Technology and Scienceupdated 50m ago3 min read
FAA Expands SMART AI Advice to All 22 Centers After Nationwide Ground Stop
“‘We’re looking at that,’ Mullin told the reporter, referring to SMART.”
“However, a human team of FAA specialists based in DC is ultimately responsible for validating the SMART system recommendations”
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
FAA expands SMART AI advisory system to all 22 U.S. air-route centers nationwide The $875 million program is intended to cut delays and fuel use across national airspace
Save coverage image
SMART expands, then ground stop
The Federal Aviation Administration expanded its SMART AI tool to advise air traffic controllers across the entire national airspace system, and the agency said the rollout would cover “all 22 centers across the country” after an initial deployment in the National Capital Region. The FAA said SMART, formally the Strategic Management of Airspace, Routes and Trajectories, helped reroute 180 flights since being implemented in airspace over Washington, DC, on September 21, saving an average of 10 minutes per flight and almost 80 gallons of fuel per flight. The FAA then issued an extremely rare nationwide ground stop, ordering “all aircraft, including those about to take off, will remain on the ground until further notice” after a communication problem affecting all Air Route Traffic Control Centers.
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told reporters that “there is no sign that it is a cyberattack,” and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the FAA technicians were investigating the problem and would provide immediate updates. The ground stop came days after the SMART expansion, while the FAA said SMART cannot replace the critical role air traffic controllers play or take over control of an aircraft.
Union, lawmakers, and denials
The National Air Traffic Controllers Association said it was not involved in the “design, testing, or implementation of SMART,” and it told Flying magazine it therefore could not speak to SMART’s effect on the air traffic control workforce. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy blamed the nationwide halt on a “communication issue impacting all Air Route Traffic Control Centers,” and the FAA said technicians were investigating the incident. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told reporters, “So far, there are no indications that this is a malicious attack against us,” and he added that “it is only a telecommunications disruption.”
The FAA said a team of agency specialists based in Washington validates SMART’s output before it reaches air traffic control facilities, while local controllers decide whether to accept any suggestion. The FAA’s SMART rollout faced congressional scrutiny, as 25 lawmakers asked the FAA and the Transportation Department to pause the deployment in the Washington region until the agency answered questions about testing, training and post-deployment oversight.
What’s at stake next
Airlines and passengers faced immediate disruption as the ground stop left more than 3,000 aircraft in the air over the country, with about 8,000 flights delayed and more than 350 canceled, according to Flight Radar. The FAA said international flights destined for the US would be studied on a case-by-case basis, and the agency’s advisory notice said “All departing flights must remain on the ground until further notice.” The FAA’s SMART expansion also carried longer-term stakes because the agency described SMART as a cloud-based system combining “weather patterns, flight paths, traffic flow and controller staffing metrics” to predict air traffic patterns.
The FAA’s contract for SMART sat inside a $12.5 billion air traffic modernization fund Congress approved in July 2025, and the Transportation Department sought another $30 billion with a goal to largely complete the work by December 2028. The FAA and its supporters framed SMART as an efficiency tool, while the labor union and lawmakers pressed for oversight, including questions about whether the AI could interfere with experienced controllers’ judgment or “hallucinate safety-critical information.”