ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Dr T E Johnson, BAE Systems

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Farnborough Airspace Change Proposal FACC Briefing 4 October 2012.
Advertisements

MINIMUM NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION AIRSPACE (MNPS)
SIP/2012/ASBU/Nairobi-WP/19
The EMERALD RTD Plan and the ASAS Validation Framework R P (Bill) Booth 10 October 2002.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Autonomous Aircraft OSED CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Autonomous Aircraft OSED.
- European CDM - To benefit from the animation settings contained within this presentation we suggest you view using the slide show option. To start the.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Free Flight with Airborne Separation will result in an uncontrolled,
Mediterranean Free Flight ASAS Separation and Spacing Presented by Andy Barff – Project Leader MFF Real-time Simulations ASAS-TN, Malmö
International Civil Aviation Organization Aviation System Block Upgrades Module N° B0-86/PIA-3 Improved Access to Optimum Flight Levels through Climb/Descent.
IP-20 Review of the Effectiveness of Branching UPRs from PACOTS Track 2 Electronic Navigation Research Institute The IPACG meeting 40, Sep. 2014, Washington.
Continuous Climb Operations (CCO) Saulo Da Silva
Advanced Safe Separation Technologies and Algorithms (ASSTAR) Project ASAS-TN2 Workshop #1 Malmö 26 th -28 th September 2005 ASSTAR is a Specific Targeted.
Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) What is it, and how can it help improve operations in Micronesia? Captain Rocky Stone Chief Surveillance.
Ames Research Center 1October 2006 Aviation Software Systems Workshop FACET: Future Air Traffic Management Concepts Evaluation Tool Aviation Software Systems.
Mr. Hooper Harris FAA/JAA Annual Meeting Phoenix, AZ June 3 - 7, 2002
ASSTAR Oceanic Applications by Nico de Gelder, NLR ASSTAR User Forum #1 4 April 2006, Roma.
Cost Benefit modelling for ASAS Applications With a particular emphasis on airline specific modelling T E JohnsonASAS-TN2 Workshop#1, September 2005.
Study Continuous Climb Operations
Federal Aviation Administration ASAS issues identified in the AP23 work ASAS-TN2.5 workshop 13 Nov 08, Rome By Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA.
Page Lufthansa ASAS It's Time for a paradigm change... Workshop May 2003, Rome
ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop ASSTAR Safety Approach and Preliminary Issues Dr Giuseppe GRANIERO, SICTA
Clustering ASAS Applications ASAS-TN2 First Workshop, Malmö 26 to 28 September 2005 Fraser McGibbon BAE Systems.
ASAS-TN Second Workshop, 6-8 October 2003, MalmöSlide 1 Airborne Surveillance Applications included in ‘Package I’ Francis Casaux CARE/ASAS manager.
CRISTAL ITP European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation CRISTAL ITP ASAS-TN, Paris Johan Martensson CASCADE CRISTAL ITPJohan Martensson ASAS-TN.
CARE/ASAS Validation Framework Guidelines & Case Studies Mark Watson NATS.
ASAS TN2 WP3: Assessing ASAS Applications Maturity Eric Hoffman EUROCONTROL.
Federal Aviation Administration ASPIRE Update APEC TPT-WG Aviation Emissions Taskforce Singapore 15/16 Sept 09.
ASAS FRA OB/T ATM Projects Lufthansa point of view.
International Civil Aviation Organization Measurement of environmental benefits Saulo Da Silva Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology.
2 nd ASAS-TN2 Workshop - Rome, 4 th April 20061/13 Civil-Military cooperation as a key factor in ASAS implementation Italian Air Force (IAF) Ltc. Maurizio.
NAS-WIDE Simulation Workshop December 10, 2008 Interagency Portfolio & Systems Analysis Division Yuri Gawdiak.
ASIA PACIFIC Air Traffic Flow Management
Federal Aviation Administration Surveillance and Broadcast Services ADS-B In-Trail Procedures Presented to the ASAS TN 2.5 Workshop November 2008 Kenneth.
International Civil Aviation Organization Aviation System Block Upgrades Module N° B0-10/PIA 3 Improved Operations through Enhanced En-Route Trajectories.
KLM - Operations at Schiphol: how does ASAS fit? ASAS TN2: final seminar, April, Paris E. Kleiboer Sr. Manager Strategy ATM.
EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation.
Airbus Status on ADS-B In / Out Update
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ADS-B In-Trail Procedures Overview of Research Results Presented to the ASAS TN2 Workshop September 2007.
DIRECTION TECHNIQUE CERTIFICATION Paris, April 2008 SL ASAS TN2 Workshop ppt ASAS & Business.
2 nd Workshop, April 2006 ASAS in Tomorrows Airspace Pierre Gayraud, THALES Bob Graham, EEC Tony Henley, BAe Systems Dr Anthony Smoker, IFATCA ASAS-TN2.
1 Airborne Separation Assistance Systems (ASAS) - Summary of simulations Joint ASAS-TN2/IATA/AEA workshop NLR, Amsterdam, 8 th October 2007 Chris Shaw.
1 Controller feedback from the CoSpace / NUP II TMA experiment ASAS-TN, April 2004, Toulouse Liz Jordan, NATS, U.K. Gatwick approach controller.
ASAS Crossing and Passing Applications in Radar Airspace (operational concept and operational procedure) Jean-Marc Loscos, Bernard Hasquenoph, Claude Chamayou.
ASSTAR Airborne Separation Operations in Oceanic Airspace Bob McPike, NATS ASAS-TN2 Conference Glasgow, September 2006.
Federal Aviation Administration Integrated Arrival/Departure Flow Service “ Big Airspace” Presented to: TFM Research Board Presented by: Cynthia Morris.
Economic issues Formulation of Business cases H. Sudarshan
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (A-CDM) Saulo Da Silva
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
ASSTAR Overview Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA
FF-ICE A CONCEPT TO SUPPORT THE ATM SYSTEM OF THE FUTURE
SIP/2012/ASBU/Nairobi-WP/19
Free Routing Airspace in Europe
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Measurement of environmental benefits Saulo Da Silva
Continuous Climb Operations (CCO) Saulo Da Silva
ASSTAR Oceanic Session Summary
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Rome November 2008 Johan Martensson, CASCADE
Karim Zeghal EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Dynamic wake turbulence separation Saulo da Silva
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (A-CDM) Saulo Da Silva
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Saulo Da Silva
ASSTAR Project Overview & User Forum Objectives
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Continuous Climb Operations (CCO) Saulo Da Silva
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Measurement of environmental benefits Saulo Da Silva
Collaborative Decision Making “Developing A Collaborative Framework”
Long term vision for Air Traffic Systems CARATS
Dynamic wake turbulence separation Saulo da Silva
Presentation transcript:

ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Dr T E Johnson, BAE Systems

page 2 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications An initial review of benefits has been conducted under ASSTAR WP1.5. For ASAS Oceanic applications this covers the following. –ATSA-ITP (Airborne Traffic Situation Awareness In Trail Procedure) –ASEP-ITP (Airborne Separation In Trail Procedure) –ASEP-ITF (Airborne Separation In Trail Follow) –SSEP-FFT (Self Separation Free Flight Track)  The applications have been evaluated for an Organised Track System (OTS) but are also suitable for use with User Preferred Routes (UPRs).  The review was purely qualitative.  Quantitative results will be available later from simulation studies.

page 3 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Flight Efficiency  The principal benefits from ASAS Oceanic applications arise from improved flight efficiency.  A flight efficiency benefit arises because the applications allow an aircraft greater flexibility to fly at a preferred flight level and speed.  Optimum altitude for an aircraft is dependent upon fuel load.  For efficient operation, the aircraft needs to climb as fuel is burnt off.  Efficiency is enhanced if an aircraft can fly at a level to best exploit wind corridors.  Additionally, an aircraft whose speed is constrained by preceding aircraft may be able to increase its efficiency by changing levels.

page 4 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications  Oceanic applications achieve greater flexibility as follows (in ascending order) –ATSA-ITP:  Enhanced opportunity to climb or descend two flight levels.  Reduced longitudinal separation permitted for intermediate flight level. –ASEP-ITP  Further enhanced opportunity to climb or descend two flight levels.  Required longitudinal separation for intermediate flight level is less than for ATSA-ITP. –ASEP-ITF  Enhanced opportunity to climb or descend one flight level.  Reduced separation permits a greater number of aircraft to occupy their preferred level.  Improved level capacity creates more opportunities for aircraft to change levels. –SSEP-FFT  Further enhanced opportunity to climb or descend to the optimum flight level.  Even greater flexibility to select speed and flight level.

page 5 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Improved flight efficiency leads to benefits in the form of –Reduced fuel consumption –Reduced gaseous emissions –Largely from reduced fuel consumption –Potential for increased payload –As a partial trade-off against reduced fuel consumption –Reduced contingency fuel if the maximum fuel requirement can predicted with greater certainty. –Reduced maintenance costs –Arising from reduced flight time –Reduced diversion risk (due to reduced fuel consumption) –Applies to aircraft taking off with maximum fuel load –Earlier arrival time –Predominately a non-monetary passenger benefit

page 6 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Benefits in addition to those arising from flight efficiency –Reduced ATC provision (ASEP-ITF and SSEP-FFT)  SSEP-FFT –Substantial controller workload reduction under normal operation –Reserve levels of back-up ATC resourcing yet to be addressed –Domestic/oceanic controller transitions yet to be addressed  ASEP-ITF –Modest potential controller workload reduction for worst case scenarios –Greater potential capability to accommodate traffic growth. –Reduced turbulence  Non-monetary benefit arising from increased opportunity for flight level change –Possible safety improvements  Improvement in traffic situational awareness  Requirement for no degradation of safety, but may improve in practice.

page 7 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Some potential benefits were discounted including … –Improved predictability  The greater utilisation of wind corridors could improve arrival times but at the expense of predictability –Increased capacity  Some of the procedures will lead to an increase in route capacity.  This will only be a benefit if the level of air traffic would otherwise be limited by the available capacity. –Flight time savings  For long haul flights, shorter flying times are unlikely to lead to scheduling efficiencies or to efficiencies in the use of aircraft and crew. –Consequential reductions in maintenance and fuel consumption have been covered as separate benefits.

page 8 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Experimental Evaluation of Flight Efficiency Improvement  The main benefit to be evaluated by simulation is flight efficiency improvement –This can be measured as changes in fuel consumption, distance flown, time flown. –Reduction in gaseous emissions can be estimated from reductions in fuel consumption. –Measures of controller workload will be recorded.  A general issue for the determination of fuel savings in oceanic airspace is that total fuel consumption within the oceanic airspace is not entirely independent of manoeuvres prior to, or subsequent to travel within in the oceanic track segment.

page 9 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications The fuel consumption for Aircraft 1 may be less within the oceanic track segment but over the whole journey the fuel consumption for Aircraft 2 is less. Comparisons should be made from a common start and end point.

page 10 ASSTAR User Forum #1  Flight efficiency will be assessed by fast time simulations –7 scenarios will be evaluated for different traffic levels.  4 ASAS procedures  3 reference scenarios –‘worst case’ (no flight level changes within oceanic track) –‘best case’ (unrestricted flight level and speed changes) –‘benchmark case’ (non-ASAS, current procedural control, optimal use of level changes)

page 11 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications  Results from ASSTAR fast time simulations will be available by June 2006  Results from ASSTAR real time simulations will be available by August 2007 –Recent work commissioned by NASA gives some indications of the levels of benefits that can be expected from reduced separations.  Almira R. Williams “ Benefits Assessment of Reduced Separations in North Atlantic Organised Track System” CSSI Inc. Advanced Programs, Prepared for NASA Glenn Research Centre, p_NAtlantic_OTS_Final_Report_2005Oct3.pdf p_NAtlantic_OTS_Final_Report_2005Oct3.pdf

page 12 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Summary  A review has been undertaken of ASAS oceanic applications.  Some potential benefits identified prior to the review were found to be non-applicable.  The principal monetary benefits have been identified as arising from flight efficiency improvements.  Flight efficiency improvements will be evaluated by simulation methods.

page 13 ASSTAR User Forum #1 Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications END