Zane and others - I'm a 50-something pilot, father of two grown children and have a couple of grandkids still in diapers. So I'm probably about as out-of-touch with the latest generation of pre-teens, teens, and 20-somethings as one can get.

However, I don't think it does us much good to point out all the negatives to explain why the pilot population is down from what it used to be. I'd like to make a few points of my own for this discussion:

1) airplane flying has always NOT been something for the masses .. it's always been an elite pursuit ... and thank god for that! Do any of us really want the non-cream-of-the-crop typical moron car drivers out flying around in the pattern with us? Nope .. no, make that, "Hell nope!"

2) if the pilot numbers are down and the average pilot population is aging, there's probably a lot of reasons, cultural, economic, and all, but the number one reason is flying is an expensive hobby, and takes a lot of time ... and young people, and most early-middle-aged people, simply don't have the resources - financial and time - to be pilots. Look at any avocation or hobby, and if it is expensive and takes a big time commitment, the demographics are going to be very much the same as for today's pilot population.

3) We can all agree that it would be good if we had a growing pilot population, but the latest demographic projections that I saw a few days ago online somewhere is that the pilot population in the USA is expected to grow at something like 2-3% per year for the next 30 years ... that's a rate that is still higher than the overall population growth. If those numbers are accurate, then I don't see that we have as big a problem a lot of us are moaning about here on this board.

I dunno - I may be a natural optimist, but I think we've got so many great things going for us, including fantastic new technologies for the panel, for airframes, navigation and emergency communications, and even powerplants, and fantastic web-based pilot information and training systems, and such ... I just don't see that we've got any good reasons to be crying in our beer over demographics and culture - over which none of us are ever going to have any control anyway.

Guess what? Every generation that ever lived on this earth was always convinced that the succeeding generations were going to hell in a handbasket. Sometimes they did, and sometimes they didn't. But that's just how it always goes.

nmflyguy - I'm real curious about where you heard about the pilot population growing at 2%-3% per year. I don't think that's true, but I'd love to be proven wrong. When I look at the average age of pilots that I meet personaly, or at FAA seminars, etc. it's pretty clear to me that the pilot population is about to plumet. You don't have to be a demographics expert to figure out that anything that is mainly done by older people doesn't have a healthy future.

AOPA information on FAA Certificated Pilots 1929 - 2007

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/stats/pilots.html

Skystrider wrote:AOPA information on FAA Certificated Pilots 1929 - 2007

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/stats/pilots.html

I think the best gauge on the AOPA data would be the student pilot column. (The rest of the columns don't really "expire"). As you can see there, there is a pretty substantial decline from the last 15 years.

I was at the EAA regional show "GoldenWest" in Marysville, CA yesterday. This is supposedly one of the "big" shows. It is on the same level with Arlington, Copperstate, Sun N Fun, and Osh. I was blown away at how little public showed up. I was there on Sunday and someone said Saturday was a lot better but the participation was still pathetic. I went to that show 4 years ago and you could not even get within 50ft of the flightline fence because it was solid people. I wish I had an answer as to why that is happening. Economy, poor advertising...who knows.

It's scary....flying is such a big part of my life that I can't even fathom not having it. I think the Sport Pilot was a big step in the right direction. Half the required hours for a certificate = half the cost. So far it hasn't seemed to=half the pilot. Glass cockpits for a these LSA's are quickly becoming very affordable. Hopefully that will appeal to the video game kids.

The Young Eagles is a good program but like others mentioned very few will come back. At the last rally I did several of the kids did not even care they were flying. I think they only went because mom or dad wanted them to. Ultimately I think it comes down to what's already been said....this new generation is just not into going outside and using their brains to accomplish a goal....scary stuff for our futures!

Thanks for that link.

I agree with mountainmatt - the student column is the real indicator here. I'd love to see numbers by year for how many student pilots actually complete their PPL checkride, and for how many pilots keep flying after they get their PPL - my guess is that those numbers would be declining too.

I think BFR stats (hard to keep track of) and Flight Medical stats over the years would be the best gauge.

