User fees?
10-07-2006 | 10:03 AM
#4
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,143
Likes: 801
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
The ATA has a point that the cost of handling an IFR flight has nothing to do with the amount of fuel burned (which is how fees are charged today). The cost is determined mostly by how long the aircraft is in the system...but a light plane that spends two hours in a busy tracon (like socal) requires more effort (and $) than an airliner that spends 2 hours on a center freq.
On the other hand, much of the airspace and ATC systems we have in place were designed to protect airliners, mostly from each other so I suspect that it would be unfair to charge light GA extra to fly in a system that most of them don't really need anyway. And GA was here first...
Bizjets are another story...they operate like airliners and need similar handling so maybe there should be a usage fee for flight-level operations.
10-07-2006 | 01:26 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
From: Retired
Ask the Canadians how well user fees have worked for them. Air Canada blamed the privatization of NavCanada for the majority of it's bankruptcy woes.
As it stands right now, GA is bearing the brunt of fees. Jet fuel purchased by 121 pax operators is not taxed, yet nearly $2 per gallon of jet fuel purchased by GA goes to the feds. In Kansas they decided to give Jet fuel the same fees placed on diesel because the legislature decided that since it could be used in motor vehicles it should be taxed accordingly. Never mind the fact that it's over $3 per gallon more expensive and only available at airports plus they're already charging state and federal taxes that were already in place.
When you privatize a system such as ATC you're opening yourselves up to the lowest bidder. Which will only do just enough to keep things at the status quo or worse yet, cut corners to maximize profits. This is the exact reason that I feel ATC should remain a government function.
As it stands right now, GA is bearing the brunt of fees. Jet fuel purchased by 121 pax operators is not taxed, yet nearly $2 per gallon of jet fuel purchased by GA goes to the feds. In Kansas they decided to give Jet fuel the same fees placed on diesel because the legislature decided that since it could be used in motor vehicles it should be taxed accordingly. Never mind the fact that it's over $3 per gallon more expensive and only available at airports plus they're already charging state and federal taxes that were already in place.
When you privatize a system such as ATC you're opening yourselves up to the lowest bidder. Which will only do just enough to keep things at the status quo or worse yet, cut corners to maximize profits. This is the exact reason that I feel ATC should remain a government function.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
