Update ATC push is on

brien23

brien23

Pattern Altitude
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,624
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Brien
Home Airfield
76S
The system is showing it's age and talk of updating it is gaining traction. Shortage 3,000+ ATC controllers old radar, VOR, ILS, that is 50 years + old and failing with no or hard to find parts to keep it going. Is this the beginning of the end and scrap all the old system and move to the new navigation systems and hire ATC controllers, kind of like the old old radio range navigation system was scraped. If and when the system is updated what navigation systems in our GA aircraft will be useless, what is the next great navigation updates might we see in the next 5 to 10 years. We might even get a replacement for VHF AM (ancient modulation), cell phones updated to digital years ago. This line is more about what's it going to cost me to be able to fly in the updated ATC system, not if it's going to happen.
 
Last edited:
Zeldman said:
I see something like this.

A/C 123 unable to find your credit card on file, clearance cancelled, squawk 1200 and land at the nearest airport, good day.
Click to expand...

don't forget that A/C 123 will be told to copy a number that THEY WILL CALL...
 
Zeldman said:
I see something like this.

A/C 123 unable to find your credit card on file, clearance cancelled, squawk 1200 and land at the nearest airport, good day.
Click to expand...
So, you don’t see ADS-B-based toll tags coming?

Buy stock in Vector. Now…:)
 
Yeah, I get it. I’m sure their end goal is to build it large enough that a private equity group pays them a wad of money walk away.
 
I don’t predict any great leap in technology in the next 5-10 years. The FAA has already spent a lot of time and money on NEXGEN.

Minor improvements will be to whittle down the controller shortage. I think all the legacy analog surveillance radars are gone. TRACONs will continue to upgrade with FUSION systems and digital radar. I honestly think paper flight strips have a limited lifespan. Then again, an old friend used to work BOS tower and they tried digital strips…no bueno. As the country becomes more risk averse I can see a time down the road where ADS-B will be required in all class E along with a FF requirement. I think PDCs will eventually become required for IFR clearances to reduce frequency congestion. As ADS-B coverage improves, it’ll allow for separation in remote areas where non-radar sep once existed. I don’t see any reduced separation standards in the existing terminal radar environment though.
 
Velocity173 said:
I don’t predict any great leap in technology in the next 5-10 years. The FAA has already spent a lot of time and money on NEXGEN.

Minor improvements will be to whittle down the controller shortage. I think all the legacy analog surveillance radars are gone. TRACONs will continue to upgrade with FUSION systems and digital radar. I honestly think paper flight strips have a limited lifespan. Then again, an old friend used to work BOS tower and they tried digital strips…no bueno. As the country becomes more risk averse I can see a time down the road where ADS-B will be required in all class E along with a FF requirement. I think PDCs will eventually become required for IFR clearances to reduce frequency congestion. As ADS-B coverage improves, it’ll allow for separation in remote areas where non-radar sep once existed. I don’t see any reduced separation standards in the existing terminal radar environment though.
Click to expand...
I don’t anticipate the user seeing much change in the near future with ATC. There are parts of the system that need updating internally before the FAA can focus on implementing equipment requirements for the user. Most of these changes will be indiscernible to the user but are necessary before even considering expanding the capabilities of the national airspace system.
 
Creating a de novo ATC system that’s “state of the art” could be done fairly quickly. Maybe.

Transitioning the current system to the same level is orders of magnitude harder

Add: SAFELY transitioning it is orders of magnitude harder
 
Congress is going to demand change, airlines and the big players are going to put input, probably not good for GA. My hope is we don't end up like Europe. "BETTER THE DEVIL YOU KNOW THAN THE DEVIL YOU DON'T".
 
Velocity173 said:
I don’t predict any great leap in technology in the next 5-10 years. The FAA has already spent a lot of time and money on NEXGEN.

Minor improvements will be to whittle down the controller shortage. I think all the legacy analog surveillance radars are gone. TRACONs will continue to upgrade with FUSION systems and digital radar. I honestly think paper flight strips have a limited lifespan. Then again, an old friend used to work BOS tower and they tried digital strips…no bueno. As the country becomes more risk averse I can see a time down the road where ADS-B will be required in all class E along with a FF requirement. I think PDCs will eventually become required for IFR clearances to reduce frequency congestion. As ADS-B coverage improves, it’ll allow for separation in remote areas where non-radar sep once existed. I don’t see any reduced separation standards in the existing terminal radar environment though.
Click to expand...
The PDC idea would be interesting, but it seems that might impact situational awareness a bit. Always hear a lot of traffic banter and similar that keeps incursions/incidents from being a major factor. Seems like you'd lose that with a PDC that's quiet unless ATC is talking to you. However, it'd probably cut down on missed calls from ATC.
 
SoonerAviator said:
The PDC idea would be interesting, but it seems that might impact situational awareness a bit. Always hear a lot of traffic banter and similar that keeps incursions/incidents from being a major factor. Seems like you'd lose that with a PDC that's quiet unless ATC is talking to you. However, it'd probably cut down on missed calls from ATC.
Click to expand...
PDC is just your initial IFR clearance that you would otherwise get from clearance delivery prior to taxiing.

Enroute datalink is CPDLC (controller pilot data link communication). Domestically, that can currently deliver frequency changes, altitude assignments, and route revisions. Not all US centers are online with CPDLC at this time. CPDLC requires an active connection, you must be logged on, and all messages require a confirmation. There is an acknowledge prompt that you press to send it and you'll see when receipt is confirmed.
 
I worked on one project where we had great representatives (line pilots) from the airlines. One thing it taught me was "the system" has incredible inertia when making changes. The team: Can we do this? The representatives: Well, only 40% of our fleet has that equipment, and we don't plan on retrofitting those aircraft that don't.

The wide dissimilarity between the oldest aircraft and the newest aircraft was vast in the major airlines, and I'm sure is even wider in the GA fleet.

Change is hard. Good luck Mr. Duffy.
 
Atlantic Magazine likes the Canada model:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...opy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

"As regrettable as it is, the crisis facing our nation’s ATC system gives the Trump administration political leverage. The current proposal squanders that leverage, promising the aviation sector tens of billions of taxpayer dollars with no accompanying reform of the deeply flawed ATC-governance structure—reform that would have the support of all but a few of the aviation leaders that surrounded Duffy on April 8. In the end, the promise of a sizable investment in ATC may be necessary to get a political deal. But without the quid pro quo of structural reform, more funding won’t solve the underlying crisis."
 
Velocity173 said:
I don’t predict any great leap in technology in the next 5-10 years. The FAA has already spent a lot of time and money on NEXGEN.

Minor improvements will be to whittle down the controller shortage. I think all the legacy analog surveillance radars are gone. TRACONs will continue to upgrade with FUSION systems and digital radar. I honestly think paper flight strips have a limited lifespan. Then again, an old friend used to work BOS tower and they tried digital strips…no bueno. As the country becomes more risk averse I can see a time down the road where ADS-B will be required in all class E along with a FF requirement. I think PDCs will eventually become required for IFR clearances to reduce frequency congestion. As ADS-B coverage improves, it’ll allow for separation in remote areas where non-radar sep once existed. I don’t see any reduced separation standards in the existing terminal radar environment though.
Click to expand...
what was the issue with digital strips? My facility currently uses paper strips for every single aircraft that enters our airspace (2 if they enter and exit...) and I would love to see us get away from them. we end up with trash bags full of junk strips that are a waste of money...
 
Wrench978 said:
what was the issue with digital strips? My facility currently uses paper strips for every single aircraft that enters our airspace (2 if they enter and exit...) and I would love to see us get away from them. we end up with trash bags full of junk strips that are a waste of money...
Click to expand...
From what he said they work well for the ARTCC environment but not flexible enough for tower. Didn’t go into details but I think it has to do with strip transfers from one controller (GD) to the next (LC). They did a trial test on them and it just didn’t work out.
 
Velocity173 said:
From what he said they work well for the ARTCC environment but not flexible enough for tower. Didn’t go into details but I think it has to do with strip transfers from one controller (GD) to the next (LC). They did a trial test on them and it just didn’t work out.
Click to expand...
At one nearby facility, when a plane takes off, Tower takes the strip in its little plastic carrier and literally drops it down one of two pipes that terminate at the east and west radar positions in the TRACON downstairs. Once in a while, they will stick partway down, so there's a baseball they drop down to knock everything loose when necessary. Not high tech, but I guess it works... And it's often hard to come up with tech that's easier/better than such simple solutions.
 
