Environmentally Friendly Airport Systems (EFAS)

1
Environmentally Friendly Airport Systems (EFAS)

• Presentation at ASASTN2 4th Workshop
• Amsterdam
• Thierry Narnio (Thales Air Systems)
• Dr Zeshan Kurd (NATS)
• 25 April 2007

2
Contents

• The Environmental Issue
• EFAS Overview and Background
• EFAS Methodology and Outputs
• CDA with ASAS HAZID

3
The Environmental Issue (1)

• Aviation, environment and socio-economic
  development
• Demand is strong and growing.
• Economic and social benefits are significant.
• Growth outstripping rate of technological and
  operational improvement.
• Key environment impacts are growing annually.
• Sensitivity to environmental impacts is growing.
• Environment is fast becoming an airport capacity
  constraint.
• Issues of concern
• Aircraft noise Current
• Local air quality Current
• Climate change (fuel CO2) Medium
• Land availability/use Current

4
The Environmental Issue (2)

• Environmental Capacity
• 2/3 airports currently subject to environmental
  constraints, 80 in 5 years.
• Some airports are refused planning approval for
  growth or moved to new sites, e.g. Munich
  (noise), Dusseldorf (noise), LHR (?) (air
  quality)
• Many UK airports have noise capacity limits MAN,
  LGW, BMX, LHR.
• Constraints at individual airports are already
• Affecting the capacity of the European air
  transport network.
• Preventing airports from responding to demand.
• Maximising Environmental Capacity
• Integration of environment into business
  planning.
• Assess economic value of capacity development.
• Airports and service partners working together.
• Trade-offs service quality, costs, environment.
• Optimisation modelling, operational information,
  decision support tools.

5
EFAS Background

• EFAS is a 2-years study project funded by the UK
  Department of Trade and Industry (DTI).
• Broad range of skills and resources
• Service provider
• Aircraft systems
• Aircraft, airport surveillance and ATM systems
• Modelling
• Research
• 8 Partners
• Range of sizes (including SME)
• Industry and academia
• Stakeholders
• Manchester Airport Group
• Virgin Atlantic Airlines

6
EFAS Overview (1)

• The goals of the EFAS study are summed up below
• To identify candidate ATM technologies and system
  solutions that will reduce the environmental
  impact of the expected growth in air traffic
• To research and evaluate the effectiveness of the
  candidate solutions using simulation tools (the
  Airport Synthetic Environment)
• To select suitable candidate solutions for
  development in the later projects within the
  longer term UK ATM Technology Validation
  Programme
• EFAS focuses on solutions that can be realised
  through ATM improvements

7
EFAS Overview (2)
8
Outputs from the EFAS Project

• EFAS will provide the following outputs
• A list of candidate ATM technical solutions for
  reducing environmental impact whilst achieving
  efficient and safe operation
• A preliminary assessment (Safety, Cost Benefit
  Analysis, Environmental KPIs) leading to the
  selection of the most favourable technical
  solutions
• Outline proposals for future projects to validate
  the technical solutions using prototypes /
  demonstrations
• Indirect outputs
• Validated airspace synthetic environment that can
  be used in future projects to understand the
  environmental impact of air traffic growth
• Wider understanding of environmental issues,
  increased academia/industrial collaboration, will
  provide a broad view of ATM technologies, will
  stimulation of innovation through a broadly based
  project partnership, potential benefits to
  airports and airport users etc

9
Boundaries of the EFAS Project

• The boundaries for the technical solutions
  covered by EFAS have been defined as follows
• Consider noise and key emissions (principally
  Nox, CO2, PM10),
• Timescale until 2030,
• Approach/departure airspace, airport (runway,
  taxiway),
• Focus on larger airports where the Environmental
  challenge is more acute (e.g. Manchester
  Airport),
• Nominally, only environmental impact from
  aviation will be considered,
• No limit in terms of solutions proposed (perhaps
  a step change in technology will be needed),
• Civil aircraft but not military. IFR but not VFR

10
Solutions Overview

• Constant Climb Departure
• Path Stretch vs. Speed adjustment
• Optimisation using Aircraft types
• CDM (including DMAN)
• Advanced CDA
• Low Power / Low Drag
• More Accurate Track Keeping
• More Accurate Vertical Position and Track-keeping
• Reduced Route Spacing
• CDA with ASAS and AMAN

11
Preliminary Hazard Identification for CDA with
ASAS
12
(No Transcript)
13
Continuous Descent Approaches (CDA)

• Three solution variants
• CDA ASAS AMAN
• Goal Minimise fuel consumption, emissions and
  acoustic energy
• New ground and airborne tools
• Monitoring or advisory tool for ASAS spacing
  manoeuvres
• Operational issues for ATCO and flight crew

14
Preliminary Hazard Identification (PHI)

• Determine system-level hazards
• Conducted as group review
• Influence design and guide solution
• Proposed changes
• New tools, equipment, procedures
• Effects of failure
• Controller (ATC)
• Pilot

15
(No Transcript)
16
PHI Assumptions

• Initial conditions
• Safety constraints
• Future scenarios
• Environmental impact
• Flight path and characteristics
• PHA will determine risk severity
• SP401 ATM Risk Assessment and Mitigation (NATS
  Document)

17
HAZID Table Fields
Column Purpose
Function Describes the activity the Actor is carrying out.
Actor Person or system performing the task
System The system under consideration
Failure mode The particular failure mode of the system
?? The change brought about by the move to the new system
Effect/Severity The system-level effect on the Actor, or system of the system failure mode.
Mitigation Needed? Any identified mitigation that can be brought to bear to reduce the likelihood of the failure event happening, or reduce the severity of it should it occur.
18
CDA HAZID Table Extract
Flight phase System Failure mode Cause Effect Mitigation
VMP ASAS Undetected data corruption ASAS proc error Wind input error Reduced Spacing and Separation Correlate ASAS and radar position to ATC
19
PHI Results

• Several HAZID tables
• Loss of separation and monitoring
• Undetected data corruption (high severity)
• Increased ATCO workload
• Undetected loss jamming
• Processing should detect failure
• Incremental concertina errors
• AMAN Incorrect time
• ASAS provides cross checking for time for
  sequenced aircraft
• Incorrect sequencing (target-follower)
• Loss
• AMAN failure (no time) can be mitigated by the
  ASAS for simple geometries
• Reduced predictability of aircraft manoeuvres

20
Thank You