ATOP in the Atlantic

[atcea.com]

ATOP was commissioned yesterday at the New York Center. It is the first certification of a near-fully-automated ATC system in the U.S.

I believe other countries, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, have had such systems on line for a while now, but don't know any particulars. If anyone has information - and especially links - about these systems, I would appreciate hearing. Thanks.

ATCEA.com (http://atcea.com)

[fredator]

You probably won't get many replies from the UK. The only automated systems within NATS are the coffee machines and they're not the best. It will take a huge pay rise and a complete change of attitude from the ATCOs and Unions before things go fully automated over here. Anything new introduced at Swanwick gets completely slated by the ATCOs because they are unable to accept change gracefully, even if it is for the good. Lack of commitment and lack of loyalty to the company etc etc; I could go on but then I would be branded a traitor.:E

[BEXIL160]

Then of course you could actually involve the Swanwick ATCOs (or ATCOs anywhere) in system development instead of just telling them to like it or lump it :rolleyes:


.... but that would be far too radical wouldn't it? :rolleyes:

Rgds BEX

[BDiONU]

Hopefully the operational staff are being fully involved in iFACTS! User acceptance is recognised as a major requirement (and stumbling block or stepping stone dependent on viewpoint ;-))

BD

[Not Long Now]

(preparing to be slated for ignorance)...

And iFACTS is?

[BEXIL160]

BDINOU,

Yes, It is pleasing to note that the end user is being involved in iFACTS and that "user acceptance" is a requirement of the project.

The end result? Everybody (well nearly) happy and a system that should actually work quite well on the bigger sectors. Not sure how it will work on the smaller, point and shoot sectors but as you said, we are being involved and will have a say. So I keep an open mind.

The same cannot be said of previous projects where "user involvement" was deliberately shunned. Lesson learned, I hope by those who need it (fredator and chums, it would appear)

rgds BEX

[A I]

Hi Not Long Now.

If you work for NATS then there is tons of info on the intranet about iFACTS. If you don't then I guess you'll let us all know. It is primarily an area tool by the way.

A I

[NewModelATC]

Hi Rich,

Good to see you in this forum. ATOP is for Oceanic traffic and so far as I know it does nothing that wasn't proposed 30 years ago. Even so, it’s still good to hear about it. At the old ATMDC in Hurn NATS had simulated radar displays for OACC flights and we shouldn’t forget that GPS is essentially the newer version of Transit – The US Navy Navigation Satellite System (NNSS) from 1967. Then FDPS I at Prestwick has been capable of fully automatic operation since it went into service in 1987. NATS just wouldn't let us write the code that pressed the ACCEPT button every time the controller was asked a question. And it was FULLY automatic because OACC operated with an HF outstation, not over VHF. Every piece of information had to go via the computer. Procedural control over the ocean is now a bit of a closed book to many people, even controllers, but it’s every bit as much an art form. This thread overlaps my own on Automation in ATC so do look at my website for more about my proposals. Full automation that involves the human operator in the loop is already working in the real world and I do hope that the controllers at Swanwick don’t have their jobs taken away by an outside ANSP such as Airways New Zealand if they realise how it has to be done first.

[BDiONU]

bexil160
Glad you're 'in the loop' with iFACTS :D Still evaluating how t'll work on the smaller sectors, Daventry springs instantly to mind!

Not Long Now
Interim Future Area Control Tools. Basically an enhanced/improved/some new set of tools for controllers in the area world, which will also be without paper strips. The introduction of a Medium Term Conflict Detection tool (with a vastly improved Trajectory Prediction algorithm set) should be a big help.

NewModelATC
I really don't think NATS will be worrying about outside ANSP's LOL!!! I'd like to know how an outsider could provide some 300 fully trained ATCO's overnight :rolleyes:

BD

[Numpo-Nigit]

Quote - "Then FDPS I at Prestwick has been capable of fully automatic operation since it went into service in 1987. NATS just wouldn't let us write the code that pressed the ACCEPT button every time the controller was asked a question. And it was FULLY automatic because OACC operated with an HF outstation, not over VHF. Every piece of information had to go via the computer."

:rolleyes: It seems NewModelATC has a very different recollection of events leading up to the (much delayed) introduction of FDPS1 at Shanwick OACC. During my time with the acceptance team at Farnborough, I seem to remember lots of CAA-specified functionality being simplified or even deferred (omitted) as either being "too difficult" or "too time-consuming" whilst the project dragged on. I joined the team at "eighteen months before O-date" and left, more than two years later, at "eighteen months before O-date".

Still, that last bit was good practice for nearly everything else that happened in NATS since ... :hmm:

NN

[NewModelATC]

Thanks BDiONU,

In the thread ‘Serco trying to buy DFS’ VectorLine wrote:

I'm pretty sure that the Red Baron has his eye on increasing his ‘sales territory’ to include this part of the world.
Also, as quoted by Ashley Smout, CEO of Airways New Zealand, in his keynote speech to:

ATS Maastricht 2003 (http://www.airways.co.nz/airways_International/ceo2003.asp)

At ATS Maastricht last year, Pierre Jeanniot, outgoing Director General of IATA, commented that he saw consolidation in our industry as being inevitable:

‘A truly liberalised environment should make it possible for the 180 Air Navigation Authorities to regroup into 20 to 30 ‘Regional Single Skies’ ... in a harmonised, cost effective way.’

There are already many ATCCs that do not operate underneath the airspace they control and Indian Call Centres have also demonstrated the power and economy of modern communication technologies.

Aircraft automation has clearly reduced the number of flight crew required and simplified the training required. If The New Model works as I propose then the same effects will be observed for ATCOs. The provision of fewer than 300 controllers may not then be such a tall order.

Therefore, while we may smile at the thought of other ANSPs bidding for NATS business, I don’t think it is a business risk that can be completely ignored.

Of course there will be those who conclude that The New Model is composed of the same empty promises as so many trumpeted ideas in the past. But almost everyone agrees that automation will come one day and I believe I have put forward good sound arguments. Someone’s got to find a solution one day. From the number of hits on my website during the night it is possible that someone in China is reverse engineering the code at this moment.

[BDiONU]

The Red Barons quote was aimed at NATS looking to expand and subsume some of our close airspace neighbours, not for NATS to be 'bought out' by someone else.
I stand by my comment, no matter how simplified the ATM system to operate the complexity of UK airspace is such that training and validation of controllers will always be a long and involved process. Its people who drive the ATM system and make it work, not vice versa.

BD