FAA to Close 149 U.S. Airport Towers After Budget Cuts

The U.S. will close 149 air-traffic control towers run by contractors at small- and mid-sized airports beginning on April 7 as a result of automatic budget cuts at government agencies.

The Federal Aviation Administration spared 24 towers on its original list of 173 subject to closing, it said in an e-mail today. All the towers being shut down are run by private companies, not the government as at larger facilities.

Oh, dandy. Who were those people saying the sequestration wouldn't have any serious impact or we shouldn't worry so much?

The 15,000 controllers employed by the FAA will be forced to take one unpaid day off every two weeks starting April 21, which will aggravate delays at some of the busiest U.S. airports, including Chicago O’Hare and Atlanta’s Hartsfield- Jackson, he said.

The FAA must cut $627 million out of its $16 billion budget by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, Huerta said.

Source

I believe this is what it means to say the cuts are somewhat targeted, to say the least. We'll have maximum impact at the little person level......while the overall 85 billion is pennies over dollars to the trillions of overall spending happening or even deficit taken by itself each year. Pennies.....but awfully noticeable pennies, the way they are falling.

This is a story to give a bit more context to the one above and how this fits into the overall impact of the Sequestration. It comes from, of all places, ABC News. No Fox hit piece going on here for people sensitive about sources.

This was written before it started.

If the heads of 20 federal agencies are to be believed, disastrous consequences await if President Obama and Congress fail to reach a budget deal, triggering the automatic, across-the-board cuts known as "sequestration."

Those cuts are slated to begin March 1, and earlier this month, the Senate Appropriations Committee asked agency heads to explain what would happen in such a scenario.

(Source: 57 Terrible Consequences of the Sequester )

Now this is a bit dated for an article, as some may note. SOme may even say because it was written in February, it shouldn't count. Then, I'd note ...what #1 on that MSM generated list was.

1. Air Travel Disruption
After a $600 million Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) funding cut, furloughs would mean fewer air-traffic controllers and fewer flights.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood: "[A] vast majority of the FAA's nearly 47,000 employees will be furloughed for approximately one day per pay period until the end of the fiscal year in September, with a maximum of two days per pay period. ...

"The furlough of a large number of air traffic controllers and technicians will require a reduction in air traffic to a level that can be safely managed by the remaining staff. The result will be felt across the country, as the volume of travel must be decreased. Sequestration could slow air traffic levels in major cities, which will result in delays and disruptions across the country during the critical summer travel season. Aviation safety employees also would experience significant furloughs that will affect airlines, aviation manufacturers, and individual pilots, all of which need FAA safety approvals and certifications."

and note... the figure for the cut now? Is higher. We might also need to look over the rest of the list, since it seems to be prescient. This won't be pretty if Obama doesn't undo what he signed into law....and with Congress, not to spite them. The last part is, obviously, my opinion on how this is developing but it's gonna hurt if not fixed somehow.

All the towers being shut down are run by private companies, not the government as at larger facilities.

So people will be forced to go to government run TSA groping instead of using smaller airports that don't have to deal with that?

IF they are run by private companies how much government money are they getting?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I'm a controller, although i work for the DoD at a base. Not everyone will be given the same day off at the same time, it will be staggered so there is still coverage I'm sure.

As far as the government is concerned, it's all part of the game they play. Just constant electioneering.

Originally posted by neo96
So 149 Airports where the TSA won't get to grope people ?

I am fine with that.

No it's 149 airports where there will be no positive control. No one ensuring vehicles don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. No one ensuring planes don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. Higher risk for accidents.

Some of these small airports are busier than one might imagine. This is a very dangerous game they are playing right now. The contractors don't pay for TSA, DHS does and as far as I can tell they won't be furloughed. They'll still be there as people get onto planes.

Just because an air traffic facility is closed at these airports, that doesn't mean the airlines won't fly people in and out of them.

reply to post by Baldryck

No it's 149 airports where there will be no positive control. No one ensuring vehicles don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. No one ensuring planes don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. Higher risk for accidents.

Edited my post the cost associated with the above is not that much.

Some of these small airports are busier than one might imagine. This is a very dangerous game they are playing right now. The contractors don't pay for TSA, DHS does and as far as I can tell they won't be furloughed. They'll still be there as people get onto planes

I do know what goes on at airports considering worked at an international airport and a smaller FBO.

Looks to me like they are saying "See what you have done" questioning the Government and this is the result.

They will keep their wars and their F35's by golly but someone is going to pay.
That someone is the plain jane or dick who really does not need this bullcrap.

S&F
Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Here is something you missed Wrabbit!

The Federal Aviation Administration announced Friday that it will close 149 air traffic control towers, in a move one lawmaker said was akin to "removing stop lights and stop signs from our roads."

That lawmaker, Republican Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran, also claims the FAA could save the towers by tapping into millions of dollars in unspent FAA research money.

Yet the FAA moved forward Friday with plans to shut down the air traffic control facilities, describing them as a necessary cutback due to the sequester

Source

So apparently the funding and money is there, it is just that they "want to make it hurt"! Sound familiar?

Originally posted by Iwinder
Looks to me like they are saying "See what you have done" questioning the Government and this is the result.

They will keep their wars and their F35's by golly but someone is going to pay.
That someone is the plain jane or dick who really does not need this bullcrap.

S&F
Regards, Iwinder

That's about how I read it too. The ATC's are part of this problem and the delays by furlough are a serious thing. As noted above, I'm sure it won't stop coverage outside the ones having the tower outright shut down. However.... Hmm... Lets do some guessing here, by what we've seen so far. Just when do you think those furloughs are most likely to happen? Holiday weekends perhaps? Other periods of traditional high demand? Why not? It'll turn the screws just a hair more than they were otherwise. That seems to be the point, indeed.

Bad times.... Crazy leadership, on all sides at the top.

reply to post by seeker1963

Great catch! Thanks! I wonder how many seminars and fancy conventions they've had and still have planned in places we'd all love to vacation in our own lives? I'd say they ought to have to cut the structural costs like that before a dime is touched in the rank & file, daily working level. Every last dime needs to be squeezed from the TOP down.

I'll bet they wouldn't even get close to the guys at the bottom given the amount they need to cut, if they did it the right way. Nope... Maximum impact, maximum pain. We'll be crying uncle soon enough, I guess they figure. They're probably right too.

Originally posted by Iwinder
Looks to me like they are saying "See what you have done" questioning the Government and this is the result.

They will keep their wars and their F35's by golly but someone is going to pay.
That someone is the plain jane or dick who really does not need this bullcrap.

S&F
Regards, Iwinder

You forgot the "Robo-Squirrel".

People need to wake up to this crap.

Of course this is absolute crap. Hands up anyone who has heard of 10 management positions being axed in say management services or the assistant to the assistant pooh-bar.

How about cuts to the salaries of the 100 highest paid in each department. How about axing the deadwood in personnel services, public relations or advertising.

How about dropping back on the external consultants that feed from the golden money trough.

Give me a break! I spent 25 years in the Public Sector. It is easy as to cut 10-15% of a budget without impacting front line services. It just never happens.

This is just a dog and pony show!

P

Local paper this affecting the Victoria regional airport (TX) .

FAA grounds Victoria air traffic control funding

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


How many of those could have remained open had Crazy Uncle Joe not stayed at London and Paris hotels to the tune of 1 million dollars to the American taxpayers?

Remember this folks... Socialism is always for the subjects, not the Socialists.

Smoke and mirrors.

To me it goes hand in hand with the email that was leaked a week or two ago where the Administration was asked if there was lee-way in applying the cuts and the Admin responded to basically make the cuts as painful as possible.

As said, it's all about "How dare you question this Gov and it's spending habits...I'll make all of you pay"...

I guess it's just a sign of the times. Apparently there no problem creating infinite money in a computer that they give to the banks...that they send the bill to the People for...and then turn around and charge you interest if you borrow that money from the banks...that's right...they are charging you for money they have already sent you the bill for...nice eh?

Also...I think it is as another poster said, to force you through the "grope and humility" lines of the bigger airports.

reply to post by Jeremiah65

It really is a shocking thing to see, to view anyone in top national leadership DELIBERATELY SET OUT to cause pain among the population. That's flat out unheard of in my life experience as an American.

While I know, they've done it...probably back to the days of Washington. SAYING it openly, and where it may as well have been directly to the MSM, IS something disturbingly fresh. They ALWAYS do more of everything than what is said or indicated. SO if this is the level of contempt they are now very comfortable with us knowing they hold us in....whats the actual truth at THIS point?

I think they see the whole lot of us as their personal enemies. We stand between them and the textbook perfection of whatever the heck it is they're trying to form the nation into at this point. I've stopped trying to figure it out. It's not even Socialism. Ask Northern Europe if this is their system he's pushing and I'm sure they'd be horrified to be asked that.

My son is a pilot and this bothers him. When the drones are up and about he said it is going to be like the Wild, Wild West.

The airport in Carbondale (Southern IL) is the 2nd busiest in the state and it is on the list.

USA is going down as planned.

Thanks Obama and company. Own this!

Originally posted by Baldryck

Originally posted by neo96
So 149 Airports where the TSA won't get to grope people ?

I am fine with that.

No it's 149 airports where there will be no positive control. No one ensuring vehicles don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. No one ensuring planes don't enter the runway while a plane is landing or departing. Higher risk for accidents.

Some of these small airports are busier than one might imagine. This is a very dangerous game they are playing right now. The contractors don't pay for TSA, DHS does and as far as I can tell they won't be furloughed. They'll still be there as people get onto planes.

Just because an air traffic facility is closed at these airports, that doesn't mean the airlines won't fly people in and out of them.

I come at this in a way that I hope does not offend anyone. I flew 8.5 years in the military, 8+ years as a corporate pilot and finally 25 years for a major air carrier who could afford my own show/acrobatic aircraft. None of which makes me feel like an expert just a survivor...so with that in mind here we go.....I have been to many airshows with no tower. It was not unusual to land 350 aircraft in a period of a couple of hours without a problem except for a few go-arounds due to someone not clearing the runway in a timely manner.. Take your highly skilled controllers with all their snitch computer software rules and regulations and they are lucky to get 60 aircraft on the ground in an hour in a TCA environment. We (pilots) have/had procedures for non-controlled airports which have worked very well since Wilbur.

A close call with regards to a mid-air collision was in radar contact 3 miles north of IAH (George Bush International) in my aircraft. A Cessna 172 passed directly below me at considerably less than 500 ft. I saw him coming but I doubt he saw me...I asked the controller if he had the traffic and he said "no, oh wait I have a primary target only. Did I get his tail number"?

The Cessna had busted the TCA boundaries and to keep from having to talk to or get an ATC clearance around or through the TCA so he/she had just turned off his transponder thinking to sneak through.

Houston went through a short Butt head period and used to be a real pain when requesting clearance through the TCA; many times they would just say "remain clear". ATC knew my tail number and really never hassled me but I certainly heard others who were not so lucky. There were many/few? who seemed to think o.k. Houston you want to be a butt and make me fly an extra 30 minutes and burn fuel then catch me if you can....They caught some but many they did not.

In spite what some would have you believe aircraft fly just fine and make 1000s of take-offs and landing everyday without ATC or tower controllers. Union will scream bloody murder with teeth, hair, and eyeballs all over the runway but in reality things will be just fine IMO.

Now, as others have posted the cut is for the rank and file not where the big waste and bucks are...I have to face palm every time I read or hear someone who believes the government can do anything in a cost effective way without waste or semi-efficiently. Put another way, "If some ran their business like the government runs theirs they wouldn't have a business to run".

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
My son is a pilot and this bothers him. When the drones are up and about he said it is going to be like the Wild, Wild West.

The airport in Carbondale (Southern IL) is the 2nd busiest in the state and it is on the list.

USA is going down as planned.

Thanks Obama and company. Own this!

edit on 3/23/2013 by sad_eyed_lady because: (no reason given)

Obama and company????....... the congress holds the purse strings and you blame this on obama?...what next, blame Obama for not having your daily bowel movement?
wait till the republicans get control....goodbye medicare, social security, and anything helping the poor middle class.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Here is something you missed Wrabbit!

The Federal Aviation Administration announced Friday that it will close 149 air traffic control towers, in a move one lawmaker said was akin to "removing stop lights and stop signs from our roads."

Source

that made me laugh pretty good living in a place that has few stoplights and seemingly fewer stop signs, just makes that point fall rather flat. i would think they are trying to say that the result of these cuts will mean many accidents, and chaos. yet what i have noticed is that without stop signs and stoplights that is just not true. traffic sometimes seems to flow better without them, in fact when we have a traffic jam on my street it is normally CAUSED by someone DIRECTING TRAFFIC. there also don't seem to be as many accidents, (especially bad ones), excepting of course the insane motorcyclists that like to full speed ram stopped cars, or get caught between the vehicles they are weaving through.

still i don't think it is a good thing to do. aren't air traffic controllers already overworked and stressed out, that can lead to aircraft accidents?