Two routes crossing on a map don’t necessarily mean the aircraft will be in the same place at the same time. Equally, routes that appear separate from one angle may need a closer look at their heights and timing.
In Aerlattice, time is part of the route. The demonstrator checks the space a request occupies over its active interval, alongside other information in the exercise.
What a check looks at
A request can be checked against other flights, restricted volumes, weather and radio use. Different findings call for different changes. A route adjustment may address a spatial conflict, while a different departure time or channel assignment may be more relevant to another finding.
The result needs enough detail for the reviewer to understand the problem. Aerlattice identifies where and when a conflict occurs so it can be examined alongside the request.
For example, in a planning exercise, a restriction may be active for only part of the day. The relationship between that interval and the route’s timing matters as much as whether the route crosses the area.
Use the finding to examine a change
Once a conflict is understood, the planner can compare alternatives. A changed draft needs a fresh check because it may affect another part of the plan.
That connection between the finding, the revised request and the new assessment helps preserve the reasoning. A reviewer can see what changed and record why an option was accepted or rejected.
Understand what the result covers
A check depends on the inputs and constraints represented in the workspace. It cannot account for information that is missing from the exercise, and a clear result does not establish that a real flight is safe or authorised.
Aerlattice is a demonstrator for exploring this planning and review workflow. Its findings are information for a reviewer to examine within that scope.
