F. Baum wrote:
On May 25, 9:17 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

They'd have to trust the "big sky, little airplane" theory, just as
they did prior to ATC. Presumably the major delays you refer to
would be waiting for good weather, which would not be flying IFR.
That wouldn't eliminate delays at major hubs, however. If an airport
has a maximum capacity of X operations per hour under ideal
conditions and more than X hourly operations are scheduled delays
are unavoidable.


Welcom to the discusion. You have taken alot of my post out of
context.


What parts of your post do you believe I have taken out of context?



I dont know how much IFR you do in uncontrolled airspace but
you gotta admit, things definatly move slower. This is part what I was
refering to.


I can't admit that because it isn't true. It's actually the opposite. If
you
have no ATC you have no ATC delays; no flow control, no gate holds, no
preferential routes, no waiting for a clearance, no waiting for a previous
aircraft to cancel IFR, no searching for a means to contact ATC, no time
spent filing an IFR flight plan, etc., etc., etc.

I take it you're not a pilot?



The other part is that reliever airports rely on the
major airports for funding. The FAA set it up that way, not the
airlines.


What relievers are you referring to? Don't the airlines benefit from the
presence of the relievers?



My guess is that you dont own your own airport and the
airport you fly out of has benefited from fees and taxes from people
other than the pilots who use it.


Your guess is wrong. I base my airplane at WI78, it has never received a
penny of support from anyone other than those that use it.



The OP posted links to press
releases or editorials that had a bit of overstatement on both sides.
Editorials are nice and interesting, but they are mostly one persons
opinion. I think much of the diaolouge here could probably be between
the NBAA and the FAA. I welcome Boyers opinion but I disagree with
alot of what he says and I think AOPA does GA a diservice in many
ways. Dont make assumptions about that, it is just my opinion AFTER
having been a member for a few years.





Phil is a bit off here. I guess he wants to ignore how much of the
system has been put in place to suport GA. Also, I wouldnt put much
stock in Useless Today.

Well, how much of the system HAS been put in place to suport GA?


This is a good question. As a percentage I would guess most of it.


What do you base that on? As a percentage I would guess very little. How
many ARTCCs were established to serve GA? How many TRACONs and ATCTs? How
many NAVAIDs?



Ask yourself this the next time you fly an approach into a field that is
not served by an airline.


Ask myself what the next time I fly an approach into a field that is not
served by an airline? If the field or approach was put in place to support
GA? Interesting question, let's take a look at fields like that within 60
miles of my home, Green Bay, WI:

Carter Airport, Pulaski WI, 92C - It has a VOR or GPS-A approach off of
nearby Green Bay VORTAC. The airport is privately owned.

Douglas Bake Memorial Field, Oconto WI, KOCQ - NDB and GPS approaches. One
paved runway 3200' by 75', and one turf runway 1845' by 150'.

Shawano Municipal Airport, 3WO - GPS approach. Two paved runways, 3900' by
75' and 2225' by 60'. The airport was established before the Federal
Airport Act became law.

Clintonville Municipal Airport, KCLI - Four GPS approaches, an NDB approach
still appears in the TPP but the NDB has been decommissioned. The airport
was established before the Federal Airport Act became law and was formerly
served by Wisconsin Central Airlines.

Manitowoc County Airport, Manitowoc WI, KMTW - ILS, VOR, and GPS approaches.
Two paved runways, 5000' by 100' and 3345' by 100'. The airport was
established before WWII, the runways were paved in 1953 so that North
Central Airlines could begin operations. Airline service ceased in the
1980s.

New Holstein Municipal Airport, 8D1 - VOR/DME or GPS-A approach off of
Oshkosh VORTAC. One paved runway, 3600' by 75' and one turf runway 2970' by
250'.

Wittman Regional Airport, Oshkosh WI, KOSH - ILS, VOR, NDB, and GPS
approaches. Four paved runways, 8000' by 150', 6180' by 150', 3425' by 75',
and 3060' by 75'. The airport was established before the Federal Airport
Act became law and was formerly served by Wisconsin Central Airlines/North
Central Airlines/Republic Airlines.

Door County Cherryland Airport, Sturgeon Bay, WI - SDF and GPS approaches.
Two paved runways, 4600' by 75' and 3200' by 75'. The airport was
established before the Federal Airport Act became law and was formerly
served by Midstate Airlines.

Waupaca Municipal Airport, KPCZ - NDB and GPS approaches. Two paved
runways, 5200' by 100' and 3900' by 75'. The airport was established before
the Federal Airport Act became law.

Menominee-Marinette Twin County Airport, KMNM - ILS, VOR, NDB and GPS
approaches. Two paved runways, 6000' by 100' and 5100' by 100'. The
airport was established before the Federal Airport Act became law and was
formerly served by Wisconsin Central Airlines/North Central
Airlines/Republic Airlines.

Sheboygan County Memorial Airport, KSBM - ILS, VOR and GPS approaches. Two
paved runways, 6000' by 100' and 5000' by 75'. Formerly served by Air
Wisconsin and Midstate Airlines.

Fond du Lac County Airport, KFLD - LOV, VOR, and GPS approaches. Two paved
runways, 5940' by 100' and 3600' by 75'.

Ephraim-Fish Creek Airport, 3D2 - GPS approach. One paved runway 2700' by
60' and one turf runway 1980' by 80'.

Wautoma Municipal Airport, Y50 - GPS approach. One paved runway 3300' by
60' and one turf runway 2280' by 150'.

Langlade County Airport, Antigo WI - NDB and GPS approaches. Two paved
runways, 4000' by 75' and 3400' by 75'. The airport was established before
the Federal Airport Act became law.

Stevens Point Municipal Airport, KSTE - VOR and GPS approaches. Two paved
runways, 6030' by 120' and 3635' by 75'. The airport was established before
the Federal Airport Act became law and was formerly served by Wisconsin
Central Airlines/North Central Airlines and Midstate Airlines.



Another good example is WAAS which was
funded in no small part by the taxpayers and traveling public, and yet
it is of almost no use to the airlines.


Why is it of almost no use to the airlines?



What are the respective fuel tax rates?


The last time I read about it, it was 38 cents a gallon.


So he should have said, "The airlines pay a modest federal fuel tax of four
cents a gallon. Conversely, general aviation flights fund their use of the
system through a fuel tax nearly ten times what the airlines pay." Is that
why you said his statement was simply untrue?



If it works as advertized NEXGEN will be safer and more efficient
but it will do nothing to reduce airline delays.


OK Phil G


You apparently disagree. How do you imagine NEXGEN will reduce airline
delays?