The US Secretary of Transportation unveiled a proposal for a new Air Traffic Control (ATC) system, which tackles many issues with communication, surveillance, automation, NOTAMs, and weather observation and reporting. The largest part of the document, titled “Brand New Air Traffic Control System – America Is Building Again”, consists of an inventory of old technology in place at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). It even contains pictures of a table fan used to cool down a radar data processor and of the current Alaska flight data processing system with ribbon cables and aluminum foil to reduce interference.
Besides the anecdotal aspect of such pictures which reflect the current reality at the FAA, the report’s sheer numbers show the scale of the issue at hand:
- 800 ageing radio-switches and 25.000 radios need to be replaced and upgraded to VoIP. Current plans foresee this being done by 2037 at the earliest
- 618 radars have passed their expected service time and are planned to be replaced by 2033
- Various flight plan data processing systems based on technologies dating back to the 1960’s, many of which have underwent updates during this time, and are planned to be replaced by 2040
- Many issues with the facilities themselves, including Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems, pest issues, leaking roofs, and asbestos hazards.
The proposal defines highly ambitious timelines to replace the ageing equipment, renew 4 to 5 towers per year instead of only one at the time, and consolidate en-route control facilities to reduce operating costs. The proposed date of completion is 2028 – three and a half years from now.
Can the industry deliver?
Assume for a moment that the requirements for the new equipment are clearly defined. Assume too that the funding is made available today and that the procurement processes get started straight away.
The scale of industry providers is such that none can provide the required amount of required equipment. Indra for example, won a contract to deliver radar to 19 sites in Germany over 13 years. A similar contract in Poland for eight radar stations will last for four years.
The same is true of communication and automation systems. The industry’s delivery rate is simply one to two orders of magnitude too small for such programs and scaling-up is not easy. From an infrastructure point of view, the facilities required to build and test radar systems are large and complex, not to mention the qualified personnel required to assist in the building of such complicated systems.
Software is simpler in terms of required facilities but also requires specialised personnel for configuration and adaptation to local constraints. Finding and training such staff members is not easy.
The proposal indicates that the new systems will be provided by the industry but does not address the issues mentioned above and simply assumes that the providers will be ready and able to deliver – and this is a huge assumption.
Can the FAA manage?
The next question is to know if the FAA can handle the proposal as it is. Technical renewal projects are not easy to manage. They require good planning and a lot of attention to detail from the customer side too. ATM remains a niche market and products must be adjusted to local needs.
Such projects must be realised in parallel to normal operations, and require additional qualified staff to be managed in a safe way. Does the FAA have sufficient personnel available, especially in the days of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)? Engineers in ATC are known as Air Traffic Safety Electronic Professionals (ATSEP) and are subject to extensive training and certification. Even if the FAA could hire dozens of engineers, they would not be ready to fulfill the specific requirements immediately.
Another important aspect is the training of ATCOs, as this takes time and requires ATCOs to be in the training rooms and not in the operational rooms. For example, switching to electronic strips and advanced automation is not an easy step and it takes weeks, not days. The current understaffing situation makes ATCO training even more difficult, as it is not easy to get ATCOs out of the operational rosters.
A good signal but not a realistic plan
There are a lot of assumptions in this article and not all will be true. Approving the funding will take time, refining the requirements will be a long process, and procurement procedures take time too and the timelines in the proposal don’t seem realistic. It also says very little about the proposed solutions, except for budget and timelines.
Does this make it a bad proposal? Certainly not. One must understand that its goals are not technical or operational but purely political. It is used to draw the attention of policy and lawmakers, to stress the urgency of the situation and eventually unlock the funding of the long overdue system overhaul.
