Air Traffic Controller Exodus Stifling Airline Industry in Chicago, U.S.

[undatc]

Which story? It appears that there are several articles presented.

She would be referring to the original post I made.

Also, Senate Bill 1300 is on the docket for discussion this month.  This bill would close the loop hole the FAA exploited, and also force them back to the table. 

CALL your congressman and tell them to SUPPORT S 1300!!!

[Turbomallard]

Which story? It appears that there are several articles presented.

She would be referring to the original post I made.

Also, Senate Bill 1300 is on the docket for discussion this month.  This bill would close the loop hole the FAA exploited, and also force them back to the table. 

CALL your congressman and tell them to SUPPORT S 1300!!!

Whoa there friend... S 1300 includes user fees. Ain't no GA pilot going to support that. The $25 IFR fee in that bill would set an important precident and undoubtely lead to more, possibly much more. Sorry... I don't think you'll find a friendly climate here for that bill.


TM

[undatc]

The thing is, if you don't support this bill, it may well be the last straw in which the FAA cannot recover ATC, and it cascades towards privatization.  Welcome to navcan people where the fees are sometimes double or triple that which are purposed in this bill.  Take the lesser of two evils.  A small user fee, or the very real possibility that in the near future we may be presented with a privatized air traffic system.

*Edit, I just went back and read the bill, and it 'appears' you're wrong TM.

Here is the wordage;

Section 106 -
Directs the FAA to impose, with specified exceptions, a surcharge of $25 per flight on owners or operators of passenger aircraft and to deposit such amounts in an Air Modernization Fund to modernize the air traffic control system and implement Next Generation Air Transportation System projects. Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to borrow up to $5 billion to finance capital investments in the FAA's air traffic control system.

.

Also this is from EAA

http://www.eaa.org/news/2007/2007-09-26_senate.asp

....Unfortunately the bill still includes the $25 user fee on IFR flight plans for all turbine-powered aircraft. Many observers, however, feel an expected amendment to do away with the user fee has a good chance of passing when S. 1300 is debated on the Senate floor....

[undatc]

And for exact wording of the bill:

Section 106: 48115 Modernization surcharge

Part B reads:

Exceptions
(1) Military and other public certain other aircraft. - A surcharge may not be assessed under this ection of military aircraft, public aircraft (as defined in section 40102 of this sub title), air ambulance aircraft, agricultural aircraft, or for military or non commercial civil aircraft of a foreign government.

(2) Exemption Applicability. - A surcharge may not be assessed under this section for -
 a) pistion engined aircraft; or
 b) turbo prop or turbo shaft aircraft operating outside controlled airspace

(5) intrastate flights - ..... a surcharge may not be applied to a any flight that originate or terminate at an airport or in airpot that is not controlled by a TRACON roa combined center/radar approach control facility.

So basically this should never apply to GA.  Because of the following;

1) most GA fly VFR, therefore you never talk to ATC, so no surcharge

2) if your flight begins or ends at a non-controlled airport, or an airport that does not have a TRACON, no surcharge

I'm pretty sure those two instances cover almost all GA flights.

[AirScorp]

Just a thought undatc, I know it's your job and you have to support it everyway you can     

But ATC's are there because there are people flying! If people stop flying or learn to fly, as will happen if you start with the Fees, the ATC system will suffer too.. Don't think the money will get to the ATC, cause most of them won't..
That said because I live in Europe, and in a country that has 12-16 airports and is questionable if there are double this number ATCs and they are/were mostly undertrained, however welcoming they might be to visitors.. And still, for every landing we have to pay a fee..


ANYWAY, let's lighten up a little!   

[Baradium]

The thing is, if you don't support this bill, it may well be the last straw in which the FAA cannot recover ATC, and it cascades towards privatization.  Welcome to navcan people where the fees are sometimes double or triple that which are purposed in this bill.  Take the lesser of two evils.  A small user fee, or the very real possibility that in the near future we may be presented with a privatized air traffic system.

I concur with Turbomallard... you won't find a friendly climate here for that Chris.

I'm not willing to accept user fees

[PiperGirl]

So basically this should never apply to GA.  Because of the following;

1) most GA fly VFR, therefore you never talk to ATC, so no surcharge

2) if your flight begins or ends at a non-controlled airport, or an airport that does not have a TRACON, no surcharge

I'm pretty sure those two instances cover almost all GA flights

Really!?!?

[airtac]

The thing is, if you don't support this bill, it may well be the last straw in which the FAA cannot recover ATC, and it cascades towards privatization.  Welcome to navcan people where the fees are sometimes double or triple that which are purposed in this bill.  Take the lesser of two evils.  A small user fee, or the very real possibility that in the near future we may be presented with a privatized air traffic system.

I concur with Turbomallard... you won't find a friendly climate here for that Chris.

I'm not willing to accept user fees

I concur with Ryan,.............

[airtac]

So basically this should never apply to GA.  Because of the following;

1) most GA fly VFR, therefore you never talk to ATC, so no surcharge

2) if your flight begins or ends at a non-controlled airport, or an airport that does not have a TRACON, no surcharge

I'm pretty sure those two instances cover almost all GA flights

Really!?!?

I also concur with Pipergirls response 

[Turbomallard]

*Edit, I just went back and read the bill, and it 'appears' you're wrong TM.

It 'appears' to me that perhaps you did not read my post correctly.

Note that I stated that the $25 IFR fee for turbines would establish a precedent that would lead us down a bad path. I doubt I'll ever be fortunate enough to fly anything with a turbine, and if I could afford to fly something of that nature I would also be able to afford the $25 fee. The $25 is not the concern. The danger lies in the precedent of establishing user fees, which would bring about the very situation you describe in Canada... only the money would be going to the US government rather than a private company. Same difference. Furthermore... I doubt that charging $25 per turbine flight is going to fund the next gen system... or make enough of an impact to give you a bigger paycheck. The main function of such a fee would be to open the gates for more.

TM

[TheSoccerMom]

I don't know much, but I do know I talk to ATC every single chance I am ABLE, period.  I am talking VFR, high, low, in the flats, in the mountains. 

I view it as a system that can AID me in the goal of a safe flight VFR.  So, I am going to USE it, and I do.   

 

[airtac]

*Edit, I just went back and read the bill, and it 'appears' you're wrong TM.

It 'appears' to me that perhaps you did not read my post correctly.

Note that I stated that the $25 IFR fee for turbines would establish a precedent that would lead us down a bad path. I doubt I'll ever be fortunate enough to fly anything with a turbine, and if I could afford to fly something of that nature I would also be able to afford the $25 fee. The $25 is not the concern. The danger lies in the precedent of establishing user fees, which would bring about the very situation you describe in Canada... only the money would be going to the US government rather than a private company. Same difference. Furthermore... I doubt that charging $25 per turbine flight is going to fund the next gen system... or make enough of an impact to give you a bigger paycheck. The main function of such a fee would be to open the gates for more.

TM

Could not have said it better myself--Thanks quacker, that is right on---Remember the old axiom about "letting the camel get his nose in the tent" ............

[Rooster Cruiser]

Hey all, I am the reporter who wrote this story. I am still working on furthering my info so if anyone is interested in being interviewed please email me.
steph@midwestbusiness.com

Welcome to the Roost, Steph!     You did a decent job on that story.  PM me for more details, and do the same with UNDATC.  We'll give you the down and dirty.