gsengle Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 I still find it interesting that the union supports it. Because they don't support GASent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 1 minute ago, gsengle said: Because they don't support GA Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and you know this how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsengle Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 and you know this how? ALPA? That's not their job. They are for airline pilots. Have you followed em over the years? They would ban dangerous small airplanes from their airline airspace if they could!Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccdeuce Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 I really don't understand what the goal of privatization is. They say the benefit is because you won't have the slow beuaractic issues because of funding - but someone still has to pay for it. So my gas tax then specifically has to go funding ATC. Or my user fee. "Trump's plan would also eliminate taxes on airline passengers in favor of user fees." user fees always seem to rear their ugly head - but I'm good with a user fee. Just not good with a special fuel tax AND a user fee. And the airlines also better be paying that fee - proportionally. (... really passengers paying that fee...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 21 minutes ago, peevee said: Obama didn't try, so I'm not sure what he has to do with any of it. Globalist conspiracy folks would opine that big money is doing whatever, wherever it can, to privatize historically public sector operations. The current administration has pledged to do this with bridges, highways, and all types of infrastructure concerns. I don't know why this phenomenon is happening, but I agree that it is happening worldwide. The Hegelian dialectic explanation is that people have been conditioned to distrust or just generally dislike public sector operations, and welcome the privatization efforts. I'm not familiar with any historical references where people ended up liking the private sector radical monopoly over the public sector radical monopoly, but we nonetheless continue to sell off the public good, likely forever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 22 minutes ago, gsengle said: ALPA? That's not their job. They are for airline pilots. Have you followed em over the years? They would ban dangerous small airplanes from their airline airspace if they could! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I'm not talking about ALPA, I'm talking about NATCA... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 I would not be looking forward to a day when every bridge I drive over I need to stop and pay a toll. Every road I drive down, I need to stop and pay a toll. Every public bathroom I find, I need a dollar (like in Europe...). I mean, money aside, what a pain in the neck that is. I prefer the alacarte plan buffet. One price and you get to drive over all the bridges and go pee in all the public toilets. We pay one way or another so don't bother me to ask for a bill for every single little thing. Same with ATC. If they need more money, then fine, raise the fuel tax but don't send me a bill in the mail for talking to ATC. Plus a lot of people will try to hide from the fee by either not talking to ATC or .. not flying. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 24 minutes ago, mccdeuce said: I really don't understand what the goal of privatization is. As near as I can tell, take something provided for free from tax revenue and auction it off so someone can make a profit off of it. This isn't actually the case if they follow the plan already worked out in this instance. And don't worry Erik, you won't have to stop, they'll just issue you a transponder that charges you when it's scanned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 wash post article from awhile ago... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/study-privatizing-government-doesnt-actually-save-money/2011/09/15/gIQA2rpZUK_blog.html?utm_term=.c65c1a3ffe83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyboy0681 Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just remember, the work goes to the lowest bidder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, flyboy0681 said: Just remember, the work goes to the lowest bidder. again assuming they follow schuster's plan it's more like the post office, so... I mean, that's the level of management you can expect. difference being the board of directors type thing, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 I do not share the pessimism concerning what privatization might mean. Most of the speculation seems to be around increased costs to users whereas the power to increase fuel tax and add fees is already in place to support the present government agencies. I would think that our (GA) main interest ought to be on the advantages a private enterprise would have compared to the government. Think modernization where procurement procedures insure that any high tech change is obsolete before it is in place. And you guys who regularly have to navigate in the Washington New York corridor... do you really think a new manager could possibly make your life more miserable? I don't know all the details but ISTM pilot briefing and weather information dissemination has improved exponentially since the days of calling the FAA FSS. Hasn't much of that been turned over to private enterprises? You getting billed by DUATS, et.c? I think there is at least as much upside as there is downside to a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyboy0681 Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, Bob_Belville said: Most of the speculation seems to be around increased costs to users whereas the power to increase fuel tax and add fees is already in place to support the present government agencies. If I can be absolutely guaranteed that all related fuel taxes are dropped in place of user fees, I may be in favor of fees (of course, depending how much). But I have a sneaking suspicion that the gas tax will remain while user fees are slapped on. Just my humble opinion. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peevee Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, flyboy0681 said: If I can be absolutely guaranteed that all related fuel taxes are dropped in place of user fees, I may be in favor of fees (of course, depending how much). But I have a sneaking suspicion that the gas tax will remain while user fees are slapped on. Just my humble opinion. It absolutely will. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, flyboy0681 said: If I can be absolutely guaranteed that all related fuel taxes are dropped in place of user fees, I may be in favor of fees (of course, depending how much). But I have a sneaking suspicion that the gas tax will remain while user fees are slapped on. Just my humble opinion. In a list of all the cost of owning and operating a Mooney the cost of the ATC system is and will always be miniscule. What ought to be of interest to us is the efficiency of the system and taking advantage of advantage of GPS and digital communications. Flying in the system could be much simpler and safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steingar Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Since I started flying I have done so through four administrations, two Democrat and two Republican. The only thing all four have in common is they all tried to privatize ATC. All have failed because any halfway intelligent Congresscritter knows they loose power if it does. Congress holds the purse strings, so the Executive can't go off half-cocked. Once they give-up that power they give up a lot of influence. It is telling that the only Congresscritter pushing this is also bumping fuzzies with an airline lobbyist. Now that's some dedication to the job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, steingar said: It is telling that the only Congresscritter pushing this is also bumping fuzzies with an airline lobbyist. Now that's some dedication to the job! I have no insight but I think the airlines are consumers of the ATC product big time. Are we sure were not on the same side? If the airlines think that ATC could be significantly more efficient and press this issue why is that bad for us? Bob (devil's advocate) Belville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsengle Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 I have no insight but I think the airlines are consumers of the ATC product big time. Are we sure were not on the same side? If the airlines think that ATC could be significantly more efficient and press this issue why is that bad for us? Bob (devil's advocate) Belville They use a small subset of the approaches and airports. They don't like VFR flying. What could go wrong...Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steingar Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, Bob_Belville said: I have no insight but I think the airlines are consumers of the ATC product big time. Are we sure were not on the same side? If the airlines think that ATC could be significantly more efficient and press this issue why is that bad for us? Bob (devil's advocate) Belville Ever flown in Europe? Admittedly I haven't, but I've talked to guys who do. Fee for this and fee for that. You don't do touch and goes when you train because you pay for every landing. Oh, and you need a bureaucracy to take care of all that, and guess who gets to pay for it? There's a reason most European pilots fly American-made airplanes and train in the US. Moreover, what is a more inherently governmental function than aviation safety? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooneymite Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, Bob_Belville said: I have no insight but I think the airlines are consumers of the ATC product big time. Are we sure were not on the same side? If the airlines think that ATC could be significantly more efficient and press this issue why is that bad for us? Bob, who really knows!? We're only speculating, right? I suspect that airline managements support this because general aviation has access to the same limited airspace and infrastructure that they use. Every time an airliner has to delay taxi because a "little guy" got his taxi clearance first, it costs them money....same thing when a 777 has to slow on approach because a GA aircraft is ahead..... It's interesting to see the interplay between LGA, JFK, EWR (airline hubs) and TEB a general aviation hub. The airlines would love for TEB to go away. Once the ATS is privatized, market forces, not "equal access" will rule. In my opinion, fees on GA would be used not so much for revenue (a pittance in the big scheme), but to keep us out of the airlines' way. Money talks. But.....it's all just speculation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 1 minute ago, gsengle said: They use a small subset of the approaches and airports. They don't like VFR flying. What could go wrong... We're talking the ATC system, right? Just now, steingar said: Ever flown in Europe? Admittedly I haven't, but I've talked to guys who do. Fee for this and fee for that. You don't do touch and goes when you train because you pay for every landing. Oh, and you need a bureaucracy to take care of all that, and guess who gets to pay for it? There's a reason most European pilots fly American-made airplanes and train in the US. Moreover, what is a more inherently governmental function than aviation safety? Yeah, we don't want to be Europe. But they have a lot more issues that ATC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsengle Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Yes a very small percentage of airports are served by airlines. And by extension most instrument approaches aren't used by airlines. They generally don't use non precision approaches either. So they don't care that my home airport has an LPV approach for instance.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, Mooneymite said: Bob, who really knows!? We're only speculating, right? I suspect that airline managements support this because general aviation has access to the same limited airspace and infrastructure that they use. Every time an airliner has to delay taxi because a "little guy" got his taxi clearance first, it costs them money....same thing when a 777 has to slow on approach because a GA aircraft is ahead..... It's interesting to see the interplay between LGA, JFK, EWR (airline hubs) and TEB a general aviation hub. The airlines would love for TEB to go away. Once the ATS is privatized, market forces, not "equal access" will rule. In my opinion, fees on GA would be used not so much for revenue (a pittance in the big scheme), but to keep us out of the airlines' way. Money talks. But.....it's all just speculation. Yeah, we're only speculating. But the airlines didn't need the ATC's help to run GA out of Logan, an airport I used several times 40 years ago. Are you sure the airlines would be happy to close TEB? Those corporate jets would have access to NY somewhere that might be more of a nuisance to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, gsengle said: Yes a very small percentage of airports are served by airlines. And by extension most instrument approaches aren't used by airlines. They generally don't use non precision approaches either. So they don't care that my home airport has an LPV approach for instance. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I do not understand your logic. If the reliever dromes have LPV and GA does not have to use the Bravo drome that ought to be good for the aluminum tube operators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooneymite Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Just now, Bob_Belville said: Yeah, we're only speculating. But the airlines didn't need the ATC's help to run GA out of Logan, an airport I used several times 40 years ago. Are you sure the airlines would be happy to close TEB? Those corporate jets would have access to NY somewhere that might be more of a nuisance to them. The corporate jets would stay in TEB for sure, but high fees could definitely make them look to CDW-Caldwell, MMU-Morristown and points further from their airspace. Once that pattern is established, general aviation is going to be pushed further and further into the hinterland and its utility will become less than it is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts