On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:07:01 -0700, TheSmokingGnu wrote:


The proposals thus far presented try to make the case that it is the
former, caused in large part by the wide margins necessary in a
human-controlled and administrated system. Earlier however, the inference
is made that the proposed system will prevent a hypothetical "rationing"
situation wherein flights will be given priority based on need, indicating
a problem with the latter.

Right. That much I did see. I was wondering if you'd spotted something
different. But I'm going to go back and review exactly where you found
that math.

[...]

One of the other arguments they use is the disparity between corporate
jet taxes and fractional ownership or charter taxi taxes. What they fail
to consider is that, especially under fractional ownership, the costs
are defrayed amongst several individuals, whereas corporate jet
operation is undertaken entirely by one. They only consider the
per-plane taxation as relevant, when it patently is not.

Well, from an ATC service perspective they're right. However, there are
plenty of examples where pricing is dictated by more than just the
per-vehicle cost. As I read your paragraph above, for example, I
remembered that there's a high cost to registering a taxi in NYC. Still,
it's just another car. Why should it be charged differently?

[...]

It would be useful, though, to show what it would take to reduce ATC
service costs. For example, how low would traffic have to drop before
(for example) NY TRACON would be able to reduce staff by merging
sectors?

Not very far, if their delay schema can be applied in reverse.

I suspect you're right. But nobody is bothering to actually answer the
question? Pity.

[...]


Their solution, then, is to use (very expensive) technology to cram more
flights in less space, so that the underlying problem of too many
flights trying to use the same airport at the same time can roll on, and
sneaking in a rather sizable bit of pork for their airline buddies to
boot.

Well, yes, but they don't seem to be addressing the real limiting factor:
runway space (at those hubs).

[...]

and NOT by privatizing the whole system, but

One of the congressional testimonies I read (and cited here, though I
don't recall which just now) included the statement that privatizing was
(my words) a red herring, unrelated to the real issue but being put into
the mix anyway.

I have to add, though, that I do see problems with agencies that need to
be run well handled by political appointees. We don't need an "Ataboy
Brownie" running the FAA, for example.

But there's nothing that limits incompetence and abuse to government
agencies. And awarding non-competitive contracts (ie. FSS) seems to
offer little improvement.

- Andrew