Suggestion - PDC

[Mike Lehkamp]

It would be nice if controllers would start issueing pre-departure clearances. Many are such as ATL, MEM, and NY. Many however are not such as LA. Example. Saturday I flew and I sat for 21 minutes waiting to get a clearance. Majority of these problems stem from readbacks that are mostly wrong and often gave to be re-given, re-readback, so on and so on. In fact, this also occurs in real world brought to light by NASA that did a study of several of the more prominant airports in the US. They're findings and recommendations suggested PDC's. https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/directline/dl5_pdc.htm

 

The way Vatsim ATL does it is by sending the clearance via text and advising you (regardless of voice) not to contact until ready to taxi with proper squak code. To me this is ideal. More real to life like ACARS and surely clears up the voice airways.

 

I'm sure this has been discussed he before. At least I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume it has. I didnt bother searching as unfortnately it still occurs more than not.

 

That said, I cannot thank VATSIM and the controllers enough. They do a superb job and at the end of the day we are all just trying to enjoy ourselves. Merely a suggestion.

 

Thank you Vatsim,

 

Michael

[Morten Jelle]

There is already topics going on with this, Mike. And there has been for years. The main issue is, that there is currently no official software provided by VATSIM, and the others that are available, aren't that good yet (or have stopped development) - I think SWIFT will include CPDLC, but I am not too sure.

 

You might want to look at those:

 

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=74279

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=74019

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=CPDLC

[Bradley Grafelman]

Example. Saturday I flew and I sat for 21 minutes waiting to get a clearance.

I'm curious as to why you think PDC would have had a positive impact in this example?

 

I'm guessing it took that long because the controller was busy. Even if PDCs are in use, the controller still has to scan the scope, issue instructions, and listen for readbacks. Before issuing a PDC, the controller still has to examine the flight plan.

 

If it was simply a matter of voice frequency bandwidth (i.e. lots of pilots talking but not a lot of mental workload on the controller's part), the controller could have just issued your clearance at some point via text on frequency (or via PM - the current method of sending PDCs used in ZLA). If, however, it was a matter of mental bandwidth... the availability of PDCs wouldn't have changed that at all.

[Andreas Fuchs]

I'm curious as to why you think PDC would have had a positive impact in this example

You are a smart cookie and you know the answer...

 

If an ATCO uses PDC he can issue a multitude of clearances within minutes, because the voice channel does not get clogged up with unreadable or wrong readbacks that he needs to listen to, acknowledge or correct. That's why we are promoting the "real" PDC with dedicated software and not the "lame" PDC through private chat-messages, to make it more realistic.

[Bradley Grafelman]

I'm utterly confused.

 

You either didn't even read my post, or something got lost in translation.

[Andreas Fuchs]

I am confused as to why you are replying this to me

 

You asked Mike what difference PDC could have made when he had to wait 21 minutes for clearance. I answered it: it would have made a tremendous difference.

[Bradley Grafelman]

it would have made a tremendous difference.

What would make a tremendous difference is if you and I spoke a common language. Clearly, that is not the case. I'll try again anyway... perhaps you'll become a smart cookie, too.

 

PDC is PDC is PDC. The "realism" from a separate PDC client vs. text on frequency or via PM is irrelevant (at best) to reducing the delay in the OP's example. At worst, it's actually more of a distraction than the methods already available. As it stands, it's a simple matter of selecting an aircraft (partial callsign + ASEL), [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igning a beacon code (F9 + ASEL), and sending the appropriate PDC messages (e.g. ".pdcv", ENTER, ".pdc2", ENTER). From a time standpoint, it's already down to a few seconds after reviewing the flight plan.

 

It's a solution that was already available in the OP's situation. It apparently wasn't used. Maybe the controller was already swamped dealing with in-air traffic and couldn't find time to review the flight plan, or maybe the controller forgot about the clearance on request. PDC doesn't solve either of those scenarios.

 

Without knowing the source of the delay and whether some magical "dedicated software" solution could shave off time from an already less-than-five-second process, but unequivocally stating it "would have made a tremendous difference" is, in my opinion... tremendously dumb.

[Andreas Fuchs]

That is because you are using the cheap version of PDC. In our integrated PDC-plugin for Euroscope you simply select/confirm the departure runway, SID, squawk and temp altitude (if required) and then click on "send". That's it. Takes 7 or 8 seconds.

