Recent runway incursions and near-collisions have reignited urgent discussions about surface safety at U.S. airports, with regulators, industry groups, and manufacturers calling for new technologies and procedures to address what the NTSB has called a critical risk.
According to FAA data, the number of reported U.S. runway incursions—defined as the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle, or person on the protected area of a surface designated for landing and takeoff—has hovered around 1,700 annually for the past six years. In 2024, the agency recorded 1,758 incursions, nearly matching 2023’s total of 1,760 and continuing an upward trend from a pandemic-era dip in 2020 and 2021.
Although most incidents fall under Category C or D (ample time/distance to avoid a collision or no immediate safety impact), a growing number of high-profile Category A and B events—where a collision was narrowly avoided or risked—have captured national attention. These include close calls at New York John F. Kennedy (KJFK), Texas' Austin-Bergstrom (KAUS), and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (KDCA). T
A Crowded Environment
Each day, U.S. air traffic controllers handle approximately 45,000 flights—more than 16 million a year. With the steady rebound of travel post-pandemic, flight volumes are back to pre-2020 levels. Busy commercial hubs such as in Atlanta (KATL), Los Angeles (KLAX), Dallas-Fort Worth (KDFW), Denver (KDEN), and Chicago (KORD) see the highest volumes, but not all incursions happen at the busiest airports.
FAA data shows that pilot deviations are the primary source of incursions, accounting for roughly two-thirds of events. The remaining are split between air traffic controller operational errors and vehicle or pedestrian deviations.
As defined by the FAA, runway incursions are categorized by severity:
Category A: Serious incident; collision narrowly avoided.
Category B: Significant potential for collision.
Category C: Sufficient time/distance to avoid collision.
Category D: No immediate safety consequences.
(Surface incidents, distinct from runway incursions, involve unauthorized movement on the airfield that affects safety but does not occur in the designated runway protection area.)
Over the past 25 years, the U.S. has seen fluctuations in runway incursions, reflecting both challenges and advancements in aviation safety. In 2002, there were 987 reported runway incursions. By 2024, this number had risen to 1,757 (this number could still change as final reports are issued and causes assigned for incidents and accidents currently under investigation).
It’s important to note that while the total number of incursions has increased, the most serious incidents—those classified as Categories A and B—have shown a decrease over the past two decades. For instance, in 2022, there were 18 serious runway incursions, down from a high of 32 in 2007.
Several high-profile incidents have underscored the importance of runway safety. In June 1999, American Airlines Flight 1420 overran the runway upon landing in Little Rock, Arkansas, resulting in 11 fatalities. More recently, in February 2025, a Southwest Airlines flight at Chicago’s Midway Airport had to abruptly ascend to avoid a smaller jet crossing its runway.
Close Calls, Renewed Calls for Action
Among the most serious recent events was a February 2023 incursion in Austin involving a FedEx Boeing 767 on approach and a Southwest 737. Poor visibility prevented air traffic control from seeing the aircraft on the runway, and the FedEx crew initiated a missed approach just in time to avoid collision. The incident reignited calls for better surface detection systems in towers and alerting systems in cockpits.
NTSB board member Michael Graham, speaking at the 2024 Bombardier Safety Standdown, emphasized the importance of procedural discipline and surface awareness. He cited incidents at JFK and Austin as examples of what he called “clear opportunities for cockpit-based runway alerting systems.”
“Since 2000, we’ve been asking for surface detection in towers and alerting systems in the cockpit,” said Graham. “We now have technology that can help, and it’s time to implement it widely.”
The FAA and Industry Respond
In 2024, the FAA released its National Runway Safety Plan 2024–2026, outlining risk-based strategies to reduce surface events. The plan emphasizes collaboration with airport operators, pilots, and manufacturers and aligns with the agency’s safety risk management principles.
In March 2025, the agency convened a General and Business Aviation Safety Call to Action to address runway incursions and other safety issues. Immediate outcomes included increased outreach on phraseology, operations around Class B airspace, and reminders for pilots to use checklists and verify notams. The FAA also committed to analyzing mixed IFR/VFR airspace encounters and expanding tracking technologies in control towers.
At the same time, the U.S. DOT Office of Inspector General released an audit critical of the FAA’s fragmented data-sharing processes, calling for better integration across systems and follow-through on initiatives like the “Technology Sprint.” The FAA has allocated more than $200 million to runway incursion mitigation programs.
Technology in the Tower and Cockpit
The FAA has begun deploying new surveillance tools, including:
- Surface Awareness Initiative (SAI): This offers real-time situational awareness to controllers. It is now operational at airports, including Indianapolis and Austin, with more expected by the end of 2025.
- uAvionix FlightLine: Displays aircraft and vehicle movements via ADS-B signals on detailed airport maps.
- Collins Aerospace STARS ARV: Alerts controllers when an aircraft lines up on the wrong surface or approaches a closed runway.
In the cockpit, manufacturers such as Garmin, Honeywell, and Collins Aerospace are introducing enhanced surface alert systems. Garmin’s SafeTaxi overlays hold-short lines and hotspot indicators on geo-referenced airport diagrams. Honeywell’s Surf-A and Surf-IA systems, using GPS and ADS-B, issue real-time aural and visual alerts of potential conflicts during takeoff or taxi.
These systems offer pilots improved situational awareness and, according to NTSB investigators, could prevent accidents by alerting crews seconds earlier than ATC in some cases.
Recommendations and Next Steps
The NTSB has issued more than a dozen safety recommendations to the FAA in 2024 alone, calling for:
- Cockpit-based verbal callouts before crossing runways
- Better SOPs for managing distractions during taxi
- Flight deck alerting systems for surface hazards
- Mandatory installation of 25-hour cockpit voice recorders
- Expanded deployment of surface surveillance systems
Notably, safety recommendations A-24-4 through A-24-6 call for FAA collaboration with OEMs to develop and mandate cockpit-based surface alerting technologies in both new and existing aircraft.
The FAA has concurred with all recommendations but has yet to implement many of them. Progress has been made on CVR retrofits, thanks to congressional mandates.
Culture and Communication
Beyond technology, safety experts emphasize procedural rigor and clear communication. At the Safety Standdown, Aviation Safety Solutions CEO Amanda Ferraro presented a case study where a lack of internal documentation led to FAA scrutiny and potential violations. “It’s not about blame. It’s about asking, ‘How do we ensure this never happens again?’” she said.
General Aviation Joint Safety Committee (GAJSC) member Jens Hennig echoed that point, praising the FAA’s "From the Flight Deck" video series as a vital resource for pilots unfamiliar with complex airport layouts. “There’s nothing like seeing it visually before you go,” he said.
GAJSC studies also found that most wrong-surface events stem from distraction, inexperience, and expectation bias. “It’s not just pilot error—it’s an opportunity to improve planning, training, and awareness,” the group noted.
The Road Ahead
Efforts to reduce runway incursions are accelerating across the industry. But, with nearly 1,700 incursions annually and a steady stream of close calls, the consensus among regulators, manufacturers, and operators is clear: more must be done.
As the NTSB’s Graham emphasized, “The potential is always there. Vigilance, procedures, and technology together are our best defense.”