NextGen, who's paying for this stuff.

"NextGen, the latest innovative technology in aviation designed to make our airways safer and more efficient than ever before."  This is one of those taglines you would see at the beginning of a presentation, with the typical response from the crowd something along the lines of 'ooooh' or 'ahhhhh'.  So, the question remains, what is NextGen?  See, I got your attention.  Well, simply put, NextGen is the Next Generation of Air Traffic Control, replacing our current radar tracking system with a more precise, more reliable GPS based system.  That's about as plainly as I can put it.  For a more detailed writeup on what it involves, you can click this link, and be given a pretty good rundown of what is it.  Now, granted, it's a wikipedia article, put it takes it's information from this FAA website, so it's rather reliable.  It involves 5 different elements to make it work, those being:

1. Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B). ADS-B will use the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite signals to provide air traffic controllers and pilots with much more accurate information that will help to keep aircraft safely separated in the sky and on runways. Aircraft transponders receive GPS signals and use them to determine the aircraft's precise position in the sky. These and other data are then broadcast to other aircraft and air traffic control. Once fully established, both pilots and air traffic controllers will, for the first time, see the same real-time display of air traffic, substantially improving safety. The FAA will mandate the avionics necessary for implementing ADS-B.
2. System Wide Information Management (SWIM). SWIM will provide a single infrastructure and information management system to deliver high quality, timely data to many users and applications. By reducing the number and types of interfaces and systems, SWIM will reduce data redundancy and better facilitate multi-user information sharing. SWIM will also enable new modes of decision making as information is more easily accessed.
3. Next Generation Data Communications. Current communications between aircrew and air traffic control, and between air traffic controllers, are largely realised through voice communications. Initially, the introduction of data communications will provide an additional means of two-way communication for air traffic control clearances, instructions, advisories, flight crew requests and reports. With the majority of aircraft data link equipped, the exchange of routine controller-pilot messages and clearances via data link will enable controllers to handle more traffic. This will improve air traffic controller productivity, enhancing capacity and safety.
4. Next Generation Network Enabled Weather (NNEW). Seventy percent of NAS delays are attributed to weather every year. The goal of NNEW is to cut weather-related delays at least in half. Tens of thousands of global weather observations and sensor reports from ground-, airborne- and space-based sources will fuse into a single national weather information system, updated in real time. NNEW will provide a common weather picture across the national airspace system, and enable better air transportation decision making.
5. NAS voice switch (NVS). There are currently seventeen different voice switching systems in the NAS, some in use for more than twenty years. NVS will replace these systems with a single air/ground and ground/ground voice communications system.  

Sounds amazing, doesn't it.  It sure does to me.  Some of the benefits include route efficiency, lower fuel costs, and tighter separation of aircraft.  Everyone wants this, especially the airlines.  There's one little problem with it all.  Who's paying for all of this?

First, lets give a very fast, quick rundown of the costs.  The Cato Institute wrote an article on what the costs of this systems implementation would be.  Initial estimates put the implementation around $40 billion (with a B), but new estimates are now placing it around $160 billion (yes, another B).  I don't know about you, but I don't have a billion dollars in my back pocket.  The article goes into a little more depth than I have, but the point has been made.  This is going to cost a lot.  So, again, the question is, who is going to pay for all of this?

The quick answer would be, "Well, Uncle Sam should pay for it. The .gov is implementing the program, which is something we can't control, so why should any of us pay for anything regarding that system?"  Well, times have changed.  We can't just get the government to pay for it.  I know I can't outright afford to put ADS-B equipment into my aircraft, some estimates are saying as low as $10,000 and as high as $50,000 for GA type aircraft, and the cost to put something like that into an airliner are even higher.  At the same time, aircraft would essentially be required to have this equipment to operate into controlled airspace (I like flying in class G airspace as much as the next guy, but sometimes, you just have to hit a class C or B airspace to get to your destination).  For the third time, we ask, "Who is paying for all of this?"

Well, there is really no answer for this.  Everyone has an opinion, including me.  So, here's my idea.  Have the .gov pay for all the implementation on their side.  Then, they are going  to have to help subsidize the GA field in some way, an example being 50% cost covered by the FAA, and then a different type of subsidized cost for the airlines (after all, this really is for them).  GA pilots end up paying out of their own pocket, and most of the time, don't have an aviation based income (based around that plane) to cover the rest of the costs.  The airlines, on the other hand, do have that ability.  The airlines can turn around and pass that cost off onto the consumer, and pay it off over a period of time.  Now, the good thing is that NextGen is supposed to have 100% functionality by 2025, which means we still have a good 13 years to get there.  Not every aircraft in the fleet has to be upgraded immediately.  If the airlines raise their ticket prices by $10 - $15 one way trip, per person, to simply cover the cost of this implementation, they could make that figure.  On that same account, an agreement should be made with the government to allow that additional per ticket charge to not be taxed, and held into some sort of trust fund, with the stipulation that those funds are only used to pay out for upgrading the fleet to NextGen capability. No tax would ever be paid out on those funds after they are used either, protecting the airlines.  Simple math would show that over just a few years, given the number of people that fly every day, and the number of flights, the cost would make up for itself.  

We do not need to implement GA user fees to do this either.  There's no need to.  As a  big proponent of the GA community, user fees would do nothing but harm the GA community as a whole.  Flight training, at this point, is so incredibly expensive.  Implementing GA user fees would finally put flight training out of reach for a lot of people.  It's already too much for some people.  Would be pilots simply balk at the idea of paying 40-50 thousand dollars to get the ratings they need to get a job, which has left us with an overall pilot shortage, but this conversation is for another time.  

So, there it is.  This is my idea to implement NextGen into our airspace system.  For the record, I think NextGen is an absolutely brilliant idea.  The ease of use and efficiency it brings is what this country has needed for its airspace system for a very long time.  But, like everything else, it comes down to cost. This is my idea.  What's yours?