MC wrote:

Who stands to gain from ATC privatization?

I have seen nothing to suggest that privatizing air traffic control
services would meet any need of society. It would, however, make
SOMEBODY a bunch of money. "Philosophy" aside, I see absolutely no
benefit to privatizing ATC services - certainly not based on the
experiences of ATC privatization elsewhere.

In Australia our ATC has been 'corporatised' for several years now
and they into a 'cost minimisation/recovery' mode.,
ie. no face-to-face briefing offices, fees for IFR operations,
fees for landings at towered airports, charges for not lodging
flight-plans via the internet, and with the upcomming NAS revamp
there will be less enroute services in outback areas.
(and that's just ATC., the private airports have their own fees)

The only way a private operator will even think about running *any*
ATC system is if they can make a profit from it. This means either
recovering *all* costs from the end-users, or else by getting a subsidy
from the government.
If there are subsidies then the total cost will probably be *more*
than if the government provides the services themselves.

Of course - and all this is EXACTLY what we in the US should expect if the
Bush adminstration has its way and privatizes ATC. Your description of
the Australian experience with privatized ATC mirrors everything I've
heard about similar initiatives in other countries.

I have yet to hear a single credible benefit that ATC privatization would
provide. Only ideological rhetoric (oh, and somebody will pocket a bunch
of money). I also have yet to hear any evidence to suggest that whatever
shortcomings that the existing system may have are caused by the fact that
it's run by the government. The downsides of privatizing seem crystal
clear though. Yet Bush is intent on ramming it down the nation's throat.
WHY?

David H
Boeing Field (BFI), Seattle, WA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Pacific Northwest Flying forum:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/pnwflying