Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

Automation, same as the post office.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

The controllers wouldn't be eligible for NATCA membership.
;-)

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
news

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
. ..

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

Automation can be done, but concrete is not green.

New concrete is green.

Hmmm, you think you can sell that idea to the tree huggers?

You don't approve of trees?

Trees are a good thing, do I advocate automation of ATC. The "pour
concrete" advocates also have a point, albeit not politically viable.

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.

Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the goods".

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:AxVtb.3417$Ue4.381@fed1read01...
which makes it non responsive to general aviation?

a very bad deal..

ATC clearances go on the auction block... how bad do you really need to
go..


During peak times, through major traffic areas....

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


BTIZ wrote:

cheaper I might agree with... but safer??

so the pilots (or surviving families) sue the "private ATC company" for
the
screw up.. and not the gov't..

If that happens, the next contract will cost the Feds lots more money, so
it
won't be cheaper anymore.

Has costs to government ever keep them back?

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Peter Gottlieb wrote:

Unless they write legislation absolving the private companies from
liability.

Oh, I'm sure they can. They did that with the USPS when that got
privatized.

That's the problem if ATC "privatization" is done like USPS, or the phone
companies, power utilities....

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

Automation, same as the post office.

Profit motive (over the long term) is a great incentive. What is the FAA's
incentive?

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter
as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

Automation, same as the post office.

Profit motive (over the long term) is a great incentive. What is the FAA's
incentive?

FAA wants to move back to a regulatory stance of promoting aviation, IMO.