Hmmmm. And you work for an organization " federal government" that is 9
trillion dollars in debt.. Actions speak louder then words.....
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Ok. Now I am calling your bluff. One thing is totally wrong with your
comments. If I am on flight following/ VFR advisiories, whatever you
want to call it and I am flying from JAC to SLC, I am in communication
with ATC for over an hour. As I approach Class Bravo airspace around
Salt Lake City, if I don't hear those magic words " CLEARED INTO CLASS
BRAVO AIRSPACE" and I fly into the valley I can assure you I will hear
" CALL THE TOWER" upon landing. Being in communication with enroute
does NOT clear me into Bravo airspace or "grant" me entry


Nobody said it did. If you review the thread you'll see we were talking
about communicating with Milwaukee approach and entry to the Class C
airspace.



My next beef
is your attitude toward "participating" aircraft. If I fill my fuel
tanks with 100LL and pay all taxes that are included with each gallon I
can assure you I want all services that are available to me. For you to
whine about increased workload is not my problem. Your agency and
employer, "the federal government" has collected taxes from me from the
fuel I bought, it is up to your system to provide me with all services
included with said taxes. Now, I would love to see two fuel pumps at
all airports, one that collects taxes and then I would be a
"participating" aircraft. The second pump would be 100LL, or mogas that
charged no taxes and I would fly VRF and never deal with you
whiners.... What say you now???


I say you aren't very bright.