by Jose teacherjh@[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dec 21, 2005 at 07:38 PM


Who is benefitting? Not just the flyers. The airport you describe is
probably close to a metropolitan area, which has an even larger airport
nearby, which does have commercial service. That larger airport may
even be more convenient for many GA operations, but the airlines do not
want us mixing up in there. We get in their way. So, instead of having
us land on their concrete (and putting hardly any wear and tear on it at
all), they would prefer we land, well, "elsewhere" and just stay out of
their hair. This is what a reliever airport is. It's a way to keep
spam cans out of the way of big aluminum tubes. The primary beneficary
is the airlines, who can now schedule more flights and have fewer delays
(just imagine what American Airlines would think of a 152 doing pattern
work at JFK).

So, who benefits from this reliever airport? The airlines. And as the
airport gets bigger (think Westchester), the airlines start moving in
there too, demanding concrete and ether that spam cans usually can do
without, but would have to pay for under your plan.

Jose

Jose: I don't have a plan. I'm simply trying to debunk the AOPA nonsense
about AV gas taxes being an efficient and fair funding mechanism that
covers the cost of the GA subsidies.

Seems like, from your new argument about GA reliever airports providing
indirect benefit to commercial airports, you agree that GA airports are
subsidized.

I obviously disagree with this most recent argument. But, next week, I
will enjoy the tax subsidies when we are soaring above CT in the 172.

Happy Holidays, Skylune out.