IFATCA The Controller - April 2012

THE

CONTROLLER April 2012

Journal of Air Traffic Control

4 DATALINK: YOU HAVE MAIL!

4 EASA Rulemaking

INTER-

4 Bali & China

TION OF AIR TRAFF ERA IC C FED

LLERS’ ASSNS. TRO ON

4 Flying the A380

NATIO NAL

Also in this Issue:

Staff Planning Made Simple TrafficPlanner

The TrafficPlanner provides flow managers with a perfect overview of the future traffic situation.

The TrafficPlanner calculates the workload impact for each working position, based on traffic load and complexity calculations. Adjustable parameters such as weather conditions, flight data, military activity and conflict detection are calculated and analysed by the system.

The TrafficPlanner features intuitive traffic monitoring in an easy-to-use layout, featuring: • Online radar screen – showing moving predicted air traffic • Complexity levels in colour graphics • Sector load figures in colour graphics • Optimal sector configuration suggestion

Bidding

Roster Planning

OJT Planning

Developed by Air Traffic Controllers

Check In

BreakPlanner

Flow from A-Z Leave Planning

Duty Swapping

Contact : Integra - Michael Silau - oms@integra.dk - +4522666120

StatusChecker

Check Out

TrafficPlanner

Contents

THE

CONTROLLER

April 2012 Volume 51 Issue 1 – ISSN 0010-8073

THE

CONTROLLER Journal of Air Traffic Control

April 2012

4 DATALINK: YOU HAVE MAIL!

4 EASA Rulemaking

INTER-

4 Bali & China

TION OF AIR TRAFF ERA IC C FED

LLERS’ ASSNS. TRO ON

4 Flying the A380

NATIO NAL

Also in this Issue:

Cover photo:

In this issue:

Naddsy/wikimedia

EXECUTIVE BOARD OF IFATCA Alexis Brathwaite President and Chief Executive Officer Patrik Peters Deputy President

Patrick Forrey Executive Vice-President Technical

Scott Shallies Executive Vice-President Professional

Darrell Meachum Executive Vice-President Finance

Keziah Ogutu Executive Vice-President Africa and Middle East Vacant Executive Vice-President Americas D. K. Behera Executive Vice-President Asia and Pacific Željko Oreški Executive Vice-President Europe

Philippe Domogala Conference Executive

Adell Humphreys Secretary

The editorial team has endeavored to include all owner information, or at least source information for the images used in this issue. If you believe that an image was used without permission, please contact the editor via http:// www.the-controller.net

Editorial ....................................…………………………………......

Obituaries .........…………………………..……………………..……....

Foreword from the Executive Board ........………………..…………...

Datalink ..........……….. Datalink Frustration ....................……………

Oceanic Airspace ....………..………………….

Datalink in Africa ...…………………………….

ATSAW & Initial 4D ....…………………………

16 Years of Operational Experience ...…......

Link 2000+ ....…….……………………………..

Datalink in Singapore ....…….………………..

Datalink on the A380 ....……………………....

Aircraft .........………………..... Flying the A380 ....................………………...

Record breaking flight B787 ....……………...

Technology .........……………… VoIP ....................……………………………….

Safety .........…………………….. Safety Cards ....................………………….....

EASA Rulemaking ....……………..…………....

Asia/Pacific .........……………… China ....................…………………………......

Bali ....……………..…………………………......

Feature .........……………….... An American SST ....................……………….

Carlos/Charlie .......………………………………………………….……………….

PUBLISHER IFATCA, International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers‘ Associations 1255 University Street · Suite 408 Montreal, Quebec · H3B 3B6 · CANADA Phone: +1514 866 7040 Fax: +1514 866 7612 · Email: office@ifatca.org EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Philip Marien Van Dijcklaan 31 B-3500 Hasselt, Belgium email: bm@the-controller.net DEPUTY EDITOR Philippe Domogala email: dp@the-controller.net CORPORATE AFFAIRS Vacant

4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 18 20 21 22 23 26 27 30 33

REGIONAL EDITORS Americas: Doug Church (USA) Phil Parker (Hong Kong) Europe: Patrik Peters & David Guerin COPY EDITORS Paul Robinson, Helena Sjöström, Stephen Broadbent, Brent Cash, Andrew Robinson and David Guerin LAYOUT & PRINTING LITHO ART GmbH & Co. Druckvorlagen KG Friesenheimer Straße 6a D 68169 Mannheim GERMANY Tel: +49 (0)621 3 22 59 10 Fax: +49 (0)621 3 22 59 14 email: info@lithoart-ma.de

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this magazine are those of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA) only when so indicated. Other views will be those of individual members or contributors concerned and will not necessarily be those of IFATCA, except where indicated. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in this publication is correct, IFATCA makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the nature or accuracy of the information.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or used in any form or by any means, without the specific prior written permission of IFATCA.

VISIT THE IFATCA WEB SITES:

www.ifatca.org and www.the-controller.net

THE

CONTROLLER

3

Editorial

OLD WINE IN NEW WINESKINS BRAND NEW AIRCRAFT, CRACKLY OLD RADIO

^ by Philip Marien, Editor As of February 2012, the farthest manmade object in the universe, Voyager 1, is about 18 billion km (17,916,000,000 km to be exact) from the Earth. Its current relative velocity to the sun is 61,400 km/h. It was built and launched in the 1970s, with technology from that era. Despite this, engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory can still communicate with the probe, via a (rather slow 160 bits/s) datalink connection. It may take 16.5 hours for a one-way message, but it does get there and back!

Which makes it all the more frustrating that in a lot of cases, we have trouble getting a message to/from aircraft, which are only a few hundreds of kilometers away and are travelling at a fraction of the speed! If 40 years ago, they could come up with a technology robust enough to survive 35 years in outer space, one would expect they’d have something lying around to improve on a technology invented by a Brazilian priest in 1900*.

As you’ll see from the articles on datalink in this issue, it’s slowly coming. But even today, it very much looks like datalink will co-exist with VHF and even HF voice communica-

tions for the foreseeable future rather than replace it all together… One of the problems appears to be that despite aviation probably being the most global business to be in, that same business has failed to come up with a global standard. This appears to be the weakness of datalink and the strength of the current technology. It’s also the explanation as to why radiotelephony will be with us for at least another few decades: it’s a widely available, open standard. Unlike datalink, once you have the equipment and a bit of maintenance set up, you don’t have to pay anyone for the privilege of using it.

And in today’s competitive world of aviation, that seems to be a winning argument, never mind the drawbacks…

And for a lot (all?) of airlines today, it’s about quick wins. If an investment doesn’t pay off within a few weeks/months, it’s often not worth spending the money. This explains why passengers these days often have better and quicker ways of communicating with the world they’re overflying than the pilots and controllers. Unlike the cockpit communications, giving passengers access to internet and mobile telephony in-flight actually generates money for the airlines.

It’s almost an anachronism that we still rely on something as old as radiotelephony to

control modern airframes like the A380.

As you’ll see from Philippe Domogala’s experience, the cockpit is rapidly evolving towards an office, with the pilots acting more as managers than anything else… It’s a shame that the communication means aren’t evolving with them.

Other articles include a look at China and Bali, an interview with the EASA Director of Rulemaking and other, hopefully interesting articles.

As always, if you think you have something interesting to share with our readers, feel free to let the editorial team know. ^ Until next time,

editor@the-controller.net *On June 3rd 1900, Brazilian priest Roberto Landell de Moura was the first to publically demonstrate the transmission of a human voice using wireless signals. The demonstration was done in São Paulo, Brazil, between two stations approximately 8 km from each other.

Photo: NASA

4

Obituaries

CHARLES STUART 25 OCTOBER 1940 – 7 MARCH 2012 On the eve of IFATCA’s 51st Annual Conference, we learned that Charles Stuart, former President and Chief Executive Officer, passed away following a brief battle with cancer.

Charles served the Federation as Executive Vice President Technical in 1989, and following a restructure of the Executive Board, he was elected President of IFATCA in 1990. He served as President for four years and it is hard to underestimate the impact he had on our Federation. He strongly believed that IFATCA had a pivotal role to play in determining how the management of air traffic would progress in the 21st century, and was a strong advocate of setting up an independent full-time headquarters for the Federation to improve our relationship with ICAO, IFALPA, and IATA. We achieved this in 1997, when we opened our office in Montreal.

We will remember Charles as someone unafraid to stand up for his beliefs, chief

amongst which was the undying support of family, friends and his much loved profession. Well known throughout the aviation fraternity, he was able to relate with all from the highest elected office to those at the beginning (or end) of humble careers.

Charles’ one-of-a-kind personality reflected in his dedication to the air traffic controller profession. This strong advocacy of a worldwide body for controllers, as well as his infectious smile and sense of humour, will live with us always. He was one

of those rare persons of whom you can truly say that the world is a better place because he lived in it. We shall all deeply miss him.

On behalf of the IFATCA family, we extend our sincere condolences to the family and anyone who was fortunate enough to have known him. ^ IFATCA Executive Board & Editorial Team The Controller

MARTIN W. COLE 17 JUNE 1953 - 18 FEBRUARY 2012 We’re saddened to report that Martin W. Cole, former Executive Vice-President Technical, passed away on Saturday, 18 February 2012.

Mr. Cole was Executive Vice-President Technical from 1997 - 1999 and was the first NATCA member to serve on the IFATCA Executive Board. He retired as an air traffic controller from the Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC).

Martin was one of NATCA’s first technical Liaisons, becoming integrally involved in Controller Pilot Data-Link Communications (CPDLC). Mr. Cole served on numerous aviation related committees and working groups addressing how to improve controller and pilot communications. Martin was known as one of the most, if not the most, knowledgeable persons about how DataComm and DataLink would change aviation.

Martin brought this knowledge and passion

to IFATCA, ensuring that IFATCA’s policies evolved to keep pace with the industry.

greatest of respect for himself and others at all time.

In retirement, Martin remained available to his former colleagues, providing advice and support as necessary. Martin was one of those truly special persons who understood that service to others was a high calling that could be achieved without denying one’s own self. He always showed the

We extend our sympathies to his partner, Peter, and the rest of his family and relatives.

IFATCA Executive Board & Editorial Team The Controller

5

Foreword

FOREWORD FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD NEED FOR THE HARMONIZATION Forrey, ^ Patrick IFATCA Executive Vice President Technical we must build integrated, holistic systems and not those that are piecemeal. This is an important key to success for the future.

Photo: SempreVolando

The future of Air Traffic Management has been keeping the world busy as of late.

With NextGen, SESAR, CARATS and dozens of other technological and procedural initiatives around the globe, the entire aviation community along with the contracting states of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is deep in the throes of changing aviation to meet the demands of the 21st century and beyond.

It goes without saying that these initiatives are not all alike. SESAR, NextGen, CARATS and all the others are serving different ATM environments with different political objectives. IFATCA applauds ICAO for taking the lead in the adoption of Aviation System Block Upgrades (ASBU). Together with the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP), states will have a roadmap on the technology and procedures available to move the world’s ATM upgrades in the same direction.

Without a doubt, the need for a collaborative international commitment to address the challenges aviation faces now and for the future is paramount, and that is why IFATCA participates in these activities.

I believe this is truly an exciting time for controllers, as we face new possibilities in the ways of doing our jobs, in some instances, only bounded by our imagination.

The important point to remember is that

6

However, initiatives such as SESAR and NEXTGEN are still a long way from defining how something will actually be done in an air traffic control/management sense, likewise for the ASBU’s. One has to realize that these documents have not been subject to rigorous review, and controllers world wide retain a good deal of scepticism on the expectations being touted concerning the capabilities and enhancements these initiatives profess in the time frames provided.

From the airspace user perspective, the benefit of any change in equipage without the ground first using what the aircraft are already capable of will be difficult to accept. It will be even harder to get airspace users to equip for “future service provision concepts” that are only research ideas at present and have not been validated.

Nonetheless, the new technologies and procedures appear promising in ways to enhance safety and increase capacity.

If one looks closely at the technology and procedures being developed for the future ATM, one common enabler resonates – Data Link. The foundation of NextGen and SESAR in particular hinge on the ability for automated communication and surveillance to support Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) and Performance Based Navigation (PBN). IFATCA does not believe this capability will replace traditional voice communication, but it will definitely enhance it with situational awareness through airborne surveillance, clarity through a common message set and workload improvements.

