WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Air Transportation Association (NATA) has launched a grassroots campaign in response to the House Transportation Committee’s FAA reauthorization proposal to establish a user fee-funded air traffic control corporation.
The legislation — which poses a significant threat to the entire general aviation community — will be considered Thursday, Feb. 11, by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
NATA created a special webpage — NATA.aero/NoCorporation — to provide additional information and steps general aviation businesses can take to contact their elected representatives in opposition to this proposal.
“The hour has rarely been graver for general aviation and we are calling on all aviation businesses to join us,” said NATA President Thomas Hendricks. “Your immediate personal outreach to your elected representatives is critical to staving off the corporatization of ATC and the imposition of user fees on segments of general aviation. We want make it clear that industry insiders don’t get to decide the future of our nation’s air traffic control system.”
User fees, on any aspect of aviation, are a non-starter for me. Even with the quirks of the current system, it is far preferable than being nickle-and-dimed to death with fees. One look at other countries fee based aviation systems should be enough for anyone with common sense to reject this proposal.
OK, I’ll bite. Tell me why then is there this push? Who is pushing for it? I’ve learned that people often become rich not because they are so smart but because they are so close to the money. Someone out there, very likely, has financial gain in mind, not service to the public.
I hear that the little guy will be the one hurt by this. I think the little guy gets hurt either way. Moneyed interests are just that: interested in money only. I just think this proposal hurts the little guy more. No thank you.
So, prove to me your claims. Show me where you get your information to back those claims up. Show me who the people are behind the claims and facts that will be purported. Oh, and I want facts without the double-talk.
The FAA is a pain in the ass and it’s full of careerists but at it the devil we know and one upon which we, as a community, can exert some influence. I don’t how the double hemorrhoidal effect of having one giant bureaucracy having oversight, our government, over another giant bureaucracy is going to help anyone.
The for-profit jail system has already created a lobbyist group which now spends much money trying to maintain the status quo. I love how ‘good old, reliable” capitalism works in the real world. It’s shameful that jailing people is a for-profit industry and we all know how that motels which house people make the most money: when all of the rooms are full.
Carl,… please check the facts yourself, it’s not hard. Start with basic budgets, and then just look at cost per unit separation service, as well as the related unnecessary excessive airspace constraints on GA growing yearly (e.g., 32 miles radius this past weekend alone, in the Bay area, let alone Obama’s numerous impromptu trips). Then note the completely unnecessary GA crushing policies like the ADS-B overspecified 2020 rule (excessive NIC/NAC and DO-260B) compared to both Australia and Canada, which each have much more sensible criteria which DOES NOT REQUIRE the absurd use of obsolete WAAS and ADS-R components, …thus allowing for use of any GPS and a vastly less expensive GA ADS installation. Then look at the airspace adverse interactions for GA airports in ANY major metropolitan area, that are completely inefficient for GA and unnecessary (if not even unsafe, by forcing GA flying in areas (over water) and at unnecessary low altitudes, making E/O contingencies less safe), as compared to the now possible use of dynamic flexible automated RNP based separations, that could readily already be used to de-conflict both VFR and IFR operations around GA adjacent airports. Finally, do the calculations for the true costs for “Cost per unit separation service”, even for VFR advisories (that don’t even work any more – note the recent F-16/C150 collision). When you put it all together, FAA is an unmitigated vastly over-expensive disaster, inhibiting safety advances, rather than facilitating safety and airspace economy advances. Wake up before it’s too late. It is our last hope to save ourselves from horribly escalating GA costs and completely unnecessary restrictions. FAA needs to be disassembled and rebuilt from scratch, right now. In the process ATS will likely work much better, at lower overall cost to users, and taxpayers, if it is split-out from FAA, operated as a non-profit entity separate from FAA, with oversight from real stakeholder airspace users including GA, ….rather than be driven by FAA’s NAS contractors, local interest driven politicians (FAA can’t even consolidate present redundant facilities!), … and avionics vendors trying to get a captive regulatory compliance audience market for expensive unnecessary “eye-candy” dysfunctional avionics. FAA now seems to be most serving the interests of highly paid NAS NextGen contractors, avionics companies, and “contract captive” beltway airspace system consultants, NOT the flying public and GA. The FAA 3rd Class Medical fiasco, and the 55 pound, daylight, 400′ AGL, drone delay debacle, citing more nonsensical criteria, is just the tip of the iceberg.
I hope everyone does what they can to stop this horrible proposal.
These two are trying to destroy the freedom of aviation:
Bill Shuster (R-Pennsylvania)
Frank LoBiondo (R-New Jersey)
…What do they have in common? Just follow the money.
NATA is seriously in error. It isn’t privatization at all, and GA user fees are not an issue. Instead, FAA is seriously broken, and ATS is dysfunctional from excessive fully allocated costs to continued GA airspace restrictions to outrageous unnecessary overly expensive rules as for ADS, that won’t work. For GA’s future survival, the Shuster effort needs to be supported by GA, not opposed.
Foolish and ignorant.
Sorry Bradley. Please instead look at the facts of the Shuster proposal, and not the beltway bandit lobby group hype from both NATA and NBAA. It is NOT privatization, and it does not apply GA user fees. Whereas the present FAA seriously inappropriate 2020 ADS rule will be crippling to GA, versus taking the much better approach of either Australia or Canada for things like a much more rational and inexpensive set of ADS criteria, …the 3rd class medical policy of the FAA is seriously over-constrained and obsolete, the FAA’s complete gridlock and irresponsible policies for drones, and the horrendously high ATS “cost per-unit -separation service” is completely unsustainable for GA for the long term. Further, the FAA’s 92.225/.227 rule and policy will have the effect of crushing reasonable airspace access for tens in not hundreds of thousands of airspace users. NextGen is n already obsolete hopeless $40B mess that has no hope of being successful from either a capacity, or economy, or efficiency perspective. Hence the Shuster Bill effort is neither foolish, nor ignorant. Please wake up before its too late. This may be our last chance in a lifetime to try to save low end GA from the destructive clutches of a completely dysfunctional FAA.
Please explain how GA and drones can safely coexist in the same airspace?