IMPROVING ATM CAPACITY WITH "DUAL AIRSPACE": A PROOF OF CONCEPT STUDY FOR ASSESSING CONTROLLERS' ACCEPTABILITY Jean-Yves GRAU - SynRjy Didier DOHY - NeoSys Laurent GUICHARD EUROCONTROL Sandrine GUIBERT - EUROCONTROL EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre Innovative Research
EUROCONTROL European organization for the safety of Air Navigation: Development of a seamless, pan-european ATM system in order to cope with the forecast growth in air traffic, while maintaining a high level of safety, reducing costs, and respecting the environment 36 member states Headquarters at Brussels (Belgium) Experimental Centre at Brétigny/Orge (France): Carry out research and development to improve ATM in Europe Test and validate new concepts through simulation facilities
Dual Airspace Concept: WHY? In high traffic density areas, the traffic control is limited by the ability of Air Traffic Controllers (ATCos) to simultaneously manage a number of aircrafts'. The way to cope with the traffic growth is to reduce the size of sectors of control. This way is now reaching its limits : ATCo's workload has been increased by numerous intersector co-ordinations Control actions are constrained by the decreasing over-flight time over a sector (from 5 to 10 mn.) Anticipative aircrafts' management is replaced by reactive one's Dual Airspace Concept : Another way for splitting up airspace into control units Based on functional division of the traffic and not only on geographical segmentation
Why a functional division? Traffic is non homogenous Different working methods Dual Airspace: HOW? Throughput Regularity Shape Complexity CLIMB CRUISE DESCENT Airport Variable Airport Steady Variable Steady Diverging Flow Converging High Low High Volume Large Small Large Capacity and operation modes Low Density Freedom Efficiency Free Flight Free Route Traffic Standard Routes Airspace Trunk Tube High Density Constraints Capacity Main traffic flows
Dual Airspace: HOW? Dense Traffic Area In the same area, traffic segregation according to flights attitude and direction Cohabitation and sharing of the same geographical airspace by 2 independent and separate traffic management operation modes HIGHWAY SECTOR Each operation mode has its own ATCos
Dual Airspace: HOW? Highway Sector Long haul flight Cruise and steady traffic Main flows in the core area Satisfying Airlines business objectives Airport Service, Short haul flight Long haul flight on Low flows Diverging / Converging traffic patterns Features : Easy Trajectories Challenges : Capacity Punctuality Airspace & ATC : Continental scale Upper airspace Delegation to aircrafts' Features : Difficult Trajectories Challenges : Separation Sequencing Airspace & ATC : Like today, with higher specialization
Examples of possible European Highways H O S C L A W F P Z V M N L M B I R A A
Dual Airspace: HOW? Managing the Cohabitation of the two systems Independent operation modes Opacity (no shared responsibility) No Intrusion Minimum impact Transition via Airlocks Sector Highway Resilience to Disruptions
Dual Airspace: Expected Gains Sector will no longer have to manage any of the aircraft allocated to the highway In the sector, more aircraft can use the flows crossing those allocated to the highway Sector Highway The highway structure allows the possibility for having a much higher-capacity operational system
Proof of Concept Study
Proof of Concept Study Objectives Form and volume of highway are acceptable in the sectors crossed for operational and safe traffic management Impact of the highway on the ATCO's work in the sector (working method, traffic picture, conflict detection and resolution, workload,)
Independent Variables The Highway 22 NM 5 NM 3 NM Highway 1 Highway 2 370 370 Westbound flow 6 NM Eastbound flow 330 310 330 320 With disruptions due to turbulences Lateral structure Traffic density: medium and high traffic levels Disruption due to vertical turbulence Vertical Structure
Dependent Variables Variables relating to ATCos' activities: Workload Situation Awareness ("Picture") Control orders Variables relating to Safety: Loss of separation Highway infringement Variable relating to Performance: Efficiency
Controller Working Position and Simulation SIMULATION Radar Four controllers: 2 From France 1 from Czech Republic 1 from Slovenia One-hour scenario Reference / H1 / H2 + Turbulences DATA COLLECTED Strip board Proof of concept investigation: No statistical analysis Highlight tendencies STCA and AIW alarms ATCO's orders Time an distance for crossing the sector Self-assessment (WL SA) Behaviors verbalizations Post-run interviews
Results Medium traffic load Traffic load & Scenarios High traffic load Reference H1 H2 WL 2.00 2.25 1.75 ATCO Orders 1.32 1.76 1.28 Picture 1.50 1.75 1.50 STCA 0.00 0.25 0.00 AIW 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delta-Time (s) -1.50 0.75-3.00 Delta-Dist (1/10 NM) -2.00 0.00-4.50 Reference H1 H2 WL 2.75 3.00 3.00 ATCO Orders 1.29 1.76 1.85 Picture 3.00 3.25 2.75 STCA 0.75 0.50 0.75 AIW 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delta-Time (s) -2.75-3.75-3.50 Delta-Dist (1/10 NM) -2.50-2.75-5.75 No difference between reference and Highways (H1 & H2) scenarios for workload, picture, safety
Results Type of highways & Disruptions Medium traffic load on H1 Medium traffic load on H2 370 330 310 Normal Turbulences WL 2.25 2.50 ATCO Orders 1.76 2.06 Picture 1.75 1.50 STCA 0.25 0.50 AIW 0.00 0.00 Delta-Time (s) 0.75-0.25 Delta-Dist (1/10 NM) 0.00 0.00 Normal Turbulences WL 1.75 3.25 ATCO Orders 1.28 2.16 Picture 1.50 3.50 STCA 0.00 1.00 AIW 0.00 0.50 Delta-Time (s) -3.00-2.50 Delta-Dist (1/10 NM) -4.50-3.75 370 330 320 Same Workload Same picture No Safety impact Workload increased Low Picture Impact on Safety (STCA and AIW)
Conclusion 1. Dual Airspace concept is acceptable. However, limitation exists in termed of blocked flight levels. 3 is acceptable and not 4. Highway 1 solution is better then Highway 2 (turbulence suitability). 2. Presence of the highway in the sector doesn't change current control methods 3. ATCos disagree with a working method where flight level constraints due to the highway are automatically managed by the Aircrafts 4. Capacity and Safety in the sector are not decrease by the highway presence and meet the hypothesis for increasing traffic capacity through the Dual Airspace concept 5. Results of the proof-of-concept study are promising and have to be go in depth: Developping the concept (Airspace, Airlocks, ) Assessing it on a full CWP simulation platform