APNT An Airline view

Captain Rocky StoneChief Technical PilotUnited Airlines

APNT MeetingStanford University

August 10, 2010

Outline

• Airline Position• NextGen Navigation and surveillance

examples • Conclusions

APNT – Airline Perspective

• Cost vs. Capability– This is the number 1 driver!

• Navigation and Surveillance back-ups must be considered together

• Maximum reuse of current equipment – most desirable

• New equipment – not out of the question, but must pass the cost vs. capability evaluation

• Retrofit versus new aircraft equipage – APNT must have a retrofit solution (in some form)

Navigation Technologies

• GNSS – Not just GPS!– GPS– GLONASS– GALILEO– COMPASS– How do we certify all of these systems?– Can the synergy of these systems deliver some

APNT capabilities?

• DME-DME with Inertial Reference Units (IRU)– Many aircraft are equipped– Certification credit needs to be re-evaluated

Surveillance Technologies

• Wide Area Multilateration• Aircraft based surveillance systems

– ADS-B in• Accuracy tied to navigation source• Can be degraded by GPS interference

– TCAS• Excellent, independent range between aircraft• Will probably need changes to optimize for use

as a back-up for surveillance

Juneau Approach Video courtesy of:

Position isn’t just position, it’s safety!

• Using navigation with the accuracy and integrity enabled by GNSS in the vicinity of high terrain increases safety margin and reduces false alarms

• Much better performance from the Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS)

Wake Vortex considerations in NextGen

• Minor change can be made to ADS-B transmissions to add all the data necessary for ground based and cockpit based wake vortex avoidance applications

• Ground systems with knowledge about the local wind/temperature field can allow for more capacity with safety

• Wake visualization in the cockpit is key to gaining pilot acceptance of reduced wake vortex separation standards

Motivation for Wake Visualization

FAA Regulated Separation Distancesfor IFR

Note: Distance behind 757 is 4 nm

for all aircraft.

IMC Heavy Large Small

Heavy 4 3 3

Large 5 3 3

Small 6 4 3

IFR vs. VFR Separation

Leader Aircraft

Follow

er

Air

cra

ft VMC Heavy Large Small

Heavy 2.7 1.9 1.9

Large 3.6 1.9 1.9

Small 4.5 2.7 1.9

Typically observed minimum separation distances

during visual approaches

Leader Aircraft

Follow

er

Air

cra

ft

Distances in nautical miles

Slide courtesy Dr. J. David Powell, Stanford University

Wake Visualization Display

Picture courtesy Dr. J. David Powell, Stanford University

Conclusions

• Cost vs. Capability– This is the number 1 driver!

• Reuse of current equipment – most desirable

• New equipment – not out of the question, but must pass the cost vs. capability evaluation

• Retrofit versus new aircraft equipage – APNT must have a retrofit solution (in some form)

Conclusions

• Cost vs. Capability– This is the number 1 driver!

• Navigation and Surveillance back-ups must be considered together

• Maximum reuse of current equipment – most desirable

• New equipment – not out of the question, but must pass the cost vs. capability evaluation

• Retrofit versus new aircraft equipage – APNT must have a retrofit solution (in some form)

02/10/08

Thank you!