Wiki had this though:

Number of active pilots

As of the end of 2008, there were 613,746 active certificated pilots.[13] This number has been declining gradually over the past several decades, down from a high of over 827,000 pilots in 1980. The numbers include:

* 80,989 student pilots
* 252 recreational pilots
* 2,623 sport pilots
* 222,597 private pilots
* 124,746 commercial pilots
* 146,838 airline transport pilots
* 21,055 glider-only pilots
* 14,647 rotorcraft-(helicopter)-only pilots

These numbers are based on the highest certifications held by individual pilots.
There were also 93,202 certified flight instructors (CFIs), and 325,247 pilots overall who held instrument ratings.
An active pilot is defined as one who holds both a pilot certificate and a valid medical certificate, for certifications that require a medical certificate.

And that's from 2008, I can't imagine what 2009/2010 look like.

Some great thoughts here. I can't say I've got the answers, but I really believe we as pilots are the only ones who can inspire the passion required to want to go out there and learn how to fly. As we all know, flying is unbelievably fun, and we need to keep showing the public how much fun it can be.

As a kid, I was crazy about airplanes. I read the Bigglesworth books, a comic called Pilot, which was awesome, and the early Richard Bach books. What inspired me was tales of open cockpit biplane flying, barnstorming, landing in fields, sleeping under the wing etc. It's hard for me to imagine anyone getting turned on by EFIS, BRS systems and GPS to the point where they want to take up flying, but maybe that's just me.

Here's what really sealed the deal for little boy me: The Great Waldo Pepper, from 1975. Pure awesome. If they showed this movie a little more often, maybe we'd get some more new recruits:

I was working on a longer reply to the original questions, but my computer crashed and ate it. Until I retype it, when it comes to statistics, you can find the FAA's excel spreadsheets by year here:

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviati ... tatistics/

Or, if you want an easy-to-read version with less breakout by category, go to GAMA's annual report, here:

http://www.gama.aero/media-center/indus ... ry-outlook

Weirdly enough, the General Aviation Manufacturer's Association pulls and prints last year's pilot statistics about four months before the FAA updates their civil airmen statistics page, so you get better FAA data from the industry group.

The growth and decline of pilots is now impossible to tell because they keep changing how they measure, so the data doesn't match. For example, if you look at the number of glider pilots over 2001-2002, you will see that they decided that all pilots with a glider add-on will now count as glider-pilots-only for two years after their last medical (even if they fail) - and the number of glider pilots reported went from 8,473 in 2001 to 21,826 in 2002.

prior to '95, all pilots with incomplete addresses or who'd requested to be kept off the mailing list weren't counted - so '96 on, they're reporting more completely, but this also means that the data sets aren't truly comparable.

in '94, they extended their data capture by two months, to try to boost numbers by all the extra student pilots and who'd come in, and pilots who'd just expired.

More recently, in '08, they changed the third-class medical to 5 years, retroactively, recapturing all pilots who'd let their medicals lapse in that time period - and you see the number of private pilots suddenly gain by 11,500 over the prior year. They mixed their statistics and applied selectively - they didn't apply it, for example, to student pilots, in 2008 or 2009!

In summary, student pilot numbers are fudged but appear to be declining? Private pilot numbers are declining despite the retroactive medical numbers boost. Commercial pilots are growing, ATP holding steady, and helicopter pilots are growing steadily. Sport pilot is slowly growing, and glider is so fudged it's impossible to tell.

Speaking of 'spensive flying. We landed in Beirut late this afternoon, our mechanic asked the handling agent who has the half dozen 150's and 172's on the other side of the ramp. Local flight school sponsored by some Saudi Prince was the answer. I asked him if he know how much they charged.....about $225/hr with instructor. After we picked ourselves up he then explained that there is no avgas around most of the middle east any more so these guys bought their own brand new truck and have to special order a barge load of 100LL when they need it. It comes out to about $22 a Gallon. We don't see them fly much.

Wow - $225/hr and $22/Gal is pretty expensive alright. On the plus side you could fly across the country and back in a C150 in about a half hour..

Is there anywhere on the planet where its as easy and inexpensive to fly as the US? I can't think of anywhere...

Why aren't more people attracted to aviation? Well, there's attraction, there's finishing the rating (2/3rds don't), and there's retention post-certificate.

Well, according to my godkid, who gave up on flying once she discovered boys aren't always icky and gross (and now is getting perilously close to wanting the car keys), it's "not cool." To be more specific, the idea of flying is cool - being up in the air like a bird - but the "ancient" Cessna 172 I rented for her to get flying lessons as a reward for good grades was "So old it's not even retro. But not, like, old enough to be steampunk cool. It's just gross."

On the other hand, the ability to get out camping is "way cool" and fishing where there are no roads or crowds is "awesome" (although the lack of cell phone service for texting "really blows goats.") And air racing passes the cool test, as do acrobatics. (She wants to do that someday, "but mom'd kill me.") Currently her David Clark headset is plugged into the computer with an adapter to be a pretty good set of headphones for ignoring the world.

1. People don't get interested in something they never hear about or see, or can't approach.

I look at the airports I visited in the Lower 48, and though I hear a myth of golden age when kids could ride down to an airport, hang on the fence, provide scut work for rides, and ease into the world of flight, today all I see are sunbaked deserted ramps and locked hangars, with a few forlorn aircraft outside and FBOs with all the warmth and charm of a business lobby providing the only break in security fencing. If a kid wants to be 'like a bird', where exactly is an inviting entrance there? How often do you hear anyone who's not a pilot mention the airport or go there?

In Anchorage, Lake Hood actively encourages dog walkers and joggers with a small playground right next to transient parking, and Merrill's edges are groomed into a nice place with pullouts and a WWII memorial for people to come look at history, walk their dogs, play frisbee, practice guitar (I even saw a guy practicing violin once), etc. This is an awesome practice, not only because it provides more places for people to walk their dogs, but also because it provides an environment for positive interaction, and normalization of flying. If you're walking your dog where planes are always taking off and landing, then airplanes are 'normal'. If you see the guys coming in and out in their beat-up pickups and cars, you know, even if you don't talk to them, that it's not a "rich man's sport." Better yet, it also means that if a developer wants to move on an airport, there's resistance by the neighborhood nearby, because it's "our airport", and "Our Park" - they have something to lose. At Lake Hood, there's no fence - small children, college kids, tourists, and joggers can (and do) come up to talk to you (and try to cadge rides).

On a completely different tangent, this is also where the Red Bull Air Race (NASCAR with planes), is wonderful - it brings the excitement and speed, the fun and adrenaline and engines roaring, to the world. Reno Air Races are great for pilots - but the Red Bull Air Races are great for observers, and they sell the idea of aviation as an extreme sport to the world

(As a side note - the media does its level best to convince us aviation is extremely dangerous. That's terrible if we're trying to sell it an an alternative to your car. That's perfectly fine for extreme sports - all the spectacular wipeouts on skateboards ever shown have not dissuaded kids from picking up a skateboard or trick bike or snowboard themselves. Exciting and fun things are supposed to be dangerous - and for all the sales of snowboarding videogames, there are plenty of kids out on the slopes of Alyeska and Hatcher Pass with snowboards, too.)

2. People explore and excel to the limits of their imagination. If you want them to reach further than just a rating, you have to get them to dream bigger.

By this, I mean that when I walk into an FBO or a flight school in the lower 48, most are aimed at "become an airline pilot" - even the small mom & pops. (In Alaska, the large flight schools are often guilty as well.) Well, that's fine for people who have their heart set on being an airline pilot - but if they just want to learn to fly they only see this sterile vision of asphalt to asphalt, nosewheel only, in 35-year-old nosewheels, with a heavy emphasis on getting your instrument ticket right afterward. And the dream of flying like a bird doesn't measure up to the reality of $145/hr dual instruction. Worse, after the ticket, what's the motivation to stay in the air, paying $90/hr for a airplane with no shoulder room or cupholders? So it drops away for other priorities.

This is where, honestly, you all come in. That 80-odd page thread of "where did you fly today?" has some astounding photos, and some absolutely heartwarming photos. I've sent folks there, and watched them go from the vaguely bored of "Someone's vacation photos? joy." to "Wow, I want to fly there!" Because in the part 141 airline-pilot-creation, nobody ever told them that you can still land on grass and gravel, and that there are still tailwheels and farmer's fields and wilderness airplane camping strips. "Short-and-soft-field" is just some maneuver in the PTS, until we make it come alive in youtube and vimeo videos, in flickr photostreams, in blog posts and message boards.

If we can get people to dream of getting their own plane and taking it camping - if we can give them places to go, people to meet, things to see - then they are much more likely to continue flying after they've gotten their license. If the seaplane rating goes from a weekend add-on course because they wanted to fly but touch n' go's at their home port is boring to the means by which they get out and explore the country, they're going to continue flying floats. If the tailwheel goes from a five-hour add-on course to flying into wilderness strips for family camping, they'll keep flying tailwheel. If acrobatic goes from an unusual attitude training to "So, coming to next week's competition?", they'll spend time in the box getting the maneuvers down and finding joy in inverted flight.

3. It's not the money, it's the priority

You know, there was a study done on folks in a country who were holding their kids back in school because they were "too poor" to afford the school fees. And they are poor, and compared to what they make a week, school fees are expensive - about half a week's wages. But many of these same people, the study found, spent that amount every week in alcohol. And no few of the families had multiple cell phones in the family. If they were just sober for a week - or quit buying phone time - they could put their kids through school! The summary was "education is not a priority for the poor in this country."

I bought my plane working retail. Not a particularly hot retail job, and not making commission. Now, I paid $1000 a month for fifteen months, and it was harsh - no rental flying, no new clothes, very little eating out, no movies, no vacation getaways - but at the end, I own my plane free and clear, which is more than most folks can say about their cars. My godkid was perfectly capable of working her tail off doing odd jobs all over the place for cash in hand when we told her she had to finance half the school trip to Australia if she wanted to go - and she did it. So if it was important enough to her to find the money to learn to fly, I don't doubt that she would. Right now, music, makeup, and fashionable clothes are more important to my godkid than flying. Flying's more important to me, which explains why somebody sighs and rolls their eyes at my clothes when being driven to the mall.

Keep flying interesting places and having fun. Keep writing. Keep taking pictures and video. Keep talking to your friends. Keep inviting folks out. I don't have any other answers, yet.

I've been reading this thread with interest, since, at 61 years, and getting my private at 55, I'm one of the folks that wanted to fly but didn't until quite late in life. In a nutshell, people are not getting into flying because it is too expensive. It is relegated to the folks that either are well off, (you don't have to be rich, but significant money is required) or willing to sacrifice other pursuits for flying. That's why I waited so long. I'm not so impassioned with flying that I would cut the funding to raise kids or do things with my wife. I don't begrudge folks that do, it's just that most of us take care of family first, given limited resources.

Real wages in this country have been falling for the last twenty years or so. This means that flying is even more difficult to justify. For the same reason, more and more families rely on a second income. Given the difficulty with two parent working and raising kids, the time commitment to learn to fly is a big impediment.

So, to get more folks flying you need to overcome the above problems. A couple of solutions come to mind. Making learning quicker and cheaper has already been addressed by the new sport pilot program. I would have gone that route if it had been ready when I started. The limitations align almost perfectly with my needs; flying in good weather to explore my world from the air and feel the freedom of three dimensional movement. With endorsements I can fly as far as I want, sticking to the smaller airports. This helps the affordability part of the problem, as well as the conflict with family time.

The next part of the problem is creating an interest. No, you need more than interest, you need passion. For a younger person with a family, only passion will overcome the need to feed and clothe the kids if you can't really afford to fly. That's a joke, but you really do need to get folks fired up.

When I grew up tv programs like Sky King were on, helping to stoke fires of flying neatness. Not much of that anymore, but if AOPA and EAA could push or help fund some programs that would be a help to create demand. The Ice Pilots show, while a little corny, is a good example of getting exposure to the adventures of flying.

More flying themed video games might be a way to garner some more interest. You IPod app writers get going.

Every small airport needs to host open houses, fly-ins, or any other events to pull people in to see what the fun is all about. A good example of this is the Strawberry Festival in Lebanon, OR, where there was a tight coupling between the widely known event of the Strawberry Festival and some action at the airport. Albany, OR has an Arts and Air festival that accomplishes the same thing.

Some schools are looking for stuff to present to the kids at assemblies. Maybe that would be another venue. I haven't thought much about schools for many years, but my grand kids participate in a robotics competition that fosters interest in science and math. AOPA and EAA would have the ability to create materials that could be used locally if interested folks would run with it.

