A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Avgas in France has reached $7.50/gal !



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #331  
Old April 22nd 05, 10:19 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

George Patterson wrote:
Morgans wrote:


I wonder how many others feel the same way.



Not I. My tablesaw and a few of my other tools were made in China. I
read one review that stated they found the table surface on the Chinese
brand of saw to be flatter than any other brand (including Delta).

When the Chinese feel it's important to do so, they produce an excellent
quality product.


Where are Delta table saws made these days? I know that all of the
small drill presses are now made off-shore and it wouldn't surprise me
if this is true of table saws as well.


Matt
  #332  
Old April 22nd 05, 10:21 PM
Dave Stadt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
George Patterson wrote:
Morgans wrote:


I wonder how many others feel the same way.



Not I. My tablesaw and a few of my other tools were made in China. I
read one review that stated they found the table surface on the Chinese
brand of saw to be flatter than any other brand (including Delta).

When the Chinese feel it's important to do so, they produce an excellent
quality product.


Where are Delta table saws made these days? I know that all of the
small drill presses are now made off-shore and it wouldn't surprise me
if this is true of table saws as well.


Matt


Bottom end Delta stuff is made in China.


  #333  
Old April 22nd 05, 11:02 PM
Morgans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Newps" wrote

Ahem...120,000 is not now and never will be a "metro area".


Think again. In Iowa, and other Midwest and plains states, that is a
downright huge metro area. Such as are the wide open spaces in the US.
--
Jim in NC

  #334  
Old April 22nd 05, 11:09 PM
Morgans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dylan Smith" wrote

I also observed when I was living in the US, soccer tended to be a
girl's game -


It is slowly changing.

One problem, at least in NC, is that the boy's soccer season is at the same
time as football. The most athletic boys go for the glamour of football
(the one with the funny shaped ball that doesn't bounce right), and the
smaller, speedy types go for soccer.
--
Jim in NC

  #335  
Old April 22nd 05, 11:25 PM
Morgans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Morgans wrote:
Good Lord help us all! I suppose they will be made with China steel.

That
is the softest, inconsistent crap have ever seen, let alone all the

other
made in China crap.


Unlikely - Diamond's planes are made of plastic!


I know you are kidding, but I am sure there are some VERY important steel
parts in the "plastic" airplane, too. ;-)
--
Jim in NC

  #336  
Old April 23rd 05, 01:11 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Newps" wrote in message
...


Martin Hotze wrote:



the good thing is that I drive a car needing about 6 liters per 100
kilometers (the other car is a diesel needing about 4 to 5 liters per

100
kilometers). So I do care driving a fuelefficient car, because it saves

me
money.


Somebody run the numbers. What is that in miles per gallon? Just
wanted to compare that to my F250 Diesel.


About 40MPG and 50MPG for the diesel.

Such a car would likely be "useful" out in the west where distances are
measured in three or even four digits and those are MILES not klicks.

But Martin is such a good little milch cow!! He'll do as ordered!



  #337  
Old April 23rd 05, 04:53 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72...

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the

way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our
legislatures didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things

that
have nothing to do with aviation.)

--
Jay Honeck



Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service

stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would

be
$7.80...or more...


Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages?


The passenger and fuel taxes are all mixed together. I used avgas tax and
FSS because almost all the FSS users are flying piston engine airplanes.
There really aren't any other fees that don't go to the airport owner.

Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air
transport system at all levels?

If you consider that most of the system exists for the airlines, with GA as
an incremental user then the airlines are getting a pretty good deal. If
you divide the cost among all users by the number of flights then GA is
getting a good deal. People try to parse the facts to support their
position. Another way to look at it is that GA pilots and companies with
business aircraft pay income taxes and most airlines do not. The airlines
would counter that they pay wages and their employees pay taxes. It goes on
forever. One thing is clear though; piston GA is not paying its way through
fuel taxes as many believe. If the airplane burns 10GPH and flys 100hrs/yr
the fuel tax is only about $200/yr which doesn't cover much of anything.

Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road
trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state
highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage.

I recall a statistic that one max weight semi truck caused as much damage as
2300cars over the same road. This implies that trucking is indeed
subsidized. The railroads have to maintain their own tracks. The system
doesn't change because there are more truckers than railroads.

When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and
technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our
own
way (like good, mature adults).

Yes I would support an IFR system like in the UK. You fly without radar
separation below certain altitudes and you don't have to talk to ATC. AFAIK
there has never been a collision.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO





  #338  
Old April 23rd 05, 05:04 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:8C5ae.8520$r53.7576@attbi_s21...
- The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90%
of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or
resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth).


That's because the Feds have decided that maintaining an aviation
infrastructure is in the interest of the country, and they understand that
a local government entity is too small to pay the entire bill. Thus,
they spread the cost over many users, rather than over just the few in
(for example) Iowa City, Iowa.

Now I suppose that premise is open to debate, too -- but that's the
concept at the heart of the Federal subsidy. In that regard, runways are
no different than freeways. We all pay for them -- and we all get to use
them, if we choose.
--
Jay Honeck


No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for
all the roads and the taxes on aviation do not come close to paying for
airports. Most of the 90% is coming from non-aviation sources. Aviation is
heavily subsidized but so is everybody with an AGI under something between
$100K and $200K/yr which is most taxpayers. Same thing with SS, recipients
are getting way more in benefits than they paid in.

Ask your local FBO's how much fuel they sell and what the taxes are and
compare it to the airport budget then estimate the number of flights, figure
$10 per weather briefing and see how the numbers come out.

Mike
MU-2


  #339  
Old April 23rd 05, 05:20 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote:

It isn't important whether anybody likes it or not, what is important is
realize that it is inevitable and change what and how we do things so we
do
not compete where we are at a major disadvantage.


So what is your (US) or our (Europe) advantage? High costs for labor and
energy, higher transportation costs, more restrictions and laws, lack of
people willing to work really hard, etc. etc ...

#m
--
http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg


Lots of intellectual property, extensive infrastructure, stable political
system, lots of capital and educated people. Every country has about the
same energy costs. The US and Europe are well positioned to compete in many
industries.

Part of what looks like a trade disaster with China is an error in the way
we look at it. We may import a billion dollars worth of low margin rebar
that China made a 5% profit on but we may provide them with $100 million
worth of investment banking services that have a profit margin of 80%. It
looks like a balance of payments disaster but the trade actually worked to
our advantage. Yes, it looks like they got more dollars but they had to use
them to produce the rebar. There will be a major change in economic theory
soon because the current theories can't explain why high cost regions can
produce (and sell) anything at all. The new theory will look at trade
profitability instead of trade revenue.

Mike
MU-2



  #340  
Old April 23rd 05, 05:21 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
news
Given that only a small percentage of Chineese are participating in their
"new" economy, it will be a long time before this happens. Remember that
Japan's economy stalled after they became (and remain) the richest

developed
nation on a per capita basis.


Even after their economy puked, what, 2/3rds of it's value?
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO



How are you arriving at that?

Mike
MU-2


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Soaring near Paris, France (Not Texas :-) [email protected] Soaring 17 November 13th 04 07:39 PM
News from France HECTOP Piloting 12 April 1st 04 01:16 AM
Russia joins France and Germany captain! Military Aviation 12 September 9th 03 09:56 AM
France Bans the Term 'E-Mail' bsh Military Aviation 38 July 26th 03 03:18 PM
"France downplays jet swap with Russia" Mike Military Aviation 8 July 21st 03 05:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.