210 likes | 229 Views
ASSTAR Airborne Separation Applications. Craig Foster. Contents. Describe ASSTAR Applications Concept Environment Commonalities Between Applications Use of Datalink An Operational (ANSP) Viewpoint. Operational Concept. Airborne Separation Applications
E N D
ASSTAR Airborne Separation Applications CraigFoster
Contents • Describe ASSTAR Applications • Concept • Environment • Commonalities Between Applications • Use of Datalink • An Operational (ANSP) Viewpoint
Operational Concept • Airborne Separation Applications • Controller delegates separation responsibility and transfers separation tasks to the flight crew • Flight crew ensure applicable airborne separation minima are met • Responsibility limited to separation from a designated aircraft • Separation provision still the controller’s responsibility • Self-Separation Applications • Require flight crews to separate their flight from all surrounding traffic
Applications by Responsibility • Separation Applications • Crossing & Passing (ASEP-C&P) • In Trail Follow (ASEP-ITF) • In Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP) • Self-Separation Applications • Free Flight Track (SSEP-FFT) • New Application from Glasgow ASAS-TN Workshop • In Trail Merge (ASEP-ITM) Radar Airspace Oceanic Airspace
Oceanic Environment • No VHF Radio or radar cover over most of the North Atlantic Region (NAT) • Voice communications provided by High Frequency (HF) Radio • HF subject to weather effects • Audibility can be limited • Sometimes impossible • So ATC issues strategic clearances • Issued prior to entering Oceanic FIR • Extend from Oceanic Control Area (OCA) entry to landfall • Long-term conflict prediction used to ensure no separation loss over whole route
15 mins 10 mins 60 miles 1000 ft Oceanic Separations • Separation standards governed by various uncertainties: • Communication unreliability • Navigational accuracy • Accuracy of forward estimates (driven by weather forecasts) . . . so separation standards are very large
> 10 mins > 10 mins FL360 ATSA-ITPCriteria 5 mins FL350 ASEP-ITP (In Trail Procedure) • Aircraft at FL340 would like to climb ….. • But standard longitudinal separation does not exist at level above • Crew request an ITP Climb FL340
ITF 5 mins ASEP-ITF (In-Trail Follow) • 5 minutes : No standard longitudinal separation • Airborne Separation Established: In-Trail Follow • Climb Approved, Maintaining In-Trail Airborne Separation • In-Trail Separation maintained over extended period • Second climb approved –Maintaining ITF Separation • In-Trail Follow cancelled • Exit Oceanic Airspace FL360 FL350 FL340
SSEP-FFT • FFT is an OTS track reserved for ASAS-capable aircraft • Aircraft on the track can change speed and level at their own discretion . . . but no lateral flexibility allowed • Aircraft requires downstream clearance to re-enter managed airspace
15 minutes ITM 4 minutes ASEP-ITM (In Trail Merge) • New WP-8 to investigate • Opportunities • Procedures
Application Commonalities • Equipment • ADS-B IN • CDTI functionality • Require High ADS-B Out equipage • Common phases of application • ATC • Institutional issues for delegation • Transition issues - from today to tomorrow • Interface with managed airspace
Use of Datalink • Assumed that this is post-Package 1 and that ADS-B IN (and data link) would be available. • All ASSTAR applications designed to use both HF voice communications and datalink… • … but we wouldn’t want to use HF • Only consider these applications in a datalink environment
Operational Perspective - NATS • Potential environmental and cost benefits to our customers • NATS needs to understand the implications of implementing • Capacity effects of FFT • Control of adjacent tracks • Management of traffic at the domestic interface • Regulatory issues • Need for harmonised approach with adjacent ANSPs • Exploring other complementary options • Improved Vertical Profiling (IVP)
Thank you for listening craig.foster@nats.co.uk
Operational Perspective - DSNA • DSNA intentions in ASSTAR: • Opportunity to re-activate and extend visual separation clearance used in the past. • New sharing of tasks between air and ground should have a positive impact on ATCO workload • Capacity effects of C&P for the ATCO • Flight efficiency of C&P