Ames Research Center Terminal Area ATM Research Branch Moffett Field, California Todd Farley [email protected] (650) 604-0596 Time-Based Metering

Ames Research CenterTerminal Area ATM Research BranchMoffett Field, California

Todd Farley

[email protected]

(650) 604-0596

Time-Based Metering and the

Multi-Center Traffic Management

Advisor (McTMA)

Ames Research Center

Agenda

• McTMA training, part 1

Time-based metering Why the push for metering? Why here? Why now?

Autopsy of failed metering programs Metering: then and now

The transition to time-based metering It can be done. Here’s how it’s going at ZLA…

Introduction to McTMA

McTMA system architecture

What’s next? The game plan and your role in it


Time-Based Metering

The “M” word…


Time-based metering

“We tried that already. It didn’t work. You can leave now.”

- Boston Center controller

“This is the best feed of aircraft I have seen from ZLA ever.”

- SoCal Tracon controller


Time-based metering

• Why the push to go to metering?

Theoretically proven to be more efficient Throughput Arrival delay Airborne holding

… but what about workload?


In practice: so far, so good At every TMA site so far, results from operational use

have validated the benefits that theory suggests

… including workload

TMA: Single-Center vs. Multi-Center

ZAB ZFW

ZAU ZOB

ZTL

ZJX

ZDC

ZBW

ZNY

ZMA ZHU

ZKC

ZME

ZDV

TMA-SC FFP1

PHL

BOS

CVG

DTW

IAH

MEM

ORD

PHX

PIT

SEA

SLC

STL

LAX

SFO

DEN

MSP

DFW

ATL

MIA

MCO

CLTLAS

Minneapolis

ZMP

ZSE Seattle

ZLC Salt Lake

ZOA Oakland

ZLA

Los Angeles

Albuquerque

Denver

Houston

Kansas City

MemphisFort Worth

Atlanta

Miami

Jacksonville

Chicago

Boston

Cleveland

Washington

STLDec 2006

CVGNov 2005

IAHAug 2003 MEM

May 2006

ZID

TMA-SC FFP2

TMA-MC

New York


Time-based metering

• Why the push to go to metering here?

We’ve tried the obvious places and it’s worked ZFW, ZMP, ZLA, etc.

• ZLA is the first facility to transition from miles-in-trail to time-based metering, and the results have been positive(more on that later)

This is the Northeast Corridor… there’s more demand and tighter constraints here than anywhere

The Northeast is the ultimate test

• Why Philly? RTCA recommendation Its location makes it interesting from a research perspective


Time-based metering

time·based me·ter·ing (tīm bāsed mē’t r-ing) n. 1. A traffic management alternative to miles-in-trail spacing to de-peak the arrival demand to meet a downstream restriction. 2. A sector control technique by which aircraft are vectored (speed, heading, and/or altitude) to meet a crossing-time restriction at a coordination fix.

e


Time-based metering

• In theory, a more efficient way of spacing traffic flows to spread out the demand to meet capacity.

Time-based metering10 miles in trail


100 nm

Time-based metering

• In practice, works very well in airspace with large, open sectors that have been metering for years. for example,

ZFW & ZMP

… of course, that’s not the case here.


Arrival airspace comparison

• ZNY characteristics Small, complex sectors Heavy crossing traffic Flights in transition


Time-based metering

• Here’s the basic question:Is there a way to implement time-based meteringin complex airspace that makes sense in terms of efficiency and workload?


McTMA cadre

Traffic management: Boucher, Kurz, RosenbergNATCA CPCs: Golder, Kohler, Cummings

Traffic management: Jay Conroy, Jack WhiteNATCA CPC: Mike Dowd

Traffic management:Mike Klinker, Barry ConstantNATCA CPC: Bob Padgett

Traffic management: Mark Evans, Doug DavisNATCA CPCs: Jim Bartel, Bob Weaver

Traffic management: John KelleyNATCA CPC: Patrick Rodden

NASA: Tom Davis, Todd Farley, Ty Hoang, Steve Landry, Kathy LeeMITRE: Kerry Levin, Dennis Rowe


“We tried that already. It didn’t work.”

Metering: Then and Now

This is not your father’s metering system…


Time-based metering predecessors

• En-Route Metering (ERM) 1970s-80s [R.I.P.]

• Arrival Spacing Program (ASP) 1980s-today

• Both failed to work in complex airspace


Time-based metering predecessors

• Shortcomings are well understood, and surmountable ERM and ASP are Host-resident programs

Subject to processing limitations of the Host Inaccurate trajectory estimates

No wind data Inaccurate trajectory estimates

Host-resident programs unable to interface with other Centers Unable to develop a common metering plan across Centers Adjacent Centers worked with uncoordinated arrival metering plans


Time-based metering with McTMA

• McTMA is a completely different approach Not a Host-resident program;

McTMA is a brand new, independent infrastructure of state-of-the-art computer equipment

Superior computational resources make possible the use of far more sophisticated trajectory modeling and scheduling algorithms

• More accurate trajectory estimates



• McTMA is a completely different approach McTMA has access to hourly wind updates (RUC forecasts)

More accurate trajectory estimates

• The inherent advantages of the TMA approach over that of ERM or ASP have resulted in significant operational improvements at every facility that has upgraded from ASP to TMA Land more aircraft per hour 5-8% throughput increase Less metering



• McTMA is a completely different approach McTMA is fully integrated between Centers

Access to all relevant flightplan and track data Able to exchange metering data across Centers

• Adjacent Centers synchronized to a common arrival metering plan


The transition to time-based metering

It can be done. Here’s how it’s going at ZLA…


LAX transition to metering

• Traffic management before metering Adjacent Center MIT initiatives or

GDP or both MIT-based initiatives (jets) Call for release on satellite

departures (ZLA and SCT TMU) Internal holding at SLI, DARTS,

LAHAB No-notice holding by ZLA at SCT

boundary Occasional unfilled gaps on finals Arrival numbers often below

advertised AAR TMS delays common on IFR

days

LAX Arrival Rates

6876

84

0

20

40

60

80

100

ILS ILS/VAP VAP

64-

68

72-

76

78-

84



• Benefits for LAX arrival operations ZLA

Vectoring occurs in High Altitude sectors Less coordination necessary (speeds/vectors) between SCT feeder

sectors and ZLA sectors No-notice holding greatly reduced

SCT Arrival flow to SCT based on all traffic and the runway availability Aircraft are staggered on merging routes (East gate) Speeds faster transitioning to finals Less space wasted on finals


• Traffic management initiatives for initial time-based metering trials

Implemented to allow for safe transition to new procedures associated with time-based metering

May 14 - TMI’s (regardless of AAR at LAX) 30 MIT from East Adjacent ARTCC’s - ZAB, ZDV, ZLC 20 MIT from ZOA SAN arrivals (from the East) routed south O/IPL (Sector 39) 10 MIT - VTU Departures (from SCT) Altitude capping for arrivals to LA Basin/San Diego area airports (i.e.

BUR/VNY, SNA/LGB, SAN/CRQ)

June 4 - TMI’s back to normal operations. Dynamic application based on sector demand and workload



• May 30 (1700-1850Z) WXWX: VIS 3 MI, BKN 006, OVC 008. VIS North 2 MI No VAP’s LAX advertised AAR 64 due to heavy mix and 3

mile separation at THD East Winds at altitude Actual arrivals: 1710-1810z

69 Heavy/757 mix 38%

6469

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

AAR

SCT AAR

ACTUAL

38%

Heavy/757

May 30 metering trial results

38%

Heavy/757


June 7 metering trial results

68 69 71

0

15

30

45

60

75

Arrivals

AAR

1740-1840

1800-1900

• June 7 (1615-1900Z) WXWX: IFR OVC 008 No VAP’s LAX advertised AAR 68 Actual arrivals: 1740-1840z

69 (Heavy/757 mix: 43%)

Actual arrivals: 1800-1900z

71 (Heavy/757 mix: 34%)

43% Heavy/757

34% Heavy/757


68

59 61

0

15

30

45

60

75

Arrivals

AAR1700-18001800-1900

June 10: no metering

• June 10 (1700-1900): WX: BKN/OVC 020 (IFR) No VAP’s LAX advertised AAR 68 Actual arrivals: 1700-1800z

59 (Heavy/757 mix: 32%)

Actual arrivals: 1800-1900z

61 (Heavy/757 mix: 36%)

3 A/C held @ VTU/DARTS for +10 SAN +27 (Ground Delay)


Transition to metering at LAX

“It is difficult to compare metering vs. non-metering arrival numbers; however, I believe that if metering had been used (on June 10), the arrival numbers would have been higher, without the delays incurred today.”

