as needed. This concatenation could It must be recognised that the alternative in be a part of ground automation. This many cases is HF voice which may result in a also provides the opportunity to create delay of several minutes in issuing a any new emergency messages as ‘time critical’ clearance. needed (applies also to Comment 33). It must also be recognized that some States may use the message elements in the CPDLC message set to communicate clearances via their HF operator. Deletion of these message elements may also prevent them being transmitted by HF! 4.6.1 33 AW The creation of standalone message elements It can be Closed [Editors 21 March]: – and appears completely transparent for the “IMMEDIATELY” “EXPEDITE” to contradict the reason in the previous controller depending of the paragraph for the deletion of the implementation. Concatenations could IMMEDIATELY/EXPEDITE message be and proposed by “pre-formatted” elements! the system according to the operational context. IMMEDIATELY & EXPEDITE are terms generally used when ATC requires the [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 21 – clearance to be executed without delay. Agree with Editors above. March]: However the actual creation of the See also status of Comment 32. element message (and finding that rarely used :IMMEDIATELY” message element) will probably do more harm than good. are also human factors issues with regard to whether the additional message is appended or pre-pended to the clearance, and how this combination of message elements is displayed.
It must be recognised that the alternative in many cases is HF voice which may result in a delay of several minutes in issuing a ‘time critical’ clearance. It must also be recognized that some States may use the message elements in the CPDLC message set to communicate clearances via their HF operator. Deletion of these message elements may also prevent them being transmitted by HF! as needed. This concatenation could be a part of ground automation. This also provides the opportunity to create any new emergency messages as needed (applies also to Comment 33). 4.6.1 33 AW The creation of standalone message elements “IMMEDIATELY” and “EXPEDITE” appears to contradict the reason in the previous paragraph for the deletion of the IMMEDIATELY/EXPEDITE message elements! IMMEDIATELY & EXPEDITE are terms generally used when ATC requires the clearance to be executed without delay. However the actual creation of the message (and finding that rarely used :IMMEDIATELY” message element) will probably do more harm than good. are also human factors issues with regard to whether the additional message element is appended or pre-pended to the clearance, and how this combination of message elements is displayed. [Editors – 21 March]: It can be completely transparent for the controller depending of the implementation. Concatenations could be “pre-formatted” and proposed by the system according to the operational context. [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 – 21 March]: Agree with Editors above. See also status of Comment 32. Closed
OPLINKPWGWHL-4-APR.docx