4 th workshop, amsterdam, 23 - 25 april 2007 1 asas in the sesar ops concept presentation for...
TRANSCRIPT
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
1
ASAS In The SESAR Ops Concept
Presentation for ASAS-TN 2
Andy Barff: EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Slides prepared by:
Mike Watson: Thales Air Systems/Strategy Directorate
Members SESAR Task 2.2.2
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
2
Structure of the presentation
SESAR Political Goals
A Trajectory Based Concept
ATM Capability Levels
ASAS In SESAR
Application In Operations
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
3
Increased, sustainable capacity for the end-to-end ATM system with substantially enhanced safety:
– Traffic x 3
– Safety x10
– Users ATM Unit Costs -50% per flight
– Environmental impact -10% ATM impact per flight
Efficient Gate-to-Gate and Enroute-to-Enroute(1) operations that accommodate the user’s requirements and priorities:
– Maximise capacity and minimise constraints.
– Minimise uncertainties/maximise economic performance for all stakeholders
The SESAR Political Goals
(1) Relating to TMA entry to TMA exit on next flight. Encompasses airport air-side and ground-side operations.
USA: Traffic: x2-3 (NextGen)ASIA: Traffic: x4+ (Some areas will be equal to core Europe)
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
4
A TrajectoryBased Concept
Trajectory Based
Operations
The Business
Trajectory Collaborative
Layered Planning
Trajectory Management
Requirements
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
5
Trajectory Based Operations
Trajectory Based Operations are at the core of the SESAR Concept, enabling:
– Enhanced predictive capabilities and reactivity of the network with the objective of taking most strategic ATM actions prior to departure.
– Information sharing and collaborative processes providing more flexibility for the airspace users when changes are required.
The Trajectory Management concept:– Entails the systematic sharing of aircraft trajectory data between various
participants in the ATM process – Ensures that all participants have a common view of a flight and access to
the most accurate data available to perform their tasks.
4D Trajectory Management supports a degree of pre-deconfliction of traffic flows resulting in less tactical interventions during flight execution.
The 4D Trajectory is the principal language for information exchange supporting CDM, planning and analysis and automation.
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
6
The Business Trajectory
4D Trajectory which expresses the Business/Mission intention of the airspace user.
Fully owned by the airspace user:– Changes via CDM processes involving user BUT does not interfere with
ATC/Pilot tactical decision processes.
– When constraints are needed the solution is chosen by the user whenever possible
Based on most timely and accurate data available – Sources: AOC, Airborne Automation, ANSP, 3rd Party on behalf user.
– Normally the relevant ANSP will compute trajectory for Military or non-capable users during flight.
Exists through out all phases of the ATM process
Exists during the planning phase‘Published’ by the user and shared by all participants(User entry point to process will vary)
Trajectory that airspace user agrees to fly and the ANSP agrees to facilitate.(NOT a Clearance)
Exists during Business Development processes.Internal to the User(Not all users have a Trajectory at this time)
Business Development Trajectory Shared Business Trajectory Reference Business Trajectory
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
7
All “trajectory managed” aircraft have Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR) associated to the Reference Business Trajectory (as part of clearance).
Defines allowed deviations - time, level, lateral : without need for negotiation/notification.
When avionics detect/predict a deviation outside the parameters either a re-conformance action or a clearance revision action is initiated.
Parameters according to separation needs and operational context.
– May be ‘carried’ by airspace/route/procedure, or– Tailored to specific needs.
