NAS link down again!
Thread Starter
So close, and yet so far!
Joined: Sep 1998
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
From: Uk
NAS link down again!
Understand the link between NERC and West Drayton has gone down again, with a standard departure time of 1000z being issued for all UK airways departures...
Is this likely to be a regular occurrence?
Is this likely to be a regular occurrence?
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
NERC goes tits up 2
The simple answer is Yes.Whilst NERC / Swanwick continues to rely on NAS, or the link to it, at West Drayton this will happen again and again and again.
Lose NAS (or the link) and NERC goes MANUAL. Getting NERC back to electronic operation is really not possible until the traffic levels are reduced to minimal levels either by waiting until 0200, or slapping on draconian flow measures.
So, until NAS is replaced, the link made more stable, or NERC made to run without NAS, I'm very much sadened to say that yes, this kind of failure will happen again.
The solution? Look WEST, and see what the FAA is doing about replacing NAS in it's facilities.
rgds BEX
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
From: Anywhere
Hardly a safety problem when traffic can't get airborne is it 
Seriously though - this is crazy. The whole world was told it would take 6 weeks to get to full capacity - 12 weeks after changeover and this sort of thing is happening still. The boys and girls at the coalface are doing a great job when it happens, but isn't it time management and the government between themselves had a kick up the arse and injected some real money to sort it - we're behaving like a 3rd world country here
CM
Seriously though - this is crazy. The whole world was told it would take 6 weeks to get to full capacity - 12 weeks after changeover and this sort of thing is happening still. The boys and girls at the coalface are doing a great job when it happens, but isn't it time management and the government between themselves had a kick up the arse and injected some real money to sort it - we're behaving like a 3rd world country here
CM
Last edited by Chilli Monster; 10th April 2002 at 12:35.
.
Beady Eye
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 1
From: UK
In answer to some points raised on here, yes it was originally proposed that NERC worked totally independantly of NAS. It was what the ATC project team members wanted.
However, things are not as simple as getting what you want because it makes sense.
When you are in any phase of a project as big as NERC you cannot simply provide a single solution to the money me. When you prpose a system, or a development, or a change etc. you must not just justify your requirement, but you must give options. Generally the method used is known as an AOD (Analysis, Object, Design).
So you must give a detailed requirement of what you want, how you want it to work and why. But its not enough to simply do that, you have to give a range of options; As an example say you wanted to save more data from the workstations for later examination. You have to detail how you could do it:
1) Send it on the existing LAN (which might overload it, so details required).
2) Build an extra LAN to cope with the greater volume of data flowing.
3) Change the speed at which the processor handles other tasks, to allow your data to be sent.
4) Change the processors for faster ones.
Etc. Etc.
Its not a simple process and there are various stages (hoops!) to go through. At the end of the day you propose your solution, the one you really want, but its not your decision to make. Those that control the purse strings make the final decision based on the AOD they've seen.
Hence, despite it being the project staff's wish not to be lumbered with NAS it was out of their hands.
No idea why NAS flopped again, last time it was an incorrect route amendment which had been input. What the solution to NAS is I don't know but a stable and more reliable replacement is required urgently. However, as we all know, there's no money available for that! Sigh!!
However, things are not as simple as getting what you want because it makes sense.
When you are in any phase of a project as big as NERC you cannot simply provide a single solution to the money me. When you prpose a system, or a development, or a change etc. you must not just justify your requirement, but you must give options. Generally the method used is known as an AOD (Analysis, Object, Design).
So you must give a detailed requirement of what you want, how you want it to work and why. But its not enough to simply do that, you have to give a range of options; As an example say you wanted to save more data from the workstations for later examination. You have to detail how you could do it:
1) Send it on the existing LAN (which might overload it, so details required).
2) Build an extra LAN to cope with the greater volume of data flowing.
3) Change the speed at which the processor handles other tasks, to allow your data to be sent.
4) Change the processors for faster ones.
Etc. Etc.
Its not a simple process and there are various stages (hoops!) to go through. At the end of the day you propose your solution, the one you really want, but its not your decision to make. Those that control the purse strings make the final decision based on the AOD they've seen.
Hence, despite it being the project staff's wish not to be lumbered with NAS it was out of their hands.
No idea why NAS flopped again, last time it was an incorrect route amendment which had been input. What the solution to NAS is I don't know but a stable and more reliable replacement is required urgently. However, as we all know, there's no money available for that! Sigh!!
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Take3 etc...
Perhaps the entire process that NATS uses / has used for system specification and purchase is WRONG.
NERC with all it's woes, and the non-replacement of NAS seem to point to something being not right.
Maybe it's time to simplify the whole process. Now I know that the "can't be done" brigade will be up in arms at any threat to their empires, but take a look at the US. Things get done, largely without too much delay, and with full involvement of NATCA. (Article 48.... I think)
They are actually DOING something about replacing NAS. They are doing it function by function, with no big bang. This lessens the risk. As I understand it we are still "thinking about it". Nothing has actually been done. Perhaps we should be speaking to the FAA, or better still NATCA. RIGHT NOW.
The reason I mention the USA and not Europe so much is because their system is very familiar to UK controllers, right down to DM, PR, AU etc etc messages... because it has its roots in the good old 9020, as ours does.
Europe also offers some practical "turn key" replacements. Talk to Thomson CSF.
Til the next FLOP / Startover.....
Rgds BEX
Perhaps the entire process that NATS uses / has used for system specification and purchase is WRONG.
NERC with all it's woes, and the non-replacement of NAS seem to point to something being not right.
