SESAR DETAILED OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION - Eurocontrol · SESAR Detailed Operational Description EPISODE 3 E3-D2.2-020 Date: 28-07-2008 ... INECO Laura Serrano ISA Ian Crook Isdefe

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020

SESAR Detailed Operational Description

Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 1 of 144 - Public

This document was developed by members of the EPISODE 3 consortium under a contract with European Commission. Its content cannot be reproduced or disclosed in any form without prior written authorization, to be requested from the EPISODE 3 Project Co-ordinator.© Copyright 2008 – All Rights Reserved

SESAR DETAILED OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION

General Purpose DOD - G

Document information

EC project title EPISODE 3

EC project N° 037106

Project / Work package EPISODE 3 / WP2

EPISODE 3 WBS {To be completed}

Document Name SESAR Detailed Operational Description

Deliverable ID/ Doc ID E3-D2.2-020

Version 3.0

Version date 28-07-2008

Status Draft

Classification Public

Filename E3-D2.2-020-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD (G - General).doc

Owner of the document

Rosalind Eveleigh EEC

Contributing partners

{company} add rows if needed

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 2 of 144 - Public


DOCUMENT CONTROL

Approval

Role Organisation Name Version Date & signature

Document owner EEC Rosalind Eveleigh

Work Package leader EEC Andreas Tautz

Quality Coordinator EEC Ludovic Legros

Management cell EEC Rosalind Eveleigh

Project Coordinator EEC Philippe Leplae

Edition history

Edition Nº Date Status Author(s) Justification - Could be a

reference to a review form or a comment sheet

0.11 03/10/2007 Draft E. Isambert / D. Dohy Initial draft

0.2 15/11/2007 Draft E. Isambert / D. Dohy Update following internal EEC review

0.3 21/01/2008 Draft E. Isambert / D. Dohy Internal review draft version

1.0 25/01/2008 Draft E. Isambert / D. Dohy Update after internal review

2.0 15/02/2008 Draft E. Isambert / D. Dohy Amendment after partners review.

2.1 16/04/2008 Draft D. Dohy Consolidated release from partners comments.

2.2 16/05/2008 Draft D. Dohy

Lightened release for EUROCONTROL/FAA AP2 TIM. Major modifications:

Suppress Table 3 (reference made to Information Model)

Suppress section 5.2 Lighten Table 5 (reference made to

Information Model) Suppress sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3 & 8.4

(reference made to Information Model)

2.21 02/06/2008 Draft D. Dohy

Release for EPISODE 3 website publication. Adding Note in front page and reference to OI steps baseline 3.2a.

2.3 13/06/2008 Draft D. Dohy Alignment to SESAR D5 & integration of “late” comments.

3.0 28/07/2008 Final Draft D. Dohy Updated after internal review.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 3 of 144 - Public


DISTRIBUTION LIST

Company's short name Contact

EUROCONTROL Andreas Tautz

AENA Pablo Sanchez Escalonia

Airbus Patrick Lelièvre

DFS Matthias Poppe

NATS Alex Mclellean

DLR Frank Morlang

Reiner Suikat

NLR Hugo de Jonge

DSNA Bernard Gayraud

ENAV Antonio Nuzzo

Daniele Teotino

INECO Laura Serrano

ISA Ian Crook

Isdefe Nicolas Suarez

LFV Anders Nyberg

SICTA Patrizia Criscuolo

TH-AV Thierry Person

TR6 Bruno Ayral

Jean-Etienne Deraet

QUB Mark Price

ACG Martin Stieber

ATMB Tian Zhencai

CAST Minzhu Zhong

LPS Igor Urbanik

LVNL Ronald Dubbeldam

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 4 of 144 - Public


- This page is intentionally blank –

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 5 of 144 - Public


SUMMARY

The aim of EPISODE 3 is to conduct validation exercises with the objective of developing a better understanding of the SESAR Concept. To support these exercises, EPISODE 3 needs to refine and clarify the high level SESAR ConOps concept description.

A set of Detailed Operational Description (DOD) documents have therefore been produced to provide a central reference describing the concept with the required level of detail. The ATM Process Model, developed for EPISODE 3, provides a process breakdown of the SESAR ConOps and has been used to structure the list of Detailed Operational Description documents according to the main phases defined by SESAR:

Long Term Planning activities;

Medium and Short Term Planning activities;

Execution activities.

ATM Planning Phases

ATM Execution Phase

E1 – Runway

E2/3 – Apron & Taxiways

E5 – Arrival & Departure

E6 – En-Route

M1 – Airport Planning

M2/3 – Network Planning

E4 – Network ManagementL – Long Term Planning

ATM Network

This document is an additional DOD which acts as a technical “companion” to the other DOD documents. It presents the main assumptions and principles underlying the mode of operations, the description of the expected 2020 deployment environment, the overall view of the operational services and the description of some key elements such as Business Trajectory Management, the collaborative processes and the Network Operations Plan.

The complete set of DODs is targeting the ATM system implementing operational services up to SESAR Service Level 4.

This document also includes a description of the environmental characteristics and constraints, related to traffic and airspace, applicable to the overall ATM system and common to the various DOD documents.

Finally, a generic scenario is included providing an overview of the entire ATM process as foreseen in the target concept of operations. Specific scenarios covering detail aspects of operations are also included. These can be conveniently accessed by hyperlink from the various steps of the generic scenario.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 6 of 144 - Public


The DODs are living documents that will be developed as the project progresses. Early issues therefore have place holders, which will be completed based on EPISODE 3 validation results or material provided from other on-going research.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 7 of 144 - Public


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................................... 5

1 DOCUMENT INFORMATION................................................................................................................... 11

1.1 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 INTENDED AUDIENCE ........................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT............................................................................................. 12 1.4 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................... 13

2 OBJECTIVE OF SESAR CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS ........................................................................ 14

3 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE DODS ............................................................................................. 15

4 DOD STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .......................................................................... 19

4.1 OBJECTIVES OF DOD DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................... 19 4.2 SCOPE OF A DOD ............................................................................................................................... 19 4.3 STRUCTURE OF A DOD ....................................................................................................................... 20 4.4 ASSESSMENT OF DODS ...................................................................................................................... 20 4.5 ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .......................................................................................... 21

5 GENERAL CONCEPTS FOR ALL ATM PHASES .................................................................................. 22

5.1 ATM CAPABILITY LEVELS .................................................................................................................... 22 5.2 TRAJECTORY MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................. 23

5.2.1 Business/Mission Trajectory ..................................................................................................... 23 5.2.2 Business Development Trajectory (BDT) ................................................................................. 24 5.2.3 Shared Business Trajectory (SBT) ........................................................................................... 24 5.2.4 Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) ...................................................................................... 25 5.2.5 Updating the Trajectory ............................................................................................................ 27 5.2.6 Executed Business Trajectory (EBT) ........................................................................................ 33

5.3 NETWORK MANAGEMENT..................................................................................................................... 33 5.3.1 Network Operations Plan (NOP) ............................................................................................... 33 5.3.2 Network Operations Planner (NOPLA) ..................................................................................... 35

5.4 SYSTEM WIDE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (SWIM) ............................................................................ 36 5.5 COLLABORATIVE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES ................................................................................. 38 5.6 LAYERED PLANNING PHASES ............................................................................................................... 39 5.7 QUEUE MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 41

5.7.1 Queue management techniques within DCB ............................................................................ 41

6 GENERAL ATM ENVIRONMENT DEFINITION ...................................................................................... 43

6.1.1 Airspace Structure .................................................................................................................... 43 6.1.2 Airspace Classification .............................................................................................................. 43 6.1.3 Type of Air Traffic Services ....................................................................................................... 44

6.2 MANAGED AIRSPACE CHARACTERISTICS .............................................................................................. 45 6.2.1 Route Configuration .................................................................................................................. 45 6.2.2 Air Traffic Complexity ................................................................................................................ 45 6.2.3 Separation Minima .................................................................................................................... 46

6.3 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................................. 46 6.3.1 Traffic Demand ......................................................................................................................... 46 6.3.2 Throughput ................................................................................................................................ 49 6.3.3 Aircraft Mix ................................................................................................................................ 49

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 8 of 144 - Public


6.3.4 CNS Capability.......................................................................................................................... 49 6.3.5 Aircraft Performance ................................................................................................................. 51

7 ATM ACTORS ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................. 52

8 OVERVIEW OF ATM PROCESS MODEL ............................................................................................... 59

9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 60

10 ANNEX A: OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS ............................................................................................... 61

10.1 HIGH LEVEL SCENARIOS ...................................................................................................................... 61 10.1.1 Single Flight Perspective Generic Scenario ............................................................................. 61 10.1.2 Multi-Flights High Level Scenarios ........................................................................................... 68

10.2 INDIVIDUAL SCENARIOS ....................................................................................................................... 70 10.2.1 Business Development Trajectory Creation ............................................................................. 70 10.2.2 Sharing the Business Trajectory ............................................................................................... 73 10.2.3 Refinement of the Shared Business Trajectory ........................................................................ 75 10.2.4 Military Tactical Operations ...................................................................................................... 78 10.2.5 UDPP activation due to Capacity Shortfall ............................................................................... 79 10.2.6 UDPP process inducing delayed Push and Start ..................................................................... 84 10.2.7 UDPP process inducing early departure .................................................................................. 87 10.2.8 Reallocation of a MVPA due to Weather Constraints ............................................................... 88 10.2.9 Airspace User managing constraints through UDPP................................................................ 91 10.2.10 Non-scheduled, late request ..................................................................................................... 92 10.2.11 Obtain new TTA ........................................................................................................................ 93 10.2.12 Departure queue management ................................................................................................. 94 10.2.13 Publishing the RBT ................................................................................................................... 95 10.2.14 Preparing for Push Back ........................................................................................................... 96 10.2.15 Non compliance with TTA ......................................................................................................... 97 10.2.16 Change of departure time ......................................................................................................... 98 10.2.17 Weather forecast update .......................................................................................................... 98 10.2.18 Taxi out to take off position ....................................................................................................... 99 10.2.19 Aircraft Tow & maintenance to stand ...................................................................................... 102 10.2.20 Departure from non-standard runway ..................................................................................... 102 10.2.21 Loss of departure slot ............................................................................................................. 103 10.2.22 Allocation of the Departure Route........................................................................................... 104 10.2.23 Allocation of the Departure Profile .......................................................................................... 107 10.2.24 TMA support tools ................................................................................................................... 111 10.2.25 Conventional Control Tools .................................................................................................... 111 10.2.26 Executing Delegated Separation ............................................................................................ 113 10.2.27 Negotiating an ATC revision to the RBT (not for separation purposes) ................................. 118 10.2.28 Responding to a new airspace exclusion ............................................................................... 119 10.2.29 Weather Change Delayed ...................................................................................................... 121 10.2.30 Military provide corridor though airspace reservation ............................................................. 121 10.2.31 Flight in Managed Airspace .................................................................................................... 122 10.2.32 Flying CDA merging without Structured Routes ..................................................................... 127 10.2.33 Sequencing & merging for linked pair ..................................................................................... 133 10.2.34 Non-compliance with wake-vortex spacing ............................................................................ 133 10.2.35 Landing and Taxi to Gate ....................................................................................................... 134 10.2.36 Closely Spaced Parallel Operations in IMC ............................................................................ 137

11 ANNEX B: REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 142

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 9 of 144 - Public


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Allocation of DOD documents to SESAR planning phases ................................................ 16

Table 2: Operational Improvements steps not addressed in the DODs ........................................... 18

Table 3: Actor Roles ....................................................................................................................... 58

Table 4: Multi-Flights High Level Scenarios summary. .................................................................... 69

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Overview of the EPISODE 3 DODs .................................................................................. 13

Figure 2: SESAR Concept of Operations - Layered Planning Processes ........................................ 14

Figure 3: Timeframe of the DODs ................................................................................................... 15

Figure 4: Relationship between ATM Service and Capability Levels ............................................... 17

Figure 5: ATM Capability Levels addressed .................................................................................... 22

Figure 6: Network Airline Business Trajectory Life Cycle ................................................................ 23

Figure 7: RBT update and Trajectory Management Requirements .................................................. 28

Figure 8: Life cycle of the Reference Business Trajectory ............................................................... 29

Figure 9: State diagram for the Authorised RBT segment ............................................................... 30

Figure7 10: Flight Crew initiated revision due to weather ................................................................. 31

Figure7 11: State diagrams for RBT segment for air initiated revision .............................................. 31

Figure7 12: Ground initiated immediate revision due to separation provision ................................... 32

Figure7 13: State diagrams for RBT segment for ground initiated revision ....................................... 32

Figure 14: Relationship of the NOP and NOPLA applications (examples only) ............................... 34

Figure 15: Illustration of NOP .......................................................................................................... 35

Figure 16: Current situation without SWIM ...................................................................................... 37

Figure 17: SWIM overall approach .................................................................................................. 37

Figure 18: Traffic Growth Scenarios for 2020 (SESAR D1) ............................................................. 47

Figure 19: Traffic Growth Scenarios for 2020 (STATFOR 2006) ..................................................... 48

Figure 20: ATM phase level ............................................................................................................ 59

Figure 21: UDPP Plan for Traffic through Constrained Volume V .................................................... 85

Figure 22: Plan View of Routes to Constrained Volume .................................................................. 86

Figure 23: UDPP Plan for Traffic through Constrained Volume V (after delay to Flight C) ............... 86

Figure 24: Lateral overtaking (initial situation) ............................................................................... 115

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 10 of 144 - Public


Figure 25: Lateral overtaking (ASEP solution) ............................................................................... 116

Figure 26: Vertical crossing (initial situation) ................................................................................. 117

Figure 27: Vertical crossing (end of ASEP) ................................................................................... 118

Figure 28: Downlink of predicted trajectory in case of exceeding the delta specified in the TMR ... 123

Figure 29: MET and information data exchange ............................................................................ 124

Figure 30: Revision of route, level and/or CTA due to potential conflict ......................................... 124

Figure 31: Revision of route or level due to weather hazard .......................................................... 125

Figure 32: CTA with single merging point configuration ................................................................ 127

Figure 33: CTA with multiple merging points configuration ............................................................ 128

Figure 34: Sequence construction (initiation point) ........................................................................ 130

Figure 35: Sequence construction ................................................................................................. 132

Figure 36: Closely Spaced Parallel Runways ................................................................................ 140

Figure 37: Parallel approaches ..................................................................................................... 140

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 11 of 144 - Public


1 DOCUMENT INFORMATION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The EPISODE 3 project, also called "Single European Sky Implementation Support Through Validation", was signed on 18th April 2007 between the European Community and EUROCONTROL under the contract N° TREN/07/FP6AE/S07.70057/037106. The European Community has agreed to grant a financial contribution to this project equivalent to about 50% of the cost of the project.

The project is carried out by a consortium composed of EUROCONTROL, Entidad Publica Empresarial Aeropuertos Espanõles y Navegacion Aérea (AENA); AIRBUS France SAS (Airbus); DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS); NATS (EN Route) Public Limited Company (NERL); Deutsches Zentrum für Luft und Raumfahrt e.V.(DLR); Stichting Nationaal Lucht en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium (NLR); The Ministère des Transports, de l‟Equipement, du Tourisme et de la Mer de la République Française represented by the Direction des Services de la Navigation Aérienne (DSNA); ENAV S.p.A. (ENAV); Ingenieria y Economia del Transporte S.A (INECO) ISA Software Ltd(ISA); Ingeneria de Sistemas para la Defensa de Espana S.A (Isdefe); Luftfartsverket (LFV); Sistemi Innovativi per il Controllo del Traffico Aereo (SICTA); THALES Avionics SA (THAV); THALES AIR SYSTEMS S.A (TR6); Queen‟s University of Belfast (QUB); The Air Traffic Management Bureau of the General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (ATMB); The Center of Aviation Safety Technology of General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAST); Austro Control (ACG); LPS SR (LPS); Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland (LVNL). This consortium works under the co-ordination of EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre (EEC)

The mission of EPISODE 3 is to assess key concept areas of the SESAR 2020 Concept of Operations and provide evidence, or otherwise, that these concept areas:

Are “safe in principle”;

Can attain the “proposed level of performance”;

Are “environmentally efficient”; and

Are "operationally viable”.

The main SESAR inputs to this work are:

The SESAR Concept of Operations (ConOps): T222 [1].

The description of scenarios developed: T223 [2] & [3].

The list of Operational Improvements allowing to transition to the final concept: T224 [4].

The definition of the implementation packages: T333 [4] & [5].

The list of performance assessments exercises to be carried out to validate that the concept delivers the required level of performance: T232.

The ATM performance framework, the list of Key Performance Indicators, and an initial set of performance targets: T212 [6].

One of the objectives of EPISODE 3 is to deliver Detailed Operational Descriptions that will refine the concept and structure the validation work [7]. These documents are provided as input to the SESAR development phase. These documents are produced through the System Consistency work package of EPISODE 3 and will be updated through the life of the project.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 12 of 144 - Public


1.2 INTENDED AUDIENCE

The intended audience includes:

EPISODE 3 partners;

SESAR community.

1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT

This document provides an introduction to the EPISODE 3 Detailed Operational Description (DOD) documents. Such documents shall be used within EPISODE 3 in order to identify topics for validation exercises and provide information suitable for the conduct of the validation exercises and can be seen as being step 0.2 of E-OCVM [8] (i.e. the description of the ATM Operational Concept(s)). The DOD document structure and content is derived from the ED-78A standard [9] and the OSED. According to the ED-78A standard, "the OSED identifies the Air Traffic Services supported by data communications and their intended operational environment and includes the operational performances expectations, functions and selected technologies of the related CNS/ATM system". The structure of the DOD has been adapted from that of the OSED to reflect the nature of the concept areas being developed and serve the purpose of EPISODE 3 validation activities.

This document provides a technical „companion‟ to the other EPISODE 3 DOD documents. It presents the main assumptions and principles underlying the mode of operations, the description of the expected 2020 environment for ATM services deployment, the overall view of the operational services and the description of some key elements such as Business Trajectory Management, the collaborative processes and the Network Operations Plan.

The complete detailed description of the mode of operations is composed of 10 documents (the set of documents is available from the EPISODE 3 portal home page [10]):

1. The General DOD (G DOD) , this document; 2. The Long Term Network Planning DOD (L DOD) [12]; 3. The Collaborative Airport Planning DOD (M1 DOD) [13]; 4. The Medium & Short Term Network Planning DOD (M2/3 DOD) [14]; 5. The Runway Management DOD (E1 DOD) [15]; 6. The Apron & Taxiways Management DOD (E2/3 DOD) [16]; 7. The Network Management in the Execution Phase DOD (E4 DOD) [17]; 8. The Conflict Management in Arrival & Departure High & Medium/Low Density Operations

DOD (E5 DOD) [18]; 9. The Conflict management in En-Route High & Medium/Low Density operations DOD (E6

DOD) [19]; 10. The EPISODE 3 Glossary of Terms and Definitions [20].

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 13 of 144 - Public


ATM Planning Phases

ATM Execution Phase

E1 – Runway

E2/3 – Apron & Taxiways

E5 – Arrival & Departure

E6 – En-Route

M1 – Airport Planning

M2/3 – Network Planning

E4 – Network ManagementL – Long Term Planning

ATM Network

Figure 1: Overview of the EPISODE 3 DODs

1.4 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

The structure of the document is as follows:

Section 2 of this document provides a brief description of the objectives of the SESAR ConOps.

Section 3 provides the list of the DODs and their location within the time frame of Business Trajectory life cycle as well as the list of the “out of scope” applications (i.e. OI steps beyond 2025).

Section 4 gives a description of the common structure of a DOD document, the relationship between DOD development and the ATM Process Model, and a brief description of the approach for the DOD assessment.

Section 55 gives a general description of the main aspects of the SESAR ConOps common to all phases of the ATM process.

Section 6 gives a description of the environmental characteristics and constraints applicable to the overall ATM system and which are common to the various DOD documents.

Section 7 briefly presents actor roles and responsibilities applicable to the concept area and detailed in the various DOD documents.

Section 8 provides an overview of the ATM Process Model.

Section 9 presents the conclusions and recommendations regarding the development and use of the DODS.

Annex A presents a generic scenario providing an overview of the entire ATM processes as foreseen in the target concept of operations in which references are made to specific scenarios covering detailed aspects of these operations.

There is a separate document of terms and definitions supporting the DODs [20].

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 14 of 144 - Public


2 OBJECTIVE OF SESAR CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

The SESAR D3 milestone objective is defined as follows: ”To evaluate future concept elements and make a pre-selection of the most promising combination to build a candidate ATM target concept which will meet the performance requirements specified in D2 and address the deficiencies and limitations of the current operations identified in D1”.

The objective of the SESAR ConOps is to describe in sufficient detail the ATM operation envisaged in Europe for the 2020 timeframe and some concept elements to be deployed beyond 2020 so that airspace users, service providers and other specialised SESAR tasks may gain a complete understanding of the operational characteristics of ATM in 2020+ and the main changes they imply in operating practices and the support they require. It does not cover transition issues but does list research topics that will need to be addressed.

The SESAR ConOps covers the complete air traffic management process from early planning through flight execution to post flight activities along the „central‟ concept of aircraft business trajectory.

Figure 2: SESAR Concept of Operations - Layered Planning Processes

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 15 of 144 - Public


3 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE DODS

The ATM Process Model, developed for EPISODE 3, has been used to structure the list of Detailed Operational Description documents (refer to section 1.3). The ATM Process model provides a process breakdown of the SESAR ConOps. These documents as well as the ATM Process Model have been organised according to the main phases defined by SESAR:

Long Term Planning activities;

Medium and Short Term Planning activities;

Execution activities.

The diagram and table below provide the list of the various documents regarding the associated planning phase:

SBT

BDT

RBT

Sharing

SBT …….……………………. ……

Long Term Planning DOD

Collaborative Airport Planning DOD

Medium & Short Term

Network Planning DOD

Runway

Management DOD

Apron & Taxiways

Management DOD

Business

Model

Definition

Seasonal Schedules

Published

…………….

Departure Clearance/

Push-back

BA/GA

Intentions

……….

Sharing

Network

Management DOD

Arrival & Departure

Operations DOD

En-Route

Operations DOD

Years to 6 months 6 months to 2 hours 2 hours to operation

Agreeing

Figure 3: Timeframe of the DODs

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 16 of 144 - Public


Long Term Planning Phase Medium & Short Term

Planning Phase Execution Phase

Long Term Planning DOD (L) Collaborative Airport Planning DOD (M1)

Runway Management DOD (E1)

Medium & Short Term Network Planning DOD (M2/3)

Apron & Taxiways Management DOD (E2/3)

Network Management in the Execution Phase DOD (E4)

Conflict Management in Arrival & Departure High & Medium/Low Density Operations DOD (E5)

Conflict management in En-Route High & Medium/Low Density operations DOD (E6)

Table 1: Allocation of DOD documents to SESAR planning phases

This document represents the high level document which should be read first as an introduction to the other DODs. It presents the common operating principles and the associated scenarios whereas the individual documents are focusing on the operations dedicated to a main family of actors.

The main areas developed in this document are:

The Business Trajectory;

Network Management through the Network Operations Plan (NOP);

Information Management through System Wide Information Management (SWIM);

Collaborative Decision Making through the Collaborative Planning Process and the Layered Planning;

Constraint management through the Queue Management Process and the User Driven Prioritisation Process.

During the SESAR definition phase various elemental notions were introduced providing a path for the implementation, deployment and transition phases. Among those, Operational Improvements (OIs) and Implementation Packages (IPs) organised along Lines of Change are the most relevant for the DODs.

Operational Improvements represent significant stages in operational concept deployment. Each OI has been broken down into steps, each step focusing on specific element to take into account for the improvement of the system [24]. Some of those steps may appear only to support transition steps towards the end-state while not being themselves part of that end-state1. The OI steps have

1 OI steps considered as transition steps are not addressed (i.e. mapped/referenced) in the DODs.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 17 of 144 - Public


been clustered around Lines of Change in order to provide identifiable and well defined operational areas of the ATM environment, including all its aspects (procedures, practices, processes, systems, institutions, etc), that will need to undergo changes/series of changes in order to meet declared performance objectives and arrive at the desired end-state described in the SESAR ConOps.

In order to structure the required transition from today‟s system to the SESAR ATM Target System, a series of ATM Service Levels have been defined. Service levels are associated with operational services offered by a service provider and consumed by a user. The service level defines the deployment of a set of Operational Improvements steps which will lead to benefits (i.e. performance improvements). ATM Capability Levels are linked to each Service Levels; a Capability Level is associated with Stakeholder systems, procedures, human resources etc.

Figure 4: Relationship between ATM Service and Capability Levels

As mentioned in section the descriptions made in the DODs are related to the 2020 time horizon. Thus, these documents will consider a restricted list of OI steps for which the Initial Operating Capability (IOC) time frame is until 2020.

These documents are thus targeting the system implementing operational services up to ATM Service Levels 3 and 4 as defined in SESAR D5 [4].

Services linked to Level 5 are considered out of the scope of the DODs. The associated OI steps are summarised in the Table below:

OI Step Description

Implementing SWIM [L01-04]

Air-Air Exchange services [IS-0710]

Exchange of Meteo, Wake vortices, trajectory information between Aircraft for Self-separation

Weather Information for ATM Planning & Execution [L01-06]

Aircraft Dissemination of Information on Weather Hazards to Other Aircraft [IS-0406]

Significant weather events captured by onboard system such as wake vortices or severe turbulence are broadcast to other airspace users.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 18 of 144 - Public


OI Step Description

Increasing Flexibility of Airspace Configuration [L02-09]

Dynamically Shaped Sectors Unconstrained By Predetermined Boundaries [AOM-0803]

ATC sectors shape and volumes are adapted in real-time to respond to dynamic changes in traffic patterns and/or short term changes in users' intentions.

4D Contract [L08-01]

4D Contract for Equipped Aircraft with Extended Clearance PTC-4D [CM-0501]

A 4D Contract is a clearance that prescribes the containment of the trajectory in all 4 dimensions for the period of the contract.

The goal of a 4D Contract is to ensure separation between:

4DC capable aircraft,

4DC aircraft and dynamic special use airspace, for a segment of the business trajectory in en-route airspace.

Self-separation [L08-05]

Self-Adjustment of Spacing Depending on Wake Vortices [AUO-0504]

The spacing is adjusted dynamically by the pilot based on the actual strength of the vortex of the predecessor. This implies that aircraft can determine the wake vortex characteristic they generate and broadcast this information to neighbouring aircraft.

Self Separation in Mixed Mode [CM-0704]

The self separation is extended to all airspace to allow mixed-mode of separation. This self-separation mode needs the authorization of the controller.

Table 2: Operational Improvements steps not addressed in the DODs

Within each DOD, relevant OI and OI steps have been associated to the ATM Process Model activities covered by the individual document. This will allow to further detail the operational principle descriptions of the processes.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 19 of 144 - Public


4 DOD STRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

4.1 OBJECTIVES OF DOD DEVELOPMENT

The main objectives for the development of the series of Detailed Operational Description (DOD) documents is to refine and clarify the SESAR ConOps through the capture of the operational needs associated with ATM operations targeted for 2020 to support the conduct of validation exercises by the EPISODE 3 project (operational - performance – safety assessments).

The description of ATM operations provided by the DODs is developed:

Using the layered planning of ATM Operations, derived from the SESAR long/medium/short term planning and execution phases and the EEC ATM Process Model;

Identifying clear decision-making levels for ATM Network Operations enabling seamless operations in European airspace;

Detailing the roles of individual ATM actors and the use of key concept elements identified by SESAR ConOps, such as the business trajectory, the user-driven prioritisation process (UDPP) and improved collaborative decision making (CDM);

Establishing clear links between the proposed description and SESAR high-level operational concept elements (e.g. traceability to SESAR Operational Improvements) and documenting the assumptions made.

4.2 SCOPE OF A DOD

The series of DODs has been structured by considering two main „dimensions‟ of the SESAR ConOps:

The planning phase of ATM operations (long-term planning, medium-term planning, short-term planning or execution phase);

The decision-making level within the ATM Network (overall network, regional nodes (airspace blocks), local nodes (airport, airspace).

The content of each DOD is directly mapped to a set of ATM Actors and processes of the ATM Process Model:

ATM actors, for which roles and responsibilities within the SESAR ConOps are identified [23], potentially against the planning layers and/or the decision-making levels.

The ATM Process Model developed by the EEC [22] derived from the SESAR ConOps provides a first decomposition of the target concept for ATM operations into a series of individual operational processes covering the planning phases and decision-making levels.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 20 of 144 - Public


4.3 STRUCTURE OF A DOD

The DOD structure (except for this document) has been derived from the ED-78A method for developing operational services and environment description documents (OSED) to cover key aspects of the operational specification as follows:

Context: What SESAR operational concept elements are applicable?

Scope: What ATM operations are covered? See 4.2

Current Operating Method and Main Changes

Proposed Operating Principles:

o Objectives for ATM Operations; o Assumptions; o Expected Operational Benefits, Issues and Anticipated Constraints; o New Operating Method.

Enablers:

o Consolidation and categorisation of changes required in operational procedures/automated systems and services/human role.

Transition Issues: options – issues – uncertainties for the stepped introduction of proposed enablers and operational changes.

ATM Environment Description:

o Airspace characteristics (e.g. complexity, traffic density); o Traffic characteristics (e.g. traffic density, traffic growth).

4.4 ASSESSMENT OF DODS

In order to confirm that DODs fulfil the objectives assigned, a phased development is performed. The main assessments identified for each phase of the project are the following ones:

1. Coverage of SESAR ConOps and consistency of operational description:

Is the coverage of the decomposition of SESAR ConOps in operational processes obtained?

Consistency of the description of operational processes across DODs:

o Sequence of processes: are the description of the succeeding process and its predecessor(s) compliant, e.g. „success state‟ of predecessor matches „pre-requisites‟ of successor?

o Description of processes compliant with the definition of the planning layer and of the decision-making level?

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 21 of 144 - Public


2. Correct alignment to SESAR ConOps:

The alignment between DODs and SESAR ConOps will be internally and regularly checked through:

Reviews performed by EEC Operational Experts involved in the development of the SESAR ConOps;

Review of the traceability established between DOD elements and SESAR Concept.

All comments with respect to the alignment to SESAR ConOps will be captured and formally responded by the DOD authors (Change Management).

3. Usability by EPISODE 3 partners

This assessment concerns the compliance with EPISODE 3 partners‟ expectations for the development of validation exercises of SESAR ConOps built using DODs (operational validation – benefit assessment – safety assessment).

EPISODE 3 partner expectations fulfilment will be checked by organising reviews of the DODs by these partners and by reviewing the following documents:

Priorities for EPISODE 3 validation activities;

Description of Work (DOW) for EPISODE 3.

4.5 ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

The detailing of the concept through the DODs involved the use of material of varying levels of maturity. Some material could be taken directly from the output of the SESAR Definition Phase or from previous ATM research and development projects but other aspects could only be defined through discussions with operational experts who worked on the development of the SESAR concept. Given the time available to SESAR, the detailing process revealed a number of areas where there no conclusive information was readily available. This has led to gaps in the documents. The priority to fill these gaps will depend on the sensitivity of concept performance or costs which is determined through a separate analysis of the concept that leads to the definition of a high level validation strategy within which the validation exercises in EPISODE 3 play a part.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 22 of 144 - Public


5 GENERAL CONCEPTS FOR ALL ATM PHASES

This section describes aspects of the SESAR Concept which are common to all phases of the ATM Process. The basic information extracted from SESAR documentation has been expanded to the level of detail needed by the EPISODE 3 project.

5.1 ATM CAPABILITY LEVELS

SESAR concepts will require new air and ground capabilities and automation. SESAR summarises these requirements as a series of ATM Capability and Service Levels from 0 to 5 ([1] & [4]). Rather confusingly, the ATM Capability Levels in D3 differ from those presented in D5. EPISODE 3 has decided to align its work to the levels described in D5 – these being the most recent.

ATM Capability Levels are defined to describe the on-going deployment of progressively more advanced ATM Systems for aircraft, ground systems and airports (refer to Figure 4).The main capabilities required by the key SESAR target date of 2020 are described as ATM Service /Capability levels 3 to 4 (scope of DODs). More advanced capabilities for the high-end capacity target of the SESAR Concept (2025 and beyond) are described as ATM Service/Capability Level 5.

0

1

2

3

AT

M C

ap

ab

ilit

y L

eve

l

SESAR 2020 Requirements: Trajectory Sharing meeting ATM

requirements; avionics with VRNP capability, 3D-PTC (User Preferred

Route) and airborne separation capability (“ASEP-C&P”)

Available 2025+: Trajectory Sharing Air-Air;

Met data sharing (Air-Air/Air-Ground) ;

Avionics enabling 4D Contract and Airborne

Self-Separation

4

Aircraft Delivered 2013 onwards: ADS-B/IN and avionics enabling PTC-2D,

TC-SA & airborne spacing (“ASAS S&M”); Datalink: Link 2000+ applications

5

Aircraft Delivered 2017 onwards: avionics enabling multiple CTO,

3D-PTC (published route) and initial airborne separation capability (“ASEP –ITP”)

2013 2020 20252017Date of Initial Operating Capability

“Current Aircraft”: ADS-B/out (position/aircraft/met data); Avionics with 2D-RNP,

vertical constraint management and single RTA; Datalink: Event reporting

and Intent sharing

Figure 5: ATM Capability Levels addressed

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 23 of 144 - Public


5.2 TRAJECTORY MANAGEMENT

5.2.1 Business/Mission Trajectory

The Business Trajectory (Mission Trajectory for military2) is at the core of the concept of operations from the early business development stage up to post-operations activities. It represents the elementary object describing a flight and thus the airspace user intentions. In order to support activities linked to ATM planning, Collaborative Decision Making processes and finally tactical operations, the Business Trajectory will be shared by the ATM stakeholders and continuously refined based on the latest and most accurate data.

In correlation with the various ATM phases (refer to section 5.6) the Business Trajectory lifecycle ensures its refinement until the complete execution of the flight. Figure 6 hereafter describes the life cycle of Business Trajectories with the Commercial3 Airline Business Trajectory highlighted with a purple circle.

BDT BDTBDT

BDT BDTBDT

BDT

BDTBDT

BDT

BDT

BDT

BDTBDT

BDT

BDT

LONG TERM MID/SHORT TERM EXECUTION

Developing

SBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTSBT

SBT

SBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTSBT

SBT

SBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTSBT

SBT

RBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTRBT

RBT

RBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTRBT

RBT

RBT

SBTRBT

SBT

RBT SBTRBT

RBT

RBT

SBTRBT

SBT

RBT SBTRBT

RBT

RBT

RBTEBT

RBT

EBT RBTEBT

RBT

Refining Agreeing Authorisingand

Updating

or

Revising

System Wide Information ManagementSystem Wide Information Management

BDT

BDTBDT

BDT

BDT

BDT

BDTBDT

BDT

BDT

BDT BDTBDT

BDT BDTBDT

POST

FLIGHT

Analysingand

Archiving

Years to 6 months 6 months to 15 minutes

Business Development Trajectory(Airline 1)

Business Development Trajectory(Airline 2)

SBT

Business Development Trajectory(BA, GA or late demand)

BDT

Optimising

SBT SBT RBTSBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTSBT

SBT

SBT

SBTSBT

SBT

SBT SBTSBT

SBT

Shared Business Trajectory

Reference Business Trajectory

Executed Business Trajectory

Figure 6: Network Airline Business Trajectory Life Cycle

2 Thereafter in this document the notion of trajectory will encompass both civil and military demand.

3 For business aviation, general aviation or late demand, the BDT phase may extend up to 2 hours before

departure.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 24 of 144 - Public


The Business Trajectory is associated with all the data needed to describe the flight (e.g. 4D trajectory, flight data, trajectory management data) and will feed support activities/processes at the various stages of its life cycle.

The brief description of trajectory in each development phase is made hereafter.

5.2.2 Business Development Trajectory (BDT)

Depending on the Airspace User and the nature of its operations, the business development cycle may start several years ahead of flight execution.

The user‟s aim is to define the schedule and associated needed resources and requirements. The Business Development Trajectory is built and refined, through a number of iterations, inside an Airspace User organisation therefore it is not yet shared with the outside world. At the early stage of the development, the information contained in the Business Development Trajectory is mainly representing the user intentions and has a limited level of details and accuracy. Although the Business Development Trajectory is normally for airline internal use only, its existence represents important planning information knowledge of which can benefit long term ATM network (including airport) planning. At the same time, the Business Development Trajectory is highly competition sensitive and airspace users are generally reluctant to provide access to their trajectories in any form. However if knowledge of these intentions is requested by other stakeholders for their own planning activities (e.g. airport capacity plan assessment, network target capacity identification) the Business Development Trajectory information (level of granularity determined by the owner) may be shared with these organisations using the relevant NOP application managing stringent confidentiality access rules.

As mentioned this process is Airspace User dependent and its description is out of scope of the present document and other DODs. However, its existence is highly relevant to the processes associated to long term planning both from an airport or network/airspace perspective described in the Long Term Network Planning DOD.

5.2.3 Shared Business Trajectory (SBT)

Once the Airspace Users have stabilised their trajectories or when publication “deadline4” is reached, the Business Development Trajectory is published into the SWIM Pool using the appropriate NOP application. This publication of the trajectory and relevant flight data initiates the sharing mechanism with all the other ATM partners.

4 Publication deadline may vary either regarding the users (e.g. network airlines, low fare airlines, military …) or the

flight data type (e.g. aircraft type, souls on board).

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 25 of 144 - Public


The Shared Business Trajectory is part of the common situational awareness provided through the NOP and will be continuously refined and optimised in order to:

Plan the traffic and airspace requirements;

Refine ATM resources (including airports);

Balance planned demand and capacity.

This Collaborative Decision Making process involving a transparent sharing of the constraints/performance levels from all ATM partners is supported by the SWIM Pool and allows the Airspace User to iteratively improve the Shared Business Trajectory and the Network (including airports) to put in place and optimise the D-day (day of operation) plan (including various sub-regional plans, potential DCB solutions or airport capacity plan).

A continuous reconciliation mechanism ensures that multiple changes in the overall set of the Shared Business Trajectories will not de-stabilise the network. If instabilities are detected Network Management will initiate appropriate to recover stability using pre-defined DCB solutions as far as possible.

Finally the most recent optimised Shared Business Trajectory will be the basis for the instantiation of the Reference Business Trajectory, which is the trajectory the user agrees to fly and the airports and ANSPs agree to facilitate, leading to the effective execution of the flight.

The operations associated to the management of the Shared Business Trajectory are described from an airport perspective in the Collaborative Airport Planning DOD and in the Medium & Short Term Network Planning DOD for operations related to network activities.

5.2.4 Reference Business Trajectory (RBT)

The Reference Business Trajectory is the unique shared object describing the flight to be performed. The Reference Business Trajectory is a 4D trajectory originating from the Shared Business Trajectory and has associated trajectory management data (e.g. Trajectory Management Requirements, required navigation performance parameters).

The Reference Business Trajectory is composed of both ground and airborne segments of the aircraft operation (gate-to-gate approach). A 4D trajectory is a set of consecutive segments linking waypoints and/or points computed by FMS (airborne) or by TP (ground) to build the vertical profile and the lateral transitions; each point defined by a longitude, a latitude, a level and a time.

Depending on the ATM capability level of the aircraft5, Reference Business Trajectory data is sourced from various origins/tools, with different level of accuracy.

5 Without taking into account potential degraded capabilities.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 26 of 144 - Public


For ground systems, the trajectory can be described as:

ATM-0 level: aircraft position (“conventional independent surveillance” sensors) and ground trajectory predictor (e.g. FOC, ATC), without air/ground sharing;

ATM-1 level: aircraft position (ADS out) and ground trajectory predictor and airborne intent, with “partial” air/ground sharing;

ATM-2 level: aircraft position and aircraft parameters (ADS in/out) and ground trajectory predictor and airborne trajectory, with “partial” air/ground sharing;

ATM-3 level: airborne trajectory (Flight Management System trajectory) and aircraft parameters, with air/ground sharing

ATM-4 level: complete airborne trajectory and aircraft parameters sharing through Trajectory Management Requirements event-based mechanism.

Regarding the aircraft, the trajectory can be then described as:

For ATM-0/1/2 level aircraft:

o 2D route; o 2D route containment parameters; o Requested/cleared level and any en-route planned level changes; o Applicable level constraints (e.g. altitude min/max windows for SID/STAR); o Applicable time constraints (e.g. CTA); o Estimates/profile level/speed at waypoints and trajectory change points.

For ATM-3 level aircraft:

o 3D route (i.e. published route) when applicable; o 2D/3D route containment parameters; o Estimates/profile level/speed at waypoints and ATM significant points; o Multiple time constraints (e.g. multi-CTO).

For ATM-4 level aircraft:

o 3D User Preferred Route; o Relevant containment parameters (route & ATM sharing requirements).

Any required “containment” of the RBT will be described in the form of constraints. For example, target times may be specified with an appropriate tolerance and the trajectory itself may be defined in terms of RNP.

Containment will also be linked to the separation mode used (e.g. for 2D PTC separation mode containment will be specified in the lateral plane). Thus it may vary during the flight and associated to the needs of the various actors. For example in a low density area the containment parameters can be loose either in term of lateral/vertical deviation or required update parameters whereas when tighter restrictions need to be applied for density reasons i.e. Trajectory Control by Ground Speed Adjustment or 3D-PTC, the trajectory update parameters should be tight.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 27 of 144 - Public


5.2.5 Updating the Trajectory

The SESAR ATM processes are dependent on the most update information being available at all times. Therefore whenever any aspect of a trajectory is amended the updated data should be shared on the SWIM network.

During the planning phases this will be a simple process – new information concerning the SBT will be shared as soon as it becomes available (i.e. new ETD, revised cruising level etc.). New data may trigger collaborative re-negotiation processes depending on parameters established in the NOP.

Once the RBT has been agreed (approximately 15 minutes prior to EOBT) the execution phase of flight commences. During the execution phase the trajectory is managed with an agreed level of precision. The level of precision and frequency of trajectory update will depend on several factors such as operational needs, air-ground datalink capabilities and perhaps communications cost. Therefore requirements will have to be established based on these factors.

During the period from RBT agreement until take-off, estimates should be updated with a simple agreed granularity (i.e. whole minutes) as the airport DMAN finalises the sequence. Other changes in predicted trajectory may or may not trigger a revision process (refer to 5.2.5.1 below). Once the aircraft becomes airborne, very precise information will be available from several sources – one of which is the avionics of the aircraft. The requirements applicable to the sharing avionics trajectory data are known as the Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR).

5.2.5.1 Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR)

Trajectory Management Requirements are the means by which the automatic and transparent update mechanism of the Reference Business Trajectory (i.e. RBT update) will be achieved.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 28 of 144 - Public


Figure 7: RBT update and Trajectory Management Requirements

TMR specify the “delta” that will trigger the sharing the most up-to-date data between air and ground, in order to reduce the uncertainty of the predicted position of the aircraft. TMR will specify the delta in 4 dimensions of the deviation of the current airborne Predicted Trajectory versus the trajectory previously shared on the SWIM network. It should be noted that this mechanism is not associated to the Reference Business Trajectory revision mechanism.

5.2.5.2 Clearance to Proceed and Trajectory Revision

At any given time the Reference Business Trajectory may be decomposed into 3 main components/states (Figure 8):

Executed: already flown portion of the RBT (i.e. prior to the current position of the aircraft);

Authorised: portion of the RBT (cleared trajectory) along which the flight crew has been cleared to proceed (i.e. a conflict-free segment ahead of the current aircraft position);

Agreed6: the remaining portion of the RBT. This state is either at the initial instantiation of the RBT (i.e. transition from SBT to RBT) or when the RBT revision process is successfully ended.

6 For flight entering ECAC region the agreement process has to be further investigated.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 29 of 144 - Public


Authorised RBT

Executed RBT(Executed trajectory)

Agreed RBT

Figure 8: Life cycle of the Reference Business Trajectory

Besides these main states, the RBT may include segments that can be in the following states (i.e. intermediate states) during the flight:

Proposed: a segment of trajectory that is shared with the objective of reaching agreement on a revision;

Validated: a segment of trajectory that has been evaluated by the separator as being conflict free.

The Reference Business Trajectory is not a clearance to proceed, thus flights will be progressively authorised to execute successive segments of trajectory. Authorisation will include appropriate containment parameters (2D, 3D or 4D). Authorisation should be seen as the process clearing portions of the trajectory and ultimately assuring a conflict-free trajectory rolling out ahead of the flight, fully supported by automation.

The following diagram presents the evolution of state of the involved segment(s) during the clearance to proceed mechanism.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 30 of 144 - Public


Clearance to Proceed

Agreed AuthorisedATC

ClearanceValidated

Ground

Conflict free

Process

Updated RBT

ground to air

communication

air to ground

communication

air or ground

internal process

Airborne

Acceptation

Authorised

Figure7 9: State diagram for the Authorised RBT segment

From an avionics perspective the RBT is a combination of “4D constraints” (route/altitude/time constraints, aircraft parameters and wind forecasts) and resulting “Predicted Trajectory (PT)” computed by airline/aircraft FMS.

The PT is what the aircraft is predicted to fly (managed mode); it is continually computed by FMS and corresponds to the updated prediction from current position to final point of the RBT (ICAO + FMS points). The PT is automatically downlinked when the RBT is agreed (or revised).

RBT revision must occur when the parameters of a constraint associated with the RBT can no longer be respected. This may occur when the aircraft can no longer respect parameters associated with a time constraint (for example: +/-xx seconds) or the trajectory needs to be revised for separation purposes. Therefore the RBT remains valid until “4D constraints” are revised by the user (weather hazard and ground is separator Figure7 10), ANSP (conflict detection and ground is separator Figure7 12), or either if the initial conditions/constraints of the RBT or the containment parameters of Precision Trajectory Clearances are detected to be infringed. The result is a trajectory revision process.

The trajectory revision process may or may not involve collaborative/co-ordination mechanism depending on the time horizon within which the revision occurs or the associated criticality (e.g. conflict management).

Within a time horizon greater than 40 minutes8, co-ordination between actors (e.g. Airspace User initiated revision) can be envisaged and it will be managed by the network function (refer to Network Management in the Execution Phase DOD).

The revision process will be under ATC responsibility (refer to [18] & [19]) if the time horizon has been reached (i.e. less than 40 minutes8). Collaborative mechanisms can be still applied but will be shortened adequately up to the Immediate Revision for which the Flight Crew may only accept or reject9 the revision.

7 In all the figures the ground is considered as the separator.

8 The value mentioned is an assumption that needs to be validated.

9 In the unlikely event of rejection, the situation will be resolved by voice communication.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 31 of 144 - Public


SWIM

SWIM

Pilot

Request

Revised RBTTrajectory

Change

Instruction(closed loop)

Proposed segment

Figure7 10: Flight Crew initiated revision due to weather

The diagram hereafter presents the evolution of state of the involved segment(s) during an initiated revision mechanism.

Flight Crew Initiated Revision

AgreedPilot

RequestValidatedProposed

Ground

Conflict free

ProcessTrajectory

Change

InstructionAgreed

Airborne

Acceptation

Revised RBTProposed

Agreed

RBT

Revision

Request

ValidatedProposed

Ground

Conflict free

ProcessTrajectory

Change

InstructionAgreed

Airborne

Acceptation

Revised RBTProposed

Airspace User Initiated Revision

Validated

Ground

Coordination

Process

ground to air

communication

air to ground

communication

air or ground

internal process

Figure7 11: State diagrams for RBT segment for air initiated revision

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 32 of 144 - Public


or by ATC to provide separation or in connection with queue management.

SWIM

SWIM

Revised

RBT

Trajectory

Change

Instruction(closed loop)

Figure7 12: Ground initiated immediate revision due to separation provision

The following diagram presents the evolution of state of the involved segment(s) during the clearance to proceed mechanism.

Agreed

Ground Initiated RevisionGround

Conflict free

Process

Proposed

Trajectory

Change

Instruction

Airborne

Acceptation

Validated

Ground

Coordination

Process

Revised RBTValidated Agreed

Agreed

Ground Initiated Immediate RevisionGround

Conflict free

ProcessTrajectory

Change

Instruction

Airborne

Acceptation

Validated Revised RBTAuthorised

ground to air

communication

air to ground

communication

air or ground

internal process

Authorised

Figure7 13: State diagrams for RBT segment for ground initiated revision

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 33 of 144 - Public


If either a ground or airborne process assessing the proposed/authorised segment(s) is not successful the revision is rejected and the segment(s) previously agreed are kept.

5.2.6 Executed Business Trajectory (EBT)

The Executed Business Trajectory is the ultimate instance of the Business/Mission Trajectory. It is composed of the recorded trajectory of the performed flight.

The main purposes of this trajectory are linked to the evaluation of the system efficiency and to be inserted in database for further use during Long/Medium term planning activities.

5.3 NETWORK MANAGEMENT

Network Management is foreseen to operate at a Regional or Central Level (Europe-wide) and also at a Sub-Regional Level (Functional Airspace Block). It is foreseen to be an independent function but will also exist at a Local Level (ATSU) where close collaboration with the ANSPs will be assured. The principle tool available to Network Management is the Network Operations Plan (NOP).

In the SESAR ConOps, the name NOP is used to describe both the set of interactive applications and the plan itself. In order to avoid confusion, the term Network Operations Planner (NOPLA) has been introduced to refer to the set of interactive applications while the term Network Operations Plan (NOP) will be used for the rolling plan itself

5.3.1 Network Operations Plan (NOP)

The NOP represents a set of interactive applications that provide a window on the most up to date ATM situation both in real time and into the future. The same applications provide the functionality necessary to carry out the collaborative planning. It is also a rolling plan, a sliding window that is not for a specific day but is applicable to any point on the ATM time-line from the past through the present into the future. Thus, it is the set of plans for airspace/airport resource use (availability, restrictions, rules) throughout ECAC together with the airspace user intentions (trajectories) and the support to the resolution of demand/capacity imbalances through pre-defined resolution scenarios. It facilitates the processes needed to reach a balance between traffic demand and airspace/airport capacity.

The NOP is enabled by the System Wide Information Management environment supporting trajectory management and sharing.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 34 of 144 - Public


NOP – 4D Dynamic

Rolling Model

of the ATM systemNOPLA APP

Publish Trajectory

NOPLA APP

Publish MET info

NOPLA APP

Publish MILA ops

NOPLA APP

Create Bulletin

SWIM

Figure 14: Relationship of the NOP and NOPLA applications (examples only)

The NOP should be seen as a 4 dimensional virtual model of the European ATM environment that exists in the SWIM virtual space (i.e. the SWIMPool Figure 17). It is a dynamic, rolling picture that provides a relational image of the state of the ATM environment for past, present and future. The user, via the appropriate applications, is able to view this image, moving the window along the timeline and focusing on any particular aspect or aspects he or she is interested in.

The plan itself is the result of the complex interactions between the trajectories shared into the system, the capacity being offered, the actual and forecast MET conditions, resource availability, etc. and the automatic and manual negotiations that have been carried out.

The NOP operates under strict rules and procedures, aimed at ensuring that the flexibility and cost-efficiency targets of individual trajectories are maintained in a stable and predictable network. Strict rules prescribe under what circumstances the network targets may take precedence over individual trajectories.

The NOP is a rolling plan for the totality of the SESAR area plus other areas that may be associated with it. While a user will only need to see the part of the picture he is concerned, but with its broader implications in order to carry out an action on and with the plan, the NOPLA applications themselves always use the totality of the information available in the SWIM environment.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 35 of 144 - Public


Meteo Info

Business Trajectories

Airspace Usage

Military Operations

Approved PlansATM Capacity

Collaborative

Decision

Making

Figure 15: Illustration of NOP

5.3.2 Network Operations Planner (NOPLA)

NOPLA applications, seen by the end-users, fall into two broad categories:

Standard Set: They provide basic functions needed by all users for typical planning activities as well as for obtaining and providing information. They also ensure the enforcement of the data input syntax rules and may provide semantic support.

Specific Set: Specific to particular users, they are customised to meet the specific needs of the users concerned. There are applications among this set which are common to many users however, their parameters are set according to a given user where it is implemented or called up10. Some applications may be totally user specific.

10

An example would be the application used to plan and input trajectories and other flight data. This application would offer different choices and solutions when used by a network airline from those offered to a pilot of a light aircraft but the basic functionality remains identical.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 36 of 144 - Public


Whether an application belongs to the basic category or the user specific one, they are created in accordance with common requirements in terms of compatibility with each other and the information management background they use. This built in common and interoperable “intelligence” ensures that users interact with each other remotely and in most cases automatically, always sharing a common interpretation of the actual or planned/likely future state of the ATM system.

The NOPLA applications represent a highly automated environment offering users the possibility to initiate complex tasks which the applications carry out making sure that the proper context is used and results are returned based on the best available actual, archive, planned and expected information, formulated as proposals and/or complex decision support information, as appropriate, to help users develop plans and make decisions. In some cases, the NOPLA application (remote or local) may actually complete negotiations between each other fully automatically.

The NOPLA applications are also capable of generating warnings, or reacting to warnings generated elsewhere, intelligently supporting individual users with the information they need in the actual context of their operation (e.g. a bizjet operator, having put in a trajectory, would get a warning on the device he had specified for the purpose, if the trajectory became the subject of UDPP).

It is also possible to integrate NOPLA applications with existing system (e.g. an airline flight planning system).

The NOPLA applications always use the shared data available in the SESAR SWIM environment and also share their results (in accordance with the predefined, applicable rules) into the same SWIM environment. When NOPLA is integrated with an existing system, it becomes the “smart” functional interface between that system and the SESAR SWIM environment, while also supplementing the functionality of the existing system with those of the implemented NOPLA applications.

In any case, NOPLA applications are designed to work closely together to enable seamless use of their capabilities. For example, having used an intelligent pre-flight briefing application, the data generated is directly available on the same, or any other specified, device to develop and enter the trajectory for the same routing

5.4 SYSTEM WIDE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (SWIM)

The sharing of information of the required quality and timeliness in a secure environment is an essential enabler to the SESAR ATM concept. The current system is fragmented, with point to point communications and the aircraft is only connected by voice R/T and very limited datalink as summarised in the Figure below.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 37 of 144 - Public


ATC

ATC

ATC

ATC

ATC

Airport

Airport

Airport Airport

Airport

A/O

A/O

A/O

A/O

A/O

AIS

MET

Figure 16: Current situation without SWIM

A System Wide Information Management (SWIM) concept is proposed where the ATM network is considered as a series of nodes providing or consuming information; this network includes the aircraft and the airspace users.

Source RESPONSIBILITY Output

STORE

PROCESS

DISTRIBUTE

A/O

OPS

ATFM

MET

CDM

World

AIS

EAD

Supplies Traditional

AIS productsNAV

FIS

ATC

OPS

FDM

EFB

CDM

FDM

AIS App

CHECKManage

Data

ATC

Figure 17: SWIM overall approach

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 38 of 144 - Public


The scope extends to all information that is of potential interest to ATM including trajectories, surveillance data, aeronautical information of all types, meteorological data etc. Thus System Wide Information Management can be considered to be a multi-faceted and multi-disciplinary subject, consisting of the following constituents, in order to achieve the goal of a fully-integrated, seamless European ATM System (EATMS):

A physical SWIM network;

A SWIM Infrastructure consisting of common and standardised IT technical services;

An EATMS-wide enterprise architecture model, that defines a common view on ATM business processes, the logical system architecture and the physical system architecture that realize these business processes;

Standardised domain-level interfaces, guaranteeing interoperability, for accessing SWIM ATM Data and ATM services;

Agreed system and data standards for performance, quality, safety, security and interoperability;

Standardised and agreed rules, roles and responsibilities;

Legacy and future ATM systems fully aligned to this agreed EATM architecture and fully integrated to the SWIM ATM Data and Service interfaces;

A suitable Governance framework.

5.5 COLLABORATIVE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES

The ATM services shall be organised in such a way that collaboration processes between ATM partners are facilitated in order to achieve a more efficient management of the ATM network from gate-to-gate.

This Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) process is a key enabler allowing all relevant information to be shared between the parties involved and supporting a continuing dialogue at the appropriate level between the various partners throughout all phases of flight. This will enable the various organisations to continuously adjust their proper actions on an enlightened and up-to-date knowledge of all Traffic Flow and Capacity Management events from the long-term planning phase down to the execution phase.

User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP) is an example of a CDM process envisaged in SESAR. CDM in the SESAR concept means sharing information and acting on shared information. Decisions are therefore made on the basis of common understanding of the situation shared by the ATM actors concerned and an improved understanding of the network effects enabled by the Network Operational Plan (NOP). The UDPP is a collaborative process for the ATM planning phases which aims to improve ATM decision making processes by empowering of airspace users in the resolution of severe capacity issues.

In UDPP, airspace users among themselves can recommend a priority order for flights that would be affected by delays caused by an unexpected significant reduction of capacity. The situation is communicated to all parties through the NOP.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 39 of 144 - Public


An ATM Network Manager (Regional/Sub-Regional) oversees the UDPP process ensuring that all partners can respond in a prompt manner, and that the outcome is safe preserving the stability of the network.

In summary, the UDPP is:

Driven by Airspace Users;

Made visible to the Regional/Sub-Regional Network Manager, and other interested parties (through the NOP);

Ultimately arbitrated by a Network Manager, to come to an acceptable and accepted demand / capacity balancing solution in an appropriate timeframe;

The Regional Network Manager applies a standard DCB queue (refer to §5.7.1) if Airspace Users cannot reach a timely or an acceptable or an agreed demand/capacity balancing solution.

5.6 LAYERED PLANNING PHASES

Demand and Capacity Balancing management is implemented through a set of multi-layered collaborative planning processes between ATM actors. The main processes are:

Long Term: Schedule development, airport and ANSP investment.

It is anticipated that the advances envisaged by SESAR will provide more than adequate airspace capacity for the majority of the time. However, with major European airports already almost at capacity, the risk of extreme peaks of demand and the need to provide a cost effective service, the concept needs to define how potential excess demand is managed. Although in this phase the trajectory is not shared, the processes in the long term planning phase will be collaborative and based on traffic forecast including early Airspace Users intentions and economic regional development. This method of working will provide early notice to the ANSPs of high demand so that action can be taken to increase available capacity at those times or/and geographic locations (though the capacity plan itself or through elaboration of predefined solutions). Where it is impossible to provide additional capacity, either physically or for an acceptable cost, the objective of collaborative demand management processes will be to ensure minimum impact on optimum user operations.

The business development process corresponds to a cycle of planning that may start several years before the day of operations.

For the users, the activity can result in a first, not too detailed, schedule constituted by a business trajectory. The business development trajectory goes through a number of iterations and it is constantly refined taking into account constraints arising from infrastructural and environmental considerations. It is not shared outside the user organisation however when queried, user intentions represented by trajectories possibly containing limited details, will be provided to authorized entities such as the Regional Network Manager.

For non-airspace users (e.g. airport, ANSP) this process may correspond to a phase of investments.

Medium/Short Term: Iterative process with increased accuracy.

The planning process covers a period from six months to a few hours before the execution of the flight.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 40 of 144 - Public


The activity includes seasonal actions once the airspace user‟s business trajectories are made available and the output of the IATA airport slot conference is known. Business trajectories, when they are known, take the form of Shared Business Trajectories (SBT). Military flight intentions and airspace requirements become progressively available.

This process evolves in an iterative manner all the way through to the day of operations. During this evolution:

o Airports and ANSPs declare their capacity;

o Weather predictions, progressively refined, are made available;

o Airports and ANSPs adapt the capacity to the known and predicted traffic demand (with continuous knowledge of the traffic and the resources);

o Users adapt the Shared Business Trajectory through CDM process to the latest available capacities or constraints (e.g. military operations with short notice);

o The Network Management function elaborates scenarios to cater for particular situations / events.

The planning process is established on the basis of sharing all relevant information between the parties involved, via the NOP.

Effort shall be put on implementing all the appropriate solutions to ensure that the capacity is adapted to match the predicted demand.

The concept recognises however that there will still be a need to manage acute losses of capacity such as temporary runway closures for whatever the reason. To do so, it will be the responsibility of the user to respond in a collaborative manner to the Network Management Function, with a demand that best matches the available capacity. In the event of a significant capacity loss, selection of the most critical flights (according to Airspace User's business model) will be facilitated by the User Driven Prioritisation Process (cf. 5.5).

Execution: Continuous refinement of planning

The Planning phase ends with the finalisation of the Reference Business Trajectory (RBT). At this stage, the Shared Business Trajectory takes the form of a trajectory that the user agrees to fly and the ANSP and Airports agrees to facilitate. The RBT may integrate constraints on the demand. The Execution Phase can now start.

The process may include the provision and management of queues, both in the air, and on the ground and is linked to the following ATC, Traffic Synchronisation and Separation processes.

Sub-Regional Network Management takes most of the initiative in this phase assuring the most efficient operation. Regional Network Management assures stability of the whole network. The objective is to deal with the majority of events with pre-defined solutions (e.g. local temporary route structure activation) agreed during the planning phase.

Strategic de-confliction11 of individual flights i.e. 2D and 3D route allocation for departures

11

The term Strategic De-confliction is used in this context to mean actions taken when the take-off time is known with sufficient accuracy (after push-back) or even after the flight is airborne but with sufficient time to allow a CDM process to occur (e.g. 40 min before entry in high-density areas). It excludes tactical instructions and clearances that need an immediate response, but includes activities such as dynamic route allocation.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 41 of 144 - Public


and arrivals should reduce the need for tactical intervention on individual aircraft. Sectorisation may be dynamically adapted to changing traffic patterns to make best use of the available ANSP resources. Close co-operation with military authorities assures the smooth transition to/from periods of airspace reservation with as much prior notice as possible so that any opportunities for efficiencies can be fully exploited. During this phase, network management seeks to ensure the users business outcomes for individual flights and to maximise net system benefit.

5.7 QUEUE MANAGEMENT

Queue management measures will be applied, only when necessary, to optimise the utilisation of a constrained resource such as a runway and the results will be published via the NOP. Queue management will involve the application of constraints to the RBT to ensure the smooth integration of the trajectory of an individual aircraft into a stream to optimise the utilisation of a constrained resource, typically an airport, within the overall efficiency of the whole network.

The scope of Queue Management in the SESAR ConOps is specifically limited to departure queues for a constrained departure runway or for arrival queues to a constrained runway within the arrival management horizon (which may be extended to over 1 hour depending on the availability of accurate trajectory data).

A departure or arrival queue is an ordered flight list, i.e. a sequence generated by a Departure Manager (DMAN) or an Arrival Manager (AMAN) (refer to [20] for more details on arrival & departure managers) providing support to determine, and deliver an optimised departure/arrival sequence for an aerodrome.

5.7.1 Queue management techniques within DCB

Until SESAR techniques deliver dramatically enhanced en-route capacity and/or more advanced techniques are developed to achieve a stable demand and capacity situation, there will remain a requirement to apply queue management principles in both the Short-term Planning and Execution Phases as DCB solutions as described here.

Queue management can be seen as one Demand and Capacity Balancing scenario (refer to Medium & Short Term Network Planning DOD):

A DCB queue is a short term DCB Solution applied when every other capacity optimisation, alone or in combination with others, has been tested and does not solve the imbalance(s). Hence, queue management should be considered the final measure to ensure network stability;

DCB queues will be applied as late as possible (parameter to be determined: for example one hour before take-off and depending on the magnitude of the imbalance).

5.7.1.1 DCB En-Route Queue

When exceptionally an En-Route high-density area is not anticipated sufficiently far in advance to allow other measures to be taken, an En-Route queue can be applied. In this case flights, are

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 42 of 144 - Public


assigned constraint in terms of a TTA in the high-density area12. The Airspace User modifies the trajectory through a CDM process in order to both achieve the TTA but respecting business or mission priorities.

5.7.1.2 DCB Departure and Arrival Queues

These are applied as follows:

Either to prepare flights in order to make it easier sequencing of departures/arrivals during peak periods that cannot be handled by the managing tool (DMAN/AMAN) itself;

Or to act as a basic sequencer for non-equipped (DMAN and/or AMAN) airfields;

Or to ensure equity between flights inside and outside the active arrival management horizon. If there is no DCB arrival queue implemented then flights outside the AMAN horizon may not be treated fairly.

12

One could consider the TTA as a Target Time Over an entry point (not necessarily a waypoint) in the high-density area, and consequently call it a TTO.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 43 of 144 - Public


6 GENERAL ATM ENVIRONMENT DEFINITION

6.1.1 Airspace Structure

Airspace management and design in SESAR will serve the requirements of the trajectory managed environment, with due regard also to the needs of those operations which will continue to require the management of airspace volumes rather than individual trajectories.

A step towards the more efficient organisation of European airspace is the Functional Airspace Block (FAB) initiative. European airspace of today is organised essentially on the basis of Flight Information Regions (FIRs)/Upper Flight Information Regions (UIRs), which delineate the airspace where States are responsible for the provision of Air Traffic Services (ATS) FIR/UIR boundaries are often aligned with national borders, although that is not an ICAO requirement. It has long been acknowledged that national borders are not necessarily the optimal basis for air traffic service provision, but rather constitute a constraint to the design and implementation of an optimum pan-European airspace structure satisfying airspace user requirements.

In seeking to define a single, unified European upper airspace, the Single European Sky (SES) Framework Regulation has defined the generic term “Functional Airspace Block (FAB)”, as: “An airspace block based on operational requirements, reflecting the need to ensure more integrated management of the airspace regardless of existing boundaries.”

By separating the FAB design process from current constraints, resulting from the alignment of airspace design with national borders, FABs can represent a major step in the pan-European upper airspace design evolution. Accordingly, FABs are considered as a fundamental means of enabling the future optimisation of the pan-European ATM system. Airspace users will benefit from enhanced efficiencies stemming from an upper airspace ATS route structure founded upon a pan-European design process which ensures consistency with both lower airspace and the interfaces with perimeter areas of the SES. Inherent in the design and implementation of FABs will be the integration of the important requirements of the military, as provided for by the SES.

6.1.2 Airspace Classification

The SESAR programme identifies only two types of airspace with respect to ATM: managed and un-managed airspace

Managed Airspace

o Physical dimensions;

From a specified lower level regionally harmonised in the SESAR area, extending to an unlimited upper level. Managed airspace may extend down to ground level where service provision considerations require this (in particular around aerodromes). The dimensions of Managed Airspace will be kept to the minimum required for safe and efficient service provision.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 44 of 144 - Public


o Internal Subdivision/organisation;

The internal design and organisation of managed airspace will be optimised to ensure the safe and efficient management of the trajectories concerned. Temporary airspace structures to protect certain types of operation will continue to exist and will be managed in co-operation between the partners (e.g. military, police, General Aviation etc.) concerned.

o Managed airspace is a user preferred routing environment however where traffic complexity or the need to maximise capacity require, structured routes will be implemented. Their use will be suspended when they are not required.

Un-managed Airspace

All airspace not designated as Managed.

6.1.3 Type of Air Traffic Services

As in current ICAO regulations for Air Traffic Services (e.g. PANS ATM Doc 4444 [29]), the SESAR Concept of Operations distinguishes the provision of several services to airspace users depending on the type of airspace considered:

Air Traffic Services in Managed Airspace

In managed airspace the pre-determined separator is the designated ANSP.

Several separation modes may exist as follows:

o Conventional modes: vertical, procedural, radar vectoring;

o New ANSP Modes: these are new modes envisaged for SESAR that are purely applied by ATC:

Precision Trajectory Clearances;

Trajectory Control by Ground Based Speed Adjustment.

o New Airborne Modes: in which separation responsibility is temporarily delegated to the flight crew under specific circumstances (e.g. ASPA S&M, ASEP C&P).

The separation assurance service might not be provided in designated parts of managed airspace, for example, above at high flight levels (circa FL450+) airspace may be designated as self-separation airspace.

Flight Information Service and Alerting Service are available in Managed Airspace.

Air Traffic Services in Un-Managed Airspace

In un-managed airspace the airspace user is the pre-determined separator.

Alerting Services shall be provided and Flight Information Services may be available.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 45 of 144 - Public


6.2 MANAGED AIRSPACE CHARACTERISTICS

6.2.1 Route Configuration

The Business/Mission Trajectory is the user preferred trajectory. It is initially established without the need to adhere to a published route structure13 and it includes the optimal vertical profile which may include a cruise-climb profile and will be planned at optimum speeds. The Business Trajectory will respect all known constraints (environmental, permanent exclusions etc.)

A general route network will continue to be available but will evolve to fewer pre-defined routes and gradual replacement of permanent routes by conditional routes. Advanced navigation capabilities including VNAV will be exploited by complex route structures deployed as required in areas of dense traffic to provide capacity.

The over-riding principle is that where and whenever possible the user preferred trajectory should be facilitated and that constraints such as mandatory route structures should only be deployed reactively where and when needed to provide the necessary capacity.

Therefore route network elements will be retained in managed airspace to cater for:

Non capable aircraft;

High density/complexity airspace;

Military flight planning.

6.2.2 Air Traffic Complexity

Complexity is a generic term for description of level of difficulty of handling the air traffic. It may be used a factor in many ATM processes including DCB and also in the process described as “Complexity Management” when traffic complexity is assessed and managed as a precursor to the Separation Management Process.

Complexity is the result of several factors acting at the same time. The main element that contributes to complexity are traffic demand and the characteristics of the areas of responsibility. Examples of key elements affecting traffic complexity are:

Airspace characteristics and environmental aspects:

o Airspace classification;

o Route structure;

o Approach and Departure procedures;

o Noise, pollution and weather (Cb, wind, turbulence etc.).

Aerodrome characteristics:

o Runway, taxiway, apron and/or stands configuration, geometry and dimensions;

o Interface runway-taxiway and/or taxiway-apron.

13

High Complexity Terminal Airspace may request the use of pre-defined routes instead of User Preferred Route.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 46 of 144 - Public


Traffic demand:

o Traffic volume;

o Traffic distribution over time;

o Arrival/departure ratio;

o Aircraft characteristics;

o Flight rules.

Other factors relevant to specific situations.

6.2.3 Separation Minima

New separation minima have not been established by the SESAR programme, but it is understood that separation minima will have to be developed and agreed for the new separation modes defined by the SESAR Concept of Operations.

6.3 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS

6.3.1 Traffic Demand

Within SESAR D2 [6], the EUROCONTROL long term forecast 200414 [26] has been selected as the reference for studying the future of air traffic in Europe at the 2020 horizon. However, it must be remembered that it forecasts only the number of IFR flights, not air traffic demand as a whole, but due consideration will be given to all of the main categories of flight, as appropriate.

The forecast considers four main scenarios, namely:

Scenario A: Greater globalisation and rapid economic growth, with free trade and open skies agreements encouraging growth in flights at the fastest rate.

Scenario B: Business as usual, with moderate economic growth and no significant change from the status quo and current trends (Note: EU expansion is at its fastest in this scenario).

Scenario C: Strong economies and growth, but with strong government regulation to address growing environmental issues. As a result noise and emission costs are higher, which encourages a move to larger aircraft and more hub-and-spoke operations. Trade and air traffic liberalisation is more limited.

Scenario D: Greater regionalisation and weaker economies leading to increased tensions between regions, with knock-on effects limiting growth in trade and tourism. Consequently, there would be a shift towards increased short haul traffic. Security costs increase further beyond 2010, with the price of fuel being at its highest in this scenario, it reaching close to 40% of the airline operating costs by 2020 and beyond.

In order to consider the most demanding criteria which could be placed upon the future ATM System by the most optimistic of expectations for global economic growth, Scenario A has been

14

With updates from the 2006 version to be released in December 2006

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 47 of 144 - Public


taken as the basis for the development of the future air transport vision and the setting of the performance targets for the System.

The expected increase in the amount of air traffic, with the overall European average annual growth in the number of IFR flights for the period 2006-2020 forecast to be around 4.2%15/year. However, without major expansion plans, airports will constrain this growth to around 3.4%/year.

In 2020, traffic demand is forecast to be around two times higher than in 2005. With 9.1 Mn flights having taken place in Europe in 2005, this translates into approximately 18Mn in 2020. Some European airports will struggle to accommodate such growth and in 2020 around 60 airports are expected to be congested while the top 20 airports are saturated for 8-10 hours/day16.

The effect of the lack of airports‟ infrastructure in constraining the demand is shown in the figure below. The expectation is that the growth in air traffic will be constrained to be about 1.7 times higher than in 2005, resulting in the ability to accommodate only about 16 Mn flights. As 70% of the 50 largest European airports have reached their saturation points today, a clear vision is needed of how to both create more capacity to ensure the European economy overall remains competitive and to ensure the best operations.

0

5

10

15

20

25

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

IFR

Flig

hts

Pe

r Y

ea

r in

ES

RA

(M

illio

n)

Actual

Scenario A

Scenario B

Scenario C

Scenario D

0

5

10

15

20

25

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

IFR

Flig

hts

Pe

r Y

ea

r in

ES

RA

(M

illio

n)

Actual

Scenario A

Scenario B

Scenario C

Scenario D

1.0

2.5

2.1

1.61.7

Effect of airport

constraints in the highest-

growth scenario (A).

Effect in the lowest-

growth scenario (D).

Figure 18: Traffic Growth Scenarios for 2020 (SESAR D1)

15

The forecast from D1 is a 4.4% average per annum over the period from 2005 to 2025, expressed in revenue passenger kilometres (RPK). This is consistent with the 4.2% figure for the unconstrained demand in the number of flights.

16 ECAC/EUROCONTROL, Challenges to Growth Study 2004 [28].

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 48 of 144 - Public


However more up to date approach can be now found from the long term forecast 2006 document [27], and moreover these study takes into account EU enlargement. There are still four main scenarios considered, but they have been slightly reworked:

Scenario A: Strong economic growth in an increasingly globalised World, with technology used successfully to mitigate the effects of challenges such as the environment and security.

Scenario B: Moderate economic growth and little change from the status quo, that is, trends continue as currently observed.

Scenario C: Strong economic growth, but with stronger regulation to address growing environmental challenges for aviation. This means higher costs of travel, so lower demand (than A or B).

Scenario D: A World with increasing tensions between regions, with knock-on effects of weaker economies, reduced trade and less long-haul travel.

These scenarios are in order from A to D, highest traffic growth (in the 2004 forecast) first. However, this was not an initial assumption, they were simply re-labelled in order once the results were known. As a result, it might be that in the new forecast the scenarios change order: scenarios B and C are the closest, so the most likely to change places.

Figure 19: Traffic Growth Scenarios for 2020 (STATFOR 2006)

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 49 of 144 - Public


Regarding EPISODE 3 validation activities, the reference scenario will be scenario A described above. However it should be noted that considering 2020 traffic estimation, the increase applied to the reference traffic (i.e. 2005 traffic) is 81% increase (73% mentioned by SESAR documents) in order to be consistent with SESAR expected targets.

To be completed, for consistency reason, with figures and assumptions provided by System Wide Assessment work-package when available.

6.3.2 Throughput


6.3.3 Aircraft Mix


6.3.4 CNS Capability

The section provides an overview of the technology enablers analysis performed during the development of the SESAR D4 Milestone (“Deployment Sequence”) [5].

6.3.4.1 Communication

In order to achieve the objectives of System Wide Information Management (SWIM) concept, evolutions to the communication infrastructure need to be achieved while maintaining the need for global interoperability through the deployment of standard solutions.

6.3.4.1.1 Ground – Ground Communications

The evolution concerns the inter-connection of Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) through a Internet Protocol (IP) network covering exchanges of surveillance and trajectory or other flight planning information.

6.3.4.1.2 Air – Ground Communications

The implementation of VDL mode 2/ATN already started with the Link 2000+ programme in Europe, is set for completion by 2015. To support the full integration of aircraft to the SWIM network, the final mobile data communication infrastructure will be a set of four components:

VDL2/ATN ([30] [31]);

Satellite data-link, to complement the terrestrial data-link and provide necessary performance;

Airport data-link based upon wireless technology (IEEE 802.16e), to provide a high performance airport surface data link;

New L band terrestrial data-link.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 50 of 144 - Public


Prioritisation of data-link services (Air Traffic Services and Aircraft Operator Communications) supported by VDL2 needs to be agreed to ensure that essential services (e.g. trajectory exchanges) do not compete for data-link resources.

6.3.4.1.3 Air – Air Communications

New Air – air communications services are required at ATM Capability Level 5 (aircraft self separation), which is out of the scope for EPISODE 3 DODs.

6.3.4.2 Navigation

The improvement of navigation performance is the main pillar of the major operational improvements (trajectory management, RNAV, CDA/CCD and Precision Trajectory Clearance) essential to deliver capacity and environmental benefits. At the 2015 horizon, the availability of new GNSS constellations (Galileo, GPS L5) and the further development of augmentation means (aircraft-based (ABAS), ground-based (GBAS) or space-based(SBAS)) will improve the accuracy, availability and the integrity of the navigation signal thus allowing enhanced positioning services in all phases of flight, including airport surface.

These improvements will be driven through the strategy defined for ECAC (refer to [32] & [33]) and heavily linked to the Performance Based Navigation concept [34]. The PBN concept represents a shift from sensor-based to performance-based navigation. Performance requirements are identified in navigation specifications, which also identify the choice of navigation sensors and equipment that may be used to meet the performance requirements.

Whilst Terminal and En Route RNAV developments in ECAC have been performance-driven since their inception, Approach developments have mainly been sensor driven and over time, Approach navigation specifications will all become performance driven. Some of the impact of ICAO's PBN Concept on ECAC includes:

ECAC's B-RNAV standard contained in AMC 20-4 is identical to the RNAV 5 specification in ICAO PBN, but there is presently no intention to rename B-RNAV to RNAV 5;

ECAC's P-RNAV standard is not identical to the ICAO RNAV 1 specification but may be viewed as a European Application of the RNAV 1 specification. The difference between P-RNAV and RNAV1 centres on the allowable ground navigation aids and the PBN manual identifies additional requirements for obtaining RNAV 1 approval for an operator already having approval against TGL 10. It is not envisaged to migrate from P-RNAV to RNAV 1 in ECAC. Nevertheless, as more aircraft become approved to RNAV 1 in order to operate to those areas of the world where RNAV 1 is required, the uptake of RNAV 1 is expected to increase.

6.3.4.3 Surveillance

6.3.4.3.1 Surface Surveillance

Surveillance is foreseen to remain a mix of SSR Mode S, Wide Area Multi-lateration (WAM) as independent surveillance, ADS-B Out for dependent surveillance and PSR (including multi-static primary surveillance radar (MSPSR)), the latter where required in addition for security reasons. Air

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 51 of 144 - Public


Navigation Service providers will have a flexible choice of technologies depending on the respective operational requirements, geographic location and cost efficiency decisions.

6.3.4.3.2 Airborne Surveillance

The introduction of airborne surveillance (AS) applications would improve the situational awareness of the pilots. In its initial form, and in conjunction with the information provided by controllers and other airplanes, this concept has the potential to improve the ability of the flight crew to detect hazardous situations.

Separation and spacing applications, such as crossing and passing (ASEP-C&P) or enhanced sequencing and merging operations (ASPA-S&M) in en-route and terminal airspace will require equipping the aircraft with a full ADS-B package, consisting at least of an ADS-B receiver, a CDTI and an ASAS processor.

6.3.5 Aircraft Performance

It is expected that aircraft will adhere more closely, i.e. more accurate horizontal and vertical adherence, to the planned 4D trajectory.

For the various performances and characteristic parameters of the aircraft, the figures and assumptions of BADA will be included.


EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 52 of 144 - Public


7 ATM ACTORS ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The main actors are summarised in the following Table. For more details refer to the information model interactive tool [22].

Organisation/Unit Individual Actor Main Role(s) & Responsibilities

Airspace Users

Airline Operational Control (AOC)

WingOps (WOC)

AOC Staff

The AOC Staff will be responsible for providing the interface between the collaborative decision making process within the APOC and their own organisation. According to the scale of operation at the airport, this liaison may need to encompass both the airline operations control centre and possibly a hub control centre. The CDM agent should be able to communicate issues surrounding airport resource planning to their own internal “systems” and also communicate their own internal priorities into the global decision making environment that is the APOC.

Flight Schedule Department WingOps (WOC)

Airline, BA, Third Party Flight Schedule Department Staff

The Flight Schedule Department Staff schedules the flight programme of the airspace user for each season during the long term planning phase.

He/She takes part in the IATA Airport Slot Conference and he/she creates the Airspace User Flight Schedule based on the business model and on management objectives of the airspace user as well as aircraft and flight crew resources.

Airline Station Manager

The Airline Station Manager is responsible for the aircraft turnaround in order to manage the aircraft procedures on the ground safely, securely and efficiently. Depending on the Airline organisation some of these tasks may be carried out by or delegated to Handling Agents.

The Airline Station Manager needs to inform the AOC Staff timely on the status of the turnaround and in case of exceptional events needs to take part in or be informed about CDM processes and/or decisions.

Airline, BA, GA, Military, Third Party

Flight Crew, Pilot

The Flight Crew/Pilot to collect briefing data (e.g. aeronautical information, aircraft payload, etc…) in order to adequately prepare the flight, to identify required capabilities (RVR requirements) and to possibly initiate aircraft-related requests such as a request for remote de-icing before take-off.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 53 of 144 - Public



Airport Operator

Airport Operations Centre (Civil Aerodrome)

WingOps (Mil. Aerodrome)

APOC Staff

Airport Resources are planned and allocated iteratively and fed into the Network Operational Plan (NOP). The data has also to be collected into the airport information sharing database, which will be the entry-point for SWIM applications.

The APOC hosts the function of the Airport CDM Cell. This unit is responsible for ensuring and improving communication between all stakeholders, including data-management of CDM relevant data.

At smaller airports these tasks may also include the tasks of Apron Control and/or Turnaround Manager.

Airport Ground Handling Unit

Third Party

Ground Handling Agent

The Ground Handling Agent is responsible for providing a number of services to their contracted airlines during the aircraft turnaround period. They are heavily reliant on stable information concerning aircraft gate utilisation and expected arrival times. Similarly the timely execution of their tasks in relation to a given aircraft is a key parameter in the determination of the aircraft “ready” time for its next rotation. Whilst it is unlikely that a permanent ground handling representation be required within the APOC, it is necessary that pertinent information (airline departure priorities (e.g. UDPP), aircraft arrival times, gate allocation etc) available within the APOC be disseminated to the appropriate ground handling authorities through the CDM data network.

Vehicle Driver Avoid collisions.

Apron Control Unit (where existing)

Apron Controller

On international airports Apron control is often carried out under the responsibility of the Airport Authorities. At some airports the task apron control is also called ground control or taxi control and is carried out by ATC.

The Apron Controller is responsible to guide aircraft to the parking stands and vice versa. (The apron area includes all taxiways which are not connected to the runway). It has to:

ensure the safe, according to the rules and efficient traffic management, movement of aircraft and vehicles in its area of responsibility;

clear and monitor 4D business trajectory ground segments;

make increasingly use of digital communications;

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 54 of 144 - Public



Network Management

Regional Network Management Unit

Regional network Manager

The Regional Network Manager acts as catalyst and facilitator for an efficient overall network management by all ATM stakeholders. He/she is responsible for the ECAC-wide network planning i.e. for all network aspects beyond the range of Sub-Regional Network Managers. In particular, the network as a whole is entrusted to them. They envision it, monitor it, bring it under control and keep it under control.

Sub-regional Network Management Unit Sub-Regional Network

Manager

The Sub-Regional Network Managers are responsible for sub-regional network planning and the resolution of imbalances, whenever it can be done at their level (subsidiarity).

Air Navigation Service Providers

Airspace Management Cell (AMC, Civil-Military unit)

Airspace Manager

The Civil/Military Airspace Managers are distinct but complementary actors collocated in the same organisation/unit – the Airspace Management Cell. They interact permanently to make sure that the airspace resource is consistently allocated, in particular when segregations are needed between civil and military airspace users. They work hand-in-hand with the Sub-Regional Network Manager to meet their contrasting expectations. Ideally, the operational needs of military airspace users are fulfilled, with a minimum impact on the business intents of civil airspace users.

The definition of airspace usage rules for airspace elements part of the reservation;

Co-ordinate during the whole planning phase, up to the day of operation, to handle airspace requirements sent at very short notice;

Co-ordinate with Sub-Regional Network Managers to help solve DCB issues: airspace requirements and airspace usage rules are reassessed in light of the selected DCB solutions;

Co-ordinate with their counterparts to facilitate cross-border operations.

National Airspace Policy Body

Airspace Designer

The main tasks of the Airspace Designer are to design, to assess and to allocate the airspace regardless of national boundaries to fulfil civil and military user requirements. The design of FABs/ACC airspace should be co-ordinated with neighbouring entities.

The Airspace Designer is responsible for:

Optimisation of long-term trajectory definition aiming at offering great circle point-to-point liaisons or occasionally on shortest path negotiated with the airspace users and with

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 55 of 144 - Public



the neighbouring Airpsace Designers and Sub-Regional and Regional Network Managers and Civil/Military Airspace Manager;

Definition of military training areas of all types (TSAs, CBAs, MVPAs…), rules to use them and definition of DCB/ASM Solutions in order to minimise impact on Civilians while allowing full military training;

Definition of high-complexity airspace inc. strategically de-conflicted SIDs and STARs with specific airspace structures, and rules to use it (high-density TMAs…).

MET Office (Civil, Military)

MET Data Manager

The MET Data Manager and to a lesser extent the ANSP Staff will have a key role to play in the decision making process through the provision of timely and coherent information to each of the actors in the APOC. Neither will need to be present in the APOC but the appropriate technological means will need to be considered to ensure that both services can be contacted by individual APOC agents as and when appropriate. For example, following a weather alert or a possibility of improvement following a degraded situation, it should be possible to develop a number of different AOPs in a collaborative manner according to the potential weather evolutions which are foreseen. As the developing situation becomes more certain and following advice from the MET Data Manager in real-time, a convergence to one of the selected AOPs should be possible, allowing each actor to implement the strategies for their own operation that this AOP necessitates. Two possible examples are:

A faster return to “normal” capacity by ATC than would have otherwise been the case based on confirmation from the MET Data Manager of a continued improvement in runway visual range and ceiling;

The necessity for an airline to cancel certain flights based on advice from the MET Data Manager that low visibility procedures (and the resultant capacity reductions) will remain in force.

AIS Units (Civ., Mil.)

AI Data Manager

Within the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) each Contracting State has responsibility for providing an Aeronautical Information Service (AIS) to ensure the flow of aeronautical information/data necessary for the safety, regularity and efficiency of international air navigation within the area of responsibility of the State. The applicable rules are laid down in ICAO Annexes 4 and 15.

The AI Data Manager responsibility is to:

o Receive, authenticate and originate, collate or assemble, edit, format, publish, store and distribute aeronautical information/data in an electronic format

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 56 of 144 - Public



representing real-time data: the Single European AIP (SAIP). The Single AIP Provider will be responsible for the publication of the European Single AIP. This responsibility will be delegated by the states.

Originate issue and dynamically update XAIP, XNOTAM, XSNOWTAM etc. in electronic format.

Electronically publish pilot briefing information for proposed flights.

The responsibility of providing Aeronautical Information Services is usually delegated to State owned or controlled AIS offices/organisations. These are often run by the local Air Navigation Service Provider. Military operate their own AIS offices/organisations.

The responsibility also includes making available other states aeronautical information. The European states have delegated the gathering and processing of worldwide NOTAM to the EAD.

In general Aeronautical information will be provided via automated procedures to support data integrity, more data will be handled and the information will be published electronically. It will be made available to all ATM partners via SWIM.

In some States, the AI Data Manager provides additional services such as support to Alerting Services and Search and Rescue operations, and Aeronautical Telecommunication Services. In the future they may also offer to e.g. General Aviation to provide Business Trajectory Services (Development and Submission of BTs).

Aeronautical Information is generally provided to the main ATM stakeholders: the Airspace Users, Airport Operators and Air Navigation Service Providers.

The AI Data Manager will thus:

Provide Aeronautical information;

Support Trajectory Development.

ATC, APP, TWR units (civil & military)

Complexity Manager

The Complexity Manager maintains traffic/airspace complexity to a level which is manageable by the controllers and in the process works for the prevention of overloads. Complexity management is based on:

Complexity assessment, i.e. the determination of a complexity level, using the appropriate metrics, taking into account the airspace organisation and forecast traffic patterns;

Complexity reduction, if the complexity level is too high, through:

o Airspace reorganisation (through dynamic re-configuration, dynamic re-sectorisation, the activation of a temporary route structure …);

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 57 of 144 - Public



o Local pseudo-traffic flow17

optimisation through RBT Revisions negotiated with the Airspace Users);

Strong cooperation with the Sub-Regional/Regional Network Managers and APOC Staff, Planning Controllers, Civil/Military Airspace Managers, so that complexity management “fits in” with all the operational layers, respectively: (Dynamic) Demand and Capacity Balancing, Aerodrome Operations, Traffic Synchronisation and Conflict Management, Airspace Organisation and Management.

ATS Supervisor

The Air Traffic Services Supervisor is found in Area Control Centres, in Approach Control Units and in Towers. The Supervisor is responsible for the management of all activities in the ATC Operations Room and the efficient use of personnel and system resources. He also has the duty to provide Alerting Services and to initiate Search and Rescue operations, if required.

The actor exists for both civil and military ACC, APP and TWR Units. The military actor for OAT traffic may not require the same level of system support as for the Civil ATC (GAT) actor.

For ACC Supervisors, important tasks are also to assess the overall traffic situation against local capacity and resources by collaborating with the local Flow Manager and the Complexity Manager, to liaise with adjacent Supervisors and to activate local DCB measures as appropriate.

Tower Ground Controller

The Tower Ground Controller is responsible for assuring the safe movement of aircraft and vehicles on the manoeuvring area, excluding the runway protected area unless delegated by the Tower Runway Controller, according to the appropriate rules.

Tower Runway Controller

The Tower Runway Controller is responsible for assuring safe access to the runway for lading and departing aircraft, for aircraft and vehicles requiring crossing a runway, and or vehicles to operate on or within a runway protected area, according to appropriate rules.

Planning Controller

The principal tasks of the Planning Controller are to check the planned trajectory of aircraft intending to enter the sector for potential separation risk, and to co-ordinate entry/exit conditions leading to conflict free trajectories.

In the SESAR long term the role of the Planning Controller will evolve towards a multi-sector planning role in the en-route environment, which is supported by various tools like MTCD and CORA which - due to the

17

I.e. an aggregation of RBTs.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 58 of 144 - Public



more precisely predictable Business/Mission Trajectory - enable the planning of conflict free Business/Mission Trajectories through multiple sectors. Thus one multi-sector planner will serve various Executive Controllers. Planning Controllers may also support the co-ordination of 4D solutions for/of AMAN/DMAN with adjacent centres.

The main interactions of the Planning Controller are with adjacent Planning Controllers and the appropriate Executive Controllers and also with the Complexity Managers within the domain of Air Traffic Control.

Executive Controller

The principal tasks of the Executive Controller are to separate and to sequence known flights operating within his/her area of responsibility, and to issue instructions to pilots for conflict resolution. He/she is also responsible for the transfer of flights to the next appropriate Executive Controller and for co-ordination with the appropriate Planning Controller.

Under specific circumstances (e.g. high density traffic), separation responsibility will be delegated to flight crew (airborne separation), but Executive Controller‟s monitoring of these flights will remain in such cases.

Military operational aircraft require due to the nature of their mission and equipment partially different handling by the Executive Controllers, demanding quick reaction and responses to changes in flight due to weather or military request. This partially requires separate working positions.

The main tasks of the Executive Controller are to:

Facilitate Flight according to RBT and applicable rules;

Assure Separation (if Separator);

Avoid Collisions.

Table 3: Actor Roles

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 59 of 144 - Public


8 OVERVIEW OF ATM PROCESS MODEL

The ATM Process Model aims at describing the overall ATM system through an activity breakdown (SADT model) of the SESAR ConOps. The model will then constitute the driver for the production of the Detailed Operational Description documents.

The “Manage ATM” activity is the top level process covering the entire ATM business. The first level of the hierarchical tree is aligned on the main phases defined by SESAR:

Long Term ATM Planning Phase;

Mid/Short Term ATM Planning Phase;

Execution Phase.

Figure 20: ATM phase level

For more details refer to the interactive browsing of the processes and associated DODs into the SESAR/EPISODE 3 Information Navigator [22].

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 60 of 144 - Public


9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The DODs ([11] to [19]) were developed to provide a detailed concept description for validation exercises in EPISODE 3, a project with the remit to support the validation of SESAR. In order to have a complete and coherent concept description, the concept descriptions were structured using an ATM Process Model developed specifically for the purpose.

The document structure used was based on the ED78A standard for Operational Services and Environment Descriptions. As ED78A supports the definition, design and implementation of data link based services for ATM, this approach will naturally support the transition of the maturing concept into operation. In particular, the approach that was chosen leads to the production of Use Cases, an industry standard for capturing User Requirements.

The detailing of the concept is a first step in the validation process. As such, it involved the use of material of varying levels of maturity. Some material could be taken from previous ATM research and development projects but other aspects could only be detailed through discussions with operational experts from within and outside of SESAR. The DODs were reviewed by EPISODE 3 partners and are public documents (refer to EPISODE 3 portal www.episode3.aero) so open to review and comment by all in the stakeholder community. It is therefore believed that they represent a reasonable view of an implementation of the SESAR CONOPS.

The next step is for EPISODE 3 to develop its validation strategy based on the DODs (concept description and maturity) and the performance requirements of SESAR, while taking into account the limitations of its resources, i.e. tools, time, specialist skills. In order to support the full validation of SESAR, it is recommended that a full analysis of the concept described in the DODs is performed to provide a top-down context for the work programme of the SESAR Joint Undertaking.

www.episode3.aero

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 61 of 144 - Public


10 ANNEX A: OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS

10.1 HIGH LEVEL SCENARIOS

10.1.1 Single Flight Perspective Generic Scenario

This scenario provides an overview of the entire ATM process as foreseen in the SESAR target concept of operations.

The scenario illustrates how all the SESAR processes are linked together. The scenario starts several years before the flight and ends with the post assessment. Presentation is mainly from a “single flight” view point, but other processes around are illustrated as well, in a timeline order.

This format enables all the processes to be described as a series of events associated with a portion of the layered planning, flight execution phase or post flight. The numbering remains continuous.

10.1.1.1 Long Term Planning Phase

Several years before the day of operations approximately 6 months before the day of operations

1) Airports together with their partners in the ATM community find the best way of managing the risk of saturation and congestion, which they are primarily exposed to, but which will sooner or later impact other partners.

2) Airport‟s business planning determines if and when capacity increasing measures and initiatives (often infrastructure changes) can be realized and justified. Coordination is made between users and airports and the provision of suitable alternatives like reliever airports is considered (Creating the BDT).

3) Once the strategy is established and airport utilisation agreed the potential major traffic flows are assessed and the best organisation developed to manage them. Flight schedules may be known to varying degrees depending on the users‟ business models and plans. Historical and statistical data for traffic demand plays an important role at this stage. Allowances for Business and General Aviation will be made and military requirements included. The data is shared with all involved participants. Aspects considered include: Long-term traffic growth forecasts including User business strategy development and planned aircraft procurement; Economic, environmental and political considerations; Major events (e.g. Olympic Games, Military Exercises); Capacity enhancement plans including airspace design, systems acquisition and human resource planning. Extensive use is made of performance analysis and simulation tools (Using the Network Operations Planner in BDT creation).

4) The Business Development Trajectory (BDT) is progressively enriched and refined within the user organisation but is not yet shared or made generally available for commercial reasons or due to lack of maturity. However when queried, user intentions represented by trajectories possibly containing limited details, will be provided (Access to BDT) (Military operations).

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 62 of 144 - Public


10.1.1.2 Medium Term Planning Phase

6 months prior to the day of operation EOBT -24hrs

5) The expected demand can be assessed once the airspace user‟s flight intentions are made available (seasonal schedules) and the output of the IATA airport slot conference is known. Flight intentions in the form of Shared Business Trajectories (SBT) are known but where they are lacking, e.g. for the business and General Aviation, statistics from previous years and expert assessments (Sharing the Business Trajectory).

6) Airports will provide detailed information concerning runway and stand capacities.

7) ANSP will provide airspace capacity information, route structures and their deployment schedules and any other potential constraints.

8) Military flight intentions and airspace requirements become progressively available (Pre-tactical operations).

9) The Network Management function analyses the network impact of the airspace user intentions, publishes the results and facilitates collaborative dialogue to resolve traffic demand and capacity balancing issues (Network management).

10) Scenarios are developed with the objective of preparing in advance for particular situations and events including the assessment of weather predictions based on probabilistic forecasting: what processes will be initiated, when and under what conditions.

11) Risks are commonly shared and monitored; mitigation paths are prepared. This will ensure that the ATM system will be prepared to cope with the majority of events that might disrupt the smooth running of the day of operation.

12) More detailed information is now available to all stakeholders via the NOP.

13) Airspace users utilise NOP applications so that potential changes to schedules can be evaluated (refined schedules, changes of aircraft type etc.).

14) ANSP and Airports refine their capacity and airspace planning.

15) These processes continue in an iterative manner all the way through to the day of operations, new data that affects the plan is analysed and the plan revised as necessary. Where an imbalance between predicted traffic demand and available capacity is detected ATM partners are alerted (SBT refinement).

16) As the day of operation approaches the majority of user intentions are available in the form of Shared Business Trajectories with a high level of detail. Some users intentions will still not be known (Business aviation, etc.) so predictions will be used if relevant.

17) Military intentions are now clear with a detailed plan of airspace usage and flight activity resulting from the Advance Flexible Use of Airspace (AFUA) concept.

../../../reveleig/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLKC/E3-D2.2-020-V2.3%20SESAR%20Initial%20DOD%20(G%20-%20General)_andy_050608.doc#Sharing the Business Trajectory

../../../reveleig/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLKC/E3-D2.2-020-V2.3%20SESAR%20Initial%20DOD%20(G%20-%20General)_andy_050608.doc#Military Pre-tactical Operations

../../../reveleig/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLKC/E3-D2.2-020-V2.3%20SESAR%20Initial%20DOD%20(G%20-%20General)_andy_050608.doc#Military Pre-tactical Operations

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 63 of 144 - Public


18) Improved weather forecasts make it possible to anticipate likely trans-oceanic and trans-continental flow orientations that are influenced by the jet stream. Low visibility, high winds and other weather phenomena can be predicted allowing contingency plans to be elaborated.

19) Network management functions (both regional and sub-regional) collaborate closely to assure that the best possible plans are in place for the day of operation.

10.1.1.3 Short Term Planning Phase

EOBT -24hrs EOBT -3hrs

20) On the day of operation the additional information is available via the Network Operations Plan. Accurate weather forecasts are now available. Runways in use are declared and expected arrival and departure routings may be included in the SBT (UDPP due to constraint detection).

21) Trans-oceanic and trans-continental flight planning has been finalised and runway capacity can be more accurately assessed with respect to wind or visibility conditions (AU managing constraints through UDPP).

22) Almost all airspace user intentions are now available and a very accurate assessment of the balance of demand and the available capacity can be made (Military tactical operations) (Late request).

23) Final details of Military activity are known along with potential flexibility that may be used to improve network efficiency (MVPA reallocation).

24) Final plans are made for sectorisation and any associated dynamic constraints18 (UDPP early departure) (New TTA).

OBT -3hrs OBT -15min (Instantiation of RBT)

25) Network Management informs the users via the NOP of instances where demand is likely to exceed capacity. The airspace users working together in the UDPP process assist in deciding how any potential delays will be managed (UDPP delayed Push and Start).

26) The final phase of the planning process takes place in the hour or so prior to departure when load, fuel strategies, winds, agreed delay sharing etc. are used in the final calculation of the SBT resulting in an accurate trajectory from Estimated Off Blocks Time (EOBT) from the airport of origin to Estimated In Blocks Time (EIBT) at the next airport in a (air-ground) combined SBT (Non compliance with TTA) (Change of departure time).

27) A continuous reconciliation takes place during this stage taking benefit of the multiple changes and ensuring that the network remains stable. In case of instability, the Network

18

Dynamic constraints may be used to assist in segregating flows of traffic either laterally or vertically. They will be only applied when required.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 64 of 144 - Public


Management function can initiate ad-hoc measures (such as capacity adjustments or constraints on individual flight trajectory) to recover the stability (Weather forecast update) (Queue management).

28) The planning phase ends with the finalisation of the Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) – which the user agrees to fly and the ANSP and Airports agree to facilitate (Publishing the RBT). (Departure queue management).

10.1.1.3.1 Turnaround

This section should provide any additional description necessary of how events during turnaround are monitored and their relationship with the ATM processes conducted during the “turnaround period” which is contained within OBT-3hrs to OBT -15mins.

To be completed in subsequent issues.

Preparing for Push Back

10.1.1.4 Execution Phase

The execution phase lasts from instantiation of the RBT just prior to engines start and push-back until the engines are shut down on stand at destination

10.1.1.4.1 Prior to OBT

OBT -15 minutes OBT

29) In the event that the flight crew identifies that the EOBT in the RBT cannot be respected within the specified required tolerance they will request a revision of RBT (Aircraft Tow).

30) Tower Ground will manage the revision process that might either lead rapidly to an agreement on a revised RBT or might involve a longer process involving negotiation of a new RBT involving several actors and/or reference to ongoing UDPP processes (Departure from non-standard runway).

31) With an agreed RBT and approaching EOBT the flight crew indicates to Tower Ground Control via data-link that the aircraft is ready to move. Tower Ground Control checks that the taxi-route is conflict free and authorises the aircraft to move following the taxi route described in the RBT until an agreed clearance limit (this may be initially simply a push-back clearance). The clearance will be transferred via data-link and will ideally be represented graphically on the flight deck.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 65 of 144 - Public


10.1.1.4.2 Departure - Taxi

OBT Take Off

32) As the aircraft approaches the taxi clearance limit a subsequent taxi clearance will be issued via data-link (Taxi out).

33) System support is constantly assessing the progress of the flight and checking the validity of the departure routing in the RBT. If the agreed departure segment cannot be authorised due to traffic (or any other reason: weather etc) a revised departure route will be issued via data-link during the taxi phase.

34) As the aircraft approached the holding point of the departure runway the flight crew will be instructed via data-link to contact the Runway Controller (Loss of departure slot).

10.1.1.4.3 Departure - Climb

Take Off TOC

35) The Runway Controller confirms that the runway and initial climb-out area are conflict free for the departure

36) The Runway Controller authorises take-off and execution of the first airborne segment of the RBT.

37) After take-off the aircraft is transferred to the departure controller. The aircraft systems automatically shares FMS 4D trajectory data on the network ensuring that the system is updated with latest calculations which are available once the aircraft becomes airborne (Allocation of the Departure Route) (Allocation of the Departure Profile).

38) Transfer of communications is effectuated using data-link instructions throughout the flight (Co-ordination).

39) Subsequent segments of trajectory are checked by controllers supported by MTCD tools and then either authorised, or revised and then authorised. The clearance to proceed for any trajectory segment shall be based on the appropriate separation mode. The most efficient departure routing is considered to be a precise 3D profile which will be authorised to be executed within an agreed precision using the Precision Trajectory Clearance 3D (PTC 3D) (TMA support tools).

40) For each segment of the trajectory, specific Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR) will have been specified in the RBT. The TMR specify the requirements for the aircraft to share FMS data on the network. The TMR will include “deltas” concerning the magnitude of the change in the trajectory predictions that will trigger a sharing event. These parameters may be large in the low density airspace (perhaps revisions of >1min in time) or very tight (perhaps revisions of >5sec in time) in high density airspace. Updated trajectory information of the appropriate granularity will ensure that system support tools, such as MTCD, function

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 66 of 144 - Public


with the required accuracy. TMR may also specify information such a/c weight, flight control settings that may be of use to the ground systems (Trajectory update).

10.1.1.4.4 En-route

TOC TOD

41) As the aircraft proceeds, controllers on the ground will be responsible for strategic planning to optimise resources and to also ensure that the RBT is respected with the highest possible precision. Trajectories will be assessed to ensure that dynamic airspace has been optimised to ensure the best compromise between capacity and efficiency. Dynamic sector modifications, route structure deployment or suspension and special use airspace management will all be continuous processes (Airspace reservation) (Meteorological data exchange).

42) In the event that airspace management processes cannot assure the required capacity and trajectory revision is unavoidable the process initiated may or may not be a CDM process involving the airspace user. The conditions under which a CDM process will initiated will be described in the NOP. The parameters that will have been considered include: time available for the process prior to the RBT revision and also the scale of the revision. For example an RBT optimisation avoiding an overloaded sector which adds 90sec flying time might not be subject to a CDM process however a change of cruising level by 6000ft may be. These processes are commonly known as “dynamic DCB” and/or “Meta-sector planning” (New airspace exclusion) (Weather Change Delayed).

43) Conflict management has a longer look-ahead than today thanks to system support such as MTCD fed with precise trajectory predictions. Planning controllers will identify conflicting trajectories at a multi-sector level with system support providing resolution advice that assures the most efficient outcome whilst avoiding multi-sector co-ordination. Trajectories will be revised using data-link instructions (Control Tools)

44) Executive controllers are heavily supported by system monitoring functions providing early warning in the event of predicted non-compliance with ATC instructions (comparison of clearance issued with FMS predictions). Tactical intervention with open-loop clearances such as headings and intermediate level-offs will be minimised thanks to the improved performance of the planning de-confliction task (Ground initiated) (Air initiated) (User initiated) (Delegated Separation).

45) In the En-route phase the system will process requirements resulting from arrival management processes which may take the form of Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) placed on a suitable waypoint in the vicinity of the airport. These constraints will trigger RBT revision processes and will then constrain en-route controller‟s scope of action. However the result will be a form of pre-sequencing that will ensure that the arrival airspace is not over congested and that a Continuous Descent Approach (CDA) can be expected (ATC revision for CTA compliance).

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 67 of 144 - Public


10.1.1.4.5 Arrival – Descent

TOD FAF

46) Prior to Top of Descent the arrival trajectory is system assessed to ensure that the most efficient arrival profile can be executed. This may result in a revised trajectory or a new or updated CTA. System support will have assisted controllers in determining the optimum airspace configuration providing the best compromise between capacity and efficiency – structured, closely spaced PRNAV routes for capacity; user preferred arrival profiles for efficiency (TMA support tools).

47) It is expected that separation provision will be assured by the controller using any one of the separation modes in the early phases of the arrival, however, once the flight has merged with other streams of aircraft and all are on similar arrival profiles ASAS techniques can be used to assure longitudinal spacing and/or separation (CDA merging).

48) Highly efficient arrival paths will be deployed making full use of advanced techniques such as curved path segments potentially resulting in short final approach where the aircraft is stabilised for landing (Sequencing & merging for linked pair).

49) Final approach spacing is expected to be less than today thanks to time based spacing, optimised wake vortex avoidance spacing and minimum runway occupancy times (Non-compliance with wake-vortex spacing).

50) The flight crew share their expected exit turn-off on the network and the system supports the Tower Ground controller in determining if the inbound taxi route can be authorised and in the event of problems assists in the selection of an alternative which is passed to the flight crew by data-link (note: this process can be done anywhere from TOD to final approach, but should be completed as early as possible to allow for surface planning and to avoid increased flight crew workload after FAF).

51) On final approach the aircraft is transferred to the Tower Runway controller.

10.1.1.4.6 Arrival – Final Approach and Landing

FAF RWY Vacated

52) Separation is maintained on final approach according to the appropriate criteria in force (standard radar, WV reduced, TBS, visual contact,etc..). Flight crews benefit from increased situational awareness of relevant traffic. The target runway turnoff has been pre-agreed with the ground by Data-link contract and can be amended if circumstances require. A pre-agreed exit is not a guarantee that the exit will be achieved (Closely Spaced Parallel Operations in IMC).

53) The flight is cleared to land and minimal runway occupancy is assured using brake-to-vacate technology. Depending on the target exit, reverse thrust may or may not be used (Landing and taxi to gate).

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 68 of 144 - Public


54) The flight is transferred to Tower Ground control.

10.1.1.4.7 Arrival – Taxi

RWY Vacated Engines Shut Down

55) As the aircraft approaches the taxi clearance limit a subsequent taxi clearance will be issued via data-link until engine shut down on stand (Landing and taxi to gate).

10.1.1.5 Post-flight

After the day of operations


10.1.2 Multi-Flights High Level Scenarios

The Table hereafter presents the list of the identified high level scenarios.

Scenario Name Comments

Airport Operation Plan lifecycle for Medium-Short Term and Execution phases

Initiated

Airport Operation Plan lifecycle for Long Term phase

Initiated

Elaboration of pre-defined solutions in the Long Term

To be developed

Elaboration of pre-defined solutions in the Medium Term

To be developed

Long Term capacity planning

The purpose of the scenario is to interpret the „Long Term DOD‟ and provide the reader with a credible, accessible example of how long term planning may work in the future in order to i) provide more detail of the concept, and ii) to provoke thought and comment on how the concept might be improved.

This particular scenario is set at a high level. Thus, the detailed processes of, say, preparing traffic forecasts, have been passed over (this process is worthy of an operational scenario itself). Rather, the scenario presented here focuses on the planning cycle during the course of one year. It highlights the broad objectives/processes for successful capacity planning, giving details on what are likely to be the important inputs, who the actors may be, synergies between actors, and a timeline for the flow of information.

This scenario covers the very long term capacity planning process (up to about ten years ahead), and includes the following network elements: airports, terminal manoeuvring areas (TMAs) and en-route. It includes a new method on complexity analysis to avoid en-route bottlenecks. City airport reassignment will need direct participation of airlines.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 69 of 144 - Public


Military collaboration in the Medium Term Initiated.

Military collaboration in Short Term Initiated

Non-severe capacity shortfalls impacting arrivals in the Short Term

The operational scenario describes the resolution of a local imbalance facing a European airport in 2020 on the day of operations (that is to say during the short-term planning phase and execution phase). The imbalance is subsequent to a capacity shortfall resulting from sudden adverse weather conditions. The imbalance, albeit non-critical, is identified at short notice and occurs during a busy time period. Therefore, actions have to be taken to rebalance the situation at the airport and in the vicinity i.e. terminal airspace. Those actions result from the application of a DCB Solution, primarily impacting arrivals and taking the form of a queue management process. Those actions are described hereafter, together with the operational events they respond to.

Non-severe capacity shortfalls covering simultaneously multiple nodes of the network

To be developed

Optimisation of capacity planning in the Medium Term

To be developed

Severe airport capacity shortfalls in the Medium Term

To be developed

Severe airport capacity shortfalls in the Short Term

To be developed

Severe capacity shortfalls covering simultaneously multiple nodes of the network

To be developed

Severe capacity shortfalls impacting arrivals in the Short Term

To be developed

Severe capacity shortfalls in En-Route airspace in the Short Term

To be developed

Turn-round Management

To be developed

UDDP for Departures at a capacity Constrained Airport

To be developed

Table 4: Multi-Flights High Level Scenarios summary.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 70 of 144 - Public


10.2 INDIVIDUAL SCENARIOS

Note: In order to lighten this document, improve readability and access from the reader to the various scenarios, each of these scenarios will be published in a single file. This process has been initiated recently and some slight changes in the scenario titles may occur.

10.2.1 Business Development Trajectory Creation

10.2.1.1 Scenario summary

Civil operations

The Business Development Trajectory (BDT) is used for airline business planning and is not shared outside the airline organisation.

The business and network development experts of Blue Jet Airways have determined that there will be a market in the future for a new flight between their base at Blue Port Airport in The Netherlands and a newly developed airport in the Eastern part of the ECAC area. This new airport and its surroundings are part of Europe making full use of all SESAR developments. A strong market was expected to develop within the coming 3-5 years, with both coach and business class demand. Blue Jet Airways calculated that they could meet the target load factors operating a Boeing 737NG three times a day in both directions. For their decision, they used forecasts available from various sources, contained in the SWIM environment and accessible via their implementation of NOPLA (see below).

The new service being fully intra-EC, no special permits or diplomatic arrangements were required.

Military operations

Military Long Term Planning comprises the agreed yearly national and allied exercise plans and national training plans. According to these plans, yearly national military flight programmes are established. They form the basis for the local Wing Operations to plan their yearly exercise and training programme. This is at the early stage a pure internal military activity.

However, information on large scale exercises is published well in advance and is subject to national and international high level agreements on airspace reservation and possible impact on other air operations.

Exercise information is input into the Network Operations Plan (NOP) through the ANSP. Military flight plans which could constitute a trajectory are not be provided at this level.

Airspace requirements for the regular daily flying training, generally specified on a monthly basis with an airspace reservation schedule updated on a weekly basis, and the agreed reservation data for the day of operation could be published in the NOP.

An early incorporation into the ATM process supports that, at the daily planning and execution level, restrictions or exemptions can be minimized.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 71 of 144 - Public


The BDT (Business Development Trajectory) of the civil AO cannot be compared with this military planning level. The military long term activity planning is not considering flight planning. However, once the information is coordinated it is published in the NOP (Network Operations Plan). It is then “Shared Information”. The BDT does not exist for military operations.

10.2.1.1.1 Additional information and assumptions

10.2.1.1.1.1 Additional information


10.2.1.1.1.2 Assumptions


10.2.1.1.2 Actors in the scenario


10.2.1.2 Scenario

10.2.1.2.1 Creating the BDT

They would be using aircraft to be leased for this purpose. The leasing company was informed of this upcoming requirement and they were also warned that Blue Jet Airways would need 737s with ATM 4 or higher capability.

The business case for this new flight was predicated in making maximum use of all the advanced capabilities being offered by the SESAR environment (e.g. CDA/merging operations on arrival).

Technical and navigation experts had determined the equipment, certification and crew requirements the 737 and the flight crew will have to meet to fly in Europe using the advanced features, as required by the very strong commercial imperative.

Information was collected on the available handling agents and appropriate contracts signed with the selected company. One of the selection criteria concerned the agent‟s ability to work fully in line with the Airport CDM applications (in particular the use of mile-stones) available at the destination airport.

The best departure and arrival times were selected for both directions, carefully balancing the need for minimising departure delays with meeting passenger needs and airline performance requirements. This was done using the trajectory development tools of the airline and the integrated NOPLA capability which enabled the experts to look at a wide range of parameters and try out various options, making full use of the data available in the SWIM environment and the long-term planning functions of NOPLA. Their task was also helped by the fact that NOPLA includes also the relevant airport plans.

Taking also weather considerations into account, an initial optimal BDT was created and made available for consideration inside the airline only. Airport slots were secured at the destination airport and the business development trajectory was modified slightly to meet the slot constraints. It

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 72 of 144 - Public


should be noted that “optimal” here is used in a relative sense, since the airline will have included some other constraints also (e.g. as may be required by environmental requirements).

Since this is happening many months if not years before the date of flight, the business development trajectory is still based on a number of assumptions.

As time passes, and more accurate information becomes available, the BDT may be further refined.

10.2.1.2.2 Using the Network Operations Planner in BDT creation

Blue Jet Airways, with their sophisticated flight planning system uses the open interfaces of the SWIM environment to integrate the standard NOPLA applications with their systems. Additional applications and/or functionalities are also integrated, making maximum use of the available data. The standard and the customised, integrated applications meet the SWIM requirements and hence ensure that Blue Jet Airways experts share the overall, common situational awareness and interact with the environment in the prescribed manner.

The NOPLA applications deliver a functional extension to the existing system, mainly in terms of enabling access to the totality of SWIM data, the sharing of information into the SWIM environment and becoming a subscriber to selected information being newly created or changing in the SWIM environment.

Developing a business trajectory supported by NOPLA enables Blue Jet Airways to consult and take into account all the information that has been published by other partners, to create various “theoretical” trajectories and evaluate their particular interaction with the ATM system.

Sharing of the business trajectory via NOPLA may trigger an automatic process that evaluates the changes in the system state implied by the new trajectory and depending on the planning horizon, it may generate advisories or warnings or even undertake automatic negotiation to ensure the timely availability of the required ATM resources.

Blue Jet‟s NOPLA aware system works also in the reverse direction, informing the airline of changes or expected changes in the state of the ATM system, proposing measures that have already been pre-screened for their impact.

10.2.1.2.3 Limited access to BDT information19

Although the BDT is normally for airline internal use only, its existence represents important planning information knowledge of which can benefit long term ATM network (including airport) planning. At the same time, the BDT is highly competition sensitive and airspace users are generally reluctant to provide access to their BDTs in any form.

Blue Jet Airways is extremely competitive and hence they protect their data line from other carriers but they are also aware of the benefits they themselves can reap if they are able to assess future plans in the light of global planning information.

19

The same principle applies also to the rules of accessing other competition or other sensitive information.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 73 of 144 - Public


They have therefore pioneered the development of a NOPLA application that enables partners to pose “intelligent” planning questions to the SWIM environment and the application delivers answers in a way that is both useful and at the same time ensures full protection of airspace users‟ sensitive information.

An example of this is the following. To the question (coming from any authorised user anywhere in the world via the SWIM environment) “How many daily flights will Air France have between Paris CDG and Rome FCO in June 2020?” the NOPLA application would return something like this: “There are 62 trajectories planned on the shortest route. Planned airport capacity for departures CDG will be exceeded in period xyz. Planned arrival capacity will not be exceeded in FCO”.

The delivery of this information is based on the NOPLA application‟s ability to query all the appropriate data sources and then intelligently collate the result.

It is the owner of the source data (i.e. in the case of the BDT the airspace user) who determines the kind of response (the level of detail) that is disclosed upon a query coming in from a NOPLA application and hence the protection of their sensitive data is always under their control.

10.2.1.2.4 Military strategic operations

At the Military Long Term Planning Level the “National Airspace Body” between the respective government ministries (with support of the ANSP) coordinates the airspace demand for training airspaces and planned large scale military air exercises. The exercise information with affected areas, dimensions and times is published well in advance through the European Aeronautical Information Database within SWIM to facilitate planning for affected Airspace Users, ANSP and Air Defence Sites.

Exercise information is input into the Network Operations Plan (NOP) through the ANSP. Military flight plans which could constitute a trajectory are not be provided at this level.

Airspace requirements for the regular daily flying training, generally specified on a monthly basis with an airspace reservation schedule updated on a weekly basis, and the agreed reservation data for the day of operation could be published in the NOP.

An early incorporation into the ATM process supports that, at the daily planning and execution level, restrictions or exemptions can be minimized.

10.2.2 Sharing the Business Trajectory


Blue Jet Airways is well aware of the fact that there is a latest time by which they will have to publish the trajectory developed for the new flight, not least to enable the network managers (Regional/Sub-Regional) to start planning the resources that will have to be made available to have this trajectory (among many others from other airspace users) go through the system on the day of operation with no or minimum distortion. They are also aware that publishing the trajectory before the prescribed deadline does not convey a direct advantage to the owner of the trajectory but it does help overall network planning and hence it is a practice that is encouraged.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 74 of 144 - Public









10.2.2.2 Scenario

10.2.2.2.1 Publishing Flight and Trajectory Data

At the latest when the deadline arrives, the trajectory is published by Jet Blue into the SWIM environment, using the appropriate NOPLA function. The applicable rules specify what information must be included; in other words, the description of the trajectory must be accompanied by other, relevant data although the deadline for some of this (e.g. aircraft type, souls on board, etc.) may have different deadline requirements.

Publication of the trajectory and relevant flight data is in fact the act of sharing this information with all other ATM partners, for the purpose of enabling the conduct of the flight concerned with no or minimum distortion to the trajectory.

10.2.2.2.2 Indicating ASAS

As described in the SESAR ConOps, the SESAR environment will use a system of flight notification that includes more information than is normally considered in even the enhanced ICAO Flight Plan. Flight notification takes the form of publishing the Shared Business Trajectory and the associated flight data, not necessarily at the same point in time, but taking into account the prescribed latest publication times.

In particular, air traffic services units need to know the capabilities of the aircraft concerned to enable them to select the most appropriate and efficient trajectory management methods (including the separation methods). Specific tags associated with the trajectory will inform ATM if the aircraft is ASAS capable. This indication will mean that the aircraft is technically capable and the crew flying it is duly qualified.

ASAS capable aircraft have a number of operating modes, switchable by the pilot and shown on the ground displays. These may include:

Safety only: ASAS is operating but only to enhance situational awareness. The aircraft is not ready to self separate (but may respond positively if asked by the controller).

Ready to self separate: This mode is equivalent to a permanent request to self separate (on the basis that the intervention is then more efficient than what may be done from the ground). A controller may at all times initiate delegation of separation.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 75 of 144 - Public


Delegated procedure: this mode indicates the specific procedure that has been delegated (for a short period of time) by the controller, e.g. ASPA-S&M or temporarily delegated ASEP crossing and passing, or overtaking.

Self separating: This is the mode when the pilot has accepted the delegation and is carrying out the manoeuvre as recommended by the ASAS system.

10.2.3 Refinement of the Shared Business Trajectory


Once the trajectory has been published, it becomes “shared” and is part of the common situational awareness provided by this shared environment. In other words, it is an integral part of the Network Operations Plan; this four dimensional, dynamic and rolling model of the state of the ATM system. While the presence of a new business trajectory has an impact on the state of the system, triggering various actions to properly manage this impact, only the owner of the trajectory can actually modify the trajectory. But the trajectory and its effects are visible in the model (the NOP) to all authorised partners.

Military operations

The Military Daily Planning comprises the use of airspace for the coming days and the planning of the individual missions according to the given tasks.

Initially, the daily need for airspace for military use is coordinated within the military community by military agencies. If cross-border-areas are used, these agencies may have to be responsible for an entire region and must therefore be vested with the appropriate powers by the partners involved.

The jointly planned military airspace utilisation is then being coordinated with the civil airspace users through the civil-military manned Airspace Management Cell (AMC). The local and regional airspace structure as well as the particularities of the airspace users within the area of responsibility must be known within the AMC. Military operations may be subject to reiteration processes between the AMC and the PCA (Air Defence Planning and Coordination Authority) and/or the appropriate Tactical Air Command and Control Service (TACCS).

Planning tools offer the possibility of timely exchange of information between military and civil users to find proper solutions and an effective balancing of different needs and to respond to short-term changes in an adequate manner. The coordination process terminates with an agreed Airspace Use Plan (AUP).

Once the demand is coordinated it is published in the NOP (Network Operations Plan). It constitutes “Shared Information”.

Besides the planned airspace utilisation for the following day, the whole Wing Operations flight programme (IFR and/or VFR) is planned respecting that, due to technical limitations, some aircraft may or may not be available on the following day or some might be ready for operation unexpectedly on the following day.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 76 of 144 - Public


Air operations are complex and require careful planning. To make missions successful, the plans must be sufficiently detailed in terms of objectives and timing since several types of aircraft from different bases, sometimes from different nations, might participate in these operations. When executing missions, time is crucial. Timeslots over targets (gunnery ranges, exercise areas, air refuelling) cannot be ignored or rearranged without severe consequences. Those missions must either be flown according to plan or not at all.

ICAO Flight Plans creating a view on the planned “Business/Mission Trajectory” (BT) are delivered on the day of operation through Base Operations into the respective civil and military systems.

For military air operations the “Flight Plan” constitutes the “Military Mission Trajectory” and should therefore be differentiated from “Business Trajectory”.

Once delivered the Flight Plan becomes the SESAR-Status of an SBT (Shared Business “Mission” Trajectory) it is made known to the NOP. It is continuously updated with more accurate data through the development process. Military users not capable of generating SBT online are determined and managed by the ANSP.

The SBT will develop into an RBT (Reference Business “Mission” Trajectory) once an agreement is finalised between the military flight operations and the ANSP. It reflects the users preferred and agreed military mission trajectory. The RBT contains all known applicable constraints and is used as a reference by all relevant ATM partners during the flight execution. It is managed by the pilot and ATC via voice communication for aircraft not equipped with Data Link.








10.2.3.2 Scenario

10.2.3.2.1 Using the Network Operations Planner in Shared Business Trajectory refinement

As described earlier, the Network Operations Planner (NOPLA) is in fact a set of intelligent applications, some common to all partners, some specific to a given partner, but all written to common standards and specifications to ensure the maintenance of the common situational awareness for all partners.

If an already published business trajectory needs to be modified, this is achieved via the NOPLA. From the users‟ perspective this may be transparent in the sense that they would still be working via their own system (if NOPLA is integrated) but the same, or very similar, functionality would be

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 77 of 144 - Public


available also from mobile or remote devices, or stand-alone systems depending on the implementation. The most important consideration is that the NOPLA application would ensure that:

The owner of the trajectory has the same, or very similar, functional possibilities at his or her disposal, regardless of where and how he or she is accessing the trajectory.

The view of the shared environment (the NOP) is identical for all partners with only the accents and highlights customised to fit the mission at hand.

Any input/modification etc. is correct from both a syntactical and semantic point of view.

The access and confidentiality rules are applied and strictly enforced.

NOPLA is therefore the common tool for publishing trajectories, negotiations, making proposals and requests, etc. It is also highly automated, and functions that can be carried out without human intervention are completed automatically, with only the results or particular states requiring human decisions presented to the end-users.

10.2.3.2.2 Using the NOPLA as the common interface for Network Management (Regional and Sub-Regional)

The specific implementation of NOPLA used by Network Management is in fact a virtual manager function that provides a standardised interface to all partners in the ATM network (including airports and the military) and which can operate as a centralised or de-centralised facility, dynamically configurable to meet the requirements of the network under different circumstances. This enables managers of the ATM network to collapse/expand the Regional and Sub-Regional Network Management function using central and distributed working positions and manning to ensure that at all times the tasks are carried out but with optimised staffing levels.

10.2.3.2.3 Military Pre-tactical Operations

At the Military Daily Planning Level the determined military planning authority PCA/TACCS coordinates the planned military airspace utilisation for the following day with the civil airspace users through the AMC.

The AMC compares the military demand on airspace with all available information on other military activities and the available trajectories (SBT) of civil aircraft. The AMC detects the impact on civil traffic flows and seeks for possible adjustments in respect to acceptable shifts in time, location and/or dimension of the areas required in case major traffic flows are affected.

The AMC uses simulation tools and finds proper solutions and an effective balancing of different needs and responds to short-term changes in an adequate manner. The AMC coordinates its proposal with the respective military planning authority PCA/TACCS. The coordination process terminates with an agreed Airspace Use Plan (AUP).

Agreed military airspace reservations are published by the AMC through SWIM and thus become “Shared Information”.

The Pilot in Command files his ICAO Flight Plan on the day of operation according to his mission order considering the AUP of the AMC, AIS and WX-information and any short term changes requested to meet actual demands.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 78 of 144 - Public


Base Operations provides the pilot with actual aeronautical and WX-Information and distributes the Flight Plan into the respective civil and military systems. The “Flight Plan” constitutes the “Military Mission Trajectory”. The information available in the Flight Plan allows the System to generate a 4D trajectory.

10.2.4 Military Tactical Operations


At the Military Execution Level the FUA Concept is applied and managed in close civil-military cooperation within and among Air Traffic Control Centres (ATS Supervisor, Planning Controllers and Executive Controllers) and the Air Defence Sites (Senior Controller).

Short term changes are subject to coordination between the ATS Supervisor of the respective ACC and the AMC and in turn with the respective Wing Operations Centre /Base Operations or the Pilot in Command if the flight is already airborne.

For all military air operations dedicated efforts are undertaken to provide maximum flexibility in the use of the airspace and the successful execution of the intended mission, considering the impact of lost missions for the military user. Since the performance of air operations combine different route segments of high-value training elements, adequate support and assistance by air traffic control is of vital interest to the Operational Air Traffic (OAT).

One KPA for military operations is flexibility. In-flight change requests are common practice and need to be supported by the ANSP in a collaborative manner. This requires quick reaction and integration of flights into the existing traffic situation by tactical controller intervention.








10.2.4.2 Scenario

At the Military Execution Level the FUA Concept is applied and managed in close cooperation between the ATS Supervisor and the Controllers and the Air Defence Organisation. Short term changes are coordinated between the ATS Supervisor of the respective ACC and the AMC and in turn with the respective Wing Operations/Base Operations, or the Pilot in Command if the flight is already airborne.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 79 of 144 - Public


The Network managers (Regional/Sub-Regional) and the Traffic Complexity Manager in the ACC are involved in all measures and ensure the input of the relevant information into the ATC system.

If the AMC cancels the use of assigned airspace it may be used for other purposes.

The ANSP manages military users not equipped with 4D/Data Link capabilities with respect to input of data into the System. Any deviation from the cleared trajectory (Flight Plan/Cleared Flight Plan) will be coordinated with the pilot respectively result in a re-clearance to the original clearance by ATC.

Military users equipped like civil airlines and capable of applying 4D/Data Link are basically capable of following civil SESAR procedures. However as long as they are with their local military ATC facilities the conventional ATC procedures and data link means are applied.

10.2.5 UDPP activation due to Capacity Shortfall


This scenario is an example of how in the event of a declared ATM system capacity shortfall, the User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP) can be activated in order to respect the Users‟ business interests whilst at the same time minimising the impact on the stability of the Network Management Function. It describes how by 2020 information on ATM system demand and capacity will be available through SWIM for all ATM stakeholders and a trigger will inform all concerned Actors with relevant information in regard of their interests. In the case of an ATM capacity shortfall, (e.g. a capacity constrained airport suffering a runway closure) all concerned will look for the corresponding default pre-agreed scenario(s) appropriate for the situation. Network Management will ensure that the most appropriate scenario is applied with a view to minimising the amount of delay generated by the capacity shortfall. Following this, Network Management will make an initial attribution of delay and then activate UDPP (see 10.2.5.1.1.1 below).

The Users then work together to optimise the attribution of delay to best attain their business goals under the constant monitoring of Network Management. Should the users fail to agree, Network Management will impose an attribution of delay.

The responsibility of Network Manager is to assure network stability, and he therefore uses fast-time simulation to see that the proposed solution has no impact on the network and the UDPP agreed attribution of delay is implemented with no changes. If the Regional Network Manager verifies that UDPP proposed solution has implications on the network, he calls a CDM process to agree an alternative solution (following pre-established agreed rules).

The ATM system capacity is constantly monitored by the Network Management Function, receiving updated information through SWIM or by direct regular contacts between the Regional Network Manager and Sub-Regional Network Managers, ANSPs and Airports. The Regional Network Manager in addition maintains a close collaboration with the UDPP function20 which will be key to

20

UDPP as a means of self-regulation may need regulatory approval in order to ensure fairness and equity for all users of the ATM system.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 80 of 144 - Public


determine demand prioritisations as a continuous process in order to guarantee the Users a return on capital and costs minimisation, in particular during capacity shortfall situations.



The context in which the User Driven Prioritisation Process is expected to work is one in which the en route capacity meets the forecast demand to ensure that in normal circumstances, there are no en route flow constraints. The delays that are to be allocated in this scenario are therefore mostly generated by a lack of airport capacity, with a small number coming from isolated nodes of the en route system due to non nominal situations (e.g. convective weather). It is further assumed that the arrival capacity is more limiting than departure capacity. It follows from this that arrival restrictions will be more common and larger than departure restrictions; the result is that if a flight is allocated an arrival delay, it will normally be possible to give it a departure time which will enable it to meet the arrival constraint. It is assumed that this situation will occur mainly at major airports which will become increasingly constrained as the increase in airport resources which generate capacity do not keep pace with the increase in demand.

The following consequences should result from the change:

Improved operational control of the ad hoc slot allocation process;

Improved communication, particularly to passengers, resulting from the greater certainty of operation;

Improved economic performance as operators concentrate on operating the more profitable flights at the expense of the less profitable;

Maximised use of capacity through greater take up of available slots as the allocation process is continuous.

The User Driven Prioritisation Process is a fundamental change in the way delays are allocated. It represents a shift from the current paradigm in which service providers determine both the capacity of the Air Traffic Management Network and the allocation of resulting delays to individual flights. The principle to be adopted is that the Network Manager (Regional/Sub-Regional) retains the responsibility for the capacity of the system but individual flight delays that result from a mismatch between that capacity and the demand should be the responsibility of the Users who suffer those delays and whose business model depends on optimising the return on capital and minimizing costs. The current system imposes a burden that the Network Manager is not in a position to fulfil as evidenced by the continuing question whether they should operate first-come-first-served or serve-to-schedule. The answer is „neither‟ and that the Users should be left to themselves to decide how they want their flights to be handled; in case of significant capacity shortfall, flights will be operated by choice, not chance.

The UDPP is continuous, but can be thought as starting when a service provider, an ANSP or an airport operator, declares a shortfall in capacity at the node for which he is responsible. The ANSP update the corresponding SWIM data and informs the Regional Network Manager and hence the Users‟ representatives and Airports in accordance with the situation. who are linked in an online discussion. Typically these representatives would be operations control personnel, but smaller operators may divide the function differently. Non airline Users, and airlines with few scheduled

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 81 of 144 - Public


flights may be represented by a handling agent. The operators are offered a share of the reduced capacity based on their scheduled share. They then decide which of their flights they wish to operate at the available times. Because all participants have an overview of the situation through the medium of SWIM, their choices are visible to others. More significantly, each user, or his representative can negotiate with the rest, and time slots can be exchanged or sold. This process does not involve the Regional Network Manager directly. The inputs to the process are the revised capacities, and the outputs are flight priorities in the form of TTAs. Because the process is not secret, however, and will certainly be inspected by monopoly regulators, it is transparent. Delays arise from events which are either unplanned (weather, accident, failure etc) or planned (maintenance, special event etc); in both cases the capacity will vary in time, either restored to its normal level or subject to new restriction (either higher or lower). The UDPP will have to react to all of these changes, as well as those due to inevitable perturbations in flights airborne or planned. So although the process can be thought of as starting with the declaration of reduced capacity, in practice the function will run continuously.

The Network Management Function, ensuring the stability of the system as a whole, is not carried out by the UDPP, though it will be informed of decisions made in the UDPP.

Regarding compliance (refer to § 10.2.5.2.5) the following issue have to be noticed. In principle the process could handle all conceivable flight constraints, at all nodes. It is obvious however, that the number of negotiations and the number of interested parties would increase rapidly with increasing constraints. For example, if a flight were subject to constraints on departure, at several nodes en route, and also on arrival, the number of interacting flights would not be confined to those arriving at a similar time at the destination airport, but would include all those passing through those nodes and departing within the relevant time windows. It is not obvious that a compatible trajectory could be calculated, or, if a solution is available, it can be found in the time available before departure, and that the number of separate negotiations would be practicable. Practical limits to the procedure need to be devised. It is, however, also true that today‟s systems would struggle to find a solution to such a situation; the additional rounds of CDM negotiation provide additional means to solve the problem and should be looked at as an advantage, reducing the number of potentially available slots that are not used.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 82 of 144 - Public



The UDPP covers two SESAR layered planning phases: the planning phase and the execution phases as defined in the SESAR ConOps. The process may be triggered at any time but three general cases can be identified:

1. Capacity shortfall is predicted before any affected aircraft has departed (e.g. forecast morning fog or planned maintenance.

2. Shortfall occurs without warning when all aircraft are airborne (e.g. blocked runway due accident) for the first period of the shortfall.

3. Intermediate between (1) and (2), some affected aircraft are already airborne, some have yet to depart.

Case (1) is practically indistinguishable from the last phases of Updated Airspace Use Plan (UUP), the emphasis, however, is on the sequence, either arrival or departure with attention being given to individual flights rather than flows. In both cases a default solution is contained in the pre-agreed catalogue of solutions. In the case of the UDPP, this catalogue contains default user allocations for the capacity shortfall. In the first instance these will be proportional to the scheduled demand.

In case (2) where all the aircraft are airborne the default allocation would typically be the same as case (1).

In case (3), however, Users could agree to weight the allocation in favour of airborne flights over those yet to depart. If such a choice were to be made, it would be itself a collaborative decision.


The Actors included in the scenario are:

The Regional Network Manager;

The Sub-Regional Network Manager of the concerned sub-region (e.g. FAB);

The Airline Operational Centres (AOCs) as owners of the concerned SBTs;

Handling agents representing other airspace Users who do not operate an operations centre themselves

The Airport Operations Centre (APOC) of the impacted airport.

10.2.5.2 Scenario

10.2.5.2.1 Basic Arrival Function

In the User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP) scenario, any necessary airport delay (slot) allocation is handled without any reference to an intermediary. When airport arrival capacity is significantly less than demand such that a flow rate would have been requested by the airport through network management, the normal airport CDM process triggers the UDPP. The APOC will declare the capacity to the Regional Network Manager through the NOP. The Regional Network Manager uses the NOP to present Users with an hourly slot allocation in proportion to their normal

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 83 of 144 - Public


demand. For example, if user A has 10 slots scheduled in an hour affected by delay, and user B has 5, and the capacity reduction is 50%, then user A receives 5 slots and B receives 2 ½.

The Users‟ AOC or agents then decide in a UDPP with other concerned Users how best to fill their allocation, and if desired to swap and trade slots in accordance with their mutual interests. Affected flights are given TTAs. The formula for the basic allocation of slots is subject itself to negotiation. For instance, Users could agree to weight the allocation in favour of flights already airborne. The default allocation is by definition also the allocation used if the parties fail to agree in a timely manner. The outcome of the UDPP is published in the NOP and made available to the Regional and Sub-Regional Network Managers.

The Regional Network Manager and Sub-Regional Network Manager examine the UDPP solutions for impact on the Network/FAB (e.g. changes to the prioritization of airborne flights may impact on traffic synchronisation plans). If there is unacceptable impact on the Network stability (e.g. changes to traffic synchronisation plans lead to an increase in controller workload with an adverse impact on en route capacity), then the Regional/Sub-Regional Network Manager will initiate a CDM process (c.f. Reallocation of MVPA) with the Users to modify the UDPP in order to reach a mutual solution. In the unlikely event of non-agreement, then the Regional Network Manager will impose the necessary constraints.

10.2.5.2.2 Departure delay

In the case of significant reduction in departure capacity, the shortfall will be handled the same way, with available take-off slots distributed initially according to scheduled demand. In the case of a flight subject to both arrival and departure capacity slots, a further round, or rounds, of negotiation may be necessary in order to find a compatible set of constraints.

10.2.5.2.3 User Options

The user may decide to delay the flight, and fly a fuel efficient trajectory to meet the agreed TTA. He could however decide (e.g. for reasons of ramp congestion at the departure airport) to fly a longer slower and less efficient trajectory that still met the agreed TTA. His choice could well be influenced by any weighting rules that could favour flights already airborne over those yet to depart. In general, however, a departure delay is likely to be preferred over an extended routeing given that the UDPP process gives a high assurance that the total delay will be known (compared to today‟s situation where no account is taken of pre departure delay when allocating inbound delay or holding).

10.2.5.2.4 Adjustments

Once flights depart to meet their TTAs, some, for whatever reason, may not be in compliance with those TTAs. Currently, such flights are prevented from taking off before their slot if they are ready early, and are forced to renegotiate a slot if late; penalties for late departure are severe as the whole process will usually have to restart. This encourages conservative turnaround planning and consequently inefficient use of both aircraft and stands. UDPP gives the Users an opportunity to avoid these consequences by reshuffling their allocation. AOCs and/or agents monitor departure readiness continuously and analyse the effect of deviations from the revised plan. In the event of deviations, they will use the same negotiation process that followed the initial allocation and continue to swap and trade as long as the need exists.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 84 of 144 - Public


The major reason for renegotiation post departure, however, will be a capacity change taking place after the initial allocation. The changes can be man made (for example, early or late completion of planned work), or natural (early or late clearance of fog, higher or lower than forecast winds), but the effect is much the same and will be handled in the same way.

10.2.5.2.5 Compliance

Essential to the success of what is effectively self regulation is the threat that non compliance with agreed TTAs will result in an operational penalty. Initially the operators will attempt to negotiate a revised TTA for it off plan flight. If this fails, (e.g. if the user has no other flights to give way and no swap or trade is available), it is essential that the tools exist to impose additional delay or diversion on the non compliant flight. The mere knowledge of the existence of such tools should ensure deliberate non compliance is rare, and that the tools will very rarely be used.

10.2.5.2.6 Flight Phase View

10.2.5.2.6.1 Departure Phase

The system is updated with the actual take-off time; where this is not compatible with the previously agreed TTA, a further renegotiation of the TTA through the UDPP may be necessary.

10.2.5.2.6.2 En-Route Phase

Changes to TTA after departure, as described above, may require renegotiation of the RBT. Flights in possession of a UDPP generated TTA will not be treated any differently to any other traffic not affected when tactical separation decisions have to be made en route prior to the capacity restricted node to which a UDPP applies; normal tactical intervention procedures, or whatever tactical procedures are adopted in the SESAR concept, will apply. UDPP does not imply any prioritisation of flights other than at the aerodrome or node to which the UDPP itself applies

10.2.5.2.6.3 Arrival Phase

The consequence of the UDPP is that in periods of delay all arrivals will normally have a TTA, and that the arrival flow should be approximately in sequence. The existence of the TTA will not prevent the AMAN from calculating the optimum sequence and making the appropriate adjustments to maximise capacity and minimise delay through, for example wake vortex pair grouping.

10.2.5.2.6.4 Post Flight Phase

The post event analysis will consider the extent to which the UDPP participants have complied with the restrictions they agreed to, and the causes of any non compliance. The threat of future exclusion from the UDPP should be sufficient to deter non collaborative behaviour.

10.2.6 UDPP process inducing delayed Push and Start


An En-Route constraint has been identified in the NOP. This might result from a temporary capacity reduction while new equipment is introduced or a large increase in demand because of a sporting event.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 85 of 144 - Public




This scenario is designed to test the definition of the concept. It is not proposed for use in fast-time or real-time exercises.

Whatever action is taken to deal with change (refer to § 10.2.6.2.3), this scenario may impact on SESAR KPIs for throughput and predictability.





10.2.6.2 Scenario

10.2.6.2.1 UDPP planning

The UDPP has operated to manage constrained flights. This has been achieved by assigning Entry Time Windows for a defined volume of airspace V.

10:0010:0210:0410:0610:08

Constrained Volume

V

A

B

C

D

E

10:0010:0210:0410:0610:08

Constrained Volume

V

A

B

C

D

E

Figure 21: UDPP Plan for Traffic through Constrained Volume V

The flights are operating on from different airports on different routes, and the only characteristic they share is that they have been assigned an entry window for Volume V.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 86 of 144 - Public


V

AB

C

D

E

Figure 22: Plan View of Routes to Constrained Volume

10.2.6.2.2 Delayed push and start

Flight C has a technical failure on starting engines, and it is delayed. Flight C has a short flying time to the constrained volume, so it is not possible to fill this gap by advancing the airborne times of following flights.

This creates a gap in the planned series of flights routed through volume V.

10:0010:0210:0610:08

Constrained Volume

V

A

B

D

E

10:0010:0210:0610:08

Constrained Volume

V

A

B

D

E

Figure 23: UDPP Plan for Traffic through Constrained Volume V (after delay to Flight C)

10.2.6.2.3 Action to deal with change

This step is not defined in the SESAR ConOps. Some options are:

Accept a gap in throughput at the constrained volume.

The DMAN at the origin Airport of C revises its plan to prioritise flight C (although this may reduce local runway throughput)

Network Management advances the planned times for flights D and E, and assumes they can be expedited while airborne.

Network Management offers the vacant slot as an “opportunity for improvement” to flights which had previously agreed in UDPP to accept a less preferable route avoiding volume V.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 87 of 144 - Public


10.2.7 UDPP process inducing early departure





This scenario is designed to test the definition of the concept. It is not proposed for use in fast-time or real-time exercises.

Major issues raised are:

Will early take-offs like this be commercially justified for some operators? or would the operator of Flight Z go out of business through large fuel costs?

If early take-offs are a logical action for some operators, will the resulting reduction in the predictability of the network be acceptable?

If it is not, what action will be taken to discourage it?





10.2.7.2 Scenario

10.2.7.2.1 UDPP Planning

This step is the same as the scenario leading to a delayed push and start (c.f. Delayed push & start), with entry times for the constrained volume V assigned to additional flights. Flight Z accepts an entry time of 10:50, with a 30 minute delay, from the UDPP process.

10.2.7.2.2 Early Departure

Flight Z chooses not to absorb the delay on the ground. It requests an on-time departure, which is expressly permitted by the following sentence of the SESAR ConOps: “Flights should be able to depart when they are ready to do so; subject only to any allocated target time at destination and constraints at departure airport, resulting in a target take-off time.”

The Operator of Z has a business model where avoiding delay has a higher priority than optimising fuel and operating predictably. The intention of its on-time departure is to seek an improved slot at constraint V. If this is not possible then its first fallback is obtaining a nearby route, and its second fallback is absorbing airborne delay until it can enter V at the planned time.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 88 of 144 - Public


10.2.7.2.3 Continuing the Trajectory

Possible outcomes are:

Flight Z is accommodated at Volume V without delay on a tactical basis, using the “complexity headroom” which was incorporated in network planning;

Flight Z obtains an Improvement Slot, when another flight fails to reach V at its correct time;

Flight Z cannot be accommodated early at V, and it continues on a longer route;

Flight Z cannot be accommodated early at V, and it absorbs delay by track lengthening and enters V at its assigned time.

10.2.8 Reallocation of a MVPA due to Weather Constraints


This operational scenario is an example of how a typical CDM process could be carried out. It describes how during the planning phase of the layered planning process, the Military relocate a Military Variable Profile Area (MVPA) due to weather constraints. The Sub-Regional Network Manager uses fast-time simulation to assess the impact on the affected traffic flows and the Shared Business Trajectories (SBT) of the concerned flights in the time horizon involved. At the same time the Regional Network Manager assesses the impact on network capacity.

Through the simulation, the Sub-Regional Network Manager identifies the affected flights. According to these, the Sub-Regional Network Manager points out convenient Demand and Capacity Balancing (DCB) solutions already defined in the catalogue of DCB solutions accessible through the Network Operations Plan (NOP).

Depending on the DCB solution to be applied and if no adverse demand/capacity imbalance is identified at the network level, then a Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) process is triggered with the impacted FABs/ACCs and with the owners of the SBTs (Airline Operations Centre) for agreement.

User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP) is triggered since MVPA relocation results in significant delay (to be defined, c.f. UDPP activation scenario).

The revised SBTs are made available to all concerned Actors through the NOP.


CDM is a concept that interfaces the need for active collaboration of all the ATM actors. The goal of CDM is to enable the concerned actors to improve mutual knowledge of the forecast/current situations, of each others constraints, preferences and capabilities, so as to pro-actively resolve any

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 89 of 144 - Public


areas of potential conflicts of interest, in which the actor best able to make the decision is the one who does so21.


The process of CDM is supported by a number of key components that are described as follows:

Problem: identification of the problem (including its definition or description) or issue provides the trigger for the CDM process;

Mediator or initiator: this may be one person or two different people and may not be the “owner”22 of the problem;

Participants: those actors that are empowered to make decisions and who are directly affected by the outcome of the process;

Enabler: all participants must have a common situational awareness of the problem or issue and this is made available through the Network Operations Plan;

Outcome: - there will always be an outcome (decision) to a CDM process.


The following assumptions are made:

Due to the nature of the military activity, the MVPA has priority over GAT operations.

The concerned Sub-Regional Network Manager mediates the CDM process.

NOP contains details of the MVPA.

The System is an automated system the technical functions of which are not addressed.


The Actors included in the scenario are:

The Regional Network Manager;

The Sub-Regional Network Manager of the concerned region (e.g. FAB);

The Sub-Regional Network Manager of adjacent region;

The Airline Operational Centres (AOCs) as owners of the concerned SBTs;

The Airport Operations Centre (APOC) of the impacted airport;

The ATS Supervisor of the concerned ACC.

The Traffic Complexity Manager of the concerned ACC (could also be represented by the Multi-Sector Planner);

The Airspace Manager representing the Airspace Management Cell (AMC);

Base Operations representing the Military.

21

This actor may be the owner of the problem, the initiator of the CDM process, the proposer of the solution to the problem etc. In any event this actor is mutually agreed during the CDM process.

22 The “owner” is defined as the actor with who identifies the problem and needs to seek a solution.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 90 of 144 - Public


10.2.8.2 Scenario

Base Operations uses the system to notify the Airspace Manager that due to weather constraints, a pre-notified MVPA has to be relocated to a new airspace allocation with details of the new allocation. The Airspace Manager updates the Updated Airspace Use Plan (UUP) with details of the new airspace allocation and uses the System to publish it through the NOP. The System notifies the concerned Sub-Regional Network Manager of the updated UUP. The concerned Sub-Regional Network Manager reacts to the new UUP by using the System to carry out an analysis/fast-time simulation and determines which traffic flows and associated SBTs are impacted for the planned period of activity of the MVPA.

Using pre-defined DCB solutions catalogue available through the NOP, the Sub-Regional Network Manager points out those solutions which if implemented will impose modifications of the impacted SBTs. In case no pre-defined solution is available, then the Sub-Regional Network Manager builds an ah-hoc flow management measure. Coincident with his/her actions, the Sub-Regional Network Manager uses the System to notify the Regional Network Manager of the proposed solution(s). The Regional Network Manager carries out his own fast-time simulation to determine globally any network effect. He publishes any impact on capacity through the NOP in order that the users maintain network situational awareness.

If there is no network effect (i.e. the impact is only at a regional level or does not have significant impact on the network), the Regional Network Manager notifies the Sub-Regional Network Manager via the System of the fact and proposes to him to start a CDM process with the owners of the impacted SBTs (the concerned AOCs) to determine and agree the most equitable and optimal solution to be implemented23.

The Sub-Regional Network Manager as the initiator of the CDM process uses the System to propose to the AOCs that he will act as mediator of the process in the first instance. The AOCs

agree to the proposal24

. The Sub-Regional Network Manager uses the System to confirm that the

AOCs have the current situational awareness picture concerning the new airspace allocation for the MVPA and presents the system developed solutions to them from the fast-time simulation. The AOCs analyse the proposed solutions and determine that acceptance, modification or rejection of the solutions warrant further discussion between the AOCs.

During the CDM process, the AOCs identify some SBTs whose modification will necessitate schedule delay (c.f. UDPP activation).

In order to prioritise the delays (e.g. hub and spoke schedules taking priority over city pairs), the

AOCs decide to initiate UDPP. The Regional Network Manager25

accepts this decision and agrees

23

If there is a network effect, the Regional Network Manager selects from the simulation the solution that has the least network impact or adapts a solution, and proposes this solution to the Sub-Regional Network Manager for discussion with the affected airspace users, still in a CDM process.

24 If the AOCs do not agree to the proposal, a counter proposal(s) would take place until such times a mediator has

been agreed.

25 This role may be undertaken by a proposed new Actor the “Network Arbitrator” (see task 2.4.2)

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 91 of 144 - Public


to act as a mediator of the process only in the event of UDPP not reaching a decision. The AOCs

use the System to carry out UDPP in concert with, inter alia, the APOC of the impacted airport(s).26

The AOCs reach agreement on the prioritisation of their respective SBTs and determine which and how the impacted SBTs will be revised. The AOCs use the System to publish the revised SBTs in the NOP.

On receipt of the revised SBTs, the Regional Network Manager in co-ordination with the Sub-Regional Network Managers of the concerned and adjacent regions and with the concerned ATS Supervisor and Traffic Complexity Manager, check SBT compliance with airspace usage rules, and network demand/capacity balance.

If no timely (to be defined, refer to UDPP activation) agreement is reached, then a standard slot allocation is performed.

Revised SBTs are published in the NOP.

10.2.9 Airspace User managing constraints through UDPP


Blue Jet‟s intended destination, their home base of Blue Port, is forecast to be operating at reduced capacity due to emergency runway works the following day. The Airport Manager calculates the reduced capacity available, and this is shared via SWIM to the Network Manager (Regional/sub-Regional) and the airspace users. The capacity reduction is planned to be 50% until 1200z. The Airport Manager issues all the airspace users with their pre arranged initial runway slot allocation. This is agreed by the airport and users in regular meeting sessions, but is based on a simple pro rata system, so in this case: each user receives 50% of the slots they had scheduled for the time period in question. The resulting schedule has TTAs attached to it.








26

This process is best described using a separate operational scenario.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 92 of 144 - Public


10.2.9.2 Scenario

Blue Jet‟s operations centre then looks at the consequences on their operation using advanced booking figures, considering particularly the number of interline passengers. Their options include cancelling and merging some of the higher frequency short haul flights, and operating some long haul flights to a second destination from where some interline passengers can be re-routed direct via code share partners to final destination, while point to point traffic may be given seats on a short haul connection. Some long haul flights can be rescheduled to arrive after the restriction ends. They decide on a new schedule and calculate the SBTs for the flights concerned, to meet the TTAs and publish them through SWIM. At the same time, Red Jet‟s operations centre is doing the same thing. They discover that there is a clash for a particular TTA, when both Blue and Red Jet have chosen the same TTA. One of them agrees to choose another TTA which is available. Red Jet discovers they have a particularly valuable flight that they are unable to accommodate efficiently into the revised schedule. The details of Blue (as well as Yellow, Green Pink etc) Jet‟s flights being available to all, Red Jet investigates whether mutually beneficial slot trades can be negotiated. As it happens, Pink Jet‟s only flight is delayed due to unserviceability. They agree to cede their slot to Red Jet in return for an agreed payment, though in different circumstances they might have chosen simply to swap their slot with one of Red Jets‟. Business aviation (BA) are included in the UDPP with their interests looked after either by the operator himself (in the case of, say, a corporate operator with a large fleet of aircraft, or a company that manages several aircraft for separate clients), or by a local fixed base operator that operates as handling agent for the owner/operator. In general, however, the busiest airports, where UDPP is most applicable, are avoided by BA, precisely because they are congested.

The Sub-Regional Network Manager looks at the network flows that result from the disruption at Blue Port and notes with satisfaction that because of the loss of traffic at a major node, the overall flow has reduced and there is more margin available throughout the system. They note the consequential slight increase in demand at some airports for long haul traffic operating short, which is balanced by the reactionary reduction in short haul flights from Blue Port. Network Management checks for unwanted side effects from the recovery phase after the restriction at Blue port finishes.

While the flow restriction at Blue Port persists, all the users‟ operations centres monitor the progress of their flights. When one of Blue Jet‟s flights with a TTA is delayed at departure, they immediately chose another flight to fill it by flying at a higher speed, and amend the SBT accordingly.

10.2.10 Non-scheduled, late request





The critical point for traffic is the core area transition. The System must identify a position and altitude in the traffic stream which the flight can occupy without penalising previously approved trajectories. It must identify an arrival slot, a departure slot that will match the arrival slot, a trajectory that will take the aircraft from DDDD to OYOY, an OBT that will match the taxi time with

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 93 of 144 - Public


the departure slot and it must do all of these working with certain times that are already hardwired i.e. the traffic to follow, at all stages, has already received their approved trajectories and in most cases are already in the air.





10.2.10.2 Scenario

Airline XY requires an a/c to be deadheaded from its maintenance headquarters at airport DDDD to an aerodrome, OYOY.

It is the day of operation and the planned departure time is as soon as possible.

The aircraft is required to replace a similar model aircraft that has gone out of service due to an unspecified mechanical flag that prohibits the aircraft from being operated as a revenue producing flight but will allow the aircraft to be flown by its crew back to the same maintenance base, DDDD, for servicing.

The most direct routing for the aircraft operates through the core area of Europe during peak traffic times.

Both OYOY and DDDD are constrained airports and both are operating at 80%+ capacity: in other words there is space for adding another flight but some adjustments to planned trajectories will be required.

10.2.11 Obtain new TTA










EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 94 of 144 - Public


10.2.11.2 Scenario

Departure airport has suffered a 50% loss in capacity due to a runway closure. Arrival airport is operating at capacity.

PINK Flight 1234 must obtain a revised TTA to fit around the available departure slot. Potential variations: UDPP time is fixed, no negotiation; TTA is fixed, no negotiation.

10.2.12 Departure queue management


Actions to refine the departure queue occur during the final phases of the refinement of the SBT and may also involve revisions of the RBT in the final few minutes before EOBT. The objective of departure queue management is to optimise the utilisation of airport resources and also to minimise the time spent with engines running on the ground (queuing at the holding point) and associated environmental impact. However, the process by which the RBT will be agreed may not only include the available resources at the departure airport, but also resources at destination. If the departure airport is within the scope of arrival management at destination, the SBT will be checked to ensure that it can be smoothly accommodated with no arrival delay. In the event that over demand is expected at the time a flight is expected to arrive, the arrival management function will publish a Target Time of Arrival in the NOP. This time is taken into account in the re-calculation of an SBT by the AOC respecting the TTA whilst still meeting as many business objectives as possible. Departure queue management also includes aspects of fine tuning for wake vortex purposes and includes post-departure events.





Departure time has already been negotiated and changed (c.f. Change of departure time).



10.2.12.2 Scenario

The turn-round process has sufficient flexibility to absorb this change and the EOBT is advanced accordingly.

The RBT is agreed as described below in the scenario (c.f. Publishing the RBT). BJ123 subsequently departs.

Once airborne, BJ123 publishes precise trajectory data in the NOP via the SWIM network and arrival management processes at the destination can then make precise calculations regarding

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 95 of 144 - Public


BJ123‟s position in the arrival queue. The result of these calculations is the publishing of a Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) for the ABC fix (5nm out on final approach of the landing runway). This CTA is published in the NOP along with the precision with which it is expected to be respected (+-5secs). The flight crew acknowledge this CTA which is then considered as a Required Time of Arrival (RTA) in the aircraft‟s avionics, resulting in slight amendments to many 4D points on the trajectory – these changes are then also published in the NOP via the SWIM network.

10.2.13 Publishing the RBT


When all trajectory negotiations have been completed and Blue Jet are satisfied that BJ123‟s SBT meets as many of their business objectives as possible the SBT can be instantiated as the RBT.








10.2.13.2 Scenario

The process by which the SBT has been progressively refined has been fully collaborative with all relevant actors involved throughout including Network Management. Therefore as soon as it is expected that the EOBT will be respected with a high degree of certainty due to significant milestones being achieved during the turn-round process (c.f. Preparing for Push Back) the transition from Shared Business Trajectory to Reference Business Trajectory can occur. At this point the SBT is loaded in the aircrafts avionics and is re-computed using final figures for fuel, passenger and freight load plus latest meteorological data. The trajectory output of the aircraft‟s avionics is published in the NOP via the SWIM network and becomes the Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) which the airline agrees to fly and the ATMSP agrees to facilitate. Following agreement of the RBT (probably around 15min prior to EOBT) any necessary revisions to the trajectory are facilitated by the revision process.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 96 of 144 - Public


10.2.14 Preparing for Push Back


Blue Jet 123 (BJ123) is departing from an airport that was one of the original Advanced CDM (A-CDM) airports. This means that they were one of the pioneers introducing Airport CDM. The Milestones Approach has been in use for several years, with the milestones refined in a common and constant effort of the airport partners to maximise efficiency.

The Milestones Approach involves the definition of a series of significant events on the trajectory of a given flight (including ground movement and turn-round), the completion of which enables the system to keep track of the evolution of the trajectory and also to calculate whether there is delay (or the flight is ahead of time). On completion of a given milestone calculations are made for the subsequent milestones and the ripple effect made visible. The information is published, enabling all partners (e.g. handling agents, airport gate management) to adjust their own planning accordingly.



The milestone events have been defined in cooperation with Blue Jet Airways and they disclose nothing that may be commercially sensitive while making the trajectory much more predictable, especially in regard of the ground movement and turn-round phase.

Having achieved a highly fine-tuned set of milestones and reliable availability of completion information, Blue Jet Airways has been able to change their contract with the handling agent, no longer requiring them to have a tug ready at the EOBT but instead to work to the expected push-back time calculated on the basis of the agreed milestones and their completion. Since it no longer happens that the handling agent has to idle under an aircraft that everybody knows will be delayed by 15-20 minutes, the handling agent was able to optimise their tug disposal and personnel and serve Blue Jet Airways with fewer tugs, reducing costs and ultimately the price Blue Jet Airways is paying for the service. In fact, competing handling companies at the airport were compelled to join the CDM arrangement as they wanted to be able to generate similar efficiencies and offer lower prices.

On the instigation of Blue Jet Airways, the de-icing company was also invited to join the CDM team with the result that they now have exact knowledge of the order of departing aircraft coming for remote de-icing, making deployment of their equipment much more efficient. Even more importantly, the de-icing company is using the “Adverse Condition Milestones” to publish information on the progress and completion of the de-icing operation of individual aircraft, making the expected take off time much more predictable even during winter conditions.

This type of operational efficiency was achieved by implementing information sharing at first locally in the pioneer phase and then joining the SESAR SWIM environment when it became available.



EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 97 of 144 - Public




10.2.14.2 Scenario

On this particular day, all the milestones for BJ123 were being completed on time and hence the SBT did not have to be modified. Had there been a problem, the agreed warning would have been issued to specified partners and the SBT would have been modified automatically, based on the calculations from the milestones. Thereafter the normal SBT change process would have been carried out.

10.2.15 Non compliance with TTA





The System must be able to assess all valid trajectories inbound to Airport C and identify a flight which can adjust to fill the space and then shuffle trajectories to enable Flight 4321 to meet its new time over (considering that the velocity is fixed for at least a portion of the flight).




To be completed in subsequent issues as required by validation exercise.

10.2.15.2 Scenario

Purple Airlines flight 4321 in departure from Airport A destination Airport C receives a geographically separated SID that will result in an increase of 2 minutes in flight time at planned cruising speeds. Flight 4321 has filed a 4D flight proposal for a constrained route at a specified ground speed (efficiency and traffic synchronisation). It is therefore not practical to make up for the lost time.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 98 of 144 - Public


10.2.16 Change of departure time





Interaction between the departure management tool and various trajectory plotting tools is an issue.

Suggested solution of an aircraft operating at reduced speed to meet a TTA will require either surrounding traffic to be re-routed, a change in altitude, or speed constraints on all surrounding traffic. This all needs to be achieved prior to departure as part of the Trajectory negotiation process.


Blue Jet has agreed to a TTA in the UDPP process (c.f. UDPP) for BJ123.


Collaborative Airport responsible, RWY, SURF implicated

10.2.16.2 Scenario

As the EOBT approaches, departure management has identified a potential revision to BJ123‟s position in the pre-departure sequence that will increase runway utilisation. The proposed change is to advance BJ123 EOBT by 3 minutes to position BJ123 ahead of a series of A380 aircraft. Blue Jet operations agree to this change which will result in a slightly reduced cruising speed so the previously agreed TTA can still be respected.

10.2.17 Weather forecast update





Alternate scenarios might see the originally requested altitude as being below the reported disturbance: no required briefing but must activate the alert when the altitude or routing field as appropriate is revised.


The system must provide PINK Flight Ops room with the weather information as it is received.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 99 of 144 - Public


The system must provide alternative trajectories (including altitudes) and of course the warning on the weather itself.



10.2.17.2 Scenario

The crew of PINK FLIGHT 9876 is receiving a pre-flight briefing.

Their requested altitude and routing will carry the flight through an area of potentially moderate turbulence. The potential revision is to descend to a more favourable altitude.

10.2.18 Taxi out to take off position


This scenario covers airport surface operations during taxi out from the gate to the runway and also during take-off. In this configuration the flight crew use ASAS/CDTI to enhance their traffic situation awareness on the airport surface (ATSA-SURF).

Prior to push back BJ123 has loaded the agreed Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) data into the aircrafts‟ onboard systems. Final trajectory calculations have been made and resulting data shared on the SWIM network. The RBT includes the surface route from stand to departure runway.

ATSA-SURF provides the flight crews (and vehicle drivers) with information on the surface traffic that supplements out-the-window observations and see-and-be-seen procedures. Its purpose is to reduce the potential for conflicts, errors and collisions (e.g. runway incursions) by providing enhanced situational awareness to flight crews operating aircraft on or near the airport surface.

Flight crews will use a cockpit display consisting of a moving map and traffic display (CDTI). Additionally, the display may be used to determine the position of ground vehicles, e.g. snow ploughs, emergency vehicles, tugs, follow-me vehicles and airport maintenance vehicles. All such vehicles authorised to have access to the “active” areas of the airport should be similarly equipped.

All aircraft with ATM-2 capability or better, and therefore capable of ASAS applications, can participate in the ATSA-SURF application. They would also be able to “see” ATM-1 capable aircraft but not ATM-0 aircraft (unless TIS-B is incorporated into the airport infrastructure). Aircraft equipped to ATM-4 will be able to provide their own separation from obstacles and other aircraft.

Aircraft equipped to ATM-4 capability or better will be able to provide their own separation from obstacles and other aircraft thanks to ASAS Separation capabilities.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 100 of 144 - Public




The minimum requirement is for all aircraft and authorised vehicles on the airport manoeuvring area to be equipped with ADS-B (in/out) and a suitable moving map display.

A fundamental requirement in the long term is that both controllers and flight crew share the same information, tailored for their purpose. It must include at least:

Controllers, flight crews and vehicle drivers all share the same picture and access to appropriate warnings;

Controllers can issue surface routing instructions via data-link;

Stop bars and active runways are shown on all displays;

Automatic warnings for all relevant hazards, including other aircraft and vehicles.

It may also be necessary to incorporate advanced automated systems such as „auto brake‟ to make it impossible for an aircraft or vehicle to cross a selected stop bar.


Main assumptions are as follows:

Although synthetic vision systems are being developed none are assumed to be available in this scenario;

Navigation accuracy and quality, suitable for the purpose, is used. This would include GNSS with augmentation; BJ123 is at least ATM-3 capable;

A-SMGCS provides surveillance information for controllers and pilots, plus moving map support for pilots.

Initial A-SMGCS implementation foresees the provision of runway incursion alerts to controllers. This SESAR scenario illustrates the importance of also providing this information directly to flight crew and other A-SMGCS enhancements for pilots including routing service, surface movement guidance, route deviation alerting and traffic information.



10.2.18.2 Scenario

BJ123 is authorised to push back and is then ready to taxi from the apron area. The ASAS operating mode switch is selected to „Safety Only‟ indicating that the ATSA-SURF is functioning. Data sharing via SWIM showed the controller automatically when BJ123 was ready for push back and now advises him that BJ123 is ready to taxi.

The controller assisted by A-SMGCS services:

Authorises BJ123 to taxi (by data-link) following the appropriate portion of surface routing which is displayed graphically (automatically interpreted from the authorisation to taxi data-link message) on the CDTI and on the controllers A-SMGCS display;

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 101 of 144 - Public


A-SMGCS activates automatically any required stop bars (which are also displayed on the CDTI);

If BJ123 is required to follow any other aircraft the controller will select these on his systems (this may be supported by sequence management automation), they will then be appropriately highlighted on the CDTI;

Taxi instructions will normally be passed by data-link backed up by voice for critical instructions such as crossing active runways and take-off clearance. Voice communication may also be used for tactical interventions if necessary.

BJ123 taxis out following the route as shown on the CDTI under ATC ground movement control but with the advantages of the ATSA-SURF application. A major advantage of the CDTI is that, in addition to visual out-the-window observation, traffic is also shown on the CDTI with associated warnings.

When BJ123 approaches a selected stop bar, this is shown on the CDTI, together with a warning, which is shown in sufficient time for the flight crew to stop before the nose passes over the lights. The stop bar can also be seen visually on the ground as is the case today. If the flight crew fail to stop the aircraft in time a warning is also generated automatically on the controller‟s display.

Active runways are indicated on the CDTI, using a symbol or suitable colour coding which is only removed when clearance is given to cross or enter the runway in subsequent surface routing instructions.

Throughout the taxi out, and before while still on the gate, MET information is available and is displayed as required to the flight crew. The flight crew of BJ123 are therefore able to confirm that conditions are still valid for take-off during taxi and immediately prior to take-off. BJ123 will also be sharing appropriate information regarding potential wake vortex generation via ADS-B including such data as exact aircraft type, weight, flap settings etc. By studying data provided by aircraft plus the characteristics of the air mass available through advanced MET reporting, accurate minimum wake vortex spacing will be calculated for each individual pair of departing aircraft. Wake vortex detection will be further assured through X-Band radar or other technologies on the ground or fitted aboard the aircraft.

When BJ123 approaches the departure runway the controller clears the aircraft to enter the runway by activating the appropriate data-link message, which is then displayed on the CDTI. As this is a safety critical message it will be backed up by voice and the physical acknowledgement of the data-link message will be monitored by ground automation. Similarly, the controller activates the appropriate data-link message to clear BJ123 for take-off together with voice confirmation, this is also displayed on the CDTI and requires physical flight crew acknowledgement.

When the controller clears BJ123 onto the runway, the flight crew:

Acknowledge the clearance via data-link;

Check that no aircraft is conflicting with this clearance, by using the CDTI and looking out of the window (this is in addition to automatic warnings that will be generated should conflicting traffic be detected);

Taxi onto the runway and hold, or take off, depending on the clearance given.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 102 of 144 - Public


Before take off the flight crew of BJ123 switch the ASAS operating mode switch to “Ready for Delegated Procedure or Ready to Self Separate” to indicate that they are ready to do so when authorised (c.f. Indicating ASAS).

10.2.19 Aircraft Tow & maintenance to stand


The maintenance hangar for Green Airways is located midway between the Terminal and the threshold of the departure runway.

There is only a single taxi route.

Green Airways requires a Wide-body aircraft to be moved to the Terminal to replace an aircraft that has an undefined mechanical fault.

Airport is not at capacity but there are departures that have constraints at destination (i.e. TTA that must be met).

Additional information and assumptions


The system must integrate the aircraft under tow opposite direction to the outbound stream.

The system must take into account aircraft TTA, requirements for Green Airways to maintain a schedule, schedule tow of out-of-service aircraft to hangar, determine a stand where the out-of-service aircraft can be left in the meantime, provide route and time to the tow operator.





10.2.19.2 Scenario


10.2.20 Departure from non-standard runway


Airport ABAB normally uses dedicated runways for arrival and departure to satisfy environmental issues and alternates according to a time schedule. Flight 5678 has requested and received permission to depart on the current arrival runway, which is longer, in order to operate on a balanced field length due to the aircraft weight.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 103 of 144 - Public




The system must allocate the required time interval within the arrival sequence to accommodate the departing flight and provide the appropriate departure sequence to eliminate departure delays due to the non-nominal departure.

Departure sequence must align with arrival sequence and must account for all departures TTA or CTA.





10.2.20.2 Scenario


10.2.21 Loss of departure slot


Due to a lower than expected braking quotient, an arriving aircraft to a mixed mode runway misses its assigned taxi exit, thus causing a loss of a departure slot.



Aircraft with agreed 4D trajectories are all subject to re-negotiation.

The system must be able to adjust for the drop in braking action and space arrival traffic out further.

At least three more aircraft may be already established on approach – leading to the possibility of further missed slots until greater spacing is available.

What is the effect on calculating TTA for those flights with destination aerodrome within the AMAN horizon?





EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 104 of 144 - Public


10.2.21.2 Scenario


10.2.22 Allocation of the Departure Route


BJ123 departs from its base in a Terminal Area which is common to a number of other aerodromes. There is considerable interaction between the „natural‟ (unconstrained) departure and arrival profiles of those airports.

BJ123 is departing during one of the peak hours when traffic complexity is at its highest.

The aircraft conducting flight BJ123 is capable of 2D RNP (e.g. 2D RNP 1.0 means a lateral navigation accuracy of +/-1NM 95% of the time and a lateral containment of +/-2NM more than 99,99% of the time) and VNAV (e.g. a barometric vertical navigation accuracy of between 250ft down to 150ft depending on the altitude, with no vertical containment required). This aircraft is considered to be at ATM-1 capability.

The operation is conducted with the use of a ground based separation service.

This scenario only covers the nominal case and does not attempt to address non-nominal events such as failure modes, exceptional weather conditions, etc.


It must be noted that the term “profile” is used in this scenario to mean a 2-dimensional route with an associated vertical (climb or descent) path. This can be thought of as a tube in space although the vertical dimensions may increase at higher altitudes to resemble a cone or funnel shape27. The difference between a profile and a conventional SID (which also has vertical constraints) is that the vertical dimension is much more rigorously constrained in a profile. In a SID the vertical constraints are applied at one or more positions along the route; in a profile the vertical dimension is constrained at every point along the route. The benefit is that the profile occupies far less airspace than a SID and therefore the capacity of the airspace is significantly increased.


In the case of a 2D-RNP/VNAV flight the lateral dimension is constrained by the allocated route. The vertical dimension is controlled by the level constraints associated with the SID (cross position X at/ or below/ or above altitude) and by amendments to that vertical clearance that are issued by the Terminal Area/DEPS controller.

27

As there is no circular symmetry around the axis of the cone or funnel because the horizontal and vertical dimensions are treated in a different way and are measured in different units (nautical miles on the horizontal plane and feet/hundreds of feet in the vertical plane) a more accurate description of the actual shape would be a pyramidal frustum or a truncated pyramid to take into account that “the vertical dimension may increase at higher altitudes”.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 105 of 144 - Public


The longitudinal (time) dimension is relatively unconstrained other than by speed control.


It may be beneficial to alter the route structure depending on the direction of the runway in use at the major airfield in the TMA or based on each possible combination of runways in use, however such a choice will have significant capacity implications when the runway in use changes.

There is a need to establish lateral separation minima between parallel 2D routes that allow them to be operated without tactical constraints (tactically applied radar headings) being required to assure separation. It is assumed that route compliance will be monitored automatically by the ground system and by the avionics as part of the RNP capability. It is assumed that the lateral displacement between parallel 2D routes being flown by RNP 1.0 flights should be in the order of 11 NM.

There is a need to establish lateral and vertical separation minima to be used between non-parallel and crossing profiles (3D routes) that allow them to be operated without tactical constraints (tactically applied level clearances) being required to assure separation. It is assumed that profile compliance will be monitored automatically by the ground system and by the avionics as part of the VRNP (vertical path to be flown all along with a required containment) capability.

It is assumed that it is not possible to construct a route structure in this complex TMA that allows all routes and profiles to be separated from each other; therefore many of the routes/profiles will interact. Currently, this interaction is managed by the executive controllers applying tactical intervention measures to maintain separation. The purpose of the 2D route structure is to reduce as far as possible the need for tactical intervention. This implies that the primary departure profiles (i.e. those servicing the major flows from the busiest airfields) are separated from all other profiles, but some of the secondary profiles will interact with each other. These interactions are then managed by the MTCD-based route/ profile allocation tool that will apply longitudinal/time separation to flights using these routes.

Cockpit procedures and onboard systems input capability have been refined to allow route changes to be safely implemented during the critical phase of flight immediately after take-off. This is analogous to the current practice of tactically issuing headings and vertical clearances to flights once the noise preferential part of the departure route has been completed.

There are three SID routes that are appropriate to the destination of BJ123. These can be thought of as a core route (SID XYZ) with two alternative routes that run parallel to the core route at 11NM displacement to the left and right of the core. These might be allocated identifiers of SID XYZ Left and SID XYZ Right.


An actor in the context of this scenario is defined as anything with behaviour. It can be a human, an organisation or an automated system.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 106 of 144 - Public


The ground actors in this scenario are:

The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller

The TMA/DEPS controller

In this scenario it is not useful to differentiate between the roles/ responsibilities of the TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller (or Apron controller) as the responsibilities of these roles varies from location to location. The essential point is that the flights are controlled from start-up to take-off by ground controllers supported by the ground system.

The airborne actors in this scenario are:

Flight Crew;

2D-RNP/VNAV (ATM-1) flight.

The flight has a pilot in command and a navigation system (FMS) and the ability to communicate with the ground controllers via R/T and AGDL and to communicate with the ground system via AGDL.

10.2.22.2 Scenario

The ground system automatically issues BJ123 with the appropriate 2D SID departure clearance (SID XYZ) at start-up/ taxi.

The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller issues taxi clearance to BJ123.

The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller issues take-off clearance to BJ123.

Once the take-off run is detected by surveillance, or „airborne‟ status is published, the ground system updates the ground trajectory and computes which of the predefined departure routes is conflict-free, or minimises the number of conflicts and provides for efficient positioning and transfer to en-route.

The ground system informs the Terminal Area/DEPS controller of the best route for BJ123.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller uses the ground system (MTCD „What-if?‟) capability to assess the ground system advice.

The MTCD indicates a single predicted interaction if BJ123 is allocated SID XYZ Left.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller decides to re-route BJ123 to SID XYZ Left.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller instructs (via R/T or AGDL) BJ123 to route via SID XYZ left and clears the flight to an interim level below the conflicting/ interacting flight.

The flight crew of BJ123 selects the allocated (predefined) route from the onboard systems database.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 107 of 144 - Public


The ground system monitors the progress of the flight to ensure it remains within the predetermined limits of the route (in this case +/- 1.0 NM).

The aircraft system also monitors conformance to the allocated route.

Ground system monitors the progress of BJ123 and all the other flights to identify any potential interactions.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller assesses the interaction on BJ123 route with the aid of the ground system.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller decides that if BJ123 expedites its climb it will pass above the conflicting aircraft.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller issues the clearance to BJ123 by R/T (tactical clearance requiring an immediate response) and inputs the clearance to the ground system.

The ground system confirms that separation should be achieved by this clearance.

BJ123 accepts the clearance.

Once clear of the traffic and approaching the designated handover point the Terminal Area/DEPS controller instructs BJ123 (via R/T or AGDL) to contact the next (en-route) sector controller28.

10.2.23 Allocation of the Departure Profile


BJ123 departs from its base in a Terminal Area which is common to a number of other aerodromes. There is considerable interaction between the „natural‟ (unconstrained) departure and arrival profiles of those airports.

BJ123 is departing during one of the peak hours when traffic complexity is at its highest.

The aircraft is capable of 2D RNP (e.g. 2D RNP 0.3) and VRNP (e.g. a vertical navigation accuracy of between 200ft down to 50ft depending on the altitude, with a vertical containment29 required all along the 3D profile). In this case the aircraft is considered to be at ATM-3 capability.

The operation is conducted with the use of a ground based separation service.

28

In the SESAR end-state when the new air/ground communications system is in place, transfer of communications, as alluded to here and practiced to-day, will very probably be replaced by addressed communications where traditional re-tuning of radios will no longer be necessary. In any case, data link will be the primary means.

29 Vertical containment implies vertical performance requirements which have to be defined and agreed, it does not

correspond to EASA definition for aircraft certification; note that putting all safety requirements on the aircraft including abnormal situations should be avoided.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 108 of 144 - Public


This scenario only covers the nominal case and does not attempt to address non-nominal events such as failure modes, exceptional weather conditions, etc.


It must be noted that the term “profile” is used in this scenario to mean a 2-dimensional route with an associated vertical (climb or descent) path. This can be thought of as a tube in space although the vertical dimensions may increase at higher altitudes to resemble a cone or funnel shape30. The difference between a profile and a conventional SID (which also has vertical constraints) is that the vertical dimension is much more rigorously constrained in a profile. In a SID the vertical constraints are applied at one or more positions along the route; in a profile the vertical dimension is constrained at every point along the route. The benefit is that the profile occupies far less airspace than a SID and therefore the capacity of the airspace is significantly increased.


In the case of a 2D RNP/VRNP flight the lateral and vertical dimensions are constrained by the allocated profile. The dimension that remains relatively unconstrained is the longitudinal (time) dimension. Assuming a departure speed of 240Kts every minute (+/- 30 sec) of uncertainty in the predicted take-off time represents 4NM of longitudinal uncertainty along the departure route/profile.

The capacity that can be obtained from the route structure is directly related to the uncertainty of prediction of each flight‟s future position. Greater uncertainty means more potential interactions are detected by the ground system; therefore more workload for the controller to monitor and resolve those interactions therefore less capacity is available.


It is assumed that it is not possible to construct a route structure in this complex TMA that allows all routes and profiles to be separated from each other; therefore many of the routes/profiles will interact. Currently, this interaction is managed by the executive controllers applying tactical intervention measures to maintain separation. The purpose the 3D profile structure is to reduce as far as possible the need for tactical intervention. This implies that the primary departure profiles (i.e. those servicing the major flows from the busiest airfields) are separated from all other profiles, but some of the secondary profiles will interact with each other. These interactions are then managed by the MTCD-based route/ profile allocation tool that will apply longitudinal/time separation to flights using these routes.

What is needed (research issue) is to find the best balance between flight deck operating procedures requiring an early decision on the departure profile, and reducing trajectory uncertainty requiring a late decision on departure profile. The extremes are, on one hand, determining the departure profile before push-back (implying considerable uncertainty on take-off time and therefore reduced departure route capacity) or, on the other hand, not confirming the departure profile until

30

As there is no circular symmetry around the axis of the cone or funnel because the horizontal and vertical dimensions are treated in a different way and are measured in different units (nautical miles on the horizontal plane and feet/hundreds of feet in the vertical plane) a more accurate description of the actual shape would be a pyramidal frustum or a truncated pyramid to take into account that “the vertical dimension may increase at higher altitudes”.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 109 of 144 - Public


after the flight is airborne (implying almost no longitudinal uncertainty and therefore maximising departure route capacity).

In this scenario, the latter case will be assumed, as it is the most demanding and challenging alternative. This implies that cockpit procedures and onboard systems input capability have been refined to allow profile changes to be safely implemented during the critical phase of flight immediately after take-off.


An actor in the context of this scenario is defined as anything with behaviour. It can be a human, an organisation or an automated system.

The ground actors in this scenario are:

The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller

The TMA/DEPS controller

In this scenario it is not useful to differentiate between the roles/ responsibilities of the TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller (or Apron controller) as the responsibilities of these roles varies from location to location. The essential point is that the flights are controlled from start-up to take-off by ground controllers supported by the ground system.

The airborne actors are:

Flight Crew;

2D-RNP/VRNP (ATM-3) flight31.

The flight has a pilot in command and a navigation system (FMS) and the ability to communicate with the ground controllers via R/T and AGDL and to communicate with the ground system via AGDL.

10.2.23.2 Scenario

The ground system automatically issues BJ123 with an appropriate 2D SID departure clearance (SID XYZ) at start-up/taxi, to be used if the automated departure clearance service becomes unavailable.

The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller issues taxi clearance to BJ123.

BJ123 publishes to the ground system its preferred departure profile (a route with an associated vertical path) from a set of pre-defined alternatives as it taxis out for departure (when all the flight‟s departure parameters are known except the precise departure time).

31 Flight 2 is capable of 4D trajectory management; this means that it is able to exchange trajectory data between

avionics, AOC and ANSP. This will ensure that all participants in the ATM process share a common view of the flight intent and have access to the most accurate data on which to base their decisions.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 110 of 144 - Public


The TWR/ GMC/ RWY controller issues take-off clearance to BJ123.

Just after take off, BJ123 publishes its latest PT calculations to update the ground-computed trajectory. This trajectory will be based on the current clearance via SID XYZ.

The ground system computes which of the predefined departure profiles is conflict-free, provides for efficient positioning and transfer to en-route and is nearest to that requested by the flight.

The ground system publishes the resultant profile to BJ123 well before the noise preferential part of the SID has been completed.

The flight crew of BJ123 selects the allocated (predefined) profile from the onboard systems route database.

BJ123 publishes its revised PT calculations to update the ground-computed trajectory. This trajectory will be based on the new clearance.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller knows of the profile allocated to BJ123 through the shared trajectory.

The ground system monitors the progress of the flight to ensure it remains within the predetermined limits of the profile clearance (2D RNP and VRNP limits in this case 0.3NM lateral and +/- 200ft vertical)

The aircraft system also monitors conformance and adjusts the performance of BJ123 to remain within the 2D RNP and VRNP limits.

Periodically (in accordance with TMR‟s) BJ123 publishes its latest PT calculations (if it has deviated from its RBT). This data is used to update the shared trajectory.

The ground system monitors the progress of BJ12332 and all the other flights to ensure that no separation infringements occur.

The Terminal Area/DEPS controller does not need to communicate with BJ123 as the flight remains within conformance limits.

As BJ123 approaches the designated handover point to en-route control the Terminal Area/DEPS controller issues an instruction to BJ123 via AGDL to contact the next sector controller or controller initiated system change over occurs, depending on the communications system in use.

32

The ground system will assume that the trajectory of BJ123 will conform to the clearance unless a deviation is detected. If a deviation is detected the ground system will create a deviation trajectory based on a set of assumptions about how a flight will behave in these circumstances conditioned by the down-linked predicted trajectory from BJ123 and any additional clearance that may be issued by the controller. In the event of a deviation (non-conformance) the ground system will alert the controller and will indicate any interactions that result from the computed deviation trajectory.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 111 of 144 - Public


10.2.24 TMA support tools





In this context „Terminal area tools‟ means those tools designed to operate in airspace with a high traffic density and a high proportion of climbing and descending traffic, they may not be needed in lower density TMAs or at times when traffic is less complex, however their use may extend beyond the limits of the current busy TMA areas into areas currently considered as En-route. In this airspace, at the busiest times, the need to optimise capacity outweighs the need to optimise individual trajectories and this additional capacity will be realised by utilising highly structured arrival, departure and over-flying routes. These routes will capitalise on the increasing navigation capability of aircraft (RNP, VNAV, Single and multiple RTA capability). As the structured route system becomes more complex, route allocation support tools will be developed to enable the optimum available route to be allocated to each flight. The optimum route will be that which most closely matches the RBT but also minimises/ avoids all conflicts with other flights. This route allocation tool will be based on a modified MTCD where the output is not predicted interactions, but an optimal conflict-free route for each flight, with associated time constraints if necessary.

In addition to route allocation assistance, this airspace will be served by MTCD, conformance monitoring and resolution assistance as described in the previous section.





10.2.24.2 Scenario


10.2.25 Conventional Control Tools





Conventional control, with executive controllers monitoring the traffic and ensuring separation is maintained by issuing clearances and instructions to pilots will continue for many years to come.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 112 of 144 - Public


The transition to advanced separation techniques is dependent on the ability to continue conventional control in airspace that also includes self-separating flights and flights using 3D clearances. The controller tasks in conventional control are:

situation monitoring;

task identification;

planning;

execution/ communication.

Situation monitoring will be automated by the progressive introduction of conformance monitoring tools that compare the aircraft‟s observed behaviour (from surveillance) with the flight‟s current clearance and alert the controller of any deviation. As more data becomes available from the flight deck in the form of DAPs or shared trajectories, these monitoring tools will also be able to compare the flight‟s intent with the current clearance and alert the controller of predicted deviations.

An actual or predicted deviation from clearance is a task for the controller to bring the ground and airborne trajectory back into synchronisation, but the principal task identification tool is Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD) with a detection range covering 0-20 minutes. MTCD continuously compares the trajectories of all flights in the airspace and alerts the controller if any pair of flights appears to interact by less than the defined minima; these minima usually being set higher that the separation minima so that interactions that require close monitoring are also displayed in addition to those that require intervention. The combination of MTCD checking that all clearances are safely separated, and conformance monitoring ensuring that all flights are following their clearances will bring a very significant safety benefit.

Planning is about deciding what to do when a task has been identified. The required action may be a revised clearance for an aircraft under control, a co-ordination with another controller to ensure that separation is maintained or even the decision to continue to monitor the situation. This type of planning will be supported by conflict resolution assistance tools, which will evolve through „passive‟ assistance to an „active‟ mode of operation. Passive assistance provides the controller with context information and allows the controller to test potential resolution strategies via a „what-if‟ capability. Active assistance tools will offer alternative solutions to the conflict (e.g. the optimal manoeuvre(s) for one or both aircraft involving lateral or vertical changes) and will provide a measure of effectiveness of each option in terms of cost to the flights, constraints affected, controller workload implied and other factors. Active assistance tools will also look beyond the initial conflict to determine if other interactions are resolved or created by the proposed manoeuvre(s). It should be noted that active assistance tools will primarily be applied to flights with limited or no trajectory sharing capability. The rule will be to use constraint-based control whenever possible (where the airspace user determines what the most efficient way is for meeting the given constraint).


The execution task will require some form of communication with one or more pilots or other controllers.

Air/ground data link that has the capability to communicate complex clearances in the form of complete trajectory proposals or transmit multiple constraints for on-board incorporation into the RBT, will significantly reduce the communication workload per flight.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 113 of 144 - Public


Similarly controller/ controller co-ordination will be facilitated by the exchange of trajectory proposals and constraints.



10.2.25.2 Scenario


10.2.26 Executing Delegated Separation


This scenario covers two ASAS Separation (ASEP) manoeuvres:

Lateral Overtaking in en-route airspace;

Vertical Crossing in en-route airspace.

The technique is basically the same for crossing above, below or behind other traffic. In each case the Blue Jet aircraft (BJ123) is flying in En-route Managed Airspace, it is ATM-4 Capability Level equipped.

The purpose of using ASEP techniques in en-route airspace is to enable a trajectory to be flown that is as close as possible to the optimum whilst also relieving the controller of separation provision and monitoring workload.

The controller delegates responsibility to the flight crew for a specific situation using an ASEP instruction. The controller remains responsible for providing applicable separation minima between all other aircraft and between all other aircraft and the aircraft involved in the ASAS Separation manoeuvre.

The flight crew performs the ASEP manoeuvre applying appropriate airborne separation minima33 and wake vortex avoidance minima34 supported by onboard automation. The manoeuvre is complete and ASEP ends when the controller is able to re-assume separation responsibility under standard ground based separation minima.

33

Where flight crew have responsibility for separation, airborne separation minima will be provided and must be adhered to. This is as opposed to radar separation minimum which apply when ATC have separation responsibility. (Note that ASPA applications do not require the establishment of airborne separation minima as ATC remain responsible for separation at all times and the spacing exceeds the controller‟s separation minimum) Airborne separation minima values are yet to be established, but will depend on a number of factors (e.g. airspace characteristics, communication, navigation and surveillance technologies). The SESAR ConOps highlights the need for development, evaluation and agreement on separation minima for each separation method included in the concept. This will include research on airborne separation minima.

34 SESAR anticipates that by 2020 aircraft will share information relative to wake vortex on the network and which

will be taken into account in separation provision.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 114 of 144 - Public




Depending on the configuration of the aircraft involved, the ASEP manoeuvre may be a simple longitudinal in-trail resolution; a lateral crossing or passing manoeuvre at the same flight level or a more complex 4D manoeuvre involving climbing and/or descending traffic.

A most important aspect is that the conflicting traffic be considered as a constraint by the airborne automation which then calculates the most safe and efficient airborne solution.


It is assumed that sophisticated ground automation will detect conflicts and also assess which situations are appropriate for an ASEP solution. Airborne automation will calculate an optimum trajectory resolving the conflict which will be finally validated by ground automation before the flight crew are authorised to execute the manoeuvre.

The controller is not expected to provide any advice or assistance to flight crew during the execution of an ASEP instruction. In the event of the flight crew having to abandon the ASEP manoeuvre for any reason this will be considered as an emergency situation which will be mitigated by the flight crew following pre-defined procedures.



10.2.26.2 Scenario

10.2.26.2.1 Lateral overtaking

The Blue Jet aircraft BJ123 is rapidly catching up a slow Very Light Jet (VLJ7) cruising at FL310. BJ123 is a heavy long haul aircraft also cruising at FL310 and unable to climb higher due to its current weight.

The automated ground based MTCD/R tool detects an impending conflict and identifies that this situation may be efficiently solved by an ASEP manoeuvre. The controller decides to delegate separation responsibility to the flight crew of BJ123 and in a data-link instruction requests them:

To accept delegated separation responsibility;

To identify the target aircraft (VLJ7);

To use their airborne ASEP functionality to calculate an optimum manoeuvre to overtake VLJ7.

An important factor may be wake vortices. Airborne automation interprets data broadcast by the target aircraft (exact type, weight etc.) and, by taking into account its own aircraft parameters ensures that the vortices generated by both aircraft will not affect the safe execution of the overtaking manoeuvre. Wake vortex calculations will be used to ensure appropriate separation but wake vortex avoidance will be further assured through X-Band radar wake vortex detection systems fitted onboard.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 115 of 144 - Public


Target VLJ7

Delegated BJ123

Initial Situation Target VLJ7

Delegated BJ123

Initial Situation

Figure 24: Lateral overtaking (initial situation)

The flight crew of BJ123:

Check the data-link message received and confirm the identification of the target aircraft; VLJ7;

Activate the “resolution” functionality of their ASAS equipment which proposes an offset to the left which will ensure that airborne separation minima are adhered to and that neither aircraft will be affected by wake vortices;

Advises the controller of the intended ASEP manoeuvre by sharing a revised trajectory through the SWIM network and that they are ready to accept delegated separation responsibility.

Ground based automation checks the revised trajectory to confirm that no conflicts with third party aircraft will be generated.

The controller delegates separation responsibility between the two aircraft until the manoeuvre is complete. Both aircraft can now be considered as “one aircraft” by ATC. This is expected to result in reduced task load.

As currently written, this case does not detail whether the target aircraft (VLJ7) need to:

Be informed of the ASEP manoeuvre affecting his aircraft?

Informing VLJ7 would appear to be the proper practice and this should be easy under the future system. The controller would be fully aware of the capability of VLJ7 and would therefore be able to decide whether he/she needs to send a voice message or whether VLJ7 would be informed by an automatic text message and/or a graphic depiction of their becoming a “target”.

Agree to the ASEP manoeuvre affecting his aircraft?

ICAO PANS-ATM currently prescribes that when an aircraft requests to proceed with own separation while remaining in Visual Meteorological Conditions, this may be authorised if the procedure is allowed by the appropriate ATS authority and the other aircraft agrees (so, clearly, to-day there is a need to inform and get agreement). However, this is the only instance where a “target” aircraft has to agree to the kind of separation solution the controller decides to apply.

Consider to-day‟s situation where there are two aircraft flying under procedural control, with 10 minutes longitudinal separation. When they enter an area of radar control, the controller reduces the separation to 5 miles (e.g. vectoring one around the other). The aircraft are not specifically informed, except by being told that they are identified, but no specific agreement is needed before radar separation commences. In the future, if an aircraft and crew is

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 116 of 144 - Public


certified to carry out an ASAS manoeuvre, and it is the controller who has decided to delegate separation, this will be no different from any other separation solution. Since none of the other separation solutions decided on by the controller requires agreement from the target aircraft, it is probably true that no such agreement would be needed for an ASAS solution either.

Restrict his behaviour in any way whilst the manoeuvre is being performed?

Such a manoeuvre is no different in this respect from an aircraft being led around another using radar vectors (except that the distances may be smaller). One would assume that the ground system would only propose ASAS as a solution when the target aircraft capability is known as accurate enough. They would just fly as planned and any divergence would need to be approved by the ground (how to proceed in case of an emergency would need to be looked into).

VLJ7 BJ123ASEP Solution

offset

Aircraft pair now considered

as “one aircraft” by ATC

VLJ7 BJ123ASEP Solution

offset

Aircraft pair now considered

as “one aircraft” by ATC

Figure 25: Lateral overtaking (ASEP solution)

The ASEP manoeuvre ends when the controller is able to re-assume separation responsibility under standard ground based separation minima. The MTCD/R tool will automatically advise the controller when ground based separation minima have been re-established.

At the end of the manoeuvre the controller instructs the flight crew of BJ123 that the manoeuvre is complete and that delegation of responsibility has ceased. The conflict has been resolved in the most efficient way possible.

10.2.26.2.2 Vertical crossing

BJ123 is blocked from climbing to its optimum altitude by two aircraft crossing ahead. The controller is alerted by the automated ground based MTCD/R which proposes that an ASEP solution may be appropriate. The controller decides to delegate separation responsibility to the flight crew of BJ123 and in a data-link instruction requests them:

To accept delegated separation responsibility;

To identify the two target aircraft;

To use their airborne ASEP functionality to calculate an optimum manoeuvre avoiding the two target aircraft and continuing climb in line with the RBT.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 117 of 144 - Public


BJ123

FL250^310

Initial Situation

Target 2 FL340

Target 1 FL320

Figure 26: Vertical crossing (initial situation)

On board BJ123:

The flight crew use their airborne ASEP functionality to identify the two target aircraft and to confirm that an ASEP climb manoeuvre can be achieved;

The onboard automation calculates that the optimum solution is a 15kt reduction in airspeed which results in an increased rate of climb to give the prescribed vertical separation, thereby resolving the conflict in the most efficient manner possible without needing to turn to the right;

The flight crew inform the controller via data-link that they have identified the target aircraft and are able to climb maintaining the prescribed vertical separation;

This new trajectory is shared on the network.

The controller and his support tools:

Automated ground-based MTCD/R validates the proposed solution and only alerts the controller if it affects any third party traffic;

Authorises BJ123 to climb to FL390 following the shared trajectory (which is now the revised RBT);

Delegates separation responsibility to the flight crew of BJ123 until the manoeuvre is complete.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 118 of 144 - Public


Target 1 FL320

BJ123 FL350^390

End of ASEP

Target 2 FL340

Target 1 FL320

BJ123 FL350^390

End of ASEP

Target 2 FL340

Figure 27: Vertical crossing (end of ASEP)

When BJ123 passes FL350 vertical separation minima is re-established. The controller is automatically advised of this by the ground based MTCD/R tool and re-assumes separation responsibility. He confirms this with the flight crew of BJ123 via data-link. Alternatively, the flight crew tells the controller that they are “clear of traffic” and request to resume normal operations. The controller can reply “negative” if ground based separation is not yet established and the controller is not content to take responsibility back.

Note that as the delegated aircraft climbed through FL320 and FL340, when the vertical separation was less than 1000ft, lateral airborne separation minima was applied between it and Target 1 and Target 2, respectively. Standard 1000ft vertical minima was achieved prior to lateral (airborne) separation being lost by reducing airspeed to increase the rate of climb. The conflict has been resolved in the most efficient way possible.

10.2.27 Negotiating an ATC revision to the RBT (not for separation purposes)










EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 119 of 144 - Public


10.2.27.2 Scenario

BJ123 is progressing towards destination and has been issued with a CTA of 11:20:20 at fix ABC to be respected +/-5secs.

At the arrival airport the wind is changing and a runway change is imminent. Precise meteorological forecasting combined with pre-defined operational processes assist in deciding on an optimum time for this change to occur.

There will be a break of 5 minutes between the last landing on runway 26 and the first landing on 08; this requires that the inbound flow of traffic will have to be re-organised. BJ123 is asked to provide a revised user preferred route to runway 08.

The flight crew requests the avionics to provide an optimum route with no constraints. The new route is computed direct to the fix XYZ located at 4nm final runway 08 with a curved RNP path segment facilitating the turn onto final approach.

The avionics also calculate the optimum top of descent for an idle power continuous descent. The resulting trajectory includes a calculated estimate for XYZ of 11:23:45.

This new trajectory is published in the NOP as a “proposed trajectory”. The ground ATM system alerts all necessary actors and the arrival management processes re-assess the new arrival sequence.

It is decided that the optimum route and CDA can be accommodated as long as BJ123 increases speed slightly to arrive at XYZ at 11:22.20.

This new constraint in published using NOPLA tools and BJ123 then subsequently publishes another revised trajectory respecting the new constraint.

This new trajectory is agreed by all actors and becomes the revised RBT which is subsequently authorised.

10.2.28 Responding to a new airspace exclusion


Although airspace reservations are normally published in plenty of time to enable airspace users to take them into account in the planning of their trajectories, a new method, making maximum use of the possibilities of ASAS capable aircraft is available for BJ123.

When Blue Jet airways originally published their SBT, it was already known that at various points, it passed through areas where military air activity was being planned. The military planners have also seen this (and all other SBTs) and had in fact scheduled the military activities to have the lowest possible impact on the trajectories.

Obviously, eliminating all impact is impossible. However, they did see that BJ123 was ASAS capable and that this flight was actually requesting self-separation in mixed mode for part of the

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 120 of 144 - Public


trajectory. It was decided by the military planners that BJ123 would be allowed to keep its trajectory on the understanding that it would use its ASAS capability when it reached the area affected35.








10.2.28.2 Scenario

When the actual activation of the area affecting BJ123‟s trajectory is published, BJ132 as a subscriber of all information affecting its trajectory, is specifically informed of the event. The onboard system publishes an acknowledgement, thereby indicating to the controllers (both military and civil) that the flight whose trajectory is relevant to their operations will undertake the necessary actions to avoid the area36.

Should the acknowledgment not be forthcoming, BJ123 is contacted directly by the EC if they are under conventional control, to clarify the situation. If BJ123 is self separating, the lack of acknowledgment is considered to be a case of communications failure.

If the military area is on a that part of the trajectory where BJ123 is still under conventional control, the flight crew uses the onboard system to generate a minimum distortion trajectory that avoids the area and requests delegation of the role of separator in respect of the military area.

The EC checks whether the proposed trajectory is acceptable in terms of other relevant traffic and authorises the role delegation, eventually with some constraints on the new trajectory.

The flight crew implements the action, flying around the military area with a minimum change to the original trajectory. Thereafter they return to conventional control.

If the military area is on that part of the trajectory where BJ123 is already in self separation mode, they implement the action, taking also other traffic into account, separating themselves as appropriate.

35

This procedure is based on the extremely high reliability of the multiple communications channels BJ123 has. Should nevertheless a total communications failure occur, the procedures applicable for such situations (TBD) would be activated and would also determine what the military flights would be allowed to do while BJ123 passed clear of the activity area.

36 Since the environment is based on shared trajectories, this information exchange is managed under SWIM and

may involve controllers located in different air traffic services units.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 121 of 144 - Public


10.2.29 Weather Change Delayed


The MET Data Manager has forecasted an improvement to weather conditions (currently CAT II) at a capacity constrained aerodrome and, based upon the forecast, ATFCM has planned for an increase in capacity.



Traffic is airborne.





10.2.29.2 Scenario


10.2.30 Military provide corridor though airspace reservation


The ASM unit has determined that a temporary corridor can be safely created through a military airspace reservation.

The airspace availability is broadcast via the NOPLA.



Aircraft must individually check and see if they can update their RBT to take advantage of the airspace.

Both the aircraft and the Service Provider must update their database so as to permit operations through the previously restricted area without initiating an airspace alert warning.

Aircraft Operators must be able to ascertain whether they can take advantage of the time/distance savings (re-negotiate CTA) in collaboration with both the flight crew and the current ATCO.

ATFCM must be able to determine the effect that the change in airspace will have on traffic flows: will it create a traffic imbalance in an unexpected sector?

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 122 of 144 - Public






10.2.30.2 Scenario


10.2.31 Flight in Managed Airspace





10.2.31.1.1.1.1 Revising the trajectory

A revision may be proposed by an airspace user, the flight crew or the ATMSP. It involves the proposed change of a constraint on the RBT. Several important SESAR principles are applicable here:

Revision of the RBT should always use a CDM process involving the airspace user (the owner) to ensure the best possible business outcome unless;

The situation is urgent in which case the controller may make immediate revisions to the trajectory for safety and separation purposes;

Whenever possible the airspace user/flight crew should be given the constraint and allowed to respect it in whatever way results in the best business outcome for the user.

The detail of the revision process will depend on the level of urgency. In most cases, revisions will be agreed in advance, with the trajectory being subsequently validated and authorised. If the revision requires an immediate change in flight path, the process will be shortened as follows: A high priority revision will be proposed including authorisation to proceed - the only possible responses from the flight crew in this case will be to accept or reject. In the unlikely event of rejection – the situation will be resolved by voice communication.

10.2.31.1.1.1.2 ATC co-ordination using shared trajectories

Current processes associated with co-ordination are described in the OLDI (On-line Data Interchange) and SYSCO (System Assisted Co-ordination) documentation.

There are 3 fundamental processes: notification, co-ordination and transfer of control. For all of these processes, a series of appropriate messages have been designed to eliminate the need for verbal human-human communication.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 123 of 144 - Public


All of these processes will change due to the use of trajectories as the basis of co-ordination and the use of data-link as the prime means of communications between ground and air.





10.2.31.2 Scenario

10.2.31.2.1 Trajectory update

From take off to landing, the current position and predicted trajectory are automatically down linked if outside TMR parameters (e.g. +/-500ft for altitude estimates and +/-30'' for time estimates).

Figure 28: Downlink of predicted trajectory in case of exceeding the delta specified in the TMR

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 124 of 144 - Public


10.2.31.2.2 Meteorological data exchange

During flight, information (e.g. NOTAM, ATIS, METAR) and weather (e.g. SIGMET, wind detected by onboard sensor) reports are exchanged as relevant.

Figure 29: MET and information data exchange

10.2.31.2.3 Ground initiated revision

If the controller, supported by automation, identifies a conflict, a trajectory revision will be required.

Figure 30: Revision of route, level and/or CTA due to potential conflict

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 125 of 144 - Public


Automated conflict resolution may provide the best overall outcome for network performance, being able to consider many more aspects than a human could.

The conflict resolution process will result in a new conflict free “proposed” trajectory.

This will be shared on the network and may need to be agreed by several actors.

The agreement process should be organised using a hierarchical structure to ensure that, for example, full agreement is achieved between all ground actors prior to the trajectory being proposed to the flight crew (c.f. Co-ordination).

When all appropriate actors have agreed to the proposed revision, the revision is published as a new agreed RBT.

If the route or level is to be changed due to unexpected thunderstorm and/or icing, the new preferred trajectory is down linked, new constraints are up linked if needed, and the revised trajectory activated onboard is down linked (RBT revision at flight crew initiative).

If the route, level or times are to be changed due to queue or conflict management, new constraints are up linked and the revised trajectory integrating the constraints and activated onboard is down linked (RBT revision at controller initiative).

10.2.31.2.4 Revision initiated from the air

If the flight crew is unable to respect a constraint this will also trigger a trajectory revision.

The lateral constraints of the authorised RBT may result in a weather encounter that the flight crew wishes to avoid, or the vertical constraints of a 3D PTC may be unable to be respected due to lower than expected climb performance.

Figure 31: Revision of route or level due to weather hazard

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 126 of 144 - Public


In these cases the flight crew supported by automation will request a revised trajectory. The controller, supported by automation, will evaluate the revision proposed by the flight crew or airborne automation and assess if it is conflict free.

There may be a need for some of the processes described above in ground initiated revision to finally come to agreement on the change to the RBT which will finally be published as a new agreed RBT.

10.2.31.2.5 Airspace user initiated revision

A request for trajectory revision by an airspace user (not the flight crew) will trigger a CDM process involving all appropriate actors resulting in a new agreed RBT. This process may involve significant modifications to many aspects of the RBT (in a case such as a diversion) and will therefore be almost identical to the process used to agree the RBT prior to flight.

10.2.31.2.6 Notification

The RBT is shared on the SWIM network and is updated and revised as previously described.

Automated systems in each ASTU will extract relevant data from the shared RBT for all the ATM processes that will be in place – data display, conflict detection, queue management, etc.

10.2.31.2.7 Co-ordination

The sharing of trajectory data on the SWIM network enables an entirely new approach to co-ordination.

Automated conflict detection systems will identify conflicts on any trajectory segment thanks to the availability of all relevant trajectory information.

This process will not be bounded by any notions such as FIR or sector boundaries. Therefore problems will be identified and appropriate solutions implemented across the airspace as a continuum – the best solution being determined by dialogue between automated processes.

Prior to full automation support, the simple ability to probe the length of the trajectory into a neighbour‟s airspace ensures that controllers will be able to easily assure that trajectories are safely conflict free in the vicinity of the transfer point, eliminating the need for co-ordination dialogue. This will be further enabled by identical procedures implemented throughout the SESAR area. Agreement on trajectory revision will be enabled by the sharing of all relevant data facilitating new opportunities for flexible operations and improved quality of service.

10.2.31.2.8 Transfer of control

In the ultimate vision of SESAR, the need for the transfer of communications disappears with the introduction of digital voice communications. However, for the foreseeable future it is expected that voice communications will still be conducted on a sector basis and that routine transfers from one communications channel to another will be required.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 127 of 144 - Public


This will be initiated by a data-link message that may be automated or triggered by a controller input. The receiving controller will be alerted to the presence of a new aircraft on the communications channel by automation and by acknowledging this alert will accept responsibility for the flight.

