To My New-Found Friends, the Controllers...

... I’ll take the bait and follow up on my pre-Christmas blog that has generated considerable interest from the NATCA community. If nothing else, it is impressive how controllers rally around anything they see as potentially critical of them – which this wasn’t. First, the point of the blog was two-fold: to highlight two shortages the industry is facing – pilots and controllers; and, to suggest that while the pilot shortage is primarily a manpower (and associated career-incentive) issue, the controller shortage is more complex and heavily involves a technology solution. We live in a tech-driven industry and society, and only a Luddite would suggest that the long-term solution to ATC modernization is strictly a manpower issue. That said, the short-term problems facing the U.S. air traffic control system may indeed be more about controller shortages (and facilities maintenance, a key NATCA position), but as indicated in the previous blog, having NATCA and FAA butting heads is not the most desirable way to reach a solution. Nor is it desirable to have the controllers who operate the system feeling stepped on, to the point of wanting out. As Paul Rinaldi, executive VP with NATCA says, we need to invest in “NowGenâ€. I agree ... but again, the original blog was intended to be about long-term. A bit of background also seems in order, considering the bashing of the blog as coming from a cub reporter who just reads an FAA press release and comments. I started in aviation in 1984 at an aviation trade association (NATA) in Washington. In 1986, I was hired as editor for this publication, which was founded as FBO magazine and in 1993 transformed into AIRPORT BUSINESS. Over the past 21-plus years, I have probably been at more airports (as a reporter, not as a passenger) and more FBOs/airport-based businesses than 99 percent of the population. I’ve also been in many control towers, have spoken with controllers, know controllers, and have had this same debate over a beer on numerous occasions. I have also covered more aviation conferences than most, and ATC modernization has been a hot topic for years. I’ve heard speakers ranging from the president of NAV CANADA to the Reason Foundation to The Boyd Group to Neil Planzer of Boeing (who, of all the speakers I’ve heard on this topic, is most impressive). Interestingly, I don’t recall any non-NATCA speaker ever saying that the long-term solution to ATC lies with more bodies in towers. It’s always about technology. On the subject of research, I would recommend that the members of NATCA browse through the press releases put out by their organization for the past several years and I challenge them to find one that pushes for new technology. I did; I couldn’t. At the least, it comes off as purely self-serving to have the organization -- whose reason for being is controller membership – to always claim that every problem with the ATC system can be solved with more members, er, controllers. If the controllers are truly the caretakers of the system, why isn’t NATCA leading the charge for new technology? Through the years I’ve been critical of FAA, and I too have doubts as to whether the agency will have the ability to modernize the system. History suggests it won’t. My answer would be to pull the function out of government (except for safety regulation) and privatize it. But then, ‘privatization’ is a dirty word in the NATCA dictionary. So, while Canada prepares to install ADS-B system-wide to the north, we in the U.S. continue to debate the need and how to pay for it. I appreciate the ongoing interest and comments from the controller community, particularly the measured response from former NATCA president John Carr. It’s a serious subject and the controllers should have a leading voice on the long-term solution. But it isn’t just about bodies; it’s about technology, too. Thanks for reading. jfi