> It may sound snobby - but I'm not super excited about the idea of lowering the barrier to entry for GA on a foundational skill basis. Like the light-sport rating, it encourages more people to be in the (already congested) airspace system who haven't really gained all the other skills necessary or experience to be there.
I'm not a pilot, but I've always wanted to go down the path. In theory - this should be rather exciting to a person like myself so as to lower the barrier to entry and allow me to just start. In fact I don't really like the idea of this and my first thought was: "this seems like the plane that other pilots hate" simply because of a lowered barrier to entry and new breed of "lazy" pilots. I could be 100% wrong.
The thing that turns me off from this is that when I do chart the path I want to learn and be able to do - the traditional way. And in fact I don't want to rely on software or inconsistent controls vs the norm. I'm all for the idea of making the cockpit easier to navigate and have situational awareness, but I'm not a fan of abstractions as much as I used to be.
So as a non-pilot who aspires to become one in the next decade I agree with the parent comment in that I do really hope the goal is not to lower the bar to become a pilot.
I wanted to do this too and was in a financial position to start lessons. Had raced cars in the past, rebuilt cars, mechanically savvy, fiddled around a whole heap with flight simulars, got excited about it. Paid my money for the initial 3 flights.
First time up (in a Cessna) beautiful clear day, low wind. Once we had done the safety checks I was instructed to taxi the plane. It was about as complicated as a ride-on mower and the throttle pull I swear is identical. No problem.
Instructor took over and punted the plane into the air. I was terrified. As I've written here before, a Cessna is like a Volkswagen Bug that somebody has thrown into the air. They shudder and shake and dip and every tiny pocket of turbulence throws them around. I completed the lesson without conveying my terror, did the turns, was able to identify stuff on the ground. Instructor landed the Cessna and I thanked him and told him I wouldn't be back.
I remember feeling the same way the first time I went up in a small plane (Cessna 150). I had a tourist ride in a small helicopter later (R44) and it was so much smoother. But I was probably safer in the Cessna.
The barrier to entry for learning to fly is literally a few hundred dollars for a discovery flight. You don't need to do any preparation and you will actually fly the plane the first time up. A discovery flight is flight training, and it goes in your log book.
we won't want to lower the bar in terms of the pilot's ability to stay safe. But we do want to lower the barrier to entry so that more people can learn to do it, do it safely, and enjoy all it's benefits.
One of the biggest barriers at this point is probably getting a medical. There are tons of perverse incentives there - getting one if you've ever been prescribed mental health meds, for instance, can be at best a ton of red tape.
A $500k aircraft that still requires a PPL solves neither of those, and getting the PPL is contingent on passing the medical, both inititally and at regular intervals thereafter.
I was not saying the plane proposed here will lower the barrier, I’m just stating what I think the barrier is.
I think 90% people who aren’t older than 60 or so would get the medical without a problem. If you would remove the medical requirement, you wouldn’t suddenly have double the private pilots. If planes were 1/10th of the price they currently are (both in purchase and operation), you would. Medical isn’t the main blocker to private aviation.
Sorry for that, I didn’t read the thread again when writing the reply. I’m still not sure if I would even call the medical one of the major barriers, but of course I don’t have a statistic on how many people wouldn’t pass a medical.
I'm not a pilot, but I've always wanted to go down the path. In theory - this should be rather exciting to a person like myself so as to lower the barrier to entry and allow me to just start. In fact I don't really like the idea of this and my first thought was: "this seems like the plane that other pilots hate" simply because of a lowered barrier to entry and new breed of "lazy" pilots. I could be 100% wrong.
The thing that turns me off from this is that when I do chart the path I want to learn and be able to do - the traditional way. And in fact I don't want to rely on software or inconsistent controls vs the norm. I'm all for the idea of making the cockpit easier to navigate and have situational awareness, but I'm not a fan of abstractions as much as I used to be.
So as a non-pilot who aspires to become one in the next decade I agree with the parent comment in that I do really hope the goal is not to lower the bar to become a pilot.