approch sequencing tools
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 50N
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting...Tony Goldman who at one time was Director General, Civil Aviation in the former Department of the Environment, Transport and The Regions, and is now I think involved in a role within the JAA or Eurocontrol, was about eight years ago quoted as saying that controller computer-based support tools "...will enable all controllers to achieve the performance of the best".
Since this notion was obviously fed to the DETR at the time, one can speculate as to the Government's real objective particularly as Gonzo says,
.
Perhaps it also has something to do with workforce supply and demand...? After all, a declining pool* of 'star performers' whether in ATC, Formula 1 or on the soccer pitch can command premium rates of pay...
* retirements/emigration/medical cancellations, etc
Since this notion was obviously fed to the DETR at the time, one can speculate as to the Government's real objective particularly as Gonzo says,
...The ATCOs were regularly outperforming it anyway...
Perhaps it also has something to do with workforce supply and demand...? After all, a declining pool* of 'star performers' whether in ATC, Formula 1 or on the soccer pitch can command premium rates of pay...
* retirements/emigration/medical cancellations, etc
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that with one particular system the idea was to market it world-wide so it was really a money-spinner rather than a tool which would do the job as well as a trained ATCO at the unit where it was trialled.
I'm not saying which system or which unit.
I'm not saying which system or which unit.
None but a blockhead
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The shrimp boat link doesn't load here...
Here's another, which does - shrimp boats - and also mentions a dastardly trick.
R
Here's another, which does - shrimp boats - and also mentions a dastardly trick.
R
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ground Bound;
I've seen COMPAS and it looked alot like FAST or PFAST that was being designed by NASA. NATCA was able to show that it didn't do any better if not worse than the controllers doing it manually. NASA said for XX millions of dollars they could improve it. NATCA stated that the money could be better spent elsewhere and the program was canned.
regards
Scott
I've seen COMPAS and it looked alot like FAST or PFAST that was being designed by NASA. NATCA was able to show that it didn't do any better if not worse than the controllers doing it manually. NASA said for XX millions of dollars they could improve it. NATCA stated that the money could be better spent elsewhere and the program was canned.
regards
Scott
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: on the move again...
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my recollection, Maestro, Compas and pFAST were all 'sequencing' tools, whereas NATS FAST was/is a 'spacing' tool. Subtle differences in their design and intentions of how to aid controllers (or not
).
Maestro developed by Sofreavia in France, sold to the French ATC and also Oz plus I think elesewhere as part of bundled packages...the French have a way of doing this....
Compas developed by DFS for themselves.
NATS FAST developed by NATS for NATS at Hurn.
I think all of these products have been displayed at various conferences ATCA / Maastricht etc...
Not a controller so I couldn't / wouldn't comment on any of their effectiveness....
).Maestro developed by Sofreavia in France, sold to the French ATC and also Oz plus I think elesewhere as part of bundled packages...the French have a way of doing this....
Compas developed by DFS for themselves.
NATS FAST developed by NATS for NATS at Hurn.
I think all of these products have been displayed at various conferences ATCA / Maastricht etc...
Not a controller so I couldn't / wouldn't comment on any of their effectiveness....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only one thing as a tool "experience". There is no book which can tell you how to do it. The only book I have read is the Approach Radar book at CATC. Only basics, experience is th only way.
ATC
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Age: 55
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OSYRIS AMAN
Went recently to Zurich to see CALM - Computer Assisted Arrival and Landing Manager based on Barco Othoghon'OSYRIS Arival Manager.
Tool is working for two to three years and looks rather nice.
Barco Orthogon has also installed it in Euroicontrol Training Facilitry at Bretigny.
Im looking forward to have another look at t in ATC Maastricht 2005 in February.
Tool is working for two to three years and looks rather nice.
Barco Orthogon has also installed it in Euroicontrol Training Facilitry at Bretigny.
Im looking forward to have another look at t in ATC Maastricht 2005 in February.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Down here in sleepy hollow we use MAESTRO for Brisbane Sydney and Melbourne; with plans to roll out to other locations as/when needed.
It's a bit cumbersome at times; but it does give us a reasonably accurate 'tactical' display of the sequence. It's capable of calculating SIMOPS, Crossing runways or parallels, optimising flows when using parallels etc.
It attempts to share delays across TMA and Enroute; the first minute of calculated delay gets assigned to TMA, the next two to Enroute, the next back to TMA for one more minute then all the rest back to Enroute.
A one minute dalay would be TMA only.
A two-four minute dalay would be TMA and Enroute sharing equally (sort of)
A five or more minute delay the bulk of the delay would be done by enroute.
These of course do vary depending on runway set-up / configuration etc.
Still it needs one flow to manipulate it; where we used to have one flow 'picking the sequence'. Often there was more 'logically decisions' to the traffic sequence before MAESTRO; i.e. wake turb considered against acceptance rate; also when it optimises it just simply gets it wrong and needs manual overridding.
The best thing about MAESTROis that there is no longer sudden unexpected holding (excluding aerodrome emergencies) you can see it coming; it even gives us clues as to when to start holding, blue colours for speed and vectors, yellow for holding...
We can get in as early as 400+ miles from touch and start 'tactical' sequencing; of course if you do get in too early the configuration will change and/or the acceptance rate; thus the sequence will change dramatically and you've caused problems not solved them.
Other major problem with it is Sydney; MAESTRO says give 5 minute delay in enroute (2 inside TMA); you achieve 4.5 of that delay and hand off to Approach who say track DCT outermarker increase speed... This happens a lot because the 'acceptance rate' is lower than is being achieved. This often happens because of the 'political' limitation of 80 movements an hour yet on some configs 120+ would be achievable... I think it looks very unprofessional when enroute are acheiving the delays and slowing everything to have approach speed them up and track direct; but hey that is the system...
It's a bit cumbersome at times; but it does give us a reasonably accurate 'tactical' display of the sequence. It's capable of calculating SIMOPS, Crossing runways or parallels, optimising flows when using parallels etc.
It attempts to share delays across TMA and Enroute; the first minute of calculated delay gets assigned to TMA, the next two to Enroute, the next back to TMA for one more minute then all the rest back to Enroute.
A one minute dalay would be TMA only.
A two-four minute dalay would be TMA and Enroute sharing equally (sort of)
A five or more minute delay the bulk of the delay would be done by enroute.
These of course do vary depending on runway set-up / configuration etc.
Still it needs one flow to manipulate it; where we used to have one flow 'picking the sequence'. Often there was more 'logically decisions' to the traffic sequence before MAESTRO; i.e. wake turb considered against acceptance rate; also when it optimises it just simply gets it wrong and needs manual overridding.
The best thing about MAESTROis that there is no longer sudden unexpected holding (excluding aerodrome emergencies) you can see it coming; it even gives us clues as to when to start holding, blue colours for speed and vectors, yellow for holding...
We can get in as early as 400+ miles from touch and start 'tactical' sequencing; of course if you do get in too early the configuration will change and/or the acceptance rate; thus the sequence will change dramatically and you've caused problems not solved them.
Other major problem with it is Sydney; MAESTRO says give 5 minute delay in enroute (2 inside TMA); you achieve 4.5 of that delay and hand off to Approach who say track DCT outermarker increase speed... This happens a lot because the 'acceptance rate' is lower than is being achieved. This often happens because of the 'political' limitation of 80 movements an hour yet on some configs 120+ would be achievable... I think it looks very unprofessional when enroute are acheiving the delays and slowing everything to have approach speed them up and track direct; but hey that is the system...
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pirate;
That is what our CTAS does... PFast was a part of CTAS which we stopped using for the sequence. However, CTAS does work quite well for metering aircraft to the airport. NASA is now working on metering from one center to another. Right now we in Fort Worth help meter flow into Houston Center. They are also working on multi center metering as a test in the northeast.
regards
Scott
That is what our CTAS does... PFast was a part of CTAS which we stopped using for the sequence. However, CTAS does work quite well for metering aircraft to the airport. NASA is now working on metering from one center to another. Right now we in Fort Worth help meter flow into Houston Center. They are also working on multi center metering as a test in the northeast.
regards
Scott
