Airventure -- New Home

I am going to stay out of this thread. I have nothing to contribute. You are welcome.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Why is everyone being so obtuse? We all know what we are up against with Oshkosh this year -- and probably all future years. The FAA is going to kill Airventure as we know it with user's fees, and it behooves us all to try to think of positive, workable solutions.[/url]
Click to expand...

Insurance, or the lack thereof, would prohibit going to uncontrolled airspace. There are enough dicey situations *with* ATC help. It would be chaos without it.

Besides, for the cost of duplicating all of the infrastructure, you can pay decades of user fees...

There is no better location than the current one.
 
So what's going to be different the next 10 years than the past 40 years when the same predictions have been a staple of school discussions.

weirdjim said:
I think you will find that in a decade school summer vacation will be a thing of the past. Remember, summer vacation started so that the kids could help with the harvest at home. That is an anachronism WELL past its prime.

Schools can't afford to let the facilities sit idle for 25% or more of the year. That's just a fact those of us in education are facing. There are dozens of models out there trying to solve that problem. Lots of them are focusing on the fact that winter (short days meaning kids walk home in the dark, snow days, lousy weather for transportation) might be a viable alternative. Trimester where the kids get to choose which two out of three "semesters" to attend are one solution, as are "shifts" (early morning, afternoon, evening). The academic world is changing faces and that needs to be factored in.

It all depends on whether you are trying to solve the "Oshkosh" question for a decade or a century. That's another parameter to consider.

Jim
Click to expand...
 
Lincoln, Nebraska. Tons of space, decent temps, and basically the middle of the US.
 
DavidWhite said:
Lincoln, Nebraska. Tons of space, decent temps, and basically the middle of the US.
Click to expand...

And still a controlled airport. I know what the basis behind this thread was. Someplace big enough, large enough, and class G at the surface. The point was to get the FAA uninvolved.
 
weirdjim said:
I did chill out. I said please and thanks -- that's playing pattycake in the sandbox. You want me to play horse's ass, I can do that too.

The engineer in me wants one, JUST ONE, of these threads to get something worth our time done. JUST ONE.

"Thanks"

Jim
Click to expand...
Per your own advice,please stay on topic.
 
EdFred said:
And still a controlled airport. I know what the basis behind this thread was. Someplace big enough, large enough, and class G at the surface. The point was to get the FAA uninvolved.
Click to expand...

I fear that without a control tower it would be a ****show of the highest order.
 
DavidWhite said:
I fear that without a control tower it would be a ****show of the highest order.
Click to expand...

Private tower, funded by admission fees? The problem is, the only places I can think of off the top of my head that are central US and large enough still have control towers.
 
So the plan is that everybody will turn off their transponders to keep the location a secret? Maybe call it Stealth-kosh?;)

EdFred said:
And still a controlled airport. I know what the basis behind this thread was. Someplace big enough, large enough, and class G at the surface. The point was to get the FAA uninvolved.
Click to expand...
 
What if everyone showed up at Oshkosh this year and refused to pay the fee?
 
Anyone watching the NASCAR race? 5 cautions so far. Crazy
 
The FAA is quite familiar with the penurious tendencies of pilots. They will most likely require payment in advance.
DavidWhite said:
What if everyone showed up at Oshkosh this year and refused to pay the fee?
Click to expand...
 
It also needs tons of space or the friendliness of the local government to be able to condemn all the abutting properties like Winnebago County was willing to do for the EAA.
 
ClimbnSink said:
CA is out, if you think thefaa is into extortion try and throw the party in CA. It has to be a hick state lest the permit mongers kill you. The EAA should play the FAAs game, cancel it for a year, let all the folks that lose money and fun get ****y with whatever is left of our representative govt. That'll work. Unless we are fully evolved and the b'crat branch of govt has no check. If that is the case it is all done anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, there is KBXM(my photo accompanies), Brunswick, ME. Home for many years of the Great State of Maine Air Show(cancelled this year because of sequestration - no Blue Angels or AF Thunderbirds available for the big drawer).
While it was the Naval Air Station there was once a national convention of motor homes owners/travelers. There were 8000 motor homes arranged/parked along the 8000'(coincidental) runway during the several day event. As a municipal/public airport the tower is no longer used; however, its facility is still there. One of the 8000' runways is not in use, would accord space for camping/parking, perhaps. There are plentiful hotels here and in surrounding communities. Maine's largest hotel(of record) is on the property, having been built by the Navy in 2005, but is now owned by a private developer who is reassigning its potential uses.
- - - just a thought.
Photo 2 shows the referenced hotel and a small portion of former Navy Housing of which 700+ units all around town are now owned by the new owner of the hotel.

HR
 

Attachments

  • DSC01883 (1).JPG
    10.8 MB · Views: 13
  • DSC00805 (3).JPG
    20.2 MB · Views: 13
Last edited:
Near Lebanon, Kansas - because it is close to the geographic center of the contiguous United States; or
near Belle Fourche, South Dakota - because it is close to the geographic center of the United States with Alaska and Hawaii included:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_center_of_the_United_States

Near Plato, Missouri - because it is close to the mean center of the United States population:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_United_States_population

In Pike County, Indiana - because it contains the median center of the United States population:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_center_of_United_States_population

Somewhere in the northern part of South Asia (maybe Afghanistan(!)) because that is where the center of population of the world appears to be located:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_population

Or on Easter Island, because that is nearest the antipodal point of the center of world population and therefore far from meddling government officials.
 
Malden, Missouri. KMAW. Aside from the open runways, there are several closed runways that could perhaps be reopened.
 
Wherever you move it, the FAA would look at the chaos for a year and institute a temporary tower the following year.
 
It would never happen for a number of reasons. Move on folks, nothing to see here.

weilke said:
Wherever you move it, the FAA would look at the chaos for a year and institute a temporary tower the following year.
Click to expand...
 
Jim Logajan said:
Near Lebanon, Kansas - because it is close to the geographic center of the contiguous United States; or
near Belle Fourche, South Dakota - because it is close to the geographic center of the United States with Alaska and Hawaii included:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_center_of_the_United_States

Near Plato, Missouri - because it is close to the mean center of the United States population:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_United_States_population

In Pike County, Indiana - because it contains the median center of the United States population:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_center_of_United_States_population

Somewhere in the northern part of South Asia (maybe Afghanistan(!)) because that is where the center of population of the world appears to be located:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_population

Or on Easter Island, because that is nearest the antipodal point of the center of world population and therefore far from meddling government officials.
Click to expand...

Awesome post! :D

Kansas would work. Lots of wide open spaces.
 
wabower said:
It would never happen for a number of reasons. Move on folks, nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

You have no solution other than "Can't work."?

Project the current political trajectory three years out, and Airventure is gone. The FAA will never be satisfied with half a million bucks. Next year it will be $750K. In 2015, they will demand a million.

This parasite will kill the host, unless we find a way to purge it from our system.

Moving the event to an uncontrolled airport is one way. Another way would be to get rid of the absurd Class D airspace around OSH, close the tower, and make OSH uncontrolled.

Actually, that would be a LOT easier to accomplish. If you've ever flown into OSH during the other 50 weeks of the year, you know that the airspace should have reverted to uncontrolled many years ago. Right around the time the last airline left.

So how does one change the airspace around an airport?
 
weirdjim said:
.
Yep, Columbus, sit on your duff and drink the wine. Nothing to see on the other side of that big blue lake.

jim
Click to expand...

Columbus knew something *might* be over the horizon.

We have the advantage of knowing what *is* over the horizon.

The reality is the FAA would squash any large gathering by withholding the necessary waivers. Also, with the ongoing decline of GA, no intelligent party is going to front all of the $$$ to build a new convention site.

Which leaves us to either grow GA or play out the string at Osh...
 
