Secret spy planes.
Discussion
pherlopolus said:
red_slr said:
A "U2" (yeah right) caused a reboot of the entire US ATC system last week...
Apparently on a "training flight". ATC computer could not deal with its altitude and heading and tried to send several aircraft into avoiding action which resulted in other aircraft having to avoid them... and so on.. and then it decided to give up.
I'm betting it was more a case of, too fast, momentarily at the wrong altitude in the wrong direction, the ATC system plotted a course at that speed / vector and threw a wobbly. That would mean it wasn't a U2 though so that can't be correct.Apparently on a "training flight". ATC computer could not deal with its altitude and heading and tried to send several aircraft into avoiding action which resulted in other aircraft having to avoid them... and so on.. and then it decided to give up.
The U2 was following Visual Flight Rules On Top (of the cloud layer) at FL600 - so normally it would be left alone by ATC. On the old ATC system, the controller could just enter 'OTP' as the altitude. Whereas the system they recently introduced expects the altitude too ('OTP/600'). Where the new system isn't fed an altitude, as happened here, it treats the aircraft as potentially conflicting with every other aircraft at any level along the predicted track. Every single one of these potential conflicts generates its own chain reaction of calculations as the system tries to predict the implications of avoiding action.
Basically the system overwhelmed itself and fell over for want of altitude information on a single aircraft with an uncommon flight profile, which ATC weren't really interested in anyway (as the U2 was a) responsible for its own separation and b) well above other traffic).
ninja-lewis said:
Wasn't anything to do with the aircraft - purely a system error at the ATC end.
The U2 was following Visual Flight Rules On Top (of the cloud layer) at FL600 - so normally it would be left alone by ATC. On the old ATC system, the controller could just enter 'OTP' as the altitude. Whereas the system they recently introduced expects the altitude too ('OTP/600'). Where the new system isn't fed an altitude, as happened here, it treats the aircraft as potentially conflicting with every other aircraft at any level along the predicted track. Every single one of these potential conflicts generates its own chain reaction of calculations as the system tries to predict the implications of avoiding action.
Basically the system overwhelmed itself and fell over for want of altitude information on a single aircraft with an uncommon flight profile, which ATC weren't really interested in anyway (as the U2 was a) responsible for its own separation and b) well above other traffic).
Why should the operator have to enter any infromation at all regarding the altitude? radar = that aircraft is at that flight level.The U2 was following Visual Flight Rules On Top (of the cloud layer) at FL600 - so normally it would be left alone by ATC. On the old ATC system, the controller could just enter 'OTP' as the altitude. Whereas the system they recently introduced expects the altitude too ('OTP/600'). Where the new system isn't fed an altitude, as happened here, it treats the aircraft as potentially conflicting with every other aircraft at any level along the predicted track. Every single one of these potential conflicts generates its own chain reaction of calculations as the system tries to predict the implications of avoiding action.
Basically the system overwhelmed itself and fell over for want of altitude information on a single aircraft with an uncommon flight profile, which ATC weren't really interested in anyway (as the U2 was a) responsible for its own separation and b) well above other traffic).
Or do you mean it does something like the expected flight plan is entered, and the system attempts to marry up radar contats to those plans, and the altitude for that leg was entered incorrectly in the flight plan?
annodomini2 said:
What about it?
That would be so cool if it were real, unfortunately not though...
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8nKP0adum78
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8nKP0adum78
Just thinking of the project directors comments to the pilot.
"Take it out for a test run. Ultra top secret remember, no one must know, fly high where everyone can see you and in day light, make sure it is not a cloudy day, no one will see you, cameras are not as common as people think".
"Take it out for a test run. Ultra top secret remember, no one must know, fly high where everyone can see you and in day light, make sure it is not a cloudy day, no one will see you, cameras are not as common as people think".
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff