Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: Fly vs. Drive
Message-ID: <319@terak.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 31-Jan-85 13:06:12 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.319
Posted: Thu Jan 31 13:06:12 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Feb-85 03:24:34 EST
References: <20095@lanl.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Terak Corporation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 45

Hot dog, I think I may have made myself clear this time.

Now, let's work from my premise that under the current circumstances
people can't justify flying unless
  1) there's a business paying at least part of the bills,
  2) they're independently wealthy, or
  3) they enjoy flying and are willing to pay for that enjoyment.

I maintain that the reason that personal flying is in such a slump
right now is that the industry does not acknowledge the above "truth".
I would suggest that until the industry comes to grips with this
"truth", the personal flying slump worsen.

Once we acknowledge the situation, there are two ways to correct it
(by my count).  One way is to promote flying as an enjoyable pastime.
The other is to lower the cost of personal flying as transportation.
(Actually, there is a third way -- make more people independendtly
wealthy :-)

Both of those goals should be pursued.  But it will take time to
bring down the cost, and I don't think that personal flying will
survive until then if that's the only path we take.  I think that
promoting flying as an enjoyable pastime is a mandatory "stop-gap"
step, and maybe not a bad idea in the long run as well.

So, my suggested program:  1) acknowledge that personal flying cannot
currently be justified on transportation value alone;  2) promote
personal flying as an enjoyable pastime;  and  3) develop ways of
lowering the cost of personal flying so that it truly can be justified
entirely on transportation value.  These steps to be taken in that
order.

This whole discussion started with the Primary Aircraft proposal.
Some people feel that it can bring about a miracle cure by single-
handedly conquering "point #3".  If I believed that, I would have kept
quiet.  But I feel that it will not have revolutionary impact on the
costs.  And what impact it does have will *not* be on "transportation"
type planes, but rather on "fun" type planes.  And the hullaballoo
about it keeps us from recognizing the real problem.

We need to address the "cardiac arrest" of personal flying, and
only AFTER that is under control should we divert our attention
to the "broken leg" issues like reducing the cost of certification.
-- 
Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug