Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Assisted Visual Separation (CAVS)

Transcription

1 Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Assisted Visual Separation (CAVS) Randall Bone 6 th USA / Europe ATM 2005 R&D Seminar Baltimore, Maryland June 2005

2 Overview Background Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) Visual Separation & Visual Approach Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Assisted Visual Separation (CAVS) Development Effort Overview Purpose Concept Description Infrastructure Requirements Maturity 2

3 ADS-B Call Sign Category 3-D Position 3-D Velocity and options ADS-B Call Sign Category 3-D Position 3-D Velocity and options ATC System ADS-B Ground Receiver 3

4 Visual Separation Visual separation can be applied by ATC to separate aircraft by a pilot who sees the other aircraft involved Traffic advisories are issued by ATC to the pilot who must search for the traffic, acquire the traffic, and accept responsibility for maintaining separation from that aircraft Pilot acceptance of visual separation includes: Maintaining constant visual surveillance; Maneuvering the aircraft as necessary to avoid the other aircraft or to maintain in-trail separation; Avoiding wake; Not passing the other aircraft until it is no longer a factor ; and Promptly notifying ATC if visual contact with the other aircraft is lost Pilot acceptance of visual separation relieves the controller of separation responsibility for that particular aircraft and allows for more flexible operations 4

5 Visual Approach Visual approaches expedite traffic by shortening flight paths to the airport ATC may initiate or pilot may request Conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) In Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) Not an instrument approach procedure Flight crew must: Advise ATC if visual approach is not desired Proceed visually to the airport Remain clear of clouds Establish a safe landing interval Be responsible for wake turbulence separation Flight crew can have either the airport or the aircraft ahead in sight 5

6 Visual Separation and Visual Approach Difficulties Conditions such as reduced visibility, glare, dark night conditions with ground lights make it difficult to Find lead aircraft Keep lead aircraft in sight Visual cues alone make it difficult to Discriminate between targets Detect closure Determine distance Visual acquisition process creates Communication workload 6

7 Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Assisted Visual Separation (CAVS) during Visual Approach (formerly CEFR) 7

8 Development Effort Develop near-term, beneficial application for Currently available avionics Interested customer (United Parcel Service (UPS)) Develop the application description with key stakeholders Participation by pilot & controller unions, certification and flight standards authorities, other FAA offices, etc. Evaluate the application in simulation addressing pilot and controller operational issues Provide data and analysis of results to support decision on next development stage 8

9 Overview What? Visual separation including the CDTI (i.e., CDTI is authorized for use in lieu of visual out-the-window contact) No other operational changes to current visual approach or separation procedures Where? Terminal Area - Class B or C airspace Why? To continue visual separation and visual approach capacities (prior to transition to instrument approaches)

10 Purpose (1 of 3) Increased capacity Basic VMC Mins Visual approaches suspended - Facility Specific Visual Approach Minimums by FAA Order Facility Specific (MVA ) 5000 Visual App Reported Ceiling at Airport (feet) Delays increase as weather conditions worsen Initial CAVS Potential Benefit 1000 IMC Reported Visibility at Airport (miles) 10

11 Purpose (2 of 3) Controller flexibility 11

12 Purpose (3 of 3) Increased pilot traffic awareness when conducting visual approaches 270 DAL CAL34 5 DEF DEF112 R 5.2 GS183 LRG 12

13 Concept Description (1 of 4) CDTI and Selected Target Groundspeed Call Sign Closure Rate Range from Ownship Weight Category 13

14 Concept Description (2 of 4) Visual Approach CAVS Example - Set-Up Controller provides traffic advisory Pilot initial out-the-window acquisition and correlation with CDTI Pilot target selection on the CDTI Controller clearance to maintain visual separation and / or visual approach 270 DAL CAL DEF GS GS R R UPS927 LRG CR 33 DEF112 R 5.2 GS183 GS 188 R LRG 4.9 UPS927 LRG Not to scale 14

15 Concept Description (3 of 4) Visual Approach CAVS Example - CDTI for Separation Once lead aircraft is lost out-the-window, CDTI only can be used for separation (CAVS concept) DAL CAL34 DEF GS 175 R 4.0 UPS927 LRG CR 23 DEF112 GS 175 R 5.2 R 4.0 GS183 UPS927 LRG LRG Not to scale 15

16 Concept Description (4 of 4) Visual Approach CAVS Example - Landing Continue to normal landing using both visual and / or CDTI DAL CAL34 DEF GS 140 R 3.0 UPS927 LRG CR 6 DEF112 GS 140 R R GS183 UPS927 LRG Reacquisition Not to scale 16

17 Infrastructure Requirements Flight Deck ATC Method of identifying capable aircraft 17

18 Maturity (1 of 6) 2002 Initial application description Initial business case MITRE simulations 1, 2, & 3 Call sign procedure approved Formal decision to continue research 2003 Updated business case MITRE simulation 4 Initial operational safety assessment Formal decision to continue effort 2004 UPS develop training material 2005 Operational approval planned to be sought by UPS 18

19 Maturity (2 of 6) Overview of Four MITRE Simulations Participants 45 Pilots ~10 Air Traffic Controllers Simulation Environment Medium fidelity, twin jet aircraft CDTI (Primary field of view & throttle quadrant) Other traffic: large, 757, heavy Terminal ATC display Louisville, Kentucky (SDF) Procedure Conditions: Day and night; Instrument and visual approaches; haze and cloud layer Independent Variables: Cloud thicknesses, spacing assignment, CDTI size and location, throttle control / workload, spacing alert, lead aircraft failure condition, 2 crew member operations Data: Subjective- pilot and controller acceptability, displays, workload, call sign procedures; Objective- pilot spacing performance 19

20 Maturity (3 of 6) Results of Four MITRE Simulations CAVS concept / separation based on a CDTI is viable from a pilot (N=45) perspective based on feedback on the following topics: General difficulty of the procedure CDTI (and the tool set) use for spacing and separation Safety Workload (about the same as current visual approaches) Head down time Comparison to current operations (day and night visual approaches) All pilots reported that they would routinely perform CAVS Time on CDTI for separation not an issue 20

21 Maturity (4 of 6) Results of Four MITRE Simulations No difficulty with aggressive slow-downs of lead aircraft Able to remain outside of spacing restriction value May improve their spacing performance when a target spacing value has been determined Able to handle data degradation of lead aircraft on CDTI Throttle console CDTI implementation is acceptable and did not show performance difference Willing (and able) to perform with either autothrottles or manual throttle control Visual approach operations likely to be the initial application ATC continues to play key role Good initial set-up allows pilots to fine tune their spacing 21

22 Maturity (5 of 6) Results of Final MITRE Simulation Final Spacing Initial Spacing Magnitude and Direction of Closure Rate Distance from Spacing Reference Relationship between initial spacing and spacing at the threshold when following large aircraft Conclusion: As initial separation decreased the threshold spacing decreased Relationship between derived distance from spacing reference and mean closure rate across the entire approach Conclusion: CDTI used for higher closure rates when spacing between aircraft was greater. Lower closure rates when spacing between aircraft was reduced 22

23 Maturity (6 of 6) Equipped UPS 757 / 767 fleet with AT2000 CDTI (total of 107 aircraft) Includes conflict detection, traffic awareness, and see and avoid Metrics being collected and measured against baseline Involved user and approver throughout development Attempted to remain as close to current procedures as possible Developing building block application in Europe and US effort AT2000 Next steps: Implement call sign use in traffic advisories UPS seek approval 23

24 Randy Bone, MITRE For Further Information John Marksteiner, FAA SF-21 24

25 25 The contents of this material reflect the views of the authors. RTCA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Department of Transportation make no warranty or guarantee, or promise, expressed or implicit, concerning the content or accuracy of the views expressed herein.