Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:50 AM - Yak 52 brake valve replacement (Michael B. Cavanagh)
2. 10:27 AM - Re: Yak 52 brake valve replacement (A. Dennis Savarese)
3. 10:29 AM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
4. 12:03 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Dr. Robert Schroeder)
5. 12:13 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Rico Jaeger)
6. 01:46 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (William Halverson)
7. 02:11 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (cjpilot710@aol.com)
8. 02:15 PM - Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Adrian Coop Cooper)
9. 03:53 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (jblake207@comcast.net)
10. 04:10 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (bill wade)
11. 04:13 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (William Halverson)
12. 06:10 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Roger Kemp M.D.)
13. 06:26 PM - Re: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows (Roger Kemp M.D.)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Yak 52 brake valve replacement |
I am looking for a replacement brake valve for my Yak 52. (the green one below
the front seat on the right) Does anyone know of a source? The problem appears
to be wear in the brake valve cylinders themselves. There is not pitting
or scratches, but there are polished areas of wear. Cleaning, lubing, and re-pressurizing
and testing the unit reveals no improvement.
Thanks, Mike Cavanagh
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak 52 brake valve replacement |
Doug Sapp, our CJ6 parts guru has overhaul kits. The assembly you are
talking about is the brake differential valve. The unit in the CJ is
identical to the one in the 52.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 8/19/2013 11:47 AM, Michael B. Cavanagh wrote:
>
> I am looking for a replacement brake valve for my Yak 52. (the green one below
the front seat on the right) Does anyone know of a source? The problem appears
to be wear in the brake valve cylinders themselves. There is not pitting
or scratches, but there are polished areas of wear. Cleaning, lubing, and
re-pressurizing and testing the unit reveals no improvement.
>
>
> Thanks, Mike Cavanagh
>
>
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
over that boundary many times.
I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
anyway.
KOSH is a public use airport with a Control Tower. It is owned by the
COUNTY and not the "EAA". That control tower is authorized and managed
by the FAA.
This FAA managed Control Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROL to all aircraft taking off from, and arriving to that specific
airport. This is not an OPTIONAL FUNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show
Security", so that comparison does not "fly"! In any case, that Control
Tower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
Every single towered airport keeps a count of every take-off and landing
performed. Those numbers are used to determine manning levels at the
tower. If you have a lot of activity at the airport, be it General
Aviation, Military, or Commercial, the FAA will increase or decrease
manning levels accordingly.
There are many cases where airport activity increases dramatically for a
number of reasons. When that happens, and that activity is known in
advance, the FAA increases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the
reason. This happens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE
DAY.
As I said, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide
mandated FLIGHT SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on
the ground as mandated by FEDERAL LAW. They are funded by the Federal
Government through a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.
That funding does not include charging the Aviation Public directly for
their services, which is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.
Keep in mind that these kinds of charges have never been made before, to
the EAA or anyone else. It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges",
which President Obama during a direct interview said that he and his
administration supported. If you consider that fact to be: "constant
hysterical blaming of Obama", then so be it.
The FAA has never done this before, the FAA is under control of the
present administration, the present administration has promoted "Usage
Charges" to General Aviation. Now normally I would think 2+2=4
However, you are implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical blaming of
Obama"
Really? Good luck with that.
The subject is ATC Fees at Air Shows. It really should be: "Usage
Charges of any type to General Aviation". Oshkosh was just the opening
shot. More is sure to follow. I can't imagine why any General Aviation
pilot or aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense
and would support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the
EAA was involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support
the folks on the Yak-List.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:41
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
EAA Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is
owned by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the
business of providing free support to a privately owned, for profit
event. It can be argued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel
sales, etc that ATC support should be provided. This doesn't work in the
real world. Go to any Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find
that even though there is local law enforcement there they are being
paid by the event to be there to work.
I am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of Obama only
weakens arguments as well as making it that much harder to take the
Republicans seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO by
not having stellar candidates to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job,
Romney= Obviously a part of big business / financial interests at a time
when distrust of the financial industry is at an all time low.
If the Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball
finding a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on that
subject...
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
Mark,
Well stated...Thank you for reminding all of us about FAA tower staffing and
responsibilities.
ras
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV NAVAIR, WD
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 12:25 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed over
that boundary many times.
I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
anyway.
KOSH is a public use airport with a Control Tower. It is owned by the
COUNTY and not the "EAA". That control tower is authorized and managed
by the FAA.
This FAA managed Control Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL to
all aircraft taking off from, and arriving to that specific airport. This is
not an OPTIONAL FUNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show Security", so that
comparison does not "fly"! In any case, that Control
Tower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
Every single towered airport keeps a count of every take-off and landing
performed. Those numbers are used to determine manning levels at the tower.
If you have a lot of activity at the airport, be it General Aviation,
Military, or Commercial, the FAA will increase or decrease manning levels
accordingly.
There are many cases where airport activity increases dramatically for a
number of reasons. When that happens, and that activity is known in
advance, the FAA increases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the
reason. This happens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE DAY.
As I said, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide mandated
FLIGHT SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on the ground as
mandated by FEDERAL LAW. They are funded by the Federal Government through
a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.
That funding does not include charging the Aviation Public directly for
their services, which is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.
Keep in mind that these kinds of charges have never been made before, to the
EAA or anyone else. It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges", which
President Obama during a direct interview said that he and his
administration supported. If you consider that fact to be: "constant
hysterical blaming of Obama", then so be it.
The FAA has never done this before, the FAA is under control of the present
administration, the present administration has promoted "Usage Charges" to
General Aviation. Now normally I would think 2+2=4 However, you are
implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical blaming of Obama"
Really? Good luck with that.
The subject is ATC Fees at Air Shows. It really should be: "Usage Charges
of any type to General Aviation". Oshkosh was just the opening shot. More
is sure to follow. I can't imagine why any General Aviation pilot or
aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense and would
support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the EAA was
involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support
the folks on the Yak-List.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:41
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
EAA Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is owned
by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the business of
providing free support to a privately owned, for profit event. It can be
argued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel sales, etc that ATC
support should be provided. This doesn't work in the real world. Go to any
Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find that even though there is
local law enforcement there they are being paid by the event to be there to
work.
I am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of Obama only weakens
arguments as well as making it that much harder to take the Republicans
seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO by not having stellar
candidates to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job, Romney= Obviously a part of
big business / financial interests at a time when distrust of the financial
industry is at an all time low.
If the Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball
finding a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on that
subject...
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
As usual, Mark has a great grip on some solid facts here. No organization
will ever be perfect in everyone's eyes - EAA included. But they do strive
to be the best and make their membership happy / proud of what they / we
do. As far as I know - EAA is not a "business." It was founded by Paul
Poberezny as a club on the basis that aviation ROCKS and should be within
reach of the "common man" w/ a vision and drive - not just surgeons, CEO's
and assorted "big-leaguer's." Additionally, if you read the yearly
financial report, they deal routinely in 7 and 8 figures regarding cost and
OUTput. I went to my 28th consecutive OSH / AirVenture this year and found
it to be healthy and refreshing - despite a still-struggling national
economy and complete lack of current military hardware. Occasionally,
during my 10-day stay, I strayed off-field for a change of pace for a bite.
When locals engaged me in conversation regarding the event, I was stunned
how much erroneous / negative hype was out there. I heard things like EAA
got too "greedy" and now that the FAA has stepped in, EAA is "penalizing"
it's members w/ excessive ticket prices, parking prices and off-the-scale
food prices. INCORRECT. I was routinely excited to correct that
misinformation when the opportunity arose. The ticket prices have not
escalated past the usual minimal yearly increase - nor did parking. Our
membership dues have not risen more than $10 in 20 years. And food this
year - besides being the most diverse ever offered on the field - was
priced just as if you went to those venues OFF field...Subway, Machine
Shed, A & W, Etc. When is the last time you got a cheeseburger for $3 @
EAA? Conversely, businesses NEAR EAA look forward to those 10 days as a
time to gouge. The Hilton getting $400 / night? Heck, I stay at the dorms
which were $15 / night "back in the day" and just went to $70 / night this
year. Every time I've written EAA I've received a personal reply. I wrote
Paul back in the 90's to say "thanks for all you've done" and he invited me
to work w/ him on his PT-23 restoration. I worked side-by-side w/ one of
the most sincere & dedicated aviators ever.
I don't know. I'm a fan I guess. Every time I chat w/ someone who traveled
hundreds or thousands of miles - or even around the world to partake in
AirVenture, I almost feel guilty it's only 90 miles away by car and 35
minutes by air. But maybe instead of guilty...I should just feel "blessed."
EAA isn't perfect. Neither is America. But MY "perfection" will never be
YOUR perfection and vice versa. Hopefully, we can all live relatively
happily w/ the way things are - and if / when we see them endangered, be
proactive instead of simply passively disgusted. There will ALWAYS be room
for improvement. But before we start pointing fingers though, let's look a
little deeper for the facts.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
> over that boundary many times.
>
> I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
> That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
> assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
> anyway.
>
> KOSH is a public use airport with a Control Tower. It is owned by the
> COUNTY and not the "EAA". That control tower is authorized and managed
> by the FAA.
>
> This FAA managed Control Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC
> CONTROL to all aircraft taking off from, and arriving to that specific
> airport. This is not an OPTIONAL FUNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show
> Security", so that comparison does not "fly"! In any case, that Control
> Tower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
>
> Every single towered airport keeps a count of every take-off and landing
> performed. Those numbers are used to determine manning levels at the
> tower. If you have a lot of activity at the airport, be it General
> Aviation, Military, or Commercial, the FAA will increase or decrease
> manning levels accordingly.
>
> There are many cases where airport activity increases dramatically for a
> number of reasons. When that happens, and that activity is known in
> advance, the FAA increases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the
> reason. This happens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE
> DAY.
>
> As I said, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide
> mandated FLIGHT SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on
> the ground as mandated by FEDERAL LAW. They are funded by the Federal
> Government through a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.
> That funding does not include charging the Aviation Public directly for
> their services, which is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.
>
> Keep in mind that these kinds of charges have never been made before, to
> the EAA or anyone else. It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges",
> which President Obama during a direct interview said that he and his
> administration supported. If you consider that fact to be: "constant
> hysterical blaming of Obama", then so be it.
>
> The FAA has never done this before, the FAA is under control of the
> present administration, the present administration has promoted "Usage
> Charges" to General Aviation. Now normally I would think 2+2=4
> However, you are implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical blaming of
> Obama"
>
> Really? Good luck with that.
>
> The subject is ATC Fees at Air Shows. It really should be: "Usage
> Charges of any type to General Aviation". Oshkosh was just the opening
> shot. More is sure to follow. I can't imagine why any General Aviation
> pilot or aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense
> and would support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the
> EAA was involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support
> the folks on the Yak-List.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt
> Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:41
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
>
>
> EAA Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is
> owned by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the
> business of providing free support to a privately owned, for profit
> event. It can be argued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel
> sales, etc that ATC support should be provided. This doesn't work in the
> real world. Go to any Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find
> that even though there is local law enforcement there they are being
> paid by the event to be there to work.
> I am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of Obama only
> weakens arguments as well as making it that much harder to take the
> Republicans seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO by
> not having stellar candidates to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job,
> Romney= Obviously a part of big business / financial interests at a time
> when distrust of the financial industry is at an all time low.
> If the Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball
> finding a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on that
> subject...
>
>
--
Rico Jaeger
Choir / East High School
General Music / Horace Mann
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
BZ Mark.
On 8/19/2013 10:25 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>
> It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
> over that boundary many times.
>
> I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
> That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
> assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
> anyway.
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
Here I tend to agree with Mark, BUT, several problems are apparent,
"Sequestration" and the ever creeping expansion of government. This expansion
of government, occurs at the local level, when local politicians (mayors or
city commissioners) to justify their existence by pushing for control
towers, though their federal congressmen, to get the FAA to put in a control
tower, even if the amount of traffic didn't justify a control tower. The
federal subsidies are to tempting for local politicos to pass up. With in 30
miles of my field are 5 control towers that can not be justified by the
amount of traffic. 3 of them are there because of the influence of Emory
Riddle at DAB. That's a political considering, not a operational one on any
account. Right now because of the sequestration the FAA plans on shutting
down 14 control towers in FL, the most of any state, and in my opinion, a good
idea.
A pilot dependent on ground control, is a poor pilot in my book. It leads
a pilot to not learn SA or develop pilot decision making skills. BTW one
of the airports schedule to be closed is OSH. However that was not due for
several months, so Mark's point is still valid. Now on those X-country,
when you stop to refuel, how many airports do you find that are NOT operated
by a private FBO? I fly a B-24 around the country. I often (to often in
my opinion) the FBO is part of the local government structure (i.e. a
political controlled money making business). I once was at an airport that had
a control tower, 10 T hangars, country run FBO (4 employees), and one
5,000' runway. In the 3 days we were there, I saw ONE - repeat ONE - C-150
doing touch and go's One day! Nothing else. In the old days in the private
sector, this is called 'feather bedding'. The only thing that stops feather
bedding in government is your vote. And yes we can blame this of BO.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 8/19/2013 1:30:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
over that boundary many times.
I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
anyway.
KOSH is a public use airport with a Control Tower. It is owned by the
COUNTY and not the "EAA". That control tower is authorized and managed
by the FAA.
This FAA managed Control Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROL to all aircraft taking off from, and arriving to that specific
airport. This is not an OPTIONAL FUNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show
Security", so that comparison does not "fly"! In any case, that Control
Tower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
Every single towered airport keeps a count of every take-off and landing
performed. Those numbers are used to determine manning levels at the
tower. If you have a lot of activity at the airport, be it General
Aviation, Military, or Commercial, the FAA will increase or decrease
manning levels accordingly.
There are many cases where airport activity increases dramatically for a
number of reasons. When that happens, and that activity is known in
advance, the FAA increases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the
reason. This happens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE
DAY.
As I said, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide
mandated FLIGHT SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on
the ground as mandated by FEDERAL LAW. They are funded by the Federal
Government through a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.
That funding does not include charging the Aviation Public directly for
their services, which is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.
Keep in mind that these kinds of charges have never been made before, to
the EAA or anyone else. It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges",
which President Obama during a direct interview said that he and his
administration supported. If you consider that fact to be: "constant
hysterical blaming of Obama", then so be it.
The FAA has never done this before, the FAA is under control of the
present administration, the present administration has promoted "Usage
Charges" to General Aviation. Now normally I would think 2+2=4
However, you are implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical blaming of
Obama"
Really? Good luck with that.
The subject is ATC Fees at Air Shows. It really should be: "Usage
Charges of any type to General Aviation". Oshkosh was just the opening
shot. More is sure to follow. I can't imagine why any General Aviation
pilot or aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense
and would support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the
EAA was involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support
the folks on the Yak-List.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:41
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
EAA Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is
owned by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the
business of providing free support to a privately owned, for profit
event. It can be argued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel
sales, etc that ATC support should be provided. This doesn't work in the
real world. Go to any Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find
that even though there is local law enforcement there they are being
paid by the event to be there to work.
I am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of Obama only
weakens arguments as well as making it that much harder to take the
Republicans seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO by
not having stellar candidates to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job,
Romney= Obviously a part of big business / financial interests at a time
when distrust of the financial industry is at an all time low.
If the Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball
finding a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on that
subject...
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
Bill. For the benefit of non social media types like me, please explain the meaning/implication
of BZ. Thanks. Coop.
--------
Coop
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=407062#407062
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |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Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
Great reply Mark, I wrote-a reply after reading but felt A35PLT was a tro
ll and didn't want to encourage him-her- also didn't have anything to do
with Yak's or CJ's it made me fell better though. One little cricket Bill W
ade N4450Y=0A =0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "Bitterlich,
Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.
com =0ASent: Monday, August 19, 2013 1:25 PM=0ASubject: RE: Yak-List: Re: A
Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0A=0AIt's debatable whet
her this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed=0Aover that boundary m
any times.- =0A=0AI am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned bus
iness" per se.=0AThat's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's
for a moment=0Aassume you are correct, because in my opinion it really does
n't matter=0Aanyway.- =0A=0AKOSH is a public use airport with a Control T
ower. It is owned by the=0ACOUNTY and not the "EAA".- That control tower
is authorized and managed=0Aby the FAA.- =0A=0AThis FAA managed Control
Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC=0ACONTROL to all aircraft taking o
ff from, and arriving to that specific=0Aairport. This is not an OPTIONAL F
UNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show=0ASecurity", so that comparison does not "f
ly"!- In any case, that Control=0ATower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY
UNDER FEDERAL LAW.- =0A=0AEvery single towered airport keeps a count of e
very take-off and landing=0Aperformed.- Those numbers are used to determi
ne manning levels at the=0Atower.- If you have a lot of activity at the a
irport, be it General=0AAviation, Military, or Commercial, the FAA will inc
rease or decrease=0Amanning levels accordingly.- =0A=0AThere are many cas
es where airport activity increases dramatically for a=0Anumber of reasons.
