User Fees

beestforwardspeed said:
All of those things you mention are not nearly as easy as you make it out to be.

That will still cost them more than what it does now with the current system.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not, but they will adjust none the less. I lose no sleep over what the airlines might have to do. I'm sure that if they are pushing for user fees on GA, then they have done the calculations on this deal. They have some smart people working for them, so I'm sure they have considered any possible disruption in new pilot supply and consider it either a non issue, or workable.

We need to keep hammering on simply making temporary fuel tax increases to help fund Next Gen if that is what this is all about. If the Feds want to dump ATC onto a private contractor (Who are we kidding it's Lockmart. :rolleyes2: There won't even be any real bidding.) fine. The FAA has to keep the funding as it is now, through the fuel tax and Lockmart shouldn't have anything to do with the tax rate.

I'm not some hard core Tea Party type, so I do believe that there are some things the federal government can and should over see, the nations ATC and airport infrastructure is one of those things I support. I don't believe it should be privatized. It smells like disaster to me. That also doesn't mean that the FAA can't work to function within it's budget. I think it can.
 
Both flavors of political party have favored things like toll roads & adding tolls to existing highways. Call it a "user fee" and you can use money you committed for construction on something else.

Search the term "lexus lanes" on your favorite search engine & see how the highway tolls have evolved.
 
Dav8or said:
I'm not some hard core Tea Party type, so I do believe that there are some things the federal government can and should over see, the nations ATC and airport infrastructure is one of those things I support. I don't believe it should be privatized. It smells like disaster to me. That also doesn't mean that the FAA can't work to function within it's budget. I think it can.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure almost nobody is a hard core Tea Party type, but I think even they would agree that the government should oversee the national air system. There are government things worth spending money, but there is nothing we should waste money on.
 
Dav8or said:
Adjust their pay scales/benefits to convince youngsters it worth it to pay even more to be trained. Then pass the additional cost off to consumers. They're a business that provides a now indispensable service to the world. They'll figure it out and be just fine.

The hobbyists and convenience travelers like most of us, not so much.
Click to expand...

Which is basically what Europe does. You've got pilots going from zero time, getting complete training done via the company, and then putting them in the right seat with a few hundred hours.

But the US Airlines have a sweet deal now, basically making pilots train themselves until ATP minimums, at which point they have a highly experienced pilot to hire for chump change and very little training costs. It saves them a ton of money.

We'll see whether they care or not in the long run. If they are smart, they'll care.
 
If you want to argue for government funding of facilities and services then the USA needs to go to a flat tax on unadjusted gross income. As it is some guys are paying a lot more than others with no regard to user or not. Just one more category of government that's broken.
 
Bonchie said:
Which is basically what Europe does. You've got pilots going from zero time, getting complete training done via the company, and then putting them in the right seat with a few hundred hours...
Click to expand...

A process that is inadequate for weeding out the suicidal maniacs, as Germanwings found out the hard way. :(
 
Bonchie said:
Which is basically what Europe does. You've got pilots going from zero time, getting complete training done via the company, and then putting them in the right seat with a few hundred hours.

But the US Airlines have a sweet deal now, basically making pilots train themselves until ATP minimums, at which point they have a highly experienced pilot to hire for chump change and very little training costs. It saves them a ton of money.

We'll see whether they care or not in the long run. If they are smart, they'll care.
Click to expand...


Who trains "themselves until ATP minimums" ?

You are trained to CPL mins,then you WORK until you met ATP mins before going the airline route, if that's even where you want to go.

The euro way is inferior to the US method, our pilots have a much better foundation and have been tested in the gauntlet of multiple disciplines of aviation before they ever touch the controls of a 121 aircraft.

Becoming a airline pilot is also much more obtainable in the US compared to Europe.

Go ask any pilot in Europe who has also flown over here which system is better.
 
Palmpilot said:
A process that is inadequate for weeding out the suicidal maniacs, as Germanwings found out the hard way. :(
Click to expand...
I don't think I would blame the European system for that. I know two recent suicides. Would not have suspected either one. On the other hand, they didn't take anyone with them.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't think I would blame the European system for that. I know two recent suicides. Would not have suspected either one. On the other hand, they didn't take anyone with them.
Click to expand...

I don't think the U.S. systems stops anyone from doing themselves in, but I think it raises the odds that they will have done so before getting into the cockpit of an airliner, thereby saving many lives.
 
Dav8or said:
We need to keep hammering on simply making temporary fuel tax increases to help fund Next Gen if that is what this is all about.
Click to expand...

:yikes: When was the last repeal of any "temporary" tax in living memory?
 
Palmpilot said:
I don't think the U.S. systems stops anyone from doing themselves in, but I think it raises the odds that they will have done so before getting into the cockpit of an airliner, thereby saving many lives.
Click to expand...

