challenges for achieving the full potential of pnt in...

Imagecredit:LuisAparicioFernandes

(2017)

Challenges for Achieving the Full Potential of PNT in Civil Aviation

Prof. John Hansman T. Wilson Professor of Aeronautics & Astronautics

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (rjhans@mit.edu)

With the help of faculty and students from ICAT

www.icat.mit.edu

MITICAT Components of Air Transportation Infrastructure

•  Airports–  Runways–  Terminals–  Ground transport interface–  Servicing–  Maintenance

•  Air Traffic Management–  Communications–  Navigation–  Surveillance–  Control

•  Weather–  Observation–  Forecasting–  Dissemination

•  Skilled personnel•  Cost recovery mechanism

Surveillance

Communication

Navigation

Air Traffic Control

MITICAT

•  Increasing Demand

•  Capacity & Access

•  Safety

•  Efficiency & Environment

System Evolution Drivers

0

250

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1,750

2,000

2,250

2,500

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

Rev

enue

-Pas

seng

er-K

ilom

eter

s (b

illio

ns)

North America Europe Asia-Pacific Middle East Latin America & Caribbean Africa

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

Tota

l Len

gth

of D

elay

s (m

illio

ns o

f min

utes

) Total Length of Delays12 per. Mov. Avg. (Total Length of Delays)

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

325

350

375

400

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

19901991

19921993

19941995

19961997

19981999

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

20122013

20142015

20162017

20182019

2020

Jet F

uel (

in C

ents

per

Gal

lon)

Crud

e Oi

l (W

TI) i

n Do

llars

per

Bar

rel

Crude Oil (WTI) in Dollars per BarrelJet Fuel (in Cents per Gallon)

MITICAT Model of Evolution of Air Transportation System

Solution Refinement Loop

DriversSystem Capability

CollectiveDecisionMaking

System Behavior

SelectedActions

Stakeholder Awareness

ObjectiveFormation

StakeholderValues, Context

Capability Opportunities

Negotiation Loop

AwarenessBuildingProcess

Change Process

Catalytic Event

Public Awareness

SafetyandEnvironmentalApprovalProcesses

Implementation Process

Stakeholder Preferences

MITICAT

•  Maintaining High Level of Safety •  Complexity •  Achieving Operational Benefits

–  Airborne Elements –  Infrastructure Elements –  Procedures

•  Multi-Stakeholder Considerations –  Mixed Equipage

•  Environmental Considerations –  Noise –  Emissions

System Evolution Challenges

MITICAT

System Complexity FAA “Simplified” NAS Architecture

MITICAT

Stakeholder Benefits Dependent Upon Approved Applications and Operational Capabilities

AircraftOperationalCapability

OperationalProcedures

ATCOperationalCapability

Application1Application2….Applicationx

Significant

Some/Indirect

None/ Insignificant

Level of Benefit/Cost

Applications Stakeholder Benefits

b1(t)

b2(t)

b3(t)

stk1 stk2 stk3

c1(t)

c2(t)

c3(t)

stk1 stk2 stk3

benefits

costs

Capabilities

Disaggregate benefit/cost approach adapted from Marias and Weigel

MITICAT

Modernization Cannot Compromise Exceptionally High Level of Aviation Safety

Source:2017BoeingStatisticalSummary

MITICAT Safety Management Systems

ICAOAnnex19 FAAOrder8000.369B

MITICAT

•  Equivalent Level of Safety –  If technical performance can be shown to be equivalent or

superior to existing system then system is assumed to maintain or improve safety

–  Useful for Technology Substitution –  Tends to replicate existing system –  Performance gains are often marginal

•  Target Level of Safety –  Proposed system or procedure must meet target safety levels

defined by risk analysis –  Requires assumptions and modeling which must be accepted

by regulators –  Limited number of successful examples

•  UAS Part 107, RVSM North Atlantic

Two Approaches to Safety Analysis

MITICAT

•  Hypothesis: High safety performance of current system (with SMS) makes it difficult to implement real operational improvements. –  Technical Transition Easier than Operational Procedure Transition

ATM Modernization Efforts

MITICAT

NextGen-SESAR-ICAO Common Technical Elements

CommunicationsCPDLC

VDLMode2

SurveillanceADS-B

NavigationPBN

RNAV/RNP

MITICAT

NextGen-SESAR-ICAO Common Technical Elements

CommunicationsCPDLC

VDLMode2

SurveillanceADS-B

NavigationPBN

RNAV/RNP

MITICAT

Performance Based Navigation RNAV and RNP

>95% air carrier fleet >30% air carrier fleet

Source:BruceDecleneFAA

MITICAT Benefit - RNAV Enabled Direct Routing

China

China US

Not Quite - Free Flight

MITICAT Benefit - RNP Based Improved Access

Non-precision path

RNP RNAV path

Runway

• Source: Brian Kelly, Boeing

•  Pioneered by Alaska Airlines

MITICAT

•  Highest Benefits for New Procedures in Locations Without Existing ILS

•  Difficult to supersede existing ILS

–  ILS Air and Ground infrastructure widespread

•  Operator Benefits Limited

Challenge - Existing Infrastructure and Limited Benefit Limit GBAS Procedures GLS (GPS/GNSS)

MITICAT

W002W.18

Safety Benefit – Improved Situation Awareness Honeywell EGPWS (TAWS)

MITICAT

Prototype MIT Terrain Alerting Displays

Jim Kuchar Thesis 1995

CollaborationwithDonBatemanHoneywell

MITICAT Catalytic Event Implementation Example

Solution Refinement Loop

DriversSystem Capability

CollectiveDecisionMaking

System Behavior

SelectedActions

Stakeholder Awareness

ObjectiveFormation

StakeholderValues, Context

Capability Opportunities

Negotiation Loop

AwarenessBuildingProcess

Change Process

Catalytic Event

Public Awareness

SafetyandEnvironmentalApprovalProcesses

Implementation Process

Stakeholder Preferences

MITICAT Catalytic Event – American Airlines Flight 965

•  Cali, Colombia December 20, 1995

•  US Mandate Proposal April 1998

•  Implemented March 2000

MITICAT ATC Benefit – RNAV Procedures

•  Departures are vectored –  Headings, altitudes and

speeds issued by controllers

–  Large number of voice transmissions required

•  Significant dispersion –  Tracks are inconsistent and

inefficient •  Limited exit points

Source: Bruce DeCleene, FAA

ATL Departure Procedures Before RNAV

MITICAT

Source: Bruce DeCleene, FAA

ATC Benefit – RNAV Procedures

ATL Departure Procedures After RNAV

•  Departures fly RNAV tracks (not vectored –  Headings, altitudes and

speeds are automated (via avionics)

–  Voice transmissions reduced (30-50%)

•  Dispersion Reduced –  Tracks more consistent and

efficient •  Additional exit points available

MITICAT Challenge – RNAV Track/Noise Concentration

2015 2010

27

BOS Runway 33L Departures: 2010-2015

MITICAT Challenge – RNAV Track/Noise Concentration

28

2017 2010

BOSNoiseComplaintLocations

MITICAT

NextGen-SESAR-ICAO Common Technical Elements

CommunicationsCPDLC

VDLMode2

SurveillanceADS-B

NavigationPBN

RNAV/RNP

MITICAT

•  Update Rate –  Terminal – 4.2 sec –  Enroute – 12 sec

Current Radar Surveillance Limitations

UA 123 350C B757 310

MITICAT Separation Assurance Considerations

PROCEDURALSAFETYBUFFER

PERSONALSAFETYBUFFER

MINIMUMSEPARATIONSTANDARD

HAZARDZONE

SURVEILLANCEUNCERTAINTY

MITICAT

Improved Surveillance has not led to Reduced Separation Standards

WHENSTANDARDSWEREDEVELOPED(e.g.1950sforenrouteradar)

IMPROVEDSURVEILLANCEENVIRONMENT(e.g.todayforenrouteradar)

•  Surveillance has improved, but separation minima have not changed: procedural safety buffer has implicitly increased

MinimumSeparationStandard

MITICAT

ATC-Based Applications • Surveillance • Separation procedures • Trajectory-based operations

ADS-B (1 sec update)

Air Vehicle Component

Cockpit-Based Applications • Self-separation • Equivalent VFR operations • Traffic & runway awareness • Airspace, weather, terrain awareness • Precision Navigation

Ground Component

Coverage Volume

Operating Procedures

Air Traffic Control

Aircraft Cockpit

ADS-B In Information transmitted from ground to the aircraft

Other Aircraft

Cockpit

ATC

Global Navigation Satellite System

Avionics Integration

ATC Integration

ADS-B Out Position & intent broadcast from aircraft to ground or other aircraft

Air to Air

Air to Ground

Radar Tracks

MITICAT Benefit - Cockpit Display of Traffic Information

MITICAT ANSP Benefit – Surveillance of Remote Regions

Source: Greg Dunstone ADS-B Program Manager

ADS-B Track

Radar Track

Australia Example

MITICAT Worldwide ADS-B Coverage

Source:FlightAware

OneWeekofADS-BTracks

MITICAT Extensive US Radar Coverage Limits Benefits

MITICAT

Stakeholder Benefits Dependent Upon Approved Applications and Operational Capabilities

AircraftOperationalCapability

OperationalProcedures

ATCOperationalCapability

Application1Application2….Applicationx

Significant

Some/Indirect

None/ Insignificant

Level of Benefit/Cost

Applications Stakeholder Benefits

b1(t)

b2(t)

b3(t)

stk1 stk2 stk3

c1(t)

c2(t)

c3(t)

stk1 stk2 stk3

benefits

costs

Capabilities

Disaggregate benefit/cost approach adapted from Marias and Weigel

MITICAT

System Processes Required to Achieve Operational Capability

(artifacts to detailed specifications)

(detailed specifications to safety requirements)

System Description

Specification Development

Incorporation of Safety-Derived Requirements

Safety Approval

Avionics Specifications

Link Specifications

Application Specifications

Ground Infrastructure

Hardware & Software

System Performance Requirements

Decomp

Acquisition Policies

ATC Op Policies

Operator Certification

Datacom Standards

Pilot Certification & Training

Aircraft Certification

(airborne)

Avionics HW & SW

Requirements

Pilot Knowledge

Operating Procedures

((ATC/ground)

Operating Procedures

Data Requirements

Ground HW & SW

Requirements

Proposed Change/ Concept of Operations

Flight Crew Roles

Avionics

Procedures

Applications

Surveillance Infrastructure

Controller Roles

ATC Automation

(desired capabilities to artifacts)

Airborne Components

Procedural Components

Infrastructure Components

(operating certificate)

(TSO, TC, STC)

(OpsSpec) Training & Op.

Approval

Development & Certification

Operational Approval

Operational Approval

Qualified Pilot

Certified Avionics

Approved Functionality

Airborne Operational Capability

Approved Procedures

Approved Procedures

Publishing & Deployment

Capable Airspace

Validation & Verification

Integrated ATC Function

Infrastructure Operational Capability

Commissioning & Deployment

Deployed Infrastructure

System Operational Capability

Legend

Specification

System Element

Operational Capability

Required Predecessor Assessment or

Implementation Processes

Policy/ Process Basis

Element Property/ State

(flight stds/ SMS)

(credentialing)

(AMS)

(AMS/ NCP)

Notes ATC = Air Traffic Control HW = Hardware LOA = Letter of Agreement NCP = NAS Change Proposal TC = Type Certificate

TSO = Technical Standard Order SMS = FAA ATO Safety Management System STC = Supplemental Type Certificate SW = Software

(safety-derived requirements to operational capabilities)

Systems-Level

Criteria

Safety Assessment

Flight Crew Roles

Controller Roles

Rulemaking Airspace (Rulemaking/ LOA) Training &

Certification Trained

Controller

System Description & Specification Development

Safety-Derived Requirements

Operational Approval

RolandWeibel(PhDThesis)

MITICAT

Proposed ADS-B Procedures FAA Application Integrated Work Plan v2.0 2010

✔

✔✔✔✔

✗✗✗✗✗✗✗✗✗✗✗

✔

MITICAT

•  ADS-B “ Out” mandate by 2020•  Impacts

–  Class A, B, C–  Mode C veil (30 nm radius)–  Class E above 10,000

•  Requires DO-260A Change 2•  Nav Source Requirements

–  NAC of 9 ~30 meters–  NIC of 7 (0.3 nm)

•  Final commitment date of 2013 for all ground infrastructure

Limited Operator Benefits and Mixed Equipage Required ADS-B Out Mandate

MITICAT Satellite Based ADS-B

Source: NavCanada

MITICAT

Satellite Based ADS-B Enables Surveillance in Remote and Oceanic Regions

Source:FlightAware

OneWeekofADS-BTracks

MITICAT

Challenge - Operator Benefits Require Changes to Oceanic ATC Procedures and Systems

ReducedLateralSeparation–ADS-BorADS-CReducedTrackSeparation–RNPUserPreferredRouting–PotentialADS-BbutrequiresmajorATMprocedurechanges

NorthAtlanticOceanicTracks

MITICAT

Over 100 companies (of varying credibility) have announced UAM vehicles

Future Challenge – Integration of UAM and UAV will Require Changing Separation Standards

AirbusA^3Vahana OpenerBlackfly

JobyAviationS4

eHang216 Volocopter2x

WorkhorseSurefly

KittyHawkCoraLiliumLiliumJet

KittyHawkFlyer

FlyingFull-ScalePrototypes

MollerSkycar

Terrafugia

Pipistrel

Boeing–AuroraFlightSciences

Rolls-Royce

Karem Bell Airbus

OtherWellFundedDevelopers

MIT estimates over $2 Billion invested in UAM vehicles, infrastructure, and technology

Embraer

ManyAdditionalVehicleConcepts

MITICAT

SFO Southeast Flow Example Grey Area not Accessible for Independent Ops

ParkerVasickThesis

Imagecredit:LuisAparicioFernandes

(2017)

Questions?

www.icat.mit.edu

MITICAT

Satellite Based ADS-B Iridium Orbital Constellation

Source: NavCanada