AOPA Propaganda, cont.

snip....

even in the rude parts of the country (Chicago, New York, St.
Louis, etc) where being rude seems to be a local disease, many
controllers are unspoiled

Agreed. I've never had any issues with NY TRACON controllers (I fly out
SW Connecticut) as long as they see you're competant on the radio and
are not 5 miles behind the airplane. Missing calls is the fastest way
to get on a controller's sh*t list by far, especially in this busier
airspace, but on slower days they are often very accomodating to VFR GA
types.

Wooly

by "Jim Macklin" Dec 13, 2005 at
10:46 PM


A jet, like the G V needs a 5,000 runway, 100 feet wide and
2 feet thick, including the sub-base.
A King Air or Citation needs 3,000, 75 feet wide and maybe
1 -2 feet thick.

An airliner such as the 747, 757, 777 needs 7,000-10,000
feet 200 feet wide and 4 feet thick.

A C152 needs even less. But the fees collected from the
fuel taxes add up to a whole lot more, particularly when you
consider that FAA "services" are only offered in controlled
airspace and controlled airspace exists because the airlines
want it.

But rational reasons are not what you want to hear, neither
do you want to hear an airplane fly over and disturb you in
your chosen pastime.

Sigh. You are going to force me to post the financial data from the DOT
website showing how much of the Aviation Trust Fund comes from various
sources.

I am saying GA fuel taxes pay a pittance (the position Blakely is taking
in supporting user fees). Do you want the actual data? It will take a
few minutes, but I would be more than happy to retrieve it.

I can then use my favorite John Adams quote again! ;-)

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

Sigh. You are going to force me to post the financial data from
the DOT website showing how much of the Aviation Trust Fund comes
from various sources.

I am saying GA fuel taxes pay a pittance (the position Blakely is
taking in supporting user fees). Do you want the actual data? It
will take a few minutes, but I would be more than happy to retrieve
it.


You probably are correct, but I would like to either see the data, or a link
to it, and explaining how to find and understand it. Nothing personal, but
I prefer to see the data before I accept a premise.

My point is that MOST of the cost of the systems is due to
the air carriers and military and government imposed
regulations, but based on the actual needs of GA, we pay
more than our "fair share."


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
| by "Jim Macklin"
Dec 13, 2005 at
| 10:46 PM
|
|
| A jet, like the G V needs a 5,000 runway, 100 feet wide
and
| 2 feet thick, including the sub-base.
| A King Air or Citation needs 3,000, 75 feet wide and maybe
| 1 -2 feet thick.
|
| An airliner such as the 747, 757, 777 needs 7,000-10,000
| feet 200 feet wide and 4 feet thick.
|
| A C152 needs even less. But the fees collected from the
| fuel taxes add up to a whole lot more, particularly when
you
| consider that FAA "services" are only offered in
controlled
| airspace and controlled airspace exists because the
airlines
| want it.
|
| But rational reasons are not what you want to hear,
neither
| do you want to hear an airplane fly over and disturb you
in
| your chosen pastime.
|
| Sigh. You are going to force me to post the financial
data from the DOT
| website showing how much of the Aviation Trust Fund comes
from various
| sources.
|
| I am saying GA fuel taxes pay a pittance (the position
Blakely is taking
| in supporting user fees). Do you want the actual data?
It will take a
| few minutes, but I would be more than happy to retrieve
it.
|
| I can then use my favorite John Adams quote again! ;-)
|
|
|
|

Jim Macklin wrote:

Military controller are not unionized government employees,

NATCA membership is falling because of their radical, typical union
views. There's a fighting chance we here at BIL will be a 0% union
facility shortly after the new year. At most there will be 3 members
out of the 18 controllers.

Some of the nicest flights I had were during the controller
strike and firings back in the 80's. Afterward, the new
hires were nice, too.

--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Newps" wrote in message
...
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| Military controller are not unionized government
employees,
|
| NATCA membership is falling because of their radical,
typical union
| views. There's a fighting chance we here at BIL will be a
0% union
| facility shortly after the new year. At most there will
be 3 members
| out of the 18 controllers.