Guidance and Control Programs at Honeywell Sanjay Parthasarathy Honeywell Aerospace Advanced Technology October 11, 2006

2HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 Update since Fall, 2005 Autonomous Systems programs - Micro Air Vehicle (MAV)  FCS Class 1 vehicle  Increase endurance - Organic Air Vehicle – 2 (OAV-2)  Phase 3a commenced  Obstacle Avoidance Demonstrated Successfully - Heterogeneous Urban RSTA Teams (HURT)  Planning and Control (P&C) software  Coverage Planner, Vehicle Tracker developed  Successful Demonstration using 4 UAVs Air Traffic Management (ATM) Modernization - Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) program  US Industry Input via Boeing, Rockwell-Collins and Honeywell - ERASMUS program kicked-off

3HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 ERASMUS Project: E n R oute A ir Traffic S oft M anagement U ltimate S ystem Funded by European Commission ERASMUS project proposes an air-ground cooperative work aiming at defining and validating innovative automation and concepts of operations for the En-route phase. The goal is to propose an advanced automation while maintaining the controllers in the decision loop. Three majors applications are proposed to be investigated:  Enhanced Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD);  “ATC autopilot”;  subliminal control. Team Lead: EuroControl Industrial Partner: Honeywell Kickoff meeting: May 11-12, 2006

4HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 ERASMUS Hypothesis: - Air Traffic Controller (ATC) perceives many situations as potential conflicts - Small changes in speed and/or Rate of climb can convert a conflict into a “non-conflict” - An “auto-pilot” for the ATC can reduce workload and increase safety - ATC need not consciously observe every small change to speed and altitude issued by the computer

5HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 En Route Air Traffic Soft Management Ultimate System (ERASMUS) - Air Traffic Controller (ATC) perceives many situations as conflicts  Lacks precise knowledge of aircraft trajectory  Human Factors – visualizes entire sector on limited screens  Lacks computational tools to advise if indeed there is a conflict Staggers traffic resulting in inefficient operations - Small changes in speed and/or Rate of climb can convert a conflict into a “non-conflict”  Need better 4D Trajectory Prediction Ground-based v/s on-board FMS Weather and aircraft parameters are main variables  Need Conflict Detection and Resolution (CD&R) algorithms - ATC need not consciously observe every small change to speed and altitude issued by the computer  Use 4D-trajectory predictions to optimize flights  Uplink minimal speed/altitude change  Human-in-the-loop; “subliminal control”; can be over-ridden Eases workload and increases airspace capacity

6HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 ERASMUS Objectives – 3 applications Subliminal control ATC Autopilot Enhanced MTCD Not Applicable Human decision (ultimate control in any cases) Machine decision High Low High Full automation path Low Courtesy of Eurocontrol

7HONEYWELL SP_Oct 2006 Future Research 4D Trajectory prediction and downlink to ATC Optimal flight path generation for aircrafts in sector - CD&R - “Green” ATM 4D Trajectory negotiation - Air-to-ground - Air-to-air Dovetails with Required Time of Arrival (RTA), Required Navigational Performance (RNP) RTA Region of RTA Speed Adjustment Cruise Descent Mach Descent CAS T/D RTA Decel First Constraint or Speed Transition Region of Off-Idle Descent T/D