Air travel is generally considered quite safe, according to performance data gathered over multiple years. Yet, some recent incidents, such as the near-miss involving a Delta plane and a regional jet in Mexico City, have made people wonder if the current risks are greater than what historical data would suggest.
In light of these concerns, it’s no surprise that “smart” technology has started making its way into aviation.
Tools like Smart Landings and Smart Runways are designed to enhance safety by assisting pilots during takeoffs and landings, as well as while navigating the airport grounds. These systems fall under the oversight of Air Traffic Control. But, since human error still plays a role in monitoring, mistakes can and do happen.
Does the label “smart” guarantee better performance, or is it simply a marketing gimmick?
The Federal Aviation Administration tracks errors and potential issues across all air traffic. They categorize instances of runway incursions. In 2024, there were 1,758 reported incidents—around 146 per month. Although this might sound alarming to the average traveler, considering the total of about 45,000 flights each day, these events are statistically rare.
Nonetheless, even infrequent incidents can lead to accidents.
The FAA classifies runway incursions by their severity. Most of these events fall into Categories C and D, which indicate that while planes might be out of position, there’s usually enough time to avert a collision. These are monitored, and the risks to planes and passengers are generally minimal.
On the other hand, Categories A and B are more serious and pose a real risk to safety. The close call in Mexico City was classified as a runway intrusion of this kind.
Out of the total 1,758 incursions in 2024, only 9 were categorized as A or B—less than 1% of all incidents. Had any of those resulted in an accident, it would likely have spurred calls for regulatory changes.
Smart technologies aim to give pilots more user-friendly information to help reduce pilot error, which accounts for about 80% of aviation accidents.
Pilot error occurs when a pilot strays from standard procedures or commands from air traffic control. Smart technology aims to alert pilots about these deviations, allowing them extra time to correct their course and prevent potential accidents.
If this technology can indeed lessen pilot errors, one would think it could lead to safer overall air travel. But how do we measure this increased safety?
Southwest Airlines has recently adopted these technologies in their fleet of Boeing 737 planes, providing a testing ground to evaluate their effectiveness.
However, given the infrequency of runway incursions—especially serious ones—analyzing the benefits can be tricky. If only one aircraft is equipped with smart technology, it complicates understanding how well it performs.
As more airlines implement this tech, reports may start to emerge from Southwest Airlines pilots about its advantages, but anecdotal evidence alone won’t establish a clear causal link. A broader implementation across the industry would assist in reducing the risks of incursions, but it would be even easier to quantify if the FAA mandated such technology for all planes in U.S. airspace.
Just because a system is labeled as “smart” doesn’t automatically guarantee better performance. The critical question remains: how does it stack up against traditional systems? Measuring improvements is a challenge, particularly with rare occurrences like near-misses.
Sheldon H. Jacobson, PhD, is a professor of computer science at Grainger College of Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
