BIK 116.8;
Hate to say it mate, but you are looking at some OLD data. The FAA doesn't have old computers anymore. We have gotten rid of most of the old stuff. We do indeed have some older software around in the host processing in the new hardware, but our computers don't fail very much anymore. We are also working with new displays and some of the enroute facilities are working with new data systems also. More are to come on line in the next 8 to 12 months.
We are also working on the new HOST replacement hardware and software. The design is being ironed out and the requirements are set in firm jello as of now. Hopefully we will see some good direction on this new program by next year (ERAM)....
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman
116.8;
While I am at it <G>... The Boeing plan does look sexy doesn't it. The problem with it though is when you get into it, it lacks substance and the HOW they are going to do it. We have talked with them about the PLAN... They can never answer the questions of just how they are going to be able to do it, nor can they answer how much is it going to cost and who is going to pay for it...
While working on projects ( I enjoy working out of the box ) we have asked the engineers to come up with some really neat stuff that we controllers would like to have to make our jobs eaiser so that we can move more aircraft. It is something that we like to do here if you aren't to familiar with the US ATC... The answer from the experts who are writing all this wonderful code ( Don't work for the FAA or any other part of the govt. they are private enterprise. ) is that we can't do that yet. Even the more or less minor things that we would like to do we are told that we can't afford it even if we can make it work. So, if it is unaffordable, then it is for now unobtainable.
There are indeed things that we can do better, and hopefully we can come up with an integrated solution for it that is not cost prohibitive. But many of the things that are going to be needed to improve the through put of aircraft is going to require equipment not just on the ground and in space, but in the cockpit, and as we have found out with datalink. The airlines are not in a position to desire to upgrade their fleets and spend the money. Nor are they in a position to upgrade the nav in the 70's and 80's era glass cockpit aircraft that use DME/DME for navigation. This is leaving them out of some of the leading edge nav stuff that we are trying to do to improve efficiencies of getting about in both the terminal and enroute airspace. So it isn't just the problem of the ATC provider.
While we are speaking of equippage. For us to do our jobs as controllers, we have to have everyone doing things about the same. When we start mixing navigation equipage which in the future may determine separation criteria it makes our jobs a LOT harder. If we want to increase our output, then we have to make the job easier and not harder...
Would like to go on, but my brain is mush right now after a nice evening shift with thunderstorms about...
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman