Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1746217
Flyingfemme wrote:The way I read it, the money isn't to help GA. It's money to pay consultants to "help" GA........ From what I've seen of most consultants I'd pay them to stay away.


Rather that consultants in general, there are some specific things that cost GA airfields a ton of money that might qualify for this though. Sywell's reported cost of getting permission to tarmac their runway comes to mind, as well as the cost of getting instrument approaches approved that will actually be available to you and me.
#1746218
Flyingfemme wrote:The way I read it, the money isn't to help GA. It's money to pay consultants to "help" GA........ From what I've seen of most consultants I'd pay them to stay away.

What, consultants like the 'Airfields Environment Federation' who do all they can to get GA curtailed?
#1746260
I can give them some helpful advice - change the status of airfields back from brownfields to green fields as it was before Prescott's 'mistake'

There you go, I will settle for half the loot.
Ian Melville, Dusty_B, JulietTango and 1 others liked this