1 / 38

Trajectory Based Operations 2011 Seattle Flight Trials

Trajectory Based Operations 2011 Seattle Flight Trials. October 10 th , 2012. Chris Wynnyk Mitch Wynnyk. Approved for public release: distribution unlimited Case Number: 12-4272 Date: 10/8/2012

ona
Download Presentation

Trajectory Based Operations 2011 Seattle Flight Trials

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Trajectory Based Operations2011 Seattle Flight Trials October 10th, 2012 Chris Wynnyk Mitch Wynnyk

  2. Approved for public release: distribution unlimited Case Number: 12-4272 Date: 10/8/2012 The contents of this material reflect the views of the author and/or the Director of the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development. Neither the Federal Aviation Administration nor the Department of Transportation makes any warranty or guarantee, or promise, expressed or implied, concerning the content or accuracy of the views expressed herein.

  3. Outline Background Air/Ground Trajectory Analysis & Results Discussion

  4. BACKGROUND

  5. 4D Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) Concept Apply RTA and FMS downlink data to time-based metering concepts Research Operational data analysis (TMA, FMS downlinks) Large scale parametric studies (Spacing / RTA factors) Human in the Loop Simulations (HITL) Seattle Flight Trials (2010, 2011) Objectives Evaluate viability for Mid-term implementation (2015 - 2018) Inform on standards development

  6. 2011 Seattle Flight Trials Overview Large-scale use of RTA for meeting meter fix times into Seattle- Tacoma International Airport (KSEA) Nov 30th, 2011 – Dec 22nd, 2011 833 Flights assigned an RTA 3 metering fixes (OLM, RADDY, JAKSN), North and South flow Automated data transfer and data collection Objectives Increase RTA acceptance + success rate Assess viability of RTA as a near-term leave behind operation Automate information exchange Increase exposure to RTA concepts/procedures Assess FMS downlink data use for ATC

  7. 1. RTA Planning/Calculation: • TMA ground system calculates STA • Aircraft downlinks detailed flight plan • Winds and performance limits uplinked PLANNING HORIZON (Typically > 200 nm) FREEZE HORIZON • 2. RTA Assignment: • Sector A/B controller assigns the STA as an RTA to the aircraft at the merge fix • The pilot accepts RTA clearance verbally • Crew enter the RTA into the FMS and the aircraft adjusts the speed schedule to meet the RTA. (Typically 150 - 200 nm) Sector A • 3. RTA Monitoring: • ATC Monitors the aircraft to assure that it will meet the RTA using: • Host/ERAM Controller tools • TMA information • Takes action if aircraft does not appear to be able to meet the RTA Sector B 1 TRACON Sector C TOD Region 2 METER FIX 3 Arrival Runway

  8. 2011 Seattle Flight Trials 27 (3%) Assigned, Unable Immediately Assigned, Accepted, Achieved 514 (62%) 79 (9%) Assigned, Accepted, Unachievable 132 (16%) Assigned, Accepted, Cancelled 81 (10%) Assigned, Accepted, Achieved Outside Tolerance Total: 833 Flights

  9. Crossing Times μ = 8.99 sec Accuracy Out of the 595 total aircraft that completed RTAs: 86.4% met +/- 20 sec tolerance 96.6% met +/-30 sec tolerance σ = 11.36 sec

  10. 2011 Seattle Flight Trials Conclusions Meet time accuracy is very good for aircraft that fully execute the RTA Many factors beyond accuracy affect the operational viability Ops concept requires additional automation and ground support tools Next Steps Further develop and mature the operating concept Inform on standards development: RTCA SC-227: Updates to the MASPS / MOPS – RTA requirements RTCA SC-214: Data Communications – RTA and trajectory-related message sets

  11. AIR / GROUNDTRAJECTORY

  12. 2011 Flight Trials: Information Exchange Objectives Share information between air and ground systems: Synchronize air-ground trajectory models Enable more successful RTA assignments Enable more successful RTA completions Provide RTA monitoring support tool: “Intent Display” Extensive data collection for post-trials analysis Strategy Provide aircraft with up-to-date wind forecasts and performance limits, downlink trajectory and RTA information, and display for TMU

  13. Information Exchange FMS initiates exchange at 70 min from KSEA. Aircraft downlinks detailed trajectory: Winds Course Fuel remaining Waypoint Name Lat / Long, ETA KIAS, Mach, TAS 1 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  14. Information Exchange • ASA AOC uplinks to aircraft: • Customized performance limits (max/min speed, altitude) • Cruise and descent winds based on FMS planned trajectory • Temporary RTA assignment 2 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  15. Information Exchange Aircraft FMS downlinks RTA Window (earliest and latest possible arrival times) at the meter fix, given the wind forecast, performance limits, and airspace constraints 3 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  16. Information Exchange • FMS downlinks are processed in real-time at MITRE and information is shared with TMU on a web-based display, including: • Estimated Times of Arrival (ETAs) • RTAs • Wind and Aircraft Performance Limit confirmation 4 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  17. Information Exchange TMA Intent Display at TMU TMC verifies that the STA is within RTA window, communicates time to area supervisor, then Controller issues this time to the pilot via voice as an RTA. Source: NASA 5 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  18. Information Exchange Flight crew enters the RTA. Source: GE Aviation 6 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  19. Information Exchange • Controller monitors aircraft • RTA entered in 4th line data block • Each Trial segment lasts 25-70 minutes 7 4 6 3 2 1 5 7

  20. Information Exchange Limitations Info not sent directly to TMA system (aircraft weight, fuel, realtime winds, etc) Aircraft trajectory downlinks dependent on FMS workload RTA window not available for downlink unless RTA is being executed Manual coordination process: • TMC visually compares to see if STA is within the RTA window Adaptations Configuration changes needed for flight trials: • Updates to FMS firmware (triggers to send custom messages) • Ground software (wind service, intent display, message routing) Technical workarounds: • Temporary RTA entered to get RTA window • Performance limits adjusted to meet speed/altitude constraints • Communication of RTAs from TMC to controllers was manual

  21. Analysis & Results

  22. Analysis Data (833 flights) RTA Outcome (AAA, AAT, AAC, AAU, AUI,) FMS ETA for meter fix FMS RTA window TMA ETA for meter fix ATA – Actual Time of Arrival Topics What factors influence RTA window size? How do TMA ETA’s compare to FMS ETA’s? Do wind uplinks improve the air-ground trajectory synchronization? Are TMA ETA’s accurate enough for RTA assignment?

  23. RTA Window • The soonest and latest the aircraft could cross the meter fix • Estimated by many RTA-equipped Flight Management Systems

  24. Influences on RTA Window Size • Cruise Flight Level

  25. Influences on RTA Window Size • Cruise Flight Level • Aircraft Series

  26. ETA Predictions at Planning Horizon Direct comparison of ETA predictions at Planning Horizon (45-50 minutes from Meter Fix) Wind update for FMS greatly improves synchronization of FMS and TMA ETAs

  27. Capture of TMA ETA in RTA Window TMA ETA falls within the RTA window 79% of the time overall

  28. Outcome vs. Placement in RTA Window

  29. Outcome vs. Placement in RTA Window * % AAA does not include AAC

  30. Using TMA ETA to Assign RTA Subset of flights: RTA time was assigned using only TMA ETA for reference, no FMS information Most fell within the next-available window

  31. Using TMA ETA to Assign RTA Subset of flights: RTA time was assigned using only TMA ETA for reference, no FMS information Most fell within the next-available window * % AAA does not include AAC

  32. Conclusions Findings RTA window size is strongly dependent on aircraft type and cruise altitude Wind uplinks significantly improve air-ground trajectory synchronization TMA ETA falls within the RTA window 79% of the time Controllers uncomfortable not knowing RTA speed profiles Discussion Downlink may need to include RTA windows, speed profiles, coordinate on wind information Additional standards for winds handling(blending, representation)

  33. Backup Slides

  34. ` Wind Service 3 NFDC Database 1 2 Wind Service Aircraft FMS ACARS Service 7 5 4 6 ASA AOC RUC Wind

  35. ` FMS Winds A B C Top of Descent FL 300 ALTITUDE FL 250 FL 200 RTA ENABLED FLIGHT PLAN WINDS CRUISE WIND WPT A Linear Interpolation by Along Track Distance CRUISE WIND WPT B CRUISE WIND WPT C DESCENT WIND FL 300 Linear Interpolation by Altitude SENT TO AIRCRAFT DESCENT WIND FL 250 DESCENT WIND FL 200 (ZERO WIND AT SURFACE)

  36. Delay Absorption Required Delay = Final RTA Time – TMA ETA at Decision Time

  37. Delay Absorption Required Delay = Final RTA Time – TMA ETA at Decision Time * % AAA does not include AAC

  38. Cost Index and RTA Window

More Related