It takes YEARS to qualify a new controller so it will take at least a decade to get even half the needed numbers trained and online. Opposing Bases FTW!

The FAA did a good thing mandating ADS-B and now it’s seen pretty much as a universal good… but they stopped short of fully integrating it for controllers.

My thoughts are the FAA should only be approving airports outside of metro areas. Start to scuttle the existing ones and build a new system.
 
PastZTL said:
I worked on one project where we had great representatives (line pilots) from the airlines. One thing it taught me was "the system" has incredible inertia when making changes. The team: Can we do this? The representatives: Well, only 40% of our fleet has that equipment, and we don't plan on retrofitting those aircraft that don't.

The wide dissimilarity between the oldest aircraft and the newest aircraft was vast in the major airlines, and I'm sure is even wider in the GA fleet.

Change is hard. Good luck Mr. Duffy.
Click to expand...
Well ADS-B was done, as well as the 5ghz radar filters (I helped install quite a few of those little buggers) so the reps leverage may not be as powerful as made out to be.
 
pfarber said:
My thoughts are the FAA should only be approving airports outside of metro areas. Start to scuttle the existing ones and build a new system.
Click to expand...
That’s got to be one of the more crazy takes I’ve seen a long time. Where do you think that all the traffic that goes to big metro airports is going to go? Do you think there is some glut of unused and available land within even 100 miles of most any major metro area for new airports?

Or am I misunderstanding what you’re saying?
 
Look at Washington DC. They built Dulles way out in the country, cheap land, etc.

From downtown, a long drive out, expensive parking.
Taxi, out of sight cost.
Metro line? With a medium roll around and legal roller carry on, you can not even get through the fare collector gates.
Who is going to be in a Metro station with that kind of loot?

Washington Reagan is a cheap taxi or Lyft ride from most of the city, and is the dominant choice of all but international travelers. That is why the flight density is so high there.

BWI is the second choice for air travel from DC, the drive is long, but 2 good highway choices, plus trains.
SW dominance of schedules give real ticket price advantage to BWI.
Parking is adequate, with low cost long term lots with frequent shuttles.

Fill a little more of the Potomac for a longer north south runway to increase its capacity. The reason that Reagan is in DC is that most of it is on fill dirt on a mud flat.
 
AKiss20 said:
That’s got to be one of the more crazy takes I’ve seen a long time. Where do you think that all the traffic that goes to big metro airports is going to go? Do you think there is some glut of unused and available land within even 100 miles of most any major metro area for new airports?

Or am I misunderstanding what you’re saying?
Click to expand...
Traffic management would be part of the project. High speed rail can cut 50 miles down to minutes. How long is a taxi/train from JFK to the Manhattan? 30-40 minutes if you are lucky. Train is an hour.

The existing airport paradigm is failing. An airport in a city means that you cannot use the runways 24/7. At ATL traffic is ZERO after about 10pm until 6. How many more flights can be made in that 8 hour span?

Passengers would fight for low fare night flights even more than they do for cheap day routes.

You cannot fix a problem if you still have the old ideas weighing you down. I can think of Narita and Beijing that are somewhat remote and still have heavy airline traffic. Hong Kong built an island for the airport, ditto for Kansi, Kobe, Nagasaki and more in Japan.

How many legacy airports are at capacity due to being land locked? Heathrow? SFO, ATL EWR, JFK, LGA and on and on and on.

In 50 years if the city encroaches on the airport, start again somewhere else. Why renovate a old field (which is a huge inconvenience for passengers) when you can build new? Done properly, when the airport does move, converting it into residential/commercial space should be easy... you can plan in utilities, roads etc.
 
pfarber said:
Traffic management would be part of the project. ….
Click to expand...
Pffft. No arrival from or departure to a location closer than the average domestic flight length (in miles). Today, that’s 678NM.
 
Velocity173 said:
From what he said they work well for the ARTCC environment but not flexible enough for tower. Didn’t go into details but I think it has to do with strip transfers from one controller (GD) to the next (LC). They did a trial test on them and it just didn’t work out.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top