issues with pbn implementation and trajectory prediction in atc 2012-10-24آ  issues with pbn...

Download Issues with PBN Implementation and Trajectory Prediction in ATC 2012-10-24آ  Issues with PBN Implementation

If you can't read please download the document

Post on 14-Aug-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Issues with PBN Implementation and Trajectory Prediction in ATC Operations

    Hassan Shahidi MITRE - USA

    Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD)

    Director, Aviation Safety

  • Issue: Different Implementations of Standards Lead to Path Performance Variations

    Due to Flight Management System (FMS) differences, planned and as flown paths vary, resulting in less predictability for controllers

  • Issue: FMS Performance Differences Flyby Waypoints, Speed Constraints and Wide Turns

    • Turns at flyby waypoints – Turn anticipation differences varies

    • Speed constraints at waypoints – Some FMSs require an altitude at a

    speed constraint; some don’t

    • Turns above FL195

    – Some aircraft perform wider turns for shorter path length (fuel savings) resulting in bank angles of 5-15 degrees

  • Issue: FMS Performance Differences Lateral Offsets, Runway Transitions

    • Lateral Offset – FMS’s perform Lateral Offset differently

    • Some FMS’s may start and end a lateral offset at a waypoint and some cannot

    • Runway transitions – Not all FMS’s automatically process

    (non tailored) runway transitions • Limiting leg types off the runway

    – Heading to Altitude (VA) vs. Heading to Intercept (VI)

    – Direct to Fix (DF) vs. Course to Fix (CF)

  • 5

    Under busy conditions, controllers take airplanes off the PBN procedure and the full benefits are not realized

    Project title (Insert, Header & Footer)

    Example: Path Prediction

    KEPEC

    Lateral path prediction impacted most fly-by turn variation

  • 6

    Example: RF Legs Improve Trajectory Predictions

    OAK arrivals (mixed) OAK arrivals (RNP AR)

  • KEPEC

    0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0

    50

    100

    150

    200

    250

    300

    Point of Closest Approach (NM)

    Fl ig

    ht C

    ou nt

    Sm al

    l R ad

    iu s

    La rg

    e Ra

    di us

    The point of closest approach is defined as the distance from the fix to the point where the flight bisects the turn

    Example: RF Legs Reduce Variability

  • • Unconstrained FMS planned descents lead to unpredictability and variability in vertical profiles

    Example: FMS Vertical Profile

    Potential mitigation – Applying constraints with possible impact to fuel burn and emissions.

    Controllers find it difficult to manage CDAs through departure flows and other crossing traffic

  • The Way Forward Lessons Learned

    • Incorporate new understanding of FMS performance into: – Procedure design tools – Improved standards &

    criteria – Leverage Automation Aids – Best practices given current

    fleet mix – Training (pilots/controllers)

    Near Term Future • Improve FMS standardization

    – RTCA SC 227 and EUROCAE Working Group 85

    – Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rulemaking Committee (PARC)

    – Flight Deck Automation Working Group

    – CNS Task Force

    Issues with PBN Implementation and Trajectory Prediction in ATC Operations Issue: Different Implementations of Standards Lead to Path Performance Variations Issue: FMS Performance Differences�Flyby Waypoints, Speed Constraints and Wide Turns Issue: FMS Performance Differences�Lateral Offsets, Runway Transitions Example: Path Prediction Example: RF Legs Improve Trajectory Predictions Slide Number 7 Example: FMS Vertical Profile The Way Forward�Lessons Learned�

Recommended

View more >