If you desire to visit John the bear stalker just give him a call or write.  John runs a primitive camp most men may enjoy.  Up early back late.  Lots of walking alone or with a partner.  I walked alone for two weeks and felt safe.

Good hunting.

President Obama chastized american business succeses when he bashed those who have aircraft to perform business.  President Obama has been using tax payer funded travel to campaign on a Boeing 747 and supported by numerous advanced security teams costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

The following comment is from Gary Stein a former marine who voiced his opinion about the President while seving in uniform.

He has an impressive list of accomplishments!

First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.

First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United
States.
First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing
oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
First President to defy a Federal Judge’s court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.
First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
First President to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs when
there was no such thing as ‘shovel-ready’ jobs.
First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the
deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with
criminal convictions.
First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
First President to terminate America’s independent ability to put a man in space (killing the Constellation program he said he would support during the campaign)
First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it (Defense of Marriage Act)
First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to
protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
First President to fire an inspector general of Ameri-corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his
office.
First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date.
First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
First President to go on multiple global ‘apology tour’.
First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and
Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends; paid for by the taxpayer.
First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
First President to repeat the Holy Quran tells us the early morning call of the
So–how is this hope and change working out for us?

TSA plans to continue expanding the TSA Pre check concept to include additional airlines, as well as airports that participate in CBP’s Global Entry program, once operationally ready.

Recently Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb) introduced legislation that would bar the TSA giving preferential treatment to those passengers who have paid for first class travel to expedite through the long TSA security lines.

Currently a passenger pays $2.50 per enplanement and is imposed on not more than two enplanements per one-way trip.  Senator Nelson’s legislation is about fairness and safety.  He states, "regardless of whether you have a first-class ticket or have reached a certain frequent flier status, the purpose of the airport security screening line is to ensure traveler safety. Allowing a select few to cut in front of those who are waiting patiently, just in order to provide a perk, has nothing to do with safety.’’

Senator Nelson’s legislation may be moot because all passengers may opt in for expedited screening. TSA is partnering with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as well as U.S. air carriers as part of this pre-flight screening initiative. Certain frequent flyers from Delta Air Lines, American Airlines and certain members of CBP's Trusted Traveler programs, including Global Entry, SENTRI, and NEXUS who are U.S. citizens are eligible to participate.

The TSA web site indicates this approach is based on the following premises:

• The majority of airline passengers are low risk.
• By having passengers voluntarily provide more information about themselves, TSA can better segment the population in terms of risk.
• Behavior detection and interviewing techniques should be strengthened in the screening process.
• TSA must accelerate its efforts to optimize screening processes and use of technology to gain system-wide efficiencies.
• Increase security by focusing on unknowns; expedite known and trusted travelers.

There is an application cost for the enhanced TSA passenger pass through program.  It is not clear on any TSA site what the cost is to the applicant.  Interested passengers who are not eligible through their airline and are not already a member of a CBP Trusted Traveler program may still be able to opt into TSA Pre check by applying for one of CBP’s eligible programs. Click here to learn more: global entry

The TSA approach to security is a layered approach to security through new state-of-the-art technologies, expanded use of existing and proven technologies, better passenger identification techniques and other developments that will continue to strengthen the agency’s capabilities to keep terrorists off commercial aircraft.

Aviation has been a magnet and dumping ground for excess rule making in the name of safety and political jabberwocky. Here is an example; "And when the final gleek was flort, Just two remained to zorch and vame, Which makes no diff'rence anyhow, 'Cause each one sounds the same!" by Alfred E. Neuman, Sounds regulatory to me.

Bottom line, any outside group that impacts business aviation operations via regulatory (FAA), best safety practices (SMS, IS-BAO) or best green practices (EU-ETS) increases cost to aviation department operations.  The increase in cost is derived by adding man hours and creating taxation schemes to comply with burdensome policies and regulatory enhancements. These man hour increases may be with existing personnel, sub-contracted with vendors or the need to hire additional personnel.

To staff business aircraft a minimum of two (2) pilots are required.  With the onslaught of ETS - SMS –IS-BAO  - Air Safety Rule enhancements, many aviation departments have or are considering dissolving, hiring a management company or perhaps joining a charter certificate holder.