These benefits do not come without the risks of transmission delays, addressing errors or human factors issues. Data link is a costly and sensitive technology, which may explain why deployment has not progressed much since IFATCA’s 2009 Tech-

nical Newsletter on data link initiatives.

There are other problems as well.

During oceanic flights, aircraft use the Future Air Navigation System (FANS 1/A) surveillance and communication tools to provide position reports and exchange clearances and other messages outside radar & VHF radio coverage. Continental operations in Europe primarily utilize the Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) based on the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network (ATN) service, mostly due to IFATCA’s rigorous objections to FANS limited CPDLC deficiencies.

In most models, FANS allows for the autoload of some clearance elements in the FMS, which will become a crucial feature for the future 4D trajectories concept, but its performance and integrity may not be sufficient for continental operations. ATN, in its European version (ATN/Baseline 1), does not offer the full CPDLC message set nor the Automatic Dependent Surveillance Contract (ADS-C) application and satellite communications capabilities needed for oceanic operations, but does provide the performance and reliability needed for short term tactical ATC instructions in busy and complex airspace.

Next year, data link is being mandated for a specified part of the North Atlantic (NAT) Track system and a part of the European airspace (EUR), but not for the USA. This will create a situation in which the NAT will utilize FANS while continental Europe will use ATN. These two systems are incompatible. Adding to this divergence from harmonization, the FAA appears to be set on implementing FANS data link in the continental US airspace using older technology and message sets.

This double standard for aircraft equipage has been a long-standing issue without a resolution in sight other than to equip aircraft and ground systems with both capabil-

Foreword ities; a costly and impractical solution. There is a need for consistency of service delivery at the controller-pilot level, which requires the standardization of message sets that doesn’t currently exist between the two systems.

IFATCA believes that the long-term global solution will come from new standards encompassing both oceanic and continental airspace needs. A joint standardization work group composed of RTCA SC-214 and EUROCAE WG-78 has been given the crucial task of comprehensively defining the next data link applications and services, so that manufacturers and users could enjoy a single set of standards to equip aircraft and ground centres for oceanic and continental operations with

seamless transitions. The ICAO Operational Data Link Panel (OPLINK), of which IFATCA is a member, will reference these industry standards, update the ICAO documentation, and provide guidance material and a global data link harmonization plan, so that data link deployment shall never be delayed again by parallel and incompatible developments.

The contracting states of ICAO, system stakeholders, and industry all have a vital role to play in developing the aviation system of the future. The compatibility issue associated with data link – an intrinsic enabler of the future ATM – illustrates the need for the harmonization of technology and procedures in this transformational process.

Clearly, we have a very difficult challenge in transforming today’s system to one that achieves the dreams and research of tomorrow. It is important that we build integrated, holistic systems that provide the necessary technology and procedures required to meet the needs of the 21st century and beyond. Lesson learned with data link should provide the history we don’t want to repeat. ^

evpt@ifatca.org

4 Datalink

DATALINK FRUSTRATION IS PROGRESS REALLY AS SLOW AS SOME PERCEIVE?

^ by Rob Mead, Datalink Veteran not addressing transition, or lack of a clear operational focus.

If you look around, datalink has succeeded. It brings benefits every day, and it’s expanding geographically and functionally every single day. The implementations that have trouble are generally doing one thing wrong. They aren’t copying enough. They think they can be unique and succeed. That’s just not going to happen in datalink.

I should probably stop there, but I was asked for a couple pages so let’s take this a little deeper.

I’ve been asked the same basic question twice in the last few months, something along the lines of “why hasn’t air/ground datalink delivered?” Both times, my immediate thought was: “It has. What you really mean is ‘why hasn’t air/ground datalink succeeded in the airspace I’m interested in?”

With that distinction, the question is usually pretty easy to answer. Chances are you’re having trouble because you are trying to do something unique in an area where global cooperation is essential (Not Invented Here syndrome). One layer down, that uniqueness probably traces back to insufficient benefits,

I’ve been involved in air/ground datalink for over 30 years now in one way or another. I was a user (or operator if you prefer, as I still do) of a range of pretty sophisticated links for my formative 10 years, then went on to 20 years of design and implementation in the civil aviation arena. During that time, from operator to implementer, I’ve generally had successful experiences. The civil aviation side has been slow and painful for sure, but still largely successful.

That success is true even though a few of the experiences have been about as high risk as they could be. They’ve been kinds of things

Implementations that have trouble […] aren’t copying enough. where you tell people you plan to do it and they let you go ahead because they think there’s not a chance in the world that you’ll get it done.

So let’s start there. What has been behind the successes I’ve enjoyed being a part of? Here’s a short list from my perspective.

1. All have established a clear operational objective at the beginning, and have stayed focused on that operational objective above all else, from start to finish.

2. All recognized early on that datalink is tough, and that they needed to make it easy on all parties to help them succeed. They did that by: a. Fitting into current procedures as much as possible.

Fancy ideas, no matter how tempting, must be proven necessary, because they are going to cost you.

7

4 Datalink

Photo: © Lightzoom | Dreamstime.com

Both technologies […] are just a tool.

sition is everything, not the final phase to be figured out later.

3. All have had a benefits target that was real, and it was verified early on as sufficient to drive the transition. Inflated benefits suck. They make great politics, but they’ll bite you eventually.

4. All had good people throughout the entire stakeholder set. The projects found the people that shared the above objectives, stuck to those people, and kept everyone else out of their hair.

Those are the things that were present in all of the successes I was a part of. And this brings me back to the initial summary answer I gave: copying is a really good idea.

Datalink is tough. There are a lot of entities that have to work together to make it happen, and each of those entities has a slightly or even drastically different agenda from the others. About the worst thing you can do in a situation like that is saddle yourself with an unproven idea. Copy.

b. Leverage what’s out there. If there’s something in place that meets the requirements, use it.

And this means, just as for procedures, make sure requirements that force system change are really a requirement and not someone’s idea of what would be really cool. c. Transition is dealt with at the start. It doesn’t come later. How will we train crews to do this? How will we train controllers?

How will this equipment get on board aircraft and in ground systems? Tran-

If you really think you have a unique need, check it. Then check it again. Then go back and ask yourself if you made a mistake. Because you will pay for being unique, and the price may well be your entire program. Just like ATC, datalink is global. Be global and you’ll be much happier.

For those of you thinking right now that all airspace is not the same, you are right of course.

Up to now datalink has been predominantly introduced in low-congestion, low tempo airspace. But that word is “predominantly”, not “exclusively”. Yes, congested airspace datalink is different from uncongested airspace.

But ATC is still ATC, and you still need global commonality to make it work. You still need a benefit that will compel airlines to want to invest; mandates and incentives are an in-

complete solution, and the rest of the world has not needed them. Look to what made datalink work elsewhere. Are you offering a per flight benefit that will make an airline want to put the gear on a particular aircraft?

Are you leveraging existing equipment where you can? Are you creating an easy transition path for air and ground? Are you introducing something that is likely to last more than 5 years without needing an upgrade?

If you answered any of those questions “no” or “I don’t know”, chances are you are going to find datalink a little frustrating. Copy.

There are a lot of smart people out there.

The map on this page, maintained off and on by a couple of constants in the datalink world, Craig Roberts and Tom Kraft, shows that datalink is anything but a sputtering failure. It’s a huge success. Gray and green on the map are planned deployments with firm and funded projects behind them; the brown is deployed already. It’s a large proportion of the world.

Note: Before you start picking it apart, I am aware that this version of the map is incomplete. Datalink is moving fast enough that it’s hard to keep up with and this map reflects that. And that’s the point: datalink is a growing success.

I will close with one last thought that will come up in some readers’ minds when they review that map. Someone out there is going to think that there is some political objective in that map. They will think that because it has those words FANS-1/A and ATN on there.

In answer to that, I can tell you that on more than one day I have been in front of two different audiences, each one of them furious at me because they were convinced that I was an advocate of the opposite technology (opposite to their preferred technology). Well, I’ve put both technologies in the field. And to me, they are just a tool, nothing more.

The technologies are just a tool. Is the operational objective clear? Is the transition path achievable? Is the benefit clear? Are the requirements (the real ones) met? If so, I can succeed. And I am quite sure that if we’ve done a good job with the implementation, the bulk of the pilots and controllers won’t know the specific technology they’re using, and the airlines won’t care what technology they’re carrying. If it is doing what we set out to make it do, operationally, everyone’s happy. And datalink will have delivered. ^

4 Datalink coverage across the globe.

8

Photo: C. Roberts & T. Kraft

mead.rob@comcast.net

4 Datalink

DATALINK FOR OCEANIC AIRSPACE HUGE IMPROVEMENTS OVER ANTIQUATED HF Paul Callahan, Auckland Oceanic ^ by Controller, New Zealand Auckland Oceanic has been using Datalink now for over ten years and this along with other changes over the same period has resulted in huge improvements in the services offered to aircraft in the oceanic environment.

Datalink equipped aircraft log onto NZZO prior to entering Auckland Oceanic airspace.

The Oceanic Controller connects up both ADS and CPDLC. Generally this is a straight forward process; however occasionally the log-on does not match the registration that has been filed in the flight plan which can be caused either by the pilot mis-typing the registration when logging on or the flight plan being incorrect. Either way, this is easily solved with another log-on and a change to the registration in the flight plan in the OCS (Oceanic Control System).

The ADS connection that we establish with the aircraft consists of a Periodic Contract which is set at 20 minutes, however this can be adjusted if a more frequent rate is required, such as in an emergency situation.

A waypoint change event contract and a lateral deviation contract are also established.

The lateral deviation contract is set at 5nm and is something that certainly caught pilots out when ADS was first introduced as they could no longer sneak around the odd bit of weather without telling anyone!

4

View of the Datalink sta An on- demand contract is also tus window in Auckland Oceanic.

Photo: PC available allowing the controller to select the information they reinto the OCS system without quire. These become very useful in a numthe need of any manual input ber of instances, such as determining exactly eliminating the possibility of where the aircraft is after a turn back or reerrors. route to ensure the profile is exact.

Once the datalink equipped aircraft enters Oceanic Airspace, all requests and instructions are sent via CPDLC. The message set contains practically all the messages that would ever be needed, cutting down the need for freetext and its possible ambiguities. Early on it became apparent that alternatives to requests should be sent in a separate message to the unable response to avoid any confusion.

The use of Datalink has enabled the reduction of oceanic separations. With airlines flying user preferred routes and all looking to take advantage of the jet streams the reduction from 15 minute to 30 nm separation has meant that the chance of aircraft being stuck at inefficient levels is dramatically reduced.

The use of DARPs (Dynamic Airborne Reroute Procedure) has allowed airlines to quickly change their routes mid-flight to take advantage of, or avoid weather systems. The full route is sent to the controller via CPDLC and if accepted by the controller, is entered

4 A view of the Oceneanic

airspace to the North of New Zealand. To give an idea of the scale, QFA11 is nearly abeam Tonga, some 1100 Nm NW of Auckland. Photo: PC

The address forwarding process is fully automated with the Next Data Authority (NDA) and Contact Advisory (CAD) sent at a Variable System Parameter (VSP) prior to the boundary. This process works really well except for flights that ‘hemstitch’ between two boundaries. It can be difficult to retain the active CPDLC connection when an aircraft is leaving your airspace for a short amount of time. CPDLC requests right before the boundary can also cause issues as coordination requirements with the next sector often mean the aircraft has handed out to the next sector before the clearance can be sent.

In summary, both controllers and pilots in Auckland Oceanic airspace find datalink a huge improvement over the days of HF. Clearance requests, especially weather deviation clearances are received much quicker and without the read back hear back errors associated with HF. Position reporting is much more accurate with pilots no longer having to remember to update changes to estimates and this increased accuracy has led a more efficient use of airspace and ultimately a reduction in costs. ^

Paul.Callahan@airways.co.nz 9

4 Datalink

DATALINK IN AFRICA MAKING A DIFFERENCE WHERE IT MATTERS! Serge TCHANDA, ^ by ATCO/Instructor ASECNA The Africa & Indian Ocean (AFI) geographic region has in the past been labelled as the ‘Dark Continent’, where flights traversed the large airspace with little or no communication with ATC. In order to have some level of separation, IATA member operators resorted to In–Flight Broadcasting (IFBP) when flying over most of the Flight Information regions (FIRs); this programme remains in use in some of the FIRs. But things are changing: the introduction of ADS in the region has improved the communication between Air and Ground, which has benefited safety.

