Radar problem North Sea sector?
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: NERC
Some more info
LACC Multi-Radar Processing.
ATC radars aren't the most accurate of beasts. LACC uses all of the contributing radars to enhance the accuracy of an individual track. I believe the last Mode C to be reported is the one that is used. We should be able to trust this data as the aircraft 'told' the radar. Unfortunately we can't always
West Drayton
Main-Mode only ever used one radar at a time. What it did do was allowed you to set which radar reported for which area (down to 16 mile boxes I've been tolds). So the problem may never have been seen as Claxby may not have been selected for the problem area.
055166k - Both your problems are probably being caused by Mount Gabriel. The ghosting should have disappeared as MRP has been told Mount Gabriel is an 'unreliable' source so should only be used when no other radar is tracking the given aircraft. Unfortunately MRP still uses it Mode C (See comment above)
A I in response to your post
1) Problem only reported after we entered operational service.
2) Can't say never work at West Drayton.
3) Paperwork - I'll leave that to you
4) Couldn't answer that one.
5) The TOI is to increase seperation. The final solution will probably change the Swanwick system, once someone decides what they want to do (ATC, Safety, Engineering etc)
6) I don't work for ATC so can't answer
7) First reported mid-July
In response to your comment
How dare you call into question the professionalism of the people that slogged their guts out to get LACC operational! 
ATC radars aren't the most accurate of beasts. LACC uses all of the contributing radars to enhance the accuracy of an individual track. I believe the last Mode C to be reported is the one that is used. We should be able to trust this data as the aircraft 'told' the radar. Unfortunately we can't always
West Drayton
Main-Mode only ever used one radar at a time. What it did do was allowed you to set which radar reported for which area (down to 16 mile boxes I've been tolds). So the problem may never have been seen as Claxby may not have been selected for the problem area.
055166k - Both your problems are probably being caused by Mount Gabriel. The ghosting should have disappeared as MRP has been told Mount Gabriel is an 'unreliable' source so should only be used when no other radar is tracking the given aircraft. Unfortunately MRP still uses it Mode C (See comment above)
A I in response to your post
1) Problem only reported after we entered operational service.
2) Can't say never work at West Drayton.
3) Paperwork - I'll leave that to you
4) Couldn't answer that one.
5) The TOI is to increase seperation. The final solution will probably change the Swanwick system, once someone decides what they want to do (ATC, Safety, Engineering etc)
6) I don't work for ATC so can't answer
7) First reported mid-July
In response to your comment
My mischievous mind has to ask whether or not Swanwick would have been declared fit for purpose if those charged with saying so had known about the problem. Finally I have to ask what other gremlins might be lurking and who knows about them. Was the push to "O" date so irresistable that there is more than dust under the carpet?
Last edited by NERC Dweller; 3rd October 2002 at 20:30.
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
From: South West England
NERC Dweller,
Thanks for your response. Sorry I upset you and on reflection, I could have worded the last paragraph better. What I was trying to say is that the ATC experts (obviously not you, as you admit) could have been led to believe that certain system features were acceptable and hence their modification was deferred until after "O" date. We really need to know what these might have been.
I believe the Claxby radar would always have been the firstchoice radar for the block in question under the West Drayton system. I don't really see your point regarding reducing separation. This procedure increases the ATC team load because of system deficiency. The SI says that the problem will be solved when Mode S is introduced. We don't have any timescale for this in Swanwick (or none I know about). An engineering solution would be ideal but you are the first on this thread to suggest that it is possible. Is it?
Thanks for your response. Sorry I upset you and on reflection, I could have worded the last paragraph better. What I was trying to say is that the ATC experts (obviously not you, as you admit) could have been led to believe that certain system features were acceptable and hence their modification was deferred until after "O" date. We really need to know what these might have been.
I believe the Claxby radar would always have been the firstchoice radar for the block in question under the West Drayton system. I don't really see your point regarding reducing separation. This procedure increases the ATC team load because of system deficiency. The SI says that the problem will be solved when Mode S is introduced. We don't have any timescale for this in Swanwick (or none I know about). An engineering solution would be ideal but you are the first on this thread to suggest that it is possible. Is it?
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
From: UK
Main mode.
16x16 boxes with preferred/supplementary and so on set for each box. Registration and collimation analysis took care of ensuring that the track was seen in the same location - to a parameter limit - by at least TWO radars. Thats the limit of my knowledge...
Except! Each box was split into smaller boxes and different size search area's used in track processing.
16x16 boxes with preferred/supplementary and so on set for each box. Registration and collimation analysis took care of ensuring that the track was seen in the same location - to a parameter limit - by at least TWO radars. Thats the limit of my knowledge...
Except! Each box was split into smaller boxes and different size search area's used in track processing.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
From: ISZ - not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
As a user of the Claxby Radar who doesn't sit in NERC (Or anywhere in the London FIR come to that!!) does this mode C readout thing apply to me? I generally only work sfc - fl 65, but frequently have things at 1000ft and less than 5 miles, I also work SSR only in some areas. So, should I just keep quiet about it, and hope unit management don't cotton on?
What about other units which get a feed from the Claxby = Humberside etc, would they be affected, and if so, why haven't they been told?
Cheers
What about other units which get a feed from the Claxby = Humberside etc, would they be affected, and if so, why haven't they been told?
Cheers
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: NERC
A I - No problems. Nice to see you spotted my deliberate mistake
Of course the TOI is to increase lateral seperation.
I'm afraid I'm at or even beyond my level of understanding in this area so can offer no more info
Of course the TOI is to increase lateral seperation.I'm afraid I'm at or even beyond my level of understanding in this area so can offer no more info
Watchdog Delta Hotel
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
From: here but there in 6 years
hippy and cuddles
would also like to echo your question
i have the clxby+gdf in use when i'm forced to work penal (or some range of hills) radar
haven't noticed anything strange but then again stca and smf go off out there all the time
interested to know where the affected area's are
regrds
would also like to echo your question
i have the clxby+gdf in use when i'm forced to work penal (or some range of hills) radar
haven't noticed anything strange but then again stca and smf go off out there all the time
interested to know where the affected area's are
regrds
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
From: escaped from NERC
That's alright then !!!
However, much as I admire the power of PPRuNe, I suspect it was the impact of the reduced flow rates on service delivery that forced the change of heart - see, the LAS does have a useful function!!!
However, much as I admire the power of PPRuNe, I suspect it was the impact of the reduced flow rates on service delivery that forced the change of heart - see, the LAS does have a useful function!!!
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
From: Hants, UK
Whilst PPRUNE is powerful, I think it might have more to do with Alan B getting knobbled every time he entered the Ops Room by NOR controllers dragging him over to the radar and asking him how we were supposed to keep the 5 Eastbound tracks converging on Kippa 4 miles apart from each other.
Apparently the ADNC people got all shirty as well when someone went 1 mile off route trying to keep vertically separated aircraft in the UIR 4 miles laterally apart!
As I said before, another example a knee-jerk, ill-considered, quick-fix reaction from Ops to which we have become accustomed.
Apparently the ADNC people got all shirty as well when someone went 1 mile off route trying to keep vertically separated aircraft in the UIR 4 miles laterally apart!
As I said before, another example a knee-jerk, ill-considered, quick-fix reaction from Ops to which we have become accustomed.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: EGTT
Apparently another occurrence caused by the 'Radar System' this morning on a trauma and turbulence filled LUS --please note, NOT just on North Sea.
2 targets right together south of Kent, one at FL340 and one at FL360, suddenly both show at 360 with frantic flashing of STCA.
Brown trousers all round for the 2nd time in a few minutes.
Overloads, aircraft descending without warning right on top of others due the turbulence, no flow, not enough staff but no demand.
Wrong again flow!
Get me out of this place!
2 targets right together south of Kent, one at FL340 and one at FL360, suddenly both show at 360 with frantic flashing of STCA.
Brown trousers all round for the 2nd time in a few minutes.
Overloads, aircraft descending without warning right on top of others due the turbulence, no flow, not enough staff but no demand.
Wrong again flow!
Get me out of this place!