Maybe it's time to simplify the whole process. Now I know that the "can't be done" brigade will be up in arms at any threat to their empires, but take a look at the US. Things get done, largely without too much delay, and with full involvement of NATCA. (Article 48.... I think)
They are actually DOING something about replacing NAS. They are doing it function by function, with no big bang. This lessens the risk. As I understand it we are still "thinking about it". Nothing has actually been done. Perhaps we should be speaking to the FAA, or better still NATCA. RIGHT NOW.
The reason I mention the USA and not Europe so much is because their system is very familiar to UK controllers, right down to DM, PR, AU etc etc messages... because it has its roots in the good old 9020, as ours does.
Europe also offers some practical "turn key" replacements. Talk to Thomson CSF.
Til the next FLOP / Startover.....
Rgds BEX
Beady Eye
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 1
From: UK
BEXIL160
Cannot agree more!!! Yes the whole system is FAR TOO SLOW. It takes ridiculous amounts of time to get changes (apart from adaptation, which we can generally do ourselves) put through the system.
I can accept that there's an engineering process to go through, after all when ATC types want something doing they don't care if its a token ring LAN with or without ethernet connections etc. or if its a little man on a bike who goes around handing out messages.
Its the money men (hello SDI!) that have us by the balls.
Cannot agree more!!! Yes the whole system is FAR TOO SLOW. It takes ridiculous amounts of time to get changes (apart from adaptation, which we can generally do ourselves) put through the system.
I can accept that there's an engineering process to go through, after all when ATC types want something doing they don't care if its a token ring LAN with or without ethernet connections etc. or if its a little man on a bike who goes around handing out messages.
Its the money men (hello SDI!) that have us by the balls.
Beady Eye
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 1
From: UK
1261
The route amendment (can't recall the exact detail as the bit of paper is sitting on my desk at work) caused a brainache to NAS as it removed part of the route. NAS tried a startover 6 times before going bellyup. The 'fault' has been in the system for years but this is the first time (AFAIK) that it had manifested itself. If you recall the massive NAS shutdown early summer last year, that was caused by 2 known 'faults' (known for about 12 years I believe) which the possibility of them being triggered was considered so minimal that they were never 'fixed' until OOOOPPSSS!!!
Scott made the point previously about NAS being an olde creaky system reliant on an veritable and ancient language (Jovian). Long past time to re-write and sweep it up in a modern language which has (at least) a compiler to spot programming errors! But, as always, where's the money? Maybe we could ask Easyjet to give us another £7 million wad and write it off?
The route amendment (can't recall the exact detail as the bit of paper is sitting on my desk at work) caused a brainache to NAS as it removed part of the route. NAS tried a startover 6 times before going bellyup. The 'fault' has been in the system for years but this is the first time (AFAIK) that it had manifested itself. If you recall the massive NAS shutdown early summer last year, that was caused by 2 known 'faults' (known for about 12 years I believe) which the possibility of them being triggered was considered so minimal that they were never 'fixed' until OOOOPPSSS!!!
Scott made the point previously about NAS being an olde creaky system reliant on an veritable and ancient language (Jovian). Long past time to re-write and sweep it up in a modern language which has (at least) a compiler to spot programming errors! But, as always, where's the money? Maybe we could ask Easyjet to give us another £7 million wad and write it off?
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: EU
Thanks T3C5, that's very informative.
I am continually amazed at the lack of investment in important infrastructure in this country, and not just in our business. The proposed new tower at EDI was put on the backburner again this week: "sites in the airport's central area are very valuable to us, as they may in future be required for important items of airport infrastructure" said BAA. I think they mean car parks, but I can't be sure.
Do the airlines want an ATC system that works or not? If the answer is (and continues to be) NO then maybe I will apply for a job with Virgin Trains. At least they've invested in some new equipment, and I understand I'll get a pay rise!
I am continually amazed at the lack of investment in important infrastructure in this country, and not just in our business. The proposed new tower at EDI was put on the backburner again this week: "sites in the airport's central area are very valuable to us, as they may in future be required for important items of airport infrastructure" said BAA. I think they mean car parks, but I can't be sure.
Do the airlines want an ATC system that works or not? If the answer is (and continues to be) NO then maybe I will apply for a job with Virgin Trains. At least they've invested in some new equipment, and I understand I'll get a pay rise!
"The INTRODUCER"
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: London
BEXIL160,
you are not seriously holding up the US development/procurement system as a model for everyone else. Have you actually been watching what's happened there over the last decade or two (or rather what's not happened over there)? Makes NERC look painless in comparison.
you are not seriously holding up the US development/procurement system as a model for everyone else. Have you actually been watching what's happened there over the last decade or two (or rather what's not happened over there)? Makes NERC look painless in comparison.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
From: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
errr YES I am.
It isn't perfect, I know, BUT at the very least it does have FULL involvement of the people who actually have to use the system (i.e. NATCA controllers). I am also aware how deeply unpopular this can be with some project managers ("suits"). I am certain this would also be the case over here. A
The US system has had some success. DSR for instance. The problem for them now is what happens when Ms. Garvey leaves office and who will take up the poison chalice of the COO position.
Be serious. We have NOTHING to brag over on this side of the pond. NERC cannot be described as a glowing success, perhaps a qualified one, but no more. Plainly our procument system is wrong. The USA might provide an example.
Rgds BEX
It isn't perfect, I know, BUT at the very least it does have FULL involvement of the people who actually have to use the system (i.e. NATCA controllers). I am also aware how deeply unpopular this can be with some project managers ("suits"). I am certain this would also be the case over here. A
The US system has had some success. DSR for instance. The problem for them now is what happens when Ms. Garvey leaves office and who will take up the poison chalice of the COO position.
Be serious. We have NOTHING to brag over on this side of the pond. NERC cannot be described as a glowing success, perhaps a qualified one, but no more. Plainly our procument system is wrong. The USA might provide an example.
Rgds BEX