GA paying fair (fare?) share

Not true at all.

If I am flying a commercial plane, and get warning of traffic on my course,
I really have NO choice but to accept vectors or other avoidance measures.
The VFR pilot is oblivious to the fact that he is about to get squished by
the ridiculously fast jet traffic, and has no way to avoid it.

Even if an IFR plane is right on altitude, he will be blamed for the midair
if he fails to avoid the traffic.

On the other hand, when VFR pilots use radar service, they almost always
voluntarily comply with altitudes and vectors rather than drop radar
service. That allows the IFR pilot, and the airlines, to continue through
like they own the place.

Which apparently the airlines have gotten all to used to.

GA's use of the system improves the cost of operations for the airlines, not
the other way around.



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

"Dude" wrote in message
...

Remember -
IFR traffic gets vectored around VFR pilots not on radar service.


Only if they ask to be vectored around them.

"Dude" wrote in message
...

Not true at all.


Of course it's true. Why do you say it isn't?



If I am flying a commercial plane, and get warning of traffic on my
course,
I really have NO choice but to accept vectors or other avoidance measures.


It's been my experience that very few commercial planes request vectors
around VFR targets which they've been advised of.



The VFR pilot is oblivious to the fact that he is about to get squished by
the ridiculously fast jet traffic, and has no way to avoid it.


He can't see it?



Even if an IFR plane is right on altitude, he will be blamed for the
midair
if he fails to avoid the traffic.


No more so than the other participant in the midair.



On the other hand, when VFR pilots use radar service, they almost always
voluntarily comply with altitudes and vectors rather than drop radar
service. That allows the IFR pilot, and the airlines, to continue through
like they own the place.


Comply with altitudes and vectors? What altitudes or vectors would there be
for them to comply with?



Which apparently the airlines have gotten all to used to.

GA's use of the system improves the cost of operations for the airlines,
not
the other way around.


You have a poor understanding of the system.

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:BA_uc.36617$Ly.26936@attbi_s01...

Why is the marginal cost what's relevant (rather than a pro rata
share of the total cost)?


Pro rata works fine if all users are equal. What's a Skylane's share of a
runway built to support 747s?



If I fly on an airliner, or I step onto a bus or subway, the marginal cost
of my presence (in terms of the extra energy expenditure)
is a negligible fraction of the fare. Should I therefore expect to be
transported nearly for free?


Of course not. You get one seat, the same as every other passenger.