Point Merge - Dublin
Nimmer
How are you going to maintain the level of competency of ATCOS who will, apparently, not be getting much (if any) Radar Vectoring experience once Point Merge takes over the primary vectoring task?
I remember, a while ago, someone in NATS (I think) saying that the ATC task was getting far too complicated for humans to operate therefor a new computerised ATC system would have to be developed (to replace the ATCO).
BUT, that the new system would have to be simple enough for the human ATCO to step in if the computer broke down !
If the traffic situation is so complex that the ATCO has to be replaced by a computer, exactly how is the human going to be able to step in (at a moment's notice) in an emergency situation when the computer goes down (especially if the human has rarely been able to keep up his vectoring skills) ?
How are you going to maintain the level of competency of ATCOS who will, apparently, not be getting much (if any) Radar Vectoring experience once Point Merge takes over the primary vectoring task?
I remember, a while ago, someone in NATS (I think) saying that the ATC task was getting far too complicated for humans to operate therefor a new computerised ATC system would have to be developed (to replace the ATCO).
BUT, that the new system would have to be simple enough for the human ATCO to step in if the computer broke down !
If the traffic situation is so complex that the ATCO has to be replaced by a computer, exactly how is the human going to be able to step in (at a moment's notice) in an emergency situation when the computer goes down (especially if the human has rarely been able to keep up his vectoring skills) ?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 56
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kcockayne, it all depends on how much you believe the boffins, personally I don't believe ATC will ever be fully computerised.
I agree though controllers have to retain vectoring skills, hopefully the LAMP designs do this, if they don't then we have failed in our task.
I agree though controllers have to retain vectoring skills, hopefully the LAMP designs do this, if they don't then we have failed in our task.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home away from home
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't believe ATC will ever be fully computerised within my lifetime, however I think the decisions taken in the next 50 years or so may decide wether or not it will be fully computerised at some stage in the future, that might be for a different topic though.
There is also another thing to note, we need to retain the vectoring skills of the controllers, that I think we all agree on? But we need to ensure this applies both to the area sectors and the approach controllers. If you provide an airport approach with point merge then that by definition requires no vectoring. What are we going to do then? Have every 10 aircraft vectored to keep currency (thereby reducing capacity)? Vector aircraft on tuesdays only?
If we decide not to implement point merge (or something similar) then one of the big PR points with the project is lost, and allegedly (even though I have never heard a pilot say this, only bean-counters and PR people) a lot of the potential fuel savings will also be lost.
There is also another thing to note, we need to retain the vectoring skills of the controllers, that I think we all agree on? But we need to ensure this applies both to the area sectors and the approach controllers. If you provide an airport approach with point merge then that by definition requires no vectoring. What are we going to do then? Have every 10 aircraft vectored to keep currency (thereby reducing capacity)? Vector aircraft on tuesdays only?
If we decide not to implement point merge (or something similar) then one of the big PR points with the project is lost, and allegedly (even though I have never heard a pilot say this, only bean-counters and PR people) a lot of the potential fuel savings will also be lost.
Crazy Voyager
I'm pleased that you've never heard a pilot comment on the alleged fuel savings with Point Merge; because it indicates to me that it is ONLY those who have very little professional understanding of ATC, & a bias towards automation, who make what are, to me (but I am ATC biased), outrageous claims solely on the basis of "new technology" being sacrosanct & obviously better than the ATCO - which I believe it is not.
When the ATCOS' skills & abilities have been derided & dispensed with, we'll be left with a system which cannot cope (in certain situations) & which cannot be rescued by ATCOS - because they no longer have those skills & abilities; & because the profession has been watered down, largely because of the bogus claims made for systems such as Point Merge.
Time will tell.
I'm pleased that you've never heard a pilot comment on the alleged fuel savings with Point Merge; because it indicates to me that it is ONLY those who have very little professional understanding of ATC, & a bias towards automation, who make what are, to me (but I am ATC biased), outrageous claims solely on the basis of "new technology" being sacrosanct & obviously better than the ATCO - which I believe it is not.
When the ATCOS' skills & abilities have been derided & dispensed with, we'll be left with a system which cannot cope (in certain situations) & which cannot be rescued by ATCOS - because they no longer have those skills & abilities; & because the profession has been watered down, largely because of the bogus claims made for systems such as Point Merge.
Time will tell.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The South
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think already there is de-skilling taking place. Certainly the en-route trainees coming through now know how to use the kit, but don't have great radar skills and aren't very efficient as they can't think outside the box.
I can't see how flying a continuos radius is fuel efficient, especially if you have to plan (upload fuel) to fly the entire approach, which I believe requires a/c to be lower sooner than now anyway. It just seems like it's being brought in because it's 'fashionable' and a PR tool. I remember someone saying it cost EIN 2 million a year extra in fuel, just for Dublin.
I can't see how flying a continuos radius is fuel efficient, especially if you have to plan (upload fuel) to fly the entire approach, which I believe requires a/c to be lower sooner than now anyway. It just seems like it's being brought in because it's 'fashionable' and a PR tool. I remember someone saying it cost EIN 2 million a year extra in fuel, just for Dublin.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rossoneri,
That is quite an astounding figure for one airline at one airport, especially considering the cost-reduction drivers coming from the EU. NATS started its environmental thing way back in 2007 I think, and this system certainly flies in the face of that strategy. A holding area flown by a stack of modern FMS aircraft is fairly compact too.
I remember an article in 'Transmit' magazine called "De-skilling the profession" years ago, around the turn of the millennium possibly.
That is quite an astounding figure for one airline at one airport, especially considering the cost-reduction drivers coming from the EU. NATS started its environmental thing way back in 2007 I think, and this system certainly flies in the face of that strategy. A holding area flown by a stack of modern FMS aircraft is fairly compact too.
I remember an article in 'Transmit' magazine called "De-skilling the profession" years ago, around the turn of the millennium possibly.
Rossoneri
I'm with you 100%. If these costs were being caused by "manual" ATC everyone would be complaining. Since they are being caused by "automated" ATC everything is fine !
I'm with you 100%. If these costs were being caused by "manual" ATC everyone would be complaining. Since they are being caused by "automated" ATC everything is fine !
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home away from home
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This all begs the question though, if this is the case, why aren't the airlines protesting loudly against this? Are the pilots being restrained by their managers? Have the beancounters not realised this might end up burning even more fuel?
If the ATCOs don't like it, and the pilots don't like it, why is this still being brought in at more and more airports?
Obviously I may be wrong here, maybe most of my collegues do like these new systems, and maybe pilots do like them, but if so why don't you ever hear that?
It makes no sense
If the ATCOs don't like it, and the pilots don't like it, why is this still being brought in at more and more airports?
Obviously I may be wrong here, maybe most of my collegues do like these new systems, and maybe pilots do like them, but if so why don't you ever hear that?
It makes no sense
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: N of GIRLI
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Sorry to jump in but I listen to the EIDW ATC quite a bit (due to the listening restrictions in the UK) and was curious about a few things - sorry if these are stupid questions, I'm only at PPL level currently:
- What is the story with the 1X arrivals? I saw the charts for these but not sure why you can't ever be cleared for one as someone mentioned?
- Another thing I've always wondered...when you are sitting at your computer screen, do you have the RNAV waypoints (BAGSO, LIPGO, LAPMO etc.) on there too so you can monitor the aircraft as they progress towards cleared points? Or is it more a case of referring to a chart and 'knowing' where the points are?
- What's the difference between being cleared to the 'final approach fix'/'7 mile final' as opposed to being cleared to the final waypoint (ie. LAPMO for 28)? I often hear people being given the option...
Sorry to jump in but I listen to the EIDW ATC quite a bit (due to the listening restrictions in the UK) and was curious about a few things - sorry if these are stupid questions, I'm only at PPL level currently:
- What is the story with the 1X arrivals? I saw the charts for these but not sure why you can't ever be cleared for one as someone mentioned?
- Another thing I've always wondered...when you are sitting at your computer screen, do you have the RNAV waypoints (BAGSO, LIPGO, LAPMO etc.) on there too so you can monitor the aircraft as they progress towards cleared points? Or is it more a case of referring to a chart and 'knowing' where the points are?
- What's the difference between being cleared to the 'final approach fix'/'7 mile final' as opposed to being cleared to the final waypoint (ie. LAPMO for 28)? I often hear people being given the option...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<computer screen>>
Do you mean radar display? I don't know what happens in Dublin but most ATC radar displays have video maps which show significant points, e.g. airspace boundaries, radio aids, runway extended centrelines, etc. Waypoints maybe shown, often as a cross. Controllers are expected to know which is which!
Do you mean radar display? I don't know what happens in Dublin but most ATC radar displays have video maps which show significant points, e.g. airspace boundaries, radio aids, runway extended centrelines, etc. Waypoints maybe shown, often as a cross. Controllers are expected to know which is which!
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: N of GIRLI
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes sorry - I wrote 'radar' originally but didn't want to offend anyone in case 'radar' was an outdated term.
I'm dying to spend time in an ATC unit as a PPL pilot, I'm very curious to see what goes on. Unfortunately my local unit told me to come back later as it's the busy summer season just now.
I'm dying to spend time in an ATC unit as a PPL pilot, I'm very curious to see what goes on. Unfortunately my local unit told me to come back later as it's the busy summer season just now.
It's entirely up to the individual controller as to whether they want the waypoints and their names displayed on their screen. There are various customisable features and filters in modern ATC systems.
I hear Point Merge in CDG works pretty well, any pilots care to give their opinions?
I hear Point Merge in CDG works pretty well, any pilots care to give their opinions?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Names of waypoints on the radar, (sorry, 'situation display')?
I thought learning the sector geography was part of the validation exam.
What next, runway/taxiway designators drawn on the VCR windows?
I thought learning the sector geography was part of the validation exam.
What next, runway/taxiway designators drawn on the VCR windows?
Indeed as part of a unit rating you are given a blank map and told to fill in waypoints, SIDS,STARS, vertical sector boundaries etc, but some people like the waypoint on the screen in my experience. Some people even use 2 minute predictive vector lines, think of the clutter.......
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall visiting one RAF airfield some years ago and their radar displays had names of beacons on! But the RAF also paint N, E, S and W around the tower windows...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Right here...
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar display
I for one don´t see the problem gentlemen.
I you want this info displayed, display it; if not, don´t. Is it not a question of simple preference rather than not knowing your sector?
A little akin to the discussion that smart trousers and a tie make a superior controller!
I you want this info displayed, display it; if not, don´t. Is it not a question of simple preference rather than not knowing your sector?
A little akin to the discussion that smart trousers and a tie make a superior controller!
I have no issue with colleagues filling their display with waypoints, frequencies, nav aids, SIDS, STARS etc. forgive me if I implied otherwise (although it can be quite bloody tedious reconfiguring the display to my own preferences after a relief)
Back on topic...... Point merge for CDG..... any use? At least you aren't dragging aircraft through the localiser there.....
Back on topic...... Point merge for CDG..... any use? At least you aren't dragging aircraft through the localiser there.....
