1

AvMet Applications, Inc. 1800 Alexander Bell Dr., Ste. 130 Reston, VA 20191

Using Simulation in NextGen Benefits Quantification

Alexander Klein July 22, 2014

2

Simulation Model Spectrum Analytical models (e.g. Excel based)

Queuing/network models

Superfast-time simulation models Medium-to-high detail Entire NAS

High-fidelity fast-time simulation models Airport surface / TRACON Group of sectors to Center

Real-time Human-in-the Loop simulators

“Weather-aware” “NextGen-aware” Highly detailed Day-in-the NAS in 2 min

DART

3

Airspace, weather and flows in the Northeast

ATL departure and arrival flows

LGA/EWR/JFK Flows

Individual reroute

NAS, 07/08/11, 00Z, 3,800 flights in the air

DART: Weather-Aware, Runway-to Runway, Superfast-Time NAS/ATM Simulation Model

4

Examples of DART Supported NextGen Benefit Analysis Studies • NextGen technology elements

• DataComm, ELVO, NVS, RNP-E • Technology Portfolios • Equipage and traffic growth scenarios, e.g. through 2030

• NextGen weather products and tools • CSS-WX, NWP

• New procedures (Wx related), technology driven benefits • CATMT, EDR

• New procedures, safety concerns – dis-benefits • CRO, Winter weather

5

DART Next-Generation ATM Study Example

$-

$100,000,000

$200,000,000

$300,000,000

$400,000,000

$500,000,000

$600,000,000

$700,000,000

$800,000,000

$900,000,000

$1,000,000,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Tentative NextGen Portfolio Deployment Schedule;DART Model Estimated Annual Savings vs. Same Year's Do-Nothing Baseline;

Each Portfolio Element Assessed Separately; ASQP Carriers, 2011 $$

Added Gain if Technologies1,2 and 3 Were DeployedTogether

Added Gain if Technologies1 and 2 Were DeployedTogether

Technology 3

Technology 2

Technology 1

A sample DART NextGen portfolio-of-technologies study output (including DataComm). This batch required 16,000 simulations, each representing a full day in the US NAS with 40-60,000 flights, weather, forecasts, and NextGen technology effects simulation, and took 5 days to complete.

6

Improved Convective Forecast Accuracy – Benefit Analysis Using DART • A range of forecast product features evaluated in DART using an entire

convective season (instead of a handful of weather situations) • Simulated operational benefits (reduced excess operating costs) of:

• Improved forecast accuracy (from ‘current’ to ‘more accurate’ to ‘perfect’) • Use of convective echo tops forecast information • Operational impact of using finer weather grid resolution • More effective use of TMIs, more streamlined reroutes

Baseline Improved forecast 0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Avg Cnx

Avg Dvrt

GndDly/1000

AirDly/1000

7

CoSPA with Echo Tops, 3D View

Wx at FL400 shown Flight N255QS cruising alt = FL430

FL

NC

8

Back-up Slides

9

DART for Assessing “Value” of Alternative ATM Strategies/Decisions (Realized or Needed)

Optimized solution: Airway J29 open to relieve traffic on VUZ playbook reroute; reduced MIT, less delay

Non-optimal solution: VUZ playbook reroute traffic uses standard route; J29 closed; heavier MIT, longer delays

Only the traffic using select NAS Playbook reroutes is shown; Color-coding by delay: 0-15, 15-20, 30-60, 60-120, >120 min arrival delay

J29 J29

VUZ VUZ

An Example

10

0

40000

80000

120000

160000

200000

240000

280000

320000

Dela

y m

inut

es -

daily

tota

l

Date

Delays - DART Simulation (Actual Traffic Demand) w. LAMP En-route Rechecks vs. ASQP Arrival Delay - Summer 2011

DART

ASQP Relevant

Validation Using a Multi-Day Period

ZDC distribution of flight

altitudes NAS metrics obtained from DART over a multi-day period (e.g. an entire convective season) are compared with historical data from FAA statistics

NAS arrival delays – daily totals

11

Validation Using a Multi-Day Period

NAS arrival delays – daily totals

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Canc

ella

tions

-da

ily to

tal

Date

Cancellations - DART Simulation (Actual Traffic Demand) w. LAMP En-route Rechecks vs. ASQP - ASPM77 Airports - Summer 2011

DART

ASQP

NAS cancellations – daily totals

Normalized RMSE is a measure of DART-vs-ASQP variance error over the entire convective season

Arr Delay Cnx Diversions

13% 16% 15%

Normalized RMSE

12

Selected DART Output Metrics • Delays/Cancellations/Diversions/Reroutes Statistics

• Delays by type (ground, airborne, holding), cause (e.g. airport capacity, runway, en-route weather, GDPs, AFPs, etc.), and stage (departure, en-route, approach)

• Scope: by individual air carrier, by airport, and the NAS summary for the day • Excess operating costs can be computed from these outputs

• Hourly movements and delays for major airports • Traffic demand, directional capacity and occupancy for all Sectors/Centers

• Original demand, demand adjusted by DART, capacity degradation due to diagnostic and forecast weather, maximum and average occupancy every 15 min

• “Denied sector entry requests” as a measure of airspace availability • Sector events

• Entry/exit, altitude changes, vectoring, airway transitions, potential conflicts, etc.

• Airway weather impact statistics • Individual flight statistics (Dep/Arr times, route length, delays, Wx impact) • Flight plans and 1-min trajectories exported in flat-file TFMS/ASDI format • WITI metrics (en-route, TRACON, terminal, Centers, Flows)