 

https://github.com/pierr3/vSMR/wiki/CPDLC-Clearance-system

 

And even if you use the chat-based version of PDC, you simply need to prioritize and prepare a bulk of clearances or whatever works best for you. Anyways, you have retired from controlling, maybe you lost track of what's going on at VATSIM!?

[Bradley Grafelman]

Takes 7 or 8 seconds.

swa1234<TAB>F9<TAB>.pdcvx 5000 6s<ENTER>.pdc2<ENTER>

The above is the string of keys I'd press to select SWA1234, [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ign a beacon code, and issue a PDC clearance with a "climb via SID except maintain 5000" and a departure frequency for LAX_DEP. Even accounting for the occasional fat-fingering of a key, I can't imagine it takes me much longer (if any) than 7 or 8 seconds to type.

 

That's why I'm failing to understand why the lack of PDC was the major contributor to a 21 minute delay. From ES plugin to VRC alias, both are on the same order of magnitude - a handful of seconds. I have to believe there was something else at play in the OP's scenario.

[Andreas Fuchs]

Of course something was going: PDCs were not used. Pilots did not understand (for whatever reason) their clearances issued by voice or they made bad/incorrect readbacks (for whatever reason), this is very time consuming. With PDC the ATCO could have issued a higher number of clearances within the same period of time, reducing the 21 minutes waiting time to maybe 5 or less minutes. Quite logical.

[Andrew Ogden]

I use Hoppies client seamlessly on oceanic positions. When I am working ZAK or NZZO at a busy time, it stops my frequency being cluttered with position reports and such. The only downfall is that the pilot on the recieving end has to have the software too, and I've only had a few times where most of the pilots on frequency actually have the software.

You could indeed use it for PDC, but the pilot on the recieving end also has to have the software.

 

Andreas has added the links up above.

[Mike Lehkamp]

Example. Saturday I flew and I sat for 21 minutes waiting to get a clearance.

I'm curious as to why you think PDC would have had a positive impact in this example?

 

I'm guessing it took that long because the controller was busy. Even if PDCs are in use, the controller still has to scan the scope, issue instructions, and listen for readbacks. Before issuing a PDC, the controller still has to examine the flight plan.

 

If it was simply a matter of voice frequency bandwidth (i.e. lots of pilots talking but not a lot of mental workload on the controller's part), the controller could have just issued your clearance at some point via text on frequency (or via PM - the current method of sending PDCs used in ZLA). If, however, it was a matter of mental bandwidth... the availability of PDCs wouldn't have changed that at all.

 

That is pure hogwash for crying out loud. Sending the clearance by text including the squak code is much quicker. If cannot see that that then I apologize. During the examle I provided in LA, the gentleman attempting to read back the clearance had to do so on three seperate occasions. I suspect this instance was a result of bad audio equipment. However it was further compounded by the fact the gentleman would hesistate contantly, groan, you name it. All this can quickly be eliminated by just issueing a text clearance with the squak code. Then all the pilot has to do is say "ok, thank you" back in text. No need to text the entire clearance back as the text is right in front of his face given by the controller. His first voice contact would be for example "JetBlue 2109 squaking 2165 ready to taxi". Good Lord such a simple solution.

[Mike Lehkamp]

I'm curious as to why you think PDC would have had a positive impact in this example

You are a smart cookie and you know the answer...

 

If an ATCO uses PDC he can issue a multitude of clearances within minutes, because the voice channel does not get clogged up with unreadable or wrong readbacks that he needs to listen to, acknowledge or correct. That's why we are promoting the "real" PDC with dedicated software and not the "lame" PDC through private chat-messages, to make it more realistic.

 

Bingo Andreas! You get it. Could not have explained it better!!!

[Daniel Hawton]

Having controlled in VATUK VATGER and as LAX TWR... I can tell you things are very different on this side of the pond as well as flown there and more, and unlike those places, LAX seems to be the #1 place to go for new people. For a 21 minute wait, then anyone familiar with ZLA can see that there is a lot more going on than just a person doing CD. If there was someone just working to deliver clearances, then the problems wouldn't be 21 minutes long (unless we're talking CTP level traffic). The amount of clicking for Hoppie's client (I, too, don't use Hoppie's client because I absolute HATE being forced to use a mouse and do everything by key strokes -- no key strokes, no usage) is ridiculous. Clicking was a big dislike of mine when I was stuck on EuroScope as well.

 

Without knowing what was going on during those 21 minutes, it's hard to really judge what .. if any .. difference would be made by issuance of clearances by text or not. I've used ATL's PDCs and it began with a message asking if you want to use PDCs. That just kills any time saved right there, especially if it's a center working by themselves in busy airspace.

[Andreas Fuchs]

Hi Andrew,

I use Hoppies client seamlessly on oceanic positions. When I am working ZAK or NZZO at a busy time, it stops my frequency being cluttered with position reports and such. The only downfall is that the pilot on the recieving end has to have the software too, and I've only had a few times where most of the pilots on frequency actually have the software.

You could indeed use it for PDC, but the pilot on the recieving end also has to have the software.

 

Andreas has added the links up above.

maybe you'll find these ALIAS useful. I have created short-URLs to direct people to our CPDLC Quick Starter Manual. Installing the software takes less than 10 minutes. The short-URL http://tiny.cc/cpdlcquickstarteren takes members to the English version on the VATSIM forums.

; ==============================================================================

; CPDLC PDC

; ==============================================================================

 

.CPDLC Hi! I am currently offering CPDLC services (Controller Pilot Data Link Communication) and I encourage you to make use of it. You haven't heard of it or you have not installed the necessary software yet (all FREE of charge)? It will take you about 5 to 10 minutes to do this with the help of our CPDLC Quick Starter Manual. You can find it here: http://tiny.cc/cpdlcquickstarteren

 

.CPDLCinfo Installing and getting to grips with a CPDLC client is really is easy and will take you about 5 to 10 minutes to complete. You can find our CPDLC Quick Starter Manual here: http://tiny.cc/cpdlcquickstarteren

 

.PDC Hi! I am currently offering PDC services (Pre Departure Clearance) and I encourage you to make use of it. You haven't heard of it or you have not installed the necessary software yet (all FREE of charge)? It will take you about 5 to 10 minutes to do this with the help of our CPDLC Quick Starter Manual. You can find it here: http://tiny.cc/cpdlcquickstarteren

 

.PDClogon I noticed that you have tried to LOGON to my PDC-station. Please avoid this, as this is NOT possible and inhibits further PDC-communication at this point. Please re-start your CPDLC-client and use the ACARS-pages of it to fill in your flight-information. Then proceed to its PDC-subpage and use my PDC-address to send the PDC-request to. Again: NEVER try to logon to a PDC-station, or it will crash the communication.

[John Wiesenfeld]

For what it might be worth, I can share the personal experience of someone who issues PM-based PDCs at ZNY airports around NYC and Philadelphia. We have an extensive set of alias commands that cover the various PDC contingencies, of course, and I have programmed an iPad that I use to simulate an ARTS keyboard to also issue those alias commands at the touch of a soft key using an app called Keypad. It all goes very quickly and I can sometimes issue the PDC in 10 or 15 seconds once I have reviewed the flight plan and set the squawk code.

 

The huge benefit of this methodology is that I can issue the PDC via PM at any time that I have a free moment and not only in response to a pilot's clearance request on frequency. This helps the workflow significantly, but I do need to admit that it requires me to divert my attention from the scope screen. Sometimes pilots will call in for a clearance immediately after logging on, having submitted the flight plan via the VATSIM website, so I will also issue verbal clearances. I have never timed it, but I'm guessing that these take more time, but less off-screen attention than the PDCs.

 

We have been using this method to issue PDCs for a year or so, maybe more. I have never had a problem with a pilot not understanding the PDC, but some newbies don't know to look at the PM channel. That gets fixed quickly. It would be nice if we had an official CPDLC integrated into both the pilot and controller clients, but this will certainly raise issues with some pilots having the new client, others not, and ditto for the controllers. The current system works every time and everyone can access it. Pilot compliance to PDCs seems to significantly exceed that of verbal clearances, but one's mileage may vary. Some days are good days, others not so much.

 

Cheers,

 

John

[Andreas Fuchs]

Thanks for your feedback, John.

 

Of course it is much quicker to issue a clearance by means of a PM or through a CPDLC-plugin to a proper CPDLC-client. The beauty is that the receiver has all the time in the world to review the clearance and reply when ready. As an ATCO I do not need to actively wait for and listen to a reply on voice. It frees an immense amount of time to server other pilots.