Flying car & roboplane-worthy air traffic digi-net go for 2025
Radar, voice to be replaced by satnav and data
What you need to know about cloud backup
Moves to replace conventional air-traffic infrastructure - at present reliant on slow and inaccurate radar and voice comms - with modern satnav and digital networking tech are reportedly "on the right track".
Present-day air traffic is handled primarily by ground controllers using radar, either primary (where the pulse from the transmitter bounces back from the aircraft's skin) or nowadays more commonly secondary (where a transponder on the aircraft sends out a signal in response to the ground radar). In either case, the controller's picture updates only as rapidly as the radar antenna can spin, generally every six seconds or so, and the information - particularly the bearing, as opposed to the range - isn't very accurate.
A jet can fly a mile in six seconds, and the radar blips are far from precise to begin with. Furthermore, instructions and messages are transmitted to and from planes very largely by voice at the moment, leading to very time-consuming comms and high error rates.
All this means that large margins of safety must be maintained, sharply limiting the number of aircraft that can move through a given amount of airspace in a given time. With green/nimby pressure against new runways and airports intense - despite the fact that aircraft may well be greener than surface transportation overall - there's a pressing need to make air-traffic control more efficient and reliable.
That's the idea behind the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) "NextGen" plans, which would see the radars in large part replaced by modern location tech such as onboard satnav, and inefficient voice chitchat mostly superseded by digital networking. Precursor schemes such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), which is underway now, offer a picture updated every second and accuracies inside 50m. Better still, they can make pilots independent of ground control - which is by no means always available - by offering them a clear picture of all the aircraft in the sky around them.
As most Reg readers will be well aware, the cost of NextGen equipment could be insignificant in the context of aviation - any modern smartphone already contains hardware capable of the job.
So the potential's there to move many more aircraft through the sky, faster and more safely - and even to get much more use out of existing runways. Existing Instrument Landing Systems have now reached the point where they can bring a plane down automatically onto a runway in the thickest fog - but the rules mean that planes must still be spaced further apart in low visibility, so that fog still causes chaos at airports. New technologies, using satnav and other locating means, could not only more-or-less put a stop to weather problems, but potentially get more planes down safely in a given time and so obviate the need for more runways. Alternatively, perhaps, they could be used to cut down on night flights.
Next page: But what about the robots and flying cars?
COMMENTS
Ye cannae change the laws of aerodynamics
I thought the cast iron limiting factor on takeoff and landing intervals was aircraft-generated turbulence. The vortices generated by an airliner in flight can take over a minute to dissipate, and would make final approach a rather hairy experience for all concerned.
WTF !
How the hell do you get from "any modern smartphone already contains hardware capable of the job" to "As most Reg readers will be well aware, the cost of NextGen equipment could be insignificant in the context of aviation" ?
There is only one guarantee in aviation - whatever standards arrive, consumer electronics at consumer electronics prices will NOT be allowed. Just getting Mode-S for a light aircraft is non-trivial in cost terms - and just to top it off, the regulators (CAA in our case) then charge you for the privilege of being allowed to do it (this cost alone can be into four figures if it's not classed as a 'minor mod').
And while other parts of the world are busy installing modern systems to use the new capabilities - here in the UK, I understand there are no plans to provide any data whatsoever that might provide some justification for fitting the gear. The result is that in the US where Mode-S is not mandatory there are queues at avionics shops to get new kit installed (note - the US actually use the uplink capability to provide information such as weather), but over here where it's already mandatory for many aircraft we are busy trying to fight the imposition of costs which benefit only the commercial sector who then complain and try to claim that they are subsidising the small guys.
Transponders
Non transponder aircraft can fly eveywhere within the UK at present (apart from Stansted which is now a transponder mandatory zone) provided they have radio. Transponders are not mandatory in all of the other Control Zone space - but they do cut down the amount of info the pilot has to send to ATC (who do a fantastic job separating aircraft using cardboard). I fly in an area that is stuffed full of RAF so I am getting one at the thrilling cost of 1500 quid to help the boys in blue miss me

IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider