Dublin Point Merge Irish Aviation Authority Point Merge Conference March 2015 Oslo
Point Merge EIDW Runway 28 implemented 13 th December 2012
Point Merge Systemisation Effect
RWY 28 Point Merge vs. RWY10
Point Merge EIDW Runway 10 to be implemented 2 nd April 2015
Point Merge Runway 10 Initially planned for implementation coincidentally with Runway 28 PM Very successful implementation on Runway 28 at Dublin Runway 28 usage 63% Runway 10 usage 30% Implementation 2 nd April 2015
SID & STAR Changes Point Merge system for Runway 10 New STARs Minor amendments to SIDs New RNAV IAPs New ABLIN STAR replaces LIPGO STAR on runway 28
New PM System Runway 10 Airspace design Prototyping various designs Try to mirror runway 28 PM Military airspace Track miles Regulatory approval IFP design Training Safety Case
BAMLI NEVRI ROTEV SUROX NIMAT INKUR OLAPO UPPER NORTH (UN) NORTH LOWER ABOVE NORTH FL125 (LN) SFC FL125 BOYNE BAGSO LIFFY PELIG OSGAR UPPER SOUTH (US) SOUTH LOWER ABOVE SOUTH FL125 (LS) SFC FL125 DEXEN LIPGO SUTEX OLONO BUNED VATRY BEPAN PESIT
STARS BAMLI NIMAT OLAPO EPIDU BOYNE APRUT DW865 DW866 ADNAL AKIVA ELBON EKREN BAGSO NEKIL ASDER RISAP OSLEX BERMO DW755 DETAX DW754 BIVDI BABON KANUS RUBAR LIPGO OSGAR DIRUM SUTEX BUNED VATRY
NORTH SECTOR SEQUENCE LEG All points along the leg have the same Constraint Level FL80 and Speed Restriction 230kts APRUT ADNAL DW865 AKIVA 6 DW866 11 NEKIL 5 ASDER RISAP 12.5 NM Total sequence leg length 30 NM approximately EIDW
SOUTH SECTOR SEQUENCE LEG RISAP 12.5 NM OSLEX 5 EIDW DW755 11 11 11 6 BERMO DW754 BIVDI BABON Total sequence leg length 24 NM approximately All points along the leg have the same Constraint Level FL70 and Speed Restriction 230kts
New IAPs Runway 10 NEKIL 4000 IAP commences from NEKIL RISAP 3000 GANET 3000 OSLEX 5000 IAP commences from OSLEX 14
EIME KANUS
INKUR ABLIN 1L Replaces LIPGO 1L DS706 DW705 LIFFY LAPMO DW704 SOPEP BAL SUGAD DEXEN PELIG OSGAR KEPOR PEKOK Level Constraint: AT FL70 PEKOK SORIN FL70 PEKOK FL70 SIVNA FL70 LIPGO DIRUM IRKUM Level Constraint: Not Below FL90 IRKUM FL90 SUTEX OLONO BUNED ABLIN Level Constraint: Not Above FL180 Not Below FL150 VATRY ABLIN ABLIN FL180 FL150 BADSI BEPAN 18
Training PM28 9 days PM10 2.5 days 1 day of Bookwork 1½ days of simulation Basic approach Full circuit Runway change and holding All instructors are from PM project team
SOME LESSONS LEARNED AND SUGGESTED BEST PRACTICES Dublin Point Merge Implementation Runway 28 2012-2015
R&D CONCEPT The Point Merge Concept originally aimed at increase of ATC capacity and improved sequencing; therefore sequence leg length was optimised for ATC use (i.e. accommodation of aircraft) rather than flight and fuel efficiency. 6
SYSTEM DESIGN Sequence leg entry points should be positioned on direct tracks from major TMA entry points to merge point on final approach shortest route to the runway. Not possible from all directions. It was necessary to publish required airspeed on the sequence leg to assure spacing between consecutive aircraft may be a compromise if significant mix of traffic types 3-in-1 rule for airspace design used to optimise CDO as far as possible fuel reduction. Both from en-route to the sequence leg and then again to merge point. Level constraints should be kept to a minimum to assist efficient CDOs and flight idle descents.
TRAFFIC FLOW BASED SYSTEM
MINIMAL LEVEL CONSTRAINTS IAS = 230kts NORTHERN SEQUENCE LEG FL80 SOUTHERN SEQUENCE LEG FL70
FUEL ISSUE IDENTIFICATION IAA engaged regulator, airlines, FMS manufacturers and data houses 6 months before implementation when fuel issue highlighted. In retrospect, engagement from earlier stages of the project may have identified potential fuel issues. LAPMO DIRECT TO MERGE POINT
ADDRESSING THE FUEL ISSUE The ANSP and its Regulator participated in Forums and Task Forces to identify potential solutions to the fuel issue. Participation of all appropriate disciplines is vital to ensure any identified solutions are feasible, cost-effective and efficient. ANSP REG FUEL FORUM AIRLINES DATA FMS
FUEL ISSUE AWARENESS The ANSP conducted an aggressive awareness campaign for airlines flight crew and operations departments to inform them about the flight planning and fuelling STAR but this strategy had mixed success.
(NOT) GETTING THE MESSAGE ACROSS It did not get full buy-in and led to some crews uplifting up to 400kgs per arrival to ensure no FMGC message was ever observed. Therefore proven fuel benefits of Point Merge not reportedly achieved by all airlines. Clearly, the extra un-needed fuel had not been carried then the benefits would have been available. The concept of Point Merge is relatively easy to grasp but fuel planning issues are complicated - therefore much ill-informed comment can contaminate the true picture. Bad press resulted from anecdotal comments made around the industry.
SCHADENFREUDE
RE-DESIGN? Re-design of the Dublin Point Merge system was considered, to be balanced between ATC requirements and those of the airlines Decided that reduction of sequence leg length was not appropriate because of consequent reduction of ATC linear holding capacity It is worth noting that, if aircraft were actually permitted to fly the short direct-to STAR, then fuelling would become less of an issue.
KEEP PILOTS INFORMED The ANSP should develop a robust method for providing pilots with realistic information regarding expected use of the sequence leg. This information may be enhanced by controllers giving pilots time/expected delay information derived from an appropriately-tuned arrival manager. Use of the enhanced information provided by the arrival manager could also lead to a reduction in the distance flown along the sequence leg.
MONITORING STILL VITAL Especially in the early days following implementation there were numerous occurrences of pilots wishing to actually fly the short flight planning and fuelling STAR, even after they had been issued with the long (ATC) STAR on first contact with Dublin ATC. This caused added RT workload and some confusion, and when introduced care must be taken to ensure aircraft do not fly the short STAR even though they have been issued with the long STAR.
L and X ON SAME COCKPIT CHART X L ATC ISSUE L
CONCLUSIONS Every location has different challenges Keep all the stakeholders well informed Keep an open mind to suggested changes Build a constructive relationship with the Regulator and. The benefits achievable are worth all the effort!