Increase CPDLC Usage Campaign at Maastricht (EDYY)
 

a1592/15 notamn
q) ehaa/qcdxx/i /bo /e /245/999/5259n00454e999
a) ehaa b) 1512010001 c) 1602292359est

e) following recent improvements, flights through maastricht uac airspace (especially fans 1/a) are requested to log on to edyy whenever possible as secondary means of communication improving safety.
in case of technical issues no inquiry shall be made on the frequency. Report via tech log or contact
muac.datalink(at)eurocontrol.int.)

(a1591/15 notamc a1582/15
q) ehaa/qcaxx/i /bo /e /000/999/5259n00454e999
a) ehaa b) 1511261154
e) new notam will be issued.)

Hello !

What's the statistical usage of the CPDLC at MUAC by the time being ?

How many messages are exchanged on a day ?

Are the operators (pilots and atcos) confident in this system ?

Who are operators and type of aircrafts using CPDLC on a regular basis ?

Any news are welcome !

Thanks.

LudoDab

Hi LudoDab

I don't know the number of messages exchanged or day but the latest I read was that 10% of all aircrafts are logging on to CPDLC. There have been numerous issues with the system but it seems that some of the bugs have been fixed recently, but the system is still very far from being reliable.

We have a list of white listed aircrafts/operators that are encouraged to use CPDLC as much as possible. Among the airlines are SAS, Lufthansa, Eurowings/Germanwings, Norwegian, BA (presently only Fans 1a aircrafts). Easyjet has the equipment on many aircrafts but pilots have not been trained to use it yet. That's also the case for Swiss. All aircrafts flying transatlantic have the equipment (fans 1a) but especially with these aircrafts the system is very slow and unreliable.

I think many of the atcos would like to use CPDLC a lot more but when the system is very unreliable still, it's not very helpful and often causes frustration when messages don't go through. Also the functionality on the atco side is very limited. At the moment we can only send a very limited number of messages to aircrafts.

Hope that answers your questions 😃

Mattis, what messages are you currently able and permitted to send?

Why is there this mad compulsion in ATC to move away from direct voice communication to typing messages on keyboards?

Zooker,

As far as complex/high density ATC environments are concerned CPDLC is, in my opinion, a tool in search of a use. It doesn't solve the problem of shortage of ATC frequencies as one is still required to operate in parallel with a data link. CPDLC is too slow to deal with more than routine messages such as frequency/SSR changes.

CPDLC has been around for several years. Uptake by ATC/airlines is still very low. I think that tells its own story about the extent of the perceived operational benefits over R/T.

It should not be forgotten that the promoters of CPDLC have enough influence to have been able to get the law changed inside the EU. Somehow I think those who work in ATC/airlines in the EU will be forced to use CPDLC whether they like it or not!

To ease those frequencies that are completely congested with having to give full routings to all aircraft on first call and other benefits that CPDLC deliver??

I am a controller that really wishes that CPDLC was far more widely available, and that it was far better than it is. 40 second acceptance of a message is totally inappropriate for many instructions, however I find it increasingly useful to transfer some aircraft to the next frequency, to CPDLC full routings (that we currently are not allowed to do in some circumstances) and to obtain the requested cruise level. However as FANS aircraft have to be given even more RTF to disconnect should they not acknowledge a message in time, I avoid using it with any of them unless it is to transfer to a different FIR.

Datalinking has many benefits that would improve ATC systems worldwide, however the beancounters sadly govern how much of it will ever be used and are already overlooking those parts of real potential.

In London we are not allowed to use it for any instruction of a time critical or safety nature, so essentially all we can use it for is direct routings when there's no real need for it and transfer to the next sector.

I find it useful for transfer when I'm busy as I can get rid of several aircraft in a matter of seconds, but that's it. I certainly wouldn't use it for a heading instruction

zonoma has hit the nail on the head... if every aircraft was equipped and able to use CPDLC reliably, r/t congestion would be significantly reduced. It's a source of frustration to London controllers that CPDLC hasn't been developed into something which could really benefit controllers and pilots alike.

Typing... how quaint. Most CPDLC messages can (or at least should be able to) be completed with a click of a mouse. Imagine the savings in r/t loading when we frequently conduct conversations along these lines:

Controller: ABC123, contact London on 123.450
Voice from Ether: *Blocked*
Controller: ABC123, contact London on 123.450
Pilot: Roger, London on 132.450
Controller: Negative, ABC123 contact London on 1...2...3...decimal...4...5....0
Pilot: Ah, 123.450 thank you
Controller: Confirm that was the ABC123?!
Voice from Ether: London, good morning.....

Repeat ad nauseam...

LTP

And trying to avoid merging this into a debate on another thread, one really useful tool would be "contact ***.***" when they have been out of contact for 'considerable time'. However it doesn't happen often enough at the moment. Apparently.

Thank you for all detailed replies !

(b0872/16notamn
q)edxx/qcdxx/iv/bo/e/245/660/5119n01018e250
a)edww edgg b)1606021133c)1608312359
e)all aircraft entering Maastricht uac airspace are requested to log
on to edyy as secondary means ofcommunication to improve safety and
capacity. data link capabilities aredisplayed to the controller. Flight crews
shall expect to receive up linksin busy situations and are requested
to confirm them asap. atn aircraft can obtain therequired white listing with the link 2000+ cro. No inquiries shall bemade on the frequency. In case of
any log-on issues please contactmuac.datalink(at)eurocontrol.int.)


(a0756/16 notamn
q)ehaa/qcdxx/i/bo/e/245/660/5259n00454e999
a)ehaa b)1606021229c)1608312359
e)all aircraft enteringmaastricht uac airspace are
requested to log on to edyy assecondary means of
communication to improve safetyand capacity.
data link capabilities aredisplayed to the controller.
flight crews shall expect toreceive up links in busy
situations and are requested toconfirm them asap.
atn aircraft can obtain therequired white listing
with the link 2000+ cro. Noinquiries shall be made
on the frequency. In case of anylog-on issues please
contactmuac.datalink(at)eurocontrol.int)


(a1696/16 notamn
q)ebbu/qcdxx/i/bo/e/245/660/5029n00411e999
a)ebbu b)1606021151 c)1608312359
e)all acft entering maastrichtuac airspace are requested to log on to
edyy as secondary means ofcommunication to improve safety and
capacity. data link capabilities aredisplayed to the controller.
flight crews shall expect toreceive up links in busy situations and
are requested to confirm them assoon as possible.
atn aircraft can obtain therequired white listing with the link
2000+cro. No inquiries shall bemade on the frequency.
in case of any log-on issuesplease contact
muac.datalink(at)eurocontrol.int)

So you log on, get an automated message saying CPDLC established.
Next thing the controller gives you a voice instruction!

Does that count as a successful usage???

Also, why get us to check in on VHF too, we can monitor the next freq and you know we have it as we have acknowledged the CPDLC message.

ATC do not get any indications that you are "on frequency" so voice comms must be established first. You will be given voice instructions more often than not as many instructions require immediate action and cannot suffer the 40 second delay possible if using CPDLC. CPDLC has some uses that can save valuable RTF on certain frequencies, such as obtaining requested flight level, issuing routings and also transferring to the next frequency, all can be done simply whilst doing other tasks with other aircraft.

I have had aircraft tell me they are "logged on, CPDLC available" and when the message sent failed, worked out they are logged onto a different centre who they are about to contact :ugh: It's never as simple as it may seem.

We just started using CPDLC on the ground on clearance delivery (about a dozen, maybe more US towers now have it). For those aircraft that are equipped, it does help with route revisions, particularly lengthy ones for our flights getting rerouted around storms. Not being used by enroute controllers yet, but I could see a similar benefit there, rather than tying up the frequency with phonetic fix readouts and readbacks.

Oh Boy, you could write half a Bible on CPDLC,. In a nutshell, 2 systems one based on an obsolete technology and never meant for ATC ( ACARS ) pompously labelled FANS 1 ot 1A and another one (designed by bright enginers who never flew an aircraft or controlled aircraft in their life) , called ATN which has many shortcomings and does not deliver what was expected.

2 users groups, the oceanic/low density where FANS1/A is enough and helps as it replaces HF, and the Continental high density where it does not work well.

Add the fact that upgrading to ATN cost a lot of money per air frame but gives no operational advantage , and has some shortcomings , so no wonder airlines a reluctant to equip. and here you go.

Add also 2 commercial entities ( ARINC and SITA delivering the comms parts ) not really interested in ATC .

A last point, some groups in FAA and Eurocontrol pushed in the beginning to data link replace all R/T comms ( to justify the investment) and we lost very good ideas then :
Like for instance having Data link and VHF COMM boxes connected , Controller click on an aircraft label : Contact next sector " the D/L send the message with correct frequency embedded. Pilot receive message : Contact LONDON WEST 123.425 , has just to press " ACCEPT-WILCO" and the VHF box automatically tunes in the next frequency . and send a message back. When pilot press the PTT ( and TX is noted) another message is sent and both controllers in both sectors sees/knows that the aircraft has been transferred and on which frequency he is .

How about that for reducing R/T ? Pilot worklosd ( no frequency to tune, no read back errors, etc.. science fiction ? no, it was technically possible 15 years ago. Still is by the way . One day maybe, but unfortunately not in my lifetime. If it does remember me. :E

Although CPDLC has indeed still some way to go. We have seen considerable improvements lately at EDYY (MUAC) and there are more improvements on the way for the end of the year.
However so small at times, it can indeed help with the workload on the sector.

I know it can be frustrating for a pilot to log-on to EDYY and only get voice messages.
There can be many reasons for this. But overall a logged-on aircraft can help out the workload of the controller.


Mind you as well that there are always at least two controllers working any sector. So if the R/T is busy and you have a request feel free to do so via CPDLC. Chances are the Coordinating Controller (or Assistant Controller) can pick up on your request and incorporate it in the overall plan for your flight. If this is unable or ATC wants you to stand by, in both cases these responses will have be sent by the CC(AC). Again reducing the workload of the EC.
The Executive Controller will choose the best means for him/her at that time to rely you the reply.


The controller can see if an aircraft is equipped but not logged on and therefor you may be asked to log on. However to question all equipped and not logged on would increase the workload. Hence the request in the NOTAM.

Feel free to always try and log on to EDYY when with "Maastricht Radar".
There is a difference in performance depending on the type of CPDLC you have but as well the combination of hardware and software. These should normally be known to your company.

New CPDLC Messages
 

As of today, there are new CPDLC Messages that will be uplinked;


- CLIMB/DESCEND FL___ REACH BY FIX
(expect this specially when inbound to an ADES which has to be descended by Maastricht)


- DCT FIX1 VIA FIX2 (FIX3, FIX4)


- CLIMB/DESCEND + DCT


REPORT;
- REQUESTED LEVEL
(expect this specially when with first Maastricht sector)


- WHEN CAN YOU ACCEPT FL__
(expect this specially when flying N-S/S-N in Maastricht due to change in semi-circular systems; REIMS and MAASTRICHT)


- TOP OF DESCEND

Quite simply ZOOKER its the future or an incarnation of it will be. Remove the human and you will remove a significant number of errors. The ability to connect the aircraft FMS directly with the ATC system to send and receive request/clearances and offer optimum cruise levels / directs / speed profiles will be beyond the ability of even the best controllers in the not too distant future. Yes it will put many people out of jobs but we drive cars these days that don't require someone to walk in front of them with a flag, who'd go back to that!!??

Quite simply ZOOKER its the future

Fine piece of manplaining there. Are we therefore led to believe that a human is not required to read and acknowledge the message.