Viewpoint: Is ATC Privatization Worth Discussing?

Congress just approved $12.5 billion for rebuilding the national air traffic control system. It’s a down payment on what may cost over $31 billion to complete. While the initial funding is an excellent move toward modernization and addressing staffing shortages, it’s only the first step and will require more political willpower to push through.

The New York Times recently accused the private aviation industry of not paying its “fair share” into the system, which was promptly debunked by the NBAA. The argument for or against privatization shouldn’t be based on sensationalized headlines, but rather a rational, fact-based discussion.

As a former Part 135 operator, the idea of privatizing air traffic control was a no-go for me. I thought this was mostly airline jealousy wanting us “little guys” to pay more for the system or take more control of the ATC system for their gains, squeezing us out in the process.

The last serious effort to privatize in 2018 was met with statements from NBAA such as: “For more than 20 years, several big airlines have sought to seize control of our nation’s air traffic control system so they can effectively determine where and when general aviation operators can fly. These airlines want the ability to control where investments in our aviation system are made which represents a significant threat to general aviation.”

At that time, NBAA countered the argument to modernize equipment, saying: “According to the FAA Administrator, over the past five years, NextGen has delivered benefits to the aviation industry and traveling public that are on time and on budget… In recent Congressional testimony, the President of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association said, ‘The U.S. National Airspace System (NAS) is the safest, most efficient, most complex, and most diverse system in the world.’”

It’s been a long time since 2018, and the facts have changed. Controller shortages have widened, modernization has been delayed, and recent accidents and incidents have raised questions about whether our current structure can keep pace.

On Jan. 29, 2025, the illusion of “the safest” system in the world was shaken when a U.S. Army helicopter and an American Airlines flight collided over the Potomac River near Washington D.C. killing everyone on board.  

NTSB Investigator on the crash, Todd Innman, spoke through tears saying, “we have several hundred recommendations open for aviation. You want to do something about it? Adopt the recommendations of the NTSB, you’ll save lives. Get up and do something. I don’t want to have to meet with another set of those parents like that again.”

While the investigation is ongoing, the preliminary report showed “a review of commercial operations (instrument flight rules departures or arrivals) at DCA between October 2021 and December 2024 indicated a total of 944,179 operations. During that time, there were 15,214 occurrences between commercial airplanes and helicopters in which there was a lateral separation distance of less than 1 nm and vertical separation of less than 400 ft.,” according to the NTSB.

Midair collisions are rare, and the accident cannot be attributed solely to the air traffic control system; however, it has served as a catalyst to bring the outdated air traffic control technology and understaffing of controllers to the forefront of the public’s mind. While no governance model can eliminate all accidents, a structure like a nonprofit agency with consistent, long-term funding could address systemic staffing and technology gaps.

Efforts To Modernize

ATC modernization has been a long-term goal. One of the more spectacular failed federal procurement efforts was the Advanced Automation System, an attempt to modernize controller stations and software in the 1980s and 1990s. In 1988, the project was expected to cost $2.5 billion. By 1994, it had ballooned to $7.6 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), with most projects being cancelled or restructured after spending $1.5 billion. Other projects, such as Wide Area Augmentation Systems and STARS, saw their costs triple from the 1990s to 2011.

NextGen, has had its own set of challenges. A National Research Council (NRC) report stated: “the FAA’s NextGen program had not developed adequate plans to achieve fundamental transformations of the National Airspace System (NAS), including decommissioning surveillance radars and automating air traffic control processes.” In 2024, an Office of the Inspector General report stated: “While obstacles remain, including community noise concerns and lack of controller automation tools, FAA has made significant progress implementing high value advanced flight procedures through its metroplex program.”

Long-term capital planning requires consistency. When air traffic control is subject to political whims, both the system and its users suffer.

Ever-Changing Budget Priorities

The National Air Space Safety Review Team (NAS SRT) submitted a report to the FAA administrator in 2023, commissioned due to increases in serious runway incursions. While they cite excellent organizational culture, they claim most of “these challenges, in the areas of process integrity, staffing, and facilities, equipment, and technology, all have ties to inadequate, inconsistent funding.”

The FAA is in an unfortunate position of being subject to the whims of Congress. We see this in the constantly changing leadership, as new presidents select their chosen administrators, and in the push and pull of FAA reauthorization bills that occur every five years. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is a champion of revitalizing the ATC system today, but what happens in the next election cycle when the projects are underway and over budget?

Airlines and Part 135 air carriers pay federal excise taxes, and all aircraft pay fuel taxes to fund the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which typically covers a little over half of the FAA’s budget (depending on the year). The rest relies on Congressional approval.

Beyond federal excise and fuel taxes, airlines and private operators are already paying a heavy price for air traffic controller shortages and antiquated systems. Delays cost operators high fuel bills when they are rerouted across New York state to reach Teterboro, and angry passengers out of south Florida are held for departure when Jacksonville Center can’t handle the traffic flow due to a lack of controllers.

Is Private Better?

Nav Canada is the air traffic organization responsible for managing Canadian airspace; it was established as a private, non-profit corporation in 1996. It charges user fees to run its system, around $1.2 billion Canadian dollars annually. General aviation holds a seat on Nav Canada’s board, and costs are tiered based on aircraft weight and frequency of operations.

While Nav Canada has its own issues with controller staffing, and no model is perfect, it leads in technology development. ADS-B rollout there has been arguably more successful than in the U.S., and the organization is the first in the world to introduce space-based ADS-B tracking in 2019.

The U.S. is now in the minority as a partially taxpayer-funded air traffic control system; in its Document 9082, ICAO recommended that air navigation services should be autonomous and separated from state controls for many reasons, including financial autonomy and long-term planning. Many countries have shifted to public-private partnerships, nonprofits, and other models that create independent boards that decide how to collect funding and spend it wisely. The risk of airline control and ballooning costs for general aviation is real due to imbalances in scale, but with proper controls, it can be mitigated.

To pretend general aviation isn’t already paying for ATC staffing and technology shortfalls in increased safety risks and delays is shortsighted. Next time the discussion arises, let’s approach it with an open mind and engage in a thoughtful conversation. Our system is long overdue for real enhancements and upgrades. Privatization could mean longer-lasting financial support and commitment to long technology horizons, but it must come with careful governance design that doesn’t squeeze out GA. Let’s at least consider it.

Jessie Naor is founder and president of the Private Aviation Safety Alliance, a  nonprofit organization advancing transparency in private aviation (www.flyingprivate.org). Previously, she served as president of GrandView Aviation .