Historical aircraft accident statistics and evolutionary improvement of aircraft engine performance design and pilot training it appears a natural parallel improvement of safety and reliability has occurred organically without adding the burdensome acronyms. 

EU-ETS has come home to roost within your aviation department by taxing engine carbine emissions.  The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has recommended that all aviation authorities implement a path to an SMS structure.  IS-BAO would like to audit your aviation department.  All three increase cost and reduces aviation job growth and future employment in the name of safe operating practices. 

All three require participants pay to play.  Pay to play is the latest Obama plan to tax all business flights and other turbine-powered planes that use the U.S. air-traffic system an additional $100 per flight.  Is this tax for increase services provided, an increase in operating expense, a fee for future investment or perhaps past misspending?  Does the tax provide an immediate or future benefit to anyone?  This tax will be an impediment to aviation job growth. 

When one evaluates the severity of regulatory oversight in aviation, a pilot's time management of safety verses outside influences appears to be 75% outside the cockpit and 25% inside the cockpit.  Whereas in past years time management of safety was emphasized to be in the cockpit and the safety percentage was 75% inside the cockpit and 25% outside the cockpit. 

One must ask are pilots and passengers better off now than in years past?  This past decade aviation has become another we gotcha job do to the plethora of alphabet acronym intrusions.

How does one determine if it is a fee or tax?  If a fee, monies collected should go directly to fund the purpose of the fee.  If a tax, the collected monies will go into a large pull of money where congress may use the collected money as they desire. 

Overflight Fees and EAS

Overflight fees are the only example of the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization actually charging users for the services it provides. Instead of these funds going to shore up the agency's squeezed ATC budget, elected representatives have decided instead to use those dollars providing subsidies for Essential Air Services (EAS). Funding for EAS will decrease over a four-year period, at which point the program would sunset (except for Alaska and Hawaii). All of which demonstrates why Congress should not be in charge of creating ATC user fees.

Background

For nearly four decades, excise taxes on general aviation fuel, airline passenger tickets, and cargo have financed the bulk of the expenses for airport improvements, modernizing the air traffic control system, researching new technologies, and the operations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control system. The taxes deposited into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund support nearly 87 percent of the FAA budget.  The remainder of the FAA's budget is funded through a contribution from the General Fund.

Historically, user fees have severely impacted general aviation, often curtailing growth in operations. A user fee system would limit congressional oversight, effectively removing Congress from its role as the FAA's board of governors. For over a decade, aviation industry organizations, have maintained that a user fee system for any segment of the aviation community will be harmful to the entire community.

Industry leaders believe user fees are not the best way to collect it for the following reasons:

• Assessing user fees for air traffic denigrates safety by discouraging aircraft operators from using the services.
• Collecting the current aviation excise taxes is extremely efficient with a low cost of collection and has been in place for nearly four decades, requiring very little government oversight. Collecting user fees would require a huge new accounting bureaucracy with a much higher cost to collect the fees.
• Implementing user fees removes critical congressional oversight, directing, and management of FAA resources that are key to an efficient national air transportation system.
• The air traffic control system is a public system designed to provide services for the airlines that is far in excess of that necessary for general aviation.
• Operators of light general aviation aircraft contribute $60 million a year and corporate jets pay $210 million annually to the trust fund through fuel taxes.
• General aviation also supports the aviation system with locally imposed taxes and charges on hangar and tiedown rental, fuel, and other assessments.

The aviation trust fund was projected to have a $4.2 billion surplus by 2011. The 2012 FAA budget is about $15.9 billion per year. User fees will be a tax and not a use fee. The consumer will not reap any benefits.

Numerous years ago an assistant Chief Pilot of an aviation division at Sugarland airport had a bad habit of parking his car in the in the clear zone of the hangar doors.

My friend, the Chief Pilot, recently received a pay raise and felt his money would be well spent on a vehicle that would represent his new management status.  The vehicle was a used Mercedes.

One day the hangar doors were selected to the close position.  Without following the best practice safety tips below, the doors sandwiched his Mercedes between the closing hangar doors.  It can happen.  It did happen and will most likely occur to some unlucky person again.

Reminder about hangar door safety. The following are some key tips that may prevent an unforeseen event:

• Comply with the hangar door operating checklist. (If your flight department does not have a checklist, develop one.)
• Prior to moving hangar doors, perform a visual check of the clear zone for clearance of personnel, equipment, and materials; also ensure that door tracks are free from obstructions.
• Ensure personnel entry doors are closed.
• Verify that applicable hangar doors, tracks, warning buzzers, and switches are operational; ensure hangar door safety devices are not tampered with or compromised.
• Doors should be opened in a manner that has one individual opening only one door.
• Never open more than one door by yourself! Always get help opening the doors or completely move one door then go back and individually move the remaining doors.
• Personnel not involved with opening or closing hangar doors should remain clear while the doors are in transit.
• Do not attempt to enter or exit a hangar door while the door is moving.
• Do not walk between hangar doors that are partially open.
• For additional safety consideration, leave the hangar doors in the open position to a minimum width of 10 feet.
• Aircraft security should be evaluated with SOP's against company procedures.

These tips can apply to light aircraft pilots who own a T-hangar from Fallbrook Ca., North Las Vegas, or Rostraver airport to business aviation pilots based in Las Vegas (KLAS), Chicago Midway, Dallas Love, Carlsbad Ca. to Fargo ND..

By following these tips one may prevent a sad occurrence that could be damaging to your aircraft investment or career longevity.

Fly safe and be wise.

The Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 prohibits, ending December 31, 2015, the use of jets that were exempted from the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of 1990.  They are jets that weigh 75,000 pounds or less and do not comply with quieter Stage 3 noise levels.

A Coalition of airport managers around the country has championed an effort to eliminate the exemption since 2004.

Congress and the FAA, when considering The Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of 1990, weighed the right of communities to peace and quiet and the right of commerce to engage in free market enterprise, against the cost that must be paid to protect that right or to accord the other the courtesy to that right.

The National Business Aircraft Association (NBAA) is an advocate of aircraft having the right to fly into and out of public airports utilizing safe and proven operating techniques.  The objectives of the NBAA program, since 1967, have withstood the test of time and have been effective in reducing noise exposure for citizens on the ground.  Congress determined that thirteen percent (13%)  of U.S. citizens are affected by airport noise.

A benefit of owning a Stage 2 aircraft is the initial cost to purchase. This type of aircraft maybe purchased for as little as $300,000 to $2,000,000.  Owners, when considering a purchase of stage II aircraft, weigh reduced cost of investment against cost of operation.  Many times it is best to purchase an older aircraft.

Government regulations tend to discourage the use of older aircraft. The FAA’s aging aircraft regulation is one example of directing business commerce and satisfying the public concern of noise.  Not that these aircraft are unsafe.  Older aircraft must comply with time honored FAA aircraft inspection timeline. Decline in use of these aircraft have been driven by EU countries, the FAA and implementation of noise regulations.

The new law gives operators of what FAA registration records indicate are more than 850 Stage 2 aircraft until the end of 2015 to modify their aircraft to meet new standards or discontinue their use in U.S. airspace over the contiguous 48 states.

Many Stage II aircraft have been modified to comply with local noise concerns and have attempted to meet Stage III compliance.

Pilots desire to be good neighbors when flying business aircraft.  Pilots understand residence desire to have quite neighbors and the local airport is part of the quite flying neighbor policy pilots have adopted.  Pilots are trained to remain safe at all times and monitor local ordinance restrictions when flying near airports.  In order to satisfy noise restrictions pilots are able to implement a modified take off and approach aircraft configuration to comply with noise restrictions.

During takeoff, with restrictions, aircraft pilots may select a reduce power and flap configuration to minimize takeoff decibel noise.  When landing the aircraft landing flap configuration may be delayed and the aircraft landing weight may be reduced in order to minimize decibel levels.  This procedure is recommended but safety and aircraft performance are the utmost concern.  Either way, noise is the by-product.