Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

ATC (was: strategies for survival)

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
brian



Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 5:58 am    Post subject: ATC (was: strategies for survival) Reply with quote

The surprising thing is that ATC is not really of great utility. We
have better ways to provide traffic separation now (TIS, TCAS, ADS-B)
so the only real service they perform is long-distance flow control
into the major hubs and that does not require controllers sitting at
scopes. That is just a function of when you release the airliners so
they don't all arrive at ORD, ATL, or DEN at the same time. It just
requires a computer on the ground noting the arrival time at the
gates (entry points to a sector where the approaches will begin) and
then providing feedback to the aircraft as to whether they need to
slow down or not. This is just a data link problem and we have that
with Mode-S and ADS-B.

The only service that only ground radar can perform, that of
providing ground-controlled approaches, i.e. ASR or PAR, is almost
never used anymore. Even that is being moved into the cockpit through
the use of WAAS precision GPS approaches.

I would be fine with ATC wanting user fees so long as I could opt
out. Let the market decide. Widespread deployment of ADS-B would let
me see and avoid the other airplanes around me. (Heck, I do that with
my Mk-I eyeball just fine now.) Maybe ATC would find that there isn't
a market for their "service".

Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
endspeed(at)yahoo.com
Guest





PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:11 pm    Post subject: ATC (was: strategies for survival) Reply with quote

Brian, Being a pilot and therefore a lover of
technology, I would love to subscribe to the new
theory of ATC. Unfortunately, how do you handle
dynamic responses to unforeseen situations with a
computer program? I still like talking to someone
with gray matter calling the shots when things get
irregular. Bob

--- Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> wrote:

Quote:

<brian-yak(at)lloyd.com>

The surprising thing is that ATC is not really of
great utility. We
have better ways to provide traffic separation now
(TIS, TCAS, ADS-B)
so the only real service they perform is
long-distance flow control
into the major hubs and that does not require
controllers sitting at
scopes. That is just a function of when you release
the airliners so
they don't all arrive at ORD, ATL, or DEN at the
same time. It just
requires a computer on the ground noting the arrival
time at the
gates (entry points to a sector where the approaches
will begin) and
then providing feedback to the aircraft as to
whether they need to
slow down or not. This is just a data link problem
and we have that
with Mode-S and ADS-B.

The only service that only ground radar can perform,
that of
providing ground-controlled approaches, i.e. ASR or
PAR, is almost
never used anymore. Even that is being moved into
the cockpit through
the use of WAAS precision GPS approaches.

I would be fine with ATC wanting user fees so long
as I could opt
out. Let the market decide. Widespread deployment of
ADS-B would let
me see and avoid the other airplanes around me.
(Heck, I do that with
my Mk-I eyeball just fine now.) Maybe ATC would find
that there isn't
a market for their "service".

Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline
Way
brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788
(fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny
of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry








browse
Subscriptions page,
FAQ,
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Admin.













__________________________________________________


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
brian



Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:57 pm    Post subject: ATC (was: strategies for survival) Reply with quote

On May 31, 2006, at 9:05 PM, Robert Sultzbach wrote:

Quote:

<endspeed(at)yahoo.com>

Brian, Being a pilot and therefore a lover of
technology, I would love to subscribe to the new
theory of ATC. Unfortunately, how do you handle
dynamic responses to unforeseen situations with a
computer program? I still like talking to someone
with gray matter calling the shots when things get
irregular. Bob

Of course, you still are. You are communicating with the grey matter
in your own head.

Regardless, the flow control that takes place now in ATC is not done
by people anyway. When the automation breaks down flow control
becomes virtually nonexistent regardless of the number of "brains"
running the system.

The problem is, solving the flow-control problem for all the aircraft
in "the system" for the whole of the US on any given day is beyond
the capacity of any particular human brain. It requires computers to
ensure that not all the airplanes arrive at the same airport at the
same time. GA is sufficiently distributed that random statistical
distribution is sufficient for GA. The airlines with their hub-and-
spoke architecture and the need to coordinate huge numbers of
arrivals and departures at relatively few airports is just a big,
messy queueing problem, one that is ideally solved by automation.

And when the automation breaks down and you have to solve the problem
on the fly, the pilots will be able to make it work out. Now with
things like TIS and ADS-B, the pilot will have the necessary
information.

When we fly mass formations we get a lot of airplanes up in the air
and back on the ground with very minimal separation. It is done by
the pilots, not by ATC.

So the real future of ATC is distributed processing, not centralized
processing. And the processing elements belong in the aircraft, not
on the ground. Time for a change.
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Jim Baker



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 181
Location: Sayre, PA

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:58 pm    Post subject: ATC (was: strategies for survival) Reply with quote

Quote:
I still like talking to someone
with gray matter calling the shots when things get
irregular.

As an ex-UASF ATC type, I'll second that. Had several situations that could
only be human controlled...but also had a couple that were human induced
as well.

; )

Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jim Baker



Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 181
Location: Sayre, PA

PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2006 9:52 pm    Post subject: ATC (was: strategies for survival) Reply with quote

Quote:
When we fly mass formations we get a lot of airplanes up in the air
and back on the ground with very minimal separation. It is done by
the pilots, not by ATC.

Yeah, but there is no CARSA (Civilians Assume Responsibility for Seperation
of Aircraft) in a regulated, individual flight environment where the participants
aren't all from the same company..and even if they were from the same
company the OpSpec wouldn't allow it given the way things are now. Thus
the need for lateral, lateration, and vertical seperation standards, human
supervised.

I know what you're saying and don't necessarily disagree. I've often thought
that just at the point where NASA's SATS program *might* work, and the
technologies to make flying, both commercial and private, a whole lot more
accessible/easier for the common man/woman (dogs need not apply...), that
the beauracracy and the cost of compliance/participation will be so great that
not many will be able to participate. There are lots of wealthy folks out
there...at least as evidenced by the sell rate of, say, Cirrus aircraft, but I'm
not one of them and I don't know too many who are. That's not sour grapes,
just an observation. Navigation used to be more difficult and flying relatively
less expensive. Now it's fairly easy to navigate but look at the cost to get a
nice Gee-Whiz-Glass Panel set up (not really needed but makes it easier)
and then add the cost of fuel, maintenance, insurance, etc.....

Sorry to ramble....kinda off the forum's topic....

Do Not Archive
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group