CARE ASAS Validation Framework System Performance Metrics 10th October 2002 M F (Mike) Sharples.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TWO STEP EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 2. DO THE ADDITION STEP FIRST
Advertisements

LEUCEMIA MIELOIDE AGUDA TIPO 0
1 Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved Fig 2.1 Chapter 2.
By D. Fisher Geometric Transformations. Reflection, Rotation, or Translation 1.
ASYCUDA Overview … a summary of the objectives of ASYCUDA implementation projects and features of the software for the Customs computer system.
1 Welcome Safety Regulatory Function Handbook April 2006.
Business Transaction Management Software for Application Coordination 1 Business Processes and Coordination.
SIP/2012/ASBU/Nairobi-WP/19
By: Michael A. Cirillo, Vice President, Air Traffic Organization, System Operations Services Date:March 27, 2007 Federal Aviation Administration Performance.
1 Marinus C. F. Heijl Acting Director Air Navigation Bureau ICAO 30 March 2007 SYMPOSIUM OUTCOMES AND THE WAY FORWARD.
1 Performance Indicators: Selection, Application, and Reporting Presented by John M Rodgers Federal Aviation Administration.
Performance Review Commission, and performance management of the European ATM system Keith C. Williams, Chairman PRC.
1 PHARE Operational Scenarios J-P. Nicolaon, Operational Task Force Chairman EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre.
1 Measurements & Validation R G Stamp Head of Department of ATM Research National Air Traffic Services Ltd, UK.
1 Validation & Measurement Methods for the PHARE Demonstrations R A Whitaker Validation Project Leader.
1 centre dÉtudes de la navigation aérienne COMMON METRICS FRAMEWORK FOR ATM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING Almira Williams, CSSI Inc.
GENSPACE Air Traffic Management
Introduction ATMCP and Performance Dominique Colin de Verdière (CENA) Bernard Miaillier (Eurocontrol) TIM9 - ATMCP-RTSP May 2002.
1 NAS Performance and Analysis: The Role of the Airspace Laboratory Airspace Laboratory May 2002 Toulouse, France.
CARE ASAS Validation Framework. Partners CARE ASAS Board - Francis Casaux EURCONTROL - Mick van Gool, Ulrich Borkenhagen Consortium Partners Aena, Isdefe,
1 NEXTOR Monitoring and Modeling NAS Performance at the Daily Level Mark Hansen Performance Metrics TIM May 2002.
Whole Airspace ATM System Safety Case - Preliminary Study
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
© 2002 EUROCONTROL 1 One Sky for Europe EUROCONTROL CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION FRAMEWORK DISSEMINATION FORUM Validation Data Repository.
FAA/Eurocontrol TIM 9 on Performance Metrics – INTEGRA Rod Gingell 16 May 2002.
The EMERALD RTD Plan and the ASAS Validation Framework R P (Bill) Booth 10 October 2002.
One Sky for Europe EUROCONTROL © 2002 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) Page 1 FAA/Eurocontrol Technical Interchange.
1 Performance indicators, targets, steering Technical Interchange meeting Toulouse, May 2002 Xavier FRON Head Performance Review Unit.
WP 3: Human Performance Metrics 10 Oct 2002 Brian Hilburn.
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Title Subtitle.
0 - 0.
ALGEBRAIC EXPRESSIONS
DIVIDING INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
MULTIPLYING MONOMIALS TIMES POLYNOMIALS (DISTRIBUTIVE PROPERTY)
ADDING INTEGERS 1. POS. + POS. = POS. 2. NEG. + NEG. = NEG. 3. POS. + NEG. OR NEG. + POS. SUBTRACT TAKE SIGN OF BIGGER ABSOLUTE VALUE.
SUBTRACTING INTEGERS 1. CHANGE THE SUBTRACTION SIGN TO ADDITION
MULT. INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
Addition Facts
ZMQS ZMQS
Airspace Volumes and Sectorisation Good Design Practice Airspace Volumes and Sectorisation Good Design Practice 1.
BT Wholesale October Creating your own telephone network WHOLESALE CALLS LINE ASSOCIATED.
Episode 3 / CAATS II joint dissemination event Gaming Techniques Episode 3 - CAATS II Final Dissemination Event Patricia López Aena Episode 3 Brussels,
Air Traffic Analysis, Inc Using WITI for Airport Arrival Performance Analysis A report on work-in-progress December 2010.
ABC Technology Project
© S Haughton more than 3?
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Page 1 The ONESKY (Single-Sky) project and what it means for ASAS.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR DXXX-1A The Free Flight Deck Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) S-7, “Flight.
Twenty Questions Subject: Twenty Questions
International Civil Aviation Organization Aviation System Block Upgrades Module N° B0-20/PIA-4 Improved Flexibility and Efficiency in Departure Profiles.
Linking Verb? Action Verb or. Question 1 Define the term: action verb.
International Civil Aviation Organization Trajectory-Based Operations(TBO) Saulo Da Silva SIP/ASBU/Bangkok/2012-WP/25 Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12.
Past Tense Probe. Past Tense Probe Past Tense Probe – Practice 1.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (A-CDM) Saulo Da Silva
Addition 1’s to 20.
25 seconds left…...
Test B, 100 Subtraction Facts
Week 1.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
1 Unit 1 Kinematics Chapter 1 Day
Traffic Management and FUA integration
Supply Chain Performance Measurement
Chapter 13 The Data Warehouse
Ch. 13: Supply Chain Performance Measurement: Introduction
Supply Chain Performance Measurement
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
CARE/ASAS Validation Framework Guidelines & Case Studies Mark Watson NATS.
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
EUROCONTROL/FAA ATM R&D June, Standardizing Performance Metrics Almira Williams and Stéphane Mondoloni, Ph.D. for Tamara Breunig CSSI, Inc. Washington.
Presentation transcript:

CARE ASAS Validation Framework System Performance Metrics 10th October 2002 M F (Mike) Sharples

2 Content Aims Approach Analysis System Performance Metrics

3 Aims Using recognised metrics is fundamental to measuring system performance The ASAS Validation Framework requires consistent metrics to provide comparable results The System Performance Metrics work demonstrates a method for identifying existing metrics for new scenarios System Performance Metrics

4 Approach Considerable existing work in this area –PRS –C/AFT –TORCH –INTEGRA Collating these required a consistent hierarchy & taxonomy System Performance Metrics

5 Hierarchy OBJECTIVES PERFORMANCE METRICS AREAS System Performance Metrics

6 Hierarchy OBJECTIVES –Tie in with ATM Strategy –High level & therefore no direct measure PERFORMANCE AREAS –Tie in with PRC (as this gives greatest commonality) –Lower level & therefore easier to measure METRICS –The measurements that can be made System Performance Metrics

7 Taxonomy System Performance Metrics METRICS INDICATORS CARE-ASASPRC ValidationC/AFT FrameworkTORCH METRIC DEFINITION MEASURE Event, ratio or unit that is quantifiable

8 Linkage (many to many) ECONOMICS ENVIRONMENT SECURITY / DEFENCE System Performance Metrics Delay (not capacity) Cost effectiveness Flight Efficiency Environment regulation Military Co-operation Military Access Air transport security Metrics

9 Further breakdown PERFORMANCE AREAS broken down into ASPECTS where appropriate Example: –ACCESS (PERFORMANCE AREA) Airports Sectors(ASPECTS) Routes Assists use with scenarios that look at specific airspace System Performance Metrics

10 Perspectives Different views (perspectives) can be applied to the selection of metrics: – Airline perspective as in C/AFT – ATM perspective as in PRC – Validation technique Permits further breakdown and filtering other than purely hierarchical System Performance Metrics

11 Example of perspective Performance Area: Flight efficiency – Airline perspective Actual fuel burn.v. planned fuel burn – ATM perspective Efficiency of route structure System Performance Metrics

12 Characteristics Further criteria for selecting metric suitability –ObjectivityObjective/subjective –IntrusiveHigh / Low –CostHigh / Low –ReliabilityHigh / Low –ValidityHigh / Low –UtilityHigh / Low –ExpertiseHigh / Low –ResourceHigh / Low System Performance Metrics

13 Analysis To illustrate feasibility of approach a demonstrator database was created 230 System Performance Metrics stored on database Derived from recognised sources Preliminary metric classification Perspectives available –ATS provider / Operator / ASAS / Analysis Type (or any combination of these) System Performance Metrics

14 Metrics storage System Performance Metrics

15 Cross link queries System Performance Metrics

16 Flexible output System Performance Metrics

17 ASAS case studies Time based sequencing in approach Airborne self-separation in en-route airspace System Performance Metrics

18 Metrics selection criteria Time based sequencing in approach –Selected Objectives: Safety; Capacity; Economics –Selected Performance Areas: Safety; Delay; Cost Effectiveness; Flexibility; Flight Efficiency –Methodology: Each of... 1 Analytic or fast-time simulation 2 Real-time simulation –Airspace: TMA / Airport –Perspective: ASAS & each of... 1 Operator 2 Service provider System Performance Metrics

19 Metrics selection criteria Airborne self-separation in en-route airspace –Selected Objectives: Safety; Capacity; Economics –Selected Performance Areas: Safety; Delay; Cost Effectiveness; Predictability; Flexibility; Flight Efficiency; Equity –Methodology: Each of... 1 Analytic or fast-time simulation 2 Real-time simulation –Airspace: En-route –Perspective: ASAS & each of... 1 Operator 2 Service provider System Performance Metrics

20 Metrics selection Microsoft Access prototype developed to demonstrate the filtering and selection process Automated selection process provides guidance –Identifies metrics used in previous work –List is not definitive or restrictive Once automatic selection process is complete, a manual overview can select the most appropriate metrics System Performance Metrics

21 Conclusions System performance metrics can be linked to the strategic objectives of ATM (and ASAS) The work has successfully consolidated metrics from a number of sources Effective filtering requires effective classification - this will necessarily be an ongoing and iterative process Selection process provides guidance - it is not definitive or restrictive System Performance Metrics