Upload
sophia-ferguson
View
218
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Presentation to EUROCONTROL/FAA Action Plan 6 TIM 8“Collaborative Decision Making Applications in
Air Traffic Flow Management”
ATFM Priorities
Evaluation Study
Alison Hudgell
QinetiQ
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Background “ATFM Priority Options” Study (1998)
for European Commission how to reduce operational impact of congestion considered chronic congestion and “crises” stakeholder interviews proposed prioritisation strategy options
EUROCONTROL commissioned to validate proposals through simulation ATFM Priorities Evaluation Study (2000-1)
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Agenda
Project Background Assessment criteria Proposed ATFM strategies
description assessment recommended next steps
Conclusion
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Assessment Criteria
Feasibility of technical implementation Potential abuses & feasibility of verification Implementation acceptability to stakeholders Frequency or range of applicability Benefits: delay reduction and split amongst target
population Impact on ATFM performance
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Global Prioritisation Strategies Current: First Planned First Served
all flights are equal Proposed: Prioritisation by ...
Flight Type - some types more time-critical Consumer Cost - equity per passenger Flight Distance - equity over day’s operation
Modified slot allocation algorithm to prioritise flights by category
Redistribute delays across flight categories
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Global Prioritisation Strategies (2)
Flight Type rejected 75% of regulated flights in high-priority class prioritisation ineffective problems of verification / policing
Least Consumer Cost rejected categorisation / validation more feasible redistributes delay from larger to smaller aircraft negative impact on hub operations
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Results equal-sized categories most effective “strength” of prioritisation can be tuned
with 5 equal categories; weight: 20% to prioritisation / 80% to FPFS improved hub management
Recommended next steps stakeholder consultation/analysis concerning
strength of prioritisation dynamic slot allocation algorithm
Flight Distance
Categories
Percent of Regulated Demand
Mean Delay per Regulated Flight
Number of Delayed Flights
Mean Delay per Delayed
FlightTotal Delay
flights < 95 mins 60% - 9 minutes - 63 % - 3 minutes - 57%flights >= 95 mins 40% + 11 minutes + 0.3% + 19 minutes + 103%
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Integration of AO Tactical Priorities “Slot Swapping” and
“Substitution on Cancellation” AO to decide on swaps between flights limitiation: same regulations in same order
Modelled Operational Implementation swap flights only of same AO minimum improvement: 5 minutes SIT1A < CTOTB - taxi time - margin for swap
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Estimate Number of Slot Swaps
Number of'Required' Swaps
Number of'Feasible' Swaps
Run a b a b
AfterOperationalModel Filter
Same AOTotal
Total pairsthro’ sameregulations
Date
07-Jul 204 201 613 618 2027 2778 13320
08-Jul 117 123 358 361 849 1212 6303
11-Jul 151 132 424 419 1054 1701 7717
13-Jul 169 161 501 493 1459 2163 10100
14-Jul 131 166 440 437 1065 1668 26427
Each flight may swap only once (random selection)
1 in 3 “feasible” swaps is required
(random selection)
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Slot Swapping - Conclusions Estimate 100 - 200 swaps per day
daily delay savings on critical flights of1600 to 4000 minutes
No disbenefit to non-swapping operators No systematic impact on bunching or overload Recommended next steps
define procedure and rules trial implementation
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Selective Amelioration
AOs request amelioration of delayed flights that have become critical - e.g. airport curfew air-crew rostering transfer passengers
Ad-hoc process exists today Need to limit number of cases
agreed constraints? quota system
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Selective Amelioration (2) Modelled random selection among flights
delayed by more than 30 minutes
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 100 200 300 400 500 600Number of flights ameliorated
Nu
mb
er o
f o
verl
oad
slo
ts
07/07
08/07
11/07
13/07
14/07
15/07
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Minimal impact on ATFM performance from amelioration of up to 200 or so flights? further validation needed
Recommend limiting number of cases by quota system
Recommended next steps monitor and analyse current live usage stakeholder consultation on how to distribute quota across
AOs trial implementation
Selective Amelioration - Conclusions
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Airport Public Order Exceptions
Initial aim: when serious delays lead to risk of public order disturbances
Delegation of control from central (CFMU) to local (Airport) level e.g. now: De-Icing Procedures generalise: “Chaotic Situation Management”
If number of flights affected is small,use Selective Amelioration
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Airport Public Order Exceptions(Chaotic Situation Management)
Monitoring and reporting of use to guard against abuse or overuse
Recommended next steps trial implementations put in place Letters of Agreement
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Burden Sharing
Applicable when capacity shortfall expected to avoid delays, must reduce demand all make agreed proportional reduction AOs to decide which specific flights to cancel
Currently, national ad-hoc frameworks for crisis management
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Trade-off of demand cut and delay saved
Delay Saved by Demand Cut
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
-10% -20% -30% -40% -50%
Demand Reduction
Del
ay S
aved Capacity -25%
Capacity -37%
Capacity -50%
Burden Sharing
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Burden Sharing - Conclusions Implement as fully structured collaborative process
strategic or pre-tactical
Recommended next steps refine guidelines for demand reduction - especially among smaller operators develop collaborative procedures apply in trial cases
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
“Global” Solutions -Slot Allocation Prioritised by:
• Flight Type• Least Consumer Cost
• Flight Distance
Overview of Strategies
CDM Proceduresfor Prioritisation ofParticular Flights
• Integration of AO Tactical Priorities• Selective Amelioration
• Airport Public Order Exceptions• Burden Sharing
• Public Comment Proceedings
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Public Comment Proceedings
Strategic planning to deal with large events capacity enhancement demand management and prioritisation
Transparent, consensus-based planning EAG-OSG level
Recommended next steps analysis of events to date consultation on guidelines for applicable events trial procedures in real cases
EUROCONTROLExperimental
Centre
© EUROCONTROL
Conclusion All strategies apply to crises, several also to chronic
congestion None appear to reduce ATFM performance Many formalise existing procedures Some could provide incentives for “good behaviour” by
AOs Recommended next step for many is specification of
procedures and live trial Institutional and operational issues remain to be
addressed