Pilot's Political Orientation

wrote in message ...

I believe I said that. Let me change that to: the average G/A guy
who flys a small IFR-equipped (with IFR GPS) a 100 hours a
year and often utilizies GPS instrument approach procedures at
small airports (of which there are hundreds now, if not thousands)
doesn't begin to pay for the system.


The average G/A guy who flies a small IFR-equipped (with IFR GPS) airplane
100 hours a year and often utilizes GPS instrument approach procedures at
small airports doesn't begin to put a burden on the system.

wrote in message ...

Not since the advent of GPS approaches. Thousands have been
issued for small airports, and those cost just as much as a GPS
approach for Green Bay Interuniversal Skyport.


Well, if you can confidently make that statement, you must know the cost to
create a GPS approach. What is that cost?

wrote:

The guy who uses it [the small airport] to fly for $100 hamburgers (or, are they $200 hamburgers these
days?) is getting subsidized without his flight contributing very much to the
economy.

You may be right; on the other hand that $100 (or $200)
got spent. An airplane was built and bought, it was
maintained somewhere (likely on another small airport),
gas was bought and so forth.

Cities more often than not conclude that airports are an
economic add to the community. That's why they fund them.
So does the FAA.

Having said that, governmental decisions are often suspect
and I would like to see a study that addresses the
economic benefit of small airplanes.

"Otis Winslow" wrote in message
...

I would hardly call Libertarians very conservative. While the
free market position could lead one to think that ... the general
approach of us being able to do our own thing as long as we
don't interfere with others exercising that same freedom is a
long way away from the ultra conservative approach. They want
to control our every action and make our moral judgements for
us.


It is liberals that wish to control other people.

"Judah" wrote in message
...

Actually, CJ, you should go back and follow the thread a little more
closely, and maybe read it without your blinders on.

The conservative view presented was that liberals want to take other
people's assets and redistribute them. I responded that conservatives
want to take other people's assets and keep them for themselves. The
response was that conservatives don't want other people's assets, and I
disagree with that completely.


Your disagreement does not make it a false statement.

In article , wrote:

I believe I said that. Let me change that to: the average G/A guy who
flys a small IFR-equipped
(with IFR GPS) a 100 hours a year and often utilizies GPS instrument
approach procedures at small
airports (of which there are hundreds now, if not thousands) doesn't
begin to pay for the system.

how much does that guy cost?

Say what?

How much does it cost "the system" for the "average G/A guy"?

Do you have any actual facts wrt to have much money would be saved
if the "average G/A guy" didn't use the system? I trust you have
facts, otherwise you wouldn't continually claim that the
"average G/A guy" doesn't begin to pay for the system.

--
Bob Noel

"BllFs6" wrote in message
...

Actually for ALL practical purposes....heavy trucks DO ALL
the damage to a properly engineered roadway....

The same is true for heavy aircraft vs little light ones on runways...
I know because I worked in a runway/pavement engineering
group for a few years....


My point exactly. The only difference with regard to the vehicle/highway
versus aircraft/runway comparison is in numbers. If there were no cars we'd
need far fewer multi-lane superhighways in heavily trafficked areas. We'd
still need the same heavy-duty runways if general aviation did not exist.

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...

below you state that life begins with conception. How will it then be
posible to terminate the pregnancy without harming (killing) the child?


I don't know. I'm not a doctor. I said a procedure MAY be developed that
terminates a woman's pregnancy without harming the child.



You can only pass this issue with: let life (legally; for the lawyers)
begin (for example) in the 5th week after conception (or any other legal
ways).


Life begins at conception.

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...

Well, since same sex marriage does not exist, no, I have no problem with
it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

in Message-ID: .net you
wrote that gays marry.


Yes. What's your point?

Hey come on, now. Cut me a break. You know what I meant!

I was just feeding a troll, anyway!


"Newps" wrote in
:


"Judah" wrote in message
...
Put it in perspective.

At MOST, the 100-hour per year pilot uses 100 hours of ATC time per
year.

The Airline pilot, who flies back and forth across the country twice a
day, uses 100 hours of ATC time in about a week.

Considering an airline pilot flies 80 hours a month, this is a pretty
neat trick.