Would this be the way to avoid user fees?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16758977/

Could a predominately private industry-based ATC system work?

Just food for thought(s).

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 19:52:40 -0700, "Jay Beckman" >
wrote in >:

>Would this be the way to avoid user fees?

If private industry performed ATC, who would fund them if not users?

>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16758977/
>
>Could a predominately private industry-based ATC system work?

If Poole's backers have their way, we'll have an opportunity find out.
A better question is how current users of privatized ATC systems rate
them compared to government operated ATC.

Jay Beckman writes:

> Would this be the way to avoid user fees?
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16758977/

It sounds like nothing more than a marketing blurb for a relatively
minor project.

> Could a predominately private industry-based ATC system work?

It could work, just not well. It's always a bad idea to entrust a
monopoly to private enterprise. The only thing that makes private
enterprise work is competition, and that doesn't exist for a monopoly.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jay Beckman wrote :
>Would this be the way to avoid user fees?

On the contrary. LM and Boeing are being tasked with a complete
overhaul of the current system, with one being based on ADS-B
technology. If you've heard any of Ms. Blakey speeches lately, she
insists that the only way to pay for this behemoth is user fees.

Frankly, if the last two attempts at overhauling the ATC system are
any indication, this will be another multi-billion dollar boondoggle.
It doesn't matter what company is contracted to do the overhaul. The
FAA management is just not equipped to deal with change of this
magnitude.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)


--
JGalban
Posted at www.flight.org

JGalban writes:

> On the contrary. LM and Boeing are being tasked with a complete
> overhaul of the current system, with one being based on ADS-B
> technology. If you've heard any of Ms. Blakey speeches lately, she
> insists that the only way to pay for this behemoth is user fees.
>
> Frankly, if the last two attempts at overhauling the ATC system are
> any indication, this will be another multi-billion dollar boondoggle.
> It doesn't matter what company is contracted to do the overhaul. The
> FAA management is just not equipped to deal with change of this
> magnitude.

Good. Maybe things will stay the same after all the dust settles.

Is there truly a reason to undertake such a massive overhaul?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.