Based on the people I am referring to I would say you never know....

Both were ATPs. Both were middle-aged.
 
We're both talking about anecdotal evidence. I'm not saying that requiring 1500 hours would prevent all cases like the Germanwings one. I just have a hunch that it improves the odds, but I admit that it is only a hunch.
 
The expansion of government required to collect and administer a user fee would mean, after the pensions, health care, long-delayed and overpriced collection system etc. etc. about one cent per dollar collected would actually go to pay for ATC so I'd much rather have a higher fuel tax.

On the other hand, if the day does come when I'm paying a fee to use the system per flight, I'm going to try and get the most bang for my buck and land at every class B I can.
 
Wingsofglass said:
...
On the other hand, if the day does come when I'm paying a fee to use the system per flight, I'm going to try and get the most bang for my buck and land at every class B I can...
Click to expand...

THIS:)
 
I can say that alot of us private airport owners have sat around a campfire and chatted about setting up a network of point to point landing strips and cater to the GA side of aviation...No need to deal with the guvmint... There are several times more private airports out there then public ones.. If flying VFR, running with the transponder off and NO ADS-B out unit on board...you are golden,,:yes:

File IFR in A,B,C or D airspace, and the ADS-B system will send ya a bill...:eek::yikes::redface:
 
Or they could go the Canadian route with a flat fee (something like $60/year) for small airplanes and the route fees for larger ones.

Then everyone will be using the system as much as they can to get their money's worth...
 
Everskyward said:
Or they could go the Canadian route with a flat fee (something like $60/year) for small airplanes and the route fees for larger ones.

Then everyone will be using the system as much as they can to get their money's worth...
Click to expand...

That would certainly be a lot more palatable than paying per flight or per ATC use, at least for small planes.
 
Everskyward said:
Or they could go the Canadian route with a flat fee (something like $60/year) for small airplanes and the route fees for larger ones.

Then everyone will be using the system as much as they can to get their money's worth...
Click to expand...

But that's not the intent of the legislation. The intent is to squeeze the smaller commercial players, who are robbing the craptastic airlines of their marquee consumers, out of the interstate system by economic attrition. The only effective way to do that against a much smaller part 91 turbine industry is by fee-per-sortie. The secondary consequence is it unapologetically swats piston GA out the sky with impunity, something the FAA is completely copacetic about but hardly the primary target behind this legislation. That's just a sweet bonus to them.

This is done by your elected representatives that you didn't really vote for, they were placed in the ballot paid for by corporate interests as non-choices, in this case the purse holder being the airlines. Do we really want Europe for our discretionary life choices? If Im gonna eat the musky castle, room temperature coke, loafer wearing apathy towards full-time work, I want full medical too, you know what I mean? Europeanized America is a worse deal that Europe outright if you want to get technical. Screw that. American GA needs to be preserved, we hardly have anything to show for these days.
 
Everskyward said:
Or they could go the Canadian route with a flat fee (something like $60/year) for small airplanes and the route fees for larger ones.

Then everyone will be using the system as much as they can to get their money's worth...
Click to expand...

The problem with this kind of deal is it starts out at $60 a year. Three years later it goes to $200... you know, to pay for XXX. Then five years after that it goes to $500 because it's discovered there is a budget deficit... blah, blah, blah...
 
hindsight2020 said:
But that's not the intent of the legislation. The intent is to squeeze the smaller commercial players, who are robbing the craptastic airlines of their marquee consumers, out of the interstate system by economic attrition. The only effective way to do that against a much smaller part 91 turbine industry is by fee-per-sortie. The secondary consequence is it unapologetically swats piston GA out the sky with impunity, something the FAA is completely copacetic about but hardly the primary target behind this legislation. That's just a sweet bonus to them.
Click to expand...
I'm too lazy to look it up just now but I think the $60/year only applies to airplanes under about 6,000 lbs. So the smaller commercial players get to pay the route fees. That doesn't seem to slow them down, though. It seems that there are many more small commercial airplanes flying around in Canada per capita than the US. It's probably because there are not many ways to get to some of the isolated spots, just like in Alaska.
 
DJTorrente said:
:yikes: When was the last repeal of any "temporary" tax in living memory?
Click to expand...

Sadly, not often. It has happened here in California on very rare occasion, but on the federal level, I can say I can think of a time. Unfortunately, most taxes with a time limit some how always get renewed. :( :mad2:

Hard to break the addiction to "free" taxpayer money. I think it's time to start authorizing taxes like this only if the legislation includes a the clause for no possible renewal.
 
Compare and contrast aviation user fees with road taxes and road "improvements"

For example, consider bike lanes. When a bike lane is added to a local road, who pays? The expense of the bike lane only benefits the bicyclist, but the bicyclist doesn't pay a dime for it.
 
User fees for bikes! And this is going to require them to be equipped with an ADSB equivalent, too. Never mind that it will cost more than the bike!
 
Bob Noel said:
Compare and contrast aviation user fees with road taxes and road "improvements"

For example, consider bike lanes. When a bike lane is added to a local road, who pays? The expense of the bike lane only benefits the bicyclist, but the bicyclist doesn't pay a dime for it.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. The bicyclists (general aviation in your analogy) have equal right to the space, but since the majority of travelers want to proceed, unfettered, at high speed in automobiles (or via the airlines) they (airline passengers) should pay entirely for the benefits they accrue by traffic separation through bicycle lanes (ATC).

dtuuri
 
Last edited:
dtuuri said:
Excellent point. The bicyclists (general aviation in your analogy) have equal right to the space, but since the majority of travelers want to proceed, unfettered, at high speed in automobiles (or via the airlines) they (airline passengers) should pay entirely for the benefits they accrue by traffic separation through bicycle lanes (ATC).

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Poor comparison IMHO...

GA pays through fuel tax, landing fees, tie down fees, taxes on hangar fees, etc etc...

For instance,,,,
Bicyclists here in Jackson are fanatical and in power on the government boards....

Teton County has spent over 10 million in the last few years on "bike" paths and installed signs and had laws passed to fine anyone using them with a motorized vehicle.. In the winter the paths are covered with snow and god forbid you ride a snowmobile on it.. Instant fine....

Now, the kicker is the bicyclists ( known locally as the pathway group) have been able to extract millions from property taxes, millions more from motor fuel tax and even more from state and federal grants to build a pathway system strictly for them.. They didn't contribute a friggin dime to their scam...


And, after a bike path gets finished they still ride on the side of the road holding up traffic because they claim they can ride faster on the road then using the paths...:mad2::mad2::mad2:

So, the paths just sit there unused, in fact they just spent more taxpayer money ( over 700,000) last year to actually paint centerline strips on a 6 foot wide path... Like people are soo stupid as to not keep to the right..:mad2::mad2:..

I say...

Make EVERY bike buy a license tag with a annual cost of 100 bucks, Then install a mileage meter and charge them 5 cents a mile no matter where they ride..:rolleyes::rolleyes::yes:
 
N801BH said:
Poor comparison IMHO...

GA pays through fuel tax, landing fees, tie down fees, taxes on hangar fees, etc etc...

For instance,,,,
Bicyclists here in Jackson are fanatical and in power on the government boards....

Teton County has spent over 10 million in the last few years on "bike" paths and installed signs and had laws passed to fine anyone using them with a motorized vehicle.. In the winter the paths are covered with snow and god forbid you ride a snowmobile on it.. Instant fine....

Now, the kicker is the bicyclists ( known locally as the pathway group) have been able to extract millions from property taxes, millions more from motor fuel tax and even more from state and federal grants to build a pathway system strictly for them.. They didn't contribute a friggin dime to their scam...


And, after a bike path gets finished they still ride on the side of the road holding up traffic because they claim they can ride faster on the road then using the paths...:mad2::mad2::mad2:

So, the paths just sit there unused, in fact they just spent more taxpayer money ( over 700,000) last year to actually paint centerline strips on a 6 foot wide path... Like people are soo stupid as to not keep to the right..:mad2::mad2:..

I say...

Make EVERY bike buy a license tag with a annual cost of 100 bucks, Then install a mileage meter and charge them 5 cents a mile no matter where they ride..:rolleyes::rolleyes::yes:
Click to expand...


The bike mafia is huge in Wisconsin. Every road project now requires bike lanes, including 6 lane divided highways - I work on Hwy 100, and I don't think I've seen a bike on that road in two years. Even bikers aren't that stupid.
 
nddons said:
The bike mafia is huge in Wisconsin. Every road project now requires bike lanes, including 6 lane divided highways - I work on Hwy 100, and I don't think I've seen a bike on that road in two years. Even bikers aren't that stupid.
Click to expand...

California has a new law that I must not get closer than 3 feet to a bicyclist while passing them. It is a moving violation if caught by the cops.

OTOH, they are supposed to ride single file but they never do. Many of them are rude, arrogant, and blast through stop signs without even slowing down.
 
aterpster said:
California has a new law that I must not get closer than 3 feet to a bicyclist while passing them. It is a moving violation if caught by the cops.

OTOH, they are supposed to ride single file but they never do. Many of them are rude, arrogant, and blast through stop signs without even slowing down.
Click to expand...

Many of them??! Pretty much all of them. Not just stop signs either. Stop lights too. Cyclists cry for special paths and lanes and then pretty much do whatever the hell they want. They are very annoying and until this thread I never did consider that they don't even contribute to the up keep of the roads.
 
nddons said:
The bike mafia is huge in Wisconsin. Every road project now requires bike lanes, including 6 lane divided highways - I work on Hwy 100, and I don't think I've seen a bike on that road in two years. Even bikers aren't that stupid.
Click to expand...

There's a short stretch of freeway near here that has a bike lane inside the sound wall. :rolleyes: I tried it out once, but the noise and fumes were just too much.
 
aterpster said:
California has a new law that I must not get closer than 3 feet to a bicyclist while passing them. It is a moving violation if caught by the cops.
Click to expand...

Less than three feet is within arm's reach, and does seem too close for safety.

What bugs me is people who bicycle on the line of the bike lane, instead of in the lane. That doesn't seem like a good survival strategy to me.

OTOH, they are supposed to ride single file but they never do.
Click to expand...

I do when there are cars present.

Many of them are rude, arrogant, and blast through stop signs without even slowing down.
Click to expand...

Many motorists roll through stop signs.

When I bicycle, I stop if there is anyone crossing the intersection or waiting to cross.
 
Last edited:
Dav8or said:
...I never did consider that they don't even contribute to the up keep of the roads.
Click to expand...

We also drive, and considering that many destinations are too far for bicycling to be practical, most of us probably drive a lot more miles than we bicycle, so we do pay gas taxes.

Insisting that everyone pay only for what they use can get pretty ridiculous. Should I get a rebate on my property taxes because I don't have children in school? I say no, because I benefit from living in a well educated society, which increases prosperity and reduces the crime rate. Should I get a rebate on my federal income taxes for wars I don't approve of? I say no, because we need a strong defense capability, I get to vote, and I have the right to lobby for our military to be used wisely. And even if I never bicycled, I wouldn't mind paying for bike lanes, because when a person rides their bike instead of driving their car, it takes up a lot less space on the road, and it creates less air pollution.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
We also drive, and considering that many destinations are too far for bicycling to be practical, most of us probably drive a lot more miles than we bicycle, so we do pay gas taxes.
Click to expand...

You pay the same exact taxes as the same exact vehicle with the same use. I don't begrudge the cost of break-down lanes, curbs, signage, paint, lighting associated with the orderly and safe utility of road going, tax paying vehicles, whether cars, trucks, motor-cycles, or any registered and licensed highway vehicle. No prob, it's all part of the package I signed up for when I bought a car, got a license, learned to drive, registered and insured my car, got it inspected, maintained it, and the myriad other requirements for highway use.

Now - bicycles. Rarely, almost never licensed, although every state has a bike license program. Never, ever insured for liability. No operator license, no helmet requirement, seemingly no respect for any signs, lights, or basic traffic laws. But - worst of all, absolutely no RESPECT for cars which pay for the added bike facilities adjacent to, or in lieu of road lanes.

Representation without taxation. Talk about user fees, every un-licensed bike operated should be subject to a massive fine, and the license fee for bikes should start at $100/year, and go up depending on wheel size. < 21" = $100, < 27" = $700, > 27" (racing tire) = $2000. It's only fair. :wink2:
 
Dav8or said:
Many of them??! Pretty much all of them. Not just stop signs either. Stop lights too. Cyclists cry for special paths and lanes and then pretty much do whatever the hell they want.
Click to expand...
And in most places they can be ticketed for doing that, same as cars.
They are very annoying and until this thread I never did consider that they don't even contribute to the up keep of the roads.
Click to expand...
How so? Is road maintenance not funded by the taxpayers? Do bicyclists not pay taxes? (If funding is via fuel taxes, then consider that bicyclists drive cars as well.. at least, most of them. Not sure how true that is in VT, of course, but VT is pretty unique. I am thinking mostly of more normal places like MI.)
 
I know a husband and wife ATC team and they make over $450 K per year, plus a great pension package, That is too much.
 
N801BH said:
Poor comparison IMHO...

In the winter the paths are covered with snow and god forbid you ride a snowmobile on it.. Instant fine....
Click to expand...
See? It WAS a good comparison! The disgruntled snowmobilers can play the part of drone operators. Perfect.

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
See? It WAS a good comparison! The disgruntled snowmobilers can play the part of drone operators. Perfect.

dtuuri
Click to expand...


NO.... The snowmobiler has to BUY a license sticker each year for trail maintenance.. Oddly enough that money goes toward grooming machines ( over 400 grand each) to groom the snowmobile trails... The guvmint used the same machine to groom the bike paths in the winter for cross country skiers.. Oh yeah,,,, the skiers don't pay a dime into the grooming system either... Another free ride for the gorpers..:mad2::mad2::mad2:..

Ps. Most bicyclists are skiers in the winter too... What a scam they have going..:mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top