Saab's Remote Tower system has taken over a conference room at Leesburg Executive Airport for testing.
Thousands of small US airports lack air-traffic control towers. And many operate just fine that way—pilots are trained to communicate with one another to signal their intent to land or take off.
But Leesburg Executive Airport is growing, and it already operates in crowded and tightly regulated airspace. The FAA predicts that Leesburg will serve a combined 116,000 takeoffs and landings this year, and more than 200,000 by 2040. (Compare that to a mere 76,000 in 1990.) To boot, Leesburg falls under DC’s Special Flight Rules Area, meaning it’s subject to flight restrictions put in place after 9/11. So an air-traffic control presence could help the airport, just 40 miles west of DC, serve as a portal to more people flying in and out of the Washington area. But building a tower for air-traffic control would cost about $8 million or so.
The answer may be Saab—yes, the car company that inspired cries of front-wheel-drive hatchback lovers when it was dissolved, a casualty of the General Motors bankruptcy reorganization. Saab never really died—its defense and security operations were separate and live on. And in Leesburg it has partnered with the Virginia Department of Aviation (VDOA) to test its Remote Tower technology, which allows an air traffic controller in another location to direct planes during landing and takeoff.
Remote Tower uses high-definition cameras (14 at Leesburg) to create a real-time, simulated view of the airspace surrounding the airport—not unlike what an air-traffic controller might see out of an air-traffic control tower—displayed on a screen at a remote location.
“We’ve taken over the conference room in the terminal building and we’ve turned it into an air-traffic control tower,” says Keith McCrea, executive director of the Virginia STATSLab (Small Aircraft Transportation System), the division of the VDOA that’s partnered with Saab on the test. “Saab put up what they call their ‘Crow’s Nest’—and it is indeed on a tower, on a pole basically—above the airport administration building.” It supports the cameras that provide controllers a view of the environment around the airport.
In this first stage of testing, which began in August and is wrapping up in the coming weeks, controls are passively “measuring their ability,” says McCrea, to control the airplanes coming and going from Leesburg. They are not actually conducting control operations remotely—yet. If the test is successful, it could revolutionize air traffic control (or the lack thereof) at small airports nationwide.
“Multiple airports could theoretically be controlled through a central control facility,” says McCrea. So at some point in the future, a bunch of small airports could pool resources and control their air traffic from one centralized, virtual facility.
The remote system is already in use at Ornskoldvik Airport in northern Sweden, where a dozen or so commercial planes land every day. The cameras’ feeds are monitored at a control center more than 75 miles away. But, says McCrea, “there’s no real test until it’s tested in the US,” because our air space is so much more crowded and complex.
And whereas most new technologies of this magnitude have the potential to displace humans, Remote Tower could actually add more air traffic controllers—albeit, remote ones—monitoring the airspace around facilities that otherwise would have no air-traffic control. Saab and VDOA partnered with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association for the testing.
How’s it looking so far? There’s been “nothing systematically troubling,” according to McCrea. If testing continues to go well, the stystem will be operational—on a testing basis—next year. But as for when the system can operate with FAA certification is, ahem, up in the air. Saab’s North American spokesman John Belanger is optmistic and hopes for a late-2016/early-2017 rollout. But McCrea is doubtful: “Nothing is accepted [by the FAA] when it comes to an implementation or technique unless it’s been dragged through every possible safety net you can conjure up. We’re looking at a couple years anyway, and likely longer.”
Leesburg Airport May Soon Have Remote Air Traffic Controllers
"Nothing systematically troubling" during phase one of testing.
Thousands of small US airports lack air-traffic control towers. And many operate just fine that way—pilots are trained to communicate with one another to signal their intent to land or take off.
But Leesburg Executive Airport is growing, and it already operates in crowded and tightly regulated airspace. The FAA predicts that Leesburg will serve a combined 116,000 takeoffs and landings this year, and more than 200,000 by 2040. (Compare that to a mere 76,000 in 1990.) To boot, Leesburg falls under DC’s Special Flight Rules Area, meaning it’s subject to flight restrictions put in place after 9/11. So an air-traffic control presence could help the airport, just 40 miles west of DC, serve as a portal to more people flying in and out of the Washington area. But building a tower for air-traffic control would cost about $8 million or so.
The answer may be Saab—yes, the car company that inspired cries of front-wheel-drive hatchback lovers when it was dissolved, a casualty of the General Motors bankruptcy reorganization. Saab never really died—its defense and security operations were separate and live on. And in Leesburg it has partnered with the Virginia Department of Aviation (VDOA) to test its Remote Tower technology, which allows an air traffic controller in another location to direct planes during landing and takeoff.
Remote Tower uses high-definition cameras (14 at Leesburg) to create a real-time, simulated view of the airspace surrounding the airport—not unlike what an air-traffic controller might see out of an air-traffic control tower—displayed on a screen at a remote location.
“We’ve taken over the conference room in the terminal building and we’ve turned it into an air-traffic control tower,” says Keith McCrea, executive director of the Virginia STATSLab (Small Aircraft Transportation System), the division of the VDOA that’s partnered with Saab on the test. “Saab put up what they call their ‘Crow’s Nest’—and it is indeed on a tower, on a pole basically—above the airport administration building.” It supports the cameras that provide controllers a view of the environment around the airport.
In this first stage of testing, which began in August and is wrapping up in the coming weeks, controls are passively “measuring their ability,” says McCrea, to control the airplanes coming and going from Leesburg. They are not actually conducting control operations remotely—yet. If the test is successful, it could revolutionize air traffic control (or the lack thereof) at small airports nationwide.
“Multiple airports could theoretically be controlled through a central control facility,” says McCrea. So at some point in the future, a bunch of small airports could pool resources and control their air traffic from one centralized, virtual facility.
The remote system is already in use at Ornskoldvik Airport in northern Sweden, where a dozen or so commercial planes land every day. The cameras’ feeds are monitored at a control center more than 75 miles away. But, says McCrea, “there’s no real test until it’s tested in the US,” because our air space is so much more crowded and complex.
And whereas most new technologies of this magnitude have the potential to displace humans, Remote Tower could actually add more air traffic controllers—albeit, remote ones—monitoring the airspace around facilities that otherwise would have no air-traffic control. Saab and VDOA partnered with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association for the testing.
How’s it looking so far? There’s been “nothing systematically troubling,” according to McCrea. If testing continues to go well, the stystem will be operational—on a testing basis—next year. But as for when the system can operate with FAA certification is, ahem, up in the air. Saab’s North American spokesman John Belanger is optmistic and hopes for a late-2016/early-2017 rollout. But McCrea is doubtful: “Nothing is accepted [by the FAA] when it comes to an implementation or technique unless it’s been dragged through every possible safety net you can conjure up. We’re looking at a couple years anyway, and likely longer.”
Most Popular in News & Politics
Washington DC’s 500 Most Influential People of 2025
Rock Creek Isn’t Safe to Swim In. RFK Jr. Did It Anyway.
Johnson Says Congress Will Fix DC’s Budget Eventually, Pete Hegseth Used Signal More Than We Thought, and Locals Won Pulitzers
Jeanine Pirro: 5 Things to Know About the Fox News Host Trump Picked to Be DC’s Top Prosecutor
Trump Fires Librarian of Congress, Fox News Host to Be Next Top DC Prosecutor, Possibly Rabid Actual Fox Terrorizes Arlington
Washingtonian Magazine
May Issue: 52 Perfect Saturdays
View IssueSubscribe
Follow Us on Social
Follow Us on Social
Related
DC Might Be Getting a Watergate Museum
DC-Area Universities Are Offering Trump Classes This Fall
Should the Park Service End Rock Creek Parkway’s Reversible Lanes?
Viral DC-Area Food Truck Flavor Hive Has It in the Bag
More from News & Politics
Meet the Duck Whisperer of DC
Rock Creek Isn’t Safe to Swim In. RFK Jr. Did It Anyway.
Humorless Scolds Fret About Trump’s Free Plane From Qatar, RFK Jr. Swam in Rock Creek, and We’ve Got 20 New Restaurants for You to Get Excited About
This Pop-Up Museum Is All About the Teenage Experience
Jeanine Pirro: 5 Things to Know About the Fox News Host Trump Picked to Be DC’s Top Prosecutor
Trump Fires Librarian of Congress, Fox News Host to Be Next Top DC Prosecutor, Possibly Rabid Actual Fox Terrorizes Arlington
9 Embassies to Check Out During the EU Open Houses This Weekend
Trump Yanks Ed Martin’s Nomination