eman1200
Touchdown! Greaser!
https://www.flyingmag.com/women-in-aviation-withdraws-support-for-recent-aopa-on-airport-access
I guess they like paying $50 ramp fees.
I guess they like paying $50 ramp fees.
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.https://www.flyingmag.com/women-in-aviation-withdraws-support-for-recent-aopa-on-airport-access
I guess they like paying $50 ramp fees.
I wonder how many members "Women in Aviation" has ?
I wonder how many members "Women in Aviation" has ?
How many members on this board joined AOPA, then opted out. New facts come to light. Worthy goals become distorted. Things change.no idea. I just find it odd that they would join in support of the effort, then back out.
How many members on this board joined AOPA, then opted out. New facts come to light. Worthy goals become distorted. Things change.
My point is that your conclusion that they like paying a $50 ramp fee is off base.do you actually have anything to add to the thread other than how much your hangar costs and 'things change'? what's your point? I found it to be an interesting article, if you don't, then go troll a different thread.
Yup. Or they may not feel that it is the FAAs place to regulate ramp fees. I have no idea. I’m not a member."liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
giving pilots an option to park in areas not controlled by the FBO
I’d bet good money the head of WIA owns an FBO with high and hidden ramp fees or is related to someone who does.....
I don’t doubt that but the why join the fight to begin with?
Always follow the money.
I’d bet good money the head of WIA owns an FBO with high and hidden ramp fees or is related to someone who does.
Anyone want to do the legwork to find out, feel free.
Seriously doubt they took a membership vote or poll in the week since the first AOPA press release.
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
https://www.flyingmag.com/women-in-aviation-withdraws-support-for-recent-aopa-on-airport-access
I guess they like paying $50 ramp fees.
I wonder how many of those are dudes just signing up for the WIA job fairs?
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
"liking" and "understanding" are two different things.
I don't like paying over $400/month for my hangar either, but I pay it anyway and am happy to have a hangar.
Or maybe given the choice between an FBO with a nice restroom and a free ramp with nothing they decided to support FBOs.
Well, that article really sucks but I think the premise of the objection is HIDDEN fees.
I flew into KLEX recently... only one FBO on the field. Signature or something (one of the big chains). Its a very sleepy class C.
$7/gal avgas. I asked at the desk what the tie down fee is for one night. $15 bucks she says, 10 gal fuel minimum to waive it. I said go ahead and put in 10 gallons. I don't need the fuel but I figured I might as well get something out of the transaction.
Next day I get a bill for almost $100. I said "hey wait, I thought the fees were waived?". The girl at the desk politely let me know that the tie down fee was waived. Sure enough the $15 tie down fee was waived. But the $15 handling fee, the $6 infrastructure fee and the $5 security fee remained. Between the mark-up on the gas and the fees they probably pocketed in excess of 50 bucks off me and I used zero services. The FBO was an inconvenience if anything.
Remind me again why it's legal for undisclosed fee to be legally owed to the service provider when a written service contract is absent?
See I have no problem with the pricing. I have a problem with the fact the fees are not disclosed. They know if they had disclosed the entirety of the fees, you would have made other arrangements. That's what makes that particular manifestation of the profit motive unethical imo.
I flew into KLEX recently... only one FBO on the field. Signature or something (one of the big chains). Its a very sleepy class C.
$7/gal avgas. I asked at the desk what the tie down fee is for one night. $15 bucks she says, 10 gal fuel minimum to waive it. I said go ahead and put in 10 gallons. I don't need the fuel but I figured I might as well get something out of the transaction.
Next day I get a bill for almost $100. I said "hey wait, I thought the fees were waived?". The girl at the desk politely let me know that the tie down fee was waived. Sure enough the $15 tie down fee was waived. But the $15 handling fee, the $6 infrastructure fee and the $5 security fee remained. Between the mark-up on the gas and the fees they probably pocketed in excess of 50 bucks off me and I used zero services. The FBO was an inconvenience if anything.
Subtract the fuel and the tie down, the fees were $26 had you just stopped there. Add the tie down you were at $41. Not exactly highway robbery.
You should disclose you're being rhetorical. ¡Of course the majority of those members are male! It's a rent-seek by that organization to peddle the sausage crank at the airline job fairs. (the irony of that dynamic does not escape me). As to your point further, of course they're also not about to publicize that fact and be uncovered as turncoats, having only a tertiary "concern" for female professional employment membership.
To be fair, most folks on here are not airline pilots. What you highlight is already well established common fact among pro circles. I have several female students of mine who were WIA sponsors and free training recipients. Token recipients, not all "women in aviation" get a free ride. At any rate, they'll make it to the right seat of a SW 737 before I will, and I'm 10 years senior in military progression and hours (to be fair, I'm not pursuing airline aspirations at the moment).
I don't fault them for it; if I had a vagina I would be just as cunning and unapologetic in taking advantage of these leg-ups. After all the game is chess, it ain't checkers. My only objection is to people born rounding third base waxing poetic about arguing they've hit a homer. That's my only dog in the WIA fight. They're not victims, let's get that clear. If that makes me a misogynist, as a brother, son, and husband, I'm more than happy to be called one.
Subtract the fuel and the tie down, the fees were $26 had you just stopped there. Add the tie down you were at $41. Not exactly highway robbery.
"$26 had you just stopped there" is disingenuous, don't forget the forced purchase of 10 gal at $7/gallon. I'm guessing they net about 30 bucks on the fuel.
I should have just refused the fuel and paid the fees. $41 plus a few bucks tax for a night is still expensive for an experience I was actually inconvenienced by. A tie down spot with zero services, within 150 yards of any airport exit or gate would have been more convenient. If you need manned security for the gate charge $10/night and put in a 100LL self serve with a reasonable mark-up, it would easily pay for itself.
~10-20%I wonder how many of those are dudes just signing up for the WIA job fairs?
No one forced you to purchase fuel, in fact self serve fuel is available at KLEX for a $1.50 a gallon cheaper. You opted to buy fuel at $7 bucks a gallon to save on another fee(s), which rarely work out to the pilots favor and why FBO offer sucker deals like this.
So if you subtract a net $55 fuel purchase, your fee was $41, which included one night tie down and that is not an egregious overnight fee at a 4 star FBO.
Not that it matters to you, but that FBO that you can’t remember the name of invested $11 million in the KLEX facility in 2011 and they aren’t going to let members of the poor pilots club use it for free. Nor is the KLEX airport going to build you a free ramp and diminish that FBOs investment in the airport infrastructure, diminish rent and other fees paid to the airport or reduce local employment.
11M of stuff I don't need when i'm flying a bugsmasher. I don't want to be forced to pay for their marble floors and high ceilings on a huge publicly funded airport that does not see much traffic. The investment is nice for the bizjet crowd who needs the nice facilities and specialized services, and we are happy to pay for it in that setting.
They did not invest $11m, 7 years ago so they could corner the bugsmasher market. I don't want to be forced to pay for their marble floors and high ceilings on a huge publicly funded airport that does not see much traffic. The investment is nice for the bizjet crowd who needs the nice facilities and specialized services, and we are happy to pay for it in that setting.
I am aware of the self serve pump, but please tell me how I can, as a transient, tie down for a night without paying 50 bucks in fees. There is no way to avoid them and they are not posted online. As I mentioned earlier, they are not posted in the FBO and the person at the counter did not fully disclose them either.
Finally, please don't belittle the poor pilot's club by including me in it.
I realize you don’t get it. You aren't going in and out of that airport without paying and that is how the airport and the FAA want it.
“Airports must maintain a fee and rental structure that makes the airport as financially self-sustaining as possible under the particular circumstances at that airport. The requirement recognizes that individual airports will differ in their ability to be fully self-sustaining, given differences in conditions at each airport. The purpose of the self-sustaining rule is to maintain the utility of the federal investment in the airport.”