|
automatic dependent surveillance Broadcast - Out Vectors?
Is it possible to request an ADS-B vector from Air Traffic Controllers which would be the new equivalent of Radar Vectors? For example: Around weather....I have done a Google search for the term ADS-B vectors with nothing discovered.
Thanks! |
Not sure of the foundation of your question.
Currently, ADSB broadcast does not include anticipation, so if you are looking for a vector that does not conflict with others. ie ADSB-IN As to quote an old movie line.. I am not sure what you would do with an ADSB vector if you had one... |
Even if radar coverage is be done using ADSB i imagine the controller would still call it radar vectors.
|
Australia has ADSB only areas. I haven’t heard it done but I suppose you could call for vectors. I’d just ask for a “vector”, they’d know what I meant. |
Is it possible to request an ADS-B vector from Air Traffic Controllers |
From PANS/ATM (Doc 4444):
Vectoring. Provision of navigational guidance to aircraft in the form of specific headings, based on the use of an ATS surveillance system. ATS surveillance system. A generic term meaning variously, ADS-B, PSR, SSR or any comparable ground-based system that enables the identification of aircraft. What's the problem? |
Don't know of anywhere in the world though where you get vectors while ATC is watching you via ADSB only. From Wikipedia Hudson Bay ADS-B deploymentIn the mid-2000s the company decided to address the lack of radar coverage in the Canadian north, especially in the area of Hudson Bay where airliners transition from the North Atlantic Tracks system to Canadian Domestic Airspace by deploying a ground-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) network. The five station network was operational on 15 January 2009, filling a 850,000 km2 (330,000 sq mi) gap in radar coverage which allowed reduced separation of airline flights by ADS-B tracking over procedural separation. In January 2009, Nav Canada estimated that the ADS-B system would save its customers 18 million litres of fuel per year and reduce CO=left2 and equivalent emissions by 50,000 t (110,000,000 lb) per year.[7][20][21]In November 2010, a second set of six ground-based ADS-B transceivers was later deployed along the coast of Labrador and Nunavut, providing an additional 1,980,000 km2 (760,000 sq mi). In March 2012 four more stations were added in Greenland, increasing the area covered by 1,320,000 km2 (510,000 sq mi).[7] https://airtrafficmanagement.keypubl...essing-system/ |
Hudson Bay
yes, but that is still procedural separation, where increased surveillance allows lower separation thus increasing capacity. for (semi-)radarvectors you would need continuous position down links and uniform requirements for downlink delays (that vary per type) so don’t see that happening. |
Originally Posted by golfyankeesierra
(Post 10441454)
yes, but that is still procedural separation, where increased surveillance allows lower separation thus increasing capacity. for (semi-)radarvectors you would need continuous position down links and uniform requirements for downlink delays (that vary per type) so don’t see that happening. “Fusion takes all the surveillance sensors available for an aircraft target – whether radar, Multilateration (MLAT), Wide Area Multilateration (WAM), space-based or ground-based ADS-B – and fuses all these sources to create a single track,” said Steve Williams, assistant vice president, ATM engineering, on a company blog. At its core are complex mathematical algorithms that can deliver more complete and accurate flight data directly to controllers’ display screens. This advanced new-generation system significantly improves accuracy when providing aircraft position estimates and represents the future of ATC surveillance technology. Retiring the legacy system Radar Data Processing System Re-host (RDPS-R) The technology itself is replacing the provider’s legacy Radar Data Processing System Re-host (RDPS-R), which has been operating across the air navigation system for 20 years. RDPS-R has always been a robust and exceptionally reliable workhorse in our stable of ATM technologies, but it was never designed to process the high volume of data that will originate from space-based ADS-B. |
Originally Posted by MarcK
(Post 10441607)
Did you read the linked article?
This advanced new-generation system significantly improves accuracy when providing aircraft position estimates and represents the future of ATC surveillance technology. but I am just an end user (with quite some time over Hudson Bay) and will let the experts take over this discussion. |
I don’t have any references and I’m not ATC, but this is what I’ve observed in Australia, which was an early adopter of mandatory ADSB for IFR in controlled airspace a few years ago: Non-radar controlled enroute airspace with ADSB coverage (pretty much the whole country at airline cruise levels but not the whole ATC region) appears to operate similarly to radar airspace: No position reports, vectors available on request, separation standards similar to radar airspace. Some procedural separation standards may still apply to ADSB-exempt IFR, eg legacy military aircraft. ADSB surveillance separation is not yet available in non-radar terminal airspace - procedural only. Although the tower controller can “see you” on a surveillance display, he can’t base separation on it or provide vectors. It’s pretty awesome to be “identified” immediately on takeoff out of a Class G mining airstrip 1000 NM from the nearest civilisation. Australia has very limited radar coverage away from populated areas. So ADSB is a huge advancement here, hence the early adoption. Observation only. |
ADS-B: Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast can be and is used by ATC for anything that secondary surveillance radar (SSR) is used for. But that is the issue both ADS-B and SSR are 'cooperative' surveillance, the aircraft is broadcasting its position or replying to the SSR interrogation with a reply. If the controller only has ADS-B and SSR then the surveillance will not show non-cooperative aircraft. So once the aircraft is in airspace that is not mandatory SSR/ADS-B, the airspace is shared with aircraft legally flying without ADS-B/SSR and in some airspace not even required to have radio contact with ATC. Therefore, the controller can no longer guarantee separation from all aircraft only from other cooperative aircraft. This becomes important for example when aircraft follow a TCAS RA in non-mandatory airspace and there is no guarantee that the RA is safe as TCAS (which uses a version of SSR) will not see non-cooperative aircraft.
|
Yes, which is why ADSB has been mandated in certain airspace in Australia. |
ATC only provides separation from know traffic |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:11. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.