The SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU) has just announced that they are launching a specific initiative on flight tracking in oceanic and remote areas. The call for tender (OPTIMI) is meant to select contractor(s) for the performance of a study and flight demonstrations – co-funded for a maximum amount of € 360.000 -aimed at demonstrating the feasibility to implement oceanic tracking services in the Atlantic at a reasonable cost and within a limited timeframe (2010).
The SESR JU was tasked to analyse the issue and provide recommendations on the way forward in response to the apparent lack of appropriate tracking over remote areas that came to light following the recent tragic accident over the South-Atlantic.
As I read this news in my office, one of the several computer screens was focused on the Pacific Ocean, showing the Western Coast of the US and the Hawaii Islands. All traffic was clearly visible and by pointing on any of the blips, I could immediately bring up corresponding, real-time flight data, including heading, level, speed, departure and destination aerodrome and the filed track was also presented.
Scrolling the map to the North Atlantic, as I briefly looked at traffic in and out of Paris, two questions came to mind.
When SESAR was created, it was tasked to define the way forward for making air traffic management better in Europe. While admittedly there are remote areas in Europe as such, they have never been treated with high priority. They were seen more as a possible proving ground for new surveillance technology, like ADS-B.
Every accident has its lessons from which we must learn. The tragic AF crash is no different. But is SESAR being turned into an instrument of politicians to respond to such things, changing its priorities and using its resources in ways never intended?
The marching orders came from the top, European Commission VP and Commissioner for Transport Antonio Tajani himself had expressed concern over the shortcomings uncovered as a result of the crash… But the crash was not caused by any of those shortcomings, neither would the investigation have been necessarily easier had the disappearance been noticed earlier.
Optimizing the horribly expensive surveillance infrastructure in Europe (remote and non-remote) has been on the SESAR Agenda from the start yet it is not a really high priority. Yes but that is not connected with safety you might say. Neither is the current initiative, per se. True, if information can be provided to Search and Rescue Services faster, their action can be more effective. But flight safety is not directly served.
This is a political reaction to a high profile crash and should not be mixed with SESAR. If something needs to be speeded up, it is the use of the new surveillance technologies for a more effective and cheaper surveillance system everywhere, including the core area. SESAR should not be allowed to become a mere quick reaction force on the end of strings moved by politicians.
The other question is possibly even trickier. 360K co-funding is a tidy sum and I am sure there will be lots of takers. But I would suggest that the SESAR JU talk to the FAA and companies like AirNav Live before spending all that money on things they could probably get to know for free. The professional version of AirNav Live Flight Tracker, including the monthly subscription for the service, costs just a few hundred Euros and it shows in almost real time on the screen of your PC ALL the aircraft known in the FAA flight data processing system plus a good deal of traffic over Europe. It is a wonderful sight to see traffic arching across the Atlantic… My display here is being updated every 48 seconds… surely good enough for any SAR purpose???
Dear SJU, try to figure out how to get the remaining (relatively small %) of European traffic visible and then advise SAR organisations to take out a professional subscription to AirNav Live Flight Tracker… Surely this is not going to cost 360K? You do not need flight trials either. The thing works, guaranteed! You can then use all the money saved to help airlines equip with ADS-B to generate real benefits. The cost of equippeing aircraft that need it and paying for the messages is there anyway on top of the study…
Also, please think of SWIM and information sharing… A lot of information on flights over the North Atlantic not available in European systems is available from the FAA (I know… I see the traffic here every day). You do not need a megabuck study to make that information visible. A few hundred euros should do it…
I couldn’t agree more, this is a nasty example of ‘grandstanding’ (yelling from the sidelines to draw attention to oneself) by politicians. Improved surveillance would not have prevented the accident nor altered its outcome. The apparent failure to address, or even to take seriously, multiple pitot problems over the couple of years does not reflect well on European industry and its Regulators, and should have been much higher up the list of Commissioner Tajani’s concerns.
I’d like to echo Steve’s call for planning to commence on a modern, low cost, co-operative surveillance system for Europe where all vehicles in managed airspace are electronically visible.
A Low Cost Surveillance structure, SWIM and de-fragmentation are among the top priorities for modernisers.