Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by rbrochey, Mar 16, 2017.
I think you could close more than that.
Trying? It is hard to know, the bottomless pit of excuses has gone on for more than three decades. Even by government standards, it is a scandalous failure to deliver. At what point does it become clear that the whole endeavor is obviously not goal-driven, but is instead just out to maximize the size and duration of appropriations? Finishing the thing would end the gravy train. Outside of government entities, what kind of organization gets credit for "trying" if they continually fail to meet their own promises? FAA people aren't bad or evil, but at some point it makes sense to try a new approach if faced with a record like we have here.
In a sense, it should be seen as a merciful unburdening of an agency that has clearly been asked to do something it just cannot accomplish. It could be good for them and for us.
Sounds as if ICON is a department in the imperial government.
Yes. Look at these numbers.
In my state of Washington, the Walla Walla airport has a tower with only 68 daily operations.
Look a little more closely at the OIG report on the FAA. You will find that the FAA has actually made a lot of progress; and most of the benefit is for the airlines.
In my state of WV the operations listed is about X 10 for what is true. KPKB will have less that 20 total a day and KCRW will have less that 30 a day. KCRW had one runway (23-5) and average 313 a day, someone is dreaming. Maybe they are counting people
I keep track of KPKB most days and for the winter months it averages about 8-10 operations a day.
There is no airport in this state that needs a control tower at any time.
Each year I would be photographing every square foot of the county that KCKB is located and would be with tower for most of the day. I stated at 9am and flew till 5pm and other than me it would be luckly to have 2 other aircraft. The first day I called the tower after about an hour thinking my radio must have quit working. The tower was slow in answering and he said he was getting coffee. We talked for 10 or 15 minutes and he said it's dead until about 5pm when a few airplanes will be landing.
Are you referring to the DoT IG's May 2017 report? If so, I'm not seeing what you are seeing regarding progress and, especially, an overall improvement in FAA's ability to manage programs.
Here's what the report says about FAA's progress in fielding the improved ATC system the nation needs:
That paragraph says it all. It identifies every key aspect of managing a major program, and makes clear that the FAA is not doing any of them well.
The FAA decision to break up the mammoth effort into smaller parts (six "transformational programs") that they might be able to manage has also not yielded the hoped-for results. Instead, the segmentation has apparently resulted in a loss of clarity as to the overall program status and uncertainty as to the ongoing and projected costs. From the report:
Maybe this is what "trying" looks like. But this has been going on for decades, and the problems have been identified over and over. GAO reviews of FAA's progress in fielding ATC improvements has been similarly lukewarm.
Why don't they shut them down?
Data from NavCanada shows otherwise. Since assuming ATC in Canada, they have increased traffic volume by 50%, after they cut 25% off the roster and they are doing it for 75% the cost of the previous Canadian gov. run ATC. Canada's ATC system is high tech, can handle more traffic even all the airlines want to land at Toronto at the same time. When a congressman reads this kind of report, it's difficult to convince them with emotion that privatizing ATC is a bad idea.
Practically all Level 1 towers were closed in the aftermath of the PATCO strike. A yr later, those started reopening under contract by a private ATC corp. Again, the IG numbers show contract towers are one of the few success stories the FAA can showcase where they are getting positive return on investment. That would be the 10-20% you would close.
And that HAS to include every touch and go from the flight school ...... only 6 airline flights per day.
Talk of closing towers is again muddying the waters. (Gunning for that Most Metaphors In a Single Thread record.)
Many of the 'inefficiencies' y'all are complaining about, really have little to do with FAA management. Towers, in particular, are very often (I dare say always, at low traffic airports) driven by local governments and citizens. Towered airports look busier, more important, more worthy of extra money for important stuff like customs facilities, attack dogs, deer fences, etc etc. Try telling your local city or county government that they should ask FAA to get rid of the tower at your local airport. Probably won't play well since they fought to keep it when FAA tried to close it 5 (or 2) years ago.....
Not unlike what happened a few decades ago when you (the gubment) were telling the citizens of East Podunk that the USA really didn't need that military base in their county any more. Or when NASA tried to tell the politicians that building a solid fuel booster in 3 pieces so it could be transported over land from an inland city in made less sense than building a one piece booster (so it would be safer), in a shoreline factory so it could be transported in one piece, by sea. (That booster, by the way, was built by a private contractor....)
Like Mercury 7, Apollo 11, and every other bit of hardware the US has used to go into space.
NASA manages programs, and they do it pretty well overall. They don't build rockets. They do, however, maintain a staff of technicians and engineers who have enough technical knowledge to effectively oversee the big technical aspects of their programs, to include effective oversight of the work done by contractors. That's an effective way to get big things done.
Sooner or latter it will happen no matter what they want. The debt bubble.
Agreed; the point was that pressure from local/state governments (citizens, and corporations) to move Federal money to their state forced a bad design on NASA.
Bureaucracies only expand; they never get smaller.
The analogy of the highway system is a good one. Thank god we have the Federal interstate system. I remember driving when before the interstates were built. What if each state had their highway system, one state drove on the right side of the road, the next state had a 40 mph speed limit and the next state had a huge fee per mile that only the rich could afford.
I believe in the U.S. Constitution and the 10 amendment but by the Constitution there are things that the states should do and there are things that the Federal Gov should do. I think the ATC is the job of the Federal Gov only and not put more interest in running it to another party. No more, don't want to get in trouble.
I agree, but I think if the semi traffic didn't pay the taxes they do you'd see toll roads all over the place. No toll roads within a thousand miles of us and I want to see it stay that way! West Virginia is probably fine (I like West Virginia BTW) but most of the east coast is a hellish tangle of toll roads, and I honestly don't know why anyone would want to live there. I'm happy to live on the outskirts of corporate America, we're basically fringe dwellers here, but I know when you have companies lobbying for regulations that protect and expand their profit margins it is a cumulous cloud ready to go nimbus... you simply cannot trust the corporate (do not give me that non-profit BS) mind set to govern our skies or they'll turn into the New Jersey Turnpike on steroids... just my humble opinion of course.
The states patrol the interstate highways. I think the states do the maintenance also.
Well run states don't need user fees.
But when the unions get control of the government then the citizens lose and eventually the government goes broke.
Even FDR was against government unions.
The FAA does not take in enough revenue from taxes to meet their budget. The rest comes off printing presses. If I could print my own money I wound't care how much something cost.
Separate names with a comma.