Anbody going to that FAA Online chart meeting tomorrow?

Congress already weighed in on this years ago when it wrote the statute, and I don't believe it says what you or the FAA think it says. Please read the statute already in place and tell me where or how it requires AeroNav to be self-supporting (technically the Aeronav entity isn't even mentioned - just the FAA.) Here is how I see it works in reality:

  1. The FAA may NOT exceed some of the costs involved. (Per the section on Maximum Price.) After this I think everyone else stops reading and thinking.
  2. There is no way to set prices such that the price can precisely match the costs, so some loss is expected and allowed by the wording of the statute. That loss is covered by the FAA general fund.
  3. The "Maximum Price" paragraph is subject to the "Adjustment of price" paragraph, which specifically allows for selling at a loss by saying the FAA "shall adjust the price of an aeronautical product and service sold to the public as necessary to avoid any adverse impact on aviation safety attributable to the price specified under this paragraph."
  4. Ergo, they could set the price at zero or close to it if the FAA judges (or can be convinced) that is needed for reasons of safety.
Just about every web site seems to be repeating the meme that Aeronav is somehow required to recover its costs and some strange thing prevents the FAA from simply burying the cost into their general funding. :mad2:

Read the budget, and show me where Congress is funding AeroNav to NOT be self-supporting.

Basic principle- if you're ALLOWED to charge a fee to the public, you WILL charge a fee to the public, unless Congress specifically funds you so you don't have to.

Why on earth would you NOT get revenue from the public and give the agency overall more money to play with?
 
Read the budget, and show me where Congress is funding AeroNav to NOT be self-supporting.

Basic principle- if you're ALLOWED to charge a fee to the public, you WILL charge a fee to the public, unless Congress specifically funds you so you don't have to.

Why on earth would you NOT get revenue from the public and give the agency overall more money to play with?

Are you arguing from a point of view as some in the FAA might see things, or as you see things?

All I can say is that Congress legislated an "out" that allows the FAA to fund the costs in making charts from other revenue sources, such as taxes on things unrelated to charts, if need be. As an example of your argument, I would guess there is no statute that disallows the FAA from charging a fee to navigate their web site, so yes, based on that line of logic that kind of revenue source is also plausible.
 
Here is the relevant U.S. Code that allows the FAA to charge for charts; note that it specifies a maximum amount - but no minimum:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_49_00044721----000-.html

Note that it even provides that "A fee may be reduced or waived for research organizations, educational organizations, or non-profit organizations, when the Administrator determines that reduction or waiver of the fee is in the best interest of the Government by furthering public safety."

(I could find nothing in that statute that could be read as requiring the FAA to set a non-zero price or fee.)

Bingo.... To the best of my knowledge the AOPA and the EAA are a non profit.... They just need to set up a arm of their organization that provides aero data and then the FAA has to give them all the gathered info free.... After all, we paid for that information once with fuel taxes... :yesnod::yesnod:
 
Are you arguing from a point of view as some in the FAA might see things, or as you see things?

All I can say is that Congress legislated an "out" that allows the FAA to fund the costs in making charts from other revenue sources, such as taxes on things unrelated to charts, if need be. As an example of your argument, I would guess there is no statute that disallows the FAA from charging a fee to navigate their web site, so yes, based on that line of logic that kind of revenue source is also plausible.

I still have mixed feelings. I don't necessarily think the common taxpayer should be covering the cost of charting so that we can all enjoy Foreflight/WingX/Etc for low prices because they don't have to pay for the charts they repackage.

My real point was that if YOU were a government agency told by Congress to do X, and funded to do .7X, you'd look for every opportunity to reduce costs or increase revenue. And if Congress said "you can charge a fee to the end user for this service, not to exceed your costs", you'd charge the fee and (if you're a smart bureaucrat) you'd work hard to ensure that your costs appeared to be high and justified the money you were taking in.

In this particular case, I want to be satisfied that AeroNav isn't inflating their costs on the digital side to make up for losses on the print side.
 
I still have mixed feelings. I don't necessarily think the common taxpayer should be covering the cost of charting so that we can all enjoy Foreflight/WingX/Etc for low prices because they don't have to pay for the charts they repackage.

My real point was that if YOU were a government agency told by Congress to do X, and funded to do .7X, you'd look for every opportunity to reduce costs or increase revenue. And if Congress said "you can charge a fee to the end user for this service, not to exceed your costs", you'd charge the fee and (if you're a smart bureaucrat) you'd work hard to ensure that your costs appeared to be high and justified the money you were taking in.

In this particular case, I want to be satisfied that AeroNav isn't inflating their costs on the digital side to make up for losses on the print side.

What's to stop me from buying my $150 yearly subscription and giving away copies hosted from my webserver... i.e. does this mean WingX, FF Et.al. just have to buy ONE copy and use their own servers to redistribute them or is there going to be a new "Enter AeroNav Subscription Credentials" box showing up in my WingX?
 
copied from the AeroNav website.

AeroNav Products hosted a meeting on Dec. 13, 2011, for companies interested in distributing our digital product line in the future. The meeting goal: to collaboratively discuss options for FAA's AeroNav Products to develop a proposal to best distribute digital products.

Highlights of the meeting included:

  • Legislative history of the aeronautical charting program dating from 1926 to the present.
  • 49 USC Section 44721 provides for the collection of fees for the purpose of reimbursing the government for the costs of creating, printing, and disseminating aeronautical products and services.
  • AeroNav Products' High Performing Organization requirement, approved by OMB, to develop a digital products strategy delineated in the plan.
  • Need to protect the technical content and critical navigation information embedded in the digital products.
  • Current digital product revenue cannot sustain the charting program.
  • AeroNav Products needs to recover $5M for the first year and the price of digital products needs to be set at a rate to recover these costs.
  • Industry groups presented multiple pricing structures to recover those costs and more work is necessary to determine the pricing.
  • AeroNav Products is committed to continuing to provide digital aeronautical products to support new and innovative technologies for pilots.
  • Based on the input from this meeting and other information we've gathered, AeroNav Products will develop a proposal for the sale and distribution of digital products and will make this proposal available to the public.
 
What's to stop me from buying my $150 yearly subscription and giving away copies hosted from my webserver... i.e. does this mean WingX, FF Et.al. just have to buy ONE copy and use their own servers to redistribute them or is there going to be a new "Enter AeroNav Subscription Credentials" box showing up in my WingX?
That remains to be seen.
 
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Higher_Prices_Digital_Charts_205875-1.html

Just did a calculation for AF/D, Sectional, Low En route and Terminal Procedures subscription I pay just over 125/year. I grab a Seattle sectional and TAC chart every year so I'm figuring I spend about 150/year on my FAA dead tree technology.

My fear is what's about to happen to the digital charting industry. I see hobbyist that make some of the better software, just locking the door and going home. And the new industry of iThing apps getting a major blow.

I'm never a fan of new taxes or fees but I don't like the pay per year model and locking people out if they don't pay. These charts are pretty much only interesting to pilots and almost a 100% a necessity for flight, they should find a new revenue model (I hate saying that) that lets the charts stay like they are and open to the public and flight application developers.


That Vendor specific pricing scares the hell out of me, does than mean I get to buy 3 copies of the data if I want Paper, FF and WingX?
 
Last edited:
td03.gif

Job Title:Management and Program Analyst
Department:Department Of Transportation
Agency:Federal Aviation Administration
Job Announcement Number:AAC-INT-12-AJV3-23474

SALARY RANGE: $96,690.00 to $125,695.00 / Per Year
OPEN PERIOD: Monday, November 21, 2011 to Monday, December 12, 2011
SERIES & GRADE: FG-0343-14
POSITION INFORMATION: Full Time - Permanent
DUTY LOCATIONS: 1 vacancy(s) - Oklahoma City OK
WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED:

FAA Employees - Organization Wide - This announcement is ONLY open to permanent and temporary* FAA employees of AeroNav Products (AJV-3) only. See Note 3.
JOB SUMMARY:

The Next Generation of Flight is Underway - and you can be part of it! We need you and your fresh ideas to shape the air transportation system of tomorrow, and the way America flies. Come be a part of the new generation in aviation, an industry that is absolutely critical to this nation's economy and security.

The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is a fundamental transformation of our nation's airspace system. It uses 21st century technologies to meet future demands, avoid gridlock in the sky and on the runways, further improve safety, and protect the environment. For more information on NextGen, watch this brief introduction
DUTIES
Recognized subject matter expert in financial and accounting areas provides leadership for highly complex activities under the minimal direction of the RPMS Manager. Serves as an advisor in the development, implementation and administration of policies and systems needed to manage AeroNav Products financial and accounting systems. Responsible for planning, organizing, coordinating, analysis, development, and implementation of operational projects and studies of major significance to the AeroNav Products Program. Exercises a high degree of initiative and judgment in analyzing and evaluating organizational program accomplishments related to fiscal resources, management systems, workload production, manpower utilization, and organizational and performance metrics, in order to identify any existing or potential problem areas, trends, significant accomplishments, merit, and deficiency situations within the assigned program/organization. Advises management on program status and makes recommendations on possible solutions for current problems and future approaches to long-range requirement planning. Assesses potential impacts on short-long range goals/mission requirements/accomplishments. Advises the RPMS Team Manager involving various organizational issues (i.e., organizational efficiencies, organizational structure, fiscal resource allocation/planning). Represents the RPMS Manager in discussing problem areas or possible methods of improvement with other Team Managers and other program officials, and assists in their resolution.
 
Of course the braniacs discouraged people from buying paper charts by drastically cutting down the number of poeple who can sell it. While it used to be the case that I could walk into any FBO in the country and get some of the local charts, now most have had their dealership rights canned because they didn't "sell enough"
 
If they are going to charge they need to come up with a better pricing scheme. $150/year per user is pretty good if you are getting charts for the whole country, not so much so if you only need charts for a small geographical area or you don't need IFR charts at all.
 
td03.gif

Job Title:AeroNav Program Specialist
Department:Department Of Transportation
Agency:Federal Aviation Administration
Job Announcement Number:AAC-INT-12-AJV353-23461

SALARY RANGE: $105,211.00 to $136,771.00 / Per Year
OPEN PERIOD: Monday, November 21, 2011 to Monday, December 05, 2011
SERIES & GRADE: FG-0301-14
POSITION INFORMATION: Full Time - Temporary NTE - 1 Year, may be extended or made permanent
DUTY LOCATIONS: 1 vacancy(s) - Silver Spring MD
WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED:

FAA Employees - Organization Wide - This announcement is open to permanent and temporary* employees of AJV-3 (Aeronautical Products).
JOB SUMMARY:

The Next Generation of Flight is Underway - and you can be part of it! We need you and your fresh ideas to shape the air transportation system of tomorrow, and the way America flies. Come be a part of the new generation in aviation, an industry that is absolutely critical to this nation's economy and security.

The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is a fundamental transformation of our nation's airspace system. It uses 21st century technologies to meet future demands, avoid gridlock in the sky and on the runways, further improve safety, and protect the environment. For more information on NextGen, watch this brief introduction
DUTIES:
The incumbent continually monitors and evaluates accomplishments of the Aeronautical Products (AeroNav) programs to ensure adequacy, standardization, and conformance to policies and criteria and advises higher management levels on matters pertaining to assigned programs. Provides technical knowledge in the accomplishment of AeroNav program and serves as an expert to the Service Team Manager(s). Participates in operational accomplishment of organization mission and responsibilities. The work of the organization requires extensive coordination, integration, and decisions involving complex and critical aeronautical information. The incumbent, who is considered a principal technical specialist within and outside AeroNav, may be required to perform duties as they relate to one or more of the following program areas: Development, maintenance and revision of terminal/enroute instrument flight procedures (IFPs); Design, compilation and maintenance of aeronautical charts (visual, enroute and terminal) and related publications; Ensure IFPs are coordinated and integrated in the NAS and provide for safe operation of aircraft; Collect, evaluate and verify aeronautical data; Provides subject matter guidance on automation applications as used by AeroNav Products; Ensure the construction and publication of all aeronautical charts/publications that support commercial, military and general aviation meet operational requirements; Initiate Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs). Responsible for planning, designing, developing, and conducting a variety of independent and interdependent studies and advising, coordinating, and assisting efforts to identify and assess existing or potential issues and problems relating to organizational programs. Analyzes and evaluates the objectives, planning, policies, work and progress, of assigned programs. Presents results of analysis and evaluation to executives and upper management for use in making recommended improvements and assuring efficiency, economy, and balance in the execution of assigned programs. Performs studies, analysis, evaluates, and develops implementation plans, practices, methods, and procedures for assigned program responsibilities. The incumbent plans, organizes and implements studies/projects that may directly impact the agency's programs. The studies require coordination between many activities within and outside the agency. Responsible for coordinating these efforts throughout the final stages of the completed projects that have direct impact on Federal Aviation Regulations and operations throughout the agency. Applies knowledge of FAAs policies and objectives to identify, define, and organize work for multiple work activities. Identifies potential issues and proposes recommendations for preventive action. Assures that activities are efficiently carried out and that program objectives are being effectively accomplished. Assures uniformity and consistency of performance and adherence to national and regional policies, standards, systems, and procedures. Establishes and maintains effective communications with the aviation industry; with regions, centers, and other FAA offices; and with other affected departments and agencies of Government, both foreign and domestic, in an effort to further the understanding, support and coordination of AeroNav's program responsibilities. Represents AeroNav Management at industry, agency, inter-agency, and inter departmental meetings.
 
Just did a calculation for AF/D, Sectional, Low En route and Terminal Procedures subscription I pay just over 125/year. I grab a Seattle sectional and TAC chart every year so I'm figuring I spend about 150/year on my FAA dead tree technology.
You're getting off cheap!

When I did the cost/payback analysis last year before buying the iPad/Foreflight set up, I found that I was spending $500 to $600 annually on FAA paper. It was a no brainer for me. But, now??? I guess we'll find out.
 
Last edited:
If they are going to charge they need to come up with a better pricing scheme. $150/year per user is pretty good if you are getting charts for the whole country, not so much so if you only need charts for a small geographical area or you don't need IFR charts at all.

They need money and can't cut costs, I'll take that at face value.

I'll gladly cancel my Paper Subscriptions, throw old charts I scrape up around the hangar in the back for backup and cough up the 150/year. That's about what I pay for the VFR/IFR publications for my one little area. My issues are

-> I think this data is infinitely more valuable if available freely for download by anyone. Just look at the software\websites that have popped up in the last 5 years around this data.

-> They appear to be tossing around the idea of Vendors pay per user. If I'm a glutton and like to use more than one vendor, do I get the fee rolled to me from every one? Essentially paying multiple times for the same data? If we have to go this route, Just let me enter my FAA subscription number and password into the software and lets move on, like we do with DUATS.

-> Having worked on federal software projects similar to what they would have to do to get this rolling, there's no way they operate the fee program at a reasonable cost. This looks like a 15 Million dollar solution to a 5 million dollar problem.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater... That is leave the charts up free for download by pilots and everyone else curious about FAA publications and come up with something, preferably something that doesn't require more resources and employees to collect and oversee.
 
FAA Employees - Organization Wide - This announcement is ONLY open to permanent and temporary* FAA employees of AeroNav Products (AJV-3) only. See Note 3.


There is a huge problem right there.......:yesnod::yesnod::yesnod:

Advertise the positions to employees ONLY........:nonod::nonod::nonod::no::confused:

Talk about a imbred clusterf*uc..:idea:
 
Probably More than $150/Year/Users

AeroNav is saying $250/year/user for small resellers, with discounts for
large resellers ... declining to $150/year/user. There is also mention of
a $10k/year minimum.

But it'll likely be more. Why? AeroNav is requiring a bunch of subscription,
audit, QA and possibly DRM (copy protection) procedures. The vendors are
unlikely to absorb these oversight, reporting and process requirements for no
add'l charge.

Nor do I believe that $5 million/year will be the end of it. When Abby was
still talking to me (before demanding I sign an NDA) ... she repeatedly said
that AeroNav is a $150 million/year operation and that they must recover
all their costs.

Small ops such as mine, are dead. Websites that provide on-line viewing
are dead.

What might happen? Before the FAA began distributing digital data,
Seattle Avionics bulk-scanned AeroNav paper. AeroNav cannot copyright
their paper. Ergo; if SA dusts-off their bulk scanners, they MIGHT become
an alternative source for AeroNav data. Of course, they are not gonna do
it for free. I expect that they would undercut the AeroNav tax by a bit.

Of course; AeroNav could act to hamstring such an effort by SA ... by
witholding access to hardcopy until the day before the effective date ...
(which they began doing with digital data in Oct).

Meanwhile; prepare for AOPA to issue yet another plea for money.
 
Last edited:
Re: Probably More than $150/Year/Users

It's beyond me how they can put copyright or other DRM restrictions on the digital products as well. I've seen this in some of the military stuff. They can make the price of access high, but once someone buys in, they lose control over the stuff.
 
The concern I have is if AeroNav ends up charging the large volume vendors $150/yr per user, folks like FF and W-X will still need to get their revenue/profit covering their costs, so tack on at least another $75 and we're looking at $225 - 250/yr. If that happens, it will really have a negative impact on the EFB market.

Now that I have been flying the past year with FF on x/c trips, I feel my situational awareness has improved by an order of magnitude, compared to GPS and charts! Having a sectional or TAC in front of me, with my position shown, vs fumbling/folding charts and trying to keep track of where I am on those charts by cross referencing the GPS, is an incredible improvement in safety, keeping me looking more outside the cockpit than inside, especially when flying around busy Class B terminal areas like Phx and Las Vegas.

Whatever they do, I hope they don't ruin a good thing by charging so much that most folks like me won't be able to justify the costs.

If they tier price the charts based on number of users as described, new APP developers will have a hard time getting started. That could be crippling in itself. The thing I like about the iPad is you have options and can switch to new applications if better ones come along.

Hopefully AOPA and EAA will get to weigh in at some point and point out these things and more.
 
What I'd like to see is that the user pay AeroNav directly for the chart data they want, and it gets published in a standard format that the various apps can read and use.

Thus you pay Hilton for the WingX software, and you pay Aeronav for the amount of chart coverage you need.

All of this assumes that AeroNav can legally "own" in digital form what they cannot in paper form... that's a mighty big IF.
 
What I'd like to see is that the user pay AeroNav directly for the chart data they want, and it gets published in a standard format that the various apps can read and use.

Thus you pay Hilton for the WingX software, and you pay Aeronav for the amount of chart coverage you need.

All of this assumes that AeroNav can legally "own" in digital form what they cannot in paper form... that's a mighty big IF.

That would be my 2nd option, where you enter your FAA credentials into WingX like you do for the Seattle Avionics Chart Data now.

I won't have an issue paying to cover their shortfall, even if if I suspect they could cut costs, as long as the data stays freely available to the world at large. If they put this stuff under lock and key, i feel they are doing a huge disservice to the pilot and general population. Why are aviation charts being singled out? I work and have worked along side GIS folks that do nothing but churn out maps for the consumption of the general public and for much much much smaller user bases than pilots. Should we pay for weather or get locked out of it too?
 
Here's skyvector's report. Cute way to get around the fact that aeronav can't copyright its stuff - force the distributors to affix their own copyright.
 
Here's skyvector's report. Cute way to get around the fact that aeronav can't copyright its stuff - force the distributors to affix their own copyright.

Skyvector did a nice job with their writeup. And I like their workaround - We'll buy the paper (once) and redistribute it to you for free. Of course, that may doom AeroNav.

I have some sympathy with AeroNav. If they can't copyright their work, then why are they doing it? Either free/cheap charts are "good" for society (and thus the general revenue should fund/subsidize aeronav), or they aren't (and thus the gov't should get out of the charting business and let us buy from Jepp and any other competitors).

Edit: I wonder if this isn't a pretty smart play on the part of FAA/AeroNav to get themselves funded from general revenue?

What happens if everyone were to say "thanks, we'll buy from Jepp or do without". Does AeroNav go away?
 
...
Edit: I wonder if this isn't a pretty smart play on the part of FAA/AeroNav to get themselves funded from general revenue?
...

I don't think so, they'd have a lot more support from the pilots, I think, if they just came out and said that. I don't think anyone wants to see the charts get put under lock and key and create a new AeroNav department of fee collection.

I'll pay to keep them free!
 
Here's skyvector's report. Cute way to get around the fact that aeronav can't copyright its stuff - force the distributors to affix their own copyright.

Bottom line is that vendors can't copyright the material from Aeronav - the law is pretty settled on that. Doesn't matter what Aeronav demands of them.

