I haven’t written anything since June because I finally went over the top and became totally disgusted with the current state of our political affairs. At precisely the time when reason and deliberative thought are most sorely needed, it is being intentionally undermined! I don’t know about everyone else, but I deserve better from my government. And so does aviation!
How will this appalling new political reality impact NextGen? Well, given the recent “serious debates” over whether or not the United States of American should pay its outstanding bills, or whether or not the government should provide education grants so our kids can afford college, or whether or not the government should subsidize winter heating oil for poor and the elderly, I’d think that the probability of funding for aviation research looks pretty low. In this political environment how can anyone defend spending billions of tax dollars for research and development to make air travel more efficient for a relatively small and prosperous segment of the population?
So exactly what is the defensive strategy for preserving aviation research and development? You’d think that it might be to create an army of defenders armed with solid information, rigorous analysis, and rational arguments to overwhelm the mindless political agenda. You’d think!! But so far the quiet has been deafening. Where is that NextGen soaring rhetoric and marketing genius when it’s needed?
How about just some information so that our aviation army can have some ammunition before going off to do battle? And what better information opportunity can there be but for FAA to utilize the grand stage of the 56th ATCA Annual Conference and Exposition on October 3-5, 2011 to provide industry with the informational tools it needs to defend itself. What we (industry) need is: (1) an updated vision of where NextGen is going beyond the current near-term focus on enhanced CNS capabilities, (2) information on the documented incremental benefits NextGen has achieved since 2003, (3) sound analytical proof that the actual “transformative” NextGen is still a viable goal, and (4) the status of the research into those genuinely transformational ATC technologies.
Speaking for myself, there are certain things I need to know before I’d be willing to enlist in our army. Hopefully at least one of the ATCA panel sessions will address at least one of these questions:
Question 1: “There is no doubt that enhanced communications, navigation, and surveillance capabilities will provide operational benefits to individual users/operators in terms of enhanced planning and coordination, logistics, maintainability, reliability, etc., and even safety. However, they remain ATC enabling technologies that, alone or collectively, cannot provide systemic tactical ATC operational benefits. An analogous transportation situation is the nearly ubiquitous presence of GPS navigation systems in almost every vehicle on the highway. To what degree has that technology influx enhanced the efficiency of the highway system? While my GPS unit is fantastically helpful to me, without some system wide planning and execution function that actually tells me how to change my route for the good of the whole; I’d have to answer, “Not much! I still get caught in traffic delays”. Similarly, NextGen is currently focused on the collection and distribution of aviation related “data” without much attention to developing any technological capability for tactical or strategic planning or control. Please tell me I'm wrong. I’d like someone on the panels to please address the status of research related to technological capabilities that will serve as the aviation tactical planning and execution functions. Without these critical functions that are essential for changing the very nature of the ATC process, the claim for “transformation” seems to be inappropriate at best. If the official response to the question is that developing such hugely difficult functions is unrealistic, impossible, or impolitic; then perhaps we have wrong people in charge of NextGen.
Question 2: One of the ATCA panels is charged with addressing the requirement for workforce cultural changes in a NextGen environment. Why? The six Transformational Programs and the seven solution sets are all focused on CNS enhancements and massive data collection and distribution capabilities, with nothing oriented towards applying advanced technologies to transform the actual ATC process. The question is: “Except for expanded “collaboration”, how will the NextGen operational environment be any different from today’s environment? Can the panel, or anyone else, describe the anticipated NextGen ATC operational environment, at a workforce role/culture level, with any certainty beyond the extremely vague speculation offered in the original NextGen concept?”
Question 3: While FAA seems to have an abundance of resources available to simulate, analyze, and evaluate changes to the ATC system, those studies are usually focused on airspace changes, traffic routing changes, and other very pragmatic near-term approaches to enhancing system efficiency. While that is a good thing, there is no evidence that those same resources are being applied to simulating and analyzing long-term NextGen concepts except for those that are mere extensions or variations on the current controller-centric ATC process. I’m certainly no technologist, but I’ll bet there is any number of highly sophisticated ATC compatible technologies out there that could, in time, change (transform?) the very nature of air traffic control. My questions are: "To what degree can the existing simulation capabilities simulate an ATC environment that is not controller-centric?" and "To what degree is FAA willing to let go of the conceptual reins and allow industry to begin to explore the operational viability of alternative tactical ATC concepts and technologies?" Isn’t that why DARPA is a NextGen partner?
Naturally I don’t expect to have any of these broader questions addressed by any of the people on any of the panels. But if someone doesn’t give the right answers to the right people right now, don’t be surprised if they receive an invitation to a Tea Party right soon. If we as a nation fail to take the lead on developing and deploying an advanced ATC system and chose to simply continue to manage a routine technological evolution, then perhaps extraordinary funding for NextGen is not justified and that whole ATC transformation business can simply be left to the Europeans, or perhaps someday the Chinese.