running with scissors wrote:
from NATAC website:

Hrm...I wonder if *they* have an axe to grind.

The FAA's Contract Tower Program takes air safety and sells it to the
lowest bidder. It is about reducing staff and cutting all possible
corners in the name of saving a buck or two. This unsafe and highly
controversial privatization program now sits at the epicenter of a
fierce debate on Capitol Hill. The White House wants to turn over air
traffic control towers to the Contract Tower Program, which consists
of three private companies in charge of what should always be an
inherently governmental function.

All I know is that, of my flights to towered fields, fully 95% of them
are to contract towers (Norman Westheimer, KOUN, and Wiley Post, KPWA).
I have found them to be *without exception* professional, helpful, and
good at what they do. Matter of fact, once a year or so I take my grill
up to Westheimer and cook steaks or something for the tower crew to
thank them for the great job they do. Ever seen seven or eight aircraft
in the closed patter, with another two on instrument approaches, and one
or two more trying to take off, with only intersecting runways? They do
a damned fine job.

Now, if I were going to grumble about controllers, it would be Oklahoma
City Approach. But we'll not go there. Short answer, there's nothing
wrong with contract towers. It's absolutely *not* unsafe (Norman has
only had two accidents in the past umpteen years during controlled
hours, and neither were due to tower error--one was an engine failure,
the other a student's failure to control the aircraft on his first
solo), and no corners are being cut there; in fact, they're *adding*
features: upgrading the radio systems and recorders, going from
non-radar to TARDIS to a full radar system, and so forth.

Why should it *always* be inherently governmental? I grow weary of such
claims without supporting data.

--Dave Buckles

--
Dave Buckles

http://www.flight-instruction.com