MA-AFAS USER FORUM 3 · Steve Zerkowitz MA-AFAS 3rd User Forum Chairman. 4 24th-25th June 2003 User...

1

24th-25th June 2003User Forum #3 - Bretigny

MA-AFAS USER FORUM 3

EEC Bretigny 24th and 25th June

WELCOME


Page 2

MA-AFAS User Forum 3 Agenda Day 1

Registration & Coffee 10.00 - 10.30 SCAA

Welcome and Introduction ChairmanEuropean Objectives EC Objectives and Relevance BAESAchievements

Operational Concept Eurocontrol Phase of Flight – Introduction to Themes BAES

Lunch - 12.00. Themes

– TAXI Management ETG – Comm. FRQ– ASAS CDTI BAES

Trials system Architecture BAES

Trials Boscombe Down QinetiQ Amsterdam NLR

Coffee Braunschweig DLR Rome QinetiQ

Discussion SessionChairman’s review

Demonstrations and Cocktails 16.30-

2


Page 3

MA-AFAS User Forum 3 Agenda Day 2

Cost Benefit BAES

User viewsATS Providers ENAVPilots Marcel FlickAirline View EasyJet

Coffee

Way forward ASAS CDTI BAES TAXI Management ETG AOC CDM SkysoftSummary BAES

Discussion period

Chairman’s review

Demonstration of key systems developed by the programme will take place during the event.


Page 4

UF 3 Agenda

Demonstrations of equipment to include :ASAS Airborne Applications Rig

Manoeuvres using BAC1-11 model

Ground Applications Rig

Taxi Management

AOC Ground Platform (AGP)

TAXI and ATC Tool (TAT) for CPDLC

Traffic Simulator

HMI Operational Scenario Demonstration

Eurocontrol CoSpace Trials Environment

Trial Video’s and Multimedia Presentations

Demonstrations to be available at the end of day one and throughout day two.

3


Page 5

Ladies and Gentlemen!

Depending on where you come from within the big ATM family, your perception of the state of the ATM worldmay be slightly different, but none of us can claim to be unaware of the extremely hard times our industry hasbeen enduring for some time now.

There can be little doubt that the situation will improve and we will be flying high once more. If nothing else,the very important role aviation plays in the world economy will take care of that. Indeed, aircraft ordersannounced at the Paris airshow are but one of the many subtle signs of an upcoming improvement.

But right now, it is tempting to say we need to concentrate on survival and forget most everything else… Andsome airlines and other ATM organizations are doing just that.

New operational concepts, new ways of working, new technologies…. Who has the money, who has thetime?

Yet here we are, on the verge of opening the 3rd MA-AFAS User Forum and the question may be asked: isthis still relevant?

The answer is a resounding YES! The results and conclusions of programs like MA-AFAS are more relevantthan ever, in spite of the fact that the world has changed substantially since its inception.

The basic mismatch between ATM capacity and demand has not been resolved and conventional methodsare no more effective than in the past. Yet, the traffic patterns and complexity is changing as a result of morepoint-to-point traffic flows with the number of aircraft in the system increasing as a result of more and moreregional aircraft being used by the airlines.


Page 6

The past and still lingering crisis has transformed most airlines and has seen the low-costcarriers prosper. The “slash costs” mentality will slowly give way to acceptance of the inevitableneed to improve operations in all kinds of ways, to remain competitive and continue keepingcosts down. Once again, the value of initiatives that go beyond corporate borders and whichenable predictable, repeatable schedule performance and which do so with optimum flightefficiency, will be recognized.

Airlines will continue to look for efficiencies and lower costs. They will also want to be able toinfluence ATM costs. With more autonomous aircraft in the system, ATC involvement is likely tobe less both on a per flight as well as on a per volume basis. This will be reflected in thecharges.

With some optimism, one could say new concepts will not only help airlines control efficiency offlight but also to control the cost of ATC….

To-day and tomorrow we will hear the conclusions of one of the premier programs dealing withsuch new concepts, and most importantly, we will consider the way forward.

To me, this User Forum is already part of the future!

Steve ZerkowitzMA-AFAS 3rd User Forum Chairman

4


Page 7

Tuesday 24th June - AM


Page 8

MA-AFAS Objectives and Relevance

Presented By Tony Henley

BAE SYSTEMS

5


Page 9

Background

In Preparation for EU Framework 5 European Union and Air Transport Industry jointly identified need

To dramatically enhance the operational efficiency and capacity of European Air Traffic Management While maintaining or increasing safety

European Union and Air Transport Industry agreed to fund major RTD programmes to bring about the necessary improvements - noting that

ATM changes typically required extended time periods to bring aboutNothing short of a ‘paradigm’ change would be sufficient to meetthe predicted requirement


Page 10

EU Framework 5More Autonomous - Aircraft In

the future ATM System

A large project was identified to address all aspects of ATMground/ air , short/ long term, retrofit/new build

Subsequently this split into two more manageable projects MA-AFAS (led By BAE SYSTEMS) and AFAS (led by AIRBUS)

The specific objective of MA-AFAS was:To accelerate the move to greater aircraft autonomy -

to support the increasing demand for air travel in and around Europe

MA-AFAS 28M€ 3 year programme supported by the European Union

As a Technology PlatformUnder the Growth Programme

Key Action 4New Perspectives in Aeronautics

6


Page 11

ATM environment as seen in 1999

The current European ATM system has been pushed to breaking pointPredicted growth of 5 to 8% per year for next 10 yearsAir transport is characterised by :

Inefficient routing for operatorsLong waits and increasing numbers of delayed flightsUnacceptable stress for controllers

Lack of capacity in Air and at AirportUnreliable Voice communications

IATA identified an ATM ‘Brick Wall’ around 2007


Page 12

Current and Future SituationEUROCONTROL DIVISION DED4 2000 DATE:04/11/97

2000 FORECASTMean IFR Flights per day

in 6’ by 10’ rectanglesFlights 150 OR MOREFlights 100 TO 150Flights 50 TO 100

TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION FORECAST ASSUMING FLIGHTS ON DIRECT ROUTES8 600 000 flights estimated - Based on STATFOR 97

CHART: DY_97_00

20008.0 M Flights

EUROCONTROL DIVISION DED4 2010 DATE:04/11/97




CHART: DY_97_10

2010

11.9 M Flights





CHART: DY_97_20

2020

15.8 M Flights




TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION FORECAST ASSUMING FLIGHTS ON DIRECT ROUTES7 500 000 flights estimated Based on STATFOR 97

CHART: DY_97_97

19977.0 M Flights

Flights 150 or more

Flights 100 to 150

Flights 50 to 100

7


Page 13

MA-AFAS approachATM is complex - many elements to the solution- however much initial work had already been doneKey requirements:

Build on ATM concepts already developed eg TORCH projectApply new technology- particularly in the Aircraft

Paradigm Shift - for MA-AFAS -– Make more use of Aircraft capability

Provide a solution in which - to the extent possible ‘He who pays - Gains’ while maintaining wide interoperability

Enable near term deployment - including retrofit to existing aircraftAcknowledge that services and procedures have to be modified and adapted in parallel

A new approach to ATM is required including technological innovations and new management processes


Page 14

EUROCAE/RTCA

NUP/ MFF

Interrelationships

MA-AFAS

ATM 2000 plusGOP Vision 20202 ASAS PK1

ACARE

European Strategy

DatalinksDependent Surveillance

Airport DatabaseTechnology

Gate to Gate

ASAS-TNConcept integration

EU- JCB

EuropeanSingle Sky

EMMA

C-ATM

SEAP/LAVA

AAA Pk2/3Large Scale Validation

AFMS/AATMSTORCH

Concepts

CARE-ASAS

8


Page 15

MA-AFAS Themes (1)

Enhance Surveillance and Separation Assurance Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Airborne Separation Assurance/ Assistance System (ASAS)

Partial Delegation - New ATC instruction– Station Keeping – Passing and Crossing

Autonomous Operation4D Flight Path Generation, Negotiation and Guidance Global Navigation Satellite System - Approaches and Departures

Space Based Augmentation Ground Based Augmentation


Page 16

MA-AFAS Themes (2)

Taxiway Management – Taxi Map – Traffic display (CDTI) – Data Linked Taxi Routes

Airline Operation Centre Fleet Management – Flight Planning & CDM – Asset Management and Maintenance

Data link Communications -– Point to Point, ATN compliant – Broadcast, ADS-B, TIS-B

With necessary improvements to flight deck HMI

9


Page 17

Ambitious Objectives

Concept Definition, Evaluation and Validation for semi-autonomousaircraft operations.Development of Basic Technologies.Validation via ground simulation.Integration of Aircraft, Air Ground Datalink, Ground Network, ATC and AOC End Systems.Flight Trials.


Page 18

Implications

1 Datalink and ASAS

2 Taxi operations

10


Page 19

Objective - Near Term Capacity Gain

Key Issue - reduce controller workloadAir ground Data link Communications

Reduction of mundane tasks But cost increase and no gain for early implementation

Improved surveillance data availability on the groundBut in core Europe? And global equipage required

Improved airspace management based on real aircraft data and precise aircraft control

No surprisesBut ground extensive tool set required


Page 20

Near term gains!

Application of Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Optimise operations for all stakeholders - eg RTA for optimised runway utilisationPotential benefits for equipped aircraft/airlines Ground tools TBD

Simplification (elimination?) of short term tactical managementASAS Pk1, (PK2, Pk3) Benefit - to airlines- in local regions with high levels of equipageInitially -in radar controlled airspace - no ground tools required!

11


Page 21

But near term -

Need controllers, pilots and airline accountants to buy into ASASProving that it works is not enough Continuing Work on

operations requirementsStandards and proceduresSafety casesimplication of pilot / control role change ( not yet transfer ofresponsibility)operational and cost benefits

But must be accelerated if European airspace is to meet the demand


Page 22

Near term

Large Scale Validation

Down Link ofAircraft Parameters

Early CDM Applications

AAA Pk2/3

MA-AFASASAS-PK1

AFAS C-ATM

Production Avionics and ATC tools

12


Page 23

Route to Long Term Capacity

ASAS Package 1 is Not Sufficient to to meet the expected requirement

Must be part of a longer term route to increase capacityBoth in terms of equipment upgrades, procedures and future ground infrastructure and toolsATM Road Map


Page 24

TAXI Operations

Situation Awareness - Safety Optimised Routing - BETAAll weather Precision Approach - everywhereRunway exit time optimisation

13


Page 25

Runway Incursion Prevention A Technology Solution

114 Fatalities

1 - Flight SK686 (MD-87) starts takeoff roll on RWY 36R. Cessna Citation II instructed to taxi from GA terminal via taxiway R5.

2 – Presumable point of collision with Cessna Citation II. MD-87 travelling over 110knots.

3 – Location of impact of MD-87 against baggage handling building.Since 1993, the yearly number of runway incursions in the U. S. has

risen by 232% (186 to 431)Steven D. Young and Denise R. Jones, NASA Langley

International Air Safety Seminar Athens, Greece November 3 – 9, 2001

Milan, Italy, October 8, 2001,8:14 am, RVR 735 feet


Page 26

EMMA

SLATS -UK DTI

MA-AFASTaxi

BETA Production Avionics and ATC tools

14


Page 27

MA-AFAS Non Technical Achievements

A biased Co-ordinator's ViewA ‘Good’ European Project

Well Managed !On Time and On Budget

(4 Month Extension due to Aircraft availability)Large but well integrated and co-operative teamNo internal disputesAll (most!) significant goals achievedStill relevant to today’s situation

Major Exploitation Potential


Page 28

MA-AFAS Partners

Avionics Suppliers– BAE SYSTEMS Avionics UK– Galileo Avionica Italy– Euro Telematik AG Germany– Skysoft Portugal

Communications Suppliers– Airtel-ATN Ireland– Frequentis Austria– Saab TransponderTech Sweden

ATC Equipment Suppliers– AMS Italy– Indra Spain– Thales ATM France

Airlines– EasyJet (Supporting ) UK

Research organisations– QinetiQ UK– Eurocontrol Experimental

Centre International– NLR Netherlands– DLR Germany– Sofreavia France– Stasys UK

ATM Service Providers– NATS UK– LFV Sweden– ENAV Italy

15


Page 29

MA-AFAS Operational Concept

Presented By Tony Henley

ForEric Hoffman

EEC


Page 30

Identify the Bottlenecks

FINAL

DEPARTURE

1

4D arrival manager

WWSparallel approaches brake to exit

HIROtaxi guidance& surveillance

bottlenecks

# of available gates

En-route

A/P Arrival / Departure

T/OLanding & Take-off

Surface Movement

16


Page 31

Charta of a Vision

ATC procedures need to satisfy customer needs (safety and traffic demand)Co-operative ATM system approach (air & ground) from gate to gateTake advantage of today´s state-of-the-art technologies for CNSAutomated processes for best safety & efficiencyAllocate tasks ( pilot/controller) according to best capabilitiesCommon data source used by all participants. Stop predicting, use real data - they are available!


