GA paying fair (fare?) share

Dude wrote:
: Having seen the recent diatribes from airline executives, I feel like I
: could just about throw up.

: Don't these idiots realize that if it was not for their "all important"
: fleets of precious cargo we could slash ATC by 90 plus percent?

It was my understanding that the diatribe from NWA had to do with fees
for use of the AIRPORT, not with the use of ATC services. Have the other
airlines' execs added ATC services to the list of things that they can't
pay for anymore?

It seems to me that when the airlines stop pricing their product below what
it costs to produce they'll be in better financial shape.
--
Aaron Coolidge

With the amount of government cash gifts given to the airlines to keep them
afloat, I fail to see where they have any room to complain. The government
cash handouts far exceed any financial burdens, real or imagined, that the GA
community has placed on the airlines.


--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759

You apparently think you know everything, and are being argumentative and
obtuse. I am not getting anything from this anymore, and I am done. I will
talk to the guys at the FSDO, and maybe I will learn something there.



"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Dude" wrote in message
...

Every pilots' number one responsibility is safety.


That's swell, but it doesn't answer my question.



Approach: Lear 1234 VFR traffic your 12 o'clock same altitude,
same heading, 5 miles, do you see them?

Lear: No Visual

Approach: Lear 1234 - Immediate right turn to 090.

Lear: ???????

You propose to ignore this warning?


What do mean by "this warning"? The traffic advisory or the improper ATC
instruction? The traffic is five miles away and moving in the same
direction, there's certainly no imminent threat.



Even if he is trying, he may not see it, its going 350 knots straight at
him, maybe from behind.


So what prevents the Lear from spotting the traffic?



I would not make that bet. The IFR traffic has been told to change
course
by ATC to avoid a possible mid air. The VFR pilot could be flying
perfectly
legally.


What bet? Does IFR traffic have a greater responsibility than VFR traffic
to see and avoid other traffic? Why do you have the controller issuing
improper instructions in your scenario?



Yes, even outside the class B, I have been assigned altitude and vectors
by
ATC to avoid VFR and IFR traffic. I once had a VFR plane coming right
at
me, and the controller's voice had enough fear in it that you would have
thought he was in the plane with me. He did not vector me around it, I
told
him I was changing course, but I have had my altitude and vector changed
to
avoid possible conflicts.


ATC can issue headings and altitudes to VFR aircraft in Class B and Class
C
airspace, in the outer area associated with Class C airspace, and in a
TRSA.
Nowhere else.



On what do you make this assumption?


From your statements.



I will be at the FSDO tomorrow, should
I as them a question for you?


I have no questions on this subject.

Apparently, the latest guy brought up a statistic about how many ATC
functions are performed for GA vs. the scheduled carriers.

If NW is PO'd about their airport costs, they should remember how easy they
got off when MN finally caught them a few years back. They had locked up
all the gates, and many of the routes in and out of the Twin cities which
only they flew had HUGE prices. I bet this led to more GA competition, and
they are now suffering for it.

"Aaron Coolidge" wrote in message
...
Dude wrote:
: Having seen the recent diatribes from airline executives, I feel like I
: could just about throw up.

: Don't these idiots realize that if it was not for their "all important"
: fleets of precious cargo we could slash ATC by 90 plus percent?

It was my understanding that the diatribe from NWA had to do with fees
for use of the AIRPORT, not with the use of ATC services. Have the other
airlines' execs added ATC services to the list of things that they can't
pay for anymore?

It seems to me that when the airlines stop pricing their product below
what
it costs to produce they'll be in better financial shape.
--
Aaron Coolidge

Rip ) wrote:

Primarily the northeast. I've rarely had any luck getting clearance for
GPS direct anywhere around the New York, Washington, or Philly class
B's. It happens (Philly seems to be more accomodating), but not often.

Are you the same poster as CriticalMass?

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Dude" wrote in message
...
You apparently think you know everything, and are being argumentative and
obtuse.


Obtuse is the exact word I was thinking of when reading Steven's posts. I
don't believe he was always this way, it just started with the Rutan space
thread. Perhaps he should get in for a thorough check-up?

Allen

Dude wrote:
: Apparently, the latest guy brought up a statistic about how many ATC
: functions are performed for GA vs. the scheduled carriers.

Since the airlines don't really pay for ATC services (neither does GA), this
little statistic should be treated as the worthless tidbit that it is.
The fuel tax assists in paying for ATC. The remainder of the money come from
the government's budget. This is not as unfair as some are making it out
to be. Every person in the US benefits from the ATC system, even if they
never fly! If you (1) eat food, (2) wear clothes or (3) have a job your
life has been improved by ATC.
--
Aaron Coolidge

"Dude" wrote in message
...

You apparently think you know everything, and are being argumentative
and obtuse.


No, I don't know everything, but I do know everything about the subject
we're discussing.



I am not getting anything from this anymore, and I am done.


I don't think you've tried to get anything from this.



I will talk to the guys at the FSDO, and maybe I will learn something
there.


What will you ask the guys at FSDO?

"Allen" wrote in message
m...

Obtuse is the exact word I was thinking of when reading Steven's posts.


In what way do you think I've been obtuse.



I don't believe he was always this way, it just started with the Rutan
space
thread.


If you check the statements I made in that thread you will find them all to
be correct.

Aaron Coolidge ) wrote:

Every person in the US benefits from the ATC system, even if they
never fly! If you (1) eat food, (2) wear clothes or (3) have a job your
life has been improved by ATC.

Not to mention the improvement in safety to those on the ground. Imagine
how many more ground-based deaths there might be without an ATC system
controlling the aircraft above their heads.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---