episode 3 - eurocontrol · episode 3 d5.2.1-01 - wp5 validation strategy version : 1.01 page 1 of...

Episode 3

D5.2.1-01 - WP5 Validation Strategy Version : 1.01

of 39

Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.

EPISODE 3 Single European Sky Implementation support through Validation

Document information

Programme Sixth framework programme Priority 1.4 Aeronautics and Space

Project title Episode 3

Project N° 037106

Project Coordinator EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Deliverable Name WP5 Validation Strategy

Deliverable ID D5.2.1-01

Version 1.01

Owner

Matthias Poppe DFS

Contributing partners

LFV, INECO, NLR, ENAV, EEC, AENA, NATS

Episode 3


of 39


DOCUMENT CONTROL

Approval

Role Organisation Name

Document owner DFS Matthias Poppe

Technical approver NATS Richard Powell

Quality approver EUROCONTROL Ludovic Legros

Project coordinator EUROCONTROL Philippe Leplae

Edition history

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

reference to a review form or a comment sheet

1.00 10/11/2008 Approved Matthias Poppe

Eliana Haugg

Approved by the Episode 3 Consortium

1.01 07/04/2009 Approved Matthias Poppe Changes due to EC comments in sections 1.1, 3.4 and 3.5

Episode 3


of 39


- This page is intentionally blank -

Episode 3


of 39


TABLE OF CONTENTS

0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................... 6

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 7 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT ....................................................................................... 7 1.2 INTENDED AUDIENCE.................................................................................................... 7 1.3 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE............................................................................................... 7 1.4 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 7 1.5 GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................. 7

2 REFERENCES AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS................ ......................................... 9

3 WP5 CONTRIBUTION TO EP3 VALIDATION STRATEGY........ ................................... 10 3.1 STEP 0.1 UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM........................................................................ 10 3.2 STEP 0.2 UNDERSTAND THE PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ................................................... 11

3.2.1 Scope of WP5 addressed solutions................................................................. 11 3.3 STEP 1.1 VERIFY THE STAKEHOLDERS, THEIR NEEDS AND INVOLVEMENT ...................... 12 3.4 STEP 1.2 IDENTIFY THE EXISTING INFORMATION INCLUDING LEVEL OF MATURITY........... 14

3.4.1 DM – Departure Metering Validation ............................................................... 14 3.4.2 Tailored Arrival (oceanic)................................................................................. 14 3.4.3 TAM -Total Airport Management AT-ONE....................................................... 15 3.4.4 “Point Merge”: Improving the management of arrival flows............................. 15 3.4.5 TMA2010+ ....................................................................................................... 16 3.4.6 RESET............................................................................................................. 16

3.5 STEP 1.3 DESCRIBE VALIDATION EXPECTATIONS AND OUTLINE CASES......................... 17 3.5.1 Case Approach in the Project .......................................................................... 17 3.5.2 Case Approach in WP5 ................................................................................... 17

3.6 STEP 1.4 IDENTIFY CONCEPT PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES IN KPA .............................. 18 3.6.1 Safety............................................................................................................... 20 3.6.2 Environmental Sustainability............................................................................ 21 3.6.3 Capacity ........................................................................................................... 21 3.6.4 Efficiency.......................................................................................................... 23 3.6.5 Predictability..................................................................................................... 23 3.6.6 Operability........................................................................................................ 24

3.7 STEP 1.5 ESTABLISH INITIAL VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS............................................ 25 3.8 STEP 1.6 SELECT VALIDATION TOOL OR TECHNIQUES ................................................. 30 3.9 STEP 1.7 DEFINE VALIDATION STRATEGY.................................................................... 31

3.9.1 Expert Groups for Concept Refinement .......................................................... 31 3.9.2 Concept Validation Activities ........................................................................... 33

Episode 3


of 39


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4-1: SESAR Key Performance Areas ........................................................... 19

Figure 4-2: Grouping of KPA ................................................................................... 19

Figure 4-3: Validation Techniques in EP3 WP5....................................................... 30

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1: Stakeholders Needs and Expectations ................................................... 13

Table 4-2: Validation Map SESAR – Episode 3 WP5 .............................................. 29

Episode 3


of 39


0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document describes the Airport and TMA validation strategy of the Episode 3 project. It provides the necessary link between the SESAR Operational Concept and the validation activities in this project. The methodology is based on the E-OCVM approach of step 0 and step 1 following the EP3 validation guidelines [1]. It will be used by the EP3 WP5 exercise leaders for elaboration of their detailed exercise plans. Due to the scope of the project this validation strategy describes an example of the approach how the ATM Target Concept [5] could be further clarified and how cost-effective validation techniques could be applied in such an early stage of concept development. Moreover, an assessment will take place in some selected performance areas.

The problem statement and the proposed solutions are derived from SESAR deliverable D1 through D5. They are linked to the Lines of Change and Operational Improvement steps. A first mapping and scoping of the envisaged validation exercises towards the Lines of Change and the Operational Improvement steps was undertaken. Consequently, some of the benefit areas will be addressed. The status of the current Research & Development activities in the airport and TMA area is analysed.

As SESAR follows a performance oriented strategy the targets are set in terms of Key Performance Areas. A more detailed breakdown defines the Focus Areas and the associated Key Performance Indicators. The contribution of this validation strategy towards the focus areas is provided. Finally, the validation tools and techniques for each exercise are defined. Two experts groups interact with the three defined Fast Time Simulations and the prototyping session. The Fast Time Simulations specifically address the runway capacity problem, a multi-airport TMA and the new trajectory management solutions such as Continuous Descent Approach or PRNAV routes. The prototyping session is defined with Human-in-the-Loop simulations that help gain first insight into operational acceptability of the proposed procedures. The results of all exercises will be used for concept clarification and consolidation of the learning on the application of the E-OCVM.

Episode 3


of 39


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT

The purpose of this document is to contribute to the overall Episode 3 Validation Strategy Step 0.1 to Step 1.7. The input is provided from the viewpoint of the exercises in EP3 WP5 TMA and Airport. If no specific input has been identified references are given mainly to SESAR documentation.

Acknowledging that a large part of the SESAR Concept of Operations [6] is at a relatively early stage in the Concept Validation Lifecycle (late V1, early V2) there has been a shift in focus, since the establishment of the SESAR JU, with emphasis now lying in three main areas:

• Clarification of the concept; recognising that the concept is large and that EPISODE 3 does not have the resources to address all areas and OIs,

• Expanding the repertoire of cost-effective validation techniques (e.g. gaming variants) suited to these early stages of concept validation,

• Consolidating our learning on the application of the E-OCVM to SESAR-scale Concept of Operations.

In this context, as well as targeting improved performance assessment, exercises can support clarification, provide some trials of clarifications, explore alternative validation techniques and gain important validation experience.

1.2 INTENDED AUDIENCE

This document is intended for use by the exercise leaders and in EP3 WP2.3 Validation Process Management for the consolidated validation strategy. Moreover, it forms the basis for further elaboration of the detailed WP5 validation and exercise planning (E-OCVM step 2).

1.3 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

The document has two remaining sections: the references in section 2 and finally the inputs to the WP5 validation strategy in section 3, highlighting its contribution to the overall EP3 validation process.

1.4 BACKGROUND

This document is based on the descriptions of EP3 WP5 validation exercises, the expert groups and the Detailed Operational Descriptions (DOD), SESAR Deliverables D3 to D5 including the Performance Framework and SESAR Concept of Operations.

1.5 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Term Definition

ACC Area Control Centre

BIC Best in Class

BT Business Trajectory

CDA Continuous Descent Approach

Episode 3


of 39


Term Definition

CONOPS Concept of Operations

DCB Demand Capacity Balancing

DOD Detailed Operational Description

E-OCVM European Operational Concept Validation Methodology

EP3 Episode 3

FAF Final Approach Fix

KPA Key Performance Area

OI Operational Improvement

N/A Not Available

P-RNAV Precision Area Navigation

PTC Precision Trajectory Clearance

RBT Reference Business Trajectory

SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research

TBS Time Based Spacing

TMA Terminal Movement Area

TOD Top of Descent

UDPP User Driven Prioritisation Process

WP Work Package

Episode 3


of 39


2 REFERENCES AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

REF. Document Status

[1] Guidance Material for identification of validation issues at WP and Programme level: steps 0.1 to 1.7 of the E-OCVM, Version 0.2, 02.07.2007

Reference

[2] Episode 3: DOW Revision 3.0, 10.07.2008 Applicable

[3] SESAR D1 The Current Situation, 31.07.2006 Reference

[4] SESAR D2 The Performance Target, 22.12.2006 Reference

[5] SESAR D3 The ATM Target Concept, 04/09/2007 Reference

[6] SESAR Concept of Operations, Version 1.0, 17.07.2007 Reference

[7] The European Air Traffic Management Master Plan Portal, www.eumasterplan.eu

Reference

[8] SESAR Performance Objectives and Targets RPT-0708-001-00-02, 02.11.2007

Reference

[9] Episode 3, SESAR Detailed Operational Descriptions, General Purpose DOD – G, E3-D2.2-020, Version 3.0, 28.07.2008; Runway Management - E1, E3-D2.2-024-V3.0, 29.07.2008; Aprons and Taxiways Management - E2/E3, E3-D2.2-025-V3.0, 29.07.2008; Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations - E5, E3-D2.2-027-V3.0, 29.07.2008

