Primary ATC is still done that way but at least for the big jets there are other ways they send digital comms to ATC[1]. The main reason is because radios fail and more complex radios fail more easily. A standard Jetliner carries three radios, any of which the pilots can use to contact ATC. The bands are internationally standardized. So it's not just a case of the FAA mandating a change. It would have to be the entire world. So even if the FAA did require digital radios it wouldn't actually change much because both ground and plane would still have to transmit analog backup anyway. That creates more chatter etc.
It's also important to recognize that controllers are human and can only deal with one thing at once. The current system generally speaking gives one human control over one section of airspace.
In this specific case the pilot should have been aware of the restricted airspace and set a flight plan that took them away from it before turning to their destination. There is zero excuses for flying into restricted airspace as there are published maps. The zone around the WH and USC is a permanent zone, so even less of an excuse.
Interesting, that explanation does make sense. It's interesting to think about how the limits of human synchronous focus are involved. That must be such a stressful job! TIL about ACARS.
Airplanes live for decades (probably a fair amount are going to pass the 100 year mark) and so backwards compatibility is a huge issue for adding any tech into the system.
Radio works pretty well and it's flexible. Imagine some asshole is flying a drone around on short final. It's easy enough to say "Hey heads up everyone, there's a DJI buzzing around at 200'", but with a more streamlined system there might not be an easy way to communicate that, and if you have the new system and radios then you still need to commmunicate everything on both while everyone adopts the new system.
Same reason there's party chat in your FPS game - puts a sense to use for a real time information channel. Most of the time voice ATC comms are boring, but when they are not they're super useful.
Set a calendar reminder for the afternoon of July 23, 2023 in UTC-5, and go listen to the audio channel for the north ATC sector for AirVenture arrivals at KOSH. You'll get what I mean.
Put on your systems theory hat when thinking about alternatives.
FWIW, As was discussed in the post, ground/departure channels at a major airport were overwhelmingly busy for a private pilot untrained in that environment. As an occasional private passenger, I'm accustomed to quite low radio traffic because of the routes and airports we use. I've heard radio so quiet that a Controller handed us off to... herself on a different frequency for a different airspace.
I feel it somewhat obvious that humans talking to humans is a good thing for life and death split second stuff, same page there.
But aren't most of the comms really rote and mundane instructions that follow a standard pattern? We trust automated systems to land the plane, [1] why not to tell a plane to say, cross runway 22 and stop at threshold Z?
A human could still give that instruction, but with a button instead of their mouth parts flapping? Then the radio channel would be more open for higher urgency stuff.
People may chime in at any time and the relative priority, timing, volume, etc of calls is unknown in advance. Basically it’s CSMA, implemented via human brain. If it’s good enough for Ethernet, it’s good enough for ATC.
(I know nothing of the vagaries of air control)