4 ms·

> U.S. debate to privitize air-traffic control spotlights Canada Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work we

> U.S. debate to privitize air-traffic control spotlights Canada Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work well and efficiently...

pubman 11y ago
It works well for them. Keep in mind the US has thousands of more airports and significantly more air traffic. Just like in the tech world something might work for 100 users of an app but may not work at scale. I am not bashing the NAV Canada system just saying the comparisons to the US ATC aren't apples to apples for numerous reasons.
- pj_mukh 11y ago
  I think, the guys who built the system for a 100 airports probably know best how to change the system for a 1000 airports while preserving all its advantages. Maybe NavCanada can slowly scale up by exporting it to bigger and bigger countries until its big enough for American airports.
  - VLM 11y ago
    Note with respect to scalability you're only asking for one order of magnitude. Technologically we've advanced far more than one order of magnitude in the 15 years they've been developing the system, so we NIH'd it and started development here, there should be no technological limit.
- katbyte 11y ago
  from wiki, canada: > Nav Canada manages 12 million aircraft movements a year for 40,000 customers in over 18 million square kilometres, making it the world’s second-largest air navigation service provider (ANSP) by traffic volume usa: > In 2006 En Route and Oceanic Services supported 47 million operations in the national airspace system. We are responsible for controlling more than 5,600,000 square miles (15,000,000 km2) of airspace in the U.S. and more than 24,600,000 square miles (64,000,000 km2) of airspace over the oceans. roughly 1/4 the volume, I'm willing hazard a guess it would scale.
- maxxxxx 11y ago
  It seems the US can't learn anything from anywhere in the world because it's too big, too many states, too small (in comparison to China) or for some other reason.
  - pubman 11y ago
    Your words not mine. I said nothing about learning and only about making comparisons.
    - maxxxxx 11y ago
      Sorry, I didn't want to attack you. I just notice that whenever something works in another country (see healthcare or public infrastructure) a lot of people in the US will say it can't work in the US: Either the US is too big or it's a "socialist" thing and therefore needs to be avoided. I think this attitude is a big danger for the US. There was a time when the US could teach the world but that time is coming to an end. Other countries have learned whatever advantages the US system has and now they are building on that knowledge and they are sometimes coming up with better solutions. If the US keeps ignoring these developments it will slowly fall behind until it's too late.
      - pubman 11y ago
        No worries. I agree completely that the US can learn plenty from other countries regardless of size on tons of topics. I was just trying to point out the typical over simplification/comparisons that news articles tend to make about technical things especially aviation.
phkahler 11y ago
>> Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work well and efficiently... Yep. Came here to suggest that. The problem is the old system is surely being maintained by someone and a purchase of a new system will mean less spending in some congress persons district. This is an explanation of course, not a justification.

> U.S. debate to privitize air-traffic control spotlights Canada Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work well and efficiently...

pubman 11y ago

It works well for them. Keep in mind the US has thousands of more airports and significantly more air traffic. Just like in the tech world something might work for 100 users of an app but may not work at scale. I am not bashing the NAV Canada system just saying the comparisons to the US ATC aren't apples to apples for numerous reasons.

pj_mukh 11y ago
I think, the guys who built the system for a 100 airports probably know best how to change the system for a 1000 airports while preserving all its advantages. Maybe NavCanada can slowly scale up by exporting it to bigger and bigger countries until its big enough for American airports.
- VLM 11y ago
  Note with respect to scalability you're only asking for one order of magnitude. Technologically we've advanced far more than one order of magnitude in the 15 years they've been developing the system, so we NIH'd it and started development here, there should be no technological limit.
katbyte 11y ago
from wiki, canada: > Nav Canada manages 12 million aircraft movements a year for 40,000 customers in over 18 million square kilometres, making it the world’s second-largest air navigation service provider (ANSP) by traffic volume usa: > In 2006 En Route and Oceanic Services supported 47 million operations in the national airspace system. We are responsible for controlling more than 5,600,000 square miles (15,000,000 km2) of airspace in the U.S. and more than 24,600,000 square miles (64,000,000 km2) of airspace over the oceans. roughly 1/4 the volume, I'm willing hazard a guess it would scale.
maxxxxx 11y ago
It seems the US can't learn anything from anywhere in the world because it's too big, too many states, too small (in comparison to China) or for some other reason.
- pubman 11y ago
  Your words not mine. I said nothing about learning and only about making comparisons.
  - maxxxxx 11y ago
    Sorry, I didn't want to attack you. I just notice that whenever something works in another country (see healthcare or public infrastructure) a lot of people in the US will say it can't work in the US: Either the US is too big or it's a "socialist" thing and therefore needs to be avoided. I think this attitude is a big danger for the US. There was a time when the US could teach the world but that time is coming to an end. Other countries have learned whatever advantages the US system has and now they are building on that knowledge and they are sometimes coming up with better solutions. If the US keeps ignoring these developments it will slowly fall behind until it's too late.
    - pubman 11y ago
      No worries. I agree completely that the US can learn plenty from other countries regardless of size on tons of topics. I was just trying to point out the typical over simplification/comparisons that news articles tend to make about technical things especially aviation.

phkahler 11y ago

>> Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work well and efficiently... Yep. Came here to suggest that. The problem is the old system is surely being maintained by someone and a purchase of a new system will mean less spending in some congress persons district. This is an explanation of course, not a justification.