Reference

[10] SESAR WP3.1 DLT-0706-31X-00-10 Integration of European ATM Initiatives & Programmes Volume 1., Version 00-11, 24.10.2007

Reference

[11] Eurocontrol: Study Report “Challenges to Growth”, Eurocontrol, 2004, Version 1.0, 01.12.04

Reference

[12] SESAR Task Deliverable: DLT-0507-111-00-13_T111_D1 - Analysis of the air transport value chain, 30.05.2006

Reference

[13] Eurocontrol: Long-Term Forecast Flight Movements 2006 – 2025, Version 1.0, 01.12.06

Reference

[14] SESAR Task Deliverable: DLT-0507-322-00-17_T322_D1 - Identification of limits/blocking points for airport environment, 31.05.2006

Reference

[15] Eurocontrol Performance Review Commission: Performance Review Report 1006 - An Assessment of Air Traffic Management in Europe during the Calendar Year 2006, Eurocontrol, 2007, 10.05.2007

Reference

[16] European Operational Concept Validation Methodology E-OCVM, Version 2, 17/03/2007

Reference

[17] Compute and map Operational and Airspace KPI’s, SESAR T2.3.1/D4, DLT-0706-231-00-02, 13.11.2007

Reference

[18] SESAR Task Deliverable DLT-0507-321-00-96 Task 3.2.1/D1 Identification of blocking points/bottlenecks for the current European Airspace

Reference

Episode 3


of 39


3 WP5 CONTRIBUTION TO EP3 VALIDATION STRATEGY

3.1 STEP 0.1 UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM

At present, capacity at airports (i.e., their infrastructure and consequentially, TMAs) is primarily the limiting factor of overall system capacity, with delays in the en-route sector at historically low levels.

The EUROCONTROL Study Report “Challenges to Growth” [11] suggests that, under the most optimistic of circumstances, existing airport capacity in Europe is capable of absorbing a maximum of twice the traffic demand of 2003. Other studies [12], [13] suggest a traffic growth rate of between 4 & 5% per annum through to 2025 can be expected. At these rates, a total capacity barrier would be reached around 2017. Noting that this includes capacity filling at regional airports as well as current major hub airports, it is reasonable to assume that the practical capacity barrier will be reached between 2013 and 2015, well before the theoretical barrier.

Consequently, in order to meet the SESAR challenge and break through this barrier, sufficient capacity in the basic ATM infrastructure of the air transport network (including airports) must be created, together with a concept of operations which makes it function as a true, single network.

In addition to the capacity problem the PRR2006 [15] describes the predictability issue in its executive summary as follows:

Standard deviations of departure and arrival times reached 18 and 20 minutes respectively (~ +2.7 minutes vs. 2003). This growing variability has a negative impact on predictability, i.e. the ability of airlines and airports to build and operate reliable and efficient schedules. Pre-departure processes play a main role in this poor predictability, and ATM only a minor role. Improved predictability enables airlines and airports to improve the punctuality/financial performance trade-off.

As a result of the current problems in the airport and TMA domain the SESAR Task Deliverable “Identification of limits/blocking points for airport environment” [14], [18] describes the most relevant blocking points which are addressed in this validation strategy:

• Non optimum traffic throughput for sustained period s. ATC operation is not synchronized with the overall network operation. New initiatives should lead to an optimum flight operation. (SWIM, System-Wide Information Management leads to the network operations plan, NOP),

• Environmental issues (noise and air quality) where the local community is increasingly able to constrain or delay airport exp ansion and airspace changes. The ICAO “balanced approach” considers that cost effective responses to noise are a mix of four main measures: reduction of noise at source, operational restrictions, operational procedures and land use planning. Other examples: non-optimal airspace design and non-optimal operations result in longer 2D-routes or in non-optimal speed or flight level (increase of cost and emissions),

• Lack of relevant tools and procedures to manage bad weather conditions and imperfect meteorological forecasting, which give substantial reduction of airport capacity (Taxiways and runways) in abnormal weather operations (CatII, CatIII, contaminated taxiways and runways) and leads to excessive maintenance of regulations. Under low visibility conditions the possibility of runway incursions rises dramatically. A degraded situational awareness of all partners involved (ground and

Episode 3


of 39


cockpit) is the cause. The Runway Occupation Time rises under these conditions with a consequent reduction in runway capacity,

• Inadequate airport infrastructure and poor predicta bility of Runway Occupancy Times. Short-term improvements are possible (rapid exit taxiways, holding areas…), but have to be planned in the long-term cycle of the infrastructure building. It is also relevant to safety (prevention of runway incursions).

3.2 STEP 0.2 UNDERSTAND THE PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

While the airport planning is covered by EP3 WP3 this section elaborates the proposed solutions of the airport and TMA execution phase with regard to the aforementioned problems.

The main characteristics of the general SESAR proposed solutions can be found in [5]. Further details can be obtained from [6], sections F3.3 High Complexity Terminal operations, F.5 Operations on and around Airport and from F.6.1 Airport Operations and F.6.2 Terminal Area Operations.

3.2.1 Scope of WP5 addressed solutions

This section briefly characterizes the specific solutions addressed in this work package. The details about the application of the solutions and the mapping to SESAR Operational Improvements, Lines of Change, and the Key Performance Areas are described later in sections 3.7 and 3.9. More detailed descriptions of possible solutions including scenarios can be obtained from the EP3 Detailed Operational Descriptions [9]. General information of future airport and TMA operations can be found in the SESAR Operational Concept, sections 2.2.4.2.2 and 2.2.4.2.3 [5].

In summary, the addressed solutions to the blocking points are listed below:

1. Non optimum traffic throughput for sustained periods

• P-RNAV arrival routes and arrival sequences will be studied as well as Precision Trajectory Clearance (PTC) 2D and 3D; allocation of departure routes; controller tool Medium Term Conflict Detection in TMA; KPA: Capacity and Efficiency,

• Separation and queue management during approach in mixed traffic environment (using P-RNAV and ASAS, operating at different performance levels). KPA: Efficiency, Predictability and Capacity,

• Optimum use of existing exits by adapting braking techniques (Brake to Vacate), lower runway occupancy times. KPA: Capacity,

• Fixed reduced separations based on wake turbulence prediction, time based separation for arrivals; KPA: Capacity.

2. Environmental issues (noise and air quality) where the local community is increasingly able to constrain or delay airport expansion and airspace changes.

• Managed thrust on take off, continuous climb departure routes and continuous descent arrival procedures all contribute to fuel efficiency and noise reductions. KPA: Efficiency, Environment.

• Optimum arrival and departure routes and procedures to minimize the noise impact. KPA: Efficiency, Environment

3. Lack of relevant tools and procedures to manage bad weather conditions and imperfect meteorological forecasting

Episode 3


of 39


• Surface management processes and their integration with the NOP will be studied. Included are turnaround processes in relation to runway sequencing and scheduling. KPA: Capacity (maintains VMC capacity in IMC conditions for the movement area), Efficiency (improved time and fuel efficiency in IMC conditions),

• Reduced ILS sensitive and critical areas; KPA: Capacity.

4. Inadequate airport infrastructure and poor predictability of Runway Occupancy Times

• Optimum use of existing exits by adapting braking techniques (Brake to Vacate), lower runway occupancy times. KPA: Capacity,

• Fixed reduced separations based on wake turbulence prediction, time based separation for arrivals; KPA: Capacity.

3.3 STEP 1.1 VERIFY THE STAKEHOLDERS, THEIR NEEDS AND INVOLVEMENT

According to SESAR D1 [3] Air Transport is defined as the full set of activities required to satisfy mobility needs by air. The principal direct stakeholder groups in today’s air transport industry are the end-user customers (i.e., passengers and freight), the airspace users (i.e., scheduled & non-scheduled airlines, military, business & general aviation), the aerodrome community, the air navigation service providers and the supply industry (i.e., aircraft manufacturers, suppliers of systems used for air traffic management and airport purposes, suppliers of other supporting systems).

Important stakeholders for EP3 are the airspace users and their requirements as expressed in SESAR D2 [4]. In order to bring together the various characteristics of the airspace users’ needs, the notion of a so-called “ business trajectory ” [6] has emerged as being central to the way in which they envisage the future ATM System performing. However, airspace users are not directly involved in the project. Their needs will be taken into account through use of the relevant SESAR documentation.

Involved project stakeholders are the European Commission and the project partners, divided in the ANSP and research community group. The SESAR Joint Undertaking is the major customer though not directly involved in the project.

From an internal stakeholder point of view, active controllers from each ANSP will be involved in the preparation and execution of all validation activities. This secures a realistic operational feedback and evaluation of the results. Moreover, EP3 WP2 ensures the integration of all results on a project level. There is also an interface with WP3 in terms of overlap between (network) planning and execution phase.

The management of the stakeholders1 expects the following evidence in order to have sufficient confidence in the validation results (Table 0-1):

ANSP • Clear statement of the assumptions,

• Use well known operational TMA environment (not generic airspace) if concept is in phase V2 (Feasibility) or beyond, because this increases confidence in results

• Involve operational experts who are familiar with the airspace, procedures etc. Even though sometimes ATC needs new operational procedures that the controllers are not familiar with. Sometimes early in the development of new technology and/or procedures one needs to make the airspace familiar and realistic but also less complicated than it is in the real life. Otherwise the validation objectives are difficult to measure,

• Controller tools must represent the operational system and procedures in a

1 according to a survey of internal project stakeholders

Episode 3


of 39


realistic way.

Research Institutes • Clear definition of the scenarios (e.g. airspace, assumptions),

• Detailed description of the TMA/airport concept elements to be validated (actors, roles, procedures, functionalities of technological enablers) in order to reflect the corresponding concept element in a realistic way,

• Visibility that the European programme will benefit the TMA and airport operations at a national level,

• Active involvement in validation activities of ANSPs and airspace users, and, if possible also outside the consortium,

• Concise reporting, including published papers and conference presentations,

• Evidence to support decision making of whether the SESAR concept in TMA and at airports will be able to achieve the assigned objectives

European Commission • Episode 3 addresses the fourth Call of Proposals on Aeronautics and Space thematic priority: research area 4 “Increasing the operational capacity and safety of the air transport system”, IP13 Improvement of ATM system processes through validation,

• The Project aims to identify substantial and sustainable improvements in ATM performance by addressing some of the current day ATM inefficiencies through an initial validation of the SESAR Operational Concept,

• It complies with the key priorities identified for Research Area 4 whilst contributing directly to the implementation of the Single European Sky through SESAR,

• It builds upon the European Commission’s Gate-to-Gate project and other FP project results and experience gained, which will provide a source of validation and operational information as well as integrated validation platforms to support the assessment of the SESAR concept of operations,

• Episode 3 will, for the first time, allow application of the E-OCVM methodology to the validation of a holistic ATM concept. This is supported by ongoing work by the CAATS-2 project to support ATM R&D projects and to capture application experience from Episode 3 and other projects in future versions of the E-OCVM itself,

• It is expected that the validation data and experience gained will be captured and integrated within the Validation Data Repository.

SESAR Joint Undertaking

• Key aspects of the project support the SJU in understanding the validation needs, methods and techniques appropriate for the validation of the SESAR Operational Concept, taking into account the complexity of the task and the scope of the concept,

• To gain greater understanding of the concept, Expert Groups in WP5 will clarify a number of key SESAR concept elements supported by analytical modelling, gaming and prototype development and exercises. These descriptions will be captured in Detailed Operational Documents that will consolidate operational scenarios and use cases used in assessment activity, clearly linked to the SESAR Concept documents,

• The output of these activities will also feed into initial operability and performance assessments of the concept linked to the SESAR performance targets whilst the validation methods and techniques used will be assessed and reported on to provide learning to the SJU work programme,

• Episode 3 has been focused to propose a consistent work programme ending in 2009, to avoid the complexity of managing a SESAR validation programme in parallel with SESAR JU activities.

Table 0-1: Stakeholders Needs and Expectations

Episode 3


of 39


3.4 STEP 1.2 IDENTIFY THE EXISTING INFORMATION INCLUDING LEVEL OF

MATURITY

Numerous projects and programmes in Europe and in the US are addressing airport and TMA concept validation. The most recent survey has been done by SESAR WP3.1, Integration of European ATM Initiatives and Programmes [10].

The following subsections provide a more detailed analysis of some selected TMA and airport related projects based on the results of SESAR WP3.1. It includes a summary description, the research areas addressed, the maturity level and possible deployment dates. The EP3 Coordination Cell together with the EP3 WP5 expert groups will further provide a more detailed analysis regarding inputs for the validation exercises. This will be done by means of the Question & Answers spreadsheet and the assumption analysis.

3.4.1 DM – Departure Metering Validation

DM includes an Operational Concept for Departure Metering in a multi airport TMA. The analysis is performed by use of an airport and airspace model validating initial concept benefits in high density traffic situation. The model was applied in fast time, and the operational environment was the London TMA including the five biggest airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted and City).

The results are reduction of the variability of traffic flows over TMA exit fixes. Smoothed flows instead of strong peak behaviour result in less workload for TMA and ACC controllers. The objective is to reduce the bunching effect in London TMA and ACC sectors, to reduce the workload of executive controllers and limit the costs in runway sequence delay by use of a departure management concept.

Research issues addressed Innovative ATM Concepts and New Technologies, Overall and System-Wide ATM Topics, Validation of ATM Systems and Procedures, Airline Operations and Systems

Start and end date 28/9/2005– 28/9/2007

Maturity level (E-OCVM) V2

Deployment dates Possibly 2013-2020. Most likely 2021 and beyond.

3.4.2 Tailored Arrival (oceanic)

Tailored arrival procedures use an FMS-loadable route clearance, with along-path altitude and speed constraints, to construct a 4-D trajectory that extends from cruise altitude to the runway threshold with a Required Time of Arrival constraint at a feeder fix. The resulting trajectory is designed to be a continuous, low-power descent that, with the proper ground tools, can be “tailored” for individual aircraft performance characteristics, airline preferences, and local traffic and weather conditions. The Tailored Arrival permits the aircraft to remain at cruise altitude longer than conventional step-down arrival procedures used today, leading to reductions in community noise impact, flight time, and fuel consumption.

Research issues addressed Airspace Management and ATC Procedures, Flow and Capacity Management, Validation of ATM Systems and Procedures, Airport Operations and Traffic Management, Environmental Topics

Start and end date 2004 – N/A


Deployment dates 2007-2013 in non dense traffic conditions

Episode 3


of 39


2013-2020 in dense traffic conditions.

3.4.3 TAM -Total Airport Management AT-ONE

Total Airport Management (TAM)2 concerns the strategic, tactical and operational planning of arrival, departure and ground traffic at airport, including gate and stand allocation, ground vehicle traffic, passenger and cargo handling, and aircraft turn around ground services. All parties at the airport are involved in the process: air traffic management, air traffic control, airlines, airports, ground handling companies, and passengers, but just as well air cargo companies, environmental groups, and governmental organisations, each with their own goals.

To improve traffic throughput at the airport, Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) and System Wide Information Management (SWIM) are introduced. CDM and SWIM concern the optimisation of the decision making process of each actor, based on shared information. This requires information exchange, co-ordination of activities, co-operation between parties, and negotiation. TAM includes CDM and SWIM and takes a next step to support the joint airport planning and decision making processes of all parties involved.

Research issues addressed Innovative ATM Concepts and New Technologies, Overall and System-Wide ATM Topics, Flow and Capacity Management, Decision Support Systems, Airport Operations and Traffic Management, Airline Operations

Start and end date 01/01/2006– 31/12/2010

Maturity level (E-OCVM) N/A

Deployment dates 2013-2020

3.4.4 “Point Merge”: Improving the management of arrival flows

Point Merge is a new method to merge arrival flows, based on a specific P-RNAV (Precision Area Navigation) route structure. It also enables continuous descent approach (CDA).

The motivation is to improve the management of arrival flows, and in particular to:

• Maintain current runway throughput (during longer periods and with high accuracy) with potential to match future capacity increases.

• Minimise environmental impact (continuous descent and containment of trajectories).

• Increase predictability (aircraft on Flight Management System trajectory).

• Address staffing and qualification (standard and streamlined controller working methods).

The route structure is made of a point (merge point) with predefined legs (sequencing legs) equidistant to this point for path shortening or stretching. The sequence is achieved with conventional direct-to instructions to the merge point. (Open-loop vectoring should only be used for recovery from unexpected situations).

Point Merge relies on existing technology: P-RNAV and AMAN (Arrival Manager) metered traffic. It can be implemented in the short term (e.g. in 2012 time frame). It is also a building block for medium and long term developments in the context of SESAR, such as 4D trajectory management.

2 Overlap with EP3 WP3. Here, only the tactical part is within the scope of this Strategy.

Episode 3


of 39


The Point Merge project, fully integrated within EUROCONTROL TMA activities, will identify benefits, limits and applicability of Point Merge and support ANSP’s for implementation.

The support to implementation has started with three potential candidates: AVINOR (Oslo), IAA (Dublin) and ENAV (Roma), and simulations are planned for 2008 and 2009.

Research issues addressed Validation of ATM Systems and Procedures, Airspace Management and ATC Procedures,, Environmental Topics, Safety

Start and end date Start: Oct 2005 – Dec 20123

Maturity level (E-OCVM) V2/V3 (towards V4/V5 with some ANSP’s)

Deployment dates Planned from end 2010

3.4.5 TMA2010+

Initiatives exist, in various locations, to progress the implementation of P-RNAV and also of CDAs. When implemented, these bring benefits in terms of predictability, efficiency, safety and the environment. However, the benefits that could be achieved are currently not being fully exploited, because, without appropriate system support, when traffic levels increase controllers routinely revert to radar vectoring to ensure tighter separation and increased throughput.

TMA2010+ is promoting the use of P-RNAV and CDAs, and is also developing the required system support, including trajectory prediction enhancement, conformance monitoring capability and advanced sequencing capability that will, through system advisories delivered to the controller for validation and execution, allow P-RNAV and CDA operations in high-density traffic situations. The proposed system will also be capable of handling mixed-mode operations, catering for aircraft of differing navigation capabilities. It will rely on airspace design principles and procedures being in place to support the advanced operation.

