Oceanic ATC

[Roger Curtiss]

Since VATSIM operations are essentially all radar-based why do we use position reports as the basis for oceanic ATC? Since the aircraft are easily observed with data blocks would it not be much easier to control as we do in domestic airspace?

[Torben Andersen]

Because we try to simulate ATC in the real world. That was the obvious answer. But you got a point. We ought to have a system/tools, which are closer to real life than the radar client(s) we are using in the domestic FIR. An idea of such a tool could perhaps be developed by looking at the tools shown in the video

On the other hand it is much work to start developping for the relative few sim pilots, who crosses into OCAs. But at CTP it could be handy. But newer technologi like ADS-B might mean that the use of our radar clients perhaps is not so far off. So perhaps you got a point.

 

regards

[Trevor Hannant]

In terms of the North Atlantic, Space Based ADS-B is already in operation so controllers now already have a “pseudo-radar” picture to work from.

 

 

I don’t see any reason why those areas using Space Based ADS-B can’t be simulated as such on the network.

[Kirk Christie]

Since VATSIM operations are essentially all radar-based why do we use position reports as the basis for oceanic ATC? Since the aircraft are easily observed with data blocks would it not be much easier to control as we do in domestic airspace?

 

Euroscope has the ability to install radars in the sector file and an option to have non radar areas, chances are that the person on Oceanic, can't actually see where you are.

[Sean Harrison]

Oh, I’ve been doing it wrong. I thought we were suppose to have the sector window minimised for oceanic.

[Johnny Coughlan]

Oh, I’ve been doing it wrong. I thought we were suppose to have the sector window minimised for oceanic.

 

You're not,

 

I use vNAS's Oceanic tools v3 when I do Shanwick, it has a seperate, outside of Euroscope GAATs Map which moves the a/c data block on it based on position report timings and a position report system.

 

I only use euroscope for the text box.

[Richard McDonald Woods]

When CPDLC is available within the larger aircraft, we shall reduce the need for oceanic position reports

[Johnny Coughlan]

When CPDLC is available within the larger aircraft, we shall reduce the need for oceanic position reports

 

How do you figure?.

 

CPDLC provides position reports on a text basis instead of the use of HF/VHF to send them via voice.

 

And who wants to sit on a position on VATSIM sending text messages to each other?.

 

The occasional text pilot is one thing an entire position using only text, no thanks.

[Richard McDonald Woods]

Hi Johnny,

My understanding is that interpreting the text messages within a controller client is eminently doable.

[Andreas Fuchs]

In an ideal world, our Oceanic Tools would automatically interpret and insert the data from CPDLC POS REPs. All the ATC needs to do then is to identify potential issues and try to resolve them. Like in the real world. I had the pleasure of visiting Oceanic ATC in Prestwick and there are literally to controllers doing all the stuff of the Atlantic east of 30W - and this is only possible because of CPDLC and because of Shanwick Radio (who are a separate unit and simply do the radio communication between pilots and ATC).

[Andrew Ogden]

The Gander sector files are engineered so that there are no radar zones. Aircraft locations are displayed through Euroscope's S-Mode feature, and are considered to be inaccurate at best. Therefore it is not viable to rely on them when one controls the airspace. For that, position reports are necessary to maintain the required separation.

[Alex Ying]

We actually have implemented pseudo ADS-C at ZWY. Like the OP said, we have all the data available to us at the client side from VATSIM, so simulating ADS-C reporting is trivial. Especially for heavy event traffic, this lets the controller actually provide air traffic control service, rather than just taking position reports non-stop. Things like re-routes, deviations, ADS-B ITP, and ADS-C CDP can be implemented by the controller. Greatly increases capacity and reduces controller workload providing an all-around better experience for everyone.

[Sean Harrison]

 

And who wants to sit on a position on VATSIM sending text messages to each other?.

 

The occasional text pilot is one thing an entire position using only text, no thanks.

 

Plus one.

 

It is amazingly contradictory to me that we seek and desire the best quality voice quality possible, after coming from text only with some voice _V_ and now a quantum leap on the door step. Yet, we strive for removing as much radio traffic as possible and desire CPDLC etc. Do we go full circle.

 

Confused.

[Ryan Geckler]

 

Yet, we strive for removing as much radio traffic as possible and desire CPDLC etc. Do we go full circle.

 

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

I don't know if you've ever worked a CTP on an oceanic position, but the less I have to talk, the better. It is absolute chaos when everyone is on voice.

[David Zhong]

Since the aircraft are easily observed with data blocks would it not be much easier to control as we do in domestic airspace?

 

Most modern non-radar ATC systems display aircraft "positions". These "positions" are predicted based on last radar position, flight plan data, pilot estimates, (low quality) ADS-B and ADS-C. This is great for situational awareness but cannot be used for separation in the sense that radar and high quality ADS-B is used. Controllers cannot measure 5 miles between two symbols and call it a day because the rule book requires a procedural separation standard.

 

Aside from vertical separation (which we all know and love), most traditional procedural separation standards are based on either time reports (actuals and estimates) and distance reports to navaids and RNAV fixes. Traditionally, the controller must obtain these reports from the pilot. The separation standard is only achieved if the controller meets the criteria using the pilot reports. With CPDLC, this reporting can become semi-automated and minimise transmission delays [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ociated with HF (controllers don't operate HF radios, the messages are relayed by a HF radio operator) and data entry errors.

 

With the advent of ADS-C in the Pacific/Indian and now the proliferation of this into the Atlantic, radar-like separation (albeit at 30 miles for RNP4 and 50 miles for RNP10) can be used in non-radar areas for participating aircraft.

 

All of that is to say, most divisions simulating non-radar airspace adopt procedural separation requirements which means that position reports need to be obtained even if we can "see" the aircraft.

[Alex Brown]

 

Yet, we strive for removing as much radio traffic as possible and desire CPDLC etc. Do we go full circle.

 

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

I don't know if you've ever worked a CTP on an oceanic position, but the less I have to talk, the better. It is absolute chaos when everyone is on voice.

 

Ryan..you are so right!!