You may well be right. I do still believe that average people such as ourselves cans still make a difference if we stand together. But first we have to stand up against things that are just plain wrong. I still have hope that the American people can pull together when the need arrises.Originally Posted by Mayhemxpc
Most events such as the Masters, NASCAR, etc. do pay for their additional ATC services, but for good reason: unlike aviation events, their additional ATC resources are there primarily due to the increase in IFR traffic, not overall volume. The VFR traffic generated by such events is quite manageable, but there would be fairly lengthy IFR delays if only the "normal" ATC system were in place. IOW, with those events, it's not about safety, it's about efficiency-- and NASCAR, the PGA, etc., are more than willing to pay whatever the cost might be to get the corporate jets and turboprops in and out with the least possible delay.
OTOH, in the case of Airventure and other fly-ins, sheer volume is driving the equation, and safety is the primary issue. Given decent weather, the airplanes are going to be there, they can't be flow controlled in the manner that IFR traffic can.
You can hold an event like the Masters without additional ATC services and the only consequence will be inconvenience. The same can't be said for fly-ins-- the additional volume would quickly overwhelm even the best of controllers, so additional personnel and special procedures are implemented to prevent that. Since safety is supposed to be the primary mission of the FAA, they shouldn't be charging extra to provide what is, for the duration of the Fly-In, the minimum acceptable resources that will fulfill that mission.
Hal - another question for Jack and the webcast.
"Will the Administrator come and have a Meet the Administrator session?"
Both Organizations need to work together for the health of GA.
I'd happy to give Mr. Huerta the right seat, I have to fly right past DC enroute OSH.
I don't think any of the last few federal budget proposals favored corporate aviation... just the opposite.
The EAA just sold out it's members by accepting the FAA extortion.
Now EAA has set the precedent that User Fees are okay.
I'm sorry I just renewed my membership.
I think you will have an answer to what the membership thinks a year from now when membership dives.
Well, I've been a member for quite a while. I never bothered with the forums, but this event has spurred me to bring my perspective in, not that it's anything special. To steal blatantly from the movies, I think it's important to fight the fights that need fighting, and not just the ones you think you can win. This power and money grab by 'crats from the fed, without mandate is one of the central themes of what's going wrong with the country.
We are becoming far too much like the plutocracies of old Europe, with the minions running the people's lives in the most direct way for the benefit of the ruling classes. Something Alexis de Tocqueville warned of, and here we see it in our own time. We left the ruling class of Europe hundreds of years ago because we thought that republicanism was the better way. Repression of liberty can be carried out in many ways, and fiscal hegemony has to be one of the basest methods of all.
I'm sad that the management of EAA, which has had it's own turmoil recently chose to put the short-sighted benefits of taking from their members at the longer term cost of promoting experimental aviation, and GA. This exorbitant cost will not be paid for by lower income from the staff of EAA, or by the general public, or by some wealthy benefactor, it will be paid for by you, and I, and all future aviation generations. The effects will be serious -- the probable loss of two more planes being built or designed because it just became too expensive to complete. The loss of a new instrument, or radio sale because the cost of this added fee is being tacked on to the final price. The losses are hard to quantify, but they are real, and they will have a negative effect on experimental aviation as a whole.
Finally, there are things that are wrong in a civil society when the 'crats start running things. Make no mistake, this is completely about subjugation and control. It's exercise could have come from a federal mandate not to fly, or it could have come disguised as a financial burden, with the same ultimate goal. Well, I won't be a part of it. I'm not interested in experimental aviation on their terms any more. This is my last year supporting EAA. I've been absent in AOPA since 2009 after more than 30 years of membership, but if membership means grovelling for the scraps of federal support or federal authority then I don't want to be a part of that. The EAA had a chance to go down fighting, and stand by the principles that made aviation great when I was a kid, but they chose poorly, and I say they choose cravenly in an effort to protect their own selfish interests. No thank you, and good bye. When my membership expires, I will mourn the eventual loss of EAA.
Docmirror,
I don't agree with your sentiments or your conclusion, but I send kudos to you for well thought out and very well expressed comments with historical perspective.
This is NOT about "subjugation and control"-that's a hysterical and paranoid response. It's just about Money and how budget reduced government depts. need to make up deficits with new revenue streams in order to operate in a post budget reduced reality.
As Dylan said, "The times they are a changin'."
OK; how come no one has told us how to fix things? If y'all are so rushing for the exit doors over this FAA scam, I guess it's obvious that everyone believes there is no solution.
All I've read so far has been vitriol directed at EAA management followed by threats and actions to drop your EAA membership.
So what happens? Who's going to step up to even wave a white flag if both organizations are defunct because folks don't like what they do? I've been an AOPA member since 1979 and an EAA member since 2005. I used to donate additional monies to AOPA until they started with the wine sales, etc. But I'm still a member. I donate regularly to the EAA throughout the year because I believe in the overall mission. I will continue my membership and additional donations because this is basically the only game in town.
Folks, if no one is there to provide some support for us, you might as well sell all your planes now. As, if you say, this FAA action is going to open the doors for the death of aviation, then I'd better sell mine now. Remember - first sellers get the highest price! If we all sell our planes, or junk 'em, or whatever, that will effectively send the message to FAA that we mean business! No air traffic, no need for the thousands of airports spread across America. We could probably do with 30 or so major airports. Think of all the FAA controllers and beauracracy that will go down the drain. No staff needed to develop approaches for all those out of the way fields. Probably won't be that great a need for radar, either. With all those "little planes" out of the way, the Big Sky concept should work. And, just to make sure I'm clear, yes, that was sarcasm.
I will remain an EAA, and AOPA member. I don't like that they "folded" (your words), but we need someone there to do *something* for us. Do y'all join just for the advocacy? I didn't - I joined for the people, the local Chapters, the education, and on and on.
If you want to puhish EAA, then by all means come up with a better idea and/or association. I'm sure we'll all join just to be able to stick it to the FAA.
Cancel Oshkosh? C'mon, now, be realistic. Do we really think that the big sponsors will sue the FAA over that? No, the contracts are with EAA. They'll follow the money, since they are in the business of making it. Think of the smaller to mid-sized vendors that will be shut-down. Oshkosh is their Christmas "Black Friday" week. Some of these companies survive only BECAUSE of Oshkosh sales. Yeah, I could survive a year without attending Convention, but doing so would create a horrific cost to the industry in general.
EAA, be more aggressive in solving this issue. Go with the independent contractors if you must. Come up with a workable plan to get buy-in from more members of Congress. We've got to solve it. But I'll still be here for you.
Independent ATC contractors have been suggested by many, and some have even mentioned a specific company that does this. It sounds easy, but I wonder how much EAA's insurance for the event would increase if the FAA, which I guess is basically self-insured, wasn't doing ATC. Does anybody have any idea?
Reply With Quote
