BA108 intercepted on April 30'th
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Within 3 hours of a suitable alternate
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I've seen that done in a slightly different way - ATC asked a "same company" aircraft on freq (i.e. us) to contact base to initiate the above string of comms.
I guess doing it that way saved ATC ringing directory enquiries and also the cost of an international call....![Oooh](https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/icon25.gif)
Edit to add: Genuine query - as anyone here actually used CPDLC with Budapest?
I guess doing it that way saved ATC ringing directory enquiries and also the cost of an international call....
![Oooh](https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/icon25.gif)
Edit to add: Genuine query - as anyone here actually used CPDLC with Budapest?
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Doctor's waiting room
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHCC CPDLC
It's worth noting that there is a likelihood that the BA 777 involved was not capable of logging on to Budapest CPDLC, unless a retrofit to the CPDLC interface had been carried out.
Budapest is a non FANS based CPDLC system and in my outfit, only 777s that are around two and a half years or younger can log on to such CPDLC connections. BAs -200 airframes are a little older than that if I can recall correctly. The newer aircraft enable you to select if the CPDLC connection is FANS equipped or not and for Budapest, the FANS selection box should remain unticked when logging on. For connecting to Maastricht (for example), the FANS box would be ticked whilst logging on as that is a FANS based CPDLC system. Older 777 airframes do not allow you to differentiate between a FANS or non FANS based CPDLC connection and default to all connections being FANS equipped. Therefore connecting to the likes of Budapest will not be possible. The same applies to the likes of Rhein and Copenhagen who have a non FANS based CPDLC system.
My basic understanding is that FANS CPDLC connections use ACARS technology to send and receive messages and the alternative uses the ATN network to send and receive messages.
I myself have used CPDLC with Budapest with no problems!
Budapest is a non FANS based CPDLC system and in my outfit, only 777s that are around two and a half years or younger can log on to such CPDLC connections. BAs -200 airframes are a little older than that if I can recall correctly. The newer aircraft enable you to select if the CPDLC connection is FANS equipped or not and for Budapest, the FANS selection box should remain unticked when logging on. For connecting to Maastricht (for example), the FANS box would be ticked whilst logging on as that is a FANS based CPDLC system. Older 777 airframes do not allow you to differentiate between a FANS or non FANS based CPDLC connection and default to all connections being FANS equipped. Therefore connecting to the likes of Budapest will not be possible. The same applies to the likes of Rhein and Copenhagen who have a non FANS based CPDLC system.
My basic understanding is that FANS CPDLC connections use ACARS technology to send and receive messages and the alternative uses the ATN network to send and receive messages.
I myself have used CPDLC with Budapest with no problems!
Last edited by Emma Royds; 3rd May 2016 at 23:28.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Västerĺs
Age: 44
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't CPDLC logging-on be made automatically? In my mind such a system becomes much more useful, specifically as a side-channel for lost comms, if the pilots didn't need to do anything except maybe once at the start of the flight (entering a callsign/ID/authentication, whatever), and it then handles log-ons by itself. I realize this might be difficult for technical and legal reason, such as it not being easy from GPS position to determine where to log in....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: hungary
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All,
The Budapest ATM system was upgraded in line with "VDL Mode 2" CPDLC specs by EU requirements. (The older FANS was out of question).To my knowledge, the deadline for the full implementation in EU states is 2018.
The Budapest ATM system was upgraded in line with "VDL Mode 2" CPDLC specs by EU requirements. (The older FANS was out of question).To my knowledge, the deadline for the full implementation in EU states is 2018.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't CPDLC logging-on be made automatically? In my mind such a system becomes much more useful, specifically as a side-channel for lost comms, if the pilots didn't need to do anything except maybe once at the start of the flight (entering a callsign/ID/authentication, whatever), and it then handles log-ons by itself. I realize this might be difficult for technical and legal reason, such as it not being easy from GPS position to determine where to log in....
Problem is that CPDLC is rather like sending an SMS text message from your cell phone. You do not know that it has been read by the crew until/unless you get a response.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a 'frequent flyer' on this route, my sympathy goes out to the BA crew and a strong dose of being thankful for my good luck (thus far) not to be on the receiving end of a 'close inspection'. One of the most insidious issues we have to face is the sectorisation that is invoked in many European FIRs. In the Bucharest FIR there is a frequency change about 40 miles from the Budapest FIR, least when you expect it (too soon for an ATC FIR handover, too soon to expect an inter FIR handover). Germany is another classic case in point, it seems that if you are heading E-W in Germany, you get a freq change every thirty miles (slight exaggeration I know, but the point is made). We can use various techniques to alert us to the passage from one FIR to anther, but we are blissfully unaware of how each FIR is divvied up into sectors.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for CPDLC air traffic controllers - does your system give you an option to send a message to an aircraft to inform them they are "lost comms" or similar? The UK has both ATN and FANS CPDLC capabilities but no message available to solve a lost comms issue, there is however a "stuck mic" message!!
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CPDLC is not above fallacy. EK-LH loss of separation incident is a clear example.
There will always be mistakes when humans are involved and failures when technology is involved.
There will always be mistakes when humans are involved and failures when technology is involved.
Yeah, or put in abeam lines.
All the above is good for FIR entry/exit but as another frequent flyer on the specific route in question I'd agree with the point Thridle Op Des made about the size of some of the sectors.
![](/images/avatars/th_new.gif)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regrettably not uncommon for ATC to fail to transfer flight to next freq. Then, when pilot notices and calls, they are out of range and it then takes time to re-establish comms with current FIR.
Agree
Agree
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is getting close to that. You may not have noticed but the airspace in Europe is being split into 'Functional Airspace Blocks'. These are blocks of airspace that are very similar. So the whole of central Europe is one FAB known as FABEC. UK and Ireland airspace are one FAB. This is part of the move toward user preferred trajectories. The routes are being simplified already and you can plan from entry point of the FABEC to exit point of the FABEC for example. Step 2 of the 'SESAR Master Plan' will see all fixed routes removed from European airspace (more correctly EUROCONTROL States airspace) from exit of the departure TMA to entry of the destination TMA.
This is a huge change.
Concurrent with that the North Atlantic Oceanic Track Structure will cease to be published in 2025. All transatlantic flights will be user preferred trajectories, or in SESAR parlance, Business Trajectories. It might be a good idea to start chatting with your dispatch to see how they intend to work with airspace without air routes. It will not be a simple change for dispatch.
This is a huge change.
Concurrent with that the North Atlantic Oceanic Track Structure will cease to be published in 2025. All transatlantic flights will be user preferred trajectories, or in SESAR parlance, Business Trajectories. It might be a good idea to start chatting with your dispatch to see how they intend to work with airspace without air routes. It will not be a simple change for dispatch.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a huge change
FABEC is a wonderful idea on a politicians piece of paper, which is where it should stay.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAB's have already demonstrated clearly that they simply don't work. SES is indeed a great idea and a noble cause strongly supported by airspace users but just have a look at the recent attempt to implement a common transition altitude across the EU and you will quickly see how difficult the process of establishing a workable single FABEC is.
Ian W
It is not.
Ian W
It is getting close to that