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 |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
Sam Spade wrote: Newps wrote: User fees are dead. They don't stand a chance. I would agree that is the case for a few years. It goes in 10 year increments. |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
Newps wrote:
Sam Spade wrote: Newps wrote: User fees are dead. They don't stand a chance. I would agree that is the case for a few years. It goes in 10 year increments. I didn't know that. How can they lock any appropriation method for 10 years? |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
In article ,
B A R R Y wrote: Viperdoc wrote: You have to remember that tankers are an essential and valuable asset, and the current ones are based on 707's. I thought they had a bunch of KC-10's? Yes, but not a lot. There are over 500 KC-135's (which, btw, are NOT based on the 707 - they share bloodlines, but the 135 preceded the 707). -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
Sam Spade wrote: Newps wrote: Sam Spade wrote: Newps wrote: User fees are dead. They don't stand a chance. I would agree that is the case for a few years. It goes in 10 year increments. I didn't know that. How can they lock any appropriation method for 10 years? The last time we had this fight was 10 years ago, the current system has to be decided no later than Sept 30 because there is a sunset provision in what we are doing now. They will, in the end, reauthorize the current system pretty much as is. Taxes on airline tickets and per passenger fees may get adjusted slightly. |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
"Newps" wrote in message . ..
Ray Andraka wrote: scott moore wrote: Most likely we'll be lining up for autogas conversions. Those of you who can. Some 70% of the piston flying is done with high performance engines that can't use mogas, my Six included. All but a very few engines could run on mogas. Those that can't now would need an electronic ignition. The few that never will are the high HP turbo models, such as in the Navajo Chieftain. I won't argue percentages, but I keep hoping technology will rescue us before I need to replace my matched pair of TSIO520NBRs again. I doubt that turbodiesels are in my future, but it's hard to know for sure. |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
"Ray Andraka" wrote in message
... scott moore wrote: Most likely we'll be lining up for autogas conversions. Those of you who can. Some 70% of the piston flying is done with high performance engines that can't use mogas, my Six included. Rather like the old 80/20 syndrome - 80% of the flying is done by 20% of the aircraft, which is the high performance stock that needs 100LL. Whatever happened to GAMI's PRISM ignition STC? The simple (relatively) conversion would ostensibly allow even rotgut gas in the most touchy turbo piston engines. |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
Bob Noel wrote:
Yes, but not a lot. There are over 500 KC-135's (which, btw, are NOT based on the 707 - they share bloodlines, but the 135 preceded the 707). You're right as to the timing. But, the 707 was a direct direvative of the 135 development program. And, as I recall, the development program was for the C-135. The tanker came later. |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
"Viperdoc" wrote in message . net... The KC-10's are almost as old as the KC-135's. How many 707's and KC-10's are still active in commercial service? I don't believe the KC-10 was ever in commercial service. |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 In rec.aviation.piloting Steven P. McNicoll wrote: "Viperdoc" wrote in message . net... The KC-10's are almost as old as the KC-135's. How many 707's and KC-10's are still active in commercial service? I don't believe the KC-10 was ever in commercial service. I believe you're correct, as they were the military variant of the DC-10. Speaking of, aren't the KC-10s still in active service as refuel tankers? BL. - -- Brad Littlejohn | Email: Unix Systems Administrator, | Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF1quSyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsvJAKCtt1x1330ow4B/wCDp7OOgenr4QgCgsheF wXF/a3QrNjsB8JA531hOvks= =m9Yf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
#170
|
|||
|
|||
If user fees go into effect I'm done
In article ,
A Guy Called Tyketto wrote: I believe you're correct, as they were the military variant of the DC-10. correct. Speaking of, aren't the KC-10s still in active service as refuel tankers? yes. -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
If user fees go into effect I'm done | [email protected] | Piloting | 286 | February 20th 07 02:02 AM |
Trouble ahead over small plane fees | AJ | Piloting | 90 | April 15th 06 01:19 PM |
What will user fees do to small towered airports | Steve Foley | Piloting | 10 | March 8th 06 03:13 PM |
GA User fees | Jose | Piloting | 48 | December 24th 05 02:12 AM |
The Irony of Boeing/Jeppesen Being Charged User Fees! | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 9 | January 23rd 04 12:23 PM |