Re:WiFi without internet on a Southwest flight
by _moof on Thursday September 28, 2023 @09:07PM
(#37698102)
Yes, it's called the navigation paradox, and it mostly came about with the advent of GPS. It's the reason we now have what's called "strategic lateral offset procedure," or SLOP, whereby aircraft on heavily trafficked oceanic routes fly zero, one, or two miles off the centerline, randomly chosen.
Re:WiFi without internet on a Southwest flight
by darkerside on Friday September 29, 2023 @07:10AM
(#37701988)
This is really interesting. But it seems like it could make collisions more likely, and the better solution would be separate corridors for east vs west traffic. Are there really 5 bidirectional lanes?
Re:WiFi without internet on a Southwest flight
by _moof on Friday September 29, 2023 @08:26AM
(#37702853)
It's a bit more complicated than that. The routes I'm talking about are the North Atlantic Tracks, which are used for most traffic between North America and Europe. There are multiple tracks and SLOP is used within each track. All of the tracks run in the same direction at the same time, switching directions twice a day. They go eastbound at night, westbound during the day. SLOP is a mitigation to prevent aircraft in sequence on the same track from colliding. There are, of course, many other systems and procedures in place to prevent such collisions, but it's belt-and-suspenders up there.
Re:WiFi without internet on a Southwest flight
by spixy on Thursday September 28, 2023 @09:08PM
(#37698106)
how is it any better when 2 opposite planes choose same 2950ft?
Re:WiFi without internet on a Southwest flight
by Dylan16807 on Thursday September 28, 2023 @10:04PM
(#37698465)
It's not. But now that's half as likely. Several choices are even better.
This is because this way, if a pilot goes 3000 ft for instance, it will be exactly 3000 ft, if another pilot also wants to go 3000 ft on a collision trajectory, it will be a guaranteed collision. When altitudes are not that accurate, there is a higher chance it being just a near miss. The solution, I think, was to simply avoid round numbers. So now, it is 2950 ft, 3050 ft,...
I may have the details wrong, but I am quite sure about that problem being seriously considered.