Talk:General aviation

message: I've got a few issues here. 
1)I work for a charter airline, which makes us comercial aviation, but my company has a MEDEVAC contract ans so we operate medical flights and the pilots must hold a commercial licence because they are being paid. i would therefore classify med flights as commercial aviation. I thinks that if the pilots are being paid for their services it makes it commercial aviation and many of the examples of GA in this article should not be here. 
2) Except for the few aircraft we have that operate at high altitude, very few of our flights operate IFR. Trevor MacInnis 00:29, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues

message: There is a strong geographic bias in the article towards the U.S. Whilst I don't think there's a problem with the content as it stands, it could do with being placed in a better international context. I've marked it with a tag accordingly Andrewferrier 20:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Geographic bias

message: I've rewritten the page to remove excessively narrowly-focussed or US-specific information, and provide a simple introduction to GA in general.  I don't think detailed discussions of the cost/benefit of private light aircraft ownership really belong here, nor do the specifics of FAA part 91 regs .  David 23:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: A good example of the common definition of GA in North America appears here: "General Aviation, which includes all flying except for military and scheduled airline operations, makes up more than 1 percent of the U.S. GDP."  However, during a discussion on Talk:Civil aviation, User:Treesmill has pointed out a UK example that defines GA as "All Civil Aviation operations other than scheduled air services and non-scheduled air transport operations for remuneration or hire", which might be much narrower, depending on how "air transport operation" is defined — basically, GA there might be only private aviation.
Granted, Canada and the US together account for well over half of the world's GA operations, but we should still make sure that the article takes into account what general aviation means to people outside North America.  Can anyone else give local definitions or citations from Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Latin America, Australia/New Zealand, etc? David 12:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "General Aviation" outside North America? 

message: It is asserted that the majority of air traffic is General Aviation. It would really be a good idea to back that up with a reference, as it seems pretty counter-intuitive to me as a non-pilot. --Booch 17:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This one's U.S.-specific and a few years out of date, but in 2001 general aviation accounted for 79.82% of all non-military U.S. flights David 00:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto.  It is counter-intuitive, but it's also quite accurate.  Commecial aviation (United, Delta, etc.) doesn't put near the passenger miles through the sky that general aviation does.  - Mugs 19:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure about passenger miles, but definitely number of flights and probably flight hours. David 22:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majority of Air Traffic 

message: Added stub tag. This article surely needs expanding...it doesn't begin to do justice to the diversity and importance of general aviation worldwide.  Additional images showing the range of aircraft (say, from a Flybaby to a Gulfstream) would be useful.  The Safety section is generally unsourced and of questionable accuracy. There are excellent data on GA safety available from AOPA ASN and the NTSB...more authoritative information would be a great plus.  Cmichael 07:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub 

message: Put "aerial burial" back in list, as virtually all aerial burials, or ash scatterings, are performed by general aviation aircraft under Part 91 (US reg).  Cmichael 06:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aerial Burial

message: The length of the list of GA examples has become excessive, so I've tagged it with a cleanup template.  Can we cut it down to 5–8 solid examples?  If someone wants to create an article "List of general operations", we could move the full list there and link to it.  David 21:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me.  Maybe then we could concentrate on developing the article, rather than developing the list <wink>.  Cmichael 05:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done — I've created a new article List of general aviation activities and moved most of the list there. David 21:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List cleanup 

message: I've removed the section about the film One Six Right — I know that the film is well-loved in the U.S. general aviation community, but a lengthy description (or even a quick mention) is out of place in an article dealing with general aviation world-wide. David 21:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''One Six Right'' 

message: I just removed a link to AOPA in the External Links section.  We already have a link to iaopa.org, which links on to AOPA (for the U.S.) along with more than 60 other national GA organizations from around the world -- if we start linking to country-specific ones like AOPA, we'll end up with a very long section. David (talk) 12:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing AOPA link 

message: When an airport severs both commercial and general aviation, do passengers on general aviation flights have to go through the same security checkpoints as everyone else? Are there different rules about what can/cannot be brought on board the aircraft? Can a general aviation pilot carry a gun? A knife? I'm both currious about the answers to these questions and think that they might deserve mention in the article. Thanks. ce1984 (talk) 10:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this really fits the article, because there's no single answer — it depends on the country and the airport.  Often, GA is far from the passenger terminal, and the space around the passenger terminal is restricted, but again, it depends on the airport. David (talk) 17:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airport Security 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on General aviation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150214124431/https://www.aopa.org/ to http://www.aopa.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060413085904/http://www.iaopa.org:80/ to http://www.iaopa.org
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on General aviation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161220152840/http://www.iaopa.org/what-is-general-aviation/ to http://www.iaopa.org/what-is-general-aviation/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060413085904/http://www.iaopa.org/ to http://www.iaopa.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:38, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have some doubts about including the table of "current aircraft". First off it is not all the current GA aircraft, just some of the ready-to-fly production types and even then misses many ready-to-fly UL and LSA types in production. It ignores kit built aircraft, non-certified types and aircraft built via other means, like plans, partial kits, etc. I have re-labelled it to try to explain that. If it was complete it would be a very, very long table. Does this serve any purpose in a general introduction article? - Ahunt (talk) 13:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, I put this table here because I needed it otherwise, so I thought it would add some value to Wikipedia as I stumbled upon a good ref (flying's buyers guide). Of course it's limited to certified, in production types. An ultralight list would belong in ultralight aviation (but would be indecently long), a LSA list in Light-sport aircraft (already there), and a list of kits and plans in homebuilt aircraft. This certified GA table is more useful here than in certified aircraft. The point is to show some starter points to further explore through comparables : from the mentioned Cessna 172 you can explore Cessna's timeline and competitors, etc. Otherwise the only starter point is the random DA20 pictured. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:02, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I can understand the concept of providing links to some example GA aircraft, but even as a list of current production, certified light aircraft it is incomplete. For instance, the Vulcanair V1.0 is missing. The other factor is that it gives the impression that GA only includes certified aircraft, when GA includes ULs, homebuilts, LSAs, warbirds, gliders, balloons and many other categories of aircraft. I just think a table of one small corner of GA aircraft will leave readers with the impression that is all that there is to GA. Then there is the question of who will maintain this table, adding and removing types as they go in and out of production. Basically even for production certified types it will always be out of date, unless someone is right on top of it. I would rather have a short list of a few representative types. - Ahunt (talk) 12:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  So maybe we should move it to General aviation certified aircraft. It may be US-centered but as it is the largest GA market, it should be the most representative one. The Vulcanair V1.0 had its FAA certification last December, maybe an importer is searched for. We should not maintain it as a borderline WP:OR table with specs from multiple sources, Flying's buyers guide is updated yearly. Making a list of representative types would be difficult to establish a standard (numbers produced, maybe?)--Marc Lacoste (talk) 12:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be fin with moving it to something like List of current production certified light aircraft or similar. I think it might be a battle to keep people from adding aircraft, though, especially through the year as aircraft go in and out of production. - Ahunt (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  or maybe in the already existing Light aircraft, more adapted than here, which I did not saw earlier?--Marc Lacoste (talk) 13:14, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather see it as a stand-alone list, as Light aircraft is the same issue as general aviation, it includes everything 12,500 lbs and below, not just certified aircraft. - Ahunt (talk) 13:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK then!--Marc Lacoste (talk) 13:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Table

message: Under the definitions given in this article, they would could as GA. Is this correct? Turkeyphant 12:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: GA is all non-airline and military aviation, so civil drones would be GA, yes. - Ahunt (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Slight correction: GA is all non-airline and non-commercial civil aviation. A distinction is made between commercial air transport and aerial work. cagliost (talk) 08:28, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drones 

message: I propose merging Private aviation into General aviation. 
The article Private aviation makes the following unreferenced claim: "In most countries, private flights are always general aviation flights, but the opposite is not true: many general aviation flights (such as banner towing, charter, crop dusting, and others) are commercial in that the pilot is hired and paid." I don't think this is true. The article on general aviation defines these as Aerial Work. I don't see a clear distinction between this article "Private aviation" and GA. Since GA has a well-referenced definition, and "Private aviation" does not have a referenced definition, it would make sense to merge this article in to General aviation. cagliost (talk) 08:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: I am not opposed to merging Private aviation into General Aviation, since the PS article is pretty deficient, but I think we need to be clear on what is what first. General Aviation is all civil aviation that is non-airline. It includes commercial aviation such as flight training and aerial work (such as forest fire fighting, banner towing, aerial surveying and so on) and also includes private aviation. Private aviation includes only non-commercial aviation activities, such as light aircraft pleasure flights and business aviation. - Ahunt (talk) 12:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I see from the above discussion #Scope_of_this_article that ICAO has two definitions of GA (the second is here). I still think we should merge the articles, but make the explanation of the two definitions clearer. Civil aviation would also need to be updated as part of the merge. cagliost (talk) 13:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That ref says , which the same as I had stated. I don't see a second definition. Where do you find that? - Ahunt (talk) 14:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

text: Okay. I had a look though your changes to General aviation and, given the limits of the ICAO refs, it seems okay. - Ahunt (talk) 15:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retracted merger proposal