LMINET2: An Enhanced LMINET Dou Long, Shahab Hasan December 10, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Federal Aviation Administration 1 Collaborative Decision Making Module 2 Developing A Collaborative Framework.
Advertisements

1 NEXTOR Monitoring and Modeling NAS Performance at the Daily Level Mark Hansen Performance Metrics TIM May 2002.
Airport ATC Capacity Research Programme
Performance Requirements – Dynamic Density & Dynamic Resectorization Concepts Rich Jehlen Manager, Air Traffic Planning Division Toulouse June, 2002.
CHARLES N. GLOVER MICHAEL O. BALL DAVID J. LOVELL Collaborative Approaches to the Application of Enroute Traffic Flow Management Optimization Models.
- European CDM - To benefit from the animation settings contained within this presentation we suggest you view using the slide show option. To start the.
Air Traffic Analysis, Inc Using WITI for Airport Arrival Performance Analysis A report on work-in-progress December 2010.
By: Tony Diana, Date: September 19, 2005 File: apo130\ASPMDocs\ASPM Presentation 05.ppt Federal Aviation Administration Presentation of the.
Modeling Airport Capacity
Federal Aviation Administration Examples of OR Practices at FAA WINFORMS Nastaran Coleman, Ph.D. January 28, 2014.
1 Northeast Corridor Cost Benefit Assessment Status Mark Kipperman SAIC July 14, 2003.
© 2002 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Economic Effects of Congestion and Delay Joe Sinnott March 2002.
Development of a Closed-Loop Testing Method for a Next-Generation Terminal Area Automation System JUP Quarterly Review April 4, 2002 John Robinson Doug.
LMI Airline Responses to NAS Capacity Constraints Peter Kostiuk Logistics Management Institute National Airspace System Resource.
MIT Lincoln Laboratory Evans benefits ARAM1 jee 6/4/2015 Assessment of Aviation Delay Reduction Benefits for Nowcasts and Short Term Forecasts James Evans.
Hamsa Balakrishnan Massachusetts Institute of Technology NSF−UC Berkeley−MIT ActionWebs Kickoff Meeting December 17, 2009 ActionWebs: Energy-efficient.
FAA Air Traffic Organization NAS Operational Analyses and Challenges to Modeling the Future.
Effects of the 3- Hour Tarmac Delay Rule Yi-Hsin Lin 15 December Final Project.
Airline Schedule Optimization (Fleet Assignment II) Saba Neyshabouri.
Airline On Time Performance Systems Design Project by Matthias Chan.
Date: 18 February 2008 Federal Aviation Administration Collaborative Decision Making at the FAA/ATO A look at how CDM is applied in the U.S.
Presented to: By: Date: File: apo130\Airport Efficiency\TAER SAER Updated Briefing(2).ppt 1030 Federal Aviation Administration Presentation of System Airport.
Federal Aviation Administration FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (Public availability to be determined under 5USC 552) Data Communications Program DCL Benefits Modeling.
ICRAT 2004 Airport Surface Operations Analysis Tarja Kettunen ISA Software International Conference on Research in Air Transportation Zilina, Slovakia,
1 AvMet Applications, Inc Alexander Bell Dr., Ste. 130 Reston, VA Weather-Aware Post Event Analysis Mike Robinson AvMet Applications, Inc.
Federal Aviation Administration Valuation of NextGen Capacity Benefits A Consumer Surplus Approach to the Monetization of NASPAC Results For: INNOVATIONS.
. Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS) Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) Transportation authorities around the globe are working to keep air traffic moving.
Outlook for Commercial Aircraft McDonnell Douglas (Made in 1995)
MIT ICAT ICATMIT M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Virtual Hubs: A Case Study Michelle Karow
Workshop PRIXNET – 11/12 Mars CONGESTION PRICING IN AIR TRANSPORTATION Karine Deschinkel Laboratoire PRiSM – Université de Versailles.
Federal Aviation Administration Date: July 2011 Terminal Arrival Efficiency Rate (TAER) 101 Metric Explanation.
M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ANALYSIS OF BARRIERS TO THE UTILITY OF GENERAL AVIATION TROY D. DOWNENR.
Federal Aviation Administration ATO Future Schedule Generation Performance Analysis and Strategy January 27, 2010.
Distributed Multi-Nodal ATFM Operational Trial
Bureau of Transportation Statistics: Aviation Data Bases Bureau of Transportation Statistics Research and Innovative Technology Administration United States.
Jenifer Miller Simulation Modeling and Analysis Term Project December 2000 Simulation of Airplane Traffic at Bradley International Airport.
Presented to: NAS-Wide Simulation & NextGen workshop By: Kimberly Noonan, Joseph Post Date: December 10th, 2008 Federal Aviation Administration The Modernized.
Presented to: NAS-Wide Simulation Workshop By: Kimberly Noonan, FAA NextGen and Ops Planning Date: January 28, 2010 Federal Aviation Administration NextGen.
1 ATM System Wide Modeling Capabilities in Fast-Time Simulation 1 st Annual Workshop – NAS-Wide Simulation in Support of NextGen Dec. 10th – George Mason.
F066-B © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. MITRE-CAASD’s systemwideModeler State and Near-Term Plans Pete Kuzminski 10 December 2008.
F E D E R A L A V I A T I O N A D M I N I S T R A T I O N A I R T R A F F I C O R G A N I Z A T I O N 1 Federal Aviation Administration System Airport.
Harris.com Alex Murray | DCIS Benefits Lead DCIT Brief Data Comm Benefits & Metrics Alignment with DC Program, NIWG, & NAC.
Ames Research Center 1 FACET: Future Air Traffic Management Concepts Evaluation Tool Banavar Sridhar Shon Grabbe First Annual Workshop NAS-Wide Simulation.
Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis March 18, 2005 (408) Matthew Blake.
Moving toward Arrival-Departure GDP Bill Hall December 1999.
Chapter 10 Verification and Validation of Simulation Models
Route and Network Planning
Improving Revenue by System Integration and Cooperative Optimization Reservations & Yield Management Study Group Annual Meeting Berlin April 2002.
1 An Integer Linear Programming model for Airline Use (in the context of CDM) Intro to Air Traffic Control Dr. Lance Sherry Ref: Exploiting the Opportunities.
Benefits of CDM Within AFI Region Presented by: Mikateko Chabani.
Lufthansa Looking for Feedback Performance Measurement in Revenue Management Stefan Pölt Lufthansa German Airlines AGIFORS Reservations & Yield Management.
Presented to:GMU System-Wide Modeling Workshop By: Joseph Post, ATO NextGen & Ops Planning Date: 10 December 2008 Federal Aviation Administration FAA System-Wide.
Federal Aviation Administration 1 Collaborative Decision Making Module 5 “The Collaborative Environment”
Using Simulation in NextGen Benefits Quantification
Joint Planning & Development Office Evaluations & Analysis Preliminary Scenario Analyses Strategy Assessment to Provide a Basis for Prioritizing Investments.
RSPA/Volpe Center Arrival/Departure Tradeoff Optimization at STL: a Case Study Dr. Eugene P. Gilbo tel.: (617) CDM.
________________________________________________________ GBI Cost Analysis SAE Advances in Aviation Safety April 11th, 2000 SAE Advances in Aviation Safety.
1 Surface CDM Sub-team Concept of Operations Briefing Marshall Mowery (FAA CDM Lead) Dan Allen, FedEx Express (Industry CDM Lead) Carl Calcasola, ATM PBI.
F066-B © 2003 The MITRE Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Predictability and Uncertainty in Air Traffic Flow Management Len Wojcik, Josh Pepper,
RSPA/Volpe Center Arrival/Departure Capacity Tradeoff Optimization: a Case Study at the St. Louis Lambert International Airport (STL) Dr. Eugene P. Gilbo.
Greater Binghamton Airport March 2016 BGM. Sixel Consulting Group March 2016.
Presented to:Nextor NAS-Wide Modeling Workshop By: Joseph Post, NextGen Systems Analysis Date: January Federal Aviation Administration NextGen.
The Role of Air Traffic Control in A CDM ENVIRONMENT
Capacity and delays at Newark Airport, theoretical and experimental approaches Thomas Morisset.
A Modeling Framework for Flight Schedule Planning
Chapter 10 Verification and Validation of Simulation Models
1.206J/16.77J/ESD.215J Airline Schedule Planning
Complex World 2015 Workshop
Collaborative Decision Making “Developing A Collaborative Framework”
Presentation transcript:

