Is there any historical basis for how the traffic to cut is selected? Future flights? Existing flights? Short domestic flights vs international flights?
It’s also unclear what the actual definition of ‘cut’ is
Yes, there's a well-established historical basis through Ground Delay Programs (GDP). The FAA uses "Ration-by-Schedule" delays are allocated based on your scheduled arrival time with adjustments for airline equity.
Flight selection: It affects flights already in the system (filed flight plans), not future bookings. The scope is defined geographically all flights within X miles or specific air traffic control centers get hit proportionally. There's no inherent bias toward domestic vs international; if you're in scope, you're in scope.
What "cut" means: They reduce the Airport Acceptance Rate (AAR) the number of aircraft the airport can handle per hour. So instead of 60 arrivals/hour, maybe it's 54. Your flight gets assigned an Expect Departure Clearance Time (EDCT) basically "don't take off until this specific time" to meter the arrivals.
The system prioritizes keeping planes on the ground rather than having them circle the destination airport burning fuel. Late-filing flights (cargo, charters) get assigned the average program delay first, then compete for any remaining slots.
So if you filed a flight plan to LaGuardia and there's a 10% cut, you're getting a controlled departure time calculated by the Flight Schedule Monitor software based on your original schedule, airline equity, and current delays.
Of course, that assumes that this won't be politicked. I would not at all be surprised to see them kneecap NYC, Chicago and any other cities that are doing something the current white house doesn't like.
The sibling comment has a more structured reply to the whole process, but of note the article specifically mentions the FAA has exempted international flights.
Presumably airports would prioritize whatever flights pay the highest fees. Not that I’m an expert or anything, but I’d assume that small regional flights are going to be the first to get cut.
I’m not positive how this will be implemented but typically airport authorities work with airlines on this subject. The airport authority will likely tell airlines instead of 50 aircraft per hour we can only handle 45 and leave it to the airline to determine where to cut. The result is likely to be the same as what you’ve indicated. Airlines are not going to slash their most profitable routes so the reductions will almost certainly be smaller markets.
I have travel scheduled next week and I fear what this might do to my itinerary. Really hoping the Govt sorts itself out before then but there’s been almost no indication that is going to happen.
Ironically this might be one of the most green actions the US has ever made
That would be the COVID shutdown.
I'm in favor of cutting air traffic at night.
Is there any historical basis for how the traffic to cut is selected? Future flights? Existing flights? Short domestic flights vs international flights?
It’s also unclear what the actual definition of ‘cut’ is
Yes, there's a well-established historical basis through Ground Delay Programs (GDP). The FAA uses "Ration-by-Schedule" delays are allocated based on your scheduled arrival time with adjustments for airline equity.
Flight selection: It affects flights already in the system (filed flight plans), not future bookings. The scope is defined geographically all flights within X miles or specific air traffic control centers get hit proportionally. There's no inherent bias toward domestic vs international; if you're in scope, you're in scope.
What "cut" means: They reduce the Airport Acceptance Rate (AAR) the number of aircraft the airport can handle per hour. So instead of 60 arrivals/hour, maybe it's 54. Your flight gets assigned an Expect Departure Clearance Time (EDCT) basically "don't take off until this specific time" to meter the arrivals.
The system prioritizes keeping planes on the ground rather than having them circle the destination airport burning fuel. Late-filing flights (cargo, charters) get assigned the average program delay first, then compete for any remaining slots.
So if you filed a flight plan to LaGuardia and there's a 10% cut, you're getting a controlled departure time calculated by the Flight Schedule Monitor software based on your original schedule, airline equity, and current delays.
Of course, that assumes that this won't be politicked. I would not at all be surprised to see them kneecap NYC, Chicago and any other cities that are doing something the current white house doesn't like.
Of course the deep state would have a well-crafted and equitable contingency plan.
> the deep state
What does this even mean?
A term for unelected federal employees that have enough autonomy that they carry on what they're doing regardless of which party is in power.
Which sounds kind of ominous but really, it's just the civil service.
I used it tongue in cheek. It is a right wing pejorative for career government employees.
The sibling comment has a more structured reply to the whole process, but of note the article specifically mentions the FAA has exempted international flights.
Presumably airports would prioritize whatever flights pay the highest fees. Not that I’m an expert or anything, but I’d assume that small regional flights are going to be the first to get cut.
I’m not positive how this will be implemented but typically airport authorities work with airlines on this subject. The airport authority will likely tell airlines instead of 50 aircraft per hour we can only handle 45 and leave it to the airline to determine where to cut. The result is likely to be the same as what you’ve indicated. Airlines are not going to slash their most profitable routes so the reductions will almost certainly be smaller markets.
I have travel scheduled next week and I fear what this might do to my itinerary. Really hoping the Govt sorts itself out before then but there’s been almost no indication that is going to happen.
I wonder if foreign airlines are going to demand compensation, like US airlines have done in the past when a country made one sided changes.
This is very French!
It was air traffic issues that ended the [now] 2nd longest shutdown during Trump's first term, right?
They could just...pay the air traffic controllers.
Airlines would pay them all personally if they were permitted.
[flagged]
> to win multiple elections around the country.
So voters across the country have come to the conclusion that the Democrats aren’t to blame.
You don’t always get comments that contain their own rebuttal, but when they happen they just bring a tear to your eyes.
Going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are a Russian propaganda llm.
The other side has refused to convene the House and put through a compromise that would open the government.
All because they don't want the Epstein client list released.