Also specify any periodic trajectory sharing and the data content required
Trajectory Mgt. Requirements
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
8
Tactical Actions
L
R
C
D
F
SASAS
YEARS 6 MONTHS
Mid/Short Term
Long Term Execution
Trajectories Throughout the ProcessHOURS MINUTESDAYS
Un
ce
rtain
ty
Time Horizon
FLIGHT OBJECT
Business Development
Trajectory
SBT
Shared Business Trajectory
SBT SBT SBT SBT RBTBDT
Reference Business Trajectory
SWIMNetAOC
BA/GA
MIL
ACFT ATM
APT
NETman
MET
Reclose the loop
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
9
ATM Capability Levels
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
10
ATM Capability Levels (Part)
CTA/CTO (Single RTA). 2D-RNP. Vertical/Longitudinal Constraint Mgt. ADS-B/OUT(Output of position/aircraft/MET data. Event reporting/Intent Sharing: Datalink)
0
1
2
3
2010 2020 2030
AT
M C
apab
ilit
y L
evel
Trajectory Sharing – ATM Designed. CTA/CTO (Multiple RTA)Vertical Nav Perf Req. (V-RNP). Cooperative Separation
Trajectory Sharing Air-Air. Met data sharing (Air-Air/Air-Ground)Longitudinal Nav Perf Req. Self-Separation
4
ADS-B/IN. Airborne Spacing/Sequencing and MergingDatalink: Link 2000+
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
11
ASAS In SESAR
Queue
Management
Conflict
Management
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
12
Queue Management (1)
In the real world, there will be circumstances in which, after all possible optimisations, demand does exceed capacity.
– Queuing is a natural result of the excess of demand over capacity
Queue management is the tactical establishment and maintenance of a safe, orderly and efficient flow of traffic.
– Includes the handling of queues, both in the air and on the ground.
– Operates on individual flights
– Closely related to the Separation process.
Queue management will not by itself reduce delays or increase capacity: – The goal is a better management of throughput, ensuring that delay is
managed in the most fuel-efficient and environmentally acceptable manner.
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
13
AMAN Horizon
Queue Management (2)
Turn-Around Activities(User and
Airport Tasks)
CTA
TTA RQ/TTA Issued
TTA
DMANEOBT
SWIMNet SEQ/CTA
SMAN
AMANSEQ
Clearance (TTA Update)
Sequence ‘Frozen’
(CTAREV) CTAFREEZE
TacticalFine SpacingATC/ASAS
Airborne Spacing
(andSequencing
and Merging)
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
14
Conflict Mgt: Background and Needs
Task-Load
TMA and En-route capacity is a function of ATC task-load.
Task IdentificationTactical Intervention to ensure Separation
Clearances CommunicationsCoordination
Provide Automation AssistanceMTCD/R, Conformance Monitoring …
Reduce the need for InterventionDeconfliction, Share Tactical InterventionAutomation
Routine Tasks
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
15
Separation Modes (Part)
Airspace: Managed TMA/ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: ANSPCapability Level: 1+
Containment: Lateral – RNP
Provides 2D separated routes in dense and complex airspace and reduces need for tactical intervention in all airspace.
TMR apply to ATM-3+.
Airspace: Managed ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: ANSPCapability Level: 4
Containment: Lateral/Vertical/Longitudinal
Constant accuracy for period of contract.
Debate: ‘size’ of containment vs. ‘fly-ability’
Flight adjusts to remain within TMR. If predicted deviation is unmanageable a clearance revision action is initiated.
Non-Deviating – have priority.Will be identifiable to other aircraft.
Trade-off: fuel efficiency/environmental impact vs. capacity. Used for short periods to resolve specific capacity issues.
Effective period of 20-30 min. Goal: FIR/FAB
NOT used for deconfliction pre-flight.
Airspace: Managed TMA/ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: ANSPCapability Level: 3
Containment: Lateral/Vertical – RNP/V-RNPDebate: ‘tubes’ vs. ‘cones’
Provides 3D separated routes in dense and complex airspace increasing capacity and further reducing need for tactical intervention in all airspace.
TMR apply.
Airspace: Managed TMA/ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: ANSPCapability Level: 2
Separation Task Delegation
In TMA for Queue Management: merging and longitudinal spacing of the arrival stream and for longitudinal spacing of ‘same route’ departures.
Also for en-route spacing if airspeeds are compatible
In Cooperative-3D (in lieu of ASAS Separation).
Airspace: Managed TMA/ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: AIR (ANSP)
Capability Level: 3
Separation Responsibility Delegation for a single (multi) aircraft (interaction).
ATC designates target aircraft and specifies the scope of the manoeuvre allowing the flight crew to conduct it in the most efficient way possible.
ANSP responsible for other separation.
To resolve specific conflict situations reducing controller workload.
In Cooperative-3D.
Airspace: Managed ENRDetection: AIR Separator: AIRCapability Level: 4
(Debate: Feasibility in mixed mode operations in managed airspace. Timescale – 2021-2030).
Aircrew are the designated separator for a defined segment of a flight during which they shall assure separation with all other aircraft. Supported by automation capabilities (including Air-Air Trajectory/Intent exchange and specific ASAS applications).
In managed airspace ANSP authorises Self-separation.
Aircraft participate fully in the 4D-Trajectory management process.
Aircraft flies RBT. Goal is to return to RBT following tactical actions.
Airspace: Managed TMA/ENRDetection: ANSP Separator: ANSP/AIRCapability Level: 3
Combines Precision Trajectory-3D and Cooperative Separation.
Aircraft fly along separated 3D ‘tubes’ with longitudinal separation achieved through airborne capabilities. These may be:
SPACING: ANSP assigns spacing task but retains separation responsibility.
SEPARATION: ANSP delegates separation responsibility with preceding aircraft.
Mode
Conventional Self-Separation
Conventional Surveillance/Procedural
Trajectory Control-Speed Adjust.
Precision Trajectory-2D
Precision Trajectory-3D
Precision Trajectory-4D Contract
Cooperative Separation: Visual
Airborne Spacing, Sequencing/Merging
Cooperative Separation (ASAS-Sep)
Self-Separation (ASAS-Self Sep)
Cooperative-3D
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
16
Application In Operations
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
17
High Density TMA Operations
Allocation of ‘best available’ departure route – 2D or 3D.– Clearance at gate: possible revision during taxi
Allocation of ‘best available’ arrival route – 2D or 3D.
4th dimension separation along the 3D routes by ATC using time/speed control/surveillance, or airborne separation
Conventional SID and STAR for ATM-0 flights
Clearance conformance monitored independently on ground and in the air.
Airborne Spacing, Sequencing/Merging, Cooperative separation
No tactical intervention by ATC for 3D flights (if in conformance)
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
18
High/Medium Density ENR Operations
PTC-2D/3D with 4D-Contracts/Cooperative-3D used when required.– Priority for 4D contract or Cooperative-3D flights. No tactical intervention.
Conventional ATC modes for ATM-0/1 aircraft.
Clearance conformance monitored independently on ground and in the air.
Arrival constraints incorporated in RBT
Airborne Spacing, Sequencing/Merging, Cooperative Separation, Self-separation
Route structure retained for TMA transition and Military needs
Improved upper wind data through MET sharing capabilities
PTC-3D/4D-Contracts And Airborne Separation
The PTC-3D/4DC modes address the deconfliction of airborne flights to achieve the goals.
Cooperative separation/Self-separation address the distribution of tactical intervention to achieve the goals.
Both methods must operate in a mixed (equipped and non-equipped) environment.
The two methods can co-exist, with self-separating flights separating themselves from 4D contract flights:
Feasibility of mixing these and other ATC Separated flights is doubtful
Implementation of 4DC and Self-Separation in mixed mode/hi-density is likely to be in the 2025+ timeframe.
Some users may push self-separation for high level operations (above F410).
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
19
Capacity Positive impact Potential solution for the high end-goals.
Cooperative separation in time-scale. Self-separation outside.
Safety Positive impact Scale of benefits may be airspace dependent.
Impact on Safety Nets and ACAS to be studied.
Environment Pros and Cons May provide NET System Benefit but not always individual benefits.
Cost Pros and Cons May provide NET System Benefit but not always individual benefits.
TRADE OFFPros: Maintenance of throughput: Reduced queuing:May keep trajectory close to optimum.Cons: Traffic mix/performance compatibility may impact individual results.
ASAS Contribution To Goals
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
20
The SESAR operational concept is based on precision trajectories and
includes advanced ASAS applications
SESAR proposes a timescale of ASAS:
Airborne Separation by 2020
4th
Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 - 25 April 2007
21
End