Research issues addressed Airspace Management and ATC Procedures, Flow and Capacity Management, Validation of ATM Systems and Procedures, Airport Operations and Traffic Management, decision Support Systems, Environmental Topics, Safety

Start and end date 2006 - 2013


Deployment dates 2013 [or before]

3.4.6 RESET

RESET will identify, for each flight phase, if and by how much the separation minima have to be reduced in the highest traffic areas in order to accommodate a doubling of peak-hour air traffic. This will be addressed independently of the particular operational concept, meaning that the feasibility remains to be proven. It is intended that the RESET project will select and prioritise (at least) three separation minima proposals for potential modification, which will be supported by comprehensive safety, efficiency and economic assessments. Finally, RESET will provide adequate supporting evidence and justification, in terms of safety, efficiency and economic assessments, to press for changes in separation minima. The principal objective for the project is to identify what reductions in separation minima are safe and feasible to contribute towards enabling a factor of 2 (x2) traffic growth over Europe.

3 Depending on the progress and benefits achieved the project may continue after this date.

Episode 3


of 39


Research issues addressed Overall and system wide ATM topics, Human resources in ATM, Decision support systems, Airport operations and traffic management.

Start and end date 31/10/2006 – 31/10/2009

Maturity level (E-OCVM) V0, V1

Deployment dates 2013 – 2020

3.5 STEP 1.3 DESCRIBE VALIDATION EXPECTATIONS AND OUTLINE CASES

There has been a shift in focus of the validation expectations, since the establishment of the SESAR JU, with emphasis now lying in three main areas:

• Clarification of the concept; recognising that the concept is large and that EPISODE 3 does not have the resources to address all areas and OIs,

• Expanding the repertoire of cost-effective validation techniques (e.g. gaming variants) suited to these early stages of concept validation,

• Consolidating our learning on the application of the E-OCVM to SESAR-scale Concept of Operations.

In this context, as well as targeting improved performance assessment, exercises in EP3 WP5 TMA and Airport can support clarification, provide some trials of clarifications, explore alternative validation techniques and gain important validation experience.

3.5.1 Case Approach in the Project

EP3 has made a number of simplifying assumptions in order to take a consistent and harmonised approach to cases as described in E-OCVM [16].

The first is that from the point of view of developing the system there is a need for an integrated process which may identify issues associate with the new operational concept from ‘the system perspective’, traversing classical issue boundaries, e.g. between safety, business or human performance.

In fact, E-OCVM limits its use of cases to serving two main functions: firstly the identification and management of stakeholder needs and expectations; and secondly the development of arguments as to the delivery of potential benefit.

With respect to stakeholder expectations, EP3 makes a second simplifying assumption that the general needs of ‘typical’ SESAR stakeholders are broadly represented by the performance framework and targets already identified by SESAR D2 and further developed in SESAR D4. With respect to the benefit arguments, within EP3 the work being undertaken to develop the performance framework explores the value of influence diagrams as a means of developing these arguments. That work is supported by feedback from the development of exercises and their subsequent results.

In consequence, at this early stage of validation, EP3 does not conduct separate cases at the exercise level. Instead a general, project wide, issue analysis process, reflecting our system perspective will be put in place. Consolidation and analysis in WP2.3 will feed lessons learnt but will also serve to identify outstanding issues and case priorities for post EP3 Studies.

3.5.2 Case Approach in WP5

This Work Package establish and maintain an issue log to identify potential issues of all types, e.g. Safety, Human Factors, Environmental, Technical enabler or indeed Operational

Episode 3


of 39


Issues which are identified within the preparation and conduct of exercises. The main sources of issues within WP 5 are expected to come from the TMA and Airport Expert Groups (WP5.3.1 and WP5.3.2) and from the prototyping exercises (WP5.3.6).

This WP will also contribute to safety and environmental issues.

Target concept safety assessment will be undertaken through hazard assessment and preliminary system safety assessment. An integrated risk picture will be developed and associated safety analysis built to address derived target levels of safety. EP3 WP2 will integrate the safety assessments to provide a consolidated view and to confirm that the target concept is safe “in principle.” [2].

In this work package, expert groups and exercises will contribute to the EP3 safety activity:

• Specification of risk reducing properties of the system,

• Hazards identification,

• Specification of risk limiting properties of the system.

The exercise 5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA looks at initial trends regarding safety improvements through increased situational awareness, due to the deployment of new route structures and structured/standardised working methods.

The EP3 environmental issue analysis will produce framework and guidance material for environmental assessment. Such guidance material is currently not available. The main objective is to provide the methodological approach including performance indicator definition for environmental assessment and the identification of the SESAR Concept elements which are related to environment.

In this work package no contribution to this analysis is foreseen though the expert groups and exercises address the environmental impact of new operational procedures. This is also in line with the reduced scope of the EP3 project and the shift in focus (see above).

3.6 STEP 1.4 IDENTIFY CONCEPT PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES IN KPA

The ATM Performance Targets for 2020 [D2]

ATM performance covers a very broad spectrum of aspects, which are represented through eleven Key Performance Areas (KPAs). The diagram below illustrates these KPAs and how they could develop towards the 2020 targets according to SESAR Deliverable D2 [4].

SESAR Deliverable D2 clustered the KPAs into three major groups “Societal Outcome”, “Operational Performance”, and “Performance Enablers”. The decision criteria for grouping are based on the “highest” degree of visibility of the KPA outcome and impact, rather than on how the performance is achieved.

Basically, the three levels of visibility are:

• Societal Outcome – High Visibility: effects are of a political nature and are even visible to those who are not users of the Air Transport System.

• Operational Performance – Medium Visibility: visibility of the effects stops generally at the level of ANSPs, Airport Operators, airspace users and airspace user customers (e.g. passengers).

• Performance Enablers – Low Visibility: these are not of direct interest to airspace user customers and the KPAs play their role mostly at the business trajectory planning stage.

Since the focus in Episode 3 WP5 is on the Societal and Operational Performance KPAs the Performance Enabler KPAs will not be further detailed.

Episode 3


of 39


Figure 0-1: SESAR Key Performance Areas

The figure below illustrates the grouping of KPAs:

Figure 0-2: Grouping of KPA

The SESAR Operational Concept describes a performance driven approach. It does not solve a specific local problem but aims to deliver at European level a well defined performance level. Therefore, the targets are expressed in terms of KPA’s and focus areas at European ATM system level. It is still to be determined how these global targets can be broken down to local level, i.e. to targets at Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for the geographical area the specific simulation is addressing.

The experimental plans of each exercise will explain their contribution towards the SESAR targets in terms of KPI’s and tool specific metrics and indicators.

The tables in the next section represent the findings of the SESAR performance framework [8]. They provide the focus areas and the strategic design target (i.e. the Key Performance

Episode 3


of 39


Indicators) which should be achieved with the SESAR Operational Concept by 2020. In addition to the above ATM performance areas, an important element to check is that the changes envisioned by the novel concept are checked for operability4 [16].

3.6.1 Safety

This KPA addresses the risk, the prevention and the occurrence and mitigation of air traffic accidents.

Focus Areas:

• ATM-related safety outcome: This Focus Area covers the occurrence and prevention of accidents involving aircraft with a MTOW > 2.25 tonnes, operating under IFR, with a direct and/or indirect ATM contribution. This includes collisions on the ground and in the air, CFIT etc.

Initial Indicative Strategic Design Target (Key Per formance Indicators)

The SESAR initial indicative safety performance objective builds on the ATM2000+ Strategy objective: "To improve safety levels by ensuring that the numbers of ATM induced accidents and serious or risk bearing incidents (includes those with direct and indirect ATM contribution) do not increase and, where possible, decrease".

Considering the anticipated increase in the European annual traffic volume, the implication of the initial safety performance objective is that the overall safety level would gradually have to improve, so as to reach an improvement factor 3 in order to meet the safety objective in 2020. This is based on the assumption that safety needs to improve with the square of traffic volume increase, in order to maintain a constant accident rate.

In the longer term (design life of the concept) safety levels would need to be able to increase by a factor 10 to meet a possible threefold increase in traffic, in accordance with the political vision and goal.

EP3 WP5 contribution to Safety:

EP3 WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Safety

WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group The Expert Group will reflect on all focus areas to help the validation exercises.

WP5.3.2 Airport Expert Group This group does not directly address the focus area which deals with the occurrence and prevention of accidents but will contribute to the safety assessment and hazard identification

WP5.3.5 TMA Trajectory and Separation Management Through reduction in the number of potential separation loses (conflicts), as well as a reduction in the time the controller is either overloaded or underloaded

WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA This exercise does not directly address the focus area. It rather deals with safety impacts through increased situational awareness, due to the deployment of new route structures and structured standardized working methods which will enable more predictable arrival procedures to be achieved.

4 Note that main focus of prototyping activities generally remains on operability even though some initial/indirect performance measurements may be provided.

Episode 3


of 39


3.6.2 Environmental Sustainability

Aviation has a diverse impact on the environment, but not all aspects can be influenced by the ATM System. This KPA addresses the role of ATM in the management and control of environmental impacts. The aims are to reduce adverse environmental impacts (average per flight); to ensure that air traffic related environmental considerations are respected; and, that as far as possible new environmentally driven non-optimal operations and constraints are avoided or optimised as far as possible.

Focus Areas:

• Compliance with environmental rules: covers the degree to which environmentally driven traffic rules and constraints imposed on airports and airspace are respected,

• Atmospheric Impacts: covers gaseous emissions (CO2, NOx, H2O, etc.), particulates and secondary effects (such as contrail triggered cirrus) generated in all flight phases (taxi, departure/arrival, en-route), and their impacts on both local air quality and the global climate,

• Noise Impacts: covers noise generated during all flight phases (en-route = sonic boom) and its impact on affected population.


As a first step towards the political objective to enable a 10% reduction in the effects flights have on the environment, the initial indicative Environmental design targets are:

Local environmental rules affecting ATM are to be 100% respected (e.g. aircraft type restrictions, night movement bans, noise routes and noise quotas, etc.). Exceptions are only allowed for safety or security reasons. Noise emissions and their impacts are minimised for each flight to the greatest extent possible.

EP3 WP5 contribution to Environmental Sustainability:

EP3 WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Environmenta l Sustainability


WP5.3.4 Multi-Airport TMA Focus Area Noise Impacts: Flight path and flight duration in TMA airspace will give an indication of the impact of noise load on the environment.

Focus Area Atmospheric Impacts: will be addressed trough the assessment of advanced CDAs and 3D planned departures which will enable fuel-efficient profiles.

WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA Focus Area Noise Impacts, Focus Area Atmospheric Impacts: This exercise will provide initial trends by assessing the optimisation of vertical trajectories as well as 3D containment of trajectory dispersion, expected to result in a decrease of the environmental impact.

3.6.3 Capacity

This KPA addresses the ability of the ATM System to cope with air traffic demand (in number and distribution through time and space).

Focus Areas:

Episode 3


of 39


• Airspace capacity: covers the capacity of any individual or aggregated airspace volume within the European airspace. It relates to the throughput of that volume per unit of time, for a given safety level,

• Airport capacity: Focus is on the throughput of individual airports in terms of aircraft movements, taking into account the composite effect of air- and landside constraints. So this Focus Area covers much more than just runway capacity. Focus is also on the throughput of individual congested airports in low visibility (i.e. IMC) conditions.

Initial Indicative Strategic Design Targets (Key Pe rformance Indicators)

The initial indicative design target for Capacity deployment is that the ATM System can accommodate by 2020 a 73% increase in traffic (annual IFR traffic growth in the European network from 2005 baseline) while meeting the targets for quality of service KPAs (Efficiency, Flexibility, Predictability): 5% increase in the period 2005-2010, 3.5-4% during 2010-2015, 2-3% during 2015-2020, and 2% p.a. beyond 2020. This corresponds to an optimistic demand forecast combined with an optimistic airport capacity growth scenario, which however assumes that there will be very few Greenfield airport development projects in Europe in the next 20 years.

These are the average European design targets (at network level). When transposing this to local targets, regional differences will exist. The ATM target concept should be able to support a tripling or more of traffic where required.

For airports without special physical constraints (including environmental considerations) in the airside-landside value chain, the objectives are:

• Increase hourly capacity in nominal conditions,

• Decrease the capacity gap between VMC and IMC conditions.

Airport daily capacity targets expressed previously by daily movements are replaced by hourly capacity targets. This hourly capacity is "the best in class" value available 365 days per year, all day long (from 0700 till 2200 hrs local time):

• 60 movements per hour in VMC (and 48 movements per hour in IMC) for airport with a single runway,

• 90 movements per hour in VMC (and 72 movements per hour in IMC) for airport with parallel but dependent runways,

• 120 movements per hour in VMC (and 96 movements per hour in IMC) for airport with parallel and independent runways.

Congested airports will need a capability for sustained operations at maximum capacity during most hours of the day. Avoiding disruptions is top priority for those airports.

EP3 WP5 contribution to Capacity:

EP3 WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Capacity

WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group Focus Area Airspace Capacity. The Expert Group will reflect on all focus areas to help the validation exercises.

WP 5.3.3 Runway Operations FTS Focus Area Airport Capacity: This exercise will investigate runway throughput improvements.

WP 5.3.5 TMA Trajectory and Separation Management

Focus Area Airspace Capacity: This exercise will investigate TMA throughput improvements associated with expected reduction of controller workload due to the a/c capabilities to fly precise trajectories and the introduction of new OIs.

Episode 3


of 39


WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA Focus Area Airspace Capacity: This exercise will provide initial trends on the reduction in controller task load achieved by a reduced requirement for controller tactical intervention – due to new organisation of TMA operations relying on Performance Based Navigation (PBN) concepts. This reduced workload is expected to result in an increase in Terminal Airspace Capacity.

3.6.4 Efficiency

This KPA addresses the actually flown 4D trajectories of aircraft in relationship to their Shared Business Trajectory.

Focus Areas:

• Temporal efficiency: covers the magnitude and causes of deviations from planned (on-time) departure time and deviations from Initial Shared Business Trajectory durations (taxi time, airborne time),

• Fuel efficiency: covers the magnitude and causes of deviations from optimum fuel consumption.


Only the fuel efficiency design target is considered here. The initial indicative Efficiency design target is an improvement in ATM efficiency such that:

• Gate to gate fuel efficiency (Actual compared to Initial Shared Business Trajectory):

o Occurrence: less than 5% of flights suffering additional fuel consumption of more than 2.5%,

o Severity: for flights suffering additional fuel consumption of more than 2.5%, the average additional fuel consumption will not exceed 5%.

EP3 WP5 contribution to Efficiency:

EP3 WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Efficiency

WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group The Expert Group will reflect on all the focus areas to help the validation exercises.

WP5.3.4 Multi-Airport TMA Focus Areas Temporal Efficiency, Focus Areas Fuel Efficiency: This exercise will address flight path and flight duration figures. It will also investigate advanced CDAs and accurate 3D planned departures.


Focus Areas Temporal Efficiency,: This exercise investigates the impact of flying the optimum trajectory and reducing the flight duration.

WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA Focus Areas Fuel Efficiency, Focus Areas Temporal Efficiency: This exercise will provide initial trends by assessing the optimisation of vertical trajectories as well as 3D containment of trajectory dispersion, expected to result in an increase in fuel efficiency.

3.6.5 Predictability

This KPA addresses the ability of the ATM System to ensure a reliable and consistent level of 4D trajectory performance. In other words: across many flights, the ability to control the variability of the deviation between the actually flown 4D trajectories of aircraft in relationship to the Reference Business Trajectory.

Episode 3


of 39


Focus Areas:

• On-Time operation: covers the variability of the flight operation: departure (off-block) and arrival (on-block) punctuality, and the variability of flight phase durations (turnaround time, taxi time, airborne time),

• Service Disruption Effect: Focus is on the prevention and mitigation of the Business Trajectory effects of ATM service disruption. Such effects can take the form of departure/arrival delays, flight cancellations and diversions,

• Knock-on effect: Focus is on the impact of (a lack of) On-Time operation and schedule buffers on subsequent flights. Such impact takes the form of reactionary delays, and in more extreme cases may lead to flight cancellations.


The initial indicative Predictability design target is an improvement in ATM predictability focused on On-time operation (on-time means within 3 minutes before or after the time reference), Service disruption effect and knock-on effects. This means for arrival:

• Arrival punctuality: less than 5% (European-wide annual average) of flights suffering arrival delay of more than 3 minutes,

• Arrival delay: the average delay (European-wide annual average) of delayed flights (with a delay penalty of more than 3 minutes) will be less than 10 minutes.

EP3 WP5 contribution to Predictability:

EP3 WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Predictabili ty

WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group The Expert Group will reflect on all the focus areas to be able to help the validation exercises.

WP5.3.4 Multi-Airport TMA Focus Area On-Time operations: The exercise will analyse the differences between planned and actual times.


Focus Area On-Time operations: The exercise will analyse the difference between RBT’s related to the different enablers studied.

WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA The exercise will provide initial trends by exploring the impact of the adherence to the RBTs (CTA) and of the use of CDA on predictability of TMA traffic (more predictable lateral/vertical flight paths).

3.6.6 Operability

In addition to the SESAR performance areas, an important element to check is that the changes envisioned by the novel concept can safely be operated by Air Traffic Controllers.

The E-OCVM methodology [16] defines Operability that way: “OPERABILITY: [the changes envisioned by the novel concept are] usable by and suitable for those who operate the system, e.g. controllers and pilots. Satisfaction of usability and suitability issues lead to operational acceptability.”

EP3 WP5 contribution to Operability:

WP5 Exercise Title Contribution to Operability


WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA This exercise will provide an initial assessment of operability and acceptability aspects of the SESAR

Episode 3


of 39


concept in dense terminal airspace, from a controller perspective, relying on subjective/objective measurements.

3.7 STEP 1.5 ESTABLISH INITIAL VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS

The validation map (refer to

Table 0-2) provides a mapping of SESAR Operational Improvement (OI) steps and the Lines of Change and how these are addressed in EP3 WP5. Only the OI steps are listed here which are addressed by the exercises (see column EP3 WP5 Validation Intent). Additionally, the Implementation Package (IP) and the Key Performance Area (KPA) are described. All information is derived from the SESAR ATM Master Plan [7] while the beneficiaries and the EP3 WP5 validation intent comes from the responsible project partners.

In many cases only parts of the OI-steps will be validated, e.g. regarding AO-0301 Crosswind Reduced Separations for Departures and Arrivals all procedural aspects how reduced separations could be achieved and managed are not part of the approach. Instead, the exercise assumes that reduced separations can be achieved, and it validates the impact with regard to the possible capacity increase. The same is valid for most of the other OI-steps as the validation exercises focus on concept clarification and expanding the repertoire of cost-effective validation techniques as outlined in section 3.5. Table 0-2 also illustrates the fact that only a limited number of SESAR OI-steps can be addressed within the scope of this project.

