Good and bad of ATC Privatization

jsstevens said:
I think the biggest problem with the existing system is that the hardware they depend on is getting nearly impossible to fix. And the FAA has not been able to upgrade it. IBM won a contract to do so and failed (and I'm not necessarily blaming IBM, I wasn't on the inside and there are so MANY reasons government contracts can go sideways that have nothing to do with the contractor).

NextGen was/is supposed to make the spacing tighter safely, and to make the ascent/descent smooth all improving capacity. And it would/will if they can get the hardware and software in place to support it. I think the idea behind privatizing it as a service contract allows the contractor to upgrade the systems as they see fit as long as they meet the service standards. This removes the government red tape involved in upgrading systems. It might even be set up as an incentive fee based contract so they make more money of they improve services based on a predefined set of measurements.

This could be a good idea as long as user fees stay out of it. But that's a long shot. And unfortunately playing the safety card is more likely (in my opinion given today's social and political climate) to result in efforts to restrict or eliminate those "dangerous little planes".:(

John
Click to expand...





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jsstevens said:
There are so many possible ways to privatize its hard to say. Handle it like FSS (government contract to a private company to provide the service with specific performance parameters on the contract) and it's seemed pretty good to me. I realize you don't get the local weather knowledge that you used to, but that was already going away (due to station consolidation) before the privatization. They (LockMart/Leidos)have updated the systems used and make more services available online (directly from FSS) than before.
Click to expand...
The initial transition to privatized FSS was painful, and privatizing ATC would be a MUCH bigger job, and a much more safety-critical job. How many fatalities are we willing to incur to accomplish the imagined benefits?
 
jnmeade said:
How does the private ATC handle FAA violations by pilots? (And by controllers, for that matter.)
Click to expand...
The same way. The FAA would still be the regulatory agency. In Canada the private ATC is NavCanada and their regulatory body is Transport Canada.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
...Privatization I think depends on how it's done. Using your example of LockMart, I've got some significant issues regarding availability and speed of service. Now, I have no idea how FSS was before Lockmart, so I have no basis of comparison....
Click to expand...
The Web access features that Lockmart/Leidos has didn't exist in the FAA FSS system. There were just the two DUATS providers for Web access. After Lockmart got past the learning curve, the quality of interactions on the phone and on the radio seem similar to what I remember from before privatization.
 
Last edited:
jsstevens said:
...This could be a good idea as long as user fees stay out of it. But that's a long shot. And unfortunately playing the safety card is more likely (in my opinion given today's social and political climate) to result in efforts to restrict or eliminate those "dangerous little planes".:(
Click to expand...
I think the safety card that most needs to be played on GA's behalf is that Congress wanted airline new hires to all be 1500-hour ATPs for safety reasons, and the only reason it's possible to meet that requirement is that we have a viable general aviation industry for pilots to get that much training and experience in. (My understanding is that the military no longer trains enough pilots to meet all of the airlines' hiring needs.) And while the necessity of the 1500-hour rule has been debated, let's consider the possibility that requiring that much time may reduce the chances for a suicidal pilot like Andreas Lubitz to live long enough to get behind the controls of an airliner.
 
denverpilot said:
No. Flat no. It was not. No technical document EVER promised that from ADS-B. The only place you'll find it is in "NextGen" marketing material. No specification EVER promised ADS-B would do any of those things OR ever be primary for ATC target data. There were numerous documents that said the radars had to remain with not even a hint of them being decommissioned.
Click to expand...
You just pointed out exactly what is wrong with government contracting: the decision makers rarely, if ever, read the technical documents.....kind of like having to 'pass the bill to see what's in it'.

The technical documents almost never match the marketing materials. The PowerPoint slide decks that are briefed to the SESers, Flag Officers and Congress critters are full of rainbows and unicorns.

Then when the finished product doesn't match up with the wild marketing promises and everyone is pi$$ed off, the contractor holds up the technical docs and says: "see, it does everything it's supposed to do".

And we're stuck with another expensive POS system while GD, NG, Lockmart, BAE....etc are laughing all the way to the bank.
 
Good:





Bad: higher costs, decreased access, increased bureaucracy, less accountability, decreased safety...
 
Sundancer said:
I duuno. . . really; maybe an approach like for NASA? They (NASA) can't do much, at least not efficiently - they did get a bunch of the big lift done, at stupendous expense, in the early days, and now it looks like private concerns will carry the ball going forward, or at least in "partnership". . .

The FAA has been stop, stumble, and fall across the spectrum of their role in aviation; they do ATC OK, but at fantastic cost; NextGen is embarrassing for them. Or should be. I don't see FAA getting "better" as a policy implementer, or a driver of aviation technology, just because ATC goes private. Unless the long term planning goes with it. . .
Click to expand...
The whole reason NextGen implementation has been hampered is because of congress, not the FAA.
 
Fearless Tower said:
You just pointed out exactly what is wrong with government contracting: the decision makers rarely, if ever, read the technical documents.....kind of like having to 'pass the bill to see what's in it'.

The technical documents almost never match the marketing materials. The PowerPoint slide decks that are briefed to the SESers, Flag Officers and Congress critters are full of rainbows and unicorns.

Then when the finished product doesn't match up with the wild marketing promises and everyone is pi$$ed off, the contractor holds up the technical docs and says: "see, it does everything it's supposed to do".

And we're stuck with another expensive POS system while GD, NG, Lockmart, BAE....etc are laughing all the way to the bank.
Click to expand...
Actually the FAA micromanages every little detail of what we do, every step of the way. The FAA requirements are so specific that there they do end up getting exactly what they asked for. There are FAA quality people that work full time at my office. Something as minor as the model of DVD drive in the ATC system maintenance work station going end-of-life requires us to perform a qualification test of the replacement drive in front of FAA QA.

They even require us to provide all the source code for the software to them and they make their own tweaks. They have total control of what we do here.
 
Others have asked, I'll ask it again... why is privatization equated with user fees?

It's an unfortunate fact that the FAA could establish user fees if they so chose. I would oppose that.

The idea that privatization and user fees are tantamount just doesn't make sense. How much do you pay to call LockMart for briefings? That's a privatized service that I use while never paying for directly.

Where's the there on this whole thing?
 
Ravioli said:
Others have asked, I'll ask it again... why is privatization equated with user fees?

It's an unfortunate fact that the FAA could establish user fees if they so chose. I would oppose that.

The idea that privatization and user fees are tantamount just doesn't make sense. How much do you pay to call LockMart for briefings? That's a privatized service that I use while never paying for directly.

Where's the there on this whole thing?
Click to expand...
I think it comes from the fact that the administration keeps using NavCanada as a model, and it relies on user fees.
 
They put this 3rd lane on Hwy 36 from Denver to Boulder and it is a toll lane. I think it just sucks. Roads should be paid for by fuel taxes (have not been raised in 35 years) or car and truck registration. Airways, sidewalks, roads and schools should be universal to all and free of charge to use. It is part of our freedom in this country! Now I know they arent really "free". Somehow they have to be paid for. Taxes and such. Ok. Pay at the pump, but no fee to file IFR and such. Such a system is somehow unamerican to me....

We tried all this toll road stuff in that past. Good way to start a war IMO. Thats why we got rid of it. We dont want war. War REALLY sucks! That may be an overstatement. Its really about "class warfare".

Buses are subsidized so people that cant afford a car can get to work. Then they can get enough money to buy their own car. That makes sense to me. Do we want to make buses unaffordable? No one will ride them and they will disappear. Result? More people on welfare. I know this is a sensitive subject, because it gets into politics and all. No we dont want the government to do everything. As much as possible should be done by private industry....Somehow there is an optimum solution. We need to find it.

One thing is true. Dont fix what isn't broken.
We have a inexpensive, safe and efficient air travel system. I can travel by air for way less than I can drive (airlines). And it is SAFER! Thats the DEFINITION of BETTER! It IS working! Its NOT BROKEN!!!

And they are improving it! ADSB is going to make it even SAFER! We gripe about ADSB, but its a good idea. Every plane will be putting its position out in GPS coordiates. Thats a good idea folks. And its brought to you by the FAA! The one we have thats NOT privatized!!!
 
Last edited:
coloradobluesky said:
They put this 3rd lane on Hwy 36 from Denver to Boulder and it is a toll lane. I think it just sucks. Roads should be paid for by fuel taxes (have not been raised in 35 years) or car and truck registration. Airways, sidewalks, roads and schools should be universal to all and free of charge to use. It is part of our freedom in this country! Now I know they arent really "free". Somehow they have to be paid for. Taxes and such. Ok. Pay at the pump, but no fee to file IFR and such. Such a system is somehow unamerican to me....
Click to expand...
So you can drive in the other two lanes without paying a toll but you have to pay a toll to use the 3rd lane? Never heard of a road like that. All the toll roads I've been on have tolls for the entire road.
 
ktup-flyer said:
I think this guy nailed it.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1617272361657725
Click to expand...

I agree with the crux of what he's saying, however he kinda just totes some marketing lines a little in there too..

How is the ATC "in need of updating" as someone who fly for a living, and not as a CFII or a Facebook page, I've never been let down by ATC, the systems work just fine and that's also as someone who is in a area with less radar services than a big city and it's not even a problem.

So no Facebook dude, the system works great as it is NOW. Actually it worked great before the BS with student pilots carts and the ACS dumbing things down.
 
Fearless Tower said:
You just pointed out exactly what is wrong with government contracting: the decision makers rarely, if ever, read the technical documents.....kind of like having to 'pass the bill to see what's in it'.

The technical documents almost never match the marketing materials. The PowerPoint slide decks that are briefed to the SESers, Flag Officers and Congress critters are full of rainbows and unicorns.

Then when the finished product doesn't match up with the wild marketing promises and everyone is pi$$ed off, the contractor holds up the technical docs and says: "see, it does everything it's supposed to do".

And we're stuck with another expensive POS system while GD, NG, Lockmart, BAE....etc are laughing all the way to the bank.
Click to expand...

Bingo. And to be even more "cynical", there's an argument to be made that such defense spending leakeage/inefficiency is by design and intent. Meaning that, the purpose of the modern DOD is to create these transfers to the civilian economy, first and foremost. Say it twice out loud, so it sinks in. Anything from housing, weapons platforms, even my own personal circumstances of where they geo-locate my duty station, is all done not with national security in mind, but in order to act as a conduit for federal welfare transfers to local economies that would cease to exist in its current form if operations/expenditures within DOD were otherwise consolidated and actually strategically located within sincere de-centralization needs.

I'm being rhetorical of course, because I have my own life and service as proof that is exactly the reason why government contracting, appropriation and budgeting is as leaky and corrupt as it is. Frankly I don't understand the resistance acknowledging the dynamic, nor consideration of the utterance as "cynical"; it's clear as day to me. Which is why I also find it laughable when civilians wank about government labor costs. From where I sit, civilians fed with defense contracts are in effect as much rent-seekers and welfare queens as they accuse my kind of being. We're all innocent in Shawshank....
 
MassPilot said:
Actually the FAA micromanages every little detail of what we do, every step of the way. The FAA requirements are so specific that there they do end up getting exactly what they asked for. There are FAA quality people that work full time at my office. Something as minor as the model of DVD drive in the ATC system maintenance work station going end-of-life requires us to perform a qualification test of the replacement drive in front of FAA QA.

They even require us to provide all the source code for the software to them and they make their own tweaks. They have total control of what we do here.
Click to expand...
Being micromanaged by action officers doesn't necessarily mean that the senior execs know what is in the technical documents.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Being micromanaged by action officers doesn't necessarily mean that the senior execs know what is in the technical documents.
Click to expand...
True but it's faa employees that have ultimate control over the technical documents, requirements, and finished project. If they're not properly managed or higher ups in the government aren't aware of what's going on then it's their own fault (I'm not saying that this is actually happening since I don't really have any visibility into their side).
 
coloradobluesky said:
They put this 3rd lane on Hwy 36 from Denver to Boulder and it is a toll lane. I think it just sucks. Roads should be paid for by fuel taxes (have not been raised in 35 years) or car and truck registration. Airways, sidewalks, roads and schools should be universal to all and free of charge to use. It is part of our freedom in this country! Now I know they arent really "free". Somehow they have to be paid for. Taxes and such. Ok. Pay at the pump, but no fee to file IFR and such. Such a system is somehow unamerican to me....
Click to expand...
I don't have any philosophical objections to toll roads or bridges in general (I grew up in the northeast where they are common), but that HOV or toll lane is stupid. If they need more money they should raise the fuel tax or registration fees as you point out. Also the E-470 system is expensive compared to the NJ Turnpike, for instance. But the toll road that wins in the expensive category is that one near Dulles where it was about $5 to drive a couple miles to the hotel. I'm sure locals have found a way to bypass that area, especially when they are only going a short distance.
 