- When that happens, and that activity is known in=0Aadvance, the FAA inc
reases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the=0Areason.- This happ
ens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE=0ADAY. =0A=0AAs I said
, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide=0Amandated FLIGH
T SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on=0Athe ground as man
dated by FEDERAL LAW.- They are funded by the Federal=0AGovernment throug
h a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.=0AThat funding does
not include charging the Aviation Public directly for=0Atheir services, whi
ch is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.- =0A=0AKeep in mind that th
ese kinds of charges have never been made before, to=0Athe EAA or anyone el
se.- It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges",=0Awhich President Obama d
uring a direct interview said that he and his=0Aadministration supported.
- If you consider that fact to be: "constant=0Ahysterical blaming of Obam
a", then so be it.- =0A=0AThe FAA has never done this before, the FAA is
under control of the=0Apresent administration, the present administration h
as promoted "Usage=0ACharges" to General Aviation.- Now normally I would
think 2+2=4=0AHowever, you are implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical
blaming of=0AObama"- =0A=0AReally?- Good luck with that.- =0A=0AThe s
ubject is ATC Fees at Air Shows.- It really should be: "Usage=0ACharges o
f any type to General Aviation".- Oshkosh was just the opening=0Ashot.-
More is sure to follow.- I can't imagine why any General Aviation=0Apilo
t or aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense=0Aand w
ould support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the=0AEAA was
involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support=0Athe fol
ks on the Yak-List.- - - =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----
=0AFrom: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-yak-list-serve
r@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt=0ASent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:4
1=0ATo: yak-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Sho
A Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is=0Aowned
by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the=0Abusiness of p
roviding free support to a privately owned, for profit=0Aevent. It can be a
rgued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel=0Asales, etc that ATC s
upport should be provided. This doesn't work in the=0Areal world. Go to any
Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find=0Athat even though there i
s local law enforcement there they are being=0Apaid by the event to be ther
e to work.- =0AI am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of O
bama only=0Aweakens arguments as well as making it that much harder to take
the=0ARepublicans seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO b
y=0Anot having stellar candidates- to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job,
=0ARomney= Obviously a part of big business / financial interests at a ti
me=0Awhen distrust of the financial industry is at an all time low. =0AIf t
he Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball=0Afind
ing a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on that=0Asubject...
=================
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
BZ = Bravo Zulu = Current naval slang for 'job well done' http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq101-2.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Coop Cooper [mailto:cooperairracing@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 02:13 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=407062#407062 _-
============================================================
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
Akin to SH.
DOC
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 19, 2013, at 3:43 PM, William Halverson <william@netpros.net> wrote:
>
> BZ Mark.
>
>
>
> On 8/19/2013 10:25 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>>
>> It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
>> over that boundary many times.
>>
>> I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
>> That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
>> assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
>> anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows |
So right Pappy. The contract on my land lease reads that I can not operate a
POL selling fuel from my Ramp at my hanger. They included a non compete cla
use in the damned contract. Only the city can operate the fuel pumps. I can n
ot even contract a fuel truck to come in for a Yak Fly in yet they will not g
ive a discount on fuel for an event either. As a result turn times are dela
yed because of the single filing through the fuel pits forthe self serve pum
ps. As a result, I said screw it and dropped the Red Air events. Their loss!
The FBO at Selma changed hands and became unfriendly to YAKs N CJs also.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 19, 2013, at 4:06 PM, cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
> Here I tend to agree with Mark, BUT, several problems are apparent, "Sequ
estration" and the ever creeping expansion of government. This expansion of
government, occurs at the local level, when local politicians (mayors or ci
ty commissioners) to justify their existence by pushing for control towers, t
hough their federal congressmen, to get the FAA to put in a control tower, e
ven if the amount of traffic didn't justify a control tower. The federal su
bsidies are to tempting for local politicos to pass up. With in 30 miles of
my field are 5 control towers that can not be justified by the amount of tr
affic. 3 of them are there because of the influence of Emory Riddle at DAB.
That's a political considering, not a operational one on any account. Rig
ht now because of the sequestration the FAA plans on shutting down 14 contro
l towers in FL, the most of any state, and in my opinion, a good idea.
>
> A pilot dependent on ground control, is a poor pilot in my book. It leads
a pilot to not learn SA or develop pilot decision making skills. BTW one o
f the airports schedule to be closed is OSH. However that was not due for s
everal months, so Mark's point is still valid. Now on those X-country, when
you stop to refuel, how many airports do you find that are NOT operated by a
private FBO? I fly a B-24 around the country. I often (to often in my opi
nion) the FBO is part of the local government structure (i.e. a political co
ntrolled money making business). I once was at an airport that had a contro
l tower, 10 T hangars, country run FBO (4 employees), and one 5,000' runway.
In the 3 days we were there, I saw ONE - repeat ONE - C-150 doing touch an
d go's One day! Nothing else. In the old days in the private sector, this i
s called 'feather bedding'. The only thing that stops feather bedding in go
vernment is your vote. And yes we can blame this of BO.
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
>
> In a message dated 8/19/2013 1:30:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mark.bitt
erlich@navy.mil writes:
bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> It's debatable whether this is a valid YAK-List topic but we've strayed
> over that boundary many times.
>
> I am not sure whether the EAA is a "privately owned business" per se.
> That's a legal topic I would rather not broach, but let's for a moment
> assume you are correct, because in my opinion it really doesn't matter
> anyway.
>
> KOSH is a public use airport with a Control Tower. It is owned by the
> COUNTY and not the "EAA". That control tower is authorized and managed
> by the FAA.
>
> This FAA managed Control Tower is required to provide AIR TRAFFIC
> CONTROL to all aircraft taking off from, and arriving to that specific
> airport. This is not an OPTIONAL FUNCTION, as in "Car or Gun Show
> Security", so that comparison does not "fly"! In any case, that Control
> Tower is RESPONSIBLE FOR FLIGHT SAFETY UNDER FEDERAL LAW.
>
> Every single towered airport keeps a count of every take-off and landing
> performed. Those numbers are used to determine manning levels at the
> tower. If you have a lot of activity at the airport, be it General
> Aviation, Military, or Commercial, the FAA will increase or decrease
> manning levels accordingly.
>
> There are many cases where airport activity increases dramatically for a
> number of reasons. When that happens, and that activity is known in
> advance, the FAA increases manning levels accordingly, regardless of the
> reason. This happens all the time, all over the country, EVERY SINGLE
> DAY.
>
> As I said, the FAA provides Air Traffic Control in order to provide
> mandated FLIGHT SAFETY to folks in the air, and the general public on
> the ground as mandated by FEDERAL LAW. They are funded by the Federal
> Government through a number of means in order to meet this REQUIREMENT.
> That funding does not include charging the Aviation Public directly for
> their services, which is why the EAA is taking the FAA to court.
>
> Keep in mind that these kinds of charges have never been made before, to
> the EAA or anyone else. It is a direct attempt at "Usage Charges",
> which President Obama during a direct interview said that he and his
> administration supported. If you consider that fact to be: "constant
> hysterical blaming of Obama", then so be it.
>
> The FAA has never done this before, the FAA is under control of the
> present administration, the present administration has promoted "Usage
> Charges" to General Aviation. Now normally I would think 2+2=4
> However, you are implying that 2+2= "constant hysterical blaming of
> Obama"
>
> Really? Good luck with that.
>
> The subject is ATC Fees at Air Shows. It really should be: "Usage
> Charges of any type to General Aviation". Oshkosh was just the opening
> shot. More is sure to follow. I can't imagine why any General Aviation
> pilot or aircraft owner would think that this kind of thing makes sense
> and would support it in any way, shape, or form, PARTICULARLY when the
> EAA was involved, which is an organization that does nothing but support
> the folks on the Yak-List.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A35plt
> Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 16:41
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: ATC Fees at Air Shows
>
>
> EAA Oshkosh is a privately owned business is my understanding. EAA is
> owned by the poberezny family IIRC. The government is not in the
> business of providing free support to a privately owned, for profit
> event. It can be argued that because of sales taxes generated by fuel
> sales, etc that ATC support should be provided. This doesn't work in the
> real world. Go to any Car or Gun show, for example, and you will find
> that even though there is local law enforcement there they are being
> paid by the event to be there to work.
> I am no Obama fan but the constant hysterical blaming of Obama only
> weakens arguments as well as making it that much harder to take the
> Republicans seriously. Who elected Obama? The Republicans did IMHO by
> not having stellar candidates to run against him. Mccain=Nut Job,
> Romney= Obviously a part of big business / financial interests at a time
> when distrust of the financial industry is at an all time low.
> If the Repubs don't want Hillary elected they had better get on the ball
> finding a good candidate. Right now all I hear is crickets on ====
===================
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|