Newark International Airport (EWR) has been in the news over the past several months, and not in a good way. The airport has struggled with operational issues, with the situation being the worst in the late spring and early summer.
This was due to a combination of factors, including runway construction, a shortage of air traffic controllers, and technological issues. So far, we’ve seen the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) limit flights at the airport through the end of 2025. There’s now a plan to extend that through late 2026, and that has major implications for airlines.
In this post:
Newark Airport could see flight cap through late 2026
Currently, the FAA has a policy in place to reduce the flight arrival and departure rate at Newark Airport through December 31, 2025. The FAA is now proposing extending restrictions through the end of the summer 2026 IATA season, which is through October 24, 2026. Specifically:
- While runway construction takes places (typically Saturdays through the end of the year), Newark is currently limited to 28 flight arrivals and 28 flight departures per hour
- Outside of runway construction periods, Newark is currently limited to 34 flight arrivals and 34 flight departures per hour
- The FAA is now proposing a limit of 36 flight arrivals and 36 flight departures per hour between January 1 and October 24, 2026
For context, historically Newark has seen up to 40(ish) flight arrivals and departures per hour, so 36 movements per hour would be an increase over the current cap, but still represent a reduction over the standard cap. As the FAA describes this:
While the FAA continues to address the staffing challenges at EWR and evaluate longterm options for EWR, the FAA tentatively intends to extend and amend the June 2025 order to mitigate congestion, delays, and cancellations at EWR for the Winter 2025/2026 and Summer 2026 scheduling seasons.
Since the June 2025 order took effect, the status of the staffing pipeline for PHL has not materially changed. In the absence of the FAA’s extension of the order, the FAA anticipates a return of the staffing-related delays that precipitated the voluntary schedule reductions reflected in the June 2025 order.
As you can see, the reason for the continued reduction in flights is due to a lack of air traffic control staffing. How bad is the staffing issue?
Presently, PHL’s targeted staffing number remains 114 Certified Professional Controllers (CPCs); the current onboard number at PHL is 82, representing 71.9 percent staffed. Within PHL, Area C’s targeted staffing number is 46 CPCs, with its current staff of 22 CPCs representing 48 percent staffed. Under an arrangement by the previous administration, by the end of July 2026, 14 CPCs currently assigned to Area C will return to the New York Terminal Radar Approach Control facility (N90), which previously oversaw the Newark area. ATO is taking action to replace those 14 CPCs. PHL now has a total of 31 trainees, with 26 assigned to Area C.
For those curious about the reference to Philadelphia (PHL), it’s because Newark approach is staffed from there, which was supposed to be a solution to many of Newark’s problems a while back (though that didn’t end up being the case).
These seem like sensible but sad capacity cuts
Unfortunately I think extending these capacity cuts at Newark Airport is necessary, given the reality of what we’ve seen in recent months. It’s more important for airlines to be able to operate reliably, rather than just scheduling as many total flights as possible, even if they can’t actually operate on-time.
So while I think the change is sensible, it’s also sad. You have one of the two international airports serving one of the most important cities in the United States being artificially capacity constrained because we don’t have enough air traffic controllers. If that doesn’t reflect the neglect our air traffic control system has seen for years, then I don’t know what does.
United is obviously most impacted by these changes, given that the carrier has a fortress hub at Newark. So, how do we think executives at the airline feel about these capacity cuts? They’re probably very happy:
- For one, it’s important to United that the airline can operate reliably out of Newark, since the airline doesn’t want Newark to be in the news every other day for a meltdown; we know United’s Q2 2025 financial results took a hit because of the Newark miss
- By further limiting capacity, United will have even more of a dominant position in the market, and will have more pricing power; it’s good to be the dominant airline at an airport where competitors can’t add capacity
Bottom line
The FAA plans to extend flight cuts at Newark Airport all the way through late October 2026, in light of ongoing air traffic control issues. We saw the situation at Newark get really bad in late spring, due to a combination of runway construction, air traffic control shortages, and technological issues.
While it’s sad that we’re at the point where we have to restrict airport operations due to a lack of staffing, this ultimately seems logical enough, since smooth operations should be the priority. I’m sure United is happy to see this, given the pricing power that it’ll give the airline out of Newark, plus the ability to keep out competitors.
What do you make of these Newark flight cut extensions?
The EWR capacity cuts are the direct result of UA's overscheduling of EWR for decades and CO before.
UA controls 65% or more of flights from EWR and has as long as they operated the hub - just as CO did before.
UA could have fixed the poor on-time at EWR via less overscheduling any time they wanted.
Scott Kirby trashed the DOT and FAA for its handling of the ATC transfer and the DOT's...
The EWR capacity cuts are the direct result of UA's overscheduling of EWR for decades and CO before.
UA controls 65% or more of flights from EWR and has as long as they operated the hub - just as CO did before.
UA could have fixed the poor on-time at EWR via less overscheduling any time they wanted.
Scott Kirby trashed the DOT and FAA for its handling of the ATC transfer and the DOT's response was to cut capacity for all carriers at EWR via private proposals; Kirby demanded slot controls be returned and EWR is not more heavily schedule coordinated than it was before but not slot controlled.
The schedule caps at EWR have cost UA heavily in market share.
For the month of June (which included part of the closure of one of EWR’s runways), EWR’s on-time for domestic flights was 68.2% while LGA was at 80% and JFK was above that. So far, there has been no improvement of on-time. EWR still has more hours of ATC delays than LGA or JFK, all of which have had above average levels of ATC delays this summer.
The capacity cuts have allowed DL to handedly become the largest airline from NYC – serving all 3 airports. UA carries more international passengers but DL carries 1/3 more domestic passengers; guess which part is more important for corporate travel?
For June, DL operated 37% more flights from NYC's THREE airports than UA. DL carried 11% more total passengers and 28% more domestic passengers.
UA can spin it any way they want but the notion that they are happy with the capacity cuts is simply not in line with actual data.
EWR on-time is not better and, even if it will be eventually, it will be by a small percentage. NYC airports have below average on-time than the rest of the country. Being the least ugly is not a selling point.
DL's advantage in number of flights has grown even larger with the biggest advantage in domestic passengers.
UA's fans loved to talk about UA had an advantage in having the most ASMs and revenue from NYC but that is likely no longer the case with the difference in passengers carried and flights.
The irony is that Kirby negotiated the DL-USAirways DCA/LGA slot swap almost 15 years ago which gave DL a large advantage at LGA and JFK and DL's NYC strategy has now beat Kirby once again, overtaking UA which not only doesn't serve JFK but which touted EWR as a single airport hub for NYC which clearly no single NYC airport can be.
The value of adequately funding something doesn't become apparent until something goes wrong. Like other vital infrastructure services, Air traffic control needs to be adequately funded.
LGA is also international, albeit with a smaller footprint (Canada and Caribbean).
Also Bahamas and TCS (which are not in the Caribbean).
Kirby's groveling supplicant routine is yielding returns!
The EWR ATC fiasco is exemplary of everything that is wrong with America's creaky, aging, outdated infrastructure. EWR simply cannot handle the volume of traffic that it did prior to the reductions and absent a miracle, it will likely be a permanent reduction. The silver lining is that outside of weather, which seems to impact EWR a lot more than LGA and JFK operations, UA can run on time at EWR for the most part.
Ben - any perspective on the flip side of two things you’ve highlighted? Aka financial impact of the raw capacity cuts United will have to make as result of these restrictions? Thanks!
Your FAA quote references PHL several times. Typo?
@ Barb -- Sorry for the confusion. It's not a typo, it's because Newark approach is staffed remotely from Philadelphia, which is why staffing there is relevant.