FAA greenlights satellite-based air traffic control system

[birrddog]

More info here :

FAA greenlights satellite-based air traffic control system | NetworkWorld.com Community (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/35714)

(I could not find a similar post using pprune search)

[suninmyeyes]

It's not really surprising the USA are getting it. Shanwick and Gander have been using CPDLC for years. New York oceanic has had it for a while and even Algiers uses it.

Mind you it would be nice to have the whole of Africa covered by it and universally controlled by a competent authority. That way it doesn't matter if the Djamena and Lubumbashi controllers go home at night. Ahh well I can dream.

[Iceman49]

Unfortunately its still rare when Shanwick or Gander allows a climb in oceanic airspace. Especially frustrating when you have the aircraft on TCAS.

[Henry VIII]

European timetable. (http://www.ans.dhmi.gov.tr/TR/Sistem/Dok/ADS-B%20Politikasi.pdf)

[Fly3]

Been using it in KZAK and PANC airspace for a couple of years at least with no problems. Level changes and even block levels are given readily making it very economical to operate. 14 hour crossing of the Pacific Ocean with one HF call at 150W, bliss.

[Del Prado]

Especially frustrating when you have the aircraft on TCAS.

'Identified' on TCAS or are you assuming?

[GetTheFlick]

Should I be cynical about the timing of all this ? Would anybody like to bet that the current regime at the FAA is trying to get some contracts signed before the Obama Administration comes in and cleans house ?

Keep your eyes on Bobby Sturgell & Co. next year and see where they wind up.

Blakey Named Top Lobbyist (http://www.smartbrief.com/news/aia/storyDetails.jsp?issueid=2F5C1BA2-592B-4392-83AF-6AD3C03256E8&copyid=97418FB7-CA5F-4B8F-A40B-99900C7546C3&lmcid=)

AIA dailyLead | 11/05/2008

The Hill newspaper recently named Aerospace Industries Association President Marion Blakey to its list of top business lobbyists. "The former FAA administrator took the helm of the powerful association last year and is already making an impression," the newspaper says. Hill, The (05/01)

[VulcanPrincess]

I fly through Mastricht and they also use CPDLC

[Iceman49]

"Identified" on TCAS, they show up or do we have to worry about the Stealth aircraft on the tracks?

[Del Prado]

How exactly are they identified?
Have you ever been warned by Shannon of Russian carriers and associated air activity when on the north atlantic tracks or other unauthorised military penetration of North Atlantic airspace?
Have you ever heard of a Mode C error causing erroneous TCAS advice?

Still, 999 times out of 1000 your assumption will be correct, I guess that's safe enough for you.

[Iceman49]

Negative on the first 2(been flying the North Atlantic since 74...military and comercial) yes I have read about mode C errors, 40 miles seems to be excessive for separtion...

[PeltonLevel]

The article seems to confuse ADS-B with ADS-C (the latter being satellite-based, the former using radar frequencies and a network of ground stations).

60 mile separation on the ocean does seem a lot, but less than 50% of aircraft on the North Atlantic are currently capable of automatic reporting of satellite derived positions and receiving instructions over the much more reliable satellite communications channels. There is also some evidence that, even when they get through, not all reports received over the Ballygirreen HF radio link are totally accurate, so manual reporting cannot be relied on for reduced separation.

[slatch]

It will be interesting to see if the Aircraft get any better service for the money it will cost for the increase in polling. Those Sat position reports are not cheap. If the system allows the ATC facility to set the polling rate and the Airline has to pay the bill, why would the ATCO not put it at maximum. Who cares what it costs the airline. There are alot of issues to be ironed out. The Airlines are going to want and see a cost benifit before they start sending $2 position reports by sat every minute or more.

[PeltonLevel]

The Airlines are going to want and see a cost benifit before they start sending $2 position reports by sat every minute or more.Well they would do, if the system made much use of satellites for ATC communications in addition to aircraft location (GPS). As I noted above, the article seems to invite confusion between ADS-C (generally satellite based) and ADS-B which broadcasts periodically - of the order of once per second - and uses the ground stations mentioned in the body of the article. ADS-B ground stations can go anywhere, they just need a non-directional antenna and a comms link back to the ATSU. A sensible place might be at cellphone base stations - the requirement is similar (all aircraft must be in radio sight of the receiver) but the density of stations is less. The cost of hauling the data back to the ATSU falls on the ANSP, not the operator.

[GetTheFlick]

ADS-B ground stations can go anywhere,...

Even in the middle of the North Atlantic ? Can't wait to see that.

I notice in the Gulf of Mexico they'll be on oil rigs. Wonder what happens when the oil rigs move ? If I remember correctly, the FAA has already tried sea buoys.

U.S. ADS-B coverage (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/enroute/surveillance_broadcast/coverage/)

Don Brown

[PeltonLevel]

Even in the middle of the North Atlantic ? Can't wait to see that.
Me neither!

However, we are talking about continental, not oceanic, control!
The rig installations are needed in the Gulf of Mexico because the northern area is counted as domestic airspace. It doesn't matter if the host rigs are moved, as long as there is still overlapping coverage in the area of interest. It's a lot easier than using them as radar sites as you don't need to recalibrate the processing systems if the antenna is moved.

[GetTheFlick]

I was looking for something different...but until I find it, this ought to keep your interest. :)

Radar on an oil rig (http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/story/6770337p-6659173c.html)

Don Brown

[PeltonLevel]

Amazing! Thanks for that.

[undervaluedATC]

slatch:If the system allows the ATC facility to set the polling rate and the Airline has to pay the bill, why would the ATCO not put it at maximum. Who cares what it costs the airline.

so slatch, what do you base that accusation on? Are do you just generally hate ATC's?

Here in Australia, where we have both ADS-C (Contract) and ADS-B (Broadcast) when it comes to ADS-C the minimum time we can establish between position reports is 5 minutes - and we only do that in an emergency - otherwise the default reporting rate is 30 minutes. We know that everytime a report comes down it costs the airline money.

We DO NOT see how many times in one minute we can set it off!

[GetTheFlick]

You're welcome Pelton. But it's nothing new.

Texas Towers (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/texas-tower.htm)

Makes you wonder what we could do with today's technology. It's amazing how much money we can spend on defense -- but can't on infrastructure.

Don Brown

[GetTheFlick]

...otherwise the default reporting rate is 30 minutes.

Does anyone know what it is in the North Atlantic (or what is normal) ? The FAA is pushing NextGen like it's the answer to all our prayers. I just don't see it. It look more like another AAS-type disaster (http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Projects-Processes/The-Ugly-History-of-Tool-Development-at-the-FAA/) to me.

Don Brown

[Minesapint]

Try Welcome — ASAS TN (http://www.asas-tn.org) and look up In Trail Procedure. NATS have trialled this recently. The system uses a new type of cockpit display (CDTI) which I understand uses the current TCAS 'screen'. The requirement is for ADS-B 'in' to support aircraft to aircraft exchanges. The procedure is still authorised and notitored by an ATCO. The USA are using this in the Gulf of Mexico, pick an ASAS workshop from the website - best the ASAS Global recently held in rome - and view the FAA slides, possibly Boeing and Airbus too. This is part of the reason that ADS-B/C is required for Nextgen and SESAR.

[GetTheFlick]

Try Welcome — ASAS TN and look up In Trail Procedure.

Well, thanks but, no thanks. The first page was quite enough. It's bad enough trying to wade through the FAA's stuff. I'm too old to start trying to wade through Eurocontrol's. :)

I'll stick with the bit of logic that tells me JFK and Heathrow are both operating at capacity even though we running huge amounts of spacing over the Pond. Cutting that spacing in half won't relieve the congestion where it counts -- at the airport.

[PeltonLevel]

Cutting that spacing in half won't relieve the congestionBut it does make it more likely that more optimal routes can be offered, saving a few tons of fuel every day.

[GetTheFlick]

But it does make it more likely that more optimal routes can be offered, saving a few tons of fuel every day.

Okay. If you say so. I never worked oceanic so I can't say.

Don Brown

[Minesapint]

Yup, airport capacity is another question!

[Blockla]

But it does make it more likely that more optimal routes can be offered, saving a few tons of fuel every day.Which then get wasted flying in circles awaiting your allocated landing slot...

RNP/ADS-B/CPDLC/ADS-C/WAM/ADSB-IN etc. are all wonderful tools heading towards enroute free flight and better performing nav /comms systems; but there still is no real point if the bits of TAR are all full; generally speaking airspace isn't congested it's airports (admitting there are times when routes fill up)

I'm interested in what FEDex are doing re self spacing for landing (by airborne systems)? Is it working for them are they realising any true savings; or is it just smoke and mirrors? Are any others doing this?

Until you get fleet-wide systems in place there are massive limitations on this self separation, it only takes a few airframes to disrupt the whole show (like one non RVSM approved a/c flying in RVSM airspace)... Then there are the failure events....

I used to do APP control with RNP approach paths (apparently huge benefits for fuel burn and safety margins), the speed variations even with same type on the same route were huge (as the individual box is picking the individual optimal performance), combine that with different types on different approaches to the same bit of TAR and it becomes very inefficient because the safety margins and missed approach procedures were totally different and it was very difficult to judge what space and speeds between aircraft were required to enable two or more successful arrivals; so some flying the RNPs may have saved some juice, but others were cost that saving and probably more because these things exist...

[GetTheFlick]

I'm interested in what FEDex are doing re self spacing for landing (by airborne systems)?

Do you mean FedEx in Memphis (MEM) or UPS in Louisville (SDF) ?

My info is a couple of years old but...

FedEx was getting cute -- their dispatchers (reportedly) were telling them to slow down or speed up (hundreds of miles out) trying to set up their arrival times -- forgetting to tell ATC. Supposedly (again, just rumor) a few would ask for a reroute to a different arrival becuase the dispatchers were shuffling gates.

UPS has a full-blown experimental program using ADS-B and Continous Descent Approaches (CDAs). All the eggheads and managers think CDAs are the best thing since beer. I don't know of any controllers that think they will work in congested airspace. I know they didn't work well at ATL or CLT. (Very limited experiments on the midnight shift.)

Experiments on the midnight shift at an isolated airport (SDF) with just one company (UPS) isn't going to tell us much about the real world.

Don Brown

[Blockla]

Thanks Don, I suspect the later was what I had in mind.

CDAs can work if the APP paths and Routes don't cross the DEP paths and Routes or conflict with other nearby airports... And if you can design an efficient route structure that does that then you've gonna have a few Squillan $$$ to bank.

Whilst the isolated nature of this trial may not prove too much, at least it is proving the technology and the possibilities moving forward. But is it working, are they getting it right? Is it more efficient?

From my reading of the processes it appeared that it would be very hands on regarding 'automatic' speed adjustments etc which I'd have thought would have reduced the benefits significantly; the landing gap may be 'perfect' but to achieve it cost all the benefits or more?

[PeltonLevel]

gtf
Does anyone know what it is in the North Atlantic (or what is normal) ?The current proposals for reduced longitudinal separation (RLongSM) in the Shanwick/Gander areas are:
Normally position reports are provided every 10 degrees (approx 40 minutes). For the use of a RLongSM, the reporting frequency will be increased by the use of 20 minute ADS-C periodic contracts, in addition to waypoint reports.

[Minesapint]

UPS use it too at thgeir hub in Kenyucky.

[ollie_a]

For anyone interested, the technology UPS use is called SafeRoute (http://www.acss.com/products/Pages/SafeRoute.aspx). There is a link to a presentation which is quite interesting.

[GetTheFlick]

From my reading of the processes it appeared that it would be very hands on regarding 'automatic' speed adjustments etc which I'd have thought would have reduced the benefits significantly; the landing gap may be 'perfect' but to achieve it cost all the benefits or more?

I see where you could say that Blocka. It's get spaced at high altitude instead of spaced at low altitude. The problem you run into is in spacing at high altitude (for a CDA), there's always some guy taking off at an in-close airport that will mess up the sequence.

It's easier for me to go with what I know (my old airspace) but not easier for you. :) We used to have everybody just about all lined up for CLT and then the guy out of TRI would launch. Two minutes later the guy off AVL would launch. They're both less than 150 miles from CLT. The high-altitude merge plan went right out the window. And that was just one out of four arrivals -- not even the busiest side.

It's all a fantasy. Again, it might work on the mid for UPS. But in the real world ? I don't think so. There are just too many variables.

Don Brown

[GetTheFlick]

Thanks Pelton.

Don Brown

[GetTheFlick]

There is a link to a presentation which is quite interesting.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion Ollie but "interesting" isn't the word I'd choose.

SafeRoute (http://www.acss.com/products/Pages/SafeRoute.aspx)

"...so when the they come to the merge point,..."

And proof reading is the least of their problems. The "conversations" in their presentation are priceless. :ok:

Don Brown

[NIFTY SO AND SO]

Anybody here ever heard of it?

Alledgedly to do with the North Sea...why not used Atlantic wise???

NIF

[eglnyt]

REBROS uses the North Sea rigs as platforms to broadcast and receive VHF. This allows the normal line of sight issues to be overcome and VHF communication coverage to be provided well offshore. There are no similar installations in the Atlantic which you could use.