The House narrowly defeated a bill that would have mandated ADS-B In in most aircraft flying in most controlled airspace and will almost immediately take up what critics say is a watered-down replacement. The ROTOR Act was before the House in an expedited procedural vote that required two-thirds majority, and it missed by one vote. That act was in response to glaring shortcomings exposed in air traffic management from the investigation into the collision of a Black Hawk helicopter and a regional jet at Reagan National Airport in January of 2025. Although the ROTOR Act appeared to have broad support, on Monday the Pentagon pulled its support for bill and even those who proposed it ended up voting against it, resulting in a 264-133 vote. Instead, the chamber will speed up consideration of the ALERT Act, introduced Monday, which proponents say is more comprehensive, a notion NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy dismissed. “Getting up on the House floor and saying ‘we implemented all the N.T.S.B. recommendations’ is false,” she said.
The Defense Department has consistently opposed rules in the ROTOR Act that would limit its latitude to turn off ADS-B when it considers running dark to be an operational necessity. Meanwhile, top House members predicted the ALERT Act could be put to a vote as early as next week. That measure includes a mandate for aircraft now required to have TCAS to eventually be equipped with ACAS-X, an emerging technology that uses more advanced algorithms to more accurately predict conflicts between aircraft. But the ALERT Act is likely to meet headwinds in the Senate and Sen. Ted Cruz, who proposed the ROTOR Act, said he wasn’t giving up on it. He vowed to see it passed and said the families of victims of the DCA crash and the traveling public “deserve nothing less.”
Meanwhile, aviation groups are considering the implications of the various scenarios, and AOPA says it supports expanded use of anti-collision technology as long as it’s used for its intended purpose. “At the same time, we believe Congress must also address the misuse of ADS-B data by passing the Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act to prohibit the use of ADS-B collision avoidance technology to collect fees from pilots,” the organization said in a statement. The National Air Transportation Association said it would support whatever safety legislation the politicians settle on.
If the FAA stopped broadcasting identifying , ownership,and specific information about ADSB equipped aircraft no would have any reason to “run dark “
As I’ve said before the ONLY thing the public needs ( not really but) is that an aircraft is in that particular 3 dimensional position. It matters not who it is.
The RJ was running ADS-B in and out, but the chopper wasn’t even monitoring ADS-B in. The ROTOR act would have required ADS-B installations in all aircraft in this incident, but would allow the chopper to go silent (and just watch) if there were security concerns. Once again, our Representatives have demonstrated their alliance to the wrong folks.
ROTOR is down for now. ALERT is maybe. DFR is still a concept.
That is where we are.
ROTOR would have expanded visibility. More aircraft receiving traffic data. Fewer unknowns. The House vote didn’t clear the two-thirds hurdle, so it stalled.
ALERT may move forward. It upgrades the safety net, smarter collision-avoidance logic when aircraft are already converging. Useful, but reactive.
DFR is different. It is not a box. It is not an alert. It is a redesign of how traffic gets organized, especially in the lower bands where drone density is rising: shared position and intent, defined lanes, geo-fenced boundaries, automated deconfliction before things get tight.
Yes, DFR is years away. It takes standards, certification, enforcement, and real engineering. It is not plug-and-play.
But here is the uncomfortable part: if traffic volume keeps growing, visibility alone will not scale. A better last-second warning will not scale. Controllers cannot absorb unlimited targets just because the screen is clearer and the alarms are smarter.
So the short version is: ROTOR improves the picture. ALERT improves the rescue. DFR improves the structure.
If we are serious about the future, the structural conversation has to start now, not after density forces it on us.
(Click on the image to expand).
(careful, reads like an AI written passage)
I’ve been writing about DFR for a while.It is an interisting topic.
https://avbrief.com/theres-vfr-ifr-and-now-dfr/
Repubs that voted against it will be primaried this fall.
Primaries in the United States typically occur in the spring, Kiddo.
Can we not just get along and don’t slam into each other? Asking for a friend.
This is not a technical problem. ATC had every opportunity to deconflict but didn’t and gave that responsibility away to PAT25. The RJ did everything right. ADSB is not the issue.
Predictable. Not that ADS-B would have prevented the DC collision, but if there is “operational necessity” to turn off ADS-B broadcast, operations should be in a MOA or a similar piece of airspace, or a TFR should be placed. Routine training and transporting fatcats aren’t good enough reasons to just turn off the position reporting everyone else is required to use at all times if the position reporting system is for safety.