[Peetwo]

Canucks set the benchmark for 1st class ATC -

Antiquated air traffic control systems are becoming a serious threat to safety
America could learn a few things from Canada
Aug 10th 2016 | LOS ANGELES | Science and technology

• 
  Add this article to your reading list by clicking this button
  
  
  
  

THERE is a strange disconnection between the way lawmakers in America go about protecting the country's airline passengers on the ground, and the way they abandon them to their fate once they are airborne. Nothing is too much trouble when it is a question of stopping bombs, guns and bad guys getting on board. But that contrasts with the deaf ear turned to calls to make flying safer, cheaper and less arduous by dragging the country's creaking, 1960s-era air-traffic-control (ATC) system into the 2010s.

Yet, such is what happened this summer when, before heading off for the beaches, Congress once again failed to address the question of how best to reform the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). An authorisation bill, passed on July 13th (two days before the FAA’s legal authority expired), merely extended the agency's finance for another year and included measures to reduce the length of queues at security checkpoints, acquire more bomb-sniffing dogs, tighten vetting of airport employees and let surplus screening equipment to be donated to foreign airports. But it studiously ignored the bigger question of how to get the FAA’s “NextGen” modernisation plan, which would shift ATC from relying on ground-based radars to a system called Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (ADS–B), which uses satellites and transponders to follow aircraft movements, back on track—and thus bring the country’s antiquated ATC system up to international standards.

In February, the House of Representatives' Transportation and Infrastructure Committee proposed the Aviation Innovation Reform and Reauthorisation Bill. This would spin the air-navigation service out of the FCC and turn it over to an independent, not-for-profit organisation (to be called the ATC Corporation) set up explicitly for the purpose. Instead of relying on an excise duty levied on fuel and air tickets, this independent corporation would be self-financing, using a sliding scale of fees paid by airlines and other users. With its own revenue, the corporation could then get on with installing ADS-B gear without having to fight Congress each year for an apppropriation. The bill, eminently sensible on the face of things, remains stalled in the House of Representatives, having failed to garner bipartisan support. One side sees it as a giveaway of public assets; the other has difficulty finding agreement amongst its own divisions.

Hiving off air navigation is not exactly a new idea. Over the past couple of decades more than 50 countries, including Australia, Britain, Canada and New Zealand, have privatised (or at least “commercialised”) their ATC services, freeing them to innovate and modernise without government interference. The International Civil Aviation Organisation, the UN agency that oversees worldwide aviation standards, has urged all 191 of its member countries to extricate their air-traffic control from government bureaucracy and political micromanagement—so they can manage the explosive growth in air travel with greater safety and effectiveness.

America remains the biggest holdout. It is not that its airlines have balked at the proposal. Practically all are on board. So, encouragingly, are the unions—which have reversed their position since ATC liberalisation was first mooted back in the 1980s.

Insiders are aware that things simply cannot carry on as they are. The number of passengers flying around the world each year is expected to double, to 6.4 billion, by 2030. In America, this is happening as a staffing crisis threatens to bring the country’s ATC system to its knees. The FAA has missed its recruitment target for each of the past seven years. As a consequence, the number of certified air-traffic controllers (some 10,600) is the lowest it has been in 27 years. Making matters worse, some 3,000 of them are approaching retirement age.

Not all of America’s carriers think privatisation is the answer. Delta Air Lines has been particularly outspoken, arguing that it would raise costs and cause fares to rocket.

Competitors, however, reckon Delta’s objection has more to do with the age of its aircraft, which would be expensive to fit with modern transponders. Private pilots have misgivings, too. The cost of fitting ADS-B units to their small planes would hit them hard. For the rest of the industry, though, NextGen cannot come soon enough. And if that means privatisation, so be it. Most have watched Nav Canada, the non-profit company that has managed air traffic across Canada and the North Atlantic, for the 20 years it has been in business. Despite Delta's fears, Nav Canada’s costs reportedly dropped 30% following privatisation. The FAA's costs amount to $450 per flight hour, while Nav Canada's are $340.

All of which is hardly surprising. America’s patchwork of ground-based radio stations and radars dates back to the Kennedy era. Planes are guided to their destinations in a series of zig-zags, as they fly from one control point to the next. It can take ground controllers up to half a minute to get a fix on a plane’s echo transponder. Then there is the time it takes—typically, around 12 seconds—for a radar dish to update a plane’s position. By the time the dish has completed a rotation, an aircraft may have moved a couple of miles. That is why planes are required to fly at least five miles apart while crossing the country. Also, because radar operates by line-of-sight, controllers can "lose" planes that are flying at low altitude or behind mountains. In an age when digital communications are instananeous and ubiquitous, controllers often have to pass along a plane’s location and other important details on strips of paper.

Planes equipped with ADS-B transponders, by contrast, get a precise location from GPS satellites. This information is encoded with data providing the aircraft’s flight number, speed, heading and any manoeuvre it is making. These data are then broadcast automatically every second to all ground stations and other aircraft within a 150-mile radius. By knowing at any instant exactly where they are relative to other aircraft in the sky, planes so equipped can travel closer together without fear of colliding. They can also take more direct routes to their destinations, instead of zig-zagging their way from one control tower to the next. That saves fuel and time, while minimising aerial congestion.

The FAA claims to be more or less on target with the ground part of its ADS-B installation programme. But NextGen is still far from complete. Developing the software that lets air-traffic controllers see ADS-B positional data on their computer screens, as a superior digital version of the traditional radar blips, has proved tougher than expected, notes the Department of Transportation. The DOT’s inspector general is also sceptical about the FAA’s estimates of NextGen’s final cost and completion date. The original estimate put the amount the government and industry would pay at $20 billion apiece. The inspector general thinks it could wind up costing “two or three times” as much. Back in 2012, the FAA said all aircraft flying in American airspace would need to have ADS-B transponders installed by 2020. The completion date has since slipped to 2025—and even that could be off “by as much as a decade”, the Wall Street Journal recently reported.

Meanwhile, satellite-navigation technology has not stood still. ADS-B was first mooted in the mid-1990s. Prototype testing got underway in the early 2000s, with the aim of having the new ATC system in place by 2015. However, innovations that have taken place over the past decade have raised questions about what role (if any) ADS-B’s hugely expensive ground-based infrastructure may actually play.

Once again, Canada has shown the way. In terms of traffic volume, Nav Canada manages the second largest airspace in the world after America's. The vast distances over remote areas present special challenges. Pilots essentially fly blind once they are out of line-of-sight range of radars on the ground. For safety reasons, planes crossing oceans and remote regions must therefore be spaced well apart, restricting the flow of traffic.

To address the problem, Nav Canada teamed up with Iridium, a mobile communications supplier based in McLean, Virginia. Iridium provides data connections between any two points on Earth using its own satellite network. Aireon, its joint venture with Nav Canada, has installed ADS-B receivers in Iridium’s latest generation of satellites, which are beginning to replace the company’s existing constellation. The company is on track to have swapped out all 66 of the old Iridium satellites for new ones by 2018. Aireon will then be able to relay signals from ADS-B-equipped aircraft flying anywhere in the world to controllers on the ground. This will change things a lot. The ability to provide surveillance, second-by-second, of all the air traffic in the world—irrespective of whether the planes are flying over oceans or polar regions—will be available to air-navigation service providers without the need to install any additional infrastructure on the ground or equipment in the air. Had such a capability been available in 2014, Malaysia Airlines’s ill-fated flight MH370 would have been pinpointed instantly.

Aireon says, modestly, that its space-based ADS-B system will “complement existing [ground-based] surveillance systems” and provide a back-up service in emergencies. But the message is clear: when planning how best to meet future growth in traffic, independent air-navigation providers everywhere are going to find it cheaper, quicker and less fraught with uncertainty to sign up for a space-based ADS-B service off the shelf, rather than try to build NextGen-like gear on the ground. That may be the best reason yet why America needs to privatise its air-traffic control without delay.

When I read this line...

"...THERE is a strange disconnection between the way lawmakers in America go about protecting the country's airline passengers on the ground, and the way they abandon them to their fate once they are airborne..."

...I had a strange feeling of déjà vu??? Anyway the argument for ASA privatisation is well and truly enhanced by the many parallel comparisons between the Nav Canada & FAA management of their individual ATC systems...

Is it any wonder that Murky Mandarin and his minions are seriously looking at the function & efficiency of ASA and the future possibility of privatisation:

Mr Mrdak : The Functional and Efficiency Review did look at international examples of where governments have placed their air traffic control provider—air services provider—in different governance structures, particularly the United Kingdom and Canada, where they have been placed in either part-private ownership or a not-for-profit government body. They were models that were looked at in the scope. The Functional and Efficiency Review recommended that we consider further options for the future of Airservices Australia..

 
TICK..TOCK Harfwit & your fellow shonky, trough-feeding numbnuts TICK..TOCK indeed -  


MTF...P2