11

PHARE Operational ScenariosPHARE Operational Scenarios

J-P. Nicolaon, J-P. Nicolaon,

Operational Task Force ChairmanOperational Task Force Chairman

EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreEUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

22

Overview of the work on PHARE scenariosOverview of the work on PHARE scenarios

JULY 1990JULY 1990 PHARE Medium Term Scenario(Research Programme) :Initial operational organisation based on :

Human in the loop4D NavigationAutomated ATC ToolsData-Link Communication

with the aim to increase ATC productivity

33

PHARE medium term scenario 2000-2015PHARE medium term scenario 2000-2015

Envisaged changes in en-route controllers’ working Envisaged changes in en-route controllers’ working methodsmethods

Extended planning horizonExtended planning horizon Multi-Sector Planning ControllerMulti-Sector Planning Controller Redistribution of workload from Tactical to Planning Redistribution of workload from Tactical to Planning

ControllerController

Assisted runway managementAssisted runway management Assisted Arrival and Departure sequencing managementAssisted Arrival and Departure sequencing management Computer-based merging and final approach spacing Computer-based merging and final approach spacing

advisoriesadvisories

44

Scenarios for PD/1, PD/2 and PD/3Scenarios for PD/1, PD/2 and PD/3

PHARE

Medium

Term

Scenario

PD/1: PD/1: En-En-

routeroute

PD/2: PD/2: ArrivalsArrivals

PD/3: PD/3: Gate to Gate to

gategate

19901990 19941994 19951995 19971997

55

lateral planning screenlateral planning screen

lateral route points unchanged

prediction uses ground radius turns

predicted time / alltat route points

request downlink of prediction to ATC

guide to this prediction locally

vertical planning screenvertical planning screen

altitude constraint windows

predicted altitude profile

66

Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1

• Planning up to 20/25 minutes ahead of time

• Conflict-free sector transit plan (4D and 3D)

• Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D aircraft

• Information and directives to his TC• Co-ordination of entry/exit conditions• Update ground system

PC Role

77

Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1

• R/T• Conflict-free passage• Monitoring 4D aircraft• Data-Link trajectory negotiation with 4D

aircraft if current “contract” was to be modified

• R/T transmissions to 3D aircraft of instructions as proposed by the ground system

• Handling of exceptions

TC Role

88

HIPSHIPS

99

Scenario for PD/1Scenario for PD/1

PD/1 highlighted the need to look at task PD/1 highlighted the need to look at task sharing between Planning Controller and sharing between Planning Controller and Tactical ControllerTactical Controller

Results were taken into account when designing Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/2 and PD/3scenarios for PD/2 and PD/3

1010

PD/2 Frankfurt TMAPD/2 Frankfurt TMA

1111

PD/2 ground tracksPD/2 ground tracks

With PHARE toolsWithout PHARE tools

Identical traffic samples in both cases

1212

Scenario for PD/2Scenario for PD/2

The main PD/2 objectives became: to experiment / demonstrate the performance of

the Arrival Management software and the feasibility of real flight according to automatic trajectory uplink

to assess the controllers behaviour and acceptability versus automation

to evaluate landing rate improvement

1313

Scenario for PD/2Scenario for PD/2

Controller’s roles changed as follows:

ObserverPCPC

Monitoring of 4D aircraftR/T transmission of Arrival Manager advisories

to 3D aircraftDeconflicting remaining conflicts (if existing)

TCTC

1414

Lessons learned from PD/2Lessons learned from PD/2

Automated Arrival Manager interactivity Automated Arrival Manager interactivity requiredrequired

The definition of STARs, Holds and Stacks The definition of STARs, Holds and Stacks needs to be reconsideredneeds to be reconsidered

Results were taken into account when designing Results were taken into account when designing scenarios for PD/3scenarios for PD/3

1515

Scenario for PD/3Scenario for PD/3

Main concept elements :• Timely work sharing• Complementary tasks remaining consistent and

relevant with time Layered Planning

Multi-Sector Planner 30'Planning Controller 10'Tactical Controller Assume Control

1616

4D TRAJECTORY 4D TRAJECTORY MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT

Sector n-1 Sector n Sector n+1 Sector n+2

aircraft position

assume control by sector n

TC trajectory modification via:• formalize clearance• trajectory negotiation•or R/T communication

Objectives : to differentiate clearance from planning to pilot to update ground system (planning and negotiation authority)

PC modification viatrajectory negotiation

sector contract approval = clearance

MSP modification via uplink

MF

previous sectorcontract approval

1717

Multi-Sector Planner (30' =>10') (En-route)

To equilibrate traffic between sectorsTo equilibrate traffic between sectors

To reduce local complexityTo reduce local complexity

to optimize trajectoryto optimize trajectory

1818

Tactical Tactical Load Load

SmootherSmoother

1919

2020

En-route Planning Controller :(10' =>Assume Control)

En-route Planning Controller :(10' =>Assume Control)

To manage Problem SituationsTo manage Problem Situations to resolve 4D conflictsto resolve 4D conflicts to prepare and transfer solutions for 3D aircraft to the to prepare and transfer solutions for 3D aircraft to the

Tactical ControllerTactical Controller To transfer problems to the Tactical Controller if he was To transfer problems to the Tactical Controller if he was

in a better position to resolve themin a better position to resolve them

To negotiate trajectory with 4D aircraftTo negotiate trajectory with 4D aircraft To assist the Tactical Controller after assume To assist the Tactical Controller after assume

controlcontrol

2121

En-route Tactical Controller

(Assume Control => Sector Exit)

En-route Tactical Controller

(Assume Control => Sector Exit) To resolve conflicts unresolved by the Planning To resolve conflicts unresolved by the Planning

Controller and new conflictsController and new conflicts To monitor aircraft trajectoriesTo monitor aircraft trajectories To negotiate short-term trajectory modificationTo negotiate short-term trajectory modification To uplink formalized clearancesTo uplink formalized clearances To manage R/TTo manage R/T

2222

Arrival TMA ControllersArrival TMA Controllers

Arrival Sequence Planning Controller (ARR- SPArrival Sequence Planning Controller (ARR- SP)) Interaction with the Arrival Manager (AM)Interaction with the Arrival Manager (AM) Conflict-free passageConflict-free passage Trajectory Negotiation Trajectory Negotiation Co-ordinationCo-ordination

Tactical ControllerTactical Controller R/TR/T Final responsibility for real-time separation and final Final responsibility for real-time separation and final

runway spacingrunway spacing

2323

Departure TMA ControllersDeparture TMA Controllers

Departure Planning Controller (DEP-PC)Departure Planning Controller (DEP-PC) Interaction with the Departure Manager (DM)Interaction with the Departure Manager (DM) Initial conflict-free SIDs (before departure)Initial conflict-free SIDs (before departure) Trajectory Negotiation / Co-ordinationTrajectory Negotiation / Co-ordination

Departure Tactical Controller (DEP-TC)Departure Tactical Controller (DEP-TC) R/TR/T Ultimate responsibility for real-time separation and final Ultimate responsibility for real-time separation and final

runway sequencingrunway sequencing

2424

Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.

The co-operation between the PHARE partners: The co-operation between the PHARE partners: highlighted:highlighted:

divergence in approaching concept designdivergence in approaching concept design necessity of compromises (Done !)necessity of compromises (Done !)

Demonstrated enrichment of ideasDemonstrated enrichment of ideas Made possible common understandingMade possible common understanding

2525

Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.Conclusions drawn from the scenario work.

It addressed:It addressed: all phases of flightall phases of flight transition for 2000-2015 periodtransition for 2000-2015 period long-term applicationslong-term applications

was partly technology drivenwas partly technology driven showed difficulties to balance functional requirements for showed difficulties to balance functional requirements for

advanced tools with controller rolesadvanced tools with controller roles showed need for further research into progressive and showed need for further research into progressive and

pragmatic adaptation of scenarios for short and medium-pragmatic adaptation of scenarios for short and medium-term implementationterm implementation

2626

PHARE Operational ScenariosPHARE Operational Scenarios

J-P. Nicolaon, J-P. Nicolaon,

Operational Task Force ChairmanOperational Task Force Chairman

EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreEUROCONTROL Experimental Centrenextnext