Unjustified GA User Fee

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...

All grants for GA airports are "pork." Users should bear 100% of the
capital and operating costs of the airports.


They are. The grants come from taxes on users.

How do you spell "uninformed?" You are 100% wrong.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"Skylune" wrote in message
alkaboutaviation.com...

All grants for GA airports are "pork." Users should bear 100% of the
capital and operating costs of the airports.


They are. The grants come from taxes on users.

19.4 cents federal tax per gallon of 100LL Skylune.

Ron Lee

Mr Lune, please answer the following questions, so I won't be uninformed:

What did the FAA collect in fuel tax last year?

What percent of that was collected from GA?

What did the FAA spend on ATC last year?

What percent of the recorded ATC operations last year were GA?

What did the FAA spend on capital improvements last year?

What percent of that was of no benefit to GA?

If you don't have the figures from 2005, feel free to use any other year
after 2001.



"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
How do you spell "uninformed?" You are 100% wrong.

All grants for GA airports are "pork."

If one looks up on faa.gov at who gets AIP funds, air carrier
fields gets the bulk. Then look at what GA fields get other than
mickey mouse grants, often safety items. The bigger GA fields
are relievers, to help keep corporate aviation out of big
airports, to prevent airline delays. So it's airlines and the
passengers who benefit too. In fact, in our town, the Port
Authority owns the big field and one reliever. They further
extract the reliever's operating deficit, like $1.5 million bucks
annually, out of the pockets of the air carriers, to keep the
bizjets out of their hair and not soak the city taxpayers to
subsidize bizjets.

Fred F.

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:27:21 -0400, Owen wrote:

Steve Foley wrote:

"jbskies" wrote in message
ups.com...
FAA wants GA users pay additional user fees that to match the airline
users. I don't think that's justified. Read the following paragraphs
regarding to recent ConAir CRJ crash quoted from ABC News:

--------------------
Although Blue Grass Airport's main runway is 7,000 feet, for some
reason the plane departed Sunday from the 3,500-foot general aviation
runway. The twin-engine CRJ-100 would have needed 5,000 feet to fully
get off the ground, aviation experts said.

There also were clues for the pilot: Signs marking the right way. Less
lighting. And severely cracked concrete not the type of surface
typically found on runways for commercial routes.

... the main runway, which had been repaved last week.

-------------------- from
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2364735

GA airplanes use "severely cracked and less lid" runways comparing to
the commercial jets use the brand new runway that just paved last week.
And now FAA want GA to pay additional fee to match the commercial
users? No way.


I agree 100%.

The airlines claim is costs as much for ATC to handle my Cherokee as it does
for them to handle a 747.

Why is ATC there to begin with? Class B around Boston (a big, commercial/air
carrier airport). Class C around Bradley, Manchester and Providence (all
big, commercial/air carrier airports). It there were no airlines, we
wouldn't need ATC in New England.

Huh? If there were no airlines, Hanscom wouldn't need a tower? I think you
might be smoking funny stuff. Or Lawrence, Quonsett, Barnes, Portsmouth,
Westover, Norwood, Hartford, Bridgeport, Nashua, etc. You're saying that those
New England airports need towers because they of airlines???


Me (15 years ago) headed into Beverly Field:
Beverly tower this is Cherokee (what ever it was) landing Beverly.
Tower, Cherokee *** follow the blue Cherokee two miles ahead of you.
Me: I have the blue Cherokee in sight, will follow.
about a minute passes....
Tower: Cherokee *** Where are you going?
Me: I'm just following that blue Cherokee as instructed.
Tower:....Oh!... Not that blue Cherokee! Follow the other blue
Cherokee. The one at your two o'clock position, same altitude.
Me making right turn: Have the other blue Cherokee in sight. I'll
follow this one now.

There are a number of small fields out there that do need towers even
on bright sunshiny days.

Around here even the larger airports with airline service could get
along without a tower, but I doubt they'd be able to provide the
safety required with out one.




Keene, NH has an ILS, so, obviously, ATC is not NEEDED when you've got an
ILS.

Lots of airports have ILS and no tower. So? Nobody said one created the need
for another.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
...

Me (15 years ago) headed into Beverly Field:
Beverly tower this is Cherokee (what ever it was) landing Beverly.
Tower, Cherokee *** follow the blue Cherokee two miles ahead of you.
Me: I have the blue Cherokee in sight, will follow.
about a minute passes....
Tower: Cherokee *** Where are you going?
Me: I'm just following that blue Cherokee as instructed.
Tower:....Oh!... Not that blue Cherokee! Follow the other blue
Cherokee. The one at your two o'clock position, same altitude.
Me making right turn: Have the other blue Cherokee in sight. I'll
follow this one now.

There are a number of small fields out there that do need towers even
on bright sunshiny days.

Around here even the larger airports with airline service could get
along without a tower, but I doubt they'd be able to provide the
safety required with out one.




Keene, NH has an ILS, so, obviously, ATC is not NEEDED when you've got
an
ILS.

Lots of airports have ILS and no tower. So? Nobody said one created the
need
for another.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger, I'm missing your point.

Without the tower, you would probably have proceeded to the airport, seen
the correct Blue Cherokee and landed safely. You're story seems to imply
that two planes in the pattern and one transitioning justifies the need for
a tower. I'm not saying that the tower at that field wasn't unnecessary.
Just that your story doesn't seem to support that justification.

My average flight contributes $7 in Fed taxes. My cross countries that
typically require no services other than the airport maintenance contribute
more like $15 to $20. Plus the profit from fuel sales to the local FBOs. I'd
say I'm paying my share of "user fees."

It seems like pretty simple math to me to make the current system work. Of
course, that does require that the American public is reasonable and that
the Feds can make reasonable decisions. I do not believe that cheap,
commercial flights are an inalienable right. Just as I don't believe that
train travel should be either. Supply and demand. Free market. That's what
we used to believe in.

Apparently no more.

We want it for everyone. We want it cheap. We want it risk-free. I just
don't get that the greater population doesn't see the vicious cycle these
combined attitudes create.

You want no risk? Get a life! You want it cheap? Get a job!

Skylune, I'm confused by your attitude (who isn't?). You seem to be trying
to kill GA in favor of commercial air travel. You do realize that the big
boys make more noise, kill more people and damage more property that GA,
don't you?

-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK