$100 Surcharge to contact air traffic control

corporate jets....fair share.....this clown is like a human Chatty Cathy doll.

 

Ummmm, so don't contact them.....just fly on through!

 

I think the actual wording was the fee was "to fly in controlled airspace." So contacting ATC isn't necessarily a requirement.

Of course, "recreational piston aircraft" are exempted-- anyone think there will be a boom in the 421 market?

 

While I wouldn't support this thing I can't agree that it's an "end of the world" scenario for GA.

First off:

That piston exemption excludes nearly every private aircraft. So now you're looking at corporate turboprop/turbofan aircraft and commercial turboprop/turbofan aircraft. So realistically the smallest aircraft this tax will apply to is a Cessna 208 or a Pilatus PC-12.

According to this website (http://www.planequest.com/operationcosts/op_cost_info.asp?id=69) the operating cost estimate for a C208 is $358/hour based on 500 hours a year. Assuming it's a commercial commuter airline with 9 seats (the maximum # of seats allowed in a single engine aircraft per the FARs) you raise ticket prices $15/head to cover it. If it's a private/corporate aircraft then it's not doing 500 hours/yr it's probably doing more like 200 or 250, and longer legs at that, so the price would still not be THAT big a dent.

It won't really affect GA that much...although it's still got good in principle...

 

Piston is right behind. Don't kid yourself.

How is it possible that anyone continues to think it's OK to give the government more money? Why isn't everyone fighting it?

 

They will spend it responsibly this time .... Honest ....

 

We're becoming just like Mexico, fly thru their airspace, let's say Southern California to Acapulco, and then return home, and receive an airspace handling fee of $700.00- $1,000.00 . I would assume that this fee for the FAA is per leg, not per trip? Haven't read the fine print on the proposal yet. It's not the end of the world, price wise, but it's just one more nuisance-abusance tax. It all adds up. Maybe when ATC requests pilot info, such as tops, and ride conditions, should we send them a bill for outsourcing information to the FAA ? Maybe $500.00 per PIREP? I am starting to like the sound of that, as long as our Government won't issue IOU's for payment!
Gary Bobileff

 

The only problem with your logic is that this tax is in addition to the tax we already pay in order to use the US ATC system.

That tax is known as the FET, and it's a per gallon tax. Which makes a lot of sense, when you think about it-- the larger the aircraft, generally the more fuel it burns, and the more tax it pays.

If the President were serious about raising more revenue, he would propose an increase in the FET. However, he really doesn't care about that-- what he is looking to do is to score cheap political points.

 

AHHH, yes, ....scoring political points, How is that done again? Attacking the upper GA crowd, who employees and/ or manages the blue/ white collar worker. Voicing displeasure about the additional tax falls on deaf ears, as your typical worker doesn't care, or even understand anything about GA taxes. But what our President can't seem to fathom, is that the decision makers who will expand businesses and hire workers has little incentive to do so, when there are so many new taxes around every corner in life. Let's see now, a worker out of work ......is a happy worker/voter? Is that the way it works?
Gary Bobileff

 

This is another attempt by the airlines to destroy private aviation and kill off any potential competition from fractionals. They tried to do it a couple of years ago with what was then called a "user fee" and there was a big fight and it didn't happen.

If you think that they would go away and not try again you are just kidding yourself. The airlines are terrified that the Eclipse model (even though it didn't work) would take the high paying first class passengers. If they spread the tax over a full flight it costs each passenger almost nothing, and they will use it as an add-on to the ticket price. Every time they get a chance they will try to put some kind of onerous fee on small jet aircraft, and by extension, private aviation. The last time it was a lower fee but it was going to apply to all aircraft and it would have made flying as bad as Europe.

Write your congressman. It's the least you can do. If we have to pay this every time we go flying it would kill GA.

 

Just for fun, I looked up the FET and other taxes on Tuesday's A/V Fuel price report for GA. Results at random:
Barcelona Fuel cost with out tax $3.62/gal fuel cost with tax $3.62'
Rome $3.67 with out tax, $3.67 with tax
Edmonton $4,53 with out tax, $5.51 with tax, tax 1.20 OR 22% Tax
St Maarten $4.33 with out tax, $4.55 with tax , tax 0.20 OR 4.5 % Tax
Colorado Springs $3.33 with out tax, $5.0038 with tax, tax 1.67 OR 33% Tax
Orlando $3.36 with out tax, $6.02 with tax , tax 2.66 OR 37% Tax
E. Boston $3.28 with out tax, $7.05 with tax, tax 3.77 OR 54% Tax
Bloomington, Ind. $3.36 with out tax, $4.41 with tax , tax 1.05 OR 24% Tax

Yep, I think that our taxes are still way too high, based upon the above . Does GA really need another tax??
Gary Bobileff

 

True enough. The Europeans are not really a fair comparison, since while they don't have fuel taxes, they do have significant ATC fees-- which more than make up for it.

 

Although not all you need to know.... this type of thinking may be a contributing factor in all of his and the Democrats decisions. This type of rhetoric does not help us heal old wounds but in my opinion creates a larger divide than ever. If only we had Herman King instead of Obuma, Harry Reid, Nancy Peolosi, and their allies in the misguided liberal press.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwQWuQVE6sw[/ame]