BBC Scotland - Air Traffic Control " needs massive modernisation."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: EGPF/EGPK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC Scotland - Air Traffic Control " needs massive modernisation."
The following article was included in the BBC Scottish News on 30 June.
Air traffic control 'needs massive modernisation' - BBC News
My home on PPRUNE is in Spectators' Gallery but I thought the article might be of interest to those employed in the industry.
Incidentally, I am intrigued as to what, in practical terms,the author of the sentence ( 4th paragraph ) " But it says government support is needed to improve the network of "ageing" flightpaths", is hoping to achieve.
Air traffic control 'needs massive modernisation' - BBC News
My home on PPRUNE is in Spectators' Gallery but I thought the article might be of interest to those employed in the industry.
Incidentally, I am intrigued as to what, in practical terms,the author of the sentence ( 4th paragraph ) " But it says government support is needed to improve the network of "ageing" flightpaths", is hoping to achieve.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a very high level comment that means that the government needs to grow a pair and stop the public taking control of saying "no". Naturally, no one wants to have new routes flying over their houses so every time a new proposal is consulted, there is an overwhelming resistance from the public so the proposals are denied. The current route structure cannot handle the amounts of traffic that are expected to be flying in the very near future so needs to be changed, either that or there will be outrage (from the public) about the amount of delays caused by ATC.......
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A similar theme is repeated here. I'm not really surprised either. What is surprising is that our current method of looking at ATC has not really changed that much over the past few years. Unfortunately the solution depends on a fresh thinking and a great dollop of imagination and this had shown to be lacking in the upper levels of NATS.
There are some immediate gains, but admittedly small ones, that can be made now. From the top of my head we could be given less micro-management of headings. A fair degree of headings just mimic our planned track which we would follow without intervention. Another is the constant statement of our passing of our passing level and readback of cleared level on handover. In a Mode S world these things are known or at least should be.
As for the future how about airways? I say ditch every one of them. What purpose do they serve? And SIDs and STARs. Do we really need them? And providing there is little extra noise, let's keep the public out of this. So once we have traffic going in-interrupted from A to B let it go, only interfere if it is going to bump into something. And even then, only get one to change. Then to back-up decision making, flow prediction software should then be able to predict times for arrivals and departures at boundaries. The difficult and complex job of controllers will still be weaving the arrivals and departures into the "flow", but at least they will have less to listen to and less to say.
Hopefully such things are being worked on now. I'll know some big thinking is happening when "big thinking" decends to trivia such as ATIS information. Do I really need to know "there is increased bird activity at the airfield" at 10:30pm (and increased by how much; 7% or 43%? Or threshold elevation. What on earth do I do with that number?).
The above is not me having a pop at ATC. I find UK ATC a helpful and pragmatic bunch but always feel they are constrained by some pretty limiting rules. Not until these change will improvements be possible.
PM
There are some immediate gains, but admittedly small ones, that can be made now. From the top of my head we could be given less micro-management of headings. A fair degree of headings just mimic our planned track which we would follow without intervention. Another is the constant statement of our passing of our passing level and readback of cleared level on handover. In a Mode S world these things are known or at least should be.
As for the future how about airways? I say ditch every one of them. What purpose do they serve? And SIDs and STARs. Do we really need them? And providing there is little extra noise, let's keep the public out of this. So once we have traffic going in-interrupted from A to B let it go, only interfere if it is going to bump into something. And even then, only get one to change. Then to back-up decision making, flow prediction software should then be able to predict times for arrivals and departures at boundaries. The difficult and complex job of controllers will still be weaving the arrivals and departures into the "flow", but at least they will have less to listen to and less to say.
Hopefully such things are being worked on now. I'll know some big thinking is happening when "big thinking" decends to trivia such as ATIS information. Do I really need to know "there is increased bird activity at the airfield" at 10:30pm (and increased by how much; 7% or 43%? Or threshold elevation. What on earth do I do with that number?).
The above is not me having a pop at ATC. I find UK ATC a helpful and pragmatic bunch but always feel they are constrained by some pretty limiting rules. Not until these change will improvements be possible.
PM
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar separation should not be attempted unless all the relevant aircraft are on radar headings. Having one on a radar heading against one on its own navigation is asking for trouble. There is NO GUARANTEE at all that an aircraft its own nav will follow its planned track.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Near VTUU or EGPX
Age: 65
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditch AIRWAYS and fly DIRECT, wonderful in theory, just try to get the military to agree.
I wish I have a penny for every wasted mile flown by airlines going around "active" areas in the North Sea which were actually empty.
As for SIDS and STARS, even with the latest generation of very quiet aircraft, try to convince the NIMBY brigade, even though they are the most likely to be those actually flying from their local airport.
Luckily for me, those frustrations ended a year ago, but I am sure my PC colleagues have exactly the same issues on a daily basis
I wish I have a penny for every wasted mile flown by airlines going around "active" areas in the North Sea which were actually empty.
As for SIDS and STARS, even with the latest generation of very quiet aircraft, try to convince the NIMBY brigade, even though they are the most likely to be those actually flying from their local airport.
Luckily for me, those frustrations ended a year ago, but I am sure my PC colleagues have exactly the same issues on a daily basis
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nimmer,
Delighted to come and help out if need-be.
A few of us saw this coming about 25 years ago. Mentioning it at a 'team-building awayday' mangement-thingy, about 10 years back, the HR bod present didn't seem interested.
And Talkdownman is spot on.......As one of our best unit OJTIs used to say...."For separation purposes, radar headings come in pairs".
Delighted to come and help out if need-be.
A few of us saw this coming about 25 years ago. Mentioning it at a 'team-building awayday' mangement-thingy, about 10 years back, the HR bod present didn't seem interested.
And Talkdownman is spot on.......As one of our best unit OJTIs used to say...."For separation purposes, radar headings come in pairs".
Last edited by ZOOKER; 26th Jul 2017 at 20:34.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the way to sea
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piltdownman, respectfully, I disagre. We are already making steps in the future (well, outside UK at least)
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes...te-airspace_it
https://www.canso.org/merging-free-r...fra-and-seafra
and this is only the small part
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes...te-airspace_it
https://www.canso.org/merging-free-r...fra-and-seafra
and this is only the small part
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PM,
You've highlighted an area where the current regulatory environment doesn't allow what you're proposing, which is why we have to use headings.
It's being worked on. We have to ensure it's safe, conduct simulations and trilals, and that all 'stakeholders', to use that hateful term, are 'aligned', to use another.
We just can't decide to do it tomorrow.
You've highlighted an area where the current regulatory environment doesn't allow what you're proposing, which is why we have to use headings.
It's being worked on. We have to ensure it's safe, conduct simulations and trilals, and that all 'stakeholders', to use that hateful term, are 'aligned', to use another.
We just can't decide to do it tomorrow.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
K - For enroute projects this has to be the way to go. Free, direct routing has to be more efficient. But the best plans come unstuck and the challenge will be putting it back together after a disturbance. A couple spring to mind but from a drivers' viewpoint, the worst that happens to us is a missed slot combined with these wretched CDM systems. The moment you get on the wrong side of these things your day goes down the toilet. A more complicated system will give a greater opportunity for the computer to say "No!" If you are involved in the design, would it be possible for the final version to be transparent? At the moment we, like the local controllers, are virtually in the dark when it comes to delays. We are given a story from a faceless, totally unaccountable system that we are unable to reason with. It might not reduce the delay, but at least we have something to tell our passengers (i.e. the ones who actually pay!) as to why they are going to miss their connections, trains home or four hours of holiday.
PM
PM
PM
PM
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Earthville
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't wander around the sky for the hell of it, we just let the plane follow the magenta line.
Towards the end of the year the UK will get its first PRNAV1 routes which will allow for routes to be put closer together and lessen the use of headings between aircraft which are suitably equipped. However, although this will reduce the use of headings a bit, expect the use of headings within the UK for a long time to come yet.