CFS Video Feed

Well, I made it to Chicago safely and I am settled in my room. Dinner is about to start but I wanted to let you that you can watch the Communicating for Safety conference on the ‘net. It will start on Tuesday morning. You can check the schedule here.

The live feed will be from here.

Don Brown
March 31, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 31

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

”Mar 31, 1956: The Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA) was established as a nonprofit professional organization to promote the advancement of air traffic control. Originally composed only of controllers, ATCA broadened its membership to include governmental agencies, private companies, and other individuals and organizations worldwide. “

I’ve only heard the oldest of stories about ATCA (as opposed to PATCO or NATCA.) I believe it started with the same intentions -- to represent the controller profession -- but it transformed into the good-old-boy network for FAA management. Whatever the story, one look at their board tells you they aren’t controllers.

I know Mr. Planzer is ex-FAA. And I recognize Mr. Washington from his recent appearance on The Main Bang (which is usually not a good thing for FAA management -- and it wasn’t.) You’ll probably recognize some of the companies. Harris, ITT, NAV CANADA, etc. They might be involved in air traffic control but I don’t think they’re representing controllers anymore.

Don Brown
March 31, 2008

FAA Oversight

You are paying attention to the airline inspection story right ? Southwest Airlines got popped with a big fine, the FAA is accused of letting them slide and the FBI is investigating threats made against the FAA inspector that blew the whistle on the whole deal.

If you go to the union that represents the people that blew the whistle, you start getting the whole story.

FAA INSPECTORS UNION QUESTIONS TIMING OF $10.2 MILLION PENALTY AGAINST SOUTHWEST AIRLINES

”It is appalling that the FAA chose to impose this penalty only after several months of investigations by Congress and the threat of a pending hearing instead of immediately addressing the implications brought forward by inspectors over a year ago “

That investigation was instigated by my buddy Chairman James Oberstar. And a funny thing happened on the way to the Forum...

American and Delta Ground More Than 200 Planes

”American Airlines and Delta Air Lines said Wednesday that more than 200 of their planes might not comply with Federal Aviation Administration rules “

Golly gee, it seems as if oversight actually works. Too bad it takes a Congressman (from the right Party) to make the FAA do their job.

Do you see how all this works ? Did you notice that all this hasn’t been working for the last few (about 7) years ? Pay attention.

COMMUNICATIONS OUTAGE HIGHLIGHTS SERIOUS FLAWS AT THE FAA

”The culprit for this outage was once again problems directly attributed to Harris Corporation’s Federal Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI) system, which provides vital circuitry and communication functions for the FAA. Harris engineering failed to provide appropriate backup, which would have kept air traffic fully operational following the primary failure. “All around the country, we’ve seen very serious issues resulting from Harris’ unreliable services. This failure is no different, yet the FAA continues to ignore the issue while declaring the FTI program a success,” said Steve Garrett, a local PASS representative. “


NATCA PRESIDENT PATRICK FORREY DELIVERS SPEECH TO AERO CLUB OF WASHINGTON

”And no, we will never forget that the FAA abandoned a fair collective bargaining process, and tore apart the already tenuous relationship it had with its controller workforce.  

This is the open, bleeding wound we are desperately trying to repair, for the sake of the safety and stability of the system. But, we are faced with an employer chasing after us with a salt shaker. “

”As a direct result of this, the total number of fully certified controllers has fallen to a 15-year low.  

Nationwide, more than 2,200 controllers and trainees left their jobs between Oct. 1, 2006 and Jan. 5, 2008. 

That’s roughly one out of every seven in the workforce. Only 17 of the 911 controllers that retired last year reached the mandatory age of 56. “

”The FAA knows its imposed work rules have failed. That is why it has begun offering $24,000 bonuses to veteran controllers to try and keep them from leaving. It hasn’t worked.  

This fiscal year’s attrition total is on track to shatter FAA projections by a wider margin than even last year’s record exodus of over 1,600. “

The FAA has more problems than oversight alone can fix. In other words, one committee chairman -- no matter how good he might be -- can fix it all.

PASS is doing their part. NATCA is doing theirs. Chairman Oberstar is doing his. Are you doing your part ?

Don Brown
March 29, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 29

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

”Mar 29, 1996: The Clinton Administration announced a Presidential directive assuring the availabilility of Global Positioning System (GPS) signals to civilian users. The new policy included a planned end to the practice of degrading civil GPS signals, within a decade, in a manner that would allow the U.S. military to prepare for this eventuality.

On Apr 26, FAA cancelled its contract with Wilcox Electric for the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) to enhance GPS signals (see Aug 1, 1995). The agency cited project management problems and projected cost overruns. On May 1, FAA entered into a letter contract with Hughes Information Technology Systems regarding WAAS. This was followed by the Oct 29 announcement of a comprehensive contract with Hughes for WAAS development and implementation. Other related milestones during 1996 included a Jul 26 FAA plan for transition to GPS-based navigation and landing guidance during a period of about 10 years that would start when augmented GPS service became available.“

When you start talking about GPS, WAAS and LAAS -- things start getting complicated in a hurry. Like so many things, I suggest hopping over to Wikipedia if you’d like to find out more.

To be honest, the only thing that grabbed my attention in Wikipedia’s WAAS article was this:

”The 2004 baseline estimates the final program cost to the US Federal government as over US$ 3.3 billion when delivered in 2013; more than 3.7 times the original budget and 12 years behind schedule. “

When we’re talking basics, controllers don’t really care how pilots navigate -- just so long as they can navigate. The problem is when the FAA starts certifying various means of navigation without basic commonality. Controllers don’t care how you get to TAWBA -- with INS, GPS, LORAN or NDB -- we just want you to get there and we don’t want to have to spell it, give out the radial/fix distance or look up the Lat/Long for it.

Don Brown
March 29, 2008

ATC Globalization

I’m pretty sure you didn’t see this news story. Unless you’re reading the news from Botswana that is. It's about an air traffic controller conference held in Arusha, Tanzania.

3,000 air traffic controllers lacking worldwide

”Citing the immediate need for an estimated three thousand controllers, IFATCA president and CEO Marc Baumgartner said:  "This shortage of controllers, which is evident in all regions - Africa, the Middle East, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, and North and South America - represents a serious hazard to the flying public as we strive to maintain a safe and efficient air traffic system handling ever increasing numbers of flights. “

This dire situation is exacerbated when air traffic service providers, in an effort to keep the system running, resort to mandatory or forced overtime. Excessive overtime amid the continuing growth of air traffic results in mental and physical fatigue that threatens the health of air traffic control personnel.

"We call upon States and air traffic services providers worldwide to recognise this potential hazard and to take immediate steps to mitigate the serious risks posed", stated Baumgartner.

IFATCA is the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations , based in Montreal, Quebec. It’s embarrassing that I haven’t mentioned them before. You really should check out their forum section. The language barrier is always a problem but they are still informative.

For instance. I learned that in Mexico, controllers only work 35 hours a week. Overtime is paid at double your hourly rate and anything beyond 9 hours of overtime in a week is paid at triple time. In that I know some American controllers occasionally work a 60 hour week (6 days, 10 hours a day), I bet they’re calculating what 16 hours of overtime at triple their rate -- instead of 1 and 1/2 their rate -- would be worth.

But before you get blinded by the dollars, think about this. The fact that controllers are working overtime seems to be a problem worldwide. This statement was also in the article.

”In addressing the staff shortage and the consequent safety issues, IFATCA resolved that its member associations should discourage air traffic controllers from working overtime and to be aware of their obligations concerning the number of working hours permitted within the framework of the applicable laws. “

While many controllers are just calculating what they make in overtime, the air traffic control service providers of the world made those calculations long ago. It’s cheaper to use controllers up than it is to hire new ones. Keeping staffing to a minimum and covering the shortage with overtime is cheaper than hiring the extra body and taking on the other costs -- administrative, benefits, retirement etc. If their cost of hiring a new person is 1.5 times the cost of their current controller (and I bet that number is close), when you’re only getting 1.5 times your regular rate for overtime...well, the math isn’t very hard to figure out is it ?

Right now, some controllers are figuring out that overtime doesn’t hurt the FAA and some citizens are figuring out just how little value their safety gets in that equation. Think about it and it will clue you in on the worldwide shortage of controllers. Because no matter who is running the system -- the civilian government, the military, a private contractor or some type of combination thereof -- the calculations are the same.

(Note to CK: Thanks for the tip on the topic.)

Don Brown
March 28, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 27

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

”Mar 27, 1977: Two Boeing 747s collided on a runway at Tenerife, Canary Islands, under conditions of limited visibility. One of the aircraft, a Pan American jet, was moving down the runway toward an assigned taxiway. The other, belonging to Royal Dutch Airlines (KLM), had been assigned to wait at the end of the same runway. The Dutch crew was approaching the legal flight duty time limit. Their captain apparently misinterpreted a message from the tower as clearance to take off. Disregarding the doubts of a crew member, he began the takeoff roll. The resulting collision killed all 248 persons aboard the KLM jet and 335 of the 396 persons aboard the Pan American. The fatality total of 583 was the worst that had occurred in any aviation accident. Most of the casualties were caused by the intense fires that engulfed both aircraft. The accident stimulated interest in fire safety (see Jun 26, 1978) and in airport surface detection equipment (see Jul 5, 1977). “

Tenerife is still the biggest accident in the history of aviation. So much has been written about the accident but yet, in searching around the internet, I have found another documentary I hadn’t seen before. It’s in two parts, on YouTube. Please use your discretion before clicking on the links and watching. Some of the scenes aren’t easy to take. The camera panning the (seemingly) endless rows of coffins is haunting.

Part I

Part II

Aviation accidents rarely have just one cause. This fact usually gives rise to debate as to which cause was the main cause. It’s not all that relevant as far as safety goes but -- after safety fails -- the lawyers enter to attach blame. Having said that, this documentary emphasizes what I believe to be the main cause. The KLM 747 had taxied to the end of the runway and was in position to take off without having received its routing clearance -- the route it would be cleared to fly. It seems as if the captain of the KLM believed this ATC clearance was (or would include) his takeoff clearance. We’ll never know what he was really thinking. He died along with everyone else aboard his aircraft.

Don Brown
March 26, 2008

NextGen Irony

The modern-day traffic light traces its roots back to 1912. Too bad it wasn’t in 1908. I like nice, round numbers and “100-year-old technology” just has a better “ring” to it than “96-year-old technology.”

Regardless, traffic lights are what the FAA is going with.

F.A.A. Wants Stoplights Added to Runways


”The system will use a computer to determine when a runway is in use, and then turn on red lights embedded in the pavement at each intersection. Thus it would help to counter errors by pilots and controllers at the 20 airports, which include Kennedy International and Newark Liberty International, but not La Guardia.“

I’ll wait and see what my Tower friends have to say about all this before I pass judgment. Airport surface operations are not my area of expertise. I just enjoy the irony of it all -- a “space-based” air traffic control system installing lowly traffic lights.

Don Brown
March 26, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 25

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

” Mar 25-Apr 10, 1970: Some 3,000 air traffic controllers, all members of PATCO, engaged in a "sickout" strike. All but a few of those involved were en route, rather than terminal, controllers. Some remained absent for a day or two, others for the entire 17-day period. The work stoppage reflected widespread discontent, but its immediate trigger was FAA's decision to ignore PATCO's protests and carry out the involuntary transfer of three controllers from the Baton Rouge combined station-tower. The absentees claimed sick leave, but the Department of Transportation viewed their action as a strike against the U.S. government and hence illegal. The government obtained temporary restraining orders against PATCO. When the union failed to comply with these orders, a show-cause order was obtained against its officers. During the hearing on the show-cause order, PATCO agreed to call off the "sickout." FAA suspended nearly 1,000 controllers and fired 52 for their role in the affair. (See Feb 18, 1970, and Apr 23, 1970.) “

History is always a little different -- depending upon the sources. As I understood it, every one of those controllers was rehired -- except for Mike Rock. Mike Rock was one of the original founders of PATCO. The stories I was told seem to be verified in this document.

” 1970: PATCO stages a three-week "sick-out" in which 2,200 controllers participate. The Air Transport Association wins a court order ending the job action. PATCO ignores the order, but an eventual deal bars PATCO from further job actions. Sixty-seven controllers are fired. All but PATCO founder Mike Rock eventually are reinstated. “

If you’re interested in the bigger story, a good place to start is ”The Pressures of PATCO by Rebecca Pels.

Don Brown
March 25, 2008

Where Angels Fear

Some of you may remember from awhile back that I recommended reading the Economist’s View. I don’t read it as much as I used to simply because of time constraints and the fact that Paul Krugman’s column at The New York Times is now available to all.

I realize that economics is not my field and that the true experts (such as Mr. Krugman) are having a tough time deciphering what all is going on...but I can’t help myself. For my money, Fred Block hit the nail on the head with this article.

“Mortgage Meltdown for Dummies: Defining the Changes We Need”

You can read a condensed version of that article at Economist’s View.

All the smart guys keep telling me that another Depression is virtually impossible. Yet Brad DeLong (another well-respected economist) had an attention-getting post on his blog Saturday where he used the “D” word.

It’s all enough to make you sit up and take notice. With so many controllers up for retirement and so much of their money wrapped up in the Thrift Savings Plan, the future economic situation could have a substantial impact on air traffic control in ways most people aren’t aware of. Speaking of which, I wonder how many are aware that U.S. government employees have $224 billion in “the market” ? Or that, every two weeks, Uncle Sam deposits up to 15% of the Federal payroll into “the market” on behalf of its employees ? (Somebody check the math. It’s a big chunk of change whatever the percentage.)

It’s a good thing Barclays isn’t Bear Stearns. What do you mean, “Who is Barclays ?”

Don Brown
March 24, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 23

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

”Mar 23, 1962: FAA type-certificated North American Aviation's Sabreliner (Model 265), an executive type jet aircraft. It thus became the first executive-type aircraft with twin turbojet engines to be designed, developed, and certificated in the United States. “

I was reading some piece on aviation the other day and the author was saying that business aviation wasn’t really a factor in air traffic control until the 80’s or the 90’s. That was news to me. The Jetstar came out even earlier than the Saberliner.

”Aug 28, 1961: FAA issued type and production certificates for the Lockheed Model 1329 JetStar, powered by four Pratt & Whitney JT12A-6 engines. The JetStar was the first four-engine turbojet executive-type transport designed and developed in the United States to be certificated. “

And the Learjet was right behind them.

”Oct 7, 1963: The Learjet 23 made its initial flight. FAA certificated the twin-engine executive aircraft in July of the following year, and the company made its first delivery in October. The success of Model 23 and later Learjets helped to popularize corporate jet transportation.“

I find it very odd how we used to value this industry, and now, it too seems to be slipping from our grasp. Corporate jets are now being built by Brazil, Canada and, soon, Japan. Cessna will manufacture it’s SkyCatcher -- a “light sport aircraft” in China.

Factor in all the conventional wisdom you’ve heard about expensive labor, exporting jobs and fair trade. See if any of it makes sense to you. Japan has a skilled workforce but they’ll manufacture their jet here in the States. China isn’t known for its high-tech workforce but an American company (Cessna) will export its jobs there. Brazil isn’t even on most American’s radar scope but has been quietly invading our market for years. If you clicked on the link above, I assume you noticed the Bombardier bought the Learjet. If you want to read something that doesn’t jibe with conventional wisdom, read about Bombardier.

Don Brown
March 23, 2008

Wall Street Needs You

Every once in a while, someone writes something that makes me say, “I wish I had written that.”

”The Street on Welfare “”

”Never do I want to hear again from my conservative friends about how brilliant capitalists are, how much they deserve their seven-figure salaries and how government should keep its hands off the private economy.”

I mean it -- I wouldn’t change a single word of the article. I look forward to reading more from E. J. Dionne Jr. in the future.

Don Brown
March 22, 2008

Kyrie Eleison

Just a reminder that it’s Good Friday and an observation: Have you ever noticed how many exclamations come from church ?

Lord have mercy, the airline industry is talking about bringing back the turboprop.

North America Looks to Turboprops

One of the problems you see in air traffic control (over and over again) is that business can move so much faster than government. Airlines can put a dozen airplanes into a new airport before the FAA can redesign the airspace to accommodate the new traffic. When the price of fuel goes up, the airlines change the way they operate and the FAA, once again, has to play catch up.

With the price of fuel -- and the financial crisis -- expect to see a lot of changes in the entire aviation community. It could be a huge break for the FAA. Air traffic usually declines during a recession. That could give the FAA some extra time to hire more controller trainees and it might keep some from leaving.

Don Brown
March 21, 2008

Mapping

Yesterday, I sent you to Strange Maps and I’m going to send you there again. Open up this map in a new window on your browser so you can refer to it as you read.

Locate Atlanta, GA on the map. Precisely.

Describe to me how to drive from New York to Atlanta using this map.

How many “intersections” are there between New York City and Atlanta on this map.

No, this isn’t designed just to frustrate you. I want you to think about maps. In transportation, you have to be able to give directions. To be able to give directions, there must be common points of reference. A road -- Interstate 85. An intersection -- the SW corner of Maple and Third. Landmarks -- In Marietta (an Atlanta suburb), you can’t go anywhere without reference to “The Big Chicken.”

The FAA is heading down a dangerous road and I really wonder why no one seems to be paying attention. Take a look at these two STARs (Standard Terminal Arrival Routes.)







I see only two common points of reference -- the ATL (Atlanta) VOR and the SOT (Snowbird) VOR. That doesn’t do you much good (some, but not much) when you’re trying to figure out if you can hold at SHANE or PLEES on the PECHY STAR while you’re holding at ODF on the WHINZ STAR.

