Thousands of buildings could be forced to change if the Federal Aviation Administration gets its way, according to USA Today. That source has reported on the proposal that would require tall buildings placed in flight paths to shrink in order to make maneuvering easier and more efficient for pilots.
These regulations would set a cap on the height of adjacent buildings, and although cities would technically still be able to build even if such a regulation was passed, it would likely discourage most from doing so due to a series of financial repercussions.
In the text of the proposed policy statement posted back in April, the FAA described the way that tall buildings could contribute to accidents in the right circumstances. Charter services might eventually be affected as well as the larger public commercial planes.
"An engine failure could prevent the aircraft from climbing at the normal climb rate and structures near an airport could, under such circumstances, create a safety risk," the statement reads. Later on, the FAA also notes that "the last forty years have shown economic activity and structures only accelerating around airports—creating an ever increasing risk."
However, these assertions have been met with some protest from city planners. ARL Now, a news source based around Arlington, Virginia, quoted local Representative Jim Moran, who dismissed this plan as being motivated primarily by the desire for money, seeing as the kinds of plane accidents this proposal anticipates "never happen."
Regardless, this debate should make one consider whether the plane they are using for transportation has a proper balance between size and functionality. A charter airplane might provide more security when it comes to this.