Includes a little bit about infringements, and also how clumsy the process of entering a flight strip is.
Very nice video!
alioth wrote:
also how clumsy the process of entering a flight strip is.
Even if could be made less clumsy, it would still take noticeable time. I’m not at all surprised that ATC wants you to call in advance.
I wonder how it’s dealt with in the US? Certainly in Houston’s class B there was no expectation on calling ahead (I suspect what we’re lacking is simplified flight strips for VFR transits).
That’s precisely the Q I would first ask!! This system is so convoluted and so rigid. 13 pop-up boxes to fill in.
Obviously their system has been designed to work with pre-notified transits, which sidesteps answering that big question 
It’s like making a rod for your back and then complaining that you have a sore back Clearly the US does it differently, but how?
Interesting that the CAIT software uses the squawk – just as I posted elsewhere earlier. I suppose it’s obvious they had to do it that way. Wityh a Mode C target you have nothing else to go on.
They could pre-fill strips by doing voice to text on the callsign. Then use a database (a live link to G-INFO) to fill in the type. With Mode S you could do all this in one go, probably using the 24 bit ID. Debatable since the ID configured in the txp might not match the callsign.
Or, of course, have somebody sitting at a desk taking the details down and entering them… could be somebody “cheap” since they don’t need to be an ATCO; just an “ATC assistant” and they don’t even need a medical. That would mean a separate frequency for transiting traffic.
A great video, worth watching. Thanks for posting it.
Great video, that lifts the veil of UK radar ATC. A big thank you to the guy that talks in the video, he is very understanding to GA.
My first reaction is : what a mess this strip tool !!!!!! ATCOs have so much information to put in this system. Basically everything they say has to be put in the machine.
What is the point to put in writing a route, a altitude restriction, the QNH, the type of service all in this system for PA28 making the basic over-the-bay tour ? This will never help safety on any way right ?
Clearly, like in too many industries, they have fallen to motto of “everything shall be written and saved somewhere”. To me, this was done in ATC by the recording of radio coms. There is ZERO trust in anyone in this industry (again, depsite the radio recordings)
Edinburgh has about 15 million passengers per year, of course with one approach controller they will get extremely busy, especially with this system 
It is ranked between Nice airport and Luton in number of passengers. Why so little ATC service
I feel so sorry for UK ATCOs. Now I see why French ones are so reluctant to go to e-strips (in France, paper strips are pre filled by the computer for traffic with FPL, hand written for others, and used strips are stored). I am glad I didn’t become one
To be clear, my point is : this system takes too much time and mental workload from the controller, which should better used building his mental picture of the airspace. ATCOs are considered as workers of a system that have to be monitored, instead of airspace managers, responsible for the safety and efficency of air traffic.
At the end of the day, the ATCO keeps you safe, not the computer.
Jujupilote wrote:
What is the point to put in writing a route, a altitude restriction, the QNH, the type of service all in this system for PA28 making the basic over-the-bay tour ? This will never help safety on any way right ?
Several reasons. The ATCO can’t remember every detail, and even if (s)he could, if (s)he is relieved (which for busy TMC controllers can happen as often as every 20 minutes) the next ATCO must be able to know what clearances have been given. If the aircraft passes to another sector then the strip with all the information is transferred as well to the next controller. This is no different from paper strips.
Clearly, like in too many industries, they have fallen to motto of “everything shall be written and saved somewhere”. To me, this was done in ATC by the recording of radio coms.
Like flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders, ATC recordings are primarily to assist in incident investigations. That has nothing to do with trust.
There is ZERO trust in anyone in this industry (again, depsite the radio recordings)
You don’t really believe that, do you?
Nice video. I have been up in that tower and had the tour. Edinburgh ATC used to hold briefing visits for local GA clubs, groups, not sure if they still do. I used to operate from Kirknewton, which sits a couple of miles to the south east of the main approach and runway. Also a lot of the local clubs use the VFR route Kelty, Bridges, overhead, or down one of the VFR lanes so there is a busy GA VFR operation going on. The tours were for information and Q&A for all to ease the traffic flow. All very good stuff and in fairness very good and knowledgeable GA pilots who appreciate the goodwill of Edinburgh ATC. Glasgow are just as good though!!
In my view it is all about collaboration with informative, knowledgeable ATC and pilots. I do not have the stats but it would be interesting to view the airspace busts with this approach.Few years ago Edinburgh definately thought it very worthwhile with the increase in commercial movements.
Writing out the strip with the touch pen is a dreadful way to implement a man machine interface
Probably 10x slower than handwriting, too.
Peter wrote:
Writing out the strip with the touch pen is a dreadful way to implement a man machine interface
Given the amount of information they have to put in, I has to be dreadful (except a super AI that translates voice with no errors).
I found this video of how it works in JFK tower :
The journalist’s reaction at the end is interesting too.
I looked up the movements. JFK has a similar movement # to Heathrow – over 1M/year. So what are the ATC doing that’s different?
Edinburgh is ~ 130k/year.
Gosh even Shoreham reached 60k-80k!
a super AI that translates voice with no errors
It would not need to be perfect because one could always correct errors manually, which is a lot better than nothing. Only the callsign would need to be auto-detected. The rest is rubbish in many UK-PPL cases Then you do a database lookup on the rest.
But this isn’t the issue here. The issue is that no money was allocated to support GA transits.
