Date post: | 15-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
PROJECT FINAL REPORTDSES-6620 Spring 2002
Airport Approach Simulation
Scott Munro
Precision vs. Non-Precision Approach
Overview Simulation of IFR Approach at
Small Commercial Airport
Object: Assess the Benefit of Non-Precision vs. Precision Approach
Metrics of Interest:
- Number of Landings
- Number of Diverts
- Average Delay
Precision vs. Non-Precision Approach
Instrument Approach Allows Aircraft to Land in
Weather which Precludes VFR Flight
Operates based on RF equipment which provide:
- Course (VOR, ILS Localizer)
- Range (DME)
- Glide slope (ILS)
- Position (Marker Beacon)
Non-Precision Approach Description
Non-Precision Approach VOR Rwy 2
Course via VOR Radial
Range via DME
Limits
- Visibility: 1 mile
- Minimum Descent Alt: 380 ft
Precision Approach Description
Precision Approach ILS Rwy 2
Course via ILS Localizer
Range via DME
Glide Slope
Limits
- Visibility: 3/4 mile
- Minimum Descent Alt: 257 ft
Simulation Methodology
Element Impact
Approach Procedure
Time and weather required to successfully execute the approach. Time required to execute the missed approach procedure.
Air Traffic Control Minimum separation between aircraft, and aircraft arrival rate.
Federal Aviation Regulations Fuel on board for each aircraft on an instrument flight plan.
Weather Current ceilings, visibility, and winds at any given time during the simulation.
Aircraft Performance Approach speeds, landing distances and maximum crosswind limits for landing.
The following elements must be considered…
Weather
US National Climatic Data Center Surface Weather Observations
Over 10000 hours of Weather Observations Used
Application “weather.exe” Created to Decode SWO’s and Build Weather Database
Model Weather Database
- Visibility
- Ceilings
- Wind Speed and Direction
Weather
Wind Speed vs Run Hour
0
5
10
15
20
25
Jan-01 Feb-01 Mar-01 Apr-01 May-01 Jun-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 Sep-01 Oct-01 Nov-01 Dec-01
Time
Win
d S
pee
d (
kt)
Out of Limits
Aircraft Performance
Piper PA-28 Single Engine Fixed Gear
Landing Performance
- w/ Head Wind
- w/ Tail Wind
Maximum Crosswinds
Speed
- 70 KIAS Approach
- 63 KIAS Final
- 90 KIAS Missed Approach
Air Traffic Control and FAR
Air Traffic Control Maintain IFR Separation Between Aircraft
3 nm or 2.0 minutes at 90 knots
Federal Aviation Regulations – Fuel Requirements Fly to the Destination Airport, then…
Fly to the Alternate Airport, then…
Fly 45 minutes longer
Air Traffic Control and FAR
Air Traffic Control Maintain IFR Separation Between Aircraft
3 nm or 2.0 minutes at 90 knots
Federal Aviation Regulations – Fuel Requirements Fly to the Destination Airport, then…
Fly to the Alternate Airport, then…
Fly 45 minutes longer
Approach Model
Approach Model
Weather Data Playback via UpdateWeather()
IFR Separation via Single Capacity Queue Segments
Fuel via FuelRemaining Entity Attribute
Transit Time via Triangular Distribution
Results
Parameter VOR ILS Change % Change
Landings 148353 151375 3022 2.0%Divert to Alternate Airport 12342 9320 -3022 -24.5%Missed Approached 387 332 -55 -14.2%
Approach Type
Table 1 – Total Airport Approach Performance
Parameter (per hour) VOR ILS Change % Change
Landings 13.85 14.13 0.28 2.0%Divert to Alternate Airport 1.15 0.87 -0.28 -24.5%Missed Approached 0.036 0.031 -0.005 -14.2%
Approach Type
Table 2 – Airport Approach Performance Per Hour
Average Non-Precision Approach Delay : 4.43 minutes
Average Precision Approach Delay : 3.55 minutes