1. Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis March 18, 2005 mblake@seagull.com (408) 364-8200 Matthew Blake

2. 1 Some Impacts on Future Flight Demand 2004 2025 2014 Total Number of Flights 1X Note: Not to scale Time, years 20?? Different Growth Rates Different Shaped Growth Rate Shift to Larger Aircraft Shift to Smaller Aircraft Many factors have significant impact on long range demand estimates Different Starting “Seed”

3. 2 A. Pax/Cargo Demand B. Fleet Mix/ Aircraft Types C. Business Model/ Schedule D. NAS Capability E. Disruptions /Weather Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System Market-Driven “ Mother Nature ” Government-Driven (Technology or Policy) 1)Current 2)Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025 3)2X TAF Based Constrained Growth 4)3X TAF 1)Good Weather (Wx) 2)Bad Weather Airport IFR En route 7 Wx days 3)Disruption Sudden Shutdown of an airport or region 1)Current Scaled 2)More Regional Jets 3)New & Modified Vehicles Microjets UAVs E-STOL/RIA SST Cleaner/ Quieter 1)Current 2)2014 OEP 3)Increased Capacity of: Landside Surface Runways Terminal En route 4) Systemic: CNS SWIM Wx Prediction 1)Current (mostly Hub & Spoke) 2)More Point to Point + Regional Airports 3)Massive Small Airport Utilization

4. 3 A. Pax/Cargo Demand B. Fleet Mix/ Aircraft Types C. Business Model/ Schedule Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System 1)Current 2)Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025 3)2X TAF Based Constrained Growth 4)3X TAF 1)Current Scaled 2)More Regional Jets 3)New & Modified Vehicles Microjets UAVs E-STOL/RIA SST Cleaner/ Quieter 1)Current (mostly Hub & Spoke) 2)More Point to Point + Regional Airports 3)Massive Small Airport Utilization Baseline Future Demand Scenarios Current Scaled: FAA forecast of demographics and rate of growth, current fleet mix and business model (both hub and spoke and low cost carrier point to point) Higher Growth Rate: Same FAA forecast demographics, higher rate of growth which achieves 2X passenger and cargo traffic by 2025 Shift to Smaller Aircraft/Airports: Growth comes mainly in smaller aircraft (approx 100 passenger) and new flights mainly in under- utilized regional airports

5. 4 Initial Baseline JPDO EA Flight Demand Sets 2004 2025 2014 Number of Flights 2004 Baseline Current Flight Schedule Current Capacities 2014 TAF TAF growth rate flight schedule 3X TAF TAF growth to 3X 1X ~3X 2025 TAF TAF growth rate flight schedule 20?? ~2X 2014 Biz shift Smaller aircraft, more airports Note: Not to scale Time, years 2025 Biz shift Smaller aircraft, more airports Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) Growth Projection 2X TAF TAF ratios, faster growth 2X Biz shift Smaller aircraft, more airports 2014 and later Baseline analysis will use OEP Capacities TAF Growth Ratios, Higher Rate Current Scaled Higher Growth Rate Shift to Smaller Aircraft/Airports

6. 5 Baseline Seed Day Target Criteria: –Relatively heavy traffic and relatively light weather –Selected Thursday, 19 February 2004 –There were 64,276 flights in the ETMS database on this day –Filtered out pure international, military, various other anomalous flights –50,077 IFR flights

7. 6 AvDemand Seagull Technology AvDemand Future Flight Generation Process Historical Schedule (ETMS) Historical Flight Plans (ETMS) Demand Growth Flight Shifting Fratar Algorithm for Airport Load Balancing Airport Pair Demand Profiling Schedule Generation Flight Plan Generation Demand Growth Parameters (TAF)

8. 7 Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft AvDemand Seagull Technology Move Excess Demand from Major Airports to underutilized Secondary Airports Flight Demand Shift to Smaller Airports Secondary Airport

9. 8 Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft: Specific Demand Generation Approach Selection of Flights to Shift to Auxiliary Airports –Shift flights only from 34 OEP airports –Select flights from any 15 minute time interval where arrival or departure traffic exceeds airport capacity –Only shift flights with great circle distance less than 1000 nm –Select high frequency flights first Selection of Auxiliary Airports –Each airport must be located within 30nm of the associated OEP airport –Each airport must be a public-use airport –At least one runway in each airport has to be at least 5,000 ft –Only runways that are asphalt and good-condition or better were utilized –Enough departure/arrival slots within the same time window of the diverted flight must be available at the auxiliary airports Change of Aircraft Type –If a flight has seat capacity of 99 or less, shift the aircraft type as is to the auxiliary airport –If a flight has a seat capacity of 100 or more, change the aircraft type to a Regional Jet with seat capacity of 100, add extra flights to capture the required number of seats in the original flight

10. 9 Example: MAJOR-HUB Airport and nearby SECONDARY Airport Departure Demand Profile MAJOR-HUB 2X Baseline Departures MAJOR-HUB 2X After Bizshift, Departures SECONDARY 2X After Bizshift, Departures MAJOR-HUB Departure Capacity Target Number of Flights per 15 minutes

11. 10 Demand Comparison between Future Scenarios and FAA forecasts CategoryDemand Created Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) 2 FAA Aerospace Forecast 2004-2015 3 Scenario ETMS 2004 Seagull 20142004201420042014Reference Flights (Daily) Air Carrier 19,97125,25117,75722,36519,43425,836Table 46 Commuter + Air Taxi 17,12120,87521,98126,44417,34322,390Table 46 GA + Other + Unknown 1 12,98613,42058,18563,08425,57529,304Table 46 System 50,07859,54697,924111,89362,35277,530Table 46 Flight Growth Air Carrier + Freight 11.261 11.33 Commuter + Air Taxi 11.2211.2011.29 1 The TAF General Aviation (GA) operations include both IFR and VFR itinerant operations. The FAA Aerospace Forecast GA operations include only instrument operations at primary and secondary airports as well as overflights. Thus, instrument operations total in the FAA report are higher than actual flight counts. The demand sets created (ETMS 2004 and Seagull 2014) in this practice only account for IFR itinerant GA Operations. Thus, the demand growth ratio is skewed due to the difference in the GA counts. 2 Terminal Area Forecast, http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faatafall.HTM, February 2005. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight).http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faatafall.HTM 3 Federal Aviation Administration, FAA Aerospace Forecast – Fiscal Year 2004 – 2015, Department of Transportation, March 2004. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight).

12. 11 Future Scenarios Operations Growth Scenarios Percent Growth by User Class Air Carrier Commuter/ Air Taxi General Aviation Overall NAS Growth 2004 – 2014 TAF26%22%4%19% 2004 – 2025 TAF59%45%17%43% 2004 – 2014 Shift49%24%4%29% 2004 – 2025 Shift99%48%17%61% General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

13. 12 Future Scenarios Operations Growth Scenarios Percent Growth by User Class Air Carrier Commuter/ Air Taxi General Aviation Overall NAS Growth 2X Ops TAF142%100%38%100% 3X Ops TAF294%195%65%200% General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

14. 13 Initial Analysis Results Simulation Configuration: –NASA Airspace Concepts Evaluation System (ACES) B2.1 –24 hour period, good weather, 2004 has today’s capacities, future scenarios include OEP improvements –Earlier flight demand sets (correct airport growth but slightly different mix of commercial, air taxi, GA) TAF Based Growth at 4 scenario demand levels: –2004 –2014 –2025 –2X Comparison at 2X Demand of 3 scenarios: –TAF based growth –Business shift to smaller airports/aircraft –Business shift and doubling airspace capacity

15. 14 Baseline TAF Based Growth Scenarios Delay During a 24 Hour Period 2014 2025 2004 2X Excessive congestion even in 2014 leads to some flights not completing by end of day. Airline Operations untenable at this level of delay.

16. 15 Baseline TAF Growth Scenario Passenger Impact of Severe Arrival Delays Greater than 2 hours 1 to 2 hours 15 minutes to 1 hour Less than 15 minutes Source: ACES Analysis of NAS At 2X demand, nearly one million passengers are delayed more than 2 hours

17. 16 Comparison of 2X Future Scenarios Delay During a 24 Hour Period Business Shift to smaller aircraft and secondary airports still leads to untenable behavior due to airspace congestion. Increasing airspace capacity helps, shows how problem is coupled.

18. 17 Summary A Baseline set of future scenarios has been developed and verified against FAA projections Initial NAS-wide analysis indicates all future scenarios require significant airport and airspace capacity increases to avoid major constraints on growth in air transportation Future JPDO evaluations will be expanded to cover more possible future scenarios and solution strategies

19. 18 Acknowledgement This work was sponsored by Sherry Borener in support of the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis (EA) Division and the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) Many JPDO EA team members helped along the way, special thanks to: –Alex Huang, Kris Ramamoorthy, George Hunter, Greg Carr (Seagull Technology) –Baseline day, Joe Post (CNAC) –Review of TAF based scenarios by Roger Schaufele (FAA) NAS-wide ACES simulation courtesy of the NASA Airspace Systems Program (ASP), Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project