Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Tower Closings Delayed...

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    David Pavlich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Mandeville, LA...humidity central
    Posts
    139

    Tower Closings Delayed...


  2. #2
    Joe Delene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    327
    I can go either way with this, closed or not. I do think they could find $$ elsewhere, the cuts do seem minor. We have to do something. Maybe give the President a 'line item veto' if Congress can't act. If it's that important Congress can later over-ride the veto & put the item in.

    We've kicked this battered can down the road about as far as we could. The road is a dead end with nothing but swamp ahead. It's also about impossible if over half the federal budget is off the table, growing on auto-pilot all the time.

  3. #3
    Mayhemxpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia
    Posts
    800
    And that is why we have three branches of government. None are close to perfect. Together they should work at cross purposes enough to keep liberty and freedom relatively safe. (Save me from an efficient government.)

    Anyway, to get back on point, the issue is safety, not the quickest way to cut costs. The threat of litigation has forced the FAA to do what it should have done in the beginning. And three cheers for the States and local governments who have said they will fund the towers themselves. They recognize the safety and commercial benefits of towered airports at select locations.

  4. #4
    Sirota's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    166
    I recognize the slippery slope concern about the governmenttaking anything away from aviation but I got'a tell you, this is our tax moneyand SOME of these towers are a waste of money. I can only speak about KRYN and it needs to go. There is no way there's sufficient traffic tosupport it and many of the controllers are rude and surly.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    16

    Disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirota View Post
    I recognize the slippery slope concern about the governmenttaking anything away from aviation but I got'a tell you, this is our tax moneyand SOME of these towers are a waste of money. I can only speak about KRYN and it needs to go. There is no way there's sufficient traffic tosupport it and many of the controllers are rude and surly.
    KRYN needs to keep the tower. A lot of activity with parallel runways and an ILS.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    106
    According to the FAA, KYRN has over 122,466 operations per year. That makes it the 9th busiest on the list of potential closures.

    In my opinion, that is busy enough to justify a tower. That tower is open 8.5 hours each day. That is about 39 operations each hour, or approximately one take off or landing every 1.5 minutes. Seems pretty busy to me.

    If I were king, I would take that original list, and every tower with less than 50,000 operations per year would be closed (there are 107 of those). There is just not enough traffic at that level to require a controller. Every tower with over 100,000 operations would remain open (there are 24 of those). I feel they have enough operations to justify a tower. The remaining towers (106 of those), with more than 50,000 operations but less than 100,000 operations, would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Most likely the majority of those would end of being closed, too.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •