Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium – National Aerospace Laboratory NLR

European Air Transportation System

Safety and Environment

Dr. F.J. van Schaik

Ir. R. Hogenhuis, Ir. R. Wever

2

Content

Approach / EPATS aircraft / EPATS operations

Environmental issues

Safety issues

Recommendations

3

Approach

Market study

Aircraft designsSafety study

Environmental study

D3.2 EPATS Airports Requirements including

Other infoConcepts, US, VLJ

4

EPATS aircraft

GNSS / P-RNAV

ADS-B

ACAS

TAWS

EFB / Moving Map

Weather

HUD / SVS / EVS

FADEC 2020: about 100.000 a/c

5

EPATS Flight Operations

Internet Based Ticketing and Flight Operations

Air Taxi / Shared Ownership

One day return

High reliability, High punctuality

Network Centric ATM (SESAR)

All weather 24 ops

VFR / IFR / SCA

(Un)controlled/ Self Controlled

6

Environmental issues

Assumptions:

100.000 a/c 2000 airports

365 flights per EPATS a/c per year

lead to:

– +24000 movements per year (m/y) per airport

– Some airports will get 3x more movements– Other airports can’t have more than present day

7

Environmental issues / noise

--> Piston/ turbo prop aircraft are preferred for noise

--> New aircraft become more and more silent

Environmental issues / noise

Noise = f (construction date, weight and number of passengers)

Aircraft + type year MTOW pas range LA TO LA APP LA TO corr LA APP corr

Cessna Citation Encore (J) 1998 7634 11 7634 58.3 83.0 54.9 79.6

Mitsubishi MU300 Diamond I (J) 1996 7394 7 2744 71.9 77.2 70.4 75.7

Cessna Citation 525 CJ (J) 1998 4853 5 2408 60.3 81.7 60.3 81.7

Piper PA-42 Cheyenne (TP) 1977 5125 6-9 3015 70.3 77.1 67.7 74.5

Beech Super King Air B200 (TP) 1981 5670 13 3251 68.8 77.8 64.7 73.7

Cessna 421C (P) 1976 3103 8 2756 61.0 74.0 59.0 72.0

Beech Bonanza A36 (P) 1970 1633 3-5 1291 67.8 64.0 67.8 64.0

Eclipse 500 (VLJ) 2007 2719 5 2408 54.9 72.8 54.9 72.8

8

Environmental issues / emissions

If bio-fuel is used, CO2 is compensated, however

The total production chain should be taken into account

If Hydrogen is used, it will produce water and

it is inefficient to make it and

it needs heavy tanks

Flying below 7 km will reduce water emission negative effect

Restricted study

9

Environmental issues / emissions

Comparison of Specific Fuel Consumption:

(kg. fuel per passenger kilometre)

Car load factor 0.3

A/c load factor 0.6 to 0.9

Piston and Turbo

are better

than jets

10

Safety issues studied

Aircraft manufacturing and certification

Flight operations

Training and qualification

Airport and Air Traffic Control

Safety programs and

Safety oversight

11

Safety issues

CS23 is not CS25

100.000 new pilots!

Aspects of pilot training, inexperienced pilots

Bird and wildlife, de-icing

New technology, new ATM concepts like Self Controlled Airspace

(Single) pilot operations / communications

Controller workload

12

Safety and Environmental conclusions and recommendations (1) / noise

Many local airports are noise constraint and the upcoming EPATS might become a problem quickly => Socio - economic impact

Local economy might forgive more noise

VLJs replacing regular light jets reduce the noise impact

Single and twin piston engines and turboprops give better or comparable noise characteristics during approach (comp. to VLJ)

VLJ produce less noise during the take-off than conventional jets

Engines should become more silent, higher efficiency, new propulsion techniques

13

Safety and Environmental conclusions and recommendations (2) / noise and emissions

Development of noise abatement routes, CDA , avoid the night

Piston and turboprop engines have lower emissions than VLJs

Piston and turboprop a/c are cleaner than VLJ up to 600 km but are slower

Increase the load factor (optimisation)

Fuel research for low environmental impact

==> It is difficult to predict what is possible

==> Define goals

(e.g.) Can we bring/keep the airport noise below that of provincial roads?

14

Safety and Environmental conclusions and recommendations (3) / Safety

Are current regulations sufficiently safe for EPATS?

R&D in automation supporting safe single pilot operations, flight envelope protection and further automation of flight

Single pilot operations and feasibility study of the virtual co-pilot, Single Pilot Resource Management

Mentor pilot and scenario based training concepts in EPATS

Safe integration of EPATS aircraft in the air transport system of today has to be studied in more detail (impact on ATC and airport)

Tailoring and application of commercial aviation safety programs to EPATS operators and outsourcing of safety programs shall be studied

15

Overall recommendations

Better EPATS statistics and forecasts needed

EPATS will come quietly, so prepare! ATM safety research Environmental friendly procedures Emissions Remote airfields / control / autoland / de-ice

Better SESAR for EPATS

Single pilot Resource Management / Safety

16

Conclusion

Can you do without your PC? No?

You also can’t do without your PA!

17

18

Safety issues in alphabetical order (1)

Clear air turbulence/jet stream core or boundary encounters

Convective weather encounters

FMS programming and autoflight vs. manual flight control

High-altitude upset

Inadequate "land and hold short" (LAHSO) preparation

Inadequate crosswind takeoff/landing preparation

Inadequate exercise of "command"

Inadequate knowledge of high-altitude weather

Inadequate preparation for high-rate/high-speed climbsSource NBAA

19

Incorrect/less-than-optimum cruise altitude selection

Jet blast damage behind larger jets during ground operations

Lack of pilot self-evaluations

Low-fuel arrivals trying to stretch range

Microburst/windshear encounters /Mountain wave encounters

Physiological effect of high-altitude operations

Recognizing single pilot "red flags" (as an alternative to below)

Single pilot adherence to checklists

VLJs misunderstood by ATC (pilot mitigations)

Wake turbulence encounters

Winter operations

Safety issues in alphabetical order (2)

Source NBAA