The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is suspending the use of visual separation between helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft in some of the nation’s busiest airspace, requiring controllers to instead use radar to maintain standard separation, the agency announced Wednesday.
The change applies to Class B and Class C airspace as well as Terminal Radar Service Areas, where helicopter traffic frequently crosses arrival and departure paths near major airports.
Under the new general notice (GENOT), controllers will no longer rely on pilots to “see and avoid” other aircraft in these environments. Instead, they will actively manage traffic using defined lateral or vertical separation standards.
Federal officials said the move follows a year-long safety review that identified an overreliance on visual separation in high-traffic areas—particularly where helicopter and airline operations intersect.
“Today, we are proactively mitigating risks before they affect the traveling public,” said FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford, noting that recent analysis found the practice contributed to close calls between helicopters and airplanes.
The agency cited a near-conflict between an American Airlines flight and a police helicopter in San Antonio, and a similar event involving a Beechcraft 99 and a helicopter near Hollywood Burbank Airport. In both cases, the aircraft were on converging paths before last-minute evasive maneuvers.
The policy shift comes in the wake of the 2025 midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, which prompted a broader review of mixed helicopter and fixed-wing operations across the National Airspace System.
Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy said the agency is continuing to implement reforms following that accident, including the use of data analysis tools to identify risk areas nationwide.
The agency has already implemented similar restrictions in the Washington, D.C., area over the past year, including limits on helicopter routes and expanded use of ADS-B requirements. The new directive effectively extends those safety measures nationwide.
Although not made clear in the article, the reader can infer that controllers are now tasked with providing IFR separation standards between helicopters operating VFR and IFR traffic in all of class B and C airspace. While this may be an effective way to address a safety issue, it does increase the workload of controllers operating a system that is already stressed and understaffed.
There was a specific VFR helicopter corridor involved in the Washington, D.C. accident. Its initial design set up a hazardous operation and numerous subsequent incidents and safety reports over a span of years brought no change. Many other VFR corridors exist in busy airspace around the country that are well designed and work quite well. It would seem that redesigning this one early on may have been effective in mitigating this situation as well.
Mr. Bedford’s statement that the F.A.A. is “proactively mitigating risks before they affect the traveling public” rings false to me. I’m thankful that action was taken after a recent analysis was done as opposed to a knee jerk reaction, but that analysis was not done until after a fatal accident occurred. The investigation of which disclosed that a hazardous situation was known to exist for years beforehand.
All this reminds us that the F.A.A. has a mandate to cooperate with other government agencies such as the Department of Defense. Both of these agencies are subject to political influence. This works in a constitutional government operated by people guided by honest and integrity, but I’m not sure that still exists.
Seems like another, albeit smaller, knee jerk reaction that has a simple and better solution rather than what has been put before us here. I fail to see the overall benefit in this decision.
The FAA will not pick a fight with DOD (DOW) over military helicopters in commercial class B or C airspace. With every state having at least one military operation area (MOAs), no reason exists for military helicopters to fly in commercial airspace. Commercial helicopters have never had a problem following IFR procedures in class B airspace, to my knowledge. So this article is dodge, distracting from the real problem, military helicopters in commercial airspace; which should never happen. Get your Congressman to tell DOD, no more military helicopters in commercial airspace, period!!! Enough is more than enough of this crapolla! If Congress needs to make another law to tell DOD (DOW) to stay out of commercial airspace, so be it! Way, way too much waffling on this subject!!!
It wasn’t so much an issue of “see and avoid”, as an issue of “using the see-and-avoid phrase as an excuse to boldly and blindly go anywhere I want to go without paying attention to anyone” on behalf of some (military) pilots, and a case of “hey look I can use these 3 words to absolve myself of any and all responsibility, knowing very well I will receive an aircraft in sight response instantaneously but we all understand each other we are big boys right” on behalf of (some) controllers. It was an attitude issue, not a regulatory issue. Hence, the regulatory solution may or may not work, perhaps partially. I sure hope it does, but mostly I hope every instructor is now very clear on how NOT to abuse freedoms as loopholes, and pass that on to all airspace users.