PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - JAL plane attempts takeoff without permission in Hokkaido
Old 17th Feb 2008, 17:53
  #13 (permalink)  
The African Dude
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation

Just replying to Carrier regarding the use of text-based comms. for standard instructions. I also read a very good post elsewhere which summed up the antiquity of vocal radio communications technology. I agree with this; it is bizarre behaviour for such a safety-critical environment. But then again, I'm one of the few who also think that driving a car is a bizarrely dangerous activity.

That aside.. I understand that flight plans, for example, are already transferred in some cases by text, and directly to FMC's. I see a few issues with the transmission and reception of what are currently voice instructions, however.

Text instructions require reading. ATC vectoring can be read and then verbally communicated by the non-handling pilot, fine. It adds a small link to the information chain but removes the issue of non-std phraseology- or does it?

Consider: the controller would have 2 options - 1, type his or her own message to the crew, or 2, select from a list of standard calls (a list as long as CAP 413!!). In the first case, non-std phraseology or numeric errors in entering headings can be made. In the second case, it would take ages to send a command. In both cases the command has to be sent to the correct aircraft using a keyboard, which is more prone to errors than your voice.

But would this be worth it to prevent using this old RT shenanigans? Well, a voice radio would still be required to transmit immediate commands, for maintaining separation and this would include emergencies. And about situational awareness for pilots, as mentioned by londonmet? We would either need to develop a method of sending pilots ATC information, not that there aren't enough items to monitor in the flight deck already, or somehow send the text commands as electronically-generated voice commands on some kind of monitoring frequency. But we don't want these interrupting high priority real-voice calls! Meaning pilots then have to monitor two frequencies.

It becomes incredibly complicated and adds many options for failure, because of that complexity. I think the real beauty of our antiquated system is its simplicity. At least in that respect alone, it's the safest.

AD
The African Dude is offline