IFly project: Airborne Self Separation as basis for advanced en route ATM Henk A.P. Blom iFly coordinator National Aerospace Laboratory NLR

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MINIMUM NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION AIRSPACE (MNPS)
Advertisements

EUROCAE WG 73: UAS integration Elements for the European Commission UAS panel Presentation at Workshop 2 UAS insertion into airspace Gérard Mardiné (SAFRAN-Sagem)
1 The PHARE Concept and Scenarios by Job Brüggen Head Air Transport Division National Aerospace Laboratory, NLR.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Estimating safe separations.
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
Page 1 CARE/ASAS Activity 3: ASM workshop Brétigny, 19 December 2001 Autonomous Aircraft OSED CARE-ASAS Activity 3: ASM Autonomous Aircraft OSED.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Overview of NLR Free Flight project ‘97 - ‘99 Jacco Hoekstra
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A “Free Flight with Airborne Separation will result in an uncontrolled,
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Free Flight with Airborne Separation will result in an uncontrolled,
Advanced Safe Separation Technologies and Algorithms (ASSTAR) Project ASAS-TN2 Workshop #1 Malmö 26 th -28 th September 2005 ASSTAR is a Specific Targeted.
IFly: ASAS Self Separation – Airborne Perspective Petr Cásek & Rosa Weber November 13, 2008 ASAS-GN Workshop, Rome.
ASSTAR User Forum #1 Rome 4th April 2006 ASAS-TN2 Second Workshop Benefit Appraisal for Oceanic Applications Dr T E Johnson, BAE Systems
Sense & Avoid for UAV Systems
NASA Self-Separation from the Air and Ground Perspective Margaret-Anne Mackintosh, Melisa Dunbar, Sandra Lozito, Patricia Cashion, Alison McGann, Victoria.
Space Indexed Flight Guidance along Air Streams Mastura Ab Wahid, Hakim Bouadi, Felix Mora-Camino MAIA/ENAC, Toulouse SITRAER20141.
Federal Aviation Administration ASAS issues identified in the AP23 work ASAS-TN2.5 workshop 13 Nov 08, Rome By Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA.
The CASCADE Programme Validation Status and Plans ASAS-TN2 Workshop 3-5 April 2006 Christos Rekkas CASCADE Deputy Programme Manager European Organisation.
Enav.it Channelling Finance and Innovation to Industry Steps towards the Air Traffic Management system modernisation.
The SESAR Definition Phase is co-financed by the European Community and EUROCONTROL Responding to the 2020 Challenge Introduction to SESAR DEFINING THE.
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
4 th Workshop, Amsterdam, 23 rd -25 th April 2007 ASAS LC&P Applications in Radar Airspace: Operational Scenario Example and Fast-Time Simulation Results.
CRISTAL ATSAW Project Sep 2007 ASAS TN Christelle Pianetti, DSNA Simona Canu-Chiesa, Airbus.
Clustering ASAS Applications ASAS-TN2 First Workshop, Malmö 26 to 28 September 2005 Fraser McGibbon BAE Systems.
CARE/ASAS Validation Framework Guidelines & Case Studies Mark Watson NATS.
ASAS-TN Workshop Glasgow 11 September 2006 Alex Wandels CASCADE Programme Manager EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation CASCADE.
Slide 1 July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR3/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG WP2 Current situation analysis – Aircraft perspective Philippe Louyot (CENA)
An Automated Airspace Concept for the Next Generation Air Traffic Control System Todd Farley, David McNally, Heinz Erzberger, Russ Paielli SAE Aerospace.
ASAS FRA OB/T ATM Projects Lufthansa point of view.
International Civil Aviation Organization Aviation System Block Upgrades Module N° B0-102 Increased Effectiveness of Ground-Based Safety Nets SIP/2012/ASBU/Nairobi.
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.
ASAS WORKSHOP Roma April 2003 Airlines’ perspective Nicolas Zvéguintzoff Assistant Director- Technical / Financial Liaison – Europe.
KLM - Operations at Schiphol: how does ASAS fit? ASAS TN2: final seminar, April, Paris E. Kleiboer Sr. Manager Strategy ATM.
MFF is a EC co-funded programme Rome, 3-5 Aprili 2006 ASAS-TN2 Rome, 3-5 April 2006 Maurizio Zacchei, ENAV (MFF PM) Mediterranean Free Flight Programme.
EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation.
Air Systems Division GROUND ASAS EQUIPMENT Michel Procoudine Gorsky ASAS TN2 – Workshop 5 Toulouse 17th-20th September 2007.
Federal Aviation Administration AP23 briefing on D3: ASAS Concept of operations ASAS-GN Seminar 13 Nov 08, Rome By Ken Carpenter, QinetiQ.
Air Ground Cooperation Summary 27 June 2003 ATM 2003 Budapest, June Rapporteur: W. Post AGC Sessions: Tuesday s Session 1: 2 papersChair:A.
Algorithm Design for Crossing and Passing Applications John Anderson and Colin Goodchild University of Glasgow, UK Thierry Miquel DSNA, Toulouse, France.
DIRECTION TECHNIQUE CERTIFICATION Paris, April 2008 SL ASAS TN2 Workshop ppt ASAS & Business.
CARE/ASAS Activity 2 Follow-up: Validation Framework Dissemination Forum Isdefe Ingeniería de Sistemas CARE/ASAS ACTIVITY 2 FOLLOW-UP: VALIDATION.
1 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation Jan Van Doorn Director EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre April 2006 ASAS / ADS-B: Implementation.
Discussions Summary ASSTAR - Crossing & Passing session.
1 ILA Berlin - May 2008 Marc Brochard - EEC EPATS ATM General Requirements & relative issues to be solved.
1 Airborne Separation Assistance Systems (ASAS) - Summary of simulations Joint ASAS-TN2/IATA/AEA workshop NLR, Amsterdam, 8 th October 2007 Chris Shaw.
SSAP The European Strategic Safety Action Plan (SSAP) The History & Rationale.
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.
MFF is a EC Co-funded Programme  MEDITERRANEAN FREE FLIGHT Flight Trials Report ASAS TN2 1st Workshop | September 2005, Malmö Gennaro GRAZIANO 1/32.
4 th Workshop, Amsterdam, April 2007 Progress since 2003 First workshop in 2003 (Rome) Large number of successful R&D projects in US and Europe.
Programme Status ECTL AAB February FACTS  A mature approach: 2500 contributors Release process organises the delivery cycle ATM Engineering:
1 Roma, 3-5 April 2006 – ASAS TN2, 2 nd Workshop, Session 1 – When ASAS meets ACAS When ASAS meets ACAS Thierry Arino (Sofréavia, IAPA Project Manager)
COST ES0802 MC/WG Meeting > /09/2010 Slide 1 COST ES0802 MC/WG Meeting Cambridge, September 20 th – 21 st, 2010 Determination of the conflict potential.
ASAS TN2 Final Seminar Paris, April 2008 LEGAL ASPECTS OF ASAS Dr. Francis SCHUBERT Head Corporate Development / skyguide.
1 / 22 INNOVATIVE RESEARCH EUROCONTROL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTRE Peter CHOROBA Eurocontrol R&D Centre/ University of ZILINA Supervisors: Vu Duong.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A l Humans smarter, meaner, more strategic, emotional, variable, etc.
Digital In The Skies Simon Daykin NATS Chief Architect.
RACOON Project Daniele Teotino - ENAV RACOON Project Manager
ASSTAR Overview Jean-Marc Loscos, DSNA
KDC ASAS 2008 project - How could ASAS benefit the NL ATM System
Chris Shaw, EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
ASSTAR Oceanic Session Summary
Chris Shaw, EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Karim Zeghal EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
iFly: ASAS Self Separation – Airborne Perspective
Sybert Stroeve, Henk Blom, Marco van der Park
Workshop on preparations for ANConf/12 − ASBU methodology
Presentation transcript:

iFly project: Airborne Self Separation as basis for advanced en route ATM Henk A.P. Blom iFly coordinator National Aerospace Laboratory NLR 5 th ASAS-TN2 Workshop/2 nd FLYSAFE Forum September, th, 2007, Toulouse

LL/Mod 2 iFly iFly project HYBRIDGE based safety risk simulation Conclusions

LL/Mod 3 iFly project and motivation Innovative project for EC DG-TREN (6 th Framework) –Partners: 11 universities + 7 from ATM/aviation –iFly project duration: May August 2010 –Total effort: ~ 50 person-years Motivation: –Free Flight (airborne self separation) has been “invented” as a potential solution for high traffic demand airspace –During recent years ATM community research trend is to direct self separation research to situations of less demanding airspace Builds on theoretical results of HYBRIDGE project for EC DG-INFSO ( ) –Novel methods in rare event modelling and estimation –Novel methods in conflict modelling and resolution –Accident risk simulation results for Mediterranean Self Separation

LL/Mod 4 iFly participants 1.NLR (NL) 2.Honeywell (CZ) 3.ISDEFE (ES) 4.Univ. of Tartu (EE) 5.Athens U. Economics & Business (GR) 6.ETH Zurich (CH) 7.L’Aquila University (IT) 8.Politecnico di Milano (IT) 9.Cambridge Univ. (UK) 10.NTU Athens (GR) 11.Twente Univ. (NL) 12.ENAC (FR) 13.Dedale (FR) 14.NATS En Route (UK) 15.INRIA (FR) 16.Eurocontrol Experimental Centre (F) 17.DSNA-DTI-SDER (FR) 18.Leicester Univ. (UK)

LL/Mod 5 iFly objective Objective: developmentment of two advanced en route concepts: –High capacity Self Separation concept –Complementary ATM ground support of Self Separation equipped aircraft Key research questions: –At which en route traffic demands is Free Flight sufficiently safe ? –Which complementary support services from ground ATM are needed in order to accommodate higher traffic demands ? Key design aspects –Human responsibilities are leading –Complexity is well understood –SESAR compliant safety targets

LL/Mod 6 Safety feedback based design Air traffic operation design Safety / Capacity Assessment

LL/Mod 7 iFly design cycles First cycle starts on basis of Hybridge based safety risk simulation results

LL/Mod 8 iFly iFly project HYBRIDGE based safety risk simulation Conclusions

LL/Mod 9 Autonomous Mediterranean Free Flight (AMFF) Future concept developed for traffic over Mediterranean area Aircrew gets freedom to select path and speed In return aircrew is responsible for self-separation Each a/c equipped with an Airborne Separation Assistance System In AMFF, conflicts are solved one by one (pilot preference) RTCA/Eurocae ED78a safety assessment for pair of aircraft

LL/Mod 10

LL/Mod 11 Parameter values used in baseline simulation of AMFF enabling technical systems Model ParameterProbability Global GPS down 1.0 ∙10 -5 Global ADS-B down 1.0 ∙10 -6 Aircraft ADS-B Receiver down 5.0 ∙10 -5 Aircraft ADS-B Transmitter down 5.0 ∙10 -5 Aircraft ASAS System mode corrupted 5.0 ∙10 -5 Aircraft ASAS System mode failure 5.0 ∙10 -5

LL/Mod 12 Monte Carlo simulated scenarios 1. Two aircraft head on encounter 2. Eight aircraft encounter 3. Random traffic very high density

LL/Mod 13 Safety related events assessed Event MTCSTCMSINMACMAC Prediction time (minutes) Horizontal distance (Nm) Vertical distance (ft) MTC = Medium Term Conflict STC = Short Term Conflict MSI = Minimum Separation Infringement NMAC = Near Mid-Air Collision MAC = Mid-Air Collision

LL/Mod 14 Figure 1. Two aircraft encounter under AMFF; dependability on GNSS, ADS-B and ASAS systems Baseline  High Availability/reliability

LL/Mod 15 Eight aircraft encounter - coordinated resolution

LL/Mod 16 Two aircraft encounter vs. eight aircraft encounter 2 a/c  8 a/c # of aircraft

LL/Mod 17 Scenario 3 Random traffic, high density Eight aircraft per packed container –3 times as dense above Frankfurt on 23 rd July ’99 –factor 4 lower dense

LL/Mod 18 High density random traffic 3/4  3 Traffic density

LL/Mod 19 iFly iFly project HYBRIDGE based safety risk simulation Conclusions

LL/Mod 20 Conclusions HYBRIDGE theoretical developments enabled to assess safety risk of self separation concept, and has deserved iFly continuation Self Separation in combination with solving conflicts one by one, appears to fall short in accommodating high en-route traffic demand. iFLY objectives –Assess maximum en-route traffic to be accommodated by self separation –Develop en-route high traffic demand Self Separation concept –Develop complementary ATM ground support concept which further increases capacity of self separation Web site:

LL/Mod 21 Thank You !