At SkyPath we have a simple solution that doesn't involve installing any HW on the aircraft and uses the airline issued iPad the pilot already uses for other important tasks to help fight Clear Air Turbulence. We use the iPad's accelerometers to measure and report turbulence in real time and collect this data via the internet where it's processed in AWS by our machine learning model to produce customized alerts for each flight that uses our service on incoming CATs in their route.
amazing! it seems like much of the innovation on the flight deck is happening in iPad apps.
i'm curious, in the beginning, before you had so many users of the app, how did you convince pilots/airlines to install SkyPath before it had enough user-generated turbulence data for its ML model? it almost feels like a chicken-and-the-egg problem: you need enough reports before it's useful around the world at all imaginable air routes, or maybe there's enough air/wind data. interesting stuff!
We had to give incentives for the first airline partners and give the product for free for a long trial period at the early years to be able to have initial installs. It was a long ride including Covid which came in the middle and didn't help. In the last years since we have several big airline partners this is less of a problem.
The effect on the route is immediate. There is no installation or integration so the moment you deploy (with a reasonable fleet size) you have data. Those that where quick to understand the concept embraced technology very fast even without initial data set in the route
Didn’t ForeFlight just come out with something similar recently? https://blog.foreflight.com/2024/05/07/smooth-skies/ They don’t mention ML specifically, but I imagine their install base is a tad larger and can therefore gather more real data. Is your solution different?
We have a partnership with Jeppesen, a Boeing company, for their Flight Deck Pro product. With this collaboration, users can access our data layer and predictions, and also report real-time turbulence within their app. While I'm not extensively familiar with the inner workings of ForeFlight, based on what I've heard, it relies on an external hardware solution, and its coverage and quality are not comparable
Our solution is compatible with Airbus, Boeing, or any other aircraft. It's important to note that connecting to the aircraft systems can be more expensive and add maintenance and complexity costs for the airline.
Apart from usual SW tests, Lots of testing with airlines and experienced pilots. Processing feedback and improving the model step by step over the course of several years.
I'm very curious how you "bootstrap" a model like that. Do you start with a physics simulation? Make an educated guess and then get pilots to label when it's wrong in order to incrementally improve? Recruit pilots to manually track CAT events?
I've had to build a few of these kinds of models over the years, and it's consistently the hardest task I've faced in my DS career.
The second is closer to reality , initially let pilots (lots of them) label flight events and after landing take all data and build the algorithm around their initial labels. The when there are more pilots let them label agree / disagree and relabel etc.
Another aspect is you have usually two iPads in the cockpit for captain and first officer so you can correlate and match what both accelerometers read.
Can run in the background, pilot can use any other app meanwhile. Or just leave the iPad with screen off. Our app keeps recording and alerting as long as you are in flight.
I'm assuming that the most valuable data for predicting turbulence during a flight is timely data from the accelerometers of the iPads on nearby airliners, which gets me curious as to whether these iPads usually have connectivity (to your AWS servers) during a flight, and how that connectivity is provided. (I'm guessing satellite.)
Yes, satellite internet is now standard on many Western airlines. In addition to this, we utilize weather data and real-time turbulence reports to predict Clear Air Turbulence (CAT) events across the entire sky, even where iPads are currently not on flights.
By analyzing the acceleration patterns that the iPad the pilot has in the cockpit which is securely attached to the aircraft is measuring. Cleaning out noise such as engine and other non CAT noise and training our model to identify these and also predict future events in the next 3 hours by looking at the current data. It takes millions of events and lots of pilots which help train the initial model and fine tune it.
You guys have a great product, I fly for a major airline and really like it. Hurry up and get Delta onboard so we can get their data too: I’ve used their in-house app at my old job and Sky Vector is much better.
Any plans to change the Jepp integration? Most of my colleagues don’t use it, too much data displayed at once. I’m not sure of a solution but would love to hear if you guys have any ideas.
Thank you. We are actively working to onboard as many airlines as possible, and partnering with Delta would be highly beneficial. The more data we have, the safer and more efficient flights become.
Regarding the integration with Jeppesen, we would greatly appreciate hearing more about any issues you encounter and receiving your feedback
I’m not sure I have any suggestions on how to fix it, but the Skypath integration with the moving map in Jepp FD Pro is way too cluttered. There’s already quite a bit of information in Jepp and the bright colors from Skypath really wash out all the other information. I haven’t seen many pilots use it more than once.
Anecdote: I recently flew from Texas to Florida, and the pilot requested a reroute south around Louisiana to avoid a storm cell. ATC denied reroute due to “staffing shortage” and forced us into an extremely uncomfortable ride.
I’ve been hearing about statistics for turbulence incidences increasing, and wonder if this type of thing is a contributing factor. With this app you’d get a warning but I wonder if you could do anything about it.
Forget any app. Just put on your seatbelt. If you are wearing a seatbelt, the worst that will happen is spilled coffee.
I cannot stand the sound of a hundred belts unclicking all at once the moment the seatbelt sign turns off. Idiots. The presence of a seatbelt across one's lap is the least of the various tortures associated with modern air travel.
Some of the most severe injuries occur among crew members because they must rush to secure passengers in their seats, often being the last to fasten their own seat belts. Additionally, when turbulence reaches a certain intensity, the aircraft must undergo costly structural testing on the ground, which disrupts the airline's schedule significantly.
How do you eliminate false positives from pilot usage of the device or knocking into it? I wonder how long it will be before flight insurers start using this data for hedging following the Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 turbulence incident.
Valid observation: turbulence patterns differ from pilot tapping and can be recognized and disregarded. While complete elimination of false positives isn't always feasible, employing various techniques allows us to significantly minimize such occurrences, thereby mitigating their impact.
From the testimonials it seems this is used for tactical rather than strategic planning. Honestly, that would keep me up at night.
It's similar to problems which have been previously caused by a reliance on in cockpit weather data delivered by satellites. At worst it can be 15 minutes out of date and more than one eager light aircraft pilot has flown into the center of a storm cell which wasn't there 15 minutes ago - taking his family with him.
Its only turbulence but worst case scenario with turbulence is still pretty bad - injuries and even deaths are completely possible outcomes.
Good comment! our algorithms take into account time of report as recorded by the aircraft so latency or offline aircraft is not an issue. Surprisingly most CAT phenomena is pretty stable and can stay in the same area for hours at time.
Thanks for responding. That is interesting. I guess you also have the advantage that current "state of care" is sharing a few radio messages with other aircraft with lots of subjective judgements.
Typically, flights do not deviate from their planned routes for non-severe turbulence levels. It's safer and simpler to have passengers remain seated with the seatbelt sign on. Our model considers weather inputs alongside real-time data, acknowledging that weather is continuously changing and somewhat unpredictable. Therefore, we don't perceive this issue as significant
Don't be scared of flying, be scared of crashing.
Crashing doesn't happen that often.
Try watching/downloading flightradar24 - the sheer number of flights is staggering. Then multiply them by the number of days since you can (without assistance) actually remember hearing about a plane crash.
Right now flight predictions and route quality are offered only to pilots who are operating the flight and to dispatchers. There are discussions with the airlines to integrate our technology into their apps but at the moment there is no such solution available.
It depends on the provider that the airline has partnered with, I suppose. We don't manage the satellite connectivity, so I can't provide specifics on that. However, in areas with fewer ground stations, disruptions are more likely. Our app and servers are designed to function effectively on unreliable internet connections. it downloads prediction data for several hours ahead and is capable of uploading turbulence data once the internet connection stabilizes.
In my last flight the disconnection over the arctic circle lasted about 5hs. Is the data still relevant then? Does turbulence happen in cycles and is predictable that way?
Five hours is a bit long; you can choose in the app how far ahead you would like to see. We typically recommend looking two hours ahead. This way, for the initial two hours, you'll have some data that may be partially outdated but still better than having no information at all.
Are these rates for both commercial (part 121/135) and part 91 private pilots? I would imagine the costs to be quite easy to swallow if you're a captain at a big airline but for someone flying occasionally, a per month rate might be expensive. How about a per distance (or time) pricing, if that's possible?
