Northwest CEO wants GA to pay

SteveC

"Laconic"
Staff member
Northwest CEO Richard Anderson wants general aviation users to pay more for the national airspace system:
Click here

AOPA vows to straighten the record. From AOPA ePilot newsletter (Vol. 6, Issue 11):[ QUOTE ]
AIRLINE MAGAZINE TAKES SHOTS AT GA
If you happened to travel on Northwest Airlines recently you may have been upset by a little turbulence, but not the kind caused by meteorological forces. A column in the airline's magazine, written by Northwest CEO Richard Anderson, took some jabs at general aviation and how the air traffic control system is funded. "As the system works today, you, the commercial airline passenger, are subsidizing private aircraft ownership. This is not right," he wrote. But he's not right. As a general aviation pilot, you know very well that flying and using the system isn't free. You pay a wide range of fees from fuel taxes to landing fees. And you also know that you don't enjoy many of the services the airlines do. AOPA President Phil Boyer wants to arrange a meeting with Anderson to straighten out misconceptions caused by the column (as well as discuss issues regarding reliever airports in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area). We will keep you posted.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ready for ATC user fees?
$10 to fly an approach, maybe? $25 for enroute services?
 
Dick can kiss my.......

You know the rest.
mad.gif
 
It is true that the fees GA pays are not apparent.

It also true that by avoiding certain airports and FBOs one can get around paying most of them. (Signature is THE BORG!)

What the public doesn't seem to be aware of is two things:
1) All AvFuel has a high dose of FET in there, which is supposed to be dedicated to Aviation.
2) The General Aviation fund has been tapped by airline interests and not used specifically for GA as it was designed. This is one arena where Boyer needs to get to work!
 
Guess I won't be flying Northwest any time soon. As in until Mr. Anderson is no longer getting any money from them -- and I mean pensions, deferred comp, and so on.

Guess he'll be dead before I fly on them.
 
I happened to fly on Northwest (coming back from SkiJC 2004 as a matter of fact) on March 1, the day this article came out. It got me aggravated enough that as soon as I got home, I faxed it to AOPA and NBAA. One of NBAA's operations guys called me back to let me know what they were doing about it, and the answer is ... plenty. A couple of NBAA members who also happen to be located in a large Northwest hub and have HUGE corporate travel accounts with NWA are calling upon Mr. Anderson to rethink his position. I've also written him a rather pointed letter.

I'm hopeful Richard will change his tune ... but unlike Tony, I can't boycott NWA. If I did, I'd have to fly steerage!!

Russ
 
I'm a somewhat frequent NW flier--but haven't been on them this month yet. Does anyone have a copy of the article they could paste here or PM me? I'd like to write a letter.

[ QUOTE ]

1) All AvFuel has a high dose of FET in there, which is supposed to be dedicated to Aviation.
2) The General Aviation fund has been tapped by airline interests and not used specifically for GA as it was designed. This is one arena where Boyer needs to get to work!

[/ QUOTE ]

What's FET stand for? Got any links?
 
Uhhh...just saw Steve's link. Sorry. I'd edit my post--but I can't.
mad.gif
Frankly, after reading the article, I'm pi$$ed, though I do agree that the taxes on plane tickets right now are rediculous. Mr. Anderson needs to be reminded that were it not for all the gov't bailouts--particularly in the early 90s after Cecci ran the airline into the ground--he wouldn't be making complaints about GA right now because he wouldn't have a job.



I'm still interested in learning more about the $$$ GA does contribute.
 
ATC: "Baron 8793X, credit card declined; execute missed approach and contact SoCal with another form of payment."

frown.gif
 
This man is crazy. I fly out of one of trhose reliever airports and we get quite a bit of jet traffic that would be sure to clog up MSP were the option not available. NWA is cutting wherever they can. They have outsourced their computer data center, they are trying to negotiate higher fees from the NWA Federal Credit Union (which serves it's employees) for renting a spot in teh terminal for cash machines, and the list goes on. They are still coming up short so who knows where they will end up.

Instrument Training is costing me enough without having to pay any ladnding fees or the like.
grin.gif
mad.gif
 
FET = Federal Excise Tax

The plan now is for user fees built in to aircraft registrations and airport landing and service fees.

There is currently no plan for flight plan fees or flight service fees. The people I have been talking to at the FAA in Washington do not see how that could be done feasibly.

