RECAT Phase 2 - Approach to Airport Specific Benefits

Similar documents
WakeNet3 Capacity Workshop (London)

Speed Profiles Analysis Supporting the FAA Wake Initiatives

Wake Turbulence Standards

FAA RECAT Phase I Operational Experience

Benefits Analysis of a Departure Management Prototype for the New York Area

Automated Integration of Arrival and Departure Schedules

Have Descents Really Become More Efficient? Presented by: Dan Howell and Rob Dean Date: 6/29/2017

Airport capacity effects of RECAT or: An airport view on RECAT

Enhanced Time Based Separation (ETBS) & RECAT EU. Heathrow Crew Briefing

Appendix B Ultimate Airport Capacity and Delay Simulation Modeling Analysis

Leader/Follower Static Pairwise (RECAT Phase II) RECATEGORIZATION WORKSHOP June 20, 2011

Proposed suas Safety Performance Requirements for Operations over People

Benefits Analysis of a Runway Balancing Decision-Support Tool

Feasibility and Benefits of a Cockpit Traffic Display-Based Separation Procedure for Single Runway Arrivals and Departures

CANSO Workshop on Operational Performance. LATCAR, 2016 John Gulding Manager, ATO Performance Analysis Federal Aviation Administration

Wake Turbulence Evolution in the United States

Wake Vortex R&D. Status Briefing. NBAA Convention. Federal Aviation Administration. By: Steve Lang Date: September 2007

FAA Progress on Wake Avoidance Solutions for Closely Spaced Parallel Runways (CSPR)

USA Near-Term Progress for Closely Spaced Parallel Runways

A Methodology for Environmental and Energy Assessment of Operational Improvements

TravelWise Travel wisely. Travel safely.

Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO)

Current practice of separation delivery at major European airports ATM R&D Seminar, June 2015, Lisbon

A Standard for Equivalent Lateral Spacing Operations Parallel and Reduced Divergence Departures

The O Hare Effect on the System

ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF WIND DEPENDENT PARALLEL ARRIVAL OPERATIONS

Enhanced Time Based Separation

Evaluation of Strategic and Tactical Runway Balancing*

Temporal Deviations from Flight Plans:

Wake Turbulence Research Modeling

9 th USA / Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar June 14 June 17, 2011 Berlin, Germany

Managing And Understand The Impact Of Of The Air Air Traffic System: United Airline s Perspective

Analyzing & Implementing Delayed Deceleration Approaches

Point Merge & RECAT-EU at Leipzig-Halle Airport (EDDP) DFS Center Munich

Air Transportation Infrastructure and Technology: Do We have Enough and Is this the Problem?

Airport Preliminary Master Plan Workshop Board of County Commissioners April 18, 2017

Evidence for the Safety- Capacity Trade-Off in the Air Transportation System

Description of the National Airspace System

Federal Perspectives on Public-Private Partnerships (P3) in the United States

Lockheed MITRE Collaborative Effort

Session 2: CORSIA MRV System Practical demonstration of the ICAO CORSIA CO 2 Estimation and Reporting Tool (CERT)

Approximate Network Delays Model

FLL Master Plan Update Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Briefing #2 July 10, 2017

Assignment 10: Final Project

Megahubs United States Index 2018

RECAT-EU. European Wake Turbulence Categorisation and Separation Minima on Approach and Departure

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

Name of Customer Representative: Bruce DeCleene, AFS-400 Division Manager Phone Number:

The Development of Wake Turbulence Recategorization in the United States

NextGen Priorities: Multiple Runway Operations & RECAT

Lessons Learnt From The EUROCONTROL Wake Impact Severity Assessment Flight Simulator Campaign

Free Flight En Route Metrics. Mike Bennett The CNA Corporation

Application of Wake Turbulence Separation at London Heathrow. Paul Johnson Development Manager NATS Heathrow

LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA

According to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, the elements that affect airfield capacity include:

Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) Aircraft Noise Contour Map Update

Interval Management A Brief Overview of the Concept, Benefits, and Spacing Algorithms

Impact of Select Uncertainty Factors and Implications for Experimental Design

Kansas City Aviation Department. Update to Airport Committee January 26, 2017

THE BEST VALUE IN LUXURY CRUISING

Analysis of Air Transportation Systems. Airport Capacity

Application of TOPAZ and Other Statistical Methods to Proposed USA ConOps for Reduced Wake Vortex Separation

Airfield Capacity Prof. Amedeo Odoni

Modeling the Impact of the A380 on Airport Capacity

Capacity Constraints and the Dynamics of Transition in the US Air Transportation

Merchandise Guidance. Presented by Bryan Touchstone November 15, 2011

Airports Council International

Economic Performance and NGATS

Using PBN for Terminal and Extended Terminal Operations

Airport/Aircraft Compatibility Challenges on the Apron

Uncertainty in Airport Planning Prof. Richard de Neufville

Growing Size and Complexity Prof. Amedeo Odoni

Runway Length Analysis Prescott Municipal Airport

Puget Sound Trends. Executive Board January 24, 2019

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

CEE Quick Overview of Aircraft Classifications. January 2018

Looking for the Capacity in NGATS

System Oriented Runway Management: A Research Update

Time-Space Analysis Airport Runway Capacity. Dr. Antonio A. Trani. Fall 2017

Impact of Advance Purchase and Length-of-Stay on Average Ticket Prices in Top Business Destinations

Naples Municipal Airport Master Plan. Joint NAA / NCC Workshop April 30, 2018

International Civil Aviation Organization South American Regional Office

Traffic Flow Management

Wake Turbulence Recategorization (RECAT) ATC Human Factors Issues During Implementation. Terminal Services

Aviation Gridlock: Airport Capacity Infrastructure How Do We Expand Airfields?

North Atlantic FIR Traffic Forecast

Larry Leung. Anthony Loui

Have Descents really become more Efficient?

Table of Contents. Summary Sheet Top 50 National Airspace System Airports by Operations 1

WAKE TURBULENCE RE-CATEGORISATION ON APPROACH AND DEPARTURE FOR SAFE AND MORE EFFICIENT AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Kansas City Aviation Department. Update to Airport Committee October 20, 2016

Operational Demonstration of a Performance-Based Separation Standard at The Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Assessing Schedule Delay Propagation in the National Airspace System

Assignment 6: ETOPS Operations and ATC

Trends Shaping Houston Airports

Brian Ryks Executive Director and CEO

Key Purpose & Need Issues

The Departure Regulator: A Working Paper

Outmaneuvered AIRFLOW

Surveillance and Broadcast Services

Transcription:

RECAT Phase 2 - Approach to Airport Specific Benefits Craig Guensch, Marshall Koch, Collin Schaffer Presented by Clark Lunsford February 28, 2012

Outline RECAT Phase 1 review Six Categories International Benefits RECAT Phase 2 ConOps Application to Single Runway or Closely Spaced Parallel Runways Operational Considerations Airspace Constraints Minimum Radar Separation Considerations Conclusions and Next Steps 2

Leader Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft RECAT Phase I redefined aircraft weight classes and the separations between them Wingspan (ft) Wingspan (ft) A388 B744 A346 B772 B773 A332 A333 A343 MD11 A306 B753 B736 B737 B738 B739 A318 A321 B722 MD82 F50 B733 B734 E190 GLF5 B712 DC93 DC95 DH8D F100 F70 DH8C AT72 RJ1H RJ85 B462 B463 E170 DH8A DH8B CRJ9 AT45 AT43 GLF4 CRJ7 SF34 CRJ1 CRJ2 E45X E145 E120 B190 C650 H25B C525 A388 B744 A346 B772 B773 A332 A333 A343 MD11 A306 B753 B736 B737 B738 B739 A318 A321 B722 MD82 F50 B733 B734 E190 GLF5 B712 DC93 DC95 DH8D F100 F70 DH8C AT72 RJ1H RJ85 B462 B463 E170 DH8A DH8B CRJ9 AT45 AT43 GLF4 CRJ7 SF34 CRJ1 CRJ2 E45X E145 E120 B190 C650 H25B C525 ICAO A380 Heavy Medium Light A380 MRS 6 7 8 Heavy MRS 4 5 6 Medium MRS MRS MRS 5 Light MRS MRS MRS MRS U.S. A380 Heavy B757 Large Small A380 MRS 6 7 7 8 Heavy MRS 4 5 5 6 B757 MRS 4 4 4 5 Large MRS MRS MRS MRS 4 Small MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS RECAT Phase 1 Proposed RECAT Separation Matrix Follower A B C D E F A MRS 6.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 B MRS 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 7.0 C MRS MRS MRS 3.5 3.5 6.0 D MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 5.0 E MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 4.0 F MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Current U.S. Classes RECAT Classes Aircraft Type (Decreasing Wingspan ) Super Heavy Large Small CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF 3

RJAA RJTT VHHH RKSI OMDB VTBS SAEZ WSSS OERK YMML UUEE HECA ZBAA YSSY SKBO SBGR ZGGG VIDP DNMM MMMX CYUL UUDD CYYZ FAJS Decrease in Average Minimum Separation (Positive = Decrease) International Phase 1 Benefits KSFO KORD KATL CYYZ CYUL KEWR KJFK EGLL LFPG EHAM EDDF UUDD UUEE HECA OMDB ZBAA ZGGG RKSI RJAA RJTT MMMX SKBO OERK VIDP VTBS VHHH DNMM WSSS SBGR YSSY SAEZ 20% FAJS YMML 15% 10% 5% