Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Page 1 The...

Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium

National Aerospace Laboratory NLR

CXXX-1APage 1

The ONESKY (Single-Sky) project and what it means for ASAS

A view on the results of the ONESKY project

By

R. Van Gent



CXXX-2APage 2

propose new EU airspace structure (Single Sky)– support an efficient traffic flow.– based on needs.– regardless of national frontiers.– acknowledging the geopolitical realities.

demonstrate that the proposals:

– will increase airspace capacity.

– will decrease delays.

ONESKY Project objectives



CXXX-3APage 3

ONESKY Approach to the work

Fast time simulation study– TAAM, RAMS

Two lines of action:– Optimise ‘current’ airspace locally.– Redesign total EU airspace from scratch.

Two phases– Small scale partial designs.– Integration & optimisation in overall model.



CXXX-4APage 4

ONESKYConsortium

NLR (NL - Lead)

AENA (E)

DNA/(CENA - F)

QinetiQ (UK)

DFS (D)

Isdefe (E)

NATS (UK)

NEI (NL)

SICTA (I)

Skyguide (CH)



CXXX-5APage 5

ONESKY - current linePadua Baseline Analysis

5

Traffic Density

Traffic Density Plot for LIPPN3 - 23/07/99



CXXX-6APage 6

ONESKY Current line Padua Iteration 1

Old routeNew route

Re-direct southbound traffic west of BZO

Use existing route network

Original Routes– PITAR-BZO-SUMIR-ALBET– PITAR-BZO-ALESE-VIC

New Routes– PITAR-RENTA-ADOSA-ALBET– PITAR-RENTA-ADOSA-VIC



CXXX-7APage 7

ONESKYPadua - Iteration 2

OldNew

Re-directing northbound traffic west of BZO

Navigate via existing waypoints

Original Routes– VIC-ALESE-BZO-ENOGO– ALBET-SUMIR-BZO-ENOGO

New Routes– VIC-RENTA-ENOGO– ALBET-RENTA-ENOGO

Converging traffic at ENOGO



CXXX-8APage 8

ONESKYPadua Iteration 3

OldNew

Northbound traffic via ADOSA re-directed west of BZO

Original Routes– ADOSA-BORMI-BZO-MATAR– ADOSA-BORMI-BZO-BRENO

New Routes– ADOSA-BORMI-ENOGO-MATAR– ADOSA-BORMI-ENOGO-BRENO

Remaining Munich airspace allocated to Padova North



CXXX-9APage 9

ONESKYPadua Results - Conflict Count

Conflict Count Comparison - All samples

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Iteration 1 - LIPPN Iteration 2 - LIPPN+EDWest Iteration 3 - LIPPN+ED

Number of Conflicts

Baseline(1999)

Optimisation1

Iteration

• Decrease of 41% between the baseline and iteration 3

• Decrease of 11% between optimisation1 and iteration3



CXXX-10APage 10

Problem areas selected

Baseline 1999

Changes made to airspace since 1999

Iterations/designs based on TOSCAII

Comparative results obtained– Max gain in terms of delay-reduction is expected to be between 2 - 6 %

ONESKYCurrent line Summary



CXXX-11APage 11

11

ONESKY Clean sheet study:

Redesign total EU airspace from scratch.



CXXX-12APage 12

12

ONESKY Clean sheet study

Workloadings Initial PSB +35% compared to 1999



CXXX-13APage 13

13

ONESKY Clean sheet study

Workload optimised PSB design



CXXX-14APage 14

ONESKYClean Sheet WP3 (optimised PSB)



CXXX-15APage 15

ONESKYClean Sheet WP3 (IT 2 -direct routing)



CXXX-16APage 16

16

ONESKYMilitary sectors in core area!



CXXX-17APage 17

ONESKYClean Sheet compared to Current



CXXX-18APage 18

ONESKY conclusions

Single Sky initiative necessary for Europe (grid-lock imminent if not started soon)

35 % capacity increase can be expected!

– But…

Not much more!!



CXXX-19APage 19

ONESKY study showsATCo workload is bottleneck

ATC function– Collision prevention– Expedite and Maintain traffic flow

Sector limit is around 35 aircraft an hour– Validated by a number of studies– Supported by Air Traffic Controllers

Sector size cannot be made too small– Transition time becomes too short

With increasing traffic more emphasis will go to Collision Prevention and less to Expedite and Maintain traffic flow resulting in higher charges for less service



CXXX-20APage 20

The promise of ASAS (self separation)

Studies show crew workload hardly increases with densities up to 9 times present core European densities (due to the distributed nature)

Subjective Workload

33.85 35.4228.76

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

first second third

Conflict rate

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

900 1000

0 10 20 30 40 Number of aircraft in sector

Pc/P2

Air Ground



CXXX-21APage 21

ATM Paradigm Shift: increased Efficiency and more Capacity, with INCREASED SAFETY, by. . .

Delegation of responsibilities– Separation Assurance based on the best available aircraft position &

intent data (using ASAS technologies)

Co-operative Flight Planning . . . – all ATM participants share the same data, processed in closed loops– replace routine voice communication by data link

Weather independent TMA and Landing throughput . . . – with ASAS in combination with enhanced future landing systems

Enhanced airport surface movement . . . – ASAS will enhance safety (e.g. runway incursion) and efficiency of airport ground

operation



CXXX-22APage 22

But…. Where/how to progress?

Real benefits are expected from delegated responsibilities/ self-separation

Core Europe too complex for self separation as first step

Package 1 applications are a good first step (for Core Europe)

However, there is more than Core Europe (ASAS initially seen as application for sparse density areas)



CXXX-23APage 23

Conclusions / Suggestion

ATCo workload is the problem of present ATM paradigm

Delegate / transfer of responsibilities is needed (fast) to counter grid-lock

Start implementation of self-separation in sparse density regions parallel to Package 1 to also gain experience with autonomous operations

Date post:	31-Mar-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	latrell-caron
View:	218 times
Download:	1 times

Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A Page 1 The...

Documents