Page 32

Identification of “Key Concepts”

Many European Programmes & Strategies are already addressing the perceived problems of future ATM operations in ECACMA-AFAS/AFAS jointly carried out a review of the Programmes & Strategies considered most relevantSelected North American programmes were included in the review to provide a more “global” perspectiveThe review identified 9 “Key Concepts” seen as fundamental to meeting the stated aims of the two programmes and therefore fundamental to the Operational Concept

17


Page 33

“Key Concepts”

Air / Ground ATM Datalink ServicesDependent Surveillance

Collaborative Airspace ManagementFlexible Use of Airspace

Collaborative Decision Making4-D Strategic ClearancesArrivals/Departures ManagementDelegation of Separation AssuranceAdvanced Surface Movement

Enablers - supporting the other key concepts

Assumed within the Operational Concept

Fundamental parts of the Operational Concept


Page 34

Background to Concept Framework

Operational Concept developed jointly between MA-AFAS/AFASTORCH framework used as a baseline to provide continuity with current and future projectsTORCH: Technical, Economical and Operational Assessment of an ATM Concept Achievable from 2005

Focus on improvements in airspace management & flow managementProposed a layered planning processProposed greater involvement of all ATM stakeholdersFramework - 18 generic Elements with related functions/services

MA-AFAS / AFAS Concept Framework developed from TORCH to reflect the advanced airborne capabilities required to support more autonomous aircraft operations beyond 2005

18


Page 35

MA-AFAS / AFASConcept Framework

AirlineOperations Planning

Airport Strategic Planning

Airspace Plan development & Implementation

Demand & Capacity Determination

Operational Plan Development

Separation Assurance

Hazard Assessment

Years…months..weeks days…hours hours…minutes minutes…seconds

Economy / Efficiency Capacity / Throughput Safety

Increasing criticality level

ExecutionPlanning

E09

E12

E01

E02E08

E03E07

AO Flight Control

E11

Airport Operations

E13

Central Rep-Planning Local Optimisation

E04

En Route planning

E05

Terminal AreaSequencing

E06

Aircraft Flight Management Gate-to-Gate

E10

E14 - Adjacent ATM AreasE15 - Military OperationsE16 - Meteorological AgenciesE17 - Performance ManagementE18 - Information Management Increased “Aircraft”

participation in ATM


Page 36

Summary

A brief overview of the Operational ConceptOnly covered the aspects most relevant to MA-AFAS

Collaborative Decision Making4D Strategic ClearancesArrivals / Departures ManagementDelegation of Separation AssuranceAdvanced Surface Movement

Subsequent presentations will go into detail on the implementation

19


Page 37

END


Page 38

Introduction To MA-AFAS Themes

Presented By Mick PywellBAE Systems

20


Page 39

The MA-AFAS Vision

Total gate-to-gate packageNear term capabilities to improve throughputLonger term capabilities to improve throughput


Page 40

DOWN STREAM CLEARANCESVERTICAL CROSSING

SIGMETIN-FLIGHT SPACING

FFAS

MAS

ASAS

IN DESCENT SPACING

GNSS APPROACH

FOG

LATERAL PASSING

The MA-AFAS Vision

21


Page 41

The MA-AFAS Achievement

Concentrate onWhat is most acceptable to usersWhat is most achievable in nearer term

More Autonomy is practical and WORKSGate-to-gate MA-AFAS concept is feasible


Page 42

Taxi ManagementTake-off

IN-FLIGHT SPACING

In-flight Spacing

IN DESCENT SPACING

In Descent Spacing

GNSS APPROACH

Curved Approaches

FOG

Precision Landing Lateral Passing

PASS BEHIND

VERTICAL PASSING

Vertical Passing

22


Page 43

MA-AFAS Developed Themes

Enhanced Surveillance and Separation Assurance Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Airborne Separation Assurance System (ASAS)

4D Flight Path Generation and Guidance Global Navigation Satellite System - Approaches and DeparturesTaxiway Management Airline Operation Centre Fleet Management Data link Communications


Page 44

Questions and Answers

23


Page 45

Tuesday 24th June - PM


Page 46

Taxi Management

Presented byMirsad Delic

EuroTelematik AGMA-AFAS Taxi Management Theme Leader

24


Page 47

Taxi Management

Challenges

Solutions

Realised MA-AFAS FunctionsMap DisplaySurveillance & Conflict DetectionGround CDTIDisplay of Taxiroute and Clearances


Page 48

Taxi ManagementChallenges

CapacityCurrent ground handling inadequate for growing trafficExtensive workload for controllers and flight crewAdverse weather conditions decrease capacity significantlyNon-adherence to instructions

SafetyCause for incidents: Disorientation, Misunderstanding, MisinterpretationResults: Runway Incursions, Unauthorised Take-OffProminent accidents (fatal): Tenerife ('77) , Atlanta ('90), Taipei ('00), Milan ('01)Prominent incidents (near-collision): Chicago ('99), New York ('99)

25


Page 49

Taxi ManagementSolutions

Increased Situation AwarenessAirport Map DisplayGround CDTI

Use of Digital Datalink instead of VoiceCPDLC for Ground OperationsDisplay of Taxi Route and Taxi Clearances

Use of Airport Map Databases according to ED-99

Surveillance and WarningRunway AlertRunway Incursion


Page 50

Taxi ManagementMap Display

Featuring :Runways & TaxiwaysParking Positions & GatesIntersections & StopbarsBuildings & ApronsTraffic ObjectsOwn Aircraft symbolDesignators for Traffic & Airport Objects

Presentation :Clear, ComprehensibleThree Display ModesSeveral Display RangesText line for CPDLC messages

Creation of airport maps via Map Creation Tool : EGDM, LIRA, EDVE & EDDF

HMI document : contribution to taxi related part

26


Page 51

Taxi ManagementSurveillance Functions

• Advisory on :– Runway Alert : When entering the area in front of a Runway (= holding

box) ==> two different warning messages according to clearance of runway

– Runway Incursion : Ownship is situated on runway and another aircraft or ground vehicle enters the same runway => several warning levels and messages according to distance, speed and heading oftraffic objects

• Independent Operation :– No Ground Systems needed


Page 52

Taxi ManagementGround CDTI

ADS-B and / or TIS-BSituation Awareness onlySeveral Manual and Automatic Decluttering Options Three different symbols for :

Aircraft with heading informationAircraft without heading informationGround Vehicles

Aircrafts with heading information are displayed with a label containing information about plane : ID, ground speed, altitude, …

27


Page 53

Taxi ManagementDisplay of Taxiroute

• ATC composes Taxi Messages by selecting airport segments (taxiways, etc.) on Taxi Tool screen

• Taxi Messages :– Clearances– Taxi Route Instructions– Message is displayed

textually– Taxi Route is calculated by

analysing CPDLC message

• Taxi Route :- Cleared and uncleared part- Display of stopbar in front

of uncleared runway

• Definition of set of taxi related CPDLC messages


Page 54

Communications- an Enabler for MA-AFAS Applications

FREQUENTIS

28


Page 55

Contents

MA-AFAS Operational CommunicationsAirborne MA-AFAS Communications ArchitectureMA-AFAS Communications OptionsCommunications Environment for MA-AFAS ValidationCommunications ChallengesMA-AFAS Validation - Ground AchievementsLessons LearnedTypical Ground Communications EnvironmentTAT- Flexible Platform For CPDLC And TAXI ManagementConclusions


Page 56

MA-AFAS Operational Communications

MA-AFAS Operational Concept (OC) is enabled by CommunicationsMA-AFAS Themes (CDTI/ASAS, PA, AOC, TAXI, 4D) require

Voice communications

Broadcast data link (ADS-B, TIS-B)

Point-to-point data link (AOC, CPDLC)

MA-AFAS OC is open for different technological DL options!

Data LinkVoice

29


Page 57

Airborne MA-AFAS Communications Architecture

Legacy voice radio system For ATC voice communicationsFor MA-AFAS in-flight service communications

MA-AFAS Flight Management System (FMS) Hosts operational DL applications

Airborne applications must be interoperable with peer ground applications

MA-AFAS Communications Management Unit (CMU) Supports DL communications services

Airborne system must be able to communicate with all involved ground systems

VDL transceiver Provides VDL functionality


Page 58

MA-AFAS Communications Options

Initial intentionsUse legacy R/T system for voice communications Use VDL Mode 4 for broadcast (non-ATN ) communications Use VDL Mode 2 for ATN point-to-point data link communications

Options for SATCOM, VDL Mode 3 data links

Final statusLegacy R/T system used for voice communications √VDL Mode 4 used for broadcast (non-ATN ) communications √VDL Mode 4 used for ATN point-to-point data link communications!

VDL Mode 2 ground support was not available when and where required for MA-AFAS validation!

30


Page 59

Communications Environment for MA-AFAS Validation

Multiple ground facilities at different locations

Ground-ground communications required for simulationsGround-ground and real air-ground communications required for system integration and flight trialsCommunications interoperability required

Between MA-AFAS avionics (CMU) and all involved ground systems

QinetiQ FS

DLR FS

BAC 1-11 A/C

DLR ATTAS A/C

DLR A-SMGCS

DLR TAXI EEC

ESCAPE

AMS MEDUP

MEDUPGS

DLRGS

BoscombeGS

ASX/ BLISConverter

G/G BIS

A/G BIS

IHTPAGP

LANs/ WANs(ISDN, X.25, NUP, MEDUP)

??

?

??

?

??

?

?

?

?

?

?


Page 60

Communications Challenges

Unclear, which communications services and interfaces are already available at involved validation platformsUnclear, which additional MA-AFAS-specific communications functions and facilities are required and where to place themUnclear architecture of involved VDL Ground StationsNeed to select cost-effective inter-facility data solution

Answer to the challenges: iterative co-ordination activities to achieve stable ground architecture!

31


Page 61

MA-AFAS Validation -Ground Achievements

All architectural issues could be resolvedIHTP-based ATN End System and A/G router were specified and builtRequired supporting components have been designed and built Two VDL4 ground stations were built for MA-AFAS

Architecture was harmonized for all MA-AFAS trial environments Nearly the same communications architecture was used in BoscombeDown, Braunschweig and Rome

Cost-efficient inter-facility data communications solutionIP over ISDN for both ATN and broadcast communications

TAT (Taxi and ATM Tool) has been developed and implementedComprising an ATN End System, CPDLC server and user HMI

The “common situational awareness” of involved Partners was increased!


Page 62

Lessons Learned

Modifications of existing ground communications facilities were required

ESCAPE, MEDUP, A-SMGCS...Some MA-AFAS-specific communications components had to be added to the architecture

ASTERIX converters, ATN G/G- and A/G routers, TAXI HMI Server…Cost-complexity tradeoffs had significant impact onto ground communications architecture

In particular “shifting” of communications functions between physical locations

Real-time air-ground DL communications were required by MA-AFAS Partners in support of MA-AFAS integration

32


Page 63

Typical Ground Communications Environment

Ground HMIs/CWPsApplication ServersCommunications End SystemsRoutersProtocol ConvertersGround Station

LANs and WANs

Voice Communications

PSTN

ISDN

Radio tower

ESCAPE CWP

Router

DLRA-SMGCS

VDL4 Radio

A/G BIS TAT Server BAGS

VDL4 GS ATN ES

Router

ESCAPECOM Server

Telephone

Telephone

G/G BIS

TAT HMI

ESCAPEAPPL Server(s)

Radio tower

Voice Radio

IHTP


Page 64

TAT- Flexible Platform For CPDLC And TAXI Management

MA-AFAS Development: TAT - Taxi and ATM Tool

FREQUENTIS Power-panelBAES IHTP PC

HMI for En-route CPDLCHMI for TAXI ManagementCPDLC application serverATN End SystemA/G ATN router

33


Page 65

Conclusions

MA-AFAS Operational Concept and user’s applications are enabledby Communications

Air-ground interoperability was required and achieved at both application and communications level!

