The U.S. ATC privatization debate

[Mike53]

Curious of what my flying brethren south of the 49th think of this idea?From Avweb news today.

AVFLASH NEWS
September 21, 2011

The ATC Privatization Debate?
By Glenn Pew, Contributing Editor, Video Editor




NextGen air traffic control improvements are championed by government officials, but one former government official argued through an editorial this week that ATC may fare better in private hands. According to Peter Orszag, former director of the Office of Management and Budget, NextGen is "a step in the right direction." But because it's being rolled out in stages, he argues it will take too long to implement. The former director cites Canada's nonprofit corporation NAV Canada and says the answer to a better air traffic system in the U.S. is the private sector. And user fees. Not everyone agrees.

Orszag is now the vice chairman of global banking at Citigroup Inc. His opinion is that a user-based revenue model would ensure that those who use the system would pay for it. That, says Orszag, would also keep funding debates outside of the political process. Orszag says that while NAV Canada suffered initially, it now offers a nonprofit example that compares favorably against the FAA. "It tends to be more responsive to innovation and better able to make improvements in technology, investing in the needs of its user airlines," he said. Opposition to Orszag's approach may have already formed. Nine groups, including AOPA, EAA, GAMA, and NBAA, issued "unified opposition" to a deficit-reduction plan proposed by President Obama, Monday, that included user fees for some general aviation flights. And questions remain. One raised by another editorial asks what leverage users would have if private controllers decided to strike and suggests that costs borne by airlines would cause ticket prices to skyrocket.
NAV CANADA is the first private sector company in the world to use a non-share capital structure to commercialize a government service.

A bit of history on Nav Canada

On November 1, 1996, the responsibility for the country

[N111YX]

Nav Canada does do a great job. I have never flown VFR there. How does that billing work for you if at all? Can you avoid fees when VFR completely?

In the USA it seems the greatest users would be those paying the most in per gallon fuel tax ("fair share" and all that).

Do I think that if the USA went to a"pay to play" system that the fuel tax would be lowered...?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :x

[chris]

Here is a link to a pdf for their Customer Guide to Charges

[Mike53]

Nav Canada does do a great job. I have never flown VFR there. How does that billing work for you if at all? Can you avoid fees when VFR completely?

In the USA it seems the greatest users would be those paying the most in per gallon fuel tax ("fair share" and all that).

Do I think that if the USA went to a"pay to play" system that the fuel tax would be lowered...?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :x

Being a fair weather pilot I have never paid any up front fees I simply avoid the major international airports that charge landing fees.Here is a list of airports in Canada and their fees if any.http://archive.copanational.org/PlacesToFly/index.php

[N111YX]

I wonder about enroute charges or talking to a tower. It seems that problems would arise if IFR flight plans are billed and VFR not. The IFR pilots would be more apt to avoid the positive control to save a few bucks. The predictable results would follow.

I don't mind avoiding big airports if it's just landing fees...:)