Question for Lefty

[Goober McTuber]

You are not very good with the google, 88. I found a couple of different references, though they are both old news.


This one speaks about private jets being able to be depreciated over 5 years instead of the 7 years allowed for commercial jets:

https://thinkprogress.org/republican-se ... 664fd8448d


This one speaks to the ability of corporations to provide private jets for their CEOs as a non-taxable benefit:

http://www.alternet.org/economy/private ... -loopholes


The above article also mentions this loophole:

In Florida, wealthy developers, lawmakers and even some corporations game the tax code by placing cows on their land for a limited amount of time each year, thereby qualifying for agricultural tax breaks. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-FL) has benefited from this absurd loophole for years, as has Disney World. But Florida isn’t the only offender. From rock stars in New Jersey to movie stars in Colorado, tax breaks meant for farmers get gamed by the most privileged, using everything from sheep to beehives.

[Goober McTuber]

You are not very good with the google, 88.

Nor are you, apparently. The "old news" references are not what I understood the radio advertisement to be talking about. So I did some more Googling. Here is the link I could not find:

http://www.ontimeflights.org/

I didn't see anything in there about tax breaks.

[Left Seater]

Lots of stuff going on here with what you might have heard on the radio. First and foremost there is a movement to have the FAA update and modernize the nation's Air Traffic Control infrastructure. Many of the groups that are pushing for this are also resorting to political type ads to get people on board.

I am sure the line about private jet tax breaks is included in the ad just to get the reaction that JSC posted here. Why are (wealthy) private jet owners getting tax breaks while (I am paying for the ATC system?) There are some tax breaks for private jet owners. Just like there are tax breaks for buying a Prius or Tesla. If you offer tax breaks for one form of transportation, why not for others? So the tax breaks really have nothing to do with the larger argument of the radio ad. Further the tax breaks for private jet owners would come no where near funding the ATC modernization that this radio ad wants. It is just a line or three to get the JSC reaction and hopefully more people looking into this ad and ATC modernization. For what it is worth, I don't think private jet owners should get a tax break for their jets. Just like there shouldn't be a tax break for a Prius or Tesla or for farming or ranching or paying your state taxes or your mortgage interest, etc, etc, etc. Get rid of every single tax break today and lower rates for everyone.

As for the ATC modernization it is certainly needed. Our current system operates off of a radar based system. Air Traffic controllers work off of paper strips instead of digital strips. Our system has no fallbacks or redundancy. If a TRACON goes down due to a loss of power or a snow storm, the area that is controlled by that TRACON comes to a stop. Further our current system wastes a ton of time and millions of gallons of fuel each month as it requires pilots to fly their planes hundreds of miles out of the most direct path. Instead of a radar based system we can and should move to a GPS based system. Here is an example of a standard flight path that I fly a bunch between San Antonio and Dallas.



This is an approximation but it is very close. It is close just over 400 miles. Meanwhile with a more modern ATC system the flight plan would look more like this:



This shorter route is under 300 miles. So it saves 120 miles on a short trip between San Antonio and Dallas and almost 20 minutes. Now multiply that across the 12 flights a day American Airlines flies each day from San Antonio to Dallas and the 10 flights Southwest flies between San Antonio and Dallas. (Note Southwest operates into Dallas Love Field, but the flight plan is quite similar.)

In a more modern ATC system the pilots would fly direct to a point near the destination airport where they would sequence for landing. Controllers would only get involved at take off and landing and if there were a potential conflict with another aircraft. This would save a ton of time and fuel and money.

Further it would increase safety. You may have seen the near miss in San Francisco a few weeks ago. An Air Canada flight from Toronto lined up on taxiway when attempting to land in San Francisco. Luckily one of the planes on the ground let ATC know they were lined up on the taxiway not the runway and the controller canceled their landing clearance. The Air Canada flight went around and landed safely. The issue with this situation though is the controllers can't tell with any degree of certainty where planes are with our radar based system. With a modern GPS based system the controller would have known that the Air Canada plane was lined up on the taxiway and could have stepped in when the plane was still miles from the airport.

So yeah, lots going on here. Questions?

[Goober McTuber]

Just blame Obama.

[Left Seater]

So where to start. I think most agree that the ATC system needs to be upgraded. The disagreements come in on how/who to pay for it.

Many people (myself included) think the FAA should be out of the Air Traffic Control game. As it is now they are the judge, jury, cop and driver of the car. They set the rules that they are supposed to follow, they self investigate, and rule on the same. ATC should be moved out of this org chart and someone else should handle ATC. But who and what should handle ATC. Trump has said that the ATC controllers should be privatized. Since he said it many are opposed just because he said it. Others like small airlines, airports and general aviation oppose how this privatization might happen. They are worried that the major airlines would control this new ATC group and make it hard on everyone but themselves. This is what is dominating the news cycles right now, but it is only a part of the ATC modernization discussion.

The major part is the way the infrastructure is paid for. Congress has the purse strings and each year the FAA has to fight a claw for each appropriation. This isn't an R or D thing either. Both sides have played games with funding the FAA. Any modernization effort is going to be a huge expenditure and take multiple years. Since Congress damn near refuses to spend money beyond one year, this project has been stalled for decades. What needs to happen is Congress needs to agree to spend the Billions of dollars over multiple years and be done with it. Pass something that says x billion $s will be appropriated each of the next 5 years and then pass something that prevents future Congresses from changing that. Problem with the Budget rules is that isn't possible. Further, as you heard in the radio ad, there are hundreds of ideas on where this funding should come from and many won't support it without increased taxes (more of the liberal position) or spending cuts elsewhere (more of the conservative position). Bottom line is those on both sides of the aisle are screwing the public on this and putting safety on the back burner.

I doubt we see any movement on this in the next few years. What it is going to take is another fire or outage at a TRACON or tower in Chicago, LA, NYC, Dallas, Houston, Miami etc that causes disruption of the aviation system for a few weeks and/or an accident that could have been prevented with better tech before things change.

[Left Seater]

I am actually pretty surprised that the environmental army hasn't raised a fuss over this. There is so much wasted fuel due to this outdated system that I can't believe they just sit on their hands on this.

Another example of wasted fuel happened tonight on approach to Kansas City. Most birds are equipped to handle a continuous descent approach. This means the onboard computer calculates the top of descent point where we can pull the throttles back to flight idle. We don't have to touch the throttles again until the wheels are on the runway. Instead what happened is we were given 5 stair steps on our approach. What this requires is we are given a clearance to a new altitude and we level off there waiting for further permission to descend. While maintaining said altitude we have to throttle up to keep the plane at the required altitude. This wastes time and fuel. But the ATC system can't handle this CDA approach unless there are only one or two airplanes in the sequence. Freaking disgrace.

[smackaholic]

88 nailed the problem. It has been "Washingtoned up".

Going to a new GPS based, computer controlled system would put thousands of very well paid ATCers out of work. These are all gubmint unionized folk. Good luck prying them out of their yobs.

As for the treehuggers, they don't give two fukks about a few gallons of fuel. They will not do anything to jeopardize their brothers in arms, the ATCers.

Hopefully Trump will follow with doing something about this mess. I don't think privatization is necessarily the answer. They just need to go to a highly automated control system.

I think there is another thing that ought to be considered.

Hi speed rail in the more densely populated areas.

The northeast corridor has well over a dozen cat X and cat 1 airports. It seems to me that a system consisting of fewer busier cat X airports with high speed rail spokes to current cat 1 locations.

Of course, such a system might put me out of a job, but unlike many folks on the federal teat, I have marketable skills and could find something else.

[Left Seater]

F'ing great discussion. Lefty, I want to ask you this:

What about autonomous planes? Once the GPS driven systems get into place it seems like a natural progression.

When do you see it coming for freight or passengers? Will you retire first?

We already have GPS and crazy detailed Auto Pilot systems. When the weather is bad, vis is near minimums, and approaching a busy airport, damn near all of us use auto land. Basically the plane flies the approach and we monitor. We are ready to take over in an instant if we don't like the approach of see something wrong.

One problem with this is some pilots lose their ability to fly. (See the Asian crash at SFO in vfr weather.)

Yes I would retire if this became widespread and I wouldn't be a lax in a plane without a human upfront. I would expect we would see this first in military applications before we saw it in cargo or commercial ops.

I still don't see how a cockpit without a human in it handles the alligator emergency I had a few years ago. Would a computer have seen the alligator 200 yards down the runway when the tower and ground radar didn't? Without my copilot looking outside we hit that beast and who knows what the outcome might have been.

I guess let me ask you a question, are you ready to turn driving of you car over to a computer when not all cars will have the same tech and you are still liable for any damage or injury to others?

[LTS TRN 2]

you unspeakable toxic fraud, how do you look in the mirror?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Laaq44SDgg

Hello, Henry..don't worry, the fake "trolls" don't see you or understand..

[Left Seater]

Good luck adding more rail until you stop the lawsuit abuse the environmental freaks can throw at such a project. High Spped rail has been studied to death here. Plans would have trains running between Dallas, Houston and Austin/San Antonio. Most of the tracks would be alongside existing interstate highways, 45, 35 and 10. But the environmental folks have succeeded in stalling every potential project thru lawsuits.

[smackaholic]

Seems like between the big cities in Tx, rail makes sense. 275 miles, downtown to downtown. A high speed train could easily do this in under 2 hours. That beats the hell out of air travel.

[BSmack]

Seems like between the big cities in Tx, rail makes sense. 275 miles, downtown to downtown. A high speed train could easily do this in under 2 hours. That beats the hell out of air travel.

And it takes roughly four hours to make the drive by car. I know I did the Houston to Dallas drive once. I don't regret for a minute not having to deal with the airport situation in Houston or Dallas.

[Softball Bat]

the airport situation in Houston or Dallas.

[Left Seater]

Seems like between the big cities in Tx, rail makes sense. 275 miles, downtown to downtown. A high speed train could easily do this in under 2 hours. That beats the hell out of air travel.

And it takes roughly four hours to make the drive by car. I know I did the Houston to Dallas drive once. I don't regret for a minute not having to deal with the airport situation in Houston or Dallas.

First off let me say that the TSA is a joke. Their war on water has lasted far too long and they continue to employ people that would have been fired in a normal company. Never mind they fail at their job repeatedly.

All that said, I never drive between Dallas and Houston. No need when there are sub hourly flights, for cheap. Plus with Clear and TSA PreCheck you can arrive at the airport 20 mins before your flight if you don't check a bag. Less than 2 hours vs 4 plus by car is a no brained for me. Same for San Antonio/Austin to Houston despite that being closer to a 3 hour drive. Forget even thinking about driving between San Antonio and Dallas.

[Bucmonkey]

Secede already...

[Left Seater]

Yeah, hopefully this Calexit II effort is successful.