Develop a lightweight system that will accommodate most aircraft to: Reduce Runway Incursions Increase Safety Enhance situational awareness Alleviate airport congestion Project Proposal Research and develop a system to help reduce incursions involving different aspects surrounding airports, technological designs, and its users. Technical aspects: Improving Situational Awareness Acquiring Additional Airport and Environmental Information Maintain Communications with Pilots, ATC, and Ground/Maintenance Vehicles The Design Challenge

Category A - serious incident in which a collision was narrowly avoided. Category B - incident in which separation decreases; significant potential for collision Category C - incident characterized by ample time and/or distance to avoid a collision. Category D - incident with no immediate safety consequences “any unauthorized intrusion onto a runway, regardless of whether or not an aircraft presents a potential conflict.”

Air Traffic Control (ATC): operational errors Pilot Deviations (PD): action of a pilot violating FAA regulations Vehicle/Pedestrian Deviations (V/PD): vehicles and pedestrians interfering with aircraft operations.

Stage 1 Research and Information Gathering Operations Runway Incursions = NTSB’s “Most Wanted List” Ground operations present distinct challenges FAA top priority = reduce runway incursions Limitations Runway incursions on the rise Air Transportation on the rise, 3.4%/year through billion passengers/year (FAA) Corrections Pilot warning systems Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X Stage 2 Problem Assessment ASDE-X The primary foundation of the PATS Provide seamless coverage and aircraft identification to ATC Pilot Warning Cockpit advisory system that will alert pilots to potential runway incursions Integration PATS will be primarily software driven Little to no innovation in design Limited by the implementation of the system itself Resources and expertise are readily available

Attain Industry Knowledge Qualitative Methodology Primary Research: Literature Reviews Statistical and factual data offered through the NTSB and the FAA Secondary Research Interviews with industry experts Group advised surveys Guideline format: Primary areas of concern: Solution Scenario Industry advantages Attain Industry Knowledge Qualitative Methodology Primary Research: Literature Reviews Statistical and factual data offered through the NTSB and the FAA Secondary Research Interviews with industry experts Group advised surveys Guideline format: Primary areas of concern: Solution Scenario Industry advantages

Progressive = characteristics of a system that will drive towards a change in how ATC handles their ground operations Automation = Best routes for taxiing aircraft Human Control  Computer Control PATS Defined Hardware & software redundancy Human supervision Complete automation Ground operator real-time displays Use ASDE-X as the only source of ground detection Dispatcher input stations, or means thereof Adaptable software structure Simplicity in software patch design System Requirements – Software Deign

Piggy-back system off of ASDE-X PATS relies solely on ASDE-X for all ground operating vehicles’ real-time positions while in taxi operations. ATC user display Acts as waypoint for all position gathering hardware. The PATS will interlink into ASDE-X much like that of the ASDE-X ATC user display. ASDE-X

Multilateration Secondary Surveillance Optimizes Surface Movement Radar Accurately identifies aircraft and vehicles Adapts to changing weather Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Key component of ASDE-X Uses GPS Future of Air Transportation System Multi-sensor Data Processing Enables stronger signals to be processes Tower Displays Real-time monitoring ASDE-X consists of five main components:

FAA approved airports to receive the ASDE-X System.

Offers programming teams no strenuous roadblocks Ideals and theories seen in many other traffic management systems Unavoidable bug stage of the software implementation Within the first six months of operating The number of bugs present will be at an unacceptable amount for full-automation Software

Aircraft A has deviated off its taxi course Approaching runway 1. Air traffic control is trying to alert aircraft A Aircraft A is not responding.Aircraft A is crossing runway 1 Aircraft B, equipped with the PATS system Aircraft B on Short Final for runway 1. PATS system alerts aircraft B and ATC of an aircraft on the runway and provides an accurate image of the aircraft, including the aircrafts location in distance and height, and information informing the pilot of their distance from the runway. After an alert is issued, the pilot/ATC will be able to then make an accurate judgment of the situation.

Dispatcher A has input flight and aircraft information to PATS for Aircraft A Aircraft A has requested to taxi to active runway PATS decides which runway is active based on weather station information and other aircraft present Aircraft B has just landed on the active runway PATS will decide the most efficient route for aircraft A & B with consideration to the other PATS knows Aircraft B’s destination from its initial dispatcher input information at its departure location PATS actively and progressively monitors the taxi routes of both aircraft as they taxi Aircraft B is taxiing faster than PATS initially calculated and a taxiing conflict is possible PATS reassigns new taxi instructions to both air craft that eliminate the chance of any collision

Risk was assessed for three types of airport Factors involved Traffic density/type Size Complexity ATC presence

Largest and busiest airports High traffic volume Large, complex environment Busy ATC personnel Potentially high impact of incidents Unacceptable risk level Prime candidates for PATS

Medium-sized airports Moderate traffic volume Complex environment Risk level is acceptable with mitigation

Smaller airports Varying traffic volumes Relatively simple environment Few ATC personnel Acceptable risk level

We interviewed two professionals with industry experience Joel Feigum, Software Engineer Software design process Time and costs of development Chad Nelson, Air Traffic Controller Causes of runway incursions Suitable environments/potential impact of PATS

Software design and testing Identify requirements Software coding Testing phase Hardware design and testing Must be small, lightweight, simple to use

Will address FAA’s goals for runway incursions Maximize information available to operators Increase situational awareness Decreased frequency congestion Minimal impact to ATC and procedures

Estimated development and hardware costs Initial design: $1,300,000 Hardware development: $1,000,000 Formal qualification: $200,000

Components: Aircraft-Specific PATS indicator and receiver: $5,000 Installation/maintenance: $500 Airport-Specific Servers: $15,000 Networking: $2,000 PATS software: $5,000 Radio Transmitter (2): $10,000 Installation: $20,000 Maintenance: $10,000

The PATS system: Will provide an accurate picture of the approaching environmentWill provide airport information (dimensions)Will alert the pilot of any potential approaching problemWill increase situational awareness for both ATC and PilotsWill reduce the chance of an incident/accident PATS will determine taxi routes that are far more efficient than human controller’s routes