Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) - Joint Planning and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report 2.0 Overview The objective of this report is to describe TBO for flight planning, surface movement, climb, cruise, and arrival using 4DT management starting as early as 2018 and leading to initial implementation and use by 2025. This 2018 to 2025 timeframe represents “far-term” in the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) NextGen planning. Full use of TBO would then mature across the airspace and airports as demand rises. 4DT operations are central to the NextGen (and Single European Sky ATM Research [SESAR]) concept of use, and follow the limited use of trajectory operations in the en route environment that is a mid-term initiative of the FAA. TBO migrates from strategic traffic flow management and en route cruise to arrivals within the mid-term timeframe, linking en route trajectories to top of descent (TOD) and then through Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs) to approach and landing. 3D trajectories (3DT) (lateral, longitudinal, and time) are used in surface movement, with introduction of surface movement management tools for sequencing aircraft for departures. By 2012, the transition from TOps to TBO is defined with a performance framework that describes aircraft and ANSP requirements. This framework allocates aircraft and ground system performance for the safe and efficient sequencing, spacing, and separation of aircraft based on their trajectories. This report started with development of nominal descriptions of TBO activities on three flight segments. The first is from Phoenix (PHX) to Miami (MIA) using expected flight operational procedures that would exist in a 2025 timeframe, and incorporating opportunities for a mix of domestic and offshore airspace. A second flight segment is built around a flight from Detroit (DTW) to Washington (IAD) to explain how TBO would work in a flow-constrained airspace, with merging of flights from DTW into crossing over-flight traffic and very closely spaced parallel runway (VCSPR) operations at IAD 1 . A third is a flight segment highlighting GA capabilities between PHX and Bozeman (BZN). These three scenarios represent the team’s estimate of what could be possible, subject to further research and further definition as to safety, security, efficiency, capacity, and the necessary functional requirements to make TBO possible. These three scenarios were then deconstructed in a timed sequence to build use cases. A use case captures each action in the scenario and documents the actor or initiating activity, the action, the recipient of the information about the action, and the result of this interaction. Use cases help to identify missing elements of the scenarios and support architecture development that can support defining necessary redundancies and performance. Once defined for the nominal case (how TBO would work in a perfect case), the scenarios are then expanded to deal with off-nominal conditions— where TBO performance degrades or conditions are imposed for safety or security. The scenarios presented here represent a 2018 to 2025 starting timeframe that describes NextGen capabilities, from flight planning through flight performance. It starts in a mixed equipage environment and transforms to extensive use of TBO. 1 Washington-Dulles International Airport does not have and has no plans to build a closely-spaced parallel runway, but for purposes of this scenario it has been added so that procedures and benefits can be described. Joint Planning and Development Office 1
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report TBO flows from experience gained in mid-term implementation of trajectory operations. TBO is the concept of an Air Traffic Management (ATM) system in which every aircraft that is operating in and managed by the system is represented via a 4DT. A 4DT includes a series of points from departure to arrival representing the aircraft’s path in four dimensions: lateral (latitude and longitude), vertical (altitude), and time. Every managed aircraft known to the system has a 4DT either provided by the user or derived from a flight plan for the type of operation. Increasingly, the trajectories used are much more accurate than those in use today. High performing aircraft are flying the trajectory via Flight Management System (FMS), using more precise navigation capabilities. The nature of the aircraft’s adherence to the trajectory is based on the aircraft’s capabilities and the type of operation being conducted. In this way, operations are performance based, meaning that improved services are available to better-equipped aircraft. The 4DT is quite complex. Its creation must consider not only the individual aircraft performance, but also the interaction of the aircraft with other aircraft in the airspace. The 4DT extends its complexity to consider weather, security, user preferences, the airspace and airport configuration, flight procedures, and environmental performance. The 4DT itself can have performance tolerances that vary with the conditions and density of the traffic. For example, the time element of the 4DT can be seconds or minutes. Altitude can be either an assigned altitude or a block of altitude. Lateral precision, normally measured in RNP, can have values in miles in low-density airspace to fractions of a mile on approach. This is why the 4DT starts with pre-negotiation flight planning and is followed by negotiation with the ANSP. Once agreed to, the 4DT is executed as planned. This is not to mean that the operator/user can expect to have a clear path to top of descent at destination top of descent from takeoff. Updates by the aircraft, based on its performance, will require periodic update with more current information to support separation based on TBO. Changes can be expected from the ANSP based on changes in flow constraints. Execution of the 4DT is impacted by the addition or subtraction of downstream constraints, winds aloft, the need to protect airspace for other aircraft, and changes in use of airspace. To the extent possible, trajectories, from initial flight plans through any subsequent changes, are managed through negotiations among the users and the ANSP. Trajectories are used for flight planning, advisory services, airspace security, sequencing, spacing, separation, and congestion management. Any changes to the flight (aside from time-critical safety clearances) are communicated through or to the trajectory. To be effective, the trajectory must be maintained and updated at all times to reflect the latest flight plan, intent information, or clearance. During pre-flight, the users share trajectory intent information with the ANSP and have improved awareness of current and predicted availability of National Airspace System (NAS) resources, including expected constraint information. The ANSP aggregates the trajectory intent information across all user classes for improved planning. The resulting negotiated trajectory reflects user intent and provides a common basis for access to resources and knowledge of system constraints. While flights are airborne, the ANSP uses the trajectory to manage separation with support from problem detection/resolution automation. Throughout the day, the trajectories are aggregated by ANSP flow management automation to assess potential congestion problems, evaluate alternatives collaboratively, and then implement strategies with aircraft-specific clearances. After flight completion, trajectories are used for post analysis and monitoring of system performance by the ANSP and by the users. At the end of the mid-term for NextGen, initial applications such as paired approaches, pair-wise delegated separation, and Required Time of Arrival (RTA) clearances will be available. Joint Planning and Development Office 2
Page 1 and 2: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 3 and 4: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 9: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 61 and 62:
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
15.0 Phoenix To Bozeman Scenario Tr
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145:
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) O
show all

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) - Joint Planning and ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?