AOPA Mag This Month

On 2007-04-05, Skylune wrote:
The AOPA only publishes propaganda in their efforts to maintain the
massive tax subsidies, and to cover up the FAAs lack of any
enforcement.

What's the incremental cost of light GA? Almost zero.

All that infrastructure that is supposedly subsidised for GA exists
solely for the benefit of business and the airlines. Light GA would
continue to exist quite happily without ATC or the FAA (indeed, would
probably work better) or any of these other so-called subsidised
services which only are actually required because of the airlines or
for-profit business aviation.

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

All that infrastructure that is supposedly subsidised for GA exists
solely for the benefit of business and the airlines. Light GA would
continue to exist quite happily without ATC or the FAA (indeed, would
probably work better) or any of these other so-called subsidised
services which only are actually required because of the airlines or
for-profit business aviation.

One need only look at the explosion of experimental types (5000+ RVs
alone!) to see what *could* happen to GA if the FAA would get the hell
out of the way.

On 90% of my flights, I need ATC like I need an enema. On 5% of my
flights, I need them only because some silly rule *says* I do (when,
in fact, it would probably work better without them). On the
remaining 5%, I absolutely, positively need ATC.

So, I say reduce their budget by 95%. It won't affect me -- or tens
of thousands of pilots like me -- in the least.

Funny thing is, back in the good old days (when ATC and pilots were on
the same side), local controllers used to practically BEG us to use
flight following, because it helped their budgets.

Now I see we were only cutting our own throats by doing so. Now they
can point to statistics showing "all those little planes using flight
following" and use them as a justification to add users fees.

We were suckered.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2007-04-05, Skylune wrote:
The AOPA only publishes propaganda in their efforts to maintain the
massive tax subsidies, and to cover up the FAAs lack of any
enforcement.

What's the incremental cost of light GA? Almost zero.

All that infrastructure that is supposedly subsidised for GA exists
solely for the benefit of business and the airlines. Light GA would
continue to exist quite happily without ATC or the FAA (indeed, would
probably work better) or any of these other so-called subsidised
services which only are actually required because of the airlines or
for-profit business aviation.

Its hard to believe that you really think that Dylan. Saying that Light GA
does not need ATC or the FAA is one way of getting excluded from them by the
airlines and then when they become the owner of the infrastructure will
charge through the nose to let light GA back in when Light GA realises that
some of the services were worthwhile.

I suspect that ATC spends as much time keeping CAT away from light GA as it
does keeping CAT apart. Improved technology like mode S and ADB-S is great
for the heavy end but giving like GA access to it just means that they end
up hanging around the same airspace as CAT and need separating.

Bring Class A airspace down to 5000' agl, that keeps the IFR traffic in one
area away from the VFR stuff below, the IFR stuff can pay for having
exclusive access to that airspace away from the poor trash VFR stuff who
have it for free.

On 2007-04-06, Borat wrote:
Its hard to believe that you really think that Dylan. Saying that Light GA
does not need ATC or the FAA is one way of getting excluded from them by the
airlines and then when they become the owner of the infrastructure will
charge through the nose to let light GA back in when Light GA realises that
some of the services were worthwhile.

You misread the intent of my message: the point is if airlines did not
exist, then the remainder of aviation could quite happily exist without
ATC or the FAA in most instances. ATC only came about because the
airlines exist. Now GA is being forced to pay for services that only
exist to make it possible for airlines to exist.

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

On Apr 6, 3:17 pm, Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2007-04-05, Skylune wrote:

The AOPA only publishes propaganda in their efforts to maintain the
massive tax subsidies, and to cover up the FAAs lack of any
enforcement.

What's the incremental cost of light GA? Almost zero.

All that infrastructure that is supposedly subsidised for GA exists
solely for the benefit of business and the airlines. Light GA would
continue to exist quite happily without ATC or the FAA (indeed, would
probably work better) or any of these other so-called subsidised
services which only are actually required because of the airlines or
for-profit business aviation.

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

I'll try that same logic with my local toll highway authority. My
car's incremental cost
is 2 cents. Haaaaaa JG

In article .com,
wrote:

On Apr 6, 3:17 pm, Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2007-04-05, Skylune wrote:

The AOPA only publishes propaganda in their efforts to maintain the
massive tax subsidies, and to cover up the FAAs lack of any
enforcement.

What's the incremental cost of light GA? Almost zero.

All that infrastructure that is supposedly subsidised for GA exists
solely for the benefit of business and the airlines. Light GA would
continue to exist quite happily without ATC or the FAA (indeed, would
probably work better) or any of these other so-called subsidised
services which only are actually required because of the airlines or
for-profit business aviation.

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

I'll try that same logic with my local toll highway authority. My
car's incremental cost
is 2 cents. Haaaaaa JG

"jgrove"'s car does not impose incremental costs -- everything he does
is excremental.