Renew aopa or not to renew?

[Screaming_Emu]

I loved flying GA (and still would now if I could afford it). What AOPA does is important in keeping GA the way it is. I however, did not renew because I'm reasonably convinced that they spent more than I gave them in trying to get me to renew early or donate money. Put what I give you to good use...instead of using it to ask me for more.

 

[surreal1221]

"The correlation of who advertises in thier magazines and what the AOPA stands for is flat wrong... many of the same advertisers (like ATP) advertise here as well, so those arguments are ridiculous."

Once again, I'm not seeing that AOPA is worth a dime. If you want to support GA, support EAA. I'm a proud supporter of EAA and their mag isn't full of ads from BS flight academies. You can call it ridiculous, but one ATP ad is the same as another. AOPA, JC, they both suck. Seeing the ATP ads at JC doesn't make me happy, but at least I can have a voice against what I consider wrong about the ATP ads by being here. And JC doesn't cost me a friggen dime.

No matter what anyone else says. . .and no matter what I've said about you in the past - that is, if I've said anything negative towards you (can't remember if I have). . .

You're one of the Good guys in my book.

 

[Goonie]

PCL,

Have you flown with or trained JAA pilots?

They may take 13 test for their ATP, but they don't take them all at once and they memorize their answers too.

Anyhoo....SUPPORT AOPA!! The US has the strongest GA system in the world and we need to keep it that way.

JUST SAY NO TO USER FEES!!

 

[SIUav8er]

Once again, I'm not seeing that AOPA is worth a dime. If you want to support GA, support EAA. I'm a proud supporter of EAA and their mag isn't full of ads from BS flight academies. You can call it ridiculous, but one ATP ad is the same as another. AOPA, JC, they both suck. Seeing the ATP ads at JC doesn't make me happy, but at least I can have a voice against what I consider wrong about the ATP ads by being here. And JC doesn't cost me a friggen dime.

I think its time to remind everyone that doesnt read the ATP section that you did your MEI (and ATP?) at ATP flight school... So why discredit the entire organization because a flight school that you went to advertises in their magazine? AOPA represents the same principles as the EAA and they work together in Wasington. I dont get it.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

PCL,

Have you flown with or trained JAA pilots?

Yes, I've flown with many pilots that also have their JAA certs.

JUST SAY NO TO USER FEES!!

I don't think so.

 

[Goonie]

I don't think so.

You understand what user fees will do to GA in this country?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

You understand what user fees will do to GA in this country?

I support user fees for corporate aviation, which is what every user fee proposal to date has been for. No one has proposed user fees for true GA.

 

[SIUav8er]

You understand what user fees will do to GA in this country?

He doesnt care. He got to where he is today because of the best general aviation system in the world and now that he doesnt need it any more, he feels that supporting it is a waste of his time and money. Simple.

 

[SIUav8er]

I support user fees for corporate aviation, which is what every user fee proposal to date has been for. No one has proposed user fees for true GA.

good luck separating "corporate" and "true GA" By the way, whats your definition of "true GA"?

 

[Goonie]

I support user fees for corporate aviation, which is what every user fee proposal to date has been for. No one has proposed user fees for true GA.

Understood, but it will be a PITA to distinguish 'corporate aviation'. If I owned a Citation Mustang operating it under part 91 how can we prove that's corporate aviation. It might be easier to create user fees for 135 and 91K operators.

Its a slippery slope if you ask me.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

By the way, whats your definition of "true GA"?

Piston aircraft lighter than 12,500 pounds. See, not that difficult to differentiate, huh?

 

[RynoB]

I support user fees for corporate aviation, which is what every user fee proposal to date has been for. No one has proposed user fees for true GA.

Do you think user fees will help the airline industry? If so, how?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Do you think user fees will help the airline industry? If so, how?

User fees would replace current tax schemes that heavily penalize the airlines. More of the tax burden would be shifted to the corporate operators that aren't paying their fair share under the current system.

 

[RynoB]

User fees would replace current tax schemes that heavily penalize the airlines. More of the tax burden would be shifted to the corporate operators that aren't paying their fair share under the current system.

Some propose a moderate increase to the fuel tax. More so on jet fuel than 100LL. Do you think a fuel tax increase on GA would help shift more of the burden to the GA side, and enough to make up for the lack of user fees?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Some propose a moderate increase to the fuel tax. More so on jet fuel than 100LL. Do you think a fuel tax increase on GA would help shift more of the burden to the GA side, and enough to make up for the lack of user fees?

A fuel tax increase would increase the burden on both the airlines and the corporate operators. You can't tax fuel at a different rate when it's loaded on a Citation than you do when it's loaded on a 737.

 

[RynoB]

I thought the fuel taxes would just be levied against non-121 operators, but I haven't followed the airline side of the argument very closely. That's why I'm asking these questions.

I'm a frac pilot, so naturally I'm against user fees. Another concern I have about user fees is that they will make there way to piston operators, even if it is initially aimed at the turbine operators.

 

[Zero1Niner]

He doesnt care. He got to where he is today because of the best general aviation system in the world and now that he doesnt need it any more, he feels that supporting it is a waste of his time and money. Simple.

:yeahthat:

Its actually worse than that. Now that he doesn't need it anymore, he wants to stomp it into the ground so no others can have the same opportunity, or pose a threat to his employment. Kinda makes me sick.

 

[SIUav8er]

Piston aircraft lighter than 12,500 pounds. See, not that difficult to differentiate, huh?

So youre saying that no corporate flight department uses aircraft less than 12,500 lbs? What if, for example, a company operates a Pilatus? Thats less than 12,500 lbs. I dont believe that there is really much distinction at all. Many small companies use light aircraft to further their business. Making the size of the airplane the differentiating factor makes no sense. Why should the airplane weighing over 12,500 make it that much more of a burden to the system to charge them user fees? If it flies under part 91, its GA. You cant categorize beyond that.

 

[Goonie]

If it flies under part 91, its GA. You cant categorize beyond that.

:yeahthat:

PCL,
I understand where you are coming from, but at the same time I dont see it panning out the way you want.

First of all your going to have to hire a ton of people to keep control of user fees.

Secondly, the owners and operators paying them, the ones operating aircraft over 12,500 are just going to deduct them off their taxes. Its kinda a sister kisser for the government.

The only way to make money from user fees is to charge the weekend warrior or student pilot $10 per touch n go. That's just wrong!

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So youre saying that no corporate flight department uses aircraft less than 12,500 lbs?What if, for example, a company operates a Pilatus? Thats less than 12,500 lbs.

A Pilatus is a turboprop. I said piston aircraft weighing less than 12,500 lbs could be exempt. All turbine aircraft would be included. Anyone that can afford to pay for a turbine aircraft can afford to pay the user fees.

If it flies under part 91, its GA. You cant categorize beyond that.

Government can make any categories it chooses. Regulations are filled with arbitrary demarcations. I personally believe that the dividing line I suggested would be fair. There are probably other fair dividing lines also. I'm open to suggestions. I'm not open to continuing the current system as-is like AOPA would like.