1 Airborne Separation Assistance Systems (ASAS) - Summary of simulations Joint ASAS-TN2/IATA/AEA workshop NLR, Amsterdam, 8 th October 2007 Chris Shaw EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre, France European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

2 Contents of presentation Introduction Radar airspace Simulations of airborne spacing merge and remain behind in TMA Non-radar airspace Simulations of air traffic situational awareness for oceanic step climbs

3 Introduction (1/2) Secondary surveillance radar coverage 10,000 feet - green quadruple Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) invented 1980s. 74% of flights in Europe equipped with ADS-B Mode S extended squitter of which 79% broadcasting position (Eurocontrol, August 2007) Benefits: Surveillance cost 1/10 of ground based radar -> reduced navigation service charges ~30% Wider coverage – niche areas too expensive for ground radar Increased efficiency of flight operations enabled by airborne separation assistance system

4 Introduction (2/2) Airborne Separation Assistance System (ASAS) 1983: “Analysis of in-trail following dynamics of Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI)”, Sorensen & Goka, NASA 2007: > 80 ASAS applications identified (Eurocontrol/FAA) Example ASAS applications with early benefits: Airborne spacing merge and remain behind in TMA Airborne traffic situational awareness for oceanic step climb © EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

5 Merge and remain behind in TMA (1/6) Motivation Improve the sequencing of arrival flows through a new allocation of spacing tasks between air and ground Neither “transfer problems” nor “give more freedom” to pilots … shall be beneficial to all parties Assumptions Air-air surveillance capabilities (ADS-B) Cockpit automation (ASAS) Constraints Human: consider current roles and working methods System: keep things as simple as possible Paris Orly, 2002, source: ADP To achieve spacing at waypoint Merge spacing at waypoint Merge To maintain spacing Remain To maintain spacing Remain

6 Merge and remain behind in TMA (2/6) Development and refinement of spacing instructions and working methods Identification of required functional evolutions (air and ground) and route structure Aircraft under spacing Aircraft with target selected © EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

7 Merge and remain behind in TMA (3/6) Assessment of feasibility, benefits and limits Representative environment with very high traffic From cruise to final approach Nominal and non nominal conditions ( mixed equipage, go- around, emergency, radio failure, airborne spacing error, … ) Controller, pilot and system perspectives Large panel of participants Controllers from various ANSP (AENA, DSNA, ENAV, IAA, LFV, NATS, NAV-EP) Pilots from Airbus and various airlines (DLH, CTN, …) Baseline With spacing Distribution of inter aircraft spacing at final approach fix Number of aircraft Baseline Number of aircraft passing final approach fix (period 45min) With spacing Flown trajectories Baseline Flown trajectories With spacing © EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

8 Merge and remain behind in TMA (4/6) EUROCONTROL-DSNA Project, October 2005 – February 2007 Evaluation of operational benefits of airborne spacing sequencing and merging for Paris Arrivals Charles de Gaulle North – partial equipage – time gain

9 A new RNAV route structure? A preliminary step to prepare implementation of airborne spacing A transition towards extensive use of P-RNAV A sound foundation to support further developments such as CDA (continuous descent) and 4D (target time of arrival) Merge and remain behind in TMA (5/6) Altitude (feet x100) Distance to final approach fix (NM) Baseline New route structure Final Frequency occupancy (%) New route structure Baseline Approach © EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

10 Merge and remain behind in TMA (6/6) Point merge preliminary fast-time simulation results (RAMS platform) 4 Initial approach fixes 1 runway 1 hour traffic ~30 aircraft with 20% heavy/80% medium mix 2 controllers Continuous descent approach from 12,000 -> 3,000 feet Distance range NM © EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

11 Oceanic step climbs (1/3) FL340 FL360 FL350 > 10 mins ATSA-ITP Criteria Aircraft at FL340 would like to climb ….. But standard longitudinal separation does not exist at level above Crew request a step climb with airborne traffic situation awareness 5 mins ASSTAR step climb with airborne traffic situation awareness

12 Oceanic step climbs (2/3) Today over North Atlantic average 0.2 step climbs per flight recorded Fast time simulations show with airborne traffic situation awareness number of step climbs per flight could be 2 or more. ~75% of climb requests could be satisfied immediately and at least 93% satisfied eventually. ASSTAR fast time simulations

13 Oceanic step climbs (3/3) Costs Implementation costs per aircraft 45,000 € retrofit 35,000 € forward fit Maintenance costs per annum 1,200 € retro fit 1,500 € forward fit Benefits 150 Kg fuel saved per single oceanic transition 54,000 € per aircraft per year 0.6% reduction in emissions Payback period 0.9 years retro fit 0.7 years forward fit (Assuming 2 transitions a day and 0.5 € per kilogram) Cost benefit analysis by BAE Systems D5.3 (