From the editors of Aviation International News

Responses to: "Airline CEO Says Bizav Gets ’Free Ride’ (AINalerts, Tuesday, May 30)."

I just read the comments from American Airlines’ Gerard Arpey regarding the “unfair” cost sharing between business aviation and the airlines. If the repercussions of his remarks were not so serious, I would laugh myself silly. The statement that business aviation is getting a “free ride” while he admits that business aviation is paying 5 percent of the total ATC costs is ridiculous at best. The government, passengers and businesses must spend billions on the airlines to provide airport infrastructure for huge terminals, parking lots, security, longer runways, costly ground handling systems and so on–so how does business aviation benefit from this expense? Private aviation does not even need a terminal. It has its own lower cost support facilities–FBOs–and private flight operations facilities. In reality, business aviation is reducing the burden on the ATC system, while the scheduled carriers are increasing their burden. This is because business aircraft have more sophisticated avionics and by regulation are able to do things that the scheduled carriers cannot do, such as fly direct point to point, land at non-air carrier airports, burn less fuel and require less ground support, among others. The truth is the airlines are in serious trouble, and Mr. Arpey’s ability, like most of the airlines, to historically spend their way out is not working. The classic mismanagement of an the airlines and the repeated finger pointing that it’s “the other guys’ fault” will not work. While this might seem like a good tactic to Mr. Arpey and his other airline buddies, it is in reality the last desperate gasp for air of an industry drowning in a sea of indifference that they themselves created. The airlines could have owned the air and along with it the flood of private aviation that is growing each day had they only realized what business they were truly in–the transportation of people.
Bob Brewster
Lynch Corporate Services
Daytona Beach, Fla.

Please tell Gerard Arpey that all of us tax-paying citizens who happen to work in corporate aviation will gladly accept his check to reimburse us for the millions of our tax dollars that have been shelled out to subsidize his poorly run, failed business model that continues, year after year, to lose money while his compensation increases.
Beth Stebenné
San Carlos, Calif.

After reading the item on user fees, I could not help notice the part Gerard Arpey left out. As a commercial/business aircraft operator, I find that an FBO–paid for by the owner of said FBO–with a 5,000-foot runway is more than sufficient for my operation. Further, I would be willing to accept some delays based on the number of aircraft that are airborne, hardly the kind of environment that American Airlines could live with. The problem is that the airlines have decided that flights to leave at the same time from very expensive airports to very expensive airports. I would guess to say that if we did not allow the airlines to all leave at the same time and instead used a lottery system to select the times that American Airlines could leave Dallas Fort Worth, for example, then the good CEO would have a new problem to complain about and the cost of the ATC system could be reduced to his “fair share.”
Mark A. Murray
Ypsilanti, Mich.

Gerard Arpey is off base. The funding mechanism described in the item might be true, however “a blip is not a blip.” When an American Airlines 777 does a 360-degree turn on final for a business jet, alters course en route for a business jet and takes extended vectors in the terminal area for a business jet, then we can start to call “a blip is a blip.” When the passengers stop paying the fees collected for the ATC system and the airlines pay these fees for their customers, we can look for other methods of funding. When the airlines stop tying up the radio frequency for ride reports and turbulence reports, we can look to other methods of funding. The airlines must point the finger at someone for all of the problems they have. They should keep looking in-house.
Hal Sims

I would have to agree with the airlines logic–a blip is a blip. But a landing slot is a landing slot, too. So I suggest that the airlines hire a whole lot of telephone operators and get busy dialing for their landing slot reservations at airports like ATL, BWI, CVG, DEN and so on. The airlines can also pay into the aviation trust fund. As I recall, it’s the passengers on the airliners that pay these fees, not the airlines, so maybe this, too, should change. I wonder how the airlines would like to operate a scheduled service without “their” slots? Calling ahead for fuel, since who knows when they might actually land and get to the gate? They can also pay retail for their fuel and pay for ramp space based on their weights of course. Shall I go on? After all, a blip is just a blip. Better yet, why don’t we just impose the pay-as-you-go to those airplanes operating in RVSM airspace only? We’ll just fly lower, out of “their” airspace, and avoid paying any fees. And how about we get rid of the upside-down wedding cake airport space and go back to approach corridors? The airlines can maneuver around and fly protected in the only space they really need, and not tie up “our” airspace all around the bigger airports. Seems to me that if fair is fair–a blip is just a blip–then the rules should change for everything else.
Bill Mermelstein

AINalerts is a publication of The Convention News Co., Inc., 214 Franklin Avenue, Midland Park, NJ 07432. Copyright 2006. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission from The Convention News Co., Inc., is strictly prohibited. The Convention News Co., Inc., also publishes Aviation International News, Business Jet Traveler, NBAA Convention News, HAI Convention News, EBACE Convention News, Farnborough 2006, Paris 2007, Dubai 2007 and Asian Aerospace 2008.