View Single Post
  #16  
Old October 12th 17, 04:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Frank Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,099
Default ATC Privatization, HR 2997

On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 8:33:20 AM UTC-6, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 9:33:03 PM UTC-5, JS wrote:
By the number of views and on-topic posts, it appears that few people care.
The bill was supposed to be voted on today but there is no update.
Jim


I care and have contacted my representative and senators.
In Florida Senator Nelson is opposed to privatization.
I have not been able to confirm Rubio's position or that of my representative Gaetz.

I believe: "IF IT IS NOT BROKE, DO NOT FIX IT"

My understanding is that the vote in the house has been delayed with no new date set.

We have some smart people in soaring and it would be good if someone would take a look at the bill. It is 461 pages, so there is a lot in there.
I have a call into AOPA and they were unable to answer my questions, the young lady actually said she had not read it. She was from the UK and said she knew their system was a disaster. Someone is suppose to call me back.

In my quick review, it appears that the bill says no fees may be charged to Part 91 operators??? Of course, I suppose they could start that way and then change it once the billing systems are in place.

However, a couple of other items potentially scary items jumped out at me..
--AIRSPACE
There are almost twice as many references to "airspace" is there are to "fees". It appears that the Corporation can make recommendations to the Secretary for airspace changes and they can be approved without any public review. If that is correct, that is scary.

--EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT CLASSIFICATIONS
There is a reference to the corporation evaluating ... "the appropriateness of requiring an authorization for each experimental aircraft rather than using a broader all makes and models approach". Not sure what that could mean to us with aircraft classified as experimental.

--REQUIRED SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS
Section 315 appears to allow the corporation the ability to require certain "safety enhancing equipment and systems for small general aviation airplanes".

++10 YEAR REGISTRATIONS
One positive thing I noticed, is a change to the re-registration requirements for aircraft from the current 3 years to 10 years.


Neither of my senators nor my representative will register a position for or against. I certainly registered by preferences with them.

Frank Whiteley

Frank Whiteley