The Aviation Thread [Contains Lots of Awesome Pictures]

To me the cost difference between a sport pilots license and the full blown private pilot license don't justify the restrictions you're limited with on just the sport. Only being able to carry one passenger can be inconvenient for activities with groups of people. Not being able to fly at night can really mess up your trip itinerary. For example, the weather is bad during the day but clears up at night. With a sport license you're stuck in a hotel whereas with a private you can fly on no problem. Not to mention night flying is a lot of fun. But the biggest downside with the sport license comes from the airspace restrictions. Unless you're in the middle of nowhere there's going to be at least class D somewhere in your area. Flying anywhere near a major city would be a nightmare. If I remember right in order to legally fly through an airspace on a sport license you have to receive training and get an endorsement for that specific airspace.

As far as affordable aircraft probably the best way to go is partial ownership. When 2-4 people are sharing the maintenance costs of a plane it becomes quite affordable.
 
Hmm, the private license here doesn't allow night or bad weather flying - They both require an endorsement.

I should move to the US and do my flight training there.....seems to be quiet a bit cheaper than Aus.
 
nsx_23 said:
Flying > Motorcycling.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to that because I'm not a pilot. What I can say is that with literally no income I was able to save enough coins to buy a beater motorbike and trade up to my VFR in only three purchases. Also, an M1 is way cheaper than a pilots license.
 
Well, obviously motorcycling is cheaper. Heck, I plan on/have thoughts of getting my bike license and maybe a beater bike like this:

postieburnout.jpg


with my tax returns. Obviously I don't plan on smoking the rear wheels everywhere I go. :lol:

But for fast traveling a plane will beat pretty much anything. Whether its more fun is the subjective question.
 
^ Old, small Hondas. Nice! :cool:

As someone who rides and flies it's hard to pick which one is more fun. They're two very different animals. With the bike I just hop on and go wherever I feel like and just enjoy the ride. With flying much more planning is needed and you're much more engaged during the whole process. But nailing that smooth landing where you can't feel the impact of tire on tarmac is just sublime. Stalls and steep turns are a lot of fun too. Not to mention the amazing views from the air.
 
I would love to become a pilot, I always have. I just wish it was more affordable.
 
Don't we all wish it was more affordable.
 
Yeah, but only for us. Let the peasants walk.
 
I remember about a year ago I was shown a picture of what looked a lot like a UH-60 Black Hawk in RAF colours, but it was in fact a sort of prototype longer Westland Lynx. It looked amazing.

Anyone got any info on it?
 
^Wasn't that supposed to be new Marine One for Obama?
 
Chaos said:
The Merlin probably? (I hadn't noticed they changed the name from EH101 to AW101, but whatever, it's still a Merlin)
Click to expand...

It used to be EH as in European Helicopter International or similar so EHI101 but that became EH101 then Agusta bought Westland so now it's the AW101.

The US101 was based on the AW101 but the aircraft has been a classic example of defense procurement failure. The absolute obsession the military have for protecting the president lead to it being so over specified and so expensive that they've kept the exceedingly old current aircraft instead even though it doesn't meet any of the criteria that the US101 did.
 
Donington said:
I remember about a year ago I was shown a picture of what looked a lot like a UH-60 Black Hawk in RAF colours, but it was in fact a sort of prototype longer Westland Lynx. It looked amazing.

Anyone got any info on it?
Click to expand...

Not the WildCat by any chance?

AW159-Lynx-Wildcat1.jpg


Or the AW149?

aw149%20mockup-thumb-450x320.jpg
 
nsx_23 said:
Yep, the cost is insanely high over here for flight training. Its almost $6000 just to get to GFPT, then another $6000 to get to PPL.....and then you'd still pay another fortune for endorsements for twin-engine or night flying.....<_<
Click to expand...

I believe that's along the lines of if you can't afford the license you can't afford the aircraft, begone peasant. And what good is being licensed with nothing to fly?
 
Some aircraft I took pictures of when I was in the USN on deployment.

107_0724.jpg


107_0738.jpg


107_0739.jpg


RoyalNetherlandsUNREP-1.jpg


100_1823.jpg


133_1539.jpg


DSC_0127.jpg
 
WillDAQ said:
Not the WildCat by any chance?

AW159-Lynx-Wildcat1.jpg


Or the AW149?

aw149%20mockup-thumb-450x320.jpg
Click to expand...

It was probably one of those two, looking back.

I'm sure it wasn't a Merlin, I'm in Devon a lot so I see those helicopters quite a bit.
 
Ramseus said:
I believe that's along the lines of if you can't afford the license you can't afford the aircraft, begone peasant. And what good is being licensed with nothing to fly?
Click to expand...

Hmm, but opening up flying to more people surely can't be a bad thing? Its not like the training standards will drop, so that should help in eliminating as many morons as possible.

Also, the point is that we down here seem to be getting shafted when it comes to aircraft prices, which sucks.
 
KaJuN said:
To me the cost difference between a sport pilots license and the full blown private pilot license don't justify the restrictions you're limited with on just the sport. Only being able to carry one passenger can be inconvenient for activities with groups of people. Not being able to fly at night can really mess up your trip itinerary. For example, the weather is bad during the day but clears up at night. With a sport license you're stuck in a hotel whereas with a private you can fly on no problem. Not to mention night flying is a lot of fun. But the biggest downside with the sport license comes from the airspace restrictions. Unless you're in the middle of nowhere there's going to be at least class D somewhere in your area. Flying anywhere near a major city would be a nightmare. If I remember right in order to legally fly through an airspace on a sport license you have to receive training and get an endorsement for that specific airspace.
Click to expand...

The whole point of the Sport Pilot license is not to cater to the people who fly as a means of transportation first and a means of recreation second; it is to cater to the people who for the opposite (fun first, conveyance second). While there are restrictions on the Sport Pilot license, for someone who would only bang around the circuit, or go for the occasional $100 hamburger, I can see a great appeal for it, especially since don't need a full medical for it (a valid driver's license is sufficient).
 
MrChips said:
The whole point of the Sport Pilot license is not to cater to the people who fly as a means of transportation first and a means of recreation second; it is to cater to the people who for the opposite (fun first, conveyance second). While there are restrictions on the Sport Pilot license, for someone who would only bang around the circuit, or go for the occasional $100 hamburger, I can see a great appeal for it, especially since don't need a full medical for it (a valid driver's license is sufficient).
Click to expand...

Unless you have failed a previous FAA physical, then you can't "downgrade" to a sport license.
 
New Russain 5th gen fighter:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22fN4fVoFdY&feature=player_embedded#at=37[/YOUTUBE]

YF-23 prototype:

YF23_PAV1_01.jpg


:think:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top