Sep 16, 2026, 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM (America/New_York)

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.https://meet.goto.com/790699981

You can also dial in using your phone.

Access Code: 790-699-981

United States: +1 (571) 317-3122

Get the app now and be ready when your first meeting starts:

https://meet.goto.com/install

CAM Credit

This free GoToMeeting event is open to anyone who would like to participate. If you are a CAM or working towards becoming a CAM, the NBAA CAM Governing Board has approved a 1/4 point CAM credit for all participants. In order to get the CAM credit we request that you logon to GoToMeeting via computer/table so we can record your name for submission to NBAA.

AGENDA

• Michael Graham, NTSB Vice Chairman – “When the Expected is Not Respected”: Every day decisions impact your margin of safety. Vice Chairman Graham will address the practices necessary to ensure that unexpected events lead to a safe outcome. NTSB
• Shelby Balogh, GE Aviation Principal Analytics Engineer, will present the most current data defining the locations and prevalence of KTEB TCAS Resolution Advisories, and outline possible solutions to mitigate this hazard. Safety Operating Systems
• Sherri Smith, PANYNJ Airport Manager, and Scott Marsh, AssistantAirport Manager, will provide an Airport Operations update. PANYNJ
• Matt Petersen, FAA Air Traffic Manager, Teterboro ATCT will review best practices to maximize safety and efficiency. FAA 
• Gabe Andino, Avports Noise Abatement and Environmental Compliance Manager will provide a brief update on all matters Noise. Avports
• Ralph Tamburro, PANYNJ Airport Delay Reduction Program Manager,will provide an update regarding delay mitigation initiatives at Teterboro and throughout the NY Metroplex. PANYNJ
  
   
• Please make every effort to participate, and invite others from your organizations. All are welcome!

Feel free to send any questions or suggestions with respect to these planned presentation

The post 3rd Qtr TUG Meeting Agenda, Wed, Sept 16, featuring NTSB Vice Chairman Michael Graham and GE Aviation Principal Analytics Engineer Shelby Balogh appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

Q: When executing the RNAV(GPS)-Y Rwy 19 there exists a “disconnect” at UNVIL between the ATC cleared altitude of 2000’ and the published altitude of 2100’.

 A: This is not done at TEB ATCT, but on approach. From NY TRACON: [The reason that the controllers do this is because the airspace at 3,000 over UNVIL we do not own. It belongs to the N90 LGA Sector. So essentially, we have an approach that was designed within approach parameters however this internal airspace consideration was missed.]

Q: The ILS-Z Rwy 6 DANDY crossing restriction is 1300’. Please confirm that following the GS from outside of DANDY will lead an aircraft to cross this waypoint high.

A: Regarding the crossing restriction at DANDY, the glide slope is higher than the published crossing restriction. The reason for the lower altitude restriction at DANDY is primarily related to departures out of EWR that overfly the area while climbing.

We have experienced issues with slow climb rates from EWR departures. When an aircraft established on the RWY 6 final does not cross DANDY at the published lower altitude, we can lose the required vertical separation with the EWR departure.

I am not a procedures developer, so I cannot speak to whether there is an opportunity to modify the glide slope or otherwise adjust the procedure. However, this is the operational reason TEB has the lower crossing restriction at DANDY. Any potential modification would need to ensure that the necessary separation from EWR departure traffic can still be maintained.

Q: Since the publication and implementation of the WENTZ 1 SID, are operators correctly honoring the restriction to cross WENTZ at 1500’?

When looking at the WENTZ1 departure, it has been a significant improvement compared to the previous RUUDY departure. Since implementation of the WENTZ1, we have seen a noticeable reduction in altitude restriction deviations. While deviations still occur from time to time, they are significantly less frequent than what we experienced with the RUUDY departure.

The primary issue we continue to see with the WENTZ1, similar to what we experienced with RUUDY, is that aircraft will occasionally become airborne and make a left turn that places them directly in conflict with overhead EWR arrival traffic, resulting in a potential loss of separation. The aircraft generally appear to remain at the 1,500-foot restriction while making the turn, but the turn itself creates the conflict.

I am not a pilot and am not familiar with the specific functionality of the equipment and flight management systems being used in the cockpit. Based on what we are observing operationally, it appears that in some instances the departure SID may not be loaded or entered correctly, resulting in the aircraft turning toward a fix rather than following the published SID.

I would ask that this observation be brought forward during pilot and operator discussions as a reminder for pilots and copilots to carefully verify the procedure being entered and displayed prior to departure. TEB operates in an extremely congested airspace environment, and an unexpected turn or climb that differs from the published procedure can very quickly result in a separation issue.

Q: Have you any thoughts to share regarding the high incidence of TCAS RAs along the RYW 19 final approach course and transition from the northwest.

 A: As you know, we are also continuing to work on the TCAS RAs occurring along the RWY 19 final. I am hopeful that the work currently underway will result in additional changes and improvements to the overall operation.

Last but not least, some operators fail to secure an FBO reservation, contributing to gridlock and associated delays during high volume days.

The issue of FBO reservations and ramp capacity is a challenging one from an ATC perspective. ATC is not in the business of determining which aircraft are permitted to arrive at TEB or which FBO an aircraft may use. Once an aircraft is on the ground and advises ATC where it is parking, we take that information at face value and taxi the aircraft to the FBO of its choice.

This has been a recurring issue for TEB for many years, and as we move into our busier season, I am hopeful that users will make appropriate reservations and adhere to their scheduled arrival and departure times. Effective reservation management is critical to keeping aircraft moving efficiently both on and off the airport.

When a gridlock situation develops, there are several questions that unfortunately cannot be answered by ATC. For example:

• Did the FBO overbook its available ramp capacity?
• Did the aircraft have a reservation?
• Did the aircraft simply arrive and proceed to its normal FBO without a reservation?
• Are aircraft arriving outside of their scheduled reservation times?
• Is the FBO experiencing an unexpected surge in demand?

While these factors may contribute to the problem, ATC is ultimately left managing the operational consequences.

It is never an ideal situation to have double-digit numbers of aircraft held on active taxiways for extended periods while waiting for parking to become available at an FBO. TEB simply does not have the available taxiway real estate to hold large numbers of aircraft for extended periods of time.

When this occurs, frequency congestion increases, operational efficiency decreases, and the potential for a safety event increases. Additionally, holding aircraft for extended periods creates significant impacts for other users who may have reservations at different FBOs or need to access the airport for legitimate operational purposes.

We are actively working with all of the FBOs, TEB Airport Operations, and PANYNJ to get ahead of these situations. We have established daily communication with the FBOs and are working to obtain reservation numbers and better understand anticipated ramp demand. This information is extremely helpful in allowing ATC and airport stakeholders to anticipate potential problems before they develop. However, if aircraft arrive without reservations or outside of the information provided to us, the reservation numbers only provide limited insight into the actual demand on the ramps.

There are also occasions when FBOs issue PPR NOTAMs when they anticipate being extremely busy or when they are unable to accommodate additional unscheduled aircraft on their ramps. These measures can be very helpful in managing demand, and I encourage users to remain aware of applicable NOTAMs and FBO requirements before departing for TEB.

From an ATC perspective, we are not in a position to shut down the entire airport because one FBO has reached gridlock. Doing so would negatively impact every other user and FBO on the field in an attempt to address an issue affecting one location. Our goal is instead to work collaboratively with the FBOs, airport management, PANYNJ, and users to identify these issues early and prevent them from reaching a point where ATC has no reasonable place to hold additional aircraft.

Q: At times, when we call ground for taxi at TEB, we can go several calls without acknowledgement. I think the simple answer for why this happens is obvious, they’re busy and we get that. However, just wondering if this has come up from any other operators, and if we are to assume ground has heard us? Or should we continue calling until we receive acknowledgement? More concerned with the local customary position on this.

A: It could be a few things, maybe the ground controller is busy, and they are working on things in an order of necessity before getting back to aircraft who are not moving yet.  Examples would be, they coordinated crossing reference arrivals or departures, and they do not want to miss the gap.  At that point, the ground controller will almost block out people calling to ensure that they get the crossing done safely.  

Another possibility is that we do currently have 4 people training on the ground control position and they are still getting used to the volume.  In those cases, maybe they are a little behind, and they are moving people out the best they can safely.  

And last, there is a chance your call was not heard or mistaken for a different call sign. 

My suggestion is if you make a call and time passes where you feel you are being skipped then call again. I know some people may tell you they know, but you don’t know that and there is a chance they missed it.  Please do not take this personally, if you are told they know you are waiting or tell you to stand by it is most likely due to one of the scenarios above.  I wish we could get everyone moving right away but that is not always the case, there may be traffic opposite direction of your ramp, some kind of coordination happening not on frequency that you are not aware of so the GC can not respond right away or they are just behind and trying to catch up.  If you are waiting for what seems like a long time and others are checking in, call again.  I will say give it a little time for the response but if you feel you were not heard then call. 

Matthew J PetersenAir Traffic Manager TEB ATCT (A)Air Traffic Services (AJT) / NY DistrictU.S. Department of Transportation(201) 419-3484 (cell)(201) 426-9457 (work)Matthew.J.Petersen@faa.gov

The post Ask the Tower Manager appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

Thursday, August 27th – Friday, September 04th

Runway Closures

Monday, August 31

Runway 01/19 Closure

0630L-1200L (1030-1600Z)

Tuesday, September 01

Runway 01/19 Closure

0630L-1200L (1030-1600Z)

Wednesday, September 02

Runway 06/24 Closure

0630L-1200L (1030-1600Z)

All closures are contingent upon traffic volume, Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) requirements, and weather conditions.

Jakub Lengowicz, ACE

Construction, Wildlife and Security Supervisor 

Airport Operations – Teterboro Airport

111 Industrial Avenue | Teterboro, NJ 07608

P: 201.393.7650

C: 551.352.4560

Operations: 201.393.4081

Teterboro Airport (TEB)

The post Airport and Runway Closures This Week appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

From Insight to Impact: Embedding Safety in Every Decision This is your opportunity to take the stage at the 2027 Business Aviation Safety Summit, happening April 20–21 in Tampa, Florida, U.S. Join business aviation leaders from around the world as they share practical solutions, proven strategies, and lessons learned that are advancing safety across the industry. This year’s theme — From Insight to Impact: Embedding Safety in Every Decision  — is centered on turning knowledge into action. We’re looking for presentations that showcase what works, backed by operational experience, data, and measurable outcomes that offer practical takeaways that attendees can apply within their own organizations. If your work is helping strengthen safety across business aviation, consider submitting a proposal in one of these focus areas: Safety Intelligence & Data-Driven Decision-Making, Artificial Intelligence & Decision Support, Safety Culture Beyond Compliance, Human Factors & Human Performance, Operational Resilience, Leadership for Safer Operations, Emerging Technologies & Advanced Air Mobility, Lessons Learned From Real-World Events. SUBMISSION DEADLINE:Sept. 11, 2026 Submit Your Speaker Presentation Today   Questions can be directed to Megan Helsel: helsel@flightsafety.org Registration Opens November 2026 Date: April 20-21, 2027 BASS 2026 is organized by Flight Safety Foundation in partnershipwith the National Business Aviation Association and NATA.   BASS 2027 HOST SPONSOR FOR EXHIBITOR OR SPONSOR INFORMATION, CONTACT: Elizabeth Allingham, Senior Conference Specialist: allingham@flightsafety.org Kerry Benik, Director, Marketing & Events:benik@flightsafety.org Events Team: events@flightsafety.org Flight Safety Foundation members bolster our collective voice and allow for us to remain the only independent, impartial, and international safety advocate for the aviation and aerospace industry. Become a Member Today!AeroSafety World FSF EventsAsia Pacific Centre for Aviation SafetyAviation Safety NetworkMember BenefitsFSF Officers and StaffContact Membership View email in browser Flight Safety Foundation, Inc. · 1920 Ballenger Ave · 4th Floor · Alexandria, VA 223146913 · USA update your preferences or unsubscribe

The post Flight Safety Foundation Business Aviation Safety Summit 2027 appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

https://www.flightglobal.com/events-webinars/2026/04/future-of-aviation-tackling-the-threats-to-navigation-resilience

The post FlightGlobal Webinar on Navigation Resilience appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

The post NY Terminal Area Chart Update to Include KTEB Caution appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

Next Steps

The U.S. Aviation Safety Team (USAST) has asked the General Aviation Issue Analysis Team and General Aviation Joint Safety Committee to initiate a safety risk assessment for the increasing Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System – Resolution Advisories (TCAS RAs) along the final approach corridor for RWY19 at Teterboro (TEB). The goal of the assessment is to identify and quantify the risk of the TCAS RA events, document proposed mitigations, and provide a report back to the USAST for next steps.

This assessment is expected to occur April 28^th – April 30^th, 2026, with a virtual kickoff meeting to occur in early April. The FAA, TUG and NBAA will participate in the SRA process, and we’ll provide further updates as necessary and appropriate.

The post FAA Publishes Special Notice to KTEB Chart Supplement – Mar 19, 2026 appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

We strongly encourage Operators to become familiar with a VGF and an Extended Visual Segment by reviewing InFO 24005, Instrument Approach Operations with a Visual Guidance Fix (VGF) and an Extended Visual Segment.

The procedure will be advertised on ATIS whenever the approach is in use, and pilots should advise ATC if they are unable to accept it.

No specific pilot training or operator authorization or operations specification is required to use an RNP approach procedure with a VGF and an extended visual segment; however, the approach must be in the navigation database.

The FAA introduced public Required Navigation Performance Approach (RNP APCH) procedures that offer the flightcrew continuous advisory lateral and vertical guidance in an extended visual segment leading to the landing runway threshold in 2019, in response to a request from the Commercial Aircraft Safety Team (CAST). These approach procedures feature a final approach track offset from the runway centerline and a published visual ground track beginning at the VGF which includes reference waypoints and recommended altitudes.

This type of approach is already available at:

• Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (KDCA), Area Navigation (RNAV) (Global Positioning System (GPS)) runway (RWY) 33, 
• John F. Kennedy International Airport (KJFK), RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 13L and RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 13R, and 
• LaGuardia Airport (KLGA), RNAV (GPS) X RWY 31.

The post KTEB RNAV (GPS) Rwy 1 Introduction, Feb 19, 2026 appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

• Altitude change at DANDY from 1500 to AT 1300. New Transition from COATE TO ELIZE, STW to ELIZE TO ALIDA TO WAWAH VINGS. VINGS crossing altitude AT 2000. New crossing altitude at MALCN 3000. Cancels T-NOTAM !FDC 5/4001.
• Approval Request for Mandatory altitudes at VINGS and DANDY due to adjacent airport departure crossing restrictions.
• Waiver Request for Maximum Altitude Restriction In Missed Approach Segment.

Please be especially vigilant to honor these new requirements.

The post Changes to KTEB ILS Z or LOC Z Rwy 06 Include New Mandatory Altitudes appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.

Currently the tower has flashing white lights at the top and midway down the tower.  These are operational 24/7. 

However, the lighting manufacturer is working to address a problem with the red flashing lights, which typically would be used at night.  Currently, they can’t get the red flashers to operate while the Radio station is broadcasting. 

A NOTAM has been issued, but it generically indicates that the Obstruction Light is unserviceable – which is true of the red lights.  But I hope this email provides some additional clarification.  

!TEB 12/286 TEB OBST TOWER LGT (ASR 1046247) 405250.00N0740410.00W (1.9NM NNW TEB) 691.6FT (652.6FT AGL) U/S 2512192259-2601192359

The Obstruction Evaluation Specialist will keep us updated on any changes.

Please share this info as you see fit,

Kathy Moclair-Shea

NYAPIO Integration Officer, AEA-1SP

NY Area Program Integration Office

Email:  Kathleen.moclair-shea@faa.gov

NYAPIO WEBSITE:  www.faa.gov/go/nyapio

The post Obstruction Lighting on ABC Tower – Update Jan 6, 2026 appeared first on Teterboro Users Group.