FAA short on radio frequencies

Nov. 13 B The radio airwaves that pilots and air traffic controllers use to communicate are nearly filled to capacity, threatening the ability of the aviation system to expand to meet growing demand for air travel, according to Federal Aviation Administration, airline and union officials. BBy 2005, it is absolutely clear youBll have gridlock, and it may come several years earlier. Any flight involving a connection will become a daylong excursion.B B ANTHONY J. BRODERICK former FAA official

THE LACK of radio frequencies is quickly becoming as important a factor in aviation congestion as the lack of runways and limited airspace, these experts say. Moreover, technological advances to increase the systemBs ability to handle more communications are not expected to come soon enough to prevent the even greater crunch of delays and cancellations that will occur when all of the FAABs radio frequencies are being used to the maximum extent possible. Complicating the situation is a dispute between the FAA and the airline industry over how to solve the problem. The airlines argue that time is running out and are pushing for a system now being used in Europe, which could be in place as soon as five years but would probably be outdated in less than 20 years. The FAA and some other aviation groups prefer a long-term digital solution that could solve the problem for generations but would take nine to 12 years to implement.

BThere is a brick wall somewhere in the future,B said George K. Sakai, program director of the FAABs Office of Spectrum Policy and Management. BItBs hard to predict where. But itBs near.B Aviation insiders have known for a decade or more that a day of reckoning was coming, but a solution has been delayed by the need for research and development of new technology, the need for worldwide agreement through United Nations agencies, and the need for consensus within the U.S. aviation community and the FAA. Now it appears those delays have pushed a solution beyond the inevitable frequency crunch.

BIt is impossible to overstate the seriousness of this problem,B said Anthony J. Broderick, former FAA associate administrator for regulation and certification who has served as an adviser on the frequency problem. He said the air traffic delays of last summer are only Btiny hints of what is going to become an everyday affair soon.B

Broderick said the air traffic system is already suffering. FAA Administrator Jane Garvey must make the frequency problem a top priority, he said. Otherwise, the aviation system soon will not be able to handle any growth. BBy 2005, it is absolutely clear youBll have gridlock, and it may come several years earlier,B Broderick said. BAny flight involving a connection will become a daylong excursion.B GOBBLING UP FREQUENCIES

Radio is the lifeblood of aviation control. One major airport requires dozens of frequencies. Air traffic controllers must have separate radio channels to talk to pilots while they are at the gate, moving on the ground, taking off and landing. Additionally, dozens of separate frequencies are needed for the radar controllers in the surrounding area who line up planes for landing or give them directions after takeoff. Twenty major en-route centers need dozens of channels to guide planes at higher altitudes. Automated weather reporting stations eat up dozens of channels. Each of many navigation aids, such as an instrument-landing system, needs separate channels. Fire and rescue personnel need more channels. As the aviation system grows, so does the need for radio communication.

FAA officials say it is already difficult to find new radio channels when they are needed. This is particularly true in high-altitude airspace, above 18,000 feet, where the FAA has identified areas that tend to have in-air traffic jams, or Bchoke points.B High-level airspace is controlled by the 20 en-route air traffic control centers across the country. Inside these centers are rows of computer screens where each controller is in charge of a portion of airspace called a Bsector.B When one of these sectors becomes too busy for one controller to handle, the standard solution is to split the it into two sectors. But the new sector needs a new radio channel. The FAA has been reduced to artful scrounging to find the needed channels. For instance, the Cleveland en-route air traffic center, which controls high-altitude traffic over a large part of the Great Lakes region and Ohio Valley, was forced to use a frequency previously assigned to an automated weather observation station to deal with a serious choke point where several air routes converged. The weather station, which had not yet been turned on, will be left to gather dust for a while.

When new ground facilities such as runways are built, they require new radio channels. FAA officials said some pressure on radio channels was temporarily relieved because Atlanta is moving more slowly than planned to build a new runway. Atlanta air traffic facilities will require seven new channels when the runway is eventually opened. Sakai said finding seven channels will be difficult, but until the system hits the expected brick wall, Bwe will find it. ItBs our job to find it.B QUICK BFIXESB BThere is a brick wall somewhere in the future. ItBs hard to predict where. But itBs near.B B GEORGE K. SAKAI FAA program director Sakai said his group has identified 23 possible short-term BfixesB that could produce more channels. Among other things, he said, the FAA could convert some navigation channels from a form of Morse code to voice transmissions. He noted that the universal emergency channel B 121.500 B has a Bguard bandB of six unused channels around it, and perhaps two or four of them could be activated.

Some of the possible fixes that Sakai has identified would require changing and juggling frequencies across wide areas. A frequency can be used at two or more locations as long as they are far enough apart not to interfere with one another B usually hundreds of miles. In high-altitude airspace, where radio traffic from the 20 en-route centers can be heard for hundreds of miles, one radio channel can be used only three times nationwide. FAA and airline officials say there is no hope of getting new frequencies, so only a new solution can create new channels, and that will take a lot of time. BWeBre not going to be able to do anything [in] under five years,B said Steve Zaidman, the FAABs associate administrator for research and acquisitions. Yet Zaidman acknowledged the the crunch point will probably hit within five years. BWe can keep going for three to five years, but after five years, it gets dicey.B Officials say there is no way to accurately measure whether the frequency crunch is already exacerbating delays, but many suspect itBs having a profound effect.

BWe have a far greater crunch than most people are aware,B said Bill Stine, director of international operations for the National Business Aviation Association. He also heads the FAA advisory committee that began looking into the problem in 1991. At issue is a dilemma facing all forms of radio communication. The demand for radio frequencies is outstripping supply, especially as new wireless communications flood the marketplace. MSNBC's travel coverage

CROWDED SPECTRUM The aviation system owns the spectrum from 108 to 137 megahertz, which is just above the segment used by FM radio stations. The FAA administers this band within U.S. borders. The radio spectrum became crowded many years ago, but initial solutions were relatively simple as radio technology advanced. First the FAA doubled the number of number of radio channels by cutting each frequency in half. Rather than turning to, say, 118.0 MHz or 119.0 MHz, the system could be tuned to 118.0 MHz, 118.5 MHz or 119.0 MHz. Later radio technology allowed the frequencies to be split again into the current arrangement B 118.0 MHz, 118.25 MHz, 118.5 MHz, 118.75 MHz, etc. That, however, was as far as the FAA could go using radio equipment available at the time of that last split. A next-generation solution was needed, which would require expensive new equipment on the ground and in the air.

But the FAA and the industry also face another dilemma: Should they push forward with a high-tech digital solution that would split available frequencies into enough voice and data channels to meet the needs of the foreseeable future? Or should they use technology developed in the past few years to create a shorter-term solution? In the mid-1990s, the International Telecommunications Union, a United Nations agency that controls frequencies worldwide, seemed to settle the issue by adopting a long-term digital plan B called VDL-3 for BVHF Data Link, Mode 3B B as the worldwide standard. But VDL-3, which the FAA has dubbed Nexcom, would take a minimum of nine to 12 years to develop, test, certify and implement, and some aviation professionals believe it would take even longer. A new generation of radio transmitting systems and radio receivers would have to be developed and manufactured by the thousands, and thousands of ground antennas and broadcasting facilities would have to be replaced. Congress would have to debate creation of the system and come up with funding for it. And, perhaps most important, the FAA would have to test and certify the system as working perfectly every time, because any failure could be disastrous. BYou canBt make me wait 10 years when IBve got a problem in three,B said Russell Chew, managing director of the American Airlines systems operations center. Like others, Chew said he supported Nexcom, but itBs too late to begin development now, and a near-term solution is needed. Stine of the business aviation association said he prefers Nexcom, but it may soon be too late to consider it. BCertainly logic is in our corner,B he said. BHowever, time is running out on logic.B AIRLINESB ALTERNATIVE BYou canBt make me wait 10 years when IBve got a problem in three.B B RUSSELL CHEW American Airlines official Chew and other airline representatives, at a Sept. 18 meeting that included the FAA, the airlines and various aviation groups, demanded that the FAA adopt a shorter-term analog plan that would split the frequencies again. This plan is widely known as the B8.33 planB because it would split each frequency into 12 channels, leaving 8.33 kilohertz between each channel. Using current technology, channels placed that close together on the spectrum would interfere with each other. But radio technology has now been developed to mitigate such interference. There are drawbacks to the 8.33 plan, including the fact that it would be capable of only voice transmission, not data. It also would solve the problem for less than two decades. The advantage of the 8.33 plan is that the Europeans have already proved it will work because it is widely used there now. European countries hit the frequency crunch much earlier than the United States, and obtained a waiver from international standards to install an 8.33 system. And because any airliner that flies to Europe must be equipped with an 8.33-capable radio, hundreds of U.S. airliners are already equipped with them. In fact, all newly manufactured airliners now come equipped with an 8.33-capable radio, meaning that 20 percent or more of U.S. airliners could switch to a U.S. 8.33 system now. However, the Europeans have also said they are already running out of 8.33 frequencies and must begin implementing a new solution by 2007. Zaidman said the decision will be a monumental one. Going for a short-term solution would merely put off the day of reckoning a relatively short time longer, and would make a long-term solution such as Nexcom much more difficult to achieve technologically and politically.

Zaidman said Congress is unlikely to spend billions of dollars for a new system, only to start spending billions more for a replacement system. BWith funding, you get one crack at it,B Zaidman said. BWhatever we do is permanent.B Zaidman said he is discussing with the communications industry the possibility of a new radio receiver than can accept broadcasts on any of the various systems. But he said the FAA cannot order a reluctant airline industry to accept its Nexcom plan because the radio frequency problem is not a safety problem. Increasing delays and cancellations may be a problem of economics and convenience, but they are not unsafe, he said. Chew of American Airlines said a hybrid solution may be possible, using the 8.33 solution in combination with digital broadcasts now managed by Arinc Inc., a private company in Annapolis that was chosen by the FAA to manage the portion of the radio spectrum that is used for radio communications not related to air traffic control, such as conversations between pilots and airline dispatchers. DIGITAL DRAWBACKS BObviously, the fact that we are heading for some kind of problems in mid-decade [means] we got to get our act together and pick a course of action soon.B B JAMES L. PIERCE president, Arinc Inc. ArincBs digital broadcasts cannot be used for critical air traffic control messages, such as instructions to change altitude or turn. However, Chew said Arinc channels can be used for routine non-critical air traffic messages. He pointed out that 40 percent of air traffic communications are to tell a pilot to switch to another radio channel in the next air traffic sector. BWe want to unload routine voice communications so the controller can spend time controlling traffic,B Chew said. James L. Pierce, president of Arinc, stressed that the company is not in competition with the FAA. Pierce said his system can help take up some slack for controllers but that is not an ultimate solution.

BObviously, the fact that we are heading for some kind of problems in mid-decade [means] we got to get our act together and pick a course of action soon,B Pierce said. BThis is going to be hard since weBre split between the government and industry having a separate view.B Bill Blackmer, head of the safety and technology department of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the controllersB union, said he put it more bluntly at the Sept. 18 meeting, which sources said was acrimonious at times. BBasically, I kind of chewed those people out,B he said. BI told them if theyBd just stop having these meetings we could get something done.B The next meeting is scheduled for Nov. 15. Pierce said he fears the consequences of a short-term solution, but there appears to be no choice. He said it may be possible to use the 8.33 approach in a very limited way that would not preclude an eventual long-term solution. Some in the industry have suggested temporarily using 8.33 only for high-altitude channels. BAlthough I think 8.33 is inevitable, none of us really like that,B Pierce said. BAnd itBs absolutely imperative that we donBt go too far down that road, because that means you really have trouble extracting yourself and ultimately going to some kind of general com [communications] system. ItBs a reluctant course weBre on, but one thatBs almost been dictated because of the Europeans and the way the airlines are equipped.B

http://www.msnbc.com/news/489202.asp

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), November 13, 2000

Answers

Paris, Tuesday, November 14, 2000 Lack of Radio Frequencies/Warnings of Gridlock A 'Brick Wall' Threatens to Stop Growth of U.S. Aviation System

By Don Phillips Washington Post Service WASHINGTON - The radio airwaves that pilots and air traffic controllers use to communicate are nearly filled to capacity, threatening the ability of the aviation system to expand to meet growing demand for air travel, according to Federal Aviation Administration, airline and union officials. The lack of radio frequencies is quickly becoming as important a factor in U.S. aviation congestion as the lack of runways and limited airspace, these specialists say.

Moreover, technological advances to increase the system's ability to handle more communications are not expected to come soon enough to prevent the even greater crunch of delays and cancellations that will occur when all of the aviation agency's radio frequencies are being used to the maximum extent possible.

Complicating the situation is a dispute between the agency and the airline industry over how to solve the problem. The airlines contend that time is running out and are pushing for a system now being used in Europe, which could be in place in five years but would probably be outdated in less than 20 years. The aviation agency and some other aviation groups prefer a long-term digital solution that could solve the problem for generations but would take 9 to 12 years to put in place.

''There is a brick wall somewhere in the future,'' said George Sakai, program director of the aviation agency's Office of Spectrum Policy and Management. ''It's hard to predict where. But it's near.''

Aviation insiders have known for a decade or more that a day of reckoning was coming, but a solution has been delayed by the need for research and development of new technology, the need for worldwide agreement through United Nations agencies, and the need for consensus within the U.S. aviation community and the Federal Aviation Administration. Now it appears those delays have pushed a solution beyond the inevitable frequency crunch.

''It is impossible to overstate the seriousness of this problem,'' said Anthony Broderick, former aviation agency associate administrator for regulation and certification, who has served as an adviser on the frequency problem. He said last summer's air traffic delays in the United States were only ''tiny hints of what is going to become an everyday affair soon.''

Mr. Broderick said the air traffic system was already suffering. The head of the Federal Aviation Administration, Jane Garvey, must make the frequency problem a top priority, he said. Otherwise, the aviation system soon will not be able to handle any growth.

''By 2005, it is absolutely clear you'll have gridlock, and it may come several years earlier,'' Mr. Broderick said. ''Any flight involving a connection will become a daylong excursion.''

Radio is the lifeblood of aviation control. One major airport requires dozens of frequencies. Air traffic controllers must have separate radio channels to talk to pilots while they are at the gate, moving on the ground, taking off and landing. Additionally, dozens of separate frequencies are needed for the radar controllers who line up planes for landing or give them directions after takeoff. Twenty major U.S. en-route centers need dozens of channels to guide planes at higher altitudes. Automated weather reporting stations take up dozens of channels. Each of many navigation aids, such as an instrument-landing system, needs separate channels. Fire and rescue personnel need more channels.

-

OFFICIALS of the Federal Aviation Administration say it is already difficult to find new channels when they are needed. This is particularly true in high-altitude airspace, above 18,000 feet (5,500 meters), where the agency has identified areas that tend to have in- air traffic jams, called choke points.

High-level airspace is controlled by the en-route air traffic control centers. At these centers are rows of computer screens where each controller is in charge of a portion of airspace, or sector. When one of these sectors becomes too busy for one controller to handle, the standard solution is to split it into two sectors. But the new sector needs a new radio channel.

The aviation agency has been reduced to artful scrounging to find the needed channels. For example, the Cleveland en-route air traffic center, which controls high-altitude traffic over a large part of the Great Lakes region and Ohio Valley, was assigned a frequency that had been set aside for an automated weather observation station, in order to relieve serious congestion at a point where several air routes converged. The weather station, which had not yet been turned on, will be left to gather dust for a while.

When new ground facilities such as runways are built, they require new radio channels. Officials of the aviation agency said some pressure on radio channels was temporarily relieved because Atlanta was moving more slowly than planned to build a new runway. Atlanta air traffic facilities will require seven new channels when the runway is eventually opened.

Mr. Sakai said finding seven channels would be difficult, but ''we will find it.'' He said his group had identified 23 possible short- term fixes. Among other things, he said, the agency could convert some navigation channels from a form of Morse code to voice transmissions. He said that the universal emergency channel, 121.500, had a ''guard band'' of six unused channels around it, and perhaps two or four of them could be activated.

Some of the possible fixes would require changing and juggling frequencies across wide areas. A frequency can be used at two or more locations as long as they are far enough apart not to interfere with one another - usually hundreds of miles. In high-altitude airspace, where radio traffic from the 20 en-route centers can be heard for hundreds of miles, one radio channel can be used only three times nationwide.

Aviation agency and airline officials say there is no hope of getting new frequencies. At issue is a dilemma facing all forms of radio communication. The demand for radio frequencies is outstripping supply, especially as new wireless communications flood the marketplace. The aviation system owns the spectrum from 108 to 137 megahertz, just above the segment used by FM radio stations. The Federal Aviation Administration administers this band within U.S. borders.

The radio spectrum became crowded many years ago, but initial solutions were relatively simple as radio technology advanced. First, the agency doubled the number of radio channels by cutting each frequency in half. Rather than tuning to, say, 118.0 MHz or 119.0 MHz, the system could be tuned to 118.0 MHz, 118.5 MHz or 119.0 MHz. Later, radio technology allowed the frequencies to be split again into the current arrangement: 118.0 MHz, 118.25 MHz, 118.5 MHz, 118.75 MHz, and so forth.

That was as far as the agency could go using radio equipment available at the time of the last split. A next-generation solution was needed, which would require expensive new equipment on the ground and in the air.

But the Federal Aviation Administration and the industry face another dilemma: Should they push forward with a high-tech digital solution that would split available frequencies into enough voice and data channels to meet the needs of the foreseeable future? Or should they use technology developed in the past few years to create a shorter- term solution?

In the mid-1990s, the International Telecommunications Union, a UN agency that controls frequencies worldwide, seemed to settle the issue by adopting a long-term digital plan, called VDL-3 for ''VHF Data Link, Mode 3,'' as the worldwide standard. But VDL-3, which the Federal Aviation Administration has dubbed Nexcom, would take a minimum of 9 to 12 years to develop, test, certify and put in place, and some aviation professionals believe it would take longer.

''You can't make me wait 10 years when I've got a problem in three,'' said Russell Chew, managing director of the American Airlines systems operations center. Mr. Chew and other airline representatives, at a Sept. 18 meeting that included the aviation agency, the airlines and various aviation groups, demanded that the agency adopt a shorter- term analog plan that would split the frequencies again. This plan is widely known as the ''8.33 plan'' because it would split each frequency into 12 channels, leaving 8.33 kilohertz between each channel.

-

USING current technology, channels placed that close together on the spectrum would interfere with each other. But new technology has been developed to mitigate such interference. There are drawbacks to the 8.33 plan, including the fact that it would be capable of only voice transmission, not data. It also would solve the problem for less than two decades.

The advantage of the 8.33 plan is that the Europeans have already proved it will work because it is widely used there now. Also, all newly manufactured airliners now come equipped with an 8.33-capable radio, meaning that 20 percent or more of U.S. airliners could switch to a U.S. 8.33 system now.

But the Europeans have also said they are already running out of 8.33 frequencies and must begin carrying out a new solution by 2007.

Steve Zaidman, the aviation agency's associate administrator for research and acquisitions, said the decision would be a monumental one. Going for a short-term solution would merely put off the day of reckoning a relatively short time longer, and would make a long-term solution such as Nexcom much more difficult to achieve technologically and politically.

http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/TUE/IN/fly.2.html

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), November 13, 2000.