Most of us get it.

The auto execs could have avoided all of this mayhem for the rest of us if they had simply stood their ground and said, “Sure we came in out biz jets. We did that because we need to be in two other places yet today and this is the most efficient use of our time to get us out of this mess.”

But as we all know, that isn’t quite the way it all went down.

I’d invite anyone reading this to go click on any of the Cessna Rise ads on our homepage and take a look at how one manufacturer is dealing with the issue.

Two major corporations requesting billions of dollars in grants decide to make their case arriving in top-of-the-line executive jets.

The news media was quick to attack the whole genre of business aviation, something Dee Howard created back in 1947.

Every major News outlet mentions the gas guzzling Gulfstream as the culprit of economic distress. How ridiculous. Ever think of how much employment goes into assembling such luxurious traveling time machines? Recent fourth quarter GAMA statistics show how the direct effects of bad publicity really dictate
the downturn in business aviation.

I hope someone realizes the impact corporate travel has on the entire spectrum of aviation and it’s ability to train, employ, and sustain the manufacturing climate in the U.S.

I’m not a fan of the New York times, by the way.

Business aviation has a public perception problem, to be sure. The problem is not insurmountable – though it won’t be solved by pollie-bashing (as tempting as that may be). The answer lies in more (and more, and more) clarity around the value of business aviation services to the various segments of the population that it serves. The NBAA is putting commendable effort into clarifying BizAv’s value… the message is seeping through, though more work from all stakeholders is required.

– p.s. Great blog, gentlemen! I wish I had the time to participate more frequently. Please keep up the great work.