Apron Control and CCTV
 

I need to provide apron control facilities at a large airport. The client wants to stick a pod on the roof even though only abot 20% of stands will be visible from this point. The idea is to supplement it with CCTV. I think a better location is out on the apron where all AC can be seen.

In your opinion which is best - natural vision or CCTV? Surely CCTV cuts down on situational awareness? or is it quite acceptable to rely on CCTV 100%?

Thanks in advance for any input on this. I prefer to talk to the people who know!

If it's just Apron Control by the airport authority, I don't know, but if it's ATC it'll be a no-no; ATC are only permitted to use CCTV as a last resort when it's an 'old' facility where the view has been restricted by new developments and even then SRG would be very cautious of approving it; new ones must be designed so that the direct view is protected from development. The same might apply to airport authority facilities.

Not easy to give an answer from the info you've given. Apron Control means different things in different countries and even at different airports in the same country! In the UK it is not a function undertaken by ATC. In other places you'll find a variety of different responsibilities extending to issuing taxi instructions on apron areas (and sometimes even on manoeuvring area).

There are some big airports that do stand allocation and co-ordination of the multitude of agencies involved in turning an aircraft round in a windowless room surrounded by CCTVs, information displayed on monitors, telephones and sometimes working on a number of different RT frequencies. If the service more involves issuing instructions then I would expect a visual control room with good sightlines of aprons wherever possible.

For ATC, which usually has limited or no responsibilities on aprons, CCTV sometimes provides additional information to the controller about what's happening on an area he or she can't see. However there are many ways that a controller can work (albeit not always easily or quickly) on some parts of an airport that are not in sight or covered by a CCTV.

Has your client specified what functions and services he wants the facilities to support? If not, that's the first question you need to ask.

That's very helpful. I actually don't know whether or not they intend to issue taxi instructions etc. so I can now go off and pose the right questions. My current understanding is that the Apron Control facility is intended to co-ordinate all the companies and aqencies servicing the aircraft and the windowless room was my other proposal. Thanks.

One more question...what is your view on splitting Apron Control into 2 or 3 separate facilities each dealing with a different sector of the apron?

If it's a big airport then this may be the only way that it can be done practically but it is likely to mean greater overheads in co-ordination between the apron units.

Cheers Spitoon. I'll let you know what happens.

As far as i've heard, one of the solutions to lack of view of parts of T3 at EGLL will be CCTV!! Not exactly ideal in a brand new purpose-built tower if its true!!!:*
FB:ok:

That's what CAP 670 says!

You're joking! With that new tower I thought you would be able to see the aprons at Northolt as well! :}

Problem is they forgot to consider that there would be desks etc inside the new tower that you cant see through if you are sat the wrong side of it :ugh:

This CCTV thing at EGLL is not strictly true.

There will be a camera provided to view an area that cannot be seen by one of the controller positions. It is for monitoring purposes only and no clearances may be passed based on information derived from it.

The controllers already have an A-SMGCS that shows the area so I am unsure as to why they need the CCTV:confused:

P7

Two CCTV views exist on monitors in the EGKK tower ever since the new pax footbridge was built which blocked the view of pushbacks on a few stands. Therefore im not sure CCTV is limted to older establishments only.

IFATCA policy regarding CCTV
 

IFATCA, the international federation representing controllers across the world, has had policy in place for many years opposing the use of CCTV cameras. Ideally airport design should enable direct visual observation of the entire manoeuvering area.

However, as there are so many airports where CCTV is now required during to a lack of direct visual observation, it is looking likely that the current IFATCA policy may be relaxed in the near future. There is some concern though that the acceptance of CCTV may be taken as a form of acceptance of the Virtual Tower concept that is being proposed in Sweden and Germany.