Kathryn,
Nav Canada charges business aviation the same basic ICAO-compliant weight-distance fees that bizjets pay all over the world without apparent diminishment of the usefulness of business jets as a tool for doing business. My recollection is that the Canadian counterpart of NBAA was part of the aviation coalition (including controllers) that CEO John Crichton pulled together to design Nav Canada. In 2006 I did a policy study to quantify the impact of applying the Nav Canada ATC fees to 15 then-current bizjets in use in the United States. I obtained data on key parameters and performance for each, including average miles and hours flown per year. The outcome then compared what the operator of each one paid in user fees/taxes under current US aviation law and what they would pay using Nav Canada’s pricing model. For most of these aircraft, the annual charge worked out to about double what they paid as fuel taxes. A further set of calculations showed the break-even point for each jet, if the shift to a Nav Canada-type ATC system led to very modest reductions in flight hours (due to a modernized system). In most cases, if the new system saved about 5% of annual flight hours, the cost savings would offset the increase in user charges. “Business Jets and ATC User Fees” is available on the Reason.org website. My recollection from the early years of Nav Canada is that general aviation aircraft do not pay ATC user fees, as such. Instead, they pay an annual fee based on the gross weight of the aircraft. This gives them access to ATC services of use to GA. For single-engine piston aircraft, my recollection is that this amounted to a few hundred dollars per year. I have never heard of any concerns or lobbying against this by Canadian GA pilots or their counterpart of AOPA. Note, of course, that airport landing fees are set by Canadian airports, not Nav Canada, I have not looked into the extent to which GA-serving airports in Canada have landing fees. These facts about how business jets and GA aircraft interact with Nav Canada were completely ignored in the AOPA/NBAA propaganda campaign against Shuster’s ATC corporation bills. From: Kathryn Creedy via Mifnet <mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 1:42 PM To: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com Cc: Kathryn Creedy <kcre...@gmail.com> Subject: [Mifnet 🛰 72845] Re: Here's my ATC story Bob, laudable goals, especially considering this is only political theatre on the administration's part. You have long recognized Congress is part of the problem, not the solution. Michael, are you questioning that ATC does not have a safety problem? The entire aviation ecosystem, training, ATC and on and on has major safety problems which cannot be solved by government fiat or theatre. I'd like to see the specifics of the costs to private aviation at NavCanada vs the FAA, which were alluded to in this article. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2025/06/26/why-the-us-should-copy-canada-to-fix-its-broken-air-traffic-control-system/?utm_source=newsletter <https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2025/06/26/why-the-us-should-copy-canada-to-fix-its-broken-air-traffic-control-system/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailydozen&cdlcid=5e33380026f096d31d26a600> &utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailydozen&cdlcid=5e33380026f096d31d26a600 So, if costs rose for private aviation, what were the corresponding operational benefits that mitigated those costs? Private aviation is afraid of airline dominance which would be diff for Canada than the US. I'm afraid of airline dominance too because it has such a negative impact on the consumer. But how does it play out elsewhere? Cheers -- Kathryn On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 1:05 PM R. Michael Baiada via Mifnet <mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> > wrote: Bob, While I was not asking you directly, I appreciate the response. * Increase safety by separating ATC safety regulation (FAA) from ATC service provision (Air Traffic Organization). Self-regulation is a conflict of interest; ICAO called for this kind of organizational separation in 2001 and most countries have done this. While it may be a conflict of interest, how does privatization directly “Increase safety by separating ATC safety regulation (FAA) from ATC service provision (Air Traffic Organization)” and by how much (e.g. 10%, 20%, etc.). * Properly finance and rebuild a capital-investment-starved system with ancient technology and aging, sometimes-decrepit facilities. While I agree, does anyone have a breakdown of the age of the US ATC systems, system by system? Exactly which are “decrepit”? Many systems have been replaced in the last 20 years (ERAM, STARS, etc.). Exactly which systems need to be replaced first, and in what order and timetable? * Restore professional staffing, such as systems engineers, to free the Air Traffic Organization from dependence on aerospace contractors. I agree. * Increase productivity, as Nav Canada has done. Productivity of what, and by how much? How is Nav Canada’s productivity measured and how is higher than FAA’s? I believe that a new ATC system needs much more specific goals. FAA has been told to work harder, do better and spend more for decades, without success. In what way does Privatization change this? Before we conclude that Privatization is better for FAA, we need many more answers. Thanks, Michael xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx R. Michael Baiada ATH Group, Inc. cell - (303) 521-6047 <mailto:rmbai...@greenlandings.net> rmbai...@greenlandings.net <http://www.greenlandings.net/> www.GreenLandings.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The information contained in this email (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-252 and is confidential and proprietary and should be treated as such. The information contained herein may contain ATH Group, Inc. Privileged/Proprietary Information and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by email or telephone, and destroy the original message and any copies thereof in whatever medium stored. Information contained in this message that does not relate to the business of ATH Group, Inc. is neither endorsed by nor attributable to ATH Group, Inc. Thank you. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: bob.poole--- via Mifnet <mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 09:15 To: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> Cc: bob.po...@reason.org <mailto:bob.po...@reason.org> Subject: [Mifnet 🛰 72843] Re: Here's my ATC story My goals for ATC “corporatization” in one form or another are to: * Increase safety by separating ATC safety regulation (FAA) from ATC service provision (Air Traffic Organization). Self-regulation is a conflict of interest; ICAO called for this kind of organizational separation in 2001 and most countries have done this. * Properly finance and rebuild a capital-investment-starved system with ancient technology and aging, sometimes-decrepit facilities. * Restore professional staffing, such as systems engineers, to free the Air Traffic Organization from dependence on aerospace contractors. * Increase productivity, as Nav Canada has done. Those goals are absent in the “brand new air traffic system” proposal, which would subsidize a poorly performing status quo. Nav Canada demonstrates all four of these improvements, as the Forbes article explains. Bob Poole From: ATHGroup--- via Mifnet <mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 11:25 AM To: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> Cc: athgr...@baiada.com <mailto:athgr...@baiada.com> Subject: [Mifnet 🛰 72841] Re: Here's my ATC story Before the US embarks on ATC Privatization, we should build a detailed plan and identify the program goals, which I have yet to see. So far, all I hear about is throwing more money at FAA to buy new equipment. If ATC Privatization is meant to lower FAA’s costs, this is an admirable goal, but what is the target reduction and how is planned to be achieved? If ATC Privatization is meant to increase ATC efficiency, by how much and what does increasing ATC efficiency mean? If ATC Privatization is meant to reduce airline delays, it will never happen since ATC is not the root cause of airline delays. Does Nav Canada, NATS or Eurocontrol have less delays than the US (at airports with comparable traffic density)? In my 40 years of flying, I did not notice any appreciably difference in the ATC function or service anywhere in the world. Finally, as long as the airlines sit on the sidelines as cheerleaders instead of participants/leaders, while refusing to define how they want to fly their aircraft, little will change. Michael xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx R. Michael Baiada cell - (303) 521-6047 rmbai...@greenlandings.net <mailto:rmbai...@greenlandings.net> From: bob.poole--- via Mifnet <mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 08:01 To: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> Cc: bob.po...@reason.org <mailto:bob.po...@reason.org> Subject: [Mifnet 🛰 72840] FW: Here's my ATC story Here is an article on ATC reform just out from Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2025/06/26/why-the-us-should-copy-canada-to-fix-its-broken-air-traffic-control-system/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: 20250507 You are receiving The Mifnet because you requested to join this list. The Mifnet is largely a labor of love, however the infrastructure isn't exactly cost-free. If you'd care to make a small contribution to the effort, please know that it would be greatly appreciated: https://wardell.us/url/mifbit All posts sent to the list should abide by these policies: 1) List members acknowledge that participation in Mifnet is a privilege--not a right. 2) Posts are always off the record, absent specific permission from the author. 3) The tone of discussions is collegial. 4) Posts are expected to be in reasonably good taste. 5) We discuss ideas and not personalities, and we don't speak ill of other Mifnet members. * The Mifnet WEB SITE is: https://www.mifnet.com/ * To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list at any time please visit: https://lists.mifnet.com/ OR: SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=leave <http://mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=leave> * Send Mifnet mailing list POSTS/SUBMISSIONS to: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet@lists.mifnet.com> * You may reach the person managing The Mifnet at: mifnet-ow...@lists.mifnet.com <mailto:mifnet-ow...@lists.mifnet.com> * Please consider the DIGEST version of The Mifnet, which consolidates all list traffic into 1-3 messages daily. See instructions at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * Manage your personal Mifnet SUBSCRIPTION at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * For a list of all available Mifnet commands, SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=help <http://mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=help> * View The Mifnet LIST POLICIES and PRIVACY POLICY at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/policies * View instructions for Mifnet DELIVERY PROBLEMS at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/delivery-problems * View The Mifnet LIST ARCHIVE at: https://lists.mifnet.com/hyperkitty/list/mifnet@lists.mifnet.com/ -- Kathryn Creedy PHONE # 321 405 4395 US-Eastern Time Zone Twitter: @kcreedy Visit me on LinkedIn
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: 20250507 You are receiving The Mifnet because you requested to join this list. The Mifnet is largely a labor of love, however the infrastructure isn't exactly cost-free. If you'd care to make a small contribution to the effort, please know that it would be greatly appreciated: https://wardell.us/url/mifbit All posts sent to the list should abide by these policies: 1) List members acknowledge that participation in Mifnet is a privilege--not a right. 2) Posts are always off the record, absent specific permission from the author. 3) The tone of discussions is collegial. 4) Posts are expected to be in reasonably good taste. 5) We discuss ideas and not personalities, and we don't speak ill of other Mifnet members. * The Mifnet WEB SITE is: https://www.mifnet.com/ * To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list at any time please visit: https://lists.mifnet.com/ OR: SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=leave * Send Mifnet mailing list POSTS/SUBMISSIONS to: mifnet@lists.mifnet.com * You may reach the person managing The Mifnet at: mifnet-ow...@lists.mifnet.com * Please consider the DIGEST version of The Mifnet, which consolidates all list traffic into 1-3 messages daily. See instructions at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * Manage your personal Mifnet SUBSCRIPTION at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * For a list of all available Mifnet commands, SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: mifnet-requ...@lists.mifnet.com?subject=help * View The Mifnet LIST POLICIES and PRIVACY POLICY at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/policies * View instructions for Mifnet DELIVERY PROBLEMS at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/delivery-problems * View The Mifnet LIST ARCHIVE at: https://lists.mifnet.com/hyperkitty/list/mifnet@lists.mifnet.com/