10.2.32 Flying CDA merging without Structured Routes


This scenario covers a Continuous Descent Approach (CDA) during which aircraft merge at a Merge Point prior to the Final Approach at a busy destination airport in a busy Terminal Area.

The subject aircraft (Blue Jet 123) is ATM-4 Capability Level equipped, the aircraft operator and flight crew are suitably qualified (i.e. the SESAR end-state in a fully networked environment). The scenario covers primarily the CDA and the ASAS Sequencing & Merging to the Final Approach Fix (FAF).

Reference is made to the early part of the flight and other sub-scenarios only in order to provide the necessary context.



The CTA will be applied at the Merge Point which will be as close as possible to the Final Approach Fix (Figure 32).

Figure 32: CTA with single merging point configuration

After the Merge Point relative spacing will be applied with respect to the preceding aircraft in the approach sequence using the onboard ASAS functionality.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 128 of 144 - Public


When traffic densities are high, or when interactions with other traffic streams in the Terminal Area require, it may be necessary to use extended common arrival routes, in which case earlier and/or multiple Merge Points may be published (Figure 33).

Figure 33: CTA with multiple merging points configuration

The appropriate arrival procedures, be they user preferred routings with few restrictions or Standard Arrival Routes (STARs), together with their associated Merge Points, will be published as constraints via the SWIM network to be included in the RBT. This will ensure that any CTA issued by the AMAN systems can be correctly respected.





10.2.32.2 Scenario

10.2.32.2.1 Continuous Descent Approach

A CDA, commencing at Top of Descent (TOD) and terminating at the Merge Point, will be achieved by the aircraft‟s onboard systems.

BJ123 will have shared its latest 4D trajectory throughout the flight, automatically and at required events in accordance with the associated Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR), via data-

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 129 of 144 - Public


link into the SWIM network (refer to 5.2.5). Thus all relevant parts of the ATM network will have access to BJ123‟s Predicted Trajectory, TOD position and time, and ideal descent profile.

At some airports, depending on traffic density and the proximity of other airports, it may be necessary to publish several altitude constraints (pass above, pass at, pass below), in which case they will be calculated on a case by case basis and applied to the trajectory. Such constraints will be kept to a minimum in order to facilitate optimum descent trajectories for each aircraft.

The updated RBT will include the TOD point and descent trajectory in relation to the altitude constraints and/or Required Altitude at the Merge Point.

Each ATSU is equipped with an automated ground based Medium Term Conflict Detection and Resolution (MTCD/R) tool which looks ahead using the all the updated RBTs and appropriate surveillance data. It identifies possible conflicts, alerting the controller only when a conflict exists and a resolution solution needs to be given.

If no conflict is detected BJ123 will be authorised via data-link to execute the CDA portion of the RBT commencing descent at the exact TOD identified in the RBT.

If a conflict is detected, the controller may decide to modify the arrival path. This may include a new 2D route portion or a new level constraint. This will be passed to BJ123 via data-link to modify the descent trajectory as appropriate.

The flight crew will acknowledge any constraints and insert them into BJ123‟s onboard systems. The onboard systems will then calculate the new descent trajectory and publish this as the revised RBT in the normal way.

Assuming there are no further conflicts, the controller will authorise BJ123 to execute the approach in accordance with the RBT.

The flight crew then manages the onboard systems which guide BJ123 along this trajectory to the Merge Point.

10.2.32.2.2 ASAS Spacing – Sequencing and Merging (ASPA-S&M)

The ASPA-S&M technique fits smoothly with a CTA technique as follows. Prior to the point at which the CTA is applicable, an aircraft can commence the establishment of relative spacing in relation to a leading (target) aircraft by identifying the target and receiving ATC clearance. See section 4.1 for details.

During the merging phase, the instructed aircraft adjusts speed to achieve the required spacing expressed in time or distance to be applied at the moment the target aircraft passes the common Merge Point (time is considered in this example as offering advantages on final approach under all wind conditions).

From this point onwards the instructed aircraft maintains the required spacing as the two aircraft follow compatible arrival trajectories towards the runway.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 130 of 144 - Public


10.2.32.2.3 Approach Sequence Construction and CTA

The procedure starts at the „Initiation Point‟, an optimum point at which to start the procedure which is when Blue Jet aircraft (BJ123) is at least within ADS-B range of the target aircraft „Red Jet 456‟ (RJ456). This is illustrated below.

Instructed a/c

current position

Target a/c

current position

Initiation

Point

ADS-B

Range

Instructed a/c

projected position

Target a/c

projected position

Instructed a/c

current position

Target a/c

current position

Initiation

Point

ADS-B

Range

Instructed a/c

projected position

Target a/c

projected position

BJ123

RJ456

RJ456

BJ123

Figure 34: Sequence construction (initiation point)

The information required by the AMAN (e.g. the trajectory data for BJ123, RJ456 and other adjacent aircraft) will be obtained from the SWIM network. The AMAN logic builds an optimum approach sequence taking into account factors such as:

Compatible positions of aircraft (altitude and relative position);

Compatible trajectories/routes;

Compatible performance of aircraft, particularly speed and rate of descent;

Appropriate ASAS capability of aircraft;

Wake vortex limitations of the aircraft stream (see below) ;

Weather.

On approach, as in other phases of flight, aircraft will share appropriate information regarding potential wake vortex generation via ADS-B. In addition, through the brake-to-vacate function, the number of seconds of runway occupancy will be available. This together with other separation criteria (radar separation minima, ILS protection etc.), and by the use of advanced MET reporting, will allow to determine the optimal arrival sequence and very accurately determine the minimum separation time between each individual pair of aircraft, thus allowing for an optimisation of final approach spacing and runway throughput.

Additional ground based automation assists the controller in identifying appropriate situations when ASPA-S&M is appropriate, and the optimum point at which the procedure should commence (the “initiation point”).

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 131 of 144 - Public


Prior to the instructed aircraft (BJ123) arriving at the Initiation Point, the controller will send a data-link message to the flight crew of BJ123 including:

Confirmation that they are the instructed aircraft in an ASPA-S&M procedure;

The identity of the target aircraft (RJ456);

The required spacing to be achieved at the common Merge Point further downstream.

This spacing is calculated by the AMAN to allow for the best estimate of the actual wake vortex limit of each specific aircraft pair, thus ensuring maximum possible runway landing rate. This will be supported by airborne wake vortex separation calculations as described above.

The flight crew of BJ123:

Identify the target aircraft (RJ456) on their CDTI;

Confirm acceptance of the ASPA-S&M instruction, target identification and acceptance of the required spacing to the controller via data-link;

Will then use the onboard ASAS S&M guidance to adjust speed to make good the nominated spacing at or before the Merge Point.

10.2.32.2.4 ASPA-S&M from the Initiation Point to the Merge Point/Final Approach Fix

On initiation of the ASPA-S&M procedure the flight crew of BJ123 switch from flight management aimed at achieving the CTA to flight management to achieve a fixed time behind RJ456 (relative time). The ASAS-S&M function is used to enable BJ123 to achieve and maintain the instructed spacing and to merge behind RJ456 at the common Merge Point, after which the instructed time spacing will be maintained to the Final Approach Fix (FAF).

The trajectory of BJ123 is now dependant on position and velocity information broadcast via ADS-B from RJ456. Because the instruction is given at a reasonably long range, it will be unusual for the required speed changes to be significant and the instruction will normally be well within aircraft capability while still maintaining near optimum performance during its descent to the Required Altitude at the Merge Point.

The authorised trajectory will be flown, in 3D, in relative time (spacing), using speed cue guidance provided by the ASAS S&M function. The aircraft flight management system will normally be used to control the aircraft or it may exceptionally be flown by the flight crew using the appropriate onboard guidance mode. It is unrealistic to expect the flight crew to fly spacing based solely on relative position information from a CDTI. Guidance commands will be provided, either be built into the CDTI and/or primary navigation displays, or be provided by a stand alone system.

For ATM-2 aircraft, flying a „relative‟ trajectory is not a constraint provided the trajectory of the target aircraft can be known by the instructed aircraft. For the ASPA-S&M application as it is currently being developed, this does not necessarily require full intent data. The standard procedure is that after the Merge Point both aircraft must follow the same Standard Arrival Route (STAR).

In this example, ASPA-S&M is used to enable BJ123 to remain behind RJ456 with the same required spacing until final approach.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 132 of 144 - Public


For ATM-3 aircraft, capable of ASAS Self-Separation, the procedure will be the same.

Any time variations resulting from differential/uncompensated wind will be automatically accounted for by the ASAS logic on the following aircraft. It has been proven that sequences of many aircraft can be constructed with stability provided by the relative spacing guidance provided by the aircraft system.

The above procedure is illustrated below:

Initiation

Point

ADS-B

Range

FAF

RunwayRunway

Common

Merge Point

Instructed a/c

Target a/c

Instructed a/c

merged behind

target with desired

spacing

Initiation

Point

ADS-B

Range

FAFFAF

RunwayRunway

Common

Merge Point

Common

Merge Point

Instructed a/c

Target a/c

Instructed a/c

merged behind

target with desired

spacing

Figure 35: Sequence construction

The key phases in the process are:

Identification

Ground based automation supports the controller by displaying the appropriate instructed and target aircraft in the approach sequence, the optimum point at which the procedure should commence (the “initiation point”) and the required spacing to be achieved. The controller advises the instructed aircraft that they are the instructed aircraft in an ASPA-S&M procedure, the identity of the target aircraft and the spacing required via data-link. The flight crew identifies the target and confirms this to the controller, also via data-link.

Clearance

The controller rechecks applicability conditions, and makes a decision whether to progress with the procedure. The ground based automation may also support the controller in this task. The feasibility of the application is also assessed by the on-board ASAS onboard systems.

Execution

The instructed aircraft flies the ASAS manoeuvre, based on the received instruction(s). As a spacing application, the controller monitors the S&M task and remains responsible for separation throughout the ASPA-S&M manoeuvre.

Termination

Upon reaching 1000ft above threshold elevation the ASAS manoeuvre is terminated or as otherwise instructed by the controller.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 133 of 144 - Public


10.2.33 Sequencing & merging for linked pair


Aircraft C is following Aircraft B via ASAS.

Aircraft B is issued instructions to merge behind Aircraft A.

Two choices are then available:

B reduces speed;

B turns to widen out and then turns back in behind A with the appropriate distance.



The main issue is to ensure the safety of Aircraft D which is a flight operating in proximity to A, B, & C, but not initially a constraint.

It could be a cross-behind or it could be opposite direction passing to one side. The tools must/should consider B & C as a unit for safety nets.

What effect if Pilot of B elects to manually steer and follow the prompts on the CDTI?





10.2.33.2 Scenario


10.2.34 Non-compliance with wake-vortex spacing


An aircraft is given an ASAS spacing delegation of 5 NM behind heavy traffic.

Pilot receives indications from a/c systems that turbulence is greater than expected and plans greater spacing.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 134 of 144 - Public




How will the system compensate if it detects greater than minimum spacing?

How will system know what spacing the cockpit crew is electing to use?

Will it apply the same criteria to subsequent situations in compensation to prevent capacity imbalance from developing?





10.2.34.2 Scenario


10.2.35 Landing and Taxi to Gate


This scenario covers airport surface operations during taxi in from the runway to the gate, and also during landing. In this configuration the flight crew uses ASAS to enhance their traffic situation awareness on the airport surface (ATSA-SURF).

On final approach the flight crew of BJ123 is operating the aircraft with the ASAS operating mode switch selected to either of the two following modes depending on which type of procedure they had been cleared on:

“Ready to Self Separate” if no spacing instructions had been required;

“Delegated Procedure” if the ASAS has been used for ASPA or ASEP-S&M (it does not matter which) in order to maintain the specified spacing from the designated aircraft ahead (see 3.13.1 „Flying a CDA merging operation)‟. This function allows the flight crew of BJ123 to maintain a precise spacing to touch down relative to the aircraft ahead.

As was the case during taxi out and take-off, MET information is available and is displayed as required to the flight crew. The flight crew of BJ123 is therefore able to confirm during all stages of the approach that conditions remain valid for landing.

The RBT contains a route from the landing runway to the parking position. Several minutes before landing this route will be reviewed in an update of the airport surface planning process. An optimum surface route will be transferred by data-link to BJ123 where it will be displayed on the CDTI. Where options of Rapid Exit Taxiway (RET) are available, this will be highlighted to the flight crew who will make an appropriate choice, selecting the required auto-brake function to achieve the selected RET

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 135 of 144 - Public


“brake to vacate”. The controller‟s A-SMGCS will also be updated with the choice of RET and subsequent surface route made by the aircrew.

ATSA-SURF provides the flight crews (and vehicle drivers) with information on the surface traffic that supplements out-the-window observations and see-and-be-seen procedures. Its purpose is to reduce the potential for conflicts, errors and collisions (e.g. runway incursions) by providing enhanced situational awareness to flight crews operating aircraft on or near the airport surface.

Flight crews will use a cockpit display consisting of a moving map and traffic display (CDTI). Additionally, the display may be used to determine the position of ground vehicles, e.g. snow ploughs, emergency vehicles, tugs, follow-me vehicles and airport maintenance vehicles. All such vehicles authorised to have access to the “active” areas of the airport should be similarly equipped.

All aircraft with ATM-3 capability or better, and therefore capable of ASAS applications, can participate in the ATSA-SURF application. They would also be able to “see” ATM-1 capable aircraft but not ATM-0 aircraft (unless TIS-B is incorporated into the airport infrastructure). Aircraft equipped to ATM-4 will be able to provide their own separation from obstacles and other aircraft.

Aircraft equipped to ATM-4 capability or better will be able to provide their own separation from obstacles and other aircraft thanks to ASAS Separation capabilities.



The minimum requirement is for all aircraft and authorised vehicles on the airport manoeuvring area to be equipped with ADS-B (in/out) and a suitable moving map display.

A fundamental requirement in the long term is that both controllers and flight crew share the same information, tailored for their purpose. It must include at least:

Controllers, flight crews and vehicle drivers all share the same picture and access to appropriate warnings;

Controllers can issue surface routing instructions via data-link;

Stop bars and active runways are shown on all displays;

Automatic warnings for all relevant hazards, including other aircraft and vehicles.

It may also be necessary to incorporate advanced automated systems such as „auto brake‟ to make it impossible for an aircraft or vehicle to cross a selected stop bar.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 136 of 144 - Public



Main assumptions are as follows:

Although synthetic vision systems are being developed none are assumed to be available in this scenario;

Navigation accuracy and quality, suitable for the purpose, is used. This would include GNSS with augmentation; BJ123 is at least ATM-3 capable;

A-SMGCS provides surveillance information for controllers and pilots, plus moving map support for pilots.

Initial A-SMGCS implementation foresees the provision of runway incursion alerts to controllers. This SESAR scenario illustrates the importance of also providing this information directly to flight crew and other A-SMGCS enhancements for pilots including routing service, surface movement guidance, route deviation alerting and traffic information.



10.2.35.2 Scenario

On approach, as in other phases of flight, BJ123 will share appropriate information regarding potential wake vortex generation via ADS-B. In addition, through the brake-to-vacate function, the number of seconds of runway occupancy will be available. This together with other separation criteria (radar separation minima, ILS protection etc.), and wind information provided by the use of advanced MET reporting, will allow to determine the optimal arrival sequence and very accurately determine the minimum separation time between each individual pair of aircraft, thus allowing for an optimisation of final approach spacing and runway throughput.

On final approach, from 1000ft above ground level to touch down, and throughout the landing roll, the ASAS will display on the CDTI all aircraft and vehicles on or near the landing runway. The flight crew of BJ123 monitors their CDTI to ensure that the landing runway is clear of conflicting traffic (aircraft and vehicles). This reduces the likelihood of flight crew errors associated with runway occupancy and improves the ability of flight crew to detect ATC errors.

At the appropriate point the controller clears BJ123 to land by activating the appropriate message, which is then displayed on the CDTI and confirms this by voice transmission. The flight crew of BJ123 makes a final check on their CDTI for conflicting traffic and vehicles and accepts the landing clearance by activating the message on their CDTI.

Similarly, if a conflict occurs at or before touch down, requiring a go-around, the system generates a warning first to the controller, and if the situation remains critical prompts the flight crew to execute the go-around.

During the landing roll the trajectory sharing function alerts the controller if the aircraft is not exiting via the desired runway exit. If this occurs the system will automatically calculate the optimum revised route and offer it to the controller who sends it to BJ123 via data-link, where it is shown graphically on the CDTI. The subsequent landing aircraft will also be warned by this function that runway vacation will not occur as early as expected.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 137 of 144 - Public


When BJ123 clears the landing runway, the system identifies when the aircraft has vacated sending the appropriate message to the controller and the CDTI. The flight crew switch the ASAS operating mode switch to „Safety Only‟ so that, from this point on, the ASAS is operating in ATSA-SURF mode.

The controller aided by A-SMGCS and data-link functions:

Authorises BJ123 to proceed along the pre-agreed surface route and selects any required stop bars (which are also displayed on the CDTI);

Other aircraft that should be followed;

Voice communication may be used for tactical interventions if necessary.

BJ123 taxis in following the route as shown on the CDTI under ATC ground movement control but with the advantages of the ATSA-SURF application. A major advantage of the CDTI is that, in addition to visual out-the-window observation, traffic is also shown on the CDTI with associated warnings.

When BJ123 approaches a selected stop bar, this is shown on the CDTI, together with a warning, which is shown in sufficient time for the flight crew to stop before the nose passes over the lights. The stop bar can also be seen visually on the ground as is the case today. If the flight crew fail to stop the aircraft in time a warning is also generated automatically on the controller‟s display. This aircraft is also equipped with an advanced autobrake system that actually makes it impossible for it to cross selected stop bars.

Active runways are indicated on the CDTI, using a symbol or suitable colour coding which is only removed when clearance is given to cross or enter the runway.

When BJ123 approaches the apron area, the flight crew follow ramp or airline instructions regarding the availability of the parking gate.

10.2.36 Closely Spaced Parallel Operations in IMC


The runway is the major bottleneck in the air transport system and runway capacity is a critical element of airport capacity. Therefore growth in airport capacity and quality of service (flexibility, predictability etc.) is very much dependant on runway capacity.

The configuration of multiple runways plays a leading part in determining their combined capacity. Doubling the number of runways can only double capacity if the runways are truly independent. Where runways are placed closely together, they can no longer be considered independent and measures have to put in place to include additional separation between aircraft thus constraining capacity. A dependent operation also puts severe constraints on the operation of the whole airport as both arrivals and departures on both dependent runways have to be linked together.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 138 of 144 - Public




Parallel runways are considered to have independent approach paths when they are 1035mtrs or more apart. Between 1035 mtrs and 1525 mtrs the operation must be monitored by a high precision/high update radar system, known in the USA as PRM. Beyond 1525 mtrs runway separation, „normal‟ surveillance radar is considered adequate. These figures take into account the accuracy of the radar, and the ability of the controllers to spot blunders into the Non Transgression Zone between the runways in a timely manner. They assume normal ILS tracking accuracy. Reducing this minimum separation would mean many more airports would qualify for independent operations with consequent benefits of capacity and ease of operation. In the USA simultaneous independent parallel operations are carried out in VMC at much lower spacings than those quoted above. The challenge is to achieve similar reductions in IMC by the use of suitable technology.

The following factors govern the minimum separation permitted and restrict the application of Closely Spaced Parallel Runways (CSPRs):

1. ILS - The angular nature of ILS guidance means that while high accuracy is achieved at the threshold, it reduces, and separation becomes progressively more difficult, further from the runway. If all other problems were overcome, that fact in itself would limit the minimum runway separation for independent operations in IMC

2. Environment - Where runways are suitable for independent operations, aircraft are deemed separated once both aircraft are fully established on the ILS. This means that the two approaches must have „platform levels‟ at least 1000 ft apart and the profiles have to be arranged so that the lower aircraft is fully established on Localiser and Glide path before the higher can leave its platform altitude. In consequence neither approach can conform to Constant Descent Angle criteria, and the lower one will be especially problematic from the point of view of community noise.

3. Path Following Error – this is low once the aircraft is established, but high while intercepting the localiser.

4. Radar Monitoring – Currently a No Transgression Zone, 2000 ft (600m) wide, is established between the two approaches and traffic is monitored by controllers, a dedicated team in the case of PRM operations for potential and actual blunders into the zone. Clearly, under this scheme the minimum runway separation cannot be less than the width of this zone. But the „blunder‟ scenario is implausible (evidence of such blunders on ILS approach does not exist, on the contrary, the safety of all ILS approaches to date suggests blunders outside the obstacle assessment areas are extremely small), and monitoring by a third party adds to the alarm latency time, without which the minimum spacing could be less

5. Wake vortex - At the current minimum runway spacing the upwind vortex cannot be transported to the downwind approach path within the vortex‟s expected lifetime (heavy aircraft = 2 minutes), other than in crosswinds which would themselves destroy the vortex (minimum 20 knots). Separation below current standards, however, will eventually require vortex issues to be resolved.

6. Longitudinal spacing - Minimum longitudinal spacing, if no wake vortex considerations apply, are currently limited to 3 miles (exceptionally 2.5). In zero winds, these figures correspond to the spacing set by runway occupancy and radar separation considerations, but in headwinds, they may not. Time based separation seeks to maintain flow rate in head winds,

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 139 of 144 - Public


when reduced longitudinal separation would be appropriate. A review of these regulations will be needed to unlock potential capacity gains.

The first three of these issues could be addressed by use of high precision RNP approaches, either the whole approach or an RNP transition to a conventional precision final approach.

In this scenario, aircraft would be routed, by radar vectoring or other means, to the start of two separated RNP procedures, each leading to one of the parallel runways. Aircraft would be deemed separated once established on the relevant RNP procedure subject to necessary precision monitoring being in place. This is similar to the way aircraft are currently considered separated on parallel ILS paths, even though these are closer than „standard‟ radar minima.

The lateral runway spacing for independent operations, however, could potentially be much less than current PRM operations because the third party monitoring is replaced by ASAS with lower latency. Because in this case the joining manoeuvre onto the two curved paths can take place at points further apart than the runway spacing itself, there is no need for vertical separation during the capture phase; there is therefore also no need for the separate platform altitude, and both approaches can be CDAs.

The necessary monitoring of closely spaced RNP approaches is a suitable candidate for an ASEP application, ASEP-CSPA; not only would the latency be reduced, but alarms would only sound for potential collision rather than transgression per se. Suitable algorithms will need to be developed, and the operation of existing ACAS reviewed for false alarm rates to be acceptable.

Solutions to the final issue, wake vortex, are more speculative. Current wake vortex rules seem to be safe, as the absence of accidents appears to confirm. In fact, since vortices sink below the path of the generating aircraft, vortex encounters on the approach are fundamentally unlikely, other than in moderate tailwinds. Averaged over all approaches the safety record is good, but measured over the few instances when encounters are even possible, the safety achievement is less confidence inspiring. Current rules give excess margin when none is needed, but too little when it is. Drastic reductions in spacing, backed up by improved vortex evolution predictions, are possible but would only be acceptable if suitable monitoring were in place to ensure that prediction and practice coincided on the particular approach. The ideal solution, which would also address vortex encounters in other circumstances (e.g. cruise) would be to sense and avoid wake directly by means of on board detection. Such technology does not currently exist, though the basic element, laser anemometry, does, and development of a production system in the 2020 time frame is realistic. Such improvement would also have a major influence on all approaches, not just simultaneous parallels.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 140 of 144 - Public


600m

3nm3nm

Arrival – 1300m runway spacing (0.7nm)

Independent parallel runways 1300m spacing

3nm final approach spacing (OK=radar) 0.7nm lateral.

0.7nm

Non Transgression Zone (NTZ)

Figure 36: Closely Spaced Parallel Runways

The graphic above shows the situation of parallel landings on runways spaced 1300mtrs apart. Aircraft may come within 0.7nm on parallel approaches Note the NTZ which limits the minimum approach segregation.

Figure 37: Parallel approaches

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 141 of 144 - Public


The graphic above shows two RNP transition to two independent parallel straight in precision approach finals, where standard separation is provided before the RNP phase, but a constant descent approach is possible avoiding level flight at platform altitudes.





10.2.36.2 Scenario

BJ123 and RJ456 are ATM-4 capable and equipped to conduct ASEP-CSPA. The aircraft operator and the flight crew are suitably qualified and familiar with the procedures for ASEP-CSPA at Caesar International Airport. The ASAS equipment onboard is in the “Ready for Delegated Procedure” mode.

The weather conditions are low overcast with cloud base at 300ft.

BJ123 has been authorised to conduct a continuous descent approach to runway 27L as described in the RBT. They are instructed to follow an RNP transition to the final approach which provides 3D navigation to the final. The flight crew has been informed that ASEP-CSPA operations are in use.

At the same time, RJ456 received similar instruction for an approach to 27R, via its RNP transition. Both crews are able to verify that the other aircraft is on the correct path and will receive warnings if either strays from its assigned path by more than a permitted margin.

Both aircraft follow their RNP procedures onto finals. The paths are designed so that position accuracy can be guaranteed up to a cross wind (at joining level, not surface) of 60kt, If crosswinds greater than that figure are forecast, dependent approaches must be flown, to avoid longitudinal overlap. The controller ensures that BJ123 and RJ456 have both identified each other and the ASEP-CSPA instruction is received and acknowledged - all by the use of data-link.

Once established, the precise longitudinal spacing of BJ123 from RJ456 is not normally relevant. As the runway separation is minimal, 400m, the possibility of the leading aircraft‟s vortices being carried by cross wind into the path of the follower is real. Both aircraft receive forecasts of the position of vortices from neighbouring aircraft. Both are equipped with a vortex detection system which projects an image of the any vortices detected within 1 mile of the aircraft on the pilot‟s HUD. By this means, the follower is able to verify that no vortex risk exists and that the decision not to impose vortex spacing was correct. Had the conditions been different, and a light tailwind was predicted which could have carried vortices into the adjoining path, independent operations would again be withdrawn, and a restriction would have been imposed on the longitudinal position of the follower.

The procedure ends when RJ456 touches down.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 142 of 144 - Public


11 ANNEX B: REFERENCES

[1] SESAR Concept of Operations, WP2.2.2 D3, DLT-0612-222-02-00 v2.0 (validated), October 2007.

[2] SESAR Operational Scenarios and Explanations – Network Airline Scheduled Operation, v0.6, November 2007

[3] WP2.2.3/D3, DLT-0707-008-01-00 v1.0, July 2007.

[4] ATM Master Plan, SESAR D5, DLM-0710-001-02-00 (approved), April 2008.

[5] The ATM Deployment Sequence, SESAR D4, DLM-0706-001-02-00 (approved), January 2008.

[6] The Performance Target, SESAR D2, DLM-0607-001-02-00a (approved), December 2006.

[7] EPISODE 3 DOW, v3.0, July 2008.

[8] E-OCVM version 2, EUROCONTROL, March 2007.

[9] Guidelines for Approval of the Provision and Use of Air Traffic Services Supported by Data Communications, EUROCAE ED-78A, December 2000.

[10] Single European Sky Implementation support through Validation (EPISODE 3) portal, www.episode3.aero.

[11] General Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-020-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[12] Long Term Network Planning Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-021-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[13] Collaborative Airport Planning Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-022-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[14] Medium/Short Term Network Planning Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-023-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008

[15] Runway Management Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-024-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[16] Apron and Taxiways Management Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-025-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[17] Network Management in the Execution Phase Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-026-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 143 of 144 - Public


[18] Conflict Management in Arrival and Departure High & Medium/Low Density Operations Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-027-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[19] Conflict Management in En-Route High & Medium/Low Density Operations Detailed Operational Description, E3-D2.2-028-V3.0 SESAR Initial DOD, July 2008.

[20] EPISODE 3 Glossary of Terms and Definitions, E3-D2.2-029-V1.0, July 2008.

[21] The ATM Target Concept, SESAR D3, DLM-0612-001-02-00a (approved), September 2007.

[22] SESAR/EP3 Information Navigator, July 2008.

[23] Description of Responsibility, DLT-0612-242-00-09 (draft), July 2007.

[24] The European Air Traffic Management Master Plan Portal, www.atmmasterplan.eu.

[25] SWIM SUIT Information Content and Service Requirements, D1.2.1 v1.0 (final), January 2008.

[26] EUROCONTROL Long-Term Forecast of Flights (2004-2025), v1.0, December 2004.

[27] EUROCONTROL Long-Term Forecast: IFR Flight Movements 2006-2025, v1.0, December 2006.

[28] Challenges to Growth Report 2004, CTG04, v1.0 December 2004.

[29] ICAO Doc 4444-ATM/501, Procedures for Air Navigation Services, Air Traffic Management, Fourteenth Edition, 2001.

[30] EUROCAE ED-110A – Interoperability Requirements Standard For ATN Baseline 1, August 2004.

[31] ICAO ANNEX 10 - Aeronautical Telecommunications – Volume III, Part I (Digital Data Communication Systems) First Edition, July 1995 – amended by Amendment 76 (01/11/2001).

[32] Navigation Strategy for ECAC, NAV.ET1.ST16-001, v2.1, March 1999.

[33] Transition Plan for the Implementation of the Navigation Strategy in ECAC 2000 -2015, NAV.ET1.ST16-002, v3.0, May 2000.

[34] Performance Based Navigation Manual, volume 1, ICAO draft 5.1 Final, March 2007.

Reference

EPISODE 3

E3-D2.2-020


Date: 28-07-2008

N°: 3.0

Status: Draft

E3-D2.2-020 - Page 144 of 144 - Public


END OF DOCUMENT

Documents

SESAR DETAILED OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION - Eurocontrol · SESAR Detailed Operational Description EPISODE 3 E3-D2.2-020 Date: 28-07-2008 ... INECO Laura Serrano ISA Ian Crook Isdefe