Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Requires the Secretary of Defense to deliver two reports to Congress within 90 days assessing the feasibility of (1) installing traffic alert and collision avoidance systems (TCAS) and (2) installing automatic dependent surveillance–broadcast (ADS‑B) IN capability in all military rotary‑wing aircraft. Each report must analyze costs, effects on civilian airspace safety, required cockpit configuration changes, implications for combat/training/domestic security operations, and recommend alternatives if installation is not feasible.
Liberal emphasizes civilian safety and transparency benefits
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑scoped reporting requirement that clearly defines the deliverables and required analyses, with a named responsible official and deadline.
Requires the Secretary of Defense to deliver two reports to Congress within 90 days assessing the feasibility of (1) installing traffic alert and collision avoidance systems (TCAS) and (2) installing automatic dependent surveillance–broadcast (ADS‑B) IN capability in all military rotary‑wing aircraft.
Each report must analyze costs, effects on civilian airspace safety, required cockpit configuration changes, implications for combat/training/domestic security operations, and recommend alternatives if installation is not feasible.
Technically narrow and bipartisan‑friendly, but DoD operational/security objections or classification issues could slow or block enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑scoped reporting requirement that clearly defines the deliverables and required analyses, with a named responsible official and deadline. It is specific about what should be analyzed but provides limited procedural and resourcing detail for how the Department of Defense should carry out the studies or handle follow‑up actions.
Liberal emphasizes civilian safety and transparency benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberal emphasizes civilian safety and transparency benefits
Likely views the bill positively as a low‑risk, evidence‑gathering step to improve flight safety for military and civilian aircraft.
Will appreciate requirements to analyze civilian airspace impacts and alternatives when infeasible, while watching for protection of operational needs.
Sees the bill as a pragmatic, narrowly tailored directive to gather facts before policy changes.
Appreciates focus on costs, safety impact, and operational implications; would want clear, evidence‑based recommendations and realistic timelines.
Will generally favor a study rather than an immediate mandate but will be cautious about impacts on mission effectiveness and information security.
Concerned about ADS‑B revealing tactical movements and any downstream regulatory or budgetary pressure to install equipment.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and bipartisan‑friendly, but DoD operational/security objections or classification issues could slow or block enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberal emphasizes civilian safety and transparency benefits
Technically narrow and bipartisan‑friendly, but DoD operational/security objections or classification issues could slow or block enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑scoped reporting requirement that clearly defines the deliverables and required analyses, with a named responsible official and deadline. It is specific abo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.