death of GA in NY

I've seen way too many CFIs go on to get airline jobs to believe that losing
that stream of employees wouldn't hurt.
"Michael" wrote in message
oups.com...


There are already large numbers of flight schools out there, located in
the middle of nowhere, which are quite prepaed to take pilots from zero
to 250-hour CFI/CFII/MEI without any contact with recreational GA (or
real-world flying). They train their own instructors, and the
instructors train the next crop, with maybe a retired (or failed)
airline pilot or two supervising the whole deal. They can keep
supplying the airlines long after there is a 30-mile no-fly zone around
every major city and there is a fee for every flight plan.

Don't kid yourself - the airlines don't need GA, especially not
recreational GA.

Michael

Skylune wrote:
Probably just the useless, recreational form of GA is dying for economic
reasons. And this is before the user fees are enacted! Outstanding!

Part of the reason that user fees are inevitable is because commercial
aviation is tired of subsidizing small planes.

Yeah, yeah. And motorists are tired of 'subsidizing' bicyclists. City
dwellers are tired of 'subsidizing' the national parks. Small
businesses are tired of 'subsidizing' giant corporations, who believe
they are 'subsidizing' the small buinesses. And we are all tired of
'subsidizing' the farmers.

Get a clue. Everyone pays taxes. The method of collecting taxes is
meaningless. It all goes into one big pot anyway. No one is
'subsidizing' anyone else. Just because the government, in its infinite
mercy, chooses to let you keep some small part of your own money does
not mean that you are subsidizing anyone. Be sure that they are getting
their share, well, more than their share, actually, of your hide from
somewhere else.

This is the guy who castigated someone on the board who said he didn't
bother getting a medical or do a BFR.

Hey Skylune, you probably think your hacking is simply harmless fun, right?

What a putz. (Putzlune would be a better moniker you dolt/Emery-Riddle
washout.)



"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
Read the "Fuel Price Affect" (sic) posted on the AOPA member board (easy
to
hack into their site if you are not a member; I-pilot is a bit tougher,
but doable): Rising AV gas prices are definitely having an "affect."

kontiki wrote:
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message

I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the
only FBO small GA friendly
Is $35 really unfriendly in the NYC metro area? I haven't lived in the
area for almost 10 years but even then it cost over $20 to park a car
for the day in prime midtown spot. Why would it not cost the same or
more to park an aircraft?

Agreed. A reasonable overnight parking fee ($10 a night ?) I could go
along with but $35 will pretty much guarantee a lot of GA aircraft
will avoid that FBO. In their own way they are contributing to the
extermination of general aviation.
I expect to pay $10 a night almost anywhere. Often it's less. But at
prime locations I'm sometimes surprised at how little we pay... and how
much we complain.

I'd like use of all airports to be free too. I hate getting charged
parking and service and whatever. Although with the increased security
that 9/11 caused, I feel like I get a little more for the dollar. But
I'm willing to pay to get access, security, and service. I'm glad
someone is there to provide it and I have to be willing to pay for it.

It shouldn't work the way it worked for me this weekend. I filled up at
our private tank, then flew to our local Class C airport to pick up my
passenger. The FBO generously provided a car and driver to do the round
trip to the passenger terminal. No charge but I tipped the driver. We
returned and flew to a busy Class B. There were a number of smaller
airports nearby but none as close to our downtown hotel as the this one.
We tookour tail dragger directly to the overnight parking area knowing
that it can't be towed. We were met by 2 golf carts for luggage and the
trip to the FBO. We checked in, ate a cookie, met our host, and off we
went. We stayed an extra day. Returned, told the receptionist that we
needed a ride out to our plane because it couldn't be towed but
otherwise didn't need anything else. "Fine, have a nice flight". Three
different guys helped us get our luggage out to the plane.

No charge. I'm embarrassed by that. I know that they have charges for
overnight parking and service in lieu of a fuel purchase. But I didn't
offer and they didn't ask. It shouldn't work that way but often than
not, it does. (Taildragger helps). How do these guys stay in business?
I know my $35 isn't going to make or break the business but how many
businesses provide great, on-demand service and don't bother to collect
anything? Maybe I'll invest that $35 in a new ANR headset to stimulate
the economy.

No, actually I returned home and filled up again at the private tank
with the $35 I didn't pay the FBO. Great for me!

Just as with excessive income taxes, there is a point of diminishing
returns. There somes a point where reducing tax rates actually results
in an overall increase in tax revenues because people start increasing
economic activities. I think some of these FBOs need a little dose of
supply side economic thinking.
It was BS then, it's BS now.

Steve S wrote:

I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the
only FBO small GA friendly

Oh. Well. I'm out of date again, then.

I thought a new school/FBO had opened there a couple of years ago ("Blue"
something?).

- Andrew

Maybe I look at it strangely?
When you pay to park your car in a parking lot is it on private
property? When you pay to park your plane is it on private property? My take
on it is, if it is being (car or plane) parked on public property funded by
taxpayers it has already been paid for.
Heck I hate toll roads! Now if a private company wants to build a road
and charge a toll , fine. When tax dollars pay for the construction it just
really gets my goat. I don't mind some sort of tax, but I hate being
"double" taxed . I just do not see taxes funding airports and then the
airport turning around charging someone a landing fee or what have you ,
when the Federal tax dollar supports the airport. If the airport wants to
charge for it's use, then it needs to be a private airport and not publicly
funded. IMHO, a 2 buck charge at a funded airport is 2 bucks to much .
Is it just me or does anyone else feel they are being ripped off when
airports do this? Seems to me they could do more biz by not having landing
and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their services
wouldn't they? I think the fees just add to the slow death of GA in an area.

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message

I wouldn't call a $35.00 landing/parking/handling fee by Signature the
only FBO small GA friendly
Is $35 really unfriendly in the NYC metro area? I haven't lived in the
area for almost 10 years but even then it cost over $20 to park a car for
the day in prime midtown spot. Why would it not cost the same or more to
park an aircraft?

Given the clear weather and the (odd) northeasterly wind, I travelled a bit
farther out of the Peconic than I normally would have. Got some shelter
around Southhold bay, about 8 nm from the marina. Total travel time, each
way, about 25 minutes. So, say about an hour of travel time, at about 15
gph. We spent about 6 hours on the water, and several more at the dock.

In article
outaviation.com,
"Skylune" wrote:

Given the clear weather and the (odd) northeasterly wind, I travelled a bit
farther out of the Peconic than I normally would have. Got some shelter
around Southhold bay, about 8 nm from the marina. Total travel time, each
way, about 25 minutes. So, say about an hour of travel time, at about 15
gph. We spent about 6 hours on the water, and several more at the dock.


I forgot to include boaters and their marinas and Coast Guard protection
to my list of "subsidies of recreational activities."

Get a clue, "Skylune," you hypocrite!

Orville: What percentage of boaters use Coast Guard Services vs.
percentage of flyers using FAA funded services (including the airports
themselves, controllers, etc.)? How much of an operating subsidy and
capital subsidy do private marinas receive?

Why does the AOPA cry about "privatization" and "user fees" while the Boat
US has no such issues?

By the way, your red plane is butt ugly.

W P Dixon wrote:
Maybe I look at it strangely?
When you pay to park your car in a parking lot is it on private
property?
I never know. It is being managed and presumably atleast leased by a
private operator. Go to a federal or state building and you park in a
pay parking lot.
When you pay to park your plane is it on private property? My
take on it is, if it is being (car or plane) parked on public property
funded by taxpayers it has already been paid for.
I feel that way about using the ATC system and operating in and out of
public airports. But every ramp I see (and want to park on) is
privately operated. I don't think it makes any difference who *owns*
it, the question is who *operates* it. That is, who puts the chains
out, chocks at night as required, provides security, who is liable?
Heck I hate toll roads! Now if a private company wants to build a
road and charge a toll , fine. When tax dollars pay for the construction
it just really gets my goat. I don't mind some sort of tax, but I hate
being "double" taxed . I just do not see taxes funding airports and then
the airport turning around charging someone a landing fee or what have
you , when the Federal tax dollar supports the airport. If the airport
wants to charge for it's use, then it needs to be a private airport and
not publicly funded. IMHO, a 2 buck charge at a funded airport is 2
bucks to much .
It's pretty obvious that roads *have* to be a public entity. It's a
regional and national interest and private ownership just won't work
(who would build the interstates? Or the PA turnpike? Major airports,
to a lesser extent, need to be public too. Otherwise they would all be
closed or closing. NIMBY applies, squared!
Is it just me or does anyone else feel they are being ripped off when
airports do this? Seems to me they could do more biz by not having
landing and parking fees. More pilots would stop there and use their
services wouldn't they?
No, I don't think so. If that were the case, someone would be running a
Walmart FBO chain and cleaning up. Who cleans up in the FBO business?
Who cleans up in the small piston FBO business. Let's see, "if I just
didn't have to pay $12 bucks to park overnight (with no fuel) I'd fly 20
more hours a year". I don't think so.
I think the fees just add to the slow death of
GA in an area.
Myself, I fly to get somewhere and land where I'm closest to my
destination. I pay the fees with a smile when asked. I appreciate each
and every airport I land at mainly because they are there. Good
services are even better. I rarely end up paying a government entity
directly though I'm sure taxes are collected from those private
operators operating on public land. The few airports where the local
gov actually operates the airport, things seem to get strange... but
that's ok too.

I don't like the idea of ATC user fees. I don't like state run
lotteries. But I like successful FBOs and usually end up 'ripping them
off' (burp) rather than feeling ripped off.