Summary of the First Meeting Special Committee 227 ... - RTCA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

o Are the ATM operational concepts well enough defined o Clear that there is some relationship between ground and air systems Coordination with SC214 / WG78 data comm. standards is needed. Interim steps to 4D that need to be considered. o Enhanced time-based flow mgmt o Use of target time of arrival o Part of an AMAN/DMAN + collaborative ATM o Need to provide adequate intent information to the ground systems Perhaps the CNS section in DO236 needs to better explain the interrelations to other systems Help define clearer requirements for 4D requirements and operations Harmonization with WG85 Need to bring SC214/WG78 into line or accept there may need to be rework Data quality – DO-200A is a bit dated, perhaps needs to be updated Summary Need all stakeholders, especially controllers, participating. SC181 History Perspective and Need for FMS Standards – Frank Alexander Frank Alexander, IATA, former Co-Chair of Joint SC181/WG13. Powerpoints: “3b SC-227 History Presentation.pptx “ & “3b FMS standardization presentation.ppt” Early 1990s observed need for FMSs from disparate suppliers and OEMs to have similar behavior. December, 1993 was the first SC181 meeting. In early 1994, SC181 joined with WG13. Frank stated that we must try to look forward 20 years to what the requirements will be so that we can define the system once now, since upgrade opportunities for airplanes happen seldom. Today’s technical standards do not incorporate the requirements that are needed to insure consistent performance across all lines of FMC. The main concerns, and areas of differences are: Turn performance variation Phase of flight transitions – variations affect o roll rates, speeds, default RNP values, display scaling Dissimilar VNAV path construction RTA differences o What are the performance numbers o Acceptable tolerances for ATM o How is it achieved o Availability of intent Database coding o Offsets, dep/app procedures, speed constraints Holding o Wide variation in paths for holding patterns Sylvain: common performance requirements will not allow manufacturers to optimize their aircraft performance. SC181 History Perspective and Thoughts for SC227 – John Hillier John Hillier, Honeywell Powerpoint: “3c SC 227 KOM - Honeywell.ppt” John led the SC-181 path definition subgroup, co-chaired with Airbus’s Gilles DeCevin John pointed out that RNP RNAV certification now is painful and we need to fix this! 10
Sharing of common flight plan between air and ground (ADS-C EPP) is the key to TBO. Datalink is the enabler. RTA is one piece of the puzzle, but there are concerns about different solutions affecting separation. Deterministic LNAV and VNAV is required. Lessons learned Not being tied out with SC159 really hurt o SC214 is strikingly similar situation, is data link driving nav/guidance o Security, this is more than data, it’s the expanding scope of security into operations. o ADS-B impact to navigation is another area. Nav world was and still is split between GPS/WAAS and RNP SC’s o Not close to being harmonized o Full time RNP vs. RNP RNAV o AR RNP vs. non-AR RNP We should have dealt more with classic procedures and use of the RNP concept Need to tie out CAAs We need to make it so pilots can understand this stuff Problematic areas in SC181, still need to be addressed o Offsets o Temp Comp o VNAV o Fixed radius transitions • Started simple – name of airway indicated o RNP holds o Integrity o Accuracy models o Flight deck annunciations How things evolved Evolve existing concept of RNAV into RNP RNAV Wanted to avoid sensor-based procedures Break into logical pieces o UI o Performance o o Path definition / path guidance Spin-offs • DO200, DO 201, VNAV, TOAC, DO -283 What’s the same Nakamura still trying to maintain order Classic procedures (VOR, etc.) cause 99% of the problems for FMS The transition period will always be there – mixed equipage It still costs more to change the airside than the ground side The editing process is painful – get draft sections out early and often o 10% do 90% of the work, and attend the meetings o The rest will send comments only after the draft is out What’s different Data link! Vertical situation displays RTA trials SESAR / NextGen Integrated cockpits are the norm now o SVS, TAWS, ADS-B 11
Page 1 and 2: Summary of the First Meeting Specia
Page 3 and 4: NEXTGEN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (NGIP)
Page 5 and 6: NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP)
Page 7 and 8: • flight deck display of speed cu
Page 9: Powerpoint: “3a Standards of Navi
Page 13 and 14: Q: what is the impact on economy of
Page 15 and 16: Section 1.1 para 3 is significant.
Page 17 and 18: David DS: network and flow manageme
Page 19 and 20: concern that we don’t have moment
Page 21: Prioritization and Scope of Updates

Summary of the First Meeting Special Committee 227 ... - RTCA

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

Delete template?

Save as template?