Stark reminder

[hammdo]

One point I would make is if we stopped sending money to other countries to build ‘their’ infrastructure, we might be able to discuss upgrades here, then ‘help’ others.
 

Yep addicted to ‘USA federal’ crack - all states and other countries have it…

-Don

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

It is recognized that those who make a profit from infrastructure pay more than private use. Toll roads commercial sized vehicles pay more. 

It is interesting that you claim this.  Here in "free market" Texas, for an approx. 4,000 lb car or SUV w/ two (2) axles (about 15 ft long) to enter the Harris County Toll Road at a main plaza, it cost $1.50.  For a Commercial five (5) axle Semi-truck trailer, 80,000 lbs (about 72 ft long) at the same plaza, it costs $7.00.  

So a Commercial semi-truck pays 4.7 x my car or SUV.  And it is about 4.8 x as long as my car.   I am not seeing that the commercial truck "using the infrastructure to make a profit" pays any premium over the average driver.

If we look at weight (which ultimately breaks down the roadway), the Commercial truck weighs 20 times my car. And they are only paying 4.7 times my car.  It looks like the Commercial (working for profit) truck is getting a great bargain.

[GeeBee]

1 minute ago, 1980Mooney said:

It is interesting that you claim this.  Here in "free market" Texas, for an approx. 4,000 lb car or SUV w/ two (2) axles (about 15 ft long) to enter the Harris County Toll Road at a main plaza, it cost $1.50.  For a Commercial five (5) axle Semi-truck trailer, 80,000 lbs (about 72 ft long) at the same plaza, it costs $7.00.  

So a Commercial semi-truck pays 4.7 x my car or SUV.  And it is about 4.8 x as long as my car.   I am not seeing that the commercial truck "using the infrastructure to make a profit" pays any premium over the average driver.

If we look at weight (which ultimately breaks down the roadway), the Commercial truck weighs 20 times my car. And they are only paying 4.7 times my car.  It looks like the Commercial (working for profit) truck is getting a great bargain.

Don’t normalize the exception. Post modern thinking

[1980Mooney]

1 minute ago, GeeBee said:

Don’t normalize the exception. Post modern thinking

Exception?....I think you mean the "norm".  Next I will be hearing the those that make a profit from infrastructure like power and water pay more than private users.   That is why all these Crypto Mining power hogs are setting up in Texas.  When the Grid is overloaded, ERCOT designed premium pricing kicks in which slams private users on variable price plans while the Crypto hog shuts off and pays no premium.  

[GeeBee]

Again 1 of 50 states, you are only discussing your locale. 

[Fly Boomer]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

The government wanted this system to protect public transportation and it is only right the airlines pay for the protection they get and required to have.We 91 operators should pay for the system we need, not the one the airlines need or are required to have.

But the big boys have more lobbyists and deeper pockets.

[GeeBee]

Here is how I look at it. This ATC thing is a lot like Social Security. You saw a problem and rather than fix the problem for those who actually had a problem you created this grandiose scheme in which every one had to participate on the same level because without buy in from everyone you could not make your grandiose scheme function. The problem is the pyramid eventually collapses and then you look for someone to blame, in the case of aviation the little guy, in the case of Social Security the rich person "who does not need it" aka "means testing". Here is how I see it. These politicians are like bird dogs that keep wanting to chase skunks. Well you know what? When you catch that skunk, I'm not going to shoot it to protect you, I"m going to let you get a good snoot full, and I'm going to make you ride in the back of the truck in the winter and sleep in the shed for a week. No tomato juice baths for you, and the next time you want to chase that "skunk" aka "comprehensive solution" you're going to remember the day and decide pushing birds is a whole lot better.

That means, "hands off my ATC" and I"m cashing that huge SS check you promised me till the day I die. I'll let my broke progeny take out their vengeance for your stupidity upon you (aka sleep in the shed). Only way you'll learn.

[dkkim73]

2 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Exception?....I think you mean the "norm".  Next I will be hearing the those that make a profit from infrastructure like power and water pay more than private users.   That is why all these Crypto Mining power hogs are setting up in Texas.  When the Grid is overloaded, ERCOT designed premium pricing kicks in which slams private users on variable price plans while the Crypto hog shuts off and pays no premium.  

An interesting example might be "net neutrality". While it is has been held up as protecting The Little Guy, it arguably has historically allowed large players (Gloogletube Alphabet Octopus) a fairly cheap means of distribution subsidized by others. 

I'm not sure this proves the rule, as an example or as an exception, but it is another example of how entities can abuse the system. 

To a certain extent, this should be self-correcting by market interests, and ideally "pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered". However, you could argue there's a perverse environment in which public opinion can be bought (introduce straw men and distracting issues), there is regulatory capture, etc, etc. 

 

[skykrawler]

I certainly don't use $14000 of IFR (or flight following) services in a year.

I know a private jet that goes to TEB pretty much weekly - or more, not to mention JAX.

[slowflyin]

So I guess if all of GA stopped flying the FAA would shrink and everyone would save money?   Or if we started paying a 10% of the cost the airlines would pay 10% less?     

[Hank]

13 hours ago, slowflyin said:

So I guess if all of GA stopped flying the FAA would shrink and everyone would save money?   Or if we started paying a 10% of the cost the airlines would pay 10% less?     

When they start charging for ATC services, I start using them only when flying in IMC . . .  And if the weather is iffy, launch VFR in the blind squawking 1200, and get a pop-up clearance only if necessary to complete the flight. You know, like it used to be before ADSB ( which i also don't have  ).

Edited July 26 by Hank

[1980Mooney]

Did anyone bother to notice that ATC User Fees are a key goal of conservative agendas, Heritage Foundation, and Project 2025?

From Project 2025:

“The FAA is the only modern Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in the world that does not assess fees for its services"

"Require the FAA to operate more like a business."

”at a minimum separate the ATO from the FAA”

"Shift from aviation user taxes to fees for air traffic services paid directly to the ATO."

[N201MKTurbo]

6 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Did anyone bother to notice that ATC User Fees are a key goal of conservative agendas, Heritage Foundation, and Project 2025?

From Project 2025:

“The FAA is the only modern Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in the world that does not assess fees for its services"

"Require the FAA to operate more like a business."

”at a minimum separate the ATO from the FAA”

"Shift from aviation user taxes to fees for air traffic services paid directly to the ATO."

I don't know of any candidates who care about project 2025.

[1980Mooney]

12 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I don't know of any candidates who care about project 2025.

Don’t you mean that you don’t know of any “that will publicly admit YET”. Funded by Koch Foundation among others. Seriously doubt it or goals are going away. Likely will resurface with a name change. 
https://www.heritage.org/press/project-2025-reaches-100-coalition-partners-continues-grow-preparation-next-president

[Hank]

4 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

Don’t you mean that you don’t know of any “that will publicly admit YET”. Funded by Koch Foundation among others. Seriously doubt it or goals are going away. Likely will resurface with a name change. 
https://www.heritage.org/press/project-2025-reaches-100-coalition-partners-continues-grow-preparation-next-president

Let's keep the politics off of mooneyspace! This is my refuge from all of the fingerprinting, yelling and intolerance. 

Your point-of-view in politics doesn't matter, please post all of it that you want in the appropriate non-aviation sites.

[N201MKTurbo]

My last political post.

If the conservatives prevail, at least we will be able to afford the user fees.

[Hank]

33 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

. . . . at least we will be able to afford the user fees.

I'll just stop flying IFR, and let Atlanta Approach vector traffic away from me as I go past, instead of vectoring me out into the boonies. If the stupid Bravo didn't go to 13,500, I'd save myself a half hour and go over!

[1980Mooney]

29 minutes ago, Hank said:

Let's keep the politics off of mooneyspace! This is my refuge from all of the fingerprinting, yelling and intolerance. 

Your point-of-view in politics doesn't matter, please post all of it that you want in the appropriate non-aviation sites.

Oh you mean like this “point-of-view in politics”  post in a “Fuel Cost” topic on MooneySpace by someone named “Hank”?..

“Also, Kalifornia is busy giving money hand over fist to illegal aliens, and ignoring the citizens from whom the money is taken . . . .“

 

 

[Ragsf15e]

3 minutes ago, Hank said:

I'll just stop flying IFR, and let Atlanta Approach vector traffic away from me as I go past, instead of vectoring me out into the boonies. If the stupid Bravo didn't go to 13,500, I'd save myself a half hour and go over!

I hear you!  One thing that bugs me are a couple of class C airspaces i fly by take my vfr flight following as permission to just vector me way out of my way even when my route wouldn’t have actually gone through their class c borders.  I don’t mind a few small heading changes to avoid the ifr arrivals, but if you’re going to vector me all over the place then I might not want flight following any more and that’s not good for either of us!

[MikeOH]

9 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

I hear you!  One thing that bugs me are a couple of class C airspaces i fly by take my vfr flight following as permission to just vector me way out of my way even when my route wouldn’t have actually gone through their class c borders.  I don’t mind a few small heading changes to avoid the ifr arrivals, but if you’re going to vector me all over the place then I might not want flight following any more and that’s not good for either of us!

Spot on!  Same thing here in southern California.  I'll monitor approach even if I'm not on FF and sometimes I piss them off, and I feel a bit uncomfortable, but why should I be the only one that gets vectored all over?

I went on a TRACON tour and their big 'push' was to have you always talking to them; we're here to "help you!" Yeah, maybe...but they'll put you on a vector and forget about you (hand-off to the next sector without informing that next guy), VFR slam dunk after an altitude restriction (held at 5K, then dumped to tower 4 miles out to lose 3K and slow to pattern speed), and when you ask, "Mooney Nxxx would like to start our VFR descent now" (after being restricted) and get a snarky toned come back, "Mooney Nxxx VFR altitude is pilot's discretion"...even if it's the same controller that restricted me! (I believe the proper phraseology would be, "cancel altitude restriction, descend pilot discretion") So, he forgets he restricted me and I'm the idiot for asking??  More common response is, "ask the next controller for lower"...which is the set up for the slam dunk!

With ADSB-out I've even had them blind call me with my call-sign if I'm not on FF. Remember, this is all VFR outside of Class C.

/rant off

To be fair, most of the time they're great.  I'm just pointing out that sometimes I'd just like to enjoy a nice flight without being hassled so I forgo FF

[Schllc]

54 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

I hear you!  One thing that bugs me are a couple of class C airspaces i fly by take my vfr flight following as permission to just vector me way out of my way even when my route wouldn’t have actually gone through their class c borders.  I don’t mind a few small heading changes to avoid the ifr arrivals, but if you’re going to vector me all over the place then I might not want flight following any more and that’s not good for either of us!

I have a class c in the route to my home field and four times they have left a phone number at my tower for me to call when I land.
When I call they ask me to talk to them when overflying their VFR airspace. I don’t really understand the purpose of “airspace” if they want me to talk to them when I am NOT in their airspace. 
I always fly at least 2k over their lid, and fly directly over the airport to avoid the corridors. 
I just tell them I’ll cal, if convenient, but not if I want the quickest route home. 

[Hank]

14 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

. . . when you ask, "Mooney Nxxx would like to start our VFR descent now" (after being restricted) and get a snarky toned come back, "Mooney Nxxx VFR altitude is pilot's discretion"...even if it's the same controller that restricted me! (I believe the proper phraseology would be, "cancel altitude restriction, descend pilot discretion") So, he forgets he restricted me and I'm the idiot for asking??  More common response is, "ask the next controller for lower"...

I hate the former, too. Leaving AVL, Tower vectored me into steeply rising terrain and forgot about me, they sounded surprised when I asked to turn on course.

In the latter case, "cancel flight following" is a good option, unless you're in cluttered airspace like SoCal. It works for me!

Often as I'm approaching home, ATL will ask if I have the field in sight, often at 20+ miles out with heavy summer haze, so that they can cancel on me, VFR or IFR. If I think I see it, I'll let them know; sometimes VFR, they don't ask, just tell me "no observed traffic between you and your destination, squawk VFR, frequency change approved".

[MikeOH]

While you could certainly ask to cancel FF, I don't think that works if you've been given an actual ATC instruction; vector or altitude, or both.  That is, you can't just respond to their instruction with, "Mooney Nxxx canceling FF"

[Ragsf15e]

6 minutes ago, Schllc said:

I have a class c in the route to my home field and four times they have left a phone number at my tower for me to call when I land.
When I call they ask me to talk to them when overflying their VFR airspace. I don’t really understand the purpose of “airspace” if they want me to talk to them when I am NOT in their airspace. 
I always fly at least 2k over their lid, and fly directly over the airport to avoid the corridors. 
I just tell them I’ll cal, if convenient, but not if I want the quickest route home. 

And that’s exactly the tradeoff I don’t think the younger controllers get.  I have definitely had the same thought… oh im coming up on the handoff to xxx approach, maybe it’s time to cancel ff.  Just because you’re vfr doesn’t mean they should make you the only one being vectored!  Now, to be fair, my home class c (Spokane) is very good to ga, but they’re also not very busy. 

[Ragsf15e]

3 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

While you could certainly ask to cancel FF, I don't think that works if you've been given an actual ATC instruction; vector or altitude, or both.  That is, you can't just respond to their instruction with, "Mooney Nxxx canceling FF"

Yeah, that’s where it gets interesting.  We should look at the reg, but it’s something like “will follow all ATC instructions…”. So once ff has given you a heading and then you cancel ff (remaining clear of airspace of course), i think they could still say you violated the regulations.