How do all of you feel about user fees for GA?

[The Hoffspatcher]

I did a little research based on the situation presented by AOPA of somebody cancelling IFR, encountering IMC and needing IFR and to land at an airport using ILS using services of the various fee based ATC systems:


NavCanada: Free IFR services but may have a landing fee, ARFF/RFFS included.  Guy at the FSS was most helpful eh. 

Airservices Australia:  Pay for filing, pay for IFR services, pay for approach AND pay for ARFF/RFFS!  They wanted to charge me for the call too

Airways New Zealand:  Free to file IFR flight plan online but you need to pay for the IFR services.  Couldn't garner any specifics about approach or landing fees.  Not a great bunch of call center people there, they only "kinda" knew what I was talking about.


I feel bad for you guys in Europe.  That system is just crazy, every flight plan I generate comes up with a ton of restrictions on why I have to generate another ten for the same route so I can get one with no restrictions, then there's the weather, curfew, holds etc, yuck!

I am against the idea of having to pay for IFR services if you NEED them - ie cancelling IFR and going VFR only to return to IMC.  If you WANT them, well, I WANT cable TV so I pay a cable bill so if I WANT to fly the ILS in VMC then you should pay.

I hate to sound like a villian but I liken it to paying for tolls on the bridges and tunnels when you want to drive upstate and see your Grandma. 

Airservices Australia charge (USD) between $2 and $17 for an instrument approach and landing depending on where you are.  You can also pay $60 a year (USD) for 8-50 flights in a "light aircraft" using "terminal navigation services"

[athaker]

Here's a recent article on CNN.com the other day that I read, and realized just now that its relevant here.  Has to do with subsidizing of small airports.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/04/16/ticket.taxes.ap/index.html





Good topic, btw

[Jason]

Here's a recent article on CNN.com the other day that I read, and realized just now that its relevant here.  Has to do with subsidizing of small airports.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/04/16/ticket.taxes.ap/index.html

Good topic, btw

That AP article has received a lot of criticism since it was first published (and rightfully so) due to the countless inaccuracies clearly inserted into the article.  Take a look at how AOPA and NBAA responded; I'm happy to see them respond appropriately.  Hopefully once the press realizes how different the story really is, they can start telling the truth.

[EivlEvo]

I just wanted to say that you guys are all my heroes.

I'll probably be using a bunch of these in class. Don't worry... I'll pass along the correct citations. (Not the jets though.... can't afford that hot action)

Looks like im not alone and THAT ROCKS!

~DAVE

[athaker]

nice jason.

thanks for posting the responses to the article.  I had heard about them but couldn't find the sources.

[w0x0f]

Private jets use Newark, delay commercial flights
Wednesday, April 18, 2007

By DAVID A. MICHAELS
STAFF WRITER


Teterboro Airport's flood-related closure has forced more private jets to land at Newark Liberty International Airport, causing delays for commercial passengers and upsetting the airport's largest carrier, officials said Tuesday.

Continental Airlines complained that its on-time arrival rate at Newark fell to 22 percent on Monday because of increased traffic from Teterboro, said Russ Halleran, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association at Newark Liberty. Teterboro has been closed since Monday because of flooding on its runways and taxiways.

"It is definitely affecting the arrivals into Newark," Halleran said. "They [Continental] were a little displeased with what happened yesterday [Monday], and it's apparently happening today [Tuesday]."

Julie King, a Continental spokeswoman in Houston, said the extra traffic at Newark is causing dealys.
 
"We know the ATC [air traffic control] is going the best job they can, yet the additional unscheduled demand that these corporate jets are putting on the system means more delays for the traveling public," she said.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I got that from the Bergen Record.  http://www.bergenrecord.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2MDgmZmdiZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTcxMTUxNzImeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXky

I wonder where the corporate jets would have to land if the airlines were running things?  Check out the comments by the COA rep.  She talks about the corporate jets like they are pests that you can smash with your foot.  The airlines can't deal with the current first come first serve policy of ATC.  They demand priority.  She doesn't realize that the corporate jets are carrying the "traveling public" too.  More than likely they are making major business decisions which effect our economy also.  Airlines and the current administration do not see the benefits of GA.

w0x0f

[EivlEvo]

With teh whole TEB issue the thing that fires me up the most is that whenever the airlines are late all they can do is talk about weather. Weather weather weather, and you know what its just cause. But now an airport that they rarely (if ever) use has to shut down for weather and Continental (I assume the company moreso than the pilots) decides that "thats there problem" and they should be afforded rights to land ahead of corporate jets. Its very displeasing to see the extreme lack of apparent professionalism demonstrated on part of that airline since we ALL know that if EWR had to shut down and they diverted to TEB or even JFK or LGA it would be totally justifiable.

The other issue regarding the GA user fees that i really wanted to get out is that I think its totally ridiculous for GA to have to have fees imposed on services simply because we're being charged for something that is more or less in place to keep us out of the airlines hair. I mean honestly if I have to start paying a user fee to get a weather briefing, Im going to be using the computer for free. If I have to pay for Air traffic control services, Im going to start renting Cessna 150's and flying at Vso on final into JFK to practice touch and gos. Because if they really want to play the game and say that we use the funding that they have to charge people more than they do, then goddamnit Im going to make it happen.

How often are we all listening on here and hear ANY GA traffic into a SOLID 70% of these airports. Now while I DO recognize that GA probably is getting a good portion of the funding that the airlines have to charge, I still don't see for a second how its proportional enough for them to say, "we want to cut the tax off of our tickets completely, and have every GA aircraft pay for this that and their moms"

Not to mention you know for a FACT that if they're charging a 10% tax and that fee gets removed completely the price is only going to go down by 7%.

GOD it makes me mad.

~DAVE