National Airspace System: FAA Has Implemented Some Free Flight
Initiatives, but Challenges Remain (Chapter Report, 09/28/1998,
GAO/RCED-98-246).

The predicted growth in air traffic and the aging of air traffic control
equipment led the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to undertake a
multibillion-dollar modernization effort in 1981 to improve the safety,
the capacity, and the efficiency of the nation's air traffic control
system. Since then, this program has experienced substantial cost
overruns, lengthy schedule delays, and significant performance
shortfalls. To get its modernization effort back on track, FAA--in
consultation with the aviation community--is developing a phased
approach to modernization, including a new way to manage air traffic,
known as "free flight." FAA plans to introduce a host of new
technologies and procedures that will allow it to adopt a more flexible
approach to air traffic operations, one in which decisions for
conducting flight operations will be based increasingly on collaboration
between FAA and users. For example, the technologies and associated
procedures will give pilots and controllers more precise information on
the location of aircraft and allow them to exchange information more
efficiently. As a result, pilots will have greater flexibility to change
their route, speed, and altitude with fewer restrictions. FAA will be
able to improve the air traffic control system's safety and use airspace
and airport resources more efficiently. This, the first in a series of
reports on this topic, discusses (1) the status of FAA's efforts to
implement free flight, including a planned operational demonstration
known as Flight 2000, and (2) the views of the aviation community and
FAA on the challenges that must be met to implement free flight cost
effectively.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  RCED-98-246
     TITLE:  National Airspace System: FAA Has Implemented Some Free
	     Flight Initiatives, but Challenges Remain
      DATE:  09/28/1998
   SUBJECT:  Interagency relations
	     Transportation safety
	     Air traffic control systems
	     Air transportation operations
	     Systems conversions
	     Cost effectiveness analysis
	     Strategic planning
	     Program management
IDENTIFIER:  FAA Flight 2000 Program
	     FAA Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************
GAO/RCED-98-246

Cover
================================================================ COVER

Report to Congressional Requesters

September 1998

NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM - FAA HAS
IMPLEMENTED SOME FREE FLIGHT
INITIATIVES, BUT CHALLENGES REMAIN

GAO/RCED-98-246

Free Flight Initiatives

(348025)

Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  ADS - Automatic Dependent Surveillance
  ADS-B - Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
  ARINC - Aeronautical Radio Incorporated
  ARTCC - Air Route Traffic Control Center
  ATC - air traffic control
  ATIS - Automatic Terminal Information Service
  ATM - Air Traffic Management
  CDM - Collaborative Decision Making
  CPDLC - Controller Pilot Data Link Communications
  CTAS - Center TRACON Automation System
  DOD - Department of Defense
  DSR - Display System Replacement
  DSS - decision support system
  FAA - Federal Aviation Administration
  FANS - Future Air Navigation System
  FAST - Final Approach Spacing Tool
  FIS - Flight Information Service
  GAO - General Accounting Office
  GPS - Global Positioning System
  HF - High Frequency
  LAAS - Local Area Augmentation System
  MDCRS - Meteorological Data Collection and Reporting System
  MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  NAS - National Airspace System
  NRP - National Route Program
  PDC - Pre-Departure Clearance
  pFAST - passive Final Approach Spacing Tool
  R&D - research and development
  RNAV - Random Navigation/Area Navigation
  RVSM - Required Vertical Separation Minimum
  SATCOM - Satellite Voice and Data Communications
  SMA - Surface Movement Advisor
  STARS - Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System
  SUA - Special Use Airspace
  TFM - Traffic Flow Management
  TFM-ART - Traffic Flow Management-Architecture and Requirements
     Team
  TIS - Traffic Information Service
  TIS-B - Traffic Information Service-Broadcast
  TMA - Traffic Management Advisor
  TRACON - Terminal Radar Approach Control
  URET - User Request Evaluation Tool
  WAAS - Wide Area Augmentation System
  RTCA -

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER

B-279201

September 28, 1998

The Honorable John McCain
Chairman
The Honorable Ernest F.  Hollings
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Commerce, Science, and
 Transportation
United States Senate

The Honorable Slade Gorton
Chairman
The Honorable Wendell H.  Ford
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Aviation
Committee on Commerce, Science, and
 Transportation
United States Senate

In response to your request, this report discusses the results of our
review of (1) the status of the Federal Aviation Administration's
(FAA) efforts to implement free flight, including a planned
operational demonstration formerly known as Flight 2000 and now
called the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program, and (2) the
views of the aviation community and FAA on the challenges that must
be met to implement free flight in a cost-effective manner.

We are providing copies of this report to interested congressional
committees and subcommittees, the Secretary of Transportation, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and other
interested parties.  Copies will also be made available to others
upon request.  Please call me at (202) 512-3650 if you have any
questions about the report.  Major contributors to this report are
listed in appendix V.

Gerald L.  Dillingham, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Transportation Issues

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
============================================================ Chapter 0

   PURPOSE
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1

The predicted growth in air traffic and the aging of air traffic
control equipment led the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to
undertake a multibillion-dollar modernization effort in 1981 to
improve the safety, capacity, and efficiency of the nation's air
traffic control system.  Since that time, this program has
experienced substantial cost overruns, lengthy schedule delays, and
significant performance shortfalls.  To get the modernization effort
back on track and thereby address the limitations of the present
system and satisfy users' growing demands, FAA--in consultation with
the aviation community--is developing a phased approach to
modernization, including a new way of managing air traffic known as
"free flight." Under the modernization program, FAA plans to
introduce a host of new technologies and procedures that will enable
free flight--allowing the agency to move gradually from its present
use of highly structured rules and procedures for air traffic
operations to a more flexible system in which decisions for
conducting flight operations will be based increasingly on
collaboration between FAA and users.  For example, these technologies
and associated procedures will give pilots and controllers more
precise information about the location of aircraft and allow them to
exchange information more efficiently.  With more precise and
efficiently exchanged information, pilots will have more flexibility
to change their route, speed, and altitude (under certain conditions)
with fewer restrictions, thus saving users time and money and
allowing FAA to improve the air traffic control system's safety and
use airspace and airport resources more efficiently.

Because FAA is at a critical juncture in its plans to implement this
new system of air traffic management, the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation and its Subcommittee on
Aviation asked GAO to monitor the progress of free flight initiatives
and provide them with a series of reports.  This first report
discusses (1) the status of FAA's efforts to implement free flight,
including a planned operational demonstration known as Flight 2000,\1
and (2) the views of the aviation community and FAA on the challenges
that must be met to implement free flight cost-effectively.

--------------------
\1 FAA officials working with the aviation community reached broad
consensus on a general roadmap for restructuring the Flight 2000
program--including a recommendation that it be renamed the "Free
Flight Operational Enhancement Program"--and presented this roadmap
to FAA for formal approval in Sept.  1998.

   BACKGROUND
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2

FAA's mission is to promote the safe, orderly, and expeditious flow
of air traffic in the U.S.  airspace system, commonly referred to as
the National Airspace System (NAS).  To accomplish its mission, FAA
provides air traffic services 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.  The
air traffic control system, which is the principal component of the
NAS, comprises a vast network of radars; automated data processing,
navigation, and communications equipment; and air traffic control
facilities.  Through the air traffic control system, FAA, among other
things, controls takeoffs and landings and manages the flow of
traffic between airports.  Other components of the NAS include
airports or landing areas; aeronautical charts, information, and
services; rules, regulations, and procedures; technical information;
and personnel and material.

Over the past 17 years, FAA has had an ongoing program to modernize
the air traffic control system.  Under this program, FAA is upgrading
and replacing equipment and facilities and developing new
technologies to help improve the safety, efficiency, and capacity of
the system.  However, this program has substantially exceeded its
budget, encountered lengthy delays, and fallen short in its
performance.  As a result, the aviation community's confidence in
FAA's ability to manage the modernization program has been weakened.
While many of FAA's efforts under the modernization program, such as
replacing controllers' workstations and supporting equipment, are not
a part of the free flight initiatives, these efforts will provide the
infrastructure that is critical for its implementation.  To address
the shortcomings in its modernization program and develop consensus
on and commitment to the agency's future approach to both
modernization and free flight, FAA has been working with the aviation
system's users and their major trade organizations, representatives
of air traffic control personnel, equipment manufacturers, the
Department of Defense (DOD), and others (collectively referred to as
stakeholders).

Free flight is a new system of air traffic management that will
provide controllers and pilots with new technologies and procedures
that will allow them to increase the safety, capacity, and efficiency
of air traffic operations throughout the NAS.  The implementation of
free flight is expected to affect a wide range of users--from
part-time pilots to major airlines--and allow many of them to take
advantage of increased operating flexibilities.  Despite the
availability of such flexibilities to pilots, controllers will retain
the ultimate decision-making authority for air traffic operations.

   RESULTS IN BRIEF
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3

Since 1994, FAA officials and stakeholders, under the leadership of
RTCA, have been collaborating to implement free flight.\2 These early
efforts led to a definition of free flight, a set of
recommendations--most of which contain implementing initiatives--and
an action plan to gradually move toward a more flexible operating
system.  While working to implement the recommendations, FAA and
stakeholders agreed on the need to focus their efforts on deploying
technologies that will provide early benefits to users.  In early
1998, FAA and stakeholders developed a strategy that calls for the
phased implementation of free flight, beginning with Free Flight
Phase 1.  Under this first phase, FAA and stakeholders have agreed
upon the core technologies that are expected to provide these early
benefits, as well as the locations where they will be deployed.
However, until recently, FAA and many stakeholders have not agreed on
how best to conduct a limited operational demonstration of
free-flight-related technologies and procedures--known as the Flight
2000 program.\3 FAA is currently prohibited from spending any fiscal
year 1998 funds on the Flight 2000 demonstration itself.
Congressional conferees for the Department of Transportation's fiscal
year 1998 appropriations act stated that additional financial and
technical planning were needed before the demonstration program would
be funded.  Stakeholders concurred that FAA had yet to develop a
detailed plan for conducting this demonstration.  While they
generally agreed with the need for such a demonstration, they have
questioned whether the lessons learned from FAA's recommended
demonstration, to be conducted primarily in Alaska and Hawaii, would
be transferable to operations in the continental United States, where
free flight operations will ultimately focus.  To address the
concerns of stakeholders, FAA has been working with them--under the
leadership of RTCA--to restructure the Flight 2000 demonstration.
FAA and stakeholders agreed on a general roadmap for the
demonstration, including a recommendation that the demonstration be
renamed the "Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program," and
presented it to FAA for approval in September 1998.

Despite these efforts, FAA and stakeholders have identified numerous
challenges that will need to be met if free flight--including Free
Flight Phase 1 and Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational
Enhancement Program)--is to be implemented cost-effectively:

  -- Stakeholders told GAO that FAA will need to provide effective
     leadership and management of the modernization efforts both
     within and outside the agency.

  -- Stakeholders cited the need for FAA--in collaboration with
     them--to further develop its plans for implementing free flight,
     including establishing clear goals for what it intends to
     achieve and developing measures for tracking the progress of
     modernization and free flight.

  -- FAA and stakeholders agreed on the need to address outstanding
     issues related to technology development and deployment, such as
     improving the agency's process for determining that new
     equipment is safe for its intended use and addressing the impact
     of modernization on human operators, including controllers,
     maintenance staff, and pilots.

  -- FAA and stakeholders also identified a range of other challenges
     that will need the agency's attention, including coordinating
     FAA's modernization and free flight efforts with those of the
     international community and integrating the various technologies
     that will be used under free flight operations with one another
     as well as into the air traffic control system.

--------------------
\2 RTCA serves in an advisory capacity to FAA, making recommendations
that are subject to approval by FAA.  It was organized as the Radio
Technical Commission for Aeronautics in 1935 to provide a forum where
industry and government representatives could discuss aviation issues
and develop consensus-based recommendations.  In Nov.  1991, it
reorganized and shortened its name to RTCA.

\3 Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program)
is intended as a risk-mitigation demonstration of communication,
navigation, and surveillance technologies planned for use under
future phases of free flight.

   PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4

      STATUS OF FREE FLIGHT
      IMPLEMENTATION EFFORTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.1

In 1995, FAA and stakeholders defined free flight and outlined 44
recommendations--many of which have multiple initiatives--for
consideration in implementing free flight.\4 In 1996, they developed
an action plan with time frames to guide the implementation of these
recommendations.  Since that time, they have fully implemented 1 of
35 recommendations scheduled for completion by the end of 1997 and
have made substantial progress toward completing initiatives under
many of these and the remaining recommendations.\5 Under the fully
implemented recommendation, FAA has incorporated airline schedule
updates (e.g., airline delays and cancellations) into its Traffic
Flow Management system to allow the agency to work more effectively
with the airlines to reduce unnecessary operating restrictions and
delays.  In addition, under a recommendation to extend the benefits
of data exchange, FAA has deployed digital displays of departure
information in lieu of voice messages for pilots' use at 57 sites, as
planned, and is currently working to expand the digital exchange of
information about weather, airport, and facility conditions.  Digital
communications provide an advantage over voice communications by
helping to relieve congested voice frequencies and reduce the number
of operational errors that are caused directly or indirectly by
miscommunication.  Under another recommendation, FAA and stakeholders
are working under the leadership of RTCA to improve the process that
the agency uses to ensure that new technologies are safe for their
intended use.  Furthermore, as part of another recommendation, FAA
has deployed technology--on a limited basis--to improve the
sequencing of airplanes as they enter, depart, and operate within
terminal airspace.

In addition to implementing the recommendations and their
initiatives, FAA began to allow users to choose routes and use
procedures (under certain conditions) that could save them time and
money through two ongoing programs--the National Route Program and
the Future Air Navigation System.  In 1990, FAA launched the National
Route Program to give users the flexibility to select and fly more
direct routes.  FAA estimates that the aviation industry saves over
$40 million annually through participation in this program.  Under
the Future Air Navigation System program, which is conducted
primarily over the oceans, new technology is used to improve the
efficiency of communications between pilots and controllers.  This
technology, in combination with new procedures, is expected to
provide them with more precise information on the location of
aircraft so that distances between aircraft can be safely
reduced--enabling users to save time and money.  However,
stakeholders told GAO that because FAA has not deployed the promised
hardware and software infrastructure to support the use of these new
technologies, the benefits to users have been marginal.

FAA's collaborative efforts with the aviation community to develop
plans for implementing free flight have led to a general consensus on
an incremental approach--beginning with Free Flight Phase 1--that
would cost less for FAA and extend early benefits to users.  This
first phase is expected to provide these early benefits through the
limited deployment of technologies that are intended to enhance the
system's safety, capacity, and efficiency.  For example, these
technologies are expected to provide controllers with better
information to detect and resolve potential conflicts between
aircraft and to sequence traffic more efficiently.  With such
information, controllers will be able to give pilots increased
flexibility to fly more optimal routes but will retain the ultimate
authority for decision-making.  FAA expects to implement Free Flight
Phase 1 by 2002 and is currently developing a plan that will provide
more details on implementing the program.

FAA and many stakeholders have disagreed on how best to implement
Flight 2000--a limited operational demonstration of new technologies
and procedures that was to be used under free flight to improve
communication, navigation, and surveillance capabilities.  Initially,
FAA announced this initiative without consulting users, and
disagreements persisted until recently, despite FAA's ongoing efforts
to resolve them collaboratively.  FAA believed that the Flight 2000
demonstration, as planned primarily for Alaska and Hawaii, was a
means to mitigate the risks associated with implementing free flight.
While many stakeholders agree with the need to mitigate risks, they
have had strong reservations about conducting this demonstration in
these remote locations, believing that the lessons learned there will
not transfer well to operations in the continental United States.  To
address these concerns, FAA and stakeholders--working under the
leadership of RTCA--developed a roadmap for restructuring Flight 2000
and presented it to FAA in September 1998.  Among other things, this
roadmap recommended that (1) the program be conducted in the Ohio
Valley and Alaska, (2) nine major operational capabilities be
implemented, and (3) the demonstration be renamed the "Free Flight
Operational Enhancement Program." In developing this roadmap, both
FAA and stakeholders emphasized the critical role of safety in
achieving operational efficiencies, and many components of the
program are designed to enhance safety.  FAA is currently considering
RTCA's roadmap.  While FAA had planned to begin the Flight 2000
demonstration by 2000, time frames for the new demonstration are
uncertain because issues such as funding and the need for additional
planning have not been resolved.

--------------------
\4 The 44 recommendations were developed by FAA and stakeholders
under RTCA Free Flight Task Force 3.  This task force was conducted
under the leadership of RTCA, a nonprofit organization that serves as
an advisor to FAA.

\5 The remaining nine recommendations are scheduled to be implemented
between 1998 and 2001/beyond.

      CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTING
      FREE FLIGHT SUCCESSFULLY
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.2

FAA and stakeholders generally agree on the phased approach to
implementing free flight but have identified several challenges that
must be addressed if free flight is to be implemented
cost-effectively.

         EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT IS
         THE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL
         IMPLEMENTATION
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:4.2.1

Some stakeholders and FAA officials believe that strong FAA
leadership is needed both within and outside the agency to
successfully implement free flight.  In particular, they maintain
that FAA needs to encourage more effective communication and
coordination among its various program offices responsible for
modernization.  According to some stakeholders and FAA officials,
despite the agency's move to use integrated cross-program teams to
improve coordination, this effort has fallen short because some
participants are more beholden to their individual program offices
than they are to the goals of the team.  FAA has begun to develop
incentives to encourage staff to work more cooperatively.  As for
FAA's leadership within the aviation community, some stakeholders
cited the need for FAA to make and stick to its decisions so that
they can move forward with their plans for free flight.  While
stakeholders recognize that FAA must balance competing priorities,
they find it frustrating when the agency announces a course of action
and then either drops the effort or moves in a different direction.
Some stakeholders told GAO that this indecision has eroded their
confidence in FAA's ability to lead modernization efforts, including
free flight.  Effective leadership will also be critical to
successfully implement the planned evolutionary approach to
developing and deploying technology and to demonstrate that FAA can
effectively manage its air traffic control modernization programs and
deliver promised capabilities.

         CLEAR GOALS AND MEASURES
         AND SUFFICIENTLY DETAILED
         PLANS ARE NEEDED
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:4.2.2

To move safely and efficiently from the present system to free
flight, stakeholders said that FAA needs to develop specific goals
for what it intends to achieve and a system for measuring its
progress.  For example, one stakeholder cautioned that if FAA does
not fully consider what the system needs to look like 10 to 20 years
from now, it runs the risk of investing in technologies that may not
address the system's future needs.  In addition, some stakeholders
and FAA officials agree on the need to develop baseline data for use
in tracking their progress in improving the system's safety,
capacity, and efficiency.  As a next step, stakeholders maintain that
the transition to free flight will require FAA to develop detailed
plans for the various activities under free flight, including Free
Flight Phase 1, Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational
Enhancement Program), and various follow-on efforts.  Stakeholders
told GAO that these plans need to include cost/benefit analyses to
provide them with assurances that their investments in free flight
technologies will result in benefits to quickly offset expenses.
They also said that new procedures are critical to allowing them to
fully exploit these benefits and expressed concern that such
procedures will not be developed and implemented in a timely fashion.

      ISSUES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY
      DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT
      REMAIN TO BE RESOLVED
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.3

FAA and stakeholders recognize that certain issues related to the
development and deployment of free flight technology need to be
resolved.  Chief among these issues is the need for FAA to streamline
its process for determining that new equipment is safe for its
intended use.  However, several stakeholders cautioned that FAA will
need to take care to ensure that changes to the process do not
inadvertently compromise safety.  FAA and the aviation community are
currently working together to identify possible solutions.  Many
stakeholders also noted that successfully implementing free flight is
inextricably linked to identifying and addressing issues associated
with human factors.  These issues include developing a reasonably
paced training schedule to help ensure that pilots, controllers, and
maintenance staff are not overburdened by too many changes at one
time, as well as identifying risks associated with changes in
technologies and procedures and the potential effects of these
changes on human operations in a free flight environment.

      OTHER OUTSTANDING ISSUES MAY
      LIMIT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
      FREE FLIGHT IMPLEMENTATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.4

FAA and stakeholders identified other challenges that must be met for
free flight to be successfully implemented.  For example, airlines
that operate internationally and DOD believe that FAA needs to work
diligently to ensure that, to the extent possible, users do not have
to purchase multiple sets of equipment to meet different operating
requirements in various parts of the world.  While FAA is currently
working with its international counterparts on various issues related
to modernization--including issues related to free flight--some
stakeholders question the sufficiency of the agency's efforts to
coordinate technology selection decisions that will allow users to
operate worldwide.

Some stakeholders and FAA officials cited the need for FAA to ensure
that, to the extent possible, technologies will work together to
maximize potential benefits.  For example, FAA has new technologies
that are expected to improve the efficiency of operations at high
altitudes, close to the terminal, and on the ground.  Because some of
these technologies have not been designed to work together, some
stakeholders and FAA officials contend that their potential
benefits--e.g., allowing distances between aircraft to be safely
reduced, when practical, throughout a flight's operation--will not be
maximized unless the technologies are integrated.  The agency
recognizes that it does not have the internal expertise or experience
to integrate the hardware and software that will be on board
participating aircraft as part of the Flight 2000 demonstration (now
the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program) and plans to hire an
integration contractor to do this work.  Finally, stakeholders also
stressed that the benefits of free flight depend on having adequate
airport surface capacity (such as runways and gates) and question
whether FAA is paying enough attention to the system's lack of such
capacity.  They noted that if users get to their destination more
quickly, only to be delayed by limited airport capacity, they will
lose some or all of the expected benefits.

   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:5

GAO provided copies of a draft of this report to FAA for its review
and comment.  GAO met with FAA officials, including the Director,
Program Office, Free Flight Phase 1, and the Acting Program Directors
for Flight 2000 and Architecture and Systems Engineering, who
generally agreed with the contents of the report and provided
clarifying comments that have been incorporated as appropriate.

IMPLEMENTATION OF FREE FLIGHT
REPRESENTS A SHIFT FROM AIR
TRAFFIC CONTROL TO COLLABORATIVE
AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
============================================================ Chapter 1

The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) mission is to promote the
safe, efficient, and expeditious flow of air traffic in the U.S.
airspace system, commonly referred to as the National Airspace System
(NAS).  To accomplish its mission, FAA provides services 24 hours a
day, 365 days a year, through its air traffic control (ATC)
system--the principal component of the NAS.\6 Predicted growth in air
traffic and aging equipment led FAA to initiate a multibillion-dollar
modernization effort in 1981 to increase the safety, capacity, and
efficiency of the system.  However, over the past 17 years, FAA's
modernization program has experienced substantial cost overruns,
lengthy schedule delays, and significant performance shortfalls.
Consequently, many of the benefits anticipated from the modernization
program--new facilities, equipment, and procedures--have not been
realized, and the efficiency of air traffic control operations has
been limited.  In addition, the expected growth in air traffic will
place added strains on the system's capacity.

To get the modernization effort back on track and thereby address the
limitations of the present system and meet the growing demand for
increasing its capacity, FAA--in consultation with the aviation
community--is developing plans to implement a phased approach to
modernization, including a new concept of air traffic management
known as "free flight." To enable free flight, FAA intends to
introduce a host of new technologies and procedures that will allow
the agency to gradually move from its present system of air traffic
control, which relies heavily on rules, procedures, and tight control
over aircraft operations, to a more collaborative system of air
traffic management.  Under such a system, users would have more
flexibility to select optimal flight paths, whose use would lower
costs, improve safety, and help accommodate future growth in air
traffic through the more efficient use of airspace and airport
resources.  Implementing this new air traffic management system will
require FAA to introduce new technologies\7 and procedures.  FAA
plans to test other new technologies and procedures through an
initiative called Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational
Enhancement Program).\8

--------------------
\6 The ATC system comprises a vast network of radars; automated data
processing, navigation, and communication equipment; and air traffic
control facilities.  It is through the ATC system that FAA controls
takeoffs and landings and manages the flow of traffic between
airports.  Other components of the NAS include airports or landing
areas; aeronautical charts, information, and services; rules,
regulations, and procedures; technical information; and personnel and
material.

\7 Many of these technologies, such as the User Request Evaluation
Tool (conflict probe) and Single Center Traffic Management Advisor
and Passive Final Approach Spacing Tool (traffic sequencing tools)
are currently in various stages of development.

\8 Among other capabilities, this demonstration will use (1) the
Flight Information Service to provide enhanced weather information
and the status of Special Use Airspace, (2) Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast in a number of ways to improve the efficiency
of ground and air operations, and (3) the Traffic Information Service
to improve pilots' awareness of surrounding traffic and the
efficiency of operations in low-visibility conditions.

   NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM/AIR
   TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1

FAA's air traffic controllers direct aircraft through the NAS.
Automated information-processing and display, communication,
navigation, surveillance, and weather equipment allow air traffic
controllers to see the location of aircraft, aircraft flight plans,
and prevailing weather conditions, as well as to communicate with
pilots.  FAA controllers are primarily located in three types of
facilities:  air traffic control towers, terminal area facilities,
and en route centers.  The functions of each type of facility are
described below.

  -- Airport towers control the flow of aircraft--before landing, on
     the ground, and after take-off--within 5 nautical miles of the
     airport and up to 3,000 feet above the airport.  A combination
     of technological and visual surveillance is used by air traffic
     controllers to direct departures and approaches, as well as to
     communicate instructions and weather-related information to
     pilots.

  -- Terminal area facilities--known as Terminal Radar Approach
     Control (TRACON) facilities--sequence and separate aircraft as
     they approach and leave busy airports, beginning about 5
     nautical miles and extending to about 50 nautical miles from the
     airport and up to 10,000 feet above the ground.

  -- Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC)--or en route
     centers--control planes in transit over the continental United
     States and during approaches to some airports.  Planes are
     controlled through regions of airspace by en route centers
     responsible for the regions.  Control is passed from one en
     route center to another as a plane moves across a region until
     it reaches TRACON airspace.  Most of the en route centers'
     controlled airspace extends above 18,000 feet for commercial
     aircraft.  En route centers also handle lower altitudes when
     dealing directly with a tower or after agreeing with a terminal
     facility.  Aircraft over the ocean are handled by en route
     centers in Oakland and New York.  Beyond the radars' sight,
     controllers must rely on periodic radio communications through a
     third party--Aeronautical Radio Incorporated (ARINC), a private
     organization funded by the airlines and FAA to operate radio
     stations--to determine aircraft locations.

  -- Flight Service Stations provide weather and flight plan
     services, primarily for general aviation pilots.\9

See figure 1.1 for a visual summary of air traffic control over the
continental United States and oceans.

   Figure 1.1:  Summary of Air
   Traffic Control Over the
   Continental United States and
   Oceans

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

FAA will continue to operate en route, terminal, and tower facilities
under the new air traffic management system; controllers in these
facilities will be able to manage flight operations more
collaboratively through the use of new decision support tools.  For
example, two new traffic management tools will allow en route and
terminal controllers to better sequence aircraft as they move into
the terminal environment--potentially increasing the system's safety
and efficiency.\10

--------------------
\9 Our report focuses on free flight technologies that will be
implemented primarily in the tower, terminal, and en route
environments.  Therefore, we do not include further discussion of
Flight Service Stations.

\10 Under Free Flight Phase 1, FAA will use two Center TRACON
Automation System (CTAS) tools:  Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) and
Final Approach Spacing Tool (FAST).  TMA will provide en
route/terminal controllers with automation tools to schedule aircraft
to enter or depart from airspace that is between 5 and 50 miles from
the airport.  FAST will provide runway assignment and sequence
numbers to air traffic controllers.  FAST operates in conjunction
with TMA to provide integrated traffic management system decision
support tools.  En route and terminal traffic management coordinators
will use TMA, and terminal radar controllers will use FAST.

   WHAT IS FREE FLIGHT?
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2

Free flight is a new way of managing air traffic that is designed to
enhance the safety, capacity, and efficiency of the NAS.  Under this
new management system, air traffic control is expected to move
gradually from a highly structured system based on elaborate rules
and procedures to a more flexible system that allows pilots, within
limits, to change their route, speed, and altitude, notifying the air
traffic controller of the new route.  In contrast, under the present
system, while flight plans are developed in conjunction with air
traffic control personnel, aircraft are required to fly along
specific routes with minimal deviation.  When deviations from
designated routes are allowed--to, for example, avoid severe
weather--they must be pre-approved by an air traffic controller.
Under free flight, despite the availability of flexibilities to
pilots, the ultimate decision-making authority for air traffic
operations will continue to reside with controllers.

While FAA and the aviation community have recently increased their
efforts to implement free flight, the concept of free
flight--allowing pilots to fly more optimal routes--is not new.  In
fact, the idea has been around for decades.  With the development of
navigation technology in the 1970s that allowed aircraft to fly
directly from origin to destination without following fixed air
routes (highways in the sky), the possibility of providing pilots
with flexibility in choosing routes became viable.  However, until
recently, movement to develop the procedures and decision support
systems needed to fully use this type of point-to-point navigation
has been slow.  In the last several years, because of the need to
meet demands for increasing the system's capacity and efficiency, FAA
and aviation system users and their major trade organizations,
representatives of air traffic control personnel, equipment
manufacturers, the Department of Defense (DOD), and others
(collectively referred to as stakeholders) have been working on plans
to accelerate the implementation of free flight.

To enable this new system of air traffic management, FAA plans to
introduce a range of new technologies and procedures that will give
pilots and controllers more precise information about the location of
aircraft.  This information will eventually allow for the distances
between aircraft to be safely reduced--in turn, allowing more
aircraft to operate in the system.  For example, a new tool planned
for use primarily in the en route environment will give controllers
better information about the location of aircraft so that they can
detect and resolve potential conflicts sooner than they can using
current technology.  Similarly, pilots will have more precise
information about the location of their aircraft in relation to other
aircraft.  The use of these technologies will help to improve the
system's safety and capacity.  While free flight will provide pilots
with more flexibility, different situations will dictate its use.
For instance, in clear, uncrowded skies, pilots may be able to use
free flight fully, but some restrictions may be necessary during bad
weather or in highly congested areas.

      FAA DEVELOPED A DEFINITION
      OF FREE FLIGHT WITH
      STAKEHOLDERS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2.1

Developing an integrated, modernized air traffic control system
requires that government and stakeholders reach consensus on or hold
complementary views of what they want to achieve and how they want to
achieve it.  In an effort to gain consensus, in 1994, FAA asked RTCA
to form a select committee of government and industry participants to
study free flight.  This group included representatives from general
aviation, the airline industry, pilots' and air traffic controllers'
unions, and government.  To continue the work of this select
committee, RTCA formed a task force with similar representation to
develop a strategy for implementing free flight.  As part of its
work, the task force defined free flight as

     "a safe and efficient flight operating capability under
     instrument flight rules in which the operators have the freedom
     to select their path and speed in real time.  Air traffic
     restrictions are only imposed to ensure separation, to preclude
     exceeding airport capacity, to prevent unauthorized flight
     through Special Use Airspace (SUA),\11 and to ensure safety of
     flight.  Restrictions are limited in extent and duration to
     correct the identified problem.  Any activity which removes
     restrictions represents a move toward Free Flight."

Stakeholders generally agree with the above broad concept--especially
the idea that any activity that removes restrictions represents a
move toward free flight.  However, because users have different
priorities based on their use of the system, they have different
ideas about how best to implement this concept.

--------------------
\11 In general, SUA is airspace designated for use by DOD and other
federal agencies to carry out special research, testing, training,
and other activities.  Nonparticipating aircraft--both civil and
military--may be restricted from flying into such areas.

      FREE FLIGHT WILL AFFECT A
      WIDE RANGE OF USERS IN ALL
      OPERATING ENVIRONMENTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2.2

RTCA has found that the implementation of free flight will affect a
wide range of users--from part-time pilots to major
airlines--depending on the operating environment.  For example, in
the en route environment, users will be allowed to fly more optimal
routes between airports, thus saving time and money.  In addition,
under certain conditions, these users may be allowed to safely reduce
the distance between themselves and other aircraft.  Similarly, in
airspace between 5 and 50 miles from the airport, the improved
sequencing of traffic for approaches and landings will provide the
potential for users to operate more efficiently than under the
present system.  Improved sequencing is expected to increase the
number of aircraft that can safely operate in this environment at a
given time.  In addition, improved information sharing between pilots
and controllers on the location of aircraft on an airport's surface,
for example, is expected to allow for better use of the airport's
surface capacity (such as runways and gates).  Efficient use of this
limited capacity is key to allowing users to maximize the benefits of
operations under free flight.

   OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND
   METHODOLOGY
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3

In light of FAA's current efforts to replace its aging infrastructure
and keep pace with increasing demands for air traffic services
through the new system of air traffic management known as free
flight, the chairmen and ranking minority members of the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and its
Subcommittee on Aviation asked us to monitor the implementation of
FAA's efforts and provide them with a series of reports.  This
initial report provides (1) an overview of FAA's progress to date in
implementing free flight, including Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight
Operational Enhancement Program), and (2) the views of the aviation
community and FAA on the challenges that must be met to implement
free flight cost-effectively.

To address the first objective, we met with key FAA officials
responsible for the programs involved in the agency's free flight
implementation efforts to gain a better understanding of how FAA is
coordinating the agencywide and program-specific elements of free
flight.  The issues discussed with these officials included (1) the
definition/philosophy of free flight; (2) details on key agencywide
and program-specific initiatives, such as Flight 2000 (now the Free
Flight Operational Enhancement Program); and (3) the status of the
agency's efforts to develop, deploy, and integrate new technologies;
mitigate risk; develop metrics; collaborate with other FAA program
offices and stakeholders; improve certification procedures; develop
cost/benefit analyses; and gain buy-in to free flight implementation
efforts among FAA staff and the aviation community.  We discussed
these same issues with a broad range of stakeholders to get their
views on the agency's progress to date in implementing free flight.
These stakeholders, who have collaborated with FAA to implement free
flight, included representatives of RTCA, trade organizations (such
as the Air Transport Association, Airports Council International,
Regional Airline Association, National Business Aircraft Association,
and Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association), employee unions
(including the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, Air Line
Pilots Association, and Professional Airways Systems Specialists),
DOD, academic institutions (Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT) and University of Illinois, Champaign) and research and
contracting organizations (MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Department of
Transportation/Volpe Center, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and MITRE), major airlines, cargo carriers, and
aircraft and avionics manufacturers.

In addressing the second objective, we asked the same FAA officials
and stakeholders to identify the key challenges that must be met for
free flight to be implemented cost-effectively.

As part of our review for both objectives, we researched the current
literature and reviewed relevant FAA documents (such as the NAS
architecture and operational concept, capital investment plan, and
cost and schedule information for key projects).  In addition, we
obtained and reviewed documentation from stakeholders in support of
their positions on outstanding issues related to implementing free
flight.

