OptiFrame WP2: State-of-the-art and Stakeholders Expectations LANCASTER UNIVERSITY Centre for Transportation Systems and Logistics (CENTRAL) Lancaster, March 24, 2017

Table of content Objectives Methodology Review of the TBO concept Review of ATFCM literature Lessons from other industries Stakeholders’ workshop Synthesis and conclusion

1. Objectives To review the current state of development of the TBO concept. To review the state-of-the-art of mathematical modelling approaches and algorithmic efforts for optimizing decisions in the broader area Air Traffic Flow Capacity Management (ATFCM). To identify the needs, expectations, objectives, priorities, and constraints of all stakeholders in relation to the TBO concept.

2. Methodology CURRENT TBO CONCEPT AND RELEVANT ATFCM DOCUMENTS ATFCM LITERATURE FROM OTHER SECTORS LITERATURE REVIEW TEMPLATES MODELLING AND ALGORITHMIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE TBO CONCEPT OBJECTIVES KEY PERFORMANCE AREAS CONSTRAINTS (KPA) PRIORITIES KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPI) TBO STAKEHOLDERS’ WORKSHOP SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

3. Review of the TBO concept (1/4) Objectives: Review the documentation on the TBO concept in order to understand: The objectives of the TBO concept as defined by ICAO The TBO concept within the SESAR Master Plan The institutional and regulatory aspects of the TBO concept The constraints, enablers and requirements of the TBO concept The potential benefits for the stakeholders

3. Review of the TBO concept (2/4) Documents reviewed: ICAO Doc 9854 “Global Air Traffic Management Operational Concept” (1st Edition 2005) TBO Concept (ATMRPP WG/31-WP/702 Draft June 2016) European ATM Master Plan – Executive View (Edition 2015) ICAO Doc 9750 “2013-2028 Global Air Navigation Plan” (4th Edition 2013)

3. Review of the TBO concept (3/4) Key findings: The objectives of the TBO concept as defined by ICAO The TBO concept aims at further changing ATM towards a more collaborative and performance oriented operations.

3. Review of the TBO concept (3/4) Key findings: The objectives of the TBO concept as defined by ICAO The TBO concept within the SESAR Master Plan The TBO falls in SESAR step 2 and is focused on flight efficiency, predictability, environment and capacity.

3. Review of the TBO concept (3/4) Key findings: The objectives of the TBO concept as defined by ICAO The TBO concept within the SESAR Master Plan The institutional and regulatory aspects of the TBO concept The implementation of the TBO concept will be evolutionary and phased It will recognize the mix of capabilities and performance levels from the aircraft and the ATM service provider’ perspective.

3. Review of the TBO concept (4/4) Key findings: The constraints, enablers and requirements of the TBO concept Inconsistencies between airspace users and ATM service providers’ Trajectories. Inconsistencies and Inaccuracies between ATM and Ground System Trajectories.

3. Review of the TBO concept (4/4) Key findings: The constraints, enablers and requirements of the TBO concept Information sharing and Collaborative Decision Making among all TBO stakeholders. Involvement of all key stakeholders in the Trajectory Design decision making process. Consideration of KPAs that reflect the needs and expectations of all stakeholders.

3. Review of the TBO concept (4/4) Key findings: The constraints, enablers and requirements of the TBO concept Robustness of the trajectories Rules for managing and coordinating trajectory negotiations ability to manage trajectory uncertainty The optimization modelling of the flight trajectories should be focused on individual flight and should be holistic in terms of assessing the resulting network stability and efficiency.

3. Review of the TBO concept (4/4) Key findings: The constraints, enablers and requirements of the TBO concept The potential benefits for the stakeholders Air Space users will be able to plan and fly a specific trajectory The Network Manager will be able to accommodate the needs of the airspace users Improvement of the ATM system in terms of KPAs such as: safety, equity, cost-effectiveness, capacity, predictability, punctuality, environmental sustainability and fuel efficiency.

4. Review of ATFCM literature (1/2) Objectives: Review the relevant academic literature in the ATFCM domain with special emphasis to TBO. Identify modelling approaches applicable to TBO concept. Identify solution approaches capable of solving real instances of ATFCM models. Documents reviewed: This include a list of academic journal articles which relate to the above objectives. Among the reviewed articles, a total of 16 relevant journal articles (1987 – 2015) were identified and reviewed in depth

4. Review of ATFCM literature (2/2) Key findings: KPIs used in the objective functions of existing ATFCM models include: delays, fuel costs, air traffic control workload requirements, dispersion of delays among flights, route charges, costs of deviating from scheduled travel time, cancellation costs. These models are single-objective optimisation models. A mixed of both heuristics and exact approaches have been proposed. Models have been tested based on randomly generated instances reflecting the size of the USA air space. ATFCM literature is focused more on operational aspects than the pre-tactical operations

5. Lessons from other sectors Objectives: Understand the mathematical modelling and solution approaches used in the energy and telecommunication sectors Decision problems within these sectors have similar features with the ATFCM problem addressed in the OptiFrame project: Multiple stakeholders Underlying network Dissimilarity: Presence of a market used to trade and regulate the provision Energy from one source can be split to supply different demand

6. Stakeholders’ workshop (1/5) Objectives: Elicit the views of ATM stakeholders about their preferences and priorities in relation to: The optimization of flight trajectories; The establishment of KPAs and KPIs for assessing the quality of the OptiFrame solutions; The validation and prioritization of scenarios for assessing the performance of the TBO concept.

6. Stakeholders’ workshop (2/5) Methodology The workshop was organized according to guidelines provided in the deliverables D17 and D18, Presentation of the project, Presentation of the results of the literature review, Presentation of other relevant projects, Synthesis of the results.

6. Stakeholders’ workshop (3/5) Venue: The Stakeholders’ workshop was organized at the premises of EUROCONTROL in Brussels (Belgium) on the 5th of October 2016. Participants: In addition to the OptiFrame Consortium members, the following organizations also participated: Lufthansa Systems Transavia British Airways EUROCONTROL Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB): PARTAKE Project CRIDA: COPTRA project

6. Stakeholders’ workshop (4/5) Outcome: The concept of preference is still under development and no concrete definition currently exists. These preferences may be expressed through the ranking of alternative means for absorbing tactical delays (e.g. flight level, re-routing and/or delay). Currently there are not established rules suggesting how flights should be prioritized, which take into account the TBO concept. OptiFrame models may provide the capability to check the viability of the two prioritization mechanisms proposed for step 2 of User Driven Prioritization Process (Fleet Delay Apportionment & Selective Flight Protection).

6. Stakeholders’ workshop (5/5) Outcome: Disturbance scenarios to be studied should be based upon current day traffic and a reasonable growth scenario. Disturbance scenarios identified include: Unforeseen wind (e.g. jet stream causing flights to arrive earlier) Airport restriction (unforeseen limited capacity) Airport closure (sudden closure) Aircraft related disruption (variation of performance) Insufficient synchronisation (wrong or incomplete information to one stakeholder) Costs were identified as the most important KPA for airspace users. Other relevant KPAs include equity, fuel efficiency, capacity, predictability, punctuality, and flexibility.

7. Synthesis and conclusion (1/2) Overview: An integrated methodological framework was developed in WP2. It focused on the review of: Documents that describe the TBO concept and its implementation requirements. Documents providing input regarding the expectations of the TBO stakeholders, and elicitation of the point of view of key categories of TBO concept stakeholders regarding the incorporation of their decision making requirements into the OptiFrame mathematical models. The broader mathematical modelling and algorithmic literature related to existing pre-tactical ATFCM models.

7. Synthesis and conclusion (2/2) Two models can be developed within OptiFrame: A model to design a 4D-trajectory for each flight that is the closest possible to the users’ preferred trajectory. A model which selects a 4D-trajectory from a set of alternative trajectories for each flight. The preferences of the stakeholders will be modelled in a multi-objective optimisation framework. The priorities of airspace users will be included based on the Fleet Delay Apportionment mechanism proposed in the Step 2 of UDPP.

Thank you very much for your attention! OptiFrame WP2: State-of-the-art and Stakeholder Expectations Thank you very much for your attention!

The TBO concept: Collaborative + Performance Trajectory Based Operations represents a shift from present operations towards the use of a shared trajectory, collaboratively developed as the basis for decision-making across the ATM System Participants. Performance: working towards achieving the SESAR target of concept.

Efficiency, Predictability, Environment The Flight Efficiency Initiative (FEI) aims at scrutinising AUs’ flight plans and seeing if there is not a quicker or more cost-effective way for their aircrafts to fly. Predictability refers to the adherence to flight plans. Environment refers to the environmental impact of the ATM system. (GHG emissions).