ASSTAR Oceanic Applications by Nico de Gelder, NLR ASSTAR User Forum #1 4 April 2006, Roma.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
B-RNAV OPERATIONS IN EUROPEAN AIRSPACE
Advertisements

MINIMUM NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION AIRSPACE (MNPS)
FANS (Future Air Navigation System) Flight Crew Procedures
ASAS Thematic Network – Rome April 2003 Session 2-B Cost / Implications ASAS Impact on Ground Systems An Industry Viewpoint Thales ATM Peter.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Autonomous Aircraft OSED CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Autonomous Aircraft OSED.
Mediterranean Free Flight ASAS Separation and Spacing Presented by Andy Barff – Project Leader MFF Real-time Simulations ASAS-TN, Malmö
SC227 – SC214 ISRA – Datalink Interface. PBN Manual, Part A, Chapter On-board performance monitoring and alerting On-board performance.
Continuous Climb Operations (CCO) Saulo Da Silva
Introduction The Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) is an airborne system that interrogates transponders in other aircraft. From the replies.
Advanced Safe Separation Technologies and Algorithms (ASSTAR) Project ASAS-TN2 Workshop #1 Malmö 26 th -28 th September 2005 ASSTAR is a Specific Targeted.
Protection Values for VOR-Defined ATS Routes
ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Dr T E Johnson, BAE Systems
Applications from packages I to III
TCAS Basics Capt Craig Hinkley. 2 TCAS HISTORY  Two planes collided over the Grand Canyon  Alternative airborne version using transponders.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Time-Based Sequencing OHA CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Time-Based Sequencing OHA.
Airborne Traffic Situational Awareness – In-Trail Procedure (ATSA-ITP)
Study Continuous Climb Operations
Federal Aviation Administration ASAS issues identified in the AP23 work ASAS-TN2.5 workshop 13 Nov 08, Rome By Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA.
20 In-Trail Climb experience and an airlines view of ASAS opportunities Captain Rocky Stone United Airlines Manager – Flight Systems Technology.
The SESAR Target Concept of Operations ASAS Related Aspects
CPDLC / ADS Operations 4/22/2017 2:35 PM
1 CoSpace Experimental results on sequencing & merging Karim Zeghal ASAS Thematic Network, Second workshop 6-8, October 2003, Malmö, Sweden.
ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop ASSTAR Safety Approach and Preliminary Issues Dr Giuseppe GRANIERO, SICTA
Workshop on FORMAL METHODS IN AEROSPACE, Eindhoven,November 3, 2009 Observability and Diagnosability of Hybrid Automata, and their application in Air Traffic.
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.
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.
CRISTAL ITP European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation CRISTAL ITP ASAS-TN, Paris Johan Martensson CASCADE CRISTAL ITPJohan Martensson ASAS-TN.
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.
1 Airborne spacing in the terminal area: A study of non-nominal situations EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre European Organisation for the Safety of Air.
- Session 4: Interoperation José M. Roca Air/Ground Cooperative ATS Programme Eurocontrol.
Federal Aviation Administration Surveillance and Broadcast Services ADS-B In-Trail Procedures Presented to the ASAS TN 2.5 Workshop November 2008 Kenneth.
RECITE A PRAYER…(15 SECONDS). ATM TOPIC 1. INTRODUCTION TO AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT,TYPE OF CONTROL AREAS & FLIGHT PLAN 2. AERODROME CONTROL 3. AREA CONTROL.
Direction générale de l’Aviation civile centre d’Études de la navigation aérienne First ASAS thematic network workshop The user’s expectations and concerns.
Federal Aviation Administration AP23 : a snapshot on Package2 ASAS-TN2 Seminar 14 April Paris By Dragos Tonea, Eurocontrol Roberta Massiah, FAA.
Air Systems Division GROUND ASAS EQUIPMENT Michel Procoudine Gorsky ASAS TN2 – Workshop 5 Toulouse 17th-20th September 2007.
Federal Aviation Administration AP23 briefing on D3: ASAS Concept of operations ASAS-GN Seminar 13 Nov 08, Rome By Ken Carpenter, QinetiQ.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ADS-B In-Trail Procedures Overview of Research Results Presented to the ASAS TN2 Workshop September 2007.
NUP Phase 2 – Extended Visual Acquisition (EVA) and Airborne Approach Spacing (AAS) Oliver Reitenbach / DFS, Matthias Groth / DLH September 2005 / Slide.
Aircraft Manufacturer Plans - Airbus Stéphane Marché – Airbus ASAS TN Glasgow, September 2006.
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.
International Civil Aviation Organization Aviation System Block Upgrades Module N° B0-86/PIA-3 Improved Access to Optimum Flight Levels through Climb/Descent.
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
Glasgow 12 September 20061/22DEEP BLUE CONSULTING AND RESEARCH | CLAUDIA FUSAI ASAS-TN2 Controllers situational awareness issues.
Malmö 5 September. 27 th 2005 NUP ITP TT Reykjavik “NUP -- ITP”
CY Segment 1 Phase 1 Tower Services Initial En Route Services Departure Clearances (DCL) Transfer of Communications Initial Check-In.
Discussions Summary ASSTAR - Crossing & Passing session.
2 nd Workshop, April 2006 ASAS in Tomorrows Airspace Pierre Gayraud, THALES Bob Graham, EEC Tony Henley, BAe Systems Dr Anthony Smoker, IFATCA ASAS-TN2.
1 Airborne Separation Assistance Systems (ASAS) - Summary of simulations Joint ASAS-TN2/IATA/AEA workshop NLR, Amsterdam, 8 th October 2007 Chris Shaw.
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.
ASSTAR Airborne Separation Operations in Oceanic Airspace Bob McPike, NATS ASAS-TN2 Conference Glasgow, September 2006.
19-21 April 2004ASAS TN – 3 rd workshop AIRLINES/IATA OVERVIEW Needs and Considerations Anthony van der Veldt/IATA Assistant Director Safety Operations.
4 th Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 rd -25 th April 2007 ASAS-SEP Applications Airborne Implementation Overall Architectural Considerations.
Page 1 July 28, 2003 Richmond Facility ATN 2003 IEE London Raytheon Integrated Data Link–RIDL
1 International Flight Operations Efficiency Enhancements: Oceanic Navigation and the North Atlantic Track System (NATS) Presented by Frank Ketcham.
ASSTAR Overview Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
ASSTAR Airborne Separation Applications
ASSTAR Oceanic Session Summary
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Rome November 2008 Johan Martensson, CASCADE
FANS (Future Air Navigation System) Flight Crew Procedures
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE
SEPARATION Module 1, Topic 1.
Karim Zeghal EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
ASSTAR Project Overview & User Forum Objectives
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Presentation transcript:

ASSTAR Oceanic Applications by Nico de Gelder, NLR ASSTAR User Forum #1 4 April 2006, Roma

page 2 Overview  General Introduction  Oceanic ASAS Applications –In Trail Procedure (ATSA-ITP) –In Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP) –In Trail Follow (ASEP-ITF) –Free Flight on an Oceanic Track (SSEP-FFT)

page 3 General Introduction  Oceanic Environment –Focus on the Organised Track System  Operational limitations caused by procedural separation standards  Structured system with potentially large benefits –North Atlantic OTS is characterized by:  5-6 parallel tracks  Longitudinal separation of minutes  Lateral separation of 60 NM  Vertical separation of 1,000 ft

page 4 General Introduction  Oceanic Environment (cont’d) –Reduction of Oceanic Separation is studied (RNP-4, 30/30 Separation)  30 mile lateral and longitudinal separation  Standards call for: –Direct controller-pilot communication via voice or data link –Aircraft navigation accuracy to RNP-4 –Appropriate ADS-C position reporting capability (air and ground)  Implementation from 2009 onwards –starting with RNP-4, 30 mile longitudinal separation on one or two OTS tracks

page 5 General Introduction  Airborne ASAS application categories defined by FAA/Eurocontrol (in PO-ASAS document) –Airborne Traffic Situation Awareness (ATSA)  Neither delegation of separation responsibility nor delegation of tasks  In Trail Procedure (ATSA-ITP) –Airborne Spacing (ASPA) –Airborne Separation (ASEP)  Limited delegation of separation responsibility and associated tasks  In Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP)  In Trail Follow (ASEP-ITF) –Airborne Self-Separation (SSEP)  Full delegation of separation responsibility and associated tasks  Free Flight on an Oceanic Track (SSEP-FFT)

page 6 In Trail Procedure Airborne Traffic Situation Awareness application (ATSA-ITP)

page 7 In Trail Procedure (ATSA-ITP)

page 8 In Trail Procedure (ATSA-ITP)  Anticipated Benefits  enabling more frequent flight level changes for better flight efficiency (fuel savings)  improved safety by avoiding turbulent flight levels  Requirements Focus Group (RFG) –is creating standards for this application –as part of ASAS Package 1

page 9 Initial Procedures for ATSA-ITP  Flight Crew (given own aircraft/flight crew is qualified for ATSA-ITP) –determine the need to climb/descend (at least) 2,000 ft –check for Potentially Blocking Aircraft at intermediate level –check for compliance with ATSA-ITP initiation conditions  Potentially Blocking Aircraft  Reference Aircraft –request ATSA-ITP flight level change with Reference Aircraft  Example ATSA-ITP initiation conditions are:  procedural separation exists at the desired flight level  potentially blocking aircraft has qualified ADS-B Out  distance from the blocking aircraft exceeds 15 (or 20) NM  closure rate does not exceed 20 (or 30) kts  own aircraft (ITP aircraft) can climb with at least 300 fpm

