Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

"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.

If the contractor can't instantly eliminate all the controllers,
where will qualified controllers be obtained? Who is going to
certify them as being competent to do their job?

What is the backup process in case the chosen contractor fails
to perform? Will the current controllers be kept on the payroll
as a "hot backup" in case the contractor has to be terminated?

Let's say that a contractor devises a super slick, whiz-bang
way to automate ATC. If the contractor installs the ground
equipment for this, does it depart with the contractor when
the next contract is awarded to another contractor? ATC
operations are suspended for some number of months while the
new contractor replaces all the equipment? [Instead of
"radar service terminated", we'd have "radar terminated"?]

If the super slick, whiz-bang automation comes to pass, who's
going to control the interface for the end-users? Who is
going to convince the end-users that they have to spend some
possibly large amount of money per aircraft to be compatible
with the scheme devised by the (latest) contractor? What if
the next contractor decides that the previous contractor's
scheme sucks and wants to produce something quite different?

"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.

"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.

Can you imagine this scenario.

Plane flying from London to New York. Pilot is wondering which New York
Center he is going to talk to today. There are two ATC operators with their
own bits of airspace and routes into JFK.

Captain calls up the airline's operation center to find out how the bidding
is going along.

There is a guy at the operations center whose job it to find the best most
cost effective route into JFK. The ops guy is trying to bid down the price
of a slot. Traffic is light today as the plane was late leaving London
because of an outbound delay the previous day. The airline rescheduled the
flight back two hours because the cost of a departure slot was more than the
charges for staying at the airport.

The Ops guy opposite numbers in the ATC centers knows what he is up to and
they are playing hard ball. They know that if the plane flies into the
Centers traffic area without a deal being concluded then there will be a big
penalty on the airline.

If this happens the airline will automatically pass the charge on to
passengers as an additional billing on their credit card.

In the end, the Airline Ops guy gets ****ed off with the New York centers
and sends the plane to Toronto where there is less hassle.

Under the new terms of carriage it is the passengers responsibility now to
get themselves to New York from Toronto.

The new bullet-proof doors to the flight deck come in really useful although
the flight attendants give way to Airline Security Operatives (big guys
shaven heads with rotweillers) to ensure the passengers leave the plane in
good order.

With no passengers the Airliner is able to position it self at tiny cost
back to JFK to pick up the passengers waiting for it as ATC charges are
based on the number of passengers carried as a proportion of the capacity.

Of course GA has disappeared due to the excessive user fees. $100 to file a
flight plan and $1 a mile or $2 a minute which ever is the higher as a
facility usage charge.

Far fetched, its that ridiculous it could happen.

Ben

"Ben Dover" wrote in message
...

"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.

Can you imagine this scenario.

Plane flying from London to New York. Pilot is wondering which New York
Center he is going to talk to today. There are two ATC operators with
their
own bits of airspace and routes into JFK.

Captain calls up the airline's operation center to find out how the
bidding
is going along.

Close, but the track enroute is where money is saved/made. Automation
enhances the ability to make those dollars.

Ben:
You forgot to mention the ATC Futures market,
the trading in derivatives, and scandalous market-timing trades. :-)
---JRC---

"Ben Dover" wrote in message =
...
=20
"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.
=20
Can you imagine this scenario.
=20
Plane flying from London to New York. Pilot is wondering which New =
York
Center he is going to talk to today. There are two ATC operators with =
their
own bits of airspace and routes into JFK.
=20
Captain calls up the airline's operation center to find out how the =
bidding
is going along.
=20
There is a guy at the operations center whose job it to find the best =
most
cost effective route into JFK. The ops guy is trying to bid down the =
price
of a slot. Traffic is light today as the plane was late leaving London
because of an outbound delay the previous day. The airline rescheduled =
the
flight back two hours because the cost of a departure slot was more =
than the
charges for staying at the airport.
=20
The Ops guy opposite numbers in the ATC centers knows what he is up to =
and
they are playing hard ball. They know that if the plane flies into the
Centers traffic area without a deal being concluded then there will be =
a big
penalty on the airline.
=20
If this happens the airline will automatically pass the charge on to
passengers as an additional billing on their credit card.
=20
In the end, the Airline Ops guy gets ****ed off with the New York =
centers
and sends the plane to Toronto where there is less hassle.
=20
Under the new terms of carriage it is the passengers responsibility =
now to
get themselves to New York from Toronto.
=20
The new bullet-proof doors to the flight deck come in really useful =
although
the flight attendants give way to Airline Security Operatives (big =
guys
shaven heads with rotweillers) to ensure the passengers leave the =
plane in
good order.
=20
With no passengers the Airliner is able to position it self at tiny =
cost
back to JFK to pick up the passengers waiting for it as ATC charges =
are
based on the number of passengers carried as a proportion of the =
capacity.
=20
Of course GA has disappeared due to the excessive user fees. $100 to =
file a
flight plan and $1 a mile or $2 a minute which ever is the higher as a
facility usage charge.
=20
Far fetched, its that ridiculous it could happen.
=20
Ben
=20
=20

