back to article Radar gremlins GROUND FLIGHTS across southern Blighty

Computer glitches in the UK's air traffic control system have restricted the number of flights over the south of England. It's reported thousands of passengers and holidaymakers face delays thanks to the technology gremlins. National Air Traffic Services (NATS) confirmed that it's "experiencing technical problems" at its …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. zaax

    flightradar24

    flightradar24 seems to show no less aircraft than normal for Southern Britian.

    1. Shades

      Re: flightradar24

      Could this be because scheduled flights are being given priority over chartered flights which, last time I looked, weren't tracked in-flight anyway?

      1. druck Silver badge

        Re: flightradar24

        All aircraft entering commercial flight lanes have to have a suitable mode-S or ADS-B transponder, so will be picked up on surveillance radar, and hence "tracked in-flight".

        1. Shades

          Re: flightradar24

          Well, the last few chartered flights I've tried to track (one being a couple of weeks ago, a Thomson flight) did not appear on any (online/app) flight tracker I used, only the scheduled (and actual) departure and arrival times were displayed. Maybe I've been doing something wrong then?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: flightradar24

      "flightradar24 seems to show no less aircraft than normal for Southern Britian."

      I expect you mean "no fewer"

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm going on holidays in two weeks

    WARNING JOKE FOLLOWS

    They better fix their shit up, or I'm going to blow it sky high!!

    WARNING JOKE ENDS

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Recent cases on either side of the Atlantic suggest that marking your commentary as "a joke" in order to avoid being arrested on suspicion of being a terrorist is about as useful as as marking it as "allegedly" in order to avoid being sued for libel.

      Even talking about the weather is risky these days :-(

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
        Big Brother

        Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

        "It is allegedly alleged that jocularity is involved in rumors about the use of possible $HOTWORD"

        THAT'S IT! YOU ARE GOING DOWN!

    2. hplasm
      Big Brother

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Two weeks in Gitmo.

      You're doomed!

      1. xyz Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

        >Two weeks in Gitmo.

        >You're doomed!

        Actually, it sounds quite nice. I hear that you even get your own personal food attendant these days ++ you don't even have to chew anymore and they'll even carry you to the table. That's what I call service!

    3. Maharg
      Happy

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Hi! Paul Chambers here, You may remember me from such news stories as

      “Twitter airport bomb joker to face jail”

      “Robin Hood Airport, Yes, it is a real place”

      “Northern Irishman in bomb scare shock”

      and “My only comment is, thank God I’m not a Muslim, or I would not be available for comment”.

      While I fully support your joke, I would like to suggest you remove all items that could be mistaken for a weapon from a half mile radius of your home, and spend the rest of the afternoon practicing your ‘non-threatening face’ while waiting for the knock on the door. You may also want to become friends with Al Murray and Stephen Fry.

    4. plrndl
      Big Brother

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      You do realise that ALL ACs will now be locked up until they can be extradited to the US to face terrorism charges?

    5. Daniel B.
      Alert

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Didn't a teen just get jailed because he joked about "going to blow up a school full of kids and eat their corpses" ... even though the next lines said "lol, jk" ???

      The security services seem to be going dumber every day...

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Looks like there's 33 members in your terror joke cell and you're all being actively tacked now!

      1. Will Godfrey Silver badge

        Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

        "tacked"

        Gives a whole new meaning to being nailed to the wall.

    7. mIRCat
      Black Helicopters

      Re: I'm going on holidays in two weeks

      Anonymous is only anonymous until government comes knocking.

    8. Evil Auditor Silver badge

      Re WARNING JOKE FOLLOWS

      Word "JOKE" does not compute. All I understand is bomb threat. Get him! Hang him!

      /irony

  3. b0llchit Silver badge
    Alien

    Oh Boy

    Its a cyber-attack! All duck and quack!

    Alternatively, the aliens have been spotted once again and the global conspiracy will continue to hide them in the secret chamber.

    (sometimes you wish you could choose multiple icons; a coat for the aliens may be required)

    1. WatAWorld

      or a bug in the NSA interface routine

      or a bug in the NSA interface routine

  4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    FAIL

    *still* not got all the bugs out of this yet?

    Swanwick seems to be "slow-motion-car-crash" mode for years already.

    And for the record "Allegedly" works pretty well for avoiding trouble with lawyers.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Good

    There are far too many aircraft in the sky over the SE already. Long may this fault continue.

    1. Alan Johnson

      Re: Good

      What makes too many?

      I work extremely close to heathrow and it is remarkable how quiet the aircraft are nowadays. Modern economies are founded on easy communication and travel. I think there are far too few aircraft over SE england caused by the paralysis of our political and planning system that makes it impossiblw to sensibly increase capacity. This is damaging the UK economy and therefore jobs etc.

      1. bazza Silver badge

        Re: Good

        "I work extremely close to heathrow and it is remarkable how quiet the aircraft are nowadays."

        From what I've read it seems that planes landing are now the bigger noise problem, not planes taking off.

        Quiet engines, steep ascents, throttling back at the right moment so as to be able to tip-toe away have made take-offs much quieter than they used to be.

        But when landing aircraft are still coming in on a straight line, in a shallow glide, shedding speed as they go (which makes a ton of noise) and they're going slowly anyway. It means they can't fly around noise sensitive areas like they can on take off, they're low, and they they take ages to pass overhead. Sorting those problems out will take a lot of thinking.

        1. Christoph
          Flame

          Re: Good

          So now can they reduce the noise of the Met's helicopter when it circles somewhere above my house for half-an-hour at three in the morning?

          1. JimmyPage Silver badge
            Flame

            Re: Good

            Tell me about it - only it's not London, but Brum. Have had that sodding copper chopper hovering in a tight circle around my street for 90 minutes at least 3 times this year.

            Around 2 am.

            No sirens, no sounds from the ground, and nothing on their twitter feed.

            Oh, and it has some sort of flashbomb on the front, so as it's bearing down it's blinding you - really wouldn't have been out of place in "Apocalypse Now".

            I have little time for a police force that tries hard to intimidate it's citizens.

          2. John G Imrie

            Re: Good

            So now can they reduce the noise of the Met's helicopter when it circles somewhere above my house for half-an-hour at three in the morning?

            No those are deliberately noisy as its a well know fact that terrorists hate the sound of western helicopters and will run out of their hiding places to shake their fists at them, making it easier to detain them.

            PS if you don't know a terrorist in you area, then its you!!!

        2. An0n C0w4rd

          Re: Good

          @bazza

          If you watched Airport Live, you'd know that manufacturers like Airbus are working on the problem. e.g. a lot of noise comes from landing gear and slats and flaps and other devices that are needed for takeoff and landing and disrupt the otherwise smooth passage of air around the aircraft (e.g. airbrakes/spoilers). Those contribute a lot noise, especially on landing (landing gear is raised quickly on takeoff to reduce drag). Putting a small cover over the landing gear mechanism near the wheels (brakes, etc) made a noticeable difference in the noise profile of the undercarriage.

          There are other things that can be done also. The universally accepted approach angle is 3 degrees. A slightly steeper approach angle will reduce the noise quite a bit, especially further from the airport. It also means less engine power is needed to sustain the glide slope (you never fly your engines at flight idle on approach at 3 degrees, they're always generating a bit more thrust. It's easier said than done as you'd have to recalibrate a LOT of gear, including the now infamous glideslope ILS transmitters.

          1. genghis_uk
            Unhappy

            Re: Good

            Not so sure about 3 degrees glideslope on my recent landing in Dallas Fort Worth!

            I swear the BA pilot was an ex-harrier flyer and the spine shortening lading was one of the harshest I have ever had...

            1. nsld
              Stop

              Re: Good

              I flew into Frankfurt last week with BA, they didnt land the plane, they threw it sideways at the runway.

              3 degrees might be optimal but no one told our pilot that!

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Good

            > you never fly your engines at flight idle on approach at 3 degrees

            Someone should tell Asiana...

        3. Stevie

          Re: Good

          Possibly the decision to relocate International Rescue's secret headquarters to an island in the Pacific has had something to do with it.

          Every time Thunderbird Two launched or landed my kitchen windows would break.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Good

        ".... system that makes it impossiblw to sensibly increase capacity"

        What the f'ing hell do you think HS2 is? A way of getting more people to do business ooop North (outside of M25 that is). Don't be so silly, it's to get people in and out of BHX and London ASAP.

      3. Maharg
        Megaphone

        Re: Good

        “I work extremely close to heathrow and it is remarkable how quiet the aircraft are nowadays”

        I also work close to Heathrow, and I agree, the aircrafts have gotten a lot quieter, I recently told this to my brother who lives in the countryside when I went to stay with him, he told me to stop shouting and turn the TV down.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        WTF?

        Re: Good

        "What makes too many?"

        The fact that you hardly get blue skies over London any more - its always a white smear of vapour trails - and in a damn aircraft goes over at low level about once a minute either taking off or landing.

        "I think there are far too few aircraft over SE england caused by the paralysis of our political and planning system that makes it impossiblw to sensibly increase capacity."

        Too few?? Are you a troll or just a fool?

        "This is damaging the UK economy and therefore jobs etc."

        Utter bollocks. Air travel is a minor part of the UK economy - its only the vested interests in the air transport sector who are clamouring for more capacity and gullible politicians who believe them.

        For the record London has more runway capacity than ANY other capital in europe. Don't believe me?

        Ok then , try Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, City, Stansted, Southend, Biggin Hill.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Good

          "you hardly get blue skies over London any more"

          Up-voted for correct writing of "any more" and not that horrible non-word "anymore."

          (Oh, and agreeing with the sentiment).

        2. Intractable Potsherd

          Re: Good

          I'm appalled at the Luddism shown by supposedly techy types. Air travel is one of the greatest inventions of mankind, and you complain about a bit of noise (I grew up on the flight path of Vulcans, and recently lived on the path from Birmingham), and would happily move back to live near a proper airport (Dundee doesn't count ...)

          NIMBYs are the lowest form of social life.

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Good

        "What makes too many?"

        Remember the few days after 9/11? And how there wasn't the continual background rumble of aircraft, and skies unpolluted with contrails? Lovely.

      6. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge
        Black Helicopters

        Re: Good

        I work extremely close to heathrow and it is remarkable how quiet the aircraft are nowadays.

        Are you sure it isn't just continual aircraft noise slowly making you deaf?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Good

      I may be one of the few people who would gladly see profoundly noisy aircraft such as the Fairey Rotodyne reinvented and put into use - no matter how loud those rotor tip jets were - because it looked brilliant.

      Anon, as I hail from an area of Eastern England where there seem to be fewer flights and I grew up to the sound of Lightnings and Jaguars so unlikely to be met with enthusiasm by someone whose conservatory lies under the final approach into Heathrow.

      1. mad_dr
        Boffin

        Re: Good

        Yeah - bring back the Republic XF-84H too!

        The loudest plane in history. Powered by a supersonic propeller mated to a turbine engine with reheat capability! Famed for making ground crew and people in the tower physically ill (nausea, headaches and seizures!), even when taxiing due to the constant sonic boom coming off the tips of the prop that were travelling at over mach 1.1.

        The sonic boom shockwave extended from the prop for hundreds of yards and was audible from up to 25 miles away when doing high-speed ground run-ups!

        Respect...

    3. Tom 38

      Re: Good

      The Evening Standard has had a multitude of articles on Heathrow expansion.

      A couple of weeks ago it was a scare piece, saying how awful everyone's life is in West London due to all the flights, aircraft noise and so on, and how a Heathrow expansion would be a disaster.

      Literally two days later, the local politicos in West London went apeshit at the idea of BoJo Island, which would DESTROY their local boroughs and lead to the collapse of civilisation in Hillingdon.

  6. Flywheel

    Signal failure

    Due to running out of money after the last round of directors' bonuses we couldn't afford to pay the bill for this quarter. We apologise for the interruption to your journey and any inconvenience this may cause. We're attempting to source a couple of buses for you..

  7. Don Jefe
    Happy

    Diplomacy At Work

    Wonder if there's a chance Snowden might have been going that way. It is unlikely I know, just more fun than to think its just buggy software.

  8. g e
    Black Helicopters

    Keep an eye out

    For US transport planes with Snowden-shaped rendition cargo on those flight paths.

  9. Pete4000uk

    I did wonder...

    Why a few pilots were talking about radar problems in Bristol (sector). I guess they can't use hand signals at 25,000ft!

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: I did wonder...

      It's not the 25,000ft that's the problem, it's the 500MPH!

      1. Velv
        Coat

        Re: I did wonder...

        "It's not the 25,000ft that's the problem, it's the 500MPH!"

        I think you'll find opening the window at 25,000ft to do a hand signal is a big problem.

  10. Rob H

    In the mean time, at Eindhoven.nl airport

    pic.twitter.com/hauY6TOfEP

    1. Alan Edwards
      Coat

      Own up, who put petrol in a diesel 737?

    2. An0n C0w4rd

      New jet engines (Which I think includes the APU in the tail) come covered in a protective oil for storage purposes. When you first fire them up, that smoke cloud happens. Go watch the video on airbus.com of the recent power-up of the Trent XWB engines for another example.

  11. wolfetone Silver badge

    Chinese Engineer

    They need to get that Chinese Engineer on the case and fix this. You know the guy, the one who was watching the film on the big screen he was supposed to be fixing?

  12. Down not across
    Joke

    Maybe they should just blow the dust off the old PDP-11s...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Swanwick PDP11 now at TNMoC?

      "Maybe they should just blow the dust off the old PDP-11s.."

      They're in Bletchley at TNMoC aren't they, so hopefully not gathering too much dust?

      The people who understood them, on the other hand? Hopefully they're still around, but they may not come cheap (it's a scarce resource, Tim Worstall will tell you that scarce stuff in demand can be expensive).

      I might be available.

      1. Down not across

        Re: Swanwick PDP11 now at TNMoC?

        As far as I know TNMoC indeed have some of the old kit.

        There is a nice article by Peter Vaughan about getting all running again involving some board shuffling and a rather userful paperclip.

        Note to self, must make some time for trip up to Bletchley.

  13. Piers

    Poor Amy-Kate Robinson...

    ...is #boredboredbored

    Although this may be a bit better than her hitting another aircraft in flight...

  14. Velv
    Joke

    The Russians used to have it sussed. They didn't bother with controllers to keep the planes apart in flight. Before departure the pilots were given three things: a height, a route and a speed.

    If they deviate from any one of them they'd be joined by a couple of Migs and they'd land at the nearest available airfield. Passengers continue by coach and the crew are never seen again Very good system, didn't suffer in the slightest from repetitive faults!

    (credit to David Gunson for his awesome After Dinner speech)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      An upvote for your reference to David Gunson

    2. graeme leggett Silver badge

      I was just thinking about that bit of it on the way home. "One on each wingtip" he says about the MiGs.

      chock full of beautiful lines. It might be imprinted on my brain, the number of times we listened to it in the car on long journeys. In describing landing "my apologies gentlemen, but the wind is coming from your end"

      I think he covers most everything under the sun in aviation in that speech. Concorde, why helicopters take off, landing on aircraft carriers, French air traffic control ( "I accept zem"), aircraft evacuation. All yours for £8 off Amazon and there's a taster on youtube.

  15. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
    Coat

    FAO The Post Office

    Would the Post Office please note that this is the correct procedure for handling a computer failure. You do NOT insist your system is bullet proof, let the planes fly, and then put the pilots or air traffic controllers into jail when a plane crashes. (Or insist 76 crashes out of 200,000 flights is acceptable.) This has been a public safety announcement. The exits are on the left and on the right, next to my coat, which I will now take. Thank you for your attention.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: FAO The Post Office

      Congratulations on cross connecting these two stories!

      So as with the Post Office cock up adequate remedy for those killed in the ensuing accidents would be a refund of their air fare!

      (Readers who've not seen the PO story: computer error led to people being bankrupted and jailed for fraud, having belatedly investigated and found out it was indeed a computer error PO appears to be proposing a refund as adequate recompense for ruined lives).

  16. John G Imrie

    Mixing two stories

    Computer glitches in the UK's air traffic control system have restricted the number of flights over the south of England.

    and

    Post Office Computer system so bug free people have gone to jail solely on its evidence.

    I know which of the two industries I want a job in

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Pride cometh before a fall...

    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/uk/news/press-releases/2013-press-releases/lockheed-martin-performance-recognised-by-nats-.html

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      Oh. NATS get their software support off LockMart

      All your aircraft movement belong to the NSA.

  18. ThatGuy

    Airbus 787 Dreamliner

    The image for this article is an image with the above tag. If it's a joke, well done, otherwise: please fire your designer...

  19. taxman

    Non news really?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23241791

    1. Bob Starling
      WTF?

      Non news. Really?

      I'm somewhat concerned by the statement in that BBC news link that the problem was caused by a "rogue flight plan" and required a reboot to fix. I would have hoped that a system like NATS would not fall off its perch merely because of a bit of bad data.

      1. SkippyBing

        Re: Non news. Really?

        Indeed, the "rogue flight plan" line does smack of 'lies told to children' rather than being a plausible explanation of what happened.

  20. SharkNose

    Come back IBM 9020D, all is forgiven...

  21. ElNumbre
    Black Helicopters

    Switching to Backup

    My first reaction was... why don't they just switch to computer system B? or system C if B is currently under maintenance.

    Then I remembered that this was NATS running a safety of life service for one of the busiest airspaces in the world. Oh how I laughed at my own sillyness.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Switching to Backup

      Yes NATS record in recent years is less than impressive.

      But in what way is it "safety of life" though ? Obviously life is easier for the drivers if everything at NATS is working, and you can get more traffic through if everything is working. And the chance of incidents does increase when the system stops working.

      But it's not safety critical in the same sense as (say) the no-mechanical-backup computer controlled fuel system on pretty much every modern commercial or military aircraft engine fitted in the last decade or two is safety critical, really, is it?

      When each engine control system on a given plane has an identical software or hardware failure at the same time for the same reason, because they're all identical, now THAT's a problem in "safety of life" terms. Or as the industry calls it, DO178 Level A terms (there's probably an IEC SIL equivalent but I'm not sure their system and nomenclature is entirely equivalent).

      Fortunately those things don't happen very often. Keep your fingers crossed it stays that way.

This topic is closed for new posts.