Hacker News Reader

> The lack of automation is causing ATC work to be stressful. … > And it would free up ATC staff and pilots to do more urgent things.

There’s a problem that can happen with this, though, wherein the “easy” routine work is automated out and the number of humans involved is scaled down, but the work those people do then winds up being 100% the urgent/stressful stuff.

I’ve heard that ER doctors have been experiencing this in recent years–not quite with automation so much as just offloading, as less serious cases are picked up by nurse practitioners/urgent care centers, staffing has been adjusted and the actual physicians wind up with a steady stream of stressful high-acuity cases back to back to back.

Another reason not to scale down the number of humans is that they're needed when automation breaks.

Planes could very well fly themselves 99%+ of the time, but you want to have pilots when there are in flight issues that aren't handled by automation.

> I’ve heard that ER doctors have been experiencing this in recent years–not quite with automation so much as just offloading, as less serious cases are picked up by nurse practitioners/urgent care centers, staffing has been adjusted and the actual physicians wind up with a steady stream of stressful high-acuity cases back to back to back.

Yet at the same time, ERs (near me at least) are still inundated with so many patients that average wait times are 4-5hrs.

Maybe you are in an oasis of reason where this doesn't happen. But most ERs I have heard of that are overcrowded is because people go to the emergency room when there is no actual emergency.

I’m sure there’s a number of reasons for this - after about 5 PM, your options are typically the ER or an urgent care. UC’s usually require payment up front, and for people who either don’t have insurance or who have high deductibles, the cost of care at a hospital (which is way more but can be put off) vs the up front cost of urgent care probably pushes people towards ERs.

There’s likely other factors - lack of medical education/first aid, consulting Dr Google and then having anxiety that maybe that slight pain is something horrible, etc.

A public health system could alleviate this stress, if done well. Clinics that are open later than “business hours”, readily accessible telehealth providers, and better public health education could all come about from a public system. Privatized, all of these can only exist with a profit motive, and the insurance and health system are costly.

I agree we might need a minimum staff level of, say, 1 air traffic controller per airport, but unless I've been grievously misinformed about the safety of flying, urgent/stressful emergencies should be very rare.

I suspect the main thing limiting ATC automation is the fact ATC is all done by voice using incredibly shitty radios, and equipment upgrades take like 50 years to roll out.

Isn't that how it should be? Why should a highly paid doctor ever be involved in a routine case that could easily be handled by a nurse?

As an engineer I only get tickets that are too difficult to be handled by support and require code changes. Why should medicine be any different?

Software doesn’t quite have the same fungibility to allow for this, but imagine your job was only being responsible for urgent, high severity tickets throughout your company.

There was no time to mull over a problem, pair code with a peer or junior, or talk to a product owner because everything was urgent and on fire.

They've been talking about automated ATC for at least 20 years now, in part for getting the benefit of more flights arriving and departing per hour than humans can safely manage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Air_Transporta...

They have been working on automated ATC for a lot longer than 20 years. I worked at Eurocontrol 1991-1996 where they had been developing a system called ARC2000 since well before I arrived. As the name suggests it was intended to take over ATC in Europe by the year 2000. I worked on a less ambitious system that helped visualise conflicts for manual resolution but that was not a big priority so I eventually left.

My internship in the mid-1990s was with a professor studying VR systems for ATC for low-visibility operation. At the speed this field changes (or doesn't), I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime.

I'm sure it would be done better if implemented over audio, but the image of a frustrated pilot yelling "REPRESENTATIVE! REPRESENTATIVE!!!" just came to mind.

> Dealing with ATC is very stressful for pilots.

This is not my experience at all, and I suspect is also not at all for air carrier pilots who deal with ATC on every flight.

Sure, the guy in the 170 or J3 who mostly flies off his farm might be stressed by flying into the big city airport, but the vast majority of pilots who interact with ATC regularly don't find it particularly stressful.

In fact, given a choice (and as a VFR pilot I have the choice), 99 times out of 100, I will voluntarily call up and receive flight following from ATC. There's pretty much no down side.

> Those planes will likely be communicating with ATC via networked protocols that have yet to be proposed and standardized.

The protocols are not the issue, it’s the high-bandwidth, low-latency wireless network that’s missing. LEO satcom may be an option in the future, but it isn’t yet for flight and safety critical real time applications.

I just finished building a pilot information system for an airline that uses ACARS to communicate. It’s a backup system for a backup system that supports a redundant electronic flight bag tablet.

An uncurrent pilot is not inherently an unsafe pilot.