During the last 5 years, ADS/ CPDLC systems have been implemented in more than 10 FIRs in the AFI region.

Technical Issues As a fully operational ATCO, my main concern has always been that of lack of reliable means for air-ground communication, especially poor readability and limited VHF coverage. In fact most of our

10

airspace could be classified as “inhospitable”: spread over wide damp forest, deserts, sea and high mountains. Installation and maintenance of ground stations in such areas is very difficult. Outages have occasionally led to some critical incidents including high risk Airprox. The implementation of CPDLC brings an alternative solution for such problem areas. The satellites used ensure that the remotest areas are covered, allowing information exchange with aircraft thousands of miles away. The very first time I used the system, I was able to get useful information (such as estimates, flight level and actual position) from a connected aircraft flying from Johannesburg to Zurich at 1000NM from my FIR boundary: that means more than 2 hours ahead of estimated time at boundary!

Service Level Issues IATA has signed service level agreements (SLA) with many African ANSPs to improve the service quality. It is therefore a challenge for the latter to meet their commitments among which implementation of reliable and sustainable means of communications, navigation and surveillance (CNS) is top priority.

Moreover, applying of the AFI air navigation plan many African states have included the enhancement of CNS as part of their main safety policy, which the involved ANSPs must abide by.

Ground Effectiveness Many ATSUs on the continent are already using a datalink system, mainly in Northern Africa: some ASECNA FIRs (Dakar continental and oceanic, Niamey, N’djamena, Brazzaville, Antananarivo, and Abidjan), Seychelles, Accra (Ghana), Khartoum, Moga-

4 Consoles in N‘djamena ACC operations room. Photo: ST

discio, and Johannesburg FIRs to name but the few. Although the AFI plan includes the implementation of ADS-C in large continental and Oceanic airspaces, there is still work to be done. The fact that I was able to get a full connection with a northbound traffic 1000NM from my FIR means that many FIRs are yet to be connected to the system as the CPDLC protocol allows only one connection between an aircraft and an ATSU at a time.

Airbone Component According to my own observations, less than 60% of aircraft flying through some of the above-mentioned FIRs are ADS/CPDLC capable. The majority are European and American based. Equipage seems to be lower for Asian, Middle Eastern and African based operators. The above mentioned facts make the implementation of the system fairly desirable as the problems of communication and surveillance are solved best with aircraft that are equipped with a compatible ACARS version.

Conclusion The future is certainly promising, as many ANPS and airlines or aircraft operators will hopefully follow the current trend in the short term. That is why it is important that IATA continues to encourage their members to fully equip their aircraft, but also that the remaining African states and ANSPs include the implementation of ADS/CPDLC in their safety policy. Should we come to a 100% implementation in the near future, the use of IFBP will become optional and African skies will earn more credibility. ^

tchanda_serge@yahoo.fr

4 Close-up of a radar display in N‘djamena ACC. Photo: ST

4 Datalink

COCKPIT SURVEILLANCE

Christos Rekkas, ^ by Eurocontrol CASCADE Programme Manager The Eurocontrol CASCADE Programme coordinates the deployment of initial Automatic Dependant Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) applications and Wide Area Multilateration (WAM) in Europe. The Programme covers ground surveillance (i.e. ADS-B Out and WAM) and airborne surveillance applications, establishing the baseline for future airborne Surveillance applications. CASCADE works actively to ensure global interoperability. ADS-B and WAM are currently being deployed operationally in Europe and worldwide.

Airborne Traffic Situational Awareness (ATSAW) provides pilots with a real time picture of the surrounding traffic during all phases of flight. On Oceanic routes where air traffic control has no radar picture of traffic, ATSAW enables the pilots to identify opportunities for a safe climb or descent through traffic to a more fuel-efficient or turbulencefree altitude, although they will still have to request clearance for the manoeuvre from ATC. ATSAW will also support visual separation on approach and provide traffic situ-

ational awareness on the airport surface. ATSAW is expected to bring concrete benefits in terms of safety and capacity, as well as significant fuel savings per airliner and corresponding cuts in CO2 emissions.

ADS-B is a surveillance technique that relies on aircraft broadcasting their identity, position and other information derived from on board systems. This signal can be captured for surveillance purposes from the ground (ADS-B Out) or on board other aircraft (ADSB In). The latter enables ATSAW, spacing, separation and self-separation applications.

A breakthrough point has been reached in civil aviation with the operational deployment of surveillance capability in the cockpit, using ADS-B. On 7 February, an A330-300 of Swiss International Airlines, equipped with a certified ATSAW system from Airbus (including a Honeywell traffic computer) took off from Zurich Airport to Montreal. It thus became the first European commercial ATSAW flight, providing the pilots with real-time surveillance information on surrounding traffic.

4 ATSAW enables the pilots to identify traffic in their vicinity.

This aircraft is part of the ATSAW Pioneer Project initiative of the EUROCONTROL CASCADE Programme. The project includes a total of 25 Airbus and Boeing aircraft from British Airways, Delta Airlines, Swiss International Airlines, US Airways and Virgin Atlantic. It also involves the UK and Icelandic air navigation service providers (NATS and ISAVIA) as they provide the ATC services in the projected trial area over the North Atlantic.

More information via http:// www.eurocontrol.int/cascade

WORLD’S FIRST 4D FLIGHT

Philip Marien, ^ by Editor

On February 10th 2012, an Airbus A320 test aircraft flew from Toulouse to Copenhagen and Stockholm and successfully validated the capability of the aircraft system to comply with time constraints elaborated and negotiated with ATC units through air ground datalink communication. This evolution is referred to as the 4-dimensional trajectory concept, or 4D, meaning a three-dimensional trajectory plus time. It is a cornerstone of the SESAR programme as it is the first step towards more predictable flights.

Throughout the flight, the trajectory information containing current and predicted positions was exchanged with the concerned air navigation service providers and airports.

Flying through the Eurocontrol Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC) air-

space, the airborne and ground systems agreed on a first time constraint at a merging point close to Copenhagen airport. After reaching the merging point, the flight climbed and continued into Danish airspace, where a second time constraint was negotiated for an optimised descent to a merging point close to Stockholm’s Arlanda Airport, followed by a landing.

The flight trial is part of the SESAR framework release process aiming to validate both technical and operational aspects. A significant number of operational validations using flight test aircraft are planned within the context of the SESAR programme over the next two years. Provided all validation exercises are successful, I-4D should be implemented by the European industry by 2018.

4 The different windows showing

the 4D datalink exchanges with AIB01CH, the Airbus test aircraft.

Photo: eurocontrol

More information on http://goo.gl/VONAT ^

11

4 Datalink

16 YEARS OF OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE CPDLC AND THE AIRLINES Volker Stuhlsatz, ^ by Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre The year is 2012 AD. The whole of Europe still uses radiotelephony to control aircraft.

The whole of Europe?

Not quite!

A small, pioneering multinational control centre inside FABEC has been using datalink for more than a decade to combat daily traffic invasions…

In 1995, the first Preliminary Eurocontrol Trials Air/ground Data Link (PETAL) were restricted to Airbus flights between Hamburg and Toulouse. Despite the restrictions of the ageing HMI, the limited number of

trial flights proved that the concept worked, at least for strategic messages (i.e. non-separation instructions). If anything, controllers highly appreciated the down linked parameters (heading, airspeed and vertical speed), over a decade before enhanced Mode-S. Obviously a follow up project had to prove itself to a broader audience. PETAL II (two) introduced some 11 airlines and a variety of aircraft types to datalink in all MaastrichtUAC sectors. Between 1998 and 2002, some 12.000 successful flights were completed using a mix of platforms: NEAN (VDL mode 4), FANS 1/A and ATN (VDL mode 2). Despite the different protocols, the controllers’ HMI was the same. Overcoming some important challenges, including having a reduced message set, HMI development and limited pilot and ATCO exposure, the system became a powerful additional ATC tool, though still mostly used strategically.

From PETAL II to LINK2000(+) When the LINK2000 project entered the scene, the rather modest Maastricht trials

One of the prime limitations for additional capacity was found to be frequency congestion. were integrated into this full-blown European ATM project. It was the time of high ATC delays in Europe and one of the prime limitations for additional capacity was found to be frequency congestion. Simulations showed that frequency use could be reduced by some 60%, thereby reducing an ATCO’s R/T workload by 30 to 50%. This translated into an estimated 11% ATC capacity gain, at least in a scenario where 75% of the traffic was datalink equipped. This was deemed promising enough to pursue…

Moving from a trial to operational use was a challenge for Maastricht. Not in the least because a switch to a new display system was foreseen (from an alphanumeric to a window based system) changing later to a label based design. Eventually, some 20 airlines agreed to participate and got certified. Today, only 5 of those airlines are responsible for more than 95% of the ATN datalink traffic at Maastricht.

Over the years, actual CPDLC usage at Maastricht has always increased, despite the occasional downturns in traffic levels (e.g. in 2001 and 2008). Even so, the overall percentage of the traffic using CPDLC remains too low to have a noticeable effect on our daily work and therefore on capacity: so far only some 5% of aircrew select to log-on to the Maastricht datalink service despite the service having been nearly continuously available since 2004. Some 50% is wide body traffic using FANS 1/A technology, which is not part of the EU ATN DL mandate.

Over the years, message sets were adapted and their usage evolved as well. Currently, more than 58% of the messages are transferring aircraft to the next sector. Second most popular (around 20%) is the route clearance (to send aircraft to a routepoint/position).

Around 14% are level clearances and the remaining 6% of messages are automated SSR code uplinks. The latter is somewhat misleading, as only a small number of air-

12

4 Datalink All Photos: MUAC

craft actually require an SSR code change in the airspace. But since it relieves the ATCO completely of a very error prone, routine task, it’s probably the most popular application of datalink together with the sector transfer.

So what’s taking so long?

Essentially, with ground implementation dates constantly shifting, many airlines could not really be convinced to start equipping.

This in turn didn’t make it very urgent for ANSPs to equip either: the famous chicken and egg problem… Only in 2009, when the EU adopted their Datalink Implementation Rule for traffic above FL285, were definite implementation dates set not only for the airborne but also for the ground-based systems. Since the beginning of last year (2011) nearly all-new production aircraft have to be CPDLC equipped. In combination with some 500 early equippers benefiting from a EU incentive scheme, we are hopeful of seeing a quick increase in the number of equipped aircraft before the ground implementation mandate in the core area in February 2013.

But with the retrofit for existing airframes not required til Feb. 2015 and a possibility of new long-range aircraft (up to 2014) having a lifetime exemption, we’ll still be some time away from the targeted 75% equipage in the European airspace.

What about FANS 1/A? Accommodating FANS 1/A services in highdensity airspace is not straightforward. There are performance issues, both in how fast messages are delivered as well as concerning the robustness of the system in coping with late or even mis-delivery of messages. This has resulted in the safety cases restricting datalink services to non-profile changing messages. Despite this restriction, use of FANS 1/A in dense continental airspace should still bring some benefits to the estimated 20% of the traffic, which will use this system.

Airborne use While carrying the equipment will be mandatory, using it will not be. By having archaic HF replaced with datalink, long-haul crews are generally convinced of the benefits already.

But things are different for the busy shorthaul flight crews. Trying to squeeze in an additional element in an already high workload environment (fast turnarounds, short cruise phases, increased paperwork etc). They would only spend a relatively short time in CPDLC airspace, so the benefit would be proportionally limited…

A lot is expected from further automatic exchanges to reduce workload on both sides: apart from the current AUTO SSR code uplink, cross checking the filed route between

airborne and ground systems has a very high potential for ATC capacity gain.

What about Human Factors?

The loss of the so-called party-line effect has proven less of an issue, at least in the type of airspace that Maastricht UAC controls. For pilots, it’s often too busy to follow what is going on. And in high traffic levels, the controllers appear to rely more and more on the visual aspects, i.e. their systems having updated information as easily as possible.

This offloading of the audio channel and more emphasis on the visual cortex will require changes to both ground and airborne routines. On the ground, this might involve redistributing the tasks between the executive and planning controller, but it’s difficult to predict exactly what this will entail.

CPDLC might be an enabler for future concepts, such as the multi-sector planner. Recent simulator validations show a lot of potential, but this has yet to be proven in every day traffic. If anything, it could result in controlling in certain types of airspace once more becoming more strategic rather than tactical.

4 Aircraft is logged-on but no CPDLC (yet).

4 Aircraft is logged-on and CPDLC connected. There are no open dialogues with the aircraft.

Where Next?

The requirement for a Voice Read Back (VRB), presently still needed for all profile changing messages, will be removed ASAP. For the socalled “Protected Mode” PM aircraft using ATN (VDLm2) or FANS B, this is planned for the end of 2012 by using a 24-bit address.

The FANS1/A message sets will be reduced in accordance with the safety case requirements: due to the technical limitations for the system, a readback of level changes would still be required. By removing these, it will allow 100% homogeneous datalink procedures independent of any underlying technology used.

While the strength of datalink is probably not in emulating voice via text messages, the real use will be by integrating arrival managers with the onboard FMSes. As highlighted in other articles, the first successful trials are already underway. The final implementation is probably still relatively far down the road and many issues still need to be resolved until we arrive there! ^

4 A message was sent and is awaiting a closing operational response.

4 Aircrew has sent a

downlink request to ATC.

4 Yellow indicated a time-out, an UNABLE response or a technical error.

volker.stuhlsatz@eurocontrol.int

The loss of the so-called party-line effect has proven less of an issue.

4 Separate window shows CPDLC dialogues.

13

4 Datalink

DATALINK IN EUROPE AN OPERATIONAL REALITY WITHIN 3 YEARS Martin Adnams, LINK2000+ Programme Manager, ^ by EUROCONTROL Modifications to route structures and sectorization to cope with traffic growth are reaching their limit. The cost of not meeting the demand, in terms of delay and lost revenue for the airlines may be high, particularly if the traffic estimates are exceeded.

New technologies supporting the ATC process will help to meet the growing demand.

Controller Pilot Datalink Communication (CPDLC) is one of the first such new technologies which can make a direct impact on ATC capacity.

The LINK 2000+ Programme packages a first set of en-route CPDLC services into a beneficial and affordable set for implementation in the European Airspace.

LINK 2000+ “simply” implements three basic services. These should help to automate routine tasks, which fill up to 50% of the controllers’ time today. Studies have shown that, with an equipage rate of 75%, this would result in an 11% capacity increase.

The basic services are ATC communications management to handle repetitive frequency changes; ATC clearances to provide standard clearances; and ATC microphone check to enable communication in case of blocked frequencies. Datalink implementation in Europe is governed by the Datalink Services Im-

plementing Rule (DLS-IR, EC Reg. 29/2009).

This stipulates that all “core” European ANSPs need to have Datalink operational by 2013 above FL285. The rest of Europe has until 2015 to comply with this implementation rule.

EUROCONTROL’s Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC) has been using airground datalink in daily operations since 2003. Within its international area of responsibility, which totals 260,000 km2 over the Benelux and North-West Germany, close to 520 datalink messages are exchanged each day.

On 26 January 2012 DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH went live with Controller Pilot Datalink (CPDLC) in the German upper airspace controlled by Karlruhe UAC. As a neighbouring centre of Maastricht UAC, it’s a highly significant step forward for the implementation of datalink in Europe. DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH has taken a positive and decisive step to come on line as the first Datalink partner for Maastricht.

Extending the datalink map over Europe by connecting to neighbouring airspaces will significantly increase datalink usage and hence bring clear benefits both for airlines and for air navigation service providers.

At the same time airborne equipage is being stimulated by the incentives package funded by the European Commission (TENT-EA) and all new aircraft must now have Datalink as standard.

So we can say that the “ball is rolling” towards full European implementation by 2015, in accordance with the Single European Sky regulation. ^

martin.adnams@eurocontrol.int

4 Map showing the areas affected by the implementation rule.

Photo: eurocontrol

More information on the LINK2000+ Programme can be found online: www.eurocontrol.int/link2000

14

4 Datalink

MARITIME SEPARATION: “SPEEDBIRD 123, “SHIP CROSSING, EASTBOUND, HEIGHT 38 METRES!“ On the northern side of Singapore’s Changi international airport, there’s a shipping channel. The proximity of this channel and the height of some of the ships affects flights landing from the north and those departing to the north. Aircraft using runway 20 for landing will be vectored so that they make the final approach when ships are clear of the ILS glide path for this runway. Occasionally, traffic is switched to use the eastern runway.

For departures to the north, Changi tower passes information on a ship to the pilots, who will then plan their departure profile to stay clear. If the aircraft is unable to do this, the pilot should ask to delay their take-off until the ship is clear of the departure path.

4 Radar map of the channel. Photo: DP

The tower controller, who has information on the crossing shipping traffic and is able to determine the actual location of the ship visually, will inform the pilot when he can depart with the minimum or no delay.

The Port Authority will report information of ship crossing the northern channel to ATC. It includes the identity, type, height and the entry and exit point estimates. The ATC Ship Crossing Unit will then verify the ship’s height using a special camera, which can measures the ship’s height very accurately. This information will then be relayed to Changi Tower.

Ship crossing information will only be passed to pilots of departing aircraft. ^

4 Screen showing the ship‘s identity and height in the label. Photo: DP

4 The camera screen used to verify the height of each passing ship. Photo: DP

DATALINK IN SINGAPORE ^ by Philippe Domogala, Deputy Editor Singapore uses a modern Thales radar system (Eurocat) and will soon upgrade to an even better one, LORADS3, one of the latest generation systems. But the centre also has a very large non-radar oceanic sector, extending some 800 NM out of Singapore. In this airspace, they’ve been using FANS-1/A CPDLC since 1995. They plan to have ADS-C based operations towards the end of 2012.

4 Screenshot of the CPDLC interface.

Traffic in Singapore area has increased by 18% in the last 2 years. Forecasts predict a 9 – 10% increase for the coming years. CDPLC is seen as a tool, which reduces workload and thereby contributes to safely enabling the traffic growth in the area.

Prime user of CPDLC is Singapore Airlines, especially their B747s, B777s and A340s.

CPDLC is faster and easier to use than HF in the oceanic sector. Currently, between 30 and 35% of traffic in the area is equipped, though it would seem that this has somewhat stagnated. At a cost of approximately US$ 500,000 per aircraft, very few additional airlines seem prepared to equip or retrofit their aircraft. And even the massive arrival of new aircraft in the region, which come with the equipment standard installed, some airlines do not want to pay for the service – which

4 Sector 5 (Oceanic)

position in Singapore ACC. Photo: DP

charges per message, pretty much like a telephone provider charges for text messages*.

Recently a large, low cost carrier in the region said that all its aircraft were equipped but it will not train its pilots to use it nor will they agree to pay the SATCOM charges associated with the service. The core business of a low cost airline is to keep costs as low as possible, so why pay extra for a service that can be provided for free via HF? So HF continues to be used, and the service provider still needs to employ and recruit HF radio operators… ^

dp@the-controller.net (*) one CPDLC message via satellite typically costs between US$ 0,50 and 3,00, depending on the length. For a long range flight, this can add up to US$100 per flight or more…

Photo: DP

15

4 Datalink

CPDLC FROM THE AIR HOW IT WORKS AND WHAT PILOTS THINK ABOUT IT

^ by Philippe Domogala, Deputy Editor ADS-C. As with any modern cockpit these days, the one of the A380 is full of screens.

The 2 screens through which CPDLC is managed are just above the throttles.

How does CPDLC work from the pilot point of view? During a flight on a Lufthansa Airbus 380, I asked to look at the different CPDLC systems they used: ACARS, FANS1/A and

While the aircraft was still at the stand, we received our pre-departure clearance. This reduces misunderstandings and errors and everyone I’ve talked to, loved it. While doing the pre-flight checks, an ACARS message came up in a little window, about the size of half a postcard – see photo. The data simply needed to be transferred to the FMS. Nothing could be easier…

En-route CPDLC and ADS-C is a more complex feature. It is mainly used in oceanic airspace, not only to replace HF communi-

cations but also enhance surveillance. By sending regular and automatic position reports, it allows ATC to reduce the separation, as there’s more certainty on the position of all the aircraft.

On the return leg Singapore-Frankfurt, we tried to use the various systems. Singapore has CPDLC based on FANS1/A (see specific article on page 14) but our route took us through a non-datalink sector.

The next opportunity on our route was with Bangkok. Unlucky as we were, their system was unserviceable that night! Next and last chance was Rangoon. The YANGON FIR uses ADS-C and has reserved tracks for equipped aircraft. As it happened, we weren’t using

4 The ACARS pre departure clearance.

4 The drop menu on the input screen.

4 Making the request for higher altitude.

4 The “Standby” reply. Note the requested

time (17:50) and the reply received (18:01).

16

4 Datalink

4 A380 cockpit elements relevant to datalink. Photo: Naddsy/wikimedia

one of those, but we nevertheless tried and logged on. This was done via the screen on the left, using simple menu drop down menus, accessed via a rolling ball. Almost instantly, the system told us we were logged on.

When a CPDLC message comes in, a small blue light flashes on the top of the cover of the instrument panel for 10 sec or so. If you do not press and cancel the light within that time, an audio buzz will activate to remind you there is a message. There were some CBs around us and we asked ATC, typing via

4 CPDLC Log on confirmation

(also confirming ADS connection)

4 The “Climb and Maintain FL 340”

instruction. Again note the time received (18:17) a good 25 minutes after the request was made.

Photos: DP

the free text a request to deviate 20 NM right of track. The answer came immediately: “ CLEAR TO DEVIATE “. The Captain said that when you are en route, the response after log on is usually “NO POSITION REPORTS REQUESTED, AT TIME 01:00Z CONTACT CHENNAI ON 123,455”, which was nearly 2 hours away. Both pilots praised the system, saying: “This is far, far better than HF!” We had been at FL300 since departure, which was now 4000 ft below our optimum level. The Captain clicked on request; vertical change. That brought up the climb to window. He then selected FL 340 and clicked send. The request took 5 seconds and 5 clicks. But this time it took more than 10 minutes to get the first answer: “STANDBY” and another 16(!) minutes to finally get the: “CLB TO & MAINT FL340“. The large delays in replying were most probably due to ATC and not the system. Anyway my pilots were happy and climbed.

I asked them what the fuel penalty is for an A380 stuck 4000 ft below optimum. They checked their computers and the difference is only 2%. That’s the equivalent of 310 kg extra fuel per hour, as the A380 at this altitude uses just over 16 tons per hour. They were as surprised as I was at the small difference. The combination of a state of the art engine management system, aerodynamic design and of course the engines themselves result in a much smaller impact of not flying at the optimum level.

link in general. His answer is mixed: “In a non-radar environment it is a real plus, no doubt, much, much easier than HF communications. The predeparture clearances are nice, but just that. It is just one small thing when you are not really busy… On the contrary, what we did in the past with Maastricht (i.e. dense continental European airspace ) where we still have to repeat everything on the R/T and this in phases of flight were we are very busy or very tired, it’s pretty useless in my opinion. Far too complicated and too slow for phases of flight when we have no time!

For me, CPDLC is an additional tool, not a real replacement for VHF or even HF. Especially when you’re having some trouble, you want direct voice communications“.

This is the opinion of one pilot of course, but I have heard very similar comments from other pilot-friends about CPDLC. The interesting thing is that is not in accordance with what many ANSPs have in mind for the future. ^

dp@the-controller.net

I asked the Captain what, based on his experience, he thinks about CPDLC and data

17

4 Aircraft

FLYING THE AIRBUS A380 ^ by Philippe Domogala, Deputy Editor

4 A large,

roomy cockpit.

Photo: DP

board computers. The A380 is a totally paperless aircraft. There are no paper charts or manuals and 2 laptops provide the necessary backup.

4 Airport maps on the side screens Photo: DP

Thanks to a Lufthansa 747 Captain friend of mine, I managed to arrange a cockpit flight on the A380 from Frankfurt to Singapore. Visiting cockpits has become quite complex after 9/11, but common sense seems to be slowly returning, at least to some airlines. In short, it’s time to ask again!

The cockpit is very roomy with good jump seats. It actually brings back memories of the good old Lockheed Tri-Star.

Preparation for a long 12-hour flight between Frankfurt and Singapore mainly consists of entering numbers into the on-

4 Lufthansa A380 in flight Photo: Jens Goerlich

18

Our take-off weight was some 526 ton, a bit below the the maximum TO weight of 560 ton. Passenger-wise, the aircraft is full with 450 people on board. The preferred way of flying the Airbus 380 is the so-called “performance based operation”. This called for a “Flex take off“. In this mode, the on-board computers take the weight and temperature to calculate the most efficient use of the runway. Well almost: with a runway-width less than 58 m, as is the case in Frankfurt, the outside engines will be over the grass. The take-off procedure is then to push all 4 thrust lever to 30% of N1.

This will get the aircraft to start moving slowly.

When all 4 engines are stabilized, only the 2 inner engines throttles are pushed to “FLEX”.

The pilots then wait until they have 40 knots IAS and then push the 2 other throttles to FLEX as well. This is done to avoid ingesting foreign objects from outside the paved runway. The computer constantly calculates the required power to make maximum use of the runway length. And you wait, and wait, and wait… Over half the runway is gone when the computer calls “V1”. The aircraft continues to accelerate and rapidly approaches the end of the runway (you’re sitting quite high, so that probably also influences this perception).

Eventually with about 400 m left on the runway, and not a moment too soon in my opinion, the computer calls “Rotate“. The initial climb is very slow, around 400 ft/min for some 20 – 30 seconds until the speed creeps to 180 knots and then increases to a more normal 1000 – 1500 ft/min.

The captain told me: “We all come from the A330/340 fleet. The 380 handles much better: it has a very good super wing and all inputs are well coordinated (on the 340s, the wing is flexible and handles like a glider, you bank one way and the nose goes the other way!)

The controls of the A380 are very smooth.

The only real criticism we have at this stage is the absence of wingtip cameras. The wingtips cannot be seen from the cockpit and taxiing with an aircraft this size is quite a challenge.

Also other aircraft or tug drivers are not used to us. And even in our home-base Frankfurt, we have to be very vigilant.“

4 Aircraft

4 Making inputs on the keyboard

4 Keeping on the yellow line, using the cameras. Photo: DP

Photo: DP

From an ATC perspective, one of the more notable features for the A380, is that the aircraft can fly a TCAS RA automatically. I asked about the crew about this feature: “It’s great!

We keep it on all the time. In case of an RA the auto-pilot automatically follows the RA and it does this very smoothly.”

Other innovations include the digital frequency selection. It can learn and remember frequency sequences and will only allow certain logical inputs: no need to insert the first digit (always a ‘1’), it only accepts a 1, 2 or 3 for the second digit and so on.

The on board weather radar antenna can be tilted to detect and show cloud tops, giving a 3-dimensional view of adverse weather. On top of that, both pilots have their own displays, with separate controls over the radar. ”A real plus”, according to them.

Visually perhaps the most striking feature is a foldaway table with keyboard in front of each pilot. They can use this to make inputs and interact with the aircraft. While it looks impressive, the pilots indicated they preferred the touch screens of the A330/340: the keyboard and table have to be stowed away during taxi, take-off and landing, making it impossible to make certain inputs. On the A330/340 that remained possible via the touch screens…

Finally, after a 12h flight, we arrived in Singapore. We received lots of vectors and it was easily the busiest moment in the cockpit. All 4 engines were at flight idle and at a speed of around 200 to 250 knots, it was almost completely quiet in the aircraft. At least until the gear was lowered… As the nose gear is just below the cockpit, lowering the nosewheel is like opening a window! Until the speed drops

below 180 knots, the noise level is quite significant. This wasn’t the case during take-off, as the gear retracts at around 140 knots.

As any pilot will tell you, the heavier and larger the aircraft, the easier it is to put it down. In that sense, the A380 is no different to a B-747 for example. As soon as the aircraft touches down, the side screens switch to a map of the airport (see photo) and on the central Multi Function Display, a cameraview of the nose wheel is shown. This allows the crew to easily make corrections and stay exactly on the centre lines during landing and taxi.

The aircraft has a “brake to vacate” feature, whereby it will automatically adjust the braking power to exit at a selected runway exit.

The pilots claimed that it was very good, but it could not be demonstrated in Singapore,

as the latest map was not in the database.

Taxiing to the gate was quite tricky, in between lots of smaller A320s and B737s. While they kept the aircraft precisely on the yellow lines, they weren’t sure about the others. When in doubt, they preferred to stop and double check… “Why they did not fit cameras on the wingtips is still a mystery to me!” said the captain!

All in all, a very impressive aircraft and no doubt a glimpse of the future… ^

dp@the-controller.net

“SUPER” The A380 has been assigned a new wake turbulence category, super heavy, to cope with the vortices it causes mainly on take-off and landing. To stress this, the pilots append the word “super” to their callsign.

One of the problems encountered during the first flights was that they underestimated the time it took the cabin crew to secure the cabin before landing.

Serving and cleaning up 450 breakfasts took a bit longer than anticipated.

On quite a few occasions at the beginning, the aircraft had to go around due “cabin not secured”.

On one of those days in Frankfurt, on short final the Captain announced to the Tower: “Ah! Frankfurt, LH 123 Super, we have to go around,“ disrupting the whole sequence. The controller asked for the reason, pilot replied, “Cabin not secured yet, LH 123 Super”. To which the controller replied: “That is not really Super!”

19

4 Aircraft

4 Orange line is the track of the

Boeing 787-8. The green lines represent the FIR borders.

Photo: FlightAware/Google Earth

RECORD-BREAKING ETCH-A-SKETCH FLIGHT OR HOW TO MAKE A 19,5 HOUR FLIGHT A LITTLE BIT INTERESTING!

^ by Philip Marien, Editor On February 9th 2012, Boeing filed a rather unusual flight plan for a test flight with a brand new Boeing 787-8.

time, the flight plan and track was devised in such a way that it would ‘sketch’ the number 787 and the Boeing logo over a large part of the US sky.

The flight took off from Boeing Field, near Seattle around 21:30UTC and was intended as an ETOPS endurance test flight.

Since they planned to fly around for a considerable amount of

When it touched down again, some 19 hours and 20 minutes later, it had travelled over 10.000 nautical miles across 5 different FIRs – Seattle, Salt Lake City, Denver, Minneapolis and Chicago. On a FlightAware forum, one of the pilots on board Karsten Liljegren, posted

Photo: kinghuiyvr/Flickr

4 The Boeing logo

the following: “I was one of the Boeing pilots on this record setting flight. 19 hours and 22 minutes block to block (and 10408 Nautical Miles)… The longest ETOPS endurance test flight ever! Air Traffic Control was fantastic and very accommodating. – Thank you! The airplane performed flawlessly. As a matter of fact – we didn’t even top off the fuel tanks.”

The aircraft used for this flight will be delivered to Air India and will have registration VT-ANH. The website FlightAware has the tracklog of the record breaking flight, which you can find here: http://goo.gl/Aahhi While sketching a logo like this has been done before, it’s by far the longest and most elaborate effort so far. Other attempts have included the Gulfstream V logo (http://goo. gl/7BsU3), the Cessna logo (http://goo.gl/ E0j2w) and the numbers 747 using a Boeing 747-800 (http://goo.gl/8FN5w). ^ ed@the-controller.net

20

4 Technology

VOICE OVER IP INTERNET TECHNOLOGY FOR VOICE COMMUNICATION

^ by Liviu Popescu, Voice Communications Expert at EUROCONTROL The idea of using the Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM is not new. Until now, inter-centre voice ATM communications were mainly based on analogue (ATS-R2) and digital (ATS-QSIG) protocols. For the ground component of the air-ground communication, no common standard is defined: all communications between ATC centres and ground radio stations are point-to-point and a network is usually not needed.

The 2009 Single European Sky package II (SES II) requires a more efficient operational concept based on functional airspace blocks (FABs). Within a FAB, there is a need to effectively deliver capacity to airspace volumes when required. To do this, airspace and sector structures must have the ability to adapt to predicted traffic flows and workload without delay or restriction. Furthermore, adjacent units must know the sector configuration of all the surrounding FAB partners.

Dynamic sectorisation is generally considered an enabler for this new concept.

To achieve dynamic sectorisation, new flexible technical solutions are needed for which interoperability is an essential ingredient.

The VoIP in ATM standard is the ideal solution to provide interoperability, particularly for the air-ground component where a (usually remote) ground radio station will be shared by several adjacent ATC centres belonging to different air navigation service providers (ANSPs).

Planned Deployment EUROCAE, with cooperation from EUROCONTROL, European industry, and ANSPs, developed the first VoIP in ATM standard defining the operational voice concept, the interoperability solutions and the networkassociated requirements. For the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) States, an active objective for VoIP in ATM is defined by the EUROCONTROL European Single Sky Implementation (ESSIP) Plan.

The initial deployment is planned in January 2013 for both inter-centre telephony and the ground segment of the air-ground voice communications. The migration of the European ATM voice services to VoIP is expected to be finalised by December 2018

for inter-centre telephony and by December 2020 for the ground segment of air-ground communications.

To support the European-wide ATM voice communications transition towards VoIP, the EUROCONTROL VoIP Implementation and Transition Expert Group (VOTE) has the generic mission to address VoIP in ATM implementation and transition-related issues on a case-by-case basis; and to identify solutions and deliver recommendations to interested parties (e.g. ANSPs, industry, TELCOs and standardization bodies).

The Global Dimension The ICAO Aeronautical Communication Panel, working group I responsible for the development of the ICAO Aeronautical Telecommunication Network over the Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) standards, finalised the inclusion of VoIP requirements in the ATN/ IPS Manual DOC 9896 Edition 2 by making a reference to the September 2010 edition of the EUROCAE ED137A standard. An evolution of this standard (ED137B) became available in February 2012.

On the other side of the Atlantic, the FAA has identified VoIP as a key technology in developing the US Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). NextGen is an umbrella term for the ongoing, wide-ranging transformation of the US national airspace system.

segment of air-ground communications and will contribute towards the validation of the relevant ICAO standards.

Conclusion VoIP in ATM is a mature standard able to respond to SES II challenges and become a building block of future European FABs. The time is right to initiate the transition from legacy ATM voice services that will soon no longer be supported by the European TELCOs. The global standardization of VoIP protocols for ATM systems is a key step in the evolution towards an integrated, modern and highly capable worldwide air traffic control system.

Cooperation between the FAA and EUROCONTROL is paving the way for early adoption of VoIP in ATM services to thereby realise their potential benefits to meet the challenges of air travel in the twenty-first century.^ liviu.popescu@eurocontrol.int

EUROCONTROL and the FAA are planning a set of activities in support of the transition to VoIP in ATM services. They will investigate the possibility of sharing VoIP test specifications and the use of test beds and test tools to facilitate global interoperability of ATM voice services and the set-up of field trials.

The activities will examine the transition and validation aspects of VoIP in ATM for both inter-centre telephony and the ground

4 Air-Ground Voice Network overview.

Photo: Eurocontrol

21

4 Safety

SAFETY CULTURE IN YOUR HANDS TAKE THE FUZZINESS OUT OF SAFETY CULTURE DEBATES Steve Shorrock, ^ by Human Factors and Safety Specialist, Eurocontrol Are safety issues raised by front-line operational/technical staff given appropriate priority within your organisation?

Do you and your team incorporate lessons from incidents into your work? If you saw a colleague doing something you thought was risky or unsafe, what would you do?

These are questions about safety culture. They are just examples of the types of questions that are addressed in the EUROCONTROL safety culture programme for European air traffic management (ATM), which has been underway since 2003.

One thing that is clear from the programme, which involves questionnaires and workshops with operational and non-operational staff, is that controllers have very clear opinions

about these sorts of questions. But a survey is fairly pointless without action and continued conversation about the issues that matter to those on the front line of safety.

To help the conversation, the EUROCONTROL Safety Culture Discussion Cards are a practical resource to aid real discussion about safety culture by any person or team within the ANSP, especially operational staff.

This article gives you a brief overview of the cards. So what is the point of the cards?

They get people talking. The cards are designed to provoke discussion among both operational and non-operational staff, and have been used successfully with operational staff in safety culture workshops, as well as an aid to TRM training. They do not give answers, but instead raise questions.

The cards build on what you know already.

