IP-20 Review of the Effectiveness of Branching UPRs from PACOTS Track 2 Electronic Navigation Research Institute The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C.

Introduction Computer Simulation’s (IPACG38/39) South Branching UPRs from PACOTS Track 2 Trade-off between flight on ideal altitude, and time- of-flight shortening effect The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Effective Course 2 Trade-off A Less Effect in the South Branching Model (50% RNP4 Capability) A Less Effect in the South Branching Model (50% RNP4 Capability) Non-ideal altitude

RNP 4 installation rate -Whole Oceanic ATC Area (Fukuoka FIR) The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. 3

RNP 4 installation rate -Flight heading NA (Fukuoka FIR) The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. In June of 2014, RNP4 installation rate was 80% in destination to North American flights. 4

UPRs or Random Flights More UPRs or Random flights at Track2 south side than north side 40%~50% non PACOTS for Hawaii 5 The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Average 10%Average 17% Average 46% One week each month, total 28days East bound flights cross FIR BDY between 0700Z~2100Z

Further experiment for IPACG/40 Optimal cruising altitude is assigned by great use of 30/30 separation, Even if there is traffic concentration. PACOTS Track 2 becomes the boundary, the procedure to determine PACOTS Track 2 is important. Further experiment was executed 80% of RNP4 capability Scenario North Branch Track generating process The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Priority Trk3 Priority Trk2 Priority Trk1 Trk1 Trk2 Trk3 Track 1, 2, 3 have a same gatewayThree pattern Track 2 6

Simulation Conditions THREE patterns – Pattern “W1” Priority Track 1 – Pattern “W2” Priority Track 2 – Pattern “W3” Priority Track 3 The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Trk 2 Priority Trk3 Priority Trk2 Priority Trk1 TWO Models – Model N Baseline – Model B Branch Southward and Northward from PACOTS Track flights, 80% of RNP4 PANCKDFWKSEAKSFOKLAX RNP RNAV TOTAL

Results 1 The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. When PACOTS Tracks are generated to priority on Track2, good effect balance in flight time and fuel consumption. longer time and more fuel in Model N (Most Cases) Large difference between Model N and Model B in fuel consumption (“W2”, “W3”) 8 Total Flight Time Total Fuel Consumption *Since each flight tracks were created by Minimum Time Track (MTT), shorter flight time not necessarily compare to low fuel consumptions.

Results 2 20%~25% of flights changed their cruising altitude “W1” lowest numbers The most of change width is 1,000feet lower Almost no differences between Model B and Model N The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. 9 Change Width(Feet) 2,0001,000-1,000-2,000-3,000-4,000TOTAL W1-B W1-N W2-B W2-N W3-B W3-N Number of Altitude Change and Change Width Altitude change means flights were not able to fly at an ideal altitude.

Results 3 W1W2W3 Destination Altitude Change Flight Time Fuel Consumption Altitude Change Flight Time Fuel Consumption Altitude Change Flight Time Fuel Consumption North Branch , ,874 South Branch ALL* , The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Performance Differences (Model N – Model B) per Flight “ + ” symbolizes altitude change of Model B is higher than that of Model N “ North Branch ” Flights destination to KDFW and KSEA “ South Branch ” Flights destination to KSFO and KLAX South Branch indicates a less benefit same result as previous study North Branch indicates higher benefits Model B have large benefits (dark orange background), even though no difference or high altitude change (“W2” and “W3”) *ALL is a weighted average of the flight number

Traffic Concentration 11 The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. ”FREE” ; UPRs without any restrictions Number of combination traffic existing within 35NM and 1,000feet Traffic concentration was occurred, but the effect comes out by the heavy use of 30/30

SUMMARY Totally, any pattern has fuel consumption benefit by branching UPRs, especially North Branch (South Branch has small effect or negative effect) Traffic concentration was generated by the branching UPRs, but the effect comes out by the heavy use of 30/30 12 The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington D. C. Effective Course Non-Ideal Altitude