Rod Machado's New PPL Manual

On Mar 26, 1:55 am, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:
>
> Aside from all the "feel good" reasons, the FBOs, like any other
> business, do not see the risk-reward economic benefits in their favor.
> Like most small businessmen, they have great fear in leading the market
> rather than following and reacting to it. If all FBOs had a slew of
> people waiting to spend their flight instruction $$$ with them, things
> would rapidly change. The GA industry, led by the mfgs, have failed to
> develop that demand.

If you think "feel good reasons" don't play a part in choice of what,
when, and where to purchase, you really don't understand the
marketplace and business at all.



Dan Mc

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:18:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>>> I don't think that I have ever seen a hobby, pleasure sport or job field
>>> that appears to go out of its way to place barriers, hurdles and
>>> hoop-jumping as GA. My novitiate guess is that this must stem from a
>>> post-War mentality when pilots were trained and coming into GA ready to
>>> fly in gobs.
>> There is indeed a "macho mystique" associated with pilots in general
>> that attracts a specific demographic to flying and discourages the rest
>> of a potential market. Not a good business model at all.
>
> This is a fundamental failure that has to be laid at the feet of the
> Cessnas of the world. Unless I missed it (surely could have), where is
> the consolidation of the major mfgs efforts (monies) to promote GA? Not
> to promote Piper, to promote GA?
>
> Competitors in most any underexposed market, when faced with entry level
> barriers, have found that it is a strong economic model to *first*
> promote their market (GA); let the competition begin...when there are
> folks to compete for.
>
It's an interesting concept for sure, and to some extent has been done
by the major manufacturers in the past, but not as a push into the GA
base as a push for GA alone.

With only a few major manufactures competing for the same customer base,
and in such a limited market, anytime this has been done, the pitch has
usually centered both on the positives of GA, AND as these positives
applied to the manufacturer's product.

Both Cessna and Piper have done the introductory pilot program and
sponsored the "Flight Center" concept. I don't recall any major
manufacturer advertising or promoting the concept of GA without a
product tie in.

I believe there are industries that do general activity advertising but
to my knowledge aviation might not have been one of them. I'm sure an
argument could be made for doing it, but I just can't see any of the
existing majors going that route. There might be some benefit, but none
that I personally can see that would justify the expenditure as opposed
to a pure product advertising program that includes the benefits of
enjoying what GA has to offer as a residual or peripheral built into the
advertising push.


--
Dudley Henriques

On Mar 27, 11:16 am, Larry Dighera <LDigh...@att.net> wrote:

> But the 800 lbs gorilla in the room that no one is mentioning here is
> our inate fear of, and the risk posed by, heights. That's probably
> the first turn-off for those who bother to consider GA at all.

Most people are nervous about climbing a 20 foot extension ladder, yet
most readily walk up a jetway to fly to Orlando.

I think the perception of height is very different in an airplane than
it is on a ladder, or a roof, or on belay.

My wife hates heights, but has flown. The thing she doesn't like are
the "bumps" that make the airplane feel like it's "falling."


Dan Mc

On Mar 27, 12:13 pm, Gig 601XL Builder <wrgiac...@REMOVE>
wrote:
>
> We took off and there was no problem. So this made me figure out that I
> wasn't really afraid of heights I was afraid of falling.

Absolutely.

And it's a natural human reaction, which is a good thing.


Dan Mc

Back to the original topic...

The sample pages for this book look much better -- better layout and
graphics, not as busy as the instrument manual.

Amazon isn't stocking this edition yet and the price is steep --
$64.95 plus s/h.

A close second and worth a look is the ASA Pilot Manual series.
Shopping around I purchased all three volumes for less than the price
of the Jepp Private Pilot book.


Dan Mc

In rec.aviation.student Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> wrote:
> But the 800 lbs gorilla in the room that no one is mentioning here is
> our inate fear of, and the risk posed by, heights. That's probably
> the first turn-off for those who bother to consider GA at all.

I'm skeptical of this. Hundreds of millions of people fly commercially all
the time. All the times I've done it, I've never encountered anyone who
mentioned or acted as though they were afraid of heights but felt that
they had to fly anyway. I have no doubt that fear of heights stops some
people, but I don't think it's any large number. (And I realize that
commercial planes and light aircraft would have different effects on
people this way, but I still don't think this accounts for a large
proportion of the population.)

Wandering off the subject a bit, I have a pretty fierce fear of heights.
Any time I'm on the upper floors of a tall building, I try to stay away
from the windows. It's something I can get used to with time; I spent an
entire school year living on the 15th floor of my college dorm building,
but that's not particularly high either. I'll go up to the top of
landmarks to sightsee but tend to stay away from the edges if I can.

Airplanes, on the other hand, cause no problems for me whatsoever. Even in
a really light single-seater getting smacked around by turbulence, or
making steep turns and looking straight down, I have no trouble. It's
weird.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

On Mar 27, 5:48 pm, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:
>
> I stood on a 55 story roof, at the edge, in a wind, no problem. Same
> thing with WTC 1. BIG problem, never got to the edge, low wind. Was it
> the WTC "sway", I don't know. Too scared to figger out :)

Nearly a year to the day I stood on the observation platform, I
returned to the WTC site... on September 13th & 14, 2001.


Dan Mc

On Mar 28, 6:33 pm, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:10:56 -0700 (PDT), Dan wrote:
> > On Mar 28, 4:59 pm, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:
>
> >> I have. Read.
>
> > I have.
>
> > YAWN
>
> > Question: Are you a certified pilot yet with your "200 hours in the
> > left seat"??
>
> Then you didn't read.


Somehow I have better things to do than tracking down every
intentionally deceptive thing you write. There are so many, even a CIA
wiretap would be insufficient.

And -- once again -- you fail to reply to the direct question.

I wonder why?


Dan Mc

On Mar 29, 1:34 pm, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:

And -- once again -- you fail to reply to the direct question.

I wonder why?

Dan Mc

On Apr 1, 9:57 am, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:

> > You were probably too busy humping a ruck in that LRRP unit, or
> > scaling Everest, or building time in a Lear, then...
>
> > Dan Mc
>
> Hump a ruck?

Yep, "hump a ruck."

If you had spent any time in LRRP or Rangers you would know that
expression.

Got ya.