A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old November 17th 03, 02:33 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?


  #72  
Old November 17th 03, 03:16 PM
Casey Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 14:10:13 -0800, "BTIZ"
wrote:

cheaper I might agree with... but safer??


Let's put it this way. If you had a very valuable package that just
had to get there, would you take it to the post office or to Fed Ex?

When you go through airport security, would you feel safer in Boston
(where the screeners are federal employees) or in Haifa (where they
are private)?


I mail everything through USPS except for one or two times a year -- when
some sends me a prepaid mailer to return something. USPS does a fine job.
I've used "overnight" delivery in a couple of panics and they have never
missed.



  #73  
Old November 17th 03, 04:39 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?


Automation, same as the post office.


  #74  
Old November 17th 03, 04:49 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

The controllers wouldn't be eligible for NATCA membership.
;-)


  #75  
Old November 17th 03, 05:28 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:01:51 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

An ATC responsive to common carriers has a very real apeal.


To whom, other than the airlines?
  #76  
Old November 17th 03, 06:06 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
news

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
. ..

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

Automation can be done, but concrete is not green.

New concrete is green.


Hmmm, you think you can sell that idea to the tree huggers?


You don't approve of trees?


Trees are a good thing, do I advocate automation of ATC. The "pour
concrete" advocates also have a point, albeit not politically viable.


  #77  
Old November 17th 03, 09:41 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the goods".




  #78  
Old November 17th 03, 09:41 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:AxVtb.3417$Ue4.381@fed1read01...
which makes it non responsive to general aviation?

a very bad deal..

ATC clearances go on the auction block... how bad do you really need to

go..


During peak times, through major traffic areas....


  #79  
Old November 17th 03, 09:44 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


BTIZ wrote:

cheaper I might agree with... but safer??

so the pilots (or surviving families) sue the "private ATC company" for

the
screw up.. and not the gov't..


If that happens, the next contract will cost the Feds lots more money, so

it
won't be cheaper anymore.


Has costs to government ever keep them back?


  #80  
Old November 17th 03, 09:46 PM
Tom S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Peter Gottlieb wrote:

Unless they write legislation absolving the private companies from
liability.


Oh, I'm sure they can. They did that with the USPS when that got

privatized.

That's the problem if ATC "privatization" is done like USPS, or the phone
companies, power utilities....


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tower Enroute Control? Sam Jones Instrument Flight Rules 5 June 2nd 04 02:31 AM
Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA PlanetJ Instrument Flight Rules 168 December 6th 03 01:51 PM
Preferred Routing or Tower Enroute Control cefarthing Instrument Flight Rules 3 November 30th 03 04:53 PM
Aviation Conspiracy: Bush Backs Down On Tower Privatization Issue!!! Bill Mulcahy General Aviation 3 October 1st 03 05:39 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.