fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (12/18/87)
In article <2234@dasys1.UUCP>, patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) writes: > From "Outlook '87 and beyond", published by the World Future > Society, 4916 St. Elmo Ave., Bethesda, Md. 20814. The > forecasts come from "The Futurist" magazine. > > * An airplane in every garage may soon be possible. > Lightweight materials such as plastics and aluminum > can reduce the cost of manufacturing, making > possible affordable, fuel-efficient "personal > planes." --WT&F/Technology, Jan/Feb '86 This must be for a parallel timeline...not ours. What with product liability suits, crowded airways, safety fears, and a widespread impression that pilots are generally nothing more than the rich playing with their toys, this is about as likely to happen as any of the past post-war flying booms. (No smiley.) On the other hand, maybe they're talking about France or Australia. seh
chris@MIMSY.UMD.EDU (Chris Torek) (12/18/87)
From: concertina!fiddler%sun.com@bu-cs.bu.edu (Steve Hix) What with product liability suits, ... this is about as likely to happen as any of the past post-war flying booms. (No smiley.) You are right about the liability suits. However, there *was* a big post-war flying boom after WWII. Indeed, that is what built most of the small airports that are still here today. Chris
MANDEL@KL.SRI.COM (Thomas F. Mandel) (12/18/87)
Steve Hix (concertina!fiddler@sun.com) critisizes the forecast of an inexpensive airplane in every garage... This is not so far-fetched or absurd as it might seem. If you interpret such airplanes to include all sorts of new kinds of flying craft from hot air balloons to hang gliders to low-powered aircraft (derived from hang gliders), it is entirely possible to see widespread existence of such personal recreational technology within the foreseeable future. In every garage, no. But as commonplace as, say, recreational vehicles, yes. In a futures study I did for the Bureau of Land Management in the 1970s, we identified new kinds of personal flying equipment as very likely to boom during the then-next 20 years. I'm still quite comfortable with that projection. --Tom Mandel mandel@kl.sri.com [My views, of course, and not necessarily my employers...] -------
hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) (12/22/87)
In article <36846@sun.uucp> fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <2234@dasys1.UUCP>, patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) writes: >> From "Outlook '87 and beyond" ... >> >> * An airplane in every garage may soon be possible. >> Lightweight materials such as plastics and aluminum >> can reduce the cost of manufacturing, making >> possible affordable, fuel-efficient "personal >> planes." --WT&F/Technology, Jan/Feb '86 > >This must be for a parallel timeline...not ours. I also choked on this one, but for different reasons. What got me was the line about "Lightweight materials such as plastics and aluminum ... ". Just what do these turkeys think airplanes are made of these days? The vast majority of production light aircraft are already made of aluminum and plastic and have been since well before I got my licenses (pilot and mechanic, both about 20 years ago). This reads more like a prediction from the '20s or '30s than the late '80s. BTW, an airplane in every garage has been "possible" since airplanes were invented. It just isn't very likely, due mostly to economic and logistic infeasibility. -- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, hollombe@TTI.COM) Illegitimati Nil Citicorp(+)TTI Carborundum 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 452-9191, x2483 Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun|philabs|psivax|trwrb}!ttidca!hollombe
dhp@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Douglas H. Price) (12/25/87)
> >In article <2234@dasys1.UUCP>, patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) writes: > >> From "Outlook '87 and beyond" ... > >> > >> * An airplane in every garage may soon be possible. > >> Lightweight materials such as plastics and aluminum > >> can reduce the cost of manufacturing, making > >> possible affordable, fuel-efficient "personal > >> planes." --WT&F/Technology, Jan/Feb '86 I wish it were true that personal aircraft would get significantly cheaper... Unfortunately, the cost of aircraft is dominated by a number of relatively inflexible critera today: 1. Certification. It costs 1-2 million dollars to certify a new airplane design today; A LOT MORE if it is to be used for air carrier type operations. Thats why most small airplanes flying today are flying on certificates granted in the late 40s and early 50s. It also means that aircraft are not built using "labor-saving" techniques. Even the production techniques for a particular aircraft (wing jigs, parts specs, etc) are part of the certification, and even a simple improvement in production materials, parts or procedures may endanger your type certificate. 2. Liability insurance. The cost of a new Cessna 172 in 1985 (single engine, four seat Chevy-of-the-skies) was about 85,000 dollars. Despite a proven safety record (as far as manufacturer's defects are concerned) it cost $25K for Cessna's liability insurance **PER HULL**. Last year, the insurance carriers announced that the cost of liability insurance for small aircraft would be DOUBLED. This raised the consumer cost of a simple 172 to over $120K That's why Cessna has suspended production of their basic aircraft and trainers. This part of the bill is the only one amenable to a "quick fix." Such changes have been considered in Congress for the last couple of years. 3. Aviation hardware. It costs $10K for the radio stack, $12K for the engine (including the engine manufacturer's liability insurance). Airplanes are not like cars, where if you don't like the sound of the engine you can just pull over to the side of the road. On the other hand, just stamping the word "aviation" on a piece of equipment means you can double or triple the price. As has been pointed out in rec.aviation, the electrical alternator and regulators in some aircraft today are normal GM auto parts. But, because the have been "certified", they cost four times as much as the part at the local car parts dealer. And, you can't just substitute in the auto parts. The FAA will revoke the flight-worthiness certificate of the aircraft if they find out. On the other hand, some of the specialty parts, such as aviation radios have their development and certification costs amortized across a relatively small production run (in the 10s of thousands). We as consumers, are used to items that have their production costs amortized across a production run of millions. 4. The remainder of the dealer cost is the "actual" cost of building the hull. If we are talking about a "new" airplane (new type certificate) then we must amortize the cost of item 1 (plus interest) across the production run of the airplane. If we are talking about a run of 10,000 airplanes in 10 years (not an unreasonable number) this amounts to a $150-500 bill per airplane. In conclusion, I, as a pilot, would LOVE to have a new $30,000 four seat production airplane I could buy like a car, but I don't expect I will see it soon, if ever. The continuing need to improve safety, and the litiguous nature of our culture (read product liability suit) will prevent it. -- Douglas H. Price Analysts International Corp. @ AT&T Bell Laboratories ..!ihnp4!ihlpa!dhp
dm@BFLY-VAX.BBN.COM (12/31/87)
Maybe they meant ultra-lights -- I wouldn't fly one to work in the winter, but it would sure make the commute more fun in nice weather...