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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
John Kulp wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:22:02 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: OK and GA pays 19.3 cents for avgas and 21.8 cents for jet fuel. Everybody pays the .1 cent for the LUSTF. Just to be clear 4.4 21.9 So, then, the airlines do not pay the 21.8 cent tax? No they pay 4.4 cents. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:40:39 -0400, NotPC
wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 01:45:17 -0400, NotPC wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:33:04 -0400, NotPC wrote: Snip Yeah, get rid of all the women and blacks. And take the stupid bigots with them at the same time. I did not say get rid of all the women and blacks. There you go twisting words. I said get rid of the UNQUALIFIED Politically Correct appointees and Diversity experiments gone horribly wrong in Federal Government(See FEMA and FAA). Just CYA bull**** of a bigot. You capitalized blacks and women and it doesn't take a genius to see all your bias with this continued bull****. CYA bull**** of a bigot. LOL!! Keep looking at life through your soda straw You are a sad example of a PC blinded sycophant Political Correctness-Tyranny with Manners And you're just a complete moron as well as a bigot. Ditto for you on the moron and closed minded part Yeah, I sure am close minded about moron bigots like you alright. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
John Kulp wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:28:25 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:50:43 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: John Kulp wrote: Perhaps. It's been a loooong time since I was piloting aircraft. But then, what are the fees being talked about for exactly? Why, exactly, are the majors talking about their customers paying almost all the freight then? They are paying for the services they are using. Most of the infrastructure is there because of the airlines and their passengers. All those little airplanes and even the CEO jets that are flying around can and do function quite well without much less. Well, the issue as I understand it is user fees, not fuel tax. The argument is that GA doesn't pay these and all the airline passengers do. Is that not the case? The airlines pay a lesser fuel tax and per segment tax. GA doesn't pay a per segment tax but this is made up for with a higher per gal fuel tax. Nothing confusing about all this is there? No not really. It has worked for YEARS. It allows the airlines to pass on a cost directly to their passengers without a whole lot of trouble because it is a /pax tax. If you think that is confusing take a look at the plans for GA user fees and try to imagine how that tax would be collected. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
Recently, NotPC posted:
Neil Gould wrote: Recently, NotPC posted: Snip Yeah, get rid of all the women and blacks. And take the stupid bigots with them at the same time. I did not say get rid of all the women and blacks. [...] The failure to see that the promotion of minorities and women into some key safety positions within the FAA was a mistake. Perhaps you can explain the difference between these remarks, and how they are not bigotted? If you identify or expose a minority in a safety job who is unqualified does that automatically make you a bigot? It does, if you think their lack of qualifications has anything to do with their status as a minority. Are we so blinded by political correctness that we can't say "Hey, that Black Female is unqualified"? Is that now taboo? No, it's just ignorant, and exposes the speaker as a bigot. For example, would you say, "Hey, that White Male is unqualified"? Would you think that the white male's incompetence is a result of his being a white male? I understand that these concepts are difficult for some people to grasp, but it really is not about being PC. Neil |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:
Apparently, you have never heard of approach control, ground control, or departure control. Apparently, you have not heard of uncontrolled. Exactly. -- "Tell me what I should do, Annie." "Stay. Here. Forever." - Life On Mars |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
On Sep 13, 9:29 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:23:10 -0600, Rick Blaine wrote: [snip] The vast majority of gen av traffic would operate just fine without ATC at all. With the exception of a few airports that are commercial hubs, and a couple like Teterboro that attract a bunch of CEO flights. Apparently, you have never heard of approach control, ground control, or departure control. Apparently, you have not heard of uncontrolled. An airport 'round these parts just went controlled because of the number of GA jets that requested it. It was over the objections of many of the actual more frequent users (VFR mostly). I suspect that the portion of the GA traffic being discussed (business jets) wouldn't "get along just fine" without some large amount of ATC. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
me wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:29 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:23:10 -0600, Rick Blaine wrote: [snip] The vast majority of gen av traffic would operate just fine without ATC at all. With the exception of a few airports that are commercial hubs, and a couple like Teterboro that attract a bunch of CEO flights. Apparently, you have never heard of approach control, ground control, or departure control. Apparently, you have not heard of uncontrolled. An airport 'round these parts just went controlled because of the number of GA jets that requested it. It was over the objections of many of the actual more frequent users (VFR mostly). I suspect that the portion of the GA traffic being discussed (business jets) wouldn't "get along just fine" without some large amount of ATC. That doesn't change the fact that airline traffic needs the ATC system WAY more than the GA traffic does. What airport are you talking about? |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
On Sep 13, 2:09 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote: me wrote: On Sep 13, 9:29 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:23:10 -0600, Rick Blaine wrote: [snip] The vast majority of gen av traffic would operate just fine without ATC at all. With the exception of a few airports that are commercial hubs, and a couple like Teterboro that attract a bunch of CEO flights. Apparently, you have never heard of approach control, ground control, or departure control. Apparently, you have not heard of uncontrolled. An airport 'round these parts just went controlled because of the number of GA jets that requested it. It was over the objections of many of the actual more frequent users (VFR mostly). I suspect that the portion of the GA traffic being discussed (business jets) wouldn't "get along just fine" without some large amount of ATC. That doesn't change the fact that airline traffic needs the ATC system WAY more than the GA traffic does. Of the traffic being discussed, I'd suspect that is not true. Not sure how to prove it however. For GA in general, I'd suspect the vast majority would PREFER no ATC. What airport are you talking about DED |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
me wrote:
On Sep 13, 2:09 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: me wrote: On Sep 13, 9:29 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote: John Kulp wrote: On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:23:10 -0600, Rick Blaine wrote: [snip] The vast majority of gen av traffic would operate just fine without ATC at all. With the exception of a few airports that are commercial hubs, and a couple like Teterboro that attract a bunch of CEO flights. Apparently, you have never heard of approach control, ground control, or departure control. Apparently, you have not heard of uncontrolled. An airport 'round these parts just went controlled because of the number of GA jets that requested it. It was over the objections of many of the actual more frequent users (VFR mostly). I suspect that the portion of the GA traffic being discussed (business jets) wouldn't "get along just fine" without some large amount of ATC. That doesn't change the fact that airline traffic needs the ATC system WAY more than the GA traffic does. Of the traffic being discussed, I'd suspect that is not true. Not sure how to prove it however. For GA in general, I'd suspect the vast majority would PREFER no ATC. What airport are you talking about DED The current AFD shows that Daytona handles approach and departure and there's no tower freq listed http://www.naco.faa.gov/pdfs/se_56_30AUG2007.pdf and it looks like it seldom averages more than 2 IFR operations per hour http://flightaware.com/analysis/grap...t?airport=KDED. But all that aside. Do you really think that the incremental cost to the ATC system for the services provided to a Cessna Citation III are really over $24/hour? If not then GA is paying it's fair share because the ATC system is primarily there because of the airlines. Others use it because it is there. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA
On Sep 13, 2:38 pm, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote: me wrote: [snip] Of the traffic being discussed, I'd suspect that is not true. Not sure how to prove it however. For GA in general, I'd suspect the vast majority would PREFER no ATC. What airport are you talking about DED The current AFD shows that Daytona handles approach and departure and there's no tower freq listedhttp://www.naco.faa.gov/pdfs/se_56_30AUG2007.pdfand it looks like it seldom averages more than 2 IFR operations per hourhttp://flightaware.com/analysis/graphs/airport.rvt?airport=KDED. It was just approved last year. Engineering and planning are going on now. Not sure they even have an announced opening date. But all that aside. Do you really think that the incremental cost to the ATC system for the services provided to a Cessna Citation III are really over $24/hour? If not then GA is paying it's fair share because the ATC system is primarily there because of the airlines. Others use it because it is there Well, I'm not commenting upon all of GA. The comment was made that GA jets would "get along fine" without ATC and I think for the true business jet traffic that just isn't true. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Restoration | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel aid | [email protected] | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | February 7th 06 12:25 PM |
Travel Supplements | Jetnw | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 15th 04 07:50 AM |