That this is generally the case, as I stated, has a rather large academic literature. One could start with von Mises' "Bureaucracy", for example.
My reply is to your original comment below that implies to me the high price of your hobby is due to the regulations. The philosophical side of the burdens of law and rule is a separate topic and should get its own thread. Regardless, current and past aviation regulations are not the reason your weekend hobby is so expensive as they have remained constant for decades.
My view is that the high price of GA is killing it, for sure, and that is due to - regulation.
However, I bet if one looked at the total number of pages in the Federal regulations pertaining to aviation it has increased substantially throughout the 60s to today.
Depends on how you look at it. Dig deep enough and you’ll find the core regulations go back to 1939 and remained basically the same until the mid-40s when the Chicago Convention was held which led to the creation of ICAO. That group of nations agreed there should be an international regulatory foundation that would guide aviation and provide a path for global acceptance by all member nations.
So in reality, a member country’s aviation regulatory structure complies with two requirements: the management and guidance of the aviation industry within a nation state’s own borders; and provides the minimum compliance for ICAO requirements. In general, for the US FARs about 75% of those regulations apply to ICAO and bi-lateral requirements. So the FARs are not only meant to keep your personal aircraft on the straight and narrow. However, if a country decided to make rules outside of the ICAO guidance then those specific aircraft or people can only operate within that nation. For example, TCCA owner maintained aircraft, E/AB aircraft, repairman certificates, etc.
As to whether aviation regulations have “increased substantially” you’ll find that after the initial ICAO regulatory initiatives between members, the type and number of new regulations basically followed the increasing complexity of new aircraft, equipment, and airspace technologies. And while there were some regulatory additions like ELTs or ADSB, you’ll find there were usually compliance exceptions made to various operations to include your level vs an 100% compliance requirement. The ICAO would write a guidance, then each member nation would write their own regulatory versions.
The interesting thing is that of all the aviation regulatory structures found in ICAO, the US FARs are the least restrictive, the least expensive, and the most flexible of any in the world. By a long shot. If you want to see over-regulation, pop over to the EASA site and see for yourself. There’s a reason people use N-reg aircraft in the EU.
So while you may think the regulations are “holding back” private GA (not all GA) you’ll find in the big picture you actually have it made in the US when it comes to operating an aircraft.
That tends to favor large established players, decrease innovation, and increase price.
How so? Any individual can design, build, modify, and fly any type aircraft they want in the US NAS. How much that venture will cost is solely up to that individual. And there is no FAR that prevents that. That pretty much leaves all innovation up to the holder of the idea. Right?
Regardless, there still is plenty of aviation innovation in the US today. Its just not where you want it to be. Just look at the recent clean sheet designs flying, the Beechcraft Denali, Cessna Sky Courier, and all the e-VTOLs. Its out there you just need to look for it.
I think the next step to seriously discuss its impacts on aviation would be to look up the academic literature on this, rather than trying to rely on personal experience.
You'll find that most in-depth research at the "scholarly " level is proprietary. Aviation in general is not that big of an industry on a global scale especially when you get lower than the Part 135/91K levels. There are some public white papers, etc. out there but usually cover topics outside of what you're looking for. This why the industry heavily relies on consultants and their experience.
You'll also find aviation has a huge amount off variance so it is difficult to research a single topic across all disciplines. However, the biggest issue relates to even your thread title as General Aviation (GA) is not just privately owned, recreational Part 91 aircraft. I'm not aware of any useful breakout of those specific numbers but those numbers are lower than most people think when compared to the overall number of GA aircraft.
What I think is killing private recreational GA is simply the lack of interest by the up-and-coming generations (Y, Z, Alpha). But if you want a singular reason, technology killed it.
