User Fees are coming closer to being very real

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...

Barry (who can definitely see NYC becoming an ADIZ and is very
concerned)

Like here in London England where it is class A from the surface to god and
where its not that class A it from 2500 msl.

Making it class A is the same as an ADIZ only tougher - NO VFR.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 22:19:53 GMT, "Tom Conner"
wrote in t::

Arguing economics as a justification for a GA airport is usually
a losing argument once the facts are clear.

So, in your opinion, what is a winning argument for justifying the
continued existence of the local municipal airport in the face of
its poor revenue generating potential compared to a new housing
development/mall?


You hit the nail on the head. I have racked my brain and I cannot come up
with a winning argument that can stand on its own for justifying an airport.
Sure a GA airport has some benefits for society and some individuals, but
when examined these benefits are on an extremely small micro scale versus
the macro scale benefits of a redeveloped airport site. If there was a
winning argument then I doubt if we would be constantly having these
airport/redevelopment situations. At least there does not appear to be a
one-size-fits-all argument. I get the feeling that we are only postponing
the inevitable when we fight back a closure. Of course that doesn't mean
give up, but it does seem to get harder and harder.

The way I see it, eventually, the international airports will be
located in the outskirts causing the municipal airports to become
gateways to air travel. Unfortunately, if the airport real estate
is abandoned to development, in the future that community will lack
local access and will be unlikely to find a new local airport venue
given the dearth of open space.

If the big airports are moved away the little GA only airports will not be
the gateway to the bigger airports. A high-speed dedicated rail line to the
airport makes more sense in that regard.


So it's a matter of shortsighted greed vs long range planning for
local transportation infrastructure.

when examined these benefits are on an extremely small micro scale versus
the macro scale benefits of a redeveloped airport site.

What are the macro scale benefits of a redeveloped airport site? More
traffic, more industry, more drain on the water system, more sewage,
another mall... pave paradise and put up a parking lot.

Granted, an airport is not the same as undeveloped wilderness, but the
"benefits" of development (except to the developer) are dubious.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article ,
Jose wrote:

but the airports won't be threatened with closure if GA is
expanding and healthy.

Sure they will. The economic forces are the same - even a healthy GA
population at a small airport that is in a developmentally desirable
area will not make enough money to fend this off. Granted, healthy GA
contributes economically many other ways, but those ways are mostly
hidden and indirect, making airports still an easy target.

Jose

What we also have to remember is that real estate developers represent
the biggest political money contributors to state and local elections in
the US. As such, they get first ear of the politicians whom they
represent. The developers also create "noise sensitive" groups to do
their dirty work.

We all have to remain vigilant and step on all the plans to "make better
use" of our local airport.

99% of all the airports we use today date from 1946 or
earlier. Most of those are WWII military training fields.



"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in
message
news | In article
,
| Jose wrote:
|
| but the airports won't be threatened with closure if
GA is
| expanding and healthy.
|
| Sure they will. The economic forces are the same - even
a healthy GA
| population at a small airport that is in a
developmentally desirable
| area will not make enough money to fend this off.
Granted, healthy GA
| contributes economically many other ways, but those ways
are mostly
| hidden and indirect, making airports still an easy
target.
|
| Jose
|
| What we also have to remember is that real estate
developers represent
| the biggest political money contributors to state and
local elections in
| the US. As such, they get first ear of the politicians
whom they
| represent. The developers also create "noise sensitive"
groups to do
| their dirty work.
|
| We all have to remain vigilant and step on all the plans
to "make better
| use" of our local airport.

("Jim Macklin" wrote)
99% of all the airports we use today date from 1946 or earlier. Most of
those are WWII military training fields.


The first part seems plausible, the second part does not.


Montblack

During WWII there were NO environmental impact statements,
every military based needed auxiliary fields. The Air Corps
had one standard airport layout that could be flipped. It
was a triangle with buildings and a ramp on one side. These
were built all over the mid-west and great plains, many are
still in use as they were built, some have abandoned the
shorter diagonal runways. Some are in terrible condition
and some have had good maintenance.

Before WWII paved runways were rare, long runways were rare,
long distance airlines used seaplanes because runways were
not available world-wide. The USA built airports everywhere
during WWII, not just in the USA.

Sad fact is that part of our problem today is that there is
no local support for those military airports that were often
sold to the local city for $1.00.



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

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Montblack" wrote in
message ...
| ("Jim Macklin" wrote)
| 99% of all the airports we use today date from 1946 or
earlier. Most of
| those are WWII military training fields.
|
|
| The first part seems plausible, the second part does not.
|
|
| Montblack
|

I make sure EVERYONE that will listen knows that our "little" airport
brings in $5.5 million dollars each year, for an annual investment of
just $186,000.

I'm not doubting the accuracy of your numbers, but how do you get to that
5.5 million number?

http://makeashorterlink.com/?M20125EBC

See page 22, Johnson County, "Value Added".

It's actually $5.7 million -- and those are FY 2000 figures.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I don't know about you folks, but all of my regular GA haunts are
frequented by a pretty decent number of "spectators" outside the
fences who enjoy watching airplanes, even if they don't fly. Wanna'
get a nice feeling? Watch the reaction of little kids when you wave
or salute them as you taxi by. That kid might be a future astronaut
because of your silly wave.

Yep, that's one of the truly fun parts of flying. We don't get too many
"fence wavers" in Iowa City, because of the way the parking lots are so far
from the runways and hangars -- but when we DO see them, we always make a
point to wave.

What I REALLY want to do is shut down, climb out, and see if they want to go
for a ride. I've never had the guts to do that -- have you?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote

I make sure EVERYONE that will listen knows that our "little" airport
brings in $5.5 million dollars each year, for an annual investment of
just $186,000.

I'm not doubting the accuracy of your numbers, but how do you get to that
5.5 million number?
--
Jim in NC