|
|
|
|
PHARE Demonstration 2 Operational Concept |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
| | PHARE Demonstration 2 Extended TMA (Click for a larger image) |
PD/2 was a real-time simulation focussed on the management arrival traffic in an Extended TMA (a Terminal Manoeuvring Area with its adjacent en-route sectors) in a post 2000 timeframe comprising a Baseline and two Advanced organisations.
The concept assumed that the controller working procedures, the working environment and the airspace structure would have no major differences to the existing system. The planning and control procedures would still be based on “current” ATC practices and the human functions of ‘planning’ and ‘tactical’ control were assumed to remain sector-based in PD/2.
|
|
|
|
The specific objectives of the PHARE Demonstration 2 trials were:
1. To assess controller workload and performance of arrival traffic handling in an ETMA
environment with
- introduction of computer assistance,
- computer generated 4D profile-planning and sequencing,
- controller support to plan and establish a conflict free trajectory covering all flight phases from Entry Fix to the Approach Gate of an airport,
- an increasing proportion of 4D Flight Management System equipped aircraft with full two-way datalink.
|
|
|
2. To gain a degree of controller acceptance for the introduction of computer assistance.
The real-time simulations of PHARE Demonstration 2 aimed at the comparison of three different modes of operation characterised by three organisations, named ORG 0, ORG 1, and ORG 2:
|
|
|
ORG 0 – Reference Organisation |
ORG 0 was a reference mode, by which the controller had to handle traffic samples with then current standard means (radar data, flight plan data, paper flight strips, weather information, radio communication, and assistance from an arrival planning system with basic sequencing and scheduling functionality). The reference system emulated a planning system functionality which was limited to the calculation of arrival times using flight plan data, radar data, and weather information. It generated and displayed an arrival time sequence, but did not provide any trajectory information to the controller.
|
|
|
|
 | |
| PHARE Demonstration 2 Arrival Events (Click for a larger image) | |
|
ORG 1 was an advanced mode with 4D profile planning, detection and resolution of planning conflicts. An arrival planning system (Arrival Manager) resolved most planning conflicts by separating all arriving aircraft in space and time. The following PATs assisted the Arrival Manager: Trajectory Predictor (TP), Conflict Probe (CP) and Flight Path Monitor (FPM).
The implementation of 4D trajectories calculated by the ground system was performed by using conventional radio communication to the aircraft. Advisories displayed to the controller were generated by the ground system in order to support the controllers in meeting constraints of the Arrival Manager.
Deviations of aircraft from the planned trajectory as well as unsolved conflicts between planned trajectories (detected by the Conflict Probe) had to be resolved manually by the controller. The system supported the controller in this process by measuring deviations (done by the Flight Path Monitor) and displaying the deviations in time and space against the planned trajectory (calculated by the Trajectory Predictor).
Flight strips (paper or electronic) were not used. The interaction between controller and ground system and also between the controllers was supported by direct label interaction mechanisms within the displays.
|
|
|
|
|
ORG 2 introduced an air-ground integrated system. This allowed 4D Flight Management System equipped aircraft to use datalink to negotiate and implement airborne calculated trajectories that fulfilled the constraints developed by the Arrival Manager in order to implement an arrival sequence and schedule. For unequipped aircraft, the trajectory support was provided by the ground system as in ORG 1.
That meant that in ORG 0 only Class M, in ORG 1 Class B and Class M and in ORG 2 Class A, B, and M guidance modes were possible. It should be noted that all guidance modes of the lower ORGs were further supported in the higher ORGs. It is an important result of PHARE Demonstration 2 that definitions of operational scenarios for the higher ORGs could be found without the requirement of a revolutionary change when moving toward more advanced organisations. The compatibility with lower guidance levels down to Class M solves the problem of connections to or transitions between areas with different levels of capability. Another advantage is that lower guidance modes can be used as safety net in case of failure of the higher guidance modes.
|
|
|
| |  |
| | PHARE Demonstration 2 Guidance Modes (Click for a larger image) |
|
The figure shows the transitions between guidance modes that were modelled in the PHARE Demonstration 2 trials.
Controllers monitored the flight progress of a Class A aircraft. If no problem was detected these aircraft flew without R/T communications other than ‘initial call’ when entering and ‘frequency change’ when leaving the sector. However, every time controllers saw the necessity to intervene, e.g. due to safety reasons, they could guide the aircraft via R/T. The first heading, speed or level change command given via R/T to Class A aircraft implied that this aircraft was guided further via R/T. A negotiated contract between air and ground via datalink was no longer valid after the implementation of the R/T command and the status of aircraft automatically changed from Class A to Manual mode as the system was updated about the tactical intervention by GHMI input. As a rule R/T communication always had priority over datalink communication.
An aircraft once degraded to Class B or Class M mode could not get back to Class A because a re-negotiation procedure was not implemented in PHARE Demonstration 2. Whereas a transition between Class M and Class B guidance was always possible depending on the deviation of an aircraft from its 4D position on the planned trajectory as detected by the Flight Path Monitor.
With Class B guidance the 4D guidance of the aircraft along its trajectory was achieved by the
Tactical Controller passing the advisories generated by the ground system to the aircraft by R/T.
PD/2 Final Report The PD/2 System Transitions from Class M or Class B guidance modes back to a Class A guidance mode for 4D FMS by air-ground re-negotiation via datalink or voice as well as a Class B guidance via datalink messages from the ground were not exercised in PD/2 measured trials. However, these are options compatible with the operational concept that was developed for PD/2.
|
|
|
|
|
The PHARE Demonstration 2 Operational Concept is documented in the following:
| PD/2 Operational Scenarios
|
|
This document details the operational procedures to support PD/2.
It describes the working procedures of controllers for each of the three organisations of the PHARE Demonstration PD/2, ORG 0, ORG 1 and ORG 2.
|
|
|
Released: 16/07/1995
|
Edition: 1
Internal code: PHARE/DLR/PD2-7.1/OSD;1
External code: DOC 95-70-11
Author: J Reichmuth (DLR)
|
|
|
|
|
|
