USER FEES

170C · Post by **170C** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 4:26 pm

Folks, I normally try to stay clear of most political issues because as one individual I am not sure my opinion makes our government representatives much difference. However I am sure most of you have been reading in the vrs aviation publications and elsewhere about the strong push the airline industry is making to push some of the costs of operating in our airspace to anyone else, especially general avaition---------THAT'S US GUYS & GALS!! I can't blame the airlines for trying this manuver, but I sure hate to see an industry that can't seem to manage their own business trying to push their problems off to us. This isn't meant as a slam against the employees of these airlines because most of them are good, hard working individuals just doing a job like the rest of us (many are private pilots too), but unfortunately a lot of the upper management with their huge salaries aren't doing their jobs. I will defer the details to those more articulate, but it sure seems now is the time for all of us individually and as a group to let our representatives know that we VERY MUCH OPPOSE THESE USER FEES. Maybe someone can come up with a form letter that we individually can use to make an impact on these folks decisions. High fuel costs are already taking their toll on the amount of pleasure flying many of us do and as they continue to rise I can see even more of a reduction in general aviation flying. Add to that user fees for everything we now pay for with our taxes and it could be a death blow to our type of flying.

Just my personal opinion.

iowa · Post by **iowa** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:19 pm

could s.o. list the
USER FEES
that the gov would
like to have us pay?
thanks
dave

Post by **Bruce Fenstermacher** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:26 pm

Dave I'm not sure there is a list but pretty sure it would include calling for a wx briefing, filing a flight plan, or simply flying into airspace and receiving ATC instructions.

Won't effect you cause you won't do any of those things? Not till they don't collect enough money and figure out a way to restrict your wheels from leaving the ground without paying the piper.

We need to stop it NOW.

Bill Hart · Post by **Bill Hart** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 5:14 pm

We need to stop it NOW.

I agree with you Bruce. The times that I have contacted my representatives it always amazes me that they normally write back and have found that the most positive responses have been when I crafted my own letters with my personal concerns. I think that if someone takes the time to write their own letter voicing their concerns it has a much greater impact than a just adding your name to a form letter. Now it would be good if someone crafted a letter outlining just what the user fees are going to look like and what the impact of those fees would be. Then everybody could take that information and put in an individual letter to their representatives also adding that we do belong to the TIC170 thus showing we are a large group of people opposed to the user fees.

4583C · Post by **4583C** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:22 pm

AOPA has been making noise about the user fee issue for a while now. Even if your not a member you can go to http://www.aopa.org and find their comments on the problem.

N2865C · Post by **N2865C** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 8:16 pm

N9149A wrote:Not till they don't collect enough money and figure out a way to restrict your wheels from leaving the ground without paying the piper.

If you check your aircraft registration on line it is interesting to note that we have all been assigned a mode S code (it's been there for years). It wouldn't be that hard to do. Require mode S transponders and have a computer send you a bill

.

iowa · Post by **iowa** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:58 pm

thanks for enlighting me guys!
you probably wonder how i
can be so profoundly ignorant
about certain things.
but i fly for fun.
dave

15A · Post by **15A** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:08 am

The way I see it, if the tanker trucks, Fed-Ex, UPS, USPS, corporate business's, ect.., can conduct their business on all the available roadways, why should General Aviation be penalized and pay for airspace and affiliates just to bring the cost down for the corporations that make money using them??? Isn't that simply the cost of doing business? If they're not making enough money, shouldn't they just charge more??? They're problems ARE NOT our problems!!!
But, that's just my opinion.

Post by **Bruce Fenstermacher** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:59 am

15A wrote:The way I see it, if the tanker trucks, Fed-Ex, UPS, USPS, corporate business's, ect.., can conduct their business on all the available roadways, why should General Aviation be penalized and pay for airspace and affiliates just to bring the cost down for the corporations that make money using them??? Isn't that simply the cost of doing business? If they're not making enough money, shouldn't they just charge more??? They're problems ARE NOT our problems!!!
But, that's just my opinion.

