Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Trump Proposes to Privatize ATC >

Trump Proposes to Privatize ATC

Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Trump Proposes to Privatize ATC

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-16-2017, 09:29 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 147
Default Trump Proposes to Privatize ATC

WASHINGTON — President Trump proposed Thursday to move air-traffic controllers out of the Federal Aviation Administration and to a private corporation, a top priority for most airlines while still contentious in Congress.

The main reason airlines, the controllers’ union and congressional advocates want the change is to avoid annual spending disputes and worker furloughs in recent years.

More stable funding is needed, according to the advocates, to spur the FAA’s multi-year modernization program called NextGen, which is upgrading ground-based radar to satellite-based GPS to track and guide planes.

Greater precision is expected to save fuel, make arrivals and departures more reliable and allow more planes to fly closer together as the number of travelers grows.

But skeptics of privatization contend that the FAA is making progress on NextGen, and that separating air-traffic control could complicate a system that is the safest in the world.

The proposal is part of Trump’s $1.2 trillion discretionary budget blueprint for the year starting Oct. 1. The Transportation Department proposes to start moving controllers “to an independent, non-governmental organization, making the system more efficient and innovative while maintaining safety.”

“This would benefit the flying public and taxpayers overall,” the budget states.

But the impact on government spending isn’t clear because the private corporation is expected to be funded by the user fees corresponding to the federal taxes that airlines already pay the government.

Airlines have campaigned for the change for years to modernize the system faster. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the union representing controllers, also supported the move as a way to stabilize funding.

“This is a bold step that will lead to the governance and funding reforms needed to move our air traffic control infrastructure into the 21st century,” said Nicholas Calio, CEO of Airlines for America, a trade group representing most of the large carriers. “Our system is safe, but it is outdated and not as efficient as it should – or could – be. We need to stop accepting pockets of progress and put in place a modernized system that better serves the traveling and shipping public.”

Doug Lavin, vice president for North America of the International Air Transport Association, which represents 265 airlines worldwide, said modernizing the system is crucial as the number of passengers is projected to increase by 500 million per year by 2035.

“Now is the time to move forward with transformation in the US through the creation of a separate, corporatized non-profit entity to manage U.S. skies.”

House Transportation Committee Chairman Bill Shuster, R-Pa., sponsored legislation last year to move air-traffic control to a corporation governed by industry stakeholders, modeled on Canada’s system.

“By removing the (air-traffic control) function from the FAA, Americans will see a more efficient system, flight times decrease, on-time departures increase, emissions reduced, and 21st century technology deployed to guide our planes from gate to gate," Shuster said. "For too long, the federal government has been the impediment in updating our ATC operation to a world-class, state of the art system."

Shuster anticipated opposition, which prevented votes on his proposal last year in the full House or Senate. But Trump's proposal rejects the status quo and will disrupt the old way of thinking, Shuster said.

“Like any transformative change in Washington, entrenched interest groups will do and say anything to protect their parochial interests," Shuster said. "But the facts are not on their side."

Critics such as the top Democrat on the House panel, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, worry that the shift would make things more complicated because the corporation would still have to ask the Transportation secretary to increase fees, change flight paths or close towers.

“If they disagree, they go to court," DeFazio said. "That’s a disaster in the making as a way to run a vital public service subject to frequent litigation because one airline says your favoring another airline."

Another concern is how the new organization would generate about $11 billion a year that FAA has for air-traffic control, which is now raised mostly through airline ticket taxes, DeFazio said. The private organization is expected to create user fees that replace the taxes, although who would pay and how much must still be determined.

“This whole thing is fraught with uncertainty and problems," DeFazio said.

The top Democrat on the Senate committee that oversees the FAA, Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, has said privatization was opposed by the Defense Department and would be costly and disruptive.

“This scheme would upset the partnership between the FAA and a lot of the agencies of government,” Nelson said at Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao’s confirmation hearing Jan. 11.

Delta Air Lines broke with most other carriers to oppose privatization at a time when the FAA is making improvements.

FAA Administrator Michael Huerta told the aviation summit March 2 that NextGen has already delivered $2.7 billion in benefits and is projected to provide $160 billion in benefits by 2030.

The leaders of the Senate Appropriations Committee, which decides with House counterparts how much to spend on agencies such as FAA each year, raised concerns about privatization.

“It does not appear to make sense to break apart the FAA, an essential part of our success in aviation,” Sens. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a letter Feb. 28. “A privatized system would provide consumers with no recourse for complaints or mistreatment, as it current does through the U.S. Department of Transportation or their members of Congress.”

I think if anything, this would increase the speed at which unmanned commercial aircraft/remote pilots become a reality and are fully integrated into the National Airspace System. NextGen is 1990's tech, and the FAA still can't figure out how to implement it. I suspect that putting a private corporation in charge of ATC and the NAS will speed up technological progress, however not necessarily to the benefit of professional pilots.
50SeatsofGrey is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 09:33 AM
  #2  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 47
Default

Isn't it working well in Canada?
serthwrmtym is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 09:38 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: Downward Dog
Posts: 1,877
Default

...and no estimate of cost savings or price tag. LETS DO IT
WesternSkies is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 09:41 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,316
Default

Originally Posted by serthwrmtym View Post
Isn't it working well in Canada?
Canada isn't as greedy. Somebody's gotta pay for the executive bonuses and golden parachutes.
Xtreme87 is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 09:53 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
prex8390's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,146
Default

Sure throw in user fees and watch a major pipeline of pilots disappear when obtaining a license becomes just that more expensive.
prex8390 is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 09:55 AM
  #6  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Default

Most smaller towers have been privatized for a long time already.
No Land 3 is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 10:22 AM
  #7  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 98
Default

I wonder what the cost effects will be on GA pilots. I'm thinking I'll hold off on buying that plane for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
cliffnd is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 10:47 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
GogglesPisano's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: On the hotel shuttle
Posts: 5,813
Default

If you fly VFR there won't be any fees. And reducing the influx of new labor into the pilot market would be a good thing (increase the "pilot shortage.") The medical profession has been doing that for the better part of a century.
GogglesPisano is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 12:41 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Default

What is the comparison traffic wise (numbers) between the US and Canada? The airspace between the 2 seem to be a lot different (spacing and congestion).
iceman49 is offline  
Old 03-16-2017, 01:21 PM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,982
Default

Originally Posted by GogglesPisano View Post
If you fly VFR there won't be any fees
Well that sounds safe...
JamesNoBrakes is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ghilis101
SkyWest
72
06-11-2019 03:53 PM
UAL T38 Phlyer
United
44
01-28-2018 07:05 PM
cantwin
Technical
6
04-28-2012 02:04 AM
TonyWilliams
Hangar Talk
11
09-29-2010 09:15 PM
atpcliff
Major
18
06-03-2009 10:56 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices