Lack of radar service Offshore/Multilateration

[stabout]

For some time now we have been told that we will be getting Multilateration a system that enables aircraft positions to be identified. Currently in the northern North Sea we don’t have a radar service beyond 80miles.

My questions is how long do we put up with this dangerous practice when an adequate system is available but not installed?:*

Your thoughts please.

Any NATS input would be greatly received also.

[HeliComparator]

Not sure that lack of multilat can be called dangerous - after all in the entire history of the North Sea there has never been a collision, but plenty of other ways to die in a helicopter. So if it is dangerous, (and danger vs safe is a sliding scale not an absolute) then there are far more dangerous issues that perhaps should receive your attention. I suspect you have an ulterior motive/hidden agenda!

I believe the problem with Multilat is not of NATS making but rather its very difficult to get beds and trips offshore for the workers who would fit the kit. You could argue that the Oil Companies should be prepared to sacrifice production time for this safety kit, but there is of course no legal requirement for them to support NATS, and bearing in mind my first para, there is no great safety case. With TCAS I and in the near future II making its way onto the N Sea, the case is further weakened.

Of course I would like to have Multilat, but in the great scheme of things its not top of the agenda.

HC

[stabout]

The problem is that we have no radar service and the only plan to resolve this is multilateration. I just want to improve safety offshore no other agenda other than that.

What I would like is more priority given to the introduction of a system that improves safety offshore. Sadly flying an old type that isn't going to be replaced any time soon means no TCAS for me.:(

[M609]

You could just hang a Raytheon Cossor Condor Mk.2 on a couple of oil platforms.

http://hangar.no/tpllib/img.php?im=cat_117/1839.jpg&w=570&h=234

http://www.adressa.no/multimedia/archive/00957/AVINOR-1_957213f.jpg

There has been a SSR on Gullfaks for years, and Heidrun and Ekofisk are getting one. Pics from Heidrun.

[rotordude]

You also have the M-ADS (http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jav/del04114.html) system that, if I remember correcly, has been mandatory in the norwegian sector for the past 6 years.

[HeliComparator]

stabout

Sorry, your post read a bit like you were not actually a pilot - had I checked your post history I would have realised that you are a pilot!

Don't dismiss the possibility of getting TCAS just because you fly an old type (for CHC?) - here in Bristow we have a strategy to retrofit TCAS II to all our fleets including the AS332L (well, maybe not the S61!). There might then be pressure for CHC to follow suit.

Anyway, the other point is that Multilat has its limitations like any other system - it only works on transponder returns so anyone not squawking is invisible. And have you considered what you would actually do if you are trundling along at 130kts and ATC advises you that there is a fast jet doing 450kts coming from you 6 o'clock same level.

I want multilat if only because it will cut down the neverending noise on 134.10 with almost every request for climb/descent generating calls from ATC to other helis requesting their position/level, and yes, that in itself improves safety a bit - less stress! And less stress when doing an ARA in the vicinity of other traffic etc.

Every little helps in the battle for safety but IMHO multilat is unlikely to make the difference between me reaching retirement age safely or not, so if its delayed by a year that is a pity but not a disaster.

HC

[malabo]

HC, if by TCAS II you are talking about that analog VSI replacement with the big red "dive" arrow, then we have already trashed it on this forum as the height of idiocy.

I doubt any other operator will follow the Bristow path on that one, in fact I doubt if Bristow will follow it either. Have they fitted a second aircraft yet?

The CHC guys see TCAS targets on their map displays that also show rigs, shorelines and waypoints. They already have a far superior product to that wretched Bristow experiment. If fact it is not too different than full ADS-B, which should be the offshore industry's holy grail - not some intermediate step like Multi-Lat.

[SASless]

HC,

No mid-airs on the North Sea yet!

There have been some very...very close calls.

Outbound from the Shetlands for the Ninian many years back....Steve Stevens and I in a 58T passed a BAH 61 in cloud going the other way. One of the other crew was wearing a dark blue float coat and the other just his white shirt. Captain was driving....FO was doing the nav board.

