Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The "hobby" flying that people, including the wealthy, do adds so little to
the cost of maintaining the national airspace system that it is hardly worth
mentioning. The things that get money spent on them like airports are
helping the struggling masses by supporting businesses that create jobs.

I strongly suspect that GA is more of a burden than an asset for the
population and society at large. Commercial air travel is a necessity;
general aviation is not.


GA is a gnat on the publics rear end. We use a resource nobody else
cares about or wants, that is, the airspace between 1000 and 18000 feet
AGL. The only part of that anyone else cares about is the circle around
large airports that big metal uses to climb up and down to their
accustomed flight altitudes. We use 3000 feet of pavement when the
general public uses countless miles of it. We use fields out of town
and give them up when the town grows out to the "useless" land the
airports were built on and want it "back". We use a tiny fraction of
the fuel, have virtually no environmental impact compared to cars
and ATVs. Our accident rate, for whatever the danger to pilots per
hour is, is to the general public a fraction of carnage done yearly
by portable power saws, much less anything more dangerous like a
car or truck. We are accused of noise pollution even though our
total impact is less than a years production of Harley Davidson.
We are accused of air pollution even though our total output is likely
less than the lawn mowers in LA.

And despite the fact that we use a resource that is virtually free and
has unlimited capacity (airspace) there is always someone who thinks
that we shouldn't have it, because they can't have it.

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get your way someday.

Scott