Airport Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

11
Airport Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic Hector Fornes Advisor: Hamsa Balakrishnan

description

Airport Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic. Hector Fornes Advisor : Hamsa Balakrishnan. Agenda. Current situation at LGA Current pushback strategy Metering strategy Calibration of the parameters for the model Results and performance measures. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Airport Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Page 1: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Airport Surface Management at LGA:Metering the departure traffic

Hector FornesAdvisor: Hamsa Balakrishnan

Page 2: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Agenda• Current situation at LGA• Current pushback strategy• Metering strategy• Calibration of the parameters for the model• Results and performance measures

Page 3: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Current situation at LGA

Source: faa.gov

Source: Balakrishna, H. , Hansman, R.J. & Reynolds 2013

Origin of the problems• Over-scheduling• Limited gates• Crossing runways (capacity reductions)• Abundance of small planes (shuttles/regional carriers)

Consequences• Operations close to capacity• Capacity limitations• Long delays• Long queues

Page 4: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Current taxi-out strategy:Push-back at discretion

Source: Kladilkar, H. & Reynolds, T. 2013

• How airlines dispatch departing flights • Consequences of the “at discretion” policy

Source: Balakrishna, H. , Hansman, R.J. & Reynolds 2013

Tower

Page 5: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Proposed taxi-out operations: Metering

Source: Balakrishna, H. , Hansman, R.J. & Reynolds 2013

Source: Balakrishna, H. , Hansman, R.J. & Reynolds 2013

Other considerations: - Gate conflicts (how we handle them)

N-control

Queing model

GOALS• Reduction of fuel burn while

taxiing out• Reduction of emissions• Reduce congestion at the

airport

Page 6: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Calibration of the parameters for the model

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

traffic (aircrafts/15 minutes)

taxi

-out

tim

e (m

in)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

traffic (aircrafts/15 minutes)

taxi

-out

tim

e (m

in)

Regression tree

Unimpeded taxi-out time

Page 7: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Results

04:00 08:00 12:00 16:00 20:00 00:000

5

10

15

20

25

Time of day (hrs)

Sur

face

traf

fic le

vel

Taxi time simulation for Aug 15

Unrestricted trafficNctrl traffic

Unrestricted pushbacksNctrl pushbacks

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24-100

-50

0

50

100

Tim

e (m

in)

Unrestricted taxi timesNctrl taxi times

Gate holds

04:00 08:00 12:00 16:00 20:00 00:000

5

10

15

20

25

Time of day (hrs)

Sur

face

traf

fic le

vel

Taxi time simulation for Aug 15

Unrestricted trafficNctrl traffic

Unrestricted pushbacksNctrl pushbacks

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24-100

-50

0

50

100

Tim

e (m

in)

Unrestricted taxi timesNctrl taxi times

Gate holds

Page 8: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Results: Reduction of fuel and emissions

Concept Value (minutes)Total taxi in the current strategy

(pushback at discretion)21,505

Total taxi with the metering strategy (pushback at discretion)

17,509

Total taxi-out time difference 3,996

Concept ReductionFuel consumption 11,988 Kg

NOx emissions 119,880 gHC emissions 48,751 gCO emissions 267,732 g

Concept Value (per minute)Fuel consumption 3.0 Kg

NOx emissions 30 gHC emissions 12.2 gCO emissions 67 g

Unitary values

Total results

Taxi-out reductions

18.5% reduction

Page 9: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Results: Gate conflicts-Maximum of 6 additional conflicts over 15 days in each 15-minute period.

-This represents a maximum 1 additional conflict per 15-minute period

Page 10: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Results:FCFS queuing policy

AirlinePercentage of flights moving

forward

Percentage of flights moving

back% change

Delta & Regionals 7,4 16,0 -8,6American and Eagle 13,3 2,1 11,3

Us Air & Regional 7,0 13,1 -6,1United 13,7 2,0 11,7Spirit 17,5 0,0 17,5

Southwest/AirTran 10,3 1,6 8,7Jetblue 11,1 1,3 9,8Others 12,7 2,5 10,3

AirlinePercentage of flights moving

forward

Percentage of flights moving

back% change

Delta & Regionals 15,7 34,1 -18,4

American and Eagle 28,7 2,1 26,6

Us Air & Regional 6,6 25,7 -19,1

United 30,1 2,6 27,5

Spirit 30,5 0,0 30,5

Southwest/AirTran 24,1 1,3 22,8

Jetblue 20,4 1,7 18,7

Others 26,8 5,4 21,4

Current pushback strategy

Metering strategy

Page 11: Airport  Surface Management at LGA: Metering the departure traffic

Summary of the performance of metering at LGA

Aspect Results of the implementation of metering

Surface congestion Reduced to the Nctrl value

Gate conflicts A maximum of 1 additional gate conflict for 15 minute period (particularly peak ours)

Taxi-out reductions 18.5% of taxi-out time18.5 % in fuel consumption18.5 % in emissions

FCFS Less deviation from the ideal FCFS policyDeviations from FCFS are reduced