Near-miss between commercial flight and B-52 bomber sparks AI air traffic control debate

A SkyWest commercial flight narrowly avoided colliding with a B-52 bomber while approaching Minot International Airport in North Dakota on July 20, with the pilot making an “aggressive maneuver” to prevent disaster. The incident highlights critical gaps in air traffic control systems and raises questions about whether AI could prevent similar near-misses, particularly at smaller airports that lack radar technology and rely on visual monitoring by controllers.

What happened: SkyWest Flight 3788’s pilot aborted his approach after spotting a military aircraft on a converging course, despite air traffic control instructions to turn right.

• The pilot told passengers he saw the B-52 bomber crossing their flight path and made the evasive maneuver instead of following the controller’s directive.
• The aircraft landed safely, but the pilot entered the cabin to apologize for the “aggressive maneuver” required to avoid collision.
• This incident occurred six months after a Black Hawk helicopter crashed into an American Airlines passenger jet near Reagan National Airport, killing 67 people.

The radar problem: Minot International Airport’s control tower operates without radar, forcing controllers to rely solely on visual observation of aircraft movements.

• Controllers at the airport depend on their own vision to make air traffic decisions, according to the pilot’s account.
• The nearby Minot Air Force Base does have radar capabilities, but apparently provided no warning about the potential collision.
• Many small airports lack radar or depend on communication from larger airports with radar systems, whether commercial or military.

Why AI matters now: The near-collision amplifies ongoing debates about whether artificial intelligence could improve air traffic control safety or replace human controllers entirely.

• Current air traffic control systems rely heavily on decades-old technology, with some runway lights using 1980s-era systems and controllers still tracking aircraft movements on paper.
• Short-staffed and overworked air traffic controllers monitor thousands of flights daily using largely analog processes that require human beings to guide pilots at every stage of flight.
• AI control systems are currently being tested at London’s Heathrow Airport and Singapore Changi Airport.

The AI debate: Aviation experts remain divided on whether automated systems would create more problems than they solve.

• AI currently lacks the creativity, intuition or adaptability needed to deftly handle any emergency that deviates from historical flight data.
• Increased automation could erode pilots’ and controllers’ ability to make quick decisions while adding another layer of unpredictability to a system already mired in uncertainty.
• Digital air traffic control systems would also face cybersecurity vulnerabilities that don’t exist with current analog approaches.

What experts are asking: The integration of AI into air traffic control raises complex legal and ethical questions about accountability and risk management.

• Could AI be blamed for an accident and how risk-averse would an automated air traffic control system be, researchers questioned in recent analysis.
• The technology could potentially provide the radar-like monitoring capabilities that smaller airports currently lack, but implementation would require addressing significant technical and regulatory hurdles.