Upload
dodat
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
TITLE
Safer Skies: New Technologies/Next Gen
2Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Safer Skies: New Technologies/Next Gen
• Premise: Safer Skies requires the same commitment—policy, innovation, funding, and technology for vertical flight that currently exists for commercial Part 121 aviation.
• Premise: the current architecture to support vertical flight is not sufficient to realize the potential and promise of Next Gen.
3Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
University of Maryland Creates Human-Powered Helicopter with SolidWorksTuesday, 08 November 2011 09:32
4Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
HeliportInfrastructure
Update
Heliport UpdateRex Alexander Air Methods / NEMSPA
5Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Heliport Advisory Circular (AC 150/5390-2C)
– Heliport A/C draft released by FAA Airports Division AAS-100, April 2011.
– Public comment period was initially extended.– Public comment period closed 10/31/2011.– Public comments are unpublished at this time.– FAA AAS-100 currently in review of public comments.– FAA time frame for response: Unknown– Final advisory circular publication date: Unknown
6Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Education– Currently
• Half of all helicopter pilots in the United States have never read the heliport advisory circular*. The majority of the information in the AC is not in the Aeronautical Information Manual.
– Recommendation• Include information from the heliport advisory circular pertinent to
pilots and operations in the Aeronautical Information Manual in the same way that airport information is included.
*Based on NEMSPA Heliport Safety Survey, October 2011
7Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Accident and Incident Reporting– Currently
• The data currently available from the FAA and NTSB on reported accidents and incidents at heliports is inconsistent and is in question*.
– Recommendation• Establish a trigger mechanism and criteria for reporting an accident
or incident at a heliport.• Outline the reporting process to be utilize by operators and
insurance underwriters when a heliport is involved.*Based on NEMSPA Heliport Safety Survey, October 2011
8Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Inspection and Auditing Process– Currently
• There is no National standard or time frame for inspecting or auditing heliports.*
• There is no clear process for reporting changes, updates, closures or hazards.*
– Recommendation• Audit heliports on an annual or bi-annual basis.• Establish either a self auditing or State DOT process.
*Based on NEMSPA Heliport Safety Survey, October 2011
9Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Data Base and NOTAM System– Currently
• There is no national data base for heliports which is accurate, up-to- date or inclusive.*
• Most heliports do not have a functional NOTAM system.*
– Recommendation• Establish a National data base for heliports that is online,
searchable and updateable with a real-time NOTAM system.
*Based on NEMSPA Heliport Safety Survey, October 2011
10Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Heliport Infrastructure
• Night Vision Lighting Compatibility– Currently
• Many pilots report issues with both heliport and obstruction lighting when using Night Vision Goggles in the field.*
– Recommendation• Further study needs to be conducted to determine what is and what
is not Night Vision compatible.
*Based on NEMSPA Heliport Safety Survey, October 2011
11Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Weather Overview
For
IHSS
MEETING
November 9, 2011
Improving WeatherRalph Petragnani: Belfort Instruments
12Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Infrastructure Improvements
To improve pilot access to low level weather infrastructurefor flight planning
•Identify potential existing and new sources of weather
•Identify access systems for weather.
13Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Existing sources of aviation weather
FAA NADIN II Network (NAS Data Interchange Network)
AWOSAWOS
Third PartyWx Processor
Third PartyWx Processor
Third PartyCentral Data
CollectionStation
Third PartyCentral Data
CollectionStation
National Airspace Data Interchange Network (NADIN) II
National Airspace Data Interchange Network (NADIN) II
Dedicated, secureX.25 Connection
KZIDKZID
WMSCRWMSCR
Flight Service Stations
National Weather Service
Commercial Weather Sources
14Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
FEDERAL SYSTEMS750 ASOS200 AWOS100 AWSS
Owned, Installed, & MaintainedBy the FAA. All on the NADIN
15Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Non-Federal AWOS SYSTEMS1163 Non-Fed AWOS
Added 68 AWOS since last year
16Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
1163 Non-Fed AWOSof this number
~600
are in the network
17Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Existing sources of aviation weather
To date, the FAA has been reluctant to allow the AWOS systems that are less than the AWOS III configuration.
One barrier is a 30 year old FAA order that only speaks to AWOS III equipment. The order was written well before the certification of other AWOS configuration.
A second barrier was the ICAO had no acceptance of a less than AWOS III system.
18Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Existing sources of aviation weather
Two steps have been taken to address the FAA’s concerns regarding the inclusion of the 250 or so non-AWOS III systems into the NADIN
The first is that the JHSIT Infrastructure Workgroup have presented a white paper to the JHSIT EXCON to present to the FAA for consideration.
19Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Existing sources of aviation weather
The second has been taken by the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO). States’ realize the importance having as much weather information available to the flying public as possible
Randall Burdette, Director of the Virginia Department of Aviation(DOAV) and 2010-2011 Chairman of the NASAO Board of Directors has been working with the FAA to allow not only AWOS III information but to include FAA certified weather sensor into the NADIN. NASAO has express their position to the FAA Administrator this ye
20Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Sources of aviation weather
The explosion of the Smartphone as greatly improve the access toAviation weather reports (METARS).
Apps are now available for the iPhone/iPad as well as the Android base phones from ForeFlight that show METARS.
Blackberry App is also on the market.
21Infrastructure Workshop – March 8, 2011
Heli-Expo 2011, Orlando, FL
Sources of aviation weather
For Garmin and other Cockpit Display Systems, XM WX provides METAR reporting in the cockpit.
The Industry continues to provide a variety of access means to aviation weather but the greater goal and the one of the most important issues for flight safety is to have a larger database of weather reporting from sites across the country.
22Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Helicopter Communications in Next GenerationNational Air Space
David Manchester Harris Corporation
Infrastructure Panel– November 9, 2011
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 2011
Ft Worth, TX
23Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Where we areWhere we are
THEN
Radar and ILS SystemPredominately VFR Operations
Line of sight communications and surveillance
NexGen
ADS-B Receiver and Network Enabled Radio
24Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Helicopter Communications in Next Generation
National Air SpaceHelicopter Communications in Next
GenerationNational Air Space
•
Expanded Low altitude coverage
ADS-B low altitude surveillance
Digital Data Communications
Network Enabled Digital Radios
Remote communications•
IFR capable low altitude infrastructure
•
Electronic Flight Bag
Available applications
Where We Need to Be
25Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Aircraft equipage
Infrastructure Funding
Expanding controlled airspace
BarriersBarriers
26Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Perhaps Alaska model of making low interest, long duration loans available for NextGen
equipment
Finding a State or local government Business Partner
Further cooperation among operators, controllers, pilots and politicians to expand low altitude portion of the NAS
Potential use of AIP funding
How We Get There How We Get There –– What might workWhat might work
27Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
NextGen Enhancements
RNAV and RNP precision allow multiple departure paths from each runway. Departure capacity increased.
Automation optimizes taxi routing. Provides controllers and pilots all equipped aircraft and vehicle positions on airport. Real-time surface traffic picture visible to airlines, controllers and equipped operators. Surface movement management linked to departure and arrival sequencing. ADS-B and ASDE-X contribute to this function. Taxi times reduced and safety enhanced.
Pilots and controllers talk less by radio. Data Communications expedite clearances, reduce communication errors. Pilot and controller workloads reduced.
Operators and traffic managers have immediate access to identical weather information through on data source.
Arrival sequence planned hundreds of miles in advance. RNAV and RNP allow multiple precision paths to runway. Equipped aircraft fly precise horizontal and vertical paths
at reduced power from descent point to final approach in almost all types of weather. Time and fuel are saved.
Emissions and holding are reduced.
Runway exit point, assigned gate and taxi route sent by Data Communications to pilots prior to
approach. Pilot and controller workload reduced and safety improved.
RNAV, RNP, and RVSM utilize reduced separation requirements increasing airspace capacity. Aircraft fly most optimal path using trajectory-based operations considering wind, destination, weather, and traffic. Re-routes determined with weather fused into decision-making tools are tailored to each aircraft. Data Communications reduce frequency congestion and errors. ADS-B supported routes available for equipped aircraft.
Federal Aviation Administration
NextGen Enhancements
28Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
ARTCCs
TRACONs
TOWERUser Flight OperationsControl
VDL-2Netw ork
ATCSCC
WX Reroutes
VDL-2
Clearances
Taxi InstructionsDigital ATIS Departure Clearance
Pilot Downlink
How We Want to FlyHow We Need to FLY
Global Harm onization, Enhanced Safety , Increased Capacity
Data Communications Integrated ServicesData Communications Integrated Services
29Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
OEM Perspective - Towards a New System
The OEM Perspective-- the way forward: Nigel Talbot: Augstawestland
30Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
A New System - Characteristics• Safe
– We need improved safety– New Technology – careful introduction
• Useful– Improved Operational Capabilities– Clear Operational Objectives
• Integrated– Airworthiness/Operational Rules/Training– Integration with NextGen/SESAR - Influence
• Cost Effective– Won’t happen unless it is
31Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
A New System – Features
• Improved IFR Capability– Low Level IFR– PINS Approaches– Self Separation between Traffic
• Operational/Air Traffic Integration– Self Separation Between Traffic– ATC Flexibility/4D/Negotiated Trajectories– Defined Equipment – ‘Best Equipped, First Served’
• SNI– Helicopter/Future Rotorcraft access to Airports
32Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Safety• Appropriate Airworthiness and Operational Rules must be
developed along with the New Technology– Systems Safety Assessment– AWO Criteria/Weather Information– Obstacles and Ground Hazards
• Training Standards must be defined• Education of Pilots• Basic Aircraft Characteristics:
– Stability– Visual Cues/Degraded Visual Environments (DVE)– Is VMC/VFR Stability Enough?
33Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Capabilities from OEMs• High Levels of Basic Stability• New Uses for Autopilot Functions• Improved Visual Cueing - Displays• High Integrity Point in Space (WAAS/GBAS/SBAS)• Performance/Controllability• Icing Capability• Fully Integrated and Approved NVG Cockpits and External
Lighting• Collision Avoidance Systems (LIDAR) & Height Awareness• Low Airspeed Indicating Systems• Noise Reduction
34Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Invest in Safety
Infrastructure improvementsin Practice
35Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
IFR Infrastructure Success and Barriers
Jason PatrickSatellite Technology International
andRachel Miller-Tester
36Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
IFR Capability
• Identified as one way to help increase HEMS safety (and other helicopter operators).
• Recovered Revenue for Operator / Hospital.• National Airspace System (NAS) benefits
(helicopter will fit into the NAS)• Requires a COMPLETE system
37Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
The IFR Triad
Pilot◦
Instrument Trained◦
Instrument Current◦
Instrument Proficient
Aircraft◦
Meets FAA IFR Standards◦
GPS Receiver Meets TSO C-129 Requirements
Infrastructure◦
GPS Approaches◦
GPS Routes◦
Weather Availability
38Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
The IFR Infrastructure• GPS Approaches
• 1994- First civilian stand-alone GPS approach into a hospital helipad at Erlanger Medical Center- Chattanooga, TN
• 2011- over 500 approaches over 45 operators• Routing
•Over 1500 miles of routing •Currently the Primary Barrier to IFR infrastructure
39Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Role of Air Traffic Control (ATC)
Funding1. ATC Approach Control Facilities
•FAA forced to close or limit operational hours•Many closed and others forced to close after midnight
2. Centers (ARTCC)•Traffic, including HEMS aircraft, from ATC Approach Control Facilities are now the responsibility of much larger Centers•Centers generally do a sufficient job keeping up, but there are side effects
40Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Effects of Center Control Status• Physical
• lack of tie in RADARs• Operational
• MIA used by a Center is often much higher than those used by an Approach Control
•Example•Approach Control MVA- 3000’•Center MIA- 5500’
• Educational• less familiarity between operator and controller• extended clearance delays for aircraft
41Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Effects of Center Control Status On Operator- HEMS Example
Primary Hospital (Trauma or Specialty Center)
Transferring Hospital
Departure at 22:00Approach Control
3000’Intermediate Departure Fix
IAF of GPS Approach
●●
6000’
Departure at 00:30Center
42Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Complications
• Pilot may elect to return VFR when IFR is the safer option → defeats the purpose of IFR capability →
Safety Compromise• Patient transport by ground EMS → Delayed access
to specialty care for patient → defeats the purpose of air transport
• Aircraft out of service until:• Weather changes to allow safe VFR return• Approach Control Facility Opens
43Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Routing Solution and Benefits1. Low Altitude Route System
• Connect with GPS approaches to form a complete point-to-point system
• Keep helicopters on routes that are studied / cleared for terrain and obstructions
• Verified safe altitudes
2. Benefits for Operators• Allows efficient and uninterrupted use of IFR system (Routes and
Approaches) by operator• Allows for lower altitudes than the MEA associated with Center
Control / RADAR• Increases overall safety for pilot, crew, and patient / passengers
44Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Murphy, NC Approach Designed with Feeder around mountainous terMurphy, NC Approach Designed with Feeder around mountainous terrain.rain.
45Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Routing Solution Benefits
3. Benefits for ATC / Center• Coordination of routes ensures that final product is
a collaboration between ATC facilities and the operator
• No longer requires RADAR tracking• Ensures aircraft is on pre-determined route by
utilizing established compulsory reporting points
46Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Current Routing Systems
• Seattle Center• Frequently used
• Atlanta Center• Signed by FAA• Due to ATC reluctance- Never used
• Boston Center• In the development process
47Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Combination of rural, coastal, and inland approaches with Routes and Feeders connecting them to urban trauma centers.
48Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Multiple approaches connected by GPS Routes and Feeders in remotMultiple approaches connected by GPS Routes and Feeders in remote mountainous arease mountainous areas..
49Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Barriers
• ATO regulation interpretation• Some accept routes as long as altitudes coincide
with Center’s MIA•Defeats the purpose of routing
• Each region sets up responsibility for routes through Letters of Agreement with each operator.
•Different in nearly every region• No specific process for development of
infrastructure from start to finish
50Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Conclusion
• Low-Altitude Route Infrastructure and GPS Approaches and Departures allow for a safe, planned IFR flight
• Operators have the availability to fly IFR without RADAR, out of icing, and on planned routes with established safe altitudes
51Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
What We Need• A centralized set of regulations guiding the
development of infrastructure• Regulations written / re-written for standard
interpretation • Specific plans to coordinate with ATC and other FAA
offices during procedure development• Regulatory agencies must be made aware of routing
necessity for safety
52Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
What We Need
• Due to limited resources, we need a Top – Down
• Directive to:1. Make low-level infrastructure a priority within
the FAA.2. Conduct route testing to determine if criteria can
be re-written based on new data• Industry input on the most advantageous
altitudes (3000’?)
53Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Providing Safety and Reliability with PBN
IHSTInternational Helicopter Safety Summit
HUGHES PROPRIETARY
54Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
•
Helicopter accident rate (nominal) is 7.5 per 100,000 hours of flying
•
In Comparison the airplane accident rate (nominal) is approximately 0.175 per 100,000 flying hours.
Helicopter Accident RateVertical Flight PBN Solutions
55Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Loss of Traffic SeparationHudson River Mid-Air Tragedy
56Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
The top of the grey lines are the altitude of passing aircraft
The top of the grey lines are the The top of the grey lines are the altitude of passing aircraftaltitude of passing aircraft
2,500’ at GREEN Line2,5002,500’’ at GREEN Lineat GREEN Line
2,000’ at top of RED Line2,0002,000’’ at top of RED Lineat top of RED Line
Aircraft altitudes are average 3,000’ providing 1,000’ vertical separation
Aircraft altitudes are Aircraft altitudes are average 3,000average 3,000’’ providing providing 1,0001,000’’ vertical separationvertical separation
Airspace Traffic Separation Vertical Flight PBN Solutions
HUGHES PROPRIETARY
57Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
PBN Helicopter AirwaysVertical Flight PBN Solutions
HUGHES PROPRIETARY
58Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Urban Area - MetroplexVertical Flight PBN Solutions
59Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Concept ChartingVertical Flight PBN Solutions
HUGHES PROPRIETARY
60Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
IFR Helicopter Route SystemVertical Flight PBN
North-South Transition Routes
NorthNorth--South South Transition RoutesTransition Routes
Bi-Directional East-West Routes
BiBi--Directional EastDirectional East--West West RoutesRoutes
Helicopter LPV Approaches
Helicopter LPV Helicopter LPV ApproachesApproaches
Helicopter LPV Approaches
Helicopter LPV Helicopter LPV ApproachesApproaches
Automated Weather/ADS-B
ATC Comms/Camera Stations
Automated Automated Weather/ADSWeather/ADS--BB
ATC ATC CommsComms/Camera /Camera StationsStations
Automated Weather/ADS-B
ATC Comms/Camera Stations
Automated Automated Weather/ADSWeather/ADS--BB
ATC ATC CommsComms/Camera /Camera StationsStations HUGHES PROPRIETARY
61Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Southampton HeliportK87N
Southampton HeliportSouthampton HeliportK87NK87N
Noise Sensitive AreasNoise Sensitive AreasNoise Sensitive Areas
K87N Southampton HeliportLPV PinS Approach with VAS
62Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
K87N Southampton HeliportLPV PinS Approach with VAS
RF LegVisual Approach
Segment
RF LegRF LegVisual Approach Visual Approach
SegmentSegment
LPV PinS Approach to Ponquogue Bridge
LPV LPV PinSPinS Approach to Approach to PonquoguePonquogue BridgeBridge
63Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
IFR Helicopter Route SystemRNP 0.3 Transitions
North-South Transition Route
NorthNorth--South South Transition RouteTransition Route
64Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
IFR Off-Shore Helicopter Route SystemPrecision Oil Platform Approach
Bi-Directional Route All-Weather Route
BiBi--Directional Route Directional Route AllAll--Weather RouteWeather Route
All-Weather Precision Approach
AllAll--Weather Weather Precision Precision ApproachApproach
LATS Station ATC Comms ADS-BAWOS IIICamera Surveillance
LATS Station LATS Station ATC ATC CommsCommsADSADS--BBAWOS IIIAWOS IIICamera Camera SurveillanceSurveillance
65Infrastructure Panel
International Helicopter Safety Symposium 9 November 2011 Ft. Worth, TX
Discussion