I think the kind of flyjacksonhole is working more in the good direction than a 400h/y GA private pilot. With the cost of aviation in general, you have to have a economic rational behind the flight, or only wealthy people interested in pilot things AND can really afford flying. Maybe that, being based in Cannes, I see too many jets and ATO and almost nothing in between (although I regularly fly and DR400 and Arrow4 in wingly flights), and it is, at the end, not a correct vision of european GA, but I don’t think GA can really been handled and maintained by private pilots and their planes.
Airlines and jet businesses are stronger and driving more money, but if we can get more people in a like flyjacksonhole does, it could help to sustain a place for small planes. And I do think flight sharing like wingly as good thing. The problem with flight sharing is that it’s aiming at lowering the cost, but it definitely increases flight hours of our club, so it’s good. But it doesn’t answer the need of an economical purpose, nobody earns money with flight sharing (except wingly for the moment :P ).
If in the UK we were allowed to land out of hours, and have PCL, I’d probably double the amount of long distance trips I do.
Schengen entry/exit is another issue (mostly if you live in the UK), which sadly is likely to not improve until I reach at least my 50s (I’m in mid 30s now), when I’ll be less likely to reap the benefits. (In a best scenario I wouldn’t be living here, not because I don’t like living here, but because there are better places to live when you are in semi-retirement)
There have always been quitters but they grow back. Regulations allow them an easy reentry today, so they are less likely to be completely “lost”. I don’t know one single flight school with a minimum of professionalism and friendlyness, that is not at it’s capacity limits. The three aeroclub-schools I know in detail have together around 80 active student pilots all year round.
The problem of stagnation of infrastructure is IMO not driven by pilot population, but to a much greater degree by non-flying reasons. Look at Bremerhaven, closed despite good GA useage. Essen, managed to death due to political reasons despite good GA useage. Kiel, public vote in favour of the airfield despite rediculous opening hours. Rheine doing well despite not being target of any noticable foreign GA. Look at Wellesbourne. When we visited the place was packed, no way you need to make losses over the airfield. Or Konstanz. Or Lüneburg. Not a single airfield being closed by too few traffic.
Yes, especially in Germany the Flugleiterzwang (and for that matter the Flugplatzzwang) is complete and utter nonsense. I would not argue that sensible useage options of airfields would not be beneficial, but I think neglecting the major impact by non-aviation related problems will result in fighting wrong reasons.
Peter wrote:
Unless people get away from the same easy runs, they give up flying, and that is the problem, because a shrinking pilot population eventually leads to the loss of infrastructure
I think the support of infrastructure is created by hours airborne, number of operational planes, and above all the number of people involved, spending time and money. People enjoy the aviation scene in many ways, being at the airport, building aircraft and flying them locally being one good example, and cross country flying being another. In the US, which is where long distance flying is relatively straightforward, there is a healthy overlap between the two groups and one encourages the other.
I think you miss the point being made, mh. Unless people get away from the same easy runs, they give up flying, and that is the problem, because a shrinking pilot population eventually leads to the loss of infrastructure, etc.
There is a presumption that the same easy runs deliver no value, and that isn’t always true. You could have a regular meetup with a dozen friends. We do this fairly often to Le Touquet, for example. But most people doing “burger runs” aren’t doing that. They are not flying to a meet-up. These are the people who are at most at risk of giving up, due to the low value they get out of it.
If the loss of infrastructure was not the danger, nobody would care why people fly. In the US the situation is fairly well protected so it matters much less.
“Death of GA” – anything lower wouldn’t do it, right?
Not one single burger run is harming anyones ability to use the aircraft for transport.
I don’t do hamburger runs. They bore me out. I do fly GA. 300h/year. Job related transport, (certification) test flights, flight training and earth observation. I am not endangered by anyone flying 100$ burgers.
I think it’s incorrect to conflate flying for recreation with limited local flying. Recreation includes flying places far away for the fun of doing it, the fun of getting there, the fun of being there. The larger issue that’s harming GA is aircraft owners under pressure to justify their activity to the uninvolved by claiming falsely that it’s stern stuff, done for transport, no fun at all, probably done on the basis of a calculation that shows a climate benefit 
That then increases the tendency toward regulating GA like a military/CAT activity, as done in Europe without much regard for normal people enjoying their lives traveling in planes. It’s a death spiral driven by unhealthy societal values.
People have every right to have fun flying, locally or long distance, without having to rationalize or explain it to authority or the uninvolved. Try telling the 165,000 buyers annually of new BMW motorcycles that they have to justify their activity in the same way, and see how that goes over with either them or the manufacturer. Try telling the thousands of people who drive to the Alps in winter that because it’s travel for recreation they should take a bus, then a train, then another bus every weekend for their day of skiing, and see how that goes over with them or the ski industry…
Yes indeed; the never-ending burger-run flying is the death of GA. FWIW, this was obvious to me even before I finished my PPL, and later it was the driver for writing up my trips which nowadays are everyday stuff to EuroGA pilots 
but back then it was very unusual to actually fly somewhere. Even today, I don’t think more than a few % have ever left their own country (and I am not talking about limitations like a lack of ELP).
That said, I am supposed to be heading for a BBQ at Cherbourg I will bring my own veg filling
That article is written by a 400hr/year pilot, in the US, which makes it all the more amazing because out there GA is genuinely usable.
https://generalaviator.blog/2019/07/03/the-100-hamburger-is-killing-general-aviation/
As I said a few posts ago. Without a real purpose GA is dead.
greg_mp wrote:
In the US do you need to have some kind of air transport certificate to operate, let’s say a Bonanza or a baron? I mean that a reason for very few pro operator of GA could be the fact that it’s really expensive and difficult to get money from this kind of bizness.
Yes, but the regulations are reasonable and applicable for the type of operation. Check out flyjacksonhole.
