If the ATIS were all digital, like a METAR that you can get on the phone or tablet it would make some sense. Besides, the METAR is updated right there on the moving map in “real time” anyway.
You can see on an approach plate if “D-ATIS” is available, i.e. you would be able to get it in digital textual form. See e.g. here for some rudimentary information:
http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Automatic_Terminal_Information_Service_(ATIS)
But I doubt that you will get this through the Golze box, as it is usually a very expensive option on the “big irons”, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
LeSving wrote:
Having to listen to ATIS before landing is just yet another self induced pain that serves no real purpose. It is also an extremely clunky (incompatible in reality) method of transferring information to a single pilot with a single radio who is flying in an airspace where two way communication at all times is a requirement.
Try to come to Zagreb tower before startup or to Zagreb approach on arrival without ATIS. It’s specified as mandatory and you have to obtain it. If you skip it regularly, you’ll get warning and they have right to warn you officially via CAA.
LeSving wrote:
If the ATIS were all digital, like a METAR that you can get on the phone or tablet it would make some sense.
How does this match to your theory of complexity of single pilot operations?
LeSving wrote:
Having to listen to ATIS before landing is just yet another self induced pain that serves no real purpose. It is also an extremely clunky (incompatible in reality) method of transferring information to a single pilot with a single radio who is flying in an airspace where two way communication at all times is a requirement.
Do you believe it’s easier to fiddle with phone or tablet, checking connectivity (roaming problems), sending query to get this data, reading it, understanding actual meaning etc. than simple tune radio to ATIS frequency (written at your plates) listen it for few seconds and come back to ATC announcing your have appropriate information on board?
Emir wrote:
LeSving wrote:
Having to listen to ATIS before landing is just yet another self induced pain that serves no real purpose. It is also an extremely clunky (incompatible in reality) method of transferring information to a single pilot with a single radio who is flying in an airspace where two way communication at all times is a requirement.Do you believe it’s easier to fiddle with phone or tablet, checking connectivity (roaming problems), sending query to get this data, reading it, understanding actual meaning etc.
…and all that while maintaining a good lookout?
Technically one could send the ATIS digitally, but in Europe the only transport would be a satellite phone for which there are no “really cheap” solutions. It isn’t going to happen.
It’s not a great system (especially when recorded by someone who can barely speak English) but it’s all we have.
I was thought about IFR arrivals to always do the following in this order…
1) Weather (which requires you to listen to the ATIS)
2) approach plate (select the right one which depends on RWY in use, ceiling, etc so again ATIS needed)
3) minima – bugged based on approach plate (ATC will give you the QNH when starting your descent but it may not be the right one for the destination field yet)
4) set required navigation equipment
5) briefing
I’ve had the QNH change during final no later than this Saturday at LFHS.
Wim
what_next wrote:
And this is one of the reasons why IFR capable aircraft need to be equipped with two COM radios.
This is confirmed not true is it?
Certainly isn’t where I fly (outside Europe). Even for the types of operation where carriage of two radio’s is required, one of those can be a HF radio.
Most aircraft I know have two COM’s anyway.
In those 5% of the cases where you only carry one COM, or the second COM is u/s, what is wrong with “PH-XXX Request latest ATIS?” And if they come back with “PH-XXX monitor 123.45”. Say: “PH-XXX unable, request latest ATIS”.
Easy, not?
However, I wouldn’t hesitate to briefly go off frequency to monitor ATIS to be honest. You can even do some quick swapping, say get half of the ATIS, go back to your ATS frequency, then switch back to ATIS to get the other half.
Emir wrote:
Do you believe it’s easier to fiddle with phone or tablet, checking connectivity (roaming problems)
The phone/tablet/phablet is already there showing the moving map and the route, and unless you are 10k+ there is no problems with connectivity, at least not for getting a couple of lines of text, an SMS. At my home airport you can even call the ATIS with a phone, and “she” will speak the robotic lines in your ear.
I understand what you are saying, but with a single radio, a single pilot, and flying where continuous radio communication is mandatory, surely listening to the ATIS for no other reason than old habit, is a questionable thing. Besides, I have seen no places where ATIS is mandatory. What is mandatory (or at least wanted, is to obtain the needed information). I don’t see why I should do it, even when flying in G, because I am already in contact with information on a dedicated frequency, and they can tell me all I need to know, that’s what the information is for. If they don’t want me to contact them, I would believe they had told me to listen to the ATIS instead years ago.
When starting at an airport, I always listen to ATIS.
Peter wrote:
Technically one could send the ATIS digitally, but in Europe the only transport would be a satellite phone for which there are no “really cheap” solutions. It isn’t going to happen.
As I said, it is currently already being done. But I don’t see why this information couldn’t be mandated to be made publicly available on the internet like METARs, and then every equipment or service provider (like Golze) could find ways to implement the broadcast of this vital information to their customers. If not in the air, then already just to get it into Skydemon before requesting startup would be a killer feature.
I would argue that the heads down time is much higher in any case in trying to correctly note down the ATIS in a moving plane with a pencil from some choppy, heavily accented VHF transmission, rather than having it delivered conveniently, error-free and unambiguously in text format for whichever device you are using to display this information (e.g. a G1000).
But as always, some companies have probably sunk a few millions in some complicated, proprietary, satellite-based delivery system and would now not be able to recover this money if the information was just published on some web server. And since the regulating agencies are staffed by many of the ex employees of such companies, they would never push for an open system that would actually be in the best interest of pilots and their safety.
