Air Carriers and Biz-jets Target GA Recreational Fliers

Air Carriers and Biz-jets Target GA Recreational Fliers

The airline industry is terrified. They've got more aircraft than
they know what to do with, and even more on order. Passengers are
unhappy with the airline travel experience, and their numbers threaten
to dwindle as a result. High revenue travelers are increasingly
turning to part 135 biz-jet transport to escape the moronic security
measures imposed on airline travelers. Competition among air carriers
is fierce as market consolidation threatens to swallow them whole. Air
Traffic Control contractors are lobbying franticly to wrest FAA fiscal
oversight from Congress, so thy can sell their marginally engineered
products to our government. And anyone naive enough to believes light
GA won't be affected by the clash of these titanic combatants is not
paying attention.

Here's the latest news:

AIRLINES CONTINUE ANTI-GA LOBBYING
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#197924)
When the Air Transport Association, the lobbying group for the
airlines, sent out an e-mail
(http://web.nbaa.org/public/news/ata.php)
this week griping about all the private jets that cluttered up the
airways during Kentucky Derby weekend,

Here's an excerpt from the Air Transport Association e-mail:

How much are you paying to subsidize these luxury liners?
Airlines and their passengers paid more than 90 percent of the
costs of running the air traffic control system but accounted
for only 66 percent of system operations. Business jets,
however, underpaid for the air traffic control services they
used by nearly $1 billion. Does that sound fair to you? What
if you were told that during Derby weekend, the overwhelming
majority of the jets in the skies over Kentucky were private
jets? This means that while these private jets clogged the
airways, they paid barely anything to use or modernize our
nation’s air traffic control system.

This unfair practice is not just limited to the Kentucky Derby
–private luxury planes account for nearly two-thirds of all
jet aircraft in the United States. And it is not as though
these jet-setters cannot afford to pay their fair share.
Private jet operators do not seem to be affected by the tight
economy like the rest of us – orders for new private jets are
up 41 percent from early 2007 to early 2008. Over the next ten
years, more than 10,000 additional private jets are expected
to enter service. Needless to say, this will overwhelm the
current system and cost airline passengers billions of dollars
a year in delays.

Notice how the airline industry conveniently overlooks their predatory
scheduling practices as the prime cause of air carrier flight delays.
The airline strategy of over-scheduling flights is two fold: It
freezes out competitors, and it creates a false impression that the
National Airspace System is inadequate, overburdened, and needs to be
replaced with the products of airliner manufacturers, so that the
airline industry will be placed in control of our nation's skies. Bush
has already nominated a former airline employee, Bobby Sturgell, to
become FAA Administrator, so part of their plan is already slated to
become fact.

Don't take your eye off of the shell with the pea under it.


the National Business Aviation Association was quick to respond
(http://web.nbaa.org/public/news/pr/2...80521-032.php).

Here's an excerpt:

“The ATA’s suggestion that GA air traffic at a well-planned
weekend event in a single location was somehow problematic is
simply laughable,” Bolen said. “The fact is, delays are caused
by the airlines over-scheduling flights 365 days a year at big
city airports all across the country. An official with the
Department of Transportation recently provided a clear example
of the airlines’ over-scheduling practices to Congress by
pointing to one airline that scheduled ‘56 departures in a
15-minute window at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport, about
three times the number of planes that the airport has the
capacity to handle.’ ...

What isn't be mentioned here is the fact that Bush got Congress to
removed flight scheduling authority (slots) from FAA regulation at all
US airports (except the one used by Washington), thus enabling the
airline over-scheduling debacle.

“It’s unfortunate that the nation’s big airlines have chosen
to focus efforts on attacking general aviation, rather than
working toward solutions for modernizing our air
transportation system, so that it remains the world’s largest,
safest and most efficient.”

The Air Transport Association also took a shot at the rest of us,
who aren't flying in private jets but in our own piston airplanes.
"The recreational piston-engine (or 'general aviation') community
has been ginned up by the jet-setters to oppose the small fees
proposed, even though these fees would not be imposed on piston
aircraft under any proposal Congress is considering," ATA
President James May wrote.

What isn't mentioned by the airline lobbying association is the fact
that their divide-and-conquer strategy calls "recreational
piston-engine" stakeholders as allies in the airlines' bid to
introduce user fees as a funding source for NextGen ATC. They figure,
that if "recreational piston-engine" stakeholders see themselves as
being exempt from the initial imposition of user fees, our large
numbers will not pose an obstacle to the airline agenda. Then once
user fees are implemented, you can bet that the "recreational
piston-engine" segment will become the future target of the airlines'
campaign to reduce user fee prices. What is ironic is the fact that
the vast majority of ATC services are only in existence because of the
needs of the airline industry.



This is the way I see it. Opposing views are welcome.

No argument here. ATC was created primarily to increase the safety of
airline travel, after some spectacular mid-airs in the early years.

If all airspace is suddenly reclassified as "G", I can't think of any
GA pilot who would complain.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
...

No argument here. ATC was created primarily to increase the safety of
airline travel, after some spectacular mid-airs in the early years.


Such as? I can think of only one rather non-spectacular mid-air collision
of airliners prior to the creation of ATC.

On May 22, 6:00 pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message

...



No argument here. ATC was created primarily to increase the safety of
airline travel, after some spectacular mid-airs in the early years.

Such as? I can think of only one rather non-spectacular mid-air collision
of airliners prior to the creation of ATC.

Perhaps I should have said "ATC was expanded primarily to increase the
safety of airline travel". Notable accidents that created public
outcry to empower ATC we
DC7 and Constellation in 1956 over Grand Canyon
DC8 and Constellation in 1960 over New York

I don't think it is a coincidence that every class B or C airspace is
located at airports that primarily serve airline traffic. Class D
tower is the highest I've seen at GA airports, and even there it
appears to be mostly due to historic reasons (ie it used to be a
military field or used to have airline traffic some time in the past).
Some airports operate their class D tower only when scheduled airlines
are expected to arrive and depart.

On Thu, 22 May 2008 13:32:47 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Sarangan
wrote in
:


If all airspace is suddenly reclassified as "G", I can't think of any
GA pilot who would complain.

I read somewhere that ICAO is considering dropping Class A and B
airspace. I know that sounds like it's reversed, but that's the way I
remember it.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message

No argument here. ATC was created primarily to increase the safety
of airline travel, after some spectacular mid-airs in the early
years.


Such as? I can think of only one rather non-spectacular mid-air
collision of airliners prior to the creation of ATC.


Perhaps I should have said "ATC was expanded primarily to increase the
safety of airline travel". Notable accidents that created public
outcry to empower ATC we
DC7 and Constellation in 1956 over Grand Canyon
DC8 and Constellation in 1960 over New York


ATC was created primarily to increase the safety of airline travel, but it
was created some twenty years before the Grand Canyon midair.



I don't think it is a coincidence that every class B or C airspace is
located at airports that primarily serve airline traffic.


There is Class C airspace at fields that serve exclusively military traffic.

On Fri, 23 May 2008 01:27:18 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:

On Thu, 22 May 2008 13:32:47 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Sarangan
wrote in
:


If all airspace is suddenly reclassified as "G", I can't think of any
GA pilot who would complain.

I read somewhere that ICAO is considering dropping Class A and B
airspace. I know that sounds like it's reversed, but that's the way I
remember it.

you really only need C, D and G.

c - full time atc above 10,000ft with mandatory radio
d - part time atc with mandatory radio even when the d is shut
down(ctaf)
g - free airspace to 10,000ft

Stealth Pilot

Stealth Pilot wrote:

you really only need C, D and G.

c - full time atc above 10,000ft with mandatory radio
d - part time atc with mandatory radio even when the d is shut
down(ctaf)
g - free airspace to 10,000ft


So no full-time ATC below 10,000 MSL? Why?


For reference, here are the ICAO airspace class descriptions:

ANNEX 11 TO THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION


CHAPTER 2. GENERAL


2.6 Classification of airspaces


2.6.1 ATS airspaces shall be classified and designated in accordance
with the following:


Class A. IFR flights only are permitted, all flights are provided with
air traffic control service and are separated from each other.


Class B. IFR and VFR flights are permitted, all flights are provided
with air traffic control service and are separated from each other.


Class C. IFR and VFR flights are permitted, all flights are provided
with air traffic control service and IFR flights are separated from other
IFR flights and from VFR flights. VFR flights are separated from IFR flights
and receive traffic information in respect of other VFR flights.


Class D. IFR and VFR flights are permitted and all flights are provided
with air traffic control service, IFR flights are separated from other IFR
flights and receive traffic information in respect of VFR flights, VFR
flights receive traffic information in respect of all other flights.


Class E. IFR and VFR flights are permitted, IFR flights are provided
with air traffic control service and are separated from other IFR flights.
All flights receive traffic information as far as is practical. Class E
shall not be used for control zones.


Class F. IFR and VFR flights are permitted, all participating IFR
flights receive an air traffic advisory service and all flights receive
flight information service if requested.


Note.-- Where air traffic advisory service is implemented, this is
considered normally as a temporary measure only until such time as it can be
replaced by air traffic control. (See also PANS-RAC, Part VII, 1.4.1.2.)


Class G. IFR and VFR flights are permitted and receive flight
information service if requested.

On May 22, 9:14*am, Larry Dighera wrote:

This is the way I see it. *Opposing views are welcome.

WOW, thats some pretty one sided stuff. I get a chukle when you ask
posters (On other threads) to provide the results of their research to
support their opinoin. Why dont you provide some reseach for your
baseless assumptions ? Dont take any of this personally, but you kinda
remind me of Phil Boyer or Bower (Sorry, dont recall the name), over
at AOPA when he gave his testimony to congress that was fraught with
(baseless) assumptions and factual errors. In this posters opinion he
made GA look bad.
Have you any idea what airlines actually pay in fees taxes and
leases ?

On May 23, 6:19*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:

you really only need C, D and G.

Actually you need A & B. The A for RVSM and to keep the transition
level consistent with other countries and B to expidite traffic at
busy terminal areas (Think WX and separation mins).
Frank