3 ms·
It's a matter of decades of tradition. They'd have to change the way this stuff works for this to work properly. If you think about it, 99% of ATC exchanges are
by jillesvangurp 4y ago
It's a matter of decades of tradition. They'd have to change the way this stuff works for this to work properly. If you think about it, 99% of ATC exchanges are entirely routine exchanges of very basic information. Requesting and answering such basic questions as: Who the hell are you, what type of airplane are you flying, what are your intentions, change course to X, altitude to Y, altimeter settings, etc. And that's before we start talking about more complicated approach and departure proceedings.
Essentially all of that can be changed to exchanging information digitally and automatically. In fact most of that information exists digitally. It's not a technical challenge to do that. There are many ways to make this happen. The challenge is entirely institutional because it would represent massive changes to an industry that resists all form of change for decades on end. And that's for good reason: safety. But it also means that a lot of very flaky technology keeps on getting used and that pilots are task saturated with a ridiculous amount of work during safety critical portions of flight. When they get behind on their tasks, dangerous situations happen. When they stop practicing, they lose the ability to stay on top of things. It's that hard. And their pilot license shortly after (currency is not optional).
If you'd design the procedures and communication from scratch using modern tools, you'd end up with a very different system than what we have today. The fun thing indeed is that with modern AI, what might happen instead is that we end up with AI assisted ATCs and pilots delegating the ritualistic exchange of information via VHF radios to AIs. They could just send each other digital messages instead that are then processed automatically and acknowledged manually when needed. But on the off chance of one of the pilots or atcs still being stuck in the nineteen sixties, it's going to be easier to pretend that everyone is and have AIs imitate human actors participating in this.
So, text to speech and speech to text on both ends combined with an AI that has enough contextual information to take simple decisions and control systems escalating to pilots and controllers only when needed to might be more doable than coming up with a new system. I'd say chat gpt 4 would be well up for a "pretend you are an ATC controller" type role playing session.
- Out_of_Characte 4y agoI'm not sure how feasable AI or automation is. How would you respond to a failure in the automated system once there are more planes in the air than ATC controllers in that area? That could be a single point of failure. ATC Can optimise for severe degradation of service but how would automation be able to respond to a sometimes unavoidable impossible situation? You can define rules how planes should and shouldn't fly, verifying that this is always possible would be a nightmare.
- jillesvangurp 4y agoSimple, just build in some escalation mechanism. Pilots should be able to get to talk to a human, and be listening in on the exchanges in case their attention is required. Of course, insisting on heavy handed, laborious, and error prone human exchanges all the time has its own risks. ATC getting overloaded with more traffic is a given either way. Loads of electrical drones will start showing up in the next decades. Some piloted, some autonomous. ATC will have to adjust to that. And keeping everything the same with more human controllers is not going to scale.
- astonex 4y agoThere does already exist a system for ATC to send info to Pilots via text. Particularly used when in heavy-traffic areas to limit the amount of voice communication. CPDLC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller%E2%80%93pilot_data_link_communications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller%E2%80%93pilot_data_...
- eesmith 4y agoIf I read the page correctly - and I am NOT knowledgeable about the topic - the CPDLC is not used for approach control, which is the issue in NYC and DC. The example uses given are oceanic routes and above FL195 or FL285. It mentions "continuous descent approaches" as a future possibility. Isn't approach one of those times where 1) you don't want the pilot distracted by more visual information (instead of audio), and 2) pilots listen to exchanges with other pilots to keep situational awareness?
- catminou 4y agoCpdlc is primarily used for oceanic clearances and follow ups (going off track due to weather, speed changes etc.).