Of all places, my favorite ski forum today had a thread about Dave Goode (of carbon fiber ski infamy) buying the first Citation Mustang. The thread turned into a debate about the state of general vs commercial aviation and whether we're getting a free ride. It was kind of an odd debate, as one individual began by assaulting 100LL's pollutive nature, and again with the noise pollution threat from VLJ's with their impending popularity.

Here's the thread(I am Bio-Smear):
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83837

A lot of jokers on there, but it's also a peek into the non-flying public's opinion of us, our facilities, and our actions. The debate heats up toward the end of the thread.

I argued with the guy, but frankly I don't feel that well armed to defend general aviation. I don't really have good facts to support GA. It's true that we're supported by the federal government. What is our fair share, and where should we submit, especially when we get grouped in with other private operators who are very much outside our realm (VLJ's)?

Thoughts, please.

Zane - I thought your responses (and the entire conversation) were quite appropriate and civil. Clearly the guy knows something about aviation.

My only real frustration is that the aviation we love is trapped in a difficult cycle. Not enough demand means we can't get reasonably priced solutions to concerns that many of us have. I would love to have a silent plane that burned carbon dioxide. But it ain't happening.

I disagree that we have to sell out the jets to save ourselves. To the general public (not this informed guy) we are as bad as jets. No one even wants us buzzing around because it is annoying them. (Irony - isn't it always amazing that golfers, pros and amateurs alike, never seem to mind planes or trains or roads, yet a camera shutter will get Tiger to stop in the middle of his backswing!!) But, there is no question that increased access to any rural locales will get people riled up. When the first VLJ hits Johnson Creek, a lot of people in the wilderness aren't going to be happy!

Michael in NH

vwkismet wrote:When the first VLJ hits Johnson Creek, a lot of people in the wilderness aren't going to be happy!

I seem to remember a few Citations going into Johnson Creek over the years....did anyone squawk? Maybe my memory is going along with the rest of my body.
If they have the Williams fanjet they will probably be quieter than a 185....I know that isn't saying much.

Rocky

When people start talking about general aviation getting a free ride, ask them about the sports arena's being built on the public's nickel. Seattle had both Safeco Field (Mariners) and Qwest Field (Seahawks) built in the last 10 years or so using alot of public money. Now the Sonics are demanding a new publically-funded arena also. The last couple years we've also had NASCAR sniffing around, agitating for a big regional race track-- again, to be built using alot of public money.
Public airports are generally clasified as "essential facilitites", used to transport travelers, accident victims, blood/organ donations, etc. A much better use of public funding than a sports arena, in my book.

Eric

I think you did a great job of representing GA with thoughtful arguments throughout. I think TruckeeLocal is a bit hyper sensitive about the noise put out by the corporate jets, but that is a subjective point. I live less than a mile from our regional airport, from wihich US Air flies -8s and RJs routinely and I rarely, if ever, hear their operations. They are very quiet on approach and only audible for a brief period on departure. Ours jets at the base are a different story, but we have some procedures in place to appease the natives.

What I think TruckeeLocal fails to amply consider is the broader economic impact of the passengers of the aircraft he finds so distasteful. They are, to some measurable extent, directly responsible for the prosperity of the region. They are the people that build the McMansions, shop in gourmet grocery stores and eat in high-dollar restaurants, and buy loads of gucci gear. That demand in turn creates jobs for locals whose aspirations are satisfied by a season pass, new boards, and overflowing bowls of ramen.

Of course, private jet pax alone don't create that level of demand, but I-80 picks up where they leave off. I wonder if he lobbies against the hordes making the mach run from the bay area.

Tourists of any flavor are a curse and a blessing. No one likes traffic, but likewise no one likes going tits up because their business can't sell enough X to stay afloat. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

On a sidenote I wonder what virtuous endeavors TruckeeLocal pursued to achieve his early retirement. Money like that is rarely made without some type/degree of impact.

I think the way ahead for us is to work doggedly at the grass roots level to educate people on all aspects of GA. Programs like EAA Young Eagles go a long way toward encouraging and educating a new generation on what GA and aviation at large have to offer. Furthermore, working constructively to educate communities on the positive economic impact of small airports may be the deciding factor in fending off efforts to curtail/eliminate funding to support our beloved fields.

In the meantime I'm happy that I live in a place where the car gas is ethanol free and there are no yuppie ranches on the departure end of the grass strips I frequent.

Thanks guys. I'm convinced that unless you're a pilot or have experienced the joys of flying that planes will always be either a nuisance or fearsome mystery to you. Which is why I think everyone needs to be armed with a few quick positive facts about GA that you can rattle off to the naysayers.

Whattya got?

I live this debate every day. Teton gravity is based here in Jackson Hole and the valley is full of well funded trust fund babies that have all the time in the world to bitch. These guys/ gals will board a 757 at the jackson hole airport, fly to DC and testify how planes are destroying the enviornment. Hipocrocy at it finest.. My experimental plane is based at JAC, I work for the FBO there as the prime construction contractor, I plow snow there in the winter, I am also the AOPA ASN rep for JAC. This month I was informed I am being thrown out of my hangar so the airport board can park their new million dollar snowplow in it. This is the same board that has all the based tenants sign a contract that only aircraft can be parked in hangars. Hipocrocy again,, are ya getting my drift. I am a recovering racer, motorhead, tinkerer, idiot that has installed a NASCAR V-8 in an experimental aircraft and I can admit that 2 stroke snowmobiles do not belong in the Yellowstone, Grand Teton parks. They are wayyyy to dirty in that pristene area. The local sledders call me a traitor, the tree huggers call me ignorant motorhead. There seems to be no middle ground in this debate, its either fest or famine. As for the issue of GA not paying its fair share let me float this.. Teton County, where I live spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on search and rescue, and sometimes on body removal in this area. The VAST majority are mountian climbers who fall and either kill or seriously injure themselves. Most have no insurance so they get free medical treatment. Cross country skiers who get caught up in an avalance and need help, or a body bag. None of these groups pay a dime in fees to use the backcountry but cost the government millions when they screw up. Bicyclists who scream loudly that they want equal, if not more rights then cars/trucks on the highways. These same people don't pay a dime for road upkeep while peddling away on their 1000+ dollar road bikes. Don't get me started.

Thanks Zane for the edit thingie.......

Click the EDIT button in the upper right hand corner.

zane wrote:...everyone needs to be armed with a few quick positive facts about GA that you can rattle off to the naysayers.
Whattya got?

I agree, Zane. There's no knight on a white horse riding in to save us...We are the spokespeople we've been waiting for.

One issue I like to bring up is: (Everybody is interested in the longevity of their pocket book.) Every hundred dollars which is spent by a transient aviator, visiting our local airport environs, will stay in circulation in our community between eight & thirty-five times before leaving our local economy. That adds up to quite a significant contribution in a small town, over the long-haul. And all from somebody who comes quickly, drops their dough - then leaves. No further impact on our community than that. Quite a good deal, overall.

Then there's the issue of air-ambulance, and freight, and all the other necessities of society that seldom are noticed on the public radar.

I'll bet that AOPA has a brochure of "Talking points", if you check out their site www.aopa.org

I hope that we're collectively supporting AOPA with our memberships ($39 per year), as they are the best lobbying voice we're likely to have en masse.

Other suggestions, everyone? Thanks, Berk

Forgive me for posting when I don't have the time to read the other post, nor this one as closely as I would like. (I'm in the middle of initial training on the A320) The good thing is that I'll be done in time for the backcountry season.

Anyway, here is the link will give you a lot of info.

http://www.aopa.org/faafundingdebate/

its interesting the cry that leaded fuel is Bad, and hence justifies their argument for aiport closure..

little interesting thing going on here re leaded Fuels v's Unleaded fuels.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread ... 034&page=2

Give me leaded fuels any day over Carcinogenic Unleaded fuels used in every car on the road!

im getting back into finishing up a private pilot's license (there are a lot of requirements to be met), and im really more depressed now about GA than i was about 5 years ago when i did my initial training. it all got started about two weeks ago when i was visiting my parents in small town, mississippi, and had them drive me out to the local airport. it looked completely abandoned, wind sock torn to shreds, etc. apparently it isnt abandoned, but its obviously not used much. mississippi is FULL of airports like this ... MANY of the municipalities in the state constructed small airports after world war 2. there were very high hopes for aviation at the time, especially general aviation.

most of those airports are now abandoned and/or used by only a handful of enthusiasts. most of the aircraft in use are 1960's and 70's vintage which require constant maintenance. im sure this is no surprise to people who have been flying for awhile, but to someone just starting a pilot's license, its shocking. we dont drive around cars from the 60's and 70's, unless we are collectors.

anyway, what im getting to (and this is imo only, im not trying to step on any toes), is that i think that general aviation is being regulated out of existence. new aircraft cost as much or more than a house, and there is little incentive to create new designs because of the expense of the certification process. the cost and requirements of flight training are truly astronomical (and i think that both high cost and high requirements are directly related to over-regulation). as long as the cost is so high (and it will be as long as the requirements are so high), more and more people are going to be squeezed out of GA. add to this the rising cost of gas prices, and the picture becomes even more grim.

