Blakey at SnF (NOT!)

[Orval Fairbairn]

FAA Administrator Marian Blakey was supposed to appear at Sun N Fun
today at 1PM. Unfortunately, she "had a prior commitment" (made last
night?). Instead, she sent a panel of managers to address us.

When I was going through the gate to the flight line, I noticed two
people coming the other way. A guard stopped them and asked to see their
armband. They replied (somewhat arrogantly) that they were "with the
FAA, from Washington." I turned to my companion (a former member of the
astronaut corps and test pilot for the Lunar module) and said "Gee, are
we ever impressed?" My only mistake was not saying it loudly enough for
them to hear.

One thing we learned was that FAA is funding a new tower at LaGuardia at
a cost of $150 million! Is it gold-plated unobtanium? For this Blakey
wants to charge us user fees!

I took along and handed out a list of questions for her and asked the
FAA attendees to make sure that she got a copy:


Questions for Marian Blakey

You have an audience of people here today whose flight experience ranges
from student pilot through airline pilot and astronaut. Here are some
questions that we would like answered:

1. Are you here to listen to our concerns and to act on them, or are you
here to parrot the Administration¹s agenda on User Fees and tell us what
you want us to hear?

2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
shill for user fees?

3. Are you aware of the negative impacts of user fees on personal
aviation in other countries?

4. Have you never heard of "cost of service vs. value of service" as a
public policy?

5. Do you intend to throw general aviation airports to the developer
wolves by cutting off AIP grants? AIP grant conditions help stop
ill-conceived airport closures.

6. Why does the FAA pay for management pilots to fly around in expensive
jets and turboprops for "proficiency" but not have them experience the
effects of their actions, by flying low-end, piston-engined general
aviation aircraft?

7. On your watch, why has the FAA continued incompetently-designed new
systems acquisitions?

8. On your watch, after spending billions of dollars, why have you not
provided severe weather updates to ATC Centers and towers?
(See Christmas Day, 2006 Daytona Beach tornado, where a Comair flight
narrowly missed a tornado that hit the airport.)

9. On your watch, why has the FAA's "new air traffic control concept"
focused so much on airline desires and not on the needs and safety of
the entire flying public?

10. On your watch, why do you continue to fund Chicago¹s airports, after
their egregious misappropriation of FAA funds to support their
Gestapo-like midnight closure of Meigs Field?

11. On your watch, why did you allow Kansas City to close
Richards-Gebauer Airport?

12. Twenty years after the principles of good airspace design were well
established, why is the FAA still incompetent in designing airspace that
general aviation pilots can readily detect and avoid?

13. Don't you think that technical organizations need leaders with
technical competence, not degrees in International Relations?

14. When are you going to to take flying lessons and become a
certificated pilot?

[Aluckyguess]

150 million should be able to build new towers for 75 airports, or it would
be able to build 30 and put two controllers in each one for 3 years.
Just my thoughts.
"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
> FAA Administrator Marian Blakey was supposed to appear at Sun N Fun
> today at 1PM. Unfortunately, she "had a prior commitment" (made last
> night?). Instead, she sent a panel of managers to address us.
>
> When I was going through the gate to the flight line, I noticed two
> people coming the other way. A guard stopped them and asked to see their
> armband. They replied (somewhat arrogantly) that they were "with the
> FAA, from Washington." I turned to my companion (a former member of the
> astronaut corps and test pilot for the Lunar module) and said "Gee, are
> we ever impressed?" My only mistake was not saying it loudly enough for
> them to hear.
>
> One thing we learned was that FAA is funding a new tower at LaGuardia at
> a cost of $150 million! Is it gold-plated unobtanium? For this Blakey
> wants to charge us user fees!
>
> I took along and handed out a list of questions for her and asked the
> FAA attendees to make sure that she got a copy:
>
>
> Questions for Marian Blakey
>
> You have an audience of people here today whose flight experience ranges
> from student pilot through airline pilot and astronaut. Here are some
> questions that we would like answered:
>
> 1. Are you here to listen to our concerns and to act on them, or are you
> here to parrot the Administration¹s agenda on User Fees and tell us what
> you want us to hear?
>
> 2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
> airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
> shill for user fees?
>
> 3. Are you aware of the negative impacts of user fees on personal
> aviation in other countries?
>
> 4. Have you never heard of "cost of service vs. value of service" as a
> public policy?
>
> 5. Do you intend to throw general aviation airports to the developer
> wolves by cutting off AIP grants? AIP grant conditions help stop
> ill-conceived airport closures.
>
> 6. Why does the FAA pay for management pilots to fly around in expensive
> jets and turboprops for "proficiency" but not have them experience the
> effects of their actions, by flying low-end, piston-engined general
> aviation aircraft?
>
> 7. On your watch, why has the FAA continued incompetently-designed new
> systems acquisitions?
>
> 8. On your watch, after spending billions of dollars, why have you not
> provided severe weather updates to ATC Centers and towers?
> (See Christmas Day, 2006 Daytona Beach tornado, where a Comair flight
> narrowly missed a tornado that hit the airport.)
>
> 9. On your watch, why has the FAA's "new air traffic control concept"
> focused so much on airline desires and not on the needs and safety of
> the entire flying public?
>
> 10. On your watch, why do you continue to fund Chicago¹s airports, after
> their egregious misappropriation of FAA funds to support their
> Gestapo-like midnight closure of Meigs Field?
>
> 11. On your watch, why did you allow Kansas City to close
> Richards-Gebauer Airport?
>
> 12. Twenty years after the principles of good airspace design were well
> established, why is the FAA still incompetent in designing airspace that
> general aviation pilots can readily detect and avoid?
>
> 13. Don't you think that technical organizations need leaders with
> technical competence, not degrees in International Relations?
>
> 14. When are you going to to take flying lessons and become a
> certificated pilot?

[Jim Logajan]

Orval Fairbairn > wrote:
> 2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
> airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
> shill for user fees?

I have voted for Libertarians and have read Poole's analysis and proposals.
I consider his analysis shallow and dangerous. Poole is confusing user fees
with free market forces - his analysis ignores all the other aspects of
those forces. User fees in conjunction with fuel taxes provide no
measurable incentive for the ATC provider to operate efficiently. The fuel
taxes insure that choice - in this case the option to not use the system so
as to not incur fees - is reduced, not increased. The combination of fuel
taxes, user fees, distancing of legislative oversight over revenue, and
government regulation creates a system about as anti-free market as you can
get.

From an engineering standpoint the existing ATC system appears to be headed
the wrong way - toward centralized single-point-of-failure. Nor does it
provide any economies of scale - as the flight load increases, the ATC
structure grows proportionally. But if the flight load decreases, there is
a minimum size beyond which it cannot reasonably contract. User fees do
nothing to correct these serious and fundamental deficiencies.

