[Baradium]

Originally Posted by JEP

That user fee is for turbine a/c on an IFR flight plan. The FAA legislation you speak if is running on it's current extension which expires on June 20th. Those are both direct from Phil Boyer's mouth at last nights Pilot Town Meeting......MY highlights will come as I am typing them up as we speak.

Look at Canada, it started for "turbine a/c on IFR" and just went on from there. This is NOT a good thing.

They just slowly add it.

Originally Posted by meyers9163

In addition the airlines are already losing money... So lets hit them all with 25 a plane and see what else we can nail them with.... Let alone GA aircraft...... Honeslty I dont see a proplem with Corp jets perhaps.... But a small GA give me a break.....

See above. Uncle sam doesn't see a difference between the lear jet and the cessna 150. They'll differentiate at first to try to get the smaller a/c guys to throw larger ones under the bus, becuase then when they go to expand it the larger guys won't care. This is the same way companies use alter egos and the award system for regionals against unions to work at them undercutting the others to get ahead.

If everyone is focused on having just a "little" less than the competition, it's just an endless fight to see who can have the worst.

Originally Posted by PCL_128

Westmoreland is a scumbag. I'm ashamed to have him representing me. But he'll still get a letter from me in support of S1300. He'll also get a letter from me after he votes against it (as I'm sure he will) that tells him just what I think of him and his anti-labor BS.

That bill is a horrible bill for aviation and voting against it isn't anti-labor. You aren't a politician as far as I know, so let's not try to make things about something they aren't. People aren't automatically against you because they don't like that bill. There are plenty of reasons to vote against it even if you want to help the controllers.

I have a number of friends who are controllers and want to see them with better conditions, but that doesn't mean I'll support this bill.

Originally Posted by surreal1221

For one, I don't feel I'm shafting my previous employer. They are in the flight training segment and shouldn't have to pay the same as say the Business Aviation (I'll get to that shortly) sector, or the Airline sector. Just as I don't think they or small business owners who use their own aircraft (Think Alaska) for commerce should have to pay the same bill as Business Aviation or Airline sector users. Second, I stay on great terms with all of my previous employers, so don't worry about that.

That bill *will* shaft them. These fees have trickled down in every case they were implemented in and has decimated the flight training industry in the associated areas.

Just becuase you see flight training and "buisiness" as seperate doesn't mean uncle sam will. To the government they are all just "units" to be taxed.

So, how much experience do you have with the system in Alaska, since you chose to use it in your argument?



---------------------------------------------------------------------------


A per flight fee for IFR in any form is a very bad idea. General aviation has been doing bad enough with the current fuel prices, let's try not to kill it just for the percieved help to the airline industry. It's also a safety issue since it will encourage taking shortcuts to keep costs lower.



This bill won't help the airlines anyway. The problem really is only going to be fixed by either consolidation or loss of some airlines. It's unfortunate, but it's true. There is too much capacity, or at least percieved, with airlines not charging enough to cover costs. A little more help would just mean they'd still lose money trying harder to undercut everyone else.


I don't know if you all have paid attention to the policitians speaking against the DAL-NWA merger because "ticket prices might go up!"

Those are the people you should be writing letters to about the industry. The ticket prices are not sustainable at current levels and fuel prices. Taking action to keep them where they are will not help.


One way or another, the airlines need to become profitable on their own. This generally means ticket prices need to actually reflect costs. Until airlines start doing that, it's bad news for all of us working in the industry.