If user fees go into effect I'm done

ktbr wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:


People who are not interested in GA don't see it that way. To them,
GA is a
hobby for the rich, and they are justifiably curious as to why they
should
subsidize GA in any way, since they receive nothing in return.


They are ignorant. Every day in this country GA is used by businesses
large to small. We have two UPS contract flights in and out of our GA
airport daily and two check hauling flights daily. Business jets come in
and out of here several times a week on business purposes with any of
dozens of business located in this town or nearby. All this is GA, not
Commercial.

Most people have no clue that much of the products that get shipped to
their homes come via GA.

"elitist hobby" clearly does not include FedEx, et al feeder flights,
medical flights, or serious business aviation. It does include "$100
hamburger" flights, personal transportation flight, personal sightseeing
flights, and warbird activities.

Smart non-flying folks I know clearly know the difference.

I bring this aspect up, because it will become part of the debate about
user fees. To ignore the argument does not make it go away.

On Feb 12, 11:01 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
If GA disappeared tomorrow,
virtually nothing would perceptibly change in the U.S. If commercial air
travel disappeared, the country would nearly grind to a halt.

If GA disappeared tomorrow, commercial air travel would eventually
suffer as well. Remember that many of those airline pilots flying
around those big planes learned how to fly in little GA aircraft.

-- Bryan

Bryan writes:

If GA disappeared tomorrow, commercial air travel would eventually
suffer as well. Remember that many of those airline pilots flying
around those big planes learned how to fly in little GA aircraft.

But that is no longer necessary. Pilots can be trained from zero in
simulators and then turned loose on the actual aircraft for a quick checkride,
or perhaps for a revenue flight. This is what the Third World is considering
in order to train enough pilots quickly enough to meet demand. The FAA is
more conservative and probably won't allow this for some time to come,
although everyone is moving in that direction. GA aircraft are so far from
airliners now that training in them is of dubious value, and airliners
themselves are too expensive and risky to fly for training.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Bryan wrote:
On Feb 12, 11:01 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

If GA disappeared tomorrow,
virtually nothing would perceptibly change in the U.S. If commercial air
travel disappeared, the country would nearly grind to a halt.


If GA disappeared tomorrow, commercial air travel would eventually
suffer as well. Remember that many of those airline pilots flying
around those big planes learned how to fly in little GA aircraft.

-- Bryan


GA will not disappear. The folks who buy new $500,000 piston singles
will not disappear.

The airlines will eventually, perhaps, use these advanced piston birds
to train their pilots from scratch, if necessary.

No one is proposing to abolish light aircraft from most of the airspace.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The "hobby" flying that people, including the wealthy, do adds so
little to the cost of maintaining the national airspace system that
it is hardly worth mentioning. The things that get money spent on
them like airports are helping the struggling masses by supporting
businesses that create jobs.

I strongly suspect that GA is more of a burden than an asset for the
population and society at large. Commercial air travel is a
necessity; general aviation is not.

I can think of 3 major companies that together employee ~2500 people in my
town of ~20,000 that would not be here if it weren't for the availability of
GA flight. In fact, the town would probably dry up and blow away if any one
of these left and would certainly do so if any two of them did.

And since one of these companies just decided to pay for the college
education of every single person that graduates from our school system I'd
say that means pretty much everybody here benefits from GA.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I can think of 3 major companies that together employee ~2500 people in my
town of ~20,000 that would not be here if it weren't for the availability of
GA flight. In fact, the town would probably dry up and blow away if any one
of these left and would certainly do so if any two of them did.

What type of business are these companies in?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I can think of 3 major companies that together employee ~2500 people
in my town of ~20,000 that would not be here if it weren't for the
availability of GA flight. In fact, the town would probably dry up
and blow away if any one of these left and would certainly do so if
any two of them did.

What type of business are these companies in?

Oil, Chemical and Timber.

The "hobby" flying that people, including the wealthy, do adds so
little to the cost of maintaining the national airspace system that
it is hardly worth mentioning. The things that get money spent on
them like airports are helping the struggling masses by supporting
businesses that create jobs.

I strongly suspect that GA is more of a burden than an asset for the
population and society at large. Commercial air travel is a
necessity; general aviation is not.

I can think of 3 major companies that together employee ~2500 people in my
town of ~20,000 that would not be here if it weren't for the availability
of
GA flight. In fact, the town would probably dry up and blow away if any
one
of these left and would certainly do so if any two of them did.

And since one of these companies just decided to pay for the college
education of every single person that graduates from our school system I'd
say that means pretty much everybody here benefits from GA.

I might go so far as to say that GA, Freight, and Military are necessary and
that Air Taxi is usefull.

OTOH, the east usefull, to the healthy functioning of our economy is
scheduled pasenger service.

Peter
Just my $0.02
(Wearing Nomex, of course)

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:


The "hobby" flying that people, including the wealthy, do adds so
little to the cost of maintaining the national airspace system that
it is hardly worth mentioning. The things that get money spent on
them like airports are helping the struggling masses by supporting
businesses that create jobs.

I strongly suspect that GA is more of a burden than an asset for the
population and society at large. Commercial air travel is a
necessity; general aviation is not.


I can think of 3 major companies that together employee ~2500 people in my
town of ~20,000 that would not be here if it weren't for the availability of
GA flight. In fact, the town would probably dry up and blow away if any one
of these left and would certainly do so if any two of them did.

And since one of these companies just decided to pay for the college
education of every single person that graduates from our school system I'd
say that means pretty much everybody here benefits from GA.



Sadly, most of them probably don't know that.

Matt

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The "hobby" flying that people, including the wealthy, do adds so little to
the cost of maintaining the national airspace system that it is hardly worth
mentioning. The things that get money spent on them like airports are
helping the struggling masses by supporting businesses that create jobs.

I strongly suspect that GA is more of a burden than an asset for the
population and society at large. Commercial air travel is a necessity;
general aviation is not.


GA is a gnat on the publics rear end. We use a resource nobody else
cares about or wants, that is, the airspace between 1000 and 18000 feet
AGL. The only part of that anyone else cares about is the circle around
large airports that big metal uses to climb up and down to their
accustomed flight altitudes. We use 3000 feet of pavement when the
general public uses countless miles of it. We use fields out of town
and give them up when the town grows out to the "useless" land the
airports were built on and want it "back". We use a tiny fraction of
the fuel, have virtually no environmental impact compared to cars
and ATVs. Our accident rate, for whatever the danger to pilots per
hour is, is to the general public a fraction of carnage done yearly
by portable power saws, much less anything more dangerous like a
car or truck. We are accused of noise pollution even though our
total impact is less than a years production of Harley Davidson.
We are accused of air pollution even though our total output is likely
less than the lawn mowers in LA.

And despite the fact that we use a resource that is virtually free and
has unlimited capacity (airspace) there is always someone who thinks
that we shouldn't have it, because they can't have it.

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get your way someday.

Scott