ATC problems for northern europe
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Stoke on Trent
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC problems for northern europe
Sky news is reporting a Frankfurt airport official has said an ATC problem stopping flights to and from northern europe
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 64
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tact/casa Information Message - Edyy
-------------------------------------
.
Ref. : Edyy Situation
.
Reg :
.
Valid : From: 1300 Until: 1800 Utc
.
Remarks : There Has Been A Radar Failure In Edyy. Currently All
Sctrs Are Regulated At 15 Percent Of Normal Capacity. Delay Per
Flight Can Reach 200 Minutes. Operators Are Requested Not To Call
For Improvement In Edyy Regulations. Cfmu Nod Are Monitoring The
Situation. An Update Will Be Sent As Soon As The Situation Changes
.
Cfmu Ops/brussels
-------------------------------------
.
Ref. : Edyy Situation
.
Reg :
.
Valid : From: 1300 Until: 1800 Utc
.
Remarks : There Has Been A Radar Failure In Edyy. Currently All
Sctrs Are Regulated At 15 Percent Of Normal Capacity. Delay Per
Flight Can Reach 200 Minutes. Operators Are Requested Not To Call
For Improvement In Edyy Regulations. Cfmu Nod Are Monitoring The
Situation. An Update Will Be Sent As Soon As The Situation Changes
.
Cfmu Ops/brussels
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 64
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparantly the track server with down due to too many vfr squawks in the lower airspace (loads of gliding was going on)
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this case, that's not a RADAR failure, but a SYSTEM failure..
but you wouldn't expect a Flow Person to know the difference
(although what happened was the system was overloaded with radar info)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that big, the hole... as flow management procedures have been implemented. (Will you have another slice ?)
Can it be called a system "failure" ?
Some systems can deal with up to N tracks. They just choose a random track and delete it when they reach N+1. You lose a track, but the system still works. That's the way it was created. Not a failure...
Usually, N is big enough to deal with everyday's life.
And beancounters will tell us : "Statistics show that this event did not occur ! At least, it shouldn't occur more than once every 10000000000000(ish) years..."
Would the capacity loss (85 per cent ?
) have been this huge with an ATC system based on paper strips (not as much automated) ? 
Can it be called a system "failure" ?
Some systems can deal with up to N tracks. They just choose a random track and delete it when they reach N+1. You lose a track, but the system still works. That's the way it was created. Not a failure...
Usually, N is big enough to deal with everyday's life.
And beancounters will tell us : "Statistics show that this event did not occur ! At least, it shouldn't occur more than once every 10000000000000(ish) years..."
Would the capacity loss (85 per cent ?
) have been this huge with an ATC system based on paper strips (not as much automated) ?
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would the capacity loss (85 per cent ?) have been this huge with an ATC system based on paper strips (not as much automated) ?
If you wanted to regress to the steam age it would be necessary to revert to an airpace route structure that last existed back in the 1980s (when it was decided that they were irrelevant to the system and structure as it developed) By the time this had been promologated and all the flight plans refiled the system would have long been up and running again (IMHO by the way; I've been out of the loop for some years now)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NeverLand
Age: 24
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with Lon on this one. Also what would be our limitation on a daily basis if we were running on strips? An educated guess (to call it something) could well be 20% less traffic a year. We can't operate on strips anymore, it'll be way too busy managing strips i.s.o. managing airplanes.
Perhaps is time we upgrade our server. Or we implement some mitigation procedures to keep a lid on it. There's no perfect system, but it'll be criminal to know about a problem and not fix it.
I guess it'll be top priority though (back at work today, let's see what's up).
A.
Perhaps is time we upgrade our server. Or we implement some mitigation procedures to keep a lid on it. There's no perfect system, but it'll be criminal to know about a problem and not fix it.
I guess it'll be top priority though (back at work today, let's see what's up).
A.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you're used to deal with steam, that's not such a big deal when the system "fails" and starts providing hot water.
My (off-topic ?) question was more about cheese layers. From my point of view, removing paper strips (in order to "improve" the system) was just putting a big number of cheese slices in a "fail-unsafe" (by definition) computer. Hence the big loss of capacity when there's one squawk too many.
My (off-topic ?) question was more about cheese layers. From my point of view, removing paper strips (in order to "improve" the system) was just putting a big number of cheese slices in a "fail-unsafe" (by definition) computer. Hence the big loss of capacity when there's one squawk too many.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 5116N00044W
Age: 76
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some systems can deal with up to N tracks. They just choose a random track and delete it when they reach N+1. You lose a track, but the system still works.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If N is known the number of tracks can be scanned. When it's too close to N, the supervisor will be warned and he will use ATFM procedures to avoid the override. ATCOs will be advised too.
If N is reached, one can use the backup radar system (based on 20 years ago's simpler technology, N is not the same). Strips are still available, automatic co-ordinations still work (however, not with the same interface).
No real big change in procedures.
If N is reached, one can use the backup radar system (based on 20 years ago's simpler technology, N is not the same). Strips are still available, automatic co-ordinations still work (however, not with the same interface).
No real big change in procedures.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where are the good places to go gliding around central Europe? (southern Germany, Switzerland etc)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Some systems can deal with up to N tracks. They just choose a random track and delete it when they reach N+1. You lose a track, but the system still works.
Seems like a scary option to me! Particularly if it does it in in a busy area.
Some systems can deal with up to N tracks. They just choose a random track and delete it when they reach N+1. You lose a track, but the system still works.
Seems like a scary option to me! Particularly if it does it in in a busy area.
What's scary perhaps is that it sounds like the system in question fell over rather than degrading the service in a known and managed manner.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC the track server is one of the older bits of a system which was designed to fail progressively.
One of the problems with Conspicuity Squawks is there is no requirement for mode C info with them. This makes it very difficult to filter them out of the system, especially if the system also supports a conflict detection and alert program
One of the problems with Conspicuity Squawks is there is no requirement for mode C info with them. This makes it very difficult to filter them out of the system, especially if the system also supports a conflict detection and alert program
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Southern England
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect it was the random part that Peltonlevel found scary as I think you'll find he has a fairly good idea of how these things work.
There will always be an N, the important thing is you know what the value of N is and you know exactly what the system will do when it reaches that point. If it drops tracks you really need to know the rules by which it will do that, just randomly dropping tracks would not be acceptable to most safety engineers or the Safety Regulator.
What we don't know from the brief details on this thread is whether the MUAC tracker actually failed or was dropping so many tracks that it was unusable.
There will always be an N, the important thing is you know what the value of N is and you know exactly what the system will do when it reaches that point. If it drops tracks you really need to know the rules by which it will do that, just randomly dropping tracks would not be acceptable to most safety engineers or the Safety Regulator.
What we don't know from the brief details on this thread is whether the MUAC tracker actually failed or was dropping so many tracks that it was unusable.