Save the contract towers

Seggy said:
Oh that is simple. If y'all paid more the funding for the NEXTGEN System would not be such a fight and you would not have been delayed as much as you were. But because the system we are using is from the 1950s, you demand on using it without having to pay, you had to wait.
Click to expand...

Seriously!? "Demand on using it without having to pay"? When did we stop having to pay? I need to call all those FBOs and get some refunds.
 
amorris311 said:
I don't think nextgen is going to help much in NYC. It is already close enough to exchange insurance information. How much closer can they get?
Click to expand...

Take a look on some of the stuff happening in Europe with their version of 'NEXTGEN' and then get back to me on that one. From my understanding the delays one used to see going into an airport such as LHR have been reduced dramatically.
 
Seggy said:
Take a look on some of the stuff happening in Europe with their version of 'NEXTGEN' and then get back to me on that one. From my understanding the delays one used to see going into an airport such as LHR have been reduced dramatically.
Click to expand...

And flight schools are booming over here in comparison because it costs an arm, leg, and a family's first born to learn how to fly over there.

Oh yeah, and it's privatized...
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
... it costs an arm, leg, and a family's first born to learn how to fly over there.
Click to expand...

I'd say that is an argument that can be made here as well. The cost of flight training has gone up considerably over the last ten years very well without any user fees.
 
Seggy said:
I'd say that is an argument that can be made here as well. The cost of flight training has gone up considerably over the last ten years very well without any user fees.
Click to expand...

Because of increased rental rates due to fuel prices and fewer renters to which fixed costs can be dispersed.

And I said "in comparison". But nice go at twisting my words.
 
JordanD said:
I really hate it when there's a flow time into EWR because there's a bunch of Barons and Navajos clogging up the airspace.
Click to expand...
Or when Obama decides that to be seen he is going to have Air Force One and his entourage of Helicopters and C17's fly into EWR instead of McGuire AFB 30 miles to the south, an AFB BTW where all the aircraft that fly his limos around are based. Not only is it a waste of tax payer dollars but it shuts EWR down for over an hour sometimes. Last year I was flying into EWR, just handed over to NY APP and was told to hold for 50 minutes, divert, of go back where I came from because AF1 had just checked in and the the airport was unavailable to everyone else. My aircraft and roughly 20 others didn't have to fuel to hold the whole time and had to divert. That helps EVERYONE.

Seggy said:
You do understand that traffic going into TEB does impact the airspace and flow programs going into LGA, EWR, and JFK?
Click to expand...
Traffic going into and out of TEB doesn't affect the other three major airports at all, the airlines are always given priority, the only exception to that is when the winds are strong out of the North West and TEB has to land RWY1. Even then they usually only accommodate aircraft already en route, and hold you on the ground if you haven't taken off yet. Again, this is an argument that holds no water.


Seggy said:
Oh that is simple. If y'all paid more the funding for the NEXTGEN System would not be such a fight and you would not have been delayed as much as you were. But because the system we are using is from the 1950s, you demand on using it without having to pay, you had to wait.
Click to expand...

I am sorry but NEXTGEN isn't going to do a damn thing for the New York Airspace situation in regards to EWR, TEB, LGA, and JFK. Especially when the weather is bad, the only way to solve that is to move TEB, which isn't going to happen. The only thing NEXTGEN will help with nationwide period is help make it safer to fly low like going into runway 11 in EWR at 2000' around all the single pistons flying around, as you will be able to see everyone, oh wait, sorry that's only if they are equipped with a made s transponder.
 
Seggy said:
Take a look on some of the stuff happening in Europe with their version of 'NEXTGEN' and then get back to me on that one. From my understanding the delays one used to see going into an airport such as LHR have been reduced dramatically.
Click to expand...
Who uses these big congested airports??? Airlines maybe, yep I am pretty sure thats it. And in the case of LHR, the reason it is delayed is because they try to pack the volume of traffic ATL faces onto 2 runways. In Europe, thanks to the cost of fuel and taxes GA is virtually non existent.
 
Pilotforhire587 said:
Or when Obama decides that to be seen he is going to have Air Force One and his entourage of Helicopters and C17's fly into EWR instead of McGuire AFB 30 miles to the south, an AFB BTW where all the aircraft that fly his limos around are based. Not only is it a waste of tax payer dollars but it shuts EWR down for over an hour sometimes. Last year I was flying into EWR, just handed over to NY APP and was told to hold for 50 minutes, divert, of go back where I came from because AF1 had just checked in and the the airport was unavailable to everyone else. My aircraft and roughly 20 others didn't have to fuel to hold the whole time and had to divert. That helps EVERYONE.
Click to expand...
Ill buy that he should utilize McGuire but it isn't a waste of taxpayer money to make sure the president is safe.
 
amorris311 said:
Ill buy that he should utilize McGuire but it isn't a waste of taxpayer money to make sure the president is safe.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying keeping him safe is a waste, my point is that if he is going to use an AF1 for that flight, instead of flying one airplane to McGuire, he has to fly three and Marine One to EWR. The fuel to move all the equipment that was already located just 30 miles to the south is what I think is a waste.
 
I'll say it again. Pilots are our own worst enemy. Instead of supporting each other and help our fellow aviators get to the next level. We continue to measure our wangs, getting us no where. I still can't believe we have pilots arguing for some thing that can effect another pilots employment (see user fees). If you are going to endorse such a thing, please stay on the 121 side of the airport when your 121 job goes away. Not if, when.

But.....

Since we are talking about fair, I guess when the economy takes a crap/terrorist attack/global meltdown happens again my boss should get a bail out just like the airlines, right? We burn kerosene so it must be the exact same thing. What's fair is fair. Oh wait, that didn't happen. When the economy took a dump a few years ago, my company closed offices, laid off workers and weathered the storm. Bottom line is, even if the airlines do pay more to use the NAS, (which I'm in no way convinced of) they should pay more. The airlines directly use the NAS to make a profit. No NAS, no airlines. If I remember history correctly the emergence of the NAS was due to a couple airliners making a smoking hole out near the Grand Canyon. If the NAS dissapeared tomorrow our company would still continue to make money. We might not be able to use our airplane as a tool to make more money, but the company would survive.

It shouldn't matter who's in the back, what should matter to us is the person sitting next to us, or the people in the aircraft parked across the taxiway. We should support pilots, period.
 
PositionAndHold said:
I'll say it again. Pilots are our own worst enemy. Instead of supporting each other and help our fellow aviators get to the next level. We continue to measure our wangs, getting us no where. I still can't believe we have pilots arguing for some thing that can effect another pilots employment (see user fees). If you are going to endorse such a thing, please stay on the 121 side of the airport when your 121 job goes away. Not if, when.

But.....

Since we are talking about fair, I guess when the economy takes a crap/terrorist attack/global meltdown happens again my boss should get a bail out just like the airlines, right? We burn kerosene so it must be the exact same thing. What's fair is fair. Oh wait, that didn't happen. When the economy took a dump a few years ago, my company closed offices, laid off workers and weathered the storm. Bottom line is, even if the airlines do pay more to use the NAS, (which I'm in no way convinced of) they should pay more. The airlines directly use the NAS to make a profit. No NAS, no airlines. If I remember history correctly the emergence of the NAS was due to a couple airliners making a smoking hole out near the Grand Canyon. If the NAS dissapeared tomorrow our company would still continue to make money. We might not be able to use our airplane as a tool to make more money, but the company would survive.

It shouldn't matter who's in the back, what should matter to us is the person sitting next to us, or the people in the aircraft parked across the taxiway. We should support pilots, period.
Click to expand...
Amen brother!
 
let me put it this way to all those who think they know anything about the ATC system,the last time the FFA fielded any ATC equipment that improved controller productivity was the early 1970 with the introduction of the NAS stage A for En Route and the ARTS 2/3 systems for the terminals.since that time there has been NO i repeat NO system that has allowed controller to be more efficient or control more aircraft using less seperation.all DSR and STARS are is a bad up dates of the NAS A and ARTS, dont belive me than why is Chicago Tracon, NY Tracon ,Atlanta Tracon, Dallas Tracon, Denver Tracon, STC and NCT tracons still using ARTS 3E oh yea thay did give us ACDs BIG <edited> DEAL. after spending 17 years and 3 Billion Dollars in the 1980s and 1990s all we got enroute was DSR , which was nothing more than a square radar display and shorter strips and a replacerment of the IBM 9020s. the new system ERAM is a joke and thay cant even get that to do what the NAS A did 30 years ago and they are 10 years into this project , and you people think that NEXTGEN is gonna be the end all of all air traffic systems when even the FFA cant tell you what it will do specifically, just the same generic BS about useing satellites to make everything all OK.

OG

<post edited by moderator, do not bypass profanity filter.>
 
Seggy said:
You do understand that traffic going into TEB does impact the airspace and flow programs going into LGA, EWR, and JFK?
Click to expand...
A better solution would be to not have 3 of the nation's busiest airports within a 20 mike radius of each other. :P
 
drunkenbeagle said:
The tax on cigarettes in NYC is $6.86/pack (I have no idea what they sell for there), but that sounds like much more as a percentage than any aviation tax I have ever paid.
Click to expand...

That's extra state and local taxes. We're talking federal, and when it comes to federal taxes, airline tickets are taxed more than cigarettes. The average $300 airline ticket is taxed $65. It's insane.

The airlines use a huge percentage of the aviation infrastructure and operations budget, and in the case of airports - their hubs cost billions of dollars, far more than the GA fields.
Click to expand...

The airlines pay $12 billion per year into the Trust Fund. All of general aviation pays only $200 million. That's indefensible.

But okay - how about we fund GA airports only with GA taxes, and don't allow 121 ops. We'll do the same for the airlines - they have their hubs, and no one else uses them, and fund them on their own. Sounds "fair," but not really.
Click to expand...

Sounds ok to me. The airlines' tax burden would shrink quite a bit, and GA would disappear. But I'd rather just implement user fees so GA doesn't have to disappear.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
The airlines pay $12 billion per year into the Trust Fund. All of general aviation pays only $200 million. That's indefensible.
Click to expand...

Is there any data to miles flow by 121 to GA in a given time frame? Or maybe time flown in same time frame? I'm looking, thought you might have a source.
 
I'm not aware of that data being available, but I'm sure it is somewhere. More meaningful data would be number of aircraft operations, though, and that data is available on the A4A web site, I believe.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I'm not aware of that data being available, but I'm sure it is somewhere. More meaningful data would be number of aircraft operations, though, and that data is available on the A4A web site, I believe.
Click to expand...

I'll keep looking as I think a flight from at CAK to AKR is using the system but not the same as CAK to ATL both being an operation.
 
While that's somewhat true, using miles or time as a metric would be far more faulty, because long flights don't use significantly more resources than short flights. The bulk of resources used are at the beginning and end of a flight. Therefore, number of operations is the best metric.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top