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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report Recommendation TBO-35 Through modeling and simulation, evaluate the pros and cons of absolute (creating and sustaining a slot) and relative (merging and spacing) timing for merging into flows. Develop procedures for both and evaluate what changes would be needed in merging and spacing capabilities, and how conflict detection and resolution would take part in joining an overhead stream of traffic. 18.23 Sharing Intent Between Self-separating and ANSP Controlled Traffic As part of the TBO closed-loop system approach (which provides information to the ANSP on aircraft 4DT changes through confirmation of execution of a change in 4DT and supplemental information derived by the aircraft), it becomes possible to have mixed operations in the airspace. The controller knows the intent of the self-separating aircraft, and the self-separating aircraft can yield to those aircraft being controlled by the ANSP. The problem is that the ANSP’s intent in directing controlled aircraft is not known to the self-separating aircraft, and the intent of the self-separating aircraft is not known to the other controlled aircraft in the airspace because the data link message is addressed and not broadcast. While this lack of exchange of information can be accommodated by a combination of ADS-B intent information and rules of the road, this issue may be mitigated. The question then becomes, what is the relationship between the intent message for TBO that is feeding conformance monitoring for the ANSP and the ADS-B Out intent information used by other aircraft in the vicinity? To what degree can we use ADS-B intent information to close the information loop and produce true situational awareness? Short-term target state intent is available from ADS-B. Self-separation requires ADS-B In for conflict detection and resolution for use in self-separation. Recommendation TBO-36 Create a study team to define air-to-air and air-to-ground intent, and how the information is used. Define the extent to which rules of the road can be used in a mixed equipage situation where some aircraft are self-separating and others are being managed by the ANSP. 18.24 Arrival Meter Point Becomes the Gate in Off-nominal Operations TBO becomes the mechanism for a new acceptance rate in the presence of off-nominal operations. As demand must be adjusted downward, aircraft en route to the arrival meter point can be managed to realize demand in a 30 to 45 minute time window. Realizing that international arrivals have priority due to fuel reserve requirements, and diversions take priority over those arriving that are new to the airspace, queuing tools can be developed that match TBO information on all flights to a demand level and recommend courses of action to aircraft already in the air. Aircraft can be slowed, held, and given a different TOD and arrival path to slow them down to balance demand, along with other measures consistent with their preferences, fuel loads, and alternates. Recommendation TBO-37 Develop alternatives for managing demand during off-nominal operations using the arrival metering point for aircraft that are airborne at the time of the need to regulate demand that can leverage TBO. Evaluate these alternatives in terms of efficiency in delay management. Joint Planning and Development Office 107
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report 18.25 TBO Policy Recommendations There are some overarching policy recommendations being made that support a better definition of the operational aspects of TBO. Recommendation TBO-38 The TBO Study Team recommends resolution of Best-Equipped, Best-Served (also known as performance-based operations) as an operational incentive for equipage, and that it should be applied relative to TBO. Collaboration with the operator community—airlines, GA, military—is required if support for TBO operations is to be realized. (IWP Policy references: PI-0014 – Aircraft Equipage, PI- 0007 – Rules of the Road) Recommendation TBO-39 TBO offers the opportunity to use computer automation to separate aircraft. Doing so may increase the cost of aircraft equipage and ANSP infrastructure due to stricter certification standards. Decisions are needed that involve human factors and labor issues, as well as technical and cost issues. Additional research is needed before policy decisions can be made to determine what the human does, including what is done by the automation, and what the role of the human is in off-nominal conditions so that requirements can be allocated for TBO. (IWP Policy references: PI-0006 – Balance of Human vs. Automation) Recommendation TBO-40 The TBO concept requires two-way data communications and associated automation in order to exchange and negotiate full 4DTs and flight plans. Although air transport aircraft already carry data communications radios, proposed FAA requirements would require equipage with new radios at a significant cost. The TBO Study Team recommends a performance-based solution, including definition of the functional requirements for TBO and other communications uses, setting the performance requirements (e.g. availability, latency, message integrity), and resolving the data communications bandwidth and spectrum. Operators could be allowed to equip with any compliant system; this would increase flexibility, avoid rapid obsolescence, and likely reduce overall direct equipage costs. This may also permit the DOD to utilize Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS) through software upgrades, thereby lowering equipage costs, reducing special mixed-equipage procedures, and streamlining TBO implementation. (IWP Policy references: PI-0017 – Data Communications Architecture Strategy, PI-0014 – Aircraft Equipage) Additionally, there is a high likelihood that a significant percentage of GA aircraft will not be able to justify the expense of data communications avionics. However, trajectory intent information transmitted as part of an ADS-B message would provide limited TBO capabilities and may be all that is needed for these aircraft to operate outside of high-density flows in a TBO environment. Research is needed to define the adequacy of ADS-B Out messaging for TBO. (IWP Policy references: PI-0014 – Aircraft Equipage, PI-0008 – GA Benefits) Recommendation TBO-41 Flight planning systems used by airline and flight operations centers (AOC/FOC) need to be able to communicate with ANSP systems and possess the necessary automation capability to carry out negotiations. Best-Equipped, Best-Served policy should be applied as an operational incentive for AOC/FOC equipage for flight planning. Operators that do not use AOC/FOC services, GA, for Joint Planning and Development Office 108
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:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 71 and 72: 15.0 Phoenix To Bozeman Scenario Tr
Page 115: 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?