AOPA talking rubbish

On 2007-02-19, C J Campbell wrote:
I guess it all depends on who you call the ultra wealthy. Sure, ordinary
people can afford luxury yachts, too, if they sacrifice everything else. But
such yachts tend to belong to the ultra-wealthy, do they not?

Flying in the US is a lot cheaper than in Europe (but Europe, being
quite a varied place - the costs vary massively across the area. I can
only speak for the area I fly in - northern Ireland, northern England
and the Isle of Man).

I'm not ultra wealthy. I certainly couldn't even dream of affording a
quarter share in a luxury yacht, yet I own a quarter share of an
airplane (an Auster powered by an O-320).

I very very rarely pay a user fee either. No user fees apply to my
aircraft for anything in flight. I don't have to pay for weather
briefings (and here we get to talk to a real meteorologist). There are
landing fees - but all the airfields I fly to are privately owned, and
the owner has to pay his running costs somehow. Large airfields are a
particular bug-bear (some of them charge 'handling fees' for essentially
no service whatsoever). So I don't go to large airfields, and yes - I do
find this annoying and the US approach is *much* better. It is
thankfully mitigated by the fact that small airfields are generally much
closer to where I actually want to be.

I'll stress that flying is much cheaper and better in the US, but there
is affordable GA flying to be had here too. AOPA is right to stir its
members to resist extra charges for US GA (especially as most of the
infrastructure is only needed because of the airlines, and GA would
continue quite happily without it), however, their editorial is a bit
exaggerated. AOPA rails against the popular press for distorting facts -
they ought to practise what they preach!

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de