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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
Of the five what is the biggest threat to GA?
1. High fuel cost The cost of Avgas combined with the decreasing availability of unleaded, alcohol-free car gas is killing grass roots aviation. It (would have) cost $320 to fill my Cherokee in St. Louis, which means that flying is now well beyond the means of most Americans. All other factors pale into insignificance by comparison. (2) Insurance is actually less than my car insurance... (4) Terror war restrictions aren't an issue in 95% of the country... (5) Maintenance costs are owner-dependent in many ways... and (3) I don't even understand what you mean by "FAA Policies"... -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
In article ,
Jose wrote: A "loser pays" legal policy would straighten this one out immediately The problem with "loser pays" is that only the rich could afford to take the risk of having to pay, so the less well off would be without fair representation. Jose That is the usual response from the tort lobby. Is it fair representation when anybody who has even a peripheral involvement in an accident is financially responsible for the whole thing? Is it fair representation when a manufacturer or individual is pulled into a legal action and has to hire lawyers to defend against someone else's misuse of a product? Is it fair that a lawyer can, with impunity, name uninvolved parties in legal actions? We truly need tort reform! How about making losing lawyers pay the costs of defense against their predations? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message news In article , Jose wrote: A "loser pays" legal policy would straighten this one out immediately The problem with "loser pays" is that only the rich could afford to take the risk of having to pay, so the less well off would be without fair representation. Jose That is the usual response from the tort lobby. Is it fair representation when anybody who has even a peripheral involvement in an accident is financially responsible for the whole thing? Is it fair representation when a manufacturer or individual is pulled into a legal action and has to hire lawyers to defend against someone else's misuse of a product? Is it fair that a lawyer can, with impunity, name uninvolved parties in legal actions? We truly need tort reform! How about making losing lawyers pay the costs of defense against their predations? Juries should have a minimum of three verdicts in a tort case. A. In favor of the Plaintiff. B. In favor of the Defendant. C. This is so stupid that the lawyer that brought the case is suspended from the Bar for X months/years. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
Is it fair representation when anybody who has even a peripheral
involvement in an accident is financially responsible for the whole thing? That's not a question of represntation, it is a question of the judgement. "loser pays" won't alter the judgement of who wins and who loses, but it will alter the field of who decides to bring suit in the first place. We truly need tort reform! Yes, but not so much in the procedures as in the attitudes of those who make the judgements. It should also be noted that not all things which appear frivilous on the surface are in fact unfounded. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
I would rank them in the following order:
1. High fuel cost 2. Maintenance cost 3. Insurance 4. Terror war restrictions 5. FAA policies High fuel cost affects GA more than others. Cars can be made to run on electric. Airlines may develop specific technologies for turbines. Piston engines will be left in the dust. As GA activity declines, maintenance cost will go up. Its just a matter of market volume. Less volume, higher prices. Insurance has already killed many clubs and FBOs. But individuals may still be able to operate without hull insurance. FAA's strict medical ceritification process will remove more aging pilots from the GA pool. Terror war restrictions have already shutdown many flight schools who used to cater to foreign students. Presidential TFRs, Washington ADIZ, airport closures (Meigs) and the crazy TSA requirements pretty much put the nail in the coffin. DILLIGAF wrote: Of the five what is the biggest threat to GA? 1. High fuel cost 2. Insurance 3. FAA policies 4. Terror war restrictions 5. Maintenance cost on aircraft |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:iPmKf.780050$x96.151238@attbi_s72... Of the five what is the biggest threat to GA? 1. High fuel cost The cost of Avgas combined with the decreasing availability of unleaded, alcohol-free car gas is killing grass roots aviation. Per gallon, fuel for airplanes in the US is still less than fuel for motor vehicles elsewhere in the world. Yet, that industry seems to continue to thrive. Fuel costs are a poor scapegoat. Even for thirsty airplanes, fuel costs are a small proportion of total operating costs (generally estimated at 25-33%). The cost of fuel cannot possibly be "the biggest threat to GA". It (would have) cost $320 to fill my Cherokee in St. Louis, which means that flying is now well beyond the means of most Americans. "To fill"? How is that relevant? You apparently did not fill up your airplane, so you did not need to, so the cost to fill up your airplane is irrelevant. Conversely, if you really want to look at the cost to fill your airplane with fuel, you need to look at the total operating costs for a flight that would require that much fuel, the number of passengers you might have taken (let's say four, in your six-seater), and how that total operating costs compares to the fuel cost portion of the total. Assuming fuel is 1/3rd of the total cost of the flight (a very generous assumption), then you could cut the fuel costs in half and still save only 1/6th the cost of the flight. A 20% increase in costs doesn't kill any industry, not even aviation. All other factors pale into insignificance by comparison. Hardly. (2) Insurance is actually less than my car insurance... I pay about 10 times my car insurance for my airplane. You either have very inexpensive airplane insurance (fixed-gear land-plane helps that for sure), or very expensive car insurance, or both. (4) Terror war restrictions aren't an issue in 95% of the country... The factors that make them politically viable are. (5) Maintenance costs are owner-dependent in many ways... That's not an argument that those costs are "insignificant by comparison". Fuel costs are owner-dependent as well. A cost being "owner-dependent" doesn't mean that the cost is insignificant. Pete |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
A. In favor of the Plaintiff. B. In favor of the Defendant. C. This is so stupid that the lawyer that brought the case is suspended from the Bar for X months/years. Exactly... if we required a pre-filing review of the basic _merits_ of a lawsuit by qualified individuals (i.e. a sort of "grand jury" made up of respectable individuals, who have a JOB and pay taxes) we could eliminate many of them. Those that did not pass this "pre-file" test of merit could still file but would be responsible to pay ALL legal costs if they lose. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
(4) Terror war restrictions aren't an issue in 95% of the country...
The factors that make them politically viable are. Bingo. That's the thing that Jay consistantly misses. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
Jose wrote:
Yes, but not so much in the procedures as in the attitudes of those who make the judgements. It should also be noted that not all things which appear frivilous on the surface are in fact unfounded. Sorry Jose but its way past time for the pedulum to swing back and even overshoot. These lawsuits are destroying this country and have become no more than a lottery for people who figure they can eventually get in on the action. If the jury pool had to pass a basic test of integrity, intelligence and demonstrate a track record of productive citizenship (other than just being a voter) then there would be hope for minor changes. But unfortunately this isn't the case... in fact the attorneys filing the lawsuits seek the lowest lifes they can take advantage of their ignorance, baffle them with BS and appeal to their hopes of winning the lottery themselves someday. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Survey Time
Sorry Jose but its way past time for the pedulum to swing back
I agree... and even overshoot. No, that would be destructive. These lawsuits are destroying this country No, they are merely a symptom of what is destroying the country. If the jury pool had to pass a basic test of integrity, intelligence and demonstrate a track record of productive citizenship .... only supporters of the present administration would have legal representation. You do support Bush and all his policies, don't you? You wouldn't be un-American, would you? Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Time, running out of fuel and fuel gauges | Dylan Smith | Piloting | 29 | February 3rd 08 07:04 PM |
The Accumulated Time Scoring System | hannu | Soaring | 1 | December 15th 05 12:24 PM |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
Logging time on a PCATD | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | December 18th 04 05:25 PM |
The National Lake Eutrophication Survey 1971-1973 | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 18 | June 16th 04 02:27 AM |