tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/air-traffic-control-14044/articlesAir traffic control – The Conversation2024-01-30T13:34:46Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2207632024-01-30T13:34:46Z2024-01-30T13:34:46ZWhy AI can’t replace air traffic controllers<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/570714/original/file-20240122-29-jlh3sm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3498%2C2330&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Control towers at airports are only the most visible parts of the complex national air traffic control system.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/an-american-airlines-airbus-a319-airplane-takes-off-past-news-photo/1246152990">Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>After hours of routine operations, an air traffic controller gets a radio call from a small aircraft whose cockpit indicators can’t confirm that the plane’s landing gear is extended for landing. The controller arranges for the pilot to fly low by the tower so the controller can visually check the plane’s landing gear. All appears well. “It looks like your gear is down,” the controller tells the pilot.</p>
<p>The controller calls for the airport fire trucks to be ready just in case, and the aircraft circles back to land safely. Scenarios like this play out regularly. In the air traffic control system, everything must meet the highest levels of safety, but not everything goes according to plan.</p>
<p>Contrast this with the still science-fiction vision of future artificial intelligence “pilots” flying autonomous aircraft, complete with an autonomous air traffic control system handling aircraft as easily as routers shuttling data packets on the internet. </p>
<p>I’m an <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=Oqm-cy4AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">aerospace engineer</a> who led a National Academies study ordered by Congress <a href="https://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/170870.aspx">about air traffic controller staffing</a>. Researchers are continually working on new technologies that automate elements of the air traffic control system, but technology can execute only those functions that are planned for during its design and so can’t modify standard procedures. As the scenario above illustrates, humans are likely to remain a necessary central component of air traffic control for a long time to come.</p>
<h2>What air traffic controllers do</h2>
<p>The Federal Aviation Administration’s fundamental guidance for the <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/">responsibility of air traffic controllers</a> states: “The primary purpose of the air traffic control system is to prevent a collision involving aircraft.” Air traffic controllers are also charged with providing “a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic” and other services supporting safety, such as helping pilots avoid mountains and other hazardous terrain and hazardous weather, to the extent they can. </p>
<p>Air traffic controllers’ jobs vary. Tower controllers provide the local control that clears aircraft to take off and land, making sure that they are spaced safely apart. They also provide ground control, directing aircraft to taxi and notifying pilots of flight plans and potential safety concerns on that day before flight. Tower controllers are aided by some displays but mostly look outside from the towers and talk with pilots via radio. At larger airports staffed by FAA controllers, <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/adsb/atc/assc">surface surveillance displays</a> show controllers the aircraft and other vehicles on the ground on the airfield.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ho4r3N559M4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This FAA animation explains the three basic components of the U.S. air traffic control system.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Approach and en route controllers, on the other hand, sit in front of large displays in dark and quiet rooms. They communicate with pilots via radio. Their displays show aircraft locations on a map view with key features of the airspace boundaries and routes. </p>
<p>The 21 en route control centers in the U.S. manage traffic that is between and above airports and thus typically flying at higher speeds and altitudes. </p>
<p>Controllers at approach control facilities transition departing aircraft from local control after takeoff up and into en route airspace. They similarly take arriving aircraft from en route airspace, line them up with the landing approach and hand them off to tower controllers. </p>
<p>A controller at each display manages all the traffic within a sector. Sectors can vary in size from a few cubic miles, focused on sequencing aircraft landing at a busy airport, to en route sectors spanning more than 30,000 cubic miles (125,045 cubic km) where and when there are few aircraft flying. If a sector gets busy, a second and even third controller might assist, or the sector might be split into two, with another display and controller team managing the second. </p>
<h2>How technology can help</h2>
<p>Air traffic controllers have a stressful job and are subject to fatigue and information overload. Public concern about a growing number of close calls have put a spotlight on <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/us/politics/air-traffic-safety-faa.html">aging technology</a> and staffing shortages that have led to air traffic controllers <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/11/09/1211838624/air-traffic-controllers-shortage-close-calls-senate-safety-near-miss-senate">working mandatory overtime</a>. New technologies can help alleviate those issues.</p>
<p>The air traffic control system is incorporating new technologies in several ways. The FAA’s <a href="https://www.faa.gov/nextgen">NextGen air transportation system</a> initiative is providing controllers with more – and more accurate – information. </p>
<p>Controllers’ displays originally showed only radar tracking. They now can tap into all the data known about each flight within the <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/eram">en route automation modernization system</a>. This system integrates radar, automatic position reports from aircraft via <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/adsb">automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast</a>, weather reports, flight plans and flight histories. </p>
<p>Systems help alert controllers to potential conflicts between aircraft, or aircraft that are too close to high ground or structures, and provide suggestions to controllers to sequence aircraft into smooth traffic flows. In testimony to the U.S. Senate on Nov. 9, 2023, about airport safety, FAA Chief Operating Officer Timothy Arel said that the administration is <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/addressing-close-calls-improve-aviation-safety">developing or improving several air traffic control systems</a>.</p>
<p>Researchers are using machine learning to analyze and predict aspects of air traffic and air traffic control, including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2020.2981959">air traffic flow between cities</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1659103">air traffic controller behavior</a>.</p>
<h2>How technology can complicate matters</h2>
<p>New technology can also cause profound changes to air traffic control in the form of new types of aircraft. For example, current regulations mostly <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-107">limit uncrewed aircraft</a> to fly lower than 400 feet (122 meters) above ground and away from airports. These are drones used by first responders, news organizations, surveyors, delivery services and hobbyists.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/B8otqU4KbNA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">NASA and the FAA are leading the development of a traffic control system for drones and other uncrewed aircraft.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, some emerging uncrewed aircraft companies are proposing to fly in controlled airspace. Some plan to have their aircraft fly regular flight routes and interact normally with air traffic controllers via voice radio. These include <a href="https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20231206413888/en/Reliable-Robotics-Flies-Large-Cargo-Aircraft-with-No-One-On-Board">Reliable Robotics</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/self-flying-cessna-completes-fully-automated-flight-xwing-2021-4">Xwing</a>, which are separately working to automate the Cessna Caravan, a small cargo airplane.</p>
<p>Others are targeting new business models, such as <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air-taxis">advanced air mobility</a>, the concept of small, highly automated electric aircraft – electric air taxis, for example. These would require dramatically different routes and procedures for handling air traffic.</p>
<h2>Expect the unexpected</h2>
<p>An air traffic controller’s routine can be disrupted by an aircraft that requires special handling. This could range from an emergency to priority handling of medical flights or Air Force One. Controllers are given the responsibility and the flexibility to adapt how they manage their airspace.</p>
<p>The requirements for the front line of air traffic control are a poor match for AI’s capabilities. People expect air traffic to continue to be the safest complex, high-technology system ever. It achieves this standard by adhering to procedures when practical, which is something AI can do, and by adapting and exercising good judgment whenever something unplanned occurs or a new operation is implemented – a <a href="https://theconversation.com/embrace-the-unexpected-to-teach-ai-how-to-handle-new-situations-change-the-rules-of-the-game-157560">notable weakness of today’s AI</a>.</p>
<p>Indeed, it is when conditions are the worst – when controllers figure out how to handle aircraft with severe problems, airport crises or widespread airspace closures due to security concerns or infrastructure failures – that controllers’ contributions to safety are the greatest. </p>
<p>Also, controllers don’t fly the aircraft. They communicate and interact with others to guide the aircraft, and so their responsibility is fundamentally to serve as part of a team – another <a href="https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/STO%20Meeting%20Proceedings/STO-MP-HFM-300/MP-HFM-300-20.pdf">notable weakness of AI</a>.</p>
<p>As an engineer and designer, I’m most excited about the potential for AI to analyze the big data records of past air traffic operations in pursuit of, for example, more efficient routes of flight. However, as a pilot, I’m glad to hear a controller’s calm voice on the radio helping me land quickly and safely should I have a problem.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220763/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amy Pritchett receives funding from the National Science Foundation through the Center for Advanced Aerial Mobility and Sensors (CAAMS) on the topic of in-flight autonomy capable of resolving faults and failures in on-board systems, and is finishing up a project sponsored by NASA examining human-autonomy teaming in advanced aerial mobility. </span></em></p>An air traffic safety expert explains why humans will remain central to managing the nation’s airports and airspace even as AI promises to improve air traffic control.Amy Pritchett, Professor of Aerospace Engineering, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2127422023-09-06T19:05:39Z2023-09-06T19:05:39ZAir traffic control chaos: how human error can lead a tiny glitch to spiral out of control<p>Several thousand passengers were stranded at airports, hotels and connection depots following the recent <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66644369">system-wide glitch of the UK air traffic control systems</a>. Some passengers were told of flight cancellations in advance, so they could make alternative travel plans. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, following some 2,000 flight cancellations over 48 hours, most passengers were either <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2023-08-29/a-nightmare-passengers-left-sleeping-on-airport-floor-as-flights-cancelled">sleeping on airport floors</a> or sitting on planes which were unable to take off. So what was the glitch and how did it create so much chaos?</p>
<p>The problems appear to have been caused by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/30/uk-air-traffic-control-failure-what-caused-it-and-who-will-have-to-pay">unusual data in a flight plan</a> submitted into the National Air Traffic Services (Nats) system by a French airline. This data couldn’t be processed because it wasn’t recognised by computers.</p>
<p>But it’s also worth considering whether there were organisational issues. It will be important to know how much senior staff knew about the systems they were in charge of and how proactive they were in addressing the problem.</p>
<p>From the managerial perspective, Nats can be divided into four different units. These are: local, regional, central and top (where the higher level of decision-making occurs). </p>
<p>In principle, controllers should be able to rectify the data error. In practice, a common approach is to mark and hold it temporarily – something called “error parking”. This can mitigate the problem as long as everything else continues to work properly. But this can also cause the error to “grow”, affecting other parts of the system.</p>
<p>This week, Nats released its a <a href="https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/NERL%20Major%20Incident%20Investigation%20Preliminary%20Report.pdf">preliminary report</a> into the incident. Its chief executive Martin Rolfe said the error was “a one in 15 million” event. In a response, transport secretary Mark Harper said he wanted to “echo NATS’s apology to those who were caught up”.</p>
<p>However, the incident will also be subject to <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/uk-air-traffic-system-overhauled-ministers-inquiry-flights-chaos-2580435">investigation by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)</a>. There are some obvious questions to ask. </p>
<p>These focus on the roles played by managers in the identification of glitches and their repair, the quality of training offered to unit controllers, guidelines for standardised operating procedures – documenting day-to-day processes to make them repeatable – and support for resolving glitches.</p>
<p>In December 2013, an air traffic control system failure led authorities to recommend changes to Nats’ “crisis management capabilities” and for it to consider the different ways crises can be handled. A year later, another incident occurred, caused by a fault in software written in the Ada programming language that was developed in the 1980s. </p>
<p>The resulting <a href="https://www.caa.co.uk/media/r42hircd/nats-system-failure-12-12-14-independent-enquiry-final-report-2-0-1.pdf">enquiry report</a> said that “it is evident that neither of these recommendations had been addressed fully”. It made further recommendations to strengthen systems and contingency steps to help ensure they were “sensitive to their impact on the wider aviation system”.</p>
<p>For the most recent incident, the picture remains unclear. But, in my experience as a researcher of management, managers further up the chain can often pay more attention to immediate threats. They may therefore underestimate the impact of accumulated errors, or may not have enough time to monitor them.</p>
<h2>Bigger picture</h2>
<p>There has been stinging criticism of the chaos from figures within the industry, including the director general of the International Air Transport Association, <a href="https://www.cityam.com/former-british-airways-boss-criticises-staggering-air-traffic-control-failure/#:%7E:text=Former%20British%20Airways%20boss%20criticises%20'staggering'%20air%20traffic%20control%20failure,-Guy%20Taylor&text=It%20is%20%E2%80%9Cstaggering%E2%80%9D%20that%20the,from%20Britain's%20air%20traffic%20operator.">Willie Walsh</a>, Ryanair boss <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/ryanair-michael-o-leary-air-traffic-control-b2401251.html">Michael O'Leary</a> and <a href="https://www.cityam.com/easyjet-boss-questions-whether-nats-is-fit-for-purpose-after-air-traffic-control-failure/">Johan Lundgren</a>, chief executive of Easyjet.</p>
<p>“This system should be designed to reject data that’s incorrect, not to collapse,” Walsh explained. Lundgren said a review of the situation should determine whether NATs is “really fit for purpose, not only on the systems but on the technology, on the staffing levels”. O'Leary said the preliminary report into the chaos was <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66723586">“full of excuses”</a>.</p>
<p>With that in mind, it’s reasonable to ask questions of managers in charge of the systems and procedures, including whether everything possible was done to avoid the disruption seen during the bank holiday.</p>
<p>Another point to bear in mind: many senior managers – particularly at chief executive and managing director level – are not necessarily technicians. This means that they may not be fully aware of glitches or their potential impacts if the problems have not previously been reported.</p>
<p>Sometimes, front-line workers may have <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-6486.00387">reasons not to report problems</a>. For example, they might not be significant enough. Or, employees might feel that raising their heads above the parapet could limit their career opportunities. Unfortunately, as long as the glitch is not salient and the machine still works, people usually ignore it.</p>
<p>What’s currently unclear is the precise role management culture, decision making or an inability by senior staff to understand parts of the system might have played in this – if at all. That will be for the CAA investigation to disentangle. </p>
<h2>Next steps</h2>
<p>Problems affecting air traffic control have the potential to spark a crisis of consumer confidence which must be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are a couple of things that should already be happening. </p>
<p>Nats has now apologised to the affected passengers. But managers and authorities should also offer replacement flights, coupons or other objects of comparable value as compensation. A phone line or website should be set up to ease the situation.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Air traffic control tower" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/546183/original/file-20230904-23-14zua9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/diverse-air-traffic-control-team-working-1978893014">Gorodenkoff / Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Managers have been <a href="https://www.nats.aero/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/NATS-Limited-2022.pdf">improving communication</a> between technicians and non-technicians and should be praised for this change in attitudes. The more two sides talk to each other, the lower the chances of something like this happening again.</p>
<p>However, the damage to the aviation industry from this episode has been severe. The risk for the industry is that passengers affected by the problems may look to alternative forms of transport in the future. In addition, aviation insurers may significantly raise the insurance premium, ultimately affecting the cost of flying for consumers.</p>
<p>The CAA has a very serious job to do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212742/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kirk Chang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The chaos caused over the August bank holiday may well have been preventable.Kirk Chang, Professor of Management and Technology, University of East LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2122982023-08-29T16:23:03Z2023-08-29T16:23:03ZHow to get help or your money back after travel disruptions – experts explain<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/545240/original/file-20230829-17-emlk1i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=70%2C94%2C7771%2C5094&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/tired-delay-couple-airport-flight-waiting-2262798347">PeopleImages.com - Yuri A/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The summer of 2023 started well for airlines, after a tumultuous few years following COVID lockdowns in most countries. <a href="https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2023-releases/2023-08-08-01/">Passenger numbers were up</a> 30% in the northern hemisphere in June 2023, versus the previous year. But air travel in July and August has been disrupted once again, not only by air traffic control strikes, but also by devastating wildfires in typical tourist hot spots such as Greece, Maui, Tenerife and Canada. </p>
<p>The latest problem – <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-66637817">a UK air traffic control fault</a> – has left thousands of passengers stranded after <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-66644343#:%7E:text=More%20than%20a%20quarter%20of%20UK%20flights%20cancelled%20yesterday">more than one-quarter</a> of UK flights were cancelled on one of the busiest travel days of the year. It will take <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/03c0e257-ae88-41a0-b571-ae91f1eabe8c?xnpe_tifc=bILN4F_lxdYjbIHlxDz7x9pJVdUZMds_O.4LhF_JOFzdtIPuxknA4FYl4CJLhIz7tIY8bdoZOfbpxfoDh9XX4DHXxIBs4dQshuUu4.nJ&utm_source=exponea&utm_campaign=B2B%20%7C%20Email%20%7C%20InLife%20%7C%20Weekly%20Send&utm_medium=email">days to resolve</a>, according to the UK transport secretary, Mark Harper. </p>
<p>Air travellers caught up in these events are legally entitled to care and assistance from airlines <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/278/made">under UK law post-Brexit</a>. But our research shows that people are often unsure or completely unaware of their rights when travel is disrupted. </p>
<p>While consumers need more information about their rights in this situation, a group including consumer affairs organisation <a href="https://twitter.com/WhichUK">Which?</a> and online travel agents have also <a href="https://media.product.which.co.uk/prod/files/file/gm-aebcaa6b-8cc6-4d45-8c8e-bd8258c46aed-joint-letter-to-the-prime-minister.pdf">called on the UK prime minister</a> to give the airline regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority, more power to punish airlines that don’t help consumers affected by disruption.</p>
<p>At present the regulator is unable to directly and independently fine an airline, it must bring a court action. The CAA also has weak enforcement powers compared with airline regulators in <a href="https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/no-uk-airline-has-been-fined-for-breaking-consumer-law-in-20-years-a6LHU4Z4oKLo">other countries</a>. Which? wants the CAA to be able to directly fine airlines for failing to either provide clear and timely information about passenger rights and what to do when air travel is disrupted, or assistance with rerouting if a flight is cancelled, or a prompt refund.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1694001478816657459"}"></div></p>
<h2>Uncertainty about legal rights of air passengers</h2>
<p>Compliance by airlines with consumer protection laws has been <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1023263X20904235">problematic for some time</a>. But the mass cancellation of flights during the <a href="https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR21_15/SR_passenger-rights_covid_EN.pdf">COVID pandemic</a> and the failure of many airlines to refund some passengers really brought the problem to the wider public’s attention. </p>
<p>We have <a href="https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/2554613-flight-cancellations,-consumer-rights-and-the-covid-19-pandemic">researched passenger experiences</a> of flight cancellations during the pandemic, as well as the level of awareness among air passengers of both their legal rights and routes to redress. Media coverage by the likes of ITV’s personal finance expert <a href="https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/">Martin Lewis</a> and online information from consumer bodies such as <a href="https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/travel/flights">Which?</a> certainly boosted awareness during COVID. </p>
<p>But our research suggests that many travellers are still not sure what action to take if their rights are not respected by an airline. People are also unaware of all the options open to them when seeking redress.</p>
