That's a fact, but first its necessary to educate them as to the difference between a J-3, a 172, and what that difference means. They need to know there is an entire world of adventure, challenge and fun out there and the 172 and other trainers, are just that. Trainers. Their purpose is to let them taste the third-dimension. The bazillion different airplanes under the EAA umbrella are meant to teach them how to enjoy and live the third-dimension. bd
Unfortunately a young person getting into GA is going to have a very narrow view of this wonderful discipline. Nearly every flight school for 1000 miles has a ramp full of nothing but Skyhawks or Archers. Sure, they’re great trainers, but there is almost no opportunity anymore to try a tailwheel, which means little opportunity to experience things like aerobatics or real off-airport adventures. As you have lamented in other articles, the major publications don’t even write about unusual airplanes anymore (is a Citabria or Cub so unusual?) so a newer pilot can be forgiven for not even knowing they exist. Aviation is as varied as the saddles you write about and I wish the new generation could be exposed to more than just spam cans.
You're absolutely right! You've just outlined why it is so important for pilots, regardless of where they stand, newbies or gray dogs, join the EAA and get their magazine, Sport Aviation. They cover everything that flies. The organization is built on enthusiasm.
Yep, it's more challenging to find tailwheel training, and has been for decades, but I guess it varies by region. Available for training in the ATL area, there's a couple of Decathlons at PDK, a Cub at LZU, a Pitts S2B at CCO, and a Champ at Peachstate. There's probably many more, but those are the ones I have either flown in or at least seen myself. Of course, we can all help expand horizons in a different way by offering rides in our tailwheel planes (or otherwise interesting planes) to anyone interested. I've given rides to a lot of people in my Pietenpol out of 2GA9. The Piet's so easy, I generally have them flying the plane themselves within the first 10 mins and have even coached first timers through take-offs and landings with me just following along lightly on the controls. Oddly enough, I just got a nice email yesterday from the father of one such kid (best 12 yr old "pilot" I've ever flown with) who I gave a couple of rides to about 4 years ago. He's now taking lessons and is set to solo this month. Sure wish I still had that plane, but the Pitts came along, and...
First step is to get a new student out of the flight school mindset and make him aware of all the other types of aviation out there. The EAA is perfect for that. Once we make them aware, if we a light a fire under them, they'll figure out the rest.
"They suddenly realize, as deeply as they’ve studied, they actually don't know squat about their interest. They realize that the more they learn, the more there is to learn."
Sooooooooo true. According to my mother, I was apparently born an airplane nut, since my first word at 11 months was "o-pane!" when I pointed up at a P-38 as it flew over the park we were in. I've certainly been steeped in it ever since in every way possible (I think I might be one of the few people who have been in both a 1917 Curtiss Jenny and a 1982 F-4E Phantom and been allowed "stick time" in each). Unfortunately I no longer fly as PIC, since you definitely don't want someone in the left seat who can do vertigo standing next to you on the tarmac if he turns his head too fast to see that airplane at 8 o'clock you just spotted (it's called Miniere's Syndrome and you don't want it). But I do still go flying in airplanes most people don't get to, because I learned long ago that a camera, a notebook and a tape recorder, along with a recognizable name in a publication the owner of said airplane has likely read, will get you past all kinds of "velvet ropes."
But that statement up at the beginning, that's the truth. There's not one book I've written in the field of aviation history that I cannot say I learned something new I did not know about a topic I knew well enough to convince a publisher to go with my project rather than the other guy's. That's why it's still magic and I'm pretty sure it will be right up to the point I keel over a week after turning in the latest manuscript.
Believe me, I know what you're saying. I'm convinced that by the time I check out I'll know basically nothing, because I'll know there is so much left to learn. I'm embarrassed daily by something coming up in a discussion or an article that I assumed I knew but actually didn't.
Anyone shopping for an airplane should also spend some time on Barnstormers.com, a treasure trove of special airplanes.
That's a fact, but first its necessary to educate them as to the difference between a J-3, a 172, and what that difference means. They need to know there is an entire world of adventure, challenge and fun out there and the 172 and other trainers, are just that. Trainers. Their purpose is to let them taste the third-dimension. The bazillion different airplanes under the EAA umbrella are meant to teach them how to enjoy and live the third-dimension. bd
Unfortunately a young person getting into GA is going to have a very narrow view of this wonderful discipline. Nearly every flight school for 1000 miles has a ramp full of nothing but Skyhawks or Archers. Sure, they’re great trainers, but there is almost no opportunity anymore to try a tailwheel, which means little opportunity to experience things like aerobatics or real off-airport adventures. As you have lamented in other articles, the major publications don’t even write about unusual airplanes anymore (is a Citabria or Cub so unusual?) so a newer pilot can be forgiven for not even knowing they exist. Aviation is as varied as the saddles you write about and I wish the new generation could be exposed to more than just spam cans.
You're absolutely right! You've just outlined why it is so important for pilots, regardless of where they stand, newbies or gray dogs, join the EAA and get their magazine, Sport Aviation. They cover everything that flies. The organization is built on enthusiasm.
bd
Yep, it's more challenging to find tailwheel training, and has been for decades, but I guess it varies by region. Available for training in the ATL area, there's a couple of Decathlons at PDK, a Cub at LZU, a Pitts S2B at CCO, and a Champ at Peachstate. There's probably many more, but those are the ones I have either flown in or at least seen myself. Of course, we can all help expand horizons in a different way by offering rides in our tailwheel planes (or otherwise interesting planes) to anyone interested. I've given rides to a lot of people in my Pietenpol out of 2GA9. The Piet's so easy, I generally have them flying the plane themselves within the first 10 mins and have even coached first timers through take-offs and landings with me just following along lightly on the controls. Oddly enough, I just got a nice email yesterday from the father of one such kid (best 12 yr old "pilot" I've ever flown with) who I gave a couple of rides to about 4 years ago. He's now taking lessons and is set to solo this month. Sure wish I still had that plane, but the Pitts came along, and...
First step is to get a new student out of the flight school mindset and make him aware of all the other types of aviation out there. The EAA is perfect for that. Once we make them aware, if we a light a fire under them, they'll figure out the rest.
bd
"They suddenly realize, as deeply as they’ve studied, they actually don't know squat about their interest. They realize that the more they learn, the more there is to learn."
Sooooooooo true. According to my mother, I was apparently born an airplane nut, since my first word at 11 months was "o-pane!" when I pointed up at a P-38 as it flew over the park we were in. I've certainly been steeped in it ever since in every way possible (I think I might be one of the few people who have been in both a 1917 Curtiss Jenny and a 1982 F-4E Phantom and been allowed "stick time" in each). Unfortunately I no longer fly as PIC, since you definitely don't want someone in the left seat who can do vertigo standing next to you on the tarmac if he turns his head too fast to see that airplane at 8 o'clock you just spotted (it's called Miniere's Syndrome and you don't want it). But I do still go flying in airplanes most people don't get to, because I learned long ago that a camera, a notebook and a tape recorder, along with a recognizable name in a publication the owner of said airplane has likely read, will get you past all kinds of "velvet ropes."
But that statement up at the beginning, that's the truth. There's not one book I've written in the field of aviation history that I cannot say I learned something new I did not know about a topic I knew well enough to convince a publisher to go with my project rather than the other guy's. That's why it's still magic and I'm pretty sure it will be right up to the point I keel over a week after turning in the latest manuscript.
Believe me, I know what you're saying. I'm convinced that by the time I check out I'll know basically nothing, because I'll know there is so much left to learn. I'm embarrassed daily by something coming up in a discussion or an article that I assumed I knew but actually didn't.
bd