Sustainable Energy – Sustainable ATC Surveillance Workshop – Eurocontrol, Brussels, April 2010 Agenda Item Wind Turbine Interference – Possible Mitigations

Sustainable Energy – Sustainable ATC Surveillance Workshop – Eurocontrol, Brussels, April 2010

Agenda Item Wind Turbine Interference – Possible Mitigations

Jason Strong, Eng Mgr Surveillance SensorsNATS En-Route Ltd

2 Sustainable Energy – Sustainable ATC Surveillance Workshop – Eurocontrol, Brussels, April 2010

Mitigation Options» Guidelines includes a variety of mitigation options which

should be considered.

» The choice and appropriateness of mitigation options varies from case to case, influenced by:» Surveillance technology employed

» Cooperative / Non-Cooperative

» Age & Capability

» Capacity

» Supportability

» Air Traffic Density

» Number of flights per Hour

» Airspace Volume

» Air Traffic Complexity

» Mix of Aircraft

» Military / State Aircraft

» En-Route or Terminal Control


Mitigation Applicability

»Guidelines Identifies different options for different Surveillance Classifications» Non-Cooperative Surveillance Sensor

» Cooperative Surveillance Sensors

» Operational

» Wind Turbine

»It is rare & unlikely that a single mitigation technique is sufficient on its own. Often a combination of options needs to be employed.


Risks identified requiring mitigation

» Reduced PSR Probability of Detection (Pd)

» PSR False Targets

» PSR Positional Accuracy

» Overload of PSR Capabilities (Capacity)

» Reduced SSR Pd

» SSR False Targets

» SSR Position Accuracy

» Guidelines identify which mitigations are effective at addressing each type of risk.


Mitigation Options Table 1 – Page 48


Mitigation Options Table 2 – Page 49


Non-Cooperative Surveillance Sensor

»Blank Azimuth Sector

»Suppress returns in a range / azimuth sector

»Filtering of Wind Farm false returns

»Strengthen Track Initiation Conditions

»Adapt PSR overload prevention facilities

»Upgrade PSR processing capabilities

»Upgrade PSR output interface capabilities

» In-Fill PSR

» In-Fill MSPSR


PSR Blanking

» Either a whole azimuth sector or range defined.

» Effective way of addressing clutter & capacity related issues.

» Obvious drawback of blanking out real aircraft returns

» Maybe be suitable in certain operational situations, e.g.:» Low Risk of non-cooperative aircraft

» Low complexity

» Low traffic density


PSR Processing

» Improved Processing Techniques» Increase Probability of Detection

» Reduce the number of false plots

» Improve the acquisition of targets through enhanced track initiation techniques

» Use of Non-Auto Initiation zones

» Several manufacturers looking at enhancements to existing technology or new/alternative replacement technology

» Complex solution but potentially offers the most ‘complete’ mitigation option.


Surveillance ‘In Fill’

» Applicable to both cooperative & non cooperative surveillance

» Places more emphasis mitigation at the end user rather than the Radar Head

» Requires a surveillance picture to be built up from multiple surveillance sensors» Mosaic solution

» Multi-Radar Tracking solution

» Effective solution but limited in number of applications due to:» Computational limitations

» Finite maximum number of surveillance sensors

» Accuracy requirements


Cooperative Surveillance System

» Blank SSR Transmission in an azimuth sector

» In-Fill SSR

» In-Fill Wide Area Multilateration (WAM)

» In-Fill ADS-B

» Improve SSR Anti-Reflection capability / Mode-S


Operational

» Move ATC Route

» Change airspace classification or create a Transponder Mandatory Zone


Wind Turbine

» Move Turbines to outside Radar Line of Site

» Move Turbines out of Critical Areas

» Change Windfarm layout

» Reduce number of turbines within Line of Site

» Reduce Wind Turbine Reflectivity


Jason StrongEngineering Manager, Surveillance Sensors

[email protected]

+44 1489 444701

NATS,

Corporate & Technical Centre,

4000/4200 Parkway

Whiteley,

Fareham,

Hampshire.

UK

PO15 7FL

Documents

Sustainable Energy – Sustainable ATC Surveillance Workshop – Eurocontrol, Brussels, April 2010 Agenda Item Wind Turbine Interference – Possible Mitigations