[Arnold Sten]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> FAA Administrator Marian Blakey was supposed to appear at Sun N Fun
> today at 1PM. Unfortunately, she "had a prior commitment" (made last
> night?). Instead, she sent a panel of managers to address us.
>
> When I was going through the gate to the flight line, I noticed two
> people coming the other way. A guard stopped them and asked to see their
> armband. They replied (somewhat arrogantly) that they were "with the
> FAA, from Washington." I turned to my companion (a former member of the
> astronaut corps and test pilot for the Lunar module) and said "Gee, are
> we ever impressed?" My only mistake was not saying it loudly enough for
> them to hear.
>
> One thing we learned was that FAA is funding a new tower at LaGuardia at
> a cost of $150 million! Is it gold-plated unobtanium? For this Blakey
> wants to charge us user fees!
>
> I took along and handed out a list of questions for her and asked the
> FAA attendees to make sure that she got a copy:
>
>
> Questions for Marian Blakey
>
> You have an audience of people here today whose flight experience ranges
> from student pilot through airline pilot and astronaut. Here are some
> questions that we would like answered:
>
> 1. Are you here to listen to our concerns and to act on them, or are you
> here to parrot the Administration¹s agenda on User Fees and tell us what
> you want us to hear?
>
> 2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
> airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
> shill for user fees?
>
> 3. Are you aware of the negative impacts of user fees on personal
> aviation in other countries?
>
> 4. Have you never heard of "cost of service vs. value of service" as a
> public policy?
>
> 5. Do you intend to throw general aviation airports to the developer
> wolves by cutting off AIP grants? AIP grant conditions help stop
> ill-conceived airport closures.
>
> 6. Why does the FAA pay for management pilots to fly around in expensive
> jets and turboprops for "proficiency" but not have them experience the
> effects of their actions, by flying low-end, piston-engined general
> aviation aircraft?
>
> 7. On your watch, why has the FAA continued incompetently-designed new
> systems acquisitions?
>
> 8. On your watch, after spending billions of dollars, why have you not
> provided severe weather updates to ATC Centers and towers?
> (See Christmas Day, 2006 Daytona Beach tornado, where a Comair flight
> narrowly missed a tornado that hit the airport.)
>
> 9. On your watch, why has the FAA's "new air traffic control concept"
> focused so much on airline desires and not on the needs and safety of
> the entire flying public?
>
> 10. On your watch, why do you continue to fund Chicago¹s airports, after
> their egregious misappropriation of FAA funds to support their
> Gestapo-like midnight closure of Meigs Field?
>
> 11. On your watch, why did you allow Kansas City to close
> Richards-Gebauer Airport?
>
> 12. Twenty years after the principles of good airspace design were well
> established, why is the FAA still incompetent in designing airspace that
> general aviation pilots can readily detect and avoid?
>
> 13. Don't you think that technical organizations need leaders with
> technical competence, not degrees in International Relations?
>
> 14. When are you going to to take flying lessons and become a
> certificated pilot?
Great bunch of questions, Orval. Blakey probably got wind of your set of
questions and decided to have a convenient "prior commitment." Let us
know if you ever get any answers to these queries. Don't hold your
breath, though.

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 03:37:28 GMT, Orval Fairbairn
> wrote in
>:

>2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
>airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
>shill for user fees?

Well done, Orval. I am particularly happy to see question two above
included in your list of questions for Administrator Blakey.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Jim Logajan > wrote:

> Orval Fairbairn > wrote:
> > 2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
> > airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
> > shill for user fees?
>
> I have voted for Libertarians and have read Poole's analysis and proposals.
> I consider his analysis shallow and dangerous. Poole is confusing user fees
> with free market forces - his analysis ignores all the other aspects of
> those forces. User fees in conjunction with fuel taxes provide no
> measurable incentive for the ATC provider to operate efficiently. The fuel
> taxes insure that choice - in this case the option to not use the system so
> as to not incur fees - is reduced, not increased. The combination of fuel
> taxes, user fees, distancing of legislative oversight over revenue, and
> government regulation creates a system about as anti-free market as you can
> get.
>
> From an engineering standpoint the existing ATC system appears to be headed
> the wrong way - toward centralized single-point-of-failure. Nor does it
> provide any economies of scale - as the flight load increases, the ATC
> structure grows proportionally. But if the flight load decreases, there is
> a minimum size beyond which it cannot reasonably contract. User fees do
> nothing to correct these serious and fundamental deficiencies.

Also, if you google "Reason Foundation" and go to their website, look
at the makeup of their Board of Directors. If I am not mistaken, there
are a number of developers on their Board.

Are user fees part of a plan to subvert AIP Grant agreements, so
developers can get their hands on nice, flat properties in urban areas?
Or am I just being paranoid?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Larry Dighera > wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 03:37:28 GMT, Orval Fairbairn
> > wrote in
> >:
>
> >2 Have you listened to anybody other than the Air Transport Assn., the
> >airlines or Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation, who is the chief
> >shill for user fees?
>
> Well done, Orval. I am particularly happy to see question two above
> included in your list of questions for Administrator Blakey.

Thank you, Larry. I tried not to be too inflammatory.

[vincent p. norris]

> Questions for Marian Blakey
>
>1. Are you here to listen to our concerns and to act on them, or are you
>here to parrot the Administration¹s agenda on User Fees and tell us what
>you want us to hear?

How can she do both when they are diametrically opposed?
>
>3. Are you aware of the negative impacts of user fees on personal
>aviation in other countries?

Why would you suppose she cares?

vince norris