Some of my long-time readers might recognize this as another version of the same problem I’m been talking about for years...Where does a flight from GSO direct M54 cross a flight on V35 ?

If you don’t know what GSO, M54 and V35 are then you begin to see the problem. It’s like trying to program the GPS in your car to turn left at the first light south of the Big Chicken.

Think about it.

Don Brown
March 20, 2008

Holy, Holy, Holy

It is Holy Week and holy cow ! (the crowd groans) am I busy. Things to do, places to go and people to see. So take this opportunity to visit some other folks.

Hop over to The FAA Follies and help out John at The Main Bang.

See those links on the left side of my page ? They’re there for a reason. Go read Paul Krugman’s “Shouting “fire” in a crowded theater” or Robert Reich’s “Why the Fed's Wall Street Bailouts Won't Work” (it’s a 2-parter) or see what James Fallows has to say about China or Obama.

For something really different, head over to Just an Earth-Bound Misfit. WARNING : For Mature Audiences Only. She has a gun and a cat (more than one actually), an airplane, a law degree and she can cuss like a sailor (which I believe she was.) I’m not kidding, she can make you blush. But E-BM is never dull.

And just for fun, there is Strange Maps. If I had hours to kill I could do it here.

Don Brown
March 19, 2008

FAA History Lesson -- March 17

From the FAA Historical Chronology, 1926-1996...

”Mar 17, 1966: The Bell Triservice X-22A, a tilting-duct Vertical/ Short Takeoff and Landing (V/STOL) aircraft, made its maiden flight. On Jun 30, 1966, with the tilting ducts at an angle of 30 degrees, the aircraft made its first STOL takeoff, and subsequently attained a top speed in excess of 100 miles an hour.

Mar 17, 1966: FAA type-certificated the Learjet 24, a two-engine turbine-powered business aircraft seating eight (two crewmembers and six passengers). In the first flight of its kind by a business jet, a Learjet 24 completed a 17-leg, 23,002-statute-mile, round-the-world flight on May 26, 1966. The global flight took 65 hours 40 minutes (actual flying time, 50 hours). “

I would normal give these two entries a pass -- neither really has much to do with air traffic control. However, because of so much talk about technology and what it will do for ATC, I thought I’d use them.

The Lear 24 was wildly successful. The X-22A -- after 42 years -- is almost ready for the field, having morphed into the V-22 Osprey.

Here are a few pictures I found as I was searching the ‘net.

X-22A

V-22 Osprey

Lear 25 (a stretched version of the Lear 24 but a really neat shot.)

Sometimes, the promise of technology works out. Sometimes, you have to wait 40 years or more.


Don Brown
March 17, 2008

We Warned You

This quote from Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) is just too good to pass up.

”Tyler Duvall is a little pointy-headed neocon with grand ideas about the future of transportation, and they all involve tolling," DeFazio said. "He's bright, young, energetic -- just totally wrong, and has a bizarre, neocon view of transportation. “

Just in case you’ve forgotten who Congressman DeFazio is, he’s one of the good guys.

Run over to The Washington Post and read:

Letting the Market Drive Transportation


And while you’re at it, I’ve been waiting for on opportunity to throw this one out. Grover Norquist is one of the biggest -- if not the biggest -- proponents of the NeoCon movement. He made the mistake of showing up on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Well, I thought is was a mistake. You can judge for yourself. Watch the video.

Don Brown
March 17, 2008

Air Referee

Whenever controllers hear from the pie-in-the-sky crowd about self-separation and cockpit-based separation in air traffic control we try to suppress the urge to snicker. We know that if these programs ever get close to succeeding we still have one ace-in-the-hole to maintain our job security -- refereeing. I saw this first hand right after the PATCO strike in 1981. Everybody likes to think they’re “first” and the arguments can quickly get out of hand.

I mention it because of the current deadlock on the FAA’s reauthorization. Congress is spilt into two camps. One wants to continue funding the FAA as it has been funded for many years -- with fuel taxes. The other camp wants to fund it with new “user fees.” If you don’t already know about this fight you can read more of the details here.

Before I start refereeing, let me provide some personal disclosure. I grew up on a General Aviation airport. That is where I worked through high school and college. I am not a pilot nor do I own an airplane. I am not a dispassionate observer about this issue but I believe I am an honest one. Here goes.

User fees will spell the beginning of the end for General Aviation. I believe the effort to impose user fees is part of the larger effort the privatize the National Airspace System. If for no other reason, I would oppose user fees on this issue alone. As I have stated many, many times on this blog, there is no comparison between the U.S. and the rest of the world when it comes to aviation. We are the sole aviation “superpower.” General Aviation is a large part of the reason behind that. We got the public policy right.

Regardless, lets examine the case for user fees. The argument is that it is a “fair” and proportional way to tax the industry. User fees would ensure that General Aviation -- especially the corporate business jets -- paid their “fair share.” When you look at the facts from behind a radar scope, that argument doesn’t hold water.

In my Area of Atlanta Center, we had 7 sectors. That is 7 radar scopes -- each dedicated to a certain area defined by geographical location and altitude. My favorite sector was the Wilkes sector (named after Wilkesboro, NC). The reason it was my favorite is that 90% of the traffic in the sector was General Aviation. The sector only “owned” the altitudes from the ground to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL).

Above that sector, life was very different. The proportions flipped and 90% of the traffic became airline traffic. The Area -- at one time -- handled all the traffic into and out of Charlotte, NC (CLT) but as the USAir hub grew, we had to divide the airspace into smaller sections and split the Area in two. There are now five sectors in Atlanta Center and one sector in Jacksonville Center designed to handle the airline traffic into and out of CLT between the altitudes of 11,000 and 23,000. In case anyone is interested, the sectors are SHINE, MOPED, LEEON, LOCAS, UNARM and CTF (Chesterfield in Jacksonville Center). Above 23,000, the traffic is probably 95% airline traffic.

Tomorrow, if all General Aviation traffic suddenly disappeared, the only change we would make would be to close the WILKES sector and combine it with the SHINE and/or MOPED sectors. On the other hand, if all the airline traffic disappeared, we would have to totally redesign the airspace. The number of sectors in my Area would certainly be cut in half and maybe more. As a matter of fact, that would probably hold true for all of Atlanta Center. We would only need half (or less) of the radar scopes we currently use.

That is a pretty powerful argument right there but there is one even more powerful -- one that paints a clearer picture. If the Charlotte and Atlanta airports disappeared tomorrow we would make almost the same amount of changes as if all the airline traffic disappeared. We wouldn’t be able to combine up as many high altitude sectors (above 23,000) but we would close just as many low altitude sectors. The hub airports -- the airports designed for and dominated by the airlines -- are the resource hogs of the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization.

If you don’t believe that, all you have to do is look at Flow Control (aka Traffic Management, Air Traffic Control System Command Center). Or, as I refer to them, The Tenth Kingdom. (Air Traffic Control in the FAA used to be divided up into nine Regions. Flow Control became the tenth “kingdom.”) The Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC) was designed and built to keep the airline hubs running. It now handles special events for General Aviation (like the Super Bowl or the Master’s Golf Tournament) but -- much like the entire National Airspace System -- it was designed for the airlines.

In closing, you might ask yourself why the airlines want to change the funding system. I’ve already mentioned the fact that user fees will really hurt General Aviation. If you’ll think about one of my other favorite themes -- runway capacity -- the picture might become a little clearer. If the major airport runways are operating at maximum capacity (and they are), the only way to add capacity is to build more runways . Or use other, existing runways. Runways currently used by General Aviation.

The future of air travel isn’t in cramming even more airplanes into maxed out airline hubs. It’s in more point-to-point flights. Technological advancements are making this possibility more and more likely. General Aviation is in a better position to take advantage of those changes. And the airlines know it.

(Note: Don’t get excited about Mr. Fallows use of the term “free flight” in the link above. As I’ve said before, the term means different things to different people. We’ll get to that problem another day.)

Don Brown
March 17, 2008

WOOF !

Okay, I admit it. I’m becoming Narcissistic. I really get a kick out of searching the web to see where my work is winding up.

It started back when I was still writing for AVweb. I was dumbfounded when I started getting emails from Germany, Australia and Hong Kong. We all know it’s called the World-Wide Web but knowing and knowing are two different things. Even now, with Get the Flick, it still happens. This is obviously a very America-oriented blog but still...

I have more readers in Australia than Washington State.

I have twice as many readers in New Zealand as Hawaii.

I have more readers in Canada than Nevada.

It just blows me away that I get more hits from Germany than I do from right-next door in Alabama. (Don’t get too excited Wilhelm and Hans. It is Alabama we’re talking about.)

The upside of my psychosis is that I’m always finding new blogs. I bumped into a new one just this morning -- JurassicBark. I don’t know who it is and I haven’t seen anyone else in NATCA talking about it but it’s yet another close-to-retirement controller that has had enough of the FAA. And from everything I can tell, JurassicBark has the flick.

For the non-controllers that decide to visit, be sure to take a look at this post. Don’t get distracted by the video. Scroll over the picture and click on it to enlarge it. The last time I saw something that ugly I was on Valium for three days. Don’t worry -- you’re safe. It’s not so bad as long as you aren’t the one talking to them -- or riding on them.

You can add JurassicBark to the growing list of voices -- barking in the wilderness. Maybe Congress will wake up and start asking, “Who let the dogs out ?” Hopefully they won’t think it’s an Echo.

Don Brown
March 15, 2008

Think Tank Thunk

Recalling (if you will) yesterday’s blog, Robert Poole of The Reason Foundation wrote to Mike Lewis of the Boeing Company’s ATM (that’s Air Traffic Management) business unit to dispel my “eloquent” but quaint notions about air traffic control. Mr. Poole, being true to his word, sent me Mr. Lewis’ full remarks (very quickly I might add) upon request.

Let me pause here to make my first point.

As I told my regular readers in a post (oddly) entitled “A note to my regular readers”:

”In reading Air Traffic Safety vs. Capacity, it won’t take you long to realize it’s a departure from my normal style on this blog. I wrote it with the intention of selling it and getting the information in front of a more general audience. In other words, you’ll notice that it was written for a non-aviation audience. It has some uncomfortable generalizations... “

Giving Mr. Lewis the benefit of the doubt, I’ll assume he is not a regular reader and didn’t see that note. I don’t assume that Mr. Poole is a regular reader either. I just thought it worth noting that Mr. Poole felt the need to turn to his “expert” to try and dispel the assertions in an article written for a general, “non-aviation” audience. Moving on...

Mr. Poole did an excellent job summarizing Mr. Lewis’ main points. They were:


• "GPS, centimeter-precise digital maps, synthetic and enhanced vision, taxi-map displays, and precision guidance can eliminate visibility as a constraint.

• "ADS-B, multilateration, integrated radar, and flight deck displays can precisely locate all traffic.

• "RNP routings, trajectory tracking and planning can give very accurate four-dimensional paths for use in automation and displays.

• "Wake vortex detection and tracking could show where wake hazards are—and aren't. (This is the one area that still needs advances in technology.)

• "With these items in place, we could safely operate with more than one plane on a 10,000-foot runway, especially with departures."

Let’s take them one at a time.

”GPS, centimeter-precise digital maps, synthetic and enhanced vision, taxi-map displays, and precision guidance can eliminate visibility as a constraint.
“

I addressed this issue in The Silver Lining . “ The trick would be to improve IFR operations to nearly the level of VFR operations. It could be something as high tech as synthetic vision to something as low tech as the angled flight deck on an aircraft carrier.” It’s interesting that Mr. Lewis chose to mention “taxi-map displays.” I’ve been asking around about this same question. (I’m not an expert on cockpit displays either.) It turns out that most airliners don’t have them, but according to my sources, they’re now coming on line. We could argue about the “why”s but it misses the larger point that they don’t. Regardless, we still bump into the theoretical limits of VFR runway capacity even if we manage to conquer the IFR limits by requiring half-million dollar (or more) upgrades on every commercial aircraft. Synthetic vision is not cheap.

”ADS-B, multilateration, integrated radar, and flight deck displays can precisely locate all traffic. “

To which I answer; “So what ?” I will point out that Mr. Lewis has the good sense to include ADS-B and radar. The FAA would have you believe ADS-B is going to replace radar. It isn’t. I’ll be honest, I really don’t see the relevance of this point (I think it’s about accuracy) so I’ll make my own point. (Besides which, my dictionary doesn’t contain the word multilateration.)

When I left the FAA, our radar scopes were big (I think 20 inch) monitors. They were really nothing more than a fancy TV or computer screen. The targets (depending upon the range settings) were anywhere from one half mile wide to a full mile wide. It didn’t matter if the target was a Cessna with 33 foot wingspan or a Boeing 747 with a 200+ foot wingspan -- they were all the same size. If we ever move to cockpit-based separation, the pilots will be using what -- 10-inch displays ? 12-inch displays ? Granted, ADS-B is more accurate than radar. But how useful is that accuracy when the target is two miles wide because of the range setting on your display ? I won’t even get into the extra skills a pilot will need (think training and wash-out rates) or the distraction from the pilot’s primary duty -- flying the airplane.

”RNP routings, trajectory tracking and planning can give very accurate four-dimensional paths for use in automation and displays. “

Right up until a thunderstorm gets in the way. Besides, we’re now getting off track. The title of the article was “Air Traffic Safety vs. Capacity” and the main point was that runway arrival rates were the main limits to capacity. “Planning” on the “trajectory” for an arrival on final is real simple -- draw a straight line to the runway.

”Wake vortex detection and tracking could show where wake hazards are—and aren't. (This is the one area that still needs advances in technology.) “

That’s a fair statement. We’ll talk again when the technology is fielded and see how much it will increase runway capacity. I would make a totally uneducated (remember, I wasn’t a Tower controller) guess and say less than 10 percent.

”With these items in place, we could safely operate with more than one plane on a 10,000-foot runway, especially with departures.“

Let me use Mr. Lewis’ own words to answer this one.

”...runways have capacity limits only with respect to the operating assumptions used. “ Where does that leave us ? If we could safely and accurately plot wake vortices (we can’t yet) we could put more than one airplane on the runway at a time. Sometimes. If we had the entire airline fleet equipped with synthetic vision we could start bringing the IFR arrival rates up to VFR arrival rates. Would-a, could-a, should-a. We could triple the width of runways and take off in formation like the military does.

Using the assumptions of today, we’re stuck with a certain capacity. Using the assumptions of tomorrow, we’ll be stuck with a certain capacity (hopefully a better one.) Whatever that capacity is, I am 100% certain -- for the places that matter, like New York and Chicago -- we will use all of it. To steal a line from a movie, If you build it they will come. And there will still be more capacity in the sky than on ground. Runways will still be the limiting factor. And safety will still be the determining factor in how those runways are used.

The question we seem to arguing over is, “What shall we build ?” The tax payers are being asked to pony up 20+ billion dollars (emphasis on the +). Boeing is not in the runway-building business (at least I don’t think they are). The Reason Foundation is in the privatization business. I’m not in any business at all. I’m a retired public servant with the quaint notion that we ought to ask how the public would best be served.

The pay off for the public’s investment in NextGen hasn’t been defined any better than the cost. What is the percentage of improvement NextGen will provide in runway arrivals rates ? The proponents think it will improve the current IFR arrival rates to nearly the current VFR arrival rates -- in 20-25 years. I believe the percentage of improvement NextGen will provide for the current VFR arrival rates will be virtually ZERO. However, an additional, properly-built runway substantially increases the IFR and the VFR arrival rate. Even the FAA can get this one right.

”According to the Federal Aviation Administration, the new runway, opening May 27, will increase by about 30% the number of arrivals the airport can handle at any time, reducing passengers' average waits as they taxi or circle in the air. “

Bear in mind that’s a 30% improvement at an airport that already had 4 parallel runways.



If you ask NextGen proponents the plain and simple question, “By what percentage will NextGen improve the VFR arrival rate at XXX airport ?” the answer will be a deafening silence. There will be a multitude of non-answers explaining that NextGen is so much more than that and those types of things are yet to be determined.

Let me close by making one last point -- one about attitude. To me, this quote sums up Mr. Poole’s attitude.

”If controllers genuinely believe the kinds of things Brown wrote, that's a big problem by itself, since they and their successors will be key participants in making NextGen a reality. And if they are not brought on-board and decide to oppose NextGen implementation efforts on safety grounds (the theme running through Brown's post), we will need a major educational communications effort to explain to reporters and editorial writers (and members of Congress) that the new paradigm not only increases airport and airspace capacity but does so simultaneously with increasing safety.”

In short, if the controllers don’t agree with him, Mr. Poole believes he needs to go around them. Nothing makes this point clearer than his consultation with Mr. Lewis of Boeing ATM. No offense to Mr. Lewis -- as I said yesterday I’m sure he’s an exceedingly bright individual -- but unless he has worked a substantial length of time as an air traffic controller, he isn’t an expert in air traffic control. I have no doubt that he is an expert on the systems that might come to be known as NextGen.

As I’ve pointed out at least twice in the last two days, I am not an expert on airport air traffic control. Yes, I know a great deal about it. I’ve spent more hours in Air Traffic Control Towers than I can count -- starting when I was 16 years old -- bugging the controllers with endless questions. Even after 25 years as a controller in the FAA, if I have a question about air traffic control operations around an airport, I still consult with the only true experts -- the controllers that work in those Towers. The fact that I do -- and Mr. Poole didn’t -- speaks volumes.

He has company though. The FAA stopped consulting with their controllers too. Considering the mess we’re in now, I’ll let the public decide if that is a wise course of action.

Don Brown
March 14, 2008