A renaissance for General Aviation?

Share

A few years ago, actually, almost 14 years ago, I wrote a posting in one of the rec.aviation groups on the Internet that talked about a possible renaissance that could occur in general aviation (GA). I’ve often thought about the posting over the years, wondering if it would be prescient or just an embarrassing prediction that never came to fruition. Thanks to Google’s ambitious indexing efforts, I have had the chance to review what I wrote, which can be a humbling experience, especially after time has passed. Rather than summarize it, I thought I’d just lay the posting out in front of God and everyone, because for me it is a combination of deja vu and a form of ‘lost time’. You can find it yourself if you search on Google groups, but here it is, word for word:

————————————————————-
Lee Devlin
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1993 03:19:26 GMT
Local: Tues, Sep 28 1993 9:19 pm
Subject: A Renaissance for General Aviation?

Do you think that GA is on the verge of a popularity explosion? It
seems that the industry has been in a tailspin for the past several
decades but I can’t help thinking that certain forces are at work which
will allow it to undergo a sort of renaissance.

This could be good or bad, depending on your point of view. Currently,
aviation has many barriers to entry and attracts primarily only the true
enthusiasts. Consequently, I feel like I have a lot in common with
those who like to fly. Perhaps you have also noticed this rapport among
aviators. It seems when I meet other aviators we immediately become
good friends. Opening up aviation to the masses is bound to attract
throngs of uncleansed infidels who have no true appreciation of the
miracle of flight :-). However, I think it would be the lesser of evils
since the current trend indicates that we are on the path to extinction.

There are several reasons I think that general aviation can make a
comeback. The primary reason is that general aviation has been
wallowing in a sort of technological ‘dark age’ for too long. It has
missed out on nearly every technological advance for the past 20 years.
Now, the world is bursting with new technology that would greatly
improve the convenience, cost, and safety of personal flying.

Some of the advances will make a few of our skills redundant. I wonder
how many of us old timers will still want to see the newly initiated
demonstrate proficiency at hopelessly arcane skills like NDB navigation
or manipulating an E6B in the cockpit. Certainly not I.

Consider that in just the last 4 years here are a few of the significant
changes that have occurred:

GPS

My biggest hope is for the virtual replacement of all navigation
equipment by GPS. A piece of equipment that gives position,
groundspeed, groundtrack, distance, and ETE makes an ADF or even VOR
seem silly by comparison. GPS navigation should knock off a few hours
of training when NDBs and VOR go the way of the AN airways.

DUAT

DUAT cuts your briefing time in half and can give a much more complete
description of the weather that you can carry with you. You won’t have
to listen to ‘All briefers are busy ….’. I’m not saying briefers can
be done away with, just that DUAT is definitely more convenient. And
don’t forget to use GTE’s plain language weather translator. It’s free.

Computerized Flight Planning Software.

Planning cross countries using paper and pencil ranks right up there
with getting a root canal. Then, if your flight gets canceled for any
reason, you must start from scratch because everything you did is now
worthless. Computerized flight planning software takes the hassle out
of preparing for flights. If you haven’t tried the one on GTE’s DUAT,
you’re missing out on a great product. It automatically interpolates
the winds aloft at your altitude. It knows the correct magnetic
variation and computes all your headings for you in seconds. Don’t
worry about database updates, it’s already handled for you. It’s also
free. Maybe it should be allowed on the FAA exams in place of the E6B
calculator :-).

Moving Maps

These should eventually be integrated into one of the several CRTs that
belong on the instrument panel to replace the instruments, avionics,
gauges, etc. If things continue to proceed the way they have been,
a GA glass cockpit is an inevitability.

The Primary Category

This EAA-inspired program is most promising. It’s ironic that the first
‘airplane’, a Quicksilver 500, to be certified under these rules looks
more like an ultralight. There will be 3 planes certified before the
end of this year and probably a dozen more over the next 2 years.

