Title: Mark Watson
1 Mark Watson Richard Pugh(NATS)
CARE / ASAS Action FALBALA Project Disseminati
on Forum - 8th July 2004 WP4 - Operational
Indicators, Interviews Workshop
2FALBALA Work Package 4
- Investigation of three Package I Airborne
Surveillance applications - Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during
Flight Operations (ATSA-AIRB) - Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach (ATSA-VSA)
- Enhanced Sequencing and Merging operations
(ASPA-SM) - Assessment based on views of controllers, pilots,
flight operations and ATM experts.
3Work Package 4Operational Indicators, Interviews
Workshop
- 1. Define the Operational Indicators
- 2. Interviews with Controllers, Pilots ATC
Experts - 3. Operational Workshop to brainstorm selected
issues
41. Operational Indicators
- Stage 1 identified a set of metrics, Operational
Indicators, which could be used throughout the
project - Two perspectives
- Airspace Perspective (characteristics of the
airspace) - Aircraft Perspective (characteristics for an
individual flight) - Operational Indicators were used as input for the
Quantitative analysis done by WP1 and WP2
(already discussed) - Operational Indicators were used as an aid for
discussions in WP4
5Examples of Operational Indicators
- Airspace Perspective, e.g.
- Runway Capacity
- Use of Radar Vectoring
- Use of Holding Patterns
- Aircraft Spacing
- . . .
- Aircraft Perspective, e.g.
- No. of surrounding aircraft (and distribution by
range) - Relative distance and bearing of traffic on same
route - Relative distance and bearing of traffic on other
routes - . . .
62. Questionnaires
- Questionnaires were developed to discuss the
operational benefits and limitations of the three
ASAS applications - Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during
Flight Operations - Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach
- Enhanced Sequencing and Merging
7Questionnaire Participants
- ATM and Airline Experts
- Controllers from DFS, DGAC and NATS
- Pilots from Lufthansa, British Airways and Air
France - Varying previous experience of ASAS Concepts
(from none to extensive)
8Questionnaires
- Two Questionnaires
- 1 for Controllers (and ATC Experts)
- 1 for Pilots (and Flight Ops Experts)
- Questionnaires included
- Background to the FALBALA project
- A brief overview of each of the three
applications - A brief summary of the FALBALA WP1 Results,
showing some of the Radar Analysis - Questions were multiple choice style but with
scope for written comments and explanation to be
added
9Summary of Responses(Enhanced Situational
Awareness during Flight Ops)
- Controller
- Benefits
- Generally A LITTLE to A LOT of safety benefit
- Improved common situational awareness between
controller and pilot - Workload
- Generally A LITTLE impact on ATC
- possible workload increase if pilots query ATC
instructions - Other Issues
- Main concern covers equipage - 100 equipage is
required to be useful - Likely to be of most benefit outside Controlled
Airspace
- Pilot
- Benefits
- Generally A LITTLE to A LOT of benefit
- More accurate position information, can
compensate for loss of party-line effect caused
by datalink - Workload
- Generally NO CHANGE, possibly a REDUCTION
- workload will depend on design
- Other Issues
- May offer safety benefit in remote areas, not in
radar controlled airspace - 100 equipage required to be useful?
10Summary of Responses(Enhanced Visual Separation
on Approach 1)
- Controller
- Feasible
- All answers from VERY DIFFICULT to EASY! Depends
on the airport. - Already in use at FRA.
- Would be very difficult to implement at LHR,
might be feasible at LGW. - Benefits
- Answers range from NO to A LOT (depends on the
airport!) - At some airports ATSA-VSA is not seen as
feasible. - At others capacity is maximised by existing
procedures, no scope to reduce spacing.
- Pilot
- Feasible
- Generally ACHIEVABLE, EASY at Frankfurt. Visual
following is already in use at Frankfurt. - DIFFICULT at LHR.
- Benefits
- Mainly A LOT, one A LITTLE (depends on the
airport!) - Clear capacity benefits at FRA, ATSA-VSA could
improve spacing precision further. - At LHR, there is no scope for reducing spacing,
ATSA-VSA may even reduce capacity.
11Summary of Responses(Enhanced Visual Separation
on Approach 2)
- Controller
- Workload
- Possible REDUCTION in workload though not agreed
by all. - If capacity increases as a result then there may
be no net change for workload.
- Pilot
- Workload
- Generally REDUCTION, but not agreed by all,
possible INCREASE at LHR - Spacing information and Ground speed information
provided on CDTI would assist visual spacing.
12Summary of Responses(Enhanced Sequencing
Merging 1)
- Pilot
- Feasible
- Not asked, as it was felt that this was
specifically a Controller question - Benefits
- Generally A LITTLE or A LOT
- Reduction of voice communications
- More efficient user preferred trajectories
- Time-based spacing may give benefits
- Controller
- Feasible
- All answers from VERY DIFFICULT to EASY !
- Difficult at LHR and FRA due to complexity of
airspace. May be more achievable at LGW and Paris
airports - Benefits
- Considerable differences in opinion, some NO,
some A LOT - Some anticipate capacity efficiency benefits,
others dont - Some concern that pilots will need more
assistance (support tools) to maintain the
spacing - Time-based spacing alone may provide some
benefits - May be some environmental benefits
13Summary of Responses(Enhanced Sequencing
Merging 2)
- Controller
- Workload
- Generally REDUCTION in controller workload
- Reduction in R/T loading
- Better conformance of flights with clearances
- Instructions may be less time-critical
- Ability to establish sequence further out from
touchdown - Other Issues
- The task of controllers may be de-skilled to some
extent - What would the consequence then be of a system
breakdown? - What happens when the sequence breaks down, e.g.
after a Go-around?
- Pilot
- Workload
- Range from REDUCTION to INCREASE, depends on how
SM is implemented, in particular the level of
automation - Without automation to assist the spacing task,
workload may be increased - With proper assistance, pilots overall workload
could be reduced - Other Issues
- What is the impact on avionics ? If FMS and CDTI
changes are required then this will not be
feasible before 2015 - Is Intent information required to perform spacing
tasks ?
143. Operational Workshop
- London Heathrow Airport
- 18th March 2004
- 26 Attendees from
- Eurocontrol, Air France, British Airways,
Lufthansa, DFS, NATS, DGAC, Sofreavia and UoG - Discussion of each of the three applications
- Demonstration of the CO-SPACE Implementation of
ASPA-SM
15Workshop QuestionsEnhanced Sequencing and Merging
- Where would ASPA-SM be applicable, i.e. which
airports ? - Is it necessary to automate the spacing on the
aircraft? - Is it necessary to have Intent information?
- Could the same benefits be derived from other
concepts, such as the use of time-based spacing
by ATC or 4D Trajectory negotiation?
16Workshop Questions Enhanced Visual Separation on
Approach
- Answers to the questionnaires show wide range of
views. Why do we have these differences ? - Visual separation is in use in Frankfurt, with an
agreed benefit. Why only in Frankfurt? - Are there possibilities to use visual separation
at other airports to increase capacity?
17Workshop Questions Enhanced Traffic Situational
Awareness during Flight Operations
- What benefits?
- E.g. what is the expected impact on controller
and pilot workload - What about Partial Situational Awareness ?
- Possibly caused by lack of aircraft equippage or
filtering? - What information should be displayed?
18WP4 Conclusions (1)
- Enhanced Traffic Situational Awareness during
Flight Operations (ATSA-AIRB) - Improved Traffic Situational Awareness for Pilots
- Can compensate for the loss of Party-Line
expected to result from datalink - Little effect on Pilot and Controller workload
- Most benefit will be obtained in remote
(non-radar airspace), not in high-density
environments - Requires 100 equipage to get full benefits (or
TIS-B) - Design work is required for the traffic display
- Issues such as filtering, the means of labelling
aircraft tracks ...
19WP4 Conclusions (2)
- Enhanced Visual Separation on Approach (ATSA-VSA)
- CAPACITY benefits at Frankfurt Airport
- A consequence of the runway configuration at
Frankfurt - Application to other airports is expected to be
limited - Benefits are not clear for single runway airports
- Normal visual approaches are not common in
Europe - Safety benefits could arise
- from improved visual acquisition
- from improved spacing accuracy
- There is a risk that capacity could be reduced if
pilots tend to apply greater spacing than
currently achieved by radar control
20WP4 Conclusions (3)
- Enhanced Sequencing Merging Operations
(ATSA-SM) - Agreement that Sequencing and Merging could
provide - Improved efficiency through reduced R/T usage,
and more consistent spacing - Make ATC instructions less time-critical
- Ability to establish the sequence further out
- Sequencing Merging is expected to provide most
benefit when spacing is defined in terms of TIME - There is disagreement about the level of
automation required on the aircraft. The impact
on pilot workload will depend on the automation
provided. - Sequencing and Merging appears highly feasible at
some airports (e.g. the Paris CDG and Orly).
Appears feasible at Gatwick. The limited size or
high complexity of other TMA areas (e.g. those
for Heathrow, Frankfurt) would make it harder to
implement without major airspace changes.
21WP4 Recommendations
- The Operational Indicators should be updated and
prioritised for use in future assessments. - Sequencing and Merging appears feasible and
beneficial for some TMA areas. More detailed
study is recommended for these areas. - Aspects of Sequencing and Merging such as
integration with arrival tools, integration with
RNAV and abnormal procedures (failure modes)
should be studied further. - Enhanced Visual Spacing on Approach offers
benefits for only a limited number of airports.
It should be considered with regard to specific
airports and not for general use. - The design of the CDTI is important to all
applications, especially Enhanced Situational
Awareness. Design work is needed to assess
filtering algorithms and how to combine TCAS and
ADS-B traffic information.
22