So much for Decca, Bar Alts, and VOR radials for separation.

State of the art kit is cheap compared to a mid-air!

Nothing less should be accepted!

[HeliComparator]

Blimey, someone call a doctor - malabo is having a funny turn!

SAS - Near misses are scary, there have been more than that one, however you get a number of very near misses for every hit - no hits in all the history of the N Sea makes multilat, IMHO, certainly a nice-to-have but not a top priority. As I mentioned, multilat only reduces the probability of a collision, it does not eliminate it. Interesting that you say
One of the other crew was wearing a dark blue float coat and the other just his white shirt
So, things have improved since then, now we can afford trousers!

HC

[Impress to inflate]

To put my tuppence worth in, some oil companies did not want rebros antennas placing on there rigs to remove some of the black spots. They said that they did not have room for a filing cabinet box of electronics and an aerial !!

Having flown in Norwegian, Danish and UK airspace, I know the Northern North Sea is a VERY poor relative. :ugh::ugh:

[T4 Risen]

I believe that we are very well looked after by ATC on both Radar and Information however anything that helps with cutting the amount of RT on information/offshore radar has to help. Getting an word in now on busy days ( nearly all the time) is getting worse.:oh:
And anything will be an improvement on the current situation...i hear the last plan was for implementation by December.......which December still remains unclear.

Any ATCO's got info/ opinion on this topic??
T4:confused:

[throw a dyce]

Maybe Radar and Rebros should be split more often,staff permitting of course.

[atcomarkingtime]

Hey Chaps....I control the most Northern north sea and the southern north sea....yes...the multilat problem is due to the lack of beds offshore....but one thing that really springs to my mind is that of the reaction us radar controllers get from the pilot.
Many times i pass traffic info only for the pilot to reply in such a tone that I have just awoken him from his slumber..."yes....we have it on tcas"....that doesnt help ME at all....you need to look out of the window to confirm!!

I had a very interesting scenario this morning....using RADAR....passed traffic info....no reply....tried again....no reply....the guy coming the other way tried....no reply....eventually went through the radio fail procedure only for the pilot to infrom me he could "read fives"....and that he was "very busy in the cockpit"......:ugh:
So...ok....give us better radar....give us great comms....but unless the guy I want to speak to isn't too busy....we can't win!!!

[helimutt]

Let me guess, a southern north sea operator, CHC or BHL? My guess BHL. Then you probably get idiots who have stuck mic and don't even realise it. That's probably worse. Oh, and we do get 'busy in the cockpit'. Don't you know how many bacon butties we have to stuff down our throats betwen decks. Jeez, some people! ;)
PS, wot's TCAS??? :E

[stabout]

Some interesting points coming out here, how do we as a body make the oil companies get a move on with installing this kit?

Why do we in the UK put up with a lack of technology compared to the likes of Norway.

Is it not about time that we say no to going past a point of no radar service i.e. 80 miles in IMC in an airspace where traffic density is on the up?
VMC a FIS will do but IMC???

[T4 Risen]

ATCO,

you got any info on when they hope to introduce multi lat? If it is goint to happen? and do you think it will be a huge improvement or is there something available that would be better?

I feel a bun fight coming on about RT procedures on the North sea. It is getting busy, we are all guilty of missing calls, stepping on each other and not following RT protocol at some stage in our career, but lets see if we can
put that to one side and try to push for the implementation of somthing that will improve our safety in an ever conjested environment...call it self preservation!!

T4

[HeliComparator]

RT congestion on 135.175 is certainly a big issue, as I mentioned before, largely due to the procedural nature of the service. As well as multilat, there is also a proposal to split 135.175 into 2 frequencies, thus presumably halving the RT traffic on each frequency. I think that is suffering from the same problem - difficulty in installing the extra rebros equipment offshore due to lack of availability of offshore time/beds etc.

In the mean time I am probably as guilty as the next man of turning the radios down to barely audible simply because I cannot stand the constant howls of crossed transmissions etc

ATCO, it must be annoying when crews don't respond to your first call, but please bear in mind that, unlike you guys who get regular breaks from the audio mayhem, the pilots who are failing to respond to you might have been constantly at it for 6 or 7 hours without a break from the noise. It gets wearing!

Splitting rebros, and installing multilat will improve our lot significantly, not so much for preventing a mid-air, but for cutting down the stress of the constant chat that we have to listen to all the time (for fear of encountering wrath following a missed call!)

HC

[atcomarkingtime]

HELIMUT....whye aye thats funny!!!! Don't know how you all fit into the cockpit after sooo many bacon butties....maybe the emergency exit stickers on the windows with a cross thru the "larger person" is.....:mad:.....as for TCAS.....blimey...from what I saw in that old S76...you'd have no room to sit if they installed that on one!!! I'll stick to dry land if thats ok!!!

My previous comment about needing pilots to listen out was justified...we can improve the (sorry...eventually improve) radar coverage....but what use is it if the cockpit is too busy to listen to the controller....and i know its not all of you pilots....I could feel the tension today when the guy said he was "BUSY"....I just had to say that I too was busy but found time to talk to pilots...and not one person brought me a bacon buttie;)

(thanks guys for making my job enjoyable though....I'm sure we ALL enjoy the odd bit of banter.....if any BHL guys want to get me started on callsigns now.....:ok:)

[atcomarkingtime]

Helicomp....fair comment...totally understand...but the route in question today had just departed the airfield in the UK....and just got feet wet...and i knew it was the first sector of the frame for the day.....and it only does 4 short trips a day....:)

[HeliComparator]

atco, yes of course pilots need to listen but my point is that once rt traffic drops to the sort of level commensurate with a radar service (ie only calls are those that are necessary to advise of conflicting traffic) I think you will find that attentiveness of crews improves.

I know you are now going to tell me that the guy you referred to was on radar! Maybe he was busy for some reason (though its hard to know what unless there was some sort of emergency) but more likely he "switched off" for a while due to heated debate in the cockpit (about terms & conditions, politics, football or whatever, probably not about flying!) and was blustering to cover it.

Even, maybe he was line training and lost in a briefing!

Yes there are good and bad pilots, there are good pilots having bad days etc, but so are there good and bad ATCOs - and we are all human!

And can I just mention it wasn't me guv as I am off this week!

HC

[atcomarkingtime]

HC...thanks for the great reply...good to see someone who can take these comments without taking offence.
I recently did a familiarisation flight from the big north east of scotland airfield....and my word did the pilots works hard...yes they need to keep a good listen out!! They have to talk to each other...and the ATC bit was an extra bit of work. I also did an offshore trip recently...something I think you pilots should try to help us controllers out to do....and maybe try to get a few of you pilots into our den to watch.....I know its hard work....we controllers are just there with our headsets on listening to pilots and our phones....whereas you lot have over 4 frequencies to monitor.
Good to hear you weren't guilty....and do pay us a visit...I'll show you round!

[RedWhite&Blue]

ATCO

The 139 drivers are aware that seeing traffic on our screen is no 'procedural' use to you.

However, how many times is traffic called at say 12 miles plus?

Not always easy to see with the Mk 1 eye ball. But with TCAS the crew's situational awareness is vastly enhanced. I guess when the crews tell you that they have the traffic on TCAS, then they do so to offer some reassurance that they are tracking the target. No more than that.

Please don't think they are then not looking out the window. But at ten miles with a rough clock bearing, looking up sun... Not always easy.

I can think of many time when traffic has been called (and response given), monitored on TCAS and never seen even though the crew are 'rubber necking' as if passing a motorway pile up.

With regard to 'listening out' things are getting crazy with regard to the 123.625 freq offshore. We now have aircraft coming in from Norwich, Denes, Humberside, and from the Dutch sector. I've known as many as eight aircraft entering, shuttling or leaving the fields at the same time. We have asked for that particular freq to be split but there is significant inertia to change from some quarters.

It’s easy to miss a call when someone is talking at the same time 'on the other box'.

Of course we are two crew and with two radios so we have one each. The radios in the 139s can be set at individual volumes (unlike the old 76's), so with good crew resource management we should be able to monitor and respond on both. I guess we all try our best but we are, like you, just human.

I would be interested to know whether the number of missed calls has increased with the introduction of G-CHC# call signs. I know that has done few favours for the crews.

Interestingly, if a crew changes airframe during a shift, (we seem to do that more often these days) the chances of missing a call increase. I have never worked out why having flown a different airframe earlier in the day I seem to remain tuned to its call sign. How many times have you heard “Anglia, good morning, G-CHCV... correction G-CHCT"?

We will try harder. Would it make you and your colleagues' jobs easier if we don't mention TCAS at all? A note in the crew room will stop it quite quickly, I guess.

In the mean time many thanks for a great service, we'd be lost without you. Some of us quite literally.:ok:

ATB
Red

[atcomarkingtime]

RED...wow...thanks for that reply...so good to see us anglia people are here!! Erm....well...i know exactly what you mean about the traffic info...we are so conscious of traffic info...cant see the point of the 12mile info...and I know sometimes how bad my 10 oclock can easily be an 8 oclock!!!and sometimes its not even a spec on the windshield. Keep up the tcas info...as you say...its so needed as we know you are looking in the correct direction.

Makes my day playing with the GCHC* callsigns....I always emphasise the last letter.....sorry if it sounds a bit OTT...but I always do it....PAPA....TANGO.....CHARLIE....and I'm sure you know its me as I laugh a few times in acknowledgement! Keep up the good work with us....and I know about the probs with the radios too....you can hear us...we cant hear you...

Just once with TCAS....a pilot said to me "anglia...TCAS has us clear of the other company aircraft....request descent".....maybe it did but my license needed 5 miles or window visual....;)

Thanks so much for that reply....I've been doing that area for so long now...keep on making it such a great sector to work!!:ok:

[helimutt]

careful there atco, it nearly sounds as if you're enjoying yourself at work.
:ok:

[HeliComparator]

Can I just point out that TCAS is a collision avoidance system, it is not a traffic management system. It really grates when I hear the opposition gloating that they "have us on TCAS". So what! you should not be predicating decisions to descend or whatever on TCAS returns. Whilst TCAS ranges are fairly accurate, bearings are not - they can have up to +-30 degrees error and that error is not constant, so its impossible to judge an aircraft's track using TCAS.

We are now starting to get 225s with TCAS but you will never hear me say "I've got it on TCAS". Very unprofessional!

HC

[atcomarkingtime]

HC...exactly!! The day I was informed by the aircraft that TCAS showed he was clear of the other company aircraft and wanted to descend.....I looked and thought no way!!! Look out of the window first!!

[RedWhite&Blue]

HC

The guys who have and use TCAS (TCAS1 for the CHC139s) are very aware of its shortcommings. Ghosting (multiple images of the same return), images that move faster on the screen than they could possibly in reality, blind spots created by the rotors and landing gear, and would you belive it is unreliabe when used at the same time as the wx radar!

The concept, that with the introduction of the wonderful TCAS people are now never looking out the window beggars belief!

However, it is a management tool when used in context. I guess you will not (when you get your TCAS 2) wait for an RA before thinking about managing your way out of problems, with the info it displays to you.

For us the targets are there, right in front of you, on the MFD along with the radar returns, way points, rigs, aerodromes, etc. What do you do? Ignore them untill you get a voice shouting a TA or RA. No of course not. You manage the situation hand in hand with the radar controller.

I also use it daily as a management tool. When lifting from platforms where two-way comms with radar are imposible below 1000 - 1500 ft msl, it is useful to look for transponder returns within 5nm, before lifting to avoid having to us the system as an avoidance system.

The system may well shout and save the day when all else fails but that is a last resort. At that point the crews of two aircraft and possibly a radar controller have all lost situational awarness. Heaven forbid.

To say you will never hear me say "I've got it on TCAS". Very unprofessional! seems a little high an mighty to me, or is it the green eyed monster getting the better of you today?

I guess when ATCO says Keep up the tcas info...as you say...its so needed as we know you are looking in the correct direction. some radar controllers may also disagree.

Just a thought, but willing to learn.

ATB

Red

PS just a quick question. With TCAS 2 will crews be able to accept MRAS? With only 500ft separation we get TA's with opposite direction traffic (with whom we are generally visual;)). An RA will require immidiate action, will it not?

[HeliComparator]

RWB

By "traffic management system" I mean using the system, for example, to make a decision to descend through the level of another aircraft on an opposite track. Of course I don't mean as a general situational awareness tool - that is what its for!

The call "I have it on TCAS" is made for what purpose? There is an implication that you are modifying what you would otherwise do just because you have it on TCAS - that is my complaint.

TCAS II is fairly sensible about RAs, I would have to check the detail but I think if both aircraft are in level flight with 500' separation, you will not get an RA. For NNS out of Aberdeen, we nearly always have 1000' separation anyway.

HC

[RedWhite&Blue]

HC

There is an implication that you are modifying what you would otherwise do just because you have it on TCAS

No implication, just a conformation that you are aware of the traffic and are tracking it. When visual, a conformation to the controller seems good practice.

I simply don't believe crews are doing their own thing when under radar control just because they have TCAS.

I don't see a problem here, but I am ready to stand corrected.

ATB
Red

[HeliComparator]

RWB

No, not when under radar control but in NNS there is no radar after 80nm (see thread title!), only a procedural service. This is where the TCAS boys (well, a few anyway) are using their TCAS as a traffic managment system, deciding to descend through oncoming traffic based on their TCAS range and possibly (God forbid) based on the bearing.

ATCO will correct me if I am wrong, but when under a FIS outside controlled airspace there are no rules for when you can descend IMC through another's level - this is why ATC don't issue clearances, they just say "nothing known to affect..." etc.

The lack of rules is in itself is a bad thing, but my fear is that TCAS is being used to reduce the margins that would otherwise be applied by comparing the reported gps ranges and bearings from Aberdeen VOR .

HC

[SASless]

HC,

May I assume routing offshore is still using the Aberdeen VOR radial method....five degree radial separation outbound from inbound with a transition point at 40 DME from the VOR and via extended radials using GPS vice DECCA as it was done in my time there?

Granted Wellington would appreciate such a lack of change but after all these years...would not a different approach to the matter make more sense?

[Brilliant Stuff]

I agree the TCAS is giving one a false sense of security just like what happened with the GPS people believe it blindly.

You would have thought in todays age it would be able to produce a Tcas which does not cost a bomb and works as it is supposed to.

[Inverted81]

Hi everyone....

Another ATCO in the "den" .... I dont work hels/rebros (as yet) but work good ol Sumburgh radar. (yes the dreaded 13 13!) . My experience (even in a radar environment) is that there is definitely an increase in the use of TCAS as a mini in cockpit radar. To an extent its great for a general level of situational awareness, however it may not show everything in the vicinity (unknown non squawkers etc)

With regard to missed calls, i'm sure markingtime will agree, it quite surprising how the workload can quite substantially increase for the controller, especially when working like a one armed paper hanger. It's totally understandable with the workload in the cockpit that calls can be missed, especially when your callsign is somewhere in the middle of the melee being transmitted. I find i tend to slow down my transmissions when busy, and emphasise callsigns etc, this usually focuses the crews attention i find.

Talking of bacon butties... heard one crew today apologise for a missed call, saying the cake was just too nice..... :p :) If there are any leftovers, feel free to bring them across (but i somehow doubt there will be ;) )

Multilat is on the way, an don't forget the new ATSOCAS..... cant wait for March! (and you thought the new ILS phraseology was a pain!)

Inverted

[atcomarkingtime]

Yup...thats correct...with a FIS....we emphasise NOTHING KNOWN TO AFFECT......but usually get the reply of "ok....cleared to descend/climb"

I check the TCAS quite alot with you pilots.....especially when military 7001 squawks show on radar in close proximity of your aircraft....no mode c at times...and you dont get it on your TCAS.....so when you here ME asking about the TCAS...then this is why. It doesn't pick up on the A139's......:\

[throw a dyce]

It's a long time since I did helis,as I tend to be stuck at the busy end of the room these day.:E At our end of the room there is no wake up call for crews.You get it once and once only.
If a rebros controller says no known traffic to affect descent,then that is what it means.If there is traffic then they will get a position check to see if it's a conflict.
It isn't a procedural service,but a flight info service with some frills attached.The frills are that any other traffic should be talking to rebros.It is Class G airspace outside radar cover,and if you are descending IMC,then that's your call.The controller can only assist with traffic that is known to them.
The offshore environment has had a shocking lack of protection from the CAA for decades.The military can blast through the HMRs at any time,without calling.There is no requirement(yet) for TCAS,even though outside 80 miles it could be the only thing that stops a collision.As one of my Airline pilot friends called it ''pongos in survival suits''.I think that the CAA sees the passengers,and flight crew on North Sea helis as semi expendable.

[atcomarkingtime]

EEEEEEE...Throw.....it was all green fields when you moved to that busy end of our room....least I can still look out of the window onto green fileds with my feet up whilst ur flat out!!:ok:

[throw a dyce]

Fits green fileds then? I was just a wee loon when our end was all green fileds.:bored:

[atcomarkingtime]

lol....hahaha...with the wx we're having now.....ALL the fields are green....or maybe they were black n white when u went to the busy side....only joking now

[throw a dyce]

EEEE we did it all in those black and white days.Airport and Offshore,and if you couldn't hack any of it, you got sacked.Now you get promoted.:}

[atcomarkingtime]

Crickey...don't try to hack it.....they'll move you south!!! Carry on regardless!!:cool:

[throw a dyce]

I'd like to see them try to move me south.:rolleyes:
Very valuable rapidly dwindling resource Approach Radar controllers.They haven't got the message yet.:=

[HeliComparator]

SAS things have changed slightly - we do not fly along VOR radials, rather along gps tracks called HMRs. However, when crossing HMRs (radials to you!) we have to have a method of reporting position that everyone understands, so we use bearing and distance from the ADN VOR, but since VORs are pretty inaccurate or out of range, we use the gps bearing and distance from the ADN waypoint.

That means we can all give a pretty accurate position indication that is easy to understand (much harder if we were to give lat and long) and common to all operators OR SO I THOUGHT until we found last year that a certain fleet had an out of date magnetic variation table in its GPSs - gps need mag var to convert the true gps bearing from the ADN waypoint to magnetic.The data was many years out of date so the bearings reported were off by several degrees. Several degrees at 120nm = a lot of lateral error! All fixed now but just goes to show how easy it is to get it all horribly wrong!

HC

[MrR]

Nice to see HeliComp climb down from his original view of whether the radar coverage is a good idea!!
Of course, anybody but a twit would advocate otherwise. It staggers me, that here is a wonderful system in offshore Scatsta and Sumburgh that works a treat (and the offshore radar is based in the Norwegian sector).
Compared to working offshore Aberdeen, where you may as well be in a Cessna 150 asking for FIS, the Northern North Sea is a pleasure to fly in, with the radar coverage; thanks to Norway.

[HeliComparator]

MrR

Yes, I have been kind of back-pedalling since the start! But it was just in response to the scaremongering comment "how long do we put up with this dangerous practice " - at first I thought that stabout was probably from the press (until I did my homework). So let me clarify my position, of course multilat is a good thing but if its delayed by a year, that is frustrating but does not have a critical impact on overall safety levels in the N Sea.

Yes the secondary radar provided by the Norwegians is good, but don't forget you are flying to a pretty small area that can be covered by one radar. For the Aberdeen routes a lot more installations would be required and if its hard to install multilat antennae with no moving parts, its much harder to install a rotating radar head ( and both only work on transponder returns)

HC

[atcomarkingtime]

MRr....yup...Brent is great when its on and the radar is working and the comms are working.....:ok:

[P1V1T1]

Interesting article

£5m system to track offshore air traffic soon to go live - Press & Journal (http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1141471)

Can anyone add to this ?

[Special 25]

Why does this article keep referring to 'Emergency Situations' ???

The whole point of 'pseudo radar' coverage offshore is for normal day-to-day operations outside of line of sight radar signals. It is there to stop Emergency situations arising in the first place, and a very welcome addition to an already excellent ATC service.

[TTFD]

This is the "multilateration" system that ATC have been trying to get in place for a few years. It would have been in a lot earlier if the oil companies had freed up beds offshore so that the NATS teams could get the receivers in place. :ugh: As it is not all of them are there yet.

For details on how it works take a look at Multilateration. (http://www.multilateration.com/surveillance/multilateration)

[Pullharder]

Will the system cover both northern and the southern N.sea??? Is anything in place for the guys down south??
Cheers,
PH

[Cuddles]

There is pretty good radar coverage for the guys down south.

Multilat's for outside 80 / 90 miles (135.175) off Aberdeen

[Satcomuk]

£5m system to track offshore air traffic soon to go live - Press & Journal (http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1141471)

As this went to press , Planeplotter was just finishing multilateration trials for the whole of the UK....at a cost of , well , nothing , other than the hundreds of volunteer man hours !

Three months down the line we have about 50 ground stations active most of the time with good coverage down to 3000 feet...even better in many areas.

The North Sea must have been a piece of cake compared to the terrain environment of the mainland.
Of course a PP user can only handle one target per broadband connection , but thats purely down to server constraint.

It will be interesting to see how much the "official" UK Multilateration network will cost , when it eventually gets off the ground.:hmm:

[HeliComparator]

As far as I know its still in the commissioning stage - ie being tested / checked but not actually being used to provide us with a service (though I haven't flown for a while). Once its fully on stream I think it will be of tremendous benefit. Not quite sure what your agenda is, you seem negative about it, why?

HC

[HeliComparator]

Not what National Air Traffic Services told the press!

Perhaps you have a special hotline to NATS, but what they are telling everyone else by means of the press releases on their website (last one on the subject Sept 2009) is that the system is under construction/testing and will come into service in June 2010. Last time I looked at the calendar its only Feb 2010.

I am aware that live data has been being monitored for some time (at least since November) but with it being a system where accuracy, integrity and reliability are critical for flight safety, the testing and proving phase should not and is not being skimped.

Patience is a virtue (or so they say).

The negativity comes out in the tone of your post but as always with the written word, may be open to misinterpretation. But you clearly had some agenda for posting, otherwise why bother?

HC

[rotorfossil]

Has any body noticed that the FAA is initiating ADS/B for the platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. Any chance of the the CAA doing the same for the North Sea. Sigh! Dreams, dreams.

[S76Heavy]

The Dutch are doing a combination of multilateration and ADS/B. Total overhaul of route structure and comms as well. Aim is to have 2 way comms and blip on screen at average helideck level in entire offshore part of FIR.
Should be close to testing phase.

And on this project the oil companies were participants and are stakeholders.

[212man]

And on this project the oil companies were participants and are stakeholders

Same in the GoM.

How to, I think where HC detected the negativity (as I did) was in this statement:

More dosh in the pocket of oil/heli companies?

[M609]

The radar head at Ekofisk has been cancelled because an agreement could not be reached with ConocoPhillips about the placement.

Sad really.

Heidrun radar is going live with a Class D CTA soon, and they are working with ICAO to get Statfjord CTA moved from Class E to D.

Ekofisk has been put on the back burner, waiting to get ADS-B coverage in the future. Multilateration not possible because the platforms are placed more or less on a line, so accuracy would be poor.

[HeliComparator]

rotorfossil / S76 Heavy

As far as I am aware the Multilat system in the N Sea is capable of using ADS-B data from appropriately equipped aircraft. If the aircraft has no ADS-B then it needs to triangulate the transponder transmissions and therefore you need to be in range of several (3 I presume) Multilat receiver aerials. If you have ADS-B then only 1 antenna is needed to pick up your extended squitter info which includes your position and a measure of the integrity thereof.

