by "someassemblyrequired" (someassemblyrequired)
Published 06/06/2017 at 12:49
by "someassemblyrequired" (someassemblyrequired)
Published 06/06/2017 at 12:49
Tags: F$$ not FAA
STARS: 1
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
The good people over at ATC Memes (get your
Saved by the TCAS
stickers and
Tug Life
shirts at their website) put together a simulation of ATIS transmissions under a privatized air traffic control system.
"Wacko" (wacko--)
06/06/2017 at 12:57, STARS: 0
Trumps new ATC slogan :MFWA
Make Flying White Again
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/06/2017 at 12:58, STARS: 0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nav_Canada
Nothing wrong with privatization. It has to be set up and run properly, though, something I personally wouldn’t trust the current head office to do.
"Ash78, voting early and often" (ash78)
06/06/2017 at 13:01, STARS: 3
"For Sweden" (rallybeetle)
06/06/2017 at 13:02, STARS: 4
“Nothing wrong with privatization” except higher costs and hurting GA operators
"Wacko" (wacko--)
06/06/2017 at 13:04, STARS: 1
guess like everyone else I completely forgot about that movie.
"someassemblyrequired" (someassemblyrequired)
06/06/2017 at 13:09, STARS: 0
Yeah I’ll agree NAV Canada works as an ATC system, but the charges are insane. It’s like $7.50-$20 per passenger on a commercial ticket. I don’t even want to think about what the GA charges are like.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/06/2017 at 13:18, STARS: 0
In the case of Nav Canada it’s a non-profit business. The money they bring in merely replaces tax $$$. Surplus funds go to system improvements. It shouldn’t end up being more expensive--it essentially becomes an arm of the government that has the freedom to operate more efficiently.
"For Sweden" (rallybeetle)
06/06/2017 at 13:21, STARS: 2
The proposal only makes a private ATC company accountable to the government via the government having a seat on the board. Many others will also have seats on the board, even though the airspace will continue to be public.
I am sympathetic to the desire to remove ATC from budget battles, and the FAA has effectively used contract towers where appropriate. However, the contract towers still work for the FAA, not a private entity largely removed from public control.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/06/2017 at 13:26, STARS: 0
A friend of mine has a private license, no plane. He pays for hourly rental, fuel and any landing fees. I don’t know what gets passed on to the company that rents to him though.
But in the end the system needs money to run. Whether that’s in taxes or straight to the ATC system. And frankly it makes more sense to me for those using the service to pay for it rather than everyone paying for them to be able to fly.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/06/2017 at 13:30, STARS: 0
Well, to quote myself:
It has to be set up and run properly, though, something I personally wouldn’t trust the current head office to do.
It isn’t something to be rushed into, and needs very careful planning, yes. But ATC privatization as a concept should not be immediately written off.
"someassemblyrequired" (someassemblyrequired)
06/06/2017 at 13:39, STARS: 1
I think the “user pay” argument holds less water in Canada than it does in the US, but I may be biased as my mom grew up in Labrador. There’s lots of areas in Canada where flying is the only realistic option most of the year.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/06/2017 at 13:53, STARS: 0
That’s fair enough, but it still holds more water than the user-pay healthcare the US is determined to hang on to. I kinda find it amusing... USA/Canada, together on so many things, are completely flipped on these two things.
But anyway, like I said (and elaborated on a little replying to For Sweden) first thing is it needs to be set up properly and not rushed into. Perhaps those remote areas need lower fees, people flying in high-traffic areas need higher fees, flights to get doctors in and out of remote areas don’t pay, etc...
"Justin Hughes" (justinhughes54)
06/06/2017 at 15:33, STARS: 0
“You have information Covfefe .” Epic.
"Turbineguy: Nom de Zoom" (will-alib)
06/15/2017 at 21:00, STARS: 0
In the current system, general aviation pays for its use of ATC services through a fuel tax on every gallon on 100LL or Jet-A sold. Fly a little, pay a little. Fly a lot, pay a lot. You pay directly proportionate with how much you fly. It works, and the funding system is already in place.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/15/2017 at 21:40, STARS: 0
Well, to quote myself again...
You can pay through taxes or pay up front, either way it’s pay as you play. AGAIN, not saying it should or shouldn’t happen, just saying I don’t see anything inherently wrong with the idea... beyond the fact that the current gov’t would most likely fuck up the execution.
"Turbineguy: Nom de Zoom" (will-alib)
06/15/2017 at 22:26, STARS: 1
A low fee/higher fee system based on airspace density is just needlessly complicating things. The existing fuel tax system is a egalitarian as it gets. I don’t have any major issue with privatization per se, but I do agree with AOPA and NBAA’s stand that the airlines would have too much say in airspace access and GA would be underrepresented. And yeah, I don’t trust the gov’t not to screw this up in fascinating new ways..
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/16/2017 at 08:16, STARS: 0
I meant more the more you fly, the more fees you pay... I guess you’d have to break it down between private and commercial, but it still seems pretty simple to me. Simpler and probably more economical than running it through the various gov’t channels. But that’s just me speaking my mind. After all, isn’t the biggest real issue currently the fact that they aren’t getting enough funding? To my mind that says the taxes really should go up anyway, so no matter how you do it it’s going to have to get more expensive.
I mentioned Nav Canada. It’s technically private, but it’s non-profit and there’s a gov’t finger still in the pie. Seems to work.
Anyway. I don’t
really
want to see anything happen because I’d prefer four years of treading lightly from this gov’t. But it’s an interesting idea.
"Turbineguy: Nom de Zoom" (will-alib)
06/16/2017 at 08:52, STARS: 1
I don’t think it’s an issue of not enough funding, just the funding is not consistent due to congressional logjams. With the current fuel tax the more you fly the more you pay.
"Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer" (smallbear94)
06/16/2017 at 08:57, STARS: 1
Well, if they can’t do a simple thing like get the money where it belongs you don’t want them setting up a whole new system, I’ll grant you that...