The subsidies to GA are MASSIVE

Skylune wrote:
No amount of actual data or reasoning will ever convince private pilots
that the paltry couple of hundred million dollars generated by AV gas
taxes per year doesn't cover the cost of the grants and FAA services
absorbed by GA.

For a group that likes to consider itself technical and scientific-minded,
this is astonishing. (Well, actually not, based on the other nonsense put
out by some GA groups on safety, cost, convenience, etc.)

Flying is not a science...it's an art.

:OP

Jay B

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

No amount of actual data or reasoning will ever convince private pilots
that the paltry couple of hundred million dollars generated by AV gas
taxes per year doesn't cover the cost of the grants and FAA services
absorbed by GA.


Actually, it would require only factual data and sound reasoning.

No fallacy.

The grants for airports listed as GA can all be considered to benefit GA
only. "R" airports are also largely GA (some that I know almost
exclusively GA). Make conservative assumptions about how much of the
grants are for GA.

Then, compare to the AV gas tax generation. There is no debate, Jose. It
is fact, confirmed by Bureau of Transportation STatistics.

Why doesn't AOPA quote the acutal numbers (revenues, capital outlays, and
operating subsidies) whenever they make their ludicrous claims?
(Rhetorical question)

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 17:07:28 GMT, "Tom Conner"
wrote:


"Skylune" wrote in message
alkaboutaviation.com...
Now that I have again provided the amount of annual funding
deriving from GA fuel taxes (including AV GAS and Jet A), compare
that to 2005 capital grants to airports by looking at the ACTUAL
2005 DATA below. (Note that these figures DO NOT include the
$150K annual operating subsidy that many GA airports receive.)

DAMN: the subsidies are enormous, as every informed person knows....


http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...rants_2005.pdf


What are the definitions for the acronyms in the "Service Level" column?
The local GA airports that received grants are listed as "R" in this column.

The meanings of "service level" a

P - Primary airport: Large, medium, and small Hubs and non-hubs with
more than 10,000 annual emplanements. Received $1,109.8 million in
grants in 2004.

CS - Commercial Service: Between 2,500 and 10,000 annual emplanements.
Received $137.9 million in grants.

R - Reliever airports: 100 or more based GA aircraft and 25,000
annual itinerant operations. Received $209.4 million in grants.

GA - General Aviation airport: No scheduled commercial service and not
CS. Typically 1 per county in rural areas. Average 33 based aircraft.
Home for 40% of GA fleet. Received $540.2 million in grants.

RK Henry

The grants for airports listed as GA can all be considered to benefit GA
only.

To do so would be an error.

"R" airports are also largely GA (some that I know almost
exclusively GA).

"R" airports benefit airlines by making more room for them elsewhere.
That's their purpose.

There is no debate, Jose.

Then what are we having here, an argument? I'm not allowed to argue
unless you've paid.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Skylune,

You seem to assume that the main purpose of GA airports is
entertainment for private pilots. This is incorrect.

Public GA airports are part the the U.S. transportation infrastructure.
They are essential for providing support for activities that are in
the public interest. These activities include:

Aerial Firefighting
Time critical medical tranportation
Disaster relief (often airports are the only access points to affected
areas)
U.S. Mail delivery
Package and parcel delivery
and many more...

Should private pilots have to pay the full cost of the infrastructure
if it is there to serve the public interest? If private pilots went
away tommorrow, most of the airports would still need to exist to serve
public needs, and they would receive less fuel tax support than they do
now. Talk about a subsidy!

Dean

Skylune wrote:
Now that I have again provided the amount of annual funding deriving from
GA fuel taxes (including AV GAS and Jet A), compare that to 2005 capital
grants to airports by looking at the ACTUAL 2005 DATA below. (Note that
these figures DO NOT include the $150K annual operating subsidy that many
GA airports receive.)

DAMN: the subsidies are enormous, as every informed person knows....

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...rants_2005.pdf

I am paying, as are all American taxpayers who are getting hosed.

Of course, these are only FEDERAL subsidies, never mind the state and
local subsidies that airports get. Just one example: The Destroyer wants
Blue Ash to increase local income taxes by .25% to help fund improvements
to the airport!!!!

Beyond audacious!!!

I am paying, as are all American taxpayers who are getting hosed.

I'm sorry about that. We're doing our best to slam people (and houses),
but the subsidies aren't big enough to make it go any faster.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

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

I am paying, as are all American taxpayers who are getting hosed.


What are you paying?

wrote in message
ups.com...

Skylune,

You seem to assume that the main purpose of GA airports is
entertainment for private pilots. This is incorrect.

Public GA airports are part the the U.S. transportation infrastructure.
They are essential for providing support for activities that are in
the public interest. These activities include:

Aerial Firefighting
Time critical medical tranportation
Disaster relief (often airports are the only access points to affected
areas)
U.S. Mail delivery
Package and parcel delivery
and many more...

Should private pilots have to pay the full cost of the infrastructure
if it is there to serve the public interest? If private pilots went
away tommorrow, most of the airports would still need to exist to serve
public needs, and they would receive less fuel tax support than they do
now. Talk about a subsidy!

Dean


Perhaps you are not familiar with Skylune. He is an anti-aviation troll,
nothing more. He may even be aware that what he posts is incorrect.