![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
gonline.com... wrote: The slow death of GA is in acceleration in the NY area. I believe you're missing the smaller picture. TEB has been *small* GA unfriendly for quite some time now. It's all about money: which makes more for the FBO, a 4 172s or 1 citation? Right now, MMU is pretty good about small GA. But I predict that this won't last long. The best break we "little plane" pilots got in a while in this I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the only FBO small GA friendly |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve S wrote:
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message gonline.com... wrote: The slow death of GA is in acceleration in the NY area. I believe you're missing the smaller picture. TEB has been *small* GA unfriendly for quite some time now. It's all about money: which makes more for the FBO, a 4 172s or 1 citation? Right now, MMU is pretty good about small GA. But I predict that this won't last long. The best break we "little plane" pilots got in a while in this I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the only FBO small GA friendly Agreed. A reasonable overnight parking fee ($10 a night ?) I could go along with but $35 will pretty much guarantee a lot of GA aircraft will avoid that FBO. In their own way they are contributing to the extermination of general aviation. Just as with excessive income taxes, there is a point of diminishing returns. There somes a point where reducing tax rates actually results in an overall increase in tax revenues because people start increasing economic activities. I think some of these FBOs need a little dose of supply side economic thinking. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
kontiki wrote:
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the only FBO small GA friendly Is $35 really unfriendly in the NYC metro area? I haven't lived in the area for almost 10 years but even then it cost over $20 to park a car for the day in prime midtown spot. Why would it not cost the same or more to park an aircraft? Agreed. A reasonable overnight parking fee ($10 a night ?) I could go along with but $35 will pretty much guarantee a lot of GA aircraft will avoid that FBO. In their own way they are contributing to the extermination of general aviation. I expect to pay $10 a night almost anywhere. Often it's less. But at prime locations I'm sometimes surprised at how little we pay... and how much we complain. I'd like use of all airports to be free too. I hate getting charged parking and service and whatever. Although with the increased security that 9/11 caused, I feel like I get a little more for the dollar. But I'm willing to pay to get access, security, and service. I'm glad someone is there to provide it and I have to be willing to pay for it. It shouldn't work the way it worked for me this weekend. I filled up at our private tank, then flew to our local Class C airport to pick up my passenger. The FBO generously provided a car and driver to do the round trip to the passenger terminal. No charge but I tipped the driver. We returned and flew to a busy Class B. There were a number of smaller airports nearby but none as close to our downtown hotel as the this one. We tookour tail dragger directly to the overnight parking area knowing that it can't be towed. We were met by 2 golf carts for luggage and the trip to the FBO. We checked in, ate a cookie, met our host, and off we went. We stayed an extra day. Returned, told the receptionist that we needed a ride out to our plane because it couldn't be towed but otherwise didn't need anything else. "Fine, have a nice flight". Three different guys helped us get our luggage out to the plane. No charge. I'm embarrassed by that. I know that they have charges for overnight parking and service in lieu of a fuel purchase. But I didn't offer and they didn't ask. It shouldn't work that way but often than not, it does. (Taildragger helps). How do these guys stay in business? I know my $35 isn't going to make or break the business but how many businesses provide great, on-demand service and don't bother to collect anything? Maybe I'll invest that $35 in a new ANR headset to stimulate the economy. No, actually I returned home and filled up again at the private tank with the $35 I didn't pay the FBO. Great for me! Just as with excessive income taxes, there is a point of diminishing returns. There somes a point where reducing tax rates actually results in an overall increase in tax revenues because people start increasing economic activities. I think some of these FBOs need a little dose of supply side economic thinking. It was BS then, it's BS now. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Maybe I look at it strangely?
When you pay to park your car in a parking lot is it on private property? When you pay to park your plane is it on private property? My take on it is, if it is being (car or plane) parked on public property funded by taxpayers it has already been paid for. Heck I hate toll roads! Now if a private company wants to build a road and charge a toll , fine. When tax dollars pay for the construction it just really gets my goat. I don't mind some sort of tax, but I hate being "double" taxed . I just do not see taxes funding airports and then the airport turning around charging someone a landing fee or what have you , when the Federal tax dollar supports the airport. If the airport wants to charge for it's use, then it needs to be a private airport and not publicly funded. IMHO, a 2 buck charge at a funded airport is 2 bucks to much . Is it just me or does anyone else feel they are being ripped off when airports do this? Seems to me they could do more biz by not having landing and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their services wouldn't they? I think the fees just add to the slow death of GA in an area. Patrick student SP aircraft structural mech "Andrew Gideon" wrote in message I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the only FBO small GA friendly Is $35 really unfriendly in the NYC metro area? I haven't lived in the area for almost 10 years but even then it cost over $20 to park a car for the day in prime midtown spot. Why would it not cost the same or more to park an aircraft? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() W P Dixon wrote: Maybe I look at it strangely? When you pay to park your car in a parking lot is it on private property? I never know. It is being managed and presumably atleast leased by a private operator. Go to a federal or state building and you park in a pay parking lot. When you pay to park your plane is it on private property? My take on it is, if it is being (car or plane) parked on public property funded by taxpayers it has already been paid for. I feel that way about using the ATC system and operating in and out of public airports. But every ramp I see (and want to park on) is privately operated. I don't think it makes any difference who *owns* it, the question is who *operates* it. That is, who puts the chains out, chocks at night as required, provides security, who is liable? Heck I hate toll roads! Now if a private company wants to build a road and charge a toll , fine. When tax dollars pay for the construction it just really gets my goat. I don't mind some sort of tax, but I hate being "double" taxed . I just do not see taxes funding airports and then the airport turning around charging someone a landing fee or what have you , when the Federal tax dollar supports the airport. If the airport wants to charge for it's use, then it needs to be a private airport and not publicly funded. IMHO, a 2 buck charge at a funded airport is 2 bucks to much . It's pretty obvious that roads *have* to be a public entity. It's a regional and national interest and private ownership just won't work (who would build the interstates? Or the PA turnpike? Major airports, to a lesser extent, need to be public too. Otherwise they would all be closed or closing. NIMBY applies, squared! Is it just me or does anyone else feel they are being ripped off when airports do this? Seems to me they could do more biz by not having landing and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their services wouldn't they? No, I don't think so. If that were the case, someone would be running a Walmart FBO chain and cleaning up. Who cleans up in the FBO business? Who cleans up in the small piston FBO business. Let's see, "if I just didn't have to pay $12 bucks to park overnight (with no fuel) I'd fly 20 more hours a year". I don't think so. I think the fees just add to the slow death of GA in an area. Myself, I fly to get somewhere and land where I'm closest to my destination. I pay the fees with a smile when asked. I appreciate each and every airport I land at mainly because they are there. Good services are even better. I rarely end up paying a government entity directly though I'm sure taxes are collected from those private operators operating on public land. The few airports where the local gov actually operates the airport, things seem to get strange... but that's ok too. I don't like the idea of ATC user fees. I don't like state run lotteries. But I like successful FBOs and usually end up 'ripping them off' (burp) rather than feeling ripped off. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I know what you are saying,
I have alot of friends here that will not fly to a airport with fees, they hate them like I do. I wonder if it's just a southern thing? ![]() Patrick student SP aircraft structural mech "Maule Driver" wrote in message ... W P Dixon wrote: Maybe I look at it strangely? When you pay to park your car in a parking lot is it on private property? I never know. It is being managed and presumably atleast leased by a private operator. Go to a federal or state building and you park in a pay parking lot. When you pay to park your plane is it on private property? My take on it is, if it is being (car or plane) parked on public property funded by taxpayers it has already been paid for. I feel that way about using the ATC system and operating in and out of public airports. But every ramp I see (and want to park on) is privately operated. I don't think it makes any difference who *owns* it, the question is who *operates* it. That is, who puts the chains out, chocks at night as required, provides security, who is liable? Heck I hate toll roads! Now if a private company wants to build a road and charge a toll , fine. When tax dollars pay for the construction it just really gets my goat. I don't mind some sort of tax, but I hate being "double" taxed . I just do not see taxes funding airports and then the airport turning around charging someone a landing fee or what have you , when the Federal tax dollar supports the airport. If the airport wants to charge for it's use, then it needs to be a private airport and not publicly funded. IMHO, a 2 buck charge at a funded airport is 2 bucks to much . It's pretty obvious that roads *have* to be a public entity. It's a regional and national interest and private ownership just won't work (who would build the interstates? Or the PA turnpike? Major airports, to a lesser extent, need to be public too. Otherwise they would all be closed or closing. NIMBY applies, squared! Is it just me or does anyone else feel they are being ripped off when airports do this? Seems to me they could do more biz by not having landing and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their services wouldn't they? No, I don't think so. If that were the case, someone would be running a Walmart FBO chain and cleaning up. Who cleans up in the FBO business? Who cleans up in the small piston FBO business. Let's see, "if I just didn't have to pay $12 bucks to park overnight (with no fuel) I'd fly 20 more hours a year". I don't think so. I think the fees just add to the slow death of GA in an area. Myself, I fly to get somewhere and land where I'm closest to my destination. I pay the fees with a smile when asked. I appreciate each and every airport I land at mainly because they are there. Good services are even better. I rarely end up paying a government entity directly though I'm sure taxes are collected from those private operators operating on public land. The few airports where the local gov actually operates the airport, things seem to get strange... but that's ok too. I don't like the idea of ATC user fees. I don't like state run lotteries. But I like successful FBOs and usually end up 'ripping them off' (burp) rather than feeling ripped off. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
W P Dixon wrote:
Seems to me they could do more biz by not having landing and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their services wouldn't they? I think the fees just add to the slow death of GA in an area. You're still missing it, I think. You're thinking "small GA". A $35 fee is nothing to "big GA", and it is those large jet-A burners that spend a serious dollar or two on fuel (and other services, I presume). That fee keeps pilots out; it's *supposed* to keep [certain] pilots out. We use up almost as much space and time as the big guys, buy less than the big guys, so we're somewhat undesirable from a commercial perspective. In a way, this is a good sign: there's enough money to be made in GA, so the airports and FBOs are turning away the less profitable business. Sadly, some of us (ie. me) are a part of that less profitable segment. - Andrew |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew wrote:
You're still missing it, I think. You're thinking "small GA". A $35 fee is nothing to "big GA", and it is those large jet-A burners that spend a serious dollar or two on fuel (and other services, I presume). That fee keeps pilots out; it's *supposed* to keep [certain] pilots out. We use up almost as much space and time as the big guys, buy less than the big guys, so we're somewhat undesirable from a commercial perspective. In a way, this is a good sign: there's enough money to be made in GA, so the airports and FBOs are turning away the less profitable business. Sadly, some of us (ie. me) are a part of that less profitable segment. - Andrew Exactly. This is why I posed the question about why a busy GA airport that is used almost exclusively for light planes and flight training "needs" to lengthen a 5500 ft runway ("for safety") and whether the small plane crowd objects. Of course I was ridiculed and someone asked why I would pose such a question.... My theory meshes with your thoughts: It seems to me that the FBOs want more repair work, more fuel fees, etc. The airport doesn't care about noise abatement, city taxes, and maybe, just maybe, doesn't even care about the current users. They just want the Net Jets and other fractionals for the benefit of the FBOs. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve S wrote:
I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the only FBO small GA friendly Oh. Well. I'm out of date again, then. I thought a new school/FBO had opened there a couple of years ago ("Blue" something?). - Andrew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Death toll now 10 times 9/11 | X98 | Military Aviation | 9 | June 11th 04 05:23 AM |
~ US JOINS CHINA & IRAN AS TOP DEATH PENALTY USERS ~ | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 0 | April 8th 04 02:55 PM |
About death threats and other Usenet potpourri :-) | Dudley Henriques | Military Aviation | 4 | December 23rd 03 07:16 AM |
"Air Force rules out death in spy case" | Mike Yared | Military Aviation | 5 | November 10th 03 07:24 AM |