I help PAY for the system through taxes, so it is for me the "hobbyist". Ted, I think you are wrong. Anybody that pays for the system, should be able to use it. Just because sometimes the only thing we are "getting done" is pleasureable flying, it is still one of the legitimate goals of General Aviation. Quite frankly, I think that statement wasn't very well thought out.
I'm sorry if I offended you with my statement, and perhaps it wasn't particularly well-worded. I'm also smelling a decent bit of entitlement here from a number of folks, which surprises me given the fact that at least some of them are conservatives. It's something like saying I should be allowed to use my studded snow tires in the summer time because I pay taxes that fund the roads. Conversely, some countries require that you have studded snow tires in winter, because otherwise you're viewed as a safety hazard.
The proposed rules with ADS-B won't restrict you from flying. So, to your point, you pay the taxes and you can use the system. That said, the system, like any system, is not designed for the benefit of one particular taxpayer. A good system needs to address the needs of the many. In this case, we'd look at the thousands upon thousands of taxpaying people who fly on the commercial airlines, which vastly outnumber us.
How much so? Well, I took a snapshot on FlightAware this morning and found about 5,500 aircraft that it covered. Of those, roughly 4,700 were airliners. The remaining 800 were GA, of which only 250 were piston GA - the rest were turboprops of some sort. Of course, this doesn't deal with people flying around VFR, but those people will still be able to do that with some exceptions.
So the next question would be, which aircraft does it make sense to do the retrofit on? We could assume that all airliners will do it, so based on this morning's snapshot. We could also assume that all turbine GA aircraft will do it. Probably not all will, but the majority will. Wayne can correct me on this, but I'm basing my assumption on the fact that operating costs for turbines are high enough that the cost of the upgrades is relatively small. Now we've got 95% of the aircraft population. Let's say that the average airliner has 50 passengers on it, and the average GA turbine has 2 passengers on it. That's probably pretty low, and that amounts to 236,000 people at any given time. We can assume that most of these people pay taxes that fund the system.
Remaining are the piston aircraft - where most of us on here live, and where it seems most of the complaints are coming from. Most of the piston aircraft during this snapshot were, as you'd expect, the higher-dollar ones - Twin Cessnas, Cirri of varying forms, etc. I'd expect for those folks, they'd go ahead and do the upgrades. But let's assume that all piston aircraft are going to end up not upgrading, and thus no longer able to use the system. Not because they aren't allowed, but because they don't have the (now required) equipment. Let's further assume that every piston aircraft has 4 passengers on board. That still only comes out to about 1,000 people - 0.5% of the people in the sky at that snapshot.
So now we say that we're going to keep the old stuff around for those 5% of aircraft in the sky to serve the 0.5% of the flying public? Most people would have a hard time justifying that to their bosses.
The merits of the system are another matter entirely, and I agree the merit is questionable. My point is addressing the folks who believe they are being provided a disservice.
I hope you found this better thought out.