imo, the sport pilot license is a BIG step in the right direction ... but even it is ridiculous. in my mind, there is no reason on earth why the sport pilot license is enough to fly the new taildragger sport cub being developed by cubcrafters, but is insufficient to fly a tricycle-gear vfr cessna 150. besides, all of the minimum numbers aside, the only people who REALLY know whether you are ready to have a license, in ANY plane, are your instructor and the examiner.

btw ... i have no problem w/ faa regulation of commercial/ATP flight. but to me, GA is completely different. its your own time and your own money (your own freedom, essentially), the only people you put at risk are yourself and those who consent to fly with you. sure you could crash into people on the ground or whatever, but you could do that just as easily with a CAR .

i think the only way that GA will survive is with a change in the laws, and especially a dramatic change in FAA regulation of GA. anyway, sorry for the huge rambling post

btw, i agree 100% w/ berk ... the best thing GA has going for it right now is the AOPA

n8

Me thinks you are preaching to the choir. Good luck in getting your license.

Like more and more things in our country, general aviation is becoming limited to the wealthy few and to those of us with the passion. We will give up other things in order to fly.

It seems like none of us can come up with any real, practical solutions to what appears to be inevitable.

Maybe it is time for all pilots to get together.

Take care
flyer

N8 Good luck on the license. I always get dicouraged when I think of flying. It is so damn expensive, but I love it so dearly. Everytime I try to substitute it with something else in my life....I always come back to aviation in one way or another. I feel like I have been cursed!!! I agree gov regulation has practical killed GA....just like everything else they get thier fingers into...

greenhorn wrote:...I always get dicouraged when I think of flying. It is so damn expensive, but I love it so dearly... I feel like I have been cursed!!! ...

Aaaaaaaa. NO! It's only been the last few generations that have even *had* the ability to fly! This is an awesome and amazing blessing!
In Europe and elsewhere, GA flying experiences conditions, politically and financially, that are a whole lot worse than here.
We've *got* to exert whatever pressure we're able to, though AOPA, and/or through our own contacts, to keep our ability to fly available here in the USA. This is not a lost cause, unless we all do nothing.
Everything we do makes a difference, including what we don't do.
Thanks for listening, Berk

I just got a reply from Congressman Brian Baird from Washington State and he thanked me for expressing my strong support for General Aviation and its importance in our communities. He said he supports our issue and is against the user fees.

Thank you for contacting me regarding FAA user fees. I appreciate hearing from you, and welcome the opportunity to respond.



Let me begin by saying that I take my responsibility to represent the people who live in Southwest Washington very seriously, which is why I deeply appreciate you taking the time to write me. Hearing your comments and concerns on the important issues facing our country is important to me as I work to represent Southwest Washington in Congress. I believe that our nation's government is only as strong as the individuals who choose to actively participate in its improvement and am grateful when constituents take the time to contact me.



I appreciate your comments regarding proposed Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) fees in the President's budget. I share your concern about the Administration imposing various user fees on airline operators, pilots, or adopting a peak hour pricing system. I am opposed to the adoption of new FAA user fees.



As a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I will certainly keep your comments in mind when the House debates FAA reauthorization this year.



I receive thousands of letters and emails every week. Please be assured that I do take note of your concerns, and sincerely appreciate you taking the time to contact me. I will keep your thoughts in mind as I continue to represent Southwest Washington .



Thank you again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to do so in the future if I may be of further assistance. In addition, I invite you to visit my website at http://www.house.gov/baird/IMA/email.shtml and sign up for periodic email updates about my work in Congress.

Here's the answer I got from Senator Patty Murray in regards to the proposed general aviation fees. I think I need Zane"s Beagle decoder ring to analyze this:
Dear Friend :



Thank you for contacting me regarding federal aviation and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). I appreciate hearing from you, and I apologize for the delay in my response.



As you know, S. 1300, the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act, would reauthorize the FAA, the programs that it operates, and its funding levels. It was introduced by Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) in the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which I do not sit on. This bill includes changes and revisions to many different policies and provisions, such as the passenger facility charge, and allows pilots to fly until age 65 if certain conditions are met. This bill also would establish an Air Traffic Control Modernization Oversight Board, and would install alert systems for controllers and flight crews in the event of certain runway complications. S. 1300 would require air carriers to provide passengers with adequate food, water, and restroom facilities in the event of a substantially delayed flight departure. Additionally, it would require that passengers be allowed to de-board a delayed aircraft if it has been more than three hours and there is no plan or clear timeframe for departure.



As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and the Chair of the Senate Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development Subcommittee, I am committed to enhancing our transportation systems. An efficient aviation system is crucial to the economic vitality of our country and the quality of life for every American. It is very important that the federal government consider the safety and quality of life of all Americans when revising and adding aviation policies.



Rest assured, I will carefully review the provisions of this bill and keep your views in mind when the Senate debates and considers it. Thank you again for contacting me.



I hope all is well in Olympia .