We provided copies of a draft of this report to FAA for its review
and comment.  We met with FAA officials, including the Director,
Program Office, Free Flight Phase 1, and the Acting Program Directors
for Flight 2000 and Architecture and Systems Engineering, who
generally agreed with the contents of the report and provided
clarifying comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.

We conducted our audit work from November 1997 through August 1998 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

FAA'S EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT FREE
FLIGHT
============================================================ Chapter 2

Under its air traffic control modernization program, FAA is upgrading
its facilities and equipment--including replacing aging
infrastructure, such as controllers' workstations and the Host
computer--and ensuring that its systems comply with Year 2000
requirements.\12

While these efforts are not part of free flight, they will provide
the infrastructure that is critical for its implementation.  To
define free flight and develop recommendations, associated
initiatives, and time frames for its implementation, FAA has worked
with stakeholders under the leadership of RTCA--a nonprofit
organization that serves as an advisor to FAA.  As of July 1998, 1 of
44 recommendations had been completed, and substantial progress has
been made in implementing many of the initiatives that fall under the
remaining recommendations.

While working to implement the 44 recommendations, FAA and
stakeholders agreed on the need to focus their efforts on deploying
technologies designed to provide early benefits to users.  These
efforts led to consensus on a phased approach to implementing free
flight--beginning with Free Flight Phase 1--including the core
technologies to be used and the locations where the technologies will
be deployed under this first phase, scheduled to be implemented by
2002.  FAA has been working with stakeholders to resolve differences
among them and to better define its planned limited demonstration,
known as Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational Enhancement
Program), which is designed to identify and mitigate the risks
associated with using free-flight-related communication, navigation,
and surveillance technologies and associated procedures.  As a result
of these collaborative efforts, FAA and stakeholders--through
RTCA--have agreed to a general roadmap for a restructured
demonstration to be conducted in fiscal years 1999-2004.  However,
unresolved issues remain, including the need to secure funding and
develop additional plans.

--------------------
\12 The Host computer is the centerpiece information-processing
system in FAA's en route centers.  It processes flight, radar, and
display data for use by controllers.  When FAA restructured the
centerpiece of its modernization program--the Advanced Automation
System--in 1994, it canceled the segment that included the Host
replacement.  FAA is currently acquiring the Host and Oceanic
Computer System Replacement to overcome hardware supportability
problems and resolve Year 2000 date requirements with the Host
computer.

   PROGRESS TOWARD IMPLEMENTING
   FREE FLIGHT RECOMMENDATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1

In its October 1995 report, RTCA discussed the benefits of free
flight and included recommendations and time frames for users and FAA
to consider for implementing free flight.\13 These recommendations,
many of which have several initiatives, emphasized, among other
things, the (1) consideration of human factors during all phases of
developing free flight, (2) use of streamlined methods/procedures for
system certification, and (3) expansion of the National Route
Program.  The vast majority of these recommendations (35 of 44) were
to be completed in the near term (1995 through 1997), 6 are focused
on the midterm (1998 through 2000), and 3 are to be completed in the
far term (2001 and beyond).  See appendix I for a list of these
recommendations.

Since late 1995, FAA and stakeholders have been working on various
free flight recommendations and many associated initiatives and, in
August 1996, agreed on an action plan to guide their
implementation.\14 According to FAA, through July 1998, they have
fully implemented only 1 of the 35 near-term recommendations--to
incorporate airline schedule updates, such as delays and
cancellations, into FAA's Traffic Flow Management system to help it
reduce unnecessary restrictions and delays imposed on airline
operations.  However, FAA and stakeholders have made substantial
progress in implementing many of the initiatives under the near-term
recommendations.  For example, as outlined under a recommendation to
extend the benefits of data exchange, FAA has deployed digital
pre-departure clearances at 57 sites, which provide pilots with
departure information via digital cockpit displays and reduce the
need for voice messages.  In addition, 49 of these sites have Digital
Automatic Terminal Information Service, which provides information
about current weather, airport, and facility conditions around the
world.  Digital communications provide an advantage over voice
communications by helping to relieve congested voice frequencies and
reduce the number of operational errors that are caused directly or
indirectly by miscommunication.  Under another recommendation, FAA is
working with stakeholders through an RTCA task force to find ways to
reduce the time and cost associated with the agency's process for
approving new technologies for flight operations.  To address another
recommendation, FAA has deployed a technology, on a limited basis,
for controllers' use that is expected to improve the sequencing of
air traffic as aircraft enter, leave, and operate within terminal
airspace.

Work is under way on six midterm and three far-term recommendations
and their associated initiatives.  For the most part, these
recommendations focus on incremental improvements to the core
technologies that are being deployed under Free Flight Phase 1 and
those planned for deployment under Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight
Operational Enhancement Program).  For example, in the midterm, FAA
has begun to modify controllers' workstations and supporting computer
equipment to accept, process, and display data received from
satellites.  In addition, under a far-term recommendation, FAA is
studying the feasibility of using satellite-based information to
provide more precise information for landing during periods of
limited visibility.

FAA also noted that while it was in the early stages of planning for
the implementation of free flight, it took steps to maximize the air
traffic control system's capacity and efficiency by extending
flexibilities to users--to select and fly more efficient flight paths
when operating in designated altitudes/areas--through programs such
as the National Route Program (NRP).

--------------------
\13 Final Report of RTCA Task Force 3:  Free Flight Implementation,
RTCA (Oct.  1995).

\14 Free Flight Action Plan, RTCA (Aug.  1996).

   EXISTING PROGRAMS EXTEND SOME
   FLEXIBILITY TO USERS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2

FAA has two early efforts under way to allow users (under certain
conditions) to select routes and procedures that will save them time
and money--NRP and the Future Air Navigation System (FANS).
Established in 1990, NRP is intended to conserve fuel by allowing
users to select preferred or direct routes.  FAA estimates that NRP
saves the aviation industry over $40 million annually.  These savings
are realized, in part, because pilots are allowed to take advantage
of favorable winds or minimize the effects of unfavorable winds,
thereby reducing fuel consumption.  Initially allowed only at higher
altitudes, the program has been expanded to include operations down
to 29,000 feet.  FAA is also working to decrease, where appropriate,
the present restriction that flights must be 200 miles from their
point of departure before they can participate and must end their
participation 200 miles prior to landing.

FANS uses new technologies and procedures that enhance communication
between pilots and air traffic controllers and provide more precise
information on the position of aircraft--allowing for improvements in
air navigation safety and in the ability of air traffic controllers
to monitor flights.  Used primarily over the oceans and in remote
areas normally out of the range of ground-based navigation aids, FANS
uses digital communication more than voice communication to exchange
information such as an aircraft's location, speed, and altitude.
Although FANS is gradually being implemented in many regions and
countries, the aviation community believes that for its full
operational benefits (such as time and fuel savings) to be realized,
air traffic control procedures need to be modified to shorten the
distance currently required between aircraft.  They also contend that
FAA needs to deploy the promised hardware and software (Automatic
Dependent Surveillance or ADS\15 ) infrastructure for FANS in
facilities that support airline operations primarily over the Pacific
Ocean in order for these benefits to be realized.

--------------------
\15 ADS is a surveillance technology that will provide more accurate
position reports for use by controllers and pilots to safely reduce
distances between aircraft and make more efficient use of airspace.
ADS would permit controllers to see traffic in places previously
outside of radar coverage.

   FAA'S EFFORTS TO REACH
   CONSENSUS LEAD TO FREE FLIGHT
   PHASE 1
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:3

In November 1997, the FAA Administrator began an outreach effort with
the aviation community to build consensus on and seek commitment to
the future direction of the agency's modernization program.  As part
of this effort, she formed a task force of senior transportation
officials, union leaders, and executives and experts from the
aviation community to assess the agency's modernization
program--including the NAS architecture--and develop a plan for
moving forward.\16 Much as we found in reviewing the system's logical
architecture in February 1997, the task force found that the
architecture under development appropriately built on the concept of
operations for the NAS and identified the programs necessary to meet
users' needs.\17 However, the task force found that the architecture
was insufficient because of issues associated with cost, risk, and
lack of commitment from users.

In response, the task force recommended a phased approach that would
cost less, focus more on providing near-term benefits to users, and
modernize the NAS incrementally.  Many of the initiatives identified
under the near- and midterm recommendations will be included under
this phased approach because these initiatives are expected to
provide early benefits for users.  A central tenet of this approach
is the "build a little, test a little" concept of technology
development and deployment--intended to limit efforts to a manageable
scope, identify and mitigate risks, and deploy technologies before
the system is fully mature when they can immediately improve the
system's safety, efficiency, and/or capacity.  Such a phased approach
to implementing free flight was designed to help the agency avoid
repeating past modernization problems associated with overly
ambitious cost, schedule, and performance goals and to restore users'
faith in its ability to deliver on its promises.

As a first step toward the phased implementation of free flight,
FAA--in coordination with stakeholders--outlined a plan for Free
Flight Phase 1 in early 1998.  This plan is expected to be
implemented by 2002.  As currently envisioned, Free Flight Phase 1
calls for the expedited deployment of certain NAS technologies.  The
technologies--which are at various stages of development and will be
further refined and tested are the (1) Controller Pilot Data Link
Communications (CPDLC) Build 1, (2) User Request Evaluation Tool
(URET), (3) Single Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA), (4)
Collaborative Decision Making (CDM), (5) Surface Movement Advisor
(SMA), and (6) Passive Final Approach Spacing Tool (pFAST).  In
general, these technologies are expected to provide tools for
controllers that will help to increase the safety and capacity of the
air traffic control system and benefit users through savings on fuel
and crew costs.  For example, FAA and many stakeholders believe that
TMA and pFAST should improve controllers' ability to more efficiently
sequence traffic to improve its flow in crowded terminal airspace.

Similarly, they believe the URET conflict probe will improve
controllers' ability to detect and resolve potential conflicts sooner
than present technology allows.  However, in June 1998, the air
traffic controllers' union at one of the two en route centers where
URET is being tested asked that its use be terminated until several
concerns about its use in the current environment can be resolved.\18
Termination did not occur at this facility, and the issue has been
elevated to the regional level within FAA for resolution.  See
appendix II for a summary of the status of the recommendations
related to Free Flight Phase 1.

The aviation community generally agrees on the core technologies for
Free Flight Phase 1 and on the locations proposed for deploying and
testing these technologies.  See figure 2.1 for these sites.  In
addition, FAA is currently developing a Free Flight Phase 1 plan that
will provide more details on implementing the program and recently
appointed a program manager to lead this effort.

   Figure 2.1:  Proposed Locations
   for Deploying and Testing Free
   Flight Phase 1
   Technologies\1,2,3

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  CDM is another Free Flight Phase 1 technology.  It provides a
real-time exchange of information on flight plans and system
constraints to assist airline and air traffic control personnel in
making decisions about NAS resources.  As such, its use is not
associated with specific locations.

As a companion effort, FAA has charged RTCA with responsibility for
building consensus within the aviation community on how best to
revise the vision for modernization (operational concept) and to
develop the blueprint (architecture/framework) for carrying out the
modernization.  It is critical that the vision for modernization and
the blueprint for implementing this vision be tightly integrated to
help ensure that free flight activities are coordinated and working
toward common goals.

--------------------
\16 This group is known as the Administrator's NAS Modernization Task
Force.

\17 In February 1997, we identified shortcomings in two main areas:
FAA's systems architecture lacked a technical architecture and an
effective enforcement mechanism.  A technical architecture details
the specific information technology and communication standards and
approaches that will be used to build the systems, including those
that address critical hardware, software, communication, data
management, security, and performance characteristics.  It ensures
that the systems interoperate effectively and efficiently.  FAA is
developing a technical architecture as we recommended.  See Air
Traffic Control:  Complete and Enforced Architecture Needed for FAA
Systems Modernization (GAO/AIMD-97-30, Feb.  3, 1997).

\18 Controllers at the Indianapolis en route center are concerned
that the use of URET has become a "distraction" when they switch from
using URET (without flight strips) to standard operating procedures
(with flight strips) and that this transition can impair their
awareness of sector operations.  In addition, controllers maintain
that using URET has increased their workload by requiring them to
enter data twice--into both URET and the Host computer.

   PLANS FOR FREE FLIGHT
   DEMONSTRATION STILL UNDER
   DEVELOPMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4

In January 1997, Vice President Gore announced an initiative--Flight
2000--to demonstrate and validate the use of navigation capabilities
to support free flight.  FAA then expanded Flight 2000 to include
communication and surveillance technologies.  FAA viewed Flight 2000
as an exercise for testing free flight technologies and procedures in
an environment where safety hazards could be minimized.  FAA expected
the Flight 2000 program to validate the benefits of free flight,
evaluate transition issues, and streamline the agency's procedures
for ensuring that new equipment is safe for its intended use.

Proposed primarily for Alaska and Hawaii, Flight 2000 would have
tested communication, navigation, and surveillance technologies, such
as the Global Positioning System (GPS) and its augmentations, the
Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) and the Local Area Augmentation
System (LAAS);\19 Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC);
and ADS-B technology.  FAA initially selected these locations because
they offer a controlled environment with a limited fleet, which
includes all classes of users, all categories of airspace, and wide
ranges of weather conditions and terrain.  However, many in the
aviation community questioned whether the lessons learned in Alaska
and Hawaii would apply to operations in the continental United
States.  At their urging, FAA agreed to add at least one site within
the continental United States to the Flight 2000 demonstration.

Collaborative efforts between FAA and stakeholders on Flight
2000--through RTCA--have led to broad consensus on a general roadmap
for restructuring this demonstration program, including four criteria
for selecting the candidate operational capabilities to be
demonstrated.  In general, under these criteria (1) industry and FAA
must address all aspects of modernization to be successful in moving
toward free flight; (2) expected benefits are the major reason for
implementing a given capability; (3) the capability does not
interfere with or slow down any near-term activities; and (4) the
risks associated with operational capabilities that require
integrating multiple communication, navigation, and surveillance
technologies should be addressed.

Using these criteria, FAA and stakeholders reviewed over 70 potential
operational capabilities and selected 9 of them.  They also
recommended demonstration locations in the Ohio Valley and Alaska.
(See app.  III for a description of these capabilities and the
expected operational benefits.) For example, under this proposal, FAA
would provide more accurate weather information to pilots and
controllers to improve safety and potentially reduce flight times.
In addition, FAA would improve airport surface navigation
capabilities by providing pilots (and operators of other surface
vehicles) with moving maps that display traffic in low-visibility
conditions.  FAA and stakeholders also recommended that the program
be renamed the "Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program."
Stakeholders and FAA recognize that more detailed planning is
needed--to identify risk-mitigation activities, select the final
site, and estimate costs, schedules, and the number of required
aircraft--and that this planning will require close coordination
between FAA and industry to ensure that plans are consistent with
stated operational capabilities and are achievable by FAA and users.
FAA is currently considering the proposed RTCA roadmap for the
restructured Flight 2000 demonstration and expects to reach a
decision in the fall of 1998.  If approved as scheduled, a detailed
plan is expected by the end of 1998.

--------------------
\19 GPS is a network of 24 satellites that transmit radio signals
that allow properly equipped users--in the air, on land, and at
sea--to calculate the time, their positions and speed, and weather
conditions.  However, as currently designed for military purposes,
GPS can provide only limited service to civil aviation.  FAA is
developing WAAS and LAAS to enhance GPS by correcting signal errors,
increasing satellite coverage, and providing timely warnings to users
of malfunctions to allow GPS to satisfy FAA's requirements for
integrity, accuracy, and availability.  GPS needs to satisfy these
requirements if it is to become a primary means of navigation for
free flight operations.

FAA AND THE AVIATION COMMUNITY
FACE MANY CHALLENGES IN
IMPLEMENTING FREE FLIGHT
COST-EFFECTIVELY
============================================================ Chapter 3

FAA's plan to implement free flight through an evolutionary (phased)
approach is generally consistent with past recommendations that we
and others have made on the need for FAA to achieve a more gradual,
integrated, and cost-effective approach to managing its modernization
programs.  However, FAA and stakeholders recognize that significant
challenges must be addressed if the move to free flight--including
Free Flight Phase 1 and Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational
Enhancement Program) is to succeed.  While FAA must address many of
the challenges, stakeholders recognize that, as partners, they must
assist the agency.  The challenges for FAA are to (1) provide
effective leadership and management of modernization
efforts--including cross-program communication and coordination; (2)
develop plans--in collaboration with the aviation community--that are
sufficiently detailed to move forward with the implementation of free
flight--including the identification of clear goals and measures for
tracking the progress of the modernization efforts; (3) address
outstanding issues related to the development and deployment of
technology--such as the need to improve the agency's process for
ensuring that new equipment is safe for its intended use and methods
for considering human factors; and (4) address other issues, such as
the need for FAA to coordinate its modernization and free flight
efforts with those of the international community and integrate free
flight technologies.

   EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT IS THE KEY
   TO IMPLEMENTING FREE FLIGHT
   SUCCESSFULLY
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1

FAA and stakeholders identified a number of managerial issues that
will need to be addressed if free flight is to be implemented
successfully.  For example, (1) provide strong senior leadership to
guide the implementation of free flight both within and outside the
agency and (2) implement an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary
approach to modernization.  Successfully addressing these issues will
help the agency effectively implement free flight.

      FAA NEEDS TO EXERCISE STRONG
      LEADERSHIP
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.1

Some FAA officials and stakeholders said that the agency will need to
provide strong leadership both inside the agency and within the
aviation community for free flight to be implemented successfully.
For example, some FAA officials and stakeholders said that the agency
will need to improve the effectiveness of its internal operations by
encouraging communication and cooperation between the various program
offices responsible for its free flight efforts.  Additionally, some
FAA officials and stakeholders said that the agency will need to
continue efforts to build consensus among the aviation community and
gain its commitment to the direction of the agency's plans for
modernization.

         EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP IS
         NEEDED WITHIN FAA
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.1.1

Some FAA officials and stakeholders told us that improvements in
communication and coordination across FAA program offices are needed
to implement free flight successfully.  For example, one FAA official
told us that the primary challenge facing the agency in its efforts
to implement free flight is developing effective communication and
coordination across program lines.  Some stakeholders shared this
concern, observing that the various program offices within FAA do not
communicate well or effectively coordinate their activities.  Thus,
according to some within FAA and stakeholders, despite the agency's
move to using cross-functional, integrated product teams\20 to
improve accountability and coordination across FAA, these teams have
become insular and some team members tend to be motivated primarily
by the priorities and management of the offices that they represent
rather than the goals of a given team.  One stakeholder stressed that
the effectiveness of these teams has also been limited by (1)
inadequate training of members on how to operate a team and (2) the
fact that these teams are given responsibility for projects without
the commensurate authority they need to carry out their
responsibilities.  Some stakeholders also noted that the agency has
not made a number of decisions about modernization because of ongoing
disagreements among various program offices over how best to proceed
with its various components, such as the selection of new free flight
technologies for communicating information digitally rather than by
voice.

The concerns cited above are consistent with our prior work on FAA's
culture as it affects acquisition management.\21 In particular, we
found that the agency has previously had difficulty communicating and
coordinating effectively across traditional program lines.  In
addition, we learned from some FAA staff and functional managers that
FAA has encountered resistance to the integrated product team concept
and these teams' operations.  As we reported, one major factor
impeding coordination has been FAA's organization into different
divisions whose "stovepipes," or upward lines of authority and
communication, are separate and distinct.  Because FAA's operational
divisions are based on a functional specialty, such as engineering,
air traffic control, or equipment maintenance, getting the employees
in these units to work together has been difficult.  Internal and
external studies have found that the operations and development sides
of FAA have not forged effective partnerships.

To its credit, FAA is currently attempting to improve cross-agency
communication and coordination by developing incentives for staff to
work toward the agency's goals and priorities.  Plans are also under
way to develop contracts with each integrated product team to hold
its members accountable for developing and deploying a given
operational capability.  According to FAA officials, these contracts
are intended to improve accountability for delivering technologies;
in the past, such accountability has not been clearly assigned.  In
addition, efforts are under way to work with the aviation community
to resolve disagreements that have persisted among FAA program
offices, such as how to proceed with the use of digital
communication.

--------------------
\20 Integrated product teams are designed to be cross-functional
teams that are responsible for developing or procuring new equipment.
The goals of these teams are to improve accountability and
coordination and infuse a more strategic, mission-oriented focus into
the acquisition process.  Team members include contractors, FAA's
engineering division, and the FAA divisions that operate and maintain
air traffic control equipment.

\21 Aviation Acquisition:  A Comprehensive Strategy Is Needed for
Cultural Change at FAA (GAO/RCED-96-159, Aug.  22, 1996).

         FAA NEEDS TO EXERCISE
         STRONG LEADERSHIP IN
         DELIVERING ON ITS
         COMMITMENTS TO THE
         AVIATION COMMUNITY
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.1.2

While stakeholders generally applaud FAA's efforts to build consensus
among stakeholders, some believe that the agency must be prepared to
exercise strong leadership by (1) making difficult decisions after
weighing stakeholders' competing priorities, (2) holding to these
decisions even amidst new and conflicting opinions about the value of
one course of action over another, and (3) delivering on its
commitments.  Some stakeholders said they were particularly
frustrated when, after announcing a planned course of action, FAA
later delayed its implementation or retracted it and moved in a
different direction.  Some stakeholders told us that such indecision
makes it very difficult for them to make plans for the future--such
as determining investments for avionics upgrades--and further erodes
their confidence in the agency's ability to manage modernization
programs and provide leadership to the aviation community.  For
example, several stakeholders cited FAA's failure to deliver the
ground-based infrastructure, needed for users to accrue benefits from
equipping with new technologies under the Future Air Navigation
System program, as a warning signal to them to proceed cautiously,
since the agency may not deliver on its promises.  In particular,
users are concerned that if they invest in new technologies, they
will not realize benefits in a timely manner to offset these
investments.

      FAA NEEDS TO EFFECTIVELY
      IMPLEMENT AN EVOLUTIONARY
      APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY
      DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.2

Some stakeholders believe that for FAA to successfully implement free
flight, it must demonstrate that it can effectively manage its air
traffic control modernization programs and deliver promised
capabilities.  To do so, FAA will need to implement an evolutionary
approach to technology development and deployment.  According to FAA,
under such an approach, it will limit the scope of project segments
so that it can deploy, test, evaluate, and refine a given technology
until it obtains the desired capabilities.  One stakeholder familiar
with this approach emphasized the importance for FAA, in implementing
it, of (1) assessing risks, (2) developing metrics, (3) limiting the
scope of each phase of development, (4) evaluating progress before
moving forward with the next phase of development, and (5) retraining
staff.  These steps would be applied to each cycle of the development
process to help ensure that each completed iteration results in
enhanced capabilities and moves a given technology closer to its
desired level of maturity.  FAA agreed that each of these steps will
be important for successfully implementing this approach.

FAA has not yet developed detailed plans for implementing this
approach; however, in concept, it is consistent with our past
recommendations that the agency avoid taking on unrealistic cost,
schedule, and performance goals.  For example, the recently developed
plans for revising the Flight 2000 demonstration recommend an
incremental approach, under which operational capabilities will be
introduced over time into planned field demonstration sites.  FAA and
users expect such an approach will allow them to achieve success by
taking smaller, less risky, more manageable steps.  Some stakeholders
told us that although they are encouraged by FAA's efforts to date,
they are taking a wait-and-see attitude as to whether the agency can
effectively implement this approach to technology development and
deployment.

   CLEAR GOALS AND MEASURES AND
   SUFFICIENTLY DETAILED PLANS ARE
   NECESSARY FOR IMPLEMENTING FREE
   FLIGHT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2

FAA and stakeholders have identified a wide range of concerns that
need to be addressed to help ensure that efforts to implement free
flight are sufficiently well developed as the agency moves forward
with related modernization activities.  These concerns include, among
others, the need for (1) FAA--in collaboration with stakeholders--to
develop clear goals and objectives for what it intends to achieve, as
well as a measurement system for tracking progress, and (2) FAA and
stakeholders to develop detailed plans that will allow for the
cost-effective implementation of free flight.

         CLEAR GOALS AND A
         MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ARE
         IMPORTANT TO THE
         SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION
         OF FREE FLIGHT
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:2.0.1

While FAA and stakeholders agree on the basic premise of moving
toward free flight and the agency's initial plans to deploy
technologies under its first phase, stakeholders told us that FAA--in
collaboration with them--needs to establish clear goals and
objectives for what it intends to achieve for this and other free
flight efforts and a measurement system for tracking progress.  For
example, a representative of a major systems contractor believes that
it is critical for FAA to clearly articulate its vision and goals for
where it intends to go with free flight so that the future direction
is clear to everyone involved.  A representative of a major airframe
manufacturer agreed with this position and added that the agency
should focus on what the system will look like 10 to 20 years from
now.  In this representative's view, once this is determined, then
the agency and stakeholders should begin discussing the technologies
and procedures that will be needed for the future system.

In addition, the representative of the major airframe manufacturer
stressed that FAA is developing the NAS architecture from the bottom
up--merely inserting technologies into the air traffic control system
rather than focusing on how the entire system needs to change.
According to this representative, FAA is "putting the cart before the
horse" by adhering to a replacement technology philosophy--"keep
doing what we are doing but with automation support." The real
challenge is to rethink the operation first, including the roles of
people and automation, and then decide which technologies and
procedures to use.  Some FAA officials and stakeholders stressed that
this approach will require long-range research programs that
currently do not receive enough priority in the agency's plans
because of resource constraints.

As for a measurement system, some FAA officials and stakeholders said
that before developing performance measurements, the agency will need
to develop baseline data to use as a benchmark for tracking its
progress in implementing free flight.  These stakeholders noted that
without a concrete sense of where the agency is now in terms of
capacity, efficiency, and other measures, progress is difficult to
measure.

Calls for these types of measures are consistent with the
requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993,
which emphasizes the need for agencies to clearly define their
missions, establish long-term strategic goals, and measure their
performance against the goals they have set.  With firm baseline
data, FAA will be in a better position to develop measures to track
its progress as it proceeds to implement free flight.  Some FAA
officials and stakeholders acknowledged that developing such
measurements is difficult, and as part of Free Flight Phase 1, the
aviation community (airlines, DOD, and other stakeholders) will
provide FAA with information to establish baseline measures.  FAA
officials also said that supplemental performance data will be needed
to track progress.  In addition, FAA and stakeholders have proposed
measures for tracking progress that will be used in conjunction with
the revised Flight 2000 demonstration.

Performance measures are also required under FAA's new acquisition
management system.  The Congress directed FAA in 1995 to develop this
new system to improve the timeliness and cost-effectiveness of the
agency's acquisition of equipment.\22 The new system includes
requirements to improve the agency's management of modernization
programs, including (1) identifying critical shortfalls in the NAS'
capability and technologies that could be used, among other things,
to improve the NAS' safety and efficiency; (2) establishing critical
performance parameters and benefits that a program must achieve and
setting boundaries for cost and schedule; and (3) developing metrics
of critical performance measures, such as time, cost, and customer
satisfaction.  According to FAA, it has followed this system for
acquiring the individual free flight technologies.  FAA also
indicated that it plans to use both Free Flight Phase 1 and Flight
2000 (now the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program) to gather
the data needed to conduct investment analyses before deploying free
flight technologies on a larger scale.

--------------------
\22 P.L.  104-50 directed FAA to develop a new acquisition management
system, which the agency implemented in Apr.  1996.

      DETAILED PLANS ARE NEEDED
      FOR IMPLEMENTING FREE FLIGHT
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2.1

Stakeholders believe that more detailed plans are needed to provide
the aviation community with assurances that moving forward with free
flight is warranted.  They believe that these plans should include
the results of cost/benefit analyses, new procedures, and schedules
for equipment installation.

         USERS SEEK ASSURANCE THAT
         TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS
         WILL PROVIDE BENEFITS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:2.1.1

Because they expect that equipping with free flight technologies will
be expensive, many users believe that FAA needs to demonstrate the
near-term benefits of the new equipment--especially given FAA's poor
record of delivering promised benefits.  As part of its efforts to
develop plans for implementing free flight, FAA has conducted
cost/benefit analyses to provide justification for free flight
investments.  However, stakeholders have raised concerns that these
analyses have focused almost exclusively on the benefits to FAA.  As
a result, they believe that these analyses are of little value to
users that must make business decisions about investing in new
technologies.  As one airframe manufacturer noted, FAA should develop
a convincing case for changing the functions of the present system
before selecting new technologies.

While users expressed a desire for studies that consider their
business needs, one airline official told us that meaningful
cost/benefit analyses are very difficult to establish for the airline
industry because the costs and benefits of equipping will vary
considerably both among and within airlines.  For example, the cost
of investments and associated benefits will vary with factors such as
(1) the cost of installing new avionics--including the cost of
retrofitting older aircraft, (2) the timing of requirements for
completing the installation of equipment, and (3) the routes flown.
Even though these factors vary from one airline to another, some
airlines expect FAA to conduct analyses that demonstrate that
technology investments will be cost-effective for them.

Similarly, DOD and general aviation users are concerned about
potential penalties for not equipping their aircraft with
technologies that will be needed to conduct operations under free
flight.  For example, DOD officials told us that they need more
detailed information about whether--or under what circumstances--they
may be excluded from certain airspace if they fail to equip with free
flight technologies.  DOD is also concerned that the lack of
specificity in FAA's plans may negatively affect its ability to meet
its mission readiness requirements--including the ability to fly
cost-efficient and effective routes.  Some stakeholders have
expressed concern that the cost of equipping with avionics for
participation in the free flight environment may be prohibitive for
the recreational end of the general aviation community.  FAA is aware
of this concern and plans to use the Flight 2000 demonstration (now
the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program) as a means for
streamlining its process for ensuring the safety of new equipment for
flight operations and developing affordable avionics for general
aviation.

         NEW PROCEDURES FOR FREE
         FLIGHT NEED TO BE
         DEVELOPED
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:2.1.2

A number of stakeholders told us that in order for FAA and users to
fully exploit new capabilities to maximize the air traffic control
system's safety, capacity, and efficiency, the agency will need to
develop procedures that will be used in the free flight environment.
Such procedures will affect a wide range of operations.  For example,
new procedures will be required to approve, integrate, and deploy new
technologies.  New procedures will also be needed to enable pilots
and controllers to use the new technologies.  Hence, some
stakeholders noted that it will be important for FAA to make explicit
any changes in pilots' and controllers' roles and responsibilities.
For example, if pilots and controllers are to share responsibility
for making decisions about altitudes, speeds, and routes, the
procedures need to be well defined.  Under Free Flight Phase 1, the
agency plans to implement new procedures as needed to demonstrate the
use of new air traffic management tools that controllers will use to
improve conflict detection and air traffic sequencing, among other
things.  Similarly, under Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight
Operational Enhancement Program), FAA plans to develop new procedures
for the new communication, navigation, and surveillance technologies
that will be used by pilots and controllers.

FAA is aware of the need to develop procedural changes for operations
under free flight and is currently working with the aviation
community to develop these new procedures.  However, some
stakeholders are concerned that the development and implementation of
new procedures will not occur in a timely fashion.  One of these
stakeholders further stressed that having new equipment and
technology working together is not enough, without new procedures, to
deliver the benefits promised under free flight.

         EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION
         WILL REQUIRE ADEQUATE
         LEAD TIME
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:2.1.3

Commercial airlines and DOD require adequate lead time to plan for
the cost-effective installation of new equipment.  To facilitate an
efficient equipment installation process, FAA will need to work with
users to consider their unique needs as they develop plans for moving
to free flight operations.  For example, to minimize costs, airlines
would prefer to install new avionics within an aircraft's regularly
scheduled maintenance cycle.  In addition, airlines do not want to
install new equipment too early because they want to be able to take
advantage of opportunities to purchase the best technologies at the
lowest cost; however, they do not want to equip too late and miss out
on the benefits.  Similarly, because DOD must request funding well
before installing new equipment, it needs ample lead time to develop
budget requests and installation schedules for many of its aircraft,
which number more than 16,000.  Therefore, it is important for FAA to
make timely decisions about future technology requirements and stick
with those decisions to give all aviation user groups the lead time
needed to ensure that their purchases are cost-effective and their
installation schedules are efficient.

To provide for a smooth transition, FAA has been working with DOD and
other users to move forward with the selection of new technologies
for operations under free flight.  FAA's most recent draft NAS
architecture (blueprint) represents the agency's attempt to provide
the level of detail requested by the aviation community.  However,
some stakeholders have expressed concern that the draft architecture
is too general to use in planning for future technology upgrades.
For example, an airline representative noted that when airlines place
orders for new aircraft, they request systems that provide maximum
flexibility for later modifications or upgrades.  However, future
free flight equipment upgrades will still be costly, and the sooner
FAA decides which technologies will be required for operations under
free flight, the more effectively airlines can plan for those
upgrades.

      EFFECTIVE COLLABORATION WITH
      STAKEHOLDERS IS KEY TO
      DEVELOPING IMPLEMENTATION
      PLANS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2.2

Collaboration between FAA and stakeholders is critical to developing
plans that will have the level of buy-in needed to start implementing
free flight.  FAA's recent experiences in developing modernization
plans have pointed to the need to work collaboratively with the
aviation community from the onset of a given program to help ensure
the effective resolution of issues as plans are developed.  In March
1998, FAA and the aviation community reached consensus to begin
implementing Free Flight Phase 1--including consensus on which
technologies will be deployed and where.  In addition, under this
first phase, steps will be taken to identify and mitigate the risks
associated with inserting new technologies and procedures into an
operating air traffic control system.

In contrast, until recently FAA and stakeholders have been sharply
divided over the agency's plans for conducting Flight 2000--a limited
demonstration of free-flight-related communication, navigation, and
surveillance technologies--primarily in Alaska and Hawaii.  Problems
began when the proposal was announced without consulting users and
have persisted, despite FAA's efforts to work collaboratively with
stakeholders to resolve them.  While many stakeholders we interviewed
agreed with the need for FAA to conduct an operational demonstration
of free flight technologies and related procedures, they had strong
reservations about the utility of conducting such a demonstration in
Alaska and Hawaii.  In their view, few of the lessons learned would
be transferable to operations in the continental United States, where
free flight implementation will ultimately focus.  In addition,
stakeholders expressed concern that FAA has not focused enough
attention on developing the detailed plans that it needs for
conducting the demonstration, as required by the agency's acquisition
management system.  In fact, the Department of Transportation's
fiscal year 1998 appropriation act prohibited FAA from spending any
fiscal year 1998 funds on the Flight 2000 program.  In the
accompanying Conference Report for the act, the conferees noted that
additional financial and technical planning was needed before the
Flight 2000 demonstration program could be implemented.  The Congress
has not yet decided whether to fund this demonstration program in
fiscal year 1999.

To address these concerns, FAA has been working collaboratively with
stakeholders--through RTCA--to develop a roadmap (general plans) for
restructuring Flight 2000.  These efforts have resulted in the (1)
development of selection criteria for the operational capabilities to
be used, (2) selection of demonstration sites in Alaska and the Ohio
Valley, (3) selection of nine operational capabilities (see app.
III), (4) proposed change of the program's name from Flight 2000 to
the "Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program," and (5) revision
of the time frame (1999-2004) for conducting the demonstration
program.  FAA is currently considering this RTCA proposal.  FAA and
stakeholders realize that they will need to continue to work
collaboratively to refine these plans.  The latest collaborative
efforts appear to be a positive step toward developing the type of
detailed plans FAA needs to carry out the demonstration and secure
the necessary funding.

   FAA NEEDS TO ADDRESS
   OUTSTANDING ISSUES RELATED TO
   TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND
   DEPLOYMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3

Stakeholders and FAA officials identified several concerns about
technology development and deployment that need to be resolved.  Key
among these were (1) the pace and cost of the agency's process for
ensuring that new equipment is safe for its intended use, (2) issues
related to human factors, (3) uncertainties surrounding the use of
GPS as a sole means of navigation, and (4) issues associated with the
use of digital communication technologies.

      EFFORTS ARE UNDER WAY TO
      ADDRESS SHORTCOMINGS OF
      FAA'S CERTIFICATION PROCESS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.1

Many stakeholders and FAA officials stated that FAA's certification
process--methods for ensuring that new equipment is safe for its
intended use--is a key challenge to the implementation of free flight
because it takes too long and costs too much; they urged that the
process be streamlined.  The certification process could be
problematic for free flight because many new types of equipment, such
as those that are required for the use of new digital communication
technology, will need to be certified before they can be implemented.
As one aviation community stakeholder noted, "If something is going
to change the aviation system, it has to go through the certification
knot hole."

Recognizing that the certification process poses a barrier to
implementing free flight, FAA has taken a number of steps to address
this problem.  For example, FAA asked, and RTCA agreed, to convene a
task force to examine ways to improve the agency's existing
certification practices.  The first meeting took place in June 1998,
and the task force expects to report to FAA within 6 months.  Among
other things, this task force will (1) develop baseline information
on the current system--including a review of avionics,
infrastructure, and satellite needs; (2) consider human factors in
the certification process--including how best to integrate human
factors into the system's design and operations; (3) identify ways to
improve the current certification process--including an attempt to
determine an acceptable range of failure for technologies and metrics
for technology design and performance; and (4) review FAA's
certification services--including what customers should expect from
the agency and alternative methods of satisfying certification
requirements, such as granting approval authority for specific types
of technologies to Centers of Excellence or individuals.  In
addition, RTCA has a special committee that is reviewing the use of
digital communication technologies for free flight, including the
development of standards that FAA could use to develop certification
requirements.  Furthermore, the agency plans to use the Flight 2000
(now the Free Flight Operational Enhancement Program) demonstration
of free flight communication, navigation, and surveillance
technologies as an opportunity for streamlining the agency's
equipment certification process.

Several stakeholders told us that while the certification process
could be streamlined, both FAA and stakeholders need to take a
careful approach.  They noted that the present system may be
cumbersome, but it is providing the desired level of safety.  If
standards are going to be relaxed, then redundancies need to be built
into the system to ensure that modifications to the certification
process either maintain or improve upon existing levels of safety.

      IMPLEMENTATION OF FREE
      FLIGHT HINGES ON THE
      SATISFACTORY RESOLUTION OF
      HUMAN FACTORS ISSUES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.2

Many stakeholders told us they believe that the successful
implementation of free flight hinges on issues related to human
factors, such as the ability and willingness of pilots, controllers,
and maintenance staff to shift to a new system of air traffic
management.  Among the concerns raised are the need to (1) define the
type of training that will best prepare human operators for the
transition; (2) provide a reasonably paced training schedule to help
ensure that pilots, controllers, and maintenance staff, in
particular, are not overburdened with too many changes at one time;
and (3) identify the risks associated with changes in technologies
and procedures and the potential effects of these changes on human
operations in a free flight environment.  For example, a recent
report by the National Research Council on human factors and
automation raised concerns that, among other things, the increased
use of automation may lead to confusion among pilots, controllers,
and airline operations personnel over where control lies, especially
in a free flight environment.\23 As a result, the report recommended
that until these and other human factors issues are better
understood, the introduction of automated tools should proceed
gradually and decision-making authority should continue to reside on
the ground with controllers.

A related issue is the need to incorporate the consideration of human
factors into the product development cycle to avoid costly and
cumbersome changes at the end of the development process.  An FAA
human factors official told us that FAA has learned a lot from its
experience with the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System
(STARS) about the need to involve users in considering human factors
throughout the product development cycle--from the mission needs
statement, forward.\24 This official stressed that the agency can pay
to consider human factors throughout the acquisition cycle or pay
more later, as it is doing with STARS, to fix the problems that arise
when these factors are not considered.  Furthermore, when human
factors are not considered along the way, problems cannot always be
fixed.  Fewer options are available at the end of a development cycle
for modifying a given technology.  Stakeholders agreed with this
assessment.

While FAA has developed guidelines for considering human factors
during the technology development process, it has not established a
formal requirement for using these guidelines.  In June 1996, we
reported that FAA's work on human factors was not centralized, and we
recommended that the Secretary of Transportation direct FAA to ensure
that all units coordinate their research through the agency's Human
Factors Division.\25 According to some FAA officials and one
stakeholder, such coordination is still lacking and the agency's
programs would benefit from assigning responsibility for human
factors to a higher level within FAA so that these issues can receive
sufficient attention from the agency's senior management.  In
addition, several stakeholders stressed the importance of retaining
the same members on teams that address concerns about human factors
through the entire development process.  One of these stakeholders
believes that such continuity will help ensure that the team's
efforts are not derailed late in the process by the inclusion of new
members and the introduction of a range of new issues and methods of
resolving them.

Human factors must also be considered in the operating environments
where technologies will be deployed.  According to one stakeholder
involved in human factors work, because the air traffic control
system has evolved--rather than being designed--it does not operate
in a homogeneous fashion, and when the system is changed, the effects
on humans can vary widely.  For example, both en route and terminal
facilities tailor their operations in many ways to factor in local
conditions.  As a result, this stakeholder stressed that as many as
1,000 letters of agreement between various components of FAA and
users making adjustments to operating rules and procedures may
exist--making it difficult for the agency to generalize across the
system when considering the introduction of changes or improvements.
In addition, under free flight, users and controllers (as well as
maintenance staff) will rely more heavily on automated technologies
to carry out their responsibilities--making the integrity of the
system even more critical than it is now and increasing the need for
more redundant systems and training to ensure that controllers can
successfully switch, if necessary, to manual control techniques.

--------------------
\23 The Future of Air Traffic Control:  Human Operators and
Automation, National Research Council (Feb.  1998).

\24 Both controller and maintenance worker unions identified numerous
human factors problems with STARS that need to be resolved before the
system is deployed.  According to union representatives, many of
these problems resulted because users were not adequately involved in
the development of this system.  While progress has been made in
addressing concerns identified by both unions, outstanding issues
remain, including the source of funds for implementing all solutions.

\25 Human Factors:  Status of Efforts to Integrate Research on Human
Factors Into FAA's Activities (GAO/RCED-96-151, June 27, 1996).

      FAA NEEDS TO DETERMINE IF
      GPS AUGMENTATIONS WILL
      PROVIDE THE PRIMARY OR SOLE
      MEANS OF NAVIGATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.3

Satellite navigation provides precise information on the position of
aircraft and offers the potential for the required distances between
aircraft to be safely reduced and, in turn, for the air traffic
control system's capacity to be increased.  FAA initially planned its
augmented satellite navigation system to be a sole means of
navigation under free flight.\26

However, FAA and stakeholders have expressed concerns about the
vulnerability of an augmented satellite system to both intentional
and unintentional (e.g., radio frequency interference) jamming, and
about problems associated with the system's weak signal.  In view of
these concerns, the Air Transport Association and the Aircraft Owners
and Pilots Association have, in coordination with FAA, developed
plans for a risk assessment of augmentations to satellite navigation.
A research organization was selected in July 1998 to conduct the
assessment, and a final report is expected in January 1999.

An Air Transport Association official told us that this risk
assessment will address concerns about the vulnerability of satellite
navigation and stressed that such a study is critical because the use
of satellite navigation as a sole means of navigation is the
centerpiece of FAA's architecture (blueprint) and is the basis for
the agency's cost/benefit analyses.  According to this official, a
risk assessment is needed to identify the risks and develop
mitigation plans and cost estimates for mitigating each risk.  The
results of this study could affect both the costs and benefits for
FAA and users because if FAA does not use the augmented system as a
sole means of navigation, it could incur additional costs to retain
some portion of its ground-based navigational aids.  Similarly, users
may find it necessary to maintain existing equipment and to purchase
new equipment under free flight.

--------------------
\26 If GPS were used as a sole means of navigation, aircraft would
not be required to carry additional types of equipment for
navigation.  However, if it were used as a primary means of
navigation, aircraft operators would be required to carry additional
navigation equipment or to have additional restrictions placed on
when and where they can fly.

      USERS AWAIT FAA'S DECISIONS
      ABOUT DATA LINK
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.4

FAA and stakeholders consider digital communication
technologies--commonly referred to as data link--as critical to
implementing free flight.  FAA expects that the use of data link--in
combination with other free flight technologies--will improve safety,
increase capacity, reduce costs, and enhance the productivity of
humans and equipment.  Data link will replace or supplement many of
the routine voice interactions between pilots and controllers with
nonvocal digital data messages.  For example, during peak periods,
one controller often may be required to communicate on a single radio
channel with 25 or more aircraft--leading to possible operational
errors and system delays.  FAA believes that using data link will (1)
reduce nearly one-quarter of all domestic operational errors--caused
directly or indirectly by miscommunication between pilots and
controllers, (2) relieve highly congested voice communication
channels, and (3) save the airlines millions of dollars annually on
communication-related delays that occur during both taxi and
in-flight operations.

Data link comprises three components:  (1) software
applications--including Controller Pilot Data Link Communications
(CPDLC), weather information, and Automatic Dependent Surveillance
(ADS); (2) hardware systems installed on the ground and avionics in
the cockpit; and (3) the communication medium that allows for the
transfer of data between the ground and airborne equipment.  FAA is
responsible for implementing ground systems, and the aviation
community is responsible for implementing airborne systems.  As
partners, both FAA and the aviation community are responsible for
ensuring the interoperability of these systems.

Stakeholders told us that despite the importance of data link, many
issues remain unresolved.  Chief among these issues is the lack of
agreement within FAA on how, when, and at what pace to proceed with
the use of data link.  This lack of agreement may be attributed, at
least in part, to the fact that data link efforts are being managed
and implemented by different organizational elements of FAA and by
the aviation community.  Recognizing this, FAA has been working with
stakeholders to reach agreement on data link issues.  In May 1998, a
group of FAA officials and stakeholders under the Administrator's NAS
Modernization Task Force began developing a consensus plan for
implementing controller pilot data link in the en route environment.
In July 1998, this group presented its plan to RTCA for
consideration.  In August 1998, RTCA modified the plan and endorsed
the implementation of CPDLC Build 1 as part of Free Flight Phase
1--recommending that the location and communication medium for CPDLC
Build 1 be changed.  FAA--in consultation with stakeholders--intends
to further develop the plans for deploying CPDLC Build 1 by the end
of 1998.  FAA's approval is expected by early 1999.

   OTHER OUTSTANDING ISSUES MAY
   LIMIT EFFECTIVENESS OF FREE
   FLIGHT'S IMPLEMENTATION
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4

A number of other issues were identified by FAA officials and
stakeholders as needing resolution for free flight to be implemented
successfully.  Among these issues were the need to (1) coordinate
modernization activities with the international aviation community,
(2) integrate free flight technologies, and (3) address airport
capacity issues.

      FAA NEEDS TO ENSURE GLOBAL
      COORDINATION OF ITS
      MODERNIZATION EFFORTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4.1

Airlines that operate internationally and DOD believe that FAA needs
to work diligently to ensure that, to the extent possible, carriers
do not have to purchase multiple types of avionics to operate in
different parts of the world.  Currently, both FAA and various
elements of the aviation community are working collaboratively with
their international counterparts on a number of modernization issues.
For example, FAA is a member of an airline-led group with
international participation--including Eurocontrol\27 and several
foreign airlines--known as the Communication, Navigation, and
Surveillance/Air Traffic Management Focused Team.  The purpose of
this team is to facilitate the implementation of new communication,
navigation, and surveillance and air traffic management technologies
by developing consensus among global airlines on economic issues.  In
addition, the agency is working with the European community on human
factors issues and data link applications.  However, some
stakeholders question the sufficiency of the agency's efforts to
coordinate technology selection decisions that will allow users to
operate worldwide.  Because the airline industry is becoming
increasingly global, it requires the development of compatible
operational concepts, technologies, and systems architectures
throughout the world.  One airframe manufacturer noted that the
airlines are increasingly demanding global solutions to minimize the
cost of changes to avionics and flight systems.  The costs of
purchasing new avionics, retrofitting them into the aircraft (and the
down time required), and training pilots in their use for a large
fleet of airplanes will quickly exceed any benefits if these benefits
are not realized as soon as additional or improved capabilities are
introduced.

According to some stakeholders, FAA has historically been the
international leader in air traffic control modernization efforts--a
position that has given the agency the flexibility to develop and
deploy technologies that best serve the needs of users in the United
States.  However, many stakeholders expressed concern that FAA's
position as the international leader in this arena has eroded in
recent years.  According to some of these stakeholders, the United
States may have to follow the lead of the European community in
selecting the types of new technologies that will be used under free
flight.  For example, some stakeholders noted that Europe is at least
3 years ahead of the United States in developing and deploying the
data link technology that will serve as a centerpiece for
implementing free flight.  While several stakeholders noted that
valuable lessons may be learned from the Europeans' work on data
link, one stakeholder stressed that it is important for the United
States to position itself so that it can make decisions about
technology requirements that best reflect the needs of U.S.
operations.

--------------------
\27 Eurocontrol is the organizational entity that addresses air
traffic management issues for the European member states.

      FAA NEEDS TO INTEGRATE FREE
      FLIGHT TECHNOLOGIES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4.2

Some FAA officials and stakeholders told us that the agency needs to
integrate free flight technologies with one another and into the
operating air traffic control system.  This integration is expected
to allow FAA and users to fully exploit the capabilities of these
technologies to help ensure that promised improvements in safety,
capacity, and efficiency are realized.  For example, as noted in
chapter 2, FAA has new technologies that are expected to improve the
efficiency of operations at high altitudes, close to the terminal,
and on the ground.  Because some of these technologies have not been
designed to work together, some stakeholders and FAA officials
contend that their potential benefits--e.g., allowing the distance
between aircraft to be safely reduced, when practical, throughout a
flight's operation--will not be maximized unless they are integrated.

One airframe manufacturer noted that the key impediment to changing
the NAS is not new technology, but how to integrate that technology
into an operating NAS.  As a result, care must be taken to help
ensure that planned changes in operations, procedures, and airspace
usage will not adversely affect safety and will meet users' future
needs.  Another stakeholder noted that integrating new technologies
(and associated procedures) into the present operating system is
difficult because there are complex interdependencies between the
technologies currently being used--making incremental changes to the
system complex and the consequences of introducing abrupt changes
unpredictable.  Stakeholders have raised concerns that FAA does not
have sufficient internal expertise to complete integration tasks.
FAA officials acknowledge that they do not have the internal
expertise or experience to do the avionics systems integration work
for Flight 2000 (now the Free Flight Operational Enhancement
Program); the agency plans to hire an integration contractor to do
this work.  FAA believes that it has sufficient expertise to do the
remainder of the integration work required for free flight.  However,
to enhance expertise within the agency, FAA has identified
competencies essential to efficiently manage complex acquisition
programs and is providing a variety of opportunities for staff to
further develop their expertise.

      AIRPORT CAPACITY ISSUES NEED
      ATTENTION
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4.3

Stakeholders questioned whether FAA is paying enough attention to
increasing airport capacity.  Many stakeholders stressed that using
free flight in the en route environment may get aircraft to their
destinations sooner, but the planes may then be delayed by limits on
airport surface capacity, such as too few runways and gates.  Several
stakeholders also stressed that poor weather conditions limit
airports' capacity and said that more sophisticated technology is
needed to predict hazardous weather conditions so that airports'
capacity can be optimized.  In June 1998, we reported that FAA has
not assigned weather information a high priority in its plans for the
NAS architecture.\28 Because weather information is not considered
critical, research on weather systems is often among the first to be
cut--potentially jeopardizing mulityear studies of weather problems
affecting aviation.  Given the significant impact of hazardous
weather on aviation safety and efficiency, improving the weather
information available to all users should be one of FAA's top
priorities.  The agency is taking steps to address its shortcomings
in this area, and in fiscal year 1999, FAA is elevating weather
research as a funding priority.

--------------------
\28 Aviation Safety:  FAA Has Not Fully Implemented Weather-Related
Recommendations, (GAO/RCED-98-130, June 2, 1998).

RTCA'S FREE FLIGHT RECOMMENDATIONS
=========================================================== Appendix I

On October 26, 1995, RTCA Task Force 3 issued a report\29 detailing
the recommended actions and time frames for gradually implementing
free flight.  These recommendations were divided into three
categories--(1) near term (1995 through 1997),\30 (2) midterm (1998
through 2000),\31 and (3) far term (2001 and beyond).\32 The
following are the recommendations from this RTCA report.  FAA
identified 11 recommendations related to Free Flight Phase 1--these
are shown in bold.

--------------------
\29 Final Report of RTCA Task Force 3:  Free Flight Implementation,
RTCA (Oct.  26, 1995).  In Aug.  1996, RTCA published a follow-on
action plan that describes the initiatives needed to implement each
of the recommendations.  See RTCA Action Plan (Aug.  15, 1996).

\30 With one exception, near-term action items are designated by
number.  The following recommendation--listed as B--while not
designated with a number, falls after recommendation 23.
Recommendation B states, Work with the user community to achieve
consensus on the role and timing of Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast [ADS-B] technology in delivering specific
near- and long-term benefits.

\31 Midterm action items are prefaced with MT.

\32 Far-term action items are prefaced with FT.

   NEAR-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS,
   1995-97
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

1.  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in cooperation with
users, must develop new procedures which use airplane Random
Navigation/Area Navigation (RNAV) capabilities to reduce congestion
over waypoints.  Such procedures should be expedited for the top 50
airports.

2.  Institute a process to quickly develop the standards, criteria,
procedures, and training programs necessary to expand implementation
procedures for use of area navigation equipment capabilities,
including vertical guidance, to increase capacity and operating
efficiency in terminal areas.

3.  Review existing air traffic control (ATC) procedures to identify
changes for increased use of RNAV routes below Flight Level 180.

4.  The planned expansion of the National Route Program (NRP) should
be continued.

5.  Where appropriate, decrease 200 nautical mile radius restriction
for NRP filing.

6.  Develop mechanisms to provide predeparture feedback to the flight
planners on potential impacts of requested flight plans, changes to
requested flight plans, and systems constraints causing those
changes.

7.  Implement rationing-by-schedule during ground delay programs.

8.  Establish more flexible ground delay program procedures and
supporting decision support systems (DSS).

9.  Establish a coordinated effort among military, FAA, and National
Airspace System (NAS) users to define the information and
capabilities necessary to improve civil use of Special Use Airspaces
(SUA) when not being utilized by DOD.

10.  An operational trial in one or more SUA should be conducted to
demonstrate how improved information exchange on the status of SUA
can improve civil use of SUAs when not being utilized by DOD.

11.  Develop and implement real-time SUA notification between DOD and
FAA, and between FAA and flight planners.  A program plan is needed
in the near term.

12.  Streamline the FAA certification process to reduce time and
costs for approval and fielding of new and emerging technologies.

13a.  In collaboration with NAS users, the FAA should make a decision
on the initial air/ground data link to be implemented for domestic
ATC communications, navigation, and surveillance.

13b.  The FAA should collaborate with the airspace users in the
continued development of oceanic data link (i.e., Satellite Voice and
Data Communications [SATCOM], High Frequency [HF] data link).

14.  Improve telecommunication mechanisms to enhance the free flow of
information between users and the Traffic Flow Management (TFM)
system on a machine to machine basis.

15.  Incorporate airline schedule updates (e.g., company delays and
cancellations) in FAA decision support systems and decision
processes.

16.  Enhance, if possible, or replace the current Air Traffic
Management (ATM) monitor/alert function, including, but not limited
to, a means of measuring controller workload and complexity.

17.  Expedite the deployment of digital Automatic Terminal
Information Service (ATIS), automated taxi clearance and expanded use
of a standard taxi clearance as appended to the Pre-Departure
Clearance (PDC).  Expedite expansion of PDC to additional 27 sites.
Evaluate expansion beyond the planned 57.

18.  FAA should initiate the development of the standards for a
cockpit situational awareness display of traffic information.

19.  Deploy a ground-based conflict probe in the near term to
accelerate the selection and development of a conflict probe with
automated planning aids to assist controllers in the identification
and resolution of conflicts.

20a.  Expedite the implementation of the technologies and
capabilities (e.g., Center TRACON Automation System [CTAS]) necessary
for improved transition to, from, and operations in the terminal
airspace, including the ability to sequence and schedule aircraft
arriving on unstructured routes.

20b.  Move mature elements of CTAS forward out of research and
development (R&D) into implementation ensuring adherence to free
flight principles.

21.  In cooperation with airspace users, investigate the technical
feasibility, safety, cost, and benefits of using Global Positioning
System (GPS) Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) as an en route
vertical reference, e.g., for Reduced Vertical Separation Minima
(RVSM).

22.  The FAA should support the Meteorological Data Collection and
Reporting System (MDCRS) to enhance the quality and quantity of
real-time aircraft-reported weather information.

23.  Develop the capability--starting with existing capabilities--to
generate more accurate forecasts on convective weather for use in
flight and operational planning.

24.  Develop methodology and tools to measure and predict dynamic
density.

25.  Develop, evaluate, and implement TFM capability for a
cooperative exchange of information amongst the users and the FAA
that will enable user involvement in the FAA's TFM decision making
process.

25a.  Building on existing activities, such as Traffic Flow
Management-Architecture and Requirements Team (TFM-ART) and
FAA-Airline Data Exchange (FADE), and related programs, the FAA and
users must determine the details of an improved user-TFM interaction.

25b.  In concert with the users, FAA must aggressively pursue the
testing and implementation of development programs, and/or more
flexible procedures, aimed at supporting the cooperative exchange of
real-time data and information between the users and TFM system.
Start now by developing TFM scenarios with the users that substitute
controlled time of arrival (CTA) instead of the currently employed
departure clearance time.  Evaluate this soon at one airport.

26.  FAA and users should establish procedures for aircraft to
aircraft separation when separation responsibility may be transferred
to the aircraft by the air traffic service provider on a case by case
basis.

27.  Implement precision missed approaches and precision simultaneous
approaches and departures.

28.  Investigate the possibility of increasing runway acceptance by
permitting two aircraft to occupy the runway at the same time.

29.  Additional expansion of the NRP below Flight Level 290 should be
explored.  Accelerate modeling and analysis efforts needed to
facilitate the continued expansion of the NRP.

30.  Issue an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding
implementation of domestic reduced vertical separation minima (RVSM)
above Flight Level 290.

31.  The FAA should determine the requirements for reduced en route
horizontal separation standards, including surveillance performance.

32.  Begin rulemaking to remove the 250 knots below 10,000 feet
restriction in Class B airspace.

33.  The FAA should study human perceptions and responses associated
with the time and distance buffers that separate aircraft (protected
and alert zones).  FAA must determine that proposed changes in
separation rules and maneuver limits do not increase perceived
hazards, statistical risks, and experienced discomfort.  FAA must
show that the proposed changes will make the present system more
efficient, safe, or economical before implementation.

34.  Real-time human-in-the-loop simulations should be conducted to
systematically study controller and pilot behaviors, interactions,
and effects within NAS environments that represent dynamic densities
and sector configurations anticipated for free flight.

35.  Reemphasize the role of the Airport Improvement Program in
increasing airport capacity.

   MIDTERM RECOMMENDATIONS,
   1998-2000
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

MT1.  Increase FAA Air-Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) decision
support capabilities as soon as possible to include the total U.S.
navigational database.

MT2.  Accelerate and expand programs to support GPS/WAAS as a primary
navigation system (e.g., airport surveys, update FAA orders,
precision approaches at majority of airports in the contiguous United
States, Hawaii, Southern Alaska, and the Caribbean).

MT3.  Ensure that requirements for Standard Terminal Automation
Replacement System (STARS) for Terminal Radar Approach Controls
(TRACONs) and Display System Replacement (DSR) for ARTCCs be modified
to include a provision, i.e., a "hook" for receiving, processing, and
displaying Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) signals
and data link.

MT4.  Develop and implement technology for the dissemination of
weather products and flight information to the cockpit.  Development
of FIS application standards should be done in coordination with
cockpit traffic display standards.

MT5.  FAA must develop and deploy dynamic/adaptive sectors as a means
to facilitate free flight operations.

MT6.  Initiate the development of, and implement, ADS to support user
preferred trajectories in non radar areas; includes ground
infrastructure (communications and automation) and user equipage.

   FAR-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS, 2001
   AND BEYOND
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3

FT1.  Expand the number of airports to receive surface surveillance
capability.

FT2.  The FAA should define a surveillance architecture and
infrastructure for en route and terminal airspace incorporating both
dependent and independent surveillance elements.  The architecture
must meet the requirements for reduced separation standards, improved
coverage, and lower-cost maintenance determined by other related
studies and investigations, and should facilitate enhancing both
near-term surveillance capabilities and those required for mature
free flight.

FT3.  Determine Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) capability to
enable increased availability of Category I, II, III approaches and
implement LAAS, as appropriate.

STATUS OF SELECTED RTCA
RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO FREE
FLIGHT PHASE 1, AS OF JULY 1998
========================================================== Appendix II

RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
4. The planned expansion of    a. FAA Notice 7110.147,       Completed. Effective 2/26/
the National Route Program     National Route Program,       97 Notice will be
(NRP) should be continued.     dated 12/20/95, has been      incorporated into FAA Order
                               revised to create a more      7210.3 chapter 18.
                               aggressive expansion form.

                               b. Conduct ATC system impact  Completed by MITRE-CAASD.
                               analysis and modeling.

                               c. NRP expansion to FL 290.   Completed 10/96.

                               d. Conduct postexpansion      Database for tracking issues
                               workload analysis to          concerning NRP developed.
                               identify issues and lessons   Ongoing historical data
                               learned from planned          collection.
                               expansion to FL 290.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
5. Where appropriate,          a. Examine feasibility of     MITRE Corporation did some
decrease 200-nautical-mile-    reducing the 200-nautical-    initial analysis on
radius restriction for NRP     mile radius using existing    reduction of 200-nautical-
filing.                        modeling and analysis         mile restriction in
                               capabilities. Analysis        increments of 50 nautical
                               should address issues such    miles. The results were not
                               as workload and redesign of   especially useful because
                               national airspace. Initial    the modeling was designed to
                               simulation analysis           set a baseline and did not
                               completed. Additional         reflect realistic
                               simulation and Human in the   expectations of increased
                               Loop (HITL) analyses are      airline participation.
                               planned.                      Further consideration
                                                             indicated this was not a
                                                             realistic approach because
                                                             (1) the ingress/egress
                                                             mileage would vary greatly
                                                             from airport to airport and
                                                             (2) programming of airline
                                                             databases to account for
                                                             airport variations would be
                                                             cumbersome and time
                                                             consuming.

                               b. Develop procedures for     Development of the DP/STAR
                               use of Instrument Departure   goal to allow users to file
                               Procedures (DP) and Standard  Instrument Departure
                               Terminal Arrival Routes       Procedures transitions to
                               (STAR) for filing a Standard  join an NRP route, and exit
                               Instrument Departure (SID)    an NRP route via the
                               to the NRP to a STAR at       transition of a Standard
                               destination.                  Terminal Arrival Route.

                               c. Begin testing and          A notification under the
                               evaluation of DP/STAR         provisions of the collective
                               egress/ingress program at     bargaining agreement was
                               airport city pairs as agreed  issued to NATCA on 2/10/97.
                               upon by FAA and industry
                               working groups.

                               d.Implement DP/STAR egress/   On 4/1/98, a committee
                               ingress program nationally.   consisting of National Air
                               Identify and disseminate      Traffic Controllers
                               ingress/egress points inside  Association (NATCA), ATO-
                               or outside 200-nautical-      100/200, and the Airline
                               mile radius (those that do    Transport Association
                               not have DPs/STARs).          convened to outline the DP/
                                                             STAR project and to provide
                                                             national oversight. The
                                                             National Business Aircraft
                                                             Association and Regional
                                                             Aircraft Association were
                                                             invited to attend and will
                                                             continue to be invited to
                                                             participate on the
                                                             committee.

                                                             ï¿½Regions and facilities will
                                                             be tasked to review DP/STAR
                                                             transitions to area airports
                                                             to evaluate applicability to
                                                             the DP/STAR goal.

                                                             ï¿½Procedures for implementing
                                                             the DP/STAR program have
                                                             been developed and agreed
                                                             upon by FAA and industry
                                                             work group members.

                                                             ï¿½Initial list of select
                                                             cities has been developed
                                                             consisting of 24 DPs and 11
                                                             STARs.

                                                             ï¿½Coordination with NATCA on
                                                             implementation of initial
                                                             cities list completed 3/25/
                                                             98.

                                                             ï¿½Initial list of DPs/STARs
                                                             changed. New list includes
                                                             Denver, Albuquerque,
                                                             Minneapolis/St. Paul, and
                                                             Salt Lake City. A total of
                                                             14 DPs with 73 transitions,
                                                             and 19 STARS with 40
                                                             transitions approved for
                                                             implementation.

                                                             ï¿½All transitions of each DP/
                                                             STAR may not be available/
                                                             published because of
                                                             facility procedural
                                                             constraints.

                                                             ï¿½Advisory Circular 90-91B
                                                             and FAA Notice 7210.468
                                                             defining program
                                                             requirements published 4/
                                                             15/98.

                                                             ï¿½Workgroup met 7/8/98-7/9/
                                                             98 to develop and agree upon
                                                             next airports for
                                                             implementation later in
                                                             1998.

                                                             ï¿½Program name changed to
                                                             "Departure Procedure/
                                                             Standard Terminal Arrival
                                                             Route Transition to the
                                                             National Route Program."

                                                             Airports that do not have
                                                             DP/STAR routes are not
                                                             likely to be the primary
                                                             departure/destination points
                                                             of the users. After the DP/
                                                             STAR program is implemented
                                                             at most major sites,
                                                             attention can be given to
                                                             address those airports and
                                                             determine a reasonable
                                                             distance expectation for
                                                             users to join a published
                                                             route. (Published route
                                                             indicating a jet or victor
                                                             airway, as opposed to
                                                             published preferred
                                                             Instrument Flight Rules
                                                             (IFR) route.) The latter are
                                                             navigational aids.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
6. Develop mechanisms to       a. RTCA Special Committee     Data exchange mechanism in
provide predeparture feedback  (SC) 169 Working Group 5 to   place. Traffic Flow
to the flight planners on      define detailed and           Management (TFM) R&D
potential impact of requested  prioritized near-and longer-  activity with industry has
flight plans, changes to       term needs and benefits       indicated that this
requested flight plans, and    estimate, including           capability will evolve
system constraints causing     requirements for a            naturally at a later stage
those changes.                 centralized database          of data exchange
                               identifying NAS status for    development. Therefore, work
                               flight planning.              on this recommendation is
                                                             being deferred until the
                                                             appropriate time.

                               b. FAA will identify, with
                               industry, near-term
                               procedural changes to
                               increase information
                               available on system
                               constraints for flight
                               planning, including general
                               aviation requirements.

                               c. Working Group 5 will
                               develop operational concept
                               automated predeparture
                               feedback and flight plan
                               amendments for operations
                               via direct interface between
                               the Airline Operations
                               Centers (AOC) and traffic
                               management.

                               d. Define interface
                               requirements between AOAS/
                               DOTS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
9. Establish a coordinated     a. Establish working group    Additional activities/site
effort among military, FAA,    of military, FAA, other       visits the SUA work group
and NAS users to define the    government agencies, NATCA,   has been involved with:
information and capabilities   and users to determine        Delta Airlines Operations
necessary to improve civil     specific information          Center (AOC), American
use of SUAs when not being     requirements concerning SUA   Airlines AOC, Jacksonville
utilized by DOD.               availability and time frames  Air Route Traffic Control
                               for notification of           Center (ARTCC), Fort Worth
                               availability.                 ARTCC, Jacksonville Fleet
                                                             Area Control and
                                                             Surveillance Facility, Fort
                                                             Worth Joint Reserve Base,
                                                             White Sands Missile Range,
                                                             USS John C. Stennis aircraft
                                                             carrier, Gainesville
                                                             Automated Flight Service
                                                             Station (AFSS), Fort Worth
                                                             AFSS, Gulf of Mexico Users
                                                             Meeting, and the Government/
                                                             Industry Aeronautical
                                                             Charting Forum.

                               b. Implement FAA system of    SAMS has been installed at
                               tracking SUA availability     all ARTCCs, Honolulu and San
                               (SAMS).                       Juan Combined Center-
                                                             Military Radar Approach
                                                             Control (RAPCON),
                                                             Fayetteville, High Desert,
                                                             and Pensacola TRACONs, and
                                                             Fort Worth AFSS.

                               c. FAA will develop rules     The procedures to
                               and procedures to support     disseminate SUA schedules
                               identified requirements for   developed in Action Item 10a
                               supporting improved civil     have been replicated at
                               access to SUA.                Jacksonville ARTCC and New
                                                             York ARTCC for warning area
                                                             information, and Albuquerque
                                                             ARTCC for White Sands
                                                             Missile Range information.

                                                             The Industry/Government
                                                             Aeronautical Charting Forum
                                                             is reviewing the work
                                                             group's request to chart
                                                             frequencies for SUA
                                                             information on aeronautical
                                                             charts used by general
                                                             aviation pilots, and to
                                                             display Air Traffic Control
                                                             Assigned Airspace on
                                                             pertinent aeronautical
                                                             charts.

                               d. DOD SUA scheduling system  Negotiations are ongoing
                               to provide electronic         between FAA and DOD;
                               schedules to FAA systems by   tentative initial operating
                               1998.                         capability is 8/98.

