Bexil160,
Thanks for those constructive comments. I am indebted to you and others who have taken the time to visit my website. I believe the New Model does address all of the issues that you and others have raised. Naturally, any shortcomings in the explanations are entirely my responsibility. There is no sarcasm intended in that statement.
Full automation isn’t necessarily obvious but your analogy is almost perfect. I would have said a modern aircraft with autopilot, autoland, fly-by-wire controls, FMS, FADEC and so on is indeed fully automated in that the crew issue instructions and the system carries them out. In the same way the New Model will always require a human operator and even in the demonstrator there is the opportunity to ignore or override advisory instructions. However, I believe the New Model does represent the first ever proposal for an ATC tool where the system is expected to calculate the complete traffic solution. The demonstrator was produced to show that the algorithms are not particularly hard.
Some controllers feel that they may not be able to retain the mental ‘picture’ if they are not actually controlling the sector. My informal investigations show that, if anything, the mental picture is actually enhanced by monitoring a concise and complete list of RT advisories. The controller can then focus on any problem areas while the system continues to look after the more straightforward parts of the sector. It is part of the mathematics of the New Model to show that this independence is a property of a well designed piece of airspace.
For space reasons may I deal with metering, strips and VFR in a future post?
You also suggest crucially that the users should be consulted at the beginning of the project. I am sorry I may not have spoken to you personally but I have actually spent a great deal of time sitting with controllers and pilots. My managers opposed this approach. The New Model represents the fusion of what is needed, what is possible and what is wanted. Many controllers told me I was the first engineer who had ever come and asked them and I treasure the several friendships I have established.
But, if there are any controllers out there who feel they have not been heard why not post your requirements for a future ATC system here? This is one engineer who does want to listen. If a few appear and there is interest I will publish the essence of all the requirements that were expressed to me by practicing controllers and pilots over 30 years. That post will be shorter than this one.
Thanks again to everyone for taking time to look at this thread.
P.S. Would Bexil160 be a sector and a standing agreement?