Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

"Everett M. Greene" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote

I agree that you need "perfect" competition to yield perfectly low
prices, but perfect competition rarely exists in the real world as it
requires consumers to have perfect knowledge of all alternate products
and their prices. A regional system is far from perfect, but it would
provide much more competition than exists now, but certainly far from
perfect competition.

It wouldn't provide any real competition. The users wouldn't have
a choice in providers.

And right you are. ATC has a very limited clientele and
providing 365/24 service is very expensive. Until the day
arrives when you can walk into Radio Shack or Circuit City
to select which ATC provider you want to use, there isn't
any competition in the consumer sense of the word.

I would presume that any privatizing of ATC would involve the
Feds awarding a contract or contracts to the "most qualified"
bidder having the best price.

Who (objectively) determines and quantifies the qualifications?
One can easily envision contracts being awarded to the organization
that has made the largest campaign contributions (bribes) to the
political party in power at the time.

What would be the transition process? A contractor can't just
walk in on day 1 and tell all the controllers that they're on
the street and are being replaced by a machine.

That sinerio is why contractors are required, as the regular controllers
will no co-operate with the elimination of their work.

"Tarver Engineering" writes:
"Everett M. Greene" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote

I agree that you need "perfect" competition to yield perfectly low
prices, but perfect competition rarely exists in the real world as it
requires consumers to have perfect knowledge of all alternate products
and their prices. A regional system is far from perfect, but it would
provide much more competition than exists now, but certainly far from
perfect competition.

It wouldn't provide any real competition. The users wouldn't have
a choice in providers.

And right you are. ATC has a very limited clientele and
providing 365/24 service is very expensive. Until the day
arrives when you can walk into Radio Shack or Circuit City
to select which ATC provider you want to use, there isn't
any competition in the consumer sense of the word.

I would presume that any privatizing of ATC would involve the
Feds awarding a contract or contracts to the "most qualified"
bidder having the best price.

Who (objectively) determines and quantifies the qualifications?
One can easily envision contracts being awarded to the organization
that has made the largest campaign contributions (bribes) to the
political party in power at the time.

What would be the transition process? A contractor can't just
walk in on day 1 and tell all the controllers that they're on
the street and are being replaced by a machine.

That sinerio is why contractors are required, as the regular controllers
will no co-operate with the elimination of their work.

There'll be another set of contractors to handle the transition
from one contract to another?

Have you ever been involved in the transition from one contractor
to the next for a continuing service contract? Do it once and
you'll swear to never get involved in any such thing ever again.
The departing contractor has no motivation to assist making the
transition go well...

"Everett M. Greene" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" writes:
"Everett M. Greene" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote

I agree that you need "perfect" competition to yield perfectly low
prices, but perfect competition rarely exists in the real world as
it
requires consumers to have perfect knowledge of all alternate
products
and their prices. A regional system is far from perfect, but it
would
provide much more competition than exists now, but certainly far
from
perfect competition.

It wouldn't provide any real competition. The users wouldn't have
a choice in providers.

And right you are. ATC has a very limited clientele and
providing 365/24 service is very expensive. Until the day
arrives when you can walk into Radio Shack or Circuit City
to select which ATC provider you want to use, there isn't
any competition in the consumer sense of the word.

I would presume that any privatizing of ATC would involve the
Feds awarding a contract or contracts to the "most qualified"
bidder having the best price.

Who (objectively) determines and quantifies the qualifications?
One can easily envision contracts being awarded to the organization
that has made the largest campaign contributions (bribes) to the
political party in power at the time.

What would be the transition process? A contractor can't just
walk in on day 1 and tell all the controllers that they're on
the street and are being replaced by a machine.

That sinerio is why contractors are required, as the regular controllers
will no co-operate with the elimination of their work.

There'll be another set of contractors to handle the transition
from one contract to another?

What?

Have you ever been involved in the transition from one contractor
to the next for a continuing service contract?

Sure, Knutson and I gutted a governemtn contractor when we left Dryden.

Do it once and
you'll swear to never get involved in any such thing ever again.

I was also a contractor at Boeing in '97, when much tabbing was automated.

The departing contractor has no motivation to assist making the
transition go well...

That depends on what happens to the previous contractor's people.

I believe Federal ATC still has time to cooperate and keep the contractors
out.