Why is aircraft marshalling still necessary?












18












$begingroup$


I've seen in a documentary that many airports have people guiding the airplanes to the parking spots (marshals). I've also noticed that the key point is to reach a precise spot on which the nose landing gear has to be placed. Couldn't that be solved with a camera installed on the landing gear itself so the pilots can check whether they go along the lines and finally reach the precise spot?






airport taxiing







share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
    $endgroup$
    – Davor
    Dec 22 '18 at 10:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
    $endgroup$
    – user16289
    Dec 22 '18 at 14:31






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
    $endgroup$
    – user71659
    Dec 22 '18 at 21:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:45
















18












$begingroup$


I've seen in a documentary that many airports have people guiding the airplanes to the parking spots (marshals). I've also noticed that the key point is to reach a precise spot on which the nose landing gear has to be placed. Couldn't that be solved with a camera installed on the landing gear itself so the pilots can check whether they go along the lines and finally reach the precise spot?






airport taxiing







share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
    $endgroup$
    – Davor
    Dec 22 '18 at 10:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
    $endgroup$
    – user16289
    Dec 22 '18 at 14:31






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
    $endgroup$
    – user71659
    Dec 22 '18 at 21:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:45














18












18








18





$begingroup$


I've seen in a documentary that many airports have people guiding the airplanes to the parking spots (marshals). I've also noticed that the key point is to reach a precise spot on which the nose landing gear has to be placed. Couldn't that be solved with a camera installed on the landing gear itself so the pilots can check whether they go along the lines and finally reach the precise spot?






airport taxiing







share|improve this question











$endgroup$




I've seen in a documentary that many airports have people guiding the airplanes to the parking spots (marshals). I've also noticed that the key point is to reach a precise spot on which the nose landing gear has to be placed. Couldn't that be solved with a camera installed on the landing gear itself so the pilots can check whether they go along the lines and finally reach the precise spot?






airport taxiing




airport taxiing






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Dec 21 '18 at 19:35









M28

2,079622




2,079622










asked Dec 21 '18 at 19:05









ClaudixClaudix

6702919




6702919








  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
    $endgroup$
    – Davor
    Dec 22 '18 at 10:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
    $endgroup$
    – user16289
    Dec 22 '18 at 14:31






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
    $endgroup$
    – user71659
    Dec 22 '18 at 21:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:45














  • 7




    $begingroup$
    @RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
    $endgroup$
    – Davor
    Dec 22 '18 at 10:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
    $endgroup$
    – user16289
    Dec 22 '18 at 14:31






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
    $endgroup$
    – user71659
    Dec 22 '18 at 21:31






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:45








7




7




$begingroup$
@RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
$endgroup$
– Davor
Dec 22 '18 at 10:31




$begingroup$
@RussellMcMahon - that is completelly and utterly false. As someone whose job is software development, that's like you said walking carefully outperforms flying in a 747. The only reason is cost.
$endgroup$
– Davor
Dec 22 '18 at 10:31




1




1




$begingroup$
Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
$endgroup$
– user16289
Dec 22 '18 at 14:31




$begingroup$
Think of it this way, (and I'm going to completely fabricate these numbers): Any extra weight requires extra fuel to be carried. Say 10 kg of weight might require 1 kg extra fuel. Across a fleet of aircraft, even a very small increase in weight can have a profound impact on fuel costs. Said another way, a human marshaller is likely more cost effective than installing such a system. At least for now.
$endgroup$
– user16289
Dec 22 '18 at 14:31




6




6




$begingroup$
camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Dec 22 '18 at 17:49




$begingroup$
camera installed on the landing gear? What about wingtips? and the top of the tail. or 180 degrees to the right, where some jackass is about to cut me off. or there's some lady chasing her kid, or baggage flying around; debris on the runway, etc. (locusts!) Cat and dogs, living together. Mass hysteria!
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Dec 22 '18 at 17:49




1




1




$begingroup$
@user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
$endgroup$
– user71659
Dec 22 '18 at 21:31




$begingroup$
@user16289 They do have taxi cameras on large aircraft already because its impractical to have a human marshaller accompany the airplane to the runway.
$endgroup$
– user71659
Dec 22 '18 at 21:31




1




1




$begingroup$
@Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
$endgroup$
– Russell McMahon
Dec 24 '18 at 10:45




$begingroup$
@Davor You misunderstood what I said / I could have been clearer :-). I meant that the cost of implementing protection measures that meet all eventualities in eg the random-threat rich environment of taxiing amongst people, aircraft, unexpected material and protrusions, un or partially authorised people, ... - is so far much more $ costly than using x% of a person to do the same thing. A well enough programmed, sensor rich system can do the job better in many cases - but so far it's not worth the cost and effort of covering potential hazards compared to using part of a person to handle it.
$endgroup$
– Russell McMahon
Dec 24 '18 at 10:45










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















35












$begingroup$

There are automated systems that provide the same function as a marshal. They are in place at some airports but not all since upgrades cost money and not all airports may see a use for it.



At smaller fields marshals often serve multiple roles aside from just guiding aircraft they may also handle baggage, pump fuel, drive tugs and all the other various ramp jobs. In this case it may be more cost effective to keep a marshal around than instal a costly automated system that only replaces one of their jobs.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 4:40










  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 9:18










  • $begingroup$
    A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 22 '18 at 19:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:12












  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:16



















20












$begingroup$

You are talking about aircraft marshalling, not sky marshal.



When an aircraft comes a gate, one of the tasks is to park on a designated spot. A marshal will help in that, and so can a camera do that. But there are many other tasks assigned to a marshal, and cameras cannot do those tasks.



This is part of the broader ramp services. The services related to aircraft directly are:




  • inserting and pulling chocks

  • indicating when can engines be started and shut off

  • navigating on ground

  • informing pilots if they need to change taxi speed






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:36










  • $begingroup$
    @Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:53













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f58290%2fwhy-is-aircraft-marshalling-still-necessary%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









35












$begingroup$

There are automated systems that provide the same function as a marshal. They are in place at some airports but not all since upgrades cost money and not all airports may see a use for it.



At smaller fields marshals often serve multiple roles aside from just guiding aircraft they may also handle baggage, pump fuel, drive tugs and all the other various ramp jobs. In this case it may be more cost effective to keep a marshal around than instal a costly automated system that only replaces one of their jobs.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 4:40










  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 9:18










  • $begingroup$
    A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 22 '18 at 19:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:12












  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:16
















35












$begingroup$

There are automated systems that provide the same function as a marshal. They are in place at some airports but not all since upgrades cost money and not all airports may see a use for it.



At smaller fields marshals often serve multiple roles aside from just guiding aircraft they may also handle baggage, pump fuel, drive tugs and all the other various ramp jobs. In this case it may be more cost effective to keep a marshal around than instal a costly automated system that only replaces one of their jobs.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 4:40










  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 9:18










  • $begingroup$
    A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 22 '18 at 19:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:12












  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:16














35












35








35





$begingroup$

There are automated systems that provide the same function as a marshal. They are in place at some airports but not all since upgrades cost money and not all airports may see a use for it.



At smaller fields marshals often serve multiple roles aside from just guiding aircraft they may also handle baggage, pump fuel, drive tugs and all the other various ramp jobs. In this case it may be more cost effective to keep a marshal around than instal a costly automated system that only replaces one of their jobs.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



There are automated systems that provide the same function as a marshal. They are in place at some airports but not all since upgrades cost money and not all airports may see a use for it.



At smaller fields marshals often serve multiple roles aside from just guiding aircraft they may also handle baggage, pump fuel, drive tugs and all the other various ramp jobs. In this case it may be more cost effective to keep a marshal around than instal a costly automated system that only replaces one of their jobs.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 21 '18 at 19:14









DaveDave

62.6k4111229




62.6k4111229












  • $begingroup$
    These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 4:40










  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 9:18










  • $begingroup$
    A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 22 '18 at 19:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:12












  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:16


















  • $begingroup$
    These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 4:40










  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 9:18










  • $begingroup$
    A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 22 '18 at 19:00






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
    $endgroup$
    – Michael Hampton
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:12












  • $begingroup$
    @MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
    $endgroup$
    – Jan Hudec
    Dec 22 '18 at 22:16
















$begingroup$
These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
$endgroup$
– Michael Hampton
Dec 22 '18 at 4:40




$begingroup$
These also may fail in low visibility conditions such as heavy fog, requiring human marshallers to go out and replace the automated system.
$endgroup$
– Michael Hampton
Dec 22 '18 at 4:40












$begingroup$
@MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
Dec 22 '18 at 9:18




