REFLECTIONS
MOSTLY A CNS/ATM ENGINEER'S SELF-REFLECTION
MOSTLY A CNS/ATM ENGINEER'S SELF-REFLECTION
I sometimes think that many people in the industry confuse objectives with means. Yes, we must always strive to improve safety, capacity, and efficiency—but improvement and development should never become goals in themselves.
If we lose focus, we risk inventing things we don't truly need, or that are technically, operationally, or economically unfeasible.
And remember this: it's not our money—it's the money of the passengers and the taxpayers.
THERE IS A REASON FOR EVERYTHING IN ATM
To anyone interested in understanding the "whys" of Air Traffic Management, I highly recommend the book "100 YEARS AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL" by Philippe Domogala and Philip Marien, published by IFATCA.
This is an extraordinary book with excellent content and outstanding editing. There is no other place where you can find such a wealth of ATM-related historical information.
Probably all of us embody a certain combination of these three roles. The proportion may depend on your age, personal experience, company, or simply your genetics—who knows.
What is true is that as you gain experience, and if you make an effort to understand “why things are the way they are,” you should become more level‑headed, avoid grandiloquent statements, and steer clear of empty buzzwords. At the same time, if you look at ATM as a whole ecosystem—comprising a variety of technical disciplines, influenced by politics and economics, formed by many organizations each with its own idiosyncrasies and dynamics, and ultimately driven by people with their beliefs, motivations, and needs—then, and only then, you will begin to understand “how it works” and what you can and cannot change.
Unfortunately, reality is sometimes so harsh that some lose all hope and fall into the renegade category. I’m not going to criticize that—we’re human, after all.
Yes, our job is complex, safety-critical, and has a significant impact on society. At the end of the day, Air Navigation is a public service — and it deserves integrity and responsibility from its professionals.
Nonetheless, it is astonishing to witness the continuous use — and eventual abuse — of terms like “seamless,” “unprecedented,” “revolutionary,” “breakthrough,” “milestone,” “success,” and so on in nearly every Air Traffic Management-related announcement.
Yes, things could (and should) be improved. However, the harsh reality is that we still rely on fundamentals established many decades ago — and in aviation, evolution has always delivered more than revolution.
Engineers (myself included) tend to believe that all problems can be solved through technology, often overlooking economic, political, and operational factors. No problem can be solved without departing from reality — and reality always has multiple faces. The technical one is just one of them, and not necessarily the most important.
There’s a reason why things are the way they are. The history of aviation has been built on bricks of fatal accidents, wars, and economic crises. So be humble — and think twice before declaring your own “revolutionary breakthrough.”
"Acronyms are unavoidable. In technical literature, they are useful and, when properly defined and used, become meaningful terms. What happens nowadays is that many professionals seem to invent the acronym first and then try to adapt reality to it—the trend of using catchy, fuzzy words is a clear example.
At the end of the day, it is much easier to invent an acronym than to create something real. It's a convenient way to look like you're doing something important when, in reality, you're doing almost nothing new."