Overview
Title
Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-38, V-133, and V-144, and Revocation of VOR Federal Airway V-214 in the Vicinity of Zanesville, OH
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FAA is planning to change some airplane routes and remove a route near Zanesville, Ohio, because they will stop using an old navigation system there; people can share what they think about these changes until January 23, 2025.
Summary AI
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing changes to some air traffic routes involving VOR Federal Airways due to the planned decommissioning of a navigational aid in Zanesville, Ohio. Specifically, they plan to amend VOR Federal Airways V-38, V-133, and V-144, while V-214 would be completely removed. These changes are part of the FAA's initiative to support newer navigation systems. The public is invited to submit comments on this proposal before January 23, 2025.
Abstract
This action proposes to amend Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal Airways V-38, V-133, and V-144; and to revoke VOR Federal Airway V-214. The FAA is proposing this action due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Zanesville, OH (ZZV), VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aid (NAVAID). The Zanesville VOR is being decommissioned in support of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The recent proposal by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), published in the Federal Register, seeks to amend several Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal Airways and completely revoke another. This proposed action is driven by the upcoming decommissioning of a key navigational aid at Zanesville, Ohio, as part of the FAA's initiative to transition to more advanced navigation systems under the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.
Summary
The proposed rule aims to amend VOR Federal Airways V-38, V-133, and V-144 while revoking VOR Federal Airway V-214. Such modifications are part of the broader effort to modernize air navigation systems to better accommodate new technologies, like Performance-Based Navigation (PBN). The amendment is set in motion due to the planned decommissioning of parts of the Zanesville VOR/DME navigational aid, which is integral to several airways. Stakeholders and the general public have been invited to comment on this proposal until January 23, 2025.
Issues and Concerns
Several concerns arise from the proposal. First, the document is laden with technical language and acronyms (e.g., VOR/DME, WINES Fix) that are not easily comprehensible to individuals unfamiliar with aviation-specific terms. This complexity may hinder public involvement in the commentary process.
Additionally, while the proposal indicates that there would be no significant economic impact from these changes, it does not supply a detailed cost-benefit analysis to support this assertion. The absence of such an analysis might raise questions among stakeholders about potential economic ramifications or missed financial considerations.
The document notes that an environmental review will be necessary according to FAA procedures; however, it lacks specifics regarding the scope, process, or timeline of this review. This omission is likely to be of interest to those concerned about environmental impacts linked to changes in air traffic patterns.
Moreover, the logic underpinning the selection of alternative airways and navigation methods for displaced routes is not thoroughly explained. Pilots and airlines might find themselves unclear on the rationale behind these alterations, potentially leading to confusion or operational inefficiencies.
Public Impact
Broadly, the public stands to benefit from enhanced aviation safety and efficiency due to the proposed modernization. Nonetheless, the technical nature of the document could limit public engagement among individuals without aviation expertise. Efforts to demystify the proposed changes could encourage more informed feedback from the public.
Stakeholder Impacts
Specific stakeholders, especially those within the aviation industry such as pilots, airlines, and air traffic controllers, may experience a direct impact from these changes. On the positive side, transitioning to improved navigation systems aligns with the industry's long-term operational goals for efficiency and safety. On the downside, the transition could entail unknown challenges, requiring adaptation to new navigation techniques—efforts that could incur hidden costs if not carefully managed.
Community groups and environmental advocates may have a vested interest in understanding the project's environmental review outcomes. Without clear timelines and outlines for the review process, these stakeholders could be left without essential information to assess the environmental consequences thoroughly.
In conclusion, while the FAA’s proposal represents a necessary step towards advancing air navigation systems, it could be improved by simplifying technical explanations, providing transparency on economic and environmental evaluations, and clarifying the operational impacts on air navigation stakeholders.
Issues
• The document does not clearly outline any associated costs or funding allocations for the amendments and revocation of the VOR Federal Airways, leaving potential financial implications unaddressed.
• The document contains technical jargon and acronyms related to aviation navigation that may not be easily understood by the general public or stakeholders without specialized knowledge.
• While the document mentions environmental review, it does not provide details or timelines for this review, which might be a concern for stakeholders interested in environmental impacts.
• The document references specific radials and fixes (e.g., WINES Fix, GLOOM Fix) without providing a non-technical explanation or visual to aid understanding for those unfamiliar with these terms.
• The rationale for the specific selection of substitute airways and navigation methods (e.g., RNAV Route T-323) is not elaborated, potentially leaving pilots and airlines unclear about their available navigation options.
• The proposal states that no significant economic impact is anticipated, but it does not provide a detailed analysis or evidence to support this claim, which might concern stakeholders about potential unforeseen economic effects.