$begingroup$
@MichaelHampton, isn't the automated system installed at about the same place the marshal is standing anyway?
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
Dec 22 '18 at 9:18












$begingroup$
A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
$endgroup$
– Nelson
Dec 22 '18 at 19:00




$begingroup$
A Marshall will know to adapt so he can see. Get fog lights, walk closer, get a second person, etc.
$endgroup$
– Nelson
Dec 22 '18 at 19:00




1




1




$begingroup$
@JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
$endgroup$
– Michael Hampton
Dec 22 '18 at 22:12






$begingroup$
@JanHudec It depends on the model. Some use lasers which get scattered by fog. Other models which use visual imaging from CCD cameras do better in low visibility. The Wikipedia article that Dave linked to in this answer has a good summary of the different types.
$endgroup$
– Michael Hampton
Dec 22 '18 at 22:12














$begingroup$
@MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
Dec 22 '18 at 22:16




$begingroup$
@MichaelHampton, oh, right, I thought about issues with pilot seeing the system, but not the issues with the system knowing the position of the aircraft, which is, however, the more tricky part.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
Dec 22 '18 at 22:16











20












$begingroup$

You are talking about aircraft marshalling, not sky marshal.



When an aircraft comes a gate, one of the tasks is to park on a designated spot. A marshal will help in that, and so can a camera do that. But there are many other tasks assigned to a marshal, and cameras cannot do those tasks.



This is part of the broader ramp services. The services related to aircraft directly are:




  • inserting and pulling chocks

  • indicating when can engines be started and shut off

  • navigating on ground

  • informing pilots if they need to change taxi speed






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:36










  • $begingroup$
    @Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:53


















20












$begingroup$

You are talking about aircraft marshalling, not sky marshal.



When an aircraft comes a gate, one of the tasks is to park on a designated spot. A marshal will help in that, and so can a camera do that. But there are many other tasks assigned to a marshal, and cameras cannot do those tasks.



This is part of the broader ramp services. The services related to aircraft directly are:




  • inserting and pulling chocks

  • indicating when can engines be started and shut off

  • navigating on ground

  • informing pilots if they need to change taxi speed






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:36










  • $begingroup$
    @Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:53
















20












20








20





$begingroup$

You are talking about aircraft marshalling, not sky marshal.



When an aircraft comes a gate, one of the tasks is to park on a designated spot. A marshal will help in that, and so can a camera do that. But there are many other tasks assigned to a marshal, and cameras cannot do those tasks.



This is part of the broader ramp services. The services related to aircraft directly are:




  • inserting and pulling chocks

  • indicating when can engines be started and shut off

  • navigating on ground

  • informing pilots if they need to change taxi speed






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



You are talking about aircraft marshalling, not sky marshal.



When an aircraft comes a gate, one of the tasks is to park on a designated spot. A marshal will help in that, and so can a camera do that. But there are many other tasks assigned to a marshal, and cameras cannot do those tasks.



This is part of the broader ramp services. The services related to aircraft directly are:




  • inserting and pulling chocks

  • indicating when can engines be started and shut off

  • navigating on ground

  • informing pilots if they need to change taxi speed







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 21 '18 at 19:16









Farhan♦Farhan

24.6k1485158




24.6k1485158












  • $begingroup$
    You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:36










  • $begingroup$
    @Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:53




















  • $begingroup$
    You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
    $endgroup$
    – Mazura
    Dec 22 '18 at 17:36










  • $begingroup$
    @Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
    $endgroup$
    – Russell McMahon
    Dec 24 '18 at 10:53


















$begingroup$
You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Dec 22 '18 at 17:36




$begingroup$
You will always need boots on the ground to make sure no one gets sucked out of theirs. This would be the last job to go after everything else is automated, if even then.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Dec 22 '18 at 17:36












$begingroup$
@Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
$endgroup$
– Russell McMahon
Dec 24 '18 at 10:53






$begingroup$
@Mazura - akin to LSO / Paddles / Batsman (or current more automated but still "a real person") on a carrier. Many do not realise that the guy with the paddles is a qualified pilot - which makes perfect sense on reflection.
$endgroup$
– Russell McMahon
Dec 24 '18 at 10:53




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f58290%2fwhy-is-aircraft-marshalling-still-necessary%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

Image
Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l...
Read more

Puebla de Zaragoza

Image
Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc...
Read more

Musa

Image
Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo...
Read more