Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- From: Owen <owen@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:27:21 -0400
Steve Foley wrote:
"jbskies" <jbskies@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1156777044.877283.282740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FAA wants GA users pay additional user fees that to match the airline
users. I don't think that's justified. Read the following paragraphs
regarding to recent ConAir CRJ crash quoted from ABC News:
--------------------
Although Blue Grass Airport's main runway is 7,000 feet, for some
reason the plane departed Sunday from the 3,500-foot general aviation
runway. The twin-engine CRJ-100 would have needed 5,000 feet to fully
get off the ground, aviation experts said.
There also were clues for the pilot: Signs marking the right way. Less
lighting. And severely cracked concrete not the type of surface
typically found on runways for commercial routes.
... the main runway, which had been repaved last week.
-------------------- from
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2364735
GA airplanes use "severely cracked and less lid" runways comparing to
the commercial jets use the brand new runway that just paved last week.
And now FAA want GA to pay additional fee to match the commercial
users? No way.
I agree 100%.
The airlines claim is costs as much for ATC to handle my Cherokee as it does
for them to handle a 747.
Why is ATC there to begin with? Class B around Boston (a big, commercial/air
carrier airport). Class C around Bradley, Manchester and Providence (all
big, commercial/air carrier airports). It there were no airlines, we
wouldn't need ATC in New England.
Huh? If there were no airlines, Hanscom wouldn't need a tower? I think you
might be smoking funny stuff. Or Lawrence, Quonsett, Barnes, Portsmouth,
Westover, Norwood, Hartford, Bridgeport, Nashua, etc. You're saying that those
New England airports need towers because they of airlines???
Keene, NH has an ILS, so, obviously, ATC is not NEEDED when you've got an
ILS.
Lots of airports have ILS and no tower. So? Nobody said one created the need
for another.
Take a look at the "Big Dig" in Boston. What business benefits from easy
access to a big, commercial/air carrier airport?
Let's see what the FAA would spend if they stopped spending on airports. How
much of this spending benefits GA?
How much of FAA Revenues come from GA? I believe the vast majority of revenues
come from the airline fees and ticket taxes/waybill taxes and GA revenue (the
excise tax) represents a pittance of the total revenue.
Looking at the spending by the FAA at my local airport (Worcester, MA -
KORH):
New Passenger Terminal
New Control Tower (they put the terminal between the old tower and the
approach end of the runway)
Resurface the crosswind (5000') runway
None of these expenses benefited GA in any way, shape or form.
Who did they benefit? I believe the latest 121 carrier to try Worcester is
pulling out real soon.
I believe the runway is pavement is eight feet thick. I don't need eight
feet thick. I've landed on 0 feet thick (grass).
I can't even approach the new terminal. There's a yellow line painted around
it that I cannot cross.
Don't feel bad. Nobody else is approaching it either, by car, foot, etc.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- From: Morgans
- Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- References:
- Unjustified GA User Fee
- From: jbskies
- Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- From: Steve Foley
- Unjustified GA User Fee
- Prev by Date: Re: CRJ crash at KLEX:
- Next by Date: Re: Part 121 Regulations Question
- Previous by thread: Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- Next by thread: Re: Unjustified GA User Fee
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
