"Deutsche Flugsicherung (DFS) is the company in charge of air traffic control for Germany. It is a company organized under private law and 100% owned by the Federal Republic of Germany. Since January 1993, DFS has been controlling air traffic in Germany. In Germany, military and civil air traffic controllers work side by side. Since 1994, DFS has been responsible for the handling of both civil and military air traffic in peacetime. Only military aerodromes are exempted from this integration. DFS's running costs are covered by applicable route charges ( "Flugsicherungsgebühren", collected by Eurocontrol for its 37 participating member states) and by approach and departure fees (determination by the BMVBS by ordinance and collected directly by DFS). According to the Gesellschaftsvertrag, (articles of association) DFS is a not-for-profit company. Any surpluses generated must also be repaid in accordance with the internationally accepted principles for the collection of air navigation charges to airspace users."
In other words, user fees pay the freight, not the taxpayer.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
The theory behind privatizing ATC, has been viewed as being advantageous in regards to technology implementation, more so than anything to do with human resources or directly related to saving money.
Optimally, ATC requires vast continual upgrades in improved technology. This hasn't been done in a timely manner, because of the bureaucratic red tape involved in making capital investments of the magnitude required to modernize ATC. There's equipment upgrades in the pipeline, that have been bogged down in the planning, budgeting, and contract bidding process for decades.
The best analogy I can give on a railroad forum, is comparing a 1950's dispatch office of a major railroad with an operations center of one today. Then look at the aeronautical equivalent of an FAA Air Route Traffic Control Center of the 1950's, compared to one today. The 1950's railroad dispatch office will look nothing like the modern center of today. But with the exception of variances in the physical appearance of the radar scopes, the FAA center will looked roughly the same.
There's other minutia on the labor intensive side of the equation related to the stagnent nature of FAA technology implementation. Let's just say FAA controllers are still doing the aeronautical equivalent of hand typing orders and stringing them up on a pole.
tree68 Euclid Specifically, how does it differ from the current air traffic control organization? How would it be funded? Why would it cause air fares to increase as the article says? Unless it's run like Amtrak - with a government subsidy - the users are going to have to pay the whole cost of the service. Right now, because the ATC people are federal employees, you're paying for them, whether you fly or not. In addition, if you read about improvements at your local airport, especially ATC stuff, you'll find a strong federal presence as well. As in dollars.
Euclid Specifically, how does it differ from the current air traffic control organization? How would it be funded? Why would it cause air fares to increase as the article says?
Unless it's run like Amtrak - with a government subsidy - the users are going to have to pay the whole cost of the service.
Right now, because the ATC people are federal employees, you're paying for them, whether you fly or not. In addition, if you read about improvements at your local airport, especially ATC stuff, you'll find a strong federal presence as well. As in dollars.
Okay, I see what you mean. That would explain why fares will rise. I would prefer that particular outcome of privatization. Is that where the main benefit is? What about the effect of getting more bang for the buck if the government overhead is removed? Generally, what I wonder is who is supposed to like this plan and why?
Trump doesn't touch anything that is by design 'non-profit'. If there is 'private' ATC, someone will profit, and profit handsomely.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
EuclidSpecifically, how does it differ from the current air traffic control organization? How would it be funded? Why would it cause air fares to increase as the article says?
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
schlimm Euclid I generally understand what is meant by “privatization,” but not what is meant by “non-profit privatization.” That sounds like a contradiction in terms. In reading some of the details, it sounds like it amounts to adding another complete and highly regulated private bureaucracy between the FAA and air traffic control. What's hard to understand? It is non-government and non-profit. University and other non-profit hospital systems are among the best medical facilities in the US
Euclid I generally understand what is meant by “privatization,” but not what is meant by “non-profit privatization.” That sounds like a contradiction in terms. In reading some of the details, it sounds like it amounts to adding another complete and highly regulated private bureaucracy between the FAA and air traffic control.
I generally understand what is meant by “privatization,” but not what is meant by “non-profit privatization.” That sounds like a contradiction in terms. In reading some of the details, it sounds like it amounts to adding another complete and highly regulated private bureaucracy between the FAA and air traffic control.
What's hard to understand? It is non-government and non-profit. University and other non-profit hospital systems are among the best medical facilities in the US
Specifically, how does it differ from the current air traffic control organization? How would it be funded? Why would it cause air fares to increase as the article says?
rdamon Some pros and cons ... https://www.floridatechonline.com/blog/aviation-management/pros-and-cons-of-privatized-air-traffic-control/
Some pros and cons ...
https://www.floridatechonline.com/blog/aviation-management/pros-and-cons-of-privatized-air-traffic-control/
"...bill for privatization (H.R. 4441) has been moved out of committee but has seen no action in the House. It calls for the creation of the ATC Corporation, “a federally chartered, not-for-profit corporation,” and says that the Department of Transportation will transfer operational control of FAA air traffic services to the corporation by Oct. 1, 2019..."
Sounds like the legislation will give us another U.S. Post Office ?
Not sure the country can afford another of those. Employee Benefits are the albatross on that, these days.
The article makes a case for privatization and lists other countries where it has been successfully done(?). The Airlines, and Unions also, seem to be for it; as long as their (ATCU) working conditions,benefit, and pay are not effected...Another USPS deal?
Apparently, the 'System' need a major upgrade , as to its equipment used to track and control the aircraft at airports and in-flight. Sounds expensive! The railroads have used "associations(?) to handle traffic in certain heavy traffic areas, Chicago Belt Rwy, Conrail shared assets, Houston, spring to mind right away.. It might work with the air traffic?
What is the advantage of running air traffic control with a private non-profit organization? Why would it be more efficient and save money?
President Trump seems to be starting in on his long awaited infrastructure initiative by announcing new technological upgrades to the air traffic control system that are long overdue. This system is envisioned to be run by a private non profit organization that will save money and be more efficient, according to him. While it's too early to tell, how much more will airlines pay and what affect, if any, would Amtrak feel? Sorry for not supplying a link to this speech, but it is on youtube. I am not too technically savvy, forgive me.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.