This is going to be an uphill battle. The dwindling numbers of pilots, the gray hair at most wings courses all show that currently not enough replacements are being created. Good luck to the folks making their living servicing the hobby flyer.

tom

I agree that the media instills a false scense of fear about GA to the public. Articles like, http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Broken+Wings+Part+Danger+skies/3085402/story.html, titled "Broken Wings......Danger in our skys" does nothing for its image to the general public. Little Johnny might show some interest in flying, but mom an dad may shut him right away reading the endless headlines titled similar to the one above.

Some really interesting responses, especially Dot_AK...

At Oshkosh last year and Sun & Fun this year it's painfully obvious that the pilot population is ageing. Later we were at Everglades City and saw that there was a "Pancake Flyin' at the local airfield...drove there on the day and introduced ourselves to the friendly bunch ...however even though we are in our 60s we were the youngest there by a decade Disappointingly, even though it was a glorious day only one aircraft flew in. Driving away after meeting some new friends we realised that the 'Pancake' days were numbered and I guess this is happening everywhere.

Living in the UK at present where the ageing pilot population is just as much a problem,coupled with high avgas prices. Getting kids interested is difficult...most schools here are unfriendly and the kid pumping gas for flying has long gone. Much discussion about the problem but no real answers - igniting 'passion' about aviation in young people is difficult, even more so here as anyone that wants to get involved in something as simple as showing them around your plane has to be given an 'all clear' after a vetting by the Police so most people can't be bothered with the BS..

mountainmatt wrote:The short answer; it's not cool.

We live in a tech world and flying something 40-50-60-70 years old doesn't appeal to kids these days. They grow up with computers, cell phones, and the internet, where everything they want they can have. Now take that youngster and make him cough up $100+ a week for a flying lesson and they will quickly loose interest'

Not true and then you lead in to why in your own quote.

Kids these days are handled like a delicate little flower, they have this super sanitary / PC/ DIFM (do it for me) vs DIY world they live in. If you look at what kids watch on TV and play on their computers you will kind that inside kids are sick of this modern sanitary world, they want a more adventurous world not this padded version of reality their over protective parents dreamed up.

Also I dont know about the condition of your aircraft, however I have a shiny red 46' taildragger and most non-pilots can tell if it's a 1946 or a 2006 model! lol

mountainmatt wrote:...... shoot-them-up video games so they can hang out with their friends and talk trashy to their Jr High girlfriends is so much cooler

Bulls eye! this is how we get these kids into the world of flying. Look at what kids do now days, talk trashy to their girl, watch two men fight in a cage on TV, shoot up zombies on their idiot box video games. TAKE THIS AND USE IT.

Remember the movie the right stuff? Kids want to be in a world where you have to be more hands on, they want a teacher/instructor to call them a pussy if they dont do a real wing-over. Go take damn near any kid up, take them through the motions, low pass over a field, stalls, (if approved) roll the thing and get back to me with them thinking "aviation is not cool"

All we have to do is sell it, go talk to a YMCA or Teacher or whatever, if you get a kid in your plane for a flight and you have half a brain and a ounce of personality the only reason that kid wont come back is money.

1SeventyZ wrote:...Why aren't more young people attracted to aviation?

...What do you guys think? What do we do now?

Answer: Get Martha King into some low-rise jeans, get John to wear a baseball cap backwards, and have them rap the ground school material?

denalipilot wrote:

1SeventyZ wrote:...Why aren't more young people attracted to aviation?

...What do you guys think? What do we do now?

Answer: Get Martha King into some low-rise jeans, get John to wear a baseball cap backwards, and have them rap the ground school material?

Every small airport needs to host open houses, fly-ins, or any other events to pull people in to see what the fun is all about.

We just did one of these a few weeks ago at our little airport (you all were invited). Best estimates are that we gave over 250 people free airplane rides. I just got a call from a former coworker whose 21 y.o. son was apparently "bitten by the bug", and wants to know when he can come back out.

A friend of mine who also hopped rides that day has half a dozen follow-up rides arranged in which he'll provide an hour of free instruction.

But at 44, we're still (today) among the oldest people at the airport...

we're still (today) among the oldest people at the airport...

Of course I meant to say "youngest".