Delta Air Lines Against ATC Privatization

pianokeys said:
The good news is, when the government privatized ATC, they set up legislation that states that Nav Canada can only rip off users so much. It would be illegal for them to overcharge, they're only allowed to charge what it actually costs them to do whatever your paying for.
Click to expand...
I don't know. Sounds like straight up communism to me.
 
z987k said:
I don't know. Sounds like straight up communism to me.
Click to expand...

More like fascisim.

Yeah, its a private company and they should be able to do and charge whatever they want, but theres a limit. You wouldn't want to get screwed by a monopoly.

Do you Americans also know its illegal for a restaurant to sell less than well done hamburgers up here?
 
pianokeys said:
More like fascisim.

Yeah, its a private company and they should be able to do and charge whatever they want, but theres a limit. You wouldn't want to get screwed by a monopoly.

Do you Americans also know its illegal for a restaurant to sell less than well done hamburgers up here?
Click to expand...
It was sarcastic. We look pretty favorably upon fascism in the states.
 
I've never been a fan of a privatized ATC service. It would probably go to Lockheed Martin. Then there would probably be years of "investigations" and "lawsuits" from bidders that didn't win. Then the whole thing would get re-bid only to have Lockheed Martin win again. I would just be one very large, and unnecessary mess. I would support spinning ATC services off into it's own government agency within DOT.

Now to user fees. Classic example of a solution in search of a problem. Lets replace a simple funding system with a much more complex system. That'll work. Yep.
 
GA is in enough trouble in the US right now without adding to its problems by instituting GA user fees for ATC.
 
I'm a firm believer in technology reducing costs. It's happened for decades, as technology improves costs come down significantly. There are a few industries where this doesn't hold true. One is in the medical field, and the second is in aviation.

I really don't think the sole act of privatizing ATC will reduce costs and make it more efficient. What will is the FAA getting out of its own way and getting on board with technology and using it to its full capability. The problem isn't ATC per se, it's the FAA side of it not being able to change with the times.

The entire idea of 1-800-WX-BRIEF needs to be done away with. It worked well when you still had NDB approaches, no smartphones and limited access to internet. Technology has completely changed the way people obtain weather and file flight plans. The new way is more accurate, with more information available.

Yes, I know not everyone has an internet connection. I'm sorry, if you're playing in field where it costs $70/hr to operate even the most basic airplane, you have absolutely zero to complain about having a $35/month smartphone plan to access the internet and file a flight plan. The hammer needs to come down, the briefers are a waste of tax payer dollars and the entire system is antiquated.

Look at where things have gone this year. Prior to this year, you had to purchase a fairly expensive ADS-B receiver to display traffic/weather info. Now you can build one for under $100 and use a cheap used iPad to obtain that info.

Technology will fix our ATC issues. If the FAA will allow it.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Those are really separate issues. I don't support privatization, but I do support user fees.
Click to expand...

The idea of user fees is fine. The implementation and fairness of them is what scares me.

An example - the IRS charges some user fees. They are not remotely "fair." For instance, a non-profit corporation can end up paying much higher fees than a for profit corporation.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
The idea of user fees is fine. The implementation and fairness of them is what scares me.

An example - the IRS charges some user fees. They are not remotely "fair." For instance, a non-profit corporation can end up paying much higher fees than a for profit corporation.
Click to expand...

Well, of course, any rule can be made fair or unfair. For example, the current funding scheme is unfair.
 
wheelsup said:
The entire idea of 1-800-WX-BRIEF needs to be done away with. It worked well when you still had NDB approaches, no smartphones and limited access to internet. Technology has completely changed the way people obtain weather and file flight plans. The new way is more accurate, with more information available.
Click to expand...

There is a huge chunk of the country (most of it) where there is no data service on smartphones. Including parts I fly from.
 
My guess is the airlines are funding most of it because they're using most of it.

Not much need for triple parallel PRM approaches (and the requisite runways, facilities, radar, controllers, etc, etc) in East Ruralsburg, Wisconsin.

"Buh, buh, buh, the corporate guys use some...."

Yup, they do. I don't see many phalanxes of Learjets descending on any one destination at one time, requiring tens of square miles of ramp space, either.

Aviation is a game of exponentials. If you want to squeeze a LOT of airplanes into ONE spot of concrete in a very SHORT amount of time, it's going to cost WAY more than the multiple of flagging down 5 Challengers an hour.

In the end, the game is about concrete. If you have enough runway per delta T, you don't need NexGen, fancy PRM approaches, RNAV arrivals or hordes of controllers. It's when you don't that it gets insanely complicated and wickedly expensive because you can only have one airplane occupy the strip at one time, and the amount of time has a minimum floor to it. You need to extract every trick in the book and then some to ensure that you can pile enough airplanes into the sky stacked and ready to utilize that finite time.

Outside the heavy usage periods, most of that fancy tech and spare concrete goes to waste.

So sure, some people get to use the fancy tech that someone else probably paid for, but it's irrelevant because they don't need it, and could get along fine without it.

I love the GPS in my airplane. Use it every trip. Glad the military picked up the nickel on that one. But I got along fine with the VOR, and could still make 100% without GPS. And a VHF shack in someone's field is still WAY less expensive than blasting a nuclear clock into orbit on a tube full of explosive juice.

Richman
 
Last edited:
Ruck said:
What have been the most developed / well-supported ATC user-fee proposals? Honest question, btw. I obviously have less knowledge about this vs. a lot of you guys.
Click to expand...

They have all been limited to turbine operators. Anyone flying piston equipment would be exempt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top