I like my privatized airport :)

Interesting. It used to have an NFCT next to it on the Boston Terminal
Area chart. I hadn't checked it since, and looking at the current chart
it isn't marked as so any more. It was one of the questions my DE asked
me when I went for my PPL years ago. It never occurred to me that a
contract tower would revert to a federal tower.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message
...

Nashua, NH (KASH) is a NFCT.


It's not designated as an NFCT on the current sectional, my 2001 A/FD
indicates it's an FAA Contract Tower.

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759

"Snowbird" wrote in message
m...

This is pretty scary. Did you follow this up somehow?

I sent in a NASA report and I have also used this example at several FAA
Wings talks which I have given for my local FSDO.

Did you mean to say "at airports with NF control towers"?

Sorry about that... yes, I meant at an airport with a non-federal control
tower... after all, that is how this whole thread more or less started.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Newps" wrote in message
news:4Z66b.274039$Oz4.72692@rwcrnsc54...

Is MGW a radar facility?

No. It is a non-radar tower. Radar services are available through
Clarksburg Approach, essentially treating MGW as a satellite of Clarksburg
airport CKB.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Newps" wrote in message
.net...

Where do you learn this stuff? If ATC says to proceed direct to some
fix they damn sure do assume terrain separation responsibility.


ATC assumes terrain separation if they provide navigational guidance in the
form of radar vectors but not if they instruct a pilot to Proceed Direct.
See AIM 5-2-6:

"ATC may assume responsibility for obstacle clearance by vectoring the
aircraft prior to minimum vectoring altitude by using a diverse vector area
(DVA). The DVA has been assessed for departures which do not follow a
specific ground track. ATC may also vector an aircraft off a previously
assigned DP. In all cases, the 200 FPNM climb gradient is assumed and
obstacle clearance is not provided by ATC until the controller begins to
provide navigational guidance in the form of radar vectors."

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...

Perhaps I'm not following the juxtaposition. Are you saying that
contract tower controllers gave you these instructions, or that
FAA controllers gave you these instructions whilst you were operating
at a non-towered airport for which they provide approach/departure
services?

The instructions were from a controller at a non-federal control tower. So
it was a controller who was not an FAA employee. When I mentioned
"non-towered" that was my error; I meant "non-Federal towered".


I have to admit the "proceed direct MGW" part might have caught
us. Thanks very much for the heads-up, we'll be on alert for that
kind of thing.

Yes, very subtle and very scary.. and I am convinced the controller used the
terminology precisely because when he finally assumed terrain responsibility
he said "Fly Heading XXX, Center Assigned Heading". I interpret that to
mean "I check with Center and I am stating for the tape that Center is
responsible for terrain if you hit something on that heading."


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Tom S." wrote in message ...
"Mike Granby" wrote in message
...

I'm based at THV (York) so I get in and out of LNS quite a bit. The
controllers there are indeed very helpful, but I never realized it was a
contract tower. You live and learn, I guess. How would one go about
confirming whether another airport was a contract tower or not, I wonder?

On the sectional or other chart it says "NFCT" for Non-Federal Control
Tower.

There is a differece. NFCT does mean Non-Federal control tower, but
very few contract towers are NFCT. NFCT signifies that the tower is
contracted by the airport owners/managers. In other words, the FAA
has no involvment in procuring services for the tower. A "contract
tower" is where the FAA has contracted with a private company to
provide ATC services. An NFCT usually exists where a municipality
wishes to have a tower, but there are not enough annual operations on
the field to justify the FAA paying for it. The municipality is free
to pay for their own tower and contract.

So, all NFCTs are contract towers, but very few contract towers are
NFCTs. I recall that either Glendale (GEU) or Goodyear (GYR) in the
PHX area used to have the NFCT designation on the sectional, but it's
not there anymore. Looks like both have enough operations for the FAA
to foot the bill for the tower contract now.

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

Newps wrote in message news:uQS5b.358784$uu5.69969@sccrnsc04...


snip
Some airports wanted their airport
to have a tower but they don't qualify for an FAA tower. In this case
sometimes the FAA agrees to add it to its contract program and sometimes
the FAA says no, which means the airport has to pay for it all by
itself.

If the airport pays all by itself (including the contract to staff
the tower), that's an NFCT.

Bozeman, MT went this route. They wanted a tower. The FAA
told them if they built the tower the FAA would add it to the contract
program.

That's what is referred to as a Federal Contract Tower. My local
airport, Chandler,AZ (KCHD), went this route in the mid-90s. The
number of ops was not high enough for the FAA to fund the tower, but
they told the city if they built the facility, the FAA would contract
the staffing. Ops are way up since then. Enough so that the FAA
recently added DBRITE radar displays in the tower without even batting
an eye.

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

"Tom S." wrote in message
...


Heck they even volunteer to the ground schools and give tours when the
FAA
allows!

Just thought i'd throw that in

For much the same basis, I prefer UPS and FedEx to the Post Office...


Just thought with all the bawk about FAA contracting out ATC i thought i
would atleast point out there are NICE airports that have been contracted

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

"Byron Miller" wrote in message
...

Nicest controllers, safe airport and friendly skies. They're not any
more
incompetant than a "guvenment" controller and most certainly they enjoy
aviation and the lifestyle just as much as anyone else could!

Well this may be just coincidence and in any event when n=2 not all that
much can be concluded, but for what it is worth I have had two experiences
when controllers gave me instructions while low altitude in IMC which
could
have resulted in a controlled flight into terrain accident, and both
situations occurred at a non-towered field -- once at Morgantown WV KMGW
and
once at Johnstown PA KJST.

Lancaster (KLNS) is a haven for ILS approach practices. We have a large
corporate jet fleet and many people who practice in and out. US Airways
also has an express flight out of here. I havn't heard of ANYTHING but
praise for our friendly staff

Johnstown PA, well... i've just driven through there. Didn't even know they
still had an airport hehe.

"One's Too Many" wrote in message
om...

Just thought i'd throw that in

The big ATC privatization issue is not so much about the tower guys at
your little class D airports. The big worry is more about enroute
stuff, centers, approach, departure, clearance delivery and all of a
sudden everyone getting repeatedly billed large sums of money just for
flying thru some airspace handled by some private corporation that
will staff these positions with personnel the quality of a typical
computer tech support script-parrot.

I understand that. But coming from actually knowing people "on the inside"
alot of what the FAA uses is from private companies/organizations. I'm sure
my lil Class D airport isn't reall the issue, but on the flipside, most
class B isn't for us "GA" pilots in many ways. I find landing at the class
B airports to be expensive as is, so any more fees wouldn't really bother
me. If i have to fly through them then i look for the VFR routes through
them or i go under and around them. No sense in my lil tin can to get in the
way of heavies.

The only Difference between contracted and government workers to me is the
people pushing the contract. IF this is a union labor vs non union labor
then leave me out of it. If this is privatized - IE "contracted" airports
then my point is to say there are alot of fully functional "privatized" ATC
airports that work like a charm.

Joe controller is still Joe controller be it he works for the government or
not.

Believe me, i'm all against privatizing in the sense that the FAA drops
federal subsidation for aviation as that would murder the industry, but
privitization via contracting out jobs to bidders isn't anything that
concerns me.

If our military can do it, if the business sector can do it, why can't the
government sector continue to do it?