1. KDC ASAS 2008 project - How could ASAS benefit the NL ATM System
ASAS-TN2.5
12-13 Nov ’08
ROME
KDC ASAS 2008 project - How could ASAS benefit the NL ATM System
Nico de Gelder

2. Overview KDC Intro KDC ASAS study
Merging & Spacing as example application
(or High Capacity CDA as example challenge)
Main high level recommendations

3. Knowledge & Development Centre (KDC)
Focuses on joint research for Schiphol mainport development
Market and environmental challenges

4. KDC ASAS Study - Objectives
To study if and how ASAS could benefit the Schiphol concept evolution
workshops addressing specific problem areas and Airborne (and Ground) Surveillance Applications
The result should be a short list of applications with recommendations for more detailed / focussed research and focus on implementation

5. KDC ASAS Study - Timing
Project started in Feb ’08, since then 4 workshops have been held
1st workshop 01 Feb ‘08
General brainstorm about ASAS and Schiphol
2nd workshop 25 Mar ’08
TMA operations
Merging & Spacing application
3rd workshop 26 May ’08
Airport Surface operations
SURF applications
18R
18C 06
36R 24
18L
36C
36L

6. KDC ASAS Study - Timing 4th workshop 29 Aug ’08
Other Airborne Surveillance Applications
e.g. closely spaced // approaches, land after procedure
Final recommendations will be finished in one or two weeks
Recommendations as agreed within the KDC ASAS project team
Recommendations will then be put forward for decision making
Adapt ATM System Strategy

7. KDC ASAS Study - Participants
KDC ASAS project team
NLR (project lead)
KLM
LVNL, Air Traffic Control the Netherlands
Schiphol Group
Delft University of Technology
involving Operational, ASAS, ATM (air & ground part), Human Factors, R&D expertise

8. Specific challenges Schiphol Airport
Complex and busy ATM environment
Air Traffic Control
proficient, but high workload
difficult to reach required proficiency levels
Weather conditions
Low visibility operations
landing capacity
visibility from the tower
taxi risks, accessibility of gates
Noise hindrance (perception)
Capacity improvement ( ,000/yr) and sustainability

9. KDC ASAS study – Scope KDC ASAS study looked at
today’s situation, and
near-to-medium future
Schiphol concept evolution
simple and stable traffic flows
high capacity CDA operations
independent parallel approaches
high capacity airport surface operations
particularly in low visibility conditions
required: >120 nm
Conceptual

10. KDC ASAS study – Scope Mainly expert assessment of the applications
They rated aspects like:
Importance for Schiphol
Safety
Efficiency – capacity
Efficiency – economy / fuel usage
Environment – noise, emissions
Sustainability
Maturity of application
Complexity of application, incl. transition path
Standardisation status
Controller & Pilot workload
Readiness for implementation
Minimum equipage level

11. High Capacity CDA Operations - Example Application
Merging & Spacing (M&S)

12. TMA Operations - M&S Two scenarios, for TMA operations + CDA’s
30 landings per hour per runway
(current LVNL Strategy & Vision)
40 landings per hour per runway
(growth scenario)
Expert assessment - conclusions
’30’ scenario
several projects has shown that it is feasible without the support of M&S
’40’ scenario
M&S enables growth towards ’40’ scenario
but is M&S adequate to support the ’40’?
 an initial performance assessment has been
carried out

13. Initial Performance Assessment
Time containment model based on RNP containment methodology
Input:
40 landings per hour per runway
‘worse case’ conditions assumed
Mean final approach ground speed 125 kt
Mean absolute groundspeed differential between pairs of aircraft of 10 kt
20% Heavy, 80% Medium
99.5% success rate assumed
Success = remain within time containment limit, i.e. adhere to distance-based separation minima
Maximum of two (2) ATC interventions per day & per runway, for the peak hours

14. Time Containment Limit
If outside containment limit
 ATC intervention, likely to be go-arounds
Time Interval RNP value
(e.g 5 sec)
Time Containment Limit
= CF x Time Interval RNP value
(tCONTAINMENT)
tMIN = tDESIRED - tCONTAINMENT
aircraft of interest
traffic to follow
tDESIRED

15. Time Containment #4 #3 #2 130 kt #1 120 kt Benchmark scenario 2
Sequence of aircraft with alternating final approach groundspeed
- mean speed = 125 ks
- mean absolute spd differential = 10 kt

16. Time Containment
Conclusion: only possible option is 2.5 miles min separation (containment limit of at least 4 s, this gives a ‘bare minimum’ time spacing SD of 1.5 s)

17. Time containment

18. M&S Perf Assessment - Conclusions
3 NM (and 4, 5) minimum separation
40 landings per hour per runway is not feasible
No airborne or ground tool is able to achieve this goal
2.5 NM (and 4, 5) minimum separation
Spacing error should be less than sec (at threshold), 95% of the time
Sequence should cluster heavy aircraft when more than 15% is Heavy (clusters of 2-3 heavy aircraft in case of 20% Heavies)
2.3 NM (and 4, 5) minimum separation
Spacing error should be less than 5.1 sec (at threshold), 95% of the time
No clustering of heavy aircraft required

19. Recommendations Merging & Spacing
To include Merging & Spacing in the ATM System Strategy of the Dutch Aerospace sector
To start Design and Development activities aiming at implementation of M&S at Schiphol in the short-to-medium term
To further explore viability of an Airborne Separation type (instead of Airborne Spacing type) of M&S
To monitor global activities w.r.t. time based separation minima
To investigate feasibility of an energy-based method to gain additional benefits, very precisely spaced aircraft performing more optimal CDA’s
Next phase: Can Merging & Spacing really deliver 40 landings per hour per runway (at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol)?
And how to get required equipage levels?

20. High Level Recommendations - KDC ASAS Project Team
Most important recommendations:
To pursue an internationally agreed mandatory implementation of
ATSA-SURF
ATSA-AIRB
To pursue design & development of
ASPA-M&S
To pursue applied research into
ASEP/ATSA-CSPA closely spaced // approach
ASEP-CSL closely spaced landings
ASEP-SURF low visibility taxi operations

21. THANK YOU
QUESTIONS?