Last edited:
MassPilot said:
So you can drive in the other two lanes without paying a toll but you have to pay a toll to use the 3rd lane? Never heard of a road like that. All the toll roads I've been on have tolls for the entire road.
Click to expand...
Yup - that's exactly it. Of course what bluesky didn't point out about the toll lane on US 36:
  • The fees vary, depending on the time of day, from $1.25 to $6.70, each way.
  • The toll road is privatized, the other 2 lanes are public
  • No revenue from the toll road is returned to the state/county, it goes direct to the private company, which is responsible for the maintenance for all the lanes
  • The manner in which the contract and negotiations were handled was very poor, with out much transparency until it was a done deal
 
Ravioli said:
Others have asked, I'll ask it again... why is privatization equated with user fees?

It's an unfortunate fact that the FAA could establish user fees if they so chose. I would oppose that.

The idea that privatization and user fees are tantamount just doesn't make sense. How much do you pay to call LockMart for briefings? That's a privatized service that I use while never paying for directly.

Where's the there on this whole thing?
Click to expand...

Actually, they can't. Separation of powers, the Executive (includes the FAA) cannot raise taxes unless the Legislative (that would be Congress) allows them to do so. Once privatized all that goes out the window.
 
MassPilot said:
So you can drive in the other two lanes without paying a toll but you have to pay a toll to use the 3rd lane? Never heard of a road like that. All the toll roads I've been on have tolls for the entire road.
Click to expand...

Yup. It's a total graft deal. Someone is getting rich.

coloradobluesky said:
And they are improving it! ADSB is going to make it even SAFER! We gripe about ADSB, but its a good idea. Every plane will be putting its position out in GPS coordiates. Thats a good idea folks. And its brought to you by the FAA! The one we have thats NOT privatized!!!
Click to expand...

Why? A secondary radar location wasn't good enough? (And it won't be *every* aircraft.) I still haven't seen any compelling reason ever given for replacing one with the other. Not one that changes a single thing about "safety" anyway. What makes it a "good idea"?
 
The biggest problem that no one is addressing is that the big airlines have controlling interest in the panel that is planning the privatization. GA is barely represented, and is most likely to get the raw end of the deal. The big airlines despise GA, it competes with their money, and for airport and airspace usage. GA around the world has suffered in other countries that have private ATC, and with the makeup of the panel, it can be expected here as well.
 
Ravioli said:
Others have asked, I'll ask it again... why is privatization equated with user fees?

It's an unfortunate fact that the FAA could establish user fees if they so chose. I would oppose that.

The idea that privatization and user fees are tantamount just doesn't make sense. How much do you pay to call LockMart for briefings? That's a privatized service that I use while never paying for directly.

Where's the there on this whole thing?
Click to expand...
I think it comes down to taxing power. Private entities don't have it. If this private entity is not reliant on appropriations from Congress, and cannot itself raise funds through fuel or othet taxes, how is is going to develop adfitional revenue streams to fund the increased costs of NextGen and other programs that are sure to occur? You can only cut costs so far, sometime you're going to have to increase income.

If the privatized ATC tell the regulatory board as it it is proposed that they need additional funds from user fees to keep the NAS safe, no way they'll be denied.
 
I love the naiveté of some posters when they remark "why are people talking about user fees in the privatization discussion, one doesn't equal the other bro". Ever heard of a dog whistle? Of course you haven't, pun very much intended.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't have any philosophical objections to toll roads or bridges in general (I grew up in the northeast where they are common), but that HOV or toll lane is stupid. If they need more money they should raise the fuel tax or registration fees as you point out. Also the E-470 system is expensive compared to the NJ Turnpike, for instance. But the toll road that wins in the expensive category is that one near Dulles where it was about $5 to drive a couple miles to the hotel. I'm sure locals have found a way to bypass that area, especially when they are only going a short distance.
Click to expand...

That Dulles one is interesting in that you can get on, take the inner lanes and go to the airport free, but if you stay in the outer lanes (so as to get off somewhere other than the airport) you pay tolls. There are a few others like that in the DC area as well.

John
 
Taxes go up, roads keep getting sold off to the private companies, and if you complain about higher taxes or ask where it's all going, some statist will tell you civilization needs taxes for roads. o_O
 
hindsight2020 said:
I love the naiveté of some posters when they remark "why are people talking about user fees in the privatization discussion, one doesn't equal the other bro". Ever heard of a dog whistle? Of course you haven't, pun very much intended.
Click to expand...

I suppose I might be naive, but we do have at least one counter example: FSS.
 
denverpilot said:
Taxes go up, roads keep getting sold off to the private companies, and if you complain about higher taxes or ask where it's all going, some statist will tell you civilization needs taxes for roads. o_O
Click to expand...

Going to be investing in boot polish, with the amount of boot licking going on nowadays...
 
denverpilot said:
Taxes go up, roads keep getting sold off to the private companies, and if you complain about higher taxes or ask where it's all going, some statist will tell you civilization needs taxes for roads. o_O
Click to expand...

Civilization does need taxes for roads. What civilization doesn't need is taxes to fund bond issues and tax credits for private ownership of roads so the taxpayer gets to pay for the same road twice via both tax and tolls.

Just issue the bond, hire people and build the damn things, but that's not happening either. If the Administration really wanted to solve air transport problems, they would be building runways, not talking about selling off public assets and farting around with ATC privatization.
 
Fearless Tower said:
The technical documents almost never match the marketing materials.

Then when the finished product doesn't match up with the wild marketing promises and everyone is pi$$ed off, the contractor holds up the technical docs and says: "see, it does everything it's supposed to do".

And we're stuck with another expensive POS system while....(they) are laughing all the way to the bank.
Click to expand...

^^^^Every software package we ever bought.
 
Here in Massachusetts we have the MassPike (I90) which has tolls for it's entire length. Apparently when they originally built the road, they instituted tolls to pay off the cost of construction with the promise of removing the tolls once it was paid off. Now decades later there are still tolls and they go into the state's general fund...
 
Chip Sylverne said:
Civilization does need taxes for roads.
Click to expand...

Obviously not, if when they sell off one lane it pays for all the maintenance of three lanes plus profit for the private company.

Proves that roads can and are maintainable and build-able by private entities.

About all that's needed of government is eminent domain to get the land. The local road here that folks have mentioned sold off a lane to private enterprise, that was the deal.

Eminent Domain to widen it, sell it off to private company, private company pays for all maintenance of all lanes henceforth.

I believe this is called "Public-Private Partnership" which translates in the Urban Dictionary to: "Everyone involved in this project gets to screw the taxpayer as hard and as fast as they can."

They almost got caught, but held some quick "public feedback meetings" and pretended that the equipment and signage for the conversion to toll wasn't already literally lying in the ditch beside the road when those meetings started.

And idiots actually bought it. Amazing. That stuff takes months to fabricate and be delivered to roadside ditches. Deal was done long before the public meetings.

The other funny one I always read, is people who have bought into this silly idea that gas taxes need to necessarily go up to maintain roads.

Let's see. The road was built. Everyone paid X in fuel taxes. Traffic tripled.

Now the agency has 3x in the same tax coming in.

And suddenly can't afford maintenance or widening, things that are both cheaper than building the road in the first place.

LOL. Must be true. A politician said it. They're "broke" collecting 3X what they used to collect, and need to sell off a lane of the road to their buddy's private company. LOL LOL LOL.
 
P.S. Y'all know this sort of "Public-Private Partnership" is where the ATC Privatization is headed eventually, right?
 
hindsight2020 said:
I love the naiveté of some posters when they remark "why are people talking about user fees in the privatization discussion, one doesn't equal the other bro". Ever heard of a dog whistle? Of course you haven't
Click to expand...

I've heard of dog whistles. I've never heard one. What's your point? Given your userid I wouldn't expect any forethought from you, being that you're all in to Hindsight in all its beauty.
 
Norman said:
As I understand it, the FAA would still have to maintain the infrastructure and only the controllers would be in the private sector. Someone correct me if that's wrong.
Click to expand...
You are wrong. All of the ATC facilities, equipment, and personnel (controllers, maintenance, staff, etc) would transfer to the new organization.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top