1. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A

2. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-2A Outline l Projects Overview l General Findings l ASAS Prototype Guidelines l The Next Steps ASAS = Self-Separation in this presentation

3. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-3A Projects Overview l Free Flight (NASA, FAA, RLD, NLR) l INTENT (ONERA, QinetiQ, TU-Delft, Rockwell Collins, Smiths, Airbus, Eurocontrol, NLR, VNV, BA, SAS, KLM) l MFF (ENAV, AENA, Eurocontrol, DNA, SCAA, HCAA, MATS, NATS, NLR)

4. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-4A Project Free Flight l Analysis: Distributed systems, capacity, safety l Offline: normal scenarios, complex geometries l SIM I: Basic FF cruise, high densities SIM II: Mixed equipage in cruise, PASAS? MHITL: Web experiment & classroom SIM III: How low can you go? l NLR ASAS prototype based on state info & PASAS

5. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-5A Project Free Flight Conflict Detection & Resolution ownship intruder minimum distance protected zone intruder avoidance vector advised vector 1. heading change 2. speed change not shown: 3. vertical speed cange Protected Zone radius = 5 nm ½h = 1000 ft =>normally vertical most optimal ASAS offers 3 separate manoeuvres

6. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-6A Project Free Flight ASAS CDR&P ASAS: 5nm, 5 min, 1000 ft Conflict symbology - red circle & track - yellow circle own zone - traffic symbol always - label time to l.o.s. Resolution symbology - horizontal - vertical Predictive ASAS If conflict => check vertical !

7. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-7A Human-in-the-loop experiment I Conflict rate tripled: so 3x, 6x, 9x ! Low workload in high density en-route traffic 114 = costing lots and lots of effort 88 = costing much effort 40 = costing some effort 27 = costing little effort 3 = costing no effort

8. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-8A Human-in-the-loop experiment II Mixed-Equipage concept: 25% & 75% equipped Airborne side prefers Full mix Ground side not able to cope with Full mix Traffic density lowered for ATCo relative to HITL I Predictive ASAS lowers conflict alert rate significantly and makes alert time predictable

9. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-9A Human-in-the-loop experiment III l Descent: not different from cruise l Arrival: –FF higher workload –CDTI in managed airspace => extremely low workload 114 = costing lots and lots of effort 88 = costing much effort 40 = costing some effort 27 = costing little effort 3 = costing no effort

10. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-10A Multiple human-in-the-loop experiments Webexperiment Classroomexperiment

11. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-11A Multiple human-in-the-loop experiment l Humans smarter, meaner, more strategic, emotional, variable, etc. l Will superconflict solving deteriorate or improve? Superconflict n=8

12. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-12A Who are the bots and who are the humans?

13. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-13A Project INTENT (not an acronym) l The objective of the INTENT project is to answer these questions, giving a technology roadmap for airborne and ground based equipment to increase airspace capacity. Where ? How ? When ? l But: –how much INTENT is required ? –where to use INTENT ? –when to use INTENT ? l Aircraft intent is a potential enabler of Airborne Separation Assurance / Free Flight

14. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-14A INTENT based CD&R l RFS intent-based ASAS –Conflict detection and resolution based on aircraft 3D position and FMS flight plan (aircraft intent) –Priority rules, one aircraft in conflict manoeuvres –Resolution advisories in more directions and always presented as an FMS modified route –Only when FMS is engaged (LNAV and VNAV) l Three alert levels: –20 - 5 minutes: green –5 - 3 minutes: amber –3 - 0 minutes: red l Experimental Design –4 intent levels: state-based with 5 min look- ahead time, intent-based with 5, 10 and 20 min look-ahead time. –3 traffic loads: 1x, 2 x and 3 x today's traffic

15. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-15A INTENT Conclusions (1/2) l Including aircraft intent in the separation assurance process is preferred by controllers and pilots l Aircraft intent information does not have a significant effect on controller or pilot workload, compared to the references without aircraft intent, both for the airborne and ground concepts l Aircraft intent information has a positive effect on flight efficiency compared to state based references

16. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-16A INTENT Conclusions (2/2) l The comparison between the airspace capacity results of the airborne and ground concepts is interesting: –ground concepts can handle about maximum of 1.5 times today’s traffic load –airborne concepts can handle 3 times this load.

17. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-17A Project MFF ASAS trials l ASAS in climb,cruise & descent l Transition FFAS  MAS FL285

18. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-18A Project MFF, results l Vertical transitions have highest workload

19. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-19A Project MFF, results l Workload higher with ASAS but acceptable

20. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-20A General Findings l ASAS yields tremendous capacity increase l ASAS offers safety benefits l ASAS allows direct routing and optimal vertical profile, hence efficiency benefits l State-based CDR&P sufficient for introduction and benefits, intent-based system preferred for future

21. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-21A ASAS Prototype Guidelines l Separate or duplicate ADS-B transmitter/receiver l State-based lookahead time 5-7 minutes in cruise, descent & climb is sufficient if fitted with predictive ASAS l Target altitude as intent info would enhance system l Intent based CD&R can expand lookahead time, optimum found to be 10 minutes l Use of priority (to 3 min to l.o.s. at the latest): –to allow state-based, state-based + target state and intent-based CDR&R to operate in the same airspace –reduction of workload: only 1 aircraft to manoeuvre l Co-operative resolution offers fail-safety and offers bottleneck solution by wave/domino effect

22. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-22A Next Steps l Test bandwidth l Standardise on principle of co-operative resolution l Develop standards for intent-based system for future that is compatible with first generation ASAS And then: l It is time for a leap forward => Retrofit state-based system during field trials in non- radar airspace: North Atlantic?

23. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-23A

24. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-24A

25. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-25A Project Free Flight Concept: state-based, co-operative l Lookahead time is 5 minutes l Two alert levels: 5-3 minutes: amber 3-0 minutes: red l Normally: –amber: vertical resolution each solves 50% of intrusion in amber conflicts –red always each 100 % (fail-safe) vertical l Exception: horizontal resolution both solve 100% of intrusion vert/vert = 50+50 v & 0 h = solved vertically hor/vert = 50+0 v & 100 h = solved horizontally hor/hor = 80 + 80 h & 0 v = solved horizontally

26. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-26A Project Free Flight Primary flight display l Conflict reso: - vertical spd - altitude - heading - speed (green bugs) l Predasas on: - vertical spd - speed - heading (amber & red bands)

27. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-27A Capacity Distributed system vs. central system l Effect on workload, safety and technological requirements

28. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-28A Capacity - Workload l Conflict rate: triple, six times, nine times !

29. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-29A Capacity Task comparison Controlled vs. Free Flight

30. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-30A Safety

31. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-31A Safety

32. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-32A Safety

33. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-33A Safety

34. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-34A Safety

35. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-35A Safety

36. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-36A Workload l Descent: no different from cruise l Arrival: –FF higher workload –CDTI and managed extremely low workload 114 = costing lots and lots of effort 88 = costing much effort 40 = costing some effort 27 = costing little effort 3 = costing no effort

37. Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-37A ASAS prototype l Retrofit: State-based with conflict prevention minimal required, target state (altitude) recommended l Lookahead time 5-10 minutes l En-route: climb, cruise, descent l Approach: extra tools needed (spacing) l Effects on safety, capacity, efficiency all expected to be beneficial. Workload acceptable. l Air Traffic Control becomes Air Traffic Management