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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report 18.3 TBO Starts with the Business Trajectory The cornerstone of TBO is that every operator/user defines their trajectory—how they want to fly the mission. The ANSP is either able to accept the choice of the operator/user, or provide constraints to the operator/user and begin a negotiation process to reach agreement. Once agreed to, the expectation is that the operator/user and the ANSP will have a contract for the flight, both sides fulfilling their parts of the mission. When changes are needed, whether in preflight or flight, options will be provided to the operator/user to help the ANSP with flows. Recommendation TBO-3 Throughout the concept of operations, there needs to be greater emphasis on developing and offering trajectory options and flexibility from the ANSP to the operator/user, whether in flight planning or while in flight. These choices must each be executable, consistent with the aircraft’s performance, ANSP capabilities, and the need to separate, sequence, and space with other aircraft. Recommendation TBO-4 Expand the discussion of the role of automation in managing TBO to emphasize the business trajectory and the role trajectory options and operator/user flexibility play in negotiation and reaching agreement. Conduct research on the balance between aircraft and ground-derived options for executing a 4DT. 18.4 TBO is a Closed-Loop System Once agreement is reached on a trajectory, a clearance is delivered to the aircraft as a 4DT. The flight crew accepts the clearance and enters the information into onboard automation. In order to close the loop, when executed by the pilot, a message needs to travel back to the ANSP that confirms the action taken and the planned execution that will follow. ANSP automation then compares what was sent as a clearance and what the flight crew is executing. This comparison starts conformance monitoring and represents the closure of the information loop. Recommendation TBO-5 Define the agreement message that makes up the 4DT clearance and acceptance by the flight crew, and the message layout and performance for confirmation of execution by the aircraft’s automation. Recommendation TBO-6 Messages to and from the aircraft representing changes in the 4DT must have higher integrity than messages used for negotiating such a change. This is because the 4DT changes the flight path of the aircraft. However, because this messaging in support of the 4DT clearance is principally a strategic operation well in advance of execution, the data link need not be an instantaneous communication. The message could be sent multiple times before acknowledgement of receipt. The required communication performance (RCP) needs to be defined for TBO 4DT negotiation and delivery. Recommendation TBO-7 Negotiation may be supported on different communication links. In a tactical situation, this negotiation will likely be accomplished by voice. In order to close the loop, a change to the 4DT should be sent using a path that allows for automatic loading from data link communications to the FMS, eliminating manual entry of information. Joint Planning and Development Office 93
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report Recommendation TBO-8 The closed-loop approach to TBO is predicated on messaging between air and ground. Information in these messages needs to be defined. The TBO Study Team recommends that the record layout for the flight object and the 4DT transmittal, acknowledgement, input, execution, and transmittal of that execution be defined in terms of information needed for automation, not just a replacement for a voice clearance. The message length, bit content, update cycles, and authentication overhead for security must be defined, so as to properly size the data link. As stated previously, the exchange of information must have the same structure for all aircraft participating in TBO. 18.5 Flight Planning Needs Strengthening in the ConOps The existing NextGen ConOps needs additional concepts explaining future flight planning activities in NextGen. TBO starts with a desired business trajectory. It may require trial planning that leads to negotiation between the operator/user and the ANSP over system constraints and preferences. The JPDO recognizes that a gap exists and that there is a need to add greater definition of the relationship between flight planning and the ANSP. While research and development will define most of the new concepts in flight planning, a starting point is needed that describes the relationship between the operator/user and the ANSP. Recommendation TBO-9 Create a new operational improvement and supporting enablers around flight planning activities that leverage network-centric operations and provide the foundation for laying out the exchange of information between the operator/user and the ANSP, negotiation of the trajectory, and the enabling services required to be developed so that TBO can proceed. The following is recommended: The airlines can provide improvements to CATM and related processes through improved flight planning systems and communications. The results of these changes can reduce costs to all operators and provide greater efficiency. The key enablers are with operators, aircraft, and the ANSP, including flight-planning systems, data communications, and enhanced weather sensors. Weather forecast tools, combined with enhanced decision support tools, will provide upgrades in aircraft, ANSP and AOC information exchange, access, and throughput. These capabilities provide direct and indirect benefits to all operators with improved overall efficiency. This solution set covers strategic and tactical flow management, with continuous flight-day evaluations including routine and critical interactions with operators, specifically AOC, to mitigate situations when the optimum desired use of capacity cannot be accommodated. CATM solution set reviews current and future capacity, flow, and weather to make capacity adjustments to shift demand to alternate resources—routings, altitudes, times, and/or demand. Performance analysis, where throughput is constrained, is the basis for strategic user requests and operations resource planning. Continuous real-time flight day evaluations of constraints are provided to ANSP traffic management decision-support tools and users such as the AOC. Flight day evaluation metrics are complementary and consistent with collateral sets of metrics for airspace, airport, and flight operations to meet stakeholder demand while ensuring the highest level of safety, throughput, and regulatory compliance. Joint Planning and Development Office 94
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 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 71 and 72: 15.0 Phoenix To Bozeman Scenario Tr
Page 101: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 145: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) O
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?