FAA efficiency

With the discussions of user fees and the economic cost of the FAA in
providing critical services (calculated as $22,600/pilot/year by
another user of this group), I've been thinking about just how
incredibly inefficient that statistic makes the FAA look in providing
service. Compared to an organization like USPS, where they've tried
everything from aircraft to optical character recognition to Regulus
cruise missiles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_mail) to deliver
mail, and now have the delivery chain almost completely automated, the
FAA seems comparatively downright archaic in their operations and
technology.

It has been somewhat endearing and on many occasions beneficial to the
flight, for pilots to be able to speak to a real, live person while
flying. Now that they say they must charge user fees to support and
expand their inefficiency, it may be time to shine a floodlight on the
waste and determine ways to improve efficiency.

It would seem that technology similar to ADS-B could go a long way
toward providing similar automation and cost savings in air traffic
services as optical character recognition and the ZIP code has at USPS.
Primarily, ATC is in place to keep two planes from ending up at the
same place at the same time. With data link technology and highly
accurate positioning and trending information, it would seem that a
significant portion of operations could be automated in one way or
another. Conflict resolution and routing algorithms are available from
other technologies that have the potential to provide clearances on
instrument flights. VFR traffic could continue to provide their own
separation, aided with a realtime graphical display of surrounding
traffic.

Radio communication is another area that seems incredibly inefficient.
If you consider the possibility of errors in reception, stepped on
transmissions, the need to repeat clearances nearly verbatim to assure
proper receipt, and the possibility of transcribing a clearance
incorrectly, it would seem much more efficient to have a data link for
the majority of ATC information.

I'm sure this is evident to people who now have datalink weather, it is
much more effective to see the information in front of you than to
imagine "An occluded front at a line starting at the 270 degree radial
of X VOR and extending to Y" when read over the radio while also flying
and navigating. Having a device that allows clearance and flight
information to be displayed and acknowledged via a data link would seem
more efficient.

VFR flights could to be integrated into an automated system with an
inexpensive data link device. The device could alert potential traffic
conflicts similar to ATC calling "traffic is a MD80, 2 miles, 12
o'clock same altitude, climbing" and the pilot could acknowledge
traffic in sight, follow standard conflict resolution procedures, or
request conflict resolution with dedicated buttons for each of those
common tasks.

Considering the prevalence of airport surface incursions, an automated
system that would set routing during taxi, alert when a hold short
area is ahead, and show runway information (runway clear, landing
traffic, etc) could be useful. We already have much of this technology
available with GPS road surface routing. Implementing this technology
could reduce or eliminate the need for clearance delivery and ground
controllers.

I'm sure there are other areas that could be made more efficient as
well. I'm curious about issues and other ideas people have about such a
system. What areas should not be automated? Are the activities I've
outlined above not the root case of the inefficiency? If not, then
where should we be looking? What areas are redundant or no longer
needed?

Doug

"Doug Spencer" wrote

It would seem that technology similar to ADS-B could go a long way
toward providing similar automation and cost savings in air traffic
services as optical character recognition and the ZIP code has at USPS.
Primarily, ATC is in place to keep two planes from ending up at the
same place at the same time. With data link technology and highly
accurate positioning and trending information, it would seem that a
significant portion of operations could be automated in one way or
another. Conflict resolution and routing algorithms are available from
other technologies that have the potential to provide clearances on
instrument flights. VFR traffic could continue to provide their own
separation, aided with a realtime graphical display of surrounding
traffic.

At what cost, will all of this technology be available?

For guys like Ron Want-a-jaw, and Joe Q Public just want to go for burgers
and breakfast, and smash bugs.

It will likely cost tens of thousands of dollars for each one of these guys
to buy the stuff that would be required. That isn't an option for most,
either.

Shoot, what about the guys that don't even have an electrical system, or a
transponder? Where are they going to fit in?
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

At what cost, will all of this technology be available?

For guys like Ron Want-a-jaw, and Joe Q Public just want to go for burgers
and breakfast, and smash bugs.

It will likely cost tens of thousands of dollars for each one of these
guys to buy the stuff that would be required. That isn't an option for
most, either.

Shoot, what about the guys that don't even have an electrical system, or a
transponder? Where are they going to fit in?


They sound like the VFR traffic that would continue to provide their own
separation, perhaps aided with a real-time graphical display of surrounding
traffic, if desired.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote

They sound like the VFR traffic that would continue to provide their own
separation, perhaps aided with a real-time graphical display of
surrounding traffic, if desired.

What about when they want to go into a class C?
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

What about when they want to go into a class C?


Guys like Ron Want-a-jaw and Joe Q. Public can find places outside of Class
C airspace to go for burgers and breakfast and smash bugs. The guys that
don't even have an electrical system or a transponder are already missing
the equipment required for entry to Class C airspace.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

What about when they want to go into a class C?


Guys like Ron Want-a-jaw and Joe Q. Public can find places outside of
Class C airspace to go for burgers and breakfast and smash bugs. The guys
that don't even have an electrical system or a transponder are already
missing the equipment required for entry to Class C airspace.

True, but if one wants to do the occasional cross country into class C and
has a radio and transponder, they will have to install a bunch of new
technology, costing thousands, right? That sounds like a move in the wrong
direction for GA.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

True, but if one wants to do the occasional cross country into class C and
has a radio and transponder, they will have to install a bunch of new
technology, costing thousands, right?


Sounds about right.



That sounds like a move in the wrong direction for GA.


Why? Automation in ATC could provide better service at less cost.

Morgans writes:

Shoot, what about the guys that don't even have an electrical system, or a
transponder? Where are they going to fit in?

Depends. How much do they donate to political campaigns?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote

Why? Automation in ATC could provide better service at less cost.
How does costs of installing thousands of dollars of technology in a GA
aircraft equate to less cost?

I could pay for many movements without automation, (possibly a lifetime)
before the cost saving would be anywhere close to breaking even.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

How does costs of installing thousands of dollars of technology in a GA
aircraft equate to less cost?


By being less costly than the alternative.



I could pay for many movements without automation, (possibly a lifetime)
before the cost saving would be anywhere close to breaking even.


Show me the math.