1. Towards ASAS Implementation The Role of the CASCADE Programme
Christos Rekkas
CASCADE Deputy Programme Manager
EUROCONTROL
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

2. Content Objectives and Scope Approach
Stakeholder Involvement and working arrangements
Through Validation towards Implementation
Summary

3. The need for CASCADE
Continuous effort towards reduced delays, increased safety and efficiency in ATM

4. Objective
CASCADE was created from the merger of two other EUROCONTROL Programmes (ADS and AGC) in order to:
Implement
Initial ADS-B applications (Package I), together with
Additional CPDLC applications and
D-FIS applications
Making use of existing infrastructures where possible
Follow-up from Mode S and Link Programme

5. Strategic Context STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 SUR COM CASCADE
departure clearance
digital-ATIS
oceanic clearance delivery
Classical Radar
transfer of control clearances microphone check
LINK 2000+
downlink of heading, speed, selected flight level
Mode S
initial ADS-B services
more CPDLC services
more D-FIS services
CASCADE
SUR COM
airborne separation applications
trajectory negotiation
autonomous separation

6. Scope (ADS-B) ADS-B applications (Package I) En-route surveillance
Terminal area surveillance
Non-radar area surveillance
Surface surveillance
Aircraft derived data
ATSA surface
ATSA airborne
ATSA see & avoid
ATSA successive visual approaches
ASPA sequencing & merging

7. Towards commitment and implementation
We need to strengthen the consensus on the scope:
Technical Feasibility
Economic Viability
Operational Need
Operational Scope
Simulations & Trials
ECIP Commitment
Initial Implement.
Requirements & Standards

8. Stakeholder Involvement
Wide involvement of stakeholders should be maintained and reinforced
Airspace Users
IATA/AEA JAFTI (Joint User Requirements Group Fast Track Initiative)
Pilots and their associations (IFALPA)
ANSPs
ADS and AGC Programme Steering Groups, Teams etc.
Controllers and their associations (IFATCA)
Industry
Airframers, avionics, ATS systems
European Commission (various projects, TEN support)
Regulatory Authorities
Standardisation Bodies (ICAO OPLINKP, SCRSP, SASP, EUROCAE/RTCA, AEEC etc)
Package I Requirements Focus Group (RFG)
Joint trials & other validation activities with EUROCONTROL
10 ECAC States already

9. Approach (1) Focus on stakeholder operational needs
Deliver the Operational Improvements through a trials campaign
Ensure global interoperability through international co-ordination
Take into account local or sub-regional requirements
Complementary to Mode S and Link Programmes
Co-operation and synergies with European Commission projects
Two streams of applications
Stream 1
Includes the Ground Surveillance applications
Stream 2
Includes the Airborne Surveillance applications

10. Approach (2) Implementation Stream 2 Commitment & Planning Simulations
& Trials
Implementation
Commitment & Planning
Stream 1
Simulations
& Trials
2006
2008
2010

11. Main Deliverables Operations Ops Deployment Plan Operational Scenarios
Controller ATC Manual Aircrew ATC Manual
Infrastructure
OSED
SPR INTEROP
Specifications
Safety
Safety Policy Safety Plan Safety Case
Business Case
CBA
Regulation
Potential regulation
My role is to make sure that you have the tools to do your job, that you do it in optimal condition and that you get recognition for what you have done.

12. External Working Arrangements
Programme Steering Group
Operational Focus Group
Validation Focus Group
Planning Focus Group
Requirements Focus Group
EUROCAE 51
RTCA 186
- CASCADE PSG Kick-Off: 08th September
- Focus Group Kick-Off Meeting invitations shortly

13. Package I Requirements Focus Group
Joint group of EUROCONTROL, EUROCAE, FAA, RTCA
With participation of Australia and Japan
The Requirements Focus Group (RFG) will perform the co-ordinated determination of Package I Requirements
Very important step towards world-wide interoperability as requested by airlines and industry
Operational procedures
Technical infrastructure
Deliverables:
Operational application definition incl. their environment (OSED)
Safety, Performance and Interoperability Requirements (SPR, INTEROP)
Baseline for Specs, MOPS and certification
Pragmatic approach
All relevant stakeholders working together towards common deliverables
Early and efficient implementation of Package I Surveillance applications

14. Package I RFG Work Plan Initial deliverables Intermediate deliverables
1Q ‘04
2Q ‘04
3Q ‘04
4Q ‘04
1Q ‘05
2Q ‘05
3Q ‘05
4Q ‘05
Initial deliverables
Intermediate deliverables
Final deliverables

15. Co-ordination with ICAO
The important role of ICAO is well recognised
Support global interoperability
Co-ordination with ICAO from an early stage onwards
Ongoing
Should become exhaustive and be optimised
Various Panels are relevant, such as
OPLINKP
SCRSP
SASP
Co-ordinated inputs towards ICAO deliverables, through stakeholder consultation as much as possible
RFG deliverables should be further elaborated to become input to ICAO documents
PSG sub-group (OFG, VFG) work

16. CASCADE Validation Purpose of the validation Approach
The ODIAC operational requirements are put through a validation process in order to assess their operational usability (i.e. controller and pilot acceptance) in a realistic operational environment and to quantify the benefits that should be used in the Business Case and safety Analysis.
Purpose of the validation
Assess operational usability
Quantify the benefits
Refine the costs
Refine technologies and standards
Approach
Real-time Simulation
Operational Usability and Acceptance
Calibration of Workload Models
Fast-time Simulations
Quantification of Benefits
Early trials
Technology and operations validation
Pre-Implementation

17. “Reference” S&M Simulations
The objective of the CoSpace project is to determine the operational feasibility and potential benefits of the use of spacing instructions ("airborne spacing"). CoSpace covers concept definition up to validation aspects through human-in-the-loop and model-based simulations.
Motivation: The key driver is the increase of controller availability through a reorganisation of spacing tasks between controller and flight crew. The motivation is neither to “transfer problems” nor to “give more freedom” to flight crew, but really to identify a more effective task distribution beneficial to all parties. Expected benefits: It is expected that the increased controller availability could lead to improved safety, which in turn could enable better efficiency and/or, depending on airspace constraint, more capacity. In addition, it is expected that flight crew would gain in awareness and anticipation by taking an active part in the management of his/her situation with respect to the concerned aircraft. Starting point: Starting with the analogy of visual separation clearance, the proposed task distribution relies on the delegation of spacing tasks in which the flight deck is tasked to implement a solution defined by the controller. Restricting the delegation to implementation tasks (as opposed to decision making tasks) is expected to preserve controller authority and understanding of the situation (“mental picture”). Responsibility: As opposed to visual separation clearance which implies a transfer of separation responsibility, the delegation of spacing shall be seen as the use of a new instruction. Thus, the controller is responsible to issue the appropriate instruction to guarantee the spacing (and the separation), and the flight crew is responsible to follow it.
Although it was had not been identified at the begining of the project (and the title of old publication may reflect this lack of maturity), it is now clear that there is no need to change separation responsibility. The rational has been formalised by the PO-ASAS.
Applications: Applications under investigation are sequencing in terminal areas and crossing en-route. The delegation applies to pairwise situations: one aircraft is “delegated”, the other being “target”. Delegation relies on the use of new instructions such as “merge”, “remain”, “pass behind”, “pass above” or “pass below”.
The slide shows the results of the 2003 Simulations (12-21 November & 1-12 December 2003)
Overall feedback was positive. The proposed working method, though implying significant changes as compared to today, seemed easy to use and assimilate. Controllers perceived benefits: reduction of workload, more anticipation in sequence building and more regular spacing on final. However, the perceived reduced monitoring for aircraft under airborne spacing, led controllers to question their ability to detect unexpected events.
The number of manoeuvring instructions seems to be significantly reduced. Geographical distribution of instructions shows the impact of airborne spacing: relief from late vectoring and earlier flow integration. With airborne spacing, the inter aircraft spacing on final is more regular and trajectories are straighter. More extensive data verification and further data analysis (including eye movement) have now started.
Close co-operation of CASCADE with EEC CoSpace project
S&M “Reference” Simulation
Both ATC and Cockpit sides

18. Local S&M Simulations Local conditions are very important
A new Simulation campaign has just being launched in partnership with the DFS in order to asses the Spacing Sequencing and Merging applications.
It is an Operational Validation exercise
Real environment (as realistic as possible)
Interaction with existing controller’s tools (4D Planner)
Targeting operational issues still to be solved
Quantification of potential benefits
Objectives
FOCUSES ON THE TRANSITION ISSUES (not 100% equipage, no changes to airspace)
Define and validate S&M operational procedures in German airspace (Frankfurt Approach) to determine usability of S&M procedures in the extended TMA
Define and validate the interaction with current infrastructure
Initial quantification of benefits
Initial assessment of abnormal situations related to S&M
Planning
First RTS in October
En-route sectors
4D planner interaction
“Abnormal” situations included
2nd RTS – mid 2005
En-route and TMA sectors
Complements the CoSpace in French airspace and MFF in Italian airspace. Quantification of benefits and usability assessment for S&M.
Local conditions are very important
in assessing the benefits
- Frankfurt S&M simulation with DFS
- More local simulations to follow
non simulation area
simulation area

19. CRISTAL – Co-opeRative ValidatIon of Surveillance Techniques and AppLications of Package I
Validation exercises in partnership with individual ANSPs and other stakeholders, in various ECAC sites
“Crystallisation effect”
Driven by the stakeholder local operational needs
Wide range of activities
Operational, technical, safety, cost-benefit, separation mimima etc.
Evolution to pre-operational level depends on the stakeholder plans and the trial progress
10 countries involved already
Cover practically all Package I applications of CASCADE

20. CRISTAL Sites CRISTAL sites 10 CRISTAL countries Discussions foreseen
Trial/Study sites & areas FI GE AM AZ EE UA MD TR CY FR LV LT NL DE GB IE BY RO AL MK BG GR CH IT AT HU YU ES PT DK NO SE PL CZ MT BA MA DZ TN SY IQ IR KZ RU LU SK SI HR BE CR
10 CRISTAL
countries
Discussions foreseen

21. Validation next steps Establish Validation Focus Group
Prepare a Validation Plan
Streamline/harmonise the current activities
Focus on clusters of applications (e.g. Ground Surveillance, ATSAW, S&M)
Define priorities
Maximise synergies
Co-ordination with other activities (e.g. European Commission, USA, Australia)

22. CASCADE Business Case Initial CBA on Package I elaborated
With feedback by an expert Review group
AIRBUS, CENA, DFS, Lufthansa, Rockwell Collins etc.
To be submitted to the Planning Focus Group of CASCADE for stakeholder review
Objective: Document to become an acceptable basis (“initial Edition”) for the further work and updates
Addresses safety, capacity, and efficiency benefits for various possible implementation scenarios
Ground Surveillance
Ground Surveillance + ATSAW
Ground Surveillance + ATSAW + Spacing
Will be updated in the future, to reflect the results from validation work
Input to an integrated CASCADE Business Case including all its applications/enablers

23. From “pocket” areas to ECAC implementation
A possible roadmap of deployment
The actual implementation plan will be developed in close co-operation with the stakeholders

24. Summary CASCADE will implement ATM 2000+ Strategy step 3 applications
Including Package I ground and airborne applications
Maximising the use of existing infrastructures and investments made so far
In the coming year, it will concentrate on trials and simulations to consolidate its scope
This scope will be the basis of the business case and the implementation plan
Using stakeholder consultation to build up consensus on the scope and the schedule

25. Contacts