FAA Greenlights Satellite-Based Air Traffic Control System 138
coondoggie writes "As one of the massive flying seasons gets underway the government today took a step further in radically changing the way aircraft are tracked and moved around the country. Specifically the FAA gave the green light to deploy satellite tracking systems nationwide, replacing the current radar-based approach.
The new, sometimes controversial system would let air traffic controllers track aircraft using a satellite network using a system known as Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B), which is ten times more accurate than today's radar technology. ADS-B is part of the FAA's wide-reaching plan known as NextGen to revamp every component of the flight control system to meet future demands and avoid gridlock in the sky."
Re: gridlock in the sky (Score:5, Interesting)
They have only been working on this for 30 years (Score:5, Interesting)
The FAA has been working on this for 30 years. I was involved in studying it back in the 1970's.
They have also been working on digital ground-air-ground communications since 1948 (I once had some reports on the subject that go back that far). AFAIK, they still don't have the digital ground-air-ground.
At one time the FAA radars were the last users of vacuum tubes, and the replacement parts were coming from factories that bought the original manufacturers equipment and were making it in who-knows-where. They didn't even replace the original manufacturer trademarks on the tubes. Quality control? Forget it.
Technology advances at the FAA very slooooowly.
Re:what's tracking going to do? (Score:5, Interesting)
Second, nobody's been investing in airport infrastructure.
That should be firstly. For all the administration's talk of opening up new airways, we do not have an air shortage. We have a concrete shortage. More routes for the enroute phase of flight just give you a shorter trip from one traffic jam to the next traffic jam, and it's going to stay that way until we get more runways open.
rj
As I understand it the traffic problems in the USA are primarily on a few high traffic routes like New York to Washington. If they invested in high speed rail on those links the congestion problem in the air might not be such an issue.
Speaking as a pilot. . . . (Score:4, Interesting)
This is mixed news for me.
Currently, a big plane will show up on radar as a blip. The pilot will call control, and state his/her identity and position. Controller will then make an educated guess as to which plane is which dot on the radar scope, and assign you a 4-digit "Squawk" code (Say, 1234). Pilot enters the squawk code in to his instruments, and the instruments then start broadcasting "Aircraft 1234 is at 32,000ft" on the radio. This then lets the radar display aircraft identification and altitude beside each blip. Simple, yes? Prone to human error?
So obviously, we need something less vulnerable to human error, and more vulnerable to programmer error. That's how the world works.
With ADS-B, the aircraft pulls down GPS coordinates and altitude, and then broadcasts them in cleartext on open frequencies to everyone. "Aircraft C-FBQN is at 10,000ft at N45.4870947 & W75.0967026 travelling at 121kts heading 180 True."
So, targeting your ground-to-air missiles just got a whole bunch easier.
The advantage, though, is that you can become much safer in the areas where there's no radar coverage. Hudson's Bay, North Atlantic, etc. Those are busy places with lots of planes and sleepy pilots.
Also, the aircraft I mentionned earlier in my example is C-FBQN. I love that baby, but she doesn't show up on radar. With ADS-B, my flying can get much safer.
http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/007288.html [zawodny.com]
And I don't have to even worry about the missiles, as I have no heat signature and don't show up on radar, so they'll be able to get really close, and never actually hit me.
Re:what's tracking going to do? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's much easier to get to the endpoints of the Acela, and so you save all the transit time to the airport, all the security delay, the waiting to board delay, and the sitting on the tarmac delay.
For the Washington to New York run, it's generally faster to take the train.
Of course, if you're dirt cheap and have the time, there are bus tickets for less than $40 round trip, and some specials were as low as $1 one-way.
don't need a satellite (Score:1, Interesting)
I work on ships and with AIS (automatic identification system) which transmits our location speed and course as well our identity,coupled with electronic charts and gps we know exactly where everyone is and what they are doing.The system allows us to safely navigate large ships in narrow channels and avoid collision and groundings.This technology with a few modifications could be adapted to air travel and ground control.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)