Originally Posted by
On the beach
I think your previous post demonstrates that perhaps your new system isn't fit for purpose yet.
In what way? The intent of EFD in it's first iteration is to move from paper to electronic.
But your answers seem to demonstrate the reservations that I and your colleagues have about introducing new technology that hasn't been thought through properly.
What hasn't been thought through properly?
Why not wait until ITEC goes in and wait for things to improve?
iTEC is a massive change as we're replacing the entire FDP system. Its not a good idea (in fact it's very risky) to make wholesale changes all at once. We're talking evolution not revolution, hence steps along the way to an entirely electronic system to support controllers with lots of safety nets.
Why not install EFPS to all airports?
Who will pay? For example Manchester isn't getting it as they're not going to pay for it, etc.
If that's one of the the intents of SESAR, are we to assume that this technology is waiting for something else to occur?
See my previous answer vis a vis evolution.
If I had this many unanswered questions or concerns I think I would seriously question the Safety Case?
Our regulator and the D of S examine the safety case, it'll be very robust.
BD