Senate Bill S.786 could kill NWS internet weather products

As a private pilot, I make frequent use of the NWS's Aviation Digital
Data Service (see 1). I especially like their "Java Tools" graphic
presentations of METAR, TAF, and AIR/SIGMET data. Senate Bill S. 786
(see 2) could well kill such NWS weather presentations in favor of
private sector subscription or advertisement supported Internet
weather services. AccuWeather.com has been a vocal proponent of this
bill. The Senator sponsoring this bill is from AccuWeather's home
state.

I have been arguing the case against this bill with AccuWeather's
Michael Steinberg in an online forum on ipetitions.com (see 3). If
any of my fellow pilots wish to add their voice to the discussion, I
would appreciate it. I must admit that I have reached the limit of my
patience with Michael Steinberg, who characterizes my views as "a
bunch of distortions at best". I believe that I have presented an
accurate interpretation of the likely effects of this bill and I also
believe that any "distortions" in the forum largely originate with
AccuWeather's Michael Steinberg. I urge those who care about this
issue to sign the online petition, join the online forum, and write
their own senators with their opinions of this bill.

1: NWS ADDS: http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/
2: S. 786: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s786:
3: http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/SaveTheNWS/

FlyBoy

Thank you for this information. I have written my Senator, and I will
follow this. Send an email to me If I may be of further service.

FlyBoy wrote:

IÂ*mustÂ*admitÂ*thatÂ*IÂ*haveÂ*reachedÂ*theÂ*limit Â*ofÂ*my
patience with Michael Steinberg, who characterizes my views as "a
bunch of distortions at best".

Why are you trying to convince someone with so obvious a financial interest
in eliminating this service for which we'd continue to pay so as to
subsidize his firm?

You might as well come into groups and try to convince us that Man Was Not
Meant To Fly.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Why are you trying to convince someone with so obvious a financial interest
in eliminating this service for which we'd continue to pay so as to
subsidize his firm?

Now that's just plain silly, Andrew. I'm not trying to convince him
of anything, I am trying to expose his specious arguments for what
they are. Indeed, rarely in public debate are the opposing debaters
trying to convince each other. Rather, they are trying to convince
the audience. The audience in this case are the readers of the forum.
Got it?

On Fri, 06 May 2005 13:11:59 -0400, Andrew Gideon
wrote:

FlyBoy wrote:

I*must*admit*that*I*have*reached*the*limit*of*my
patience with Michael Steinberg, who characterizes my views as "a
bunch of distortions at best".

Why are you trying to convince someone with so obvious a financial interest
in eliminating this service for which we'd continue to pay so as to
subsidize his firm?

I really don't follow why you are saying what you are saying, but the
bill needs to be defeated. Check with the AOPA and EAA.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

You might as well come into groups and try to convince us that Man Was Not
Meant To Fly.

- Andrew

"FlyBoy" wrote in message ...

As a private pilot, I make frequent use of the NWS's Aviation Digital
snip...

I urge those who care about this
issue to sign the online petition, join the online forum, and write
their own senators with their opinions of this bill.

1: NWS ADDS: http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/
2: S. 786: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s786:
3: http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/SaveTheNWS/

FlyBoy



This could end up like things in Russia. Public money funded resources are deemed too inefficient to be run by the
government, so the assets are put up for bid to private companies. The private company acquires the asset, and then
sells the service to the public.Very bad idea for the NWS, very bad idea for our freeways, very bad idea for our
airways...

Blueskies wrote:

"FlyBoy" wrote in message ...

As a private pilot, I make frequent use of the NWS's Aviation Digital
snip...


I urge those who care about this
issue to sign the online petition, join the online forum, and write
their own senators with their opinions of this bill.

1: NWS ADDS: http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/
2: S. 786: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s786:
3: http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/SaveTheNWS/

FlyBoy




This could end up like things in Russia. Public money funded resources are deemed too inefficient to be run by the
government, so the assets are put up for bid to private companies. The private company acquires the asset, and then
sells the service to the public.Very bad idea for the NWS, very bad idea for our freeways, very bad idea for our
airways...

