ATC privatization

[Hector]

If you have sufficient faith to believe that privatization will be done right through a non-profit corporation that will bring better services, less regulation, equal access, all at minimal cost increase to GA then this might not be bad at all. I, however, am a man of little faith.

[flyboy0681]

Just now, Hector said:

If you have sufficient faith to believe that privatization will be done right through a non-profit corporation that will bring better services, less regulation, equal access, all at minimal cost increase to GA then this might not be bad at all. I, however, am a man of little faith.

There may be at least one exception. A senior who is enrolled in Medicare has the option of choosing the traditional Medicare Part A & B, or a Medicare Advantage plan, in which case Medicare pays private insurers to assume a beneficiaries care. Since Medicare Advantage plans are for the most part publicly traded companies, they run very efficiently when it comes to medical expenses (but not administrative expenses). Members of these Advantage plans are very happy with the care they get, as are the shareholders - and no, there aren't any death panels. Medicare keeps a very close eye on these plans and won't hesitate to shut one down if they don't comply with standards of care and regulations.

Unfortunately, these plans will be on the block with the potential changes coming to Medicare. 

[Marauder]

My biggest concern is how they expect something like air safety can be privatized. With the airlines driving this, who do you think will be the focus of either helping pay for it or will be the focus when they want to eliminate costs? The USPS has been a real winner as well.

https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/usps


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[flyboy0681]

14 minutes ago, Marauder said:

My biggest concern is how they expect something like air safety can be privatized. With the airlines driving this, who do you think will be the focus of either helping pay for it or will be the focus when they want to eliminate costs? The USPS has been a real winner as well.

https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/usps


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

This is a very interesting site. I looked at various government agencies and as far as I can tell, the Dept of Agriculture is the third biggest expense to the American taxpayer, right after Defense and Social Security. Reading through the text there is one word that shows up more than any other: subsidies. 

[Tom]

If not an AOPA, please join.

[gsengle]

we are all concerned, but if user fees are collected though fuel tax then everyone using the system will share the cost (at an appropriate level). I don't think it will be less safe, or less efficient. VFR pilots are using the airspace and are being watched, so they need to share in the expense. Looking at almost every government agency I'm having a hard time seeing anything that looks like efficiency. 

Any natural monopoly has a hard time being efficient. Putting another layer of management in and possible profit motive doesn't help.

Second, how thrilled was everyone with Lockheed Martins take over of flight service? Who still actually calls them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Yetti]

It was a decision of fly vs. drive.  30 minute flight or 1.5 hour drive.  Was scared away by the Private fees of Atlantic Aviation at Austin.   $40.00 landing fee.  $15 security feet.  and $20.00 a night.   The landing fee could be waived with 15 gallons of fuel.  But the differential in fuel from the fuel at KGTU would have been $47.00.  So better to pay the landing fee and and then go get fuel elsewhere. 

Have we not already privatized out the GA?

[flyboy0681]

10 hours ago, Yetti said:

It was a decision of fly vs. drive.  30 minute flight or 1.5 hour drive.  Was scared away by the Private fees of Atlantic Aviation at Austin.   $40.00 landing fee.  $15 security feet.  and $20.00 a night.   The landing fee could be waived with 15 gallons of fuel.  But the differential in fuel from the fuel at KGTU would have been $47.00.  So better to pay the landing fee and and then go get fuel elsewhere. 

Have we not already privatized out the GA?

It's been my experience that a 30 minute flight vs 1.5 hour drive pretty much comes out in the wash. By the time one gets to the airport, pre-flights, taxis out, takes-off, lands, taxis in, parks and secures everything, there is no time saving. For me this was evidenced when I dropped the plane off at an avionics shop which was about an hour and a half drive away. My wife left at the same time as me so as to pick me and drive me back. When all was said and done, she pulled up about eight minutes after I checked the plane in with the shop.

[N201MKTurbo]

13 minutes ago, flyboy0681 said:

It's been my experience that a 30 minute flight vs 1.5 hour drive pretty much comes out in the wash. By the time one gets to the airport, pre-flights, taxis out, takes-off, lands, taxis in, parks and secures everything, there is no time saving. For me this was evidenced when I dropped the plane off at an avionics shop which was about an hour and a half drive away. My wife left at the same time as me so as to pick me and drive me back. When all was said and done, she pulled up about eight minutes after I checked the plane in with the shop.

for 20 years I commuted to Tucson from Phoenix. Typically flying was 10 minutes faster unless you needed to buy fuel, then driving was faster.

[flyboy0681]

Just now, N201MKTurbo said:

for 20 years I commuted to Tucson from Phoenix. Typically flying was 10 minutes faster unless you needed to buy fuel, then driving was faster.

Doesn't sound like much reward when factoring in additional expense and risk into the mix.

[N201MKTurbo]

Just now, flyboy0681 said:

Doesn't sound like much reward when factoring in additional expense and risk into the mix.

Flying was so much more relaxing than driving.

[AndyFromCB]

On 3/16/2017 at 10:41 AM, Browncbr1 said:

http://www.geekwire.com/2017/trump-aviation-executives-faa-infrastructure/

 

privatization sounds like a slippery slope, but at least it's good to see there is some focus also on the equipment certification process as being a big problem.  (STC's etc.. )  .. hopefully, if user fees do come up, some regulations will be changed to make avionics and instruments cheaper...    

If privatization comes in the currently proposed airline centric format where they hold majority of the seats on the board of directors and by that virtue elect the CEO, you're not going to have to worry about avionics because all you're going to need is a radio. Want to see what privatization looks like, look to EU and their IFR segment fees.

[AndyFromCB]

On 3/16/2017 at 11:32 AM, tigers2007 said:

Will this mean our "user fees" will be cheaper than Canada's? It doesn't seem that bad for the Canadians. We have far more active GA aircraft but on the other hand we have a far more complex system. Fees solely from Federal fuel taxes? That plus a quarterly use invoice?

It is quite obvious that GA today is not what it was 40 years ago. Airports seem to be closing down or are all but abandoned. Maybe compare the GA system to public libraries. With the progression of the Internet and digital media, far less people use public libraries than they did 20 years ago. Funding for libraries are at jeopardy and they are usually the first for communities to slash from their budgets. Why should my tax money pay to heat, air condition, and staff a book warehouse that nobody visits?  I think that with a simple sales pitch the public will be easily swayed to cut funding to the ATC system for GA as our lobby membership is dwindling. Same with state funding for airport projects - again, the library comparison. Why should my tax money continue to spend a fortune to re-pave crumbled runways at an airport that facilitates five aircraft (owned by guys in their 70's-80's) and who fly them twice a year? I live in Michigan where our governour Rick Snyder is going to extreme lengths to recover taxes and fees owed to the state. I sincerely think he is doing a great job in regards to solvency (he is a CPA...) but I was shocked when I got a bill for $1700 in back taxes due on my old Cessna...

We might be going back to tail draggers and farm fields soon. At least when I finally build my Kitfox or Rans I'll have some fancy radios to throw in them

Just like EU: Airlines, heavy private aircraft and then light sport aircraft flown from small, private fields for pleasure. This will not end well for light aircraft general aviation. I do not for a second believe this will end up like the Canadian system because we're not Canadian. It will end just like EU with hundreds of dollars worth of fees per IFR flight.

[tigers2007]

In that case I'm sure the FAA will see a rise in deceased pilots (or old ones in nursing homes) continuing to fly their birds under IFR flight plans; at least according to what was filed. I always wondered how that works in Canada in regards to billing for ATC services. If someone uses a different identifier, how would they really know?  Almost akin to walking into a hospital using someone else's name and address and having them billed for services. There is no actual verification as far as I know.

[Jerry 5TJ]

15 minutes ago, tigers2007 said:

.....If someone uses a different identifier, how would they really know?  Almost akin to walking into a hospital using someone else's name and address and having them billed for services. There is no actual verification as far as I know.

Mode S and UAT ADS-B Out transmit your plane's ID....

[peevee]

25 minutes ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

Mode S and UAT ADS-B Out transmit your plane's ID....

you can change the flight ID on most transponders.....

[AndyFromCB]

35 minutes ago, peevee said:

you can change the flight ID on most transponders.....

And when someone changes it to your ID on their flight, you get a bill, you refuse to pay, they slap a lien on your plane. You think it's hard to remove a lien by a government entity, try dealing with corporate world. 

[1964-M20E]

1 hour ago, peevee said:

you can change the flight ID on most transponders.....

Just make sure the id number is one in the junk yard.

 

[peevee]

20 minutes ago, 1964-M20E said:

Just make sure the id number is one in the junk yard.

 

Nah, that's what mooneyspace is for

Say, why don't you put your N number in your profile?

[1964-M20E]

I know we will use G-OBAL plausible deniability for the owner since he doesn't even live here.

 

 

[yvesg]

On 2017-03-21 at 10:15 AM, tigers2007 said:

In that case I'm sure the FAA will see a rise in deceased pilots (or old ones in nursing homes) continuing to fly their birds under IFR flight plans; at least according to what was filed. I always wondered how that works in Canada in regards to billing for ATC services. If someone uses a different identifier, how would they really know?  Almost akin to walking into a hospital using someone else's name and address and having them billed for services. There is no actual verification as far as I know.

The fee in Canada for small aircrafts is around and fixed at $70 and sent by mail every year to every aircraft registered owner (some types are freed of this... but I forgot which ones), regardless of usage. Several larger airports have landing fees but this is not related to ATC.

Yves

 

PS. Found the link with detail:

http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/media/Publications/Customer-Guide-Charges-EN.pdf

 

There is a $10 fee at major airports

[Browncbr1]

executive memo signed... 

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/US-Trump-Air-Traffic-Control/2017/06/05/id/794211/

 

 

[flyboy0681]

Just now, Browncbr1 said:

executive memo signed... 

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/US-Trump-Air-Traffic-Control/2017/06/05/id/794211/

 

 

Let's hope he has just as much success as Obama did on the subject.

 

[peevee]

10 minutes ago, flyboy0681 said:

Let's hope he has just as much success as Obama did on the subject.

 

Obama didn't try, so I'm not sure what he has to do with any of it. Democrats have never supported this.

They've just dusted of schuster's bill from last summer. None of this is particularly groundbreaking.

 

but in any event, bust out those wallets.

Quote

Trump's plan would also eliminate taxes on airline passengers in favor of user fees. Key members of tax-writing committees have questioned whether corporations can legally impose fees, which can be viewed as taxes, on air traffic system users.

Business aircraft operators, private pilots and non-hub airports have also expressed concerns they may pay more and receive less service under a private corporation. The airlines have promised that won't happen.

 

I still find it interesting that the union supports it.

[flyboy0681]

8 minutes ago, peevee said:

Obama didn't try, so I'm not sure what he has to do with any of it. Democrats have never supported this.

 

Which was exactly my point.