0. National Airspace Redesign High Altitude Redesign Briefing for NBAA User Forums

1. National Airspace Redesign
Primary means to modernize US airspace by migrating from constrained ground - based navigation to the freedom of an RNP RNAV based system
Leveraging new technologies, equipage, infrastructure, and procedural developments: to maximize benefits and system efficiencies
Collaborative effort : FAA Management, NATCA & System Users
Bottom up: Optimize & redesign local airspace targeting congested areas …
Focused on key airports and associated airspace; changes in arrival and departure routes drive change up into enroute airspace
Top down: In parallel, redesign national airspace … High Altitude Redesign (HAR)
By using new technology and airspace concepts, balance flexibility and structure to obtain maximum system efficiency
International Harmonization:
Leveraging benefits into the oceanic airspace
Integration of concepts and benefits internationally
Ensuring global compatibility and benefits

2. High Altitude Redesign
Influenced by the airspace concepts recommended to FAA by RTCA
Frequent meetings with user representatives; advice on:
Consistency with original concepts
Fleet capabilities and limitations
Implementation impacts
Evolutionary implementation based on emerging technology
Began implementing initial functions in initial airspace during 2003
Expansion geographically, vertically and functionally planned through 2008 and beyond
With each increment, benefits will increase consistent with user equipage

3. RTCA SC192 High Altitude Concept Summary
“…RTCA SC 192 examined the possibility of defining a high altitude airspace structure where the FAA could begin to implement many of the Free Flight concepts...
The High Altitude Airspace Concept…could provide more... freedoms…while offering an opportunity to deploy new technology and procedures in a controlled environment...
This airspace would allow properly equipped users to begin achieving the economic benefits of flying their preferred routes and altitudes with fewer restrictions…
RTCA SC 192 envisions the initial implementation of this airspace at the higher flight levels…and…at additional levels as technology and procedures allow.”

4. High Altitude Redesign Vision
Balance flexibility and structure to obtain maximum system efficiency
Performance Objectives
Improve system efficiency
Reduce route structure
Eliminate “airspace” miles-in-trail restrictions
Increase flexibility for controllers and users
Design Objectives
Point-to-point navigation with pilot navigation in lieu of radar vectors
Non-restrictive routing wherever efficient
RNAV/parallel RNAV routes in high density corridors
Efficient routing around active SUA/ATCAA
Improved knowledge of SUA/ATCAA status
By ...

5. Evolutionary HAR Implementation
Phase 1 Initial
When: 2003
Where: Seven Northwest enroute centers at
FL390 & Above
When: 2004
Where: Additional seven enroute centers in the south and southwest
Phase 1 Expansion
Phase 1 Completion
When:
Where: Remaining six CONUS enroute centers in the east and southeast
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008 & Beyond
Phase 2
Provides capabilities achievable with changes to the current automation system and aircraft equipped for RVSM and RNP
When: Beginning in 2005
Where: All CONUS centers
Phase 3
Provides benefits feasible with a new ground automation system and a digital environment
When: Beginning in 2008
Where: All CONUS centers
Phase 1 Completion includes vertical and geographic expansion. Vertical expansion will be dependent on user equipage. Geographic expansion to the northeast is dependent on completion of the Great Lakes Redesign and NY/NJ/PHL Redesign.

6. Phase 1 Design Enabling capability: Design Concept:
RNAV / closely-spaced parallel RNAV routes
Using structure where most efficient
Enabling capability:
Radar monitoring, RNAV/Advanced RNAV, RNP
RNAV/Advanced RNAV & FMS data bases capacity
Navigation Reference System
Efficiently defining flight paths – tactical and planned
Non-Restrictive Routing
Providing users increased routing flexibility
URET and Navigation Reference System
ATCAA & SUA waypoints and status information
Mitigating SUA effects for civilian aviation
RNAV/Advanced RNAV, access to airspace schedules

7. Phase 1 Initial Airspace

8. Mitigating the impact of SUA/ATCAA
Waypoints published near SUA/ATCAA airspace to aid in avoidance of active areas
Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA) is being depicted via Internet WEB
Redesigned website:
Improve user interface consistency with similar sites
Add waypoints associated with each ATCAA/SUA
Provide ability to filter data by altitude
Simplified URL: http//:sua.faa.gov
will auto-redirect to new site
Routine Web updates planned to - coincide with charting cycle (56 day) updates

9. ATCAA/SUA Home Page

10. ATCAA/SUA Graphic Depiction

11. ATS “Q” Route?
Historically in the U. S., IFR navigation has been through ground-based navigation aids using Federal Airways/Jet Routes.
This results in less-than-optimal routes and contributes to the inefficient use of the NAS.
Area navigation (RNAV) provides users with an ability to fly direct routes between any two points.
FAA adopted ICAO definition of “Air Traffic Service Route”: Federal Airway, Jet Route and RNAV route
US and Canada use "Q" as a designator for RNAV routes (US 1-499/Canada ).

12. HAR Use of RNAV “Q” Routes
11 Q routes - charted 7/10/03 with “GNSS Required”
Initially NOTAM as N/A assess impact of “GNSS required”
Operational use began on 9/23/03
Flight planning limited to at FL390 and above
Plan to delete GNSS required of some route segments with 12/25/03 charting revision
Some route segments may have gaps in DME coverage

13. Jet Routes Routes based on NAVAID Location
Flows that cross and converge

14. High Altitude Q Route Examples
Additional routes in the same airspace
Greater efficiency
Less conflictions between routes
Q-1
Q-7
Q-3
Q-5
Q-9
Q-11
Q-13

15. Q Routes – US/Canada
Q-504
Q-505
Q-502
Q-501
Note: Q Routes in Canada are not charted, but defined
as “Fixed RNAV Routes” in Canadian Flight Supplement

16. Non-Restrictive Routing (NRR)
NRR builds on experiences of the North American Route Program (NRP) over the last decade
Established where on departure paths aircraft can routinely leave the prescribed structure and transition to most advantageous flight paths
Controllers, borrowing from baseball, call those spots “pitch” points to reflect, much the same as when the ball leaves a pitchers hand, the point where different flight paths begin.
As for arrivals, once again controllers used a baseball term and called the spot where flights need to rejoin structure “catch” points.
Provides users with:
Widespread flexibility to vary flight paths based on current conditions
Increased predictability that the route filed will be the one flown.

17. Non-Restrictive Routing (NRR)
“AFD” Route
“Typical” filed route
“HAR”/”PTP” Route Flexibility

18. Example NRR “HAR” Flight (Using NRS Waypoints)
“Pitch” point
“Catch” point
Route Flexibility

19. Example NRR “PTP” Flight (Using Traditional Waypoints/Fixes)
“Pitch” point
“Catch” point
Route Flexibility

20. NRR Route Filing
Creating a special section in Airport/Facilities Directory (AFD) for HAR High Altitude Routes
Scheduled for October 30, 2003 publication
Interim distribution through ATCSCC CDM workgroup
HAR Advisory Circular completed
Being printed

21. Routing Example: Confined Airspace

22. Navigation Reference System
Waypoints every 30 minutes of latitude, every 2 degrees longitude
K D 54 W
FIR
Longitude
Latitude
Center Identifier

23. NRS - CONUS Fully Populated Density
20 CONUS Centers Every 10’ Latitude & 1° Longitude
Population = 6,514 points

24. HAR Weather Reroute with NRS

25. Sample Benefits (Initial airspace FL390 and above)
Looking at select city pairs, average distance saving of 8 miles per flight
estimated
$7M annual savings
2.0
2.0
19.0
20.5
12.6
12.5
2.1
5.7

26. Analytic Foundation for Decisions
Each phase supported by modeling
Proof of concept modeling
Designs modeled for benefits and workability
After implementation of each phase, post-analysis will:
Validate concept and design
Measure benefit
Picture by Mary Yee

27. User Environment Navigation Capabilities by Altitude*
*Updated data - 8/15/2002

28. Non-RNAV CY-01 to CY-02

29. Phase 1 Implementation “Roll out”
May 15, 2003
Charting
Waypoints
- Web access to SUA/ATCAA schedule
- ATCAA/SUA Avoidance Trials
July 10, 2003
Chart “Q” Routes
Initial 11 Q routes rules effective and routes charted – NOTAM NA
Sept 4, 2003
“Improved” ATCAA/SUA Web site
Sept. 23, 2003
-Initiate use of Q Routes
Initiate NRR (PTP)
Feb. 19, 2004
Chart NRS Waypoints
- Full HAR with NRR implemented
- Point-to-point for database limited A/C

30. Phase 1 Expansion Targeting first geographic expansion (2004):
Airspace:
West of Mississippi: ZLA, ZAB, ZFW, ZHU, ZME
Florida departures/arrivals - to/from the west: ZJX, ZMA
Initial design complete (FL350 floor altitude)
Lowering HAR airspace floor
Governing principle - Common floor across HAR airspace
FL350 also planned for 2004
Eventual goal – FL290 and above
May not be realizable until later phases
Expansion to Great Lakes Corridor and Northeast linked to NY redesign – 2005/06

31. Summary
In 2003/04, the initial deployment of High Altitude Redesign will provide benefits through:
RNAV/Parallel RNAV routes
RNAV waypoint navigation around SUA/ATCAA
Flexibility in routing: Non-Restrictive Routing (NRR)
Navigation Reference System (NRS) for point-to-point navigation
Initial affected airspace:
ZAU, ZMP, ZLC, ZSE, ZOA, ZDV, ZKC
NRR FL390 & above

32. Discussion

33. Waypoint Estimates - HAR
140
486
626

34. Implementation (con’t)
Aircraft Filing Suffix
100%
/A, /P (non-RNAV)
/I (Basic RNAV)
ATC uncertainty
of aircraft capability
Filed equipment level where RNAV routes effective?
(varies with airspace
complexity)
/E, /F, /R, /Q
(without GNSS)
Currently, level of
aircraft capability to use “Q” routes
(with GNSS)
/G (GNSS) 0%