NAS link down again!

[Girl Flyday]

Understand the link between NERC and West Drayton has gone down again, with a standard departure time of 1000z being issued for all UK airways departures...

Is this likely to be a regular occurrence?

[BEXIL160]

:( The simple answer is Yes.

Whilst NERC / Swanwick continues to rely on NAS, or the link to it, at West Drayton this will happen again and again and again.

Lose NAS (or the link) and NERC goes MANUAL. Getting NERC back to electronic operation is really not possible until the traffic levels are reduced to minimal levels either by waiting until 0200, or slapping on draconian flow measures.

So, until NAS is replaced, the link made more stable, or NERC made to run without NAS, I'm very much sadened to say that yes, this kind of failure will happen again.

The solution? Look WEST, and see what the FAA is doing about replacing NAS in it's facilities.

rgds BEX

[hatsoff]

Just heard Prospect's Iain Findlay saying that safety wasn't a problem this morning :(
That's alright then.

[Chilli Monster]

Hardly a safety problem when traffic can't get airborne is it ;)

Seriously though - this is crazy. The whole world was told it would take 6 weeks to get to full capacity - 12 weeks after changeover and this sort of thing is happening still. The boys and girls at the coalface are doing a great job when it happens, but isn't it time management and the government between themselves had a kick up the arse and injected some real money to sort it - we're behaving like a 3rd world country here :(

CM

[ppd]

BEXIL160,

Just look East, on the other side of the Channel!!! Plenty of back-up but it is expensive.

CHILI MONSTER

Yes, I am afraid: 3rd World Country.

[BEXIL160]

You are right, of course. There ARE solutions available in Europe as well..... pity they weren't taken into account when NERC planning began.

BEX

[Legs11]

BEX,

Was there any NERC planning?

When this sort of thing is still going on, I wonder:rolleyes: .

Crass amatuerism. Thank God for capable ATCOs.:cool:

[jocko0102]

Sack all the overpaid managers that have got us into this position take NATS back into public ownership and give the boys and girls (that keep bailing the To***rs out when it goes belly up)a proper pay rise!

[BDiONU]

In answer to some points raised on here, yes it was originally proposed that NERC worked totally independantly of NAS. It was what the ATC project team members wanted.
However, things are not as simple as getting what you want because it makes sense.
When you are in any phase of a project as big as NERC you cannot simply provide a single solution to the money me. When you prpose a system, or a development, or a change etc. you must not just justify your requirement, but you must give options. Generally the method used is known as an AOD (Analysis, Object, Design).
So you must give a detailed requirement of what you want, how you want it to work and why. But its not enough to simply do that, you have to give a range of options; As an example say you wanted to save more data from the workstations for later examination. You have to detail how you could do it:
1) Send it on the existing LAN (which might overload it, so details required).
2) Build an extra LAN to cope with the greater volume of data flowing.
3) Change the speed at which the processor handles other tasks, to allow your data to be sent.
4) Change the processors for faster ones.
Etc. Etc.
Its not a simple process and there are various stages (hoops!) to go through. At the end of the day you propose your solution, the one you really want, but its not your decision to make. Those that control the purse strings make the final decision based on the AOD they've seen.
Hence, despite it being the project staff's wish not to be lumbered with NAS it was out of their hands.

No idea why NAS flopped again, last time it was an incorrect route amendment which had been input. What the solution to NAS is I don't know but a stable and more reliable replacement is required urgently. However, as we all know, there's no money available for that! Sigh!!

[2 six 4]

Isn't it about time we had software that won't accept "wrong inputs" and doesn't take the damned code callsign off every time it restarts !!!! :( :(

[BEXIL160]

Take3 etc...

Perhaps the entire process that NATS uses / has used for system specification and purchase is WRONG.

NERC with all it's woes, and the non-replacement of NAS seem to point to something being not right.

