Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Watch out, all GA aircraft must fly IFR

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web


Well-known member
Nov 27, 2001
I saw the owner of Huffman aviation interviewed on CNN a short time ago. he is going to testify before congress today.

he is european. he said during the interview that he finds it unconcionable that a GA aircraft can takeoff from any airport in the US and no one has to watch him. the plane can just takeoff and fly to another airport without any constant air traffic control.

How outrageous!

In England one must pay a hefty fee for every takeoff and landing.
we don't want that here.

I submit that the owner of Huffman aviation could not even open a similar flight school in England as the outrageous fees to the government.

His recommendation to congress will be constant flight following for every GA aircraft.

what a joke.

FYI Huffman aviation is the school that trained the 2 hijackers that crashed into the WTC.
no user fees

AOPA has been fighting against user fees for years. There's always some looney coming out and making some statement to try to sway the votes.

There's no way any pilot or business wants to fork out money like the Europeans for General Aviation T/Os and Landings. And to constantly watch every single aircraft? Yea good luck. IF it ever happens, it will be the beginning of the end of aviation.
Makes sense.

The FBI, the NSA, the airline security folks, and a host of others failed to keep nearly two dozen terrorists off of huge commercial airliners, so it is perfectly plausible that we should restrict the pilots of 2 and 4-seaters from flying without restriction. Yep, I understand that logic perfectly.

For instance, if someone drives a semi full of TNT into the UN, we shouldn't allow anyone to drive their cars. This connection is extremely easy to follow. *rolling eyes*
ICAO-style airspace

Absolutely we should be glad for AOPA and ask it forthwith to lobby against such restrictions. I predicted shortly after 911 that unless pilots speak out and lobby Congress an uninformed and aviation-ignorant Congress will pass legislation that will convert our airspace into an European-style ICAO system. That includes, among other things, flight plans for all flights, takeoff and landing fees as noted above, and low-level transition levels requiring positive control to fly above those altitudes. Go ask any European pilot about what a burden it is to fly under those rules. Ask the same pilot how he/she likes flying here.
Is it even possible? I always heard something like 75 % of all aircraft that fly on a daily basis is GA. If thats the case how are they going to handle the work load? Doesn't seem feasible.

ATC provides flight following for VFR aircraft if workload allows right? They probably do that for a reason. They don't have enough people to handle EVERYONE on flight following.

Sounds more like politicians blowing smoke and throwing their "expertise" around because they have nothing better to do.
AOPA can also be very dangerous. They were completely against transponders in small aircraft. You can thank AOPA (oops, no, they were against them) for the one rare time when your TCAS helps you avert a midair with some weekend warrior. AOPA is not lobbying to help all pilots; certainly not airline types.
"AOPA can also be very dangerous."

Spoken like a true airline or military pilot. AOPA and the airlines don't have a whole lot in common, IMO. the airline advocacy groups I've heard from generally would like GA (particularly light GA) excluded from major airports and have everyone fly IFR.

I believe you can be an AOPA supporter and an airline type, but they aren't very complimentary groups.

If you enjoy flying as a private pilot, you really should join the AOPA. It's money well spent protecting our GA flying priveleges/ rights/freedoms.

"You can thank AOPA (oops, no, they were against them) for the one rare time when your TCAS helps you avert a midair with some weekend warrior."

You sound like you had your flying paid for by taxpayers with a comment like this. No?! Then it's hard to believe an 1800 hr airline pilot would forget where they came from so quickly.
Easy tiger, moderation is the key. A C-152 running around a busy jet arrival/departure corridor is just as unacceptable as VFR being outlawed in the 99 percent of the "rest" of our great nation. I guess it becomes more personal when you are in charge of the lives of 150 kids, mothers, fathers and grandparents relying on your sole ability to dodge spam cans with broken transponders picked up by the mark I eyeball, and no care for anything but their own percieved right to do whatever they feel like.

I know my roots, and I felt the same way when I started out as I do now. By the way, I love sport flying and RV-8's rule! Let's keep the Euro-nazi/trash stuff at bay.
Last edited:
I certainly haven't forgotten my roots. I fly in a C182 weekly. I see no justification for not having a transponder in sport aircraft. It is an issue of safety. Look at what has happened since deregulation. Money almost immediately took precedence over safety. Aggiepilot, my roots must be different from yours. I've never flown an aircraft without a transponder. I'm fairly young and new to aviation as I'm only 26 and started when I was 15. I have no real idea what aviation was like before then (steam gauges, taildraggers, etc.). Did you guys have TV back then? :p

Latest resources