Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:39 am

I say hell no.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local...ort_tax_that_some_call_unfair.html
"NEWARK, N.J. - Chances are you have never flown in to or out of Teterboro Airport. But every time you travel on a commercial flight out of a major airport, you are helping to pay for improvements there."

"Teterboro, a 90-year-old airport shoe-horned between highways and neighborhoods, received $35.2 million over two years for improvements from the ticket surcharge, known as the Airport Improvement Program - the lion's share of $54.6 million doled out to 14 of New Jersey's small airports.

In contrast, $40 million was directed from the Airport Improvement Program in fiscal 2005 and 2006 to Newark Liberty International Airport, a giant commercial operation with 400,000 flights annually.
"
I don't take responsibility at all
 
airtran737
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:44 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
I say hell no.

Then expect a lot of delays when we bring our airplanes into the busier airports. GA has every right to be out there.
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:53 am

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
GA has every right to be out there.

Of course they do; but why do we have to pay for it? What benefit is there?

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
Then expect a lot of delays when we bring our airplanes into the busier airports.

I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
BigAppleCoder
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:30 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:36 am

This thread finally made me jump and sign up for a membership.

Yeah, it's popular to say "soak the rich", but the proposed user fees and aviation fuel taxes won't hurt them much. It will however seriously damage a significant segment of the economy. General aviation is loosely described as everything other scheduled airlines. Yes, that means small planes and business jets but also includes traffic and police helicopters, fire fighting missions, and air ambulance operations. GA is also where tomorrow's airline pilots pay their dues to build flight time required to gain entry into the airlines. And let me remind you that you're certainly not going to be living the high-life flying for a small commuter carrier.

Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, main author of the report the AP based their story on, failed to account for the economic benefit provided by GA. Many people make their living from GA, from the small FBO operators who support flight operations to the Aircraft Manufacturers. The system works well as-is. The proposal to change it is coming mainly from the airlines who are desperate to increase their revenue. The system they propose may benefit them in the short-term but will be detrimental in the long-term as the supply of new pilots dries up because people can't afford to fly. Meanwhile, the rich who can afford it will continue to fly.

The airlines present their viewpoint that taxes are unfair. But like it or not government revenue programs are intended to spread the cost of services among the many even though it might only benefit a few.

Case in point, taxes in general. Here in New York for FY 2004 we got back 84 cents for every dollar we sent to the United States Government. Meanwhile, the good people of Alaska received 1.80 for every dollar they paid in taxes. This seems especially unfair in light of the fact the Alaskan Permanent fund paid a dividend in the amount of $919.84 to every resident for FY 2004. Why don't we cut off those darn Alaskans so we can get more money here in NY??? Because taxes are designed to benefit everyone in general even though we might not see the immediate benefit.

The Media does a wonderful job of sensationalizing one side of a story without presenting the entire story in order to "sell papers". The general public meanwhile generally doesn't do our own research to form our own opinion. This gets the attention of seagull politicians who appear on the scene to crap all over everything.

I could go on and on, but I wrote this on my lunch break and have to get back to work.
 
airtran737
Posts: 3460
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:43 am

Quoting BigAppleCoder (Reply 3):
This thread finally made me jump and sign up for a membership.

Welccome to A.net, and great post.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
Of course they do; but why do we have to pay for it? What benefit is there?

If you only fully understood how much work general aviation does in this country.
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
smashme33
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:34 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:53 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
GA has every right to be out there.

Of course they do; but why do we have to pay for it? What benefit is there?



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
Then expect a lot of delays when we bring our airplanes into the busier airports.

I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.

We're paying like hell already! Fuel is over 5-6 bucks a gallon in some places, plus we pay landing fees and other taxes for the use of larger airports. You can't be serious in wanting to reduce GA traffic. This is what the airlines want...to crush GA and have a corporate airspace monopoly. US federal tax money and the court system has been there to bail the airlines out of every thing that they have gotten themselves into. The airspace system is federally funded, and provides safe service to all aircraft, which is a good thing for taxes to go to. Teterboro is funded the way it is because it is a very essential airport to relieve NYC area congestion, but the problem is that instead of the airlines footing the bill, they just add it on to your ticket and charge YOU. They didn't want to share the big airports with GA becuase they wanted less delays and to maximize profits, so I think it IS their responsibility to maintain a facility for us if they don't want us at the same airport. But in the end, they found a way to do this and make you pay for it, and make you believe it is GA's fault.

There's a lot of pro GA user fee propaganda out lately, and it is just wrong. The government is considering pandering to the airline's corporate interests and the airlines, news media, and FAA have come out with a bit of GA demonization and damaging rhetoric. Your statement of "I think if GA starts paying their fair share..." is purely a repeat of rhetoric, and shows slavery to corporate agenda. If you really think about this topic, and study deeply all sides of the equation, then you will come to the realization that GA has been paying its fees and taxes, but the airlines have been successfully avoiding paying some of their taxes and fees, and passes them right to you on your ticket in the form of "this tax", "that tax", and "this fee". I'll repeat simply, they don't pay their taxes, you pay those for them.

It's expensive enough in GA-land already. If the fees were to rise, how could we further encourage people(especially young kids) on lower incomes to fly? Would we just shut future pilots out? Where are the airlines going to get their pilots? In a system that is set up for us to co-exist, we are being bullied(quite like when Wal-Mart runs small businesses away) now in the interest of their profits, which they are only going to split with their top execs and government lobbies. There is no interest in this fee proposal for consumers...do you think that passengers are really going to save money if this is implemented? They will be able to charge the same ticket price, except that money that they don't have to send for other airports is pure profit. You will pay no matter what! Also, under this program, federal funding gets crushed...so, with less GA paying user fees BECAUSE OF user fees, and no fed $ backing, who will provide the money for a safe and expanding airspace system?
Airline passengers!

I would like to close this post by saying that I am not at all anti-airline. I want to support all aviation, but it is unacceptable for corporate bullying and harsh maneuvering to go on this way.
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:06 am

GA subsidizes your tickets as it is.

Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
We're paying like hell already! Fuel is over 5-6 bucks a gallon in some places, plus we pay landing fees and other taxes for the use of larger airports. You can't be serious in wanting to reduce GA traffic.

 checkmark 

My GA company purchased over 150,000 gallons alone last quarter with ridiculous taxes, exhorbitant prices, landing fees, and ramp fees. Airlines receive the cheapest fuel on the market along with reduced landing fees, taxes, etc as incentive. GA pays for airline travelers' expenses and I am with the NBAA on the new proposed user fees. I am going to fight them as hard as I can.

We are getting raped so that the airlines can get everything as cheap as possible.
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10167
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:12 am

I think the key thing that needs to be done is to communicate what Gen Av pays and what it costs and what Commercial Aviation pays and what it costs. I am not advocating a "soak the rich" thought here (not just because most GA is NOT rich) but just so everybody is aware of who is paying for what. This is fair and unbiased. When I first saw the articles starting to appear what struck me was the "unknown-ness" of the funding of GA services. There does need to be a clear and open understanding of all the costs and benefits.

Personally I don't ANYONE in aviation can complain much about the taxes and fees we pay to the government as a good chunk of aviation in the USA is wholly supported by them.

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:17 am

Quoting BigAppleCoder (Reply 3):
account for the economic benefit provided by GA.

Any numbers to support that?

Quoting BigAppleCoder (Reply 3):
it's popular to say "soak the rich",

I knew that was a transparent ruse, as it often is. See also "tax cuts for the rich" and "executive compensation".

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 4):
If you only fully understood how much work general aviation does in this country.

Well you're certainly not helping by making statements like that Silly
I don't take responsibility at all
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
shows slavery to corporate agenda.



Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
I'll repeat simply, they don't pay their taxes, you pay those for them.



Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
now in the interest of their profits



Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
which they are only going to split with their top execs and government lobbies.



Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
They will be able to charge the same ticket price, except that money that they don't have to send for other airports is pure profit



Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
If you really think about this topic

Yeah, as you have in your unbiased response  rotfl 
I don't take responsibility at all
 
AADC10
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:34 am

There is little doubt that GA has been subsidized by scheduled commercial aviation. Attempts have been made to make GA pay a more proportionate share of costs but since there are a lot of rich, powerful people in GA who want to fly convenient flights on their company jet and pay the lowest fees possible, it is difficult to get the legislative momentum since the opposition, while broad is only marginally interested. Commercial aviation exists primarily to serve business as well, not us pawns.

Sure there are a lot of people who are not rich that are involved with GA but if they were the only ones who were involved with GA there would be no GA because it would have been crushed out of existence. They have a powerful lobby funded by rich people and businesses.

I am sure that the reason so much money is going into Teterboro is because of the need to improve safety after the business jet crash. I suppose the alternative is to push GA further away from the center of big cities.
 
detroitflyer
Posts: 372
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:01 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:56 am

please do not advocate GA paying for everything like they do in Europe. Flying is extremely expensive anyway and we dont need to start paying for Approach fees, Filing flight plans, controller fees, and landing fees(although some airports i can see exeptions being made)
Boiler Up!!!
 
BigAppleCoder
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:30 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:52 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 8):
Quoting BigAppleCoder (Reply 3):
account for the economic benefit provided by GA.

Any numbers to support that?

According to a study by the MergeGlobal, General Aviation's contribution to the US Economy in 2005 was nearly $150 billion. $40 billion of that was due to direct operations consisting aircraft manufacturing, sales, operations and maintenance, training, and fuel. $50 billion of came from economic activity supporting direct operations such as raw material production and supporting business services. $60 billion came from induced contributions which is the value of goods and services purchased through the income derived from direct and indirect General Aviation operations.

Here's a link to the document:
http://www.gama.aero/PUBLIC/GAcontribution.pdf
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:11 am

If you allow this to happen to general aviation, only the rich will be able to afford to fly. The dreams of a poor young kid of ever becoming a pilot will be shattered. Flying and learning to fly is expensive as it is. Many will simply no longer be able to keep up their hobby or dream of becoming a pilot or pursing their career as a pilot. All pilots no matter what level have to start out in the general aviation arena it's as simple as that.

With the increasing number of small affordable personal jets, this is nothing more than a move by the airlines to make those jets more expensive to operate therefore blocking any possible competition of point to point on demand service with small jets.

You're really going to open a can of worms with this topic.  twocents 
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
mustang304
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:35 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:18 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 8):
account for the economic benefit provided by GA.

Any numbers to support that?

It is easy to find. Check out AOPA's website (www.aopa.org). From their site:

The U.S. aviation industry is worth $190 billion and generates a foreign trade surplus for our economy. GA in the United States has an annual economic impact exceeding $11 billion and employs more than 1.3 million Americans in high-skill, high-wage jobs.

(As an aside, I am curious what Commercial operators have added (and taken) w/ relation to the economy. After 9/11 the commercial operators were bailed out by the government, to a tune of $15 billion? More?)

Figure this: Say I'm borderline being able to afford flying. The FAA imposes user fees, and GA loses the pilots that could barely afford to fly (not everyone in GA flies Gulfstreams). So, Cirrus, Cessna, Piper, Diamond, Columbia, (to name a few) start losing new aircraft orders, and can't sell aircraft (2-5 years down the line). They lay off employees. Those employees stop buying products and services, and head to unemployment. The knock on effect on the economy.

Flight training in the USA is one of the most cost effective places to train. With less organizations able to do that, where is the pilot pool to replace the baby boomer pilots? When people can't afford to learn to fly, what will the airlines do? Pay for the training? How can they afford that when most of them are barely able to stay in the black? I guess we'll see airfare hikes.

What about organizations like Angleflight? Disaster relief flights? Medical flights? I'd expect to see them begin to disappear as well. The Young eagles, Airshows, and other groups that generate interest in aviation will suffer as well.

Another effect (as seen in other countries) is that with User Fees, pilots will take more risks. Instead of filing a flight plan, or ask for flight following, they may go with out it. They might not call flight service for weather and Notams, to save $$$. This will lead to a higher accident rate. Kind of like toll roads, when they first open, people don't drive them due to costs. In this case, it will mean people will get killed.

I'm not saying that GA shouldn't pay something, but to shift the entire burden on to GA is ridiculous, especially when the majority of the aviation system benefits the airlines. AOPA makes reasonable arguments about the systems and the funding structure. At http://www.aopa.org/faafundingdebate/.

(Other sources for economic info: www.gama.aero/PUBLIC/GAcontribution.pdf)

Mustang304
 
ShyFlyer
Posts: 4698
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:38 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:57 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
I think if GA starts paying their fair share,

Start? Every gallon of Avgas I've burn has been taxed by the feds. That tax money goes into the Airport and Airway Improvement Fund.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
GA flying will drop like a rock

This is correct.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
plausibly even reduce delays.

Um, no.

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 6):
We are getting raped so that the airlines can get everything as cheap as possible.

Yep, airlines see GA (Bizjets i.e. fractional ownership and VLJs) as threats to their prime customers: business travelers.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 7):
I think the key thing that needs to be done is to communicate what Gen Av pays and what it costs and what Commercial Aviation pays and what it costs.

http://www.aopa.org

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 10):
There is little doubt that GA has been subsidized by scheduled commercial aviation.

This couldn't be further from the truth.


This topic was also discussed in Tech/Ops: Your Thoughts On Privatizing ATC And NextGen (by N231YE Mar 16 2007 in Tech Ops)
I lift things up and put them down.
 
smashme33
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:34 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:17 am

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 15):
Yep, airlines see GA (Bizjets i.e. fractional ownership and VLJs) as threats to their prime customers: business travelers.

You are correct in saying this, and it goes with what I posted earlier about bullying. They would just like to push GA right off of a cliff. Not only would the jet GA sector see problems, the people who can barely make flying a reality in their lives will see it slip further away or vanish completely.

I will repeat that GA pays lots of taxes in fuel and pays plenty of user fees, especially at the larger airports, where GA has been almost completely run off. It's a ridiculous notion to think that airline av is pulling most of the weight if you can see that GA is already paying, with federal and state taxes being the base of funding for all aviation. The airlines have been getting their way enough...they have taken the benefits of billions of dollars in federal bailouts and getting their way in backruptcy court, especially after 9/11. Remember what happened to GA after 9/11? FBOs, flight schools, flightseeing, and many other GA businesses went belly-up while the government writes big checks to the airlines. Where was our fair share then?

Businesses have caught on to the US foreign policy model...Create a new enemy for the public to want to crush.

[Edited 2007-04-18 00:20:09]
 
ShyFlyer
Posts: 4698
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:38 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:25 am

Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 16):
the people who can barely make flying a reality in their lives will see it slip further away or vanish completely.

Which would include me. The rise in fuel prices have put me out of the cockpit for almost a year now. If user fees become reality, I'll never get back.
I lift things up and put them down.
 
graphic
Posts: 1293
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:41 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:41 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
I say hell no.

I agree.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
Then expect a lot of delays when we bring our airplanes into the busier airports. GA has every right to be out there.

I'd like to see what happens the first time some old coot decides its too expensive to file a flight plan and communicate with ATC, and flies with no transponder into the mode-C veil at a major airport. See how many delays were avoided when the only thing flying in the airspace are some F-16s and some old fart and his Cessna.

Quoting BigAppleCoder (Reply 3):
Yes, that means small planes and business jets but also includes traffic and police helicopters, fire fighting missions, and air ambulance operations. GA is also where tomorrow's airline pilots pay their dues to build flight time required to gain entry into the airlines.

Not to mention Cancelled Checks (Bank fees go up for road transit), Large Shipping Feeders (FedEx Feeder, UPS Feeders, DHL feeders; all operate part 135, so the cost to one-day your package from Kalamazoo to Shreveport just tripled). The list goes on.

Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
but the problem is that instead of the airlines footing the bill, they just add it on to your ticket and charge YOU.

Which they are obligated to do.

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 13):
The dreams of a poor young kid of ever becoming a pilot will be shattered.

News Flash: Poor young kids aren't able to fly now.
Demand Media fails at life
 
smashme33
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:34 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:09 am

Quoting Graphic (Reply 18):
Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 5):
but the problem is that instead of the airlines footing the bill, they just add it on to your ticket and charge YOU.

Which they are obligated to do.

Which is how they can say "We had to charge you this because of GA.", and get the public to have that much dislike for it.



Quoting Graphic (Reply 18):
News Flash: Poor young kids aren't able to fly now.

Yes, and there is something very wrong with that.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:16 am

I live near (about 3-4 miles southwest of) Teterboro TEB airport. Over the last several years, considerable investment has been made at TEB including improvements and heavy maintenance as to the runways, improved taxiways, improvements as to ATC, post-9/11 security (including better periminiter fencing, check in facilities for corp pax, other security, etc.). Another major cost that TEB got money for was adding arrestor beds to the ends of runways to prevent the kind of incident that happened Feb. 2, 2005 when an overloaded/off-balance biz jet over ran the main runway, crossing a highway and crashing into a building.
TEB is also the main airport for biz jets and some GA's in the NYC area, especially as it is so close to NY City-Manhattan. Besides, if they didn't have TEB, they would clog up EWR, JFK and LGA or have to go to much further out airports like Westchester, Islip, Morristown, Essex County/Caldwell, as great inconvenience to the corporate a/c's. I also suspect that the fuel, sales and business taxes payed by the users of TEB are of an amount over the years to offset the investment of public monies. Also don't forget that the politicans like the local Congressmember has to make sure his most noisy (and campaign fund paying) constituants have to make sure money goes to such public facilites to make them look good.
 
N353SK
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:08 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:56 am

To the OP: Please keep in mind that the money going to TEB not only benefits those flying in and out of the airport, but also the communities around the airport that without improvement to TEB, would be at much greater risk of being smashed into by a corporate jet again. Furthermore, do you think the government of new jersey would stop charging that tax instead of just routing the funds elsewhere?

TEB already charges $25 to land a single engine prop there. how much more should GA private pilots have to pay to set down on a 7000' strip of asphalt?


Take a look at an average GA field (not TEB, one that isn't the busiest in the country) and compare the number of G-Vs you see to the number of C152s you see.

Quote:
"I think people still believe that the people with the financial resources to own aircraft and fly are the only people who use general-aviation airports," Feldman said.
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:19 am

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 10):
I suppose the alternative is to push GA further away from the center of big cities.

Apparently you have no idea who flies on some of these flights. Leaders of industry and politicians will fly into metropolitan areas, no matter how much the little guys get charged. I just saw McCain flying on a midsize jet last week. Most prominent politicians fly GA.

Here is a fairly new article from the NBAA.

Early indications from Capitol Hill signaled that the White House proposal for increased taxes and user fees to provide the necessary money to run the FAA and modernize the ATC system would have rough sledding in Congress.

Under the FAA’s proposal, most of the agency’s revenue would come from new cost-based user fees, along with new certification and registration fees. The fee rates would be determined by the FAA and driven primarily by the agency’s cost requirements, with input from a proposed new governance board called the Air Transportation System Advisory Board.

For general aviation, the most unpalatable part of the White House plan is an increase in fuel taxes–a hike on GA jet fuel from 21.8 cents a gallon to 70 cents per gallon and aviation gasoline from 19.3 cents to 70 cents–in addition to user fees.

The FAA is also requesting authority to propose additional fees for certain activities pertaining to the issuance of certificates to foreign and domestic repair stations, flight and maintenance technical schools, training of designees, appointment of delegated organizations and training of foreign aviation authorities. The agency would determine the charges for these activities at a later date.

....

Congress is questioning the need to change to a new system of financing the FAA when it is generally agreed that the FAA’s new proposal would hypothetically yield approximately $600 million less in Fiscal Year 2008 than the current tax structure and more than $900 million less from FY2009 to FY 2012.

...
NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen reminded the subcommittee that in 1997 the airlines argued that user fees were needed to overhaul aviation system funding. A decade ago airlines also wanted to shift some $600 million in costs and reduce the role of Congress in aviation system oversight.

“To everyone who was around the last time the nation’s big airlines pushed that scheme, there is a strong sense of déjà vu,” Bolen said. “This time around, the airlines have picked a new target for their tax shift–general aviation–and they have increased the amount to $2 billion.”

Bolen maintained that the battle over aviation user fees is about whether Congress will retain control of the air traffic system or whether that control will shift to unelected bureaucrats or even industry. Additionally, he said, allowing the airlines’ plan to prevail would impose devastating costs on the small and midsize businesses that rely upon general aviation in small and rural towns nationwide.

“Revenues going into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund are at record levels,” Bolen said, “and no less an authority than the Congressional Budget Office has said that the FAA will continue to have sufficient funds to fully support the transition to the next generation air transportation system.”


http://ain.gcnpublishing.com/content...gress/?no_cache=1&cHash=b1f2423d07

General aviation’s concerns found a firm basis last month when the FAA presented a reauthorization proposal that includes a more than 300-percent hike in the fuel tax and myriad fees for obtaining a pilot’s license, registering an airplane or receiving a medical.

The new proposal for funding the agency over the next 10 years would more than triple GA fuel taxes, from 21.8 cents per gallon to 70 cents per gallon, and create a mishmash of new or higher fees for such things as pilot licensing, aircraft certifications and other services.

It also would institute new user fees for GA flights that pass through airspace within several miles of large airports. All domestic commercial and GA users would pay a fuel tax of 13.6 cents per gallon (included in the 70-cent increase) to fund the Airport Improvement Program, the Essential Air Service program and the FAA’s R&D.

The 7.5-percent airline ticket tax–which is paid by airline passengers–would be replaced with a system of user fees, which the airlines undoubtedly will pass on to passengers.

The FAA bill–called the “Next Generation Air Transportation System Financing Reform Act of 2007”–allows general aviation to pay the bulk of its tax responsibility at the pump, albeit at a much higher rate, while at the same time eliminating the airline ticket and cargo taxes. In its place, scheduled airlines and cargo carriers will be taxed with as-yet-undetermined user fees.

...
An Unworkable Plan
Judging from its initial reception before the House aviation subcommittee, the White House funding proposal faces a tough road in Congress. Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.), an avid supporter of general aviation, said the proposal “is dead on arrival.”
Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.), a commercial-rated pilot, said, “There is no way that I can come to the conclusion that this user fee proposal is fair, equitable or that it will work.”

Echoing that view, Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) roundly denounced the proposed avgas hike and new user fees. “I know there’s going to be a gas tax hike, so I’m bracing myself, but then I hear 70 cents gallon, and it just floors me,” he said.
Graves, who also is a pilot, groused, “This will make the skies safe because nobody will fly any more.”


http://ain.gcnpublishing.com/content...udget/?no_cache=1&cHash=af373c6841


I have seen the ridiculous charges on European trips where our pilots are charged to fart in the airplane and service is usually substandard.
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
copter808
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 1:14 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:00 pm

Anyone who does not benefit from aviation, should not have to pay for it!!

Problem is...trying to find someone who does not benefit in any way from it! If you can find him, I'll pay his share of the aviation taxes!
 
floridaflyboy
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:26 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:33 pm

Quoting Copter808 (Reply 23):
Anyone who does not benefit from aviation, should not have to pay for it!!

Problem is...trying to find someone who does not benefit in any way from it! If you can find him, I'll pay his share of the aviation taxes!

When I read the first line of your post, I just about got all fired up. Then, I read the second line, which is so incredibly true, and exactly what I was thinking. People simply don't realize the dramatic positive effect GA has on the US Economy, and also the fact that GA really does effect all of us in some way, shape, or form.
Good goes around!
 
SkyexRamper
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:17 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:13 am

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 1):
Then expect a lot of delays when we bring our airplanes into the busier airports. GA has every right to be out there.

Excellent way to start things off!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.

GA already pays a big chunk...for every gallon of Jet-A or Avgas, 80% of that prices is nothing but taxes for Federal or State.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):
I say hell no.

By buying an airline ticket you are paying to help improve that airport from which you traveled from so what's your point. If we neglect the smaller GA airports, that will force the airports to turn into a dump (see MWC) and pilots will go else where i.e: the bigger pretty airports. It is in the best interest of anyone who flies the airlines to keep these GA airports open and functional so that more people will gravitate to them therefore reducing congestion at bigger airports. If any one sector of GA should be pushed for fees and taxes, it should be the fractional providers as they are also airlines themselves with 1000s of legs flown each day.

[Edited 2007-04-18 18:19:35]

[Edited 2007-04-18 18:20:00]
Good Luck to all Skyway Pilots! It's been great working with you!
 
bond007
Posts: 4428
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:14 am

Quoting Copter808 (Reply 23):
Problem is...trying to find someone who does not benefit in any way from it! If you can find him, I'll pay his share of the aviation taxes!

Yes, as I'm sitting at a small airport right now, watching a couple of Cessna Caravans from Fedex loading up with all those 'Priority Overnight' packages, and a Labquest Twin ready for tonight's run of blood samples...

You only need to look at how GA works in Europe to see what might happen ...

To be honest, airlines should be concentrating on running their businesses profitably, instead of spending time on something that will be a detriment to US aviation as a whole.

I've really had enough of this 'airlines have been subsidizing GA for years' BS. The airlines haven't been paying anything - they pass all those costs to the passenger, and buy fuel at a fraction of the cost of the airlines.

..and for those who think corporate/biz jets carry nobody but the rich and CEOs .... they really have no idea. This represents a very small percentage of all corporate flights. Stand around at the 250 arrivals at TEB each day (except this week!), and tell me how many celebrities and CEOs you see!



Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
goaliemn
Posts: 320
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:46 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:21 am

Quoting Smashme33 (Reply 19):
Which is how they can say "We had to charge you this because of GA.", and get the public to have that much dislike for it.

have you flown to Canada? You have a navcanada fee for radio communications on every ticket.. You'll see the same thing here..

I live in MSP and NW wanted the airport commission to basically charge the same landing fees they charge at MSP at the smaller feeder airports (which, years ago, NW wanted put into place to keep the smaller planes around from MSP). A bunch of smaller pilots were going to plan a cook out at the MSP airport to help slow down the big jets.. NW backed off.

Remember, part of the reason there is some GA subsidy is to keep the larger airports clear. Plus, GA doesn't use as many resources as commercial airlines, and they don't charge. Not every GA flight talks to ATC, nor do they always file flight plans. Every commercial airline flight does. Its just like in the world of telephone service. Business users there help subsidise non-business users.

Quoting Copter808 (Reply 23):
Anyone who does not benefit from aviation, should not have to pay for it!!

Problem is...trying to find someone who does not benefit in any way from it! If you can find him, I'll pay his share of the aviation taxes!

Its alot like people who support huge taxes/restrictions on large semi-trucks. Everything you own was delivered on a big truck.. they don't seem to see that..
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1741
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:44 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.

"..plausibly even reduce delays...." As you said in one of your replies above, "any numbers to support that?". Well?
You are way off on that one. I would suggest the web sites of DOT, FAA, NBAA, AOPA, NATCA, and maybe some of the busiest airports.

I wonder what your reaction would be if the Trucking Industry and DOT tried to apply this User Fee system to the nations highways? You should pay as much per mile as the bus, tractor trailer, and rich guy in the RV. Just for good measure they can up the automotive gas tax $.55 per gallon as well.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
tommytoyz
Posts: 1195
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:08 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:43 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.

OK. Then make sure you apply the same standard to the airlines and travelers, ok? Let's start with airlines repaying all the money they received as grants from the government just over the past 6 years.

Then we can go back and have them pay back what they've received before that period.

Point is, the airlines get way more than they pay in taxes and the travelers as well.

Many airports and the infrastructure on the airports are paid for by private funds like bond financings or through local taxes, outside the pockets of the airlines and travelers. If we shift all those expenses onto travelers and the airlines, it would be intolerable.

So if it is necessary to shift some user fees to build GA infrastructure, it is surely because it benefits parties outside GA, not just GA. Besides, this is peanuts compared to what airlines using NYC airports got in 9/11 money.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:55 pm

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 6):
GA subsidizes your tickets as it is.

Uh... No.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:27 pm

Keep in mind that businesspeople don't fly corporate just so they can live the good life in the air. Having a private plane means that you are not held to the schedules of the airlines, and can fly to airports that are closer to where you're actually doing your business - both factors increase one's productivity, since less time is spent in travel. If you've got an 8am meeting in Aspen and a 2pm meeting in San Diego, good luck getting there on the airlines.

GA is about much more than ultra-rich people throwing parties on their G-Vs as they wing their way to their fourth homes in the Caribbean - that's probably about 1% of all GA activity. The vast majority of it is contributing to the economy by doing things that the airlines cannot do. The airlines want a monopoly on the air travel market, and while it would certainly help them, monopolies rarely turn out well for the consumers.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:15 pm

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 34):
if the Trucking Industry and DOT tried to apply this User Fee system to the nations highways?

I think they should; it could potentially reduce traffic, urban sprawl, pollution, and taxes, particularly for me, who walks to work, the gym, and the supermarket Silly.

Quoting Tommytoyz (Reply 35):
Let's start with airlines repaying all the money they received as grants from the government just over the past 6 years.

Several airlines have paid back those grants. Moreover, even though I disagree with those grants, they were due to an unprecedented national disaster.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
mustang304
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:35 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:09 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 38):

I think they should; it could potentially reduce traffic, urban sprawl, pollution, and taxes, particularly for me, who walks to work, the gym, and the supermarket Silly.

Yes, the potential is there to remove traffic, urban sprawl etc. However, it would absolutely slam our economy. Our economy is based on consumerism (like it or not). Food, fuel, goods would all be more expensive, and further separate the upper, middle and low income families. Unemployment would shoot up, loan defaults would increase, and more people would need government assistance just to get by. As much as we don't like it, achieving some sort of Utopia where everyone walks to work, everyone is environmentally green and happy is probably not going to happen, not without a major economic and/or social crisis.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 38):

Several airlines have paid back those grants. Moreover, even though I disagree with those grants, they were due to an unprecedented national disaster.

Source? I haven't been able to find anything that states that they have. If anything, I'm pretty sure that the loan repayments were lost during the restructuring of several of the airlines. Besides I believe it was more of a bailout than a loan. Maybe we should shift the federal airline "grant" to a ticket tax to pay for it......
 
mandala499
Posts: 6592
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:11 am

It just goes to show how important general aviation is.
I am not surprised Teterboro's getting 35.2m USD, while the rest of the small airports get the rest of the 54.6... Teterboro brings a lot of money into the NY Area economy.

So what if Newark gets only 40 over the past 2 years... the airport should rely on its heavy traffic for money.

Quote:
I think if GA starts paying their fair share, the amount of GA flying will drop like a rock and plausibly even reduce delays.

And then?

To add to BigAppleCoder's reply, I'd like to invite those who do not understand General Aviation to watch "One-Six-Right".

The US is fortunate in that it has a rich aviation base... supported by general aviation, providing places for people to built up their exposure and experience to whatever they're gonna do when they do get into the big airlines. Go to a country where general aviation barely exists... shortages of people with experience in the lower end of the payscale in airlines! (shortages in manpower and brainpower... and that'll p1ss you, the pax, off!)

Cut General Aviation off and what do you get? An impending pilot's shortage... you as a pax will pay for it too in the end, through supporting the airline's training costs... and also, the costs of getting a license is comparatively more expensive... you get limited maintenance spares/support wherever you go, why? coz airlines prefer to centralize those resources... GenAv goes wherever they go! They spread such skills around...

You start from flying little planes, then go on to flying big planes...
You start from maintaining little planes, then you go onto maintaining big planes...

General aviation consists of small building blocks that are of various backgrounds, shapes and sizes... and forms the basis of an aviation industry

mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
starrion
Posts: 1023
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:23 am

Another point is that the current system is fairly efficient. The fuel taxes are billed when you buy gas from the fuel provider. The government simply has to track the small number of fuel providers, audit the number of gallons sold and there is your tax.

The user fee method would mean billing the 2 million some-odd pilots, tracking everything from touch and go's at the local airport, how many flight plans you filed, how often you used weather service, whether you flew to controlled airports ect, then add all those airspace usages fees together and send the bill to the End user. Plus dealing with all the billing processes, people who have moved, dealing with people who don't pay ect. They would need a whole new division just to deal with the implementing the new fees.

So the fees would have to cover the current level PLUS the cost of collecting the fees. And then dealing with the revenue fall off as pilots leave the system.

Does anybody remember the "luxury tax" of the 90's? They put whopping big taxes on luxury goods to soak the rich people. The rich people simply stopped buying luxury goods in the US and bought -and docked- overseas. It severely damaged the US boatbuilding industry. The losses from income of the workers and sales taxes far outweighed what they collected, so they ended up repealing the tax.

Of course it is the United States and we take pride in not learning from past mistakes.
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:45 am

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 39):
However, it would absolutely slam our economy

Why? All I'm advocating is replacing the taxes we pay that go to roads, for instance, with a user tax of equal amount. There's no net increase in taxes or fees.

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 39):
I haven't been able to find anything that states that they have

Frontier Airlines paid back their loan in whole and fairly quickly, for one.

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 40):
Cut General Aviation off and what do you get? An impending pilot's shortage...