Name the bet. Whatever it is, you're on.

weirdjim said:
.
Yep, Columbus, sit on your duff and drink the wine. Nothing to see on the other side of that big blue lake.

jim
Click to expand...
 
Wendover, NV http://www.airnav.com/airport/KENV. Two big crossing runways, absolutely the middle of nowhere so no one to complain with plenty of space for camping and exhibition space. Walking distance to a cluster of casinos with plenty of rooms. Excellent aviation history as this is the field B29s trained to drop the "big one". It is also right off I80 for those driving. It would need a private tower but the old WWII tower still stands.

And hey, it's a dry heat.
 
Not sure if this would work. Close the tower for most of the year, open temporary tower for the event. Have EAA pay for the tower and personnel, or reimburse the FAA. EAA can add $10 to their annual fee, or charge an extra $10 for the admission tickets(never been there are there admission charges), charge the exhibitors an extra 10%, or some combination thereof.

Personally, I have a hard time believing EAA would really want to move it someplace else, as they are located there, but then again what do I know?
 
douglas393 said:
Not sure if this would work. Close the tower for most of the year, open temporary tower for the event. Have EAA pay for the tower and personnel, or reimburse the FAA. EAA can add $10 to their annual fee, or charge an extra $10 for the admission tickets(never been there are there admission charges), charge the exhibitors an extra 10%, or some combination thereof.

Personally, I have a hard time believing EAA would really want to move it someplace else, as they are located there, but then again what do I know?
Click to expand...

EAA can't afford to move it. It would take tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure, and the city of Oshkosh and the State of Wisconsin probably have some huge claw-backs on their investments or subsidies if EAA moves the convention.

The reality is that the FAA is playing opportunist robber barron here, hitting the EAA with this fee at a time when the FAA knows EAA lacks the time to mount an effective push-back. So, for the short term, EAA did what it needed to do and caved. Long term, I think EAA has a decent chance of reversing the situation.
 
Any scheme that involves moving the event from OSH is a fool's errand.

The FAA controls the airspace and access thereto, including acro boxes, exhibition waivers and LOA's. They're simply not going to allow an event of that magnitude to exist without their control. They are going to call the shots and EAA and everybody who sponsors an air show, fly-in and other activity will be required to comply with their terms no matter the location.

The cost of replacing the infrastructure and accommodations that have been developed (over many years) in WS would be many times the proposed ATC charge. and with no assurance of revenues to amortize the debt. If EAA can't or won't afford to pay for whatever services they impose, they can pull the plug.

That outcome is unlikely, since the added FAA cost isn't going to matter in the big scheme of things, and the actual ticket cost is a minuscule portion of the total cost of attending Airventure. EAA will ***** about it, maybe get some relief from congress, then raise ticket prices to cover the shortfall.

GA is already shrinking at record rates, and will continue to do so until it stabilizes at the size it attains when all of the old pilots are gone. The mortality studies project that the pilot population will decrease by 50% by 2025. Cherokees are already selling for less than Corollas, with no reason to think prices will improve.

PS: Some members of this forum have family members who were or are civil service employees. You would be well advised to avoid calling them parasites if the subject comes up in face-to-face conversations.

Jay Honeck said:
You have no solution other than "Can't work."?

Project the current political trajectory three years out, and Airventure is gone. The FAA will never be satisfied with half a million bucks. Next year it will be $750K. In 2015, they will demand a million.

This parasite will kill the host, unless we find a way to purge it from our system.

Moving the event to an uncontrolled airport is one way. Another way would be to get rid of the absurd Class D airspace around OSH, close the tower, and make OSH uncontrolled.

Actually, that would be a LOT easier to accomplish. If you've ever flown into OSH during the other 50 weeks of the year, you know that the airspace should have reverted to uncontrolled many years ago. Right around the time the last airline left.

So how does one change the airspace around an airport?
Click to expand...
 
kyleb said:
The reality is the FAA would squash any large gathering by withholding the necessary waivers. Also, with the ongoing decline of GA, no intelligent party is going to front all of the $$$ to build a new convention site.
Click to expand...

Waivers for what? You want to land two abreast on an uncontrolled field with a flight of ten a quarter-mile behind you? Go for it. No rule against it.

How many $$$ to rebuild a convention site at $1M a year saved in fees?

And unfortunately nobody in the organization except the tip-top cogniscenti knows how many $$$M the EAA has squirreled away between this fund, that fund, the St. Swithin's Rainy day fund, and the like.

BUT THIS ALL BEGS THE QUESTION ... what do we want of the AIRPORT of choice, not the infrastructure?

Jim

Jim
 
I personally think that the thread is very pointless

However, from the experience of picking a location for a similar thing overseas - pic the location that's reasonable geographically and where the local government is willing to go an extra mile to provide for and accommodate the venture.

More on the subject - I'm afraid a few folks in here might have missed the part about the difference between a democracy and a republic. Democracy's been dead ever since the republic got invented.
 
weirdjim said:
Waivers for what? You want to land two abreast on an uncontrolled field with a flight of ten a quarter-mile behind you? Go for it. No rule against it.

How many $$$ to rebuild a convention site at $1M a year saved in fees?

And unfortunately nobody in the organization except the tip-top cogniscenti knows how many $$$M the EAA has squirreled away between this fund, that fund, the St. Swithin's Rainy day fund, and the like.

BUT THIS ALL BEGS THE QUESTION ... what do we want of the AIRPORT of choice, not the infrastructure?

Jim

Jim
Click to expand...

No, it points out the short-sightedness and absurdity of thinking the moving the venue solves the problem. The example using a dozen planes is pitifully inept.
 
ClimbnSink said:
CA is out, if you think thefaa is into extortion try and throw the party in CA. It has to be a hick state lest the permit mongers kill you. The EAA should play the FAAs game, cancel it for a year, let all the folks that lose money and fun get ****y with whatever is left of our representative govt. That'll work. Unless we are fully evolved and the b'crat branch of govt has no check. If that is the case it is all done anyway.
Click to expand...

+1 - this is what I've been gripping to EAA about

I wouldn't cancel the event. Go ahead and have it. If the FAA doesn't provide controllers and starts closing the airspace, so be it. We may suffer this year, but it would really put the pressure on the government and the FAA. Imagine the outrage in Oshkosh when the government kills the golden goose and all those businesses miss their annual AirVenture bonus.
 
weirdjim said:
Waivers for what? You want to land two abreast on an uncontrolled field with a flight of ten a quarter-mile behind you? Go for it. No rule against it.
Click to expand...

Make that 10,000 aircraft.
 
wabower said:
No, it points out the short-sightedness and absurdity of thinking the moving the venue solves the problem. The example using a dozen planes is pitifully inept.
Click to expand...

By the way, just saw this new about Columbia airport in California:

"The 47th Annual Father’s Day Fly-In has been cancelled this year only due to the cost for the FAA to staff our temporary tower."
From:
http://www.fathersdayflyin.com/
 
Place the pressure where it belongs, on the EAA wallet.

start the boycott movement.

when they see they are hurting maybe the EAA will get the balls to tell the FAA "NO"

then this notice goes out the pressure moves up a notch.

Notam

Due to the cost of FAA control of the airspace there will be no Air Venture in 2014.

Let the FAA take the bad press, see how much money they will ask for in 2015.
 
weirdjim said:
Waivers for what? You want to land two abreast on an uncontrolled field with a flight of ten a quarter-mile behind you? Go for it. No rule against it.

Jim
Click to expand...

You're right.

But you'll never get insurance for the event. Do you think EAA wants to be directly on the hook for legal expenses when the midairs start? Also, exactly how many pilots will sign up for an uncontrolled arrival process for 10k airplanes? Plenty of people are scared to death of the current process and many more still can't get it right despite prodding by controllers. Not having controllers would be a disaster and, quite frankly, irresponsible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top