1 / 26

PHARE Operational Scenarios

PHARE Operational Scenarios. J-P. Nicolaon, Operational Task Force Chairman EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre. Overview of the work on PHARE scenarios. PHARE Medium Term Scenario (Research Programme) : Initial operational organisation based on :. JULY 1990. Human in the loop 4D Navigation

sammy
Download Presentation

PHARE Operational Scenarios

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. PHARE Operational Scenarios J-P. Nicolaon, Operational Task Force Chairman EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

  2. Overview of the work on PHARE scenarios PHARE Medium Term Scenario (Research Programme) : Initial operational organisation based on : JULY 1990 Human in the loop 4D Navigation Automated ATC Tools Data-Link Communication with the aim to increase ATC productivity

  3. PHARE medium term scenario 2000-2015 • Envisaged changes in en-route controllers’ working methods • Extended planning horizon • Multi-Sector Planning Controller • Redistribution of workload from Tactical to Planning Controller • Assisted runway management • Assisted Arrival and Departure sequencing management • Computer-based merging and final approach spacing advisories

  4. Scenarios for PD/1, PD/2 and PD/3 1990 1994 1995 1997 PD/1: En-route PHARE Medium Term Scenario PD/2: Arrivals PD/3: Gate to gate

  5. Scenario for PD/1 • Planning up to 20/25 minutes ahead of time • Conflict-free sector transit plan (4D and 3D) • Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D aircraft • Information and directives to his TC • Co-ordination of entry/exit conditions • Update ground system PC Role

  6. Scenario for PD/1 • R/T • Conflict-free passage • Monitoring 4D aircraft • Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D aircraft if current “contract” was to be modified • R/T transmissions to 3D aircraft of instructions as proposed by the ground system • Handling of exceptions TC Role

  7. HIPS

  8. Scenario for PD/1 • PD/1 highlighted the need to look at task sharing between Planning Controller and Tactical Controller • Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/2 and PD/3

  9. PD/2 Frankfurt TMA

  10. PD/2 ground tracks Without PHARE tools With PHARE tools Identical traffic samples in both cases

  11. Scenario for PD/2 The main PD/2 objectives became: • to experiment / demonstrate the performance of the Arrival Management software and the feasibility of real flight according to automatic trajectory uplink • to assess the controllers behaviour and acceptability versus automation • to evaluate landing rate improvement

  12. Scenario for PD/2 Controller’s roles changed as follows: PC Observer • Monitoring of 4D aircraft • R/T transmission of Arrival Manager advisories to 3D aircraft • Deconflicting remaining conflicts (if existing) TC

  13. Lessons learned from PD/2 • Automated Arrival Manager interactivity required • The definition of STARs, Holds and Stacks needs to be reconsidered • Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/3

  14. Scenario for PD/3 • Main concept elements : • Timely work sharing • Complementary tasks remaining consistent and relevant with time  Layered Planning Multi-Sector Planner 30' Planning Controller 10' Tactical Controller Assume Control

  15. 4D TRAJECTORY MANAGEMENT Sector n-1 Sector n Sector n+1 Sector n+2 PC modification via trajectory negotiation sector contract approval = clearance aircraft position assume control by sector n • TC trajectory modification via: • formalize clearance • trajectory negotiation • or R/T communication MSP modification via uplink previous sector contract approval MF Objectives : to differentiate clearance from planning to pilot to update ground system (planning and negotiation authority)

  16. Multi-Sector Planner (30' =>10') (En-route) • To equilibrate traffic between sectors • To reduce local complexity • to optimize trajectory

  17. Tactical Load Smoother

  18. En-route Planning Controller :(10' =>Assume Control) • To manage Problem Situations • to resolve 4D conflicts • to prepare and transfer solutions for 3D aircraft to the Tactical Controller • To transfer problems to the Tactical Controller if he was in a better position to resolve them • To negotiate trajectory with 4D aircraft • To assist the Tactical Controller after assume control

  19. En-route Tactical Controller (Assume Control => Sector Exit) • To resolve conflicts unresolved by the Planning Controller and new conflicts • To monitor aircraft trajectories • To negotiate short-term trajectory modification • To uplink formalized clearances • To manage R/T

  20. Arrival TMA Controllers • Arrival Sequence Planning Controller (ARR- SP) • Interaction with the Arrival Manager (AM) • Conflict-free passage • Trajectory Negotiation • Co-ordination • Tactical Controller • R/T • Final responsibility for real-time separation and final runway spacing

  21. Departure TMA Controllers • Departure Planning Controller (DEP-PC) • Interaction with the Departure Manager (DM) • Initial conflict-free SIDs (before departure) • Trajectory Negotiation / Co-ordination • Departure Tactical Controller (DEP-TC) • R/T • Ultimate responsibility for real-time separation and final runway sequencing

  22. Conclusions drawn from the scenario work. The co-operation between the PHARE partners: • highlighted: • divergence in approaching concept design • necessity of compromises (Done !) • Demonstrated enrichment of ideas • Made possible common understanding

  23. Conclusions drawn from the scenario work. • It addressed: • all phases of flight • transition for 2000-2015 period • long-term applications • was partly technology driven • showed difficulties to balance functional requirements for advanced tools with controller roles • showed need for further research into progressive and pragmatic adaptation of scenarios for short and medium-term implementation

  24. PHARE Operational Scenarios J-P. Nicolaon, Operational Task Force Chairman EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre next

More Related