Utah lawmakers, NATCA resist ERAM test

From the Associated Press:

Utah’s two U.S. senators are urging the Federal Aviation Administration to hold off testing a new computer system at a Salt Lake City air traffic control center that guides planes across portions of eight states.

Republican Sens. Bob Bennett and Orrin Hatch wrote FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt on June 11, asking him to delay a test of the new system at the Salt Lake Air Route Traffic Control Center. [..] “Safety concerns demand that ERAM (the computer system) not be implemented until it meets and exceeds the standards of reliability and stability of the system it replaces,” the senators wrote.

FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency has a meeting scheduled for Tuesday with the union representing air traffic controllers to discuss the test. She said agency officials still have confidence the test can take place as planned.

The test is scheduled from midnight to 4 a.m. on June 18, said Doug Pincock, an air traffic controller [and NATCA rep — ed.] in Salt Lake City. During that period the main computer system that the control center has used for nearly two decades will be switched off and the new system, known as En route Automation Modernization, will be switched on, Pincock said.

Further information: NATCA’s press release; FAA ERAM fact sheet; Text of letter to Randy Babbitt from Sens. Bennett and Hatch.

NATCA: “We’re quite hopeful about NextGen”

The Dallas Morning News had a catch-all, general interest article about the status of NextGen. Here are some quotes:

Aviation consultant Michael Boyd: “Capt. Babbitt isn’t going to run the FAA – it is going to run him. I have no confidence this is going to work. The public is simply being bamboozled by the FAA about how this is working.”

NATCA spokesman Doug Church: “The new administration seems to want to include input from all the stakeholders. We’re quite hopeful about NextGen.”

Southwest Airlines EVP Ron Rocks: “We need the will to get this done. We need what they’re calling a World War II plan in Washington. We won that war in three or four years – that’s what we need for NextGen.”

Randy Babbitt: “NextGen is not moving fast enough”

At a speech before the RTCA, recently confirmed FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt offered some of his views on NextGen:

The only way we’re going to get rotation on this is by making sure the parties are at the table, making sure that their voices are heard. That’s the way I intend to keep it. Decisions made in a vacuum will bring the system to its knees. We’ve seen that before, and I have no desire to see us learn that lesson again.
We need constructive input. The FAA should not try to address policies or governing principles in a vacuum if we intend to maximize effectiveness. Policies can promote enhanced benefits, but we’ve got to craft them appropriately. The NextGen Implementation Task Force has more than 350 people involved, and the working groups have 280. That shows me that you’re willing to speak up, and from where I stand, that’s what we need. [..]

While I’m putting things out that, I’ve got to add this — NextGen is just flat out not moving fast enough. We must accelerate NextGen. I want more, and I want more faster. This administration has been unequivocal in its statements that the status quo just won’t go. I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been flying since my sixteenth birthday, and the pilots and the people around them in this mix are eager to have things that advance safety and efficiency. I count myself in that group.

I’ve got to close with a couple of thoughts. One, NextGen is a clear priority. And let me say for the record that I’m interested in delivery. I have absolutely no plans to get involved with the arguments about NextGen or NowGen or then or when Gen. I’m not one for labels. When you boil all this down, and all the liquid is gone, the task at hand remains the same. We’ve got to make the system more efficient, and we’ve got to make it safer while doing it. Let’s face it. We don’t have the time to argue about what to call it. What we know is that Congress and the taxpayer want something now. I think they’re right to ask for it.

AA sees fuel savings “if we can get the regulators and rules out of the way”

In a Chicago Tribune article about Thursday’s AIRE demo flight, American Airlines captain and spokesman Brian Will had this to say:

“For years, we’ve had all this great equipment on the airplanes, but we are not able to use a lot of these things because of what essentially are speed bumps caused by an outdated air-traffic system,” said Brian Will, a Boeing 777 captain at American who is also the airline’s technical programs manager. “This flight from Paris’ Charles De Gaulle to Miami International will show what can be accomplished — several thousands of pounds of fuel saved on that one flight — if we can get the regulators and the rules out of the way,” Will said. [..]

“Airplanes using GPS can report their real-time position anywhere on the planet with accuracy of 20 feet,” Will said. “We have the tools today and really shouldn’t be forced to wait until 2020.”

More on workforce development: reader comment

Elizabeth, one of our readers, had this to say in response to our recent entry about education and workforce development issues in the aviation sector:

While I agree that the aviation industry is going to be struggling because of the lack of upcoming students, there needs to be more of an effort to recruit recent engineering graduates. I am an undergraduate student with numerous friends who have recently graduated with engineering degrees. At least half of them tell me they would love to get into the aviation field, but aviation companies are just not hiring.

If the aviation industry is indeed in dire need of young talent, why not look to these students? If they are hiring, then more needs to be done to clear up students’ misconceptions about the lack of job prospects in the aviation industry.

It would be interesting to hear what industry players have to say about this. Are short-term pressures competing against long-term needs? Are certain types of jobs available if one knows where to look?

JPDO update – milestones since last all-hands meeting

Charlie Leader presented the following JPDO milestones in his all-hands update last week (links are included where available):

• FY11 Budget Guidance submitted to OST/OMB on February 20
• The Environmental Management System R&D initiated in March
• Roll-Out Plan for 2012 implementation of Net-Centric Information Sharing Capability released on March 12
• ATM Weather Integration Plan released on April 22
• NextGen Integrated Work Plan (IWP) agency gap analysis completed in April
• Phase 2 Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) ConOps endorsed by Board members at the JPDO Board Meeting on May 5
• Integrated Surveillance ConOps delivered on May 7

The original presentation is here.

Passage of H.R. 915: industry groups ‘eerily’ harmonized… or are they?

Jim Swickard at Aviation Week has the following analysis in the wake of the FAA reauthorization bill passing the House:

The current FAA bill retains the FAA funding mix of excise taxes, fuel taxes and general fund contributions, but increases the general aviation jet fuel tax rate from 21.8 cents per gallon to 35.9 cents per gallon and increase the avgas tax from 19.3 cents per gallon to 24.1 cents per gallon. These were the same rates the Way and Means Committee endorsed in the previous Congress.

Industry groups stated their acceptance these tax hikes in lieu of user fees when they were proposed last year.

The Air Transport Association last year had complained vociferously that General Aviation was not paying its fair share of Air Traffic Control costs.  That argument was muted by AOPA, NBAA and NATA’s eerily gracious acceptance of the increased fuel taxes.

There are philosophical issues related to the U.S. General Fund contribution to the FAA and ATC budgets and the Obama administration wants to reduce that contribution and impose direct user fees after 2011, a prospect that would not upset the airlines. But that’s for tomorrow.

For now, all parties involved; industry associations, regulators and legislators can feel proud of their unity of larger purpose while not cluttering the playing field with their differences.  In other words, they have acted like aviators – to their great credit.

Can this collegial atmosphere hold through passage of a final bill by both the House and Senate, and the President’s signature?  Stay tuned.

Swickard’s view is compelling, though offset somewhat by the contents of a highly critical letter sent to Congress by ATA President James May (full text at Aero-News.net):

We have asked that Congress:

• Expedite investment in and deployment of NextGen. The United States is at a critical juncture right now. Either we can accelerate the transformation of the ATC, to allow air transportation to grow in a safe and efficient manner while achieving environmental benefits, or we can risk bringing our economy and leadership in technology to a halt by failing to address our growing aviation capacity constraints. Leadership from the committee is needed to ensure that appropriate funding and program direction is in place to accelerate the deployment of this critical program.
  
• Reject increasing taxes and fees on passengers. An increase in the maximum passenger facility charge (PFC) from $4.50 per segment to $7 per segment would impose an additional and unwarranted $2 billion tax increase per year on commercial passengers. With airport revenue eclipsing record levels – over $12.7 billion in 2007 – and with $27 billion in unrestricted financial assets, the imposition of an increased PFC tax is not only unwarranted, but also will further reduce demand for travel.
  
• Protect our valued U.S. aviation repair facilities by ensuring that any requirements are applied in a manner consistent with U.S. obligations under international agreements. During recent conversations between U.S. trade associations and European officials, the Europeans have indicated that as a result of the current language in Section 303, many U.S. facilities would be subject to new, regulatory requirements by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Such duplicative, burdensome impositions are in no one’s interest.
  
• Reject the automatic elimination of previously granted antitrust immunity (ATI) to carriers for international marketing alliances. DOT has approved international airline alliances because they produce numerous and substantial benefits, both to the public and the participating carriers. Arbitrarily terminating antitrust immunity will have a harsh impact on airline employees and cause a ripple effect across the travel and tourism industry at a time when the industry is already hobbled.
  
• Maintain safety without requiring overly strict fire-fighting standards. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations have safely dictated staffing and equipment requirements for airport fire stations for years based on the needs within the airport boundary. Increasing staffing and equipment based on surrounding populations will not enhance airport safety but will increase costs unnecessarily. These are not legitimate safety claims and should be rejected.
  
• Allow carriers to continue improving customer service without imposing unsafe or unreasonable deplaning requirements. In particular, we oppose a hard-and-fast rule requiring airlines to give passengers the option to deplane after three hours. Mandatory deplaning will have numerous unintended consequences that, ultimately, will create even more inconvenience for passengers and lead to even more flight cancellations.

NYC airspace solution: “Shut down LGA”

From New York Times columnist Stephen Dubner via the paper’s  Freakonomics blog:

During a recent ground delay, I got to talking with an off-duty pilot for a major airline who was extraordinarily knowledgeable about every single airline question I could think to ask him.  When I asked for his take on New York air congestion, he said the solution was easy: shut down LaGuardia.

The problem, as he explained it, is that the airspace for each of the three airports extends cylindrically into the sky above its ground position. Because of their relative proximity, the three airspace cylinders affect one another significantly, which creates congestion not just because of volume but because pilots have to thread the needle and fly needlessly intricate approach routes in order to comply.

If the LaGuardia cylinder were eliminated, he said, Newark and J.F.K. would both operate much more freely — and, since LaGuardia handles far less traffic than the other two airports, it is the obvious choice for shuttering.

But there’s a problem: LaGuardia is the favored airport of the people with the most political power in New York, since it is a very short ride from Manhattan. So it’s unlikely to happen, at least anytime soon. But if it did, my new pilot friend insisted, New York air travel would move from nightmare to dream.

Washington Post: NextGen, please, but also high-speed rail

The Washington Post’s editorial board wants to see NextGen and high-speed rail funded and implemented in concert.

Without the one-two punch of a modernized air traffic control system and an interconnected high-speed rail system, Mr. Obama’s vision of revolutionized transportation will go unfulfilled, and the knots in that map will choke air travel in New York and beyond.

In downturn, RAA’s Cohen sees opportunity to improve ATC

Regional Airline Association (RAA) President Roger Cohen gave an interview to Aviation International News, in which he expressed optimism about a certain “breathing room” that has emerged in the shrinking airline industry. Cohen believes this period provides a window in which capacity and congestion issues can be “fixed.”

“We joined with every other aviation alphabet organization in saying this downturn in the economy really has given us great breathing room to begin speeding up the implementation of an improved ATC system,” said Cohen. “That has been a continuing theme RAA has [pressed], because we account for half the flights, and the majority of those on one end is one of the busy connection hubs.” [..]

Cohen said that the industry finds itself in an unwinnable situation as it cuts capacity and less traffic leads to fewer delays. “I think this industry gets screwed no matter what,” he said bluntly. “If [congestion is] a front-page item, we get slot auctions and everybody complaining about airline delays, and when we work to solve them, either because of fewer flights or because everyone’s doing a better job, then it takes off the pressure and we miss another opportunity to fix the system.”

Nevertheless, Cohen expressed enthusiasm about the direction the new Administration appears headed on issues such as Essential Air Service funding and congestion pricing, for example.

Newly fashionable: complaining about lack of NextGen progress

Feeling impatient about the pace of ATC modernization? Apparently, you’ve got plenty of company. The griping began at the recent Senate hearings on NextGen, with opening remarks coming from subcommittee Chairman Byron Dorgan:

We need to make progress. Some are talking about NextGen 2020, 2025. In my judgment, that’s a pace that is too slow. We need to make substantially more progress at a much better pace than that. [..] This is not some ’20 years from now’ sci-fi application.

Later in the hearing, Dorgan directed a particular criticism at what he considers to be stakeholder infighting:

You all work for the same team, paid by the same taxpayers. All of us are tired of delay, and we’re tired of some of the battles that go on.

Not to be outdone, Sen. Jay Rockefeller brought home the same point in his prepared statement:

I strongly believe that modernizing our nation’s embarrassingly obsolete air traffic control system is the FAA’s highest priority, and the efforts to reauthorize should reflect this.

Everyone knows of my passion to move the U.S. past Mongolia in the ranking of air traffic control systems, and I’d like to make just a few very brief remarks on this issue.

The development of NextGen is not just a technology project that would be good to do.  It is not just some computer upgrade project.  [..]

For too long, we have focused on the technology of the system.  We’ve become too focused on acronyms like SWIM and ADS-B, rather than the benefits that all Americans will enjoy by building a satellite-based system with digital communications.

This was just the beginning. Later in the hearing, Rockefeller followed up:

I, like Chairman Dorgan, am very intense about this subject.  And I’m kind of tired of talking about it. Everything that the President talks about, that is — carbon release, wasted time, damage to the economy, frustrated people, people not having reason to have confidence in their government, etc. — all comes together in not having NextGen, NowGen, whatever you want to call it. Some people are using the excuse that we don’t have the money for it. I consider that to be way off the mark. We have to do this and we have to do it right away. So my question to you is: why are we so slow?

Answers were thin on ground, but these remarks appear to have opened the door for others to go on record with their frustrations. United Airlines CEO and ATA Chairman Glenn Tilton gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal on Friday, in which he returned to the issue of how transportation stimulus funds were allocated.

“While it makes sense that projects need to be ‘shovel-ready’ to help these efforts in 2009, they must have to be ‘next generation’ to sustain future growth in the years ahead,” Mr. Tilton said. “Why then is rapid rail in the stimulus package for some $9 billion and for NextGen, zero?”

In an interview, Mr. Tilton said he doesn’t know why the project wasn’t included in the stimulus package. “Perhaps the absence of an FAA administrator left the project without an advocate,” he said. “If there were to be a second stimulus package, I and the ATA board would make a compelling case for NextGen inclusion.”

When the White House appoints a new FAA administrator, a step expected very soon, the new FAA chief should try to bring the timetable for the ATC system forward and “front-load the benefits,” Mr. Tilton said. “What can we do promptly with technology available today? It should be now-gen rather than next-gen.”

Hank Krakowski: “We have included controllers in all phases of NextGen so far.”

The FAA’s Hank Krawkowski testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Aviation Safety, Operations, and Security today, and summarized the last year’s worth of movement on ATC issues as well as the development of NextGen planning. One of the more interesting portions of Krakowski’s prepared remarks came at the very end, where he specifically addressed the labor dispute between the FAA and the National Association of Air Traffic Controllers:

I know that this Committee has always been interested in how FAA has interacted with our labor unions, and I would like to address that briefly. In his confirmation hearing before this Committee, Secretary LaHood made it very clear that resolving labor disputes was one of his top priorities for the FAA, and that he was seeking to fill the FAA Administrator position with someone who had the people skills to resolve our outstanding issues with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). As someone who has sat on both sides of the labor debate, I fully support the Secretary’s priority on this.

Our controllers, indeed, our entire workforce, are our most valuable assets in ensuring the safety of the traveling public. As such, we have included controllers in all phases of NextGen so far. Controller input has come from individual controllers who have been invited to participate in NextGen development, though they were not participating as official NATCA representatives. NATCA does have a seat on the NextGen Management Board, the governance structure that we originally put in place as our framework for achieving NextGen. I look forward to moving ahead towards a resolution of our differences. These have been challenging times for us, and I want to commend all the hard work that has occurred on both sides.

The full transcript is available here.

Vicky Cox: “Our programs are currently on track, our partnerships are strong.”

At this week’s Aviation Subcommittee hearing on NextGen, the FAA’s Vicky Cox laid out her views on what her agency has accomplished as well as the state of current initiatives. The testimony is fairly lengthy; here two brief excerpts:

A year ago, we received several recommendations from varied sources about how we should deliver NextGen. The Senior Policy Committee of the JPDO asked us to accelerate NextGen, to shift from concept development to execution. Stakeholders continually asked for a single point of accountability for NextGen. Industry wanted more focused oversight by FAA of JPDO deliverables; and most experts recognized that the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), as the operator of the national airspace system, has ultimate responsibility and accountability for NextGen implementation in that system.

In response to these recommendations, the NextGen and Operations Planning Organization, under my leadership as a Senior Vice President in the Air Traffic Organization, was made accountable for delivering NextGen to the National Airspace System, the NAS. I am responsible for implementation of all elements of NextGen and have authority over all matters related to FAA NextGen research, technology development, acquisition, integration, and implementation including allocation within the FAA of NextGen budgets.

[..] As you can see, we are working steadily and carefully to bring NextGen to fruition. Our programs are currently on track, our partnerships are strong. We have mapped out our course and we are moving towards our goals, and we look forward to your continued guidance and oversight as we go forward.

As always, comments and reactions are welcome. Direct your thoughts to editor (at) flynextgen (dot) com.

Reader opinion: Gingrich’s comments are “hot air talking”

A reader commented on our story “Newt Gingrich: ‘I’m launching an air-traffic modernization project’, as follows:

I don’t believe Mr Gingrich really knows much about air traffic control, most of the delays (+75%) are weather related and have nothing to do with the aircraft flying the most direct route unless of course the severe weather is along their route. Most of the commercial air traffic is already using satellite based navigation. I’m not speaking against NEXTGEN, what I’m saying is the limiting factor in capacity in the National Airspace System is runway availability. To say that one can reduce delays and get rid of “7000 union controllers” is just hot air talking.

To read more, or to add your own take on the issue, click here.

Newt Gingrich: “I’m launching an air-traffic modernization project”

So you know how Al Gore invented the internet?  Well, apparently Newt Gingrich invented NextGen. Just read this NYT profile:

Gingrich laid out for me his latest preoccupation, which, surprisingly, had nothing to do with stimulus or banking. “One of the projects I’m going to launch — we don’t have a name for it yet — is an air-traffic modernization project,” Gingrich told me excitedly. “You can do a space-based air-traffic-control system with half the current number of air-traffic controllers, increase the amount of air traffic in the northeast by 40 percent, allow point-to-point flights without the controllers having to have highways in the sky, and reduce the amount of aviation fuel by 10 percent. So it’s better for the environment, better for the economy. You have far fewer delays in New York, and by the way, you cut the number of unionized air-traffic controllers by 7,000.

“Our thematic is going to be — you’re going to love this — that if you have an air-traffic delay that’s not caused by weather, take the extra time at the airport and call your two senators and your congressman and demand they pass the modernization act,” Gingrich enthused. “Now, notice what I’m doing,” he said, leaning back and smiling. “I’m offering you a better value.”

This has led to a low-grade debate among conservative bloggers, but not exactly for the reasons you’d think.  Here’s is Andrew Sullivan’s reaction, and James Fallows’ reaction to that.

EXCLUSIVE: Bruce Holmes on the end of DayJet and the future of commercial aviation

If you’ve heard of DayJet Corporation, the JPDO, NASA’s Langley Research Center, or the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy, then you know a little something about the career trajectory of Bruce Holmes. Over a 30-year period, Holmes went from flight instructor and test pilot, to aeronautical engineer, to a Chief Strategist role at Langley, to advocate for the decentralization of passenger aviation in the United States. After a stint at the JPDO in the office’s early days, he joined Ed Iacobucci at DayJet Corporation — the world’s first digitally-managed, per-seat on-demand air taxi service.

In this wide-ranging interview — one of his first since DayJet Corp. filed for bankruptcy protection — Holmes talks to Fly NextGen about DayJet’s final months, the future of per-seat on-demand, and what’s needed to make NextGen a reality.

Some quotes:

On DayJet’s potential: “We were convinced that we could produce efficiency gains at least in the range of 15 percent, and quite a bit more than that, in many cases.”

On the Eclipse 500: “The airplane [..] wasn’t quite ready for intensive utilization.  We needed the ability to create a fleet dispatch reliability of 90%; this was not possible at the early stage of maturity of the airplane, meaning we depended on having many more aircraft in the fleet than those required for revenue service.”

Hurdles for NextGen: “The hard part in front of us is that industry has some major decisions they would make but cannot because of the absence of policy on the part of government. The simple truth is that the legacy carriers are not in a position financially to adopt new technology. They just can’t.”

No national vision? “Right now, there is a sort of brain block between the federal sector and the state and municipal level in terms of public policy for funding infrastructure at small airports for this fairly new purpose of public transportation to and from smaller airports. [..] We don’t have a national air transportation policy.”

Industry groups submit their X-mas list to Congress

A coalition of aerospace groups has written to congressional leaders, requesting a laundry list of credits and investments that would help large industry players. Signed by AOPA president-elect Craig Fuller, the letter asks for:

• $1 billion for the Airport Improvement Program
• $3 billion to fund NextGen avionics (i.e. ADS-B transceivers, etc.)
• Elimination of the Alternative Minimum Tax on certain airport bonds
• Extension of tax incentives for aircraft purchases through 2011
• Early phase-in of planned tax incentives for domestic manufacturing
• A permanent R&D tax credit

The AOPA has a summary of the letter here; you can find the full text PDF here.

Among the signatories: the AIA, ATA, ACC, ACI-NA, AAAE, CAA, GAMA, NBAA, Nat’l Association of State Aviation Officials, and the RAA.

At Safety Forum, Sturgell asks for trust

Here’s a link to the transcript of Bobby Sturgell’s speech at the FAA’s International Safety Forum in Washington today. An excerpt:

I’d like to leave you with a challenge. We must try to educate people to understand that the system is risk based and that our focus should be on the high risks and the high-consequence events. If we don’t, it’s going to get harder and harder to do the things we need to. We run the risk of working at things of lesser importance. I think that at the core of all this is partnership. In a system that’s as complex as the one we’re here to discuss, there must be familiarity and trust at all levels and across all entities, specifically industry and government. We know the “gotcha” approach drives safety issues underground … which is where they’ll stay until the next accident.

Thanks to partnership, technology and procedures, we have successfully eliminated or reduced risk in many areas. We know, for example, that precision brings safety, and technology is often the key to precision. We see that with RNP/RNAV. But technology and new procedures notwithstanding, there are still remaining risks we still need to tackle. We’re doing everything we can technology-wise on our runways, but it still comes down to the human element. When you’re told to hold short, will you? In a society that expects no risk, we’ve got to make sure we’re doing everything we can.

The fact is we do not have a risk-free system. But life is risky. You prepare, you drill, you equip, you train, you modify, make mistakes, learn from them, and correct things. And you share information, you eliminate known hazards, you flag potential weaknesses, you guard against them. Most importantly, you recognize that the antidote to fear generated by risk is trust.

EXCLUSIVE: House aviation subcommittee chair Jerry Costello on reauthorization, controller morale, and his hopes for a ‘different attitude’ at the FAA

When Congress returns for a full session next year, all eyes will be watching Rep. Jerry Costello (D-IL), who heads the aviation subcommittee of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. Costello and his colleagues will be taking point on the all-important FAA reauthorization bill, without which NextGen will remain nothing but a pipe dream.

Last week, Congressman Costello sat down with Fly NextGen to talk about his frustrations with times past and his hopes for times to come.

To read the interview from the beginning, start here.

Selected quotes:

On his skepticism: “The FAA does not have the best track record in their attempts to improve the air traffic control system. A lot of money has been spent — not only under this administration — and we have very little to show for it.” (Link)

On capacity: “I think it would be a mistake to believe that NextGen and the infrastructure improvements are not needed because of the temporary reduction in the number of flights.” (Link)

On user fees: [The Bush administration] “spent a great deal of time talking about imposing user fees, and at no time explained to the American people, let alone the Congress, how the system would work. So it was a major failure on their part.” (Link)

Economic stimulus: “There are projects that are ready to go, as far as runway and taxiway improvements and other issues addressing congestion and safety. And I believe that airport improvements should be part of any stimulus package that has a component for improving our infrastructure.” (Link)

Labor relations: “Recently, I was in a tower at an U.S. airport that is extremely busy, and of the dozen or so controllers that were on duty, the most experienced controller was on the job 18 months, and many of them were there less than a year. So there’s a horrible morale problem, everybody recognizes it but the FAA.” (Link)

Controllers want changes in ATOP system

The National Association of Air Traffic Controllers issued a press release this week, calling on the new administration to reevaluate the Advanced Technologies for Oceanic Procedures system. ATOP allows aircraft to transmit location coordinates across long distances in an automated fashion, but the implimentation is somewhat controversial because airlines are allowed to set their own policies about how frequently updates are sent to controllers. NATCA is worried that controllers could be disciplined or fired, even when separation data from aircraft is inadequate. ATOP is used at all three of the FAA’s oceanic centers: Ronkonkoma NY, Oakland CA, and Anchorage AK.