User Fees v. Active Traffic

[John Pleisse]

It's early, but clearly, American politics are becoming more eurpoean. The latest posturing by the Whitehouse and FAA clearly indicates there will be user fees at some point, probably in the $15-$25 range per use (my analysis). Inevitably, this will further curb GA use and make our planes and VFR flights more unsafe.

If this becomes a reality, we'll be faced too, with ADS-B compliance. Why not avoid an ADS-B in/out UAT, just get an extended squitter 1090 X-ponder and purchase an active traffice system for $13k installed (Avidyne). Seems like a lot of money, but hold on. I have seen a lot of Mooney panels on Mooneyspace. There are a good number of people who have WAAS GPS's and Mode S transponders already. Most guys have Nexrad in one form or another.

In a world of possible $25 user fees  for VFR flight following, an active traffic system would pay for itself in one to six years if you avoided the system VFR. You could push the envelope to more marginal VFR and still monitor IFR frequencies. You couldn't put a dollar value on the safety enhancement of active traffic either way.

Expensive, flawed logic? Or worthy of more thought?

[MooneyMitch]

User fees are to be vigorously fought!  The doors would then be open with no oversight for increases.  Write your Senators and Congressional Representatives and protest.  Let's not go there.  We MUST speak up!!!

[KSMooniac]

I won't stop fighting user fees for us until every interstate on- and off-ramp has a toll booth as well.  It is the same thing... just a different part of the national infrastructure.

[Piloto]

in the ADS-B/1090MHz environment you do not need an active traffic system since ADS-B transponders periodically transmit the traffic data without the need to be interrogated like on Mode C.

 

José

[John Pleisse]

Quote: Piloto

in the ADS-B/1090MHz environment you do not need an active traffic system since ADS-B transponders periodically transmit the traffic data without the need to be interrogated like on Mode C.

 

José

[Piloto]

Quote: N4352H

[Piloto]

Quote: N4352H

Of course you don't need active Trfx. Point was, buy it a don't deal with ATC or consider ADS-B either. Buck both ends of the system and fly with active trfx and nexrad. Sure you pay, but you would not need any part of the system for every flight accept moderate to hard IFR. You can be minimally compliant with a 1090 squitter for $1500 bucks (WAAS and Mode S enabled), so instead of buying an ADS-B/UAT box some day for $3-$5k and pay possible FAA user fees for every flight, why not consider active trfx. Logic? Not so much?

 

 

Your reasoning makes sense for this side (A/C owner) of the fence but for the other side (politicians and accountants) how do you pay a national debt now of over $15,000,000,000,000 http://www.usdebtclock.org/ You have to milk it from every sector of the population or we are going to end up like Greece.

José

[MooneyMitch]

Keep on writin' the emails to the Fed's. John.   Squeeky wheel...............Squeek away, by all means.  It will take us all to do this.  The Congressional general aviation caucus, AOPA, EAA, etc.  are great voices for us, but WE have to contribute too.

We learned this from our Oceano Airport fight............AOPA came to lend a hand, but we had to do it here, ourselves, boots on the ground so to speak.

Sorry to harp.................but, the future is ours!

[Parker_Woodruff]

Quote: Piloto

José

[jetdriven]

Air traffic control has a 7.6 Billion budget for FY 2011. 

here is some (slightly stale) info from http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=8747

So, 16% of the budget (GA'S share) is 1.2 Billion.  The FAA claims they pull in 3% of the costs, leaving a "GA" shortfall" of 988 million.   Stay withy me here. There are 600K "active pilots" in the USA, per wikipedia.  remove all the ATP's, that leaves around 500K pilots.  Thats 2400$ per person.   You could argue these figures are off by a factor of two.  They are not my numbers.

Here is my part. Its easy to see how the 99% could view ATC services as a "perk" or even a "handout" when administered on a private GA flight.   You are not paying for the entire cost of the ATC service, your Government does.  The same Government we condemn for handing out assistance, social security, medicare, disaster relief payments, crop subsidies, oil subsidies, solar subsidies, and the like.   There aren't any low income (from the 47% who cannot pay income taxes) flying programs I have seen yet.  Certainly no Fannie Mae or HUD airplane loans.

Everyone would like to cut expenses.  The problem is, we all want to cut someone else's.  I am not advocating user fees. I am against them.

 

 

 

 

[tony]

Quote: N4352H

Expensive, flawed logic? Or worthy of more thought?

[John Pleisse]

Quote: tony

I think it’s worse than you think. With ADSB we will be mode S complaint. I’m pretty sure embedded in the data stream is a unique identifier for each tail number. So even if you squawk 1200, they see you and know who you are. If you don’t want to get charged,  I would speculate will we all be forced to turn off our transponders.....Image the chaos

[John Pleisse]

Quote: jetdriven

Air traffic control has a 7.6 Billion budget for FY 2011. 

here is some (slightly stale) info from http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=8747

So, 16% of the budget (GA'S share) is 1.2 Billion.  The FAA claims they pull in 3% of the costs, leaving a "GA" shortfall" of 988 million.   Stay withy me here. There are 600K "active pilots" in the USA, per wikipedia.  remove all the ATP's, that leaves around 500K pilots.  Thats 2400$ per person.   You could argue these figures are off by a factor of two.  They are not my numbers.

Here is my part. Its easy to see how the 99% could view ATC services as a "perk" or even a "handout" when administered on a private GA flight.   You are not paying for the entire cost of the ATC service, your Government does.  The same Government we condemn for handing out assistance, social security, medicare, disaster relief payments, crop subsidies, oil subsidies, solar subsidies, and the like.   There aren't any low income (from the 47% who cannot pay income taxes) flying programs I have seen yet.  Certainly no Fannie Mae or HUD airplane loans.

Everyone would like to cut expenses.  The problem is, we all want to cut someone else's.  I am not advocating user fees. I am against them.

 

 

 

 

[jetdriven]

I hear you, I hear you, John.  The money is there. It is just mismanaged with CF's like this.  Our airport got a 1.2M grant to build a taxiway to nowhere, while the while part of the beacon is OTS for 3 years now, and the taxiway lights inop since the hurricane 2 years ago.

[KSMooniac]

Quote: jetdriven

Here is my part. Its easy to see how the 99% could view ATC services as a "perk" or even a "handout" when administered on a private GA flight.   You are not paying for the entire cost of the ATC service, your Government does.  The same Government we condemn for handing out assistance, social security, medicare, disaster relief payments, crop subsidies, oil subsidies, solar subsidies, and the like.   There aren't any low income (from the 47% who cannot pay income taxes) flying programs I have seen yet.  Certainly no Fannie Mae or HUD airplane loans.

Everyone would like to cut expenses.  The problem is, we all want to cut someone else's.  I am not advocating user fees. I am against them.

[John Pleisse]

I think it goes deeper and they have been upfront about it. A direct assault on General Aviation...we just become desensitized to it. It began with LSA classification, EPA assault on Lead in AV Gas, the Wichita crash in 2009, Congressional hearings when the economy tanked. It is class warfare....a-La-GA. Fat Cats in Private Jets, carbon foot print, rich guys palying with their toys. This is the opinion of who governs us.

Looking at budget numbers and asking ourselves how we got here, is buying into the predicament and accepting it as status quo. It's how they have worn the entire country down. It really is a shame.

[Cruiser]

Quote: jetdriven

Air traffic control has a 7.6 Billion budget for FY 2011. 

here is some (slightly stale) info from http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=8747

So, 16% of the budget (GA'S share) is 1.2 Billion.  The FAA claims they pull in 3% of the costs, leaving a "GA" shortfall" of 988 million.   Stay withy me here. There are 600K "active pilots" in the USA, per wikipedia.  remove all the ATP's, that leaves around 500K pilots.  Thats 2400$ per person.   You could argue these figures are off by a factor of two.  They are not my numbers.

Here is my part. Its easy to see how the 99% could view ATC services as a "perk" or even a "handout" when administered on a private GA flight.   You are not paying for the entire cost of the ATC service, your Government does.  The same Government we condemn for handing out assistance, social security, medicare, disaster relief payments, crop subsidies, oil subsidies, solar subsidies, and the like.   There aren't any low income (from the 47% who cannot pay income taxes) flying programs I have seen yet.  Certainly no Fannie Mae or HUD airplane loans.

Everyone would like to cut expenses.  The problem is, we all want to cut someone else's.  I am not advocating user fees. I am against them.

 

[aviatoreb]

Quote: Cruiser

>I sure would like to know what they are allocating to GA to come up with 16%? If I recall there are only about 250k instrument rated pilots of the 600k total. I just cannot imagine GA is anywhere near 16% it is probably closer to 1% or 2% in actual usage of the FAA system.

>In fact I woould be willing to say that if the FAA were to not provide any service to GA at all their costs would not be any less than they currently are.

>Don't get sucked in by this "pay your fair share" the administration is trying to brainwash us into. The truth be known we are already paying more than that.

I agree it is false economy to charge 250k people to hope to cover 16% - if it ends up chasing off many of these 250k into unsafe practices it becomes dangerous for the airlines too.  How much does a major NTSB investigation cost?  Maybe it too can be paid with the boondoggle of extra funds built $100 at a time with the few still participating GA?  Seems penny wise and dollar foolish.  As far as I see it, ALL airplanes should be encouraged to participate since it is safer for all if as many participate as possible.  They shouldn't be encouraged not to participate with a tax.  Also, will fewer controllers be needed if a small fraction of the traffic stops participating but they have to divert airlines around nonparticipating traffic where they see ski contact radar hits?  Seems like cost will be constant.

[jetdriven]

General Aviation (GA) is a vital component of the aviation sector and the national economy that accounts for some 77 percent of all flights in the United States. It encompasses a wide range of activities, from pilot training to flying for business and personal reasons, delivery of emergency medical services, and sightseeing. Operations range from short-distance flights in single-engine light aircraft to long-distance international flights in corporate-owned 'wide-bodies,' and from emergency aero-medical helicopter operations to airships seen at open-air sporting events. The sole characteristic that General Aviation operations have in common is that flights are not routinely scheduled; they are on-demand.

from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/general-aviation.htm

77% figure from here too:   http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/general_aviation/index.shtm

A 182  takes a s much space in the ATC system as a 747.

Quote: Cruiser

I sure would like to know what they are allocating to GA to come up with 16%? If I recall there are only about 250k instrument rated pilots of the 600k total. I just cannot imagine GA is anywhere near 16% it is probably closer to 1% or 2% in actual usage of the FAA system.

In fact I woould be willing to say that if the FAA were to not provide any service to GA at all their costs would not be any less than they currently are.

Don't get sucked in by this "pay your fair share" the administration is trying to brainwash us into. The truth be known we are already paying more than that.

[ChrisH]

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/IFR_Forecasts/media/artcc10.pdf

77% might be right w/ VFR flights, however, just because we're taking up sky doesn't automatically mean we should be charged (let's start the whole rights vs. privledges discussion again). Based on IFR operations, the 16% is a better number. 

[M20F]

Quote: Parker_Woodruff

[RJBrown]

 The only answer to the budget deficit is to end SOCIALISM. This current administration is pushing SOCIALISM as far as they can. We as Americans are TOO stupid to realise that there is no pie to get a piece of. 60% of the federal budget is to support SOCIALISM. Taxes pay 150% of the cost of government. SOCIALISM steals that extra portion of the taxes and forces us to borrow 40% of what the government spends. THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH. Stop the vote buying. STOP SELLING YOUR VOTE.

No socialist government has EVER not eventually gone bankrupt morally and fiscally. End the stupidity before it ends us.

[jetdriven]

Below

[jetdriven]

Any source for this? Or is this just an empty rant?  Aside from the health Carr act, what has changed? Any specific examples of this slippery slide into the abyss of socialism?

[Cruiser]

No, there is another way. GROWTH.

Instead of our government putting roadblocks and obstacles to new business development they could promote increases in domestic production/manufacturing that will produce MORE INCOME that can pay for these current obligations.

Starting April 1, (Fools Day) the United States will officially have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.