Plane Conversations

The U.S. Senate finally got down to business and did something constructive!

Monday, they passed a reauthorization bill for the FAA that includes funding for the NextGen air traffic control system.

The great news for General Aviation is that there are no user fees in this bill. The Federal Excise Tax for fuel goes up, but we can live with that – especially if we get something for it.

This has been a long battle to fund the system without implementing user fees; but, it looks like for at least the next year or two we can take a breather. Hopefully, those user fees don’t get brought up again.  The possibility exists, though; so, we will have to be vigilant.

Included in the bill are provisions for changing training and pilot qualifications for the regional airlines prompted by the Colgan Air crash last year.

An article posted on Tuesday, 23 March 2010, by Charles Spence, Washington, D.C. correspondent for General Aviation News, says the following:

Both the Senate and House bills were passed without user fees, but the Senate version raises the fuel tax from 22 to 38 cents per gallon to help fund modernization of the aviation system. The Senate bill passed by a vote of 93 to 0.

Craig Fuller, president and CEO of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), said that the final bill will give the FAA “the long-term support it needs to move forward with the crucial work of modernizing our air traffic control system, preserving our network of airports and maintaining the safest air transportation system in the world.”

Speaking for the National Air Transportation Association (NATA), James Coyne, president, expressed thanks to the Senate for approving a bill devoid of user fees but that provides a fair jet fuel tax increase.

Ed Bolen, president and CEO of the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), welcomed passage of the bill “to fund the FAA and continue transformation to a Next Generation Air Traffic Control — NextGen — aviation system.” He added that the NBAA and other general aviation organizations have been strong advocates for proposals to modernize the nation’s aviation system and that passage of the reauthorization is a good step in that direction.

Pete Bunce, president and CEO of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), echoed those comments, saying that his association was pleased with passage of the bill, which takes a number of critical steps needed for the acceleration of NextGen.

No user fees and a $.16 per gallon increase in the fuel tax (under the Senate version) is something we can all live with. The Senate’s passage, with its vote of 93 to 0 is amazing in itself.  It’s amazing that all parties in D.C. can agree on anything these days.

Conspicuously absent from the comments of the various groups representing aviation interests are comments by the ATA, which represents the airline industry.

Will the airlines applaud this bill as well?  

Click on pen to

Can the FAA speed up implementation of the Next Gen Air Traffic Control System? It seems that the case for funding based on the environment (less emissions), safety, and the economic health of our air transportation system would make this a  good investment of tax payer dollars.

Until now, the hold up has been who was going to pay for it. The battle between the airlines and general aviation as to who foots the lion’s share of the bill has the whole issue locked up in a congressional stalemate. All of us in aviation agree that the need exists and since the government is in the economic stimulus business, why don’t they just fund it?

Andy Pasztor writes in the Wall Street Journal:

“Seeking to accelerate the rollout of new air-traffic control technology, the top U.S. aviation regulator predicted that a satellite-based system designed to allow aircraft to fly shorter, more direct routes would largely pay for itself in fuel savings in just a few years. Testifying before a Senate aviation subcommittee Thursday, Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt said the multi-billion-dollar modernization project — dubbed NextGen — would save travelers time, and carriers could “save a billion gallons of fuel a year.”

NextGen, which will use Global Positioning System satellites for navigation, would permit reduced in-flight distances between aircraft and more efficient use of runways. Mr. Babbit’s comments were the most specific he has made to Congress so far about the benefits of a rapid deployment of NextGen.Airlines could achieve $2 billion in savings annually, he said, and an early phase of the proposed system costs $6 billion. Mr. Babbitt acknowledged that in the past, the agency didn’t effectively marshal data to “make the business case” justifying such investments.

With airlines complaining they can’t afford to foot the bill for equipping planes with the new equipment, more than a dozen industry association and aerospace trade groups have banded together to lobby for federal aid. Overall, the upgrades could carry a price tag of around $40 billion, but they will be phased in. The FAA already has budgeted funds to pay for its anticipated share of the costs.”

An efficient and safe air transportation system is a vital part of the United States economic recovery. Air transportation is, in itself, a huge job creator. And, as a part of the overall economy, it is a major contributor to the efficiency and innovation that will make or break this country. People need to travel in order to do business and the less time they spend traveling the more time they have to actually do business.

So why can’t congress get this done?

Click on pen to

The headline as reported by CNN
CNN Thu October 8, 2009

Flight delays to get worse as economy improves

Story Highlights include:
• Major hub cities are bottleneck for air traffic, Brookings Institution study says
• Frequent flier advises connecting through smaller cities when possible
• Aviation expert says there’s plenty of room for streamlining existing system
• Study’s authors advocate using high-speed rail to alleviate runway congestion

CNN’s report, like the Brookings study, like the hundreds of news stories and studies that preceded them are all restatements of the obvious.
For business travelers, the U.S. intercity air transportation system is unreliable.
In fact, the system is so prone to service disruptions and delays that some major airports have reconfigured their terminals into shopping malls.

Gift shop at Nashville International Airport

New York Times business columnist Joe Sharkey recently recounted his three-hour layover in Houston:
“But not long ago, thanks to the reduction in schedules being made by all airlines, I had a layover of almost three hours at the Houston airport. For the first time, I was able to actually experience the place.  For lunch, I had decent ribs at Harlon’s Bar-B-Q. I had my shoes shined. Then I wandered over to the next terminal, past an expanse of nice shops and restaurants, and entered a Continental Presidents Club, where I had free Wi-Fi to check e-mail messages, browse the news and write some posts. On the way to my gate, I bought a book I had been planning to read.” New York Times, September 28, 2009
As a nation, we have proved our ability to come together and meet any challenge that came our way. We put a man on the moon and returned him safely to Earth in less than a decade, joined with allies and won two world wars, and now we have adapted to the reality of an unreliable transportation system with “decent ribs and shined shoes?” No problem.
Some might think that those of us in the priority air charter business should be pleased that the system is unreliable.  After all, we provide on-demand services to a client base for whom “time is money.” Executives, middle managers and skilled technicians cannot afford three-hour layovers and would much rather spend their time productively than in the airport mall.
In fact, the opposite is true.
We take no pleasure in this sytem failure, because in the reality of the national and global marketplaces, the ability to move key personnel is not optional.  It is a primary underpinning of doing business in the 21st century.

So, what is the solution?
There must be a cease fire between the forces of US and THEM (business aviation vs the airlines) long enough to initiate the NextGen air traffic control system and settle the issue of who pays for what.  Perhaps the Brookings Institution or some other neutral party could serve as mediator between the two sides.
One way or another, solutions must be reached and put in place.
If not, good ribs and shoes shines await us at the Houston Airport Mall.

Click on pen to