DESIGN CONCEPT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE EXPEDITE DEPARTURE PATH (EDP)

Air traffic management decision support tools have shown the capability to incr ease arrival traffic throughput of congested Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facilities without significantly impacting air traffic controller workload. NASA Ames Research Center, in cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), is playing a leading role in identifying air traffic management problems, developing and prototyping concepts, and performing field trials for such decision support tools. The Center -TRACON Automation System (CTAS) is a suite of decision support tools devel oped by NASA Ames Research Center, and is included in the FAA's Free Flight Program. This paper describes the concept and development plan of the Expedite Departure Path (EDP) component of CTAS. EDP is a decision support tool aimed at providing TRACON Tr affic Management Coordinators (TMCs) with pertinent departure traffic loading and scheduling information, and radar controllers with advisories for tactical control of TRACON departure traffic. EDP employs the CTAS trajectory synthesis routine to provide conflict -free altitude, speed and heading advisories. These advisories will assist the TRACON departure controller in efficiently sequencing, spacing and merging departure aircraft into the en route traffic flow. The anticipated benefits of EDP include a reduction in airborne delay for departure aircraft, reduced fuel burn and reduced noise impact due to expedited climb trajectories. EDP will eventually share information with both surface and arrival decision support tools to form an integrated decision support system capable of planning, coordinating and executing highly efficient terminal airspace operations.

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

[2]  Thomas J. Davis,et al.  The Final Approach Spacing Tool , 1994 .

[3]  John E. Robinson,et al.  FUZZY REASONING-BASED SEQUENCING OF ARRIVAL AIRCRAFT IN THE TERMINAL AREA , 1997 .

[4]  John E. Robinson,et al.  OPERATIONAL TEST RESULTS OF THE PASSIVE FINAL APPROACH SPACING TOOL , 1997 .

[5]  Douglas R. Isaacson,et al.  EXPEDITE DEPARTURE PATH (EDP) OPERATIONAL CONCEPT , 1999 .

[6]  Douglas R. Isaacson,et al.  A concurrent sequencing and deconfliction algorithm for terminal area air traffic control , 2000 .

[7]  Louis Erkelens Research into new noise abatement procedures for the 21st century , 2000 .

[8]  John E. Robinson,et al.  A HUMAN FACTORS EVALUATION OF ACTIVE FINAL APPROACH SPACING TOOL CONCEPTS , 2000 .

[9]  Ian,et al.  ATM SUPPORT TOOLS IN PHARE - THE IMPORTANCE OF MATCHING THE CONCEPTS OF MANAGEMENT OR CONTROL , 2000 .

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

[11]  Hendrikus G. Visser,et al.  Optimization of Noise Abatement Departure Trajectories , 2001 .

[12]  Edwin D. McConkey,et al.  The impact of low-noise approach procedures on airport capacity , 2001 .

[13]  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).

[14]  S. Atkins,et al.  Functionalities, displays, and concept of use for the surface management system [ATC] , 2002, Proceedings. The 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference.