![]() |
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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rest assured that traffic laws enable LEOs to generate quite a fat
revenue stream. This may be true, but at least they are -our- laws. We can change them if we want. If the traffic laws were written by Saudi Arabia, that would be more difficult. Jose -- There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when they push the button. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Isn't it just a bit presumptuous for Blakey to rally support for NextGen ATC privatization in the face of Congressional resistance to it? MEXICO, CANADA JOIN ATC NEXTGEN EFFORT Mexico and Canada have agreed to implement the FAA's vision for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NGATS) in concert with the U.S. to create a seamless continent-wide, space-based air traffic management system. At a North American Aviation Trilateral meeting in Quebec last week, all three nations agreed to proceed with implementation of required navigation performance (RNP), RNAV and ADS-B technologies in an integrated way so that procedures and standards will be harmonized over North America. The primary goal of the NextGen technology is to increase system capacity but, in a speech (http://www.faa.gov/news/speeches/new...fm?newsId=8868) during the meeting, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said there are also environmental and financial benefits attached. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195229 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:45:17 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote in : Don't be fooled by the Divide And Conquer strategy of the pro ATC privatization crowed. How long do you think piston aircraft will remain exempt? Is there going to be a non-negotiable guarantee, that once ATC is privatized, piston aircraft will REMAIN exempt from user fees? I have heard no mention of such a guarantee. It is definitely what is not mentioned by the FAA that is most troubling. Funding this privatized NextGen ATC user fee system will require both the NextGen and current ATC systems to be funded simultaneously for years (decades?) until the existing ATC system is deactivated. That's bad enough, but the privatization proponents are demanding that the current Congressional oversight of FAA spending be removed, so they'll have a blank check to fill their bank accounts! Don't be fooled. Privatized ATC is a big corporate aircraft manufacturer and airline boondoggle, make no mistake. Currently airliners are lined-up nightly for over a thousand miles nose-to-tail (within separation standards) all the way from Oklahoma on their way to KLAX. How many more airliners can the NAS truly accommodate? It is setting this limit, that should be the focus of this discussion. Read all about the FAA's double-speak: FAA MYTHBUSTING -- SHOULD GA WORRY ABOUT USER FEES? (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195009) Would the FAA's proposed new funding structure force general aviation to pay more than its fair share of the FAA's costs? According to the FAA, that's a "myth." At an "Ask The FAA" session at the Sun 'n Fun Fly-In in Lakeland, Fla., on Friday, the FAA answered questions about user fees and distributed a "fact sheet" that explains the effects of its proposed financing changes on general aviation. The "facts," according to the FAA, are that GA currently drives about 16 percent of the expense of the air traffic system, but pays only 3 percent of the cost. The proposed changes would raise that percentage to 11 percent, with only 1 percent coming from piston-aircraft users. It's also a myth, says the FAA, that the airlines drive the cost of the infrastructure, while GA is only a marginal user. The FAA says it has taken those factors into account in its cost analyses. Will the proposed tax increases "ruin" GA in the U.S.? No, says the FAA. The increased cost would work out to about $500 per year for most piston fliers, according to the fact sheet. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195009 USER FEE COMPROMISE IN THE WORKS (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195007) Capitol Hill pundits are predicting the compromise on general aviation user fees that will be sent to Congress will spare the piston crowd any increases, but sock business aviation with charges for their use of the airspace. (Hear what Cessna chairman, CEO and president Jack Pelton has to say about aviation user fees (/other/JackPelton_UserFees_2007-04-20.mp3). [3.3MB mp3]) A story in The Hill earlier this week quoted unnamed sources as presenting this scenario. "The piston thing is not going to happen," the source told The Hill. "I do think there's significant traction on the whole issue of corporate aircraft." The story also quotes an internal Air Transport Association memo as conceding that the statistics it has widely used to support the airlines' position on user fees are somewhat skewed. The ATA, the strongest proponent of user fees, has publicly claimed that U.S. airlines pay 95 percent of non-general-fund contributions to the FAA's trust fund through ticket taxes, but The Hill says the internal memo admits that the airline portion is more like 74 percent, with cargo companies and foreign airlines picking up the difference. Meanwhile, there's a furor north of the border as Nav Canada has singled out very light jets for inclusion in its second tier (more than 6,600 pounds mtow) of charges. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195007 |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]() If the Senate bill imposes user fees without a guarantee of perpetually exempting GA from them, it is surely a Trojan Horse that paves the way for GA user fees: GA VERSUS AIRLINES AT AERO CLUB USER-FEE DEBATE AOPA President Phil Boyer faced off with James May of the Air Transport Association (ATA) on Tuesday at the Washington, D.C., Aero Club in a debate about the pending FAA reauthorization legislation. May questioned why Boyer was opposing the Senate bill that would require a $25 user fee for turbine aircraft flying in the IFR system and exempt piston aircraft. "Our only concern is the introduction of a user fee to any segment of aviation, whether it be $5 or $25," said Boyer. "Even if it were just the airlines [paying user fees], to put that structure in place would be a slippery slope." May said he is fine with exempting piston aircraft. "My beef quite frankly is with the corporate jets. I'm just trying to find a little balance from some folks who can easily afford to pay their fair share." http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195264 On Wed, 23 May 2007 16:45:08 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote in : Isn't it just a bit presumptuous for Blakey to rally support for NextGen ATC privatization in the face of Congressional resistance to it? MEXICO, CANADA JOIN ATC NEXTGEN EFFORT Mexico and Canada have agreed to implement the FAA's vision for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NGATS) in concert with the U.S. to create a seamless continent-wide, space-based air traffic management system. At a North American Aviation Trilateral meeting in Quebec last week, all three nations agreed to proceed with implementation of required navigation performance (RNP), RNAV and ADS-B technologies in an integrated way so that procedures and standards will be harmonized over North America. The primary goal of the NextGen technology is to increase system capacity but, in a speech (http://www.faa.gov/news/speeches/new...fm?newsId=8868) during the meeting, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said there are also environmental and financial benefits attached. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195229 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:45:17 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote in : Don't be fooled by the Divide And Conquer strategy of the pro ATC privatization crowed. How long do you think piston aircraft will remain exempt? Is there going to be a non-negotiable guarantee, that once ATC is privatized, piston aircraft will REMAIN exempt from user fees? I have heard no mention of such a guarantee. It is definitely what is not mentioned by the FAA that is most troubling. Funding this privatized NextGen ATC user fee system will require both the NextGen and current ATC systems to be funded simultaneously for years (decades?) until the existing ATC system is deactivated. That's bad enough, but the privatization proponents are demanding that the current Congressional oversight of FAA spending be removed, so they'll have a blank check to fill their bank accounts! Don't be fooled. Privatized ATC is a big corporate aircraft manufacturer and airline boondoggle, make no mistake. Currently airliners are lined-up nightly for over a thousand miles nose-to-tail (within separation standards) all the way from Oklahoma on their way to KLAX. How many more airliners can the NAS truly accommodate? It is setting this limit, that should be the focus of this discussion. Read all about the FAA's double-speak: FAA MYTHBUSTING -- SHOULD GA WORRY ABOUT USER FEES? (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195009) Would the FAA's proposed new funding structure force general aviation to pay more than its fair share of the FAA's costs? According to the FAA, that's a "myth." At an "Ask The FAA" session at the Sun 'n Fun Fly-In in Lakeland, Fla., on Friday, the FAA answered questions about user fees and distributed a "fact sheet" that explains the effects of its proposed financing changes on general aviation. The "facts," according to the FAA, are that GA currently drives about 16 percent of the expense of the air traffic system, but pays only 3 percent of the cost. The proposed changes would raise that percentage to 11 percent, with only 1 percent coming from piston-aircraft users. It's also a myth, says the FAA, that the airlines drive the cost of the infrastructure, while GA is only a marginal user. The FAA says it has taken those factors into account in its cost analyses. Will the proposed tax increases "ruin" GA in the U.S.? No, says the FAA. The increased cost would work out to about $500 per year for most piston fliers, according to the fact sheet. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195009 USER FEE COMPROMISE IN THE WORKS (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195007) Capitol Hill pundits are predicting the compromise on general aviation user fees that will be sent to Congress will spare the piston crowd any increases, but sock business aviation with charges for their use of the airspace. (Hear what Cessna chairman, CEO and president Jack Pelton has to say about aviation user fees (/other/JackPelton_UserFees_2007-04-20.mp3). [3.3MB mp3]) A story in The Hill earlier this week quoted unnamed sources as presenting this scenario. "The piston thing is not going to happen," the source told The Hill. "I do think there's significant traction on the whole issue of corporate aircraft." The story also quotes an internal Air Transport Association memo as conceding that the statistics it has widely used to support the airlines' position on user fees are somewhat skewed. The ATA, the strongest proponent of user fees, has publicly claimed that U.S. airlines pay 95 percent of non-general-fund contributions to the FAA's trust fund through ticket taxes, but The Hill says the internal memo admits that the airline portion is more like 74 percent, with cargo companies and foreign airlines picking up the difference. Meanwhile, there's a furor north of the border as Nav Canada has singled out very light jets for inclusion in its second tier (more than 6,600 pounds mtow) of charges. http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195007 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
User Fees Will Tripple Piston-Engine Operating Costs | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 3 | March 10th 07 07:29 PM |
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale | >pk | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 06 07:48 AM |