I'm not sure it is all that bad. I think if most "public" services were
provided by a free enterprise system, then we'd get a lot more in
aggregate for our money. The problem that many of us, me included,
don't like to accept is that aviation is not self-supporting and is
subsidized heavily from other revenue sources. A private enterprise
wouldn't likely have this subsidy so the user costs would reflect the
true cost of the sytem and this likely would be ugly ... even if GA only
had to pay for the meager subset of services that it really needs. Most
GA airports simply couldn't survive without subsidies.

I don't know if this is true for freeways or not, but I'm not sure they
are self supporting either if you consider the total costs, both capital
and expense to maintain them.

It all comes down to what is less costly, the waste in government or the
profit margin that a private enterprise would require. If the private
enterprise is efficient enough that it can make a profit and still cost
less than a government agency, then it is a good deal overall.


Matt

Flyboy wrote:

The audience in this case are the readers of the forum.
Got it?

Then that he characterizes your views as "a bunch of distortions at best"
should be of limited concern if the audience is clear that he's being
duplicitous.

- Andrew

I'm not sure it is all that bad. I think if most "public" services were
provided by a free enterprise system, then we'd get a lot more in
aggregate for our money.

This can only be true where there is free competition and where the value is
measurable (if you die without healthcare, then its hard to measure its
value). Also, if the government must have the weather already (which it
must) then it is likely efficient for us all to have them dissemanate it.
How many of the private weather firms have there own satellites anyway?

The problem that many of us, me included,
don't like to accept is that aviation is not self-supporting and is
subsidized heavily from other revenue sources.

I have argued this myth a thousand times, and no one listens. It simply is
not provable given our system of other heavily subsidized activities being
involved. Pointing to the subsidies is not enough. You need to show that
it is MORE subsidized than other activities, as well as trace all the taxes
(monetary and regulatory) on it. I will be happy to cut my subsidy if we
can the rest as well. Let the poor beg the rich, and the food supply shrink
if that is what you want.

A private enterprise
wouldn't likely have this subsidy so the user costs would reflect the true
cost of the sytem and this likely would be ugly ... even if GA only had to
pay for the meager subset of services that it really needs.

I suppose if weather were off the budget, the TV stations would end up
paying for a lot of it. And the airlines would HAVE to have it. I suspect I
could get almost all I need for free anyway.

Most
GA airports simply couldn't survive without subsidies.


I am not too sure of that. The only thing GA airports HAVE to have is
protection from permanent closure. After all, if we want to be able to fly
someplace, there has to be a place to land SOMEWHERE near there. NIMBY's be
damned. Besides, the GA airports by definition have their ability to compete
taken away by the heavily subsidized airports the carriers use.

This argument won't be over until Delta and AMR start building their own
airports.

Since there are still successful privately owned airports I will chalk up
the need for subsidies to government inability to manage them without graft
and inefficiency.


I don't know if this is true for freeways or not, but I'm not sure they
are self supporting either if you consider the total costs, both capital
and expense to maintain them.


My point exactly! The only sure thing is that our taxes are being spent on
lots of things we don't individually care for.

It all comes down to what is less costly, the waste in government or the
profit margin that a private enterprise would require. If the private
enterprise is efficient enough that it can make a profit and still cost
less than a government agency, then it is a good deal overall.


This is true but the problem is measuring the costs and benefits. It's not
easy. Weather has national security value and therefore must be predicted
at least somewhat well. To my knowledge, all weather services are using
some of the NWS resources at this time. I could be wrong, but this tells me
we don't know well if a free market in weather prediction is profitably
sustainable. It could be that we are unwilling to pay for the amount of
accuracy which the government requires.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

I think if most "public" services were
provided by a free enterprise system, then we'd get a lot more in
aggregate for our money.

I disagree. I remember when the Weather Station first came out, they had very
frequent local reports and paging of text weather of various cities every 20
minutes or so. Also had some aviation weather, as I recall.

Then they started attracting advertisers. The pilot weather was gone the next
time I saw a report. By 1995, the local cable companies had replaced the local
weather reports with their own ads. TWS corrected that a few years later by
announcing that the local weather would be displayed every 10 minutes (on the
8s). That forced the cable companies to play it.

Basically, if you need something special and are perceived to be a minority,
private enterprise will cut you right out of the picture. If weather info is
provided only by private enterprise, we won't have pilot weather unless
something like AOPA provides it for us.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.