Air Traffic Control Systems in the United States

Introduction

An efficient aviation industry is an important part of the nation's security and economy, and the air traffic control systems in place represent an essential part of the infrastructure that keeps this vital industry operating. In recent years, however, the aging air traffic control systems across the country have come under increased scrutiny as air travel continues to increase, amid larger concerns for security in the post-September 11, 2001 environment. To gain fresh insights into these problems, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature concerning air traffic control deficiencies in the United States, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.

Communication Failures and Safety Risks

First and foremost, the air traffic control systems in place across the country depend on seamless communications that do not always work as intended. In fact, the entire air travel process is fraught with opportunities for disaster, and the air crews responsible for ensuring safe takeoffs and landings are typically in constant communication with air traffic controllers while in close proximity to airports. During takeoffs and landings, all flight crews are responsible for controlling the aircraft, changing altitude and speed, communicating with air traffic control and/or other aircraft, as well as maintaining sufficient separation from obstacles and other aircraft (Oster, Strong & Dorn, 2003). Likewise, Poole (2008) reports, "A complex network of radars, computers, display screens, and human beings — known as the air traffic control system — works 24 hours a day to keep planes safely separated as they move from the departure gate to the runway to the skies and back to another runway and arrival gate" (p. 11).

Given this ongoing need for accurate and timely communications, it is not surprising that mistakes happen — but the consequences of these mistakes can be deadly. Errors by air traffic control systems are one of the leading causes of aircraft accidents, trailing only pilot error and equipment malfunctions (Loeb, Talley & Zlatoper, 2004). Indeed, Deitz and Thoms (1999) report that "some experts have indicated that as many as two-thirds of all aviation accidents result from deficits in communication between crew members and with air traffic controllers" (p. 37).

There are automated systems in the cockpits of some aircraft that help air traffic controllers monitor potentially dangerous behaviors by flight crews, and violations of safety protocols can have severe consequences. For instance, Jacko and Sears (2003) report that "American air traffic controllers' screens include a conflict alert that is triggered by aircraft coming too close to each other; this system is commonly called the 'snitch patch' because of the punitive consequences of its activation" (p. 868). Because of the punitive nature of these alerts, however, the potential exists for air traffic controllers to hesitate before initiating these alarm systems in time (Jacko & Sears, 2003). Furthermore, air traffic controllers have experienced persistent problems with aging computer systems despite calls for updated infrastructure from the aviation industry and policymakers alike.

Aging Systems and the Privatization Debate

Some analysts argue that the air traffic control systems in the United States are obsolete and require a fundamental — and enormously expensive — overhaul to bring them up to date (McDougall & Roberts, 2008). More than 40 countries have already privatized their air traffic control systems and provided them with the funding needed to acquire state-of-the-art equipment, but the United States has not followed suit. According to McDougall and Roberts, "The United States has not followed this path. Air traffic control remains within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which in important ways is still organized as a conventional government department" (p. 45).

This issue has been the focus of political debate in recent years. President George W. Bush vowed that the U.S. would pursue privatization of its air traffic control systems based on "the success that various nations … have experienced with individual air traffic control systems owned and operated by private companies" (quoted in McDougall & Roberts, 2008, p. 46). To date, however, these reforms have not materialized and the air traffic control system remains mired in FAA bureaucracy (McDougall & Roberts, 2008). In this regard, Poole (2008) emphasizes that the system "is managed by an unwieldy government bureaucracy, micromanaged by Congress, and subjected to the ups and downs of the federal budget process. And as air travel continues to grow, the air traffic control system is less and less able to keep pace" (p. 11).

Conclusion

The research showed that America's aviation industry is essential for the nation's economic well-being, but it quickly became apparent that the air traffic control system in place is outdated, understaffed, and underfunded. To their credit, the nation's air traffic controllers have managed to extract as much usability as possible from antiquated computer-based systems. However, the time has long passed for these systems — and the people who operate them — to receive the support they need. The U.S. government has remained adamant about retaining the ATC function under the auspices of the Federal Aviation Administration rather than privatizing it, as dozens of other countries have done in recent years. A fundamental reassessment of this position is overdue if the United States is to maintain a safe and efficient aviation infrastructure for the future.

References

Deitz, S. R. & Thoms, W. E. (1999). Pilots, personality, and performance: Human behavior and stress in the skies. New York: Quorum Books.

Jacko, J. A. & Sears, A. (2003). The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Loeb, P. D., Talley, W. K. & Zlatoper, T. J. (2004). Causes and deterrents of transportation accidents: An analysis by mode. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

McDougall, G. & Roberts, A. (2008, March). Commercializing air traffic control: Have the reforms worked? Canadian Public Administration, 51(1), 45–49.

Oster, C. V., Jr., Strong, J. S. & Zorn, C. K. (2003, Winter). Improving air safety: Long-term challenges. Issues in Science and Technology, 17(2), 77.

Poole, R. W., Jr. (2008, May). For safer, more efficient air traffic control. Consumers' Research Magazine, 81(5), 10–12.