Date post: | 05-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | gervase-terry |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Slide 1July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Mark Watson & Richard Pugh
(NATS)
CARE / ASAS Action
FALBALA ProjectDissemination Forum - 8th July 2004
WP4 - Operational Indicators, Interviews
& Workshop
Slide 2July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
FALBALA Work Package 4
Investigation of three Package I Airborne Surveillance applications:
Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during Flight Operations (ATSA-AIRB)
Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach (ATSA-VSA)
Enhanced Sequencing and Merging operations (ASPA-S&M)
Assessment based on views of controllers, pilots, flight operations and ATM experts.
Slide 3July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Work Package 4Operational Indicators, Interviews &
Workshop
1. Define the “Operational Indicators”
2. Interviews with Controllers, Pilots & ATC Experts
3. Operational Workshop to brainstorm selected issues
Slide 4July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
1. Operational Indicators
Stage 1 identified a set of metrics, “Operational Indicators”,
which could be used throughout the project
Two perspectives Airspace Perspective (characteristics of the airspace)
Aircraft Perspective (characteristics for an individual flight)
Operational Indicators were used as input for the Quantitative
analysis done by WP1 and WP2 (already discussed)
Operational Indicators were used as an aid for discussions in
WP4
Slide 5July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Examples of Operational Indicators
Airspace Perspective, e.g.: Runway Capacity
Use of Radar Vectoring
Use of Holding Patterns
Aircraft Spacing
. . .
Aircraft Perspective, e.g.: No. of surrounding aircraft (and distribution by range)
Relative distance and bearing of traffic on same route
Relative distance and bearing of traffic on other routes
. . .
Slide 6July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
2. Questionnaires
Questionnaires were developed to discuss the operational
benefits and limitations of the three ASAS applications:
Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during Flight
Operations
Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach
Enhanced Sequencing and Merging
Slide 7July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Questionnaire Participants
Pilot Respondents ATC Respondents
Air France (AFR)
2 (management pilot & airline manager)
DFS 2 (current controller & management controller)
Lufthansa (DLH)
3 (Airline manager & pilots) NATS 4 (ATM managers & LTMA controller)
British Airways (BAW)
3 (joint response airline manager and management pilots)
DGAC 4 (ATM managers & Paris controllers)
ATM and Airline Experts Controllers from DFS, DGAC and NATS
Pilots from Lufthansa, British Airways and Air France
Varying previous experience of ASAS Concepts (from
none to extensive)
Slide 8July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Questionnaires
Two Questionnaires: 1 for Controllers (and ATC Experts)
1 for Pilots (and Flight Ops Experts)
Questionnaires included: Background to the FALBALA project
A brief overview of each of the three applications
A brief summary of the FALBALA WP1 Results, showing some of the Radar Analysis
Questions were multiple choice style but with scope for written
comments and explanation to be added
Slide 9July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Summary of Responses(Enhanced Situational Awareness during Flight Ops)
PilotBenefits:• Generally A LITTLE to A LOT of
benefit
• More accurate position information, can compensate for loss of party-line effect caused by datalink
Workload: Generally NO CHANGE, possibly a
REDUCTION workload will depend on design
Other Issues:• May offer safety benefit in remote
areas, not in radar controlled airspace
• 100% equipage required to be useful?
ControllerBenefits: Generally A LITTLE to A LOT of
safety benefit Improved common situational
awareness between controller and pilot
Workload: Generally A LITTLE impact on ATC possible workload increase if pilots
query ATC instructions
Other Issues:• Main concern covers equipage -
100% equipage is required to be useful
• Likely to be of most benefit outside Controlled Airspace
Slide 10July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Summary of Responses(Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach 1)
PilotFeasible:• Generally ACHIEVABLE, EASY at
Frankfurt. Visual following is already in use at Frankfurt.
• DIFFICULT at LHR.
Benefits: Mainly A LOT, one A LITTLE
(depends on the airport!) Clear capacity benefits at FRA,
ATSA-VSA could improve spacing precision further.
At LHR, there is no scope for reducing spacing, ATSA-VSA may even reduce capacity.
ControllerFeasible: All answers from VERY DIFFICULT
to EASY! Depends on the airport.• Already in use at FRA.
• Would be very difficult to implement at LHR, might be feasible at LGW.
Benefits:• Answers range from NO to A LOT
(depends on the airport!)
• At some airports ATSA-VSA is not seen as feasible.
• At others capacity is maximised by existing procedures, no scope to reduce spacing.
Slide 11July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Summary of Responses(Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach 2)
Pilot
Workload:• Generally REDUCTION, but not
agreed by all, possible INCREASE at LHR
• Spacing information and Ground speed information provided on CDTI would assist visual spacing.
Controller
Workload:
Possible REDUCTION in workload
though not agreed by all.
If capacity increases as a result then
there may be no net change for
workload.
Slide 12July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Summary of Responses(Enhanced Sequencing & Merging 1)
PilotFeasible:• Not asked, as it was felt that this was
specifically a Controller question
Benefits: Generally A LITTLE or A LOT• Reduction of voice communications
• More efficient user preferred trajectories
• Time-based spacing may give benefits
ControllerFeasible: All answers from VERY DIFFICULT
to EASY ! Difficult at LHR and FRA due to
complexity of airspace. May be more achievable at LGW and Paris airports
Benefits:• Considerable differences in opinion,
some NO, some A LOT
• Some anticipate capacity & efficiency benefits, others don’t
• Some concern that pilots will need more assistance (support tools) to maintain the spacing
• Time-based spacing alone may provide some benefits
• May be some environmental benefits
Slide 13July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Summary of Responses(Enhanced Sequencing & Merging 2)
PilotWorkload:• Range from REDUCTION to
INCREASE, depends on how S&M is implemented, in particular the level of automation
• Without automation to assist the spacing task, workload may be increased
• With proper assistance, pilot’s overall workload could be reduced
Other Issues:• What is the impact on avionics ? If
FMS and CDTI changes are required then this will not be feasible before 2015
• Is Intent information required to perform spacing tasks ?
ControllerWorkload: Generally REDUCTION in controller
workload Reduction in R/T loading Better conformance of flights with
clearances Instructions may be less time-critical Ability to establish sequence further
out from touchdown
Other Issues:• The task of controllers may be de-
skilled to some extent
• What would the consequence then be of a system breakdown?
• What happens when the sequence breaks down, e.g. after a Go-around?
Slide 14July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
3. Operational Workshop
London Heathrow Airport
18th March 2004
26 Attendees from
Eurocontrol, Air France, British Airways, Lufthansa, DFS,
NATS, DGAC, Sofreavia and UoG
Discussion of each of the three applications
Demonstration of the CO-SPACE Implementation of ASPA-S&M
Slide 15July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Workshop QuestionsEnhanced Sequencing and Merging
Where would ASPA-S&M be applicable, i.e. which airports
?
Is it necessary to automate the spacing on the aircraft?
Is it necessary to have Intent information?
Could the same benefits be derived from other concepts, such as
the use of time-based spacing by ATC or 4D Trajectory
negotiation?
Slide 16July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Workshop Questions Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach
Answers to the questionnaires show wide range of views. Why do we
have these differences ?
Visual separation is in use in Frankfurt, with an agreed benefit. Why
only in Frankfurt?
Are there possibilities to use visual separation at other airports to
increase capacity?
Slide 17July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Workshop Questions Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during Flight
Operations
What benefits?
E.g. what is the expected impact on controller and pilot workload
What about Partial Situational Awareness ?
Possibly caused by lack of aircraft equippage or filtering?
What information should be displayed?
Slide 18July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
WP4 Conclusions (1)
Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during Flight
Operations (ATSA-AIRB) Improved Traffic Situational Awareness for Pilots
• Can compensate for the loss of Party-Line expected to result from datalink
Little effect on Pilot and Controller workload
Most benefit will be obtained in remote (non-radar airspace), not in high-density environments
Requires 100% equipage to get full benefits (or TIS-B)
Design work is required for the traffic display
•Issues such as filtering, the means of labelling aircraft tracks ...
Slide 19July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
WP4 Conclusions (2)
Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach (ATSA-VSA) CAPACITY benefits at Frankfurt Airport
• A consequence of the runway configuration at Frankfurt
Application to other airports is expected to be limited
• Benefits are not clear for single runway airports
• “Normal” visual approaches are not common in Europe
Safety benefits could arise
• from improved visual acquisition
• from improved spacing accuracy
There is a risk that capacity could be reduced if pilots tend to apply greater spacing than currently achieved by radar control
Slide 20July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
WP4 Conclusions (3)
Enhanced Sequencing & Merging Operations (ATSA-S&M) Agreement that Sequencing and Merging could provide:
• Improved efficiency through reduced R/T usage, and more consistent spacing
• Make ATC instructions less time-critical
• Ability to establish the sequence further out
Sequencing & Merging is expected to provide most benefit when spacing is defined in terms of TIME
There is disagreement about the level of automation required on the aircraft. The impact on pilot workload will depend on the automation provided.
Sequencing and Merging appears highly feasible at some airports (e.g. the Paris CDG and Orly). Appears feasible at Gatwick. The limited size or high complexity of other TMA areas (e.g. those for Heathrow, Frankfurt) would make it harder to implement without major airspace changes.
Slide 21July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
WP4 Recommendations
The Operational Indicators should be updated and prioritised for use in future
assessments.
Sequencing and Merging appears feasible and beneficial for some TMA areas. More
detailed study is recommended for these areas.
Aspects of Sequencing and Merging such as integration with arrival tools, integration
with RNAV and abnormal procedures (failure modes) should be studied further.
Enhanced Visual Spacing on Approach offers benefits for only a limited number of
airports. It should be considered with regard to specific airports and not for general
use.
The design of the CDTI is important to all applications, especially Enhanced
Situational Awareness. Design work is needed to assess filtering algorithms and how
to combine TCAS and ADS-B traffic information.
Slide 22July 2004 – FALBALA/WP5/FOR4/D – CENA, DFS, EEC, NATS, Sofréavia & UoG
Any Questions?