I stopped counting long ago, but there have been many, many attempts to try to modernize the US’s air traffic control (ATC) system over the years. As The Air Current‘s Will Guisbond told us in last week’s The Air Show podcast, there was an article written back in 1996 on the subject that could have been written yesterday. But it had been pretty quiet on anything actually getting done on that front in recent years with the Department of Transportation (DOT) more interested in overly-burdensome supposedly pro-consumer rules than actually doing the most pro-consumer thing that can be done… fixing ATC. This year, well, stuff is happening, and now we have the concepts of a plan. I don’t expect this to actually happen exactly as it’s being pitched, but I’m sure happy DOT is trying.
The news this year has finally brought things to a head. First, we had the mid-air collision between the American Eagle CRJ-700 and the Army Blackhawk helicopter. This, to be clear, likely had absolutely nothing to do with an air traffic control problem, but during the blame game, ATC took some stray bullets anyway. Then more recently we’ve had the train wreck that is Newark. I don’t need to go into full details (again, listen to The Air Show from last week or just keep watching the news for continued failures), but it has seemingly brought some urgency to the idea that air traffic control needs help sooner rather than later.
As I said on the pod, I was holding out hope that Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy would be able to make something happen. After all, if there’s one thing this administration likes to do, it’s move fast and break stuff. This is the kind of thing I’d be happy to see them move fast on, and well, that’s the gist of what’s happening.
Last week, Duffy rolled out the inspiringly-titled “Brand New Air Traffic Control System.” It even has a logo that looks like someone just hastily went through a clipart library, so you know they mean business.
This is both ambitious and also… not at all. You can read the press release filled with mindless quotes, but I’d recommend reading through the modest 8-page proposal to get a real sense of what’s to come.
When I say it’s ambitious, I mean it is going to require a lot of money in a short time to make a lot happen. But when I say it’s not, it’s because most of this is just accelerating existing projects as opposed to reinventing the wheel. It is also light on details, including the amount of money that’ll be required. But it’s hard to criticize at this point, because it’s better than nothing, which is what we’ve had for too long.
So what is in this little gem? You probably don’t want to know, because it’ll make you wonder how the heck we’re even still functioning today. But here’s what’s planned to be done in short order.
- The current telecom system is built on tin cans and string. That will be replaced with “4,000 new high speed network connections on fiber, satellite, and wireless and over 30,000 services.”
- The 25,000 children’s walkie-talkies bought at Toys ‘R Us in 1984 will be replaced with internet-based radios.
- All of the “small tower voice switch, medium, TRACON, En-Route, Air-Ground converter and Ground-Ground converter” switches will be replaced. I don’t know what this is, but it sounds old and in bad shape.
- There are 618 FAA airborne radar systems, and they are not only old, but they also come in 12 different flavors thanks to patchwork changes over the years. These will be replaced, and there will be no more than 2 configurations.
- The surface radar which monitors what’s happening on the ground needs to be replaced at 44 airports. Then it needs to be rolled out to another 200 to expand the system’s reach to help improve safety on the ground.
- ADS-B satellite aircraft tracking will be installed in the Caribbean so that airplanes don’t just disappear into thin air.
- The current TFMS traffic flow system will be replaced by the FMDS. Other than replacing the T with a D and moving the letters around, this will make it easier to handle traffic flow management programs.
- You might not know this, but Alaska is still a state. And it has been neglected, so now it needs a whole slew of new and replacement automation to get things to operate more like they do in the rest of the US.
- In 89 airports, controllers will stop relying on paper flight strips for each flight and go to an electronic system. This sounds like a joke as several of my previous bullet points are, but it’s not. This is really how things are managed today. I know.
- Information display systems will be upgraded from a whole bunch of different systems presumably created by Zenith in the 1970s that actually still use floppy disks to something more functional today. It also needs to replace old automation platforms with a standardized option that does more than allow controllers to play Pong all day.
- Instead of replacing one old control tower per year, the rate will climb to 4 – 5 per year.
- FAA will take the 21 enroute centers (ARTCCs) and presumably burn their asbestos-filled carcasses to the ground before they collapse under their own weight. It will build 6 new centers with new technology to replace them.
In addition, there is a summary document that has a few more goodies in it which I didn’t see in the main proposal:
- Speed up the roll-out of DataComm which allows pilots to text with ATC like an 11-year-old schoolgirl instead of using voice. It’s unclear if emojis are part of the package.
- Build 15 new towers. Rapunzel! Rapunzel!
- Focus on New York since that’s the place that sucks the most.
Right, so this is a lot. But let’s just be clear again that much of this is not new. The proposal shows many of these projects are already scheduled and set to be done in the 2030s sometime. This would just speed up that process… to be done by 2028.
That’s right, 2028. We are talking about doing all of this in three years. That sounds like something the government is incapable of doing, but I am here for it. So, let’s go!
Not so fast. Right now, the government spends about $3 billion a year on aviation infrastructure. How much will this cost? We don’t actually know. This isn’t in the proposal, which is the biggest red flag that this isn’t fully baked just yet but we are talking about tens of billions of dollars.
Oh and did I mention that this requires Congress to approve the funding? Normally this is followed by the sound you hear when you are a loser on the Price is Right. But things are different these days. Now that Congress has decided not to do its job of acting as a check on the executive branch, it might be simple enough for the administration to just tell them to approve the money. Normally I’m a fan of checks and balances, but in this case, the dereliction of duty in Congress could actually work out for the industry.
To summarize, this is just a giant plan to throw a ton of money at a variety of efforts in order to speed up modernization. This doesn’t rethink the entire system and start over, because that would take ages. Instead, this is a brute force effort to get something done. Considering how many false starts we’ve had over the years, I’m comfortable just hoping that this one sticks. Three years sounds impossible, but I’m more than happy to root for everyone involved on the off chance this might happen.
39 comments on “The US Government Tries to Fix Air Traffic Control… Again”
All well and good… but this administration’s prioritizing privatization and kickbacks over safety has me terrified. Which is the real priority for them, to do this well, or to do this on a way that makes Elon Musk richer.
The two aren’t always compatible
> Last week, Duffy rolled out the inspiringly-titled “Brand New Air Traffic Control System.” It even has a logo that looks like someone just hastily went through a clipart library, so you know they mean business.
LOL at the commentary on this, so true. Based on the title of the initiative and the logo behind it, I’d like to assume that it was created before the $2500/day consultants got their hands on it (and I used to be one of those consultants). Let’s be honest, though, consultants probably still designed the name and logo for a solid fee, yet were likely far more focused on pitching themselves (and their non-governmental clients) for the upcoming projects so that they can get some of the massive amount of money coming through on this.
/For the record, I wholeheartedly agree that we should be investing more in ATC (more so from an efficiency side than from a safety side, if I’m being honest), I’m just cynical amount how efficiently government will spend the money for those investments, and whose pockets in the private sector (and labor sector) will be fattened by it. It’s not just aviation, transportation investments and infrastruture investments of all types are surprisingly expensive and poorly thought out or managed in the US.
Can’t tell if you are serious or this is a very late April fools post. The first thing they could do is send Elon Musk into orbit & let him decide where each airplane should be. If that doesn’t work, then resurrect Steve Mccroski from Chicago air control & let him figure it out.
We’re in this mess because “Since 2007, Congress has passed 26 short-term reauthorization extensions for the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), but only one long-term reauthorization bill. This regular cycle of temporary funding has led to budgetary uncertainty and instability for the FAA and its programs.” With all of the uncertainty and the glacial speed of the government, you can’t do anything more than break/fix everything.
https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/importance-long-term-faa-reauthorization/
On this proposal, I would say a hail Mary, but I am not catholic. So, guess Trump is going to throw a hail Mary.
We do have a pope from America now. He can pray for us.
Cranky,
Why not just license Eurocontrol instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?
Eurocontrol uses each country’s infrastructure to create one big seamless airspace across multiple countries. It’s not necessary for the US which is already a single country and is not a fix for hardware and infrastructure which is the vast majority of this project.
Reinventing the wheel is a moneymaker
Angry Bob – Definitely not that simple, and I’m not sure Eurocontrol would bring much to the table. Also, I would imagine they would not want this to be under foreign control since it’s a critical safety system.
The state of ATC in this country is a goddam disgrace and has been for two decades.
NextGen isn’t even here yet STILL and it’s already LastGen.
What will NOT solve these problems… reduced staffing and funding at the FAA. Total and complete joke.
Without getting way too political, we can see the pattern that has formed early in this Administration.
Have Trump or his people a big public deal about some problem. Spend a lot of media time talking about how wonderful it’s going to be because Trump is gonna fix it.
Publicly threaten someone or some party to “negotiate”.
Make some minor tweaks or move up spending or whatever. Forget about the guy you threatened.
Make some splashy public announcements about how the amazing Donald Trump fixed the problem.
Move on.
Rinse and repeat.
This is my concern as well since actually executing on fixing the problems is boring and hard. Boring and hard things are of no interest to Trump.
There must be some real oversight with real teeth on the execution of moving these projects forward.
Cranky,
Would privatizing the ATC system be a better alternative to letting the Bozos in Washington try and fix it?
Baron – I am far from expert on that, but it’s certainly been discussed. I would expect it to be significantly more expensive for the users of the system based on what we see elsewhere, but it would be more functional. I don’t know enough to have a true opinion so I’d rather leave that to the experts.
Is there an intention to go really flashy as well ? Top 20 airports can have an on-site tower… everywhere else gets a remote tower. What could possibly go wrong ?
Unfortunately the ignorance and thieves in DOT leadership have little idea how to change the tires on a car that is constantly moving at 60mph. FAA leadership has historically been restrained by lack of Congressional innovative investment.
What needs to happen is;
1) Build 3-5 new ARTCCs (at internet trunklines) to replace very old Cold War facilities.
2) Replace ground based interrogation system with space based. Safety study should have started yesterday.
3) Information distribution systems can be completely revamped if someone had an ounce of courage. I.e., Paper strips, NOTAMS, WX, etc…
4) Close down ALL the antique AT Towers and tiny radar rooms. RFD, CAK, TOL etc.. Modern commercial aircraft operations do not operate at 10,000ft and below. The airspace can be absorbed into new ARTCCs.
There is much more to add to list, but after decades of of working for the FAA in air traffic and program management I know the will is there in the hard working FAA employees, but the narrow sighted politicians will never have the courage to do the right thing.
I nominate Mike to head the FAA effective immediately. Do I hear a second?
As matter of information for anyone who might care, GAO (Government Accountability Office) has been reporting on ATC for some time. Most recent, I believe is a March 4, 2025 testimony and lengthy report (GAO-25-108162), AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL, “FAA Actions Urgently Needed to Modernize Systems.”
Of course, this isn’t DOGE, so who cares in this Administration.
The repeated and spectacular failures of the ATC system at EWR over the past couple months have forced the DOT to respond. Informed people in the aviation community know how old the technology is behind the US ATC system is but most people do not. Every leader wants to fix a problem.
The problem for FAA is capital spending – as is true with most of the government; there is no long-term approach. Building anything new and lasting is argued in Congress and projects end every time there is a change in party which is part of why companies cannot work efficiently toward delivering projects. The climate of government contracts favors dragging work out for years because they are so unique compared to civilian projects that they can “justify all of the extra work” and expense to taxpayers.
The ATC system issues are not unique to EWR but the FAA probably aggravated some of the system vulnerabilities by moving EWR’s ATC handling to Philadelphia.
The real short and medium term impact of what the FAA is proposing is to cut EWR’s capacity until mid June to levels that are about what the airport has been handling under single runway ops due to runway construction and when the crosswind runway is not available due to weather conditions. Even after that period, however, the FAA is proposing a pretty dramatic cut in EWR capacity to flight levels only slightly better than what it proposes during runway construction.
It isn’t clear why the FAA is proposing such draconian cuts esp. post runway construction but Scott Kirby has been very vocal about the FAA’s decision to remove slot controls at EWR almost 10 years ago and that they need to be reinstated. DOT and Port Authority NYNJ data shows that the number of flights at EWR has not dramatically changed for the better or worse since EWR was slot controlled and even before when CO operated the hub there. However, UA is moving more people through EWR than CO did which undoubtedly is part of why the pain is higher when EWR ops fall below levels that the current runway system at EWR can handle – independent of ATC technology. CO and UA operate(d) 65-70% of EWR traffic and no other airline has more than 5% traffic share so, if EWR is overscheduled, it will be up to UA to reduce the most operations, even though the FAA is proposing proportional cuts for all carriers.
The FAA has to fix the technology problems that are leading to frequent failures of EWR’s ATC infrastructure on top; of enhancements to the entire US ATC system but they also seem determined to lower the capacity that EWR can handle to levels well below what the airport currently handles.
Why is no one talking about the real elephant in the room? It isn’t so much ATC per se. It’s that there’s just too many damn planes in the air. We have 76 seat RJ’s running halfway across the country. In 1996, 150, 200+ seaters were doing the same runs. Maybe what the airlines need to do is start upgauging back to larger metal. I realize that’s not something that can happen overnight. But keep the smaller <100 seaters doing the one or two flights a day on stages of 300 miles or less.
And I've heard the "we want choices and frequency" argument and I'm not convinced that it's a valid argument. A sense of entitlement, sure. THAT I believe. But if you need to get from A to B and your choices get cut from 20 times a day to ten, but on a larger plane, you'll still pick one. Nobody is going to not take a trip because there's no 0917 departure. You'll take either the 0730 or the noon one.
Besides what good is that "choice" anyway when one or both ends of the flight are gate held or put in the penalty box?
To me, I consider the "off the plane" time that counts. Not what time the plane touched down. What good is an "early" arrival only to sit there waiting for a gate for half an hour?
Agree that airlines still have a fair amount of blame here. Its like buying a car that can’t go over 80 MPH then complaining to the manufacturer when you take it over 80 MPH and the parts start falling off… yes we should have a better car, but they should also be operating within the current one’s known limitations.
Matt, your comment is the best near-term solution to the problem. (hands clapping)
Yes, these newly-reprised old proposals are absolutely necessary, but EWR (and others) cannot wait for their implementations. Even 2028, which seems an unlikely goal to complete all improvement, is just too long to wait it out.
Upgauging while reducing frequency seems to be the best thing to do…if there were actually available supplies of bigger airplanes. The second- and third-order effects of Boeing’s mismanagement strike again! Perhaps United could secure some planes from third-world country flag carriers. Second-hand planes sales would likely be more profitable for many of them than actually operating routes. Per Planespotters.net, Air India currently has 4 777s and 2 787s parked!
Or maybe some A380s could be repurposed for the LAX-EWR and similar routes!
All kidding aside, this is quite a pickle — the budgetary issue of instituting the proposals being one of the biggest hurdles. Seems like a perfect opportunity to use government bonds paid for by a(nother) tax on tickets. People who don’t fly shouldn’t have to pay for the improvements. I fly frequently and would gladly pay another $5-$10 per ticket to fund the improvements. Per bts.gov, there were nearly 1 billion enplanements for the period March 2024 – February 2025. $5B to $10B per year, over however many years necessary, should cover it, no?
Actually, an additional tax on tickets would be a great way to get around the biggest problem this faces: trying to get funded, especially if the FAA wants to start with the 2025-2026 fiscal year. A dedicated tax on tickets would be able to be run through a trust fund and kept out of the upcoming budget free-for-all* for 2025-2026, and it could be used to pay down up-front debt taken on for the project.
I’d personally prefer to see a base charge plus a distance component within the US, since longer flights use more ARTCC resources than shorter ones, but that just details – the concept solves the political problem at a stroke.
* – don’t yell at be for being partisan, this upcoming war is entirely intra-Republican over the budget deficit vs. making the current tax rates permanent vs. Medicare cuts vs. shoveling more cash at defence…there’s a lot of “vs” in there within the GOP.
Matt D,
I agree with upgauging as you can move the same number of flyers if not more, but with fewer planes/ slots required. In the case of EWR, perhaps removing a number of short hops will help. same could be said for JFK & a few other large international hubs as well.
yes, excellent point.
There is an airline planning desire to connect spoke cities to as many hubs as possible and that usually requires using a fair amount of regional jets to do so.
The megamerger cycle that created AA, DL and UA of today partially led to rationalization of hubs, allowing carriers to close inefficient hubs. DL led the charge w/ the closure of CVG and MEM which were RJ heavy hubs and by upgauging in other hubs. Other airlines have also made progress in using larger RJs and upgauging both from RJs to mainline and also to larger mainline aircraft.
At the time of the CO-UA merger, EWR as a hub was about 50/50 mainline/RJ and is now only about 1/3 RJ for domestic flights so UA has made a lot of progress in upgauging.
Still, the same Port Authority that operates EWR also operates LGA which has a Port Authority imposed perimeter restriction that limits the ability to serve large portions of the country and to maximize the use of slots. LGA is about 60% RJ for both AA and DL.
DCA is even more RJ heavy for AA, also because of the perimeter restriction there.
If the FAA is serious about reducing movements at congested airports, then they need to push back on perimeter restrictions at DCA and LGA and encourage airlines to use larger aircraft including to destinations that don’t receive service now because of the perimeter restrictions.
Respectfully disagree. The situation whereby the ATC system cannot cope with the number of flights was just waiting to happen. If RJs were all replaced by A320/B737 aircraft, then you are just kicking the can down the road…. and Congress + DOT will just ignore the problem for a few more years. The FAA, DOT, and any interested party in Govt has known about this for almost 30 years but people just quarreled over whether or how it should be solved. Sometimes you just need something serious to bang heads together and force people to compromise – the crash in DC and Newark are beginning to make people realise they need to find a solution.
Too many flights is really only a problem at the few busiest airports. So rather than tell airlines what aircraft they can and can’t use, just introduce stricter slot controls at airports and the airlines can figure out what works best.
“Bigger planes” isn’t quite that simple.
For safety reasons, bigger planes require greater approach/departure spacings, especially between big planes and small(er) planes, so it’s not a 1-for-1 replacement in terms of throughput in # of planes as the planes grow in size.
Also, I would argue that the current economics (especially crew salaries and fuel) and age of the existing RJ/turboprop fleets are largely driving airlines towards bigger planes anyway, and will continue to do so in the near future… There just aren’t many planes < 80 seats being bought new by first world airlines these days, and the existing ones are getting old.
Excellent point about RJs and Regional Airlines economics. Regional Airlines are smoke and mirror shell companies that exist solely for the purpose of arbitraging labor. The pilots, FA’s, tug drivers etc. *USED to be* cheaper but the redundant do-nothing management parasites are expensive. The arrangements are complicated and quality control is difficult. Constant headache for mainline management. I haven’t kept up with the day to day state of the industry hiring and remuneration, but a year or two ago when I was looking at regional pilot pay, non-contractual bonuses on top of greatly improved pilot contracts resulted in a situation where 50 seat RJ captains were frequently earning more than their mainline peers flying much larger equipment, thereby negating the entire point of maintaining such an elaborate ruse. Unless there is a sudden glut of pilots willing to work for less than $20k a year, like there was twenty years ago, it appears the market conditions that made outsourcing flying to regional subsidiaries profitable no longer exist.
Most of what you suggest has already taken place and is continuing to happen. The fifty seat RJ is now mostly a relic of a by-gone era. Pilot shortages, expensive oil and the inherent limits of airports and airspace are all contributing factors. I was a EWR based RJ pilot from 2004-2014 and you would not believe the delays in the mid-2000’s. Routine three hour plus taxi-outs on sunny, fair weather days, solely because of aircraft volume were the norm. I had EWR tower and the Continental Flow desk on speed dial and was constantly pleading for an earlier EDCT or takeoff times. Crews timing out at out stations due to delays and duty day restrictions was a constant threat. Slot controls and the Passenger Bill of Rights (imposing fines on ground delayed aircraft) were highly effective government actions that further incentivized the airlines to up-gauge aircraft.
United has a business plan to in-house more flying, replacing smaller regional jets with A320/737 sized aircraft operated by mainline, but pilot shortages and aircraft delivery issues are hampering their plans. Acquiring Jet Blue and their fleet of A320 and A220 aircraft could help them achieve their goals and alleviate problems in EWR and else where. If JetBlue doesn’t have a network or a business model that allows them to profitably operate their fleet of single aisle aircraft, perhaps another carrier should be allowed to?
What have United said about cuts in flights at Newark ? Very much doubt they will just stay quiet…
Say what you will about those paper flight strips. But when the gee-whiz electronics crap out, you still have the strips. It’s why I carry paper nav charts as a backup when flying.
Not sure I agree with the idea that the Potomac River crash wasn’t an ATC failure… true, it seems the individual controller(s) didn’t do anything wrong within the current system, but at a systemic level, I think/hope a more modern & technologically advanced system could have prevented it.
Absolutely right. It was a system failure zoning because the system is so inadequate.
How? The controller did their job.
All the newest ATC toys in the world won’t help if pilots don’t follow directions.
A person driving a train sees a red light. They must stop the train – and if they do not stop, it is the driver’s fault.
However people learned many years ago, that occasionally people make mistakes and back-up safety systems exist… so if a train goes past a red light, a safety system will (in many countries around the world) either apply emergency brakes or at the very least give a very clear warning to the driver.
Same idea applies with aircraft – humans can and do make mistakes… and “accident waiting to happen” is a very real concept.
Military chopper pilots were behaving as reckless cowboys even though they probably didn’t know it themselves. They weren’t flagrantly violating any rules that I am aware of, but they were cheating high and to the inside of the approved corridor, which is to be expected. They were just following orders and they were hostage to the system that trained and employed them, the US military at fault, not individual pilots, but wearing night vision goggles in THAT corridor while drilling a time-trial, speed-run nuclear war evacuation scenario in the real world, not a simulator??? Extraordinarily reckless. Willfull disregard for the safety of civilians IMHO. The fact that the helicopter corridor even existed and provided less than 100ft of separation from the glide slope for runway 33 was 100% fault of FAA. Unacceptable normalization of catastrophic risk. The system as designed was inherently risky. It was just a matter of time before tragedy would happen. Pilots and controllers are humans, and humans make mistakes. This is why you don’t design systems that routinely place aircraft on a collision course, but rely on imperfect humans to “save the day” with extraordinary means at the last second. It works until one day it predictably doesn’t.
It may or may not happen, this administration jumps on “bandwagons” of public concern about an issue until they decide its not as easy as it seems and just jump off and get interested in another issue that seems more trendy at the moment.