I find it frustrating that operators are continuing to buy new aircraft without ADS-B. Having identified the issue a year or so ago, the last 6 or so EC225s that Bristow has taken delivery of have ADS-B though 4 of those are now in Australia (ie 2 in the N Sea).

To have ADS-B on the 225 is a doddle - you just need to ensure that EC fits the latest dash-number of the transponder box (TDR94D -409) and connects a twisted pair of wires between the GPS and the Transponder. Not that difficult really and minimal cost!

It has other advantages such as Skywatch not needing to direction-find your bearing with dodgy DF antenna, rather it can just read your gps position, it knows its own gps position and so your bearing and distance is calculated using geometry - much more accurate than DF.

Even to retrofit older aircraft normally just needs an SB applied to the transponder box to bring it up to date, that wire between the GPS and the TDR. Older GPSs had problems outputting the necessary parameters for NIC NAC and SIL to be calculated by the TDR, but even the trusty old Trimble / Freeflight 2101 now does it having had a software update. If I was in charge all offshore helis would be modified to have ADS-B!

I think the problem is that the powers that be, including those who order new aircraft, have no idea about this technology and how straightforward it is to implement. Frustrating!

HC

[S76Heavy]

Getting the appropriate equipment proved to be a major hurdle for the Dutch authorities..with some of the operators and/or manufacturers dragging their feet.
For some of the older aircraft it was not a question of a "plug and play" feature, exacerbated by bean counter mentality in some quarters.

The whole point of triangulation is to give adequate traffic information to offshore ADS/B equipped helicopters with regard to non-ADS/B but squawking crossing traffic in the busiest and largets part of the area, both civil and military. At the far edges of the FIR the risk of conflict with non-offshore traffic is small and the ADS/B provides the basis for Alerting Service/Flight watch.

[rotorfossil]

I was mightily impressed seeing ADS/B in action in Alaska. All participating traffic's position, track and altitude overlayed on the terrain picture in the cockpit. The difference in confidence level from this and dodgy radar based information from ATC due to terrain masking made the point in some distinctly poor vis and low cloud.
However one has to admit that the FAA were funding all the ground stations and provided the first 100 odd aircraft fits FOR FREE so that a realistic trial could be made.

[HeliComparator]

Rotorfossil

Ah yes, there is ADS-B, and then there is ADS-B that is completely different!

Trouble is "ADS-B" doesn't tell you which means are used to transmit the data - could be either Mode S (1090 MHz) as in the N Sea, or the UAT (978MHz) as in Alaksa.

The N Sea (including Dutch airspace) idea is to use Mode S to allow ATC to see you without a rotating radar head. It doesn't allow other aircraft to know where you are unless either ATC tell them, or they have TCAS.

The Alaska idea is to use UAT to propagate the data to all participants, who have nice displays in the cockpit such as you mention. Clearly this idea needs much more mod work for the aircraft cockpit, especially if displays have to be integrated into existing EFIS.

However, I am not sure I am totally jealous of the Alaska system. Its great when there is no ATC but I wonder how useful it is when there is a degree of ATC such as there is in N Sea. We are already in danger of pilots using TCAS as a "traffic management system" (mortal sin!) and the addition of even more alluring data would only increase that tendancy. Too many pilots doing their own thing whilst looking at the nice ADS-B traffic displays in areas of fairly high traffic density might spell disaster. That is why we have ATC!

HC

[rotorfossil]

They have plenty of traffic, all doing their own thing around Juneau which is the whole point. The nice bit about ADS/B UAT is that it also helps those away from any radar cover (like in the middle of Scotland).
My point also was that presumably the GOM traffic situation is similar to the North Sea and they are going with the above system, as is Australia, Sweden and others. I wonder in the end whether having spent the money on a radar based system, we will in the future find that the UAT system, surprise surprise becomes the world standard because it also works where they is no dense radar environment.