Good and bad of ATC Privatization

coloradobluesky said:
Roads should be paid for by fuel taxes (have not been raised in 35 years) or car and truck registration.
Click to expand...

maybe true ... or not? I haven't researched it. But I can attest that the cost to license/register/renew my vehicles has doubled or tripled in a couple of cases in the last 4-5 years ... without raising taxes.
How? By weasel-worded regs passed by crooks politicians dancing around TABOR, and adding huge Bridge and Road "fees" to vehicle registrations.

 
gkainz said:
maybe true ... or not? I haven't researched it. But I can attest that the cost to license/register/renew my vehicles has doubled or tripled in a couple of cases in the last 4-5 years ... without raising taxes.
How? By weasel-worded regs passed by crooks politicians dancing around TABOR, and adding huge Bridge and Road "fees" to vehicle registrations.
Click to expand...

I see this more, and more for both recurring, and non-recurring "fees". It is an easy way to raise revenue for essential vehicle registrations, inspections, permits, tolls, services, energy, phone, etc.
 
Screw private ATC and their fees. I'll just listen in on my LiveATC app and squeeze in twixt the others.
no one will even notice
 
Read the Navworx thread and understand how FAA requirements push up the cost. Just assume that GA will be priced out.
 
Well, I saw an article someone posted from ANN that said the proposal is for privatized ATC should be funded by user fees. So in this case, it seems that at least the opening bid will be for privatization and user fees to be connected.

Probably a good time for me to renew my membership at some of the alphabet groups.
 
If you drive a car, I'll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet.

Beatles
 
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...
There are some highways in California like that now, although I think you have to have some kind of transponder so that the tolls are paid electronically.
 
mryan75 said:
The whole reason NextGen implementation has been hampered is because of congress, not the FAA.
Click to expand...
I guess I don't draw a distinction - gov't is gov't; inherently inefficient, usually; not always, but the FAA has never been an innovative or agile org, even by gov't standards. Compartmented to the degree that groups within unwittingly work at cross purposes. . .they don't have the vision, culture, or in-house leadership to get 'er done.
 
jsstevens said:
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
Click to expand...
Beltway hot lanes in the VA suburbs of DC have variable tolls that can exceed $21.00 in rush hour; covers 12-14 miles, maybe. Perhaps a bit more. . .
 
Palmpilot said:
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.
Click to expand...
????? Not sure how the hour count affects the propensity for suicide, or detecting the intent in advance. The debate is semi-legit, at best. Both pilots in the crash that set off the 1500 hour qual had already amassed more time than that.
 
coloradobluesky said:
If you fly a plane,
I'll tax your meat
Click to expand...

Or @SixPapaCharlie 's Rocky Mountain Oysters he keeps on the pitot tube? ;-)

Palmpilot said:
There are some highways in California like that now, although I think you have to have some kind of transponder so that the tolls are paid electronically.
Click to expand...

Electronic payment makes it such that there's no emotional connection or even rational thought about the money just automatically disappearing.

ADS-B will be used similarly in a privatized ATC system, certainly. The bill will arrive long after the flight.
 
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...
Because all of the proposals for privatization include user fees. The President's proposal makes the imposition of user fees very clear:

Open Access: All users, including the general aviation industry and emerging new entrants, must have open access to our Nation’s airspace. The FAA would continue to certify new entrants (such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Commercial Space Transports) as part of its responsibility to oversee safe use of the NAS. The new ATC entity would grant FAA-certified users access to the NAS, subject to their participation in the system’s user fees, their being equipped as necessary to fly in controlled air space, and their compliance with other applicable rules and regulations.​
 

Attachments

  • Trump's Principles for ATC Reform.pdf
    120.2 KB · Views: 0
There is Nothing good about Privatization, that I can think of. It never worked in any Country that tried it. I know that some people to the North think it works for them but every time they come here they realize that what they have is Not working as well as what we have here. I don't even want to bring up other locations where pilots / GA has basically been eliminated by fees and privatization.


I am very surprised that the present Admin proposed this, I did not expect this from a real businessman. If a business needs fixing, you fix it, not trash it / give it away for nothing. I guess if the business is not one that you invested your own money and effort in, it's useless / dispensable, let someone else have it?


ATC can be fixed, no need for a privatization, a private company can do no better, what is needed is a good Manager. We expected this Admin to come and fix things not give them away. Get a Manager that knows what to do, start by eliminating the Unions, another form of Communism in my opinion, I know that is never likely to happen since they feed many of our leaders / politicians, but they can be trimmed down / controlled, if you really want it. The same approach that is now being taken to fix VA can be used to fix the ATC, people that Know what they are doing, and Want to do the job.


If the privatized ATC will try to eliminate / charge for Flight Following, giving headings and vectors, filing IFR ... by GA, this will turn into a terrible safety issue in many areas. In addition many of the Commercial flight will likely be delayed, and in the worst case mid air collisions are very likely. ADS-B will not fix that problem, if you are not talking, and get headings / vectors you will not be able to avoid it.

Compounding the problem is going to be other aircraft that people may use to avoid fees, Drones etc. all buzzing around in uncontrolled airspace interfering with commercial operations.

Add to that the fact that GA is now providing most of training for the Commercial pilots, for free, and this will like go away. There are some companies, presently, already having to pay to train for their own pilots. This alone will cost them Millions if not Billions of Dollars, to get someone to accumulate the experience / hours needed to provide experienced / safe pilots. The only way around that would be to allow commercial pilots with fewer hours to be employed, which in itself would jeopardize safety, we all know that there is no substitute for experience / time in the aircraft.


I do hope that this does not get approved by Congress, or better yet, retract it now.
 
Sundancer said:
????? Not sure how the hour count affects the propensity for suicide, or detecting the intent in advance. The debate is semi-legit, at best. Both pilots in the crash that set off the 1500 hour qual had already amassed more time than that.
Click to expand...
My thinking is that acquiring 1500 hours takes time, and the more time goes by, the more likely it is that a pilot with suicidal tendencies will have already done himself in before he gets a chance to be hired by an airline. So I'm not saying that the propensity for suicide is affected by having 1500 hours. I'm saying that the likelihood of a suicidal pilot still being alive is reduced by the passage of time.

I agree with you about Congress's original rationale for the rule being flawed, which is what I was talking about when I mentioned that there had been debate about it. Nevertheless, if Congress thinks 1500 hours is necessary for safety, rightly or wrongly, then we should point out to them that destroying the viability of general aviation would work counter to that goal.
 
bluesideup said:
...start by eliminating the Unions, another form of Communism in my opinion...
Click to expand...
Unions are no more a form of communism than corporations are. Both are forms of collective action on behalf of their members.
 
Sundancer said:
Beltway hot lanes in the VA suburbs of DC have variable tolls that can exceed $21.00 in rush hour; covers 12-14 miles, maybe. Perhaps a bit more. . .
Click to expand...
Correct. The ones on I-95, too. They are demand based and the price can go up and down at any time based on how much traffic is in the lanes (and in the non-toll lanes). This was encouraged by the Federal DOT.

Unlike the Beltway, the I-95 and the coming I-66 toll lanes involved giving over 2 taxpayer funded lanes to the private entity, which built a third lane (on I-66 they will build 2 additional lanes, one in each direction). So they did privatize existing taxpayer-funded roads. Because "free" or "non-toll roads were given away, traffic becomes worse.

In addition to the tolls, the taxpayer is on the hook if the private entity doesn't perform. In the case of the beltway, the private entity put up less than 20% of the cost... The rest was borrowed with most of the debt being government backed. In other words, the interest rate paid by the private entity was less than a commercial rate and effectively subsidized by the government.

The Dulles road is a special case. It was originally built by the Feds when IAD was built to provide people a way to get there. The toll lanes were built by the state and tolled to cover the construction cost. They connect to the Greenway, a toll road that goes from IAD to Leesburg - that was privately built and owned, and to this day the toll rate is so high that the legislature regularly looks into potential actions to reduce the cost to drivers. As for the Dulles road, both the toll and free lanes were turned over to the airport authority (MWAA) when the airport was turned over. Because it's hard to get to IAD and they want to encourage more traffic there and less at DCA, those lanes will remain free (but tolls will be added to the I66 portion inside the beltway that connects to the Dulles road). The tolls on the toll lanes are now being used to fund the extension of the Metro system to IAD and beyond... In other words, they're being redirected for other projects.
 
Driving home today, I heard the WTOP traffic guy mention the hot lane toll had gone over $30.00 - a muck up in the free lanes had drivers taking the toll lanes, and the demand pricing was shooting up. . .
 
Sundancer said:
Driving home today, I heard the WTOP traffic guy mention the hot lane toll had gone over $30.00 - a muck up in the free lanes had drivers taking the toll lanes, and the demand pricing was shooting up. . .
Click to expand...

Automatic price gouging... awesome.

Think privatized ATC will cost more at hubs for the airlines when the weather goes down the tubes? LOL.

That's a rhetorical question of course.
 
ktup-flyer said:
I think this guy nailed it.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1617272361657725
Click to expand...
Well put. I think that this is a little more "real" than it has been in the past. The push to "corporatize" a lot of things is very real. Corporations are not into providing services for free. They are not into paying employees any more than the minimum necessary to attract enough employees to provide service and/or produce and market enough product to make money. They are into making as much profit as possible, it is their duty to their shareholders. They are very good at it. So good in fact that their leadership can command almost obscene incomes while doing it. Hail CEO, one branch down, two to go.
 
The tolls on the stretch of the PA Turnpike I drive have risen 100% in less than eight years. That is a 9% per year increase, with no end in sight! There is no public outcry, and the media doesn't report on it. They raise the tolls because they can!
 
Sundancer said:
Driving home today, I heard the WTOP traffic guy mention the hot lane toll had gone over $30.00 - a muck up in the free lanes had drivers taking the toll lanes, and the demand pricing was shooting up. . .
Click to expand...

Demand pricing.

denverpilot said:
Automatic price gouging... awesome.

Think privatized ATC will cost more at hubs for the airlines when the weather goes down the tubes? LOL.

That's a rhetorical question of course.
Click to expand...

Demand pricing is the current "golden child" idea a the DoT. Gouge or no gouge. It's seen as the "free market" alternative to rationing or highway backups - in the case of tolls on most of the DC area toll lanes it lines the pockets of the private company, though there are a couple stretches that will soon line the government coffers (to be used for public transportation and bike lane projects, they say). No toll if you have 3 or more in a car (with the right toll tag). And before we get political here, the HOT lanes project with demand-pricing was embraced and encouraged by a democratic administration.

Anthony said:
The tolls on the stretch of the PA Turnpike I drive have risen 100% in less than eight years. That is a 9% per year increase, with no end in sight! There is no public outcry, and the media doesn't report on it. They raise the tolls because they can!
Click to expand...

It's worse back here in DC with the demand pricing. I've seen an 8 mile stretch be as low as $2.40 and as high as $19.00.

I'm only surprised that Maryland hasn't done it to raise more money on their side of the beltway.
 
wsuffa said:
Demand pricing.



Demand pricing is the current "golden child" idea a the DoT. Gouge or no gouge. It's seen as the "free market" alternative to rationing or highway backups - in the case of tolls on most of the DC area toll lanes it lines the pockets of the private company, though there are a couple stretches that will soon line the government coffers (to be used for public transportation and bike lane projects, they say). No toll if you have 3 or more in a car (with the right toll tag). And before we get political here, the HOT lanes project with demand-pricing was embraced and encouraged by a democratic administration.



It's worse back here in DC with the demand pricing. I've seen an 8 mile stretch be as low as $2.40 and as high as $19.00.

I'm only surprised that Maryland hasn't done it to raise more money on their side of the beltway.
Click to expand...

Still blows the entire argument that higher taxes means we all have roads. That money isn't going to roads when stuff like this is going on.

Demand pricing should be dumped during accidents when lane closures happen. If the entire point is roads that work.
 
denverpilot said:
Still blows the entire argument that higher taxes means we all have roads. That money isn't going to roads when stuff like this is going on.

Demand pricing should be dumped during accidents when lane closures happen. If the entire point is roads that work.
Click to expand...
Folks 'round here call 'em "Lexus Lanes"....

On a different note, I see where Schumer has come out against ATC privatization...
 
Palmpilot said:
Unions are no more a form of communism than corporations are. Both are forms of collective action on behalf of their members.
Click to expand...


While I may agree with you to some point, the one main distinct difference, why I think they fit into the Com. category, is the fact that workers tend to be paid the same salary regardless of their performance, and it's like dealing with some of these diseases that have no cure. You can Not get rid of them, unlike some private corporations, you perform or get fired, assuming they have no Union.

In my experience most of the Controllers are top people and good workers, the Management and the upper echelons need to be replaced with people that understand, and want to accomplish efficiency. There is no good reason why City, County, Gov.... has to pay more for the same product than a private individual.
Contractors love any of the above mentioned, that's where the money is, because they are not spending their own money the politicians can afford to be lavish.

Most / all? gov. agencies feel like the only way to get more money next year is to overspend the present budget, now they can justify getting more.


ATC can be fixed without turning it over to some private corporation, and give them all the development and resources for free, just hire the same level of management, cut the red tape, and get rid of the deadwood.
 
I had a liberal co-worker some years back - we talked a lot, good exchanges, rational discourse, all that; he was an unusual lefty, in that he was open minded, and actually let facts sway him the face of higher truths. And he'd throw the BS flag on me, when warranted, too.

We went around about toll roads and schools once - and he had a point: we mostly all agree there is universal benefit in educating kids, so we gag up taxes for schools, whether we have kids or not. And we all benefit from roads and other infrastructure, too, so why then are tolls applied? Selective "user" tax? His point (took me by surprise) was pay for them from general revenue. Almost a supply side argument.

He also had a point of view on taxes - at the time, he said about 1/2 the Fed revenue came from taxes, and of the income tax revenue, the most wealthy 10% contributed about 90% of the personal income tax collected. Roughly half the population didn't pay fed income tax; so people like he and I weren't pitching much into the Fed coffers, relatively speaking, even though it was a big bite out of our income. He was into a flat-tax percentage for Fed income taxes. Like I said, an unusual lefty. . .
 
I have talked with several pilots who feel a flat yearly GA fee may not be so bad, as opposed to a by the service fee that is used by many other countries. I am not sure how I would feel about that, especially since we won't see a reduction in the av gas tax. I have never seen a revenue stream go away. Just look at the airlines and their baggage fees that were imposed because of higher fuel costs. Prices are down, but the baggage fees are not. Also, imposing even a flat fee on GA is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent, and that is why the alphabets are opposed to it. As someone said, if anything should be run nationally by the government, it should the NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM. This country committed to air travel versus rail. I don't know what demised the rail system, but I believe a lot of the system was privately owned in the end.
 
Several railroads went bankrupt in the 1970's. When they emerged from bankruptcy they shed their passenger operations. Most long range passenger operations would have ceased if the government had not created AMTRAK. Everyone likes the idea of having long range passenger trains, but very few people ride them. Thats how we get a subsidized (20 Billion a year) AMTRAK. Which works, but low ridership because we have airplanes at 1/2 the cost and 10 times the speed.
 
The [near] demise of the railroads was caused by the Interstate Commerce Commission setting freight rates that the railroads could not turn a profit on and the demand they maintain passenger service that was losing them money on every line. The Staggers act finally gave the railroads freedom to set reasonable freight rates, ditch passenger service completely, and rid themselves of lines that hadn't been profitable in ages. Other factors were involved including the growth of the airlines.
 
coloradobluesky said:
Several railroads went bankrupt in the 1970's. When they emerged from bankruptcy they shed their passenger operations. Most long range passenger operations would have ceased if the government had not created AMTRAK. Everyone likes the idea of having long range passenger trains, but very few people ride them. Thats how we get a subsidized (20 Billion a year) AMTRAK. Which works, but low ridership because we have airplanes at 1/2 the cost and 10 times the speed.
Click to expand...

There was quite a bit more to it than that. Passenger service was never really a money maker, but the government regulations affected the railroad's ability to shed the service. The railroads were overloaded with debt, and increased some of that debt for consolidation - they teetered on the edge of bankruptcy for some time. Passenger service, already poor, couldn't be improved and rolling stock updated without capital infusion.

Amtrak was created in 1971 to absorb the passenger services from all lines (and as I recall, the lines were given a deadline to participate in the service), and parallel government-backed corporation Conrail absorbed some of the freight lines (like Penn Central). Conrail was later sold to other freight operators, and Amtrak shed the most unprofitable lines, keeping some long-distance trains per congress but also rebuilding the Northeast Corridor. To this day, one of the issues Amtrak has is that much of the trackage in the US is owned by freight rail companies and Amtrak leases time on those tracks (freight gets priority).

The airlines were faster and by the time Amtrak rolled around had better fleets. The airlines were still regulated at that point, but became deregulated shortly after. No surprise that passengers flocked to the airlines given the sorry state of rail.

These days, Amtrak offers a superior and much more hassle-free service along the Northeast Corridor and SoCal. Commuter rail is big. Long distance has improved but is still hampered by trackage priority and the congestion of freight along those lines. In fact, the DC-NY rail line is highly competitive with the airlines, both in service and passenger load - there are a lot of days where Acela trains are sold out.

A friend of mine once said that the railroads got squashed because they thought they were in the rail business and forgot they were really in the transportation business. That's not exactly true either, but they would have been very very limited by government regulations if they tried to acquire or operate a major airline (aside from the lack of ability to raise capital).
 
Long distance passenger rail service can't compete with airplanes that get you there at 1/2 the price and 10 times as fast. (depends on the length of trip. 1000 miles by air is 2 1/2 hour plane ride. 1000 miles by Amtrak is 20 hours (50mph)) Both have getting to the airport and boarding times as well. But you get the idea.

Air travel has exploded. People LIKE railroads, but they are EXPENSIVE. And though they LIKE them, they don't ride them much. RTD in Colorado spends as much on its bus and light rail as Colorado DOT spends on roads for the ENTIRE STATE OF COLORADO. AMTRAK is subsidized 20 Billion a year.

Railroad freight makes a profit. Commuter rail makes sense financially even if its subsidized IMO. All the great cities have subways. Have to be able to get around even if you dont own a car...

It was some time ago the RR had a meeting in Steamboat Springs about cancelling passenger service. Lots of supporters of keeping passenger service came to the meeting. The guy stood up and asked the group. How many of you rode the railroad to get to this meeting? ONE PERSON raised his hand. That about sums it up for long distance rail.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top