Back to Squawk list
  • 42

Lawmakers Target Long-Term FAA Bill

Submitted
 
After an agonizing two-week partial shutdown of the FAA, lawmakers are now turning their attention to negotiations on a long-term reauthorization bill. On Aug. 5, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, pressed for a long-term bill, saying “it’s vital” that the House and Senate act to avoid another extension. (www.aviationweek.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


preacher1
preacher1 0
Only in America would the FAA make the ticket tax collection retroactive to cover the shutdown and now they are attempting to get back pay for the furloughed GOVERNMENT workers. I have no problem with the back pay but if they do that, they need to reach out and ante up for ALL the construction folks and everyone else that lost out too, otherwise, no one gets it.
canuck44
canuck44 0
Agree with Wayne on that one. The long term bill should be clean, that is fund all air movement, safety and oversight functions, but forget subsidies to favored rural airports and/or union promotions. If there is a need or interest in these projects, they should be in stand alone bills that have committee approval before being passed in both houses.

The concept of tacking on projects for special interests or imposing rules to bills is one of the reasons why the country is broke. Fund the authorized federal functions and let the pork pass or fail on its own merits.
preacher1
preacher1 0
John: Very well said. Some folks don't like the taste of pork and they should not be forced to eat it if they don't want to.lol
VANHO
EVAN HODGDEN 0
The last time there was a furlough, ATC non-essential personnel were refunded their lost pay. So, no pain, just free time away from the office. Government works that way, huh!
canuck44
canuck44 0
I don't know, Wayne. If we forced everyone to eat the pork we could probably get rid of the TSA.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
I can't believe there are really others who don't enjoy paying for someone else's plane tickets. I thought I was the only selfish one. Go figure!
preacher1
preacher1 0
You know, back in the day, when Airline dereg came along, the EAS was a good thing. They did the same thing, subsidy wise, with the railroads as branch lines were spun off and regional operators took over but those subsidies went away after awhile and branch line operators that couldn't make it on available freight took their toys and went elswhere to play and the towns lost rail service. Most still survive. Point is, I don't thonk the original intent of EAS was to be a long term thing. I think it was meant to be a transition type thing in order for those towns/cities to be evaluated. That would be the common sense thing, but then you are talking about our fedrul gumint so in some form or fashion it will probably run until hell freezes over.
captainjman
Jason Feldman 0
the number one cost for an airline is fuel. We get MOST fuel from the middle east. So by subsidizing the Essential Air Service - we are basically giving money to the middle east. Thats the way I see it. We are exporting dollars in hopes that pennies remain in our own economy. This is NOT a good way to stimulate OUR economy. On the other hand, look at all the shiny new buildings in the UAE.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
It is time for USA to take care of USA and put all these pos countries on the backburner. I personally could care less about any of them.
preacher1
preacher1 0
As somebody wrote in a comment on another post, in one form or fashion, every conflict and problem we have gotten involved in overseas lately has had OIL at the base of it, regardless of whether it's been disguised as preserving democracy or whatever. The Dept of Energy was formed way back in the 70's with a specific mission to "REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL".Now, here in 2011, it has over 25,000 employees and we import more oil than ever. Now, I realize that our economy and country has grown in 30 years but in that time, thanks to the tree huggers and no pressure from the government to add one, not a new refinery has been opened inland and drilling is not near what it was. Reason: imported oil is just too easy to get and the oil companies can make all that money without the extra effort, plus a President that will talk jobs out of one corner of his mouth and then place a moratorium on gulf drilling putting 20,000+people out of work. Even if we were spending the same money on domestic crude, at least the $ would be staying here, people would be working, and our dependence on foreign oil would be down. EAS is a waste but so are a lot of other things. There is a whole lot wrong with the whole picture. Sorry to vent but it just touched a nerve.
captainjman
Jason Feldman 0
Wayne - you are right on the money. Don't ever appologize for saying what needs to be said. Regardless if you area treehugger or not people have to understand 2 points
1. We are handing trillions to rougue enemy states which will hurt our environment more than we ever will
2. Having drilling there and not here to save the world makes no sense. It's like having a peeing and non peeing sections in a pool - know what I mean?
3. Ok so I have three points - we really need alternative energy whether your a tree higher or not - there is not an infinite amour of petroleum. So we must invest heavily in that.

Treehugger or not - republican or democrat. Dog or cat - whatever ... All have to agree on those three items because like it or not it's the fact
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
Needs to touch lot of peoples nerves. Our government has been our own worst enemy for a couple decades. They just don't get it.
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
James you are exctley right.Abolish the FAA and The DOT. What work does the FAA “DO”?. NOTHING. I am a pilot and 60% of my job is to keep some controller from killing me or getting me violated. Even Randy Babbitt could not think of anything that they “DO” When the money was cut off his reply was “These are real people with families” What does that have to do with air safety? I was flying way before there was an FAA. All they have managed to do is to reduce the flying population and make flying too expensive for the average person. Aviation should be regulated by Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, the National Business Aviation Association, National Air Carriers Association, Aircraft manufacturers Association and if need be we can bring back the National Advisory Committee for Aerobatic. Shut the money off the the thugs with highpaying government jobs.
captainjman
Jason Feldman 0
Dale - how true - we all know that a ramp check is northing more than harassment - if god forbid you forgot to cross a T or dot an i, youre ass is toast. But when thousands of pilots try to get the FAA to change rest rules - change never happens even after "blood on the runway".

The years the FAA mission statement was to help airlines be profitable - not safety related.
preacher1
preacher1 0
I never really have understood "Essential / Non Essential". My feeling is that a person performs a service or they don't. They are needed or they are not. I suppose there are routine and mundane functions, which is supposedly what these people did, but as Dale said, Babbit couldn't say what they did, and to have 4000+ in non essential functions and not be able to say what they do is a bit much.
captainjman
Jason Feldman 0
EAS is when the government pays air carriers to fly to destinations that are not profitable just so that those towns aren't cut off from air carrier service. Basically if a 19 seat plane is empty the government will subsidize the airline to fly to that town anyway, everyday.

It's nuts. Either there is a need or not. But taxpayers money flying to the middle of nowhere- bs. God forbid someone in bumblefuck has to drive to a city to catch a flight
devsfan
ken young 0
EAS should be abolished. The law that funded EAS is just another example of politicians taking care of their constituents at the expense of ALL American taxpayers.
These small airports are high fare stations and as such most people bypass them anyway.
There will be a few people who will be inconvenienced by a longer drive to a major airport, but so what? That is the price rural folks pay for living in the country. Ya can't have it both ways.
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
Come on Ken None of this can be fixed it should all be Abolished. If the FAA the DOT Homeland Security, and TSA gets off our back we could afford to fly to the small airports. We did for years before the FAA. Frointer flew to most small airports with American Made airplanes. After the FAA we hardly fly American Made AIrplanes at all. I am not much of a BABY BUSH fan but he has it right there is good and evil. The FAA is evil. In fact most of the US government is evil.
devsfan
ken young 0
...You see the FAA as unnecessary. OK. No argument there.
preacher1
preacher1 0
You know, probably as a whole, it may be unnecessary, as far as what Babbitt had to say about the non essential personnel he furloghed, BUT I just came off an Eagle round in which I DH from KFSM to KDFW, then a charter from KDFW to KLUB and back and then DH back to KFSM. Now, we hadn't much more than got on top out of KFSM and talking to center when the pilot gets handed off again and starts talking to DFW approach. Not much different leaving KDFW or coming back from KLUB. Who do ya'll gentlemen propose to handle all tha? Might not be too bad in between airports but there is a hell of a lot going on in or out of any hub????????
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
Well I can find my to Dallas Fort worth then I think That I can find my way to Lubbock. I would use the GPS to get to Fort Smith. I would look on my TCAS for any trafic. I might even turn the sound up on it to alert me of other traffic. I would then use my TAWS to see that I would not fly in to the ground. Then just like I would if I was going to KWWR I would get on the Raido and Broadcast my position to land at DFW. My goodness I think that we could do that. Wayne you could just bring your nanny along. In all Fairness we did have local controllers at OKC and TULSA before the FAA came in. As for ATC we broadcast our position to the VORs. Flight service kept up with us with Banna Boats and charts.
preacher1
preacher1 0
Kinda like driving down here in ice & snow; I could definitely find my way and I would know what I'd be doing and probably pretty much just as you said, but I would worry like hell about them other folks. I well remember those local controllers as we had them at FSM too, not really needed but with the ANG wing based there and light stuff in and out of Chaffee, it was nice to have them around. Biggest problem though, Dale, is that most folks flying today would not have the foggiest idea of what you speak.lol
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
I flew Beech 18s on Mail runs for Springdale Air for many years so I know FSM Well You are right most folks flying today would not have any idea. One thing that would be gone would the "Hub and Spoke" system that puts thousands of airplanes at one place at one time. I will bet that you did not know it but where DFW is today there was an airport larger than Love Field, Called Greater Southwest. Part of it is used for a taxiway at DFW. They had to come up with the "Wright Amendment" to make all the airlines but Southwest move from Love Field.
preacher1
preacher1 0
Well, the Hub and spoke is the thing. 1-200 mile control zone for any of them is not uncommon. Instead of an easy hop from KMEM to GSO&back here while back, I got swapped to ATL thanks to a schedule change by the almighty DAL and on a 757 rather than the CRJ I was planning on. Talk about a pucker left on that left seat. I do remember Greater Southwest; wasn't sure of the exact location. The Wright Amendment was actually put in place right before SWA started, cause they were trying to close Love and Herb pitched a fit, but dealt with it anyway. I think it expires next year or end of this one. Word I hear is that when it does that there will be a pretty good size realignment within SWA once they are unfettered.
You mention KWWR. I take it you are from out in that part of the world. I was raised down at Elgin, just North of Lawton;Army Brat. Dad at Sill for 10 years.
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
I always use Elgin to get around the Restricted area, and flew for Haliburton in the 70s Remember when you are changing planes ten times to get home that the Hub and Spoke system was an FAA invention. PS I loved Herb,saw him in Houston a couple of years ago, but remember he got a lot of backing from H L Hunt.
preacher1
preacher1 0
I can relate to that. I could stand on our back porch and watch artillery shells impact out on the range. I learned to drive on that road that bordered that portion of the range. Did you fly out of Duncan? I remember dad taking me by the Airport over there one night and seeing their plane that was based there; some type turboprop at that time, best I remember. That was in the early 60's sometime or other.
Daleroark
Dale Roark 0
Yes some I flew their Gulfstream one a little and flew a king air for them some. I worked for them out of Woodward but my home field was 93F.
preacher1
preacher1 0
I never made it up that way much. I'm outa here; looks like it's fixin to storm some. Later
captainjman
Jason Feldman 0
Don't get me wrong - controllers are a good thing. Even with them there are near misses. Without would be a nightmare given current tech. Even Using RA's is a violent maneuver. I'm sure in the future it tech can do much of the work we are just not there yet. Also, key personell that create flow control - edict times - opening and closing of approach and departure corridors closed - pilots like us don't see the big picture. We need that flight control center in DC. Weather dissemination - try to run ohare without a tower! It's the building of airports at the cost of billions for no reason like the middamerica airport. EAS, and I'm not sure what ramp checks if any have actually saved lives. I'm sure they found violations. But this is the same agency that said the air Alaska flight that went into the drink off the west coast due to a jackscrew was pilot error for a non thorough walk around - on an object 2 stories up UNDER the skin. The NTSB suggested it and the FAA ate it up because their number one job of the FAA is to protect airlines best interest - not our safety. But that is the enforcement division - controllers are very Important. I fly to controlled and non controlled airports and it's a cluster when it's busy - I don't want to see a day where heavy jets start hot dogging cutting off others or trying to coordinate arrivals spaced 3 miles apart all day long around the clock? Yeah we need controllers from ground to center

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss