Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A.
-
Upload
isai-beatson -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium National Aerospace Laboratory NLR CXXX-1A.
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-1A
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-2A
Outline Projects Overview
General Findings
ASAS Prototype Guidelines
The Next Steps
ASAS = Self-Separation in this presentation
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-3A
Projects Overview
Free Flight (NASA, FAA, RLD, NLR)
INTENT (ONERA, QinetiQ, TU-Delft, Rockwell Collins, Smiths, Airbus, Eurocontrol, NLR, VNV, BA, SAS, KLM)
MFF (ENAV, AENA, Eurocontrol, DNA, SCAA, HCAA, MATS, NATS, NLR)
Conflict rate
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
900 1000
0 10 20 30 40 Number of aircraft in sector
Pc/
P2
Air Ground
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-4A
Project Free Flight Analysis: Distributed systems, capacity, safety
Offline: normal scenarios, complex geometries
SIM I: Basic FF cruise, high densitiesSIM II: Mixed equipage in cruise, PASAS?MHITL: Web experiment & classroomSIM III: How low can you go?
NLR ASAS prototype based on state info & PASAS
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-5A
Project Free FlightConflict Detection & Resolution
ownship
intruder
minimum distance
protected zone intruder
avoidance vector
advised vector
1. heading change
2. speed change
not shown: 3. vertical speed cange
Protected Zone radius = 5 nm ½h = 1000 ft
=>normally vertical most optimal
ASAS offers 3 separate manoeuvres
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-6A
Project Free FlightASAS CDR&P
• ASAS: 5nm, 5 min, 1000 ft• Conflict symbology
- red circle & track- yellow circle own zone- traffic symbol always- label time to l.o.s.
• Resolution symbology- horizontal- vertical
• Predictive ASAS• If conflict =>
check vertical !
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-7A
Human-in-the-loop experiment I
Conflict rate tripled: so 3x, 6x, 9x !
Low workload in high density en-route traffic
Workload - Traffic Density( p < 0.0086 )
0
10
20
30
40
50
Single Double Triple
RS
ME
ratin
g
114 = costing lots and lots of effort
88 = costing much effort
40 = costing some effort
27 = costing little effort
3 = costing no effort
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-8A
Human-in-the-loop experiment II
Mixed-Equipage concept: 25% & 75% equippedAirborne side prefers Full mix Ground side not able to cope with Full mix
Traffic density lowered for ATCo relative to HITL I
Predictive ASAS lowers conflict alert rate significantly and makes alert time predictable
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-9A
Human-in-the-loop experiment III
Descent: not different from cruise
Arrival: – FF higher workload– CDTI in managed airspace => extremely low workload
Workload for flight phase and procedure
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Cruise Descent Arrival
RS
ME ATC
CDTI
FF
114 = costing lots and lots of effort
88 = costing much effort
40 = costing some effort
27 = costing little effort
3 = costing no effort
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-10A
Multiple human-in-the-loop experiments
• Webexperiment• Classroomexperiment
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-11A
Multiple human-in-the-loop experiment Humans
smarter, meaner, more strategic, emotional, variable, etc.
Will superconflict solving deteriorate or improve?
Superconflict n=8
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-12A
Who are the bots and who are the humans?
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-13A
Project INTENT(not an acronym)
The objective of the INTENT project is to answer these questions, giving a technology roadmap for airborne and ground based equipment to increase airspace capacity.
Where ?How ?
When ?
But:– how much INTENT is required ?– where to use INTENT ?– when to use INTENT ?
Aircraft intent is a potential enabler of Airborne Separation Assurance / Free Flight
Part task
Fast time
Full scaleMost interesting systems
Human acceptability
Parameters ofhuman operator
model
Literature study
Scope andcapacityconcepts
Possible validationsequence
Nominal validationroute
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-14A
INTENT based CD&R RFS intent-based ASAS
– Conflict detection and resolution based on aircraft 3D position and FMS flight plan (aircraft intent)
– Priority rules, one aircraft in conflict manoeuvres– Resolution advisories in more directions and always
presented as an FMS modified route– Only when FMS is engaged (LNAV and VNAV)
Three alert levels:– 20 - 5 minutes: green– 5 - 3 minutes: amber– 3 - 0 minutes: red
Experimental Design– 4 intent levels: state-based with 5 min look-
ahead time, intent-based with 5, 10 and 20 min look-ahead time.
– 3 traffic loads: 1x, 2 x and 3 x today's traffic
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-15A
INTENT Conclusions (1/2)
Including aircraft intent in the separation assurance process is preferred by controllers and pilots
Aircraft intent information does not have a significant effect on controller or pilot workload, compared to the references without aircraft intent, both for the airborne and ground concepts
Aircraft intent information has a positive effect on flight efficiency compared to state based references
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-16A
INTENT Conclusions (2/2) The comparison between the airspace
capacity results of the airborne and ground concepts is interesting: – ground concepts
can handle aboutmaximum of1.5 times today’s traffic load
– airborne concepts can handle 3 times this load.
No
tool
Stat
e
Inte
nt 5
Inte
nt 1
0
Inte
nt 2
0Ground / Structured
Ground / Unstructured
Airborne / Unstructured
3 3 3 3
1.51.5
1.31.3
0
1
2
3Tr
affic
Loa
d
Intent Level
Operational Concept
Achievable Traffic Load
Ground / Structured
Ground / Unstructured
Airborne / Unstructured
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-17A
Project MFF ASAS trials ASAS in climb,cruise & descent
Transition FFAS MAS
FL285
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-18A
Project MFF, results
Vertical transitions have highest workload
Instantaneous Self-Assessment (ISA)Average (95% confident)
Transition
EXTREME
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
NO
Instantaneous Self-Assessment (ISA)Maximum values
Transition
EXTREME
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
NO
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-19A
Project MFF, results
Workload higher with ASAS but acceptable
Instantaneous Self-Assessment (ISA)Average (95% confident)
PF / reference PF / ASAS PNF / reference PNF / ASAS
Role / ASAS
EXTREME
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
NO
Instantaneous Self-Assessment (ISA)Maximum values
PF / reference PF / ASAS PNF / reference PNF / ASAS
Role / ASAS
EXTREME
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
NO
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-20A
General Findings
ASAS yields tremendous capacity increase
ASAS offers safety benefits
ASAS allows direct routing and optimal vertical profile, hence efficiency benefits
State-based CDR&P sufficient for introduction and benefits, intent-based system preferred for future
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-21A
ASAS Prototype Guidelines Separate or duplicate ADS-B transmitter/receiver
State-based lookahead time 5-7 minutes in cruise, descent & climb is sufficient if fitted with predictive ASAS
Target altitude as intent info would enhance system
Intent based CD&R can expand lookahead time, optimum found to be 10 minutes
Use of priority (to 3 min to l.o.s. at the latest):– to allow state-based, state-based + target state and
intent-based CDR&R to operate in the same airspace– reduction of workload: only 1 aircraft to manoeuvre
Co-operative resolution offers fail-safety and offers bottleneck solution by wave/domino effect
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-22A
Next Steps
Test bandwidth
Standardise on principle of co-operative resolution
Develop standards for intent-based system for future that is compatible with first generation ASAS
And then:
It is time for a leap forward
=> Retrofit state-based system during field trials in non-radar airspace: North Atlantic?
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-23A
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-24A
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-25A
Project Free FlightConcept: state-based, co-operative Lookahead time is 5 minutes
Two alert levels: 5-3 minutes: amber 3-0 minutes: red
Normally: – amber: vertical resolution each solves 50% of intrusion in
amber conflicts– red always each 100 % (fail-safe) vertical
Exception: horizontal resolution both solve 100% of intrusionvert/vert = 50+50 v & 0 h = solved verticallyhor/vert = 50+0 v & 100 h = solved horizontallyhor/hor = 80 + 80 h & 0 v = solved horizontally
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-26A
Project Free FlightPrimary flight display
Conflict reso:- vertical spd- altitude- heading- speed(green bugs)
Predasas on:- vertical spd- speed- heading(amber & red bands)
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-27A
Capacity
Distributed system vs. central system
Effect on workload, safety and technological requirements
221 )1( pNNp
gc
2)1( pNpac
Conflict rate
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
900 1000
0 10 20 30 40 Number of aircraft in sector
Pc/
P2
Air Ground
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-28A
Capacity - Workload
Workload - Traffic Density( p < 0.0086 )
0
10
20
30
40
50
Single Double Triple
RS
ME
ratin
g
Conflict rate: triple, six times, nine times !
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-29A
Capacity
221 )1( pNNp
gc
2)1( pNpac
Task comparison Controlled vs. Free Flight
Fly
Navigate
Communicate with ATC
Fly
Navigate
Separation
Controlled Flight Free Flight
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-30A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-31A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-32A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-33A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-34A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-35A
Safety
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-36A
Workload
Descent: no different from cruise
Arrival: – FF higher workload– CDTI and managed extremely low workload
Workload for flight phase and procedure
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Cruise Descent Arrival
RS
ME ATC
CDTI
FF
114 = costing lots and lots of effort
88 = costing much effort
40 = costing some effort
27 = costing little effort
3 = costing no effort
Nationaal Lucht- en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium
National Aerospace Laboratory NLR
CXXX-37A
ASAS prototype Retrofit: State-based with conflict prevention minimal
required, target state (altitude) recommended
Lookahead time 5-10 minutes
En-route: climb, cruise, descent
Approach: extra tools needed (spacing)
Effects on safety, capacity, efficiency all expected to be beneficial. Workload acceptable.
Air Traffic Control becomes Air Traffic Management