Gary Hobbs, STMC, Southern California TRACON

• SCT statement regarding June 10


• June 21 (1630-1830Z): WXWX: IFR OVC 020 No VAP’s LAX advertised AAR 64 - 68 Actual arrivals - 10 minute running

totals 1630-1830z1630-1830z : 67-66-68-67-68-68 Heavy/757 Mix - 10 minute % running totals 1630-1830z1630-1830z

31-34-35-39-38-41

Metering has provided a more consistent flow of traffic over long periods of time

68 67 68 6868

0

15

30

45

60

75

Arrivals

AAR

1630-1830 AVG

1650-1750

1710-1810

1720-1820

41% Heavy/757

38% Heavy/757

35% Heavy/757



• June 27 (1630-1850Z): WXWX: IFR OVC 020 No VAP’s until 1815z AAR 72 @ 1815z LAX advertised AAR: 68 - 72 Actual arrivals - 10 minute running

totals 1730-1900z 66-68-69-69 Heavy/757 mix correlates to net

hourly arrivals

68 66 69 6968

0

15

30

45

60

75

Arrivals

AAR

1730-1830

1740-1840

1750-1850

1800-190029%

Heavy/757

33%

Heavy/757

37%

Heavy/757

41%

Heavy/757


Ames Research CenterTraffic flow from the East is staggered reducing the

incidence of vectoring within TRACON airspace.


Internal traffic fits into overall scheduling plan as a result of TBM.


ZLA transition to metering

• SCT testimonials for time-based metering

“This is the best feed of aircraft I have seen from ZLA (to LAX) ever.”

Doug Voelpel, SCT LA Area

“We were busy (during rush on June 7), but we were never out of control and we consistently had enough aircraft to fill both of the finals.”

Dan Boyle, SCT LA Area

“Do you have to stop metering?”

SCT TM (daily)


Improved awareness results in: Fewer surprises Earlier knowledge of traffic and delay

spikes Improved quality of information to

controller

More consistent flows reduce: No-notice holding Incidence of excessive ground

delays Frequency of sudden need to create

a “hole” in sequence, e.g., for aircraft in a low sector

Fluctuation in flow rates into approach airspace

Coordination with TRACON, TMC’s, supervisors

Allows flexible traffic options Spacing is based on runway

availability Delays can be effectively managed

according to sector workload

Enhanced credibility with airspace users Improved accuracy of delays and

holding predictions Equitable distribution of delays

counters perception of favoritism

The bottom line


Introduction to Multi-Center TMA

Officially: TMA-MC

NASA Jive: McTMA


efficient arrival plan: one which effectively manages demand to meet capacity as closely as practical.

What is TMA?

• Traffic Management Advisor TMU planning tool for arrival rush operations Tool for passive communication/coordination

between ARTCC(s) and TRACON Time-based metering tool Purpose: Help generate and implement a

more efficient arrival plan for the adapted TRACON & airport

Seeks to manage these arrival flows while the aircraft are still in Center airspace

Goal: improve throughput, ease workload, reduce delay, increase capacity, improve coordination between facilities

TMA is being deployed nationally as part of the FAA’s Free Flight Program.


What is TMA in practical terms…

• Predicts arrival demand TMA provides fresh (12-second update), accurate prediction of

the arrival demand

• Matches demand to capacity Based on constraints entered by the TMC (e.g., AAR, meter fix

closures, etc.), TMA computes a time-based schedule by which arrival demand will meet (and not exceed) the capacity of the airport & TRACON

• Provides metering targets Sector controllers implement the schedule by vectoring aircraft

to meet crossing times posted on their radar displays


What is TMA-MC?

• TMA Multi-Center is an extension of the TMA Single-Center to regions where more than one facility is significantly involved in arrival traffic flow management TMA-MC creates a network of TMA’s at adjacent Centers Enables transition to time-based metering in complex airspace Provides scheduling information at adapted runways, approach

fixes, and upstream Center boundaries Facilitates regional collaboration

TMA-MC is a priority research project for the FAA’s Free Flight Program,

with a goal of providing capability in the field in the 2004-2005 timeframe.


System control&

communication

Atmosphericdata

Arrival timeprediction

TMC Flow VisualizationController advisories

Flight plan dataRadar Track & SpeedController commands

Operational ATC Computer

ConstraintScheduling

TMA Workstations

TMA basic system description


TMA functions

• TMA (single-center, multi-center, whatever) essentially does three things:

(1) Predict arrival demand more accurately than anything available today

(2) Help TMU develop a better plan for the arrival rush via Timeline display (see next slide) and a much, much smarter

scheduling algorithm than has ever been available with ASP

(3) Produce metering lists to implement the overall arrival plan. The advisories are designed to distribute the metering delay (i.e.,

workload) upstream and/or downstream across different sectors, areas, and even facilities. The result is that separate flows into a common destination (PHL TRACON, for example) are synchronized to the overall master arrival plan generated in the TMUs.


TMU timeline display


DSR sector controller meter list


• Round 1: Multi-Facility Collaboration (March - June) TMA to provide TMCs in multiple facilities with consistent,

accurate arrival information Each TMU to use TMA to help develop a coordinated arrival plan Develop the ops concept

Determine hierarchy for decision-making between facilities

• Round 2: Metering (Fall ’03 - Spring ’04) Use TMA time-based scheduling

Enable free-flow of heavily saturated sectors while metering others

Transition to time-based metering in all McTMA facilities Develop operational procedures for metering in multiple facilities

Determine costs/benefits of metering in complex airspace

Field test phases


Challenges for McTMA in NE Corridor

• Complex airspace Involves multiple facilities (TMUs, sectors, and TRACONs) Small sectors, restricted controllability Tower enroute control (TEC) traffic Crossing traffic flows Streams of metered traffic with unmetered traffic Transition to metering control techniques

• Potential benefits Accurate prediction: a reliable window on the next 90 minutes Smoother traffic flow: fewer ties, less airborne holding, more

advance notice when holding is required Redistributed, more balanced workload


Who’s involved

NE CorridorController-in-the-loop, Real-time Simulation

Benefits AnalysisController Training

Field Demonstration/TestingTechnology Transfer

•AOZ (FFP2)

•Air Traffic•WJHTC

• Requirements definition• NE airspace procedures

MITRE• TMA operational expertise• System design• Algorithm development• Human factors

• System-S/W development• Installation


McTMA System Architecture

The plumbing…


Airspace Schematic

PHL

ZDC

ZNY

ZOB

ZBW


PHL

ZDC

ZNY

ZOB

Track & flight plan data sources

ZBW


ZBW

PHLZOB

ZDC

ZNY

Individual ARTCC TMA processors


ZBW

PHLZOB

ZDC

ZNY

McTMA scheduler


ZBW

PHLZOB

ZDC

ZNY

McTMA scheduler

ETAsSTAs


ZBW

PHLZOB

ZDC

ZNY

McTMA Timeline graphical user interface

ETAsSTAs


ZBW

PHLZOB

ZDC

ZNY

McTMA Timeline displays & control

ETAsSTAs


What’s next?

The Game Plan


Field trials 1 and 2

M T W T F SS

27

65

12 13

19 20

26

January 2003

1 2 3 4

7 8 9 10 11

14 15 16 17 18

21 22 23 24 25

28 29 30 31

M T W T F SS

109

16 17

23 24

5 6 7 8

11 12 13 14 15

18 19 20 21 22

25 26 27 28 1

1

2 3 4

February 2003

• Evaluate each TMA instance in standalone mode

• Objectives Confirm McTMA installations and network are stable Verify internal flight data processing Refine internal ETA computations Collect baseline data

• Expected result Each TMA node operating stably Reliable flight data processing within each TMA

and between TMA pairs Accurate partial ETA’s


Field trial 3

• Transition to full McTMA network

• Objectives Connect and operate full McTMA network Verify flight data processing Refine end-to-end ETA computations Collect baseline data

• Expected results McTMA network operating stably Reliable flight data processing throughout

the McTMA network Accurate end-to-end ETA’s TMCs familiar with timeline display, load graph display,

and basic scheduling panels

M T W T F SS

31

109

16 17

23 24

30

5 6 7 8

11 12 13 14 15

18 19 20 21 22

25 26 27 28 29

2 3 4

March 2003



• Round 1 operational evaluations

• Objectives Evaluate candidate operational concepts

for coordinated arrival planning Conduct human factors assessments

Usability, suitability, acceptability Collect baseline data

• Expected results Accurate demand forecasts Critical review of operational concept candidates User interface design requirements Scheduling performance data collected

April 2003

M T W T F SS

30

98

15 16

22 23

29

4 5 6 7

10 11 12 13 14

17 18 19 20 21

24 25 26 27 28

1 2 3

June 2003

M T W T F SS

28

76

13 14

20 21

27

21 3 4 5

8 9 10 11 12

15 16 17 18 19

22 23 24 25 26

29 30 1 2 3


Simulation at WJHTC

• Objectives Meter competing arrival flows with overflight traffic Training

Provide cadre with exposure to metering operations and techniques in the presence of competing arrival flows prior to the start of metering trials in the field

Illustrate the workload benefits of regulating arrival flows using McTMA; Illustrate the workload costs of poor metering conformance

Demonstrate how TMUs at different facilities can coordinate their decisions (e.g., departure releases) with respect to competing, external flows, and thereby avoid holding at their meter fix(es)

Research Identify the need for requirements changes in the McTMA

scheduling and/or delay distribution algorithms Assess the impact of unscheduled TEC flights

M T W T F SS

1110

17 18

24 25

6 7 8 9

12 13 14 15 16

19 20 21 22 23

26 27 28 29 30

3 4 5

August 2003

1 2



• Round 2 operational evaluations Shadowing

• Objective Assess McTMA metering performance

Activate McTMA advisories for shadowing• TMCs use Timeline display to coordinate acceptance rates

and restrictions• Output fed into McTMA for shadowing exercises• Controllers shadow the advisories for one rush,

then debrief• Shadow use of departure release tool by TMCs

Assess metering advisories and human factors issues Collect data for performance metrics

M T W T F SS

29

87

14 15

21 22

28

3 4 5 6

9 10 11 12 13

16 17 18 19 20

23 24 25 26 27

30

31 1 2

September 2003

M T W T F SS

27

65

12 13

19 20

26

October 2003

1 2 3 4

7 8 9 10 11

14 15 16 17 18

21 22 23 24 25

28 29 30 31

M T W T F SS

109

16 17

23 24

5 6 7 8

11 12 13 14 15

18 19 20 21 22

25 26 27 28 29

1

2 3 4

November 2003



• Round 2 operational evaluations Active metering

• Objective Assess McTMA performance and TFM operations in

live traffic situations Activate McTMA advisories for live metering

of PHL arrivals• TMCs coordinate acceptance rates and restrictions• Controllers use advisories for one rush, then debrief• TMCs use advisories to issue departure releases

Assess McTMA performance and human factors issues

• Expected results Coordinated, efficient, workable arrival rush planning

and control

January 2004

February 2004

March 2004

M T W T F SS1 2 3

1211

18 19

25 26

7 8 9 10

13 14 15 16 17

20 21 22 23 24

27 28 29 30 31

4 5 6

M T W T F SS

98

15 16

22 23

4 5 6 7

10 11 12 13 14

17 18 19 20 21

24 25 26 27 28

1 2 3

M T W T F SS

29

87

14 15

21 22

28

3 4 5 6

9 10 11 12 13

16 17 18 19 20

23 24 25 26 27

30

29 1 2

31


Enough already

Thanks for your time and interest

For more information:[email protected]

better yet, just gimme a call or drop me a line:

Todd Farley(650) [email protected]

See you March 4th

Documents

Ames Research Center Terminal Area ATM Research Branch Moffett Field, California Todd Farley [email protected] (650) 604-0596 Time-Based Metering