<p>These problems are even more acute for passengers who have booked through an online travel agent rather than directly with the airline. Several of the participants we spoke to during focus groups said they trusted the airlines to look after them or relied on travel insurance. But travel insurance does not always cover the specific situation faced and some airlines have failed to live up to the trust consumers place in them.</p>
<h2>How to get redress for travel disruption</h2>
<p>If your flight has been cancelled by an airline or you need to seek redress for other reasons, you should contact your airline directly in the first instance. If you don’t get a response, or are unsatisfied with the response, there are other options. </p>
<p>For example, “alternative dispute resolution” bodies can help mediate with airlines, but our study showed passengers were unaware of the two ADR bodies in the UK, the <a href="https://www.cedr.com/consumer/aviation/">Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR)</a> and <a href="https://www.aviationadr.org.uk/">AviationADR</a>. </p>
<p>Further, not all airlines are members of the schemes and ADR decisions are not binding. And while the CEDR has reports <a href="https://www.cedr.com/consumer/aviation/">high levels of demand</a> on its homepage, Which? has called for a <a href="https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/more-airline-passenger-misery-as-court-cases-could-take-years-a0Cbv3r4ziOt">mandatory aviation ombudsman</a> to be established to help mend “the broken complaints system”. </p>
<p>Alternatively, you could bring a court action against an airline, although this can be tricky if the airline is based abroad. Our study also showed passengers are often short of time and do not always have the confidence to pursue an action before the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money">small claims court</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Airport flight information board with " src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/545241/original/file-20230829-27-yus9mt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The latest major travel disruption in the UK was down to an air traffic control glitch.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/close-international-airport-board-panel-all-91041512">Nuno Andre/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Cost can be another determining factor for action. Passengers are more likely to make a claim where the cost of a family holiday runs into thousands of pounds, according to our research. In the past decade, specialist claims firms have started to offer to make claims on behalf of passengers. These firms often have useful websites that can instantly assess whether a claim is worth pursuing. Of course, there will also be a cost to use these firms.</p>
<p>Although court action can be seen as a last resort, in March this year Which? found <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/airlines-refund-compensation-check-claims-court-b1068066.html">£4.5 million is owed</a> to passengers from outstanding County Court Judgments (CCJs) and attempts by passengers to obtain money owed by airlines <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-64999557">using bailiffs</a>.</p>
<p>However, our study showed that one of the most successful ways to secure a refund was under <a href="https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/section-75-of-the-consumer-credit-act-aZCUb9i8Kwfa">Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act</a>. This allows you to make a claim to the bank or provider of the credit card you used to pay for your flights.</p>
<h2>What about the airline regulator?</h2>
<p>The routes available for consumers to seek redress for travel disruption will continue to be ineffective if they rely on resolving disputes with the airlines on an individual level. This pits the weaker consumer against the powerful interests and deeper pockets of the airlines. </p>
<p>This is why enhanced powers for the UK’s CAA are vital. The Department for Transport <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-takes-action-to-strengthen-airline-passenger-rights">proposed reforms</a> in January 2022, but the UK government has yet to act.</p>
<p>After a summer of travel disruption that has caused delays and cancellations for thousands of people, a regulator with more teeth will help air passengers caught up in such crises.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212298/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sara Drake has received funding from the European Parliament for research on EU air passenger rights and funding from the UK's Economic and Social Research Council's Festival of Social Science funding to disseminate research findings on air passenger rights in the UK.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carmela Bosangit receives funding from UK's Economic and Social Research Council's Festival of Social Science funding to disseminate research findings on air passenger rights in the UK. </span></em></p>Passengers are often aware that they have legal rights around travel disruption but are not confident about what exactly these rights are.Sara Drake, Reader in Law, Cardiff UniversityCarmela Bosangit, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1299482020-01-23T14:53:39Z2020-01-23T14:53:39ZDrones: forget flying taxis, here’s how to win public support and make them benefit cities<p>It’s easy to assume, perhaps thanks to all the <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9818573/heathrow-airport-drone-ground-flight-latest/">lurid tabloid headlines</a>, that people don’t like drones. At best, they’re a nuisance – the buzzing playthings of inconsiderate hobbyists or photographers taking pictures from above. At worst, they’re a tool for idiots to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/18/gatwick-drone-disruption-cost-airport-just-14m">close airports</a>, ruin holidays and cost the country millions. </p>
<p>But the <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/">research</a> Nesta Challenges has carried out over the past two years reveals a far more nuanced picture. </p>
<p>The public, and public services, are actually quite open to drones being used more widely – including in cities, potentially the most challenging and controversial environment for them. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/gatwick-drone-drama-shows-how-even-unarmed-uavs-can-cause-economic-chaos-and-risk-to-life-109187">Gatwick drone drama shows how even unarmed UAVs can cause economic chaos and risk to life</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But if this is to ever happen, there are challenges along the path to public acceptance. And these are not just the obvious ones around making sure operations are safe and reliable: <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/blog/public-perception-of-drones/">people also care about what drones do, who is operating them – and where</a>.</p>
<p>That’s a big departure from how traditional aviation is perceived. Nobody really cares what’s in any given plane or what altitude it’s at, what route it’s on or what airline it’s owned by – as long as it’s far enough overhead. And that’s reflected in the laws and regulations that govern existing air traffic. Providing the pilots and equipment are certified, and they’re operating safely, there are no serious restrictions on who and what gets access to the sky.</p>
<h2>Buzz needs</h2>
<p>But it turns out that an unpiloted aircraft flying just 40 feet from our heads is quite different from an airliner 40,000 feet above. And the difference in altitude isn’t just a number. Low altitude airspace means interacting with people and things on the ground, in a way that flying above the clouds doesn’t.</p>
<p>So one thing is clear: simply replicating the rules and regulations around civil aviation won’t work. The future of drone traffic will be different to present day air traffic.</p>
<p>In the research we carried out as part of the Flying High project, we aimed to think about this future. We wanted to better understand <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/what-drones-can-do-in-ukcities/#content">how people thought drones might be used in our cities</a>, to investigate how <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/five-use-cases-drones-uk-cities/#content">feasible</a> some of the more far-fetched services people are proposing are, and to <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/exploring-urban-drone-integration/#content">paint a picture</a> of what the urban drone system of the future would look like.</p>
<p>We worked with local councils, academics and businesses in five English cities, chosen in part to reflect the diversity of economics, politics and scale of the places most of us live: <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/shaping-drone-use-bradford/#content">Bradford</a>, <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/shaping-drone-use-london/#content">London</a>, <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/shaping-drone-use-preston/#content">Preston</a>, <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/shaping-drone-use-southampton/#content">Southampton</a> and the <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/shaping-drone-use-west-midlands/#content">West Midlands</a> Combined Authority. </p>
<p>Interestingly, while there were some minor local variations in how people thought drones could be used (and some rather larger variations in how much or how deeply they had thought about these possible futures), there were several consistent principles. Generally, there was interest in the public sector uses of drones (for police, fire, transport infrastructure, medical transport), support for uses that promote social and economic equity, and some degree of support for cities having a say over, or even control of, drone traffic within their borders.</p>
<p>But this support from cities, like support from the public, is tentative and conditional. Some of the wilder commercial applications of drones we have heard – from flying taxis to pizza delivery – found little favour. </p>
<p>We believe that a continued push for potentially disruptive uses like these, that bring little or no public benefit, risks turning the public against drones. We could make the same mistakes that were made with genetically modified crops in the 1990s or nuclear power in the 1960s and 70s. In these cases, legitimate concerns about how the technologies were used were ignored – and public opposition hardened, even against applications with a clear and positive story to tell.</p>
<h2>The positive case</h2>
<p>In our research, we were keen to find out more about some of the positive uses that could bring public benefit. These are the kinds of uses that, given the current state of public and civic opinion, are most likely to be received with an open mind.</p>
<p>We developed five <a href="https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/flying-high-challenge-future-of-drone-technology-in-uk-cities/five-use-cases-drones-uk-cities/#content">near-future scenarios</a>, around long- and short-haul medical transport, fire and traffic incident response, and infrastructure development, and engaged with industry experts and potential users of the technology to gauge how technically and economically feasible they would be. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/iran-attack-how-reaper-drones-really-carry-out-airstrikes-129411">Iran attack: how Reaper drones really carry out airstrikes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We found that, aside from some remaining barriers to long-distance flight (flying further than the pilot can see), precision flight and automation, existing drone technology is largely capable of providing these services.</p>
<p>However, regulation remains a barrier. And a large part of the issue is building up a track record of safe operation that could convince the Civil Aviation Authority to permit operations like these over built-up areas. </p>
<p>Business cases – in particular, defining services in a way and at a scale which is both viable for operators and useful for customers – also still need some work, particularly for medical transportation. In short, there has so far been too much focus on technology development and not enough on developing credible services for that technology.</p>
<p>Even if the economics of these uses are hard to project with any certainty, there is growing evidence of the macroeconomic benefits that drones could bring to the UK. In December, with PWC, we <a href="https://challenges.org/impact/reports/report-how-drones-can-save-the-public-sector-1bn/">jointly published economic analysis</a> of the value to the UK economy of urban public service drone use – projecting net savings to the UK taxpayer of over £1 billion, and economic activity generated to the tune of almost £7 billion over the next 15 years.</p>
<p>But the only way to figure this all out for real – and to find out once and for all whether the public will accept this kind of service – is to actually try it out. </p>
<p>We think that some of the public money allocated to the Future Flight stream of the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund needs to be spent on quickly getting live demonstrations going of public benefit drone services and testing out what the public think. </p>
<p>Spending time and money on boondoggles such as flying taxis or online deliveries for the rich, or focusing exclusively on technology development without buy-in from the public or a credible business or service model, doesn’t just risk wasting money, it puts at risk the real benefits that we have found drones could bring to our public services.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/129948/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nesta's Flying High project received funding from Innovate UK</span></em></p>Drones are coming to our cities – but what do people really think about them, and how can they have a sustainable future? New research provides some answers.Olivier Usher, Lead, Research and Impact, NestaHolly Jamieson, Head of Future Cities, NestaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/681992016-11-23T10:58:34Z2016-11-23T10:58:34ZHow much should air traffic controllers trust new flight management systems?<p>With airfares at their lowest point in seven years and airlines adding capacity, this year’s Thanksgiving air travel is slated to be <a href="http://airlines.org/news/a4a-projects-thanksgiving-air-travel-to-rise-2-5-percent-to-27-3-million-passengers-in-2016/">2.5 percent busier</a> than last year. Between Nov. 18 and 29, 27.3 million Americans are expected to take to the skies. </p>
<p>The system we use to coordinate all those flights carrying all those Thanksgiving travelers through the air is decades old, and mostly depends on <a href="http://www.onetonline.org/link/details/53-2021.00">highly trained air traffic controllers</a>, who keep track of where all the planes are, where they’re heading, how fast they’re going and at what altitude. </p>
<p>As the national airspace gets more crowded, and as technology improves, the Federal Aviation Administration has begun <a href="https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/">upgrading the air traffic control systems</a>. The new system is called <a href="https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/">NextGen</a>, and some of its capabilities are already being rolled out across the country. It is intended to make air traffic faster, more efficient, more cost-effective and even, through fuel savings, less damaging to the environment. It will also help air traffic controllers and pilots alike handle potential hazards, whether they involve weather, other aircraft or equipment problems.</p>
<p>But we the traveling public will be able to realize all these benefits only if the air traffic controllers of the future make the most of the technology. As a human factors researcher, seeking to understand how people interact within complex systems, I have found that there are challenges for controllers <a href="http://gradworks.umi.com/15/97/1597782.html">learning to properly trust</a> the computer systems keeping America in the air.</p>
<h2>Use as directed</h2>
<p>The NextGen system is designed for humans and computers to work in tandem. For example, one element involves air traffic controllers and pilots <a href="https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/priorities/?area=dcom">exchanging digital text messages</a> between the <a href="https://www.volpe.dot.gov/safety-management-and-human-factors/aviation-human-factors/changing-way-pilots-and-controllers">tower and airplane computer systems</a>, as opposed to talking over the radio. This arrangement has several benefits, including eliminating the possibility someone might mishear a garbled radio transmission.</p>
<p>Human controllers will still give routing instructions to human pilots, but computers monitoring the airspace can keep an eye on where planes are, and automatically compare that to where they are supposed to be, as well as how close they get to each other. The <a href="https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/eram/">automated conflict detection tools</a> can alert controllers to possible trouble and offer safer alternatives.</p>
<p>In addition, air crews will be able to <a href="https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=19375">follow routing instructions</a> more quickly, accepting the digital command from the ground directly into the plane’s navigation system. This, too, requires human trust in automated systems. That is not as simple as it might sound.</p>
<h2>Trust in automation</h2>
<p>When the people who operate automated tools aren’t properly informed about their equipment – including what exactly it can and cannot do – problems arise. When humans expect computerized systems to be more reliable than they are, tragedy can result. For example, the owner killed in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/business/tesla-autopilot-fatal-crash-investigation.html">fatal Tesla crash while in autopilot mode</a> may have become overreliant on the technology or used it in a way beyond how it was intended. Making sure human expectations match technical abilities is called “<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392">calibration</a>.”</p>
<p>When the people and the machinery are properly calibrated to each other, trust can develop. That’s what happened over the course of a 16-week course training air traffic controller students on a <a href="https://hsi.arc.nasa.gov/groups/aol/technologies/macs.php">desktop air traffic control simulator</a>.</p>
<p>Researchers typically <a href="https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/training/fits/Research/media/SA_and_Trust.pdf">measure trust in automated systems</a> by asking questions about the operator’s evaluations of the system’s integrity, the operator’s confidence in using the system and how dependable the operator thinks the system is. There are several types of questionnaires that ask these sorts of questions; one of them, a trust scale <a href="https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/training/fits/Research/media/SA_and_Trust.pdf">aimed at the air traffic management system as a whole</a>, was particularly sensitive to discerning changing trust in the student group I studied.</p>
<p>I asked the air traffic controller students about their trust in the automated tools such as those provided by NextGen on the first day, at the midterm exam in week nine of their course, and at the final exam at the end of the training. Overall, the students’ trust in the system increased, though some trusted it more than others. </p>
<h2>Too much trust, or too little?</h2>
<p>There is such a thing as trusting technology too much. In this study, some students, who trusted the system more, were actually less aware than their less trusting classmates of what was going on in the airspace during simulated scenarios at the final exam with lots of air traffic. One possible explanation could be that those with more trust in the system became complacent and did not bother expending the effort to keep their own independent view (or “maintain the picture,” as air traffic controllers say).</p>
<p>These more trusting students might have been more vulnerable to errors if the automation required them to manually intervene. <a href="http://gradworks.umi.com/15/97/1597782.html">Correlation analyses</a> suggested that students with more trust were less likely to engage in what might be called “nontrusting” behaviors, like overriding the automation. For example, they were less likely to step in and move aircraft that the automated conflict detection tools determined were far enough apart, even if they personally thought the planes were too close together. That showed they were relying on the automation appropriately.</p>
<p>These trust disparities and their effects became clear only at the final exam. This suggests that as they became familiar with the technology, students’ trust in the systems and their actions when using it changed. </p>
<p>Previous research has shown that providing <a href="http://gradworks.umi.com/15/24/1524202.html">specific training in trusting the automation</a> may reduce students’ likelihood of engaging in nontrusting behaviors. Training should aim to make trainees more aware of their potential to overly trust the system, to ensure they remain aware of critical information. Only when the users properly trust the system – neither too much nor too little – will the public benefits of NextGen truly be available to us all.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68199/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This study was supported by NASA cooperative agreement NNX09AU66A, Group 5 University Research Center: Center for Human Factors in Advanced Aeronautics Technologies (Brenda Collins, Technical Monitor).</span></em></p>The FAA’s NextGen system should bring safety and efficiency to American air travel, but its users need to understand it clearly.Tannaz Mirchi, Human Factors Engineer, Lecturer in Psychology, California State University, Long BeachLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/665612016-10-10T00:34:50Z2016-10-10T00:34:50ZClear skies ahead: how improving the language of aviation could save lives<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140825/original/image-20161007-32734-1fibiwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Aviation English still has too much potential for misunderstandings between pilots and air traffic controllers.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>The most dangerous part of flying is driving to the airport. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>That’s a standard joke among pilots, who know even better than the flying public that aviation is the safest mode of transportation.</p>
<p>But there are still those headlines and TV shows about airline crashes, and those statistics people like to repeat, <a href="https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=609703">such as</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Between 1976 and 2000, more than 1,100 passengers and crew lost their lives in accidents in which investigators determined that language had played a contributory role.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>True enough, 80% of all air incidents and accidents occur because of human error. Miscommunication combined with other human factors such as fatigue, cognitive workload, noise, or forgetfulness have played a role in some of the deadliest accidents.</p>
<p>The most well-known, and widely discussed, is the collision on the ground of two Boeing 747 aircraft in 1977 in Tenerife, which resulted in 583 fatalities. The incident was due in part to difficult communications between the pilot, whose native language was Dutch, and the Spanish air traffic controller.</p>
<p>In such a high-stakes environment as commercial aviation, where the lives of hundreds of passengers and innocent people on the ground are involved, communication is critical to safety.</p>
<p>So, it was decided that Aviation English would be the international language of aviation and that all aviation professionals – pilots and air traffic controllers (ATC) – would need to be proficient in it. It is a language designed to minimise ambiguities and misunderstandings, highly structured and codified.</p>
<p>Pilots and ATC expect to hear certain bits of information in certain ways and in a given order. The “phraseology”, with its particular pronunciation (for example, “fife” and “niner” instead of “five” and “nine”, so they’re not confused with each other), specific words (“Cleared to land”), international alphabet (“Mike Hotel Foxtrot”) and strict conversation rules (you must repeat, or “read back”, an instruction), needs to be learned and practised. </p>
