ATCTech
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2002
- Messages
- 1,857
Alcahuete, your statement about error reduction is exactly correct. There is a misunderstanding with casual readers/listeners that somehow CPDLC is going to be used to vector aircraft at 3 mile spacing in TRACON airspace during IMC conditions. This is simply not true. CPDLC removes substantial volumes of routine voice communication and less time-sensitive exchanges from both the flight crew and controller's workload. If a route change is required, or an altitude change, or a "direct" request is placed and granted there is no need for verbal communications. I've posted some of the current ATC uplink messages elsewhere online for readers to see. Frequency changes, handoffs to the next facility, route requests etc. are all done in a brief, accurate and timely manner without the need for voice transactions on otherwise busy frequencies. Our controllers were to some extent apprehensive at first, however pretty much all of them quickly adapted and came to appreciate the reduced radio workload almost immediately.
To those who say "simply add more frequencies", again you don't understand the complexities of ATC airspace. Adding frequencies means adding sectors which means adding controllers. Ultimately that ends up with flights being given frequency changes at an alarming, and quite frankly a confusing rate as they transition through sector boundaries. That's very inefficient operation of the airspace. CPDLC removes the voice traffic for those rapid handoffs. En route sector layouts are typically designed to accommodate the maximum logical flow of traffic in that area, east/west, or north south for example while working traffic within altitude or other restrictions. There's more to it than this, but it would be overload for this forum and a load of typing.
Frequencies are at a premium. Adding them adds all kinds of technical problems, intermodulation and interference opportunities and so forth. I know, I've worked on them in the existing 25kHz environment for decades. The geographic re-use of frequencies is always a very limited possibility because airborne traffic is subject to hearing multiple sources. Atmospheric conditions can and do magnify that on a regular basis.
My 2 cents worth, but I've worked in the ATC environment as we rolled out CPDLC and have seen the way ATC uses it to the best possible advantage. It is here, and it will grow in capability.
Cheers!
To those who say "simply add more frequencies", again you don't understand the complexities of ATC airspace. Adding frequencies means adding sectors which means adding controllers. Ultimately that ends up with flights being given frequency changes at an alarming, and quite frankly a confusing rate as they transition through sector boundaries. That's very inefficient operation of the airspace. CPDLC removes the voice traffic for those rapid handoffs. En route sector layouts are typically designed to accommodate the maximum logical flow of traffic in that area, east/west, or north south for example while working traffic within altitude or other restrictions. There's more to it than this, but it would be overload for this forum and a load of typing.
Frequencies are at a premium. Adding them adds all kinds of technical problems, intermodulation and interference opportunities and so forth. I know, I've worked on them in the existing 25kHz environment for decades. The geographic re-use of frequencies is always a very limited possibility because airborne traffic is subject to hearing multiple sources. Atmospheric conditions can and do magnify that on a regular basis.
My 2 cents worth, but I've worked in the ATC environment as we rolled out CPDLC and have seen the way ATC uses it to the best possible advantage. It is here, and it will grow in capability.
Cheers!
Last edited:
