← Back to Squawk list
  • 32

Ending 'holding pattern,' FAA cancels plan to close towers

제출됨
 
Washington (CNN) -- After several weeks of indecision, the Obama administration has decided against closing 149 contractor-run air traffic control towers due to sweeping budget cuts. The decision by the Transportation Department brought a "sigh of relief" from small- and medium-sized airports nationwide that would have been impacted by the closures. Those towers employ some 900 controllers and the airports employ a range of other workers. (www.cnn.com) 기타...

Sang Le
제트족주별 선정뉴스 정키최대 수 도달보좌열정자친구우등생 명부오늘의 픽탐험가비평가광사교인대변인아마추어 사진사홍보인애타주의자계화됨아나운서자서전 작가

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


markaz
markaz 1
Let the FAA take over all ATC functions. One or two man towers would undoubtedly be staffed with four-man FAA crews and then brag about employing more people while increasing the public's safety. Right.

Just leave airports alone, Mr. FAA.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
NF2G
David Stark 2
People are beginning to wake up to the lie that is "sequestration."

I want my stolen unemployment benefits back, too.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
Derg
Roland Dent 2
What do these folks eat for breakfast..Jack Daniels?
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
They don't have time for breakfast; their mouth is too busy telling lies.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
rwf1001
Robert Fleming 0
Glad to hear that!
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
More government hocus pokus. The obvious is that some should remain open and some should close. Rodeo clowns could run the FAA better.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
Foxtrot789
Foxtrot789 1
I feel like this will just help expedite 'user fees'. Poor GA... :(
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
canuck44
canuck44 8
This demonstrates the need for Congress to privatize the ATC functions of the FAA leaving the bureaucrats of the FAA oversight and regulatory duties. There will be more "budget" crises and if Congress funds the contract it will be immune from political tantrums as government is actually reined in to provide Constitution functions. NavCanada is an example of this working.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report
NF2G
David Stark 3
"[I]f Congress funds the contract" then we taxpayers will still be paying. Where do you think Congress gets money from?
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
Derg
Roland Dent 0
Big business...
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
NF2G
David Stark 1
Congresspersons get campaign money from "big business." The money they use to fund programs comes from taxpayers (including businesses).
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
Derg
Roland Dent 1
gottya thanks for advice..
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
99NY
99NY 5
Agreed, the official stance really should be "If you want it, you pay for it"
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
Av8nut
Michael Fuquay 5
Exactly, the airports should pay for it. If the airport is busy enough to justify keeping the controllers, they should have the money to pay them, not getting Uncle Sam to pay them. However, if they're like some of these airfields that only have a handful of movements per day, then they shouldn't have been in the first place!
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report
preacher1
preacher1 3
Well, if all our user taxes and fees went to the right fund instead of the general fund and paying for non aviation related things, there might be enough to support them. A good example is the highway trust fund. We can't upgrade highway infrastructure because they don't have the money. The reason they don't have the money is that they are subsidizing mass transit. There probably are a bunch of low use towers that could go away or be airport funded but cuts would be better done by using a little common sense and good numbers rather than a meat ax approach as they did.
응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

로그인

패스워드를 잊으셨나요?
계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
FlightAware에 참여하세요
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료