<p>In spite of globalisation and the spread of English, most people around the world are not native English speakers, and an increasing number of aviation professionals do not speak English as their first language. </p>
<p>Native speakers have an advantage when they learn Aviation English, since they already speak English at home and in their daily lives. But they encounter many pilots or ATC who learned English as a second or even third language. </p>
<p>Whose responsibility is it to ensure that communication is successful? Can native speakers simply speak the way they do at home and expect to be understood? Or do they also have the responsibility to make themselves understood and to learn how to understand pilots or ATC who are not native English speakers?</p>
<p>As a linguist, I analyse aviation language from a linguistics perspective. I have noted the restricted meaning of the few verbs and adjectives; that the only pronouns are “you” and sometimes “we” (“How do you read?”; “We’re overhead Camden”; how few questions there are, mostly imperatives (“Maintain heading 180”); and that the syntax is so simple (no complement clauses, no relative clauses, no recursion), it might not even count as a human language for <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3812905/">Chomsky</a>. </p>
<p>But, as a pilot and a flight instructor, I look at it from the point of view of student pilots learning to use it in the cockpit while also learning to fly the airplane and navigate around the airfield. </p>
<p>How much harder it is to remember what to say when the workload goes up, and more difficult to speak over the radio when you know everyone else on the frequency is listening and will notice every little mistake you make?</p>
<p>Imagine, then, how much more difficult this is for pilots with English as a second language.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140822/original/image-20161007-32708-nh1s5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Camden Airport.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Everyone learning another language knows it’s suddenly more challenging to hold a conversation over the phone than face-to-face, even with someone you already know. When it’s over the radio, with someone you don’t know, against the noise of the engine, static noise in the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWFPveG-X54">headphones</a>, and while trying to make the plane do what you want it to do, it can be quite daunting.</p>
<p>No wonder student pilots who are not native English speakers sometimes prefer to stay silent, and even some experienced native English speakers will too, when the workload is too great. </p>
<p>This is one of the results of my <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Aviation-English-A-lingua-franca-for-pilots-and-air-traffic-controllers/Estival-Farris-Molesworth/p/book/9781138022386">research</a> conducted in collaboration with UNSW’s Brett Molesworth, combining linguistics and aviation human factors. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCIZpEzcsuc">Experiments</a> in a flight simulator with pilots of diverse language backgrounds and flying experience explored conditions likely to result in pilots making mistakes or misunderstanding ATC instructions. Not surprisingly, increased workload, too much information, and rapid ATC speech, caused mistakes. </p>
<p>Also not surprisingly, less experienced pilots, no matter their English proficiency, made more mistakes. But surprisingly, it was the level of training, rather than number of flying hours or language background, that predicted better communication.</p>
<p>Once we understand the factors contributing to miscommunication in aviation, we can propose solutions to prevent them. For example, technologies such as Automatic Speech Recognition and Natural Language Understanding may help catch errors in pilot readbacks that ATC did not notice and might complement training for pilots and ATC. </p>
<p>It is vital that they understand each other, whatever their native language.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66561/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dominique Estival works for Western Sydney University. She received an internal research grant from the MARCS Institute to conduct this research. She is also a current flight instructor.</span></em></p>Flying is known to be the safest mode of transport, but many accidents could be avoided with better communication.Dominique Estival, Researcher in Linguistics, Western Sydney UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/471342015-10-16T05:25:22Z2015-10-16T05:25:22ZComplaints, peeping toms and airplane near-misses show drone regulations are needed now<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/98114/original/image-20151012-17843-1s3enfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A Phantom drone from Chinese firm DJI. Who's watching whose watching us?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DJI_Phantom_2_Vision%2B_V3_hovering_over_Weissfluhjoch_(cropped).jpg">Lino Schmid</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The thing about unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones as they’re commonly known, is that they’re very useful. They’ve been put to use for inspecting infrastructure, firefighting, monitoring in disaster areas or for environmental purposes, for border control, and of course their military use has been clearly demonstrated. </p>
<p>The problem is that, as a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/oct/11/drone-incidents-reported-to-uk-police-on-the-rise">recent Freedom of Information request has shown</a>, drones have been put to all sorts of other unofficial uses, from transporting drugs into prisons or using cameras to voyeuristically spy on neighbours, in some cases leading to landowners responding with shotguns and rifles. Clearly, developing and enforcing regulations that ensure drone use respects others’ safety and privacy is proving difficult.</p>
<p>A report from researchers at the University of Birmingham in 2014 warned that the use of drones in the UK would rise over the next 20 years, raising “<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29717771">significant safety, security, and privacy concerns</a>”. The number of drones in France rose by 350% in 2014, for example. Sales of drones are booming in the UK today, available for as little £30, and we need the regulations in place to deal with the sort of increase that has been seen in France. </p>
<p>Recreational drones, relatively easy to fly thanks to the stability of their four rotors, range from tiny toys to more advanced versions fitted with high definition video cameras used by the police and the media. Authorities have warned that the rising use of drones will lead to more prosecutions of those that do not stick to the rules. For example the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/22/us-britain-drones-idUSKCN0PW1DQ20150722">issued a warning recently</a> after seven incidents where drones had flown near planes at different British airports in less than a year. But the use of drones by civilians will undoubtedly be met with resistance.</p>
<p>The potential danger of irresponsible drone use around busy air traffic is real. Imagine yourself out jogging or riding a bicycle when a fly or bee strikes your face, or even your eye, even leading you to stumble or fall. Something similar happens when a bird hits an aircraft, a phenomenon known as a birdstrike, which can take out an engine. The effect would be similar were a drone to hit an aircraft, although drones vary from those the size of a tiny bird, to large military drones the size of a small aircraft. Of course, taking down an aircraft filled with passengers is a bigger deal than a jogger knocked off their feet by a bee.</p>
<p>While aircraft engines are <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWTb0QRIt0c">tested against birdstrikes</a>, there is no data yet on a turbojet engine’s resistance to ingesting a 4-5kg metal and plastic drone. It could destroy the engine, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlDWCDnXZ2k">damage the cockpit windshield</a>, endangering the crew and flight, or simply ricochet from the fuselage.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nWTb0QRIt0c?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Legislation is needed to at least make drones identifiable – air traffic control authorities have called for drones to be registered so that misbehaving drone pilots can be banned. However, the rules for operating drones in the UK are clear. It is illegal to fly a drone over a built-up area or within 150ft from other people, vehicles or buildings, and they are banned from any fly zones around airports. </p>
<p>In Europe, no-drone zones, software using GPS location trackers to prevent drone flight within sensitive areas and compulsory drone registers are among proposals from aviation experts and the European Union to ensure they don’t cause dangerous run-ins with passenger aircraft. Many cities already have no-fly areas for drones, but that <a href="https://vimeo.com/78822120">has not stopped people</a> – even <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/14/politics/white-house-drone-arrest/">over the White House</a>. Sense-and-avoidance technology, which would detect and avoid potential mid-air collisions, might also help.</p>
<p>The concerns of the aviation industry focus on smaller drones, operated like model planes and flown for recreation, because their users are generally unfamiliar with the rules of the air. Education is needed in the first instance, before talk of enforcement and punishment. Enthusiasts operating drones have to understand that with use comes responsibility. The Federal Aviation Authority in the US is among those in the industry that have produced <a href="http://knowbeforeyoufly.org/">educational materials</a> and spread them through social media in an attempt to prevent accidents. </p>
<p>There’s no doubt that drones have been developed as military weapons; there seems hardly a day where someone, somewhere in the world is not killed by a drone strike. But many modern inventions in the civilian world came from the military or spaceflight industries – not least the internet, for example – and much of our transport and communications infrastructure would be far from the level of technology we currently enjoy without the funding and demands of military research.</p>
<p>However, the civilian use of such technology has to be carefully guarded, with allowable uses for drones yet to be established, and pilot and airspace regulations yet to be enacted. The anonymity and ease with which drones can be used as a tool of execution could lead to greater numbers of deaths by miscommunication – we need clear answers to these problems from regulators, and we need them soon.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47134/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ivan Sikora is affiliated with Royal Aeronautical Society (A Member) as well as International Society of Air Safety Investigators. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tilmann Gabriel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Once everyone gets a taste for flying their own drone the skies will be chaos – we need to draw up rules, and enforce them, now.Ivan Sikora, Senior Lecturer, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/424962015-05-28T12:16:10Z2015-05-28T12:16:10ZReport into air traffic control failure shows we need a better approach to programming<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83241/original/image-20150528-32187-1fj0vc0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The higher they are, the further they have to fall.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Changi_Airport_Air_Traffic_Control_(141922192).jpg">Ramil Sagum</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The causes of the National Air Traffic Services (<a href="http://www.nats.aero/about-us/what-we-do/our-control-centres/">NATS</a>) flight control centre system failure in December 2014 that affected 65,000 passengers directly and up to 230,000 indirectly have been revealed in a recently published report.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2942/Independent%20Enquiry%20Final%20Report%202.0.pdf">final report</a> from the UK Civil Aviation Authority’s <a href="http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?appid=7&mode=detail&nid=2411">Independent Inquiry Panel</a> set up after the incident examines the cause of and response to the outage at the Swanwick control centre in Hampshire, one of two sites controlling UK airspace (the other is at Prestwick in Scotland). Safety is key, said the report. I agree. And safety was not compromised in any way. Bravo!</p>
<p>“Independent” is a relative term, after all the panel includes Joseph Sultana, director of Eurocontrol’s Network Management, and NATS’s operations chief Martin Rolfe, as well as UK Civil Aviation Authority board member and director of safety and airspace regulation Mark Swan – all of whom have skin in the game. (Full disclosure: a panel member, Professor John McDermid, is a valued colleague of many years.)</p>
<p>For a thorough analysis, however, it’s essential to involve people who know the systems intimately. Anyone who has dealt with software knows that often the fastest way to find a fault in a computer program is to ask the programmer who wrote the code. And the NATS analysis and recovery involved the programmers too, Lockheed Martin engineers who built the system in the 1990s. This is one of two factors behind the “rapid fault detection and system restoration” during the incident on December 12.</p>
<p>The report investigates two phenomena: the system outage, its cause and how the system was restored. It also examines NATS’ operational response to the outage. The report also looks at what this says about how well the findings and recommendations following the last major incident, a year earlier, had been implemented. I just look at the first here, but arguably the other two are more important in the end.</p>
<h1>Cause and effect</h1>
<p>In the NATS control system, real-time traffic data is fed into controller workstations by a system component called the System Flight Server (SFS). The SFS architecture is what is called “hot back-up”. There are two identical components (called “channels”) computing the same data at the same time. Only one is “live” in the running system. If this channel falls over, then the identical back-up becomes the live channel, so the first can be restored to operation while offline. </p>
<p>This works quite well to cope with hardware failures, but is no protection against faults in the system logic, as that logic is running identically on both channels. If a certain input causes the first channel to fall over, then it will cause the second to fall over in exactly the same way. This is what happened in December.</p>
<p>The report describes a “latent software fault” in the software, written in the 1990s. Workstations in active use by controllers and supervisors either for control or observation are called Atomic Functions (AF). Their number should be limited by the SFS software to a maximum of 193, but in fact the limit was set to 151, and the SFS fell over when it reached 153.</p>
<h2>Deja vu</h2>
<p>My first thought is that we’ve heard this before. As far back as 1997-98, evidence given to the House of Commons Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs <a href="http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/360iv/et0407.htm">reported</a> that the NATS system, then under development, was having trouble scaling from 30 to 100 active workstations. But this recent event was much simpler than that – it’s the kind of fault you see often in first-year university programming classes and which students are trained to avoid through inspection and testing. </p>
<p>There are technical methods known as static analysis to avoid such faults – and static analysis of the 1990s was well able to detect them. But such thorough analysis may have been seen as an impossible task: it was <a href="http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/360iv/et0407.htm">reported</a> in 1995 that the system exhibited 21,000 faults, of which 95% had been eliminated by 1997 (hurray!) – leaving 1,050 which hadn’t been (boo!). Not counting, of course, the fault which triggered the December outage. (I wonder how many more are lurking?)</p>
<p>How could an error not tolerated in undergraduate-level programming homework enter software developed by professionals over a decade <a href="http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/A-brief-history-of-an-air-traffic-control-system">at a cost approaching a billion pounds</a>?</p>
<h2>Changing methods</h2>
<p>Practice has changed since the 1990s. Static analysis of code in critical systems is now regarded as necessary. So-called <a href="http://www.eschertech.com/products/correct_by_construction.php">Correct by Construction</a> (CbyC) techniques, in which how software works is defined in a specification and then developed through a process of refinement in such a way as <a href="http://proteancode.com/keynote.pdf">demonstrably to avoid</a> common sources of error, have proved their worth. NATS nowadays successfully uses key systems developed along CbyC principles, such as <a href="http://nats.aero/blog/2013/07/how-technology-is-transforming-air-traffic-management">iFacts</a>.</p>
<p>But change comes only gradually, and old habits are hard to leave behind. For example, <a href="https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/02/24/anatomy-of-a-goto-fail-apples-ssl-bug-explained-plus-an-unofficial-patch/">Apple’s “goto fail” bug</a> which surfaced in 2014 in many of its systems rendered void an internet security function essential for trust online – validating website authentication certificates. Yet it was caused by a simple syntax error – essentially a programming typo – that could and should have been caught by the most rudimentary static analysis. </p>
<p>Unlike the public enquiry and report undertaken by NATS, Apple has said little about either how the problem came about or the lessons learned – and the same goes for the developers of many other software packages that lie at the heart of the global computerised economy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/42496/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Bernard Ladkin presented evidence to the UK House of Commons Transportation Sub-committee on the development of the Swanwick system in 1997 and 1998. His tech-transfer company Causalis Limited received consulting payments from BT Systems, as well as from Serco for due-diligence analysis of the Swanwick system, for their bids during the privatisation of NATS near the turn of the millennium.</span></em></p>Software is now too critical to how the world works, so we need to enforce ways to ensure it’s better.Peter Bernard Ladkin, Professor of Computer Networks and Distributed Systems, Bielefeld UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/381192015-02-26T16:57:12Z2015-02-26T16:57:12ZDo Russia’s flying Bears really pose a risk to civilian air traffic?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73195/original/image-20150226-1761-c95qjd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Move along now.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ministry of Defence</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>There’s an element of sabre-rattling to Russia’s Tu-95 “Bear” aircraft probing the boundary of European nations’ airspace, something that had long gone on during the Cold War and which <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/world/europe/17cnd-russia.html">has restarted under Vladimir Putin</a>. But while their probing of air defences and the subsequent response is well-rehearsed, aircraft flying stealthy around some of the world’s busiest airspace holds the potential for disaster.</p>
<p>The large, propeller-driven <a href="http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=404">Tupolev Tu-95</a> aircraft were introduced in the 1950s as long-range strategic nuclear bombers, but most of the remaining Bears are reconfigured for either maritime reconnaissance or for gathering electronic intelligence (<a href="https://www.nsa.gov/about/_files/cryptologic_heritage/publications/misc/elint.pdf">Elint</a>) – almost certainly what the Bears <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/19/raf-scrambles-jets-after-russian-bombers-spotted-near-cornwall-coast">intercepted by RAF Typhoons off Cornwall</a> were doing.</p>
<p>The flights’ aim is to inspect as much of the electromagnetic emission spectrum around UK airspace as possible. This includes emissions from air defence surveillance radars, fighter aircraft radars and command and control communications. The information gathered is used to update Russian electronic warfare systems. In times of war or conflict this information would be used to program electronic jamming systems on-board Russian aircraft in an attempt to interrupt UK air defence radar and communications. The same techniques are used in relation to warships and for land operations.</p>
<p>This electronic eavesdropping activity <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/10/close-military-encounters-russia-west-cold-war">is not confined to the borders of UK airspace</a> – within the last year, fighter aircraft have intercepted Tu-95s around Turkey, Portugal, Germany, Denmark, Finland and Sweden and, in late 2014, a major Russian reconnaissance exercise was conducted off the US west coast. The Russian Air Force reconnaissance programme is particularly active during NATO exercises as the electromagnetic spectrum is rich with military information.</p>
<h2>Invisible to civilian aircraft</h2>
<p>To ensure safety in designated air corridors, commercial and civilian aircraft employ what is called secondary surveillance radar (<a href="http://www.airwaysmuseum.com/Surveillance.htm">SSR</a>) to identify themselves to air traffic control (ATC). This is a transponder that periodically transmits location, bearing, altitude and other information to ATC. Military aircraft employ similar but more secure systems known as Identification Friend or Foe (IFF). In peacetime or when military aircraft fly in designated air corridors, IFF is operated in a civilian-compatible mode for safety in order to remain “visible” to air traffic controllers. </p>
<p>Russia’s Bears, on the other hand, turn off their IFF transponders so as to maintain the element of surprise. This prompts British air defences, using active radar to sweep the skies, to detect and respond to them as an unknown potential threat. It also means they are invisible to civilian air traffic control and invisible to other aircraft in the sky – unless close enough to be seen by pilots and crew themselves.</p>
<p>While the aircraft design may be more than 50 years old, the Bears are fitted with sophisticated reconnaissance and navigation systems that enable them to adhere to air safety standards by avoiding controlled airspace and busy air corridors. Nevertheless there have been reports of near misses and violations of sovereign airspace, but it’s difficult to separate fact from fiction. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/73217/original/image-20150226-1807-zplwgk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">New Cold War?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ministry of Defence</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Near misses</h2>
<p>For example, in December 2014 there was <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/sweden-rebukes-russia-over-near-miss-involving-passenger-jet-1418639087">a close encounter</a> between a passenger flight taking off from Copenhagen carrying 132 passengers bound for Rome and a Russian reconnaissance aircraft, with transponders turned off, 50 miles south-east of Malmo. A collision was apparently avoided thanks only to good visibility and the alertness of the airliner’s pilots.</p>
<p>Another came in April 2014 when a Russian reconnaissance aircraft <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/23/world/europe/russian-bombers-intercepted/">entered Dutch airspace</a> before being intercepted by Dutch fighter aircraft. Again, the objective was Elint collection on NATO air defence systems.</p>
<p>Although there have been reported near misses the actual risk to commercial air traffic is considered minimal – but vigilance is necessary. NATO air defence systems are well integrated into civilian air traffic control systems so once an intruding Bear has been identified controllers can be alerted to the presence and aircraft in the vicinity can be warned.</p>