Joe I agree with you but unfortunately the airlines have the money and lobbyist in front of politicians who will make laws that there friends the airlines want.

One of just a few reasons I'm a member of the AOPA. I don't agree with all things AOPA does but I'm sure they are one reason we can still fly at all after 911 and a big reason we aren't paying user fees right now.

Post by **GAHorn** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:03 am

Joe, the airlines/freight-haulers are not concerned about this in the way you suspect. What they are concerned about is their competition for airspace. If they are flying into Boston and have to slow down behind you or me or a biz-jet.... or if they have to wait a few mintues while you or I clear out of the way in our little slow airplanes on an IFR day... then they figure they can get us out of the way if they make it expensive for us to file IFR or operate out of the same fields as they.
Additionally/secondarily they see Flight Service Stations as an airspace system expense they don't utilize, therefore they'd like to see it privatized (which has just happened this last year), and the next step will be to see that it is funded only by it's users....you and me...not them. Control Towers, landing fees, and other services are next. This will encourage you and I to stay away from the airports they use most (they very happily forgetting who those airports were originally built by and for and with whose money.)
Privatization is a big carrot to big business. There's one political party that favors big business and privatization of gov't services. The other is not so inclined.
AOPA has just announced that they expect user fees to get delayed since this last election gave the other party control of both houses of gov't and we have a true system of checks-and-balances again (instead of one party having control of all branches of gov't.)

I also expect to get burned at the stake for pointing this out.

While I do not agree with AOPA on all issues, and while I frequently am appalled at Phil Boyer's self-promotion and self-interests ... (he IS a publisher and he IS the one who most benefits by large AOPA membership roles and he IS the person who therefore is empowered by those numbers).... AOPA is an organization that has many benefits that offset it's fewer drawbacks. Mr. Boyer at least does have parallel interests in most of the same ways as we do, and AOPA does give us a larger voice than we might have as individuals (as long as it's officers actually speak the same concerns as we have. I am less impressed by AOPA's commercial and political alignments.)
AOPA also has an insurance program available for pilots that offer legal assistance in case we make a boo-boo. As an ATP and professional pilot, I join primarily for that insurance policy which is available at a small additional fee to regular membership, and which would be prohibitively expensive otherwise. I recommend all pilots join, if for no other reason than that.

Tom Downey · Post by **Tom Downey** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:15 pm

It will surprise me if the cost of items they will charge you for won't be available until the user fees are law.

voorheesh · Post by **voorheesh** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:55 pm

AOPA also has excellent safety articles in their magazine like Engine Failure on Takeoff- You've got to PUSH November issue.

voorheesh · Post by **voorheesh** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:57 pm

Sorry, This thread is about user fees. Don't we already pay in avgas taxes?

thammer · Post by **thammer** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:46 am

15A wrote:The way I see it, if the tanker trucks, Fed-Ex, UPS, USPS, corporate business's, ect.., can conduct their business on all the available roadways, why should General Aviation be penalized and pay for airspace and affiliates just to bring the cost down for the corporations that make money using them??? Isn't that simply the cost of doing business? If they're not making enough money, shouldn't they just charge more??? They're problems ARE NOT our problems!!!
But, that's just my opinion.

Don't all the tanker trucks and commercial vehicles all pay an extra road tax to each state based on how many miles they drive in the state?

They're looking to do the same thing to us. Now that the socialists are in majority it's gonna get worse.

Mike Smith · Post by **Mike Smith** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:17 am

thammer,
I think you're wrong on this issue. The Republicans are more inclined to promote the user fees for IFR & ATC use. This is an issue that pits the large corporations against the little guy ... and, as mentioned above, the Republicans typically favor the corporations/big business when you are talking national issues.

You gotta know who to fight before you go in shooting.

The International Cessna^® 170 Association

USER FEES

USER FEES

User Fees