trump/ATC Privitization/User Fees

trafficinsight said:
You mean like a fuel tax?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I actually think an annual tax that's tied to aircraft weight and status makes more sense.

How does the current tax change when electric or hydrogen powered aircraft become a thing? Many states have found that transportation/public safety funding has decreased dramatically as those areas were funded by fuel taxes. Dramatic shifts in efficiencies and non-petroleum power sources have reduced fuel tax revenues.

On the low end side, this would drive most of the derelict airplanes from the ramp to the salvage yard.
 
Last edited:
hook_dupin said:
I actually think an annual tax that's tied to aircraft weight and status makes more sense.
Click to expand...

If we are talking about ATC costs, aircraft that don't fly much also aren't putting much burden on the ATC system. Fuel is probably the best gauge for how much ATC services are involved.

At some point in the future, light pistons will probably switch to Jet A. They will still use so little of it that any tax increase will not be material. I think a higher tax on fuel to fund NextGen would be fair, especially if everyone paid it (airlines, military, and GA). I would be fearful though, of the temptation to raise the tax levy, and then spend it on something else.
 
Seggy said:
Airlines are practically the only ones paying now.
Click to expand...

Seggy said:
Tough to make that argument when I am waiting in IAD, three in line for takeoff, with 179 folks behind me waiting to go on a transcon behind a biz jet who didn't switch over to tower and is holding up the line behind him when everyone else is ready to go.

They sent out an ops vehicle to wave to the guy to check his radio.
Click to expand...

The misinformation, arrogance, and self-importance off those two statements are so typical of Seggy.


trafficinsight said:
You mean like a fuel tax?
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the fuel tax. You know what that is right Seggy? That is one of the ways that GA already pay into the system on every flight they take even when not using any ATC services.

Your little story of the wayward business jet has nothing at all to do with user fees or the price of tea in China for that matter.

An older article here:

https://www.nbaa.org/news/letters/200611_propilot.pdf

Please do the world a favor and educate yourself a little.


TP
 
typhoonpilot said:
The misinformation, arrogance, and self-importance off those two statements are so typical of Seggy.
Click to expand...

Nope, try again.

One was a personal experience, the other is a fact.




Ah yes, the fuel tax. You know what that is right Seggy? That is one of the ways that GA already pay into the system on every flight they take even when not using any ATC services.

Your little story of the wayward business jet has nothing at all to do with user fees or the price of tea in China for that matter.

An older article here:

https://www.nbaa.org/news/letters/200611_propilot.pdf

Please do the world a favor and educate yourself a little.


TP
Click to expand...

The fuel tax doesn't cover the inequality in the system between biz jet and airline operators.
 
Seggy said:
Nope, try again.

One was a personal experience, the other is a fact.






The fuel tax doesn't cover the inequality in the system between biz jet and airline operators.
Click to expand...
Okay, you've made the claims, I want to see the math.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
Seggy said:
Tough to make that argument when I am waiting in IAD, three in line for takeoff, with 179 folks behind me waiting to go on a transcon behind a biz jet who didn't switch over to tower and is holding up the line behind him when everyone else is ready to go.

They sent out an ops vehicle to wave to the guy to check his radio.

Anyway, why not go after both loop holes?



We have a ATC system in place from the 1950s and 1960s, that is hardly the best in the world. We need to upgrade it to a NextGen system. That is the big picture or we will fall further behind.
Click to expand...

if only they had paid some user fees beyond their fuel taxes, they would have been listening on tower freq. that story is made all the more compelling considering airline crews have never done anything dumb with radios.
 
gne in prog said:
if only they had paid some user fees beyond their fuel taxes, they would have been listening on tower freq. that story is made all the more compelling considering airline crews have never done anything dumb with radios.
Click to expand...
I really can't believe he used this as an example. It's not possible they could've been a retired part 121 crew in their 70's trying to kill everyone aboard. We all know once an aviator has operated under 121 rules it makes them superior to mistakes and/or accidents. I mean those guys at "united" that went off the side during take off in Denver must've been operating under 91 or they wouldn't have made such a mistake. Like it's craaaaaazy.

@Seggy just incase you didn't see a mention of a united crew screwing up. We all know 121 is flawless.
 
gne in prog said:
if only they had paid some user fees beyond their fuel taxes, they would have been listening on tower freq. that story is made all the more compelling considering airline crews have never done anything dumb with radios.
Click to expand...
PositionAndHold said:
I really can't believe he used this as an example. It's not possible they could've been a retired part 121 crew in their 70's trying to kill everyone aboard. We all know once an aviator has operated under 121 rules it makes them superior to mistakes and/or accidents. I mean those guys at "united" that went off the side during take off in Denver must've been operating under 91 or they wouldn't have made such a mistake. Like it's craaaaaazy.

@Seggy just incase you didn't see a mention of a united crew screwing up. We all know 121 is flawless.
Click to expand...

Quit feeding the trolls guys!
 
Seggy said:
Tough to make that argument when I am waiting in IAD, three in line for takeoff, with 179 folks behind me waiting to go on a transcon behind a biz jet who didn't switch over to tower and is holding up the line behind him when everyone else is ready to go.

They sent out an ops vehicle to wave to the guy to check his radio.
Click to expand...

If only they could have driven an ops vehicle up to NWA188 to check their radio :rolleyes:
 
If user fees are enacted, maybe, possibly say hello to age 70-75. Cuss words for many here, for sure.

Flight training is already super expensive, and out of reach of many. Or simply out of interest to many, due to the exorbitantly high start up cost, associated fees and lower starting salaries. Yes the regionals with a bonus system are now paying $50-60k, but will that still be enough in tomorrows money, with higher loans amounts having to be taken out in order to complete training in the future with the addition of user fees?

How much extra on top of the already $43-75k at a variable interest rate, will a perspective student now have to take out to as a supplement to training? For 0-250 hrs.? $10-20k?

How will this affect flight schools, that profit greatly from countries sending their students over because it's cheaper in our current air traffic system to have them learn to fly here, versus in their own nation state? Will privatization make it harder/longer now for individuals namely CFI's to find work and reach 1500 tt?

The interest in aviation as a career is already pretty low, I have to wonder if privatization and user fees will make its interest even lower
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top