GA paying fair (fare?) share

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Dave S" wrote in message
link.net...

So what would be equitable?

A per-seat capitation? A capitation based on gross weight? or a per-user
fee? While it would cost me more in the pocketbook, I have a hard time
seeing that I am financing my share of services using JUST the avgas
fuel tax....



What is your share of services? What do you feel is the marginal cost of
providing services to you?


I'd need access to the direct costs, personnel costs, as well as the
manner in which ATC allocates its "productivity" and measures
performance. Without them, I'd be picking a number out of the air. One
ironic way of looking at it would involve me flying at night and maybe
being the only target in the sector.. ATC isnt busy at all, but I'm
receiving 100% of their attention (in theory only) where if there are 25
targets, the controller is much more busy, but each target is only
recieving 4% of the attention/service (VERY bad and flawed example, but
illustrates the difference. You dont pay a higher toll at midnight cause
you are the only car on the road, so you are the only one the guy in the
toll booth can "bill" for his time)

I think a sliding scale based on weight would be the most appropriate -
it accounts for frieght as well as passengers. Again, without specific
numbers, and a lot of time to crunch em, this is beyond me. I would
probably be willing to pay an additional $5-10 for local flights and and
additional $20-50 for longer cross countries.. these are rough figures I
just pulled out of the air that seemed reasonable for me to utilize
services. If I didnt use them, I wouldnt expect to pay the fees.

In a direct answer to your question.. I havent reached a firm decision
yet on what I think my share is of the costs of the NAS.

Dave

"Dave S" wrote in message
link.net...

I'd need access to the direct costs, personnel costs, as well as the
manner in which ATC allocates its "productivity" and measures
performance. Without them, I'd be picking a number out of the air. One
ironic way of looking at it would involve me flying at night and maybe
being the only target in the sector.. ATC isnt busy at all, but I'm
receiving 100% of their attention (in theory only)


If you weren't there, if there were no targets in the sector, would the
costs change?



where if there are 25
targets, the controller is much more busy, but each target is only
recieving 4% of the attention/service


Do the costs change now that there are 25 targets in the sector, everything
else being equal?



I think a sliding scale based on weight would be the most appropriate -
it accounts for frieght as well as passengers.


It's pretty much that way now, at least indirectly. Heavier aircraft burn
more fuel and thus pay more fuel tax. Heavier aircraft pay more in landing
fees.



Again, without specific
numbers, and a lot of time to crunch em, this is beyond me. I would
probably be willing to pay an additional $5-10 for local flights and and
additional $20-50 for longer cross countries.. these are rough figures I
just pulled out of the air that seemed reasonable for me to utilize
services. If I didnt use them, I wouldnt expect to pay the fees.

In a direct answer to your question.. I havent reached a firm decision
yet on what I think my share is of the costs of the NAS.


Without specific numbers nobody is in a position to say GA isn't paying it's
fair share now.

Without specific numbers nobody is in a position to say GA isn't paying it's
fair share now.


NOR can anybody assert that we ARE paying our fair share. Your assertion
is valid from both points of view.

Dave

"Dave S" wrote in message
link.net...

NOR can anybody assert that we ARE paying our fair share. Your assertion
is valid from both points of view.


That's true. But the assertion that we ARE paying our fair share is being
made in response to the assertion that we are not. Let those that made the
first assertion be the first to present their evidence.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dave S" wrote in message
link.net...

NOR can anybody assert that we ARE paying our fair share. Your assertion
is valid from both points of view.


That's true. But the assertion that we ARE paying our fair share is being
made in response to the assertion that we are not. Let those that made
the
first assertion be the first to present their evidence.


I pay for much more than I use, therefore I should be entitled to a rebate
based on this "fair" thing.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
y.com...

I pay for much more than I use,


How do you know?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
y.com...

I pay for much more than I use,


How do you know?


I am making an assumption just like everybody else does that spouts off
about this topic. Prove me wrong.