page 10 Initial Procedures for ATSA-ITP (cont’d)  Oceanic Controller –check  Reference Aircraft is the only blocking aircraft  speed difference is less than 0.03 Mach  Reference Aircraft has not been cleared to manoeuvre –issue ATSA-ITP clearance for a climb/descent (typically 2,000 ft)  Flight Crew –re-assess ATSA-ITP initiation conditions –respond to ATSA-ITP clearance –perform ATSA-ITP climb/descent  normal climb/descent with at least 300 fpm  monitoring of reference aircraft is not required –report established at the new flight level

page 11 In Trail Procedure Airborne Separation application (ASEP-ITP)

page 12 In Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP)

page 13 In Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP)  Expected Benefits  enabling more frequent flight level changes for better flight efficiency (fuel savings)  improved safety by avoiding turbulent flight levels  ASEP-ITP enables the controller –to designate a Reference Aircraft as Target Aircraft, and –to instruct the Clearance Aircraft  to climb/descend to a new flight level, and  to provide separation with the Target Aircraft  And the clearance aircraft (after receipt of the clearance) –to ensure that airborne longitudinal separation minimum is not infringed –to climb/descend to the instructed level

page 14 Initial Procedures for ASEP-ITP  Flight Crew (aircraft/flight crew qualified for ASEP-ITP) –determine the need to climb/descend (at least) 2,000 ft –check for Potentially Blocking Aircraft at intermediate flight level –check for compliance with ASEP-ITP initiation conditions  Potentially Blocking Aircraft  Reference Aircraft –request ASEP-ITP flight level change with Reference Aircraft  Example ASEP-ITP initiation conditions are:  procedural separation exists at the desired flight level  potentially blocking aircraft has qualified ADS-B Out  distance from the blocking aircraft exceeds 10 (or 15) NM  closure rate does not exceed 20 (or 30) kts  (or a more advanced distance/closure rate function)

page 15 Initial Procedures for ASEP-ITP (cont’d)  Oceanic Controller –check  Reference Aircraft is the only blocking aircraft  speed differences are less than 0.03 Mach (due to ADS-B limitation)  Reference Aircraft has not been cleared to manoeuvre –issue ASEP-ITP climb/descent clearance  Flight Crew –respond to ASEP-ITP clearance –perform ASEP-ITP climb/descent  monitor and maintain longitudinal separation with Target Aircraft –report established at the new flight level

page 16 Initial Procedures for ASEP-ITP (cont’d)  Questions / Discussion Items –ASEP-ITP is strongly based on ATSA-ITP, to enable a step-by-step application development. Do you agree with this approach? –Added benefit of ASEP-ITP is limited, unless...

page 17 In Trail Follow Airborne Separation application (ASEP-ITF)

page 18 In Trail Follow Required minutes-in trail maintained by ASEP-ITF Oceanic Entry Point A B

page 19 In Trail Follow Instructed spacing distance

page 20 In Trail Follow  Anticipated Benefits  enabling more frequent flight level changes for better flight efficiency  fuel savings  reduced controller workload  enabling more aircraft to fly on the flight levels of an oceanic track  improved track occupancy  ASEP-ITF enables the oceanic controller –to designate an aircraft as Target Aircraft –to instruct the Clearance Aircraft  to remain behind the Target Aircraft, for example 2 minutes, and  to provide longitudinal separation with the Target Aircraft, for example 5 miles  And the clearance aircraft must (after receipt of the clearance) –acquire and maintain the instructed spacing –ensure that the airborne longitudinal separation minimum is not infringed

page 21 Initial Procedure for ASEP-ITF  Flight Crew (ITF case during Oceanic Ops) –determine the need to climb/descend (at least) 1,000 ft –check for Potentially Blocking Aircraft –check for compliance with ASEP-ITF initiation conditions –request ASEP-ITF flight level change with Lead Aircraft  Potentially Blocking Aircraft  Lead Aircraft  Example ASEP-ITF initiation conditions are:  potentially blocking aircraft has qualified ADS-B Out  potentially blocking aircraft is flying ahead of own aircraft  spacing with blocking aircraft exceeds 2 minutes  speed difference less than 0.03 Mach  but... a more advanced spacing/speed function is anticipated, e.g. based on the current sliding Mach technique

page 22 Initial Procedure for ASEP-ITF (cont’d)  Oceanic Controller (ITF case during Oceanic Ops) –check  Lead Aircraft is the only blocking aircraft  Lead Aircraft has not been cleared to manoeuvre –issue ASEP-ITF climb/descent clearance  an exact Spacing Time, or  a Spacing Time bracket (with Max value in instruction)

page 23 Initial Procedure for ASEP-ITF (cont’d)  Flight Crew (ITF case during Oceanic Ops) –respond to ASEP-ITF climb/descent clearance –insert appropriate data in on-board system –execute ASEP-ITF manoeuvre  acquire and maintain spacing value (typically 2 to 9 min)  provide longitudinal separation with lead aircraft –climb/descend, report established at new flight level –ASEP-ITF continues until cancelled by controller  Oceanic Controller –cancel ASEP-ITF  in relation with a climb/descent instruction  at the oceanic exit point

page 24 Initial Procedure for ASEP-ITF (cont’d)  Questions / Discussion Items –In case of climb/descent and then follow  Combined ITF-flight level instruction by the oceanic controller  First an ITF instruction, and thereafter a climb/descent instruction –In case of ITF instruction at the oceanic entry point  Instruction to be given by domestic tactical controller –ADS-B message set  needs to be expanded with Mach number or something similar –Provision of airborne longitudinal separation  implicit as part of maintaining (a larger) spacing value including tolerances –Speed range during ASEP-ITF  needs to be predictable, due to non-ITF aircraft behind the ITF pair  trade-off between (near-)optimal speed and (near-)optimal altitude

page 25 Free Flight on an Oceanic Track Airborne Self-Separation application (SSEP-FFT)

page 26 Free Flight on an Oceanic Track

page 27 Free Flight on an Oceanic Track  Anticipated Benefits  enabling more aircraft at the flight levels of a track (due to lower longitudinal separation criteria)  enabling more frequent flight level changes or even cruise climbs  enabling more freedom in speed selections  these factors contribute to better flight efficiency, improved track occupancy and improved safety  controller workload reduction  SSEP-FFT characteristics –Separation responsibility relative to all aircraft on the Free Flight Track is transferred to the flight crew, for an extended period of time –New entry/exit procedures will be required  aircraft will receive a clearance to enter the Oceanic Free Flight Track  aircraft will receive a clearance to return to managed airspace –An Oceanic Free Flight Track has to be defined (in space, in time, legally)

page 28 Initial Procedures for SSEP-FFT  Flight Crew (given aircraft/flight crew are qualified) –Request oceanic clearance for Free Flight Track  between 90 and 30 minutes from reaching the oceanic boundary, as today  Oceanic Planner Controller –Check flow management issues  apply same or similar oceanic entry criteria as today –Issue oceanic clearance for Free Fight Track

page 29 Initial Procedures for SSEP-FFT  Flight Crew –Respond to oceanic clearance, including confirmation of FFT exit conditions with new estimates (if any) –At the Oceanic Entry Point  Engage Free Flight mode  Transfer to Flight Information frequency Flight Crew –Provides separation with all other aircraft on the Free Flight Track  Conflict Prevention, Conflict Detection and Conflict Resolution functions  Resolutions only in the vertical and speed domain  Appropriate display information and crew alerting

page 30 Initial Procedures for SSEP-FFT  Flight Crew –about 30 minutes from leaving oceanic airspace  contact Domestic Planning controller  request domestic airspace entry clearance  Domestic Planning Controller –issue clearance for entering domestic airspace  if acceptable based on requested exit point, time and flight level  controller may choose to offer an alternative clearance with a different flight level  clearance also includes a domestic frequency to contact on entering domestic airspace and a Mode A squawk

page 31 Initial Procedures for SSEP-FFT  Flight Crew –At the Oceanic Exit Point (i.e. domestic airspace entry point)  contact Domestic Tactical controller  disengage Free Flight Mode

page 32 Initial Procedures for SSEP-FFT  Questions / Discussion Items –Contacting a Domestic Planning controller?  planning controller currently has no access to a radio frequency (R/T)  ground system provisions in case of CPDLC (downstream clearance)  but... we do not want to mandate CPDLC  though... CPDLC is most likely mandated in the NAT prior to FF track deployment –No horizontal resolutions  to avoid impact adjacent OTS tracks  no horizontal resolutions until proven to be really necessary –Oceanic Free Flight Track(s) parallel to the OTS tracks  in between the existing OTS tracks, or  after RNP-4 implementation one of the OTS tracks will be designated as FF track –Roll-out / roll-up of the Free Flight Track –Local GNSS failure  A second GNSS - Galileo  A relatively low RNP value (e.g. RNP-4) – have some hours before exceeding RNP

page 33 THANK YOU

page 34 FEEDBACK QUESTIONS COMMENTS and NEW IDEAS SUGGESTIONS P.S. Feel free to send afterthoughts to