I just don't buy it; I think the supply/demand equilibrium would shift obviously but it wouldn't major. There seemss to be an overabundance of pilots as it is since they are willing to work for a pittance at the low end of the industry and have artificially high wages at the higher end.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
Glom
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:06 am

Come back when airlines start paying tax on their fuel. Until then, stop bullying GA.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:17 am

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 22):
“Revenues going into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund are at record levels,” Bolen said, “and no less an authority than the Congressional Budget Office has said that the FAA will continue to have sufficient funds to fully support the transition to the next generation air transportation system.”

Expenses are at an all time high negating any gains. Bolen is full of crap.

Quoting Goaliemn (Reply 32):
Plus, GA doesn't use as many resources as commercial airlines, and they don't charge.

Depends on if you consider a 737 vs. a prop that takes up the same approach airspace at a major airport resulting in a 148 passenger capacity depletion.
 
RaginMav
Posts: 335
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 5:22 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:20 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 42):
There seemss to be an overabundance of pilots as it is since they are willing to work for a pittance at the low end of the industry and have artificially high wages at the higher end

Wow... I think this is the single most short sited statement I have heard in my entire life. Can you not look at least a decade down the road, to see the effect of your own statement?

On the safety note - sad will be the day we begin to hear of the rash of accidents that result from perfectly capable instrument rated pilots either 1) scud running to avoid paying a fee for filing a flight plan or 2) Flying IMC without an IFR flight plan to avoid the same fee. It will be a lot like prohibition...
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:28 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 43):
Come back when airlines start paying tax on their fuel. Until then, stop bullying GA.

Okay...

Reference fuel taxes:

Proposed Funding Sources
We propose a hybrid funding structure with three funding sources for FAA services: user fees, taxes, and the general fund. FAA conducted a comprehensive examination of our costs to determine the most appropriate funding source and allocation.

User Fees (53% of FAA’s total budget)

Jet and turboprop flights currently subject to the ticket tax—including domestic, international, passenger, cargo, charter, air taxi, and fractional operators—would pay their fair share of air traffic costs via user fees. The proposal sets broad parameters for how these fees would be structured and how users would be consulted as they are established.

Collecting user fees to recover the cost of air traffic services is a widely accepted practice around the world. Fees would be based on data derived from FAA’s cost accounting and allocation systems, and would cover nearly three-fourths of the Air Traffic Organization’s budget.

Our proposal gives FAA the authority to charge a limited, cost-based congestion fee for users who land at the nation’s 30 most congested airports to cover equipment, personnel, and other costs directly related to managing traffic in and around these facilities.

Users would pay modest fees to recover the cost of some FAA certification services since current fees are set well below the cost of providing the service. Fees would cover 10% of the Aviation Safety organization’s budget, with 90% still covered by the General Fund.

Fuel and International Passenger Taxes (28% of FAA’s total budget)

GA and piston users will pay their fair share of FAA costs through a fuel tax, their preferred mechanism. The tax rates are based on a detailed cost allocation, and would change every two years in line with an updated cost allocation study.

All domestic commercial and GA users will also pay a common fuel tax of 13.6 cents per gallon to fund AIP, the Essential Air Service program and FAA’s Research, Engineering and Development account. International commercial passenger flights will pay a $6.39 passenger head tax to fund these services.

Furthermore, the fees will only apply to users that actually use FAA services or operate from an airport with 100,000 (ATC Controlled) or more operations, or in the case of congestion pricing, the top 30 airports. This isn't a blanket across the board fee structure. If you don't file a plan, you don't get hit. Just like the airlines, you get a fuel tax and just like anywhere else, smaller airports will have lower cost fuel. Read the stinking legislation. NBAA doesn't like it because the top 30 airports can now impose congestion pricing to drive GA out of the facility. Nothing more, nothing less. At these facilities, they add to congestion and get pilots get raped at the ramp by the FBO's on fuel prices anyway. The congestion pricing effectively takes control of the FBO fee structure because of the way FBO agreements are presently established where they pay for a leasehold and charge damn near anything they want for service with little or no contribution back to the airport.

[Edited 2007-04-19 19:56:33]
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 17946
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:32 am

Quoting RaginMav (Reply 45):
Can you not look at least a decade down the road, to see the effect of your own statement?

Pilot supply will go down and pilot wages will go up. Shocking, I know Wink There have been shocks to many different parts of the airline industry before, and it's still here.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
bond007
Posts: 4428
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 46):
Okay...

Reference fuel taxes:

Okay .... Don't see mention of any fuel tax on airlines there. Just GA.


Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 44):
Depends on if you consider a 737 vs. a prop that takes up the same approach airspace at a major airport resulting in a 148 passenger capacity depletion.

Tell that to the airlines that are running RJs by the hundreds into those airports. Mr. Joe Pilot in his 172 is not the problem, as he will not be flying into ORD, ATL, or LAX any time soon - he has DPA, PDK and SMO for that. Yet ORD, ATL and LAX continue to be flow control magnets. Every Class B airport has its GA reliever airports, and for good reason. And pilots do use them.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:49 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 49):
Tell that to the airlines that are running RJs by the hundreds into those airports. Mr. Joe Pilot in his 172 is not the problem, as he will not be flying into ORD, ATL, or LAX any time soon - he has DPA, PDK and SMO for that. Yet ORD, ATL and LAX continue to be flow control magnets. Every Class B airport has its GA reliever airports, and for good reason. And pilots do use them.

If you'd take the time to read the legislation vs. the hyperbole you'd find that the top 30 airports are given control of fees at peak times allowing them to discriminate (charge a base landing fee) against smaller aircraft at peak times. RJ's aren't under the radar by any stretch. Besides, anything under 50 seats is economically dead anyway and headed for the desert in the next 7 years.

Read page 11...

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...horization/media/NextGenBILL_1.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...horization/media/NextGenBILL_2.pdf

This bill isn't about sticking it to GA. Its about enhancing capacity at the top 30 airports and getting them off the governments dime.

[Edited 2007-04-19 19:51:42]
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:53 am

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 48):
Okay .... Don't see mention of any fuel tax on airlines there. Just GA.

Again...


All domestic commercial and GA users will also pay a common fuel tax of 13.6 cents per gallon to fund AIP, the Essential Air Service program and FAA’s Research, Engineering and Development account. International commercial passenger flights will pay a $6.39 passenger head tax to fund these services.

What exactly do you think "Domestic Commerical" means?

[Edited 2007-04-19 19:54:40]
 
mustang304
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:35 am

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:36 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 50):
Read page 11...

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...horization/media/NextGenBILL_1.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...horization/media/NextGenBILL_2.pdf

This bill isn't about sticking it to GA. Its about enhancing capacity at the top 30 airports and getting them off the governments dime.

The bill basically outlines Class B, C and D airports. In the Puget sound area, that is basically everything around Seattle (KBFI, KSEA, KTIW, KOLM, KPAE, KNUW, KRNT). Class Bravo/ Mode C veil covers most of the area, including around 14 Class E airports. According to the bill, a GA aircraft operating in the Terminal area of the busy airports will pay fees for ATC and flight service. This would effectively cause problems for the majority of flight schools in the Seattle area, as people would probably forgo the Instrument rating, as it would cost probably twice as much.

Did you notice that on page 18 where GA gets to pay additional fees for maintenance and flight training certificates? To have a 141 flight school and/or repair station means paying a fee. Please tell me how that is going to help aviation grow?

Why would I want to be come a Designated Examiner if the FAA is going to charge me a fee for the privilege? Why not let the FAA do check rides?

Oh don't forget the extra $50 each time you get a new rating for the new airman certificate. As a professional pilot, that adds another $300 to training (PPSEL/PPMEL/IA/CPSEL/CPMEL/ATP) if you don't bother being an instructor. Make it $550 if you are (CFI, CFII, MEI, Ground Instructor,Advance Ground Instructor). Then add $50 for each type cert. (Ref: page 17).

Tell me how that isn't sticking it to GA?
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:46 am

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 52):
The bill basically outlines Class B, C and D airports. In the Puget sound area, that is basically everything around Seattle (KBFI, KSEA, KTIW, KOLM, KPAE, KNUW, KRNT). Class Bravo/ Mode C veil covers most of the area, including around 14 Class E airports. According to the bill, a GA aircraft operating in the Terminal area of the busy airports will pay fees for ATC and flight service. This would effectively cause problems for the majority of flight schools in the Seattle area, as people would probably forgo the Instrument rating, as it would cost probably twice as much.

You play in the system, you pay for doing so. Must be nice doing so for free.

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 52):
Did you notice that on page 18 where GA gets to pay additional fees for maintenance and flight training certificates? To have a 141 flight school and/or repair station means paying a fee. Please tell me how that is going to help aviation grow?

Yeah, and when you get your car checked out you pay a fee. To get a certfication to work on cars, you pay a fee. What makes you think all of this should be free?

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 52):
Why would I want to be come a Designated Examiner if the FAA is going to charge me a fee for the privilege? Why not let the FAA do check rides?

Again, why should it be free?

Quoting Mustang304 (Reply 52):
Oh don't forget the extra $50 each time you get a new rating for the new airman certificate. As a professional pilot, that adds another $300 to training (PPSEL/PPMEL/IA/CPSEL/CPMEL/ATP) if you don't bother being an instructor. Make it $550 if you are (CFI, CFII, MEI, Ground Instructor,Advance Ground Instructor). Then add $50 for each type cert. (Ref: page 17).

You also pay for a fee for driver license don't you?

Again, why should all of this be free?

Aviation infrastructure, operation and maintenance is not cheap. Get over it. This isn't a supplement to existing funding; it’s a wholesale replacement that also gets the top 30 airports off the government teat making them wholly self funded by removing them from the AIP program. The AIP funds generated from Aviation Fuel taxes (paid by all users, not just GA) funds the other airports in the system benefiting GA. I don’t know where this sense of entitlement comes from with you people.

[Edited 2007-04-19 20:57:17]
 
ShyFlyer
Posts: 4698
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:38 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:10 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 53):
You play in the system, you pay for doing so.

By fuel taxes.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 53):
Again, why should it be free?

No one said it should be free.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 53):
I don't know where this sense of entitlement comes from with you people.

I am "entitled" because I pay a tax (which goes into the AAIP) on every gallon of fuel I burn, whether or not I actually use any ATC services during my flight. Hell, I even contribute to that fund even if I abort my flight during the engine run up.

[Edited 2007-04-19 21:13:01]
I lift things up and put them down.
 
floridaflyboy
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:26 pm

RE: Should Travelers Pay For General Aviation?

Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:59 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 50):
Besides, anything under 50 seats is economically dead anyway and headed for the desert in the next 7 years.

That is simply untrue. Carriers like Big Sky, Commutair, Horizon, etc. will still find plenty of uses for aircraft under 50 seats in the foreseeable future long past 7 years from now.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 51):
What exactly do you think "Domestic Commerical" means?

Not all Commercial traffic is the airlines. Some commercial traffic is still under the GA umbrella (i.e. corporate jets). I don't see anything in that legislation specifically saying the airlines would pay, and I don't see anything that says they wouldn't. Perhaps it should be worded differently to specifically state Domestic Commercial, General Aviation, and Airline, if that's what they're getting at. However, I don't support this in any way shape or form.
Good goes around!

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos