Plane Answers: Is "Free Flight" the answer to ATC delays?
Welcome to Gadling's feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!Kent:
I know a lot has been written lately about airport delays, I have also read something about "Free Flying." With TCAS is ATC obsolete? Should ATC be more focused on ground operations, to get planes in the air? I know from most recent articles the ATC system is operating on antiquated systems and in need of a massive overhaul. I am interested to hear your opinion, is "Free Flying" in our future?
-Justin
Thanks Justin,
We're not able to navigate or adjust our spacing using our Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS). This device, which is almost like a radar screen showing the other traffic within 40 miles of our airplane, is solely to keep us from running into someone. Think of it as a backup to the Air Traffic Control system. And just like passengers aren't generally interested in pilotless airplanes, pilots may not be interested in a world without controllers directing traffic and keeping us safe.
The ability for airplanes to fly directly to a destination is one thing that would shorten travel times, but it's important to put the benefit in perspective. The FAA is hoping to develop a system that would allow for a direct routing versus today's system of waypoints and VOR's that define a more jagged path, but it will only save a few minutes of flight time.
The FAA is even more interested in the ability to space flights closer when near the airport using a new technology called NextGen. Why are they so excited about this?
Because it's low hanging fruit.
Even at $20 billion, it just might offer the best answer to the capacity problem. Using computers and GPS, we can have more direct flights and airplanes can take care of their own spacing as they approach the airport. Take a look at this video on "NextGen" by David Pogue for CBS News that explains what the FAA is trying to do (after the jump):
Unless we start doing formation takeoff and landings on ultra-wide runways out of JFK and other saturated airports-a highly unlikely scenario-we're not going to see delays improve without capacity reductions or huge investments in new infrastructure. So the next step is to improve the infrastructure at airports by adding gates, revising taxiways and adding more runways. The trouble is, people living near these airports equate that to more traffic and subsequently, noise. And it's yet another cost.
At airports with most frequent delays, airlines need to 'bump-up' the size of airplanes. A 19-seat Beech 1900 takes up nearly the same airspace that a 747 does. It might take the government to step in and mandate a minimum size of aircraft at these ultra-saturated airports, but this could be an effective way to fix the problem. The smaller airplanes might begin flying more point-to-point trips from lesser used airports in the same way Southwest does now.
We're going to get some short term relief from the airlines that are cutting back later this year for economic reasons. But that's no reason to sit back and wait until we're near gridlock once again to fix the problem.
Thanks for the great question, Justin.
Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he'll use it for next Friday's Plane Answers feature.
Filed under: Plane Answers





















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
May 31st 2008 @ 12:33AM
Jimbo said...
Of course higher fares and less airplanes might also solve the problem in the short term (as it appears is happening)....
Reply
May 31st 2008 @ 1:53PM
Neil said...
Interesting read Kent!
Reply
Jun 1st 2008 @ 3:30PM
James said...
I personally think the economy will decide how busy our airspace is...to a degree. With the rising cost in fuel / avgas the ripple effect is making itself known very well. I also do not think the FAA will be able to force GA aircraft to be retrofitted with these devices, as great as they are. I think ground ops at major airports need total revamping. I like the formation departure idea Kent. "American 1212 heavy - American 2565 - Southwest 3340 winds 215 @5 cleared for takeoff runway 24". I hope I live to see the day when ATP's need a formation signoff!!! Thanks Kent
Reply
Jun 1st 2008 @ 4:19PM
Kent Wien said...
Yep, we're just thinking outside the box, James! Not to mention it'd be so much more fun.
Jun 2nd 2008 @ 11:20AM
Steve Marcus said...
Free flight will not solve delays. Delays are the result of airlines over scheduling flights at airports already at capacity. There are only so many operations a runway can handle in a given hour. It's called arrival rate. Plenty of sky up there but until airlines stop scheduling flight after flight after flight to arrive or depart at the exact same time, delays will occur and are totally unrelated to our air traffic control system which by the way is the safest in the world.
Reply
Jun 2nd 2008 @ 1:31PM
ZF said...
Steve,
You are correct. Airlines schedule this way because the traveling public demands these flights at these times. There is no easy answer to the congestion except for fewer flights which would reduce delays but increase ticket prices due to fewer seats. Soooo which way do we go??? Great post Kent!
Jun 3rd 2008 @ 9:14PM
jw said...
After 26 years as a controller, I'm firmly convinced that lack of enough airports and runways near the major population centers is the cause of delays. Tighter spacing into EWR/JFK/LGA won't help as the documented runway occupation time is the limiting factor. And the hairs on the back of my neck stand up when I hear that we plan on using smaller separation standards while airborne.
As long as the vast majority of our population lives within 100 miles of the oceanfront, travel into anywhere along the coasts is going to just get harder and harder to do safely and on time.
Reply
Jun 3rd 2008 @ 10:57PM
Kent Wien said...
Thanks JW.
It's great to get some insight from controllers here. Anytime a new technology comes out that's supposed to accomplish miracles, I like to hear what the controllers think first. You're the guys that have the insight.
Thanks for all the help along the way!
Kent
Jun 4th 2008 @ 2:10PM
jw said...
Kent,
You should talk to the national officers at NATCA. Since the FAA's "nontract"(last best offer and never ratified)went into effect on LABOR DAY WEEKEND 2006, the agency has stopped using rank and file controllers to help develop the new plans and equipment that will be needed in the future. That's right, the personnel who are best situated to help get it right the first time are shut out of the development process.
That's why we are still fighting the unilaterally imposed work rules on several legal and legislative fronts. This is the only Federal agency i know of that refuses to arbitrate contract disputes, and our accelerated retirement rate is the outcome. Of course, as the new, inexperienced people replace our 20-25 years of seat-of-the-pants knowledge base, the agency gets what it wants-a workforce with little experience in fighting against their foolish actions that also gets paid 30% less when their salaries max out. God Bless the new folks, after paying to go to college for this career or serving their country as military controllers, they have entered the FAA workforce at a truly inopportune time, salary and work rules wise.
Thanks for listening-go to NATCA.org and contact my national representatives, they will gladly discuss this in detail
jw
Reply