Canadian Automated Air Traffic System (CAATS)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Canadian Automated Air Traffic System (CAATS)
From the Navcanada website.
[This message has been edited by Smurfjet (edited 28 December 2000).]
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">CAATS provides an automated air traffic control system capable of meeting both current and long-range air traffic needs. Successful delivery of the system by developer Raytheon to NAV CANADA is a global milestone, making this country the first in the world to successfully automate the processing of flight data to this extent, and to this level of integration with other automated systems in the ANS.
The CAATS system adds to NAV CANADA's global leadership position in new technology development. This leadership has already been established with new electronic systems such as the touch-sensitive electronic flight strips currently in use at Toronto Tower and being deployed elsewhere in the Canadian ANS.
"The successful delivery of CAATS marks the beginning of a two-to-three-year implementation process which will result in NAV CANADA controllers across the country having the world's most advanced flight data processing system at their fingertips," said Sid Koslow, Vice President, Engineering, NAV CANADA.
NAV CANADA has invested close to $300 million in the Canadian Automated Air Traffic System (CAATS).
For more details on CAATS, please consult our News Release and Backgrounder. </font>
The CAATS system adds to NAV CANADA's global leadership position in new technology development. This leadership has already been established with new electronic systems such as the touch-sensitive electronic flight strips currently in use at Toronto Tower and being deployed elsewhere in the Canadian ANS.
"The successful delivery of CAATS marks the beginning of a two-to-three-year implementation process which will result in NAV CANADA controllers across the country having the world's most advanced flight data processing system at their fingertips," said Sid Koslow, Vice President, Engineering, NAV CANADA.
NAV CANADA has invested close to $300 million in the Canadian Automated Air Traffic System (CAATS).
For more details on CAATS, please consult our News Release and Backgrounder. </font>
[This message has been edited by Smurfjet (edited 28 December 2000).]
Pegase Driver
Quote : >NAV CANADA controllers across the country having the world's most advanced flight data processing system at their fingertips," <
Yeah, they also have Shift Logic ...
Always be careful of Glossy brochures...
Yeah, they also have Shift Logic ...
Always be careful of Glossy brochures...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Experience of TAAATS - previously the most advanced (rave, blather, drool) in the Western Spiral Arm of the Milky Way...
One year later....
Machine now works so slowly hardware upgrade seriously considered.
Every software "upgrade" ("its software based, change what you like") to one feature b*gg*rs up another one.
Actual change is a torturous process hampered by lack of understanding by system people about ATC and by ATC people about fiendishly complicated system.
Thousands of safety related faults remain, thousands of suggestions made to make system less infuriating to use. Every fault, if proved to be the fault of the specification, costs big money and ludicrous time to address.
Every so often provider notices a feature is "turned on" that is not in the specification, so "turns it off" (regardless of safety/workload effects) and demands money to "turn it on" again.
Management, bored after protracted process of transition (desperate to justify our top-heavy structure), have run blindly into other projects before transistion is complete.
Reporting of bewildering or everyday faults to techs results in:
1. "No, that can't happen"
2. "Yes, that happens all the time. Have to expect that with a computer based system."
3. Technogibberish worthy of Star Trek (tm).
Best of luck Canadian colleagues, don't expect too much.
------------------
"Station calling Centre, grow a head..."
One year later....
Machine now works so slowly hardware upgrade seriously considered.
Every software "upgrade" ("its software based, change what you like") to one feature b*gg*rs up another one.
Actual change is a torturous process hampered by lack of understanding by system people about ATC and by ATC people about fiendishly complicated system.
Thousands of safety related faults remain, thousands of suggestions made to make system less infuriating to use. Every fault, if proved to be the fault of the specification, costs big money and ludicrous time to address.
Every so often provider notices a feature is "turned on" that is not in the specification, so "turns it off" (regardless of safety/workload effects) and demands money to "turn it on" again.
Management, bored after protracted process of transition (desperate to justify our top-heavy structure), have run blindly into other projects before transistion is complete.
Reporting of bewildering or everyday faults to techs results in:
1. "No, that can't happen"
2. "Yes, that happens all the time. Have to expect that with a computer based system."
3. Technogibberish worthy of Star Trek (tm).
Best of luck Canadian colleagues, don't expect too much.
------------------
"Station calling Centre, grow a head..."
Pegase Driver
ADS-B another (very) nice glossy brochure !
How to separate yourself using a 10x10cm display ! As it says : seeing is believing ! ( I believe you are there, therefore I can do that ?)
Incidentaly the quoted : major support from the US cargo Airlines association for ADS -B was perhaps because they believed that with ADS-B they could eleminate the need for them to fit TCAS II on their aircraft ( as ADS-B cost a fraction of a TCAS) .But as the FAA (rightly) mandated TCAS for cargo a/c as well now, I would bet the cargo Association is not that warm about the ads project anymore...
How to separate yourself using a 10x10cm display ! As it says : seeing is believing ! ( I believe you are there, therefore I can do that ?)
Incidentaly the quoted : major support from the US cargo Airlines association for ADS -B was perhaps because they believed that with ADS-B they could eleminate the need for them to fit TCAS II on their aircraft ( as ADS-B cost a fraction of a TCAS) .But as the FAA (rightly) mandated TCAS for cargo a/c as well now, I would bet the cargo Association is not that warm about the ads project anymore...
Guest
Posts: n/a
From the tests they been doing in Alaska, I guess they want the bush pilots to use it?
Also why not use it for Oceanic traffic seperation?
If I am not mistaken ADS-B also provides "terrain awareness" for the pilots, I guess it can be the next best thing after GPS for the GA.
Regards
Also why not use it for Oceanic traffic seperation?
If I am not mistaken ADS-B also provides "terrain awareness" for the pilots, I guess it can be the next best thing after GPS for the GA.
Regards
Guest
Posts: n/a
karrank:
That has got to be the most comprehensive and accurate assessment of the great TAARTS adventure I have read. Glad to see the frustrations have been universally distributed, not just in our little corner of the system.
The other thing to be wary of is the reported costs... I still do not believe the Dr-Spin figures compared to what must be reality. Basically lots and lots of $$$$ for no improvment in acceptance rates (except the dollars in the performance based salaries of fly-in-zoom-on-out management.
------------------
[email protected]
"The views expressed here are a personal rant and rave and in no way reflect the views of my employer/s, not even by coincidence I should imagine "
That has got to be the most comprehensive and accurate assessment of the great TAARTS adventure I have read. Glad to see the frustrations have been universally distributed, not just in our little corner of the system.
The other thing to be wary of is the reported costs... I still do not believe the Dr-Spin figures compared to what must be reality. Basically lots and lots of $$$$ for no improvment in acceptance rates (except the dollars in the performance based salaries of fly-in-zoom-on-out management.
------------------
[email protected]
"The views expressed here are a personal rant and rave and in no way reflect the views of my employer/s, not even by coincidence I should imagine "
Guest
Posts: n/a
The ADS-B thing is a little more complicated (aren't things always that way) I think.
The stuffthey are doing in Alaska uses a package beuilt by UPSAT (the old II Morrow) and allows for radar like atc in a nonradar environment (mountain valleys and such), controlled flight into terrain avoidance and some moving map with weather , I think.
One of the fundamental questions that still has to be answered is what data link to use...there are a bunch floating around, each with engineering pros and cons as well as various political/economic supporters. Until this is sorted out better it will be difficult for the avionics industry to built boxes or systems. Then there is certification. Then there are operational procedures. And only then is there benefits to users.
In the Oceanic airspace what happened to FANS? It is kind of an oceanic ADS B using the ACARS data link.
The Cargo Airlines people could be looking for a "poor man's TCAS" but there also could be benefits in their making schedules for departures and arrivals by increasing the arrival and departure rates at their hub airports. What about section takeoffs?
The ADS-B
The stuffthey are doing in Alaska uses a package beuilt by UPSAT (the old II Morrow) and allows for radar like atc in a nonradar environment (mountain valleys and such), controlled flight into terrain avoidance and some moving map with weather , I think.
One of the fundamental questions that still has to be answered is what data link to use...there are a bunch floating around, each with engineering pros and cons as well as various political/economic supporters. Until this is sorted out better it will be difficult for the avionics industry to built boxes or systems. Then there is certification. Then there are operational procedures. And only then is there benefits to users.
In the Oceanic airspace what happened to FANS? It is kind of an oceanic ADS B using the ACARS data link.
The Cargo Airlines people could be looking for a "poor man's TCAS" but there also could be benefits in their making schedules for departures and arrivals by increasing the arrival and departure rates at their hub airports. What about section takeoffs?
The ADS-B
Pegase Driver
Ratboy, FANS trials in the Pacific are not ADS-B at all . I am not sure the Alaska trials will also be pure ADS-B.
I think people confuse pure ADS , which is when the ground interrogates the aircraft systems to determine a position, and in case of FANS-1 it uses the ACARS data link to do this )and display this position on a data display on the ground for controllers. On the contrary, ADS-B is the a/c systems BROADCASTING their position to each other, and this info displayed on a samll data screen in the cockpit.
I think people confuse pure ADS , which is when the ground interrogates the aircraft systems to determine a position, and in case of FANS-1 it uses the ACARS data link to do this )and display this position on a data display on the ground for controllers. On the contrary, ADS-B is the a/c systems BROADCASTING their position to each other, and this info displayed on a samll data screen in the cockpit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ratboy and ATC Watcher,
Regarding the question of which data-link to use, it seems most likely at the mo that a multiple link system will be the eventual answer... obviously this leads to problems (either there has to be a translator on the ground between the different data-links - a potential application of TIS-B currently being trialed in Alaska - or aircraft will be required to equip with two or more equipment sets for the differing links). However, these are seen as lesser problems than the current wrangling over a single system. The Alaska CAPSTONE trials are using (as far as I know) only broadcast systems - but this does include TIS-B as well as ADS-B (the basic difference being that TIS-B uses a ground station to receive all the information from aircraft and ground users, then re-transmits it to the aircraft systems. ADS-B sends the info direct from aircraft to aircraft.)
FANS 1/A (so as not to exclude scarebus's offering!) is not just about ADS (Contract or Broadcast). The acronym stands for Future Air Navigation System but includes all aspects of comms, nav and surveillance... the system will potentially include a new aeronautical telecommunication network (ATN), ADS-C, and satellite navigation and communication (using an augmentation system for greater coverage and accuracy). It isn't just about oceanic airspace either - some airlines haven't equipped yet because they are waiting for the FAA to develop FANS for domestic use - it's just that the most discernible benefits are in the oceanic environment (e.g. user preferred routing, CPDLC).
A quick note on ADS - the contract version (ATC Watcher's 'pure' ADS) does not get interrogated as such - the ground sets up a contract with the aircraft's systems to provide information (for example, every 20 secs)... this info is then sent from the aircraft automatically, and can be used by all users to whom it is transmitted.
ADS-B is broadcast - however the information does go to the ground users as well as other airborne targets... the controller on the ground will have a consistent picture to that of the pilot watching his CDTI (cockpit display of traffic information).
Smurfjet,
The trials in Alaska are for pilots to use the system for 'enhanced see-and-avoid'... in other words, as an aid to visual acquisition... bush pilots would certainly be included, but the GA market would be the main beneficiary. It would probably be integrated with a GPS system, to provide terrain, navigation and traffic information in the same box!
ADS-B will be used for traffic separation sometime in the future (next 10 yrs?) - oceanic and domestic en-route.
RS.
Regarding the question of which data-link to use, it seems most likely at the mo that a multiple link system will be the eventual answer... obviously this leads to problems (either there has to be a translator on the ground between the different data-links - a potential application of TIS-B currently being trialed in Alaska - or aircraft will be required to equip with two or more equipment sets for the differing links). However, these are seen as lesser problems than the current wrangling over a single system. The Alaska CAPSTONE trials are using (as far as I know) only broadcast systems - but this does include TIS-B as well as ADS-B (the basic difference being that TIS-B uses a ground station to receive all the information from aircraft and ground users, then re-transmits it to the aircraft systems. ADS-B sends the info direct from aircraft to aircraft.)
FANS 1/A (so as not to exclude scarebus's offering!) is not just about ADS (Contract or Broadcast). The acronym stands for Future Air Navigation System but includes all aspects of comms, nav and surveillance... the system will potentially include a new aeronautical telecommunication network (ATN), ADS-C, and satellite navigation and communication (using an augmentation system for greater coverage and accuracy). It isn't just about oceanic airspace either - some airlines haven't equipped yet because they are waiting for the FAA to develop FANS for domestic use - it's just that the most discernible benefits are in the oceanic environment (e.g. user preferred routing, CPDLC).
A quick note on ADS - the contract version (ATC Watcher's 'pure' ADS) does not get interrogated as such - the ground sets up a contract with the aircraft's systems to provide information (for example, every 20 secs)... this info is then sent from the aircraft automatically, and can be used by all users to whom it is transmitted.
ADS-B is broadcast - however the information does go to the ground users as well as other airborne targets... the controller on the ground will have a consistent picture to that of the pilot watching his CDTI (cockpit display of traffic information).
Smurfjet,
The trials in Alaska are for pilots to use the system for 'enhanced see-and-avoid'... in other words, as an aid to visual acquisition... bush pilots would certainly be included, but the GA market would be the main beneficiary. It would probably be integrated with a GPS system, to provide terrain, navigation and traffic information in the same box!
ADS-B will be used for traffic separation sometime in the future (next 10 yrs?) - oceanic and domestic en-route.
RS.
