Digital ATC
 

Article in the Telegraph re plans to digitise ATC and reduce the need for controllers. Has noone heard of cyber warfare and attacks ?

Not sure having human controllers makes any difference in the event of a cyber attack. Everything that the human does is computer based anyway.
The radio will be software based/filtered/modulated, ditto the radar picture.

British airports consider replacing air traffic controllers with remote system
I think they're referring to using cameras for local and ground control. ATCOs will still be making the decisions but from a remote control room.
With suitably placed cameras using IR etc, it could actually enhance monitoring and safety.

< it could actually enhance monitoring and safety.>

I wonder how>

I think it's easier to disrupt VHF communications than secure encrypted digital connections..

It is a big step from an airport with 20 movements a day to airports with as many movements in an hour or less. I guess it won't stop SAAB and the rest trying, especially as the numbers will look very appealing to the bean counters!

No obvious tower target.
Intruder detection.
Pics to back up ground movements radar.
Must be lots of other things; not suggesting you don't have those already.

Back in the day when I was an RAF ATCO there we were picnicking at other side of airfield during display.
Security come to enquire, show ID, "OK, Sir." :ok: Ahh . .

Basil
 

No obvious tower target?

Let's say one tower is providing the ATC for 5 or 6 adjacent airfields i.e. Gatwick for Southend, London City, Luton, Stansted, Farnborough etc- take out Gatwick tower and you've closed all the others!

How is that any different to taking out somewhere like Swanwick?

It's not!!!!!

<<Intruder detection.
Pics to back up ground movements radar.>>

Not sure what intruder detection means... but surface movement radar can detect very small objects.

What pics to "back up GMR?" Have you ever seen a GMR? I used GMR for over 20 years and never cried out for pictures as a back up!

Get used to it HD. IT must be better - it's the future !

People trying to sell it because it can be done (and someone profits) rather than because there is a real improvement in cost, safety, order or expedition. A solution looking for a problem.

You've hit the nail firmly on the head, Dan.

It makes sense for an airfield that could knock down a tower to expand within and have ATC conducted remotely or take multiply small airfields with no ATC and amalgamate them to increase safety.

Depends on the motives really. It's been successful elsewhere.

Absolutely bang on! One of today's cancers in many industries!

The operational benefits of future 'digital ATC' tools should be obvious.

The ability to display surveillance data on to a visual picture, perhaps via a HUD or similar; the ability to use IR and other electro-optical instruments to give a near-daytime visual picture in darkness or LVP; the ability to provide extended safety nets such as preventing conflicting clearances, warning of stop bar overruns, route deviations etc; the ability for cameras to contribute surveillance data into the combined surveillance picture; integration of voice-recognition etc.

Large amounts of data on each movement, integrated with intention and routing (both air and ground) will enable far more stable departure sequences.

Yes, it's all very difficult to get right. Yes, it will be a long time before things like the above operate seamlessly in a highly pressured environment, but it is all coming.

Whether for the right reasons or not, it's where the industry is headed. Do people really expect ATC technical development to stop as we are today?

No, Gonzo. But, there's still a lot of bulls**t involved !

As ever.



As ever.

The things Gonzo mentioned we used to do as ATCOs. Wonder how we managed?