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
John Mazor wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

John Mazor wrote:

If the phone company screws up, your call doesn't go through. If
Tony's ATC Service and Aluminum Siding Company gets the low bid
and then screws up, you die. If Big Jimbo's Fire Department and
Auto
Repair screws up, you die. If Slick Sammy's Police and Pet
Grooming
Station screws up, you die. There's a qualitative difference
here,
which is why historically we have tended not to privatize these
functions, at least in the sense of auctioning it off to the
lowest
bidder who wants to make a profit at it.

Within a few days, you'll be able to switch phone providers at
will
and keep your old phone number. You can't do that with ATC,
switching
contractors willy-nilly when one kills people or another comes
along
with a better price.

Sorry, if the call is 911, somebody very well could die.

True, but since I don't have the stats on 911 calls, I'll make a
WAG
here and restate it to read that if the phone company screws up,
99.999% of the time all that happens is that your call doesn't go
through.

I have no idea as I have no statistics. However, probably similar
stats
apply to ATC. You seem to think that every ATC mistake results in
guaranteed death of a pilot or airplane passenger. This is hardly
the
case at all.

Okay, it was a rhetorical overstatement, but not every 911 failure
results in deaths, either.

But you swung a two-edged sword by mentioning 911 calls. Once
your
call goes through, who do you think is at the other end of the
line?
It's not Ernestine the Operator. It's a government employee.

Not where I live. Last I knew the dispatching of emergency services
was
provided by a private contractor and all of the responders in my
area
(rural) are unpaid volunteers.

Fair enough, but I suspect that in most areas, 911 calls go to the
police or to an emergency dispatch office maintained by local
authorities.

(The contractor gets paid and the responders work for free? Now
that's a recipe for profit!)

"John R. Copeland" wrote in message
...

You forgot to mention the ATC Futures market,
the trading in derivatives, and scandalous market-timing trades. :-)

Not to mention the ATC Disasters Market, based on the futures market
for bets on terrorist attacks, the one that got Poindexter canned.

Would seriously like that people around the world on governmental
organisation level responsible for public safety read this.

Nils F

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:50:24 -0000, "Ben Dover"
wrote:


"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.

Can you imagine this scenario.

Plane flying from London to New York. Pilot is wondering which New York
Center he is going to talk to today. There are two ATC operators with their
own bits of airspace and routes into JFK.

Captain calls up the airline's operation center to find out how the bidding
is going along.

There is a guy at the operations center whose job it to find the best most
cost effective route into JFK. The ops guy is trying to bid down the price
of a slot. Traffic is light today as the plane was late leaving London
because of an outbound delay the previous day. The airline rescheduled the
flight back two hours because the cost of a departure slot was more than the
charges for staying at the airport.

The Ops guy opposite numbers in the ATC centers knows what he is up to and
they are playing hard ball. They know that if the plane flies into the
Centers traffic area without a deal being concluded then there will be a big
penalty on the airline.

If this happens the airline will automatically pass the charge on to
passengers as an additional billing on their credit card.

In the end, the Airline Ops guy gets ****ed off with the New York centers
and sends the plane to Toronto where there is less hassle.

Under the new terms of carriage it is the passengers responsibility now to
get themselves to New York from Toronto.

The new bullet-proof doors to the flight deck come in really useful although
the flight attendants give way to Airline Security Operatives (big guys
shaven heads with rotweillers) to ensure the passengers leave the plane in
good order.

With no passengers the Airliner is able to position it self at tiny cost
back to JFK to pick up the passengers waiting for it as ATC charges are
based on the number of passengers carried as a proportion of the capacity.

Of course GA has disappeared due to the excessive user fees. $100 to file a
flight plan and $1 a mile or $2 a minute which ever is the higher as a
facility usage charge.

Far fetched, its that ridiculous it could happen.

"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.