The focus of the validation exercises is on a subset of Implementation Package 2 as it is also stated in the DOW [2]. However, roughly half of the OI-steps are related to Implementation Package 1 (IP1). Although IP1 is not the primary focus of SESAR and EP3 research there are still open issues in particular with regard to performance assessment. Moreover, the IP1 OI-steps need to be listed if they are assumed in the environment. IP3 is not covered here due to low maturity of the concept and the need to adopt a stepped approach. Therefore, the result is a combination of IP1 and IP2 steps.

Assumptions will be managed through the experimental plans of the individual exercises. This is the main source of the assumptions being made by the exercises. The expert group is responsible for the collection and facilitation if there are contradicting or “unrealistic” assumptions. Moreover, it has to be ensured that the assumptions reflect the notion of the SESAR Operational Concept [6]. Finally, the assumptions for all exercises will be approved by the Expert Groups.

Episode 3


of 39


Line of Change OI step ID and title IP KPA with magnitude

Beneficiary EP3 WP5 Validation Intent

L01-05 Airspace User Data to Improve Ground Tools Performance

IS-0303 Use of Predicted Trajectory (PT) to Enhance ATM Ground System Performance through TMR

IP2 - - Enhanced ground TP, including A-G integration is a pre-requisite. No validation, but emulation of appropriate performance.

L02-07 Enhancing Terminal Airspace

AOM-0601 Terminal Airspace Organisation Adapted through Use of Best Practice, PRNAV and FUA Where Suitable

IP1 Capacity +

Efficiency +++

Environmental Sustainability +

Safety +

Airspace Users, Aircrews, ANSPs, ATCOs

Initial trends on Capacity, Efficiency, Environmental Sustainability, and indirectly on Safety

L02-07 Enhancing Terminal Airspace

AOM-0602 Enhance Terminal Route Design Using P-RNAV Capability

IP1 Environmental Sustanaibility –

Safety +

Cost Effectiveness +++

Airspace Service providers and Airlines, as safety should be improved.

Determination of the impact of introducing P-RNAV in terms of reduction of possible conflicts (safety)

Initial trends on Capacity, Environmental Sustainability, and indirectly on Safety

L02-08 Optimising Climb/Descend

AOM-0701 Continuous Descent Approach (CDA)

IP1 Capacity -

Efficiency +++


Airlines Initial trends. A trade-off between Capacity, and Efficiency/Environment should be considered (i.e. in a dense environment, resulting in “non idle thrust“ CDAs).

L02-08 Optimising Climb/Descend

AOM-0702 Advanced Continuous Descent Approach (ACDA)

IP2 Efficiency +++

Environment +

Airlines Difference of traditional sequencing against sequencing at TOD.

Initial trends. A trade-off between Capacity, and Efficiency/Environment should be considered (i.e. in a dense environment, resulting in “non idle thrust“ CDAs).

L03-01 Collaborative Layered Planning

DCB-0103 SWIM enabled NOP

IP2 Predictability +++ ANSP, AMAN is a beneficiary of NOP and departure regulations. Airlines profit

NOP should ensure low variability of demand at TOD. This may be emulated by using different scenarios. Validation intent is

Episode 3


of 39


Supported by Network Operations Plan

by more efficient use of existing runway capacity.

that less airspace and manoeuvring space and effort is needed when demand at TOD is compliant with NOP.

L06-03 ATC Automation in the Context of Terminal Area Operations

CM-0405 Automated Assistance to ATC Planning for Preventing Conflicts in Terminal Area Operation

IP2 Capacity +

Safety +

Efficiency +++

Analysis of the impact of introducing automated assistance to ATC for detecting conflicts in TMA in terms of safety (especially number of conflicts) and capacity (due to possible reduction of Tactical Controller Workload) and efficiency

L06-03 ATC Automation in the Context of Terminal Area Operations

CM-0406 Automated Assistance to ATC for detecting Conflicts in Terminal Area Operations

IP2 Safety +++ ANSPs and Airlines, as safety should be improved.

ANSP, as capacity might be increased due to the possible reduction in workload with the introduction of automated assistance.

Analysis of the impact of introducing automated assistance to ATC for detecting conflicts in TMA in terms of safety and capacity

L07-01 Arrival Traffic Synchronisation

TS-0102 Arrival Management Support Improvements (incl. CDA, P-RNAV)

IP1 Capacity +

Environmental Sustanaibility +

Predictability +++

Airlines, ANSP (enabling) Analysis of the impact of introducing P-RNAV in capacity and predictability

AMAN in support of PRNAV and CDA are emulated. Validation by assessment of difference of traditional (passing MF and sequencing) against sequencing at TOD

L07-01 Arrival Traffic Synchronization

TS-0103 Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) through Use of Datalink

IP2 Efficiency +

Predictability +++

ANSP CTA is an enabler to achieve required precision by PRNAV and CDA to meet AMAN prediction. Validation by emulation; Objective is to loose no or little capacity compared to traditional vectoring.

Initial trends (better presented traffic delivered by en-route reflected by scripted metering through CTA).


TS-0303 Arrival Management into Multiple Airports

IP2 Capacity +

Efficiency +++

Environment +

ANSP No direct validation, no modelling, but the problem is applicable in particular for the Dusseldorf area when arrival traffic is sequenced and enters the TMA to land on different airports such as EDDL and EDDK.

Episode 3


of 39



TS-0305 Arrival Management Extended to En Route Airspace

IP1 Efficiency +++

Predictability +

Airlines Difference of traditional sequencing against sequencing at TOD.

L08-02 Precision Trajectory Operations

CM-0601 Precision Trajectory Clearences (PTC)-2D based on pre-defined 2D routes

IP2 Efficiency –

Environmental Sustanaibility +

Safety +++

ANSPs as safety should be improved, and capacity might be increased due to the possible reduction in workload.

Airlines, as safety should be improved. However, if efficiency is worsened, this might have a negative impact on airlines.

Analysis of the effect of PTCD-2D in terms of flight duration and delays (for Efficiency) and in term of number of conflicts, possible separation losses and ATC underload and/or overload duration (for safety)

L08-02 Precision Trajectory Operations

CM-0602 Precision Trajectory Clearances (PTC)-3D based on pre-defined 3D routes

IP2 Efficiency –


Safety +

Capacity +++

ANSPs as safety should be improved, and capacity should be increased due to the reduction in workload.

Airlines, as safety should be improved. However, if efficiency is worsened, this might have a negative impact on airlines.

Analysis of the effect of PTCD-3D on predefined 3D routes in terms of flight duration and delays (for Efficiency) and in term of number of conflicts, possible separation losses and ATC underload and/or overload duration (for safety), and in terms of capacity

L08-04 ASAS Spacing and ASAS Cooperative Separation

TS-0105: ASAS Sequencing and Merging as Contribution to Traffic Synchronization in TMA (ASPA-S&M)

IP2 Capacity +++ Airlines due to better throughput Initial trends on capacity and first assessment of operability in conjunction with 2D PTC and CTA

L10-04 Using Runway Configuration to full potential

AUO-0702 Brake to Vacate Procedure

IP1 Capacity +++ Airports, as they can achieve best possible throughput

Airlines due to better throughput

Quantify impact of BTV w.r.t. hourly movements at selected airports

L10-05 Maximizing Runway Throughput

AO-0301 Crosswind Reduced Separations for Departures and Arrivals

IP1 Capacity +++ Airports, as they can achieve best possible throughput given certain wind conditions


Quantify impact of CRS w.r.t. hourly movements at selected airports


AO-0302 Time-based spacing for arrivals

IP1 Capacity +++ Airports, as they can achieve best possible throughput given certain wind

Quantify impact of TBS w.r.t. hourly movements at selected airports

Episode 3


of 39


conditions



AO-0303 Fixed reduced separations based on wake turbulence prediction



Quantify impact of fixed reduced separations w.r.t. hourly movements at selected airports

L10-06 Improving operations under adverse conditions including low visibility

AO-0503 Reduced ILS sensitive and critical areas



Quantify impact of reduced ILS sensitive and critical areas w.r.t. hourly movements at selected airports

Table 0-2: Validation Map SESAR – Episode 3 WP5

Episode 3


of 39


3.8 STEP 1.6 SELECT VALIDATION TOOL OR TECHNIQUES

Tools or technique for the validation exercises needs to be chosen. The decision on which tool or technique to use will depend on the initial Validation requirements, capabilities of platforms to support the selected concept and platforms availability.

Based on the addressed solutions and the initial validation requirements with respect to the early stage of the development of the SESAR Operational Concept the most appropriate validation techniques were adapted in the DOW [2]. This adaptation takes into account the conclusions from the Technical Audit. Figure 0-3 provides an overview of the tools and techniques applied in EP3 WP5.

Figure 0-3: Validation Techniques in EP3 WP5

WP5.2.2 Operational Concept Refinement reviews airport and TMA Detailed Operational Descriptions (DODs). It also provides updates in form of new operational scenarios according to the needs of the exercises. This work will occur throughout the whole EP3 project as the understanding of the SESAR concepts matures. The focus is on operational changes related to processes around the airport, improving runway separation, queue management, Advanced Continuous Descent Approach and the use of Performance Based Navigation.

After the conduction of the validation exercises the results will be fed back and integrated into the DODs by WP 2.2 Operational Requirements.

Both Expert Groups support the exercises in an iterative method by providing key answers to questions and assumptions. The Expert Groups will support in defining assumptions on how to brake down the Concept of Operations into a feasible and realistic ‘ATM system’ to be applied in an exercise.

Working methods, procedures, airspace organisation/sectors, traffic delivery and aircraft performance are issues that have to be addressed by the TMA Expert Group. The results will be reflected in the scenarios and Use cases as part of the DODs.

The Airport Expert Group is focusing on the validation of the Airport Concept Elements during the Execution phase of the SESAR Business Trajectory at the airport. The experts will go through a step by step approach for an aircraft arriving, performing turn-round and leaving an airport.

5.2.2 Operational Concept Refinement

5.3.1 TMA Expert Group 5.3.2 Airport Expert Group

5.3.3 RWY Operations FTS 5.3.5 TMA Trajectory FTS

5.3.4 Multi Airport FTS

5.3.6 TMA Prototyping Increasing Level of Detail and Effort needed Feedback

Loops

Episode 3


of 39


There are three Fast Time Simulations and one Prototyping session (Human in the Loop) which can be regarded as exemplary applications of the interaction and feedback loop technique with the expert groups and the operational concept refinement task.

The Runway Operations FTS is to test the impact of certain applications including Time-Based Spacing on runway throughput and capacity. As a capacity and throughput study, the FTS will produce results from simulated operations which are not influenced by human behaviour. The results will be fed back to the Airport Expert Group.

The Multi Airport TMA FTS examines Arrival and Trajectory Management with Continuous Descent Approaches. Specific TMA Expert Group meetings have been planned to answer outstanding questions before the finalisation of exercise. The iterative approach suggests that questions will be provided to the Expert Group during the Exercise as required. Collaboration with the other TMA simulations and prototyping will also be done through the Expert Group.

The TMA Trajectory FTS takes the same approach as the Multi Airport FTS. The focus lies on 2D and 3D PRNAV route structures focused on arrivals, alternative complex 2D/3D routes and 2D/3D Precision Trajectory Clearances, as well as transition to and from User Preferred Trajectories.

The TMA Prototyping sessions are a compromise between sufficient realism and a flexible and iterative approach in close co-operation with the TMA Expert Group. Prototyping sessions are an intermediate step of validation between expert groups, gaming exercises and full scale fast-time and real-time simulations. They enable an iterative approach: specific aspects of the concept can be assessed separately (possibly in a simplified environment), and then gradually integrated when sufficient maturity is reached.

3.9 STEP 1.7 DEFINE VALIDATION STRATEGY

As a result of the previous analysis (problems in TMA and airport, solutions, stakeholder expectations, existing knowledge and projects, initial validation requirements, chosen tools and techniques) this section presents the selected validation activities.

The descriptions include the objectives of the exercise or expert group, the rationale and the expected results grouped per SESAR Key Performance Area (KPA). Note that the relation to the KPAs is also provided in section 3.6 (organized per KPA, here organized per exercise). Moreover, the contribution to the addressed Operational Improvements steps is provided together with some information about the chosen geographical area and performance framework level.

3.9.1 Expert Groups for Concept Refinement

Expert Groups help to understand and build the concept. They are an ongoing source of expertise and will provide clarification and operational insight. Ideally some of the experts of the TMA and airport group had participated in the development of the SESAR Operational Concept.

Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group

Leading organization LFV

Validation objectives See 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6

Rationale The TMA Expert Group will be an important actor and link between the Concept of Operations and the validation exercises. The group will consist of selected individuals with specific knowledge within the areas of ATM operations and systems, airborne systems and aircraft

Episode 3


of 39


operations.

Real airspace and airports within the current ATM system will be used in the validation exercises. These environments will have to be adapted to bring on the new concept elements. Assumptions on how working methods, procedures, airspace organisation/sectors, traffic delivery, aircraft performance (CDA, VNAV, 4D) will appear must be made to support the preparation and modelling of the exercises i.e. FTS and Prototyping.

The assumptions are corner stones for the validation and will be documented by the expert group. If limitations or short-cuts have to be made these must be stated. It must be clear how the ‘modelling’ and thus the exercise was carried through. When the results are presented and rightly challenged and analysed the exercise assumptions are important factors to consider and relate to.

Expected results per KPA See 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6

OI steps addressed See 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6

Validation Technique Expert Group using judgemental techniques and, if needed, study of literature reference material. Questionnaires may be used as a means to collect and compile issues or answers to be addressed and analysed.

Supporting DOD / Scenario General Purpose DOD – G [9] DOD E2/E3 Aprons and Taxiways Management [9] DOD E5 Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations [9] Scenarios see 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6

Geographical area – performance framework level

See 5.3.4, 5.3.5, 5.3.6

Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.2 Airport Expert Group

Leading organization NATS

Validation objectives Key Concepts: Runway Management, Surface Management (including A-SMGCS)

Rationale The airport is a key concept to enable performance improvements in the ATM system.

Operational expertise is required to clarify the Airport Operational Concept and validate the execution phase of an aircraft landing and taking off from an airport against the planning phase.

Expected results per KPA Answers it will provide: An Airport Scenario for 2020 from operational experts in line with SESAR objectives.

No specific KPA measurements will be provided. This exercise will clarify and refine the Airport Operational Concept.

OI steps addressed Most airport related OI-steps will be addressed in the scenario. No concept validation activity related to airports is foreseen.

Validation Technique Expert Group

Supporting DOD / Scenario General Purpose DOD – G [9] DOD E1 Runway Management [9] DOD E2/E3 Aprons and Taxiways Management [9] Scenarios: Landing and Taxi to Stand Solve Hazardous Situations during Taxiing

Episode 3


of 39


Departure from non-standard Runway Taxi-out and Take-off


Europe (not specific)

3.9.2 Concept Validation Activities

The concept validation/clarification activities in EP3 WP5 comprise three Fast Time Simulations and four prototyping sessions (small scale Human-in-the-Loop simulations). The details are provided in the tables below.

Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.3 Runway Operations FTS

Leading organization ERC

Validation objectives Quantify the application of OI steps in terms of runway throughput/capacity

Rationale The high level objective of the FTS is to test the impact of certain applications (OI steps) on runway throughput and capacity. Using a mathematical model allows precise measurement of sometimes small changes per aircraft movement. These changes may in turn be extrapolated to indicate the cumulative effect of these small changes on for example, runway occupancy time or runway landing rates.

Expected results per KPA KPA-1Capacity, FA-2 Airport capacity (this exercise focuses specifically on runway throughput)

• Reduction in runway occupancy times due to brake-to-vacate equipped aircraft,

• Recovery of landing slots lost during strong headwind conditions by application of time-based spacing on final approach,

• Increased runway throughput during favourable wind conditions by reduction of wake turbulence separation,

• Improved runway throughput in low visibility conditions by application of reduced ILS sensitivity and critical areas,

• Combinations of the above by application of sets of the Operational Improvements.

OI steps addressed AUO-0702: Brake to Vacate (BTV) Procedure

AO-0301: Crosswind Reduced Separations for Departures and Arrivals

AO-0302: Time Based Separations for Arrivals

AO-0303: Fixed Reduced Separations based on Wake Vortex Prediction

AO-0503: Reduced ILS Sensitive and Critical Areas

Validation Technique Fast-time simulation (TAAM model)

Supporting DOD / Scenario DOD E1 Runway Management [9] Scenarios: Landing and Taxi to Stand Departure from non-standard Runway Taxi-out and Take-off


The simulation exercises use Malaga and Paris Charles de Gaulle airports - results will be generic i.e. not airport specific.

Episode 3


of 39


Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.4 Multi Airport TMA

Leading organization NLR

Validation objectives The objective of this fast-time exercise is to validate that the ATM capability of ETMA/TMA airspace in a multi hub-airport environment (Schiphol and Düsseldorf.) is sufficient to cope with increased demand in each airport, taking into account the forecast capacity of each of the airports.

Descent operations starting from Top-Of-Descent, typically 200NM out, have to become highly efficient compared to today’s operations.

Rationale The ATM capability, including the SESAR 2020 conceptual improvements, will facilitate the required highly accurate operations with minimised airspace requirements. In 2020 the scope of hub airport operations are extended significantly due to implementation of the SESAR concept of 4D trajectory management, supporting at least 3D with predicted RTA and high-precision departure and approach operations. The ETMA/TMA operations of a hub airport are growing therefore so much in size and complexity that several hub airports in the core area are to be considered now to belong to one single ETMA/TMA environment. The operations in this environment have to be integrated and harmonised in order to achieve maximum efficiency under heavily constrained conditions.

The experiment shall validate how operations in part of the network can be served in an optimised way against minimal penalties and imposing minimal requirements on airspace usage. The increased demand has to be accommodated by high performance ATM, capable to serve dense departure and arrival flows in limitedly available airspace volumes.

Expected results per KPA Airspace Capacity: This exercise will investigate TMA throughput improvements.

Efficiency: Focus Areas Temporal Efficiency, Focus Areas Fuel Efficiency: This exercise will address flight path and flight duration figures. It will also investigate advanced CDAs and accurate 3D planned departures.

Environment: Focus Area Noise Impacts: Flight path and flight duration in TMA airspace will give an indication of the impact of noise load on the environment.

Focus Area Atmospheric Impacts: will be addressed trough the assessment of advanced CDAs and 3D planned departures which will enable fuel-efficient profiles.

Predictability: Focus Area On-Time operations: The exercise will analyse the differences between planned and actual times.

OI steps addressed AOM-0702: Advanced Continuous Descent Approach (ACDA)

DCB-0103: SWIM enabled NOP

IS-0303: Use of Predicted Trajectory (PT) to Enhance ATM Ground System Performance

TS-0102: Arrival Management Supporting TMA Improvements (incl. CDA, P-RNAV)

TS-0103: Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) through use of datalink

TS-0303: Arrival Management into Multiple Airports

TS-0305: Arrival Management Extended to En Route Airspace

Episode 3


of 39


Note: These OI-steps are part of the problem to be addressed. This does not mean that they are one by one addressed in the simulation. The simulation aims to assess a scenario in which these elements are playing their aggregated role.

Validation Technique Fast-Time Simulation, using TAAM

Supporting DOD / Scenario DOD E5 Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations [9] Scenarios: High Density TMA Arrival – Flying CDA Merging


Airspace between and around Amsterdam Schiphol and the Düsseldorf area – local level

Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.5 TMA Trajectory and Separation Management

Leading organization AENA

Validation objectives This exercise will analyse the possible improvement of Trajectory and Separation Management in a complex TMA due to the introduction of the following concepts:

• An alternative complex 2D and 3D route structure, both in Departures and Arrivals

• Alternative 3D PRNAV structures in Arrivals

• 2D and 3D Precision Clearance Trajectories (PTCD) in Arrivals and Departures

This exercise will also analyse the transition between a User Preferred Trajectory airspace structure and a Fixed Route airspace structure.

Rationale Complex TMAs can be a constraint in the overall ATM System. Therefore, there is a need to investigate new concepts that could improve the trajectory and separation management and analyse its effect in the overall ATM System. This study will validate high density separation concepts and associated airspace issues in terms of detailed procedures.

In the future ATM System, it is expected that a User Preferred Routing (UPT) network will have priority over the actual fixed route system network. However, there might be situations in which the traffic is so complex that it is necessary to introduce a temporal fixed route network, especially in a high density and complex TMA. The transition from a fixed route network to a UPT network and vice versa is therefore a key issue. This study will analyse the feasibility of UPT and User Preferred routing in medium density traffic situations.

Expected results per KPA Capacity: With the new technologies under study, there may be an increase due to the expected decrease in Controller Workload.

Safety: is also expected to be increased due to a reduction in the number of potential separation loses (conflicts), as well as a reduction in the time the controller is either overloaded or underloaded.

Efficiency: With a better trajectory management due to the introduction of improved SIDs allocation, it is expected that the flights reduce their flight duration within the TMA, as well as reducing delays.

Predictability: It is expected that the introduction of alternate 2D/3D routes on arrivals and departures, together with the Precision Trajectory Clearances reduces the unpredictable deviation improving

Episode 3


of 39


therefore the predictability in terms of on-time operations both on arrivals and departures

The transition from/to UPTs is expected to provide support in the definition of a set of criteria for changing from UPTs to a fixed route structure and vice versa. The impact in controller's workload might also be studied, if possible.

OI steps addressed AOM-0602: Enhance Terminal Route Design Using P-RNAV Capability

CM-0405: Automated Assistance to ATC Planning for preventing Conflicts in Terminal Area Operations

CM-0406: Automated Assistance to ATC for detecting Conflicts in Terminal Area Operations

TS-0102: Arrival Management Support Improvements (incl. P-RNAV)

CM-0601: Precision Trajectory Clearences (PTC)-2D based on pre-defined 2D routes

CM-0602: Precision Trajectory Clearences (PTC)-3D based on pre-defined 3D routes

Validation Technique Fast-Time Simulation (RAMS). Other validation techniques to analyse the transition issues to/from UPT areas

Supporting DOD / Scenario DOD E5 Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations [9] Scenarios: Controller tools (TMA support tools for both Execution phases, Take-Off->TOD & TOD->FAF) Clear the next portion of the RBT and solve conflicts by revising the RBT at ground initiative using PTC-2D or PTC-3D in the Terminal Area


Rome TMA, including Rome Fuimicino Airport and Procedures, will be used for assessing OIs AOM-0602 an TS-0102

Barcelona TMA, including Barcelona El Prat Airport and procedures, will be used to analyse the impact of OIs CM-0406, CM-0601 and CM-0602

Validation Exercise ID and Title WP5.3.6 Prototyping of a dense TMA

Leading organization ERC (Task 1) & ENAV (Task 2)

Validation objectives The experiment of Task 1 will primarily aim at refining roles, procedures and working methods of the controllers, and assessing the impact, in terms of operability from the ground standpoint, of aircraft adhering to a RBT with CTA while achieving a CDA.

The main focus will be on the following aspects in dense terminal airspace:

- Lateral (2D): Innovative TMA route structures (Performance Based Navigation) with multiple merge points, and associated procedures supported by 2D Precision Trajectory Clearances and limited closed-loop tactical interventions.

· Vertical (3D): Adherence to vertical windows (‘cone-shaped’ envelope of trajectories), while optimising the vertical profiles by enabling advanced CDAs during arrival flow integration.

· Longitudinal (4D/time): Inbound aircraft adhering to a RBT (including respect of Airspace Users preferred sequence as per Network Operations Plan), and time constraints (CTA) issued by an arrival

Episode 3


of 39


manager (AMAN).

Notes:

The following activities are out of the scope of the present task:

• Creation, management and actual revision of the NOP, of RBTs, as well as actual issuance of PTC instructions;

• Airport turnaround management processes (e.g. SMAN, DMAN).

The focus will be mainly on arrivals, continuous climb departures will also considered, as well.

Task 2 will continue and refine the study performed within Task 1 by addressing in Roma TMA environment Point-Merge, PRNAV, CDA concepts, as well as ASAS Sequencing and Merging, with the aim to demonstrate their effectiveness in a different airspace. A special emphasis will be put on the assessment of coexistence of ASAS with Task 1 related concepts and their mutual interaction.

Rationale The improvement of TMA route structures, combined to the optimisation of descent procedures (CDA) is expected to provide benefits in terms of efficiency (optimised flight profile), predictability (adherence to pre-defined trajectory) and capacity (optimised airspace usage and reduced controller workload).

Prototyping sessions seem the most appropriate technique to assess the feasibility and acceptability of this improved TMA organisation and procedures, as they are a compromise between sufficient realism and flexible/iterative approach in close co-operation with TMA Expert Group.

They are an intermediate step of validation technique between expert groups, gaming exercises, and full scale fast-time and real-time simulations. They enable an iterative approach: specific aspects of the concept being assessed separately (possibly in a simplified environment), and then gradually integrated when sufficient maturity is reached.

Expected results per KPA MAIN FOCUS - Operability:

The main focus of this exercise will be an initial assessment of operability and acceptability aspects of the SESAR 2020 concept in dense terminal airspace, from a controller perspective, relying on subjective/objective measurements. This will be achieved through a series of prototyping sessions in a representative environment, allowing to answer research questions at a generic level. For this purpose the arrival/departure prototyping sessions in WP5.3.6/Task 1 will consider the execution phase in a dense terminal environment, with a single airport. The suitability of the new working method and the perceived benefits (reduced controller workload, standardised procedures, increased situation awareness, improved efficiency) are expected to result in an operational acceptance.

INDIRECT/INITIAL TRENDS - Safety:

This exercise does not directly address the Safety Focus Areas. It rather deals with safety impacts through increased situational awareness, due to the deployment of new route structures and structured working methods, which will enable more predictable arrival procedures to be achieved.

INITIAL TRENDS - Environmental Sustainability:

Focus Area Noise Impacts, Focus Area Atmospheric Impacts: This exercise will provide initial measurements by assessing the

Episode 3


of 39


optimisation of vertical trajectories as well as 3D containment of trajectory dispersion, expected to result in a decrease of the environmental impact.

INITIAL TRENDS - Capacity:

Focus Area Airspace Capacity: This exercise will provide initial measurements on the reduction in controller task load achieved by a reduced requirement for controller tactical intervention – due to new organisation of TMA operations relying on Performance Based Navigation (PBN) concepts. This reduced workload is expected to result in an increase in Terminal Airspace Capacity.

INITIAL TRENDS - Efficiency:

Focus Areas Temporal Efficiency, Focus Areas Fuel Efficiency: This exercise will provide initial measurements by assessing the optimisation of vertical trajectories as well as 3D containment of trajectory dispersion, expected to result in an increase in fuel efficiency.

INITIAL TRENDS - Predictability:

Focus Area On-Time operations: The exercise will provide initial measurements by exploring the adherence to the RBTs and lateral/vertical flight paths, expected to result in a predictability increase.

OI steps addressed AOM-0601: Terminal Airspace Organisation Adapted through Use of Best Practice, PRNAV and FUA Where Suitable

AOM-0602: Enhanced Terminal Route Design using P-RNAV Capability

TS-0103: Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) through use of datalink

Note: the CTA instruction mechanism, be it via voice or datalink, is outside the scope of the exercise

TS-0105: ASAS Sequencing and Merging as Contribution to Traffic Synchronization in TMA (ASPA-S&M)

AOM-0701: Continuous Descent Approach (CDA)

AOM-0702: Advanced Continuous Descent Approach (ACDA)

Validation Technique Prototyping sessions

Supporting DOD / Scenario DOD E5 Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations [9] Scenarios: High Density TMA Arrival – Flying CDA Merging


Based on Dublin and Rome TMA (‘generically’ adapted)

Episode 3


of 39


END OF DOCUMENT