![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OT - Movie Night at the Inn, 4-month review | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 30 | September 16th 06 04:05 PM |
A rough month for BD5J's | Richard Riley | Home Built | 14 | July 9th 06 01:09 PM |
SpaceShipOne to go the distance this month? | Vaughn | Home Built | 2 | June 3rd 04 02:43 PM |
CHEROKEE NATIONAL FLY-IN & CONVENTION - THIS MONTH! | Don | Owning | 0 | June 3rd 04 05:03 AM |
Followup.. Houston fatals last month.. | Dave S | Piloting | 7 | January 5th 04 05:08 PM |