Initial difficulties with communications architecture, but finallyAll architectural communication issues could be resolvedHarmonized architecture was used in all flight trial environmentsEfficient IP over ISDN solution was used for inter-facility data link Taxi and ATM Tool has been developed

Thanks to all MA-AFAS Partners involved with communications!


Page 66

CDTI / ASAS


34


Page 67

CDTI

Cockpit Display of Traffic InformationImproved situational awarenessIn air and on groundFilters to reduce clutter

Speed, altitude, codePoint-and-click target selection

or locate target from IDUses fused ADS-B and/or TIS-B broadcasts

IDRelative Altitude

Speed


Page 68

ASAS

Longitudinal spacing(same for Level Flight and In Descent)

Remain behindMerge behindChange spacing

Lateral spacingPass behindResume when clear

Vertical passingPass belowResume Descent

35


Page 69

STEP 1Target Selection

Point-and-click on Nav DisplayID entry on MCDUID uplink with CPDLC

Non-selected Traffic

Selected Target

CPDLC: (loaded automatically into MFMS)Select target <BICCA CODE>R/T:“Select target <BICCA CODE>, position target”


Page 70

STEP 2Remain Behind

Remain behind

Spacing isachieved bycontroller givingprior speedinstruction

Heading thenremain behind

CPDLC: (loaded automatically into MFMS){Heading H then} Remain behind {to be S behind | to be at least S behind} {clearance limit L}R/T:“Heading instruction, then behind target, remain (at least) X Nm behind”

36


Page 71

STEP 2Merge Behind

Merge behind atWPT

Heading thenmerge behind atWPT

WPT WPT

CPDLC: (loaded automatically into MFMS){Heading H then} Merge Behind At WPT {to be S behind | to be at least S behind} {clearance limit L}R/T:“Heading instruction, then behind target, remain (at least) X Nm behind”


Page 72

STEP 2Pass Behind

Pass behind to WPT

WPT

Closest point ofapproach

CPDLC: (loaded automatically into MFMS)Pass behind {with spacing S} then resume to WPTR/T:“Behind target, pass {S Nm} behind then resume to WPT”

37


Page 73

Trials System Architecture



Page 74

Trials System Overview

GroundTest Platform

VDL4GroundStation

ATNComms

BroadcastComms

AOCGroundPlatform

TrafficGenerator

DataLogging& Replay

BroadcastAir-Ground

Server

OptionalGROUND SYSTEMASTERIX

INTERFACE

ADS-BTIS-B

(ESCAPE)(A-SMGCS)(MEDUP)

FIS-BGenerator

Taxi/ATCTool

BAE SystemsAirtel Frequentis Galileo Saab Skysoft BAES+TEAM

Aircraft 2

VDL4Transponder

MA-AFASComms

ManagementUnit

MA-AFASFlight

ManagementUnit

Autopilot

Displays

Test Platform

TrafficGenerator

SupportServices

DataLogging& Replay

Aircraft 1

VDL4Transponder

MA-AFASComms

ManagementUnit

MA-AFASFlight

ManagementUnit

Autopilot

Displays

Test Platform

TrafficGenerator

SupportServices

DataLogging& Replay

Aircraft 1

VDL4Transponder

MA-AFASComms

ManagementUnit

MA-AFASFlight

ManagementUnit

Autopilot

Displays

Test Platform

TrafficGenerator

SupportServices

DataLogging& Replay

EthernetTestLink

AMS(UK)

38


Page 75

MA-AFAS Avionics Package : Prototype Trials Unit

COTS VME RackPowerPCs, Hard Disk, ARINC 429, Ethernet, etc.

ARINC 653 MiddlewareDatabases

ARINC 424 Nav DBTaxi MapsMeteo DBSurveillance DB

Interfaces for 2 differenttrials aircraft

QinetiQ BAC 1-11DLR ATTAS VFW 614

Aircraft SystemsGNSS Navigation-Landing Units - GBAS + SBAS + GPSAutopilot, DCP, IRS, ADC, Aural Warning


Page 76

Trials Prototype Avionics

SBAS

GBAS

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

Autopilot

ADC

IRS

Intercom(Aural Warnings)

DisplayControlPanel

MA-AFASFMS

MA-AFASCMU

1-11only

ATTASonly Both

VDL4Transponder

GPS

Trials SupportPC

39


Page 77

MA-AFAS Avionics Package :Trials Equipment

MCDUCMC Inc. flight certified unitARINC 739 standard

Navigation Display UnitExperimental aircraft displaysVarious RGB

VDL Mode 4 - Saab-Transponder TechSame VHF channel used for all broadcast and point-to-pointFrame Mode SNDCF developed for point-to-point

Trials Support PCBAES In-House Test Platform

Data loggingDisplay repeaterBack-up comms functionsBack-up traffic generator


Page 78

MA-AFAS Trials

Richard Espin QinetiQ, Bedford, UK

Leader of WP3 - Validation

40


Page 79

Overview of Trials Presentations

MA-AFAS Validation Sites

Boscombe Down, UKAutomatic Partial Delegation - Fully Coupled, (Taxi)

Amsterdam, NetherlandsManual Partial Delegation - Airline Pilot Assessment

Braunschweig, GermanyTAXI, (ASAS, AOC) - A-SMGCS

Rome, ItalyGate-to-Gate - with shadow ATC System


Page 80

Boscombe Objectives

Ground testingIntegration and testing of Partner ModulesVerification of System PerformanceFeedback to System Design

Flight testingExercise functions in flightPrepare for Rome flight trials

41


Page 81

Integration and Verification Schedule

ID Task Name1 Boscombe Validation Activities

2 Build C delivery

3 Integration and ground test

4 Build C3 (C+) delivery

5 Build C4 delivery

6 Build C4+ delivery

7 Christmas holiday

8 Build C5 delivery

9 Build C5 flight

10 Build D1 delivery

11 Integration and ground test

12 Build D1+ delivery

13 D1+ integration and ground test


15 Intergation and test

16 D2 Flight


18 Integration and test

14/10

04/11

25/11

06/12

06/01

14/01

20/01

24/01

03/02

07/02

1

19/08 16/09 14/10 11/11 09/12 06/01 03/02September November January


Page 82

Laboratory Test Facilities

42


Page 83

Laboratory Test Facilities (2)

MA-AFAS AVIONICS PACKAGE

CMU

IHTP

NAV Display,

CDU and CCD

Aircraft Model

Aircraft Autopilot

VDL mode 4


Page 84

Flight Test Facilities

43


Page 85

Aircraft System

Cabin

Cockpit

Nav Display

(ND)

Cursor Control Device (trackball)

Multi-function Control and Display Unit

(MCDU)

FMU

Flight Management

Unit

CMU

Communications Management

Unit

VDL mode 4 Datalink

IHTP with Delegated Manoeuvres


Page 86

Flight Test Route

KATE

DM005

A

B

C

G

J K

Inbound

OutboundPass Behind

H

D

E

F

AGIBS

Z

MS

T

R Q

X

Y

Merge

P

44


Page 87

Ground Facilities

Precision Approach and Departure Ground Platform


Page 88

Precision Departure

PRICE

INGLWOLF

ESPIN

TD05D127

D126

D128

D125

TOD

BDN

KATE

B1

B3

45


Page 89

Curved Departure Performance


Page 90

MA-AFAS Equipment

Cabin Installation

46


Page 91

Pilot’s View

Cockpit Displays


Page 92

Boscombe Flight Results (1)

4D Navigation

• Position Fixing - SBAS accuracyLateral: Mean = 1.32 metres SD = 0.66 metresVertical: Mean = -0.86 metres SD = 2.53 metres

• Flight Technical ErrorLateral: Mean = 110 metres (0.06 nm)

SD = 100 metres (0.05 nm)

47


Page 93


4D Navigation (continued)

• Trajectory GenerationGood response time (1-2 seconds)Difficulty with some SIDs and STARs

(Turn Types, Altitude Constraints)Climb profile needs improvementPoor go-direct implementation

• GuidanceStable and accurate lateral, vertical and speed control


Page 94


HMI

• Navigation DisplayAdequate for normal operations + Partial DelegationLimited functionality (no graphical route editing)

• MCDUEOBT, ETOT re-inputNon-optimum command words (eg Load)

• Cursor Control Device Easy and effective

48


Page 95

Boscombe Achievements

CDTI / ASASLateral Spacing - Pass Behind Longitudinal Spacing - Merge BehindMultiple (simulated) targets

PADPrecision Departure

TaxiTaxi MapSituational Awareness

4D Trajectories

Ready for Flight Trials in Rome


Page 96

Amsterdam Flight Simulator Trials

Presented by Nico de Gelder, NLR

Nationaal Lucht- en RuimtevaartlaboratoriumNational Aerospace Laboratory NLR

49


Page 97

Overview

Experiment objectivesExperiment setupASAS instructionsMeasurements takenFlight simulatorResultsConclusions



Page 98

Experiment objectives

To evaluate the new ASAS functionality of the MA-AFAS system with its HMI, applying new procedures and new task distribution, in a simulated environment regarding workload, performance, situation awareness, crew decision making, crew/pilot error and pilot acceptance

Note: where the Rome flight trials are used to evaluate in the most challenging situation for the technical system, the A’dam human-in-the-loop experiment is used to evaluate in the most challenging situation for the human operator.


50


Page 99

Experiment setup10 crews

each consisting of a captain and a first officer2 days per crew

10 experiment flights of 45 minutes each per crew8 flights with ASAS manoeuvres2 for reference purposes

Each crew exposed to the same set of instructionsa so-called within subject experimental design

Per flight, 3 delegated ASAS manoeuvres2 x vertical crossing and/or lateral spacing 1 x merging behind (time-based)

incl. remaining behind after merge pointincl. several decelerations of target aircraft

Leading to exposure to MA-AFAS concept: 10 crews x 8 flights x 3 manoeuvres = 240 ASAS instructions10 crews x 10 flights x 45 min. = 75 hours (excl. training)



Page 100

Variations in the experiment

For each crew the same functionality was applied10 flights:

8 x ASAS flights2 x reference flights

Communication: 5 x CPDLC5 x Radio Telephony

Automation (for 8 ASAS flights only): 4 x manual control of time spacing, thru speed selections by pilot4 x automatic control of time spacing, thru speed commands generated by new Auto Pilot mode: follow mode (‘FLW mode’)


51


Page 101

Variations in the experiment

ASAS instructions for lateral spacing:Behind target pass behind, then resume to (…)Turn left/right heading (…) until clear of target, then resume to (…)

ASAS instructions for vertical crossing:Below target pass below, descend flight level (…)Maintain/descend flight level (…) until clear of target, then resume descent flight level (…)

ASAS instructions for merging:Merge to (…) to be (...) seconds behind targetTurn left/right heading (…) then merge to (…) to be (…) seconds behind target

Each 4 times applied so, 24 ASAS instructions per crew



Page 102

Measurements

Questionnaires:directly after an ASAS manoeuvreafter completion of each flightdebriefing questionnaire at the end of the 2-day session

Workload rating ISA, Instantaneous Self Assessment, each 2 min. Simulator data recordingsEye point of gaze provided by the eye tracker

(for subset of flights)


52


Page 103

Flight simulator

GRACE: Generic Research Aircraft Cockpit Environment



Page 104

Instrument panel,glareshield and CCD


53


Page 105

Results

Questionnaire results:pilot acceptanceperceived pilot workload

Data recordingperformance during ASAS manoeuvres

Eye tracking data



Page 106

Pilot acceptance 1/5

2. ASAS Operations

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Hdg_merge Merge Alt_resume Pass below Hdg_resume Pass behind

"disagree""neither""agree"

2. ASAS Operations

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%




54


Page 107


3. R/T phraseology for ASAS instructions

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%



3. R/T phraseology for ASAS instructions

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%





Page 108


4. Communication

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

R/T CPDLC


4. Communication

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

R/T CPDLC



55


Page 109


5. Speed control

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

no FLW mode FLW mode


5. Speed control

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

no FLW mode FLW mode




Page 110


"Was the flight you performed overall acceptable?"

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

R/T DL R/T - ref DL - ref

perc

enta

ge o

f pilo

t res

pons

es


"Was the flight you performed overall acceptable?"

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


perc

enta

ge o

f pilo

t res

pons

es



56


Page 111

Perceived pilot workload

Rating Scale Mental Effortscale 0 to 150higher values indicate higher perceived mental effort



Page 112

Perceived pilot workload

0

20

40

60

80


RS

ME

Sco

re (0

-150

)

PRETTY EFFORTFUL

RATHEREFFORTFUL

SOMEWHAT EFFORTFUL

A BITEFFORTFUL

HARDLY EFFORTFUL


57


Page 113

Performance dataLateral spacing

8Nm

Pass behind, 8nm

Events Task=1 Event=0

0:00:00-0:02:00 0:02:00

[Nm]Distance to target

20.00

5.00

8Nm

Pass behind, 8nm

Events Task=1 Event=0

0:00:00-0:02:00 0:02:00

[Nm]Distance to target

20.00

5.00



Page 114

Performance dataVertical crossing

Continue descent

Altitude differencewith target[]

Events Event=5

0:00:00-0:01:00 0:01:00

4000.00

-2000.00

Continue descent

Altitude differencewith target[]

Events Event=5

0:00:00-0:01:00 0:01:00

4000.00

-2000.00


58


Page 115

Performance dataMerging behind



Page 116

Conclusions

ON WORKLOAD AND ACCEPTANCEPilot acceptance on ASAS spacing operations in general high

only “pass below” manoeuvres are not appreciatedlateral spacing manoeuvres are less appreciated during descent

ASAS instruction set should be reducedchange “… until clear of target” into “pass …” type instructions

ASAS phraseology should be simplifiedinstructions with three elements should be limited

HMI well appreciated, especially interactive HMI with CCD, butalerting should be improved“resume” functionality should be removedturn-in point information for “heading then merge” should be improvedspacing deviation trend vector should be improved

Below FL100 (TMA), required flight deck inputs should be limited


59


Page 117

Conclusions

ON WORKLOAD AND ACCEPTANCEAdditional task for the flight crew increases workload

mainly due to monitoring sub-taskCPDLC is the preferred communication method

related to complexity / length of ASAS instructionsbut CPDLC is not a requirement to make ASAS spacing happen

Time spacing control - thru AP/AT speed commands -seems not required, but is desirablecontrol law needs improvement

Merge/remain operations should be further investigateddifferent types of arrival energy management issuesituations in which attention is partly distracted: e.g. problems in cabin, comm with company, system failures, bad weather workload issuemultiple aircraft in a ‘train’ stability issue



Page 118

ConclusionsON PERFORMANCE

Lateral spacingone case of spacing violation observed (out of 80 manoeuvres)“pass behind” manoeuvres are executed more efficiently than the “heading until clear of target”

Vertical crossingno spacing violation for “altitude until clear of target” (out of 40) two cases for “pass below” (out of 40)“pass below” manoeuvres sometimes require high rate of descent, close to a/c capabilities safety issue

Merge behind“heading then merge” manoeuvres provide better accuracy overhead the merging point compared to the “merge” manoeuvres without an initial heading (note that the scenarios had quite some influence)accuracy of following a target a/c, up to final approach, is highaccuracy is high for both manual and automatic speed control


60


Page 119

Braunschweig Flight and Taxi Trialswith ATTAS (VFW 614)

Bernhard Czerlitzki DLR Braunschweig, Germany


Page 120

BraunschweigFlight and Taxi Trials

OVERVIEW

Test configuration with ATTASTaxi ScenariosFlight ScenariosAOCResultsConclusions

61


Page 121

ATTAS andExperimental Cockpit


Page 122

Taxi TrialsBraunschweig Airport

62


Page 123

Simulation Ground Infrastructure at DLR


Page 124

Taxi TrialsATTAS Front Cockpit - Pilot’s View

63


Page 125

Braunschweig – Taxi TrialsGround Systems

ATC: Supervisor of the experiment

Shadow ATC

Datalink via VDL-4

R/T CommunicationATC to aircraft

Communication by telephoneATC to Shadow ATC

Ground Traffic / CPDLC


Page 126

Braunschweig – Schedule ofTaxi Activities

14 May 2003 (PM)initial taxi test:TT-2: DLR Apron – F – A – RWY26 – D – C – F – DLR Apron15 May 2003 (AM)Taxi trials TT-1: DLR Apron – F – C – D – RWY08 – B – C – Tower ApronTT-3: Tower Apron – C – A – RWY26 – D – C – Tower ApronTT-4: Tower Apron – C – D – RWY08 – B – F – DLR Apron15 May 2003 (PM)TT-1, TT-2, TT-3, TT-416 May 2003 (AM)Runway alert, runway incursion, using DLR’s test van equippedwith a VDL-4 transponder as 2nd vehicle

64


Page 127

Taxi TrialsBraunschweig Scenario

TT-4: Tower Apron – C – D – RWY08 – B – F – DLR Apron


Page 128

Braunschweig – Taxi Trials ProcedureDate S tart T ime End T ime

T ower Aircraft CW P Controller

via voice Controller via Contact M an

A/C via voice

A/C via Data L ink

A/C action CW P via Data L ink

1 B efore take off procedure 1.1 Request Start up for Test Run w ithin 15

minutes.

1.2 Start up engine W IL CO Start Up 1.3 Request

Departure

1.4 Departure Clearance 1.5 W IL CO 1.6 Request Start

UP

1.7 C leared Start U P 1.8 W IL CO 1.9 Ready for Test Run 1.10 Following Data Link

Instructions W IL CO Request Taxi

1.11 C leared taxi Cleared taxi 1.13 C leared Taxi to

RW Y08 via T 2d 1.12 W IL CO Start taxiing 1.14 Ready for

TK O F

1.15 C leared enter R W Y Cleared enter RW Y

1.16 C leared Line Up 1.17 W IL CO Entering RW Y 1.18 C leared TK O F 1.19 W IL CO Continue T axi on

RW Y

2 After Landing Procedure 2.1 C leared Taxi to DLR Cleared T axi to

DLR

2.2 C leared Taxi to DLR via. T 2n

2.3 W IL CO Continue taxi to DL R

2.4 2.5 End of T est Run End of T est R un

65


Page 129

Braunschweig - Flight TrialsFlight Test Route


Page 130

Braunschweig – Flight TrialsATTAS Exp. Cockpit - Pilot’s View

66


Page 131

Braunschweig – Flight TrialsOnboard Structure

VDL4Transponder

MCDU

Switch129.247.41.xxx

IHTP129.247.41.203

Switch129.247.58.xxx

EXEC129.247.41.14

E-COCKNAV-Display

SGI-AHMIY129.247.58.13

SGI-AHMIZ129.247.58.14

129.247.58.33FMS (BIT)

129.247.41.206

Ecock Terminal-Computer129.247.33.61

SBAS

alte

rnat

ivel

y

TouchPad

HU

B CMU129.247.41.202

FMU129.247.41.201

AR

INC

Display

Display

Black Box


Page 132

Braunschweig – Schedule ofFlight Activities

20 May 2003 (PM)FT-1: Initial CPDLC tests, pass behind, remain behind22 May 2003 (PM)FT-2: P2P comm with AOC, pass behind, remain behind23 May 2003 (AM)FT-3: Merge behindFT-4: Merge behind26 May 2003 (AM/PM)FT-5: ADS-B communications range testing FT-6: Merge behindFT-7: Merge behind with heading27 May 2003 (AM/PM)FT-8: Merge behind with heading, Merge behindFT-9: Merge behind with heading, Merge behind

67


Page 133

Braunschweig – Flight Trials Flight Scenario

GRAPHIC TBD.


Page 134

Braunschweig – Flight TrialsMerge Behind with Heading

Video of Merge Behind with Heading (~60 sec)

68


Page 135

AOC Functionality (1)

Flight Plan (Enroute WPs, cruise altitude, Departure & Destination Airport, Flight-ID):- The pilot receives a message on the MCDU- He can view the flight plan and load it into the systemLoad Sheet- Zero fuel Weight- Amount of Fuel- No. of passengersThe pilot has to acknowledge the load sheet, then it is loaded into the system.Slot Allocation- Estimated block off time- Calculated Take Off Time- Free TextPilot acknowledgement, data are loaded into the system


Page 136

AOC Functionality (2)

OOOI-Report- Departure Airport- Take Off Time- On message (destination, planned time for landing)Flight Progress Reports (update every n seconds)- current position and time- flight level- 4D position of next WP- current ground speed- fuel quantity- destination4D Trajectory

69


Page 137

Braunschweig – Taxi Results

Operational Procedures- Pilot in command was taxiing- Co-pilot was observing the display and managing the data link

communicationPilot comments- Easy use of the system- No possibility to review the sent / received CPDLC messages- Taxi map shows too many details outside of the airport- The display of the taxi route on the NavD needs to be improved- Incoming messages on the MCDU/ND; an audio indicationwould be advantageousSituation Awareness Benefits and pilot workload

- not assessed (simple airport layout, good weather conditionsduring the taxi trials)


Page 138

Braunschweig – Flight Results

4D Navigation

Trajectory Generation- Short response times (~ 1 sec.)- TOC/TOD computation not accurate enough- ‘Go direct’ implementation needs improvement

Guidance- Lateral, vertical and speed control works accurate- Time based guidance not tested at Braunschweig

CDTI / ASAS Partial Delegation- Easy use of target identification and selection- Difficulty to judge severity of conflict (e.g. trend vector

for target and own ship)

70


Page 139

Braunschweig – Flight Results

HMI

Navigation Display- Adequate for normal operations and Partial Delegation- Bad readability of the menue on the display

MCDU- Adequate for normal operations and Partial Delegation- Wording of some of the command words should be modified

(e.g. load)- History function for CPDLC messages is missing

Cursor Control Device (Touch Pad)- Easy use (under good weather conditions !)


Page 140

Braunschweig – Conclusions (1)Achievements

VDL-4 Datalink- ADS-B, TIS-B, CPDLCTaxi Management- Map Display, uplink of taxi routes, CPDLC messages- Runway alert, runway incursionCDTI / ASAS Partial DelegationPass Behind, Remain BehindMerge Behind, Merge Behind with HeadingAOC Functionality- Flight plan, load sheet, slot allocation, trajectory, OOOI, meteoSuccessful preparation and execution of the Braunschweig trials- good support from partners, quick response- motivated teams - co-operation between partners was excellent

71


Page 141

Rome Flight Trials

Reg Harlow QinetiQ, Bedford, UK


Page 142

Rome Flight Trials

Live Target Aircraft - at same Flight Level

BAC 1-11 ATTAS (VFW 614)

72


Page 143

Rome Flight Trials

OVERVIEW

Available Functionality

Flight Scenarios

Schedule of Activities

Trials Procedure

Flight Results

Conclusions


Page 144

Rome - Available Functionality (1)

BAC 1-11MA-AFAS FMS System + VDL4CDTI / ASAS - Pass Behind, Merge Behind (Distance)Taxi Map4D Navigation + HMI

ATTAS (Target)MA-AFAS FMS System + VDL44D Navigation + HMI

Gate-to-Gate Operation with priority on CDTI / ASAS

73


Page 145

Rome - Available Functionality (2)

• Ground Systems

– Shadow ATC FacilityRadar Display

– VDL4 Ground StationADS (B)

– R/T CommsATC to A/CShadow ATC to A/C


Page 146

Rome - Flight Scenarios (1)

SIDR/W 15

CiampinoOST

74


Page 147


TrialsArea

KeyOrange line = ATTAS

Blue line = BAC1-11

P1 = pass behind

P2 = pass behind

MMP = merge point

OSTOST


Page 148


STARR/W 15

X Ciampino

O

O

O

O

OOST

CMP

75


Page 149

Rome - Schedule of Activities (1)

Monday 24 March, 2003AM

BAC 1-11 and ATTAS Transit to CiampinoADS (B) check in TMA

PMBriefing on planned activities and timingsLiaison and briefing between aircrews and ATC

Operational and Safety IssuesSystem problem fixing

ADS (B) ground speed / track displayShadow ATC facilitiesVDL4


Page 150

Rome - Schedule of Activities (2)

Tuesday 25 March• AM - Assessment Flight 1• PM - Assessment Flight 2

Wednesday 26 March• AM - Assessment Flight 3• PM - Assessment Flight 4

Thursday 27 March• VDL 4 ground testing + Merge Behind software mods.

Friday 28 March• AM - Assessment Flight 5• PM - Transit to Braunschweig / Boscombe

76


Page 151

Rome - Trials Procedure (1)

Pass Behind Dialogue

• On leg before conflictController: “Select target AAEEH”Pilot: “Selecting target AAEEH”

• After identification on Nav DisplayPilot: “Target AAEEH identified, 3 o’clock, 25nm”Controller: “Behind target, pass 6nm behind then resume to B3”Pilot: “Passing 6nm behind target, then will resume to B3”

• When clear of targetPilot: “Resuming to B3”


Page 152


Merge Behind Dialogue

• On leg before MergeController: “Select target AAEEH”Pilot: “Selecting target AAEEH”

• After identification on NDPilot: “Target AAEEH identified, 1 o’clock, 25nm”Controller: “Behind target, merge to MMP to be 15nm behind”Pilot: “Merging behind target to MMP to be 15nm behind”

• On reaching MMPPilot: “At MMP, maintaining 15nm behind target”

77


Page 153


Replay of Actual Tracks flown- Wednesday 26th March (AM)

Replay not available on CD


Page 154

Rome - Flight Results (1)

CDTI / ASAS Partial Delegation

• CDTIAlmost continuous target displayEasy target identification and selectionSimple monitoring task during manoeuvres

78


Page 155


CDTI / ASAS Partial Delegation (continued)

• Merge Behind

Simple, straight-forward event for pilots + controllers

Demanded spacing rarely achieved (software fault)Voice instruction could be simplifiedDisplay improvements required

– show speed demand before activation– show closure rate is adequate


Page 156


CDTI / ASAS Partial Delegation (continued)

• Pass Behind

Simple, straight-forward event for pilots + controllers

Adequate accuracy of meeting required spacingSimple spacing monitoring task (ATC + Aircrew)Earlier resume to waypoint would be preferredVoice instruction could be simplifiedDifficult to judge severity of conflict prior to

trajectory generation

79


Page 157



Page 158


Lateral Deviations during Pass Behind 1

80


Page 159


Lateral Deviations during Pass Behind 2


Page 160


Video of Pass Behind as seen by Controller and by PilotClick within the ATC Pass Behind window to view the video

81


Page 161

Rome - Conclusions

Achievements

• Pass Behind with live aircraft - WORLD FIRST

• Partial Delegation (Pass behind, Merge Behind)Simple, straight-forward events for pilots + controllersCan be treated as standard ATC instructions

• Highly successful trials planning and executionExcellent co-operation between partnersRapid response to unexpected eventsHighly motivated and dedicated teams


Page 162

Wednesday 25th June - AM

82


Page 163

MA-AFAS Theoretical Cost Benefit Analysis

Presented By BAE SYSTEMSC D Goodchild


Page 164

Overview of Presentation

ObjectiveMA-AFAS Cost Benefit AnalysisDefinitionQuantification Route Structure

Cost Benefit ModelModel StructureStatusPreliminary Results

ConclusionsFuture workMetrics for future revenue trials

83


Page 165

MA-AFAS Cost Benefit Analysis

WP 4.3.1 - Definition of metrics to be used in Cost Benefit analysis (based on those identified by C/AFT, TORCH and Airbus

WP 4.3.1 - Means of collecting and analysing data to be identified or developed

WP 4.3.2 Theoretical Cost Benefit analysis

WP 4.3.2 Presentation of Cost Benefit to User Forum

WP 4.3.3 - Identify which metrics will be used in Cost Benefit trials on revenue aircraft

ATM functionalities from avionics package

Operational scenarios used in simulator/flight trials

Survey of user priorities

AFAS Benefits, Figures and Metrics for Operational Assessment

Expert Opinion -avionics providers, ATS providers, airlines and regulatory bodies Future

ProgrammesCost Benefit Analysis


Page 166

Cost Benefits Analysis Definition

Compatible with AFAS

Efficiency

Delays

Capacity

Model RestrictionsPrimarily targeted towards is there a direct benefit for the operatorAOC not included as potential revenue stream

Efficiency = Reference Flight / Actual Flight (%) (Time; Fuel)

Arrival Delay = Actual Arrival Time - Scheduled Arrival Time (min)

Through-putTMA through-put = Number of aircraft, that can be accommodated in a

given time period by the Terminal Area

En Route through-put = Number of aircraft , that can be accommodated in a typical sector

Delay

Efficiency

84


Page 167

Quantification of Metrics

Metrics Efficiency Delay TMA Throughput En Route Throughput

Notes

Functions Level Flight Spacing X N/ALateral Passing N/ALateral Crossing X XIn Descent Spacing N/AEnhanced Successive Visual Approaches N/A

Taxi Map X X X X EnablerTaxi CDTI X X X X Safety onlyTaxi Route N/ATaxi Guidance X X N/AVertical Crossing X XFull Autonomous (Free Flight) X

Low Visibility Landing & Taxi Guidance X

AOC X X X X Large Indirect Benefit of Datalink


Page 168

Route StructureRoutes

AirportsOSL, ARN, CPH, HELCDG, FRAMAD, BCN, LTNROM, PMI, AGP

Operators considered on routes

Air FranceLufthansaSASIberiaEasyjetSpanairFinnairAlitalia

85


Page 169

Level 0 Cost Benefit Model

AirlineOperating

Costs

DelayCosts

GroundSurveillance

BenefitsAirportATC

Revenue

CostBenefit

IRR/NPV/Payback

EquippageCosts

Route StructureCapacity ProjectionsAircraft TypeAircraft ModelDelay/Flight

Functions:SMGCS, ASAS, AOC

EfficiencyDelayThroughput

AirborneSurveillance

Benefits

Functions:Level Flight SpacingIndescent SpacingLateral CrossingVertical CrossingFree FlightTaxi Management/Guidance

EfficiencyDelayThroughputRevenue

EmissionsCO & NOX


Page 170

Financial Terms

NPV - Net Present Value.The net value of the investment benefits

costs presented at current pricesA positive NPV means that the investment will give a benefitFor the analysis discount rates of 10%, 12% and 15% have been used

IRR - Internal Rate of ReturnMeasure of the equivalent investment return that the investment hasThe larger the IRR the more viable the investment

Paybackthe break-even point of the investment.

86


Page 171

Model Status

Model Structure includesLevel 0 & 1 framework covering the ASAS Package 1/2 manoeuvre functions

Benefit analysis Concentrated on benefits to operatorInitial analysis also conducted on the airports and ACC’sResults have been scaled up for EuropeVDL4 default datalink

Information requested from operatorsInformation received from Luftanhsa and Easy jetInformation has been incorporated into the model


Page 172

Cost BenefitScaled up to all Core Europe flights

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Years

mEu

ro Cumulative BenefitTotal Cost Benefit

Cost BenefitScaled up to all Core Europe flights

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Years

mEu

ro Cumulative BenefitTotal Cost Benefit

Results from Model - Operators Cost Savings

Core EuropeVariation in planned capacity & traffic growth

InputsPlanned Capacity increase 3%/yearTraffic Growth 3.5% per annumResults

NPV @ 12% 1655mEuroIRR 49%Payback 6 years

InputsPlanned Capacity increase 3%/yearTraffic Growth 4.1% per annumResults

NPV @ 12% 2200mEuroIRR 55%Payback 6 years

87


Page 173

Results from Model - Ground Case Cost Savings

Very preliminary cost assessment made

NetworkAirportACC

Cash flow split needs to be sorted outCharge for use of datalink

-400.00

-200.00

0.00

200.00

400.00

600.00

800.00

1000.00

1200.00

1400.00

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

Cumulativecost


Page 174

Environmental Benefits

EnvironmentalAn initial estimate was conducted to ascertain any potential environmental impact:

More efficient route structuresLess in flight in-efficiencyLeading to potential emissions savings

NOX Emission Benefits

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Years

Tonn

es N

Ox/

year

NOX Phase 1 Saving NOX Phase 2 Sav ing

CO Emissions Benefit

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Ye ars

tonn

es C

O/y

ear

CO Phase 1 Saving CO Phase 2 Saving

88


Page 175

Safety Benefits

Safety CaseThis has been based upon the route structure that was implementedThe accumulated saving in fatal accidents due to introduction of ADS-B was calculated to beFatal Accidents

>15 million EurosNon Fatal accidents

> 2 million EurosImplementation date to 2020


Page 176

Sensitivity AnalysisOperator Benefit

Example of sensitivity analysis conductedBase value of NPV for this example is €1,804million

89


Page 177

Scenario AnalysisOperator Benefit

Example of scenario analysis that can be conducted

Baseline NPV €1,804million 40% probabilityExpected value €1,70180% probability Expected Value €1,500Framework is in place to allow scenario analysis of different data links

no real data to date


Page 178

Results for Route Structureimplemented

Example of OperatorBenefits assessed for 8 routes

20% of single aisle flightsBut costs are based on equipping all 140 aircraftEven with this restricted study of benefits, yields a positive return

SolutionExpand route structure or can the proportion of the fleet equipped be reducedIncrease aircraft variants to be upgradedEquip aircraft fasterProvide further incentives for operator

Route Structure CBA ResultsAll fleet equipped

-200.00

-150.00

-100.00

-50.00

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

mEu

ro

-800.00

-600.00

-400.00

-200.00

0.00

200.00

400.00

600.00

800.00 SMGCS

Ph 2 Delay CostSavingsPh 2 Operating CostSavingsPh 1 Delay CostSavingsPh 1 Operating CostSavingsEVSA Benefit

TMA Benefit

Overall Cost Benefit

Cumulative Benefit

Some Operators on route structure benefit more than others:

90


Page 179

Conclusions

ResultsPreliminary results shows there is a positive business case with the correct implementation of route and fleet mix

Model very sensitive to planned capacity and traffic growth forecastsPayback is likely to be too long

– Economic incentives may be requiredThe model will be sensitive to datalink charges for the new functionality.

– Business case for the ground and the air needs to be balanced.

– Framework in place to investigate this in the model


Page 180

Conclusions

Model LimitationsPlanned capacity and traffic growth is assumed constant for whole of route structureQuantified data from revenue trials is essential to prove the Cost Benefit CaseEquipment fit for all aircraft is same value

Architecture analysis is required to determine the sensitivity of this value:RetrofitNew buildAircraft variants

Airport capacity restrictions not fully accounted forModel does not fully account for other benefits that will be introduced by other efficiency benefits

91


Page 181

Comparison with other StudiesNPV IRR Payback

Costs and benefits of ADS basedon operational studies75% equipage TMA

7 to 11 years

Helios CBA Phase 1 October 2002Package 1 ASPackage 2

2010-2020>€1460million>€9.2 billion

MA-AFAS CBAASAS Pk 1 & 2 - Operators

2008-2020€1804 million

2010-2020€2496 million

>40% 6 to 7 years

Direct comparison not possible as:Different financial periods and potentially discount rates used for NPV calculationsDifferent criteria

MA-AFAS has concentrated on benefits to the Operators


Page 182

Comparison Continued

NPV IRR Payback

Helios CBA Phase 1 October 2002 2010-2020€1027 – €1500M

MA-AFAS CBA - Operator 2008-2020€672

33% 7 years

Comparison of the benefits fromSequencing and mergingCrossing and PassingEVSA

92


Page 183

Future work & Recommendations

Future WorkExtend functionality of model

– Lateral passing– ASAS Package 3– All weather

Individual Airport planned capacity forecastsEquipment Costs for specific Aircraft variantsImprove delay model to include capacity/weather partition Quantification of benefitsConduct detailed CBA on regional areaContinue to research for data that could help quantify benefitsNeed an expanded model that includes 4D and ASASEconomic incentive models should be investigatedFuture Framework 6 programmes should be used to provide quantified data for CBA

– Metrics


Page 184

Example of Metrics for Future Revenue Trials

Aircraft Ground4D flight profile RT traffic vs timeFuel use vs time Datalink performanceSpacing accuracy vstime

% manoeuvres initiated in any givenscenario

Weather conditionsduring flight

% by controller

Traffic information vstime

No of manoeuvres accepted/rejected

Surface Trafficinformation vs time

Occurrences of intervention

Controller workload

Efficiency

93


Page 185

Metrics for Future Revenue Trials

Sample Size and Criteria Recommendations

The sample size needs to be such, that comparisons can be made against the monthly traffic and delay performance dataMetrics should start to be collected from the start of equipage, and the sample size should be increased until there is at least a 40% equipage of the aircraft arriving/departing from an airport or operating in a sectorThis will allow comparisons to be made concerning equipage vs benefits curves that have been utilised in previous studies


Page 186

The End

94


Page 187

Background Information


Page 188

Level 1 Airline Operating Costs

Flight Efficiency

AircraftModel

DOCModel

DirectIndirectOperatingCosts

ExternalDOC

Reduction

Climb Profile (step or smooth)Inflight inefficiency 11% <400nm, 8% >400nm

Fuel Load

Block timeA/C utilisation

Other factors will also contribute to DOC reduction, assumed a reduction of 1% per annum

Route StructureCapacity ProjectionsAircraft Type (model limited to A320 & 737)

Passenger loadingEscalationLabour rates

Emissions

95


Page 189

Level 1 Current Delay Costs

TrafficCapacity

2003 to 2020

Average delay/flight

2002

Actual &EffectiveCapacity

Air & GroundDirect & ReactionaryDelay Costs

Route StructureAEA/CODA delay data

Delay/minroute

AirlineAirportCosts

Delay/minimprovement

Delay/min

PlannedCapacityIncrease

Delay/minroute

Traffic Capacity projections

Ground costs

NOTE:Passenger ATFM delay Costs are not included in caseEnroute & airport delays need to be split up and broken down into causes, e.g weather or capacity

Delay capacity increases

0.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.00

2004 2009 2014

YearsD

elay

min

utes

Baseline


Page 190

Level 1 Airborne Equipage Costs

AircraftEquipage

Rate

AircraftCosts/annum

Route & OperatorPh1, Ph2 Ph3 functionality dateNew FMS in service date

NOTE:VDL 4 implemented as used on MA-AFASAircraft equipage is limited to A320, 737, MD80The whole fleet for a particular operator is equippedThe fleet is equipped with retrofit equipmentNeed to include FMS with functionality after 2014?

VDL 4 System - Dual Fit• Retrofit or New FMS• Transceivers, Antenna, GPS Antenna• CDTI - Dual Fit

Integration, Installation and CertificationO&M TrainingProject ManagementTotal - Dual fitRetrofit Unit 448 kEuroNew Unit 354 kEuroADS ADS/CBA/001 September 2001

96


Page 191

Level 1 Surveillance Benefit

TMABenefit

Flight Efficiency

Benefit

Improvement in: horizontal flightclimb/descent profileschedule buffer time

Increased EfficiencyReduced DOC costs& emissions

% improvement in delay with ADS-B surveillance

EVSABenefit

DelayBenefit

CurrentAirlineDelayCosts

CurrentOperating

Costs

CapacityIncreased through more efficientspacing arr/dep

% flights equipped arrival/departure at airport > 40%

DelaysReduction in delay costs

CapacityMaintain capacity

peak throughput maintained

SMGCSBenefit

Reduction in maintenanceExcursionCosts

extra slots @ peak throughput times

Reduced incursionsReduced gear maintenance


Page 192


Airborne delay Airborne delay per flight% of flights delayedAverage delay per flightCauseWeather conditions

Taxi in delayTaxi out delay

Taxi – in delayTaxi - out delay% of flights delayedAverage delay per flightCauseWeather conditions

Ground delay Number, deviation and impact of theground delays imposed by the AirTraffic Control System

Delays

97


Page 193


TMA Number of aircraft accommodated interminal area

Enroute Number of aircraft accommodated persector

Surface Runway utilisation vs theoreticalcapacity

Throughput


Page 194


Crew debriefingController debriefingSafety Runway incursions, number

ofRunway excursions numberofProcedural incidentsSeparation infringementsTCAS incidents

Airspace complexity

Intangibles, Safety

98


Page 195

Users Views ATS Providers

The Future Air Traffic Management

ENAV SpA

ATM Expert Giorgio Matrella


Page 196

ATM Problems

The present ATM organisation and infrastructure have inherent limitations and will be unable to cope with the total forecast traffic increase in European airspace.Airspace users are calling for more flexible and cost-effective services.Airport congestion, already a problem at many major airports, will become a serious constraint especially at the international hub.Actions are required to produce the required additional ATM capacity, safety and efficiency.

99


Page 197

Main Areas for Change

The performance of ATM must be addressed at regional level.

Air-Ground integration will allow safety enhancements, more cost-effective services and it might also offer flexibility advantages for ATM users.

In some areas, the Surveillance system does not allow the requested capacity level, but thanks to the development of ADS-B and Satellite Navigation systems this constraint can be overcome.

Increased Collaborative Decision Making among different stakeholders.


Page 198

Operational Improvements

Concept BlocksEnhanced Airspace Management;Interoperable Flight Data Management;Air-Ground integration;Free Route; CDM (mainly at airport level).

Supporting EnablersASAS;RNAV;ADS-B;TIS-B;Datalink;GNSS;A-SMGCS.

100


Page 199

ADS/B POTENTIAL BENEFITS

BenefitsASAS Spacing seems to be the most promising application in the short term;Airport enhanced surveillance should improve safety operations;

Opening issuesSharing of responasabilitiesMixed equipage (Segregation?)Safety Cases needs to be consolidatedATCOs/Pilots involment and acceptability


Page 200

MA-AFAS Trials Results

MA-AFAS Rome flight trials showed the validity of ASAS potential benefits in delegating partial separation tasks to aircrew. Due to some technical difficulties, it was not possible to experiment all MA-AFAS Applications. Even if a limited set of them was addressed, the results showed that the use of ASAS Applicationscan improve the ATC management.Merging procedures seem to be acceptable but the workload in setting up and monitoring could be high.Consideration should be given to the resulting workload that will occur when the ASAS streams have to be mergedPass Behind efficient for the aircraft because ideally one perfect heading ensures minimum route deviation and no level change for cruising flights

101


Page 201

Concept and applications understood and accepted in the same way;Based on realistic time frame; Individual Stakeholders commitment;European co-ordination and support resulting in an agreed and formalised decision making process;ECAC Wide formal decisions;ICAO SARPs;Co-ordinated implementation within ECAC, and with neighbours;

Political Enablers for the Improvements


Page 202

Involvment of ALL stakeholders, to prepare decisions by appropriate ICAO & ECAC fora;

Sound business cases for new concept applications;

Commitment of ALL stakeholders is necessary to implement new concepts and applications.

Conclusions

102


Page 203

Pilot view

Presented by Marcel Flick,

737-800 pilot, participant flight simulator evaluation at NLR


Page 204

Personal Data

Flying 14 years on B737-200/300/400/700/800 aircraft

Flying mainly in Europe, Africaand the Middle East

Function: Captain/Instructor and Test pilot

Total flying hours 9500

103


Page 205

2 DAYS in NLR Flight Simulator

1st day: training and getting used how to use varioustools

2nd day: 10 flights of 45 minutes each


Page 206

Communication with ATC

50 % of the flights using “classic” R/T procedures

50 % flights using ATC data-link in combination witha tracker-ball device and/or CDU

104


Page 207

TARGET AIRCRAFT SELECTION

TARGET Aircraft were identifiedby CALLSIGN and by BICCA code

I Prefer by CALLSIGN, because this is the most natural environment a pilot is working in.

It would be nice to know beingadressed as TARGET, e.g. by a small indication on the ND.

A pilot always wants to know whyanother aircraft is in his area. Withthis tool he knows he is a target


Page 208

AirportAirport InfrastructureInfrastructurerequirementsrequirements

Only airports with a runway to bevacated via highspeed turnoffs

ORNo runway back tracking

required after landing

105


Page 209

Non desired maneuvres

PASS ABOVEbecause you don’t really know if your aircraft performance will allow you todo so (no performance prediction available yet) and this operation mightreduce speed into dangerous low ranges

PASS BELOWthis may lead to steep descent paths (more than 4000 feet/min)This is not acceptable when flying with passengers and cabin crew walkingfreely in the aisle. Also aircraft performance might be limiting to executethis operation (e.g. approaching max. speed while encounteringturbulence)

A pilot rather likes a lateral solution in a pass below situation, because of inaccuracy of vertical path prediction


Page 210

TMA infrastructure requirement

To avoid aircraft energy problems during descent :

No approach segment shall be steeper than 3 degrees

otherwise aircraft performance can forbid certain ASAS spacing

Consideration shall be given to assign a specific lane to category C and D aircraft ( different approach speeds)

so to avoid aircraft spacing is impossible (e.g. B747 following a slower aircraft)

106


Page 211

Instrument indicationrequirements

It is very important for pilots to have a back-up system if the automation fails.

Therefore it is required to have instrument indications with so-calledGO/NO- GO bands if ASAS fails. So pilots should have a simplefeedback to avoid any dangerous situation.

In modern glass cockpits it is commonly known that when somethingfails, there are often many indications failing simultaneously.

To have a redundant system, electrical bus architecture may have tobe reviewed on certain aircraft types


Page 212

GO / NO-GO BANDS

107


Page 213

R/T workload

R/T workload was sometimes high. There is a need to furthersimplify phraseology of ASAS procedures.

Please use the most simple words to identify an unique operation


Page 214

Symbology used on NAV Display (ND)

All traffic symbols and color convention on the ND was wellchoosen and balanced.

There is an absolute requirement to have GO/NO-GO bands !if, in a critical maneuvre essential information fails to exist, a pilot

must always know where to go, to avoid a real conflict. This systemalso ensures a pilot always stays in the loop of man-machineinterface.

108


Page 215

ATC DatalinkSometimes it was hard to read and instantaneously understand the

ATC clearance. A pilot first has to “translate” written text into anoperational 3D-environment.

HDG 340 THEN MERGE TO DENUT TO BE 90 SECS BEHIND AFR3406

This can take some time, especially when occupied with other tasks.

When using R/T, a pilot uses his ears for receiving the ATC clearance, and still can use his eyes where ever he wants to look at.

When using a datalink message, he does not use his ears, and hiseyes are now only focussed at the message on the ND.

So pilot’s eye scanning is less efficient with a datalink system thanusing R/T.


Page 216

AUTOMATIC FOLLOW MODE

In Order to stay behind target aircraft ( 90 secs or 8 NM ) we usedeither manual speed control through the autoflight system

ORan automatic “follow” mode

The automatic “follow” mode is a nice feature, however:

It can command dangerously low speeds, while pilot is not aware he must extendflaps/slats.If target aircraft accelerates, you then have to retract flaps/slats to stay in the flap speed-schedule, which is not trained with airline pilots and might upset other aircraftsystems due to non logic event sequence (e.g. engine idle RPM / wing anti-ice logic)fuel economy was sometimes jeopardized during the flights.

109


Page 217

QUESTIONS YET NOT ANSWERED…

What if target aircraft is notadhering to standard routes? (e.g. circumnavigatingThunderstorms/weather)

What if target aircraft transponder fails?

What if target aircraft is flyingabnormal maneuvre. (enginefailure)

I would suggest if this condition happens, the target aircraft can deselect itself as being target, e.g. withthe switch TA ONLY on the TCAS panel. This is already a common procedure when flying N-1 orother performance degrading operations.


Page 218

Conclusions

Not all airports and/or TMA’s are suitable for MA-AFAS opsrunway infrastructure and surrounding terrain are the most restricting factors.More research is required to study pilot workload.Especially pilot fatigue is a major factor after a duty of 12-16 hoursthere will be an increase in possible mistakes.During descent there are several pilot tasks, resulting in temporary not looking at the PFD/ND. (e.g. dealing with cabin matters/consulting manuals etc.)DATA link is less efficient as a main communication method, and should be used in conjunction with R/T procedures.The auto-follow mode is nice, but should be further developed in conjunction with other flightmanagement and flightcontrol systemsMore study is required for assigning a name for a certainprocedure, to keep it as simple and short as possible

110


Page 219

MAMA--AFASAFASfor easyJet as a user

presented bygraeme clark - strategic projects manager, easyJet

25 June 2003


Page 220

low-cost

domestic

regional

charter

international

traditionalscheduled

Passengers 365m 435m 600m

2%

7%

15%

23% 21% 19%

33%32%

30%

17% 17%16%

25%23%

20%

delivering airline growth in Europe...

1998 2001 2007

Source: McKinsey Quarterly, 2002, UK-CAA, ERA, Airline Business, AEA,

111


Page 221

the low cost impact - scheduled intra-European traffic 2002…

-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Lufthansa BritishAirways

SAS Iberia Air France Alitalia easyJet Ryanair

Pass

enge

r Mill

ions

Source: Respective published accounts and reports: Geographical distribution of domestic and European scheduled passenger traffic except for Iberia which reports traffic short and medium haul.


Page 222

-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Lufthansa BritishAirways

Ryanair easyJet SAS Iberia Air France Alitalia

Pass

enge

r Mill

ions

Source: Respective published accounts and reports: Geographical distribution of domestic and European scheduled passenger traffic except for Iberia which reports traffic short and medium haul.

the low cost impact - scheduled intra-European traffic 2003…

112


Page 223

current plan is too little, too late e.g. en-route…

En-route capacity versus demand

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Year

Incr

ease

in d

eman

d/ca

paci

ty

Demand Dev. of current concept (late) Dev. of current concept (early)

En-route capacity versus demand

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Year

Incr

ease

in d

eman

d/ca

paci

ty

Demand Progresive delegation to pilot (late) Progresive delegation to pilot (early)

Source: EU DG TREN ‘Datalink Roadmap’ Application Assesment P1672020v2.0 30Oct2002


Page 224

our European responsibility…

to make a STEP CHANGESTEP CHANGE in the implementation of a 21st century air traffic system through:

leadership – deliver SES objectives by 2008(STAR 21 report has this spirit)

effective application of fundsby joining up the various EU programmes e.g TEN-T/MIP, FP6, environment etc

compelling value proposition ensuring operational implementation by airlines & general aviation

result is a significant start in the delivery of the aviation system we need…

113


Page 225

practical world approach…

research to feasible level – (‘done’)operational large-scale trials

create operationally based database for validationnon-critical applications e.g AOC, ADS-B/tracking, D-ATIS, PDC etc as incentive, introduce CDTIATM applications asap eg DAP, CAP, ADS-B in & out

complete technical standards – (‘advanced’)(only ARINC to come; in process)

rewrite operational proceduresnot overly significant; MA-AFAS shows that

progressive addition of high benefit ATM applicationsi.e. not same order as ASAS package 1


Page 226

Simplify dual links…

No technical case exists for dual technology linksI.e. (ADS-B can replace these two… = simplification = lower cost!)i.e a short term solution for a long term need…

general aviation ‘ignored’ as usual e.g. neither ADS-B via Mode S or UAT (in Europe) a real option

but on this issue, like maritime safety, ‘all’ users must be included in order to meet our ‘duty of care’…

114


Page 227

Enabler comparison…Service Type Application VDL4 VDL2 1090 ES Mode S

ATN Compliance YES YES no noPriority management YES no no noQuality of Service Multiple Profiles YES no no noData Capacity Effective Data Rate - Enroute 14000 2800 NA NAData Capacity Effective Data Rate - TMA 14000 3454 NA NAData Capacity Effective Data Rate - Terminal 14000 9734 NA NAVoice AOC, ATM, CPDLC confirmation (initially) YES no no noData-AOC & ATM Air to Air i.e."network in sky" -

increases overall network capacity... YES no no no

Data-AOC Messages YES YES no noData-AOC Aircraft/Asset Tracking YES no no noData-ATM CPDLC YES YES no noData-ATM D-ATIS YES YES no noData-ATM TIS-B YES no no noData-ATM FIS-B D-OTIS ATIS YES no no noData-ATM FIS-B D-OTIS METAR YES no no noData-ATM FIS-B D-OTIS SIGMET YES no no noData-ATM FIS-B D-RVR YES no no noData-ATM INFO-B YES no no no

Navigation Data-ATM GRAS YES no no noAir to Ground ADS-Broadcast YES no YES YESAir to Air ADS-Broadcast YES no YES noGround to Air ADS-Contract YES YES no noAir to Air ASAS - ATSAW YES no YES noAir to Air ASAS - EnRoute Following YES no YES noAir to Air ASAS - EnRoute Crossing YES no no noAir to Air ASAS - EnRoute Passing YES no no noAir to Air ASAS - Approach Sequencing & Merging YES no no noGround to Ground A-SMGS YES no no noSpoofing Prevent YES no no noEncryption YES YES no no

General

Communication

Surveillence

Security


Page 228

Effective way forward…

Accelerate SEAP within FP6 C-ATMSEAP = Large Scale South European ADS Pre-Implementation Programme

optimised flight supply chain; collaborative decision makingSEAP; serious ASAS

SEAP is the most significant mechanism to deliver operational capacity, flight efficiency and safety we have at hand… maximum European effortmaximum European effort i.e. political, financial & industrial, i.e. political, financial & industrial, must be applied to translate the R & D investment into must be applied to translate the R & D investment into operational realityoperational reality………by 2008 – no excuses!

115


Page 229

Summary

MA-AFAS shows maximum benefit ASAS applications are extremely feasibleThe ‘MA-AFAS aircraft’ will only deliver serious value with:

ADS-B in & outCockpit Display of Traffic Information

political, financial & regulatory leadership essential if aviation is to deliver needed capacity, flight efficency & safety in Europeairlines will lead industry change when shown the value proposition to their business

…note: supply chain = customer=> airline=> airport=> ansp=> regulator…


Page 230

End thoughts…

ATN system of the future must be driven by aircraft-derived parameters… ANSP’s will then undergo a quantum shift in safe, productive, cost efficient delivery to benefit of all…

quality assured ADS-B messages are the key

after 100 years of powered flight, achieved by the best engineers, applying immeasurable expenditure, aircraft, i.e. pilots cannot ‘see’ each other’…

we NEED ‘electronic VFR’!

116


Page 231

Way Forward

Presented By BAES / ETG / SKYSOFT


Page 232

Future Themes

At the end of the programme three main themes coming to prominence:

ASAS/CDTI

Taxi Management

AOC/CDM

117


Page 233

ASAS/CDTI

Mark Walden BAE SYSTEMS


Page 234

Overview

Current StatusMA-AFAS mapping to ASAS Package 1.The ProblemThe SolutionStandards and ProceduresNext steps

118


Page 235

MA-AFAS Avionics Package : Trials airborne functions

4D FMSEnhanced Manoeuvres

Airborne DisplaysLateral, Profile,

CDTI

Taxi DisplaysMap, CDTI,

Taxi Route, Alerts

CommunicationsAOC Datalink, ATC Datalink,

Broadcast Services

CMU


Page 236

ATC Surveillance for en-route airspace (ADS-B-ACC)ADS-B received and displayed at both trials

ATC Surveillance in terminal areas (ADS-B-TMA)ADS-B received and displayed at both trials

ATC Surveillance in non-radar areas (ADS-B-NRA)Solution available but not exercised in non-radar areas.

Airport surface surveillance (ADS-B-APT)ADS-B report displayed on SMGCS System at Braunschweig

Aircraft derived data for ground tools (ADS-B-ADD)No current ground tools available

MA-AFAS and ASAS Package 1 Ground Applications

119


Page 237

Enhanced traffic situational awareness on the airport surface (ATSA-SURF)Exercised at Braunschweig

Enhanced traffic situational awareness in flight operations (ATSA - AIRB)CDTI exercised at Rome

Enhanced visual acquisition for see and avoid (ATSA - S&A)CDTI exercised at Rome

Enhanced successive visual approaches (ATSA - SVA)Capability available not exercised during trials.

Enhanced sequencing and merging operations (ATSA - S&M)Exercised at both trial sites.

In-trail procedure in oceanic airspace (ATSA - ITP)Capability not exercised during trials.

Enhanced crossing and passing operations (ATSA - C&P)Exercised at both trial sites.

MA-AFAS and ASAS Package 1 Airborne Applications


Page 238

SBAS (b)

MA-AFAS Avionics Package :Prototype Trials System Summary

MA-AFASFMS

SBAS (a)

GBAS

MA-AFASCMU

VDL4Transponder

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

Autopilot

(GPS)

ADC

IRS

Trials SupportPC

Intercom(Aural Warnings)

DisplayControlPanel 1-11

onlyATTAS

only Both

120


Page 239

Future Considerations

Solution needs to be near term.

Provide Financial Benefit to End Users

Allow for Rapid Implementation i.e Minimum Infrastructure Updates

Plan for a phased introduction

Initial implementation must enable future upgrades.


Page 240

Solution

Start with

Enhanced instruction set for controllersCrossing and Passing,

Sequencing and Merging.

Successive Visual Approach

Using ADS-B (In/Out),

CDTI

Manoeuvre Generator Function

Minimal (potentially zero) Upgrades to the Ground Infrastructure

New Procedures and Training for Pilots and Controllers

121


Page 241

ASAS/CDTIManoeuvre Generator System

ASAS Minimal RequirementsR/T comms for instructions.Aircraft State Vector Target A/C Data (ADS-B)Intent Data ?

BenefitsReduced workload on ControllersIncreased Situational Awareness for pilot. More optimum use of airspace.New instruction no change of responsibility.

DeficitsAutopilot control resulting in increased workload for pilot. ?


Page 242

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

FMSFMS

MA-AFAS Avionics Concepts: Initial Retrofit Option : R/T Only

FMS

GNSS

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

Autopilot

ADC

IRS

Warning System

PFDPFD

Existing New

GuidanceDisplay

ADS-B( IN/OUT)Transponder

?TCAS/ACAS

Provides Enhanced Manoeuvres in Support of ASAS package 1

ManoeuvreGenerator

DisplayControlPanel

122


Page 243

ASAS/CDTIStep 2 : Datalink System

Provides instructions via CPDLC messages

ASAS instructions up-linked to Manoeuvre Function and displayed to pilot.Further reduction in workload for operator.Increased bandwidth for communications.Reliable Communications Adaptation of system to support AOC for commercial benefit.

No changeManoeuvres remain unchanged.Pilot still uses Autopilot to fly aircraft


Page 244

CMUCMU

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

FMSFMS

MA-AFAS Avionics Concepts: Initial Retrofit Option 2: Integrated Datalink

FMS

GNSS

NavDisplay

CursorControlDevice

MCDU

Autopilot

ADC

IRS

Warning System

DisplayControlPanel

PFDPFD

Comms &GuidanceDisplay

DatalinkRadio

ADS-B( IN/OUT)Transponder

?

?

TCAS/ACAS

Existing New

Provides most MA-AFAS capability:Datalink, Partial Delegation, Taxi

ManoeuvreGenerator

123


Page 245

ASAS/CDTIRetrofit Issues

Number of different configurations.Access to the displays.Wiring UpdatesCertification

ApproachEmbedded systems within other boxes with necessary interfaces.


Page 246

MA-AFAS ASAS/CDTI Evolution

Goals for commercial developmentSuitability for retrofitRe-use of installed equipment

Displays, FMS, DatalinkFlexibility in upgrade options

Datalink instruction or R/T onlyControl capability

– manoeuvre guidance for autopilot – Integrated FMS-Autopilot

NOW:Manual

Package 1+ ASAS

NOW:Manual

Package 1+ ASAS 2010+:

ASAS capable FMS2010+:

ASAS capable FMS

124


Page 247

ASAS StandardsThe Process

Eurocontrol has adopted methodology that will be used for the work towards implementation of Package I AS/GS applications

Based on EUROCAE ED78A/RTCA DO-264


Page 248

Interdependencies of Deliverables

Master Plan/ECIP

Development

ValidationApproval

GSA/ASAPkg I Def

OperationalRequirements

ATM2000+

EATMP OIs CONOPS

GSA/ASAMASPS

FunctionalSystemArch

Sub-SystemSpec’s

ADS-B/etcMASPS

DatalinkMOPS

Gnd SystemStandards

OSED

SPR INTEROP

Business Case

ValidationEnvironment

InternationalStd’s/GM

125


Page 249

Work has started on the PlanProgress is slow and under funded.RTCA/FAA have a more “pragmatic” approach leading to ASA MASPS

not requiring OSEDSLess functionality than package 1 (surveillance and SVA only)

US aircraft are already being equipped

Europe and US are intending to co-ordinate for ASA MASPS, but will not result in a common document

Standards activity likely to delay European deployment and Trans-Atlantic Interoperability is at risk.

Requirements Focus Group (RFG)Is attempting to co-ordinate and accelerate but is it quick enough?

The Challenge


Page 250

Next Step

Large scale Validation Trials

Validation of draft standards and procedures.Incentive for Airline Equipage of ASAS/CDTI.Real Data for Cost Benefit CaseAccelerates moves for Package 2 and Package 3.

126


Page 251

Way Forward

Presented byMirsad Delic

EuroTelematik AGMA-AFAS Taxi Management Theme Leader


Page 252

Taxi ManagementUseable Outcomes

New airport map database type according to ED-99Map Display and Ground CDTI in several modes and rangesSurveillance Functionality : Runway Alert & Runway IncursionDisplay of taxiroute and clearancesDisplay of CPDLC messages in textual formSeveral manual & automatic declutter functions & algorithmsSet of taxi related CPDLC messagesDocument describing HMIIncrease of taxi related knowledge (gained e. g. in 3FMS)

127


Page 253

Taxi ManagementRetrofit Solutions

Integration of additional display in cockpit, if not already availableTaxi Management Module as Software Update or …… as autonomous component of FMSIntegration of on board hardware providing necessary airport map databases, i. e. data loader (e. g. map on CD ROM)


Page 254

Taxi ManagementInfrastructure Requirements

Planing tool for the generation of taxi routes, i. e. TaxiToolInfrastructure for creation and uplink of CPDLC messagesIf surveillance functions are already available on airport : connection to Taxi Module necessaryAll ground vehicles should be equipped with a transponder, tooLink of Taxi Module with an A-SMGCS in order to achieve an Integrated Taxi Management SystemHardware providing up-to-date airport map database (e. g. maps on CD ROM)

128


Page 255

Taxi ManagementStandards

Airport Map Standards in ED-99; document may be advanced especially concerning database format, accuracy of data, etc.Current CPDLC standards (e. g. ATN SARPS) do not contain Taxi related messagesHMI relevant standards neededLack of standards concerning display of taxiroutes & clearancesStandards concerning Taxi Management itself needed


Page 256

Taxi ManagementFuture Programmes

EMMA I + IIDuration : 24 months each part, expected from 2003 - 2007Project in proposal phase at EC, in Framework 6Integrated project with emphasis on future integration ofrespective functions in Airbus cockpit, “successor” of BETAMajor partners : BAE Systems, Thales Avionics, Airbus, etc.

GANDuration : up to 96 months, expected from 2003 – 2012Long term project, initiated and lead by Eurocontrol with emphasison the estimation of the operational requirements, validation, implementation, etc. of an A-SMGCS

129


Page 257

Taxi ManagementConclusions

Increase of situational awareness on boardReduce of workload of ATC and on board crewPerformance of efficient warnings on board (... and ATC)Easy handling and operating of the systemEasy updates of airport mapsLess oral communication between ATC and crew leads to less misunderstandings

Remarkable increase of safety and decrease of workload on airports


Page 258

Achievements and Way Forward

AOC / CDM

Presented By José Neves

SKYSOFT PORTUGAL

130


Page 259

AOC Aims

• AOC added as new Theme to • provide commercial incentive for communications upgrade• evaluate alternatives to capacity limited ACARS

• Objectives of the Theme were to• Support existing AOC air - ground messaging• Improve airlines fleet management • Demonstrate integration of AOC into the flight management process• Explore Collaborative Decision Making (CDM)

Using new air/ground communications medium


Page 260

AOCIssues

• AOC data to be exchanged Vs Airlines objectives• Inputs from Airlines Operations and Pilots

• No existing ground platform• MA-AFAS specific development: AGP – AOC Ground Platform• Support all AOC airborne functions

• Ground-Ground Communications• No “real” external data sources / sinks available• Simulated interfaces

• CDM Applications• Lack of standardisation• MA-AFAS specific In-Flight Traffic Management

• Implementation issues• Message Encoding - extent of ACARS compatibility

131


Page 261

AOCImplemented Functions

• Flight Planning

• Maintenance

• CDM

• Asset Management

• Communications

Usable Outcomes


Page 262

AOCFlight Planning

• Pre-flight operation support• Departure Slot Information• Uplink of Loadsheet and Company Flight Plan data

• Support to accurate and up-to-date aircraft weather(meteo data uplink)

• FMS meteorological information• Used for the generation of 4D trajectories

• TAF, METAR, SIGMET Reports

132


Page 263

AOCMaintenance & Assets

• Support to a more efficient maintenance operations• SNAG Reports• ACMS Data: Contract based Engine status and APU reports

• Assets:• In-Flight Support: Free Text• Aircraft Movements: OOOI Events• Flight Progress Report

– Aircraft Progress Reports – 4D Trajectory Request

• Downlink of Aircraft Meteorological Reports– AMDAR format


Page 264

AOCCDM

• Baseline: EEC Potential Applications of Collaborative Planning and Decision Making Final Report

• In-flight replanning of 4D trajectory, in negotiation with ATC

• MA-AFAS Procedure:

1. Uplink of new trajectory constraints from Ground AOC (AGP) to the Aircraft

2. Aircraft – ATC negotiation

3. Downlink to the Ground AOC of the negotiation result

IFTM: In-Flight Traffic Management

133


Page 265

AOCUsable Outcomes

• Efficient Aircraft / Airline Ground Service communications system at all time throughout a flight

• Aircraft pilot access to up-to-date information from the groundMCDUFMU

• Ground staff access to airline fleet up-to-date information

• Airline ground processing system – AGPGround message managementFlight Progress and Weather Information DisplayMaintenance Management and Post Flight Consoles

Flight operations performed more efficiently


Page 266

AGPFlight Progress Display

Messages

WindsWindsDisplay of FIRsDisplay of FIRs

134


Page 267

AGPPost Flight Console

Messages ExchangedMessages Exchanged

Message ContentMessage Content

FUEL


Page 268

AGPMaintenance Display

Detailed

Information

per Flight

Detailed

Information

per Flight

Engine Data

135


Page 269

FleetSimulator

AOC / AGPArchitecture

AGP

Station

Air Ground

CFMUWeather

Office

FMU Unit- FMS

- AOC...

ACMSMCDUPrinter

VHF

RadioCMU

Ground

Network

IHTP

Avionics Rig


Page 270

AOC / CDMInfrastructure Requirements

• Reliable communication infrastructure between the AOC Ground Platform and:

Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU)Air Traffic Control (ATC)Weather CentresAeronautical Information ServiceAirport Authority

• VHF Subnetwork availabilityMA-AFAS: VDL Mode 4

• ATN based Air / Ground infrastructureGACS Usage

136


Page 271

AOC / CDMFuture Programmes

• Alignment or involvement with future FW6 projectsUncertain situation

• EUROCONTROL CDM Activities

• Skysoft involvement in SDLS II AOC concept used within the ESA SDLS phase II Programme


Page 272

AOC / CDMConclusions (1)

• Due to ACARS limitations there will be a natural migration path from ACARS to ATN

ATN infrastructure will permit the sharing of network resources for data exchange among airline and ATC applications

• AOC likely to be implemented more and more in airlinesCost / Benefit performance is a critical issue

• Cost on required infrastructure is a drawback• Cost / Benefit sharing is the solution

• CDM is a complex process and is important to have:Information sharing among different stakeholdersInfrastructures in place

• New technologies will bring new capabilities and responsibilities for pilots and airlines

An incremental approach should be used

137


Page 273

AOC / CDMConclusions (2)

• Stage 1 - Airline applicationsBilingual aircrafts

• Support both ACARS and AOC using VHF Communications• Minimal infrastructure changes

AOC over ATN without ATC applicationsImproved Airlines Operations Management

• Stage 2 – Cockpit applications Changes on airline proceduresGlobal availability (SATCOM based on oceanic regions)AOC over ATN with ATC applicationsReduced workload to pilots and ground staff

• Stage 3 – AOC / CDMFull solution with inclusion of CDMChanges on current ATM proceduresReduced Pilot / Controller workload


Page 274

Thank You

138


Page 275

Final Summary

BAE SYSTEMS


Page 276

Outstanding issues

Cost/benefitProcedures/Instruction terminology HMI improvementsTraining Air /GroundRoute to market (FMS and Manoeuvre Generator)Early implementation approachInvestigation of vertical manoeuvres esp. in descentCommunications issues - Datalink selection (ADS-B/PTP)Certification

Large Scale Validation

139


Page 277

Achievements

ASAS manoeuvres involving two aircraft on same flight level -WORLD FIRSTASAS implemented in automatic (FMS-AP) and manual (AP) modesATN over VDL4 - WORLD FIRSTTaxi map/database conform to ED-99Harmonised communications infrastructureImplemented ATN air and ground CPDLC end systemsUser interface for CPDLC Tower ControllerIntegration of operational air and ground AOC end systemsAll significant goals in Tech Annex/Contract, in time and in budgetCompatible with current operations - no major changes to procedures?

Accepted by aircrew and controllers


Page 278

Ladies and Gentlemen!

W e are almost at the end of the User Forum, however, you are required to still endure theChairman’s closing summary, so bear with me a few moments longer.

During the last two days we have heard about the history and achievements of the M A-AFAS program and we were reminded that the program has produced a number of worldfirsts, of these most significantly, two aircraft on the same level separating themselves,executing a series of elegant maneuvers.

I really hope that if someone decides to write the history of European air trafficmanagement, he or she will give at least a long paragraph to M A-AFAS with a few nicepictures, hopefully including also one of the trusty BAC 111 that went into retirementafter completing its important role in the program.

For there can be little doubt that M A-AFAS was writing ATM history!

Another thing that struck me throughout the presentations was the fact that it all felt so…right! Yes, it felt right, because talking about bringing more information to the cockpit,enabling it to move from being mostly blind to it surrounding to a state where it canavoid other aircraft all on its own, is the right thing, is the right direction. W ith possiblytaking the best elements from other concepts too, we appear to be well positioned to setright some of the ATM characteristics that have grown up not because they are so good,but because there was nothing else. Until now, that is…

140


Page 279

W e have heard all about the achievem ents but what we have not heard a single wordabout are the showstoppers. And that is just as well, for we have all been hoping thatthere would be none. And indeed, nothing in the course of the program has popped upthat would have invalidated the initial belief that this will work. W hile we all agree thatthere is a need to im prove and fine tune the concept and its im plem entation, neither theair traffic controllers, nor the pilots who have participated in the trials have foundanything that would have led them to reject this new way of m anaging traffic.

Finally, but no less im portantly, the M A-A FAS program has shown the world what canbe achieved if an enthusiastic professional team, that is ready to think out of the box andto explore new boundaries is given a real opportunity to do just that: they m ade intoreality what a lot of others have rejected as impractical.

W ith this I w ish you a pleasant and safe trip hom e, hopefully m any of you will be flying(please do, w e do need the revenue… ) and while you are relaxing on board, do look outthe window at the big blue sky and consider how m any m ore aircraft we will be able tosafely put in there once tools like those from M A-AFAS are im plemented.

Thank you for your support and participation.

Steve ZerkowitzM A-AFAS 3rd User Forum Chairm an.

MA-AFAS USER FORUM 3 · Steve Zerkowitz MA-AFAS 3rd User Forum Chairman. 4 24th-25th June 2003 User...

Documents

Transcript of MA-AFAS USER FORUM 3 · Steve Zerkowitz MA-AFAS 3rd User Forum Chairman. 4 24th-25th June 2003 User...