                               e. Define and implement       Remaining software
                               interface between SAMS and    development requirements
                               Enhanced Traffic Management   include, but are not limited
                               System (ETMS)/Notices to      to, analysis reports and
                               Airman (NOTAM)/other systems  interfaces with Enhanced
                               to allow for transfer of SUA  Traffic Management System,
                               information to users.         Military Airspace Management
                                                             System, and distribution of
                                                             the data to Flight Service
                                                             Stations. ADTN2000 was
                                                             selected as the
                                                             telecommunications network
                                                             for the SAMS v3.0 system.
                                                             Installation of the network
                                                             began in 9/96. Currently
                                                             there are six sites
                                                             remaining that are awaiting
                                                             connectivity or line
                                                             installation. In addition,
                                                             Internet Protocol (IP)
                                                             addresses have not been
                                                             tested which provide
                                                             connectivity to the main
                                                             server site at the Air
                                                             Traffic Control System
                                                             Command Center (ATCSCC) and
                                                             the other sites.

                               f. FAA will compare           Free Flight working group
                               available capabilities with   was formed to address real-
                               identified requirements to    time SUA management as it
                               determine if additional       applies to free flight. The
                               infrastructure development    group consists of
                               (e.g., air/ground             representatives from FAA,
                               communication) is required.   commercial aviation, general
                               Cost/benefit of additional    aviation, DOD, Department of
                               development will be           the Interior, (DOI), and
                               assessed.                     NATCA. The group met and
                                                             teleconferenced several
                                                             times since their initial
                                                             meeting 8/8/96, to address
                                                             items 9, 10, and 11,
                                                             including an on-site visit
                                                             to Edwards AFB/R-2508
                                                             Complex. The following
                                                             points have been made: (1)
                                                             DOD policy of returning SUA
                                                             back to the controlling
                                                             agency (FAA) when not in use
                                                             is considered fundamentally
                                                             sound and supported by all
                                                             concerned. The
                                                             implementation of this
                                                             policy was observed at
                                                             Edwards AFB. (2) Non-DOD NAS
                                                             users (commercial and
                                                             general aviation) reiterated
                                                             that they seek access to SUA
                                                             when that airspace is not in
                                                             use. (3) Non-DOD NAS users
                                                             understand that their
                                                             request to gain access to
                                                             SUA, when that airspace is
                                                             inactive, requires
                                                             coordination and approval
                                                             through FAA. (4) DOD
                                                             requires flexible scheduling
                                                             to accomplish its mission.
                                                             Rigid scheduling
                                                             requirements would not
                                                             accommodate the many
                                                             variables that could affect
                                                             the mission, i.e., weather,
                                                             telemetry/instrumentation,
                                                             aircraft availability, etc.

                                                             (5) Non-DOD NAS users
                                                             indicated that they require
                                                             SUA status information from
                                                             FAA as soon as FAA knows it.
                                                             This includes air traffic
                                                             control assigned airspace
                                                             (ATCAA) and its charting.

                                                             (6) Information
                                                             dissemination to non-DOD NAS
                                                             users, by FAA, appears to be
                                                             a major issue where most
                                                             follow-on action must be
                                                             focused. FAA acknowledges
                                                             its responsibility for
                                                             information sharing and
                                                             those inefficiencies in
                                                             information dissemination
                                                             that need to be addressed,
                                                             i.e., who gets the
                                                             information, how do they get
                                                             it, when do they get it, and
                                                             where do they get it?

                               g. Establish a measurement    Free Flight working group
                               capability to track SUA       was formed to address real-
                               volume, utilization, and      time SUA management as it
                               management.                   applies to free flight. The
                                                             group consists of
                                                             representatives from FAA,
                                                             commercial aviation, general
                                                             aviation, DOD, DOI, and
                                                             NATCA. The group met and
                                                             teleconferenced several
                                                             times since their initial
                                                             meeting 8/8/96, to address
                                                             items 9, 10, and 11,
                                                             including an on-site visit
                                                             to Edwards AFB/R-2508
                                                             Complex. The following
                                                             points have been made: (1)
                                                             DOD's policy of returning
                                                             SUA back to the controlling
                                                             agency (FAA) when not in use
                                                             is considered fundamentally
                                                             sound and is supported by
                                                             all concerned. The
                                                             implementation of this
                                                             policy was observed at
                                                             Edwards AFB. (2) Non-DOD NAS
                                                             users (commercial and
                                                             general aviation) reiterated
                                                             that they seek access to SUA
                                                             when that airspace is not in
                                                             use. (3) Non-DOD NAS users
                                                             understand that their
                                                             request to gain access to
                                                             SUA, when that airspace is
                                                             inactive, requires
                                                             coordination and approval
                                                             through FAA.
                                                             (4) DOD requires flexible
                                                             scheduling to accomplish its
                                                             mission. Rigid scheduling
                                                             requirements would not
                                                             accommodate the many
                                                             variables that could affect
                                                             the mission, i.e., weather,
                                                             telemetry/instrumentation,
                                                             aircraft availability, etc.
                                                             (5) Non-DOD NAS users
                                                             indicated that they require
                                                             SUA status information from
                                                             FAA as soon as FAA knows it.
                                                             (6) Information
                                                             dissemination to non-DOD NAS
                                                             users, by FAA, appears to be
                                                             the major issue where most
                                                             follow-on action must be
                                                             focused. FAA acknowledges
                                                             its responsibility for
                                                             information sharing and
                                                             those inefficiencies in
                                                             information dissemination
                                                             that need to be addressed,
                                                             i.e., who gets the
                                                             information, how do they get
                                                             it, when do they get it, and
                                                             where do they get it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
10. An operational trial in    a. Technical working group    The working group
one or more SUA should be      (formed in Rec. 9a)           recommended an operational
conducted to demonstrate how   identifies one or more SUAs   trial at the R-2508 Complex
improved information exchange  for operational trials of     (Edwards AFB). SUA
on the status of SUA can       data sharing with existing    information was disseminated
improve civil use of SUAs      capabilities.                 by Oakland ARTCC via the
when not being utilized by                                   ETMS mail system to air
DOD.                                                         carriers with no disruption
                                                             to DOD operations. The trial
                                                             was conducted in 2/97 and 3/
                                                             97 and required the
                                                             cooperation and coordination
                                                             of FAA's Western-Pacific
                                                             Region Air Traffic Division,
                                                             R-2508 Complex Control
                                                             Board, Oakland ARTCC, High
                                                             Desert TRACON, Los Angeles
                                                             ARTCC, and the user
                                                             community.

                                                             A second trial commenced on
                                                             12/20/97 between New York
                                                             metropolitan (JFK, LGA, EWR)
                                                             airports and Orlando
                                                             International Airport.
                                                             Aircraft are being routed
                                                             offshore and transitioned,
                                                             if feasible, through the
                                                             warning areas on a real-
                                                             time basis.

                               b. Identify FAA and DOD lead  Completed.
                               for this effort, and
                               identify priority status of
                               this effort.

                               c. FAA and DOD collect        FAA, DOD, and other users
                               benefits and operational      collected information during
                               issues during trials.         the operational trial at the
                                                             R-2508 Complex. One airline
                                                             stated it was saving $30,000
                                                             per month through fuel
                                                             loading decisions for the
                                                             trial, while there was no
                                                             impact on DOD's operations.
                                                             The procedure was
                                                             implemented on a permanent
                                                             basis at the R-2508
                                                             Complex.

                                                             Data are still being
                                                             collected for the Orlando
                                                             International Airport trial.

                               d. Results (costs and         The procedures for the R-
                               benefits) of operational      2508 Complex were
                               trial will be fed into        implemented at Jacksonville
                               procedure and infrastructure  and New York ARTCCs for
                               development activities in     warning area information,
                               Rec. 9.                       and at Albuquerque ARTCC for
                                                             the White Sands Complex of
                                                             SUA.

                                                             Data are still being
                                                             collected for the
                                                             Jacksonville trial.

                               e. FAA/DOD agreement on       The following points were
                               national procedures.          made:

                                                             (1) The R-2508 Complex
                                                             dynamically accommodates
                                                             civil in-flight requests for
                                                             flight within the R-2508
                                                             airspace.

                                                             (2) Information sharing
                                                             between DOD and FAA in the
                                                             R-2508 Complex is
                                                             accomplished very
                                                             efficiently through a
                                                             variety of electronic
                                                             exchanges, as well as being
                                                             physically collocated in the
                                                             TRACON facility.

                                                             (3) Information sharing
                                                             between FAA and Non-DOD NAS
                                                             users normally occurred on a
                                                             tactical, real-time basis.

                                                             (4) Filing and approval of
                                                             more preferred routing
                                                             through the R-2508 Complex
                                                             in a southeast direction,
                                                             i.e., J-110, with Oakland
                                                             Center has been a problem
                                                             for the airlines. Filing and
                                                             approval of more preferred
                                                             routing in the northwest
                                                             direction through R-2508 via
                                                             J-110 has not been a
                                                             problem.

                                                             (5) Participants are tasked
                                                             to compile a list of SUAs
                                                             that they believe would be
                                                             candidates for another
                                                             operational trial. Another
                                                             on-site visit has been
                                                             scheduled tentatively for
                                                             the North Florida area.

                                                             (6) The operational trial at
                                                             the R-2508 Complex will be
                                                             incorporated into standard
                                                             operating procedures.

                                                             (7) An attempt will be made
                                                             to transfer this strategy to
                                                             provide air carriers with
                                                             information about the
                                                             availability of certain
                                                             airspace.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
11. Develop and implement      a. The joint team (formed in  The work group in Rec. 9
real-time SUA notification     Rec. 9a) will assess the      wanted FAA to provide the
between DOD and FAA, and       need for real-time SUA        information to users as it
between FAA and flight         notifications and will        is received.
planners. A program plan is    develop a program plan to
needed in the near term.       reflect needed changes in
                               systems, procedures, and
                               training to implement real-
                               time exchanges of schedule
                               information.

                               b. Examine needed internal    The Host Replacement Mission
                               and external FAA              Need Statement has been
                               infrastructure changes to     approved by FAA. The entry
                               enable real-time SUA          and display of SUA
                               notification, such as an      information will be
                               interface between SAMS and    available to the air traffic
                               the Host.                     controller.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
17. Expedite the deployment    a. Deliver all 57 tower data  PDC is operational at all 57
of Digital Automatic Terminal  link sites for PDC and D-     sites. D-ATIS is operational
Information Service (D-        ATIS.                         at 49 sites, and the other 8
ATIS), automated taxi                                        are awaiting completion of
clearance, and expanded use                                  D-ATIS local refresher
of a standard taxi clearance                                 training. D-ATIS operation
as appended to the Pre-                                      expected at remaining sites
Departure Clearance (PDC).                                   by 5/98.
Expedite expansion of PDC to
additional 27 sites. Evaluate
expansion beyond the planned
57.

                               b. Complete Detroit           Four-month demonstration
                               demonstration of taxi route   under way, to be followed by
                               delivery.                     a 1-month evaluation,
                                                             expected to be completed by
                                                             6/98.

                               c. Publish charted standard   The activity is postponed
                               taxi routes for national      until benefits have been
                               implementation.               assessed on the basis of the
                                                             Detroit demonstrations'
                                                             results.

                               d. Free Flight Steering       No candidate sites for
                               Committee identifies          expansion have been
                               additional sites for tower    identified.
                               data link services, conducts
                               cost/benefit analyses, and
                               makes recommendations to
                               FAA.

                               e. Notify Free Flight         No candidate sites for
                               Steering Committee on         expansion have been
                               decision for additional       identified.
                               sites.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
19. Deploy a ground-based      a. Deploy mature components   The evaluation of the PRAT
conflict probe in the near     of present conflict probe     system at ZBW was completed
term to accelerate the         and automated planning        in 9/96. PRAT is a source of
selection and development of   research at selected field    potential requirements for
a conflict probe with          facilities for concept        the follow-on Initial
automated planning aids to     development and evaluation.   Conflict Probe (ICP)
assist controllers in the      (Move from laboratory to      capability. Full evaluation
identification and resolution  field evaluation.) Efforts    of PRAT was handicapped by
of conflicts.                  under way that may lead to    issues associated with
                               operationally deployable      proprietary software. The
                               capabilities include:         field evaluation of the URET
                                                             operational prototype system
                               User Request Evaluation Tool  began in 2/96 at ZID and 6/
                               (URET) at Indianapolis and    97 at ZME and remains in
                               Memphis (ZID and ZME)         progress. Daily use (8 hours
                               Centers,                      per day, 5 days per week) of
                                                             URET began at ZID in 9/97
                               Prediction Resolution         and at ZME in 11/97 using
                               Advisory Tool (PRAT) at       the baseline software
                               Boston (ZBW) Center,          version D2.1. Evaluation of
                                                             the Interfacility Automation
                               User Preferred Routing        (IFA) version D3.0 between
                               Conflict Probe (UPR) at       ZID and ZME began in 10/97
                               Denver (ZDV) Center, and      and was completed in 2/98.
                                                             D3.0 (without IFA) was
                               Free Flight Evaluation Work   implemented as the daily use
                               Station at Kansas City (ZKC)  software in 2/98. Daily use
                               Center.                       was expanded to 12 hours per
                                                             day in 3/98.

                                                             D3R3, a component of D3a1,
                                                             to correct Red Route
                                                             Processing and Airport
                                                             Arrival Stream filtering,
                                                             was delivered in 2/98 and
                                                             evaluated in 3/98 and 4/98.
                                                             D3R3 became the daily use
                                                             software in 5/98. The
                                                             remainder of the D3a1 (now
                                                             D3a since the D3a2 delivery
                                                             was eliminated) was to be
                                                             delivered in 7/98.

                                                             A preliminary Systems
                                                             Specification and
                                                             algorithmic definition
                                                             documents for key
                                                             algorithmic areas have been
                                                             developed on the basis of
                                                             URET evaluations done to
                                                             date and evaluation reports.

                                                             The initial technology
                                                             transfer process from MITRE/
                                                             CAASD to FAA and its
                                                             development contractors for
                                                             DSR ICP was completed in
                                                             late 1997. Technology
                                                             transfers continue on the
                                                             additional functionality. A
                                                             MITRE Technical Assessment
                                                             Report positively assessed
                                                             the URET operational concept
                                                             and also identified the need
                                                             for substantial re-
                                                             architecture and re-coding
                                                             of the software for full
                                                             scale DSR ICP development.
                                                             URET is presently regarded
                                                             as a source of requirements
                                                             and algorithms for both ICP
                                                             and Future Conflict Probe
                                                             (FCP).

                                                             An initial field trial of
                                                             the UPR Transition Airspace
                                                             Tool was conducted as a
                                                             research activity at ZDV in
                                                             9/96. Simulations using the
                                                             UPR Transition Airspace Tool
                                                             with controllers were
                                                             conducted in 11/96. A
                                                             "shadow mode" (office area)
                                                             version of the UPR
                                                             Transition Airspace Tool was
                                                             installed at ZDV in 12/96.

                                                             A full field evaluation of
                                                             the UPR Transition Airspace
                                                             Tool was completed by NASA
                                                             at Denver in 9/97. A process
                                                             for technology transfer of
                                                             the UPR Transition Airspace
                                                             Tool additions to CTAS Build
                                                             2 was initiated in 5/97. The
                                                             UPR Transition Airspace Tool
                                                             is viewed as a source of
                                                             requirements and reusable
                                                             components for the FCP
                                                             initiative.

                                                             The Free Flight Evaluation
                                                             System (FFES) is a MITRE/
                                                             CAASD research activity at
                                                             ZKC looking at long-term
                                                             requirements for automation
                                                             to support free flight. No
                                                             detailed FAA explanation of
                                                             FFES is planned. FFES is in
                                                             the concept exploration
                                                             stage. FFES is viewed as a
                                                             source of requirements for
                                                             the FCP capability and later
                                                             enhancements.

                               b. FAA, with users and        FAA's development strategy
                               NATCA, will develop an        for ICP has been focused on
                               incremental plan and concept  the URET operational
                               for deploying components of   prototype, user acceptance,
                               conflict probe prototypes to  and display refinement. A
                               improve functionality. This   URET implementation
                               plan will identify            viability assessment was
                               procedural and regulatory     completed in 12/96. MITRE/
                               changes and agreements that   CAASD is continuing to
                               will be needed to address     refine detailed technical
                               issues of operational         requirements for key areas;
                               deployment.                   these areas include
                                                             Interfacility Automation
                                                             (IFA) and conflict
                                                             probability prediction.

                                                             Options being explored for
                                                             the ICP implementation
                                                             included re-architecting
                                                             URET as an integral part of
                                                             DSR to achieve the initial
                                                             DSR ICP requirements and
                                                             specifications.

                                                             A formal investment decision
                                                             (JRC) on full-scale
                                                             implementation of DSR ICP
                                                             was scheduled for 3/98 but
                                                             postponed because of the
                                                             Core Capabilities Limited
                                                             Development Free Flight
                                                             Phase 1 (CCLD FFP1)
                                                             initiative. Data collected
                                                             for the JRC include cost,
                                                             benefits, schedule, and
                                                             technical requirements
                                                             baseline data. This includes
                                                             a benefits assessment
                                                             conducted at the ZID DySim
                                                             in 1/98.

                                                             FAA has been analyzing a
                                                             recommendation by RTCA/ATA
                                                             for deploying URET to five
                                                             additional sites. The
                                                             proposed ARTCCs are
                                                             Cleveland, Atlanta, Chicago,
                                                             Memphis, Kansas City,
                                                             Washington, and
                                                             Indianapolis. The proposal
                                                             includes options for URET as
                                                             a stand-alone system similar
                                                             to the ZID and ZME
                                                             installations or integrated
                                                             with DSR.

                                                             Either would include
                                                             functionality equivalent to
                                                             URET D3.1. ATO and NATCA
                                                             have indicated that a single
                                                             display, keyboard, and
                                                             pointing device would be
                                                             required, necessitating an
                                                             integrated architecture.
                                                             Deployment schedules
                                                             continue to evolve to
                                                             support funding profiles and
                                                             DSR schedules. The initial
                                                             daily use of CCLD URET
                                                             (Build 1) is estimated for
                                                             11/01 and Build 2 for 10/
                                                             02. The benefits analyses of
                                                             CCLD will drive FAA's
                                                             decisions for deployment of
                                                             an ICP or ERATMDST.
                                                             Currently, the intention is
                                                             to deploy the initial FCP 12
                                                             months after FSD of DSR ICP.

                                                             Activities leading to the
                                                             development of a
                                                             specification for the FCP
                                                             (integrated ICP/DA/TMA)
                                                             system was initiated in 4/
                                                             97, with the initial draft
                                                             specification to be released
                                                             in 3/99. Operational
                                                             evaluation of this system
                                                             will evolve from a basic
                                                             capability of ICP being
                                                             provided to the R-Side and
                                                             Traffic Management Advisor
                                                             to the D-Side, up to and
                                                             including integration and
                                                             similar capabilities
                                                             available to both D-and R-
                                                             Sides.

                               c. With users and NATCA, FAA  FAA's development strategy
                               will evaluate limited         for ICP has been focused on
                               deployment prototypes and     the URET operational
                               will determine if, where,     prototype. The initial URET
                               and when it will be possible  technology transfer from
                               to implement components of    MITRE/CAASD to FAA and its
                               those prototypes to provide   contractors is complete.
                               benefits before DSR           MITRE/CAASD is continuing to
                               implementation. (Move from    refine the detailed
                               prototype to local            technical requirements for
                               operational deployment.)      key areas of the ICP
                                                             capability; these areas
                                                             include Interfacility
                                                             Automation (IFA), automated
                                                             coordination, and conflict
                                                             probability prediction.

                                                             The implementation of ICP
                                                             was planned as the first
                                                             Pre-Planned Product
                                                             Improvement (PPPI) for DSR,
                                                             6 months following FSD. A
                                                             formal investment decision
                                                             (JRC) was planned for full-
                                                             scale implementation of ICP
                                                             by 3/98 but was deferred to
                                                             accommodate FFP1 planning.
                                                             Cost, benefit, schedule, and
                                                             technical requirements
                                                             baseline data are being
                                                             collected to support a
                                                             decision for ICP.
                                                             Most recent planning calls
                                                             for URET CCLD as part of the
                                                             FFP1 initiative. With the
                                                             establishment of a System
                                                             Program Office (SPO) to
                                                             manage the CCLD FFP1, the
                                                             direction after URET CCLD
                                                             Build 2 is still evolving.
                                                             Options would include a
                                                             nationally deployed DSR ICP
                                                             or FCP.

                                                             Preliminary benefits
                                                             analyses are based on
                                                             limited experimentation at
                                                             Indianapolis ARTCC. Baseline
                                                             measures for ATM with and
                                                             without automation decision
                                                             support tools are being
                                                             developed.

                                                             The URET operational
                                                             prototype was installed at
                                                             all sectors at ZID and ZME
                                                             by 1/98. It was expanded
                                                             from 8 hours a day, 5 days
                                                             per week, to 12 hours per
                                                             day. It is intended to be
                                                             available 16 hours a day, 5
                                                             days per week. The initial
                                                             goal of 16 by 7 will be
                                                             dependent on funding
                                                             availability. Daily use of
                                                             URET began at ZID in 9/97
                                                             and ZME in 11/97.

                               d. Implement components of    FAA's deployment strategy
                               conflict probe prototypes to  for ICP has been focused on
                               provide benefit before DSR    the URET prototype. User
                               implementation. (Move from    acceptance and display
                               local deployment to national  refinement are more advanced
                               deployment.)                  for the URET system than
                                                             other candidate systems. A
                                                             URET implementation
                                                             viability assessment was
                                                             completed in 12/96. MITRE/
                                                             CAASD is continuing to
                                                             refine the detailed
                                                             technical requirements for
                                                             key areas of the ICP
                                                             capability; these areas
                                                             include IFA and conflict
                                                             probability prediction.

                                                             Options explored for the ICP
                                                             implementation were using
                                                             URET software, re-
                                                             architecting URET as an
                                                             integral part of DSR, or re-
                                                             using portions of various
                                                             systems and prototypes
                                                             (e.g., CTAS, UPR, URET) to
                                                             achieve DSR ICP
                                                             requirements. The decision
                                                             was made to use URET.

                                                             In 3/98, FAA began
                                                             evaluation of an RTCA/ATA
                                                             recommendation to deploy
                                                             URET "as is" to five
                                                             additional centers. The
                                                             stand-alone URET will
                                                             continue to be used at ZID
                                                             and ZME and because of the
                                                             DSR schedule, will not be
                                                             deployed to additional
                                                             ARTCCs. The CCLD FFP1
                                                             initiative plans to deploy
                                                             URET CCLD to seven ARTCCs to
                                                             permit a robust evaluation
                                                             of user benefits and support
                                                             of free flight.

                                                             A formal investment decision
                                                             (JRC) on the full-scale
                                                             implementation of ACD-D was
                                                             scheduled for 3/98 but
                                                             deferred pending a
                                                             recommended position on
                                                             FFP1. Data being collected
                                                             for the JRC include costs,
                                                             benefits, schedules, and
                                                             technical requirements
                                                             baseline information.

                                                             The URET operational
                                                             prototype was installed "as
                                                             is" to all sectors at ZID
                                                             and ZME in 1/98. It expanded
                                                             to 12 hours, 5 days per
                                                             week, in 4/98 and is to
                                                             evolve to 16 hours per day,
                                                             5 days a week. Daily use
                                                             began at ZID in 9/97 and ZME
                                                             in 11/97. Daily use in at
                                                             least three areas was to be
                                                             achieved at both ZID and ZME
                                                             by 9/98. As of 6/98, all
                                                             sectors at ZID are approved
                                                             for use, and four of five
                                                             areas at ZME have been
                                                             approved. Well over half the
                                                             controllers have been
                                                             trained and the remainder
                                                             will be trained by 12/31/
                                                             98. A critical
                                                             functionality, two-way Host
                                                             interface, is scheduled for
                                                             delivery to the WJHTC in 10/
                                                             98 and the ARTCCs in 12/98.

                                                             The daily-use URET system
                                                             will continue to be used to
                                                             gather data to support
                                                             operational development of
                                                             the FSD ICP system. The URET
                                                             evaluation systems will also
                                                             support benefits data
                                                             collection as well as
                                                             controller evaluation of CHI
                                                             and functionality.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
22. FAA should support the     a. National Weather Service   The NWS review of processing
Meteorological Data            (NWS) review of processing    options is complete. The
Collection and Reporting       options for aircraft          ARINC Corporation will
System (MDCRS) to enhance the  meteorological data.          continue to decode the ACARS
quality and quantity of real-                                data from the airlines and
time aircraft-reported                                       process it into the MDCRS
weather information.                                         format. The data are
                                                             processed on a platform
                                                             called the ATS server, which
                                                             replaced the TANDEM
                                                             processor. Deployment was
                                                             completed 7/97.

                               b. Memorandum of agreement    The establishment of a
                               on cost sharing between FAA   memorandum of agreement on
                               and NWS.                      cost sharing between FAA and
                                                             NWS has not been formalized.
                                                             However, under the current
                                                             ARINC contract FAA and NWS
                                                             have equally shared the cost
                                                             of developing the new ATS
                                                             server. The ATS server
                                                             processes and sends MDCRS
                                                             data via communication
                                                             circuits to the NWS gateway.

                               c. Industry-sponsored user    ARINC continues to sponsor
                               education program to solicit  user education programs to
                               participation by more         solicit participation from
                               aircraft.                     airlines. Two additional
                                                             airlines are expected to
                                                             provide meteorological data
                                                             in 1998.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
29. Additional expansion of    a. Form a working group       Working groups have been
the NRP below FL 290 should    consisting of industry,       formed and are meeting.
be explored. Accelerate        NATCA, and FAA to identify
modeling and analysis efforts  methods to accommodate user-
needed to facilitate NRP's     preferred routing below FL
continued expansion.           290.

                               b. Conduct modeling and       MITRE/CAASD study complete.
                               simulation to identify
                               impact of increased user-
                               preferred routing below FL
                               290. Evaluate airspace
                               capacity and demand, sector
                               design, controller workload,
                               communication, and
                               information requirements.

                               c. Build on FAA/NATCA         Deferred until enhancements
                               composite direct route        to program are completed in
                               document with fixes for       RTCA recommendation 5.
                               direct routing at lower
                               altitudes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATION                 INITIATIVE                    STATUS\a
-----------------------------  ----------------------------  ----------------------------
32. Begin rule-making to       a. Using existing laboratory  The field test at Houston
remove the 250-knot speed      simulation capabilities,      has provided partial
limit for departing aircraft   evaluate removing the 250-    validation of the
at elevations below 10,000     knot restriction, assessing   operational feasibility of
feet in Class B airspace.      capacity, environmental       modifying or removing the
                               (noise), safety and workload  250-knot speed limit for
                               issues.                       departing aircraft. The
                               ï¿½Initial simulations          results of the preliminary
                                                             evaluation are, for the most
                                                             part, positive. Even where
                                                             metrics indicated some
                                                             effects on the areas
                                                             examined, the results may be
                                                             considered positive in the
                                                             sense that the test did not
                                                             produce any conclusive
                                                             indication that modifying
                                                             the speed restriction is
                                                             unworkable.

                               b. Field test removal of      The field test at Houston
                               restriction at selected       Intercontinental began 6/
                               airports.                     26/97. On the basis of
                                                             preliminary evaluation, FAA
                                                             is recommending that the
                                                             test be extended to a second
                                                             site.

                               c. Remove restriction         Pending completion of field
                               incrementally.                testing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The status of each initiative is as described by the responsible
FAA official.

Source:  FAA.

PROPOSED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES
FOR FLIGHT 2000, RENAMED THE FREE
FLIGHT OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
========================================================= Appendix III

This table describes the proposed operational capabilities contained
in the roadmap for the revised Flight 2000 program that was developed
by RTCA and was submitted in September 1998 to FAA for approval.  A
decision is expected in fall 1998.  Over 70 operational capabilities
were reviewed using four criteria\1 and 9 were selected as essential
for the successful evolution of the NAS.  The revised demonstration
is tentatively planned for implementation between 1999 and 2004.
Each of the nine capabilities is described below, including the
expected operational benefits and the locations where deployment is
planned.

                                                 Expected operational
Operational capability   Description             benefits                  Locations\a
-----------------------  ----------------------  ------------------------  --------------
Flight Information       Use FIS to provide      ï¿½Increased availability   Alaska
Service (FIS) for        pilots and controllers  of flight services
Special Use Airspace     with current and        ï¿½Increased timeliness
(SUA) Status, Weather,   forecasted weather and  and quality of data on
Wind-Shear, Notice to    weather-related         weather and system
Airmen (NOTAM), Pilot    information as well as  status
Reports (PIREP)          the status of SUAs;     ï¿½Increased access to
                         the information will    airspace
                         be displayed            ï¿½Reduced flight times
                         graphically to the      and distances
                         pilot

Cost-Effective           Provide a cost-         ï¿½Increased pilot          Alaska
Controlled Flight Into   effective terrain       awareness of surrounding
Terrain (CFIT)           database and display    terrain
Avoidance Through        in the cockpit          ï¿½Reduction in the CFIT
Graphical Position                               rate
Display                                          ï¿½Increased access to
                                                 low-altitude airspace
                                                 where terrain-imposed
                                                 restrictions exist

Improved Terminal        Use Automatic           ï¿½Improved ability of      Ohio Valley
Operations in Low-       Dependent               crew to accomplish
Visibility Conditions    Surveillance-           approaches at lower
                         Broadcast (ADS-B)\b,    minimums
                         Cockpit Display of      ï¿½Ability of flight crew
                         Traffic Information     to maintain better
                         (CDTI), and Traffic     spacing during Visual
                         Information Service     Flight Rules (VFR) and
                         (TIS) during low-       Instrument Flight Rules
                         visibility approach     (IFR) approaches
                         operations so that the  ï¿½Increased access to
                         flight crew will be     airports
                         better able to          ï¿½Increased arrival
                         identify and judge the  rates
                         distance and speed of   ï¿½Reduced arrival and
                         the aircraft they are   departure delays
                         following               ï¿½Increased
                                                 predictability of
                                                 arrival times
                                                 ï¿½Increased flexibility
                                                 of arrival scheduling

Enhanced See and Avoid   Provide traffic         ï¿½Improved ability of      Ohio Valley,
                         information             pilots to maintain        Alaska
                         electronically to the   awareness of surrounding
                         cockpit using ADS-B,    traffic, even in
                         and CDTI, and TIS or    instrument
                         Traffic Information     meteorological
                         Service-Broadcast       conditions
                         (TIS-B)                 ï¿½Increased safety

Enhanced Operations for  Evaluate the use of     ï¿½Increased access to      Ohio Valley,
En Route Air-to-Air      Cockpit Display of      airspace                  Alaska
                         Traffic Information     ï¿½Reduced flight delays
                         (CDTI) and Automatic    and distances flown
                         Dependent               ï¿½Increased
                         Surveillance-           predictability of flight
                         Broadcast (ADS-B) to    times and distances
                         allow delegation of     flown
                         separation authority    ï¿½Increased flexibility
                         to the cockpit          in routes flown

Improved Surface         Equip aircraft and      ï¿½Improved ability of      Ohio Valley,
Navigation               ground vehicles with a  pilots and vehicle        Alaska
                         moving-map display      operators to navigate
                         that allows pilots and  the airport surface,
                         vehicle operators to    including the ability of
                         "see" all other         pilots to taxi using
                         traffic                 augmented Global
                                                 Positioning System (GPS)
                                                 navigation and maps and,
                                                 in extremely low-
                                                 visibility conditions,
                                                 using Local Area
                                                 Augmentation System
                                                 (LAAS)
                                                 ï¿½Reduced runway
                                                 incursion incidents
                                                 ï¿½Reduced taxi delays
                                                 ï¿½Increased
                                                 predictability of taxi
                                                 times

Enhanced Airport         Equip aircraft and      ï¿½Enables local and        Ohio Valley,
Surface Surveillance     ground vehicles in the  ground controllers to     Alaska
for the Controller       airport movement area   monitor the positions
                         with ADS-B using        and speeds of all
                         augmented GPS-derived   vehicles on the airport
                         positions               surface, even in low-
                                                 visibility conditions
                                                 ï¿½Reduced runway
                                                 incursion incidents
                                                 ï¿½Reduced taxi delays
                                                 ï¿½Reduced arrival delays
                                                 ï¿½Increased
                                                 predictability of taxi
                                                 times
                                                 ï¿½Increased departure/
                                                 arrival rates

Automatic Dependent      ï¿½Use ADS-B to provide   ï¿½Improved controller      Alaska
Surveillance-Broadcast   additional              ability to provide
(ADS-B) for              surveillance coverage   separation services and
Surveillance in Non-     and fill gaps in radar  reduced reliance on
Radar Airspace           coverage                procedural separation
                         ï¿½Examine how ADS-B      ï¿½Increased access to
                         could eventually        airspace
                         replace some radars     ï¿½Increased arrival and
                                                 departure rates
                                                 ï¿½Reduced flight delays
                                                 and distances flown
                                                 ï¿½Increased
                                                 predictability of flight
                                                 times and distances
                                                 flown
                                                 ï¿½Reduced deviations from
                                                 the intended route
                                                 ï¿½Increased flexibility
                                                 in the routes flown
                                                 ï¿½Increased safety

Establish ADS-B Based    ï¿½Integrate ADS-B data   ï¿½Increased efficiency     Alaska
Separation Standards     with radar and          ï¿½Maintained or increased
                         conflict alert to       safety
                         determine if
                         separation standards
                         can be reduced
                         ï¿½Ultimately integrate
                         ADS-B with advanced
                         decision support
                         automation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Selected sites for demonstrations in the Ohio Valley include
Memphis, Tennessee; Wilmington, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; Scott Air
Force Base (Belleville, Illinois); and Nashville, Tennessee.
Additionally, Alaska was chosen as a second location primarily for
the demonstration of the safety aspects associated with the selected
operational capabilities.

\b ADS-B avionics periodically broadcast aircraft position
information derived from GPS augmentations to enable other aircraft
and ground systems to perform surveillance of equipped aircraft on
the airport surface or in terminal and en route phases of flight.

--------------------
\1 In general, under these criteria (1) industry and FAA must address
all aspects of modernization to be successful in moving toward free
flight; (2) expected benefits are the major reason for implementing a
given capability; (3) the capability does not interfere with or slow
down any near-term activities; and (4) the risks associated with
operational capabilities that require the integration of multiple
communication, navigation, and surveillance technologies should be
addressed.

EXPERT ADVISORS ON FREE FLIGHT
========================================================== Appendix IV

Dr.  R.  John Hansman, Jr., Professor of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dr.  Wesley L.  Harris, Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
=========================================================== Appendix V

RESOURCES, COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION, WASHINGTON,
D.C.

John H.  Anderson, Jr.
Monique C.  Austin
Beverly Norwood Dulaney
Elizabeth R.  Eisenstadt
David B.  Goldstein
Belva M.  Martin

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL

David K.  Hooper
*** End of document ***