SESAR2020 Technology Evaluation/Performance Assessment · 2018. 11. 27. · CAP2 En-Route...
Transcript of SESAR2020 Technology Evaluation/Performance Assessment · 2018. 11. 27. · CAP2 En-Route...
SESAR2020 Technology Evaluation/Performance Assessment
European Technology Evaluation Workshop
José Manuel Cordero on behalf of David Batchelor
Brussels, 17th October 2018
SESAR: The SES ATM research programme Technological pillar of SES
Mechanism coordinating and concentrating all EU research and development (R&D) activities in ATM
Unites around 3000 experts in Europe
SJU set up in 2007 to manage this partnership – single-managing entity
ATM is an essential part of European air transport and aviation, connecting cities and people citizens as well as boosting jobs and growth
SESAR timeline: SESAR 1 (2007-2016), SESAR 2020 Wave 1 (2016-2019), Wave 2(2020-2022)
SESAR: A performance-driven programme
How to achieve these benefits?
SESAR role: defining, developing & deploying new or improved technologies and procedures (SESAR Solutions)
SESAR Vision:
• Builds on trajectory-based operations (TBO)
• Relies on the provision of Air Navigation Services (ANS) supporting this Business/Mission Trajectory execution
The ATM Master Plan
The European ATM Master Plan is the common roadmap for the Development and Deployment of SESAR technologies and procedure, linking them to the Single European Sky Performance Objectives
• Enable a 3-fold increase in capacity which will also reduce delays both on the ground and in the air
• Improve safety by a factor of 10 • Enable a 10% reduction in the effects
flights have on the environment • Provide ATM services to the airspace
users at a cost of at least 50% less
ATM MP Performance Ambitions
6
How can be known that a SESAR solution will bring the expected benefits?
How can be justified that a SESAR Solution is ready for deployment and industrialisation?
How can be known if it is necessary to plan additional assessments or propose new concepts?
PJ19.04 - Performance Assessment Overview WHY do we need Performance Assessment?
7
PJ20
PJ19
SESAR Solution & Enabling Projects
SESAR2020 - main principles
Performance Areas in SESAR 2020
6 transversal areas to be assessed:
(Operational) Performance
Environment
Human Performance
Safety
Security
CBA
8
Reference material,
methodologies, etc…
available for them (output
from SESAR 1)
Support & Guidance through
Community of Practice
(with additional domains)
Performance Workflow in SESAR2020
Progressive Performance Assessment refinement
Validation
Results Estimations
SOL SOL SOL SOL SOL
SOL SOL
SOL SOL
SOL
SOL
Performance
Assessment
Release #1
Performance
Assessment
Release #2
Performance
Assessment
Release #n
VALIDATION TARGETS
Gap Analysis Gap Analysis
Gap Analysis
3 yearly cycles for SESAR 2020 Wave 1: 2017, 2018 and 2019
PERFORMANCE
FRAMEWORK
The Performance Consolidation Factory
Assumptions
Applicability
Traffic
SOL ZZ PAR
SOL XX
PAR
SOL YY
PAR
SESAR 2020 Consolidated Performance Assessment
SESAR Solution XX
SESAR Solution YY
Exercises
Consolidated PAR
v1, v2, v3 exercises
Per Transversal
Area!
Assumptio
ns
Applicability
Traffic
1st level of Consolidation
performed at SOL level per v
phase
2nd level of consolidation,
at Program level,
performed by PJ19.04
SESAR 1 performance results 2005 baseline
11
Not including Release 5 results
SESAR Performance Framework Performance-driven development approach that is applied within the SESAR Programme.
It represents a framework to support the goal of ensuring that the SESAR Programme develops the operational concept and technology
Common reference for the SESAR projects measurements
Ensures that the overall activity of the SESAR projects is coherent and, in addition, that these projects´ results are meaningful, consistent and usable.
Composed of indicators, methodologies and tools
SESAR Performance Framework
SESAR performance framework
(+maintenance)
SES performance
scheme + maintenance
Exploratory Research
results
WAVE 2 Program
definition
Master Plan + update
SESAR experience
SJU Input
Scientific Committee
Input
Indicator evaluation
SESAR Performance Framework KPIs Selected KPA Focus Area KPI KPI Definition
Safety ATM system safety outcome SAF1 Total number of fatal accidents and incidents with ATM
Contribution per year
Environment Fuel Efficiency FEFF1 Actual average fuel burn per flight
Capacity Airspace Capacity
CAP1 TMA throughput, in challenging airspace, per unit time
CAP2 En-Route throughput, in challenging airspace, per unit
time
Airport Capacity CAP3 Peak Runway Throughput (mixed mode)
Predictability and
Punctuality
G2G variability in flight duration
PRD1 Variance of difference in actual and flight plan or RBT
durations
Departure punctuality PUN1 % Flights departing within +/-3 minutes of scheduled
departure time due to ATM and weather related delay causes
Cost Efficiency
G2G ANS Cost Efficiency CEF2 Flights per ATCO-Hour on duty
CEF3 Technology Cost per flight
Security, Flexibility, Human Performance, Civil-Military Coordination, Access and Equity do not have any KPI or Validation Target.
SESAR Performance Framework PIs Selected (overview)
KPA Number of PIs Which mandatory
Safety 7 1
Security 2 2
Environment 6 2
Capacity 10 7
Predictability and Punctuality - -
Cost Efficiency 4 1
Flexibility - -
Civil-Military Cooperation 5 5 (only where relevant)
Human Performance 4 4
Access and Equity - -
17
SESAR Performance Framework Methodologies (Environment)
SESAR Performance Framework Methodologies (Environment)
5 steps approach
SESAR Performance Framework Example of tools (Environment)
The following tools are also recommended for specific purposes:
The Eurocontrol IMPACT tool: implements state-of-the-art methodology for calculating noise footprints, while providing estimations of fuel consumption and emissions released using a common set of aircraft fleet composition and performance assumptions. Generalised use in S2020
Open-ALAQS - for detailed local air quality assessments that might or might not include sources of emissions other than flight movements.
AEM - for fuel and emissions assessments, which would require large amounts of data to be processed, otherwise, it is preferable to use IMPACT.
V-PAT - for vertical flight efficiency analysis and in particular Continuous Climb and Continuous Descent operations.
Conclussions
• SESAR is a performance-driven programme where technology is evaluated mostly from an ATM performance perspective
• A common Performance Framework is provided to all solutions to ensure program-wide coherency and ensure usability of results for further consolidation
• Performance Framework consist on indicators, methodologies and tools
• The current Performance Framework is stable – maintenance to adapt to changing context is performed
• Yearly lifecycle - checkpoints
• Gap Analysis is an essential tool for technology evaluation at program level
• Support to Solutions to ensure applicability is deemed essential
This project has received funding from the SESAR Joint Undertaking under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No [number]
The opinions expressed herein reflect the author’s view only. Under no circumstances shall the SESAR Joint Undertaking be responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.
PJ19.4 Coordination with PJ20
Thank you very much for your attention!
What will SESAR deliver in terms of Environment?
SESAR Fuel Saving Ambition (10% per flight)=
SESAR2020 target for solutions (6.8%) + SESAR 1 performance (1.8%) + Deployment Baseline performance (1.4%)
As it is estimated that 50.0 millions of tonnes of fuel will be burned by 2035 ECAC wide by around 10 million flights, the above-mentioned fuel saving targets and performances are equivalent to: SESAR2020 Fuel Saving Ambition (10%) = 500kg/flight or around 1.5 tonnes of CO2/flight SESAR2020 Fuel Saving target for Solutions (6.8%) = 340kg/flight or 1 tonnes of CO2/flight SESAR 1 Fuel Saving performance (1.8%) = 90kg/flight or 283kg of CO2/flight SESAR Deployment Baseline Fuel Saving performance (1.4%) = 70kg/flight or 220kg of CO2/flight Note: while the SESAR 1 baseline was 2005, the SESAR2020 baseline is 2012.
What will SESAR deliver in terms of Environment? 30 out of 85 solutions have expected benefits in Performance.
Top 10:
Solution PJ.07-01 Airspace User Processes for Trajectory Definition PJ.10-01C Collaborative Control PJ.10-02b Advanced Separation Management PJ.09-03 Collaborative Network Management Functions PJ.01-02 Use of Arrival and Departure Management Information for Traffic Optimisation within the TMA PJ2-01 Wake turbulence separation optimization PJ.09-02 Integrated local DCB processes PJ.01-03 Dynamic and Enhanced Routes and Airspace PJ.02-08 Traffic optimisation on single and multiple runway airports PJ.08-01 Management of Dynamic Airspace configurations
SESAR 1 gains for Environment / Fuel efficiency
EUROCONTROL - General Presentation 24
DB (Deploymentbaseline)
DB+STEP1DB+STEP1
+STEP2DB+STEP1+
STEP2+STEP3
Target -0.30% -2.80% -5.65% -8.50%
Cycle 5assessment
-0.30% -2.36%
-9%
-8%
-7%
-6%
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
To
tal E
CA
C F
ue
l sa
vin
gs
Target Cycle 5 assessment
Gap Analysis
SESAR Performance Framework SESAR Performance Management Process
SJU ATM MP Committee
Stakeholders business needs
External forces + EU Performance Scheme
Content Integration Level (PJ19)
Solution Development & Validation Level -
(PJ1 to PJ18)
Master Planning Level (PJ20)
Deployment packaging /
planning
Performance-driven CONOPS (Inc Perf
Expectations) and VALS
2
Consolidated Performance Assessment
5
SESAR Solutions Development and Validation
4
Validation Targets
3
Performance needs
Performance ambitions
1
Consolidated Business Case
6
Framework
Content Integration
• Support decision
making • Reporting
information about proposed solutions
• Analyzing the impact • Identifying gaps and
overloads • Support concept
development and system design
Performance Ambitions
Set on: • Cost efficiency • Operational
Efficiency • Capacity • Environment • Safety • Security
Performance Expectations
• Estimation of
expected achieved performance outcomes
• Concept for evolution of ATM phases
• Initial expert judgment of the magnitude of potential benefits for each KPI
Validation Targets
• Overall
contributions that solutions should target for the programme
• Are aligned with the performance ambitions
• Two types: • Numerical • Qualitative
SESAR Solutions
• Two scenarios for
measuring Solution´s impact
• Reference Scenario (Without the element)
• Solutions Scenario (Element is integrated)
Performance Assessment
• Reported at
Performance Assessment and Gap Analysis Report (PAGAR)
• Covers every Transversal Areas and KPAs
• PAGAR will be use by PJ20
Consolidated Business Case
• Developed by PJ20 • Consolidating
assessments result • Most appropriate
way to support decision making
• Focus on develop-deploy transition
27
A bottom-up aggregation of what is actually being validated iteratively (from V1 to V3 maturity phases)
Consolidated Performance Assessment
Content Integration Level
Solution Validation Results
Content Development and Validation Level
Exercise Validation Result Content Development and
Validation Level
Exercise Validation Result Content Development and
Validation Level
Solution Validation Results
Content Development and Validation Level
Exercise Validation Result Content Development and
Validation Level
Exercise Validation Result Content Development and
Validation Level
Exercise Validation Results Content Development and
Validation Level
Assumptions
Applicabili
ty
Traffic
Assumptions
Applicabili
ty
Traffic
PJ19.04 - Performance Assessment WHAT is a Performance Assessment?
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Relation to Performance Ambitions (1/2)
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Introduction Session
ATM Master Plan SESAR
Performance Ambition KPA
Perf Amb. ID ATM Master Plan SESAR
Performance Ambition KPI
SESAR Performance Framework
KPA
Perf Fram. ID Performance Framework KPI/(PI)/<Design goal>
Cost efficiency
PA1 Gate to Gate direct ANS Cost per Flight
Cost efficiency
CEF1 Direct ANS Gate-to-gate cost per flight
PA1.1 Determined Unit Cost for En-Route ANS
CEF2 Flights per ATCO hour on duty
CEF3 Technology Cost per flight
PA1.2 Determined Unit Cost for Terminal ANS
CEF2 Flights per ATCO hour on duty
CEF3 Technology Cost per flight
Capacity
PA7 Network throughput additional flights (million)
Capacity
CAP1 TMA throughput, in challenging airspace, per unit time
CAP2 En-route throughput, in challenging airspace, per unit time
PA6 Additional flights at congested airports (million)
CAP3 Peak Runway Throughput
<RES1> % Loss of airport capacity avoided
<RES2> % Loss of airspace capacity avoided
PA5 Departure Delay (min/dep) Predictability
and punctuality
PUN1 % departures within +/- 3 minutes vs. Scheduled due to ATM and weather related delay causes
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Relation to Performance Ambitions (2/2)
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Introduction Session
ATM Master Plan SESAR
Performance Ambition KPA
Perf Amb. ID ATM Master Plan SESAR
Performance Ambition KPI
SESAR Performance Framework
KPA
Perf Fram. ID Performance Framework KPI/(PI)/<Design goal>
Operational Efficiency
PA4 Arrival Predictability Predictability
and punctuality
PRD1 Variance of Difference in actual & Flight Plan or RBT durations
PA2 Flight time per flight (min/flight)
Environment
FEFF3 Reduction in average flight duration
PA3 Fuel burn per flight (tonne/flight) FEFF1 Actual average fuel burn per flight
Environment PA8 Co2 emissions (tonne/flights) FEFF2 CO2 Emissions
Safety PA9 Accidents with ATM contribution Safety <SAF1> Total number of fatal accidents and incidents
Security PA10 ATM related security incidents resulting in traffic disruptions
Security SEC1
Personnel (safety) risk after mitigation
SEC2 Capacity risk after mitigation
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Relation to Performance Scheme
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Introduction Session
• SESAR PF and SES Performance Scheme have different scope and applicability
• Both documents use similar KPAs, but selected KPIs are different for
each point of view.
SES Performance Scheme SESAR 2020 Performance Framework
Use of targets (KPIs) and monitoring (PIs) to drive performance improvement in the
deployed system
Used to measure expected improvements from deploying SESAR Solutions
Implicitly includes real world issues (such as indirect ANS costs)
Explicitly excludes real world issues
Measurements are made in the real world Measurements are made in validation
exercises
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Relation to Performance Scheme (1/2)
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Introduction Session
SES Perf Scheme KPA
Perf. Scheme ID
SES Performance Scheme KPI/PI SESAR PF
KPA Perf.
Fram. ID PF KPI/(PI)
Safety
PS1 Effectiveness of Safety Management (both Regulators and ANSPs).
Safety
N/A
PS2 Application of RAT methodology. N/A
PS3 Application of Just Culture (JC) N/A
PS4 Separation infringements
<SAF1> Total number of
fatal accidents and incidents
(SAF1.3)
(SAF2.3) PS5 Runway incursions
(SAF3.4)
PS6 ATM-specific occurrences at ATS units N/A
PS7 Airspace infringements N/A
PS8 Level of occurrence reporting N/A
PS9 Application of automatic data recording for separation minima
infringement monitoring N/A
PS10 Application of automatic data recording for runway incursion
monitoring N/A
Cost-Efficiency
PS22 Determined Unit Cost for En-Route ANS
Cost-Efficiency
CEF2 Flights per ATCO hour on duty (CEF2)
CEF3 Technology Cost per flight (CEF3)
PS23 Determined Unit Cost for terminal ANS CEF2 Flights per ATCO hour on duty (CEF2)
CEF3 Technology Cost per flight (CEF3)
PS24 Costs of EUROCONTROL N/A
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Relation to Performance Scheme (2/2)
SESAR2020 Performance Framework Introduction Session
SES Perf Scheme KPA
Perf. Scheme ID
SES Performance Scheme KPI/PI SESAR PF KPA Perf.
Fram. ID PF KPI/(PI)
Environment
PS11 Horizontal en route flight efficiency of the last filed
flight plan trajectory. [%] Environment
FEFF1.1 Planned Average fuel burn per flight
PS12 Horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual
trajectory [%] FEFF1 Actual average fuel burn per flight
PS13 Effectiveness of booking procedures for FUA
Civil-Military Cooperation
and Coordination
CMC1.7 Used duration/Allocated duration ARES
PS14 Rate of planning of CDRs CMC2.2 GAT planning efficiency of Available ARES (%GAT
flights planning to use ARES vs. GAT flights for which ARES is available)
PS15 Effective use of CDRs PRD7 No. flights GAT for which ARES airspace is
offered
PS16 Additional time in taxi-out phase [minutes per
departure]
Punctuality and
Predictability
PRD3 Taxi out variability
PS17 Additional time in arrival sequencing and metering area
(ASMA) [minutes per arrival] PRD4 TMA arrival variability
Capacity
PS18 En-Route ATFM delay per flight [min per flight].
PUN1 % Departures < +/- 3 mins. vs. schedule due to
ATM causes and weather conditions
Capacity CAP2
En-route throughput, in challenging airspace, per unit time
PS19 Airport ATFM arrival delay per flight [min/arr]. CAP3 Peak Runway Throughput
PS20 ATFM slot adherence Punctuality
and Predictability
PUN1 % Departures < +/- 3 mins. vs. schedule due to
ATM causes and weather conditions
PS21 ATC pre-departure delay PUN3 % Departures < +/- 3 mins vs. schedule due to
Airport ATM Factors