Might a proven ATC technology help diminish the Controller shortage?
Below is a recent publication announcing that Norway now has a total of 23 (adding more) AIRPORTS under REMOTE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL (RATC). The Civil Aviation Authority of Norway is ranked by the FAA and ICAO among the world’s safest. Indeed, there have been no fatal accidents involving commercial air transport in Norway since 1919!!!
As the New York Times wrote “285 of 313 Air Traffic Control Facilities Are Understaffed”, there is an urgent need for air traffic controllers to work, especially at the high-volume facilities. The 47th President’s Administration has shown a propensity for offering quick answers to problems, particularly when the new dramatic solution was not used by prior Presidents.
ROBERT POOLE is Director of Transportation Policy and Searle Freedom Trust Transportation Fellow at Reason Foundation, has written extensively about innovative technology that might help this crunch. In 2017, Poole opined:
For some smaller airports, “REMOTE TOWERS” offer a possible alternative…. Instead of the traditional “out-the-window” view, the controllers would have a panoramic video display of the airfield and its environs. That “remote tower center” could be located at the airport in question, or it could be located at a considerable distance. In the case of low-activity airports, it is possible to locate controllers responsible for several small airports in a single remote tower center.
Simulations by the FAA at its Atlantic City research center in 2007 demonstrated that a remote tower can provide better surveillance at night and in rain, fog, or snow conditions, thanks to the infrared and other camera equipment, and other advanced technologies. Experienced controllers and supervisors preferred the remote tower to a conventional tower after using both during the simulations. Hence, a remote tower can improve safety margins and provide operational benefits compared to a conventional tower. Moreover, the construction cost is significantly lower than building a tall, occupied structure. And in some configurations, the operating costs can be lower, especially in cases where several low- activity airports are controlled from a single remote tower center. With the benefits greater than a conventional tower and the costs lower, a B/C ratio greater than 1.0 will be easier to achieve for many small airports.
Unfortunately, the FAA has no current program to develop and implement remote towers, presumably due to its ongoing budget problems and other priorities.
His article mentions that remote towers are already in operation in a number of European countries; the current list of these remote facilities is 20 in number in some of the globe’s most sophisticated technological countries with unsurpassed safety records [1]. These stations have operated successfully and 100% safely, at some locations, for over a decade. This track record is the stuff that the FAA insists on having as a PREREQUISITE to SAFETY CERTIFICATION. In spite of these relevant precedents, the FAA has a problem authorizing RATCs for use in the US, even in low activity towers!!!
Poole’s’ Reason colleague, Marc Scribner, writes about Congress’ addressing this apparent impact:
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (Public Law 118–63) was enacted on May 16 and runs through the end of Sept. 2028. The law includes Section 621, which aims to counteract the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) administrative inertia on remote/digital air traffic control towers that have so far prevented adoption of these technologies in the United States.
…
SEEMINGLY ARBITRARY POLICY CHANGES made mid-certification caused technology vendors at the two most advanced U.S. projects—Saab at Virginia’s Leesburg Executive Airport and Searidge at Northern Colorado Regional Airport outside Fort Collins—to jump ship in 2023 after nearly a decade of work. The Northern Colorado project, with the strong backing of the Colorado Department of Transportation, is attempting to salvage the progress that has been made with new vendors RTX (formerly Raytheon) and Frequentis.”
The Reason post includes the 4 legislative mandates that should bring RATC technology to the US. The FAA’s stated tests seem simple enough [2], but eminently qualified applicants that devoted substantial efforts to meet the FAA tests FAILED!!!
A year ago, it was suggested to the FAA Administrator that Reason’s points would provide immediate useful boosts to the ATC system. No action resulted. Suspect that the 47th team should salivate at the prospect.
While not guaranteed, releasing some of the staff from these soon-t0-be RATC facilities might free up controllers who are more likely to contribute than folks off the street. At worst they may alleviate the need for additional staff at the short facilities.
Air traffic at 23 Norwegian airports to be remotely operated
23 Norwegian airports are to be remotely operated with Indra’s air traffic control system from Avinor’s Remote Tower Centre. The centre is the largest of its kind in the world, and new airports have been gradually added since its opening in 2022.
A prerequisite for the extension is that each operator can operate up to three airports from the same working position, enabled by Indra’s InNOVA air traffic control system.
Avinor’s Remote Tower Centre (RTC) in Bodø, Norway, is owned and operated by Avinor, the Norwegian air navigation service provider. Currently, the centre manages 11 regional airports, a number set to grow to 15 by March 2025 with the completion of the first phase of Avinor’s remote tower program. After this, an additional seven new airports will be added. The contract also includes an installation at the new Bodø airport that is under construction.
Avinor’s RTC has 16 working positions, so the project extension undertakes the implementation of multiple remote tower operations, which it means that each operator will be able to control up to three airports from the same working position. They use Indra’s InNOVA air traffic control system which provides a single and fully integrated display with all required air traffic and airport control functions, including air traffic situation display, electronic flight strips and meteorological information. A SUPERVISOR will oversee the planning and allocate airports to the different working positions.
Multiple remote tower operations were developed and validated by Avinor and Indra in 2019 as part of EU’s PJ05 SESAR Remote Tower project. Furthermore, Avinor will be one of the first air navigation service providers in the world to go operational with the concept.
Indra also provides the GAREX Voice Communication Control System, used by Avinor to ensure reliable communication with pilots and ground personnel.
[1] Sweden
1. Örnsköldsvik Airport (OER)
2. Stockholm Arlanda Airport (ARN)- Controls Kiruna, Umeå, Åre Östersund, and Malmö airports.
Norway
1. Bodo Airport (BOO) – Controls three other airports.
2. Other airports managed by Avinor AS – Plans to manage up to 15 airports from Bodo.
Germany
1. Munich International Airport (MUC) – Feasibility study for a digital facility.
United Kingdom
1. London City Airport (LCY) – Controlled from NATS’s Swanwick control center.
Hungary
1. Budapest International Airport (BUD) – Backup remote tower implemented by Searidge Technologies.
Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain
1. Multiple smaller airports – Each country has developed remote tower centers to control multiple smaller airports.
[2] System Components RT systems must include optical sensors (e.g., day/night cameras, infrared/thermal cameras) to provide visual information to Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCS) Systems. Location: The display monitors and control equipment can be located off-airport grounds Systems –Operational Safety: RT systems must undergo an Operational Safety Assessment. Regulatory Compliance: RT systems must comply with FAA regulations and advisory circulars, such as 14 CFR Parts 61, 65, 71, 73, 91, and 135.Training: ATCS must be trained to use RT systems effectively. Approval Process: RT systems must be approved by the FAA before implementation Systems