Operational staff already know about safety culture. They live it and feel it. So the cards build on this understanding. The cards do not use theoretical language. They have been designed and tested with controllers.

But still, they are based on the EUROCONTROL approach, which has been used on around 20 ANSP surveys.

The cards help improve safety culture by encouraging discussions on ways to improve safety culture, inspiring action based on the outcome of the discussion.

The physical cards are printed in colour on A6 card (but may also be used digitally, e.g. on smartphones). The first few cards in the pack explain very briefly what safety culture is, show the organisation of the cards, and explain some possibilities for using the cards.

Then, the discussion cards are sorted into eight elements: Management commitment; Resourcing; Just culture, reporting & learning; Risk awareness and management; Teamwork; Communication; Involvement; Responsibility.

There are several discussion cards for each element, and each discussion card is designed to catch attention with a photo and headline, raise questions and provoke discussion.

There are 83 cards in total – 70 of these are the actual discussion cards, while the rest are explanatory (introduction, photo credits, disclaimer, etc).

So how are the cards used? The cards can be used in any way you can think of, but several ways have been tried. For instance to compare views: different individuals or teams sort cards into two piles: ‘What we do well’ & ‘What we need to improve’, then discuss the piles. Another way is to have safety moments: in a small group, take just one card and discuss the card for 10 – 15 minutes.

Or have a small group choose a specific element, such as ‘Just culture, reporting and learning’, and discuss each card in depth, eg.

What and where is our ‘best practice’ on this issue? Where do we need to improve? Etc. You could also organise the cards into patterns to show how the issues relate to one another in your ANSP, unit or team.

You can use any number of cards, from one to the whole set – whatever works for you.

Safety culture can seem abstract, fuzzy and hard to break down. The cards provide a way to discuss safety culture in a straightforward and practical way.

The pdf version may be viewed on smart phones and a low resolution version can be found at http://db.tt/KQ3pBf1q. High resolution (English and French) print ready versions are also available: contact steven.shorrock@ eurocontrol.int or esp@eurocontrol.int ^

22

4 Europe

EUROPEAN AVIATION RULEMAKING INTERVIEW WITH JULES KNEEPKENS, RULEMAKING DIRECTOR EASA ration of the rulemaking programme. This will make sure that rulemaking is justified. And it should be possible to tailor the rulemaking process according to the different typology of rulemaking projects (i.e. projects with diverse degrees of complexity or controversy).

4 Jules Kneepkens Photo: EASA

European Aviation Safety Agency was established by EU Council Regulation of 15 July 2002. Since 2004, it has its permanent headquarters in Cologne, Germany and has become the centre piece of the European Union’s strategy for aviation safety. Its mission is to promote the highest common standards of civil aviation safety and environmental protection in Europe and worldwide. At the same time EASA has to facilitate the free movement of goods, persons and organisations in the internal market.

In 2009, EASA gained competence in the area of ATM/ANS and Aerodromes and several rulemaking groups have been set up since then. The Controller interviewed Jules Kneepkens, EASA’s Rulemaking Director.

The Controller: What constitutes good rulemaking in your view?

Jules Kneepkens: Without going into the legal details, it’s important to consider the principle behind the EASA rulemaking process. EASA has just concluded a review of its rulemaking process. Amongst other things, this highlighted that drivers for and priorities of the rulemaking tasks need to be highlighted in the prepa-

In addition, a good consultation mechanism with Industry and Member States is vital. But it goes beyond EASA; the drafting group experts really have to take the opportunity to contribute. We often stress that “we need the best brains of Europe” to work with us to establish the most up to date modernized regulation proposals. That is why we invite IFATCA to all ATM and aerodrome drafting groups. However, both States and Industry often do not take this possibility seriously enough. Finally, a strong link between rulemaking, implementation and standardisation is crucial for having a continued improvement of the rules.

TC: Is the current ATM Rule making process differing from good rule making? What, in hindsight, would and should be different in the way ATM rulemaking was carried out.

JK: The Rulemaking Process as it is used needed some updating. We have just finished the review and the Management Board has accepted the proposals.

If your question refers to the three Regulations that were published in 2011*, these have been the result of the famous “fast track”, which we were asked to apply by the European Commission and the Member States via the Single Sky Committee. This was indeed not the normal rulemaking process as adopted by our own Management Board to produce regulations. On the other hand there have been practically no changes to the existing regulations, which in turn have been repealed. Now we have to work on complementing this legislation, in order to fulfil the requirements of the Basic Regulation (BR). * Regulations with detailed rules for air traffic controllers’ licences; on safety oversight in air traffic management and air navigation services; and laying down common requirements for the provision of air navigation services.

TC: Please describe the relationship between Rulemaking and safety? How might this change?

JK: Safety is of course our first priority in all our rulemaking activities. We have the European Aviation Safety plan that will identify areas we have to address via Rulemaking. Besides the plan, we are also turning towards rulemaking based on evaluation and analysis of safety data. This in turn will lead to risk-based rulemaking which is permanently evaluated and kept up-to-date to face the developments. We will need to constantly monitor the developments and adjust the Regulations in the future, using a risk-based approach necessary to face innovation. One of the most important developments of course is SESAR which will bring us many challenges in safety regulation.

TC: There is a concern that the opportunity to enhance safety through the rulemaking process has been lost. How can we ensure that ATM rulemaking process can recover these opportunities?

JK: I don’t think that we have missed an opportunity. On the contrary, we have created the opportunity to enhance safety because the Agency is competent as of this year to organise the standardisation visits. We have transposed directives in regulations that are fully binding for the ones that they are addressed to. In the coming years we will complement the present regulations to fully comply with the requirements

23

4 Europe

of the BR and the Standardisation visits of EASA to the Member States will ensure a harmonised implementation and an implementation as required by the legislator.

TC: In your view how have ATCOs benefited from the ATM regulation process?

JK: ATCOs play a key role in aviation safety. In our opinion, the new binding Regulation has contributed to the creation of a common uniform safety level.

The harmonised requirements for personnel everywhere in Europe also facilitates the mutual recognition of licences and thus the free movement of such personnel. And it should facilitate establishing the FAB arrangements.

The EASA system offers both staff and organisations the levels of “hard” and “soft” law, which facilitate the compliance with rules, yet provide the necessary flexibility. The new rules foresee audits, aimed at ensuring the safe and uniform application of common rules and assisting the authorities in their safety oversight role.

A major step was to advance the latest edition of Eurocon-

24

trol’s ‘Specification for the ATCO Common Core Content Initial Training’ to become mandatory for the so called “initial training”.

Together with national and ANSP experts, EASA is currently incorporating further elements into the common licensing, such as instructor and assessor certification and harmonised training requirements.

TC: Do you believe that the rulemaking process will deliver the right regulatory climate for SESAR – if not, what is missing?

JK: In addition to the technical and operational solutions which the Single European Sky ATM Research programme will deliver, the European regulatory environment also needs to be developed.

To support the correct development of the regulatory requirements, EASA has a working arrangement with the SESAR Joint Undertaking. One of the essential elements of this agreement is the upstream involvement of the Agency to foresee the possible regulatory implications. I do believe that we are able to handle the regulatory needs provided that we will have the necessary information in due time, as this arrangement foresees. The primary challenge is to predict the nature and specifications of the innovations in order to assess the future implications for the ATM/ANS rules.

TC: How do you see the EASA movement on Flight Time Limitations (FTL) being opposite to the US? With the proposed horizontal rule-making might there be a similar situation occurring for ATCOs in particular on Fatigue Management and hours of duty?

JK: First of all, I would like to stress that regarding FTL, the FAA and EASA are working in the same direction: towards improving the existing rules based on the latest scientific evidence. Furthermore, EASA and the FAA have been and are still constantly in contact regarding the development of the FTL regulations.

Having said this, I would like to emphasize that the ATCO rules on fatigue are developed taking into account the specific circumstances that ATCOs have to work in. By no means will we simply transpose the FTL regulations to ATCO ones. In general we will, of course, base the rules on the international rules of ICAO. We will not allow any threats to safety, especially those coming from challenges regarding fatigue management. The EASA scheme for ATCOs will be based on scientific elements and will offer a high level of protection – as it is with FTL. However, let me repeat that the current FTL framework for operations is not comparable with the future ATCO approach on fatigue.

4 Europe The circumstances for ATCOs are different from pilots. The local circumstances also may differ. Thus, any comparison lacks merit.

TC: Do you feel you have enough in-house expertise in the ATM and Aerodrome domain?

JK: My reply is yes, and, by the way, “What is enough?”

It is important to note that EASA’s recruitment procedures are designed in such a way that we have access to highly qualified rulemaking experts in the EU. As I said earlier, we need to have the best brains. Of course, once the experts are recruited, their contact with the operational world is reduced and therefore they are kept up-to-date through training (on the job training included) and as many contacts as possible with the field. On top of that the rulemaking process itself has been designed to invite subject matter experts appropriate to the scope of the task in order to assist our rulemaking officers.

TC: Is there a need from your side to improve the EASA process when it comes to NPA, CRD and the final production of the opinion as it perceived that in ATM the current EASA process shows to quickly its limits?

4 EASA HQ in Köln,

Germany. Photo: EASA

JK: As already mentioned, a review of the rulemaking process based on stakeholders’ feedback and lessons learned from the past has been carried out in the last 1,5 years in cooperation with members of the EASA Management Board, National Aviation Authorities and Industry. The review aimed at increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the rulemaking process. Its outcome has been approved by the EASA Management Board and the implementation of the new process is starting. In a nutshell, the revised rulemaking process proposes to tailor the process according to the controversy or complexity of the tasks so as to address the needs of the different domains and the continuously changing environment and for that we also need close cooperation with stakeholders and NAAs. TC: Is EASA looking for quick wins or long term improvements with regard to safety?

JK: We are looking for both.

We have concrete rulemaking issues addressing short term topics, but we also invest in research, setting up a European Aviation Safety Programme for long term improvements in aviation safety.

TC: The relationship between the commission and EASA, from the sidelines seems at best complex at worst hindrance to good regulation, how will this change and work from herein? Will EASA replace the NSA in compliance audits?

JK: I simply disagree with this assumption. From a Rulemaking perspective the relation is very clear and simple: EASA advises the Commission, and the Commission decides (after comitology*).

The procedures to do that are well described in the Basic Regulation.

EASA gives an Opinion accompanied by a draft regulation.

There is therefore no complexity or hindrance in this respect.

I have to say the cooperation is excellent.

The complexity is in the double system: SES for some areas and EASA for some others.

Given this overlap between the SES and EASA frameworks and the need for transparency on comitology work, the Commission expressed the need for a regulatory roadmap, which would support the planning of rulemaking activities in the ATM/ANS field over a multiannual period. Proposals are developed on the steps to be taken and the principles in defining regulatory objectives and the associated rulemaking plan. In this direction, the SES and EASA Committees have had their first joint meetings in Brussels.

As to the compliance audits EASA will not replace the NSA. TC: A more personal question: Have you already achieved your goals in for EASA in the rule making process in ATM and airport? What do you foresee as the major challenges for the next 2 years?

JK: My goals for the second extension were to develop rules that enhance safety and are elaborated in such a way that we have the support of Member States and Stakeholders implementing the new rules.

It is also obvious that this work has to be done in phases and not by means of a big bang. I think we are on track but we still have to address a lot of issues and challenges. The work is clearly not over yet and all the EASA Rulemaking Staff is now working hard to achieve the total system approach with a Rulemaking Programme that is based on a safety-driven and risk-based system. ^ * Comitology in the European Union refers to the committee system which oversees the delegated acts implemented by the European Commission.

25

4 Asia/Pacific

FLYING VFR IN CHINA… NOT ^ by Philippe Domogala, Deputy Editor

Photo: Phil Parker

Recently, I travelled to China and as always I looked for a way to make a local VFR flight. The last time I was in the Guangzhou (formerly known as Canton) region was in 1976. Back then Shenzhen was a small peasant village with dirt roads in the middle of rice fields. Today, it’s a modern mega-city, complete with skyscrapers and factories…

China is a country of contrasts: tradition is everywhere, but it’s competing with an ultra modern environment. Free Wi-Fi is available everywhere and every youngster has one of the latest smartphones, some even have an “iPhone 5*”. Skyscrapers are competing for the most striking architectural feature.

But at the same time the side streets are full of small tiny shops selling everything from traditional medicine, dried fish, teas, spices and herbs nearly 24H a day as they have done for hundreds of years.

4 China today: skyscrapers

Photo: DP

Aviation in China is also very different to what it was. They operate the latest generation of aircraft and do so in large numbers.

The once single civil airline in China, CAAC, has broken up into 3 very large groups: Air China, China Southern and China Eastern.

Hand-in-hand with their economy, air traffic is booming. Beijing is now the second busiest airport in the world, just behind Atlanta.

Through some of my airline pilot friends, I tried to get in contact with some local pilots to see what the possibilities were to rent a single engine VFR aircraft. To my disappointment however, I quickly learned that flying VFR is not allowed in China. There’s no general, private aviation. A private person cannot buy and register a small aircraft. A company can, but this is then labelled business aviation, which has to operate as IFR. A few flying schools have small aircraft, but these are restricted to their own airport and training area. Most airlines train their pilots abroad (Europe, USA and Singapore). So my dreams of flying VFR in China will have to wait a bit…

Controllers and Chinese pilots have to use Chinese on the R/T (*) the iPhone 5 story: when the first information leaked in 2011 about the successor of the iPhone 4, Chinese copycats went into overdrive, anticipating on what they believed would be the iPhone 5: boxes, cases, manuals etc. Apple waited until the last moment to change the name of the iPhone 4 successor to iPhone 4S. Everything that mentioned an iPhone 5 was instantly useless for export, but in some Chinese shops, they can still be found today!

Photo: Phil Parker

Talking to 2 young captains, both 30 years old and flying for China Southern, I asked what it’s like to fly in China. Not surprisingly, they said that working conditions and pay are much lower than in the West. Some would like to leave and go to work abroad.

But the airlines refuse to let them go and a resignation would not be accepted. A few have tried nevertheless. This implies that you leave the country for good and migrate to a country like India, where the demand for trained pilots is currently very high. But the Chinese CAA appears to be very uncooperative in confirming the ATPL qualifications of these people when asked by their foreign counterpart (despite the ICAO Convention).

In practice, this often means they simply cannot work as pilots anymore.

Relations between ATC and pilots is strictly business and both groups do not mix much.

They said that controllers in China are a bit like policemen; really there to make sure you follow the rules. Controllers and Chinese pilots have to use Chinese on the R/T and only foreign airlines are allowed to use English.

So I guess things need to change a bit for the pilot community in China and for me to return and fly VFR there… ^

dp@the-controller.net 26

4 Asia/Pacific

FOCUS ON BALI, INDONESIA ^ by Philippe Domogala, Deputy Editor The Island The 2013 IFATCA Annual Conference will be held in Bali, Indonesia. Tourist guides have many names for the island: the island of 10000 temples, the green jewel of Indonesia, the ultimate honeymoon island, the island of the gods, and even paradise… Unlike years ago when these applied to the whole island, today the capital Denpasar is a complex busy town of 2 million inhabitants. Indonesia’s economy grows at a rate of 9 to 10 % a year and it shows: motorcycles and relatively new cars clog the roads, causing enormous traffic jams. As is often the case, the infrastructure hasn’t kept up with the economic growth.

Despite this growth, Bali has managed relatively well to retain its trademark tropical outlook. After one high beachfront hotel was build in the late 1960s (the 8 storey Inna Beach hotel), local authorities ordained that no other building would be allowed to be build above the coconut tree line in the whole of Bali. And still today, no building is allowed to exceed 15 m (4 or 5 storeys). As a result, the coastline still looks authentic and tropical.

The endless stream of tourists can be divided up into 3 categories. Each category has its own particular area to the south of the capital: there’s the old European style colonial villas, cottages, and small hotels on the beach front in Sanur. In contrast, some 20 km away, is the exuberant nightlife of Kuta. The area is littered with bars and the surf and beer mostly attract a younger generation, including many Australians. And finally, there are the top-end 5-star hotels. These are concentrated in a so-called “secure” area, some

20 km further south called Nusa Dua. This is where the VIPs go and where most international meetings and conferences are held.

Not surprisingly, the prices are very different depending on the area. Kuta is relatively cheap, with an average hotel room costing between US$ 30 – 50; in the Sanur area, the normal price is around US$ 100 and in Nusa Dua, that rises to around US$ 300 per night.

The 3 different types of tourists appear to rarely meet and mix...

In the middle of all this, there’s the local Balinese population. These are mostly Hindus, contrary to the rest of Indonesia, which is

predominantly Muslim. Religion takes a very prominent place in everyday life. Small religious signs or ceremonies can be seen everywhere: in front of every house, in the 1000s of temples on the island and even on the beaches themselves. It results in a very peaceful atmosphere, even in the busier places…

The famous Nyepi, or silent day best illustrates that religion is so embedded in daily life. This silent day is a day of medita-

27

4 Asia/Pacific tion, which Hindus observe as part of their New Year celebration. Generally in March every year, no one is supposed to make any noise, to fast and to abstain from using electricity including radio, television and even lights. There are no cars on the streets and even the airport closes for 24 hours. Tourists are told to stay indoors, but food will be available for them on special buffets prepared the day before. Everyone that has experienced it says it’s a very impressive event. In 2012, the

Nyepi day was on March 23rd and in 2013, it will be on March 12th.

The central part of the island is mountainous.

The highest peak on the eastern side, visible from the beach, is Mount Agung. It’s a volcano, which is dormant for the moment. Traditionally, the volcano is venerated as a God. Even during its last eruption in 1962, thousands of people went up to the volcano’s crater to bring offerings to the volcano-God. Many were killed on the way up to the crater.

Today knowledge of volcanoes and education of the people will hopefully prevent such a tragedy. But tsunamis are something to be

watched more carefully. Despite the fact that Bali wasn’t very affected by the massive 2004 tsunami in the region, a warning system and evacuation plan was put in place. It’s a strong reminder that every paradise has its weak points.

But the general impression of Bali is that it’s a wonderful place to be. The lovely ambiance, the excellent, if a little spicy, food, the Balinese people and the nature around you make it well worth a visit next year! ^

4 Bali Beach religious ceremony

BALINESE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL Control Tower The international airport on the island is called is near the capital Denpasar. The airport has a single Runway 3000 m x 45 m, a taxi way and 38 parking stands. Some of these need to be combined to accommodate large jet aircraft. The limited space is a major issue, especially during large International Conferences, where many heads of State or ministers arrive with their private jets.

During the 2007 United Nations Climate Conference, VIP

28

jets had to take off again after delivering their passengers, to fly to Jakarta, 1 hour flying away, to be able to park. Pretty ironic given that the conference was mainly about how to reduce CO2 emissions.

On a typical 24-hour day, the airport sees about 300 movements. They have a total of 24 controllers to man the two working positions, GND and TWR. An automated electronic strip management system, a NOVA9000 made by Park Air (Norway) was installed about 4 years ago. While it looks nice, the controllers prefer to use the conventional paper strips rather than the electronic ones. They prefer to be able to physically move the paper strips around, which is

4 Bali airport sign

4 Asia/Pacific

not as easy in the electronic equivalent. As a result, the usefulness of the NOVA9000 is limited to collecting data. They also have airport movement control to help park the aircraft at their gates or stands.

on the north side of the island. They operate Cessna 172s and generally don’t cause any problems for the International airport.

Approach

An unusual yet major problem for them are the very popular kites, which interfere with the traffic. The other main problem is the traffic peaks caused by VIP flights during international events / meetings.

While there are officially 3 sectors (2 TMA and one DIR), because of a lack of staff, they are all combined into one sector. Only 22 controllers have an approach rating; and a radar controller and a planning assistant, who operates the computer, staff the sector.

There’s no VFR at the airport itself, but they do have a VFR corridor to accommodate such traffic if necessary. The local flying school is located in another, smaller airport

Fortunately, they are quite well equipped: the well-performing voice communication system is from Frequentis, while the Park Air 2 NEC radars feed the radar system. These will soon

4 Bali APP sector

be replaced by Indra ones. They also control the approach of nearby Lombok island (WADL), where traffic mainly consists of Russian charter flights.

While they are generally well equipped, staff shortage is a major issue. In addition, the working conditions, especially as their salaries are very low.

This is a burning issue, as many controllers need to find additional jobs to be able to make ends meet. ^ dp@the-controller.net

4 Bali Tower with electronic strip board

29

4 Feature

SUPERSONIC PASSENGER AIRCRAFT PART ONE: AN AMERICAN SST

^ by Philip Marien, Editor In the history of civil aviation, few aircraft types have stirred people’s imagination more than supersonic airframes.

Given that only around 20 individual aircraft ever flew, they’ve remained an unreachable dream for many travellers. And it would appear that at least for the foreseeable future, it will remain that way.

In this article, we’ll try and explore the lesser-known history of supersonic passenger travel.

When Convair won a US Air Force contract to produce the B-58 Hustler, a relatively large strategic bomber capable of Mach 2, people quickly realized that a commercial supersonic transport (SST) aircraft would perhaps also be feasible. With commercial jet aircraft only just starting to appear, one can’t question the ambition or optimism of the post-war aviation industry… The outcome of World War II reflected in the countries which took the lead in aircraft design and manufacturing: the USA, Great-Britain, France and the Soviet Union all played a major role in developing and producing cutting edge aviation technology.

They would take a clear lead in the race to produce a supersonic passenger jet, although their approach would be quite different.

4 Outline of the

BAC Type 223 Photo: NASA

4 Outline of the

Sud Aviation Super-Caravelle Photo: NASA

In the USA, President John F. Kennedy had set a number of national aviation goals for the decade, a bit similar to his announcement to put a man on the moon. One of these goals was the development of a Supersonic Transport or SST aircraft. It was generally accepted that supersonic aircraft were the future and the FAA estimated that there would be a market for 500 SSTs by 1990. However, not everyone was convinced of the viability of

such a project. The reasoning was that faster flight would allow them to fly more trips than a subsonic aircraft, i.e. more passengers could be flown per airframe. Some argued however that this cost so much fuel that it wouldn’t be competitive, even at 1960s fuel prices…

In 1962, the stakes were raised by the an announcement from across the Atlantic: the UK and France had signed a treaty by which Brit-

4 B-58 Hustler, strategic bomber capable of Mach 2. Photo: USAF

30

4 Feature

4 Mockup of the Lockheed L-2000, which lost out to the Boeing model. Photo: Lockheed ish based Bristol Aeroplane Company and French company Aérospatiale (originally Sud Aviation) would merge their SST projects.

Both had designs that were ready to be prototyped, but faced with the astronomical costs, both countries had negotiated a cooperation: the Bristol type 223 and the Super-Caravelle* would merge into Concorde.

This came as a big shock to the Americans, where the debate still raged on whether such a project would be economically viable. Noting that Europe appeared to have a decisive lead to develop a transatlantic aircraft (Pan Am had immediately pre-ordered 6 Concordes), the Americans decided to concentrate on a faster aircraft, but with limited (domestic) range. In June 1963, less than 6 months after the Concorde announcement, President Kennedy introduced the National Supersonic Transport program, which called for the development of a 3,800 km range Mach 3 capable aircraft.

Requests for proposals were sent out to airframe manufacturers Boeing, Lockheed, and North American for the airframes; and Curtiss-Wright, General Electric and Pratt & Whitney for engines. Eager not to miss out, airlines started putting in pre-orders even before the manufacturers had submitted

4 Mid-1960s Boeing advert for their

On a side note, there’s a link with an earlier article in The Controller: using an election microscope, a team trying to identify DB Cooper – the hijacker-parachutist featured in issue 02/2011 – recently found pure titanium on his tie. While titanium is now regularly used in household items, it was very rare at the time.

Since the design of the Boeing SST was one of the first that would use titanium and given that the project was cancelled shortly before the hijacking, it is now submitted that Cooper could have been one of those affected by the layoffs in the area. Given that the titanium was pure, they further suggest that he was not directly employed by Boeing, but at one of the companies that processed the metal before selling it to Boeing. It doesn’t identify DB Cooper, but it may focus the search for possible suspects…

their plans! It seems that Boeing had a lead on the others, having worked on a number of small-scale SST studies since 1952. By 1958, the company set up a panel dedicated to researching an SST, which over the next few years proposed a variety of delta wing designs, all under the name Model 733. In 1959, an alternative swing-wing model came of the drawing tables. The design resembled the future B-1 Lancer bomber, where a part of the wings could move, to accommodate different phases of flight.

