through my hat.

 

The reason I sometimes look at the larger ultralights is because my ultimate goal is to be able to take my missis friends and family on joy flights. Not flights from here (Townsville) to Brisbane. Just 20 min flights around our home. To share the joy of flight. So Ill look at a drifter or such and as the missis is walking past I will say “Look honey that has 2 seats I could take you up in that” Her answer is to hit me over the head with a rolled up newspaper say “No way would I go up in that …... thing”. So when I am big dollar dreaming I look at Jab's, Lightwings, and Skyfox's etc.

 

But …. When I look at what I am thinking are achievable ways for me to go flying I find myself looking at PPG's and microlights. The pipe and rag flying is still there it is just done with the HGFA. Now please nobody be upset with me I am but a poor ground dweller but That is just what I thought reading trough this thread. Now if anyone wants to give me something that fly's and learn me how to fly it I am all ears. But until then I'll keep lookin and dreamin thanks for reading

 

 

[mnewbery]

Aviat Husky running on compressed gas? Won't save a MOGAS user money but a four seater normally burning avgas and used for training will be materially cheaper for the owner and the trainee.