Good article on NextGen ATC system

[dave]

Edited by a friend over at ATCMonitor.com: http://bit.ly/J73QT

Wonder when folks think this will arrive completely.

[sykocus]

Who knows. So much of this stuff is just words on paper. It'll take years for them to just to decide on the new rules and standards for the the new system and probably a decade before it all gets implemented.

[sykocus]

...and it looks like NextGen is now on the fast track, and I'll be able look forward to an extra early retirement.
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=3f5af1d8-469e-44c9-8f8b-aa86386484c1&

[w0x0f]

NextGen will be the NextHole to throw tax dollars.  We need runways.

And now for the voice in the wilderness...

http://gettheflick.blogspot.com/2009/04/nextgen-vs-nobody.html

[w0x0f]

What is NextGen?

http://jurassicbark.blogspot.com/2008/03/what-is-nextgen.html

[aevins]

Best summary of NextGen I've read yet:

http://www.faafollies.com/?p=1179

[SJ30]

Best summary of NextGen I've read yet:

http://www.faafollies.com/?p=1179

Boy - after reading that Aevins, one would think that there are zero pilots who like the NextGen (HITS) program concept.  The author of the posts throws down his/her reasoning as having everything to do with traffic delays due to weather being below VFR mins.

Has the FAA put together a Pilots Consortium of sorts to take their input on how to better improve our national airspace system?  Maybe hold some nation wide conferences on the subject, inviting all member of the aviation community [Commercial, GA and Controllers] to get their collective input into what could be done to improve the system?  I would guess that this would be a natural thing to do before making large scale strategic changes in the system.

[atcman23]

  I would guess that this would be a natural thing to do before making large scale strategic changes in the system.

It would be, but we're talking about the FAA here... the words "natural," "logical" and "common sense" don't exist.  If it makes sense to do something one way, apply the opposite.  Actually, the FAA has not really asked controllers about anything regarding NextGen, at least according to their union, NATCA.

There a re a lot of things that need to be done now to help in the future and more runway space is one of those.  It's hard to do and I don't think it'll solve every airport's congestion problem, especially a place like LaGuardia.  However, the technology NextGen will bring is a good step forward and it's going to take lots of time and money to make everything work too.  But yes, there's a lot that needs to be done NOW before we can think of what we can do NEXT.  That's why you'll hear lots of people talk about "NowGen" too.

[EdGeneer]

Well, we all know that its about runways. Does anyone think we arent packing them tight enough, and close enough side by side??? Sounds like a money funnel for technology appropriations to make people 'think' something is being done at the same time lining the appropriate pockets.

Best summary of NextGen I've read yet:

http://www.faafollies.com/?p=1179

I agree with alot of the comments posted at the end of this. And I agree with most that claim this is a not a solution to anything. Its just alot of hot air that in the end wastes money that COULD be spent on solutions, but isnt... Apparently those in the solution end of it aren't as much in political favor as those in the smokescreen technological ends. Thus, who DOES eventually get the money that makes the greedy richer, the politically motivated justified, but really accomplishes nothing.

[SJ30]

Well then, how many of you in GA are now flying with ADS-B?  How many of you are flying with the GDL-90 ADS-B Transceiver [transponder] with graphical traffic display on your MFD? 

Given many of the objections to cost that I've seen and read about, if the technology works, it does seem like it is at the very least, a positive step in the right direction in terms of more efficient air traffic handling - but then again, I'm not yet a licensed pilot.  I'm only speaking from a pure technology standpoint, as I understand the core technology driving this concept.


GDL-90 Transponder Explained

[davolijj]

Thanks for the video link.  But I wouldn't put too much stock in any of the FAA's Public Relations driven propoganda infomercials.  Remember this agency is being run by an administration that has put more money and resources into public relations and marketing than any other administration in recent history.  Any responsible system-user should ask themself why that is unless the FAA is trying for a major sales campaign.  ADS-B has tremendous potential and the technology is very exciting.  But as with most cutting edge technology - if there is a demand for it, the marketplace will take care of the sales aspect of it.  You never saw videos like this trying to get everyone onboard with GPS 15 years ago.  If it's really such a great product, why do they keep trying to dress it up like this?

[ogogog]

NexGen, yea what was it tha P T Barnum said?

[aevins]

Take a detailed look at the FAA's history (Don Brown @ GetTheFlick - gettheflick.blogspot.com - he has some great posts about this), history tends to repeat itself (i.e. this has happened before).

At the end up the day it's not about the technological advancement (which yes I do support), it's the fact that the public and congress believe the FAA's claims that this will cure "the problems" (delays namely) of the NAS. The fact is it wont. I've read some pretty crazy things that the media claims NextGen will do, including documents from the FAA, but when you examine the individual projects that make up NextGen you have a hard time finding initiatives that will accomplish these outlandish claims.

Radar will not not disappear. (Homeland/National security necessitates it)

Delays will not be reduced. (Aircraft are already as close as they can get, concrete/slots is the only answer to this)

Aircraft will not be flying "direct routes". (Look at the research the FAA has based their Trajectory Based Operations 'plan' on. They don't even have a way of going about this yet and it's supposed to be implemented by 2018. Just look at the progress of ASDE-X and ERAM and compare them - I'm sure these have been "rebaselined" by now)

This, unfortunately, will not help the environment (that's the FAA's new claim)

The facts, when examined (by anyone not just aviation professionals) give you a clear picture of what will happen. Most air traffic controllers get it, NATCA get's it, and it's time the public get's it. If taxpayers want to fund this expensive technological undertaking great, but don't buy it under the false pretenses of delay reduction. The only answer to delay reduction is building more runways as this is the ONLY way to increase capacity (and it's cheaper than NextGen).

Some will argue with me about the impact of reduced spacing on simultaneous parallel approaches (like at EWR - but think what that will do to the ADR there) or the use of Wake Turbulence Mitigation for Departure (WTMD) (pilots, tell me if you would really trust this system?). These programs will help, but not to a noticeable extent. They will not cause a system wide reduction in reported delays.

If you want to learn more of the truth about NextGen visit:

http://www.faafollies.com

http://gettheflick.blogspot.com

[PIT]

USA Today did another article on NEXTGEN today.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2009-04-20-nextgen-air-traffic-control_N.htm

[tyketto]

Just to join in, NPR ran one last week about NextGen, as well as an entire series about the aviation industry today, with emphasis on commercial carriers, FAA, NATCA, and the turbulence (no pun intended) it is going through.

NextGen:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102914658

Troubled Skies:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102982061

BL.