The annual flight simulator recurrency training is again behind me. It was an excellent review of systems and instrument flying.

I feel ready to face another year of slipping the surly bonds and soaring on laughter's silvered wings. Our instructor only got me to "crash" once and that when a computer failed and the simulated airplane no longer responded to the controls.

The visual part of the simulator kept going, however, so it appeared to us pilots that the airplane simply rolled over and dove into the ground. Ah, but that is the value of the simulator, bolted to the floor, so no pain at all. Still, it is an eerie feeling to helplessly watch the ground rise up and smite thee.

We had a pleasant surprise when the rental company issued us a brand new hybrid automobile to drive for the week. I'd not been in one before, so the car renting lady explained the differences.

We found the car a joy, good pickup, pleasant to drive and unusually quiet when stopped or driving slowly with the engine automatically shut off. During those times air conditioning and motive power came from a large battery through electric motors.

Best of all was driving 380 some miles on about 8 gallons of gas, almost 50 miles per gallon. That kind of economy I like and there may be a hybrid or totally electric car in my future.

Well the competition is over and the Air Force is buying the wrong tanker to replace my venerable old KC-135. I hate it when that sort of thing happens. The deal smells bad all the way through! It looks like the rules were changed at the last-minute to insure that Grumman and the French company making the Airbus got the bid. Boeing finished last and to me, that is a sad state of affairs. Boeing invented the air refueling business and made it the success we have today.

The Air Force calls aerial refueling a "force multiplier" in that it greatly increases the effectiveness of all the other mission aircraft we use today.

Sad to say, presidential candidate John McCain had his finger in tweaking the rules so Grumman, traditional manufacturer of Navy aircraft, finished first. McCain is making it hard for me to want to vote for him, except that the alternative is even worse.

We in general aviation are also somewhat dissatisfied with the present administration efforts to attach aviation user's fees.

At present, and almost since time began, aviation services have been paid using "gas taxes" attached to aviation fuel, both high octane and jet fuel. Those taxes are paid into an aviation fund.

It is the same concept we use to pay for highways with federal and state gas tax collections. The aviation trust fund is overseen by Congress and like the highway funds, politicians are eager to get their fingers into what they envision as a large source of funds just waiting for them to spend.

One might ask why not pay for aviation services on a fee basis for use?

Using the same analogy as an automobile, wouldn't it be fun to have to pay for every trip you take in your car, the longer the trip the more you pay? Familiar examples are toll roads where you pay extra and, for sure, they don't refund any of the gas tax money that has already been collected.

One can ask, who will keep track. How will the additional fees be collected? How will the new money be allocated?

All these and more questions will need to be answered and all will be additional expense with no added benefit or increased safety for the air traveler. It is a sure way to kill individual initiative on how we use our automobiles and our airplanes. What we have now may not perfect but it sure beats any alternative I've seen to date.

Stuck for the moment in cool, rainy Florida, that is the way I see it.