Mediterranean Free Flight ASAS Separation and Spacing Presented by Andy Barff – Project Leader MFF Real-time Simulations ASAS-TN, Malmö

This presentation explains 2 aspects of MFF:  ASAS Separation Applications and Simulation Design  ASAS Spacing – “An Integrated Approach”

ASAS Separation

MFF ASAS Separation Concept  Definition in line with PO-ASAS  Delegation of separation responsibility to the flight crew for a particular manoeuvre in relation to a target aircraft – limited in space and time  Applications  Crossing Procedures  Lateral Crossing (pass behind)  Vertical Crossing (pass above or below)  Overtaking Procedures  Lateral overtaking (pass to the right or left)  In-trail Procedures  Remain in trail  Merge in trail  In-trail climb or descent  In-trail climb or descent to same level

MFF ASAS Separation Simulation  Simulation of Greek and Maltese airspace  October 20 th – 31 st 2003  4 days training  1 day of reference exercises  5 days of ASAS evaluation  2 large sectors over central Mediterranean (mainly high seas)  Simulation of radar and ADS-B surveillance  An area of poor or no surveillance  Inter-centre transfer procedures  Experimental Design  Qualitative assessment of ASAS Separation applications  Traffic samples “tuned” to offer several ASAS opportunities every 6-10mins  Current fixed route structure and existing sector dimensions  Technical Features  Position symbol reflects surveillance quality  ADS-B down-linked parameters displayed on demand in track label

MFF RTS3 Greece-Malta Scenario Radar cover limited in this area Radar cover only no ADS-B surveillance here  AFR m.84  BAW m.84  AFR g45 hdg m.84 rocd  BAW g45 h270 m.82 r0

Target Delegated “AF123 pass behind target maintain airborne separation, report clear of target” “AF123 clear of target, turning direct to ABC”

Target Delegated “AFR123 pass behind target maintain airborne separation, report clear of target” - Is the controller able to re-assume full control at this point – maybe no! - He will want to wait until the delegated a/c is back in surveillance cover and re- identified…… “AF123 clear of target, turning direct to ABC” - “AFR123 squawk ident” - “AFR123 re-identified, back under positive radar control”

ASAS Spacing – “An Integrated Approach”

ASAS Spacing as a “System Component”  ASAS Spacing cannot be considered in isolation  Unlike RVSM for example…….  It seems that the benefits of ASAS Spacing will be greatest when it is a component of an integrated concept of operations  Current practices will have to evolve to include ASAS Spacing in the more efficient management of arrival flows probably including RNAV arrival procedures  Current practices (generally) include:  Extensive marshalling and vectoring at low altitudes  Some use of holding (ready supply of a/c to maximise runway capacity)  This is not really compatible with the extensive use of ASAS Spacing because spacing set up in the ETMA will be “lost” if there is holding or extensive vectoring  New tasks for en-route sectors establishing the sequence in the vicinity of “top of descent”

Conventional traffic control – en-route sector has little awareness of approach sequence Holding stack feeding traffic marshalling and sequencing at low altitudes AMAN advisories organise arriving traffic and build initial sequence – ASAS Spacing initiated ASAS Spacing maintains sequence with optimal spacing Flows integrated using merging techniques Continuous descent from ideal TOD to FAF Towards a more efficient arrival flow

ASAS Spacing as a “System Component”  MFF is initiating a study of Rome arrivals using ASAS Spacing as a tool in a more efficient arrival concept…..  Subtle sector revisions to allow the controllers to concentrate on the management of arrivals. Overflights and outbounds handled mainly by other sectors  Key objectives:  To ensure that the en-route/ETMA sectors can effectively establish the arrival sequence before or shortly after Top of Descent  To study the feasibility of merging of ASAS spaced flows at medium level  To study the impact on the TMA sectors in terms of holding (reduction), environmental/efficient trajectories (mileage/levels) and controller workload/concept feasibility

▼230 ▼RFL ▼270 MFF RTS3 Rome Scenario