CPDLC

[aeroniemi]

Has any thoughts been taken to implementing CPDLC, both in the client, and working with developers to intergrate it into flight computers?

I think that'd really be something that'd set it apart, and maybe even allow for computerised ATC over places like the atlantic, where CPDLC is used quite a bit

[Andrew Heath]

8 hours ago, aeroniemi said:

Has any thoughts been taken to implementing CPDLC, both in the client, and working with developers to intergrate it into flight computers?

I think that'd really be something that'd set it apart, and maybe even allow for computerised ATC over places like the atlantic, where CPDLC is used quite a bit

Yes, CPDLC is definitely being integrated.

However, I think some people may be using the terms "CPDLC" and "ACARS" datalink interchangeably, and they really shouldn't be. CPDLC is a service of an aircraft's datalink.

ACARS datalink is the most important integration because it allows users to access a wealth of data services including:

• D-ATIS, METARs, TAFs, NOTAMs, etc. all in printable text format
• Flight plan and performance data from dispatch. Basically you can uplink your flight plan and performance data from your dispatch release.
• Free form text messages to dispatch.
• Position reporting to dispatch.
• PDC, which is NOT a direct link to ATC unless it is run through the CPDLC service.
• CPDLC, which IS a direct link to ATC, but not all airplanes or airlines are equipped with it.

Anyway, bottom line... we plan on developing ACARS datalink and all relevant data services.

[James Yuen (1011862)]

Just a thought: at London Heathrow, and possibly other European airports, clearances are given automatically (I believe) when the pilots requests it through datalink. Could something be developed that auto-scans the route, and if the flight plan is correct, then a clearance is issued automatically? Perhaps this could be a long term thought, and it might be quite useful during a busy event - removing a redundant aspect for correct flight plans.

[Josh G]

5 hours ago, James Yuen said:

Just a thought: at London Heathrow, and possibly other European airports, clearances are given automatically (I believe) when the pilots requests it through datalink. Could something be developed that auto-scans the route, and if the flight plan is correct, then a clearance is issued automatically? Perhaps this could be a long term thought, and it might be quite useful during a busy event - removing a redundant aspect for correct flight plans.

I think you probably need a pretty advanced system to check if a route is truly valid. For the US at least, there may be reroutes required on a certain route, and many different combinations of what could be considered a valid or invalid route. Additionally, simply the choice of one SID versus another may not be able to be determined by a computer all that easy (If SFO is 1/28, assign the TRUKN2, but if the plane is heavy they may require the SNTNA2, but if OAK is East everyone gets the SNTNA2, and at night they could fly the NIITE3).

There are too many exceptions to a standard for this to be able to work globally in my opinion. 

[Andrew Heath]

23 hours ago, Josh G said:

I think you probably need a pretty advanced system to check if a route is truly valid. For the US at least, there may be reroutes required on a certain route, and many different combinations of what could be considered a valid or invalid route. Additionally, simply the choice of one SID versus another may not be able to be determined by a computer all that easy (If SFO is 1/28, assign the TRUKN2, but if the plane is heavy they may require the SNTNA2, but if OAK is East everyone gets the SNTNA2, and at night they could fly the NIITE3).

There are too many exceptions to a standard for this to be able to work globally in my opinion. 

While I understand your point, we actually disagree. We are going to attempt an automatic PDC client. What will be necessary is for local Facility Engineers to put if/than statements into the client/server that will take into account all those local variables you mentioned. So to answer your question @James Yuen, we are going to attempt an automatic PDC client and we are also going to attempt to make it available 24/7 regardless of whether ATC is online or not.

[Josh G]

2 hours ago, Andrew said:

While I understand your point, we actually disagree. We are going to attempt an automatic PDC client. What will be necessary is for local Facility Engineers to put if/than statements into the client/server that will take into account all those local variables you mentioned. So to answer your question @James Yuen, we are going to attempt an automatic PDC client and we are also going to attempt to make it available 24/7 regardless of whether ATC is online or not.

In that case, awesome. Will pilots receive a transponder code if ATC is offline? Are all planes going to be able to use this, or only planes that would actually have a PDC/CPDLC system (i.e. not a Cub/Skyhawk)?

[Andrew Heath]

A little teaser for you all, enjoy.

 

[Wong B]

3 hours ago, Andrew said:

A little teaser for you all, enjoy.

 

Have any ATC client information to share?

[aeroniemi]

Looking good, nice choice of code editor

[michael l. (1013913)]

What would the ATC see in regards to PDC

[Andrew Heath]

@ml0130 Controllers will be able to manipulate CPDLC both through the data block and a CPDLC menu.

[michael l. (1013913)]

So it will be the same UI as the pilots UI for PDC

[Andrew Heath]

@ml0130 No, it will definitely be a different interface.

[RichardMcDWoods]

I would like to see the CPDLC implementation include an AI component whereby each en route sector without a duty controller would provide 'intelligent' responses to pilots messages. Then pilots would feel a much greater involvement in ATC in the great majority of sectors worldwide where there is no controller on duty.

[Andrew Heath]

@Richard McDonald Woods

What do you mean by "intelligent responses to pilots' messages"? I guess some examples of how you see this working would be good.

[SquawkModeCharlie]

10 hours ago, Andrew said:

@Richard McDonald Woods

What do you mean by "intelligent responses to pilots' messages"? I guess some examples of how you see this working would be good.

I think he means A.I. ATC for high level enroute sectors where no human ATC is online.

So if you check in with A.I. enroute ATC through CPDLC, you'll get an 'intelligent response' back.

[RichardMcDWoods]

Hi Andrew,

Because flying en route sectors has relatively fewer interactions with ATC, it would be possible for pilot initiated interactions to be supported by AI ATC when flying an unstaffed sector. The result would be an improved immersion for the pilot because, during the whole of en-route flight, ATC would be 'available' at all times.

Examples:

• Simple, pilot "Request level [level]"; AI ATC "Climb to [level]/and maintain [altitude] "; pilot"Climbing to [level] "
• More complex, on entering a sector with approach control on duty, AI ATC "At [position] contact [unit name] [frequency] "; pilot "Wilco"
• Flying in an en-route sector where live ATC comes online, no action
• Flying in an en-route sector where live ATC goes offline, no action

Only a small subset of CPDLC messages would need to be supported to give pilots a feeling of being in on-going contact. Transfers between live and AI ATC would be transparent. The implementation of CPDLC within, for example, PMDG Global Flight Operations would be complemented by the AI ATC within POSCON.

I hope this helps.

Any further details, please do ask.

Kind regards, Richard

[Tim Barker]

Richard,

 

To attempt the AI to Online Approach, you would probably have to have it defined to do that at a certain location. This would require a ton of engineering and personalization per airport I think. For example, most approach controls arent a circle so you couldnt use a base mileage from the airport. You would need to define a fix for every instance. But what if your flight plan doesn't have a switchover fix? What if you're an overflight with the switchover fix in your route? What if the airport in question uses a different approach control first for example, KMDW landers from the east go through South Bend Approach then go to Chicago Approach.  

[RichardMcDWoods]

Hi Tim!

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

As I see it, there is a need to be able to identify the transition point in the flight plan i.e. crossing the last waypoint of the en route phase and entering the STAR.  I cannot yet envisage how this could be achieved, particularly as there is nothing stopping a pilot filing an FP containing a STAR.

Yet, PMDG has said that they will be providing pilots with CPDLC functions. This implies that they will be able to determine the transition point in a flight in order to terminate CPDLC provision and switching to an approach controller. I wonder how they might do this?

Further thought needed

Regards, Richard

[RichardMcDWoods]

Hi Tim,

I am assuming that there is a CPDLC function available to the pilot such as with Global Flight Operations.

I feel that the answer to crossing the last waypoint, that is entering the STAR at the transition point, does not require any further action by the CPDLC AI.

If approach control is on duty then they will request that you contact them. If there is no active approach control then there need be no further AI interaction with the pilot and approach can be flown as the pilot desires.

Likewise, if a departure controller is on duty then the pilot will be notified to contact using CPDLC at the appropriate point. If there is no departure controller on duty, then the pilot will be free to contact via CPDLC when appropriate. If the pilot never contacts CPDLC then nothing is gained nor lost.

Do you concur?

Regards, Richard

[Mustafa 1033820]

Hey,

I´m new here and would like work with CPDLC. My Aircrafts are Include CPDLC mirror. Fenix A320, FlybyWire and Headwind Aircrafts. Can I use my Aircraft mirror "CPDLC" or only WebUi?

Thanks

Mustafa

[Maher Abaza]

Hello @Mustafa 1033820,
Currently there are no 3rd-party CPDLC integration with any add-on aircraft.