Air Traffic Control - scope for automation?

[Countdown]

Not sure if this should be in "Science", "Computers, Gadgets & Stuff", or "Video Games" . However.....

Why can't ATC be automated/computerised? Rather than having humans guiding airplanes around the sky why not have computers controlling it all and communicating directly with the airplane autopilots?

It just seems to be a task that's extremely suitable for automation.

[Simpo Two]

Until something goes wrong.

[Countdown]

Simpo Two said:

Until something goes wrong.

Could just as easily (or even more likely) happen under human control.

[anonymous-user]

Maybe we should see how it goes with London underground and driverless trains first

[Countdown]

Sorry I should have been more clear...

I didnt mean "remove the pilots", just the Air Traffic Control bit...so basically computers would do all the calculations about altitude, airspeed, direction and transmit these to pilots. Pilots would follow computer instructions rather than having highly=paid humans doing the calculations and communicating with the pilots.

[LHRFlightman]

My understandings is that ATC is very systemised. That bit can be automated but when the brown stuff bits the fan, a human brain far outperforms the computer programmer.

Personally, I'm happy those chaps are there.

[gp123]

Have you seen the news recently? How many hours of delays were there when the computers went tits up for a few hours? What would happen if there was bad weather and the aircraft couldnt land at the specified airfield? Who would actually benefit from this and who would think this is honestly a better answer to whats already in place. Why not just go the whole hog and lose the pilots too and let the computers do all the work........... What a crazy idea

[Countdown]

gp123 said:

Have you seen the news recently? How many hours of delays were there when the computers went tits up for a few hours? What would happen if there was bad weather and the aircraft couldnt land at the specified airfield? Who would actually benefit from this and who would think this is honestly a better answer to whats already in place. Why not just go the whole hog and lose the pilots too and let the computers do all the work........... What a crazy idea

It wasn't the computers, it was the telephone system AIUI. The AT controllers couldnt talk to each other. Given that our nuclear power stations have a significant amount of automation I can't see why ATC couldnt be done. Bad weather and diversions happen NOW - if humans can deal with them then why can't computers. Why do i think it might be better? Could it allow a more efficient use of spacing between aircraft and thereby allow a greater number of flights?

With regards to losing the pilots - I think it WILL happen eventually.

[LHRFlightman]

It was the computers that controlled the telephone system.

Face it, some things are best left to people to do.

[HOGEPH]

Hey, automation worked fine in Westworld...

[Simpo Two]

Countdown said:

Sorry I should have been more clear...

I didnt mean "remove the pilots", just the Air Traffic Control bit...so basically computers would do all the calculations about altitude, airspeed, direction and transmit these to pilots. Pilots would follow computer instructions rather than having highly=paid humans doing the calculations and communicating with the pilots.

Yes, I know what you meant. It will be great until something goes wrong and judgement is required. First example: pilot radios engine failure and asks for bearing to nearest airfield; computer says 'login details not recognised'. Terrific.

[gp123]

Countdown said:

It wasn't the computers, it was the telephone system AIUI. The AT controllers couldnt talk to each other. Given that our nuclear power stations have a significant amount of automation I can't see why ATC couldnt be done. Bad weather and diversions happen NOW - if humans can deal with them then why can't computers. Why do i think it might be better? Could it allow a more efficient use of spacing between aircraft and thereby allow a greater number of flights?

With regards to losing the pilots - I think it WILL happen eventually.

You're right. It was the telephones that went down. But what do you think runs the telephone system? Little old ladies in a telephone exchange. Atc is VERY automated at the moment and there are projects on the go the whole time to make the job safer. Note the word safer. A little more research on your behalf is required before making half thought statements about more economical use of spacing. Do you realise heathrow runs at approx 95% capacity and the horizontal distance required between aircraft is set to negate the effects of wake turbulence. Personally, I'd rather keep pilots and controllers in charge for the time being ta.

[montymoo]

One of the main reasons we have humans are at the sharp end is because we are far more creative than computers.
While computers can do the normal monitoring far more effectively than us,(the boring stuff) what happens when a new or a abnormal problem occurs...IE it all goes tits up?
Humans are much better at resolving new,unusual and complicated stuff, for that reason in the short to medium term, humans will be be involved at the thick end of aviation.

[Halmyre]

Countdown said:

Sorry I should have been more clear...

I didnt mean "remove the pilots", just the Air Traffic Control bit...so basically computers would do all the calculations about altitude, airspeed, direction and transmit these to pilots. Pilots would follow computer instructions rather than having highly=paid humans doing the calculations and communicating with the pilots.

I'm guessing that, by the time the government and the other NATS partners have spunked several million quid on a computer system from Crapita (other piss-poor system providers are available), the true value of these 'highly-paid humans' would be readily apparent.