1 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS When ASAS meets ACAS Thierry Arino (Sofréavia, IAPA Project Manager)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Its Good To Squawk! Why YOU should always Squawk Mode C.
Advertisements

Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Estimating safe separations.
The EMERALD RTD Plan and the ASAS Validation Framework R P (Bill) Booth 10 October 2002.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Autonomous Aircraft OSED CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Autonomous Aircraft OSED.
Slide 1 July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR1/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG Agenda & Project Overview Thierry Arino (Sofréavia) CARE/ASAS Action FALBALA.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Free Flight with Airborne Separation will result in an uncontrolled,
ASAS TN Second Workshop, 6-8 October 2003, Malmö ASAS-TN Implementation Strategy Plan Tony Henley BAE SYSTEMS.
ENAV S.p.A. ASAS TN I Workshop, April 20031/13 Airborne Spacing and Safety Alberto Pasquini - Deep Blue (ENAV)
Mediterranean Free Flight ASAS Separation and Spacing Presented by Andy Barff – Project Leader MFF Real-time Simulations ASAS-TN, Malmö
C ENTRE D'ETUDES DE LA NAVIGATION AERIENNE ASAS-TN, 2nd workshop - Malmö 6 ~ 8 october 2003page 1 Electronic separation Clearance Enabling the Crossing.
Advanced Safe Separation Technologies and Algorithms (ASSTAR) Project ASAS-TN2 Workshop #1 Malmö 26 th -28 th September 2005 ASSTAR is a Specific Targeted.
TCAS Basics Capt Craig Hinkley. 2 TCAS HISTORY  Two planes collided over the Grand Canyon  Alternative airborne version using transponders.
Interoperability of Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems Lixia Song James K. Kuchar Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Federal Aviation Administration ASAS issues identified in the AP23 work ASAS-TN2.5 workshop 13 Nov 08, Rome By Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA.
Page Lufthansa ASAS It's Time for a paradigm change... Workshop May 2003, Rome
ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop ASSTAR Safety Approach and Preliminary Issues Dr Giuseppe GRANIERO, SICTA
4 th Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 rd -25 th April 2007 ASAS LC&P Applications in Radar Airspace: Operational Scenario Example and Fast-Time Simulation Results.
CRISTAL ATSAW Project Sep 2007 ASAS TN Christelle Pianetti, DSNA Simona Canu-Chiesa, Airbus.
Clustering ASAS Applications ASAS-TN2 First Workshop, Malmö 26 to 28 September 2005 Fraser McGibbon BAE Systems.
ASAS-TN Second Workshop, 6-8 October 2003, MalmöSlide 1 Airborne Surveillance Applications included in ‘Package I’ Francis Casaux CARE/ASAS manager.
ASAS TN2 WP3: Assessing ASAS Applications Maturity Eric Hoffman EUROCONTROL.
Slide 1 July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR3/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG WP2 Current situation analysis – Aircraft perspective Philippe Louyot (CENA)
An Automated Airspace Concept for the Next Generation Air Traffic Control System Todd Farley, David McNally, Heinz Erzberger, Russ Paielli SAE Aerospace.
ASAS FRA OB/T ATM Projects Lufthansa point of view.
Situational Awareness Numerous aircraft and operational displays, when combined with effective and efficient communications and facilities, provide Air.
IFly project: Airborne Self Separation as basis for advanced en route ATM Henk A.P. Blom iFly coordinator National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
ASAS WORKSHOP Roma April 2003 Airlines’ perspective Nicolas Zvéguintzoff Assistant Director- Technical / Financial Liaison – Europe.
Direction générale de l’Aviation civile centre d’Études de la navigation aérienne First ASAS thematic network workshop The user’s expectations and concerns.
Lecture 10: Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
MFF is a EC co-funded programme Rome, 3-5 Aprili 2006 ASAS-TN2 Rome, 3-5 April 2006 Maurizio Zacchei, ENAV (MFF PM) Mediterranean Free Flight Programme.
EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation.
Slide 1 July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG Mark Watson & Richard Pugh ( NATS) CARE / ASAS Action FALBALA Project Dissemination.
Federal Aviation Administration AP23 briefing on D3: ASAS Concept of operations ASAS-GN Seminar 13 Nov 08, Rome By Ken Carpenter, QinetiQ.
April 2003ASAS TN April 2003 Workshop1 ADS Programme ASAS TN Workshop (28-30 Apr ‘03) “Package I Architecture and CBA Activities” Pieter van der.
2 nd Workshop, April 2006 Session 4: Integrating ASAS in an evolving ATM system.
DIRECTION TECHNIQUE CERTIFICATION Paris, April 2008 SL ASAS TN2 Workshop ppt ASAS & Business.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Time-Based Sequencing OSED CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Time-Based Sequencing OSED.
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
Discussions Summary ASSTAR - Crossing & Passing session.
Slide 1 Malmö, 6-8 October 2003 – ASAS TN – Session 3: Airborne spacing applications – IAPA/WP00/035/W v2.0 ACAS / ASAS interaction IAPA Project Thierry.
ENAV S.p.A. 1 AENA / ENAV / DFS / LFV ASAS Thematic Network Workshop Malmoe, ASAS /ADS-B: SAMPLE ANSPs STRATGIES & EXPECTATIONS.
SSAP The European Strategic Safety Action Plan (SSAP) The History & Rationale.
Eurocontrol ACAS Programme ACTOR/wp3/SLID/D 03/08/01 - v1.0 Slide 1 ACAS II operations in the European RVSM environment ACAS II mandate in Europe (1/2)
1 Controller feedback from the CoSpace / NUP II TMA experiment ASAS-TN, April 2004, Toulouse Liz Jordan, NATS, U.K. Gatwick approach controller.
ASAS Crossing and Passing Applications in Radar Airspace (operational concept and operational procedure) Jean-Marc Loscos, Bernard Hasquenoph, Claude Chamayou.
ASAS TN2 Final Seminar Paris, April Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA chairman of the Airborne Surveillance Subgroup of the Aeronautical Surveillance.
19-21 April 2004ASAS TN – 3 rd workshop AIRLINES/IATA OVERVIEW Needs and Considerations Anthony van der Veldt/IATA Assistant Director Safety Operations.
MFF is a EC Co-funded Programme  MEDITERRANEAN FREE FLIGHT Flight Trials Report ASAS TN2 1st Workshop | September 2005, Malmö Gennaro GRAZIANO 1/32.
Alberto Pasquini – Deep Blue Safety Assessment in MFF ASAS TN2 3-5 April 2006, Rome MENU: COVER | SUMMARY | OVERVIEW | TASKS | ALLOCATIONSCOVER SUMMARY.
4 th Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 rd -25 th April 2007 ASAS-SEP Applications Airborne Implementation Overall Architectural Considerations.
ASAS TN2 Final Seminar Paris, April 2008 LEGAL ASPECTS OF ASAS Dr. Francis SCHUBERT Head Corporate Development / skyguide.
April 9-11, 2001 Colloquium on Environmental Aspects of Aviation A European Perspective on Noise Ingemar Skogö.
1 EUROCONTROL S TRATEGIES FOR The ATM Strategy for the Years As from MATSE/6 decision (Jan. 2000): To cater for forecast increase in demand.
(Enhanced) Traffic Collision Avoidance System
Lecture 10: Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Lecture 10: Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
ASSTAR Overview Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Project conclusions and recommendations Thierry Arino (Sofréavia)
Chris Shaw, EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
ASSTAR Oceanic Session Summary
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Chris Shaw, EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Karim Zeghal EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
ASSTAR Project Overview & User Forum Objectives
NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
A European Perspective
Presentation transcript:

1 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS When ASAS meets ACAS Thierry Arino (Sofréavia, IAPA Project Manager) ASAS TN2 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 ASAS Progress, Plans and Challenges

2 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Context (1/2)  ACAS is now part of the current ATM system Airborne collision avoidance function independent from the means of separation provision ACAS = TCAS II version 7 Interrogates adjacent SSR transponders and provides two levels of alert Traffic Advisory (TA): To prepare the crew for a possible RA Resolution Advisory (RA): To achieve a safe vertical distance to prevent risk of imminent collision

3 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Context (2/2)  ASAS is a promising option for the future ATM system Airborne Surveillance (AS) and Separation Assistance function Wide range of AS applications from near to long term with different levels of responsibility delegation Package I Packages II & III  Compatibility must be assured between ACAS and ASAS operations

4 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS IAPA project (1/2)  EUROCONTROL MSA Programme contribution to understanding of ACAS / ASAS interaction 11 man-year project from 2002 to 2005 DSNA, EEC, QinetiQ and Sofréavia (Project Leader)  Implications on ACAS Performances due to ASAS implementation Any operational implications for ACAS? Benefits expected from ASAS compromised? Implications for the development of future ASAS procedures and systems?

5 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS IAPA project (2/2)  Interaction between the ACAS logic and the ASAS procedure in European airspace  Focus on operational and safety perspective Airborne system integration issues are out of the IAPA scope  Focus on demanding ASAS application In terms of potential interaction with ACAS Candidate applications: S&M and C&P

6 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Selecting a demanding application  Level of interaction between ACAS and ASAS S&M, in-trail phase: None C&P, lateral overtaking: None S&M, merging phase: Some, during marginal operations C&P, vertical crossing: Some, for realistic vertical rates C&P, lateral crossing: Some, for Horizontal Miss Distance close to radar minima  Selected application: C&P, lateral crossing More demanding in terms of potential interaction with ACAS (minimum of 4 NM with RNP-1 assumptions)

7 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Operational analysis  Quantitative analysis of the ACAS alerts during nominal ASAS operations European radar data, ATM encounter model and CFMU flight plan data Real Time Simulation (RTS) data  Sensitivity analysis of the interaction with ACAS depending on ASAS separation minimum  Comparative analysis of the interaction with ACAS between conventional ATM and ASAS operations

8 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Overall approach ASAS RTS data ACAS simulations Analysis of ACAS alerts (TAs & RAs) Radar data CFMU data ATM encounter model Modified encounters with ASAS Simplified model of ASAS procedure ACAS simulations

9 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Applicability of C&P lateral crossing  Encounters located at major crossing points in core Europe  Majority in RVSM airspace 67% above FL295  Estimated frequency Once every 2 or 3 hours per sector Once per 10 flight hours possibly up to 5 times more

10 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Undesirable ACAS alerts  Frequent (but non-systematic) TAs (15%) are likely to be considered as disruptive from a pilot perspective Role of TA as precursor to RA into question May affect the pilot confidence in the ASAS procedure and airborne systems  Occurrence of disruptive and undesirable RAs (1%) is a major ACAS / ASAS interaction issue Lack of compatibility between separation provision function (supported by ASAS) and collision avoidance function (of ACAS)

11 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Influencing parameters  Interaction with ACAS is strongly dependent with applicable ASAS separation minimum No more TAs with a minimum separation of 7 NM No more RAs with a minimum separation of 5 NM  Aircraft trajectory perturbations (linked to either navigation or surveillance imperfections) Can affect TCAS Miss Distance Filtering performance  C&P lateral crossing procedures are less compatible with ACAS than current ATM operations (except for 1000-ft level-off)

12 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS layers of protection hazards accident  Establish whether ACAS can still provide protection against collision during ASAS procedure  Full-system safety assessment ACAS collision avoidance logic Enhanced traffic situational awareness ATC involvement Visual acquisition Safety analysis

13 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Overall approach  Evaluate logic performance on operational scenarios using models tuned to represent the European airspace with or without ASAS Key metric = Risk Ratio Risk of NMAC with ACAS / Risk of NMAC without ACAS ACAS logic is one part of full-system  Operational hazard analysis and contingency tree Combines logic performance with other hazards and mitigating factors Estimates a full-system risk of collision

14 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Safety benefits delivered by ACAS  ACAS will provide a significant reduction in risk of collision in C&P lateral crossing procedure Can expect a reduction to 5% of the risk without ACAS  Enhanced traffic situational awareness from ASAS and alerting aspects of ACAS make a contribution to this reduction  Full benefit is realised by operating ACAS in RA mode and following the RAs it generates Pilot who responds to RAs exposed to half the risk compared to pilot who ignores RAs or operates ACAS in TA-only mode

15 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Conclusions  ACAS safety performance during ASAS operations ACAS remains effective as the last resort safety net Safety benefits underline the need to operate ACAS  Effect of ACAS performance on ASAS application development Interaction with ACAS dependent on the nature of the ASAS application Applicable separation minimum during ASAS operations is a significant parameter  Effect of ASAS applications on ACAS performance and requirement ASAS applications can trigger undesirable ACAS alerts Possible need for modification to current TA logic

16 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS Recommendations  ACAS constraints must be taken into account when developing ASAS procedures  Consideration should be given to ACAS developments which would improve compatibility with ASAS while preserving ACAS independence Review the TA role in the context of ASAS operations  Future investigation of ACAS / ASAS interaction should be supported by a comprehensive and robust methodological framework Such as the one established within IAPA