If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:44:45 GMT, "Chip Jones"
wrote in Message-Id: . net: Current air traffic controllers are the only people in the nation with the necessary job skills to work in such a system. Why wouldn't Boeing, LocMart, or Raytheon staff their privatized ATC monopoly with ATC controllers based in India? -- Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts. -- Larry Dighera, |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:09:04 GMT, "Chip Jones"
wrote in Message-Id: . net: What "technology?" "New air traffic management technologies abound..." http://www.boeing.com/atm/bold/index.html Air Traffic Management Bold Approach Introduction to Boeing Concept: Comprehensive Change Boeing takes an uncommon approach to air traffic management. New air traffic management technologies abound, and some of them are being pilot-tested at airports and on airplanes today. On closer scrutiny, however, these technology-driven solutions do not revolutionize the air traffic system on a global scale. Boeing not only will integrate all the discrete elements of an entire airspace system to achieve lasting results, but we have the resources, intellectual property and large-scale integration expertise to implement programs of this scope. The objectives of the program are to: Make flying even safer and more secure. The concept will support real-time detection, response and consequence management using a highly integrated global system perspective to coordinate strategies among the many public and private stakeholders when threats emerge. Increase capacity, even as air traffic levels rise. More accurate forecasts of traffic volume, real-time flight replanning and tools for fast-forward simulation of system flows to evaluate potential consequences of changes to a flight plan or traffic flow will all help increase capacity. Dramatically reduce congestion and delays. Air traffic managers will use far more accurate aircraft monitoring to alleviate congestion around crowded airports at peak times. New procedures, tools and airspace design will enhance safety factors while permitting closer minimum spacing than is possible today using ground-based radar equipment. Keep aviation affordable and accessible for commercial, military, business and general aviation operators. Equipage costs and airspace design will have a substantial effect on user access to the aviation system. Boeing is working with major stakeholders, including noncommercial operators, to define overall system requirements. See the graphic for an illustration of the envisioned system. -- Irrational beliefs ultimately lead to irrational acts. -- Larry Dighera, |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
"Chip Jones" wrote in message ink.net... "Mike Rapoport" wrote in message k.net... The drive to lower cost, presumably through technology, would result in fewer controller positions. Theoretically, but how can you lower cost while you are trying to invent and implement technology to replace human beings? Those of us on the inside know that "technology" isn't forthcoming that is going to replace us. What "technology?" The same technology airplanes use now, Chip. The airborn portion of the system is some of the most advanced technology in the world and the other is trapped in the 1950's. Costs will be lowered by reducing ATC induced delays and cancellations. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Newps writes:
Mike Rapoport wrote: The big issue for AOPA and NBAA is allocating the costs. It costs the same to separate a 747 from a 172 as it does to separate the 172 from the 747. Come and listen sometime and tell me it costs the same. Most of the time it costs 3 times as much to separate the "Hawk because of his 25 year old Narco Mk 12A. Methinks you exaggerate grossly. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
"David Megginson" wrote in message ... "Chip Jones" writes: Just curious again with Nav Canada. When you pay your ATC fees up there, do you pay Nav Canada directly, or do you pay your government who then pays Nav Canada? We pay Nav Canada directly. Don't forget, though, that any privatized ATC will still be government-regulated, because it will be a monopoly. It won't be able just to raise fees whenever it feels like it. Like the phone companies...the Postal (dis)service... |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
"David Megginson" wrote in message ... "Tom S." writes: We pay Nav Canada directly. Don't forget, though, that any privatized ATC will still be government-regulated, because it will be a monopoly. It won't be able just to raise fees whenever it feels like it. Like the phone companies...the Postal (dis)service... Exactly. People may whine about the pennies, but we're not exactly paying $5/letter, (So $4.00 a letter is okay?) And the postal service is losing it's shirt now that it has to compete with e-mail, FAX... and phone service has become cheaper over the past few years. Since they brought in competition. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Rapoport wrote: The drive to lower cost, presumably through technology, would result in fewer controller positions. I wouldn't presume it would be through technology. In the telecom industry, the drive to lower cost simply resulted in the same amount of work being done by fewer people. This actually results in more hours being worked (by those fewer people), but less money paid in salaries because "professionals" don't get overtime pay. It's less efficient, but it costs less. The only technology advance is the purchase of pagers for those poor *******s left working 7/24. George Patterson A friend will help you move. A really good friend will help you move the body. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:44:45 GMT, "Chip Jones" wrote in Message-Id: . net: Current air traffic controllers are the only people in the nation with the necessary job skills to work in such a system. Why wouldn't Boeing, LocMart, or Raytheon staff their privatized ATC monopoly with ATC controllers based in India? For one thing, because the US National Airspace System is part of our national security apparatus. I am required to maintain a security clearance. If I lose it I am fired. For another thing, who is going to train Indian controllers based in India how to work Atlanta Center airspace? Boeing? NATCA? India? Not me... Chip, ZTL |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:09:04 GMT, "Chip Jones" wrote in Message-Id: . net: What "technology?" "New air traffic management technologies abound..." Pardon me Larry, but everything in the Boeing propoganda that you posted is conceptual. *Specifically* what new technologies does Boeing have? Ever notice how they don't get specific? Oh, that's right- it's proprietary. "Give us a contract and then we'll let you know what we can do with it". Chip, ZTL |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|