LMINET2: An Enhanced LMINET Dou Long, Shahab Hasan December 10, 2008

P A G E 2 Old LMINET Refers to a suite of models –Separate commercial and GA traffic schedule forecast models –NAS-wide operations/delay model –NAS-wide projected throughput schedule construction model –Utilities to process OAG, ETMS, ASQP data sources Flight delay estimation, at 110 large airports –Based on the solution of dynamic queuing equations at 110 airports from demands and capacities –Outputs queuing delays (akin to measuring against unimpeded) Constrained flight schedule construction, all flight –Can use delay tolerance-based rules or demand/capacity ratio-based rules for airport capacity constraints –Uses sector loading for en route constraints –Runs assuming universally good weather conditions across NAS to reflect general airline scheduling practice

P A G E 3 Motivation for LMINET2 Although LMINET is capable of estimating flight delays in any weather conditions, its modeling of NAS operations in bad weather can be improved. We need to have new capabilities to reflect the disruption of flight schedules: –Delay propagation –Flight cancellation (not the same as flight trimming) –Active air traffic management (ATM) measures such as the Ground Delay Program (GDP) Some ATM technologies/strategies are designed to help the traffic operations in both good and bad weather, or in bad weather only

P A G E 4 Triad of Models and Entities in LMINET2 Flight Schedule Delay & Cancellation Model Aircraft Connection and Turnaround Model Airport Queuing Delay Model Queuing Delay Airport Demand Flight Arrival Delay Flight Departure Delay Demand Aggregate number of flights For queuing delay calculations Flight Scheduled service (O&D, time, equipment) Schedule delays depends on queuing delay, schedule pad, and schedule delay Aircraft For flight connection and delay propagation The airport queuing delay model is replaced by a triad of models: demand, flight, aircraft

P A G E 5 Modeling Flight Delays at Arrival Gate and Schedule Pad Estimation Flight schedule delay (gate arrival delay) –Block Delay = Taxi-out Delay + En Route Delay + Taxi-in Delay – Schedule pad, or –Arrival Gate Delay = Departure gate delay + Taxi-out Delay + En Route Delay + Taxi- in Delay – Schedule pad Schedule pad estimation Dept Gate (10.98) Taxi- out (4.68) Taxi-in (1.71) Arrival Gate (7.55) En Route (1.27) Block (-2.19) Pad is 9.85 min (1 st formula), or min (2 nd formula) –Their difference is caused by the rounding error in the reported data base –Data source: 2005 ASPM, all flights including negative delays

P A G E 6 Modeling Flight Connection Flight connection model is needed for delay propagation and flight cancellation modules Only the flights with the same seat size categories can be connected –The carrier flag is ignored because the model is envisioned to be used mostly for studies of future traffic when the carrier is the hardest to predict in a flight schedule Window of flight connection construction –Estimated by the scheduled arrival and departure times (not the real operation times) –Data sources: ASQP (tail #), and OAG (seat size) of June 2005

P A G E 7 Delay Propagation Model and Its Validation Model for the departure gate delay (against schedule ) = max(arrival delay + minimum ground turn time – scheduled ground turn time, 0) + adjustment factor caused by other reasons –Y = α + βx –α =7.64, β =0.966, R 2 = –α =0, β=1.05, R 2 =

P A G E 8 Operational Flight Cancellation Module The following flights are cancelled –Due to congestion based on the queuing delay –Due to schedule delay –Due to connectivity The next leg, if it exists, of a cancelled flight is also cancelled Flights can also be cancelled by the Ground Delay Program logic (discussed on next slides)

P A G E 9 GDP Logic A proactive ATM program to reduce flight delay and congestion when the capacity of the destination airport is reduced due to weather by holding flights at their departure airports While running the normal delay model, concurrently check the future capacity/demand imbalance at each of the 310 airports starting 2 hours ahead till the end of day The acceptance rate at the destination airport can be taken from an input file, or can be generated based on the weather condition If not departed, the departure times of the arriving flights are delayed to the next epoch. FIFO scheme used for multi-epoch delay. Cancel flights if they are expected to experience extreme delays

P A G E 10 Expanded Airport Coverage in LMINET2 Airports with queuing delays: 310 –110 with FAA capacity models –200 LMI-developed models Schedule delays: all commercial airports, ~ 450 All airports: contribute demand to the 310 airports and to their delays Air Carrier Air Taxi

P A G E 11 Model Parameter Calibration Default setting based on the system averages Airport specific tuning at a small set of airports –Schedule delay pad at the arrival airport –Non-congestion related departure delay adjustment They are all interconnected; there is no single parameter responsible for one statistic The model output is most sensitive to airport capacity and weather inputs

P A G E 12 Summary of Model Validation We are satisfied overall for a national model –By the delay/cancellation statistics comparison –Because of our queuing theoretic and modular approach The errors are contributed mostly by the capacity models at a few airports –The model assumes the theoretical capacity while some airports are specified by operational capacities. –The capacity models assume one set of curves for each meteorological condition. Airports may have multiple curves under weather due to different runway configurations used, which can also cause the inconsistency of in the GDP program. Some errors are expected –Used published commercial schedule and generated GA schedule instead of real schedule –It does not considered the carrier flag in flight connection for delay propagation and flight cancellation Kept it this way because it is impossible to specify it in the studies of future traffic scenarios

P A G E 13 Benefits of LMINET2: More Realistic Setting & Richer Statistics It captures the delay absorption, propagation, cancellation, and ground control –Instead of a giant airport delay calculator, it now tracks the delays of each individual flight –It is especially needed in modeling NAS in bad weather It yields better delay estimates, even for the queuing delays offered by the old LMINET, because of more proper accounting of schedule disruption It generates a richer set of statistics in addition to queuing delays: –Arrival/departure gate delay –Arrival/departure gate on-time percentage (if arrival delay > 15 min) –Taxi-out delay –Arrival/departure flight cancellation statistics –These metrics provide a better representation of the current NAS operations, and for calculating stakeholder metrics

P A G E 14 Running LMINET2 Fast turn around –Unlike the old LMINET for delay estimation, the computer work load is a function of congestion –It takes a few minutes for one day of traffic Inputs –Flight schedule –Airport capacity –Airport weather

P A G E 15 The Future of LMINET2 The model is ready to be used –Better information on some parameters would be helpful Fine-tuning the parameters –Will not yield a significantly better model –But will improve the modeling at isolated areas or metrics It still lacks an airspace delay module to claim to be a complete NAS operations model The projected throughput schedule construction is unchanged –It is run under universally good weather