WASHINGTON, D.C. – The FAA and the aviation community sent a plan to Congress last week to show how the FAA will accelerate the benefits of key NextGen initiatives over the next three years.
The agreement is the result of several months of collaboration between the agency and the NextGen Advisory Committee, which includes officials from the airlines, airports, general aviation, pilots, labor unions and safety specialists, manufacturers, international aviation, environmentalists and the Department of Defense.
Under the plan, called the NextGen Priorities Joint Implementation Plan, the FAA and the aviation industry share responsibility to meet specific milestones, locations, timelines and metrics for “high priority, high readiness” NextGen initiatives. These initiatives include Multiple Runway Operations, Performance Based Navigation, Surface and Data Communications, FAA officials explained.
“We are finishing the foundational pieces of NextGen,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. “Now is the time to increase our focus on deploying benefits and capabilities to the airlines and flying public. Collaboration like this with our stakeholders – airlines, pilots, controllers, manufacturers – is the key to the success of NextGen.”
According to the plan, the FAA will institute new NextGen procedures through the use of Multiple Runway Operations at 36 airports nationwide to increase airport efficiency and reduce flight delays.
The agency plans to deploy satellite-based navigation procedures known as Performance Based Navigation (PBN) at three key metropolitan areas – Northern California, Atlanta and Charlotte – to provide more direct flight paths, improved airport arrival rates, enhanced controller productivity, increased safety due to repeatable and predictable flight paths, fuel savings and a reduction in aviation’s environmental impact, FAA officials explained.
The plan also calls for the FAA to increase Surface Operation data sharing in order to increase predictability and provide actionable and measurable surface efficiency improvements at airports.
Finally, the FAA is accelerating its work on Data Communications services, which upgrades communication between pilots, air traffic controllers and airline operations centers from voice to digital, providing enhanced safety and efficiency of the airspace system, especially under bad weather conditions.
Those in the aviation industry are responsible for ensuring pilot awareness of new runway and airspace procedures, equipping aircraft with DataComm technology, collaborating with the FAA on performance based navigation airspace redesign, and data sharing, FAA officials concluded.
Who is representing general aviation? By that I mean the single engine and light twin pilots. Although I an instrumented rated pilot I probobaly will not fly on instruments anymore. The big boys have succeeded in getting us small GA fliers out of the way.
Cub pilots aren’t required to buy Next Gen stuff unless they are playing in the airspace where the big boys play.
Right. Thanks for pushing us below 10,000 feet MSL and out of the Class C & D etc. airspace unless we cough up the big bucks for unnecessary equipment.
Whoa. I’m speaking as the builder of an Experimental Cub who has no intention of installing the high $$ ADS-B out in his Cub. I’m with you on this., although I do have my other E-AB plane equipped with a “portable” ads-b in and out unit and find the data to be very useful. But I am not an advocate of requiring this for all light aircraft or kicking aircraft out of those classes of airspace.
In fact, the way the system is set up, aircraft with a transponder and encoder are seen on radar and broadcast back out to anyone with ADS-B in. Since they already show up on everyone’s screens, what’s the point in forcing that class of light aircraft to have both a transponder and ADS-B out? Technically, there is no reason for it in the class B and C areas with good radar coverage. Once the FAA has the traffic control centers equipped with ADS-B (almost none of them are at this point in time), then give the little guys a choice as to whether they want ADS-B out or a transponder. The cost is close to the same (or will be as the ADS-B costs drop with higher production rates). The force feeding the FAA is currently shoving down our throats doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Son, all of what you say is good except the FAA doesn’t see it that way and they are not going to be satisfied with the transponder alone because it doesn’t give them your aircraft number and that is what they are after – your number. O.K.? What they are going to require after the year 2020 is AD-SB out in addition to the transponder and not in lieu of the transponder and that’s what we are going to have to eat if we want to fly up to 12500 without oxygen and into the Class B, C, & D. This is all about control and enforcement.
“…collaboration”? Don’t you mean “arm twisting”? Cub pilots don’t need no steeenken next gen. If they want to upgrade the airlines then have at it but leave the rest of us alone thank you.