Most likely you will see a continuing trend towards non-federal control towers, but these will be paid by city taxes and landing fees.
 
Well I'm cautiously optimistic that when two of Northwest's largest corporate customers start breathing down Richard's neck, they'll get a little smarter about the whole thing.

I'm glad NBAA and AOPA are working on this one. When I talked to NBAA earlier this week, they were quite upset about the whole thing and assured me they were taking several steps to make sure nothing untoward happened to the GA side.

Russ
 
[ QUOTE ]
ATC: "Baron 8793X, credit card declined; execute missed approach and contact SoCal with another form of payment."

frown.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually nothing of the sort would happen. Can you imagine the legal implications if ATC wouldn't give an aircraft service just because their CC was declined and say an emergency happened? It'd probably be put on a credit report and sent to a collection agency like everything else out there we buy and can't afford.

Besides, it'd probably end up like it is in Canada with NavCanada being able to repo your plane if you don't pay.

I don't think it's a good idea for the US, especially now so don't get me wrong. I just think you should be a little more informed before you make statements like that because other people will take you at your word and then repeat them to everyone else and then what are we left with? A bunch of pilots, atc, etc. saying we can't have this because.... and it's totally untrue. Because then the other side will just be able to slam us even harder when it does come about, because we were ill-informed.
frown.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ATC: "Baron 8793X, credit card declined; execute missed approach and contact SoCal with another form of payment."
frown.gif


[/ QUOTE ]Actually nothing of the sort would happen....

[/ QUOTE ]
I think he was being facetious.
facetious; adj : cleverly amusing in tone; "a bantering tone"; "facetious remarks"; "tongue-in-cheek advice" [syn: bantering, tongue-in-cheek]
grin.gif
 
I know what facetious means....

it's just that I've seen that type of comment too much around here for them ALL to be facetious.
 
[ QUOTE ]
MOST of my posts have an element of facetiousness or sarcasm to them...including this one.
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Bah! Digeratti elitists!
smile.gif
 
I wonder how many FBO's went out of business after 911.
I haven't heard of any FBO getting a bail-out check from Uncle Sam.
confused.gif
 
Follow up by AOPA, from their website:

[ QUOTE ]
AOPA's Boyer to meet with NWA CEO
Mar. 18 — AOPA President Phil Boyer and Northwest Airlines Chief Executive Officer Richard Anderson will meet in two weeks to discuss an editorial Anderson recently published for his airline's in-flight magazine, charging that airline passengers subsidize general aviation operations through fees and taxes on airline tickets.

"Mr. Anderson's editorial contains numerous misleading or seriously flawed statements about GA's financial contributions to the national air transportation system," said Boyer. "It has angered GA pilots and aviation enthusiasts. But AOPA has deliberately withheld its rebuttal to the editorial, working instead for constructive discussions with Northwest."

Since first learning of the editorial, AOPA has focused on setting up a meeting between Boyer and Anderson in order to clear the air. AOPA refrained from calling for a public letter-writing campaign while efforts to set up the meeting were under way. Pilots and aviation enthusiasts wrote anyway. They spontaneously began besieging Northwest Airlines with letters and e-mails protesting the tone and the misstatements in the editorial.

Anderson has now agreed to a meeting on April 2 to explain his concerns.

"That's fine," replied Boyer, "I plan to discuss our concerns and find some common ground in our respective views."

This all stems from a dispute between Northwest and the airport authority at Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP). The Metropolitan Airport Commission also runs six reliever airports that improve efficiency for Northwest at MSP by moving most GA traffic elsewhere, and uses some of the funds collected at MSP for improvements at the relievers.

"Mr. Anderson's attack on general aviation is unfair, unwarranted, and, for the most part, untrue," said Boyer. "And by publishing his attack in so public a forum, he has raised what should have remained a regional skirmish into a nationwide battle.

"I hope that by speaking directly with him, AOPA will be able to convince Mr. Anderson that GA and the airlines are two sides of the same coin and that he should just as publicly set the record straight."

[/ QUOTE ]
 
All this guys complaining, yet when it comes time for NWA to need some dough or help he doesn't seem to mind the problems. They are building a new North/SOuth runway at KMSP that was aminly for NWA. They want the extra distance so that a fully-loaded (passengers and cargo) 747 could take off for Tokyo and beyond.
 
Back
Top