Does anyone else find it irony to see probably a whole bunch of Republicans
whining about cuts to air traffic controllers when Reagan fired thousands of
The cuts are just beginning. the tea party wants ten times more.
bodgerdlueKearns, UT"Honestly. When you folks talk about wanting
to cut the Federal budget, where did you think the money was going to get cut
from?"Well it would be too much to ask to cut really stupid
programs like Obamaphones or Obamacare because the president likes the names of
those programs, or to simplify the tax code and cut 25% of the IRS, or to cut
medical research grants even though they only yield outrageous priced treatments
that don't work any better than most of the old standard treatments, they
just cost more so the drug companies and medical equipment manufacturers glut
themselves on the money of the sick and the taxpayers. Heaven forbid capable
adults have their welfare or unemployment reduced, or we quit paying people to
not work for 2 years. And please, don't cut the Head Start Program, it
needs more money because it isn't doing any good now.With Obama
in the white house, I expected the cuts to be purely political pawns, just like
they are. "You made me cut spending, so I will make it as awful
as I can," says the king.
I'm a pilot and I have landed at a number of airports in Utah over the last
twenty years. I remember Provo before they finally got a tower in 2005. It was a
dangerous airport. It has grown considerably and I would be very concerned about
operating there with air traffic control.
Unfortunately, Switcheroo is right. But perhaps a lot of it has to do with the
cost of flying nowdays. After 9/11, Dick Cheney and others were convinced that
someone was going to load an atom bomb into a J-3 and fly it into a building.
Insurance costs skyrocketed and everything else followed.
Actually, there are some places where localities do fund their own control
towers. The controllers are paid by the city or county or whatever, but are FAA
trained and certified. It works very well. But that would mean
that Ogden and Provo would be forced to put their money where their mouths are.
Can that happen in Utah?
Correction:@Steve Cottrell.... these people love local control, it
is the local funding they are NOT so in love with.my bad... ; (
It's really a loosing battle. The pilot population is aging, teenagers
don't even care if the get their driver's licenses any more let alone
the rigors and expense of a pilot's certificate. General
aviation is shrinking, most of our airports don't have enough traffic to
need a tower so there's no need. By not having the towers manned at slower
airports they can concentrate on the airports that need more controllers. Personally I liked my local airport better without the tower. I
don't like having to ask permission to take off.
@Steve Cottrell.... these people love local control, it is the local funding
they are so in love with.
With less air traffic, wouldn't safety actually go up? We always hear how
crowded the skies are. If pilots already have a procedure for take offs and
landings without a tower, than I am not sure what the problem is. I do like
Steve Cottrell's idea of locally trained controllers, but I am sure the FAA
has some rule about it, since they wouldn't want to give up control.
Could local airports train and fund their own traffic controllers? Just a
question. Utahans who so strongly support local control might consider such an
To bodgerdlue:Reliever airports are critical and integral to the
safe operation of SLC International. Without them ALL air traffic would be sent
to SLC seriously compromising the safety of operations there. The students at
Provo would be forced into Class A operations at SLC as would the sail plane
pilots at Heber or Cedar Valley. Commercial or private pilots in rural towns
would have to land in SLC and find transportation to these outlying areas. And heaven forbid that I have an emergency and not have a reliable
runway somewhere nearby I could safely put down on instead of a rare open field
or vacant roadway with utility wires strung across it. Or would you have us
compete with the military at HAFB or the big operators at SLC? Towered or not, reliever or secondary airports are essential. SLC would not be
able to handle all the traffic if it were centralized only there. You,
obviously, are not a pilot and have no concept of the ramifications of your
‘Cutting control towers will make airspace less safe, reduce air traffic,
harm the economy’----Yes, when a person, a family
a state or a nation spends like there is no tomorrow on things they don't
really need, the day does come when they can't afford the things they do
Although it will require more alertness and care from pilots, we can get along
fine without towers at Provo, Ogden and other smaller airports. We already have
procedures in place. In fact, the Ogden tower is open only from 6 a.m. to 8
p.m. on any day. By using a common traffic advisory frequency, called UNICOM,
pilots fly established traffic patterns and advise other pilots of our positions
and intentions.The one thing that worries me a bit at Ogden is the
interface between military traffic in and out of Hill and traffic using
Ogden's Hinckley airport. It was comforting having the controllers keep us
advised. But if no one busts the altitude limits, we'll be okay.
Honestly. When you folks talk about wanting to cut the Federal budget, where
did you think the money was going to get cut from? When you cut the budget real
programs, real jobs, and real people are affected.And as to the
question about the political motivations of the cuts- did you think they were
going to cut air traffic controller jobs from LAX or JFK so that Provo and Ogden
could keep their air traffic controllers? Why do we even need these airports
when you have Salt Lake International right in between the two? The same goes
for many of these rural airports. Just because you're in a Republican
district, why do we need to keep these tiny airports afloat?
Talking about cutting the budget is easy..... it's the doing that is a bit
more complicated. To the one rep. who thinks this is being done on
political lines, well... yes, they probably are. Conservative districts by in
large are represented by rural districts. Urban district are largely more
liberal leaning. Air traffic will have higher densities in urban cooridors...
and have lessor densities in rural cooridors. It just so happens to align
politically as well. Sorry... it is what it is.Let the cutting