COMMON METRICS FRAMEWORK FOR ATM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING

1
COMMON METRICS FRAMEWORK FOR ATM
PERFORMANCEASSESSMENT AND MONITORING Almira
Williams, CSSI Inc.
2
Background

• Conclusions from ATM system performance RD are
  often inadequate for policy decisions due to the
  lack of
• Standards for quantitative analysis and clear
  terminology definition
• Consistency and comparability of outcomes from
  different analyses
• Links between quantitative analysis and corporate
  objectives.
• Performance assessments of the operational and/or
  future ATM concepts, systems and goals are often
  incomparable
• In 1995, FAA and EUROCONTROL initialized a
  co-operative RD effort to address this and other
  similar problems
• Action Plans were developed, each addressing a
  specific area of interest, e.g. AP1Airborne
  Separation Concepts, AP6ATM Decision Support
  Tools, etc.
• In 2002, AP2Air Traffic Operational Concepts,
  and AP5Validation and Verification Strategy,
  combined their activities in searching for a
  more general and systematic approach

Collaborative effort of CSSI, FAA, EuroControl,
and CENAin support of the Action Plans 2 and 5
3
Objectives

• Develop common ATM performance assessment and
  monitoring capability for
• periodic evaluation of system performance,
• operational concept validation and/or comparison,
  and
• target setting
• Support an understanding of terminology and
  performance metrics used by different
  organizations by
• providing a common metrics taxonomy,
• organizing the existing ATM metrics to maintain
  the connection between the identical metrics,
  identify metrics that have identical definitions
  but different names, identify metrics that have
  identical names but different definitions
• Establish a top-down framework for ATM
  performance assessment and monitoring that
  roll-ups performance measures to organizational
  goals and expectations of various ATM
  stakeholders
• Founded on ISO principles for QOS in IT, and
  ICAO hierarchical structure of the performance
  based ATM Operational Concept

4
Principal Considerations

• Common performance framework must facilitate the
  following
• Evaluation of both overall system and individual
  aspects of performance
• Evaluation of system-wide and regional
  performance
• Evaluation within the real-world or a modeling
  environment and
• Comparison of system performance before and after
  a change is implemented.

5
(No Transcript)
6
The Relationship Between the Metrics Taxonomy and
the ATM Performance Framework
Primary Classifications
Cost Effectiveness
ATM Security
Safety
Specification
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Metrics Taxonomy
Level 5
PrimaryCharacteristics
ATM Performance Framework

7
Example Safety Primary Characteristic
8
Common Dashboard
9
Conclusions

• We developed guiding principles for elaborating a
  comprehensive ATM performance framework that is
  applicable to all phases of (gate-to-gate) flight
  and in a uniform manner across international
  civil aviation community.
• Proposed framework is consistent with the
  International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
  Required ATM System Performance (RASP) and
  Required Total System Performance (RTSP) approach
• Proposed framework is based on the principal
  concepts for Quality of Service (QOS) framework
  developed by the International Organization for
  Standardization (ISO).

10
Next Steps

• Expand and consolidate the performance example-
  safety,
• Extend the ATM Performance Framework to the
  remaining principal objectives, and
• Further efforts on the aggregation of lower level
  into higher level results using the cause-effect
  approach.
• awilliams_at_cssiinc.com