6 ms·

> "Airline pilots are the best at what they do and have spent years honing their craft." And apparently one of those rare and vital skills is filling in the ga

> "Airline pilots are the best at what they do and have spent years honing their craft." And apparently one of those rare and vital skills is filling in the gaps when talking to air traffic controllers who are not competent to communicate life-or-death information.

blamazon 4y ago
Why are we still doing air control with competitive real time voice radio anyway? Can we not engineer in some queued delay of planning? (I know nothing of the vagaries of air control)
- bryanrasmussen 4y ago
  my startup is providing air traffic control solutions using an AI trained bot to talk to the pilots when a life and death situation arises!
  - blamazon 4y ago
    I feel it somewhat obvious that humans talking to humans is a good thing for life and death split second stuff, same page there. But aren't most of the comms really rote and mundane instructions that follow a standard pattern? We trust automated systems to land the plane, [1] why not to tell a plane to say, cross runway 22 and stop at threshold Z? A human could still give that instruction, but with a button instead of their mouth parts flapping? Then the radio channel would be more open for higher urgency stuff. [1]: https://youtu.be/LyVuGQUl2bA https://youtu.be/LyVuGQUl2bA
- leeter 4y ago
  Primary ATC is still done that way but at least for the big jets there are other ways they send digital comms to ATC[1]. The main reason is because radios fail and more complex radios fail more easily. A standard Jetliner carries three radios, any of which the pilots can use to contact ATC. The bands are internationally standardized. So it's not just a case of the FAA mandating a change. It would have to be the entire world. So even if the FAA did require digital radios it wouldn't actually change much because both ground and plane would still have to transmit analog backup anyway. That creates more chatter etc. It's also important to recognize that controllers are human and can only deal with one thing at once. The current system generally speaking gives one human control over one section of airspace. In this specific case the pilot should have been aware of the restricted airspace and set a flight plan that took them away from it before turning to their destination. There is zero excuses for flying into restricted airspace as there are published maps. The zone around the WH and USC is a permanent zone, so even less of an excuse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS
  - blamazon 4y ago
    Interesting, that explanation does make sense. It's interesting to think about how the limits of human synchronous focus are involved. That must be such a stressful job! TIL about ACARS.
- kube-system 4y ago
  People may chime in at any time and the relative priority, timing, volume, etc of calls is unknown in advance. Basically it’s CSMA, implemented via human brain. If it’s good enough for Ethernet, it’s good enough for ATC.
- dogleash 4y ago
  Resilience. Put on your systems theory hat when thinking about alternatives. FWIW, As was discussed in the post, ground/departure channels at a major airport were overwhelmingly busy for a private pilot untrained in that environment. As an occasional private passenger, I'm accustomed to quite low radio traffic because of the routes and airports we use. I've heard radio so quiet that a Controller handed us off to... herself on a different frequency for a different airspace.
- NordSteve 4y ago
  Same reason there's party chat in your FPS game - puts a sense to use for a real time information channel. Most of the time voice ATC comms are boring, but when they are not they're super useful. Set a calendar reminder for the afternoon of July 23, 2023 in UTC-5, and go listen to the audio channel for the north ATC sector for AirVenture arrivals at KOSH. You'll get what I mean.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- BWStearns 4y ago
  Airplanes live for decades (probably a fair amount are going to pass the 100 year mark) and so backwards compatibility is a huge issue for adding any tech into the system. Radio works pretty well and it's flexible. Imagine some asshole is flying a drone around on short final. It's easy enough to say "Hey heads up everyone, there's a DJI buzzing around at 200'", but with a more streamlined system there might not be an easy way to communicate that, and if you have the new system and radios then you still need to commmunicate everything on both while everyone adopts the new system.
krisoft 4y ago
No the rare and vital skill is to get a map and look at it and figure out which way you are going to go. How come this person didn't know if they have to turn left or right? How come they didn't know from the top of their head the airspace structure around them (including restricted airspaces, especially). This is 101 level stuff.
- GTP 4y ago
  But at the same time, ATC told him to follow the river, while in its trajectory he was crossing it. Did he do a wrong maneuver that made him go in the wrong direction form the start? Or was ATC that didn't give the information correctly?
  - tjohns 4y ago
    The river visual is a published approach for DCA. P-56 (the restricted airspace the pilot almost penetrated) is VERY well known and would top of mind for anyone flying in that airspace - not to mention highlighted on paper charts, EFBs, and panel-mount GPSes. This is basic preflight planning. The pilot didn't adequately prepare, given the complexity of the airspace they were flying in. ATC isn't there to micromanage your flight. They don't need to tell you to avoid restricted airspace, it's implied.
- BWStearns 4y ago
  If ATC tells you to do something you have to do that (with rare exceptions). Doesn't matter if you want to go some other direction. So even if he wanted to go up the Anacostia, if ATC said go up the Potomac then you go up the Potomac so it doesn't have to do with not knowing where you're going, it's the ambiguity of the instruction. Could he have guessed that the Anacostia would have been a better decision since the mall is just up the Potomac? Sure, maybe, but the real answer is be rude on the radio if you have to and get that clarification.
  - krisoft 4y ago
    > Doesn't matter if you want to go some other direction. I'm not talking about wanting to go some other direction. I'm talking about the previous departure clearance he received. Those are the "A very busy air traffic controller spit out departure instructions." followed by the "hectic voice said “we have an amendment to your departure are you ready to copy”". Those are telling him which way to go. And they don't just rattle them off and good luck. They wait for the pilot to read them back, and they check that the pilot reads them back correctly. I bet that he was not cleared for a visual departure out of DCA. So the departure he received must have had a list of nav points. Were they left or right? What restricted airspaces were there in the vicinity he should be aware of? You know, it is telling that those details are left out. Probably if they were spelled out it would be clearer how big a mistake the pilot did. Very conveniently they are mentioned but not described.
csours 4y ago
I wonder if Air Traffic Controller is a misnomer of the same type as "Autopilot". It's a true enough description, but it gives the wrong impression to inexperienced persons. Pilots are always responsible for flying their aircraft in a safe manner. At the same time, the whole system must allow for pilots to do this. It has been many years since aircraft incidents have been investigated in a monocausal manner; the whole system is examined each time. ATC expects a high level of professionalism from pilots, especially at a major airport.

blamazon 4y ago

Why are we still doing air control with competitive real time voice radio anyway? Can we not engineer in some queued delay of planning? (I know nothing of the vagaries of air control)

bryanrasmussen 4y ago
my startup is providing air traffic control solutions using an AI trained bot to talk to the pilots when a life and death situation arises!
- blamazon 4y ago
  I feel it somewhat obvious that humans talking to humans is a good thing for life and death split second stuff, same page there. But aren't most of the comms really rote and mundane instructions that follow a standard pattern? We trust automated systems to land the plane, [1] why not to tell a plane to say, cross runway 22 and stop at threshold Z? A human could still give that instruction, but with a button instead of their mouth parts flapping? Then the radio channel would be more open for higher urgency stuff. [1]: https://youtu.be/LyVuGQUl2bA https://youtu.be/LyVuGQUl2bA
leeter 4y ago
Primary ATC is still done that way but at least for the big jets there are other ways they send digital comms to ATC[1]. The main reason is because radios fail and more complex radios fail more easily. A standard Jetliner carries three radios, any of which the pilots can use to contact ATC. The bands are internationally standardized. So it's not just a case of the FAA mandating a change. It would have to be the entire world. So even if the FAA did require digital radios it wouldn't actually change much because both ground and plane would still have to transmit analog backup anyway. That creates more chatter etc. It's also important to recognize that controllers are human and can only deal with one thing at once. The current system generally speaking gives one human control over one section of airspace. In this specific case the pilot should have been aware of the restricted airspace and set a flight plan that took them away from it before turning to their destination. There is zero excuses for flying into restricted airspace as there are published maps. The zone around the WH and USC is a permanent zone, so even less of an excuse. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS
- blamazon 4y ago
  Interesting, that explanation does make sense. It's interesting to think about how the limits of human synchronous focus are involved. That must be such a stressful job! TIL about ACARS.
kube-system 4y ago
People may chime in at any time and the relative priority, timing, volume, etc of calls is unknown in advance. Basically it’s CSMA, implemented via human brain. If it’s good enough for Ethernet, it’s good enough for ATC.
dogleash 4y ago
Resilience. Put on your systems theory hat when thinking about alternatives. FWIW, As was discussed in the post, ground/departure channels at a major airport were overwhelmingly busy for a private pilot untrained in that environment. As an occasional private passenger, I'm accustomed to quite low radio traffic because of the routes and airports we use. I've heard radio so quiet that a Controller handed us off to... herself on a different frequency for a different airspace.
NordSteve 4y ago
Same reason there's party chat in your FPS game - puts a sense to use for a real time information channel. Most of the time voice ATC comms are boring, but when they are not they're super useful. Set a calendar reminder for the afternoon of July 23, 2023 in UTC-5, and go listen to the audio channel for the north ATC sector for AirVenture arrivals at KOSH. You'll get what I mean.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
BWStearns 4y ago
Airplanes live for decades (probably a fair amount are going to pass the 100 year mark) and so backwards compatibility is a huge issue for adding any tech into the system. Radio works pretty well and it's flexible. Imagine some asshole is flying a drone around on short final. It's easy enough to say "Hey heads up everyone, there's a DJI buzzing around at 200'", but with a more streamlined system there might not be an easy way to communicate that, and if you have the new system and radios then you still need to commmunicate everything on both while everyone adopts the new system.

krisoft 4y ago

No the rare and vital skill is to get a map and look at it and figure out which way you are going to go. How come this person didn't know if they have to turn left or right? How come they didn't know from the top of their head the airspace structure around them (including restricted airspaces, especially). This is 101 level stuff.

GTP 4y ago
But at the same time, ATC told him to follow the river, while in its trajectory he was crossing it. Did he do a wrong maneuver that made him go in the wrong direction form the start? Or was ATC that didn't give the information correctly?
- tjohns 4y ago
  The river visual is a published approach for DCA. P-56 (the restricted airspace the pilot almost penetrated) is VERY well known and would top of mind for anyone flying in that airspace - not to mention highlighted on paper charts, EFBs, and panel-mount GPSes. This is basic preflight planning. The pilot didn't adequately prepare, given the complexity of the airspace they were flying in. ATC isn't there to micromanage your flight. They don't need to tell you to avoid restricted airspace, it's implied.
BWStearns 4y ago
If ATC tells you to do something you have to do that (with rare exceptions). Doesn't matter if you want to go some other direction. So even if he wanted to go up the Anacostia, if ATC said go up the Potomac then you go up the Potomac so it doesn't have to do with not knowing where you're going, it's the ambiguity of the instruction. Could he have guessed that the Anacostia would have been a better decision since the mall is just up the Potomac? Sure, maybe, but the real answer is be rude on the radio if you have to and get that clarification.
- krisoft 4y ago
  > Doesn't matter if you want to go some other direction. I'm not talking about wanting to go some other direction. I'm talking about the previous departure clearance he received. Those are the "A very busy air traffic controller spit out departure instructions." followed by the "hectic voice said “we have an amendment to your departure are you ready to copy”". Those are telling him which way to go. And they don't just rattle them off and good luck. They wait for the pilot to read them back, and they check that the pilot reads them back correctly. I bet that he was not cleared for a visual departure out of DCA. So the departure he received must have had a list of nav points. Were they left or right? What restricted airspaces were there in the vicinity he should be aware of? You know, it is telling that those details are left out. Probably if they were spelled out it would be clearer how big a mistake the pilot did. Very conveniently they are mentioned but not described.

csours 4y ago

I wonder if Air Traffic Controller is a misnomer of the same type as "Autopilot". It's a true enough description, but it gives the wrong impression to inexperienced persons. Pilots are always responsible for flying their aircraft in a safe manner. At the same time, the whole system must allow for pilots to do this. It has been many years since aircraft incidents have been investigated in a monocausal manner; the whole system is examined each time. ATC expects a high level of professionalism from pilots, especially at a major airport.