Taxi-procedure: Follow the greens !
 

Anybody here who's got some experience with this ground ops/taxi-guidance system?
Recently introduced in UAE?
Need some info/feedback from professionals from anywhere !

Being instructed to "follow the greens" the assumptions are:

1. ATC has selected a safe route without informing you which route it is.
2. The taxiway lighting is designed to avoid conflict with other taxiway routes and runway.
3. ATC is aware of any airfield lighting design deficiencies when giving such instructions.

Taking the above into account I like to know which way the "greens" are taking me so prefer to be given the taxi routeing which helps with situational awareness and avoiding any potential conflict with other traffic.

Heathrow have had this system for years and works really well. Never been sent the wrong way, always had confidence that the Lighting Control Panel Operator was ahead of the game.

If only this system was installed at JNB..................:ugh:

SGC

I'm a retired (7 years) ex-Heathrow Lighting Op, and being unfamiliar with the UAE system, I have to ask for some background. I think I am the only ex-EGLL L/Op on the forum, but stand to be corrected; just remember that I can only offer info that is possibly out of date.

Musket 90 has summed it up well, I think.

1. Is the UAE system switchable, ie does a single green route come up and simultaneously introduce red stop-bars at any junction? ISTR that Heathrow was not the only airport with switchable greens, but there were none with the same flexibility.

2. Is the UAE lighting system controlled by the GMC controller, or is it a 'team'? With respect to the ex-LL ATCOs in here, there would have been no way that a Heathrow GMC controller could have done both tasks with the same throughput, even if they could have 'magicced' the hardware down to fit into their desks.

3. If the latter, how much leeway does the Lighting Op in following the GMC instructions? In my day, there was no 'bottom-line' responsibility conferred on the L/Op; they were working 'under' the GMC man's licence, which in many ways put both parties into a no-mans-land scenario of real trust. I'd try and wriggle moving traffic around stationary a/c, eg a pushback onto a live taxiway, and would often do it without reference to the GMC man. OTOH, any specific taxiing instructions given to an a/c had to be followed by the L/Op.

Sorry about the long post, I'm intrigued by what's been installed in the UAE.

When Sir George says <<Lighting Control Panel Operator was ahead of the game> this only ever happened on my days off............:O

I have spoken to a few friends at the other end of the mic about this before. They have nothing but praise for the LHR system, they say it is superb. Easy to follow, well laid out, no room for confusion. (their words not mine)

It is a full A-SMGCS (advanced - surface movement guidance & control system) which is being introduced at DXB. System works out where the aircraft needs to go and automatically does the route, taking into account other aircraft, does the greens, does the stopbars etc all using the ground radar to follow the aircraft. Controller can manually intervene if required. No lighting operator (there only ever is one during LVOs). Many airports are using A-SMGCS now at various levels.

OK, ta. Skynet meets ATC, then....... I mean, nothing ever goes wrong with technology, does it?

It would have to be bl**dy good to beat you guys M....

And humans never ever make mistakes :ok:

I will be watching this topi...

Does the system pick the taxiway route itself or is that done by the controller?

Is the DXB system working? How do the ATCOs like it? Is the data-feed from GMR or any other source?

Level 4. .

any more info available here?

Are DXB ATCOs working with that system and which level?
Is it american or british development?

Does anybody have experience either from ATC or flight-deck at DXB or any other location, if yes, where?

Is it really a usefull device for aircrew and/or ATCOS?

Thanks, mateys!

A few days ago I saw a video about some large scale cockpit simulation trials which have been conducted in the context of the SESAR programme (European ATM Transformation Programme).

From what I understood the 20 participating pilots from various airline attested significant improvements for situational awareness and workload.

I'll try to get a link and share it with you.

Now that is a surprise!!!!

Currently planned implementation date is October and is planned level 4.

Not 4.
 

ASMCGS Requirements ICAO Level 4.
Check point - 3.5.2 Does not include

3.5 Level 4
The implementation Level 4 corresponds to the improvement of the functions
implemented at the Level 3.
3.5.1 Surveillance
At this level, the surveillance function will be the same as in Level 3.
3.5.2 Control
The Control function will be provided to controllers, pilots, and drivers in the
movement area. Moreover, the function will be complemented by a conflict
resolution function.
3.5.3 Route Planning
The route planning function will be extended to equipped mobiles. This implies
that the route proposed by the route planning function and validated by
controllers will be down-linked to pilots and drivers.
3.5.4 Guidance
The guidance function will be the same as in Level 3

I couldn't find the above reference in the ICAO A-SMGCS Manual. In my version of that document (Doc 9830 AN/452, 1st Ed. 2004), the implementation levels I - V given in Annex B are introduced as a recommendation for airports depending on operations in the lowest visibility conditions, traffic density and aerodrome layout. For DXB, the following conditions are met:

• Visibility Condition '3': Visibility sufficient for the pilot to taxi but insufficient for the pilot to avoid collision with other traffic on taxiways and at intersections by visual reference, and insufficient for personnel of control units to exercise control over all traffic on the basis of visual surveillance. For taxiing, this is normally taken as visibilities equivalent to an RVR of less than 400 m but more than 75 m
• Traffic Density 'Heavy' (H): 26 or more movements per runway or typically more than 35 total aerodrome movements
• Aerodrome Layout 'Complex' (C): An aerodrome with more than one runway, having many taxiways to one or more apron areas

These 3 criterias classify DXB as aerodrome type T-27, for which ICAO recommends implementation level IV, including the following functions to be provided by systems:

• Surveillance (Glossary: "A function of the system which provides identification and accurate position information on aircraft, vehicles and obstacles within the designated area.")
• Control (conflict prediction and/or detection, conflict analysis, conflict resoltion)
• Routing: (section 2.5.2: "[...] the routing
  function of an A-SMGCS should: a) be able to designate a route for each aircraft orvehicle within the movement area; [...])
• Guidance (automatic switched centre line lights)

So it's up to you guys at DXB to decide if you're going to have a level IV system or not.

Equipment ?
 

To what I got till now follow-the-greens is meant to reduce the ATCOs' workload in communication with aircrew on the ground trying to find their way
This is not always easy for non native-english speakers especially on major hubs

So my inquiries are to get some more info if anybody here has got some good points on that

@fancypants: did/do you work with that? what system (american/british) are DXB using? thanks

SESAR video?
 

@jennypolar: did you find anything which might help?