I posted a story last week about the FAA hatching a poorly thought-out plan to bring in revenue by charging charting companies for their use of FAA digital data. As part of this plan the agency would also prohibit individuals from obtaining the data. The story has generated a lot of response from pilots and developers, and nearly every one of them is deeply disturbed by the plan.
It's the appropriate response. The plan is disturbing on so many levels that it's hard to know where to start.
1. It's disturbing because it's essentially a user fee. The FAA charges iPad developers; they charge pilots. It can't work any other way.
2. It's disturbing because of the half-baked process the FAA has used to implement the plan. In fact, it's too complementary to refer to the scheme as a "plan" or to call the way it's being rolled out a "process." If I were being chartitable, I'd describe it as a huge fiasco, and I'm not feeling all that charitable. I'm reminded of when Mayor Daley the younger bulldozed Meigs Field under cover of darkness.
3. It's disturbing because the FAA doesn't really have the authority to do this--by statue, the agency is not allowed to charge for the costs of collecting the data, only for distributing it. But they're trying to do it anyway.
4. It's disturbing because the FAA hasn't announced what it plans to charge us. Experience tells me that when there's not a price on something, it's because the seller desparately wants the buyer not to know the price until it's too late. That's never because the price is too low.
5. It's disturbing because Aeronav knows that digital data on the iPad puts current charts in the hands of tens of thousands of pilots--or more--who otherwise would have been flying with outdated charts and they're pulling this stunt anyway. What are they more interested in, safety or revenue? It's hard not to come up with an unflattering conclusion here.
6. It's disturbing becasue the FAA has asked industry insiders to sign a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) in order to get briefed on Aeronav pricing plans. There can only be one reason for that: Aeronav doesn't want the public to know.
In other words, the entire sordid affair is so deeply disturbing on so many levels it just needs to be abandoned.
If there's a silver liining here, it's that our story has spawned a lot of response and a call to action. There is an online petition on the White House website asking for Aeronav to cancel its plans to charge for the data. Seattle Avionics, which supplies data to many app developers and other navigation companies is putting on a free webinar to discuss the details as they're known today.
I'll be there, but based on the FAA's approach to this "process," I don't expect they'll have anything to say on the subject.
Comments (9)
Post a comment
All Comments
Submitted by Mserrano on November 23, 2011.
I just signed the petition mentioned on the WhiteHouse.gov website. I was shocked to see the required signatures threshold has been increased from 5,000 (threshold for the anti-User Fees petition) to 25,000. The window for signatures closes December 14th so I would urge everyone to sign the petition. As a side note, I find it very interesting that the White House seems to be setting the bar ever higher when it comes to these petitions which are supposed to give the public a direct line to the Administration.
Submitted by Claudio on November 23, 2011.
Also interesting that the WhiteHouse.gov site is buggy. It took several tries (and about half an hour) to create an account in order to sign the petition. How to get fewer signatures? Just foul up the collection process.
Submitted by Philip Miller on November 23, 2011.
I just went on to the White House web site and couldn't find the location of the petition. I want to sign but don't know where.
Submitted by Dite on November 23, 2011.
Robert,
Can you post the exact trail to getting to the petition? I want to sign up but my searches don't locate it. I believe there are probably hundreds/thousands of us who will sign the petition if it is easily located.
Submitted by hbocprojects on November 23, 2011.
I singed the petition, but who are we kidding here? This administration has made it abundantly clear that they view all levels of aviation as something for the evil rich, well beyond the range of the sheeple.
'Fees' are the new taxes. They can implement them all over the place and avoid the whole ugly mess of trying to expand the tax code any further. If they even consider this petition, it will be a miracle. The decision has been made and we are all going to have to pay; and pay through the nose we will.
Up next:
Landing Fees
DUATS Fees
1-900 number for filing flight plans
Aviation Fuel Fees
Etc...
Submitted by pilotart on November 24, 2011.
Here is the URL directly to the whitehouse.gov page to sign the petition:
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/%21/petition/ask-faa-reversal-char...
You will need to register once and remember password/username to return.
Submitted by williamsvaughn on November 24, 2011.
As both an accredited risk manager with significant aerospace industry experience and an active CFI who rarely sees a current pay-for-play databases but lots of digital or printed NACO plates, I KNOW that there WILL be fatalities associated with the implementation of this ill-advised scheme. The societal costs associated with each such fatality are significant. The expected (in a statistical context) number of fatalities over a given time frame and the expected associated costs can, and should have been, calculated by the FAA. The question is, have they been? If they have, what was the projection? Just doing a "back-of-the-envelope" calculation (and even assuming that Aeronav will adopt a hyper-aggressive Jeppensen-esque pricing model) suggests that this initiative cannot be justified as its revenues will surely be overwhelmed by its losses.
Submitted by gregifly on November 27, 2011.
Personally, I think that the FAA should charge for the data. Afterall, it's revenue lost on digital publications vs the paper ones. I also don't believe that anything the government does should be paid for by other tax payers. Any other business or organization should and does charge for information and if they don't, then they must make up the loss in other ways. I prefer that the loss not be made up through my tax dollars. If I want the data, then I'll pay for it. When are we as a nation and people, including pilots going to wake up and stop thinking that the government should give us anything???!!! Stop taxing me and I'll pay for what I want. User fees is a different issue. If the fuel tax isn't enough to cover the expenses, then increase the tax or find some other means to collect the revenue. Aviation isn't expensive because of the fees. It's expensive because of all the red tape. I think we are all adults and can make decisions for ourselves.
Charge for the data. I would if it was my business providing the data. Stop complaining Robert.
Greg Smith, CFI, CFII, MEI, AGI
Submitted by robert goyer on November 28, 2011.
Last time I checked, Greg, the FAA's principle charge was to make our skies safe. This will have the opposite effect. It's a short-sighted money grab, plain and simple, with a lot of subterfuge thrown in for good measure.
"Complaining" is the wrong word, here, friend. It's simply telling the truth.
Top Rated
Your Comment
All submitted comments are subject to the license terms set forth in our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