Maybe it's time to simplify the whole process. Now I know that the "can't be done" brigade will be up in arms at any threat to their empires, but take a look at the US. Things get done, largely without too much delay, and with full involvement of NATCA. (Article 48.... I think)

They are actually DOING something about replacing NAS. They are doing it function by function, with no big bang. This lessens the risk. As I understand it we are still "thinking about it". Nothing has actually been done. Perhaps we should be speaking to the FAA, or better still NATCA. RIGHT NOW.

The reason I mention the USA and not Europe so much is because their system is very familiar to UK controllers, right down to DM, PR, AU etc etc messages... because it has its roots in the good old 9020, as ours does.

Europe also offers some practical "turn key" replacements. Talk to Thomson CSF.

Til the next FLOP / Startover.....

Rgds BEX

[BDiONU]

BEXIL160

Cannot agree more!!! Yes the whole system is FAR TOO SLOW. It takes ridiculous amounts of time to get changes (apart from adaptation, which we can generally do ourselves) put through the system.
I can accept that there's an engineering process to go through, after all when ATC types want something doing they don't care if its a token ring LAN with or without ethernet connections etc. or if its a little man on a bike who goes around handing out messages.
Its the money men (hello SDI!) that have us by the balls. :(

[1261]

Maybe this is a naive question, but how can putting in one route ammendment crash an entire ATC system?

Somebody surely must realize that if that's what it's come to the system needs serious work - right now!

[BDiONU]

1261

The route amendment (can't recall the exact detail as the bit of paper is sitting on my desk at work) caused a brainache to NAS as it removed part of the route. NAS tried a startover 6 times before going bellyup. The 'fault' has been in the system for years but this is the first time (AFAIK) that it had manifested itself. If you recall the massive NAS shutdown early summer last year, that was caused by 2 known 'faults' (known for about 12 years I believe) which the possibility of them being triggered was considered so minimal that they were never 'fixed' until OOOOPPSSS!!!

Scott made the point previously about NAS being an olde creaky system reliant on an veritable and ancient language (Jovian). Long past time to re-write and sweep it up in a modern language which has (at least) a compiler to spot programming errors! But, as always, where's the money? Maybe we could ask Easyjet to give us another £7 million wad and write it off?

[1261]

Thanks T3C5, that's very informative.

I am continually amazed at the lack of investment in important infrastructure in this country, and not just in our business. The proposed new tower at EDI was put on the backburner again this week: "sites in the airport's central area are very valuable to us, as they may in future be required for important items of airport infrastructure" said BAA. I think they mean car parks, but I can't be sure.

Do the airlines want an ATC system that works or not? If the answer is (and continues to be) NO then maybe I will apply for a job with Virgin Trains. At least they've invested in some new equipment, and I understand I'll get a pay rise!

[BDiONU]

Hey!! A job with Virgin Trains! At last I could realise my schoolboy ambition to be an engine driver!! :D

[Algy]

BEXIL160,

you are not seriously holding up the US development/procurement system as a model for everyone else. Have you actually been watching what's happened there over the last decade or two (or rather what's not happened over there)? Makes NERC look painless in comparison.

[BEXIL160]

errr YES I am.

It isn't perfect, I know, BUT at the very least it does have FULL involvement of the people who actually have to use the system (i.e. NATCA controllers). I am also aware how deeply unpopular this can be with some project managers ("suits"). I am certain this would also be the case over here. A

The US system has had some success. DSR for instance. The problem for them now is what happens when Ms. Garvey leaves office and who will take up the poison chalice of the COO position.

Be serious. We have NOTHING to brag over on this side of the pond. NERC cannot be described as a glowing success, perhaps a qualified one, but no more. Plainly our procument system is wrong. The USA might provide an example.

Rgds BEX

[Warped Factor]

NATS CEO letter (http://www.guardian.co.uk/airlines/story/0,1371,683016,00.html) to The Grauniad.

WF.

[BEXIL160]

He fails to mention that this could happen again...and again...and again.....

BEX

[BDiONU]

Yes BEXIL160, it can happen again and again and again! The latest FLOP was caused by EXACTLY the same type of 'fault' as caused the previous one! In a nutshell the 'Irish Gap' problem where flights from Scottish, routing through Irish airspace and then into English airspace, if they have an amendment done on them cause the whole system to collapse!
The NOS (NAS Operational Support) team have fixed those two particular faults but are of the opinion that there are LOTS more out there just waiting for some amendment to trigger them, then BANGO!

It is a nonsense for the NATS CEO to say that there is a pile of gold to dig into!! For example the proposal a very few years ago to prevent things like the Irish Gap (which is caused because NAS only recognises one OLDI centre and, Scottish to Irish is one, then Irish to LACC is two and LACC to whereever on the continent is three!) was to have a NAS MIDI (basically a mini version of NAS) especially for Scottish, the rest of NAS treating them just like a normal external NAS unit. This would have been perfect! Allows Scottish to subsume Manch with no trouble and eventually allows LACC to subsume TC. But........ The cost was £5 million, with military buy in. However the MOD insisted on a totally transparent system, without regional divides, the cost then >KACHING< £18 million!! So NATS board backed off.
I believe they are currently looking at the Spanish system which can handle 4 OLDI's. They have already looked THREE times in 10 years at replacing the FDP system!!!!

But to stir murky waters further.
Do you all recall the luverly FLOP on 17th June 2000? Well it turns out that NATS board looked at this and came up with a host of actions to be taken to prevent repetition. Have all these actions come to fruition? No. Why not? I hear you cry! Basically because of lack of accountability by those very senior board members, most of whom have either moved on or left the company and did diddly squat about the tasks they were given to do.

[BEXIL160]

Take3 etc...

No, I don't think you are muddying the waters. I think you have given some very useful explanations. Thank you. Perhaps others will take note.

As you may have gathered, my own contacts and info are USA biased, but if the Spanish have a system that works and will replace NAS lets have a look at it and see how long it would take to get it up and running.... Hey we could have this thing sorted in months... :)

Except that it isn't going to happen that way, is it? <sigh> Nope, despite my, and your, evident enthusiam for getting the system fixed.....

NATS will continue to "spin" that everything in the garden is rosy, the controllers, engineers and assistants will continue to make the best of what equipment they have left and from time to time NAS WILL continue to FLOP causing delays.

As I said before, until the NEXT time...

Best rgds
BEX

[BDiONU]

BEXIL160

I suppose we both live in hope that others will take note but it seems to be a queer sort of accounting used to run NATS. NAS MIDI would have been £5 million (or 18 dependant on the MOD), but how much have these last two FLOPS cost the company? Short term bottom line profits!! There does seem to be one motivating factor to the NATS board and thats public embarrassment which they are getting in spades as the latest FLOP hit every UK newspaper!

One other thing which I meant to mention is that there also seems to be 'pet' project status for things which appeal to certain members of the board. As I've stated before there are a series of hoops to jump through to get money from SDI for projects, except...... For example EPS seems to be totally bypassing everything, despite it having no proven business benefit!!! It won't help shift more traffic, it might lessen the reliance on ATSA's but the amortisation time is around 12 years!! So why are they pressing ahead with EPS to the apparent detriment of other projects?

Whilst I'm in 'whinge' mode:
The next LACC software upgrade is N07 which has some decent operational stuff in it. But after that, despite a list of things as long as your arm asked for by the project team to assist the workers at the coal face move traffic, there are only 2 things in N08 (and one of those looks like being chucked out) and a single (weak) thing in N09. Builds are full we're told! Full of what??? This ATC system is there for operational staff but they are NOT getting what they have asked for and what we've demonstrated is required to make the system more robust and user friendly. :confused: :mad:

p.s. Next LACC DD&C (shutdown to you great unwashed ;) ) is Wednesday night, so get your paperbacks out as delays WILL be the order of the day!

[Lon More]

ebd wrote: Just look East

It's not all plane sailing* here unfortunately.The new ODS system at Maastricht has suffered considerable delay to great annoyance of all. We are however in the fortunate situation that it has not been touted in the media as the greatest thing since Mother's Pride and so escapes the inevitable retribution.

I was in sunny Bournemouth last week on the sim and would have liked to try to visit Swanick but was too kn@ckered every evening


*pun intended