Edit additional on the law:

"3.2.1 May another publisher or individual republish a U.S. Government work and assert copyright? A publisher or individual can republish a U.S. Government work, but the publisher or individual cannot legally assert copyright unless the publisher or individual has added original, copyright protected material. In such a case, copyright protection extends only to the original material that has been added by the publisher or individual. (See 17 USC § 40372 regarding copyright notice requirements for works incorporating U.S. Government works.)"
From: http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#321

More specifically, per the referenced copyright notice requirements of 17 USC 403 - the vendors will need to make clear which portions of their product are copyrighted works of theirs and which are those of the government. If they do not do this, they can actually lose the copyright protection of their own work.
 
Last edited:
I'd be interested in seeing how that $150MM is distributed. I haven't heard much mention of staff downsizing in all this hullabaloo.
 
Bottom line is that vendors can't copyright the material from Aeronav - the law is pretty settled on that. Doesn't matter what Aeronav demands of them.

Edit additional on the law:

"3.2.1 May another publisher or individual republish a U.S. Government work and assert copyright? A publisher or individual can republish a U.S. Government work, but the publisher or individual cannot legally assert copyright unless the publisher or individual has added original, copyright protected material. In such a case, copyright protection extends only to the original material that has been added by the publisher or individual. (See 17 USC § 40372 regarding copyright notice requirements for works incorporating U.S. Government works.)"
From: http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#321

More specifically, per the referenced copyright notice requirements of 17 USC 403 - the vendors will need to make clear which portions of their product are copyrighted works of theirs and which are those of the government. If they do not do this, they can actually lose the copyright protection of their own work.

If they lock vendors into an agreement where the vendors must DRM the data, should anyone circumvent the DRM mechanisms, they will run afoul of the law(DMCA). IANAL but that's what I'm smelling. They could pretty much do this, a vendor could ROT13 the data and anybody who decrypts it, no matter how easy couldn't redistribute it legally, creating a virtual copyright.
 
If they lock vendors into an agreement where the vendors must DRM the data, should anyone circumvent the DRM mechanisms, they will run afoul of the law(DMCA). IANAL but that's what I'm smelling. They could pretty much do this, a vendor could ROT13 the data and anybody who decrypts it, no matter how easy couldn't redistribute it legally, creating a virtual copyright.

No, DMCA applies to copyright works (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). If someone DRMs public domain works, then circumventing the DRM is not an infringement and not subject to DMCA.
 
The crux of this fiasco is the question of whether digital charts are a "public good". A public good is defined by two attributes: it is non-rival in consumption and it is non-excludable. Non-rival consumption means that one person's consumption does not impact the consumption of another. Non-exclusion means that it cannot be offered to only some people.

There are few true public goods. National defense is a classic example of a very near public good. Many services are offered by taxpayer funded government that could be excludable like police, fire and rescue but we have made a public choice not to exclude anyone from benefitting from them because to do so would be ethically reprehensible. Imagine dialing 911 and being asked by the operator for your credit card number before a police car is dispatched to you and then suggesting an upsell to "platinum" service which guarantees a three minute response!

So it is with AeroNav or just about any other service offered by the FAA. Is it a public good or is it not? Who are the true beneficiaries of this service? Is it only pilots and their passengers? Or does it also include the public on the ground over whose heads we hurl our aluminum tubes at nearly the speed of sound? What if the service did not exist? Who pays the consequences? Only the pilots and their passengers? Or would it also include the school full of kids along the approach path that somebody plows into because they were using an outdated plate?

So even if it is decided that it can be excludable, SHOULD it it be excludable? I maintain the argument that since the service we are talking about is bona fide life and death SAFETY, it is ethically and morally repulsive to deny the service to any human being.
 
This is AeroNav's faxed summary of the meeting. Mike C. on CPA.org
hand-type'd the fax. i.e. There might be a few typos/errors ... but he's
a pretty thorough/responsible guy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Support Services

Aeronautical Navigation (aeronav) Products

Aeronautical Charting Program Background and Challenges

Presented To:
Interested Aeronautical Chart Digital Distributors

Presented By:
Fred Anderson
Director, aeronav Products

December 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA Authority to Collect Fees for Aeronautical Products

49 USC Section 44721

"The collection of fees provided for in this
[legislation] are for the purpose of
reimbursing the Government for the costs
of creating, printing, and disseminating
aeronautical products and services"

Note: Originally passed as Public Law 106-181, dated April 5, 2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Aeronautical Charting Program Has
Always Included User Fees

1920's, 30's, 40's and 50's

Legislation (28 Stat. 620, dated 1895) -
Limited the recovery of cost to "paper and
printing as nearly as practicable"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Aeronautical Charting Program Has
Always Included User Fees

1960's and 70's

Legislation (Public Law 88-441, dated August 14, 1964)-
"The prices of charts shall include all expenses incurred in
actual reproduction of the charts after the original
cartography, such as photography, opaquing, plate making,
press time, and bindery operations; the full postage rates; and
any additional cost factors considered appropriate by the
Secretary such as overhead and administrative expenses."

"This legislation was essentially the outgrowth of hearings held in 1963 by
the Congress having to do with allegations of unjust price competition
between the Federal Government and private business." (Office of
Secretary Financial Systems Staff, 1972)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Aeronautical Charting Program Has Always Included User Fees

1980's and 90's

Legislation (Public Law 99-272, dated April 7, 1986)- "The
Secretary of Commerce may increase the price of aeronautical
products over a period of not less than three years after the
date of enactment of this legislation so as to recover all costs
attributable to data base management, compilation, printing,
and distribution."

"At the end of such period ... the Secretary, after consultation
with the Secretary of Transportation, shall report to the
Congress the effect of imposing or maintaining such increased
prices, including any impact on aviation safety."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact of Public Law 99-272 on Aeronautical
Product Prices and Aviation Safety

> Prices almost doubled from 1986 to 1988 (for example,
Sectional Chart Prices Increased from $2.75 to $5.00 per
copy)

> Increase in prices was substantially higher than what we
will see for any new digital product fee.

> Sales of aeronautical charts did NOT decrease (Sales of
IFR products actually increased)

> Report to Congress: "...aviation safety has not been
impacted."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Aeronautical Charting Program Has
Always Included User Fees

2000's and 10's
Legislation (Public Law 106-181, dated April 5, 2000) -
Legislation Transferring Aeronautical Charting to the FAA -
"The price of an aeronautical product sold to the public shall be
not more than necessary to recover all costs attributable to: (i)
data base management and processing; (ii) compilation; (iii)
printing or other types of reproduction; and (iv) dissemination of
the product."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
aeronav Products
High Performing Organization

> First DOT OMB-approved High Performing Organization (HPO)

>> Five-year plan approved, September 2008.

>> Full Implementation by FY 2013

> HPO plan calls for full allowable cost recovery for all
aeronautical products

>> "Costs that cannot be directly attributed to the recoverable costs outlines in
the legislation are not recoverable and include; Labor costs for
management activities, and general overhead" (FAA General Counsel Opinion)

> HPO Plan calls for Developing a Digital Products Strategy

>> "...establish a pricing methodology for digital products and identify
strategies for effectively and efficiently meeting the aviation community's
need for reliable aeronautical products in the future."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Challenge With Digital Products

> FAA has no copyright protection for aeronautical products

> Under current business processes for sale and distribution
of digital products FAA has limited ability to recover costs

> Some unofficial copies are being altered and critical
navigation information is being removed

> New technologies are rapidly changing the market for
aeronautical products

> Paper sale are declining, and current digital product
revenue cannot sustain charting program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meeting the Challenge

> Establish new agreements with Private Sector Partners for
the sale and distribution of digital products

>> Digital Agent Agreements for Standard Products

>> Special Services Agreements for Enhanced Products

> Agreements will include requirements to maintain the
quality and integrity of the digital products

> FAA is encouraging innovation through Special Services
Agreements with provate sector partners -- FAA will not
become a application of software developer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meeting the Challenge

> Need to recover about $5M the first year for digital product
compilation and database management

> Fee for a total package of all digital IFR and VFR products
for the entire United States is about $150.00 a year

>> This is significantly less than the price increases from Public Law 99-
272 in 1988

>> The cost for the same total package in paper products today is over
$3,700.00 a year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Support Services

Aeronautical Navigation (aeronav) Products

Pre-Proposed Digital Pricing Methodology

Presented To:
Interested Aeronautical Chart Digital Distributors

Presented By:
Debra Sullivan, Manager, Resource
Planning & Management Support (RPMS)

December 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Products Cost Methodology

> aeronav Products Recoverable Cost of Digital Products

>> Compilation

>> Data Management

>> Distribution via Web Media

> $5M Loss of Revenue

>> Recovering the $5M is Critical to Sustaining aeronav Products

>> Based on the Current Decrease in Paper Sales
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Digital Product Pricing - Two Options

> Option 1: Cost per Digital Product Sold

>> Digital Agent Billed for Each Digital Product Customer to Include
Customers of Sub-Agents

>> Digital Products May Be Purchased as a Bundle or Separately
Base on Digital Units

> Option 2: Cost Established as a Customer Base Range

>> Digital Agent Billed within the Appropriate Pricing Range Based on
the Total Number of Digital Product Customers to Include
Customers of Sub-Agents

>> Cost Per Unit Decreases With an Increase in Customer Base

>> Digital Products May Be Purchased as a Bundle or Separately
Based on Digital Units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Digital Product Units

> Standard Digital Products Units

>> Airport / Facility Directory (A/FD)

>> IFR Enroute

>> Terminal - TPP

>> VFR Aeronautical

>> Coded Instrument Flight Procedures (CIFP)

Note: Each Unit will Include the Digital Aeronautical Chart User's Guide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Digital Product Pricing

> Total Package Digital Product (A/FD, IFR Enroute,
Terminal, VFR Aeronautical & Aeronautical Chart User's
Guide)

>> Option 1: Annual Cost per Digital Product Customers - $150 *

>> Option 2: Annual Cost Established as a Pricing Range

Avg Unit Cost / Digital Product Agent Cost / Number of Customers

$250 / $25,000 * / 1-100
$200 / $50,000 * / 101-250
$180 / $90,000 * / 251-500
$120 / $180,000 * / 501-1500
$100 / $250,000 * / 1501-2500
<$100 / $360,000 * / 2501 - +

* Prices are Estimated - Final Pricing Should be Within The Range
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Product Pricing

> Airport / Facility Directory (A/FD)

>> Option 1: Annual Cost Per Digital Product Customers - $15 *

>> Option 2: Annual Cost Established as a Pricing Range

Avg Unit Cost / Digital Product Agent Cost / Number of Customers

$25 / $2,500 * / 1-100
$20 / $5,000 * / 101-250
$18 / $9,000 * / 251-500
$12 / $18,000 * / 501-1500
$10 / $25,000 * / 1501-2500
<$10 / $36,000 * / 2501 - +

* Prices are Estimated - Final Pricing Should be Within The Range
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Product Pricing

> Terminal / TPP

>> Option 1: Annual Cost Per Digital Product Customers - $48 *

>> Option 2: Annual Cost Established as a Pricing Range

Avg Unit Cost / Digital Product Agent Cost / Number of Customers

$80 / $8,000 * / 1-100
$64 / $16,000 * / 101-250
$58 / $28,800 * / 251-500
$38 / $57,600 * / 501-1500
$32 / $80,000 * / 1501-2500
<$33 / $115,200 * / 2501 - +

* Prices are Estimated - Final Pricing Should be Within The Range
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Product Pricing

> IFR Enroute

>> Option 1: Annual Cost Per Digital Product Customers - $37 *

>> Option 2: Annual Cost Established as a Pricing Range

Avg Unit Cost / Digital Product Agent Cost / Number of Customers

$63 / $6,250 * / 1-100
$50 / $12,500 * / 101-250
$45 / $22,500 * / 251-500
$30 / $45,000 * / 501-1500
$25 / $62,500 * / 1501-2500
<$25 / $90,000 * / 2501 - +

* Prices are Estimated - Final Pricing Should be Within The Range
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Product Pricing Versus Paper Pricing

Product / Annual Public Price for Paper Product / Annual Proposed
Price for Digital Product

A/FD, Terminal / TPP, Enroute & Visual / $3,794.81 / $150.00 *

Airport / Facility Directory / $532.00 / $15.00 *

Terminal / TPP / $786.65 / $48.00 *

Enroute / $988.05 / $37.00 *

Visual / $1,488.10 / $49.00 *

* Prices are Estimated and Do Not Include Any Additional Digital Agent Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreement Article 3

* Article 3

-- Net minimum $10K in annual sales of FAA products

-- One year to establish the net purchase requirements

-- Pay for each end user / subscriber
---- This includes any / all Sub-Agents

-- Copyright or encryption to prevent duplication

-- Quarterly report on number of end users to FAA

-- Not an exclusive franchise

-- Only permitted to sell / redistribute in digital format
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreement Articles 4 & 5

* Article 4 Obsolete Charts / Products

-- Prohibited from selling or redistributing obsolete
products

* Article 5 Product Quality

-- Requires all information on charts to be accessible
and preference for the most current aeronautical
product in overlap area(s)

-- Most not alter or omit any technical content or critical
navigation information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Support Services

Aeronautical Navigation (aeronav) Products

Standard vs Enhanced Digital Products

Presented To:
Interested Aeronautical Chart Digital Distributors

Presented By:
Eric Secretan, Manager
Technology & ATC Products

December 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Digital Products

> Includes all the Digital Products that are part of the "core"
suite of digital products.

>> Only requires a Digital Product Agent agreement to obtain these
products for resale

>> Are intended to be packaged and re-distributed without any need
for modification

>> Standard Pricing Structure for all agents
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Digital Product Suite

> Digital Terminal Procedures Publication (dTPP)

>> PDF IAP and Airport Diagram Charts (Geo-referenced late 2012)

>> PDF SID, STAR Charts and XML indexing file

> Digital IFR Enroute Charts

>> GeoTiff IFR Low and IFR High Altitude Charts

>> GeoTiff Pacific and Atlantic Planning Charts

> Digital VFR Aeronautical Charts

>> GeoTiff Sectional, WAC, TAC and Helicopter Charts

>> Seamless US Sectional VFR Chart

> Digital Airport/Facility Directory (A/FD)

>> Individual PDF page files by Airport

>> XML indexing file

> Digital Aeronautical Chart Users Guide

> Coded Instrument Flight Procedures (CIFP; aka NFD)

>> ARINC 424 format GPS/FMS product

>> Digital Enroute Supplement product
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enhanced Digital Products via Special Service
Agreement

> Includes non-standard digital products/variants/services
that are not part of the "core" suite of digital products

>> Intended to be special enhancements to standard digital products
to support unique digital partner requirements

>> Requires signed non-disclosure agreements and special service
agreement to obtain

>> Cost recovery will be on a case-by-case basis dependent on the
additional cost or providing the service by aeronav Products

>> Will require agreement by aeronav Products on how the enhanced
products/variants will be used in partner end products
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
No, DMCA applies to copyright works (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). If someone DRMs public domain works, then circumventing the DRM is not an infringement and not subject to DMCA.

Yeah but you can copyright, SOMETHING or additions to the "government works" DRM it all together then, just by virtue of de-DRMing it, you run afoul of the DMCA. Technically, you wouldn't "get it" for unwrapping the gubmint data but you could certianly find yourself in hot water over the non-gubmint data.
 
Yeah but you can copyright, SOMETHING or additions to the "government works" DRM it all together then, just by virtue of de-DRMing it, you run afoul of the DMCA. Technically, you wouldn't "get it" for unwrapping the gubmint data but you could certianly find yourself in hot water over the non-gubmint data.

Sorry, that's not true. You must have creative content in the thing. Republishing the FARs for example and throwing your own copyright notice doesn't make that work protectable.
 
150 a year for "the works" is reasonable to me.

But I still think the way to do this is for the FAA to be the gatekeeper - they release the data directly to THEIR customers via online or DVD, and the app developers can build their apps to support the data set as released by the FAA.

But that still doesn't legally prevent someone from buying the data from the FAA and re-releasing it at their own expense. And as far as I can tell, legally there's no way to prevent that, since the FAA cannot copyright the data.

This looks more and more to me like the cost of "metering" the information will be more than the cost of creating the information in the first place, and so the best thing for the taxpayers is to just foot the bill of creating the data, and people pay for the bandwidth/shipping only, and if it gets redistributed, so be it.

Or write new legislation, making AeroNav be an institution like the post office, and allowing them to hold copyright while still requiring them to charge only enough to be self-supporting.

Short of holding copyright, I see no workable way for AeroNav to legally control the distribution of their products. And it's a poor practice to make the app developers try to be the "enforcers" in such a scheme.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, that's not true. You must have creative content in the thing. Republishing the FARs for example and throwing your own copyright notice doesn't make that work protectable.

Sorry That's not what I said. You throw some "creative content" (Which was the "Something or additions to government works" i was referring to) in there. Then, just by virtue of DRMing it along with the FAA data, it is not possible to legally extract the FAA data. Not sure how far that would walk in court and whomever DRMed it in the first place would have to be compelled to sue.
 
Last edited:
150 a year for "the works" is reasonable to me.

But I still think the way to do this is for the FAA to be the gatekeeper - they release the data directly to THEIR customers via online or DVD, and the app developers can build their apps to support the data set as released by the FAA.

But that still doesn't legally prevent someone from buying the data from the FAA and re-releasing it at their own expense. And as far as I can tell, legally there's no way to prevent that, since the FAA cannot copyright the data.

This looks more and more to me like the cost of "metering" the information will be more than the cost of creating the information in the first place, and so the best thing for the taxpayers is to just foot the bill of creating the data, and people pay for the bandwidth/shipping only, and if it gets redistributed, so be it.

What's reasonable for NOAA weather data? What's reasonable for the CFRs? Look I understand this stuff isn't "free" as in beer free. But it needs to be free as in freedom "free", The charge per user model and locking the data up is just a bad way to go about it, the info has so much more value if it's unrestricted.
 
Update - Just got off the phone with Abby Smith, who called to follow up on my not being allowed into the meeting last week. She was profusely apologetic, and we had a good conversation.

I did NOT get the sense that AeroNav is being sneaky or malicious or anything like that.

They've got a business process that needs to change to reflect the digital world, and unlike their private-sector competitors they may not have the tools (intellectual propery rights) to easily change their model and be able to enforce it on their customers. That's a legal issue.

I don't think anybody wants AeroNav to go "out of business". How they get funded is a political issue.

If the political results are that they have to be self-supporting, and we don't want them to go out of business and leave us with only Jeppesen for charts, then the problem to be solved is how to ensure that the users of their products pay a fair price for the products (so that they can stay in business), and that people can't cheat.

She was receptive to the idea that AeroNav sell licenses for the chart data and not put the vendors in the middle. Just thought of another good reason for that. If you get your data from AeroNav directly, then if your EFB vendor goes out of business (and many of them will eventually) you are still free to use your license with a competing product.

Anyway, I'm going to stay involved in this, and as/if I learn new things I'm going to continue to post here.
 
Tim,

I am confused by your post above. Are you saying AeroNav has been collecting MORE than printing and distribution costs for their paper charts all these years and now that revenue stream has dried up they are trying to manipulate a way to create a new revenue stream from the digital data? :nono:

or......

are you satisfied that the cost recovery they are focused on is truly for the storage and distribution of digital downloads, not including the cost of normal ongoing operations? :confused:
 
One thing that really bugs me- there is no rational basis for AeroNav to require a sliding scale of prices, charging smaller vendors a higher cost per user. It's digital data- there is no incremental cost to AeroNav for small-volume users vs. large-volume users.

This smacks of anti-competitive behavior, care of your own tax dollars.
 
One thing that really bugs me- there is no rational basis for AeroNav to require a sliding scale of prices, charging smaller vendors a higher cost per user. It's digital data- there is no incremental cost to AeroNav for small-volume users vs. large-volume users.

This smacks of anti-competitive behavior, care of your own tax dollars.

I don't think there's a rational basis for the "per user" fee model.
 
Tim,

I am confused by your post above. Are you saying AeroNav has been collecting MORE than printing and distribution costs for their paper charts all these years and now that revenue stream has dried up they are trying to manipulate a way to create a new revenue stream from the digital data? :nono:

or......

are you satisfied that the cost recovery they are focused on is truly for the storage and distribution of digital downloads, not including the cost of normal ongoing operations? :confused:

Not really saying either. I don't know the state of AeroNav finances.

But I do know that as demand for paper charts goes down, that eventually it will no longer be cost-effective to produce them. And if they don't start generating some revenue from the digital side, they'll have to shut their doors, barring some change in their funding.

I'm still thinking on this topic, and I don't currently see any solution that works without legislation to either:

  • Somehow give AeroNav the ability to copyright their products and thus control reproduction (and charge accordingly, even if it's only enough to cover their cost). This would probably result in charges less than Jepp but not free. And I'd want to see the accounting that shows how the fees cover their costs and no more. No Hollywood accountants allowed.
  • Publicly fund the operation so that they don't have to charge for the data. Tough sell nowadays.
Without one of the two, I don't see how they stay in business..
 
Back
Top