The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA has raised safety concerns over President Donald Trump’s proposed 250-foot triumphal arch near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). The union, which represents approximately 55,000 flight attendants at 20 airlines, said Wednesday that the structure would add another potential obstacle along the airport’s approach corridor.
Association President Sara Nelson cited unresolved safety concerns following the January 2025 midair collision near DCA that killed 67 people. She also questioned Trump’s recently announced plans to incorporate military capabilities into the structure.
“DCA is already stretched to its limit, we do not need an obstacle taking up space in our flight path,” Nelson told the Associated Press. “Nor should commercial aviation have to dodge military drones, missiles or snipers while attempting to take off or land at Washington National Airport. Safety first always.”
FAA Review
The FAA issued a no-hazard determination for the proposed arch in September, concluding that the structure would not present a hazard to air navigation if appropriately marked. The agency called for an eternal flame atop the arch and floodlights to improve visibility for pilots. The determination preceded Trump’s announcement that the site could also serve as a military facility capable of supporting drones and other equipment.
Project Faces Challenges
The proposal has received preliminary approval from the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, although it has faced opposition from veterans’ organizations, lawmakers and historic preservation advocates. Three veterans and an architectural historian have also filed a lawsuit challenging the project’s approval process, arguing that congressional authorization is required.
The FAA’s aeronautical study remains subject to petitions for review through Oct. 18. The agency’s determination addresses the proposed structure’s effect on air navigation and does not constitute final approval for construction.
Gee, a tall masonry structure on the approach to a busy airport in a congested area, what could possibly go wrong? Tear it down after it is hit by an aircraft? Maybe it could be built horizontally, like a petroglyph and even larger.
It’s laughable that a F/A union is making a public objection to a structure near DCA. Apparently their flight standards, sarcasm intended, department did research and determined that approach and departure path clearways are compromised. Sure glad they’re on top of this. But where is ALPA on this?
In looking at the approach plates and River Visual 19 which is the runway that will be most effected there are already obstacles including one that is 470’ just north of the proposed arch and the current min altitude at the location is 500’ above the arch ( DALLA 780’). So from an aviation perspective I don’t see a problem. BTW, I’ve flown into DC as an airline Captain and I assure you the bigger concern will always be the restricted area that the arch will be just outside the edge of. The arch wouldn’t change my risk assessment on the approach. Just another item to brief.
You may want to look for another reason to oppose it, just sayin.
I haven’t heard anything from ALPA and I’m a member. But looking at the plates I don’t see a problem. RNAV 19 has a fix directly over the proposed location DALLA at 780’. So just an obstacle to brief.