Control Tower Sequestration Closures Cancelled

Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

It says the closures are being delayed, not necessarily canceled.
 
Email at work let us know for Texas, the state has agreed to fund the towers for 90 days. This would allow us in the training command to continue to RON and do student pattern off-station training (since we aren't allowed to do landings at non towered fields). Some of the affected fields were in our often-used refueling stops and weather options.
 
@Matthew: lol! Remembering the "wasting natural racehorses" sketch.

Maybe we need Rosanne Rosanadana to run the agency
 
Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

MAKG1 said:
And it's only to deal with lawsuits.

Sorry, it doesn't mean what you want it to mean.
Click to expand...

What do I want it to mean?
 
Crap, so much for cutting wasteful spending.
 
Unless we were being lied to...... the "cuts" which were so awful because they only had a half year to execute will now be more severe since they only have a quarter year to save the money.......

OK, I guess they were lying.
 
Certainly no guarantees, but it seems likley to me that the fact that this was postponed once means it will get postponed again. And again. Until they decide to just punt the whole closure issue altogether.

From what I have seen of traffic in my state, the towers on the final closure list in my state probably should be closed.
 
Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

MAKG1 said:
And it's only to deal with lawsuits.

Sorry, it doesn't mean what you want it to mean.
Click to expand...

OK, face saving. Sooner or later the Admin will actually sign a bill allowing all the federal agencies to allocate their cuts to programs either started - or completed - with funds remaining in the budget.

It means what it means - are you telling me that a federal court would have issued an injunction requiring them to stay open? I doubt it seriously - its face saving 101.
 
jbarrass said:
Unless we were being lied to...... the "cuts" which were so awful because they only had a half year to execute will now be more severe since they only have a quarter year to save the money.......

OK, I guess they were lying.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat::yeahthat:
 
The whole sequestration fiasco has been entertaining if nothing else. It all started with the claim that Obama was closing control towers in order to put some hurt on us...unless you thought that closing the towers was a good idea in which case Obama had nothing to do with it. Now that it's been delayed, depending on how you feel about the closing of the towers, either someone has the balls to stand up to Obama and tell him NO or Obama is hindering the sequestration process and costing us money. :rofl:
 
timwinters said:
That's a real shame as most of them needed to be closed.
Click to expand...


Things can get pretty busy at KLAL Lakeland, FL which is where I did much of my IFR training. I am glad to see this tower will stay open for now.
 
Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

I'm hoping this will allow time for more considered decisions about which towers are needed and which are not.

Hey, I can dream, can't I? :goofy:
 
Last edited:
Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

comanchepilot said:
OK, face saving. Sooner or later the Admin will actually sign a bill allowing all the federal agencies to allocate their cuts to programs either started - or completed - with funds remaining in the budget.
Click to expand...

But first the Congress would have to send the president something to sign.
 
Okay, now I am confused. I thought the sequestration was dictated by law, and the individual agencies affected had to cut the funds by a certain date without exception. So now what does the FAA do to cut the costs they were told they had to cut?
 
jbarrass said:
Unless we were being lied to...... the "cuts" which were so awful because they only had a half year to execute will now be more severe since they only have a quarter year to save the money.......

OK, I guess they were lying.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing....as this has dragged on, they have been passing spending bills here and there to allow departments to either bring money forward or take from areas that were previously protected under the original Jack Lew developed plan.

Basically, when faced with the potential political fallout that was destined to come from furloughing people, Congress balked and found some work arounds.

So basically Sequestration is accomplishing abso-friggin-lutely nothing. We (the DoD) are indeed feeling the effects (no money for equipment maintenance and training is significantly curtailed), but we have the full civilian workforce still on the job. They don't have the resources to fully do their jobs, but we are paying everyone to keep coming to work regardless.

So regardless of whether you are in favor of sequestration or against it...everybody loses.
 
They are delaying because Obama heard there were over 20,000 cattle guards in the US so he decided to lay all 20,000 off instead.
 
I was curious about the comments saying military aircraft couldn't train at fields without towers? I know at least here in the Springs we get quite a few trainers from the AF Academy who come down and do pattern work at KFLY with no tower. We also get guard copters through occasionally too. I am just curious if there is some standard reg at certain places or phases of training?

Carl
 
douglas393 said:
Okay, now I am confused. I thought the sequestration was dictated by law, and the individual agencies affected had to cut the funds by a certain date without exception. So now what does the FAA do to cut the costs they were told they had to cut?
Click to expand...

I'm curious too.

This is a pretty good summation of how the sequester is supposed to work.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/21/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-sequestration-cuts-will-be-indis/

Maybe some kind of budget gymnastics going on akin to hitting the debt ceiling where it turns from a hard deadline to a soft deadline.

Remember the sequestration was meant to be as blunt and stupid as possible so as to force both parties to the table to hammer out a debt plan.

The idea was "this is so stupid no one would let it happen...."

Well....
 
Re: Control Tower Sequestration Closures Delayed

mrdavedpg said:
But first the Congress would have to send the president something to sign.
Click to expand...

The House has passed such a bill twice . . .. Harry Reid refuses to let it come to a vote for fear it might pass . . .
 
Instead of a phased closure, they all drop dead mid june. The paper I read this morning said that approx 50 airports local/state govts. have opted to fund their tower's operations if needed, and delaying the phased closure would allow for the details and legalities to be worked out.

June is still very much in the picture. Nobody has blinked.
 
I attended the annual Missouri Airport Managers Association conference last week. A couple of politico types made an appearance and, of course, the sequester and control tower closings were a hot topic. Lots of whining...

One statement was made that really raised my eyebrows though...and I think it was made by the AOPA regional rep...and that statement was:

"If a tower closes, then that town will lose its business traffic because most corporate flight departments have a policy of only flying into towered airfields."

Hmmm...I thought...I've been with three corporations that had birds and we went into and out of non-towered fields all the time. In fact, all three were based at non-towered fields.

So, what say ye corporate (and former corporate) pilots? Do/did any of you have a policy that required operations only at towered fields?
 
Last edited:
We have lots of corporations at our never-had-a-tower field
 
timwinters said:
......One statement was made that really raised my eyebrows though...and I think it was made by the AOPA regional rep...and that statement was:

"If a tower closes, then that town will lose its business traffic because most corporate flight departments have a policy of only flying into towered airfields."
Click to expand...

Easy.....................

Don't trust a damn thing the AOPA says.....:nonod:
 
timwinters said:
I attended the annual Missouri Airport Managers Association conference last week. A couple of politico types made an appearance and, of course, the sequester and control tower closings were a hot topic. Lots of whining...

One statement was made that really raised my eyebrows though...and I think it was made by the AOPA regional rep...and that statement was:

"If a tower closes, then that town will lose its business traffic because most corporate flight departments have a policy of only flying into towered airfields."

Hmmm...I thought...I've been with three corporations that had birds and we went into and out of non-towered fields all the time. In fact, all three were based at non-towered fields.

So, what say ye corporate (and former corporate) pilots? Do/did any of you have a policy that required operations only at towered fields?
Click to expand...

Sugarland KSGR played that card... loud.. and often... and it was BS
 
SportPilotCO said:
I was curious about the comments saying military aircraft couldn't train at fields without towers? I know at least here in the Springs we get quite a few trainers from the AF Academy who come down and do pattern work at KFLY with no tower. We also get guard copters through occasionally too. I am just curious if there is some standard reg at certain places or phases of training?

Carl
Click to expand...

At Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training, by AETC reg we cannot touch down at non-towered airfields. One can do practice approaches to low approaches, but we cannot land there except in an emergency. We cannot operate when there are more than two aircraft (total) in the pattern.

I cannot speak for the IFS folks at Pueblo (flying Katanas for initial flight screening) or the AF academy gliders or powered flight programs. But for UPT that's the problem with non-towered fields. The proposed changes affected several destinations we frequently use as overnight stops for off-station training.
 
SportPilotCO said:
I was curious about the comments saying military aircraft couldn't train at fields without towers? I know at least here in the Springs we get quite a few trainers from the AF Academy who come down and do pattern work at KFLY with no tower. We also get guard copters through occasionally too. I am just curious if there is some standard reg at certain places or phases of training?

Carl
Click to expand...

I fly into Middleton Field KGZH sometimes and they have a LOT! of military training. They also are non-towered.
 
hindsight2020 said:
At Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training, by AETC reg we cannot touch down at non-towered airfields. One can do practice approaches to low approaches, but we cannot land there except in an emergency. We cannot operate when there are more than two aircraft (total) in the pattern.
Click to expand...

Maybe the people making those requirements should extract their collective heads from their....
 
Simply not true. One of the G-V's I flew was based at a non-towered field.
timwinters said:
I attended the annual Missouri Airport Managers Association conference last week. A couple of politico types made an appearance and, of course, the sequester and control tower closings were a hot topic. Lots of whining...

One statement was made that really raised my eyebrows though...and I think it was made by the AOPA regional rep...and that statement was:

"If a tower closes, then that town will lose its business traffic because most corporate flight departments have a policy of only flying into towered airfields."

Hmmm...I thought...I've been with three corporations that had birds and we went into and out of non-towered fields all the time. In fact, all three were based at non-towered fields.

So, what say ye corporate (and former corporate) pilots? Do/did any of you have a policy that required operations only at towered fields?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top