edep tct ctsd - eurocontrol.fr · company: graffica ltd . tct reference gl/tct/tr/1/ 20 february...

TCT Reference GL/TCT/TR/1/

20 February 2009 TCT Component Test Document

of 43

TCT

Technical Document

TCT Component Test Document

Issue: Version 1.1

Authors: Mike Humphrey, Steve Owen

Date: 20th Feb 2009

Company: Graffica Ltd



of 43

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................3

1.1 Document purpose...............................................................................................................................3

1.2 Document Change History..................................................................................................................3

1.3 Document Structure.............................................................................................................................3

1.4 Related Documents / References......................................................................................................3

1.5 Acronyms...............................................................................................................................................4

2 Test Plan .......................................................................................................................................................5

2.1 General....................................................................................................................................................5

2.2 Conflict Generation ..............................................................................................................................5

2.3 Display ...................................................................................................................................................5

3 Test Scripts ...................................................................................................................................................8

3.1 Aircraft Conforming Tests ...................................................................................................................8

3.2 Single Aircraft Non-Conforming Tests ............................................................................................28

3.3 Both Aircraft Non-Conforming Tests ...............................................................................................36

3.4 Composite Tests ................................................................................................................................41



of 43

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 DOCUMENT PURPOSE

This document covers the testing of the eDEP TCT subsystem as specified in the eDEP TCT SRD [Ref 1], and described further in the eDEP TCT DDD [Ref 2]. It includes test plans and test scripts, and the most recent test results where completed.

1.2 DOCUMENT CHANGE HISTORY

Release Author Release Date Release Description

Modifications (sections affected and relevant information)

1.0 Draft 2 M. Humphrey 6th September 2007 First release. All. 1.0 Draft 3 M. Humphrey 12th September 2007 Cross-references filled in. 1.1 J.Isherwood 18th April 2008 2008 8.1 Release

Testing Tests 1, 3,4

2.0 Graffica (OWEN)

19 Feb 09 Updated for B8_3 ALL

Table 1-1 Document Change History

1.3 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

This document contains the following sections:

Section 1 outlines the purpose of the document, and its contents.

Section 2 describes the test plans – the testing strategy, the features to be tested and how the testing will be performed.

Finally, section 3 has the full test scripts, with expected results and observations.

1.4 RELATED DOCUMENTS / REFERENCES

Ref Title Doc Reference Authors Date

1 eDEP TCT SRD. GL/TCT/TN/1, V1.1 M Vere, S Owen November 2007

2 eDEP TCT DDD. GL/TCT/DDD/1, V1.1 M Vere, S Owen November 2007

Table 1-2 References



of 43

1.5 ACRONYMS

Abbreviation Meaning CWP Controller Working Position EATMP European Air Traffic Management Programme eDEP Early Development and Evaluation Platform EEC EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre ELW Extended (Aircraft) Label Window MB1,2,3 Mouse Button 1,2,3 MONA Monitoring Alerts MTCD Medium Term Conflict Detection PPD Potential Problem Display PVD Plan View Display PWP Pilot Working Position SRD Software Requirements Document STCA Short Term Conflict Alert SVCI State Vector Conflict Indicator (yellow link line between conflicting flights) TCT Tactical Controller Tools VAW Vertical Aid Window

Table 1-3 Acronyms



of 43

2 TEST PLAN

2.1 GENERAL This section lists the test cases for the different areas of TCT functionality, with reference back to the original requirements in the SRD [Ref 1].

2.2 CONFLICT GENERATION

2.2.1 Tactical Conflict Test Cases

Test Case Name - description Requirements tested

Case_TTCC_010 Tactical conflict with conforming aircraft

Case_TTCC_020 Tactical conflict with 1 non-conforming aircraft

Case_TTCC_030 Tactical conflict with 2 non-conforming aircraft

TCT_TCT_GEN_020 TCT_TP_TAT_010 TCT_CP_TAT_040 TCT_TP_TAT_050

2.2.2 State Vector Conflict Test Cases


Case_SVC_010 State vector conflict with conforming aircraft

Case_SVC_020 State vector conflict with 1 non-conforming aircraft

Case_SVC_030 State vector conflict with 2 non-conforming aircraft

TCT_TCT_GEN_020 TCT_TP_SVT_010 TCT_CP_SVC_030 TCT_TP_SVT_050

2.2.3 Hybrid Conflict/Critical Manoeuvre Test Cases


Case_CRM_010 Critical manoeuvre with conforming aircraft

Case_CRM_020 Double critical manoeuvre with conforming aircraft

Case_CRM_030 Critical manoeuvre with 1 non-conforming aircraft

TCT_CP_TAT_060 TCT_TCT_CRM_070 TCT_TCT_CRM_080

Case_CRM_040 Critical CFL manoeuvre with conforming aircraft TCT_TCT_CRM_100

Case_CRM_050 Critical CFL manoeuvre with1 non-conforming aircraft TCT_TCT_CRM_100

Case_CRM_060 Critical CFL manoeuvre with2 non-conforming aircraft TCT_TCT_CRM_100

2.2.4 Miscellaneous Test Cases


Case_MSC_010 Rejoin manoeuvre TCT_TP_TAT_020

2.3 DISPLAY

2.3.1 Flight-leg Test Cases


Case_HMI_FL_010 Non-conflicting flight-leg TCT_HMI_TAC_010



of 43

Case_HMI_FL_020 Flight-leg with tactical conflict TCT_HMI_TAC_040 TCT_HMI_TAC_050

Case_HMI_FL_030 Flight-leg with state vector conflict TCT_HMI_SVT_010

Case_HMI_FL_040 Flight-leg with critical manoeuvre TCT_HMI_SVT_020

2.3.2 Aircraft Label Test Cases


Case_HMI_LAB_010 Normal display -

Case_HMI_LAB_020 Non-conformance warning TCT_HMI_TAC_025

Case_HMI_LAB_030 Tactical conflict button TCT_HMI_TAC_020

Case_HMI_LAB_040 Critical manoeuvre button TCT_HMI_TAC_020

2.3.3 PPD Test Cases


Case_HMI_PPD_010 Merged conflict display TCT_HMI_PPD_010

TCT_HMI_PPD_030

Case_HMI_PPD_020 Conflict symbol popup information TCT_HMI_PPD_040

Case_HMI_PPD_030 Tactical Controller conflict horizon cursors TCT_HMI_PPD_050

Case_HMI_PPD_040 Planner Controller conflict horizon cursors TCT_HMI_PPD_060

Case_HMI_PPD_050 Missed manoeuvre conflict horizon cursors TCT_HMI_PPD_070

Case_HMI_PPD_060 PPD cursor limits and defaults TCT_HMI_PPD_080

Case_HMI_PPD_070 PPD scope shading TCT_HMI_PPD_090

2.3.4 VAW Test Cases


Case_HMI_VAW_010 Normal display TCT_HMI_VAW_010

Case_HMI_VAW_020 Tactical conflict display TCT_HMI_VAW_010

Case_HMI_VAW_030 State vector conflict display TCT_HMI_VAW_010

Case_HMI_VAW_040 Critical manoeuvre display TCT_HMI_VAW_010

2.3.5 Miscellaneous Test Cases


Case_HMI_MSC_010 Aircraft symbol warning TCT_HMI_TAC_030

Case_HMI_MSC_020 State vector conflict indicator TCT_HMI_SVT_030

Case_HMI_MSC_030 Rejoin manoeuvre display TCT_HMI_TAC_010

Case_HMI_MSC_040 ELW conflict indicator TCT_HMI_TAC_020



of 43

Case_HMI_PTY_010 Conflict Priority in the HMI TCT_HMI_PTY_010


20 February 2009 D:\GrafficaCode\HEAD\TCT\docs\eDEP_TCT_CTSD.doc

of 43

3 TEST SCRIPTS

3.1 AIRCRAFT CONFORMING TESTS

3.1.1 CT_TCT_CFRM_01 – Conforming Tactical Conflict

Scenario ID CT_TCT_CFRM_01

Test Cases Case_TTCC_010 Case_HMI_LAB_010 Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_FL_010 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_VAW_010 Case_HMI_VAW_020 Case_HMI_MSC_010 Case_HMI_MSC_040 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_HMI_PPD_060

Objective Test functionality concerning a tactical conflict between two conforming aircraft, and basic support functions.

Dependencies -

Resource File tactical_conflict.gsdk

ID Time Test Case Actions Expectations Observations

1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. The eDEP Console and a CWP are displayed.



of 43

2 11:00:20

Case_HMI_LAB_010

Case_HMI_FL_010 Case_HMI_VAW_010

Move the pointer over the label for TACT_01. Move the pointer out of the label again.

MB3 on callsign for TACT_01 in the PVD.

MB3 on callsign for TACT_01 in the PVD.

Flight TACT_01 appears in the PVD.

The label is selected: extra information fields are displayed, the label is highlighted, and the callsign shown, in green, along with the aircraft symbol, speed vector, history trail, and connecting line.

The label is de-selected and returns to normal.

Flight Leg removed in PVD.

MTCD Flight Leg opens in PVD (green line, with time-estimates in white).

VAW opens with MTCD Flight Leg (green line).

MTCD Flight Leg removed in PVD. VAW is closed.



of 43

3 11:01:15

Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_TTCC_010 Case_HMI_VAW_020

Click MB3 on the callsign in the aircraft label for TACT_01 to view its MTCD flight-leg.

Click MB3 again.

TACT_02 appears in the PVD conflicting with TACT_01. Each aircraft label has a red dot.

The MTCD flight-leg for the aircraft is displayed in green, and shows a tactical conflict with Flight TACT_02. The conflict symbol has no ID number in it because it's a TCT conflict. The flight-leg for TACT_02 is shown dotted in green.

The VAW also appears showing the tactical trajectory and the tactical conflict with TACT_02. The flight-leg is removed, and the VAW is closed.

4 - Case_HMI_MSC_010 Click MB1 on the aircraft symbol to toggle the warning on and off.

The symbol, track history and speed vector, change from normal colours to yellow (in normal mode and high-lighted) and back again.

5 - Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case _HMI_MSC_040

Click MB3 on the callsign in each aircraft label to view the extended label window.

Move the pointer over any of the conflict dots.

Move the pointer away from the dot, but remaining within the label or ELW.

The labels and extended label windows display a red dot to indicate the conflict.

Both aircraft labels and the visible ELW become selected.

The label (and ELW if visible) for the other aircraft become de-selected.

This ELW red dot functionality has not been implemented.



of 43

6 - Case_HMI_PPD_010

Case_HMI_PPD_020

Open and observe the PPD.

Move the pointer over the conflict symbol.

Move the pointer around within the panel.

Press and hold MB3 on the conflict symbol.

The PPD shows a tactical conflict (with no ID number) for the two aircraft. Its position reflects the time to the start of the conflict, and the minimum separation distance.

An information panel appears next to the symbol giving the callsigns of the two aircraft, and the minimum separation distance. The aircraft labels and the visible ELW become selected.

When the pointer is over one of the callsigns, only that label, and the associated ELW if visible, are selected; anywhere else, both labels and the ELW are selected.

The problem-oriented flight-leg for the two aircraft is displayed in white with the conflicting sections in red up to the closest point of approach.

7 - Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_FL_020

Press and hold MB3 on one of the aircraft label conflict dots to view its problem oriented flight-leg.

The flight-legs are displayed as above while the button is pressed (there is small delay opening for the button logic to distinguish the press&hold case).

8 - Case_HMI_PPD_030 PPD: Verify the initial values of the red and blue cursors. PPD: Move the red cursor on the time axis below the conflict symbol (and its extent line).

PPD: Move the cursor back up above the conflict symbol.

The test resource file uses modified defaults:

The red lookahead is 5 minutes.

The red separation threshold is 6 nm.

The blue lookahead is 3 minutes.

The blue separation threshold is 5 nm.

The conflict dots are removed from the aircraft labels.

The conflict dots are displayed again.



of 43

9 -

Case_HMI_PPD_060

PPD: Move the red cursor on the distance axis to the left of the conflict symbol.

PPD: Move the cursor back to the right of the conflict symbol.

PPD: Verify the limits of the red and blue cursors.

The conflict dots are removed from the aircraft labels.

The conflict dots are displayed again.

The red lookahead cursor has limits 3-8 minutes.

The red separation cursor has limits 1-10 nm.

The blue lookahead cursor has limits 0-5 minutes.

The blue separation cursor has limits 0-5 nm.

10 11:02:00 Case_TTCC_010 Give one of the flights a new CFL and XFL of 350.

Click MB3 on the callsign for TACT_01.

The conflict is solved, and is removed from all displays.

The VAW opens for TACT_01 and contains a CONTEXTUAL blue conflict line for TACT_02.

3.1.2 CT_TCT_CFRM_02 – Conforming State Vector Conf lict


Test Cases Case_SVC_010 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_VAW_030 Case_HMI_MSC_020 Case_HMI_PPD_010

Objective Test functionality concerning a state-vector conflict between two conforming aircraft.



of 43

Dependencies -

Resource File svector_conflict.gsdk



of 43



2 11:00:00�

Case_SVC_010 Case_HMI_MSC_020

- Two aircraft appear in the CWP with a state vector conflict between them. A yellow line joins the two aircraft symbols, and a label on the line indicates the time to and separation distance at their closest point of approach, based on their state vector trajectories.

3 - Case_HMI_MSC_020 Move the pointer over the state vector conflict indicator label.

The label, and the both aircraft’s labels and symbols are all highlighted.

4 - Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_MSC_020

Press and hold MB3 on the SVCI label.

The state vector trajectories for both aircraft are displayed in yellow, with the conflicting sections in red (the state-vector oriented flight-leg).

5 11:00:05 �


Observe the SVCI label. As time progresses and the aircraft move forward, the time to conflict counts down, while the minimum separation distance remains constant.

6 - Case_HMI_VAW_030 Observe the VAW. There is no conflict in the VAW because the state vector trajectory is not shown in the VAW (it's the Tactical trajectory).



of 43


Case_HMI_PPD_020

Open the PPD.

Press & hold MB3 over the conflict symbol in the PPD.

Hover the mouse cursor over the conflict symbol in the PPD.

There is a conflict symbol in the PPD. It has no ID number since it is a TCT Conflict.

The state-vector oriented flight-leg is opened in the PVD while the button remains pressed (trajectories in yellow).

The two aircraft labels are highlighted in the PVD and a conflict information windows is shown in the PPD indicating the 2 aircraft callsigns and the minimum separation.

8 11:01:55 Case_SVC_010 Flight SVC_01 reaches the end of its trajectory and is deleted.

The state vector indicator, and aircraft SVC_01 are removed from display.

7



of 43

3.1.3 CT_TCT_CFRM_03 – Conforming Tactical and Stat e Vector Conflicts


Test Cases Case_TTCC_010 Case_SVC_010 Case_CRM_010 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_MSC_020 Case_HMI_MSC_040 Case_HMI_PTY_010

Objective Test functionality concerning simultaneous tactical and state-vector conflicts between two conforming aircraft.

Dependencies

Resource File crossing_conflict.gsdk


1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario.

Open PPD

The eDEP Console and a CWP are displayed.

The empty PPD opens.

2 11:00:10�

- - Flight CROS_01 appears in the CWP.

3 11:01:10 Case_TTCC_010 Case_SVC_010 Case_CRM_010

- Flight NO_CFLCT appears in the CWP. It is conflict free throughout the test – no conflict information is ever displayed for it.



of 43

4 11:01:40 Case_TTCC_010 Case_SVC_010 Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_MSC_020 Case_HMI_MSC_040 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PTY_010

Click MB3 on the callsign for CROS_02.

Flight CROS_02 appears in the CWP and has a joint tactical and state vector conflict with CROS_01. There is no red dot in the aircraft labels and extended label windows because the state vector conflict has higher priority. The PPD shows a symbol for the state vector conflict for the two aircraft (it has no ID number, and press&hold MB3 on the symbol opens a State Vector Flight Leg rather than a Problem-Oriented Flight Leg - with yellow trajectory lines). The PPD does not display the tactical conflict because the state-vector conflict has higher priority. A state vector conflict indicator is not drawn between the two aircraft because the conflict is beyond the 5 minute horizon specified in the PPD with the red lookahead cursor.

The MTCD flight-leg opens for CROS_02 showing the tactical conflict between the two flights. The VAW also shows the MTCD flight-leg for CROS_02 with a red conflict symbol (which has no ID number) at FL330.

5 Case_HMI_FL_020 Click MB3 on the callsign for CROS_01.

Click MB3 on the callsign for CROS_01.

The MTCD flight-leg for CROS_02 is closed and replaced by the MTCD flight-leg for CROS_01 in the PVD and the VAW.

The MTCD flight-leg for CROS_01 is closed, and the VAW is removed.

6 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_PTY_010

Move the red PPD lookahead cursor to 8 minutes then put it back to 5 minutes.

The SVCI appears between the two aircraft in the PVD, then disappears when the cursor is put back to its original time. No red dot should appear in the aircraft labels during this test.



of 43

7 11:03:00 �

Case_HMI_PPD_030 - The SVCI appears for flights CROS_01 and CROS_02 since the conflict is now within the lookahead time specified in the PPD.

8 11:03:05 �

Flight CROS_03 appears in the CWP.

9 11:04:40�

Case_TTCC_010 Case_SVC_010 Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_MSC_020 Case_HMI_MSC_040 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_PTY_010

- Flight CROS_04 appears in the CWP and has separate tactical and state vector conflicts with CROS_03. The labels and extended label windows do not display a red dot to indicate the conflict because the state-vector conflict has priority. A state vector conflict indicator is not yet drawn between the two aircraft because the conflict is beyond the PPD lookahead time.


Case_HMI_PTY_010

Observe the PPD The PPD shows 2 state vector conflicts for the two pairs of aircraft (and no tactical conflict). Their positions reflect the time to the start of the conflicts, and the minimum separation distances.

11 - Case_HMI_PPD_010Case_HMI_PPD_030

PPD: Move the red lookahead time cursor to 8 minutes, then put it back to 5 minutes.

PPD: Move the red distance cursor to 0 nm, then back to 6 nm.

With the red cursor at 8 minutes two SVCIs are shown in the PVD for the two state vector conflicts. With the red cursor at 5 minutes only the SVCI for CROS_01 and CROS_02 is shown.

With the red cursor at 0 nm the SVCI in the PVD is removed.

With the SVCI at 6 nm the SVICI re-appears in the PVD.



of 43

12 11:05:55 Case_HMI_PPD_030

Case_HMI_PTY_010

The SVCI for CROS_03 and CROS_04 appears in the PVD because the conflict is within the lookahead time specified in the PPD. No red dot should appear in the aircraft labels.

13 11:07:30 Case_HMI_PTY_010 An STCA alert appears for CROS_01 and CROS_02. By conflict priority the SVCI for these two aircraft is removed in the PVD.

The conflict symbol in the PPD for these two aircraft is totally red indicating the STCA alert. Hovering the mouse over this symbol shows an information popup window with the two callsigns showing the same STCA alert as in the aircraft labels.

14 11:09:30 Case_HMI_PTY_010 Flights CROS_01 and CROS_02 cross.

The STCA alert is removed for these flights.

Note: The STCI and/or the red dot in the aircraft labels may briefly return as the aircraft separate. This is because the state-vector and tactical conflicts still exist for a short period after the crossing point. If the state-vector conflict separation is within the PPD's distance threshold then an SVCI is shown, else if the tactical conflict separation is within the PPD's distance threshold then a red dot is shown.

15 11:10:00 Case_TTCC_010 Case_SVC_010

- All conflict information is removed for flights CROS_01 and CROS_02 in the PVD and PPD.

16 11:10:25 Case_HMI_PTY_010 An STCA alert appears for CROS_03 and CROS_04. By conflict priority the SVCI for these two aircraft is removed in the PVD.



of 43

17 11:13:15 Case_HMI_PTY_010 Flights CROS_03 and CROS_04 cross.

The STCA alert is removed for these flights.

Note: The STCI and/or the red dot in the aircraft labels may briefly return as the aircraft separate (as mentioned previously).


- All conflict information is removed from the displays.

3.1.4 CT_TCT_CFRM_04 – Conforming Critical Manoeuvr e


Test Cases Case_CRM_010 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_FL_040 Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_HMI_PPD_060 Case_HMI_VAW_040 Case_HMI_MSC_040

Objective Test functionality concerning a critical manoeuvre conflict between two conforming aircraft.

Dependencies -

Resource File critical_manoeuvre.gsdk



of 43

Time Test Case Actions Expectations Observations


2 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_HMI_PPD_060

From the Radar Toolbox open the PPD.

Verify the possible range of the two blue PPD cursors.

Verify the possible range of the two red PPD cursors.

Set the blue PPD cursors to 5 minutes lookahead and 5 nm lateral separation.

The two blue cursors are limited to the range 1-5 (minutes, nm respectively).

The two red cursors are limited to the range 5-8 minutes lookahead, and 5-10 nm lateral separation.

3 11:00:45 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_050

Flights CRM_01 and CRM_02 appear in the CWP.

No conflicts are signalled in the HMI. A missed-manoeuvre conflict exists but it is outside the 5 minute horizon specified in the PPD, and the PPD does not show this type of conflict.

4 11:02:30 �

Case_CRM_010 Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_050

- A blue dot indicating a critical manoeuvre point is shown in the label for CRM_01. There is no conflict symbol in the PPD.



of 43

5 - Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_HMI_LAB_040

In the PPD change the blue lookahead time cursor to 4 minutes.

In the PPD change the blue lookahead time cursor to 5 minutes.

The blue dot is removed from the aircraft label for CRM_01.

The blue dot re-appears in the aircraft label for CRM_01.

6 - Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_FL_040

Press and hold MB3 on the critical manoeuvre button in the aircraft label for CRM_01.

The missed-manoeuvre flight-leg is shown while the button is pressed.

The missed-manoeuvre flight-leg consists of the tactical trajectories for both aircraft displayed in green. The trajectory for CRM_02 stops at the conflict point. The state-vector trajectory for CRM_01 is also shown in green up to the conflict point; the conflicting section is shown in blue for CRM_01.

7 - Case_HMI_MSC_040 Click MB3 on the callsign for CRM_01 to view the extended label window.

Press and hold MB3 on the critical manoeuvre dot in the ELW.

The extended label window is displayed,


Conflict dot in the ELW not implemented.

8 - Case_HMI_PPD_050 PPD: Move the blue PPD lookahead time cursor to 4 minutes.

PPD: Move the blue PPD lookahead time cursor back to 5 minutes.

The conflict is removed from the aircraft label for CRM_01 in the PVD.

The conflict reappears in the aircraft label for CRM_01 in the PVD.



of 43

9 Case_HMI_PPD_050 PPD: Move the blue PPD separation cursor to 4 nm.

PPD: Move the blue PPD separation cursor back to 5 nm.

The conflict is removed from the aircraft label for CRM_01 in the PVD.

The conflict reappears in the aircraft label for CRM_01 in the PVD.

10 - Case_HMI_VAW_040 Case_HMI_VAW_020 Case_HMI_FL_020

Click MB3 on the callsign for CRM_01 to open the MTCD flight-leg in the PVD and in the VAW.

Click MB3 on the callsign for CRM_01 to close the MTCD flight-leg in the PVD and in the VAW.

Both flight-legs show no conflict information.

The flight-leg in the PVD is removed and the VAW is closed..

11 11:07:43 Case_HMI_LAB_040.

Case_HMI_FL_040

Press and hold MB3 on the critical manoeuvre button in the aircraft label for CRM_01.

After the first part of the turn the blue dot is still present in the aircraft label for CRM_01 because there is still a critical manoeuvre to perform.


12 11:08:30 Case_HMI_LAB_040

Case_CRM_010

- Flight CRM_01 turns away from the other flight and the missed-manoeuvre conflict disappears from the aircraft label.



of 43

3.1.5 CT_TCT_CFRM_05 – Conforming Double Critical M anoeuvre


Test Cases Case_CRM_010 Case_CRM_020 Case_HMI_FL_040 Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_050

Objective Test functionality concerning a double critical manoeuvre conflict between two conforming aircraft (i.e. where both aircraft have a critical manoeuvre with respect to the other one).

Dependencies

Resource File critical_manoeuvre_double.gsdk



2 11:00:15�

Case_HMI_PPD_050 - Flights CRM_03 and CRM_04 appear in the PVD. There are no blue dots in the aircraft label because the intended missed-manoeuvre conflicts are beyond the lookahead time specified by the blue PPD time cursor.

3 11:00:28 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_CRM_010

A blue dot appears in the aircraft label for CRM_04.



of 43

4 11:01:28 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_CRM_020

A blue dot appears in the aircraft label for CRM_03.

The dots do not appear at the same time because they are not symmetric, and the potential conflict for CRM_04 is sooner.

3 11:00:30 �

Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_FL_040

Press and hold MB3 on the critical manoeuvre button in the aircraft label for each of the aircraft in turn.

The missed-manoeuvre flight leg is displayed for each aircraft.

4 - Case_HMI_PPD_010 Observe the PPD No conflicts are shown since missed-manoeuvre conflicts are not shown in the PPD.

5 - Case_HMI_PPD_050 PPD: Move the blue critical manoeuvre time and distance threshold markers to various position combinations within their limits.

The correct conflicts are shown according to the current thresholds at each stage.

6 11:05:25 Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_CRM_020

The blue dot for CRM_04 disappears because it no longer has a critical manoeuvre after turning away from CRM_03. CRM_03 still has a blue dot.

11:06:20 Case_HMI_LAB_040 Case_HMI_PPD_050 Case_CRM_010

The blue dot for CRM_03 disappears because it no longer has a critical manoeuvre after turning away from CRM_04.

3.1.6 CT_TCT_CFRM_06 – Conforming CFL Critical Mano euvre for Head-On Flights


Test Cases Case_CRM_040 Case_HMI_FL_040

Objective Test functionality concerning a CFL critical manoeuvre conflict between one climbing conforming aircraft and one level conforming aircraft. The aircraft are on



of 43

a head-to-head track.

Dependencies

Resource File critical_manoeuvre_cfl_headon.gsdk

ID Time Test Case Actions Expectations

1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. Allow the aircraft to advance.


2 11:00:15 Case_CRM_040

HEAD_02 has a blue dot in the aircraft label because it is climbing to a level underneath HEAD_01, and the level to FL300 is a critical manoeuvre.

3 Case_HMI_FL_040 Press&Hold MB3 on the blue dot in the aircraft label.

A missed-manoeuvre flight-leg is shown with the conflicting section in blue.

4 11:01:25 Case_CRM_040 On levelling to FL300 the blue dot disappears and no more conflicts are shown.

3.1.7 CT_TCT_CFRM_07 – Conforming Double CFL Critic al Manoeuvre for Head-On Flights


Test Cases Case_CRM_040 Case_HMI_FL_040

Objective Test functionality concerning a CFL critical manoeuvre conflict between one climbing conforming aircraft and one descending conforming aircraft. The aircraft are on a head-to-head track.

Dependencies

Resource File double_critical_manoeuvre_cfl_headon.gsdk



of 43


1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. Allow the aircraft to advance.


2 11:00:30 Case_CRM_040

HEAD_02 and HEAD_01 both have a blue dot in the aircraft label because they both are approaching a CFL which must be obeyed to avoid a conflict.

3 Case_HMI_FL_040 Press&Hold MB3 on the blue dot in the aircraft label for each aircraft.

A missed-manoeuvre flight-leg is shown with the conflicting section in blue.

4 11:01:15 Case_CRM_040 On levelling to the CFL each blue dot disappears.

3.1.8 CT_TCT_CFRM_08 – Suppression of CFL Critical Manoeuvre for Conforming Flights not Laterally Conf licting


Test Cases Case_CRM_040

Objective Test that the critical CFL manoeuvre is not signalled if the two flights are not conflicting laterally.

Dependencies

Resource File critical_manoeuvre_cfl_not_triggered.gsdk



Allow the aircraft to advance.


2 11:01:35 Case_CRM_040

CROS_02 is approaching a CFL beneath CROS_01 but no blue dot appears un the aircraft label.



of 43

3 The situation remains the same while the aircraft cross.

3.2 SINGLE AIRCRAFT NON-CONFORMING TESTS

3.2.1 CT_TCT_NCFM_01 – Non-conforming Tactical Conf lict

Scenario ID CT_TCT_NCFM_01

Test Cases Case_TTCC_010 Case_TTCC_020 Case_SVC_020 Case_MSC_010 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_HMI_LAB_030 Case_HMI_MSC_030 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_PPD_040 Case_HMI_PPD_060 Case_HMI_PPD_070 Case_HMI_PTY_010

Objective Test functionality concerning a tactical conflict where one of the aircraft is not conforming to its trajectory.

Dependencies

Resource File tactical_offplan.gsdk


1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. The eDEP Console, a planner CWP, a tactical CWP, and a PWP are displayed.



of 43


Case_HMI_PPD_070

Check the default values for the cursors in the PPD for the two CWPs.

Check the TCT scope shading in the PPD.

Both Positions: The blue sliders in both positions have values 3 minutes and 5 nm with ranges 0-5 minutes and 0-5 nm.

The red distance cursor is at 6 nm with a range of 5-10 nm.

Tactical position: The red time cursors is at 5 minutes with a range of 5-8 minutes.

Planner position: The orange time cursor is at 8 minutes with a range of 5-8 minutes.

Both the planner and tactical PPDs have a rectangle in a darker grey to indicate the TCT lookahead and separation scope of the tool. This should be set at 8 minutes and 10 nm.

3 11:00:10 �

Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_TTCC_010

- Flights TDEV_01 and TDEV_02 appear in the CWP. There is a tactical conflict between the two flights but there is no red dot in either aircraft label in either CWP because it is beyond the lookahead time specified by the red tactical CWP PPD time cursor.

In the PPD of the tactical CWP there is no conflict symbol (unless the PC button is selected) because the conflict is in the planner controller's responsibility.

In the PPD of the planner CWP a square conflict symbol is shown.



of 43

4 11:01:00 Case_HMI_PPD_040 The conflict start time passes the delegation time specified by the orange cursor in the PPD of the planner CWP.

The conflict is removed from the planner PPD (unless the TC button is pressed), and appears in the tactical PPD.

The conflict symbol is now round because it is under the tactical controller's responsibility.

5 11:02:00 Case_HMI_PPD_030 Case_HMI_LAB_030

In the PPD of the tactical CWP move the red lookahead cursor to 8 minutes.

In the PPD of the tactical CWP move the red lookahead cursor back to 5 minutes.

A red dot appears in the aircraft label of both aircraft in both CWPs (since it is the tactical CWP that decides the tactical time threshold).

The red dot is removed from both aircraft in both CWPs.

6 11:02:45 - PWP: Give TDEV_01 a heading of 240.

-

7 11:04:00 �

Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_TTCC_010 Case_TTCC_020

In the tactical CWP click MB3 on the callsign for TDEV_01 to view its extended label window, and the MTCD flight-leg (in the PVD and VAW).

Until a MONA alert occurs, the MTCD flight-leg in the PVD shows the tactical trajectory in green being updated as the aircraft deviates. The GROUND trajectory is shown in white and does not follow the aircraft while it is deviating.



of 43

8 11:04:07 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_TTCC_020 Case_HMI_MSC_030 Case_MSC_010

After the MONA deviation alert occurs a deviation message appears in line 0 of the aircraft label for TDEV_01.

The MTCD flight leg in the PVD and VAW shows the tactical trajectory in orange (both CWPs) rejoining the GROUND trajectory (in white) further down-route (before or at the sector exit).

The tactical conflict is shown on the orange tactical trajectory.

9 11:04:20 Case_SVC_020 Case_TTCC_020 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_PTY_010

In the tactical CWP press&hold MB3 on the conflict symbol for the tactical conflict between TDEV_01 and TDEV_02.

In the tactical CWP press&hold MB3 on the conflict symbol for the state-vector conflict between TDEV_01 and TDEV_03.

TDEV_01 enters into a state-vector conflict with TDEV_03, and an SVCI is shown between the two aircraft.

There are now two conflict symbols in the PPD for TDEV_01.

A problem-oriented flight-leg appears in the PVD while the button is pressed.

A state-vector oriented flight-leg is opened while the button is pressed.

10 11:06:40 approx.

Case_SVC_020 Case_TTCC_020 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_PTY_010

- Flight TDEV_01 has deviated so far from its trajectory it will no longer conflict with TDEV_02 and all the conflict information for TDEV_02 is removed from display.

However, TDEV_01 still has both a tactical and a state-vector conflict with TDEV_03 and shows an SVCI. There are no dots in the aircraft labels.



of 43

11 In the PWP change the heading for TDEV_01 to 270 degrees.

12 11:07:15 Case_HMI_PTY_010 Case_TTCC_020 Case_HMI_LAB_030

The state-vector conflict is removed between TDEV_01 and TDEV_03.

The tactical conflict remains for these aircraft and both aircraft now have a red dot in the aircraft label.

13 11:08:35 The tactical conflict is removed between TDEV_01 and TDEV_03.

There is no conflict information displayed in the HMI.

14 11:08:35 Case_MSC_010 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_HMI_FL_020

Click MB1 on the deviation warning for TDEV_01 to plan a re-join to its system trajectory at STD.

TDEV_01 is re-planned to rejoin at STD, and since the aircraft is no longer deviating then the deviation alert in line 0 of the aircraft label is removed. The MTCD flight-leg for this aircraft returns to showing the tactical trajectory in green.

15 11:08:35 PWP: Instruct TDEV_01 to take a heading to resume normal navigation at point STD.

Flight TDEV_01 follows its new route.

3.2.2 CT_TCT_NCFM_02 – Non-conforming State Vector Conflict

Scenario ID CT_TCT_NCFM_02

Test Cases Case_SVC_010 Case_SVC_020 Case_TTCC_010 Case_TTCC_020 Case_CRM_030 Case_MSC_010



of 43

Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_HMI_MSC_030 Case_HMI_PTY_010 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_HMI_FL_030 Case_HMI_PTY_010

Objective Test functionality concerning a state-vector conflict and critical manoeuvre conflict where one of the aircraft is not conforming to its trajectory.

Dependencies

Resource File svector_offplan.gsdk


1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. The eDEP Console, a CWP, and a PWP are displayed.

2 11:00:00 �

- Flights SVDV_01 and SVDV_02 appear in the CWP. There are no conflicts between them.

3 11:00:30 - Assume both aircraft (Click MB1 on next sector button, select ASSUME).

PWP: Give SVDV_01 a heading of 275 so it drifts of track.

-

4 11:00:46 As SVDV_01 starts to deviate, MONA has not yet triggered an alert, and since the aircraft are assumed to be on the route and the tactical trajectories do not confirm any conflict, a blue dot is shown in the aircraft label for SVDV_01.



of 43

5 11:01:20 Case_SVC_020 Case_TTCC_020 Case_HMI_PTY_010

As the regularly updated tactical trajectories approach each other then a tactical conflict is triggered triggering the state-vector conflict. An SVCI is shown between the two aircraft.

There is no red dot in the aircraft label for SVDV_01 because the state-vector conflict has priority.

6 11:01:20 Case_HMI_FL_020 Click MB3 on the callsign in the label for SVDV_01 to view its MTCD flight-leg.

The MTCD flight-leg for SVDV_01 is displayed in the PVD and the VAW.

The flight-legs show tactical conflicts with SVDV_02 and SVDV_03.

7 Case_HMI_FL_030 Press&hold MB3 in the information label on the SVCI between SVDV_01 and SVDV_02.

The displayed MTCD flight-leg is temporarily replaced by a state-vector oriented flight-leg while the button is being pressed.

8 11:01:40 �

Case_HMI_LAB_020


- MONA signals a deviation for flight SVDV_01 and a warning appears above the callsign in the aircraft label.

A rejoin manoeuvre is shown, in orange, from the aircraft’s current position back to the next waypoint on its planned trajectory. As the aircraft progresses, the re-join manoeuvre is updated, along with the waypoint used.

9 11:01:45 Case_MSC_010

Case_HMI_LAB_020

Case_SVC_010

Click MB1 on the deviation warning for SVDV_01 to plan a re-join to its system trajectory.

The flight is re-planned from the current aircraft position.

On the next MONA update the new flight-leg is shown in green, and the re-join manoeuvre is no longer displayed.

The deviation warning is removed from the aircraft’s label.

The state vector conflict remains because of the imminent conflict.



of 43

10 11:01:45 PWP: Instruct SVDV_01 to take a heading to resume normal navigation at point SPY.

Flight SVDV_01 follows its new route.

11 11:02:05 Case_TTCC_010 - As SVDV_01 turns onto its new route, it is no longer in state vector conflict with SVDV_02: the SVCI is no longer displayed. However it has a tactical conflict with SVDV_03.

12 11:03:05 Case_SVC_010 - SVDV_01 enters into a state-vector conflict with SVDV_03: a new SVCI is displayed for this conflict.

13 - Use the elastic vector tool to put SVDV_01 on heading 305 with rejoin at RAVLO.

In the PWP enter the same heading.

14 11:07:30 Case_HMI_PTY_010 As the aircraft pass each other an STCA alert is generated and the SVCI is removed because of the higher priority of the STCA conflict.

15 11:08:45 Case_HMI_PTY_010 The STCA alert is removed. Only a tactical conflict remains and a red dot appears in the aircraft labels for SVDV_01 and SVDV_03.

16 11:09:10 The tactical conflict is removed.

17 - Enter a Direct-To RAVLO in the CWP and PWP for SVDV_01.

The aircraft turns to RAVLO and no conflict information is displayed.

18 - - The aircraft remain free of conflict to the end of their routes.



of 43

3.3 BOTH AIRCRAFT NON-CONFORMING TESTS

3.3.1 CT_TCT_NCFM2_01 –

Scenario ID CT_TCT_NCFM2_01

Test Cases Case_TTCC_010 Case_TTCC_020 Case_TTCC_030 Case_SVC_010 Case_SVC_020 Case_SVC_030 Case_HMI_FL_020 Case_MSC_010 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_HMI_PPD_010 Case_HMI_PPD_040 Case_HMI_MSC_030

Objective Test functionality concerning a state-vector conflict and tactical conflict where neither of the aircraft are conforming to their trajectory.

Dependencies CT_TCT_NCFM_01, CT_TCT_NCFM_02

Resource File double_offplan.gsdk



In the PVD open the PPD and move the blue missed-manoeuvre lookahead time cursor to 5 minutes.

The eDEP Console, a CWP, and a PWP are displayed.



of 43

2 11:00:10 �

- - Flights OFF_01 and OFF_02 appear in the CWP. There is a no displayed conflict, although a square tactical conflict symbol is visible in the PPD if the PC button is pressed and the time scale opened up to 16 minutes.

3 - Click MB3 on the callsign in the label for OFF_01 to view its MTCD flight-leg.

The MTCD flight-leg for the aircraft is displayed in solid green, with the conflicting section in red, and a square conflict symbol marking it. The flight-leg of OFF_02 is displayed as a dashed green line.

4 11:00:10 PWP: Instruct OFF_01 to continue its current heading, so it will not turn at the next waypoint.

5 11:02:14 OFF_01 starts to deviate from its GROUND trajectory (in white). The tactical trajectory (in green) is updated to follow the aircraft position.

6 A blue dot warning appears in the aircraft label for OFF_02 to signal a critical manoeuvre to avoid a state-vector conflict with OFF_01.

7 11:02:50 Case_HMI_LAB_020

A MONA deviation alert is triggered for OFF_01 - a warning appears above the callsign in the aircraft’s label and the tactical trajectory is shown in orange. The blue dot is still present because OFF_02 is not deviating.

8 11:02:50 PWP: Give OFF_02 a heading of 300 so it will drift off track.



of 43


Case_HMI_MSC_030

The blue dot is removed for OFF_02 and is replaced by an SVCI between the two aircraft.

The MTCD FlightLeg still shows the tactical conflict. There are no red dots in the aircraft labels while there exists a state-vector conflict. The rejoin manoeuvre for OFF_01 shows the aircraft rejoining the GROUND route at SUGOL (the next down-route waypoint).

10 11:03:35 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Case_TTCC_030 Case_SVC_030

Case_HMI_FL_020

Case_MSC_010

Case_HMI_MSC_030

Click MB3 on the exit waypoint in the label for OFF_02 to view its aircraft oriented flight-leg.

Flight OFF_02 starts to deviate laterally from its planned trajectory – a warning appears above the callsign in the aircraft’s label.

The flight-leg for the aircraft is displayed in solid green, with the conflicting section in red, and a square conflict symbol marking it. The flight-leg of OFF_02 is displayed as a dashed green line.

A rejoin manoeuvre is shown, in orange, from the aircraft’s current position back to the next waypoint on its planned trajectory. As the aircraft progresses, the re-join manoeuvre is updated and the conflict is re-calculated.

11 11:03:35 Case_MSC_010 Case_HMI_MSC_030

Case_HMI_LAB_020

Case_TTCC_020 Case_SVC_020

Click MB1 on the deviation warning for OFF_01 to plan a re-join to its system trajectory.

The flight is re-planned from the current aircraft position, and the new flight-leg is shown in green (after the next track update). The re-join manoeuvre is no longer displayed.


There is still a state-vector conflict and a tactical conflict further down route.

12 11:03:35 - PWP: Instruct OFF_01 to take a heading to resume normal navigation at point SUGOL.

Flight OFF_01 follows its new route.



of 43

13 11:03:35 Case_MSC_010 Click MB1 on the callsign for OFF_02 to open its MTCD flight-leg.

The tactical trajectory is shown in orange and rejoins the GROUND route at the next waypoint on its planned trajectory. As the aircraft progresses, the re-join manoeuvre is updated and the conflict is re-calculated.

14 11:04:15 Case_HMI_LAB_020 Click MB1 on the exit waypoint for OFF_02 and instruct it to go direct to TOLSA.

The flight is re-planned from the current aircraft position, and the new flight-leg is shown in green (after the next track update). The re-join manoeuvre is no longer displayed.


The state-vector conflict and tactical conflict still exist.

15 11:04:15 - PWP: Instruct OFF_02 to go direct to TOLSA.

Flight OFF_02 follows its new route.

16 11:04:415approx

Case_SVC_010 Case_TTCC_010

Click XFL button for OFF_02 and change the XFL to 340.

Click CFL button for OFF_02 and change the CFL to 340.

The conflicts are removed because the tactical trajectory is free of conflicts.

3.3.2 CT_TCT_NCFM2_012

Scenario ID CT_TCT_NCFM2_02

Test Cases Case_CRM_040 Case_CRM_050 Case_CRM_060 Case_HM_FL_040

Objective Test the behaviour of the critical CFL manoeuvre when the aircraft are deviating.

Dependencies



of 43

Resource File critical_manoeuvre_cfl_offplan.gsdk



In the PVD open the PPD and move the blue missed-manoeuvre lookahead time cursor to 5 minutes.

The eDEP Console, a CWP, and a PWP are displayed.

2 11:00:20 Assume both flights (Click MB1 on NextSector button and select ASSUME).

PWP: Set the heading of SVDV_02 to 300 degrees

3 11:00:38 Case_CRM_040 SVDV_02 starts to deviate. A blue dot appears in the aircraft label.

4 11:01:32 Case_CRM_050 A MONA alert is signalled for SVDV_02 and

a lateral deviation message appears in the aircraft label.

The blue dot remains in the aircraft label.

5 PWP: Set the heading of SVDV_01 to 260 degrees

6 11:02:17 Case_CRM_060 A MONA alert is signalled for SVDV_01 and

a lateral deviation message appears in the aircraft label.

The blue dot remains in the aircraft label for SVDV_02.

There is currently a TP problem such that the state-vector trajectory for SVDV_02 goes above FL320 before settling to the CFL, and a state-vector conflict is momentarily generated.

7 11:02:37 SVDV_02 levels to FL320 and the blue dot is removed.



of 43

3.4 COMPOSITE TESTS

3.4.1 CT_TCT_ALL_01 – Conforming Conflicts Combined

Scenario ID CT_TCT_ALL_01

Test Cases All related to conforming aircraft.

Objective Test individual situations in a combined scenario to check for interactions and side-effects.

Dependencies CT_TCT_CFRM_01, CT_TCT_CFRM_04

Resource File combined.gsdk



2 11:00:00�

- - Aircraft start appearing in the CWP

3 - - Verify that the conflicts and critical manoeuvres from tests CT_TCT_CFRM_01 to CT_TCT_CFRM_04 are all present.

The original conflicts are all present.

Some additional conflicts are also present due to additional interactions.

4 - - PPD highlighting and interactions.

5 11:00:05 �

- As the simulation progresses, the evolutions of the previous conflicts are consistent with the individual tests.



of 43

3.4.2 CT_TCT_ALL_02 – Non-conforming Conflicts Comb ined

Scenario ID CT_TCT_ALL_02

Test Cases All related to non-conforming aircraft.

Objective Test the individual situations in a combined scenario to check for interactions and side-effects.

Dependencies CT_TCT_NCFM_01, CT_TCT_NCFM_02, CT_TCT_NCFM2_01

Resource File combined_offplan.gsdk


1 11:00:00 - Launch scenario. The eDEP Console, a CWP, and a PWP are displayed.

2 11:00:00�

- - Aircraft start appearing in the CWP

3 - - Verify that the conflicts and critical manoeuvres from tests CT_TCT_NCFM_01, CT_TCT_NCFM_02, CT_TCT_NCFM2_01 are all present, while giving the instructions below…

The original conflicts are all present.

Some additional conflicts are also present.

4 11:00:30 - PWP: Give SVDV_01 a heading of 275; Instruct OFF_01 to continue its current heading.

5 11:02:15 - PWP: Give OFF_02 a heading of 300 so it will drift off track.



of 43

6 11:02:45 - PWP: Give TDEV_01 a heading of 240.

7 11:02:45 ->

- As the simulation progresses, the evolutions of the previous conflicts are consistent with the individual tests.

8 11:04:45 - Click MB1 on the deviation warning for SVDV_01 to plan a re-join to its system trajectory.

9 11:05:00 - PWP: Instruct SVDV_01 to take a heading to resume normal navigation at point SPY.

10 11:05:20 - Click MB1 on the exit waypoint for OFF_02 and instruct it to go direct to TOLSA.

11 11:05:30 - PWP: Instruct OFF_02 to go direct to TOLSA.

12 11:07:00 - Click MB1 on the deviation warning for TDEV_01 to plan a re-join to its system trajectory.

13 11:07:15 - PWP: Instruct TDEV_01 to take a heading to resume normal navigation at point STD.

14 � - Monitor the evolution of conflicts from state-vector to STCA, then until it disappears. Ensure that the results are coherent with the previous tests that use the same flights.