FAA Wants EAA To Pay Them To Staff Oshkosh l

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

No regulatory reason they couldn't do so even after the start of AirVenture.

---

There also is no regulatory reason for charging for ATC services.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FloridaJohn

There also is no regulatory reason for charging for ATC services.

---

Nor is there any regulatory reason to provide a level of service specified by a *user* of the service, vs. the agency that provides the services. Note that the FAA felt that the Oshkosh tower was not sufficiently needed, to the point where (a couple of months back) it was on the closure list. Doesn't sound like the FAA thinks it's that important.

My city allows me park free in front of my house. Police come around occasionally to, among other things, check if the curb area is being used legally. If I demanded the city, one week out of every year, put up "Reserved Parking for Ron Wanttaja" sign and station a police officer to enforce the sign, I wouldn't expect that service to be provided for free.

Ron Wanttaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

What would be unsafe? If the controllers get overwhelmed, they close the airport. If pilots run out of gas or suffer mid airs, it's their fault...they violated regulations, it's not the FAA's responsibility. That's how the Feds will spin it.

About 45 years ago, thousands of hippies decided to converge on a small North Dakota town. Massive criminal acts occurred. Was it the fault of the members of the part-time police force of the ~200 town residents?

Ron Wanttaja

---

Hmmmm....hippies...the 60's... Hey, I got it! We all start growing beards, find some tie-dyed clothes, big signs, and picket the FAA building this year :-) My sign...."FAA would rather promote themselves than safety"

In Ron's scenario, I suspect the courts would find fault with the local PD if they knew several years in advance that the mob was coming, and chose not to adequately staff and prepare. Even more so if they closed the PD and went home. I don't have a juris doctorate, but I can spell it! :-)

Peace and love (we already have the Rock & Roll ...Chicago on opening day)! ROFL!!

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FloridaJohn

There also is no regulatory reason for charging for ATC services.

---

In other words, if the FAA can charge users for ATC services at Airventure, then they can charge user fees anytime and anywhere they deem its appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martymayes

In other words, if the FAA can charge users for ATC services at Airventure, then they can charge user fees anytime and anywhere they deem its appropriate.

---

The FAA is not charging for ATC services at AirVenture. They've demanded payment for an extra level of service that a private corporation has requested.

Land's sake, folks. I don't think I've been on an aviation forum that hasn't decried big government, and pushed for a reduction in entitlements. We may not *like* that AirVenture is affected, but this sort of action is exactly what folks have been demanding.

Ron Wanttaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Berson

If 5000 volunteers work at Airventure for free to run the event, why can't controllers serve for a few hours out of the week like other volunteers?
Is there a shortage of people willing to do this?
I know the controllers do request to be sent for Oshkosh duty, for the fun of it, apparently.

---

Unfortunately, that would be illegal under federal law. My wife, as a fed, was told in no uncertain terms what would happen to her if she were to do any government work while on furlough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

Why not? They either issue an updated NOTAM, or cancel it entirely. No regulatory reason they couldn't do so even after the start of AirVenture.

Ron Wanttaja

---

Things can change. A lot of the procedures went out the window or were heavily modified during sloshkosh the year before last.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

The FAA is not charging for ATC services at AirVenture. They've demanded payment for an extra level of service that a private corporation has requested.

Land's sake, folks. I don't think I've been on an aviation forum that hasn't decried big government, and pushed for a reduction in entitlements. We may not *like* that AirVenture is affected, but this sort of action is exactly what folks have been demanding.

Ron Wanttaja

---

Then We as a aviation community need to rethink closing FAA and contract towers that are underutilized for service that we do need. Close the unwanted Towers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

The FAA is not charging for ATC services at AirVenture. They've demanded payment for an extra level of service that a private corporation has requested.

---

A distinction without a difference, in my opinion.

I haven't seen any request by EAA for additional ATC services. Could you point me to the document that shows this?

The only thing I have seen is a document from the FAA outlining a procedure to ensure safe operations that must be staffed by FAA personnel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

Note that the FAA felt that the Oshkosh tower was not sufficiently needed, to the point where (a couple of months back) it was on the closure list. Doesn't sound like the FAA thinks it's that important.

---

Do you think that list was created for safety reasons or political reasons? The data I have seen points to political reasons.