NORAD after 9/11: If it's broke, fix it

[BigAl]

(For people unfamiliar with defense procurement, 8 years to deliver a system like this is not unusual.)

”[BCS] enables our warfighters in the air defense sectors to monitor the airspace over the United States, which during 9/11 was a big gap in our capability. This system is the long-term system that not only enables us to look out, but also to monitor the airspace over the U.S. and Canada.”

- Lt. Col. Robert Bubello, BCS-Fixed program manager
​

Buried deep beneath Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has monitored the skies above North America for more than 50 years. During the height of the Cold War, NORAD was the US and Canada’s early warning system for a Soviet 1st nuclear strike.

Following 9/11, NORAD moved to improve its ability to detect and monitor aircraft originating from within the US and Canada. One of those efforts, funded by the US Air Force, is development of the Battle Control System-Fixed (BCS-F). BCS-F integrates data from civil air traffic sensors, as well as airborne, ground and naval sensors, into an integrated air picture that allows commanders to better monitor the North American airspace.
...

Among other things, BCS is designed to help detect off-course aircraft like the ones that struck the World Trade Center in 2001. Using high-speed servers that correlate data from radar and flight control sources, BCS is intended to deliver a heads-up when something is wrong in the skies over North America.

An interview with Defense News, Lt. Col. Robert Bubello, BCS-Fixed program manager, explained:

”[BCS] enables our warfighters in the air defense sectors to monitor the airspace over the United States, which during 9/11 was a big gap in our capability. This system is the long-term system that not only enables us to look out, but also to monitor the airspace over the U.S. and Canada.”​

...

Commenting on how the system could detect domestic aircraft deviating from approved flight plans, Dan De Sollar, C2 Air Operations program area director at ThalesRaytheonSystems, told Defense News that:

“Each aircraft that is flying has to have [filed] an approved flight plan with the FAA. [BCS] takes the data from the FAA and the data from radar and datalinks and correlates it to make sure it’s flying within its flight plan. When it deviates by a certain amount, it alerts the operator to determine what to do next.”
​

An effort would be made to establish radio contact with a deviating flight, but the ground commander would have the option of scrambling jets to establish visual contact if necessary. Such a tactic could be used to intercept a hostile flight or provide aid to one in distress, De Sollar said.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...Monitor-Domestic-Air-Traffic-06141/#more-6141​

 

[tfk]

(For people unfamiliar with defense procurement, 8 years to deliver a system like this is not unusual.)

”[BCS] enables our warfighters in the air defense sectors to monitor the airspace over the United States, which during 9/11 was a big gap in our capability. This system is the long-term system that not only enables us to look out, but also to monitor the airspace over the U.S. and Canada.”

- Lt. Col. Robert Bubello, BCS-Fixed program manager
​

This is very interesting. Clearly it is a giant improvement on the military's knowledge of US air space.

But there is a fundamental piece of info that is simply wrong.

He says:

Commenting on how the system could detect domestic aircraft deviating from approved flight plans, Dan De Sollar, C2 Air Operations program area director at ThalesRaytheonSystems, told Defense News that:

“Each aircraft that is flying has to have [filed] an approved flight plan with the FAA. [BCS] takes the data from the FAA and the data from radar and datalinks and correlates it to make sure it’s flying within its flight plan. When it deviates by a certain amount, it alerts the operator to determine what to do next.”

And he is wrong.

Flight plans are only required for 1) IFR flights and 2) VFR flights in coastal & domestic air defense zones. The vast majority of VFR flights do not require flight plans.

Which leads one to ask, how is this system going to respond to the hundreds of flights per day for which it has no flight plan?

Many people are unaware that there are a huge number (perhaps the majority) of planes flying at any given time that are under zero "control" from any air traffic controller. They are General Aviation VFR, recreational or private business flights.

Some of the most fun flying is just like going out for a Sunday drive. No particular destination in mind, let's just go "look at the mountains, see what we can see, land at some remote (or abandoned) airport and go exploring". I sure hope this doesn't become a thing of the past.

tom

 

[gumboot]

This sounds more like PR talk than practical reality. The NORAD alert bases are still at the perimeter so they simply can't cover the entire USA. They did this in the 1960s and it required hundreds and hundreds of alert fighters.

Also, even amongst those flights in controlled airspace that are following pre-determined flight plans, those flight plans change constantly, and aircraft deviate constantly. Any given FAA ARTCC typically experiences a transponder failure at least once a week. Temporary radio contact failure occurs multiple times on any given day.

 

[dropzone]

I grew up near an NORAD anti-bomber station I figured out was useless when I was 13, and that late date was because of technical advancements. NORAD is one of those things that most posters who aren't AQ, and probably them, might find common ground.