1

A PERSONAL PLANE AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM A PERSONAL PLANE AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Claude Le Tallec, ONERA, France

Joint EU – US Workshop on Small Aircraft and Personal Planes Systems "How to Prepare the Future"

24th October 2012, Place Rogier, Brussels

Project Funded by the EC under FP7 Framework

2

Where does PPlane fit in the Air Transport System?Where does PPlane fit in the Air Transport System?

Timeline

Veh

icle

Siz

e

Long TermFuture ExtensionTodays Common Air Transportation Systems

Airliner

Business Jet

Commuter A/C

VLJ

PAV

3

• PPlane is a research project funded by the European Commission with the aim of defining a viable Personal Air Transport System of the future (2030 and beyond)

• PPlane has the following characteristics:• Fully automated transport enabling a “regular Joe” to use the aircraft without

any prior expertise • Fly in various weather conditions• “Push button” navigation including the integration into the airspace

• Aircraft is part of a “system” enabling the “user” to manage his flight:• Set flight destination• Monitor the flight from take-off to landing• Gets help and information from the ground, when and if needed, including

emergencies

• Aircraft operation is Safe and Secure

What is PPlane?What is PPlane?

4

PPlane PartnersPPlane Partners

1. French Aerospace Lab ONERA France

2. Israel Aerospace Industries IAI Israel

3. Airnet AIR Slovenia

4. Bologna University UNIBO Italy

5. Brno University BUT Czech Rep.

6. CIRA CIRA Italy

7. Intergam Communications Ltd. ITG Israel

8. Warsaw University of Technology WUT Poland

9. AT-One, German Aerospace Center DLR Germany

10. Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aeroespacial INTA Spain

11. AT-One, National Aerospace Laboratory NLRNetherlands

12. University of Patras PAT Greece

13. REA-TECH Engineering and Architect Ltd. REA Hungary

5 RC4 Universities3 SME1 Industry

5

Delphi Survey

HoQ Tier 1 HoQ Tier 2C

usto

mer

nee

ds

Needed systems specifications

Recommended features/

technologies

Prio

ritiz

ed

syst

ems

spec

ifica

tions

Prioritized spec

Ideas for the design of operational concepts

Design of scenarios(OpCo + vehicles)

PPlane teamWP 2 to 5

Eng

inee

ring

Priorities for scenarios

Scenarios processed and rated

Most promising scenarios and aircraft characteristics

PPlane Overall MethodologyPPlane Overall Methodology

6

PPlane “Roadable” IssuePPlane “Roadable” Issue

Weight, safety andsocial acceptance

7

Potential Concepts of PPlane VehiclesPotential Concepts of PPlane Vehicles

1

2

3

4

56

8

European « Out of the box » study

7

8

PPlane Air Vehicle Cabin/Cockpit LayoutPPlane Air Vehicle Cabin/Cockpit Layout

Too complex for a regular Joe

9

PPlane System ArchitecturePPlane System Architecture

ATC: Air Traffic ControlRPS: Remote Pilot Station

10

Human Factors Team FindingsHuman Factors Team Findings

• PPlane transportation system should be used by a 'regular Joe': no specific competency nor training should be required from the PPlane occupants• Only passengers on board - pilot on the ground (GP)

• PPlane passenger will have to be confident and more independent than passengers from current commercial flights• A pre flight briefing will be required (emergency procedures)• A short simulation trial could be envisaged (actual PPlane in a

simulated mode) for familiarisation and acceptance checking before the actual flight

• In flight, information is required including voice communication with ground

• PPlane Ground Pilot (GP) should have a specific license and type rating Human factors issues are important

in the PPlane and on ground

11

Security Team FindingsSecurity Team Findings

Three main targets:• Protecting the passengers and aircraft from attack

• Difficult to get the same protection as for conventional airlines using “secure” airports

• PPlane less attractive than large airliners for any terrorism actions• Short range• Low number of passengers

• Protecting the aircraft from being used for unlawful acts• Low mass and speed resulting in limited kinetic energy • Low fuel capacity • Limited payload capability

• Protecting PPports from illegal intruders• Actions to improve security level were described for Czech Rep. (based on

existing GA airports)

Command and control data link critical

12

Safety Team FindingsSafety Team Findings

• Flight and Flight Control System (FCS) –• Need to develop new type of highly reliable FCS and autopilot• Design of FCS system could be based on existing designs for higher

category aircraft• Emergency management

• New systems and procedures have to be developed• Navigation

• 4D contract managed at the PPlane system level • Propulsion

• Multiple engine recommended (or low failure rate for electric engines?)

On board human actions to be kept to a minimum

More automation: manufacturer liability?

Pilot still “on the loop”: how much? liability?

13

Environment Team FindingsEnvironment Team Findings

• Emissions:• Emissions of NOX, CO, CO2 and H2O with combustion engines

• No direct emission with electric engines• Noise

• Engine: nearly no noise for electric engine, significant noise for combustion engines

• Propeller: used with both types of engine• Perceived nuisance by population

• 4D contracts will enable optimized flight path

• Noise• Global efficiency

PPlane may exist only if electric propulsion becomes viable for such air vehicles

14

A&C technologies have been investigated, leading to the following conclusions:

• On board 4D trajectory management: significant developments are still required, enabling acting not only on speed control but also on trajectory generation

• Separation management: automated• Detect and avoid: new paradigm…

• Fault detection and identification: model-based FDI techniques (that need further development) should lower hardware redundancy needs

• Automatic take-off, landing and taxiing: GNSS based systems + vision based technologies still require further work

• Automation and functional allocation: complex issues to share functions between on-board automation, ground automation and humans

• Aid to piloting tools & remote pilot situation awareness: Back to HF issues

Automation and Control Team FindingsAutomation and Control Team Findings

More work is needed to reach sufficient automation safety levels

15

Automation in Aviation – 2012 U.S. ReportSafety issueAutomation in Aviation – 2012 U.S. ReportSafety issue

Unmanned aircraft systems current status (US congressional report, January 2012)• Survey (Aerospace America, March 2011): in 2011, there are 680

different UAS programs world wide, up from 195 in 2005• USA unmanned aircraft inventory increased more than 40-fold from

2002 to 2010• In 2011, almost 1 in 3 U.S. warplanes is a Robot• Global Hawk-class, Reaper and Predator-class UAS will grow from

approximately 340 in FY 2012 to approximately 650 in FY 2021• The Predator has only 7.5 accidents per 100,000 hours of flight:

• down from 20 accidents over that time in 2005 • comparable to a (manned) F-16 • just under the 8.2 rate for small, single engine private

airplanes flown in the U.S

High automation has made significant progress on safety!

16

Air Traffic Management issuesAir Traffic Management issues

Need for a 4D contract based ATM

• Conventional voice messages between Air Traffic Controllers and pilots are not an option any more. On board 4D trajectory management is required

• ATC monitoring of aircraft compliance to planned 4D trajectory remains a problem for safety and efficiency

• Conflict management• Uncertainty in aircraft future positioning• Latency in aircraft reaction to ATC instructions

• Self sense and avoid system not practicable: a 4D contract based, preplanned, Air Traffic Management is needed

17

PPlane as an Element of a Multimodal Transport SystemPPlane as an Element of a Multimodal Transport System

PPlane is not a substitution to any transport means, it is

one segment of a multi modal transport system

Personal Rapid Transport (PRT)

18

• Proposed scenario: Specific ramp infrastructures

PPort Concept #1 - Assisted Take-off and LandingPPort Concept #1 - Assisted Take-off and Landing

19

Estimated Cost per Km per Seat (€ per km per seat)Estimated Cost per Km per Seat (€ per km per seat)

20

Main ConclusionMain Conclusion

The PPlane project team has identified aspects of a new small aircraft personal transportation system to be further developed:

• Technical issues: • Aircraft characteristic and performance• Associated ground support systems• High automation level that is needed for such a system

• Overall system architecture definition and operation • Identification of users needs and expectations• Integration to the overall transportation system • Management of abnormal situations

• Social issues• Safety of over-flown population • Environment concerns (emission , noise etc)

PPlane will ensure the mobility of people and goods, fostering safe and secure commuting, without negative impact on other parties

21

RecommendationsRecommendations

PPlane concept represents an important step and milestone in the long road towards a revolutionary personal air transport system

• Analysis results and recommendations of the PPlane project should be used to continue the European effort to pioneer the air transport of the future

• Future work to further investigate the concept has to be undertaken rapidly to support the European competitiveness in aeronautics

• EU – US collaboration on automated Personal Planes Transportation Systems is encouraged in order to accelerate the common vision of global citizen mobility

22

Automation in Aviation – 2011 EC ReportAutomation in Aviation – 2011 EC Report

“Automation has changed the roles of both the pilot and the

air traffic controller. Their roles are now as strategic

managers and hands-off supervisors, only intervening

when necessary”

Published in 2011 by the European Commission

Directorate-General for Research and InnovationDirectorate General for Mobility and Transport