ElizabethConley

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/articl...neral-aviation

Can more extensive use of General Aviaiation solve Americans' TSA problem?

a_random_guy

No, of course not. If too many people avoid TSA, then they will just change the rules to require screening before boarding any plane.

knotyeagle

That I look forward to, a TSA screener that wants to search me on the ramp before I walk out to the aircraft. I don't think any aviator would ever get a better opportunity to discuss the TSA rules with the errant screener.

GUWonder

Some people do it already to try to avoid the TSA nonsense that is directed at ordinary passengers of scheduled, commercial flights.

If an airline and its planes were small enough, even some scheduled, commercial flights could get around the current TSA nonsense that it directed at ordinary passengers of scheduled, commercial flights on the carriers that are household names across the country.

Cartoon Peril

InkUnderNails

I have looked into this and found the following:

GA can be price competitive for short trips, 500 miles or fewer, either by using ones own plane or purchasing a local charter. However, for trips under 500 miles, driving is usually a viable option as well.

At medium ranges 500-1000 miles, it gets a bit more difficult. The economics of commercial aviation makes these longer trips only slightly more expensive per passenger than short trips but with GA the cost per mile is closer to linear. In addition, the equipment in GA for longer trips is more expensive both to own and to charter. Even with these limitations, it is doable. The advantage of saving at least an hour for security, airport parking, extras hotel days to catch first flight and other expenses may offset the extra cost.

For longer trips and coast to coast, GA is much slower and much more expensive. Jet charters are quick, but very expensive.

I looked at the economic aspects as all of my travel is customer reimbursed. Any additional cost I must take from my personal earnings from the job, and I am not willing to do that right now.

For those of you willing or able to pay the economic coast, GS offers some very attractive alternatives, especially when all of the convenience factors are considered.

4nsicdoc

There is a way to reduce the costs. A charter flight must comply with all of the myriad (and epensive) requirements of Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Dual (flight instruction related) trips do not. Say you need to do a 2 hour meeting in a city 300 miles away. Simply call your local flight school and schedule a dual cross-country, It will be very comparable to airline costs, and you might ventually end up with a pilot's certificate. And be sure and notify the airline you would have taken that the TSA cost them your business. And as you taxi past the airline terminal, make obscene gestures to the smurfs gazing vacantly out the terminal windows.

knotyeagle

Good rule of thumb is three flight hours, i.e. 150 knot ship it is worth the 450 nm flight rather the dead time at one of 490 airports with part 121 service. Remember 5200 public use airports inherently is always more convenient than only 490 public use/schedule service airport.

A few years ago I did a FLL to OKC via Northwest (and change of aircraft in BNA), all said and done it took 11 hours. The mooney would have taken less time.

Also in comparing cost of time versus non-billable travel time, if your billing/hour is greater than the operating cost/hour of the aircraft, fly.

Global_Hi_Flyer

Be very, very careful with that. The FAA may declare it a charter operation as the primary intent is not flight instruction,, especially if it happens often or you're not engaged in regular flight instruction. Very grey area, and very risky for the flight school.

N965VJ

The Alaska Dispatch offices sit on a scenic stretch of Merrill Field in Anchorage, where planes can be seen taxiing, taking off and landing throughout the day. Separating pedestrians from the hundreds of tied-down planes is a five-foot chain-link fence, with numerous gaps for people and planes. This is supplemented by signs that say "Pedestrians and bicycles prohibited" and "Stay on trail."

It's a pretty weak security measure, considering the standards upheld at the nation's commercial airports. A pedestrian can walk out among the planes or onto the runway with little or no opposition. On any given day, one can see people doing just that, wandering among the planes.


So did the author actually go talk to people that work and fly there? It's so much easier to cast fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Even a Google search would have told the author that the DHS Inspector General found that General Aviation do not pose a security vulnerability, after Rep. Jackson Lee made a big stink about it two years ago after watching some idiotic "investigation" on a local TV station.

phoebepontiac

I see what you're saying, but I thought the writer was somewhat aiming at the point of "Why is Merrill Field just fine with a chain-link fence and yet children may need patdowns over at ANC?" Or, at least, he was trying to present a balanced article with this as one point.

Merrill Field is indeed wide-open, as is Lake Hood, the seaplane base next to ANC. I think everyone who flies up here is aware that flying is inherently risky, that they are at far greater risk of a weather-related accident than they are of a terrorist incident, so to build a big wall around Merrill field would just seem silly. We also have serious pilot error accidents here, like what happened last summer:

http://www.adn.com/2010/06/01/130332...ealership.html

It turned out the plane was significantly overloaded and unbalanced. I think verifying thing like weight and balance calculations would be mission creep beyond what the TSA is capable of managing.

A final ETA: Rereading that article, I'm not sure exactly what the point was, whether the writer thought it made sense to involve TSA in GA or not. Guess I'm just editorializing myself here as an Alaskan and (lapsed) private pilot.

knotyeagle

If the TSA screener wanted to verify that the propeller blades were not too sharp nor too long I'd be happy to allow that.

TSO1973

I've had that happen. I had let my medical certificate expire and wanted to go rent a plane and hire an instructor to take my kids on a small day trip. The flight school said that it would then be classified as a charter flight so they couldn't do that. The only way around it would be to hire a freelance instructor with his/her own aircraft.

knotyeagle

Try the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association forum to see the prevailing opinion on the usefulness of TSA screeners (or my favorite TSA aviation security inspectors). And I thought I was the only AOPA member who was so adamant about how TSA screeners should be treated.

http://forums.aopa.org/index.php

Popperian

Lots of top 1%-ers use general aviation though ... the people who actually run the country. I personally think they are trying to create even more striations in the 'class system'.