federal aviation optimization of airspace administration

Federal Aviation Administration 1

Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the

Metroplex (OAPM)

Presentation To: Phoenix Facilities and Industry Name: Phoenix OAPM Study Team Date: April 3 & 4, 2013

Federal Aviation Administration

Phoenix Metroplex Study Team Final Outreach


Agenda

• Overview of Process • Industry Comments • Analysis Methodology • Identified Issues/Procedures, Proposed Solutions, Benefits/Impacts/Risks

and Analysis Results • Alternate Procedures • Satellite Airports • RNP Procedures • Issues for Consideration During the Design Phase • Summary of Potential Benefits • Plan Forward – Dennis Roberts, Director, ATO Airspace Services, AJV-1


Overview of Process


OAPM Study Team Process

• Kickoff Meeting • Discuss concepts and proposed schedules • Establish facility POCs • Make data requests

• Administrative Week • First Outreach: Existing Operations and Planning • Study Team Work (focus on operational challenges) • Second Outreach: Enhancement Opportunities • Study Team Work (focus on solutions, costs, and benefits) • Final Outreach: Summary of Recommendations • Final Documentation

• April 19, 2013


Focus of the Phoenix Study Team

• Addressing issues through the implementation of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures and airspace optimization enabling predictable, repeatable flight paths; improved situational awareness; reduced Air Traffic Control (ATC) task complexity; and increased efficiency – Collaboratively identify and characterize existing issues – Propose conceptual PBN procedures that increase efficiency and address

the identified issues • Identification of considerations, risks, and benefits associated with the

proposed changes • Quantification of potential annual benefits by comparing distance, flight

time, fuel burn, and carbon emissions between the currently flown tracks and proposed PBN procedures


Industry Comments


Industry Participants

Wes Googe – US Airways B737 Check Airman/Tech Pilot

Marv Meng – Southwest Airlines RNP Development/Line Pilot


Analysis Methodology


Key Assumptions and Benefit Mechanisms

• All proposed routes/procedures are based on PBN • Final design details (altitudes, speeds, transitions, etc.) will be

determined during the Design Phase • Lateral and Vertical Benefits:

– Lateral • Current track data is compared to Study Team proposed procedure • Current published procedures are compared to Study Team proposed

procedures – Vertical

• Current vertical profile is compared to Study Team proposed procedures


Qualitative and Quantitative Assessments

• Qualitative Assessments – Impact on ATC task complexity – Ability to apply procedural deconfliction (e.g., laterally or vertically

segregated flows) – Ability to enhance safety – Reduction in transmissions (cockpit and controller) – Impact on Phoenix airport interdependencies

• Quantitative Assessments of Baseline and Proposed Procedures – Time/distance spent in level flight – Track length changes – Fuel loading – Fuel burn by aircraft type – Carbon emissions


Tools and Techniques

• PDARS (Performance Data Analysis and Reporting System) • Quantify level flight segments • Visually represent current issues • Analyze traffic counts and runway/flow usage • Compare current vs. proposed procedures

• TARGETS (Terminal Area Route Generation Evaluation and Traffic

Simulation) • Compare actual tracks to current routes • Compare current vs. proposed procedures • Develop proposed PBN routes


Tools and Techniques

• NTML (National Traffic Management Log) – Identify occurrence and magnitude of Traffic Management Initiatives (TMIs)

• ETMS (Enhanced Traffic Management System) – Count annual traffic by aircraft categories

• ATA Lab (Air Traffic Airspace Lab) National Offload Program (NOP) Data queries – Generate baseline track samples for use in visualization and analysis – Identify runway usage over time

• Flight Simulations – A320, B737


Analysis Assumptions

• Four high-volume traffic days were utilized for visualization of directional traffic flow for various airports

– 10/12/11 – 01/12/12 – 04/27/12 – 07/14/12

• Based on historical flow configurations, Phoenix operations are 60 percent west and 40 percent east

• All fuel burn and emissions estimates are annualized, assuming a fuel price per gallon of $2.96

– Based on fuel costs for Calendar Year 2012 from Research and Innovative Technology Administrations (RITA) Bureau of Transportation Statistics

• http://www.transtats.bts.gov/fuel.asp

• Fuel loading assumption (cost to carry): 10% additional fuel required – Standards provided by industry representatives – Cost to carry for wide body and/or international operations may be significantly

higher


Analysis Methodology

• Fuel burn modeling was performed for Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (KPHX) with filed IFR operations

• Procedures were developed but not modeled for the following airports: • Scottsdale (KSDL) • Phoenix-Mesa Gateway (KIWA) • Phoenix Deer Valley (KDVT)

• Traffic from the entire month of July 2011, was selected for the preparation of traffic baselines and fuel burn analysis • The National Analysis Team (NAT) examined the month of track data and

the Study Team proposed procedures to build flight profile models • The NAT then applied the European Organization for the Safety of Air

Navigation (EUROCONTROL) Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) fuel flow model and flight simulations to determine a range of fuel burn and emissions for both level-offs and distances


Number of Operations and Modeled Fleet Mix

• Determined operations for the modeled airport based on traffic from July 2011

• Examined the fleet mix and grouped similar aircraft types for trajectory and fuel burn modeling

Aircraft Type Weighted Distribution

CRJ2 5%

CRJ7 3%

CRJ9 10%

MD8x 3%

B75x 5%

A319/20/21 32%

B73x 37%


Sample Analysis Walkthrough

• Analyze level-offs and track length using 30 days of data

• Develop baseline routes that mimic the average vertical and lateral path of the tracks in the flow

• Develop proposed route • Estimate impacts of the proposed route

compared to the current published procedure and the baseline route • Vertical

Compare current vertical path with associated level-offs to proposed vertical path with fewer or shorter level-offs

• Lateral Filed miles = published route – proposed route Distance = baseline route – proposed route

• Estimated fuel and cost savings Filed miles savings = Cost to carry only Distance savings = Fuel savings + cost to carry Profile savings = Fuel savings + cost to carry

Filed mile savings

Distance savings

Published procedure Baseline route Proposed route

Level-offs

Level-offs mitigated

Baseline

Proposal


Benefits Sample

*Based on a fuel cost of $2.96 per gallon


Identified Issues, Proposed Solutions, Benefits/Impacts/Risks and Analysis Results


Design Concepts and PBN Benefits

• PBN Procedures: • Optimized profile descents/climbs • Optimized lateral paths • Proposed runway transitions • Removed unused transitions from current procedures

• Transitional Separation (terminal to en route) • 3NM increasing to 5NM aircraft separation where practical

• PBN Benefits Include: • Predictable, repeatable flight paths • Reduced ATC/Pilot task complexity • Reduced frequency congestion • Potential for increased airspace throughput • Accurate fuel planning • Deconflicted STARs and SIDs where possible


Review of Issue Statements and

Potential Solutions


Phoenix SIDs

22 Federal Aviation Administration

SIDs Benefits and Impacts

FAA Operational/Safety Benefits Impacts/Risks

• PBN benefits • Increased airspace throughput • Reduced vectoring • Optimized lateral/vertical flight

paths • ATC task complexity

• LOA revisions • Training • Sectorization

Airspace User Benefits Impacts/Risks

• PBN benefits • Reduced fuel burn and carbon

emissions

• Chart clutter

Environmental Considerations • Noise screening/analysis • Emissions analysis • Runway transition assessment


Phoenix SIDs

Northeast • YOTES • FORPE • FTHLS

Southeast • SHRIF • BNYRD

Southwest • GBEND • HBUUB

Northwest • ZEPER • SNOBL


YOTES RNAV SID


YOTES SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Inefficient lateral paths

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV SID • Optimized lateral paths to

reduce flight track miles • RNAV VM leg (radar vectors) to

join the course

ST Proposed Current


YOTES SID Terminal View

ST Proposed

210 KTS


YOTES SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


YOTES SID



FORPE RNAV SID


FORPE SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Connectivity to MAXXO

(FTHLS)

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV SID • Optimized lateral paths

to reduce flight track miles

• RNAV VM leg (radar vectors) to join the course when on a west flow

• RNAV off-the-ground when on an east flow

ST Proposed Current


FORPE SID Terminal View

ST Proposed

210 KTS


FORPE SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


FORPE SID



FTHLS RNAV SID


FTHLS SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Lack of connectivity to SJN SID

(FORPE)

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV SID • Connectivity to SJN SID

(FORPE) • Optimized lateral paths to


join the course when on a west flow


ST Proposed Current


FTHLS SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

210 KTS


FTHLS SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


FTHLS SID



SHRIF RNAV SID


SHRIF SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Inefficient lateral paths

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV SID • Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight track miles • RNAV VM leg (radar vectors) to join the course when on

a west flow • RNAV off-the-ground when on an east flow

ST Proposed Current


SHRIF SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

210 KTS


SHRIF SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


SHRIF SID



BNYRD RNAV SID


BNYRD SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV specifically designed for

TUS/Mexico • Optimized lateral paths to reduce

flight track miles • RNAV VM leg (radar vectors) to



ST Proposed Current


BNYRD SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

210 KTS


BNYRD SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


BNYRD SID



GBEND RNAV SID


GBEND SID






ST Proposed Current


GBEND SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

210 KTS


GBEND SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


GBEND SID



HBUUB RNAV SID


HBUUB SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Inefficient lateral paths • Unused transitions

Conceptual Solutions • Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight

track miles • RNAV off-the-ground

ST Proposed Current


HBUUB SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

AT OR ABOVE 7000

210 KTS


HBUUB SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


HBUUB SID



ZEPER RNAV SID


ZEPER SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Inefficient lateral paths • Unused transitions


reduce flight track miles • RNAV VM leg (radar

vectors) to join the course when on an east flow

• RNAV off-the-ground when on a west flow

ST Proposed Current


ZEPER SID Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

210 KTS


ZEPER SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


ZEPER SID



SNOBL RNAV SID


SNOBL SID

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Unused transitions • Connectivity to Q35

Conceptual Solutions

• RNAV SID • Optimized lateral paths to reduce

flight track miles • Procedure ends prior to GCN • RNAV VM leg (radar vectors) to

join the course

ST Proposed Current


SNOBL SID Terminal View

ST Proposed

210 KTS


SNOBL SID En Route View

ST Proposed Current


SNOBL SID



Phoenix SID Benefits


Phoenix Departure Benefits


$376,154


Phoenix STARs

72 Federal Aviation Administration

STARs Benefits and Impacts

FAA Operational/Safety Benefits Impacts/Risks

• PBN benefits • Increased airspace throughput • Multiple runway transitions • Reduced vectoring

• Runway transitions • LOA revisions • Training • Sectorization

Airspace User Benefits Impacts/Risks

• PBN benefits • Reduced fuel burn and carbon

emissions

• Preferred runway assignment

Environmental Considerations • Noise screening/analysis • Emissions analysis • Runway transition assessment


Phoenix STARs

Northeast • EAGUL Primary OPD • Offload OPD/Turboprop

Southeast • PINNG Primary OPD • Turboprop Offload

Southwest • HYDRR North OPD • HYDRR Southwest OPD • Turboprop Offload

Northwest • BROAK OPD


EAGUL Primary OPD STAR


EAGUL OPD STAR (Primary)

Identified Issues • Dogleg at PAYSO (compression issue) • Turboprops restrict descend via • J74 Interaction (TINIZ restriction) • Terminal compression/vectors

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile

Descent (OPD) • Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight

track miles • Transitions for east and west flows • Offload STAR • Floating fix for crossovers

ST Proposed Current


EAGUL OPD STAR (Primary) En Route View

ST Proposed Current

AT OR BELOW FL330


EAGUL OPD STAR (Primary) Terminal View

ABOVE 4000

AT 7000

AT OR BELOW 17000

ST Proposed Current

AT OR ABOVE 4000


EAGUL OPD STAR (Primary)



EAGUL Offload OPD STAR


EAGUL OPD STAR (Offload)

Identified Issues • Turboprops restrict descend via • Terminal compression/vectors


• RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile Descent (OPD)

• Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight track miles

• Transitions for east and west flows • Turboprop offload developed • Floating fix for crossovers

ST Proposed Current


EAGUL OPD STAR (Offload) En Route View

ST Proposed Current

AT OR BELOW FL330


EAGUL OPD STAR (Offload) Terminal View

AT OR BELOW 17000

ST Proposed Current

AT 11000

AT 5000


EAGUL OPD STAR (Offload)



PINNG OPD STAR


PINNG OPD STAR

Identified Issues • Turboprops restrict descend via • Parachute areas • International route restrictions

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile

Descent (OPD) • Optimized lateral paths to reduce

arrival/departure interaction • Transitions for east and west flows • Common fix in ZAB airspace • IAF for RNAV arrival to Runway 26 • Create a turboprop offload STAR* *Satellite turbojet arrivals can be routed on the

PINNG or offload procedure

ST Proposed Current


PINNG OPD STAR En Route View

ST Proposed Current

AT OR BELOW FL280

AT OR ABOVE 15000


PINNG OPD STAR Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

AT OR ABOVE 15000

AT 5000

AT OR ABOVE 7000

AT 4000


PINNG OPD STAR



Southeast Turboprop/Satellite STAR



Identified Issues • PHX turboprops/satellite

arrivals restrict descend via on PHX arrivals

Conceptual Solutions • Laterally segregated from

PINNG RNAV OPD • Connectivity to proposed

T-Route • RNAV STAR for:

• PHX turboprops • Satellite arrivals*

* Satellite turbojet arrivals can be routed on the PINNG or offload procedure

ST Proposed



PINNG STAR

TURBOPROP/SATELLITE STAR

PROPOSED T-ROUTE ST Proposed Proposed PINNG Proposed T-Route


HYDRR North/South OPD STARs


HYDRR North/South OPD STAR

Identified Issues • Turboprops restrict descend via • South satellite airport flow interactions • Limited airspace to blend two feeds • Inefficient lateral paths • ZLA-ZAB LOA constraints

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile Descent (OPD) • Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight track

miles • Transitions for east and west flows • PHX turboprop/satellite offload route • Segregated MOHAK flow

ST Proposed Current


HYDRR North OPD STAR


HYDRR North OPD STAR En Route View

ST Proposed Current 19000

12000

33000 28000


HYDRR North OPD STAR Terminal View

11000 10000

AT 7000

AT OR BELOW 16000

AT OR ABOVE 9000

AT 7000

ST Proposed Current


HYDRR North OPD STAR



HYDRR South OPD STAR


HYDRR South OPD STAR En Route View

35000 29000

ST Proposed Current

21000 13000


HYDRR South OPD STAR Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

AT 17000

21000 13000

AT 8000


HYDRR North and South OPD STARs Terminal View

ST Proposed Current

AT 17000

AT OR BELOW 16000


HYDRR South OPD STAR



HYDRR Turboprop/South Satellite STAR


HYDRR Phoenix Turboprop/South Satellite STAR

Identified Issues • Turboprops restrict descend via

on PHX arrivals • South satellite arrivals also on

HYDRR

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV STAR for PHX turboprops

and south satellites jets and turboprops

ST Proposed


HYDRR Turboprop/South Satellite STAR with GEELA and MOHAK Flows

MOHAK FLOW TO PHX

GEELA FLOW TO PHX

SOUTH SATELLITES

ST Proposed Proposed SID/STAR


BROAK OPD STAR


BROAK OPD STAR

Identified Issues • Turboprops restrict descend via • Inefficient lateral paths • Inefficient vertical paths • Interactions with LAS TYSSN STAR • ZLA LOA constraints


• RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile Descent (OPD)

• Optimized lateral paths to reduce flight track miles

• Transitions for east and west flows

• Floating fix for crossovers • IAF for RNAV arrival to Runway

07R • Common routes in ZAB airspace • Revise ZLA/ZAB LOA to allow for

higher tops of descent

ST Proposed Current


BROAK OPD STAR En Route View

36000 31000

ST Proposed Current

17000 14000

36000 31000


BROAK OPD STAR Terminal View

AT 7000

AT OR ABOVE 4000

ST Proposed Current 17000

14000


BROAK OPD STAR



Phoenix STAR Benefits


Phoenix Arrival Benefits



Alternative Designs


Northeast Alternative


Northeast Alternative (West Flow Only)

Considerations • West flow only • Industry strongly supports a notional

design with dual arrival routes • Arrival route over FORPE will be the

offload STAR • Potential for reduced optimization due to

Q route location • ATC task complexity • Automation • While not recommended by the Study

Team, this alternative proposal is contained in this report to provide flexibility to further explore potential benefits during the Design Phase. • Due to unknown flow assignments the

Study Team was unable to complete a benefit analysis.

ST Proposed STAR ST Proposed SID


Northeast Alternative En Route View



Northeast Alternative Terminal View



Southeast Alternative


Southeast Alternative

Identified Issues • Parachute jump activity • Route efficiency

Conceptual Solutions/ Considerations

• West flow design • RNAV STAR with Optimized Profile Descent (OPD) • RNAV SID with optimized lateral paths to reduce flight track miles • ATC task complexity • Automation • While not recommended by the Study Team, this

west flow alternative proposal is contained in this report to provide flexibility to further explore potential benefits during the Design Phase.

ST Alternative STAR ST Alternative SID

WEST FLOW

EAST FLOW


Satellite Procedures


Satellite Airport Procedures

• Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (KIWA) • Scottsdale Airport (KSDL) • Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (KDVT) • Other


IWA SIDs


Conceptual Solutions • RNAV SIDs • Connectivity to PHX SIDs

S-SW SID NE-NW SID SE SID


IWA STAR

Identified Issues • Crosses multiple traffic

streams • Altitude restricted

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV STAR • Laterally segregated in the

en route environment from PHX departures

• Mimics PHX Offload STAR

ST Proposed Current


SDL SIDs

Identified Issues • Lack of RNAV procedure • Cannot deconflict

simultaneous SDL and DVT releases

Conceptual Solutions • North and South RNAV SIDs • Connectivity to PHX SIDs

ST Proposed


DVT SID



• RNAV SIDs • Connectivity to PHX SIDs

Proposed


North Satellite Airports West STAR


North Satellite Airports West STAR



• RNAV STAR

Proposed


Other Satellite Airports Identified by Industry for Procedure Development

During the Design Phase

Identified Issue • PBN approaches into all satellite airports. There is significant

flight training activity in the Phoenix area, and a lack of instrument approach procedures is a hindrance to general aviation flight operations.

Conceptual Solutions • RNAV procedures with optimized lateral/vertical paths • Possible other airports for PBN procedure development

• CHD, GYR, GEU, FFZ


Q and T-Routes


Proposed East/West Q Routes

Identified Issues • Conflictions with EAGUL STAR with

J74

FLG PAYSO

ZUN SJN DRYHT

GUP

ABQ

CNX

PKE

HIPPI DRK

PSP

TRM

TNP TXO

TCC

CIM

PXR

CIM-TNP NOFLY-TNP TXO-PSP

NOFLY

Conceptual Solutions • Q Routes segregating EAGUL while adding

needed structure for overflight traffic


Proposed East/West Q Routes

PAYSO

FLG

PKE

HIPPI DRK

PSP

TRM

TNP

CIM-TNP NOFLY-TNP TXO-PSP

NOFLY

Proposed Q route from PSP to TXO is 0.3NM shorter than J74 Aircraft filed J74.DRK.J231.TNP

has approximately 7.0NM savings

Aircraft filed J134.DRK.J231.TNP has approximately 1.4 NM savings


North/South T-Route

PROPOSED T-ROUTE


RNP/RNAV Approach Procedures


Phoenix RNP Approach Procedures West Flow

ST Proposed STAR ST Proposed RNP


Phoenix RNP Approach Procedures East Flow

ST Proposed STAR ST Proposed RNP


Phoenix RNAV Approach Procedures West/East Flow

RNAV APPROACH USED TO TRANSITION TO RUNWAY 26

ST Proposed RNAV Notional RNAV

RNAV APPROACH USED TO TRANSITION TO RUNWAY 7R


Issues for Consideration During Design Phase


Design Phase Considerations

• ZAB and P50 Sectorization/Boundary Changes • Alternative Flows • Satellite Airport Procedures • ZLA/ZAB Coordination


Example of Facility Re-Sectorization

Potential Sector Changes • ZAB38/39/43/45 • P50 Internal Sectors

EAGUL Primary/ Offload OPD STAR

YOTES RNAV SID

SNOBL RNAV SID


Summary of Potential Benefits


Study Team Notional Benefits


$993,750


Plan Forward


OAPM Site Status

Next Study Team • TBD

Study Team Complete – Design Phase Started • Southern California

Study Team Complete – Design Phase Pending • South/Central Florida • Phoenix

Design Phase Complete – Evaluation Phase Started • Washington, DC • Houston • North Texas • Charlotte • Atlanta • Northern California


Plan Forward for Phoenix

• Study Team completes Project Proposal and Study Team Report • FAA HQ makes final decision whether to proceed with D&I

– If approved, D&I Project Manager and the NATCA Article 48 Co-Lead are selected and Phoenix D&I Team begins Design Phase

federal aviation optimization of airspace administration

Documents