There are many other advances waiting to be integrated into light aircraft
such as inexpensive autopilots, composite construction, low-cost computers,
digital communications, and collision avoidance to name a few.

Yes, I think the industry is perfectly poised for a major re-birth and
hopefully we’ll all be able to experience it firsthand.


Lee Devlin | HP Little Falls Site | phone: (302) 633-8697
Piper Colt N4986Z | 2850 Centerville Rd. | email:
“Spirit of rec.aviation”| Wilmington, DE 19808 | dev…@lf.hp.com

———————————————————–

As you can see, this was a kinder, gentler Internet where you not only provided your contact details, but your employer’s name, mailing address, phone number, etc.. How times have changed! I still am as forthright as I’ve ever been about my identity on the Internet, and I’m probably in the minority in that regard. At the time I was still flying the Colt with probably 250 hours of flying under my belt. Now that I’ve had 14 years to contemplate my predictions, I have to wonder if I was wrong, or simply ahead of my time. Maybe a new posting to further explain and elaborate on my predictions would be in order…

Aviation handheld radios

Share


At Oshkosh this year, one of the things on my ‘to do’ list was to replace my aviation handheld radio. I had loaned my Vertex Standard (AKA Yaesu) Pilot VXA-210 handheld radio to a friend who subsequently passed away and couldn’t imagine a way to broach the subject about getting the radio back.

I have long been a fan of Yaesu ham radios and own quite a few of them. I’m the keeper of the FAQ for the Yaesu FT100 which is one of my most frequently visited web sites. I had my heart set on getting the VXA-700 aviation/ham handheld radio, something I’ve wanted for a long time because it could serve double duty in the cockpit. It’s a lot of fun to talk with fellow hams on the ground when one is flying around overhead. However, I was shocked to find that the ham radio (2-meter) functionality had been removed from the VXA-710, which is the follow-on radio to the VXA-700. Details about why it was removed were sketchy, but a few competitors said that the FCC had intervened and fined Yaesu for some reason. That left the choice up to the VXA300 since I wasn’t about to step down to a COMM-only radio when the radio I previously owned had also had a NAV feature.

I don’t know why Yaesu has decided to dilute its well-known brand name by using the name ‘Vertex Standard’ for its aviation and marine radios. They’d have been much better off sticking with something that can leverage their strength in the ham radio market.

Vertex Standard has 4 aviation hand held radios in the line-up that have no consistent naming convention. For example, they have the following aviation products:

  • Pro V aka VXA-150 (simple COMM-only radio)
  • Pro VI aka VXA-220 (a COMM-only radio with a bigger display)
  • Pilot III aka VXA-300 (NAV/COMM)
  • Spirit aka VXA-710 (NAV/COMM with business radio receive (?!) + FM receive)
  • The 4 radios look dissimilar enough that they might have been designed by 4 different companies. I don’t know what they are thinking at Yaesu, but giving products two different numbering schemes and using another brand name without the name recognition of Yaesu isn’t really helping them in any way.

    When it comes to aviation handhelds, it would be better to have a high end model and a low end model with similar user interfaces and accessories that are common. In addition, it would help if the people who staffed the Yaesu trade show booth actually knew something about the products. This has been an issue for the past several years. The guys are neither hams nor pilots and they don’t provide any staff to the larger vendor booths. I began feeling so dismayed by this inept marketing approach that I started looking more seriously at the competition, namely ICOM.

    ICOM made a big splash this year with a new panel mount radio called the A210 which, unfortunately, appears to cost about twice what their current A200 radio and doesn’t really do much more. ICOM had been the price/performance leader in aviation panel mount radios for many years with the A200. It costs approximately half of what the competition charges for a similar radio.

    The venerable A200

    I don’t know why the components that can be sold in a handheld radio need to cost 8 times as much when they are wrapped in a few more dollars of aluminum and have fewer features, but that is the case with nearly all panel-mount aviation radios.

    ICOM currently produces only 2 aviation handhelds, the A6 and A24, which look identical. The only difference is that the A24 has the NAV feature, and the A6 does not. In talking with their reps, they claimed that they designed the radios using focus groups with real pilots and found that the 3 most requested features from pilots were:

  • ease of use
  • easy-to-read display and keys
  • long battery life
  • Ease of use for this kind of radio is important since it’s a backup radio used infrequently and you don’t want to have to refer to its manual during an emergency like a complete electrical system failure. The backlit LCD display is easy to read as are its backlit keys.

    The battery takes up more than half the mass of the radio giving its battery life an advantage over attempting to make the radio as small as possible and compromising battery life in the process.

    After mulling this over for a while and considering the discounted show price and a $40 rebate, I decided to switch camps. I bought the A24 and so now I’m an ICOM owner again, something that I haven’t been for more than 25 years.

    Adaptive Interfaces

    Oshkosh 2007 and my aviation addiction

    Share

    Airventure is the ultimate aviation experience. If you find aviation interesting, one of your life’s goals should be to make the annual pilgrimage to the EAA’s Airventure in Oshkosh, Wisconsin before you die. Once you do it, you’ll want to visit every year. This year marks my 16th attendance of Airventure, most of which I’ve flown to in the LongEZ.

    I attended Oshkosh for the first time in 1990 shortly after I got my private pilot certificate. I didn’t have an airplane and was too inexperienced to consider renting an airplane and flying into the event, so our visit was a part of a 2500-mile Harley motorcycle adventure that took us from Pennsylvania westward to Illinois, Wisconsin, and eventually through Ontario, Canada and back through Niagra Falls on the return trip.

    My wife had purchased an introductory flight as a 30th birthday gift for me in 1989 and I took to flying like a bird to the air. Learning to fly was a wonderful experience which still brings back a lot of fond memories. I was working at HP’s Avondale, Pennsylvania division after having moved back to Pennsylvania from Colorado. We moved to Pennsylvania primarily because Terri was feeling homesick. Both of us had grown up in northeastern Pennsylvania around Wilkes-Barre and had met in high school. I moved to Colorado in 1983 after finishing grad school at Penn State and Terri moved out when we were married in 1985. After a few years in Colorado, she began missing her family. After moving back to Pennsylvania, I was a little out of sorts, probably because I missed Colorado, where I had started my career as an engineer with HP. So the introductory flight was a way for Terri to express her thanks for my willingness to move back across the country and to restart my career. She knew it was one of my life goals to learn to fly.

    My very first experience with real airplanes occurred in 1967 when I was 7 years old and my father got us a ‘scenic flight’ around Wyoming Valley, PA in an effort to alleviate my mother’s fears about an upcoming commercial flight we were planning to take to Ireland. It didn’t help my mom at all, and she never flew in a small aircraft again because all the bouncing around had terrified her. However, the effect on me was quite the opposite. I was completely hooked.

    After that flight, whenever I met a pilot, I made sure to let him know that I was interested in aviation and that if he ever needed a passenger, I was up for it. My high school classmate and future college roommate, Dave Serhan, got his pilot’s license in high school and gave me a ride when we were students at Penn State’s Wilkes-Barre campus. We rented a small Cessna 150 at the Forty Fort airport. Shortly after gaining some altitude and while flying over the Huntsville Reservoir he pulled out his camera to take some photos, and said to me, “Here, fly the plane.” I couldn’t believe it! Here I was, flying an airplane for the first time in my life! After taking a few pictures, he took control of the plane and demonstrated some stalls and wing-overs. Since I had managed not to crash the plane while controlling it, I felt I must have been a ‘natural’. I looked forward to learning to fly.

    When I went to work for HP, one of my recruiters found me leaving the office the first day and asked if I’d like to go flying. He had remembered my excitement when he told me that he was a pilot. I could hardly believe my good fortune. We flew over the front range of Colorado in his Cessna 182 and I got to spend a little time manipulating the controls. It further reinforced my desire to become a pilot.

    As mentioned earlier, after we moved from Colorado back to Pennsylvania, Terri was looking for something for my 30th birthday. Buying me an introductory flight lesson seemed to fit the bill. There are not many things you can do in life more expensive than learning to fly. It’s not a rational decision. So having not just the support, but also the complicity of one’s spouse in such a venture cannot be underestimated. From that point on, it was out of her hands and she has never complained about the expense. I went on to get my private pilot and instrument certificates and have been flying airplanes ever since.

    About a year after getting the certificate, we bought our first airplane, a 1961 Piper Colt for $7500. That seems pretty cheap now, 16 year later, but it was an expensive toy at the time. I’m sure it’s worth 2 or 3 times that now since, unlike cars, planes have appreciated over time somewhat like a house appreciates. Compared with its sticker price of around $2500 in 1961, it’s doubled in price 3 times in 46 years which gives it an annual average appreciation of around 5%. That may sound like a good investment, but I can assure you that a lot more than its total value has gone into maintaining it over the years. Owning an aircraft is not the road to riches, not unless you can hermetically store them away for little or no cost.

    We flew that Colt to a lot of places around the east coast, including New York City, Martha’s Vineyard, Hyannis, Nantucket, Ocean City, (NJ and MD) as well as Bar Harbor, Maine and lots of little grass strips and airports up and down the east coast. We also flew it to Colorado and took some trips to New Mexico and Idaho. It was like a little magic carpet, capable of landing on big airports as well as secluded grass airstrips. After about 2 years of flying the Colt in Colorado, I began looking for something a little faster to better deal with the west’s high altitudes and vast distances.

    I’ve always had a fascination with canard airplanes. Back in 1983 I saw one fly overhead during a company celebration and my heart skipped a beat. It was like seeing a vehicle from another planet. It was just so beautiful and futuristic. I knew that day, somehow, I would pilot such an aircraft. Years later, after joining the EAA, I learned that the airplane I saw was probably a Varieze or a LongEZ designed by the legendary aircraft designer, Burt Rutan.

    At the New Garden Airport where I was learning to fly, I noticed a local pilot had purchased a LongEZ and I worked up the courage to tell him how much of a fan I was of the design. He told me that next time I saw him there to ask for a ride. I was thrilled at the prospect.

    Sure enough, a few weeks later, I saw the owner fueling his LongEZ and asked if he’d take me up for a ride. He told me he would. My expectations of it were exceeded not just by its performance and handling, but also by its outstanding visibility and comfort. It’s compact, but in the reclined seating position, you can be comfortable in it for hours. The owner, a trained military pilot, asked if I’d like to do a positive-G roll. I said I would. With his expert flying skills, he accelerated the plane to 160 mph indicated speed, set it up for a 20 degree climb, and gave it full left stick. Over we went, turning the horizon from blue to green and back to blue. I will never forget that experience and how it made me feel. I was hooked on the LongEZ.

    By early 1995 we had moved back to Colorado and I had embarked on the building process for a Cozy, the follow-on 4 place derivative of the LongEZ. The LongEZ plans had since been withdrawn from the market due to liability issues. After spending a few years and about 300 hours building to the point where my Cozy looked like a boat, I realized that at the best case, it would take at least another 8 years to finish the Cozy and I wanted to have a canard aircraft as soon as possible. I figured I already owned an airplane (the Piper Colt) and thought that selling it and buying a LongEZ wouldn’t seriously hamper the progress on the Cozy. I had many words of discourageme
    nt from pilots/aircraft builders who knew that once I got a flying canard airplane, the progress on the new one would grind to a halt. I realized they were probably correct, but I didn’t care. I wanted to experience the flying characteristics of this futuristic airplane without having to wait for another 8 years.

    Throughout the first part of 1996, I began to learn all I could about buying a used homebuilt airplane, an exercise I found could be fraught with peril. Indeed, I had talked with some homebuilt aircraft owners who had grossly misrepresented the aircraft they were selling. But I likened it to bragging about one’s own child. A parent can be excused for a slip-up like that. Lesson learned: always inspect the aircraft yourself before taking the builder’s word for it.

    Finally, in July of 1996, I found something that looked like it was at the right price and met my needs. We attempted to ride the Harley from Colorado up to Sun Valley, Idaho, but turned back when weather intervened in Wyoming. We got in the Colt the next day and flew to Hailey, Idaho and parked it amongst the jets owned by Arnold Schwarzenegger and other famous people. The next day we went to a restaurant in Hailey owned by Bruce Willis and we were sitting there having our breakfast. I couldn’t help but hear that the seller was in the booth behind me, because I could tell by the gist of the conversation that he was talking about the plane and about me. I decided that rather than continue to eavesdrop on the conversation, I’d stand up and introduce myself. From that point, everything went well and we eventually decided to do the deal.

    The LongEZ I bought was by no means a show plane. However, it was well tested with about 800 hours on the airframe and the engine had a recently-replaced crankshaft along with 3 of the 4 cylinders, making it into an ‘almost rebuilt’ engine. The finish on the plane had a number of cosmetic problems including bumps on the strakes and a history of paint blisters on the surface which stemmed from the original finish process of incorporating a polyester material called ‘Featherfill’. This polyester material was originally recommended as a filler material but was later found to be incompatible with epoxy. It takes a few years, but polyester and epoxy begin to separate and as a result, the wings and canard have continued to have blisters that I’ve had to sand and fill with epoxy-based filler. But so far, other than not winning any show plane awards, it’s been quite reliable and I’ve been enjoyed more than 450 hours of flying with it. It’s taken me to Oshkosh and back 11 times as well as a few trips to the West coast.

    On the way back from Oshkosh this year, I crossed the 1000 hour mark in total flying time. I know that is not impressive for those who fly for a living, but for those of us who do it as a hobby, it feels like quite an accomplishment.

    I periodically get requests to update the progress on the Cozy. Thanks in large part to the efforts and prodding by my friend Don, the project continues to move forward. Last week we set the main spar in the fuselage which is a big milestone. I’ll need to get some pictures of it when we hang the wings which we hope to do soon just to see how everything is fitting together. Part of the time I spent at Oskhosh this year was to finalize the components to go into instrument panel, and I’ve narrowed down the options, which is never and easy task in light of all the new glass panel choices that are available now, but I’m a lot closer to finalizing it than I had been for a while. In another posting, I’ll put together a list of companies that make ‘glass panel’ cockpit displays which is now all the rage in homebuilding.

    As for posting pictures of Oshkosh, I really didn’t take that many this year but I got a great link to a few European RV-7 builders who put together an extensive collection this year, including photos of vendor displays that will give you somewhat of a virtual tour of Oshkosh if you go through all the slideshows.

    Full scale electric aircraft?

    Share

    Over the past decade, there has been a revolution in remote controlled aircraft as they have shifted from internal combustion engines to electric motors. This has expanded the RC hobby significantly since electric-powered aircraft are more economical, quieter, and more reliable than their internal combustion counterparts. Can a similar revolution be in store for full-scale aircraft?

    In the case of remote control aircraft, a series of technological advances in batteries, motors, and further miniaturization of electronics combined to make electric flight practical. The question I have is: Does the technology scale to full-sized aircraft?

    Today we’re flying around with 60-year-old engine technology, with very few updates, unless we add them ourselves. This is only possible in the experimental aircraft category, of course. It would be nice to see a quantum leap in technology applied to airplanes that we can climb in and fly. Here is a video of a company producing an example of a full-sized (albeit small) electric airplane:

    Granted, there are a number of limitations such as the amount of charge it can hold (1 hour) and the time it takes to charge it (24 hours). But if those limitations can be overcome, it would be a very interesting alternative to conventional power plants.