It was an evolution of this design that Boeing submitted to the FAA in January 1964. It was officially known as Model 733-197. The design of the wing promised to limit the noise generated during take off and also included the possibility to stretch the fuselage to increased capacity from the normal 150 seats to 227.

supersonic prototype. Photo: Boeing

Lockheed’s initial design was referred to as the CL-823. It looked like a bigger version of Concorde, i.e. a long slender fuselage with a large delta wing but with a typical configuration allowing some 218 passengers. It relied on engine power and long runways for liftoff, ensuring a huge noise footprint.

Based on these initial proposals, the FAA selected Boeing and Lockheed to participate in a final proposal round by 1966. Boeing’s design grew steadily and as their final design, they submitted a 300 passenger widebody aircraft, Model 733-790.

Lockheed’s proposal, now called L-2000 had changed a lot less: it was judged simpler to produce and less risky, but its performance was slightly lower and its noise levels slightly higher.

Because of this, Boeing was announced the winner and would receive government funding to built the aircraft for real.

Boeing predicted that the first flight could be made in early 1970, with the first deliveries

4 While this design came out on

top, it would change significantly over the following years.

Photo: Boeing

The North American NAC-60 design was essentially a larger version of their XB-70 Valkyrie, an experimental strategic bomber.

Most striking in the design was the small wing on the front of the fuselage (called a canard). Other than that, it was more conventional than the other entries and also flew slower, at M2.65. * Sud Aviation/Aérospatiale would later recycle the name Super-Caravelle for an updated version of their SE-210 Caravelle

31

4 Feature to airlines scheduled for mid1974. By 1980 the company estimated there would be a market for a larger Model 390-475 SST, with between 700 and 1,000 aircraft being required.

Unfortunately, they kept running into difficulties, requiring design changes. By 1968, they had added canards behind the nose to counter the control difficulties presented by the stretched fuselage. This added even more weight, which was already a serious problem owing to the swing-wing mechanism. The weight had a negative impact on the range and in October 1968, the company was forced to abandon the variable geometry wing. They reverted to fixed delta wing and a smaller design, seating 234. This became known as the Model 2707-300 and two years later than foreseen, they started construction of a full-sized mock-up and two prototypes.

It was October 1969 and despite the setbacks, they had reservations for 122 Boeing SSTs from 26 airlines worldwide.

This made the company confidently proclaim that the federal government would see a quick return on their investment and that subsonic jumbo jets, such as their own brand new 747, were only an intermediate step towards skies dominated by supersonic jets. In the mean time, two prototypes of Concorde (one built in Toulouse, France, the other one in Filton, UK) hade successfully made their maiden flights and had demonstrated supersonic flight.

4 Cancellation of the SST program nearly ‘ate’ Seattle.

Photo: www

However, at the same time opposition to the project became increasingly vocal. Some scientist believed that the high altitude flights would damage the ozone layer, something which would be confirmed only years later.

But the main concerns were due to noise.

Not only from the afterburners on take-off, but most concerning were the sonic booms.

In tests in 1965 with the XB-70 near Oklahoma City, had resulted in 9,594 complaints of damage to buildings, mostly for broken glass and cracked plaster. Scaled up to the size of the proposed SST, some claimed that the sonic boom ‘zone’ would be up to 3 times bigger than that of the XB-70. As the opposition widened, the claimed negative effects became ever odder, including upsetting people who do delicate work (e.g., brain surgeons), harming persons with nervous ailments, and even inducing miscarriages.

The environmental concerns eventually resulted in a ban of supersonic flights over land in the United States, and several states added additional restrictions or even completely banned the aircraft outright.

In March 1971, despite the project’s strong support by the administration of President Richard Nixon, the U.S. Senate rejected further funding. This resulted in the “National Com-

4 North American XB-70, infamous for sonic boom damage.

Photo: USAF/NASA

4 Cockpit of the Boeing 2707 mockup, currently on display in the Hiller Aviation Museum, San Carlos CA, USA. Photo: Craig Howell, Flickr

mittee for an American SST” launching a campaign, which asked supporters to send in $ 1 to keep the program alive. They raised nearly $ 1 million worth of contributions. Labour unions also supported the project: they were concerned that the end of both the Vietnam War and Project Apollo would lead to mass unemployment in the aviation sector. Some suggested that, given the lead of the Europeans to develop a first-generation SST, the USA would cut their losses and skip ahead to start development on the second generation of SSTs. But all in spite of all this, after a heated debate, the House of Representatives narrowly voted to end SST funding on 20 May 1971. The vote was highly contentious.

At the time, there were 115 unfilled orders by 25 airlines, while Concorde had 74 orders from 16 customers. The two prototypes were never completed. Due to the loss of several government contracts and a downturn in the civilian aviation market, Boeing made over 60,000 employees redundant. In the area, the SST became known as “the airplane that almost ate Seattle.” A billboard was erected in 1971 that read, “Will the last person leaving Seattle - turn out the lights”. Even Boeing seems to want to forget this episode of its history: their Future of Flight museum has the story and models of all of its production jetliners and even Concorde, but not their own SST project. A partial mock-up was rescued and later moved to Florida and then to the Hiller Aviation Museum in San Carlos, CA. Parts of the technology developed for SSTs, such as the supercritical airfoil, are now standard of modern jet aircraft. Though many studies and designs have been proposed since, it seems unlikely that an economically viable SST will be developed in the short or even medium term.

Next time, we’ll look at the competition from the East: Tupolev’s TU-144. ^

Editor@the-controller.net 32

4 Photo: © Timothy Large | Dreamstime.com

Carlos

SELF-TRAINING FOR DENTISTS “I LEARNED IT FROM A BOOK…” It has been brought to Charlie’s attention that some very innovative procedures have been put in place in certain areas in Europe when it comes to dentists. As a consequence of a recent decision, cities with less than 50,000 inhabitants will no longer have access to fully licensed and trained dentists anymore. The state will sell the

local dental clinics to private companies, who specialize in infrastructure and equipment. The decision will ensure that the clinics remain some of the best-equipped health care centers in the world!

The decision also has some minor implications for the dentists currently working at the affected dental clinics in these cities.

Not hindered in any way by the new European Implementation Rule on Licenses, the responsible regulatory authorities have fast-tracked and imposed an innovative new piece of legislation on these dentists: Self training. As the future owner of the dental clinics will probably not have access to sufficient trained and licensed dentists, the law now makes it mandatory for any currently licensed and trained dentist whether he/she wants to or not - to train his or her non-licensed future replacement. A second part of the same law stipulates that in places that only offered dental hygiene services before and which need to be upgraded to provide full dental care for some reason or the other, self-training is not only authorized but in fact mandated by law. That means that the patient in these small

cities will be getting dental care (e.g. root canal) by self-taught ‘dentists’.

If you think this has nothing to do with air traffic control. Use the table below to decipher the article above.

Dentist



Air traffic controller

Cities



Airports

Inhabitants



Movements

Dental clinics



ATM facilities

Dental Hygiene 

AFIS

Dental care

Air Traffic Control



The only difference in this analogy is that in the real world, patients still have the choice which clinic to go to or whether he or she wants dental care administrated by someone still in the middle of the self-training phase. In sharp contrast, passengers don’t have such a choice. When buying the ticket, they won’t even know whether they’ll be subject to this newly invented procedure. Coming soon to a major European country near you! Caramba! ^ Carlos

33

Charlie

CHARLIE’S COLUMN Trusting UAVs Here at Charlie’s, it’s not a secret that we don’t really like UAVs: if they’re not getting in the way of ‘real’ aircraft or crashing, they tend to get lost. Ask the US Air

Force about the state of the art Sentinel™ that recently got lost in or near Iranian airspace, only to make it to national Iranian television… To avoid similar embarrassments, the US seems to have decided to put newer models on a leash.

The K-Max UAV helicopter weighs 2,5 tons and can deliver 3,5 tons of ammunitions, bombs and other niceties to troops everywhere. It’s pictured here being tested and attached to a cable to make sure it does not fly away into hostile territory...

Photo: Lockheed-Martin

Flying Sharks at FL 100 On December 26th last year, an Air New Zealand jet, passing 10.000 ft descending towards Christchurch airport on New Zealand’s south island, reported seeing a large shark just a few thousand feet below them. After an investigation (which was started immediately after the laughter on the frequency died down and the pilots were subjected to ‘a few substance abuse tests’), the shark was identified as a remote controlled, helium filled, sharkshaped balloon that was assumed to have been the Christmas present for someone the previous day.

In other words: it was another UAV! The local shop that sold them stated that they got heard of several ‘escapees’ as kids and their parents started assembling the toys on Christmas morning. One anonymous parent reported that early on Christmas morning, he went to secretly fill the shark with helium to surprise his kids. Before that

happened however, the shark flew up the stairway, across a bedroom and through an open window!

34

One day, while flying over the Rockies Mountains in the USA with a strong jet stream and many turbulence reports United 123: “Good day, Denver.

United 123 with you at FL 350.”

Denver Center: “Roger, United 123.

How’s the ride at your level?”

United 123: “Well, the captain is having his lunch and he just stabbed himself with his fork; so we could call it moderate turbulence.”

Denver Center: “Thanks, United 123.

Break, break. Air Canada 456, how’s things at your level? Any turbulence?”

Air Canada 456: “Sorry, Denver, we can’t tell. We haven’t eaten yet.”

The manufacturer of the toys, William Mark Corporation, has a “strictly indoor use only!“ warning on the boxes. But of course sharks can’t read!

Photo: www

“A Rough Landing“ Photo: William Mark Corp

Low Costs Repairs in ATC In last issue’s Charlie, we had duct tape aircraft repairs and predicted that ducttape repairs might come to our operations rooms. Only one issue later, we have our first entry: in the new Lisbon ACC operations room “duct tape” is used to control the air conditioning! It’s used to cool the electronics inside the working positions, but the cold blows out every slit and hole in every console. Tape has proved the cheapest and most effective way to insulate the controllers from the overzealous cooling system.

Overheard on the Frequency:

A Tupolev 134 carrying 95 passengers and 6 crews crashed in dense fog while attempting to land in Osh airport, Kyrgyzstan last December. One of the wings tore off, the aircraft flipped around on his back and stopped on the runway within walking distance of the terminal. Everybody walked out. Going for the ‘Understatement of the Year’ award, Kyrgyzstan minister of Emergency Situations, Mr Kubatbek Boronov released a statement, saying: “The aircraft came from the capital Bishkek and made a ‘rough landing’ without fatalities.”

Charlie cannot help but wonder how he would have described Captain Sully’s emergency landing in the Hudson river: “The aircraft made a ‘damp’ landing”?

Photo: DP

Less noise, less heat, more space and easier operation make me smile!

Listens . Understands . Solves

Our Support

Providing space in your working environment. Reducing noise and heat and enabling 24/7 operation and high concentration for your challenging mission.

G&D provides KVM products allowing operators and computers to be separated by moving computers from towers and flight control Centres into dedicated areas.

Access the remote computers in realtime over existing cables without any loss in quality and performance. This also enables computer maintenance without disturbing ATCOS.

Ask your technical personnel for the G&D solution!

Guntermann & Drunck GmbH Dortmunder Strasse 4a D-57234 Wilnsdorf Phone: +49 (0) 27 39/89 01-333 E-mail: sales@gdsys.de www.gdsys.de SILVER ASSOCIATE MEMBER

ht tp: // atc.gdsys.de

Leading the way in digital KVM

photo: photo: DFS DFS Deutsche Deutsche Flugsicherung Flugsicherung GmbH GmbH

Amsterdam 52° 21’ 0” N / 4° 55’ 0” E

Washington 47° 23’ 30” N / 121° 34’ 14” W Abu Dhabi 24° 28’ 0” N / 54° 22’ 0” E

Bangkok 13° 45’ 0” N / 100° 31’ 0” E

Johannesburg 26° 12’ 0” S / 28° 5’ 0” E

SAVE THE DATE ATC GLOBAL 2013 EXHIBITION AND CONFERENCE 12-14 MARCH, AMSTERDAM RAI CONNECTING THE ATM COMMUNITY FOR NEARLY 25 YEARS Organised by

WWW.ATCGLOBALHUB.COM