AOPA article: Piston pilots pay no user fee, but IFR's pay $25

[[email protected]]

Can people help decipher the AOPA article about who pays the $25 fee
on per
use of the ATC service,

"There would be a $25 per flight "Air Traffic Modernization" surcharge
imposed on all flights. Piston-engine general aviation aircraft,
turboprop aircraft "operating outside of controlled airspace," and
military, public service, and air ambulances would be exempt from the
user fee."

Is this $25 fee paid by all flights including the pistons ? OR is it
saying everyone
flying outside of Class A,B,C,D,E do not have to pay $25. But once
inside one
of A,B,C,D,E, turboprop gets $25 bill, while pistons do not get that
$25 charge ?

Is this an optimistic interpretation, or the text meant something
else ?

I hope the bill that is getting to be passed is not worded this way.

P S

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> Is this an optimistic interpretation, or the text meant something
> else?

Even if the interpretation is correct, don't think for a moment that
piston-engined aircraft would be permanently exempt. Eventually everyone
would pay the fee, and the fee would increase regularly. Your only hope is
that the fee will not be implemented in the first place. Once it's there, it
can only get worse, never better.

> I hope the bill that is getting to be passed is not worded this way.

Have you written to your representatives and senators in Congress to tell them
what you think?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> writes:
>
>> Is this an optimistic interpretation, or the text meant something
>> else?
>
> Even if the interpretation is correct, don't think for a moment that
> piston-engined aircraft would be permanently exempt. Eventually
> everyone would pay the fee, and the fee would increase regularly.
> Your only hope is that the fee will not be implemented in the first
> place. Once it's there, it can only get worse, never better.
>
>> I hope the bill that is getting to be passed is not worded this way.
>
> Have you written to your representatives and senators in Congress to
> tell them what you think?
>

Doesn't amtter, you don't fly








bertie

[Erik]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Mxsmanic > wrote in
> :
>
>
writes:
>>
>>
>>>Is this an optimistic interpretation, or the text meant something
>>>else?
>>
>>Even if the interpretation is correct, don't think for a moment that
>>piston-engined aircraft would be permanently exempt. Eventually
>>everyone would pay the fee, and the fee would increase regularly.
>>Your only hope is that the fee will not be implemented in the first
>>place. Once it's there, it can only get worse, never better.
>>
>>
>>>I hope the bill that is getting to be passed is not worded this way.
>>
>>Have you written to your representatives and senators in Congress to
>>tell them what you think?
>>
>
>
> Doesn't amtter, you don't fly

While I think that some of mx's responses are full of nonsense,
you should at least pay attention while you're calling someone
else anmes.

"See to it that when you're fighting off the monsters that
you don't become one"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Erik > wrote in news:133v2g6ovosik28
@corp.supernews.com:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Is this an optimistic interpretation, or the text meant something
>>>>else?
>>>
>>>Even if the interpretation is correct, don't think for a moment that
>>>piston-engined aircraft would be permanently exempt. Eventually
>>>everyone would pay the fee, and the fee would increase regularly.
>>>Your only hope is that the fee will not be implemented in the first
>>>place. Once it's there, it can only get worse, never better.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I hope the bill that is getting to be passed is not worded this way.
>>>
>>>Have you written to your representatives and senators in Congress to
>>>tell them what you think?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Doesn't amtter, you don't fly
>
> While I think that some of mx's responses are full of nonsense,
> you should at least pay attention while you're calling someone
> else anmes.

Why?


>
> "See to it that when you're fighting off the monsters that
> you don't become one"
>

I am one by definition, fjukkwit.

Look up Bunyip.


And I'm not fighting anyone, just entertaining myself.


Bertie

[Dan544]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.130...
>
> And I'm not fighting anyone, just entertaining myself.
>
>
> Bertie

The word myself says it all.

Dan

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

"Dan544" <dan544p@hotmail> wrote in news:46408b77$0$4876
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .130...
>>
>> And I'm not fighting anyone, just entertaining myself.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> The word myself says it all.
>

Yes I know. Otherwise I would have said "Im entertaining myself and
fjukkwit net nancies"




Bertie