I was at the 1999 NBAA convention in Atlanta attending a seminar on RVSM and the Corporate Flight Department. The meeting started off with some high ranking FAA Assistant Administrator giving a speech on how great RVSM was going to be, how it would help prevent en-route delays and why the ATC system really, really needed RVSM.
He also presented a cute little dog and pony video show depicting how many more aircraft will be able to fit into the high altitude airspace structure. Then he concluded his little presentation by pounding his fist on the podium and all but yelling at all of us that RVSM was coming, we about a year to modify the aircraft and receive RVSM approval. Then the fool opened up the floor for questions, bad mistake.
Most of the questions were rather benign in nature and more along the lines of the technical aspects of RVSM implication on older aircraft. (The airlines were having the same thoughts and worries.) Then it was my turn.
First off I stated that we had lots of airspace, in fact the US had a whole pot full of airspace. But what we didn't have was concrete to park all of these extra aircraft on when we arrived at our destination. I went on and further stated that I have had to hold, slowed down and vectored urning clear weather arriving into ORD, DFW, ATL, MIA, LAX, TEB and EWR just to mention a few. As for departing it was not unusual to have one or two hour gate holds after the scheduled departure time, once I had a 4 hour delay and knew for a fact that some other corporate operators had actually canceled flights just because of ground delays.
What we, the aviation community at large, needed was more airports and more runways. What we needed like a hole in the head was for you guys, the FAA, cramming more aircraft into the airways system going to same major airports that are too limited as it is now.
Furthermore we don't need RVSM. Europe does, the North Atlantic NATS system does, but the US doesn't need RVSM for the reasons I had previously pointed out.
Well of course my suggestions fell on deaf ears, the FAA spokesman informed us that much wiser people that knew 'the big picture' had made this decision and by God we had better live with or get out of the airspace system.
So, here we are eight years later enjoying more ground holds, gate holds and en-route holds than any other time in the US aviation history.
And just how much money did it cost the aviation industry on the whole to modify all the aircraft for RVSM?
And don't even get me started on the problems on getting RVSM certified aircrews, operation's manuals and maintenance manuals approved by the local FAA office (FSDO).
A friend of mine has two identical aircraft, the only difference is the N number and the serial number. He submitted two identical RVSM operational and maintenance manuals for the two aircraft, the only difference being the N number and serial number. One was approved, the other was not approved by the FAA.
(I love it when I can say, "I told you so!"