Concept and Laboratory Analysis of Trajectory Based Automation for Separation Assurance

An operating concept and a laboratory analysis methodology were developed and tested to examine how four-dimensional trajectory analysis methods could support higher levels of automation for separation assurance in the National Airspace System. Real-time simulations were conducted in which a human controller generated conflict resolution trajectories using an automated trial plan trajectory generation and analysis function, but only in response to conflicts detected and displayed by an automatic conflict detection function. Objective metrics were developed to compare aircraft separation characteristics and flying time efficiency under automated operations with that of today’s operations using common airspace and common traffic scenarios. Simulations were based on recorded air traffic data from the Fort Worth Air Route Traffic Control Center and were conducted using today’s and nearly two-times today’s traffic levels. The results suggest that a single controller using trajectory-based automation and data link communication of control clearances to aircraft could manage substantially more traffic than under today’s conditions, and with improved route efficiency while maintaining separation. The simulation and analysis capability provides a basis for further analysis of semi-automated, or fully automated, separation assurance concepts.

[1]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Direct-To Tool for En Route Controllers , 2001 .

[2]  H. Erzberger,et al.  Design of a conflict detection algorithm for the Center/TRACON automation system , 1997, 16th DASC. AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Reflections to the Future. Proceedings.

[3]  Morten Bisgaard,et al.  AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit (2008) , 2008 .

[4]  Douglas R. Isaacson,et al.  Conflict Detection and Resolution In the Presence of Prediction Error , 1997 .

[5]  Vernol Battiste,et al.  Enabling strategic flight deck route re-planning within a modified ATC environment: The display of 4-D intent information on a CSD , 2000 .

[6]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  A controller tool for transition airspace , 1999 .

[7]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Design of Center-TRACON Automation System , 1993 .

[8]  Shawn Engelland,et al.  Operational Evaluation of the Direct-To Controller Tool , 2001 .

[9]  Mark G. Ballin,et al.  Pilot In Command: A Feasibility Assessment of Autonomous Flight Management Operations , 2004 .

[10]  Bryan E. Barmore,et al.  Airborne-Managed Spacing in Multiple Arrival Streams , 2004 .

[11]  Thomas Prevot,et al.  ATC Technologies for Controller-Managed and Autonomous Flight Operations , 2005 .

[12]  Chester Gong,et al.  A METHODOLOGY FOR AUTOMATED TRAJECTORY PREDICTION ANALYSIS , 2004 .

[13]  David McNally,et al.  Concept and Laboratory Analysis of Trajectory-Based Automation for Separation Assurance , 2007 .

[14]  George L. Danek,et al.  Pseudo Aircraft Systems - A multi-aircraft simulation system for air traffic control research , 1993 .

[15]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Tactical Conflict Detection Methods for Reducing Operational Errors , 2005 .

[16]  Heinz Erzberger,et al.  Conflict Probability Estimation for Free Flight , 1997 .

[17]  R. A. Slattery,et al.  En-route descent trajectory synthesis for air traffic control automation , 1995, Proceedings of 1995 American Control Conference - ACC'95.

[18]  Richard Coppenbarger.  En route climb trajectory prediction enhancement using airline flight-planning information , 1999 .

[19]  Douglas R. Isaacson,et al.  Development of a closed-loop testing method for a next-generation terminal area automation system , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 American Control Conference (IEEE Cat. No.CH37301).

[20]  Sidney W. A. Dekker,et al.  To Intervene or not to Intervene: The Dilemma of Management by Exception , 1999, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[21]  William Chan,et al.  FIELD TEST EVALUATION OF THE CTAS CONFLICT PREDICTION AND TRIAL PLANNING CAPABILITY , 1998 .

[22]  Harry N. Swenson,et al.  Design and Operational Evaluation of the Traffic Management Advisor at the Ft. Worth Air Route Traffic Control Center , 1997 .

[23]  Barry E. Schwartz,et al.  Accuracy of RUC-1 and RUC-2 Wind and Aircraft Trajectory Forecasts by Comparison with ACARS Observations , 2000 .