1 phare operational scenarios j-p. nicolaon, operational task force chairman eurocontrol...
Post on 27-Mar-2015
226 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
11
PHARE Operational ScenariosPHARE Operational Scenarios
J-P. Nicolaon, J-P. Nicolaon,
Operational Task Force ChairmanOperational Task Force Chairman
EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreEUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
22
Overview of the work on PHARE scenariosOverview of the work on PHARE scenarios
JULY 1990JULY 1990 PHARE Medium Term Scenario(Research Programme) :Initial operational organisation based on :
Human in the loop4D NavigationAutomated ATC ToolsData-Link Communication
with the aim to increase ATC productivity
33
PHARE medium term scenario 2000-2015PHARE medium term scenario 2000-2015
Envisaged changes in en-route controllers’ working Envisaged changes in en-route controllers’ working methodsmethods
Extended planning horizonExtended planning horizon Multi-Sector Planning ControllerMulti-Sector Planning Controller Redistribution of workload from Tactical to Planning Redistribution of workload from Tactical to Planning
ControllerController
Assisted runway managementAssisted runway management Assisted Arrival and Departure sequencing managementAssisted Arrival and Departure sequencing management Computer-based merging and final approach spacing Computer-based merging and final approach spacing
advisoriesadvisories
44
Scenarios for PD/1, PD/2 and PD/3Scenarios for PD/1, PD/2 and PD/3
PHARE
Medium
Term
Scenario
PD/1: PD/1: En-En-
routeroute
PD/2: PD/2: ArrivalsArrivals
PD/3: PD/3: Gate to Gate to
gategate
19901990 19941994 19951995 19971997
55
lateral planning screenlateral planning screen
lateral route points unchanged
prediction uses ground radius turns
predicted time / alltat route points
request downlink of prediction to ATC
guide to this prediction locally
vertical planning screenvertical planning screen
altitude constraint windows
predicted altitude profile
66
Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1
• Planning up to 20/25 minutes ahead of time
• Conflict-free sector transit plan (4D and 3D)
• Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D aircraft
• Information and directives to his TC• Co-ordination of entry/exit conditions• Update ground system
PC Role
77
Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1
• R/T• Conflict-free passage• Monitoring 4D aircraft• Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D
aircraft if current “contract” was to be modified
• R/T transmissions to 3D aircraft of instructions as proposed by the ground system
• Handling of exceptions
TC Role
88
HIPSHIPS
99
Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1
PD/1 highlighted the need to look at task PD/1 highlighted the need to look at task sharing between Planning Controller and sharing between Planning Controller and Tactical ControllerTactical Controller
Results were taken into account when designing Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/2 and PD/3scenarios for PD/2 and PD/3
1010
PD/2 Frankfurt TMAPD/2 Frankfurt TMA
1111
PD/2 ground tracksPD/2 ground tracks
With PHARE toolsWithout PHARE tools
Identical traffic samples in both cases
1212
Scenario for PD/2Scenario for PD/2
The main PD/2 objectives became: to experiment / demonstrate the performance of
the Arrival Management software and the feasibility of real flight according to automatic trajectory uplink
to assess the controllers behaviour and acceptability versus automation
to evaluate landing rate improvement
1313
Scenario for PD/2Scenario for PD/2
Controller’s roles changed as follows:
ObserverPCPC
Monitoring of 4D aircraftR/T transmission of Arrival Manager advisories
to 3D aircraftDeconflicting remaining conflicts (if existing)
TCTC
1414
Lessons learned from PD/2Lessons learned from PD/2
Automated Arrival Manager interactivity Automated Arrival Manager interactivity requiredrequired
The definition of STARs, Holds and Stacks The definition of STARs, Holds and Stacks needs to be reconsideredneeds to be reconsidered
Results were taken into account when designing Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/3scenarios for PD/3
1515
Scenario for PD/3Scenario for PD/3
Main concept elements :• Timely work sharing• Complementary tasks remaining consistent and
relevant with time Layered Planning
Multi-Sector Planner 30'Planning Controller 10'Tactical Controller Assume Control
1616
4D TRAJECTORY 4D TRAJECTORY MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT
Sector n-1 Sector n Sector n+1 Sector n+2
aircraft position
assume control by sector n
TC trajectory modification via:• formalize clearance• trajectory negotiation•or R/T communication
Objectives : to differentiate clearance from planning to pilot to update ground system (planning and negotiation authority)
PC modification viatrajectory negotiation
sector contract approval = clearance
MSP modification via uplink
MF
previous sectorcontract approval
1717
Multi-Sector Planner (30' =>10') (En-route)
To equilibrate traffic between sectorsTo equilibrate traffic between sectors
To reduce local complexityTo reduce local complexity
to optimize trajectoryto optimize trajectory
1818
Tactical Tactical Load Load
SmootherSmoother
1919
2020
En-route Planning Controller :(10' =>Assume Control)
En-route Planning Controller :(10' =>Assume Control)
To manage Problem SituationsTo manage Problem Situations to resolve 4D conflictsto resolve 4D conflicts to prepare and transfer solutions for 3D aircraft to the to prepare and transfer solutions for 3D aircraft to the
Tactical ControllerTactical Controller To transfer problems to the Tactical Controller if he was To transfer problems to the Tactical Controller if he was
in a better position to resolve themin a better position to resolve them
To negotiate trajectory with 4D aircraftTo negotiate trajectory with 4D aircraft To assist the Tactical Controller after assume To assist the Tactical Controller after assume
controlcontrol
2121
En-route Tactical Controller
(Assume Control => Sector Exit)
En-route Tactical Controller
(Assume Control => Sector Exit) To resolve conflicts unresolved by the Planning To resolve conflicts unresolved by the Planning
Controller and new conflictsController and new conflicts To monitor aircraft trajectoriesTo monitor aircraft trajectories To negotiate short-term trajectory modificationTo negotiate short-term trajectory modification To uplink formalized clearancesTo uplink formalized clearances To manage R/TTo manage R/T
2222
Arrival TMA ControllersArrival TMA Controllers
Arrival Sequence Planning Controller (ARR- SPArrival Sequence Planning Controller (ARR- SP)) Interaction with the Arrival Manager (AM)Interaction with the Arrival Manager (AM) Conflict-free passageConflict-free passage Trajectory Negotiation Trajectory Negotiation Co-ordinationCo-ordination
Tactical ControllerTactical Controller R/TR/T Final responsibility for real-time separation and final Final responsibility for real-time separation and final
runway spacingrunway spacing
2323
Departure TMA ControllersDeparture TMA Controllers
Departure Planning Controller (DEP-PC)Departure Planning Controller (DEP-PC) Interaction with the Departure Manager (DM)Interaction with the Departure Manager (DM) Initial conflict-free SIDs (before departure)Initial conflict-free SIDs (before departure) Trajectory Negotiation / Co-ordinationTrajectory Negotiation / Co-ordination
Departure Tactical Controller (DEP-TC)Departure Tactical Controller (DEP-TC) R/TR/T Ultimate responsibility for real-time separation and final Ultimate responsibility for real-time separation and final
runway sequencingrunway sequencing
2424
Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.
The co-operation between the PHARE partners: The co-operation between the PHARE partners: highlighted:highlighted:
divergence in approaching concept designdivergence in approaching concept design necessity of compromises (Done !)necessity of compromises (Done !)
Demonstrated enrichment of ideasDemonstrated enrichment of ideas Made possible common understandingMade possible common understanding
2525
Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.
It addressed:It addressed: all phases of flightall phases of flight transition for 2000-2015 periodtransition for 2000-2015 period long-term applicationslong-term applications
was partly technology drivenwas partly technology driven showed difficulties to balance functional requirements for showed difficulties to balance functional requirements for
advanced tools with controller rolesadvanced tools with controller roles showed need for further research into progressive and showed need for further research into progressive and
pragmatic adaptation of scenarios for short and medium-pragmatic adaptation of scenarios for short and medium-term implementationterm implementation
2626
PHARE Operational ScenariosPHARE Operational Scenarios
J-P. Nicolaon, J-P. Nicolaon,
Operational Task Force ChairmanOperational Task Force Chairman
EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreEUROCONTROL Experimental Centrenextnext
top related