Eight slot-controlled airports — London Heathrow, London Gatwick, New York JFK, New York LaGuardia, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Amsterdam Schiphol, Tokyo Haneda, and Sydney — are compared below.
The clearest pattern is uneven verification: the UK and US models are traceable, with Airport Coordination Limited and the FAA running allocations, but four non-US/UK airports in this set lack confirmed coordinator details in the available sources.
At a glance
- London Heathrow (LHR)
- London Gatwick (LGW)
- New York John F. Kennedy (JFK)
- New York LaGuardia (LGA)
- Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG)
- Amsterdam Schiphol (AMS)
- Tokyo Haneda (HND)
- Sydney (SYD)
The airports compared
1. London Heathrow (LHR)
Airport Coordination Limited runs Level 3 coordination at Heathrow.
Heathrow sits under the UK’s retained version of Regulation 95/93, the same instrument that covers Gatwick. Slot mobility is allowed, but only in specified categories.
One-for-one exchanges and certain transfers still need the coordinator’s confirmation after notification. In practice, the coordinator’s approval is what makes the swap effective.
2. London Gatwick (LGW)
Gatwick shares Heathrow’s ACL-coordinated framework.
The legal mechanics match Heathrow’s. What changes is the commercial pressure: Gatwick is London’s secondary hub, so the slot mix includes more low-cost and charter operations alongside long-haul flying.
3. New York John F. Kennedy (JFK)
The FAA administers JFK slots through FAA orders rather than one codified slot subpart in 14 CFR.
JFK is a US Level 3 airport, but its governing rules come from FAA orders limiting scheduled operations. Any transfer between operators must be cleared by the FAA in advance. The control logic sits with the regulator rather than an independent coordinator.
4. New York LaGuardia (LGA)
LaGuardia follows the same FAA-order model as JFK.
It is the domestic-heavy counterpart to JFK, but the slot mechanics are the same. Worth remembering: the codified 14 CFR §93.227 usage rule belongs to Reagan National, not LaGuardia, even though the two often get lumped together in US slot discussions.
5. Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG)
Coordinator and legal instrument unverified in the retrieved material.
This comparison did not surface a traceable coordinator-plus-regulation pairing for CDG from the primary sources available. It is a major Level 3 hub in the EU system, but the specific national instrument should be confirmed before treating it like Heathrow or JFK. The table keeps the row unverified rather than guessing.
6. Amsterdam Schiphol (AMS)
No verified coordinator or governing rule appears in the material.
Schiphol is often cited as a capacity-constrained EU hub, but the retrieved evidence does not resolve which body coordinates its slots or which Dutch legal instrument carries the framework. Travelers should not assume the UK-style ACL pattern transfers to the Netherlands.
7. Tokyo Haneda (HND)
Haneda’s slot administration remains unverified, including the US DOT award case.
The commonly referenced 2019–2020 US DOT Haneda award proceeding and any later reallocation did not appear in the retrieved official material. That makes carrier-level claims hard to verify. Haneda is a critical Asia-Pacific hub for Western travelers, and its underlying slot controls deserve primary-source checking before specific figures are quoted.
8. Sydney (SYD)
No retrieved act section or instrument pins down Sydney’s slot rules.
Australia’s slot regime exists, but the specific act section the brief asked about was not in the retrieved material. Sydney shows the same gap as Haneda and the two continental hubs: high traveler exposure, no verified coordinator-plus-regulation pairing in this pass. That is not evidence of absent controls, only absent verified detail here.
One additional row deserves attention, because it shows an emerging-market example outside Europe: ANAC Resolution No. 682, issued June 7, 2022, gives Brazil’s regulator power to declare Level 3 coordination, set capacity, monitor use, and apply penalties.
| Airport | Coordinator | Legal instrument giving the framework force | Transfer or exchange rule |
|---|---|---|---|
| London Heathrow (LHR) | Airport Coordination Limited (ACL) | UK retained version of Regulation 95/93; ACL identifies Heathrow as Level 3 coordinated | Specified transfers and one-for-one exchanges permitted subject to notification and coordinator confirmation |
| London Gatwick (LGW) | Airport Coordination Limited (ACL) | UK retained version of Regulation 95/93; ACL identifies Gatwick as Level 3 coordinated | Specified transfers and one-for-one exchanges permitted subject to notification and coordinator confirmation |
| New York John F. Kennedy (JFK) | Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) | FAA order limiting scheduled operations; FAA identifies JFK as a US Level 3 airport | Transfers between operators require prior FAA confirmation |
| New York LaGuardia (LGA) | Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) | FAA order limiting scheduled operations; FAA identifies LaGuardia as a US Level 3 airport | Transfers between operators require prior FAA confirmation |
| Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG) | (unverified) | (unverified) | (unverified) |
| Amsterdam Schiphol (AMS) | (unverified) | (unverified) | (unverified) |
| Tokyo Haneda (HND) | (unverified) | (unverified) | (unverified) |
| Sydney (SYD) | (unverified) | (unverified) | (unverified) |
| Brazilian coordinated airport example | ANAC | ANAC Resolution No. 682, Articles 1, 5, 28, 36 and 43 | Resolution establishes allocation and monitoring rules; transfer provisions for a particular airport were not verified |
| Source: Airport Coordination Limited; Federal Aviation Administration; Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC) | |||
One other absence matters: no primary source in this pass shows an airport dropping slot rationing in favor of air traffic flow management. FAA material does pair strategic slot limits with tactical tools such as ground delay programs and sequencing, but it stops short of showing one replacing the other.
Flight deals
most people never see
Our AI monitors 150+ airlines for pricing anomalies that traditional search engines miss. Air Traveler Club members save $650 per trip per person on average: see how it works.
Each deal saves 40–80% vs. regular fares:
How we picked
Airports came from the brief’s named set. We verified what we could against primary coordinators and regulators: Airport Coordination Limited for the UK, the FAA for the US, and ANAC for Brazil. Paris Charles de Gaulle, Amsterdam Schiphol, Tokyo Haneda, and Sydney remain unverified in the retrieved material.
The global Level 3 total is reported around 215 as of summer 2025, but no primary dataset splits that figure by continent or country. Current as of summer 2025.
Key terms
- Level 3 coordination
- Level 3 coordination is the designation for an airport where demand for takeoff and landing slots outstrips available capacity, so a coordinator must allocate them. It is the most congested tier in the global slot-coordination system, where capacity is rationed rather than left to airlines to schedule freely. Because Level 3 status is what triggers formal allocation, the four airports in this set whose coordinator could not be verified are the ones where travelers have the least visibility into how slots are assigned.
- Regulation 95/93
- Regulation 95/93 is the slot-allocation rule the UK retained, governing how capacity is handed out at coordinated airports. Under it, the coordinator must confirm transfers that fall into specified categories — between routes, among related companies, through corporate acquisitions, or as one-for-one exchanges. At Heathrow and Gatwick, it is the instrument that gives Airport Coordination Limited’s decisions legal force.
- One-for-one exchange
- A one-for-one exchange is a slot swap in which two airlines trade one slot for another. Under the UK’s retained Regulation 95/93, such exchanges are permitted, but the coordinator must be notified and must confirm the swap. At Heathrow and Gatwick, that means a swap agreed between two airlines only takes effect once the coordinator signs off.
- 14 CFR §93.227
- 14 CFR §93.227 is the codified US rule on slot usage at a specific slot-controlled airport. It applies at Reagan National, one of the US airports where slots are limited. It matters in this comparison because it is often wrongly attached to LaGuardia, which — like JFK — is governed by FAA orders rather than a codified subpart.
Questions? Answers.
Which US airports are slot-controlled?
JFK and LaGuardia are the two US airports covered here. The FAA administers their slot allocation through FAA orders limiting scheduled operations, and transfers between operators require prior FAA confirmation.
Who controls airport slots?
At Heathrow and Gatwick, Airport Coordination Limited acts as the coordinator. At JFK and LaGuardia, the FAA runs allocation through FAA orders. In Brazil, ANAC coordinates under Resolution No. 682. The governing body depends on the jurisdiction.
What regulatory framework governs airport slots in Brazil?
ANAC Resolution No. 682, issued June 7, 2022, governs airport coordination in Brazil. Articles 1, 5, 28, 36 and 43 cover coordination, international best practices, coordinated-airport declarations, slot-use monitoring, and penalties.