<h2>Not just the Russians</h2>
<p>However this is not an activity reserved for the Russians. NATO, and particularly the UK and US, also undertake extensive reconnaissance Elint operations against Russia and other countries deemed hostile. </p>
<p>Throughout the Cold War, extensive operations were undertaken against the Soviet Union in areas stretching from the Scandinavian Kola Peninsula, through the Baltic and Germany to the Black Sea, with similar operations in the Far East. This continues today, with incidents in which NATO surveillance aircraft <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11009182/US-spy-plane-in-Top-Gun-game-of-chicken-over-Russian-air-space-day-after-MH17-shot-down.html">tracked by Russian defences</a>. The Israeli Air Force proved that Elint and electronic warfare was vital <a href="http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bdd_1349975028">during the Lebanon War in 1982</a> against Russian-built air defence systems supplied to Syria. </p>
<p>But it has not been without casualties – early in the Cold War several NATO reconnaissance Elint aircraft were shot down by the Soviets around the Baltic and Black seas, so these missions were sometimes considered dangerous. Today the Royal Air Force and the USAF employ <a href="http://theaviationist.com/2014/05/28/rivert-joint-first-raf-flight/">Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint</a> reconnaissance aircraft to fulfil the same role for NATO as the Tu-95 Bear, and operate in a similar manner. Perhaps such surveillance, although concerning to some, actually benefits both sides: by keeping the military on their toes and discovering more about each other’s military capabilities, it makes the prospect of war less likely.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38119/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Stupples does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When military aircraft fly invisible to civilian flights it could represent a disaster waiting to happen.David Stupples, Professor of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/358182014-12-29T13:33:44Z2014-12-29T13:33:44ZAirAsia flight QZ8501: how cloud computing could help prevent air disasters<p>While the full picture has yet to emerge, it appears that the reason for the loss of <a>Air Asia flight QZ8501</a> is different from the losses of <a>MH370</a> and <a>MH17</a> earlier this year. MH17 was <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-how-you-find-out-who-shot-down-mh17-30633">clearly a man-made disaster</a>, QZ8501 <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/missing-airasia-flight-qz8501-aviation-expert-claims-there-is-little-chance-of-finding-survivors-from-missing-plane-9947228.html">appears to be weather-related</a>. MH370 <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/mh370">remains a mystery</a>. </p>
<p>Even though cloud-computing could <a>help advance the status of the black box</a> in terms of the investigation after such incidents, as we are only too aware, nature – in the form of bad weather – often plays a significant role in airline disasters. Is there anything we can do, on the ground, to lower the risk of these weather-related incidents?</p>
<p>Recently, <a href="http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/news/features/windflow-060314.aspx">Microsoft Research illustrated</a> that combining real-time data from nearby flights, it is possible to predict the wind speed to an accuracy ten times better than the weather simulations by supercomputers. Augmenting the data collected from real-time sensors from the cloud, one can create a better simulation, thanks to the advances in the internet of flying things. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtmarko/2014/03/18/malaysia-370-and-iot/">internet of flying things</a> refers to the technology which is ready for adoption by agencies on the ground who want to get a bird’s-eye view of weather conditions. The basic technology is already available for less than £500: equipping a drone or unmanned airborne vehicle (UAV) with a GoPro quality camera, enthusiastic fans can already survey the neighbourhood from the air. </p>
<p>If we look at the air crash incidents caused by bad weather conditions, can the killer technology of cloud computing and augmented reality be used as a life saver?</p>
<p>Is it cyclical reasoning to want to use this sort of cloud computing technology to tell us something that the pilots of a stricken aircraft can already tell from the flight deck? After all, when you fly into such wind speeds, is it not difficult to change one’s actions accordingly? Isn’t the flight simply doomed? Not necessarily. In this case, had nearby flying objects logged the abnormal wind speeds earlier they would have been able to notify air traffic control in time to issue a warning to flight QZ8501. In these situations, often timely interventions can save lives.</p>
<h2>Internet of flying objects</h2>
<p>But before this idea can practically be realised, there are at least three obstacles to overcome if we want to harness the power of the internet of flying objects.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"549052183094652929"}"></div></p>
<p>The first thing to note is that these flying objects shouldn’t be limited to aircraft – we could be talking about weather balloons, drones – anything in the air, in short, but these objects need to be identifiable. Only though identification can messages from these flying objects be recognised and trusted by authorities such as FAA. So, for example, the drones which – it is imagined – will be carrying goods to households (not to mention the many thousands of privately owned drones which have been so popular as presents this Christmas) must be regulated and their call signs logged by the authorities before they can be of any practical help. At present they are not. In other words, the autonomous flying objects are <a href="http://oro.open.ac.uk/39643/">required to collaborate</a> with air traffic controllers if we want to build a picture that will deliver a secure and trustworthy solution.</p>
<p>In addition, these regulated and registered flying objects need to be effectively networked, so that – through the exchange of real-time data – the crowd-sourced information delivers as accurate a picture as possible. Resolving any conflicts arising from information coming in from multiple sources requires a good computational model that can assign appropriate weight to the various sources of information.</p>
<p>And this aggregated data needs to depict a physical truth to decision makers – whether they are in front of the desk in the air traffic control centre, on the flight deck of a nearby aircraft or in command of the rescue team. The task of verifying available evidence against any possible internal flaws or external tampering would require that network security levels are brought to another level.</p>
<p>These three requirements are basic, but if they can be overcome, they might offer us a better opportunity to use today’s technology to provide safer air transport in the future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35818/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Yijun Yu receives funding from ERC, QNRF, EU, Microsoft, RealTelecom, and Huawei.</span></em></p>While the full picture has yet to emerge, it appears that the reason for the loss of Air Asia flight QZ8501 is different from the losses of MH370 and MH17 earlier this year. MH17 was clearly a man-made…Yijun Yu, Senior Lecturer, Department of Computing and Communications, The Open UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/355722014-12-19T14:06:35Z2014-12-19T14:06:35ZAir traffic control system failure is too complex to fix in a day<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67808/original/image-20141219-31542-1u9cvmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Could air traffic control's ageing, 20-year-old components be to blame?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PCB_corrosion.jpg">Binarysequence</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The recent computer systems failure at the <a href="http://www.nats.aero/about-us/what-we-do/our-control-centres/">National Air Traffic Services’ en-route control centre</a> (known as NERC) at Swanwick in Hampshire <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30454240">led to an airspace slowdown</a> over England and Wales, delaying or grounding hundreds of flights. </p>
<p>The failure lasted 45 minutes – and of around 6,000 flights passing through the affected region that day 120 were cancelled and 500 delayed for an average of 45 minutes. Inconvenient, maybe, but no one was endangered, let alone injured or killed.</p>
<p>Called before the parliamentary Transport Committee, the secretary of state for transport, Patrick McLoughlin, said the failure was “unacceptable”. Also appearing at a later session was NATS chief executive, Richard Deakin, who spent some time debating whether “unacceptable” was a term that could be correctly applied in the situation, and if so to whom. </p>
<p>Discussion continued concerning salaries, bonuses, organisational performance measures, the “independence” or not of potential inquiries and how much Deakin worked over the weekend.</p>
<p>I’m a systems person. Calling such a systems failure “unacceptable” is like calling the weather “unacceptable” – nobody wanted it to rain but complaining ain’t going to stop it. My questions aren’t about salaries or working hours, they are rather: why did the system fall over? Can we expect such things to happen again? Is there is anything anyone can do about it? If so, what?</p>
<h2>Inside the problem</h2>
<p>The primary failure appeared to be in <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/iregi_confirms_it_was_dodgy_flight_server_that_took_down_uk_air_traffic_control">flight-plan processing</a>, the committee heard, run on a system dating from the mid-1990s. Deakin said the <a href="http://www.nats.aero/news/swanwick-technical-failure-update-2145/">root cause had been identified</a> and a fix put in place to ensure it couldn’t happen again. </p>
<p>Now – contrary to worries I expressed to the Transport Sub-committee in 1997-8 during <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7636426.stm">NERC’s troubled development</a> – NERC has turned out pretty well, having fallen over only a few times in 13 years of service. It’s inevitable that big, complex, resilient, highly-interconnected programmable-electronic systems such as NERC will fall over eventually.</p>
<p>Some 20-year-old subsystem falls prey to a vulnerability never triggered before, and NATS claims to have discovered the root cause and put in a permanent fix, <a href="http://www.nats.aero/news/swanwick-technical-failure-update-2145/">in just over a day</a>. But hang on a minute. That analyse-and-fix is astonishingly fast for a complex, highly-interconnected system. It suggests to me that the vulnerability was obvious. When aircraft on-board systems suffer such failures, it takes weeks to months to years to analyse – even emergency measures take days to devise. That’s because they are subtle; obvious points of failure have already been identified and selected out. Compare: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We were driving down the road, and a wheel fell off. That hasn’t happened before. We put it right back on and tightened up all the bolts on all the wheels. It won’t happen again.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>with:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The air data computer sent a burst of erroneous airspeed spikes to the flight control computer. The flight control computer treated them as true and autonomously commanded pitch excursions [roller-coaster ups and downs], which injured some passengers who were not belted in. We have no idea why those spikes occurred. The flight control computer now filters such bursts out.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This second description is from the inquiry into <a href="http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3532398/ao2008070.pdf">Qantas Flight 72</a>, conclusions which took years to reach.</p>
<h2>No easy solutions</h2>
<p>I wonder, is this really a problem solved? It’s not easy to devise lasting solutions to problems that don’t potentially bring new problems with them. And if everything is fixed, why is the first item on the terms of reference of the <a href="http://www.nats.aero/news/independent-inquiry-air-traffic-control-failure-announced/">proposed joint CAA/NATS inquiry</a> to review the “root cause”? If, implausibly, there is just one. Almost invariably there are many causes which can be called “root causes”, which is part of what makes devising solutions tricky.</p>
<p>When a wheel falls off, in hindsight it’s obvious that checking the bolts would have been a good idea. There are engineering methods that prompt us to think of such things in advance which work well for obvious vulnerabilities, but poorly for subtle ones. If Friday’s system vulnerability was so quick to analyse and fix, it was likely obvious. So why wasn’t it anticipated? What other obvious vulnerabilities are still lying around after two decades? Is anyone looking for them? </p>
<p>I bet NATS has a log of system anomalies which they are working through. How’s that going? Are there any gotchas on it which might cause the system to fall over next month? And why didn’t anybody at the Transport Committee ask NATS any of this?</p>
<p>Deakin also told the committee that: “We have never seen a repeat occurrence once a fix has been made.” That isn’t as reassuring as one might think. An <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5390362">investigation by IBM 30 years ago</a> into failures in a big software system estimated that about a third of observed failures would not be expected to arise ever again in the life of the system. That means that, statistically speaking, in about a third of cases doing nothing would be the best solution. By the same token, the same statistics would suggest that, even with perfect interventions, it is only possible to reduce the failure rate by, at most, two thirds.</p>
<p>As Benjamin Franklin might have said, in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes and complex-system failure.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35572/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Bernard Ladkin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The recent computer systems failure at the National Air Traffic Services’ en-route control centre (known as NERC) at Swanwick in Hampshire led to an airspace slowdown over England and Wales, delaying or…Peter Bernard Ladkin, Professor of Computer Networks and Distributed Systems, Bielefeld UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/354462014-12-16T14:37:12Z2014-12-16T14:37:12ZAir traffic control about to let pilots plan their own routes – but don’t worry<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67117/original/image-20141212-6054-zfvsjv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Just keep bearing left chaps.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kaptainkobold/5395561374/in/photolist-9dMEqf-858hm3-dYHBsJ-pFrEdK-p36Dgc-9X9s3x-9X9sxe-9Xck25-9X9u3g-9X9rhX-9Xcm6C-9X9tyK-9XcmFU-9X9sXM-9X9rD6-9Xciof-9X9qW4-9X9rQ6-9X9rz4-e3w961-2zE6sq-6NFrur-5CSHGQ-p14NUC-pPnTPn-7ShKiD-q4SLG1-9Xci7b-7w1VDj-8sThTo-q6CBPT-8RUTp-2jEZcL-5qWtro-7YRUbR-8sTgRA-p34K57-fpHAnk-fPqW2A-oixAED-o8xhAg-bbdFL-oVjKk8-6mcCFK-76Lf6r-4X8xzu-9dqMMT-o8QAe2-8aKnj4-9a6LQy">Alan</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A major change is coming to our skies. From next March, pilots will <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/shortcuts-in-scottish-skies-ready-for-take-off-1-3627899">be able to</a> determine their own routes and plan to fly direct from point to point. </p>
<p>Currently, flights must plan to follow explicitly defined corridors. These are rather like roads in the sky, up to 10 miles wide. Under the new scheme, flights will still be subject to air traffic control from Prestwick Centre in the West of Scotland, but pilots will be considerably more free to plan the specific route that they take. </p>
<p>The move by the UK’s main air-traffic control agency, <a href="http://www.nats.aero">NATS</a>, to switch to what is known as <a href="http://www.nats.aero/environment/consultations/pc-route-free-airspace/">“route free airspace”</a> will initially apply to an area between Skye and the Isle of Man <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/shortcuts-in-scottish-skies-ready-for-take-off-1-3627899">that carries</a> about 450 planes each day. </p>
<h2>The rationale</h2>
<p>Route-free airspace will allow aircraft to take shorter and more direct routes. This is expected to bring multiple benefits including better flight efficiency, greater cost-effectiveness, reduced engine running time, reduced fuel consumption and resulting environmental gains. </p>
<p>How it will work in practice is that the pilot or his airline will determine the best flight path using dedicated software and then submit a flight plan and route before take-off or before entering UK airspace. This can be done online or via several other methods including radio. </p>
<p>Route-free airspace has been made possible by technologies such as <a href="http://www.ads-b.com">Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)</a>. This makes use of satellite positioning to allow aircraft to broadcast their precise location every few seconds so that pilots of other aircraft are able to plan their routes accordingly. </p>
<p>This means that aircraft can make better use of available space and fly closer together. It removes the need for the tightly restricted routes that are used at present. ADS-B is being fitted to an increasing number of aircraft. It is mandatory in Australia. It will become mandatory for most aircraft in Europe from 2017, and from 2020 in the USA.</p>
<p>The idea of pilots planning routes without central coordination might raise safety concerns, but in practice, aircraft will still remain under the supervision of air-traffic control. Our fixed routes were indeed originally designed to maintain safety, but they employ decades-old systems that are based on radar and no longer necessary. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67118/original/image-20141212-6030-xjbay4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Becoming radar-undant?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&search_tracking_id=33sMT4N05s42FwzJrMKdpg&searchterm=air%20traffic%20control&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=46528372">Jirsak</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>You might also think that fixed routes could lead to greater delays as aircraft manoeuvre around each other, but as routes will be actively monitored and predicted up to 25 minutes ahead of time, such issues are actually reduced. Neither will the routes result in a noise nuisance for people on the ground, since route-free airspace only applies to airspace above 25,000 feet (4.8 miles).</p>
<h2>The bigger picture</h2>
<p>NATS plans to extend the trial to the rest of Scotland and parts of the North Sea from 2017 and has a <a href="http://www.nats.aero/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/RouteFreeConsultationDocument_Issue1.0.pdf">long-term strategy</a> to establish all upper airspace in the UK as route-free (making this work in much of England and Wales will admittedly take rather more planning because the airspace is already very congested). This is being promoted as part of the <a href="https://www.eurocontrol.int/dossiers/single-european-sky">Single European Sky</a> initiative, which aims to modernise Europe’s air traffic control system. It has the target of a 10% reduction in the effect of aircraft on the environment by 2020, against a background of increasing passenger traffic. </p>
<p>The pan-European air-traffic coordination agency <a href="https://www.eurocontrol.int/about-eurocontrol">Eurocontrol</a> estimates <a href="http://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/article/content/documents/official-documents/reports/201306-challenges-of-growth-2013-task-4.pdf">that while</a> the number of flights will have increased by 50% between 2012 and 2035, deploying route-free airspace over central Europe at night and weekends will reduce flight distance by the equivalent of 1.16m km per year. Route-free airspace has already been implemented in Sweden, Portugal and Ireland. It is planned or partially implemented in the rest of Scandinavia, Italy and central and eastern Europe. It also forms part of the Federal Aviation Authority’s <a href="https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/">NextGen programme</a> in the United States.</p>
<h2>The health warning</h2>
<p>However, despite the obvious benefits from going route-free, some argue that rising air-traffic volumes is not something that we will be able to support indefinitely. The biggest potential barriers are probably infrastructure on the ground (especially airports themselves, which consume large areas of land) and rising costs of jet fuel. </p>
<p>Particularly around major cities, airspace is already crowded. While improvements to planning and control could make better use of the space, there is only so much to be done before no further aircraft can fit in the sky with a safe separation distance. And though the answer would presumably be to improve road infrastructure and high-speed rail instead, this has its own issues and controversies.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67119/original/image-20141212-6027-136g1q3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Optimyze This!</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&search_tracking_id=OnsQz7mYBPKBiVQsJZnDTA&searchterm=runway%20taxi&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=157123961">Senohrabek</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And we can’t just rely on route-free airspace to deal with the environmental issues around aircraft. Eurocontrol’s <a href="http://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/article/content/documents/official-documents/reports/201306-challenges-of-growth-2013-task-4.pdf">central forecast</a> is that by 2035, total emissions might have fallen slightly despite the expected rise in air traffic, but that assumes that fuel efficiency keeps improving. This is by no means certain. </p>
<p>Air-traffic control therefore needs to focus on other ways of improving pollution, such as optimising taxi routes at airports and flight sequencing. This stems from the fact that short flights are more polluting than long-distance ones because of the impact of take-off and landing compared to the distance travelled. Indeed, it is interesting to note that in contrast with the liberalisation of air routes, there is a <a href="https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/field_tabs/content/documents/nm/airports/a-smgcs-definition-of-implemetation-levels-v1-2-20100630.pdf">possible move</a> towards more centralised control of taxi routes as automated systems for optimising routes are considered. </p>
<p>For the same reason, it is important that new technologies in computational search and mathematical modelling are fully explored and investigated in the context of ensuring that our air-traffic systems and resources are being used as efficiently as possible. So long as we see these moves towards making large amounts of airspace route free as just one contribution to a wider environmentally-focused modernisation of the aviation industry, we should ultimately reach the right destination.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35446/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sandy has received funding from EPSRC and Microsoft.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Edmund receives funding from EPSRC and has worked on research projects with NATS, Manchester Airport and Zurich Airport. He has also worked with KLM/Air France, and currently has an EPSRC programme grant under submission which has partners from across the air traffic industry.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Una has received funding from EPSRC and Microsoft.</span></em></p>A major change is coming to our skies. From next March, pilots will be able to determine their own routes and plan to fly direct from point to point. Currently, flights must plan to follow explicitly defined…Alexander Brownlee, Senior Research Assistant, University of StirlingEdmund Burke, Deputy Principal for Research, University of StirlingUna Benlic, Post-Doctoral Research Assistant, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.