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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report CATM represents improvements that can occur without avionics investments. However, improvements in flight planning, definition of the flight object, and building the connectivity between the operators and the ANSP should be based on net-centric operations. Airlines are coming off of years of losses and lack of investment in planning tools. With capacity reduced, every flight’s performance becomes more critical. As the economy improves, airlines will begin to reinvest to attain shared common situational awareness. The ANSP needs to be prepared to conclude tool development and join in a joint effort to improve flight planning. This is one of the reasons the TBO Study Team has recommended expanding flight planning in the ConOps. TBO has some challenges ahead that can be mitigated by TOps. Among these are resolving the intent message format and determining how ADS-B Out could be used to aid in intent and in providing more accurate wind information. Under TOps, early implementation of conformance monitoring will help to transform to TBO. Conformance monitoring provides a means of measuring flight progress based on surveillance and intent. 20.0 Conclusion The TBO Study Team has provided just a glimpse into the world of TBO. TBO is a very significant and transforming change on the path to NextGen. The approach has been to expand the value of flight planning, recognize that the traffic volume will exceed what the air traffic controller can handle today, and rely on automation to perform separation based on a combination of present aircraft position and a future position in time. There is conformance monitoring both in the cockpit and with the ANSP, and conformance to a negotiated and agreed-upon trajectory forms a contract between the operator/user and the ANSP. The separation automation must always work. Airborne and ground elements of automation must be certified to provide separation assurance. While separation represents a significant shift, increased collaboration through network-centric operations to improve common situational awareness will provide significant improvements in efficiency and capacity. It is important to emphasize that TBO is about choices. Once received, choices are negotiated, accepted, and then executed with precision. The higher the airspace traffic density, the greater will be the need for precision performance. But TBO can operate at any level of precision. It is the execution of the agreement that assures separation. Strategically, automation must provide choices to the operator/user that resolve downstream conflicts and address flows. Weather is integrated into the decisions that must be made both strategically and tactically. As the number of strategic decisions rise, the number of tactical interventions will diminish, balancing workload both in the air and on the ground. At this point in the discussion of TBO, the level of precision requires research. While the RNP values used in this report are likely to be very close to what is needed, it is because RNP is maturing at a fast pace. The same cannot be said for separation distances. While the targeted goal is three miles everywhere in domestic airspace, we will not see it until the surveillance data network is providing fused information and the population of ADS-B equipped aircraft has been reached to support it. Likewise, the TBO Study Team has used notional time performance under the concept of RTP that requires development. Joint Planning and Development Office 111
Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) Study Team Report In communications, TBO is highly dependent on ground-ground connectivity for network-centric operations and data link for negotiations, agreement, and validation of execution of any given 4DT. But one data link pipe does not represent a single solution. Because TBO communications are mostly in a strategic time frame, the urgency of connectivity is unnecessary for a majority of the transactions. The team has made several recommendations on developing the messaging content and requirements for TBO because of the urgency in getting to a set of requirements. The requirements are more about the information flows between systems than about the performance of the link. With respect to aviation security, TBO represents one of the layers of adaptive security. Intent is a powerful tool in monitoring conformance. Likewise, in flight planning there are opportunities to build in authentication, from submittal of a plan to starting the aircraft. In-flight performance puts bounds around the aircraft, and deviations from these bounds have separation consequences that must be addressed. Environmentally, TBO provides an opportunity to meet improved noise performance by more closely defining flight tracks. TBO offers savings in fuel burn, on the airport, during climb, through the use of cruise climb, and the optimized arrivals to an airport. Noise, emissions and fuel savings translate into tangible environmental benefits. Finally, The TBO Study Team recognizes that this is the start of a greater debate on the details of TBO. Our approach was to provide information on how TBO would work in the context of operational scenarios. Much work must follow. Critical in this work is the beginning of a safety case and the necessary analyses to reach decisions on fundamentally changing how aircraft are separated. This safety case is followed by the functional requirements for TBO and a significant discussion on definition of requirements for automation’s performance. Joint Planning and Development Office 112
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:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70: Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) S
Page 71 and 72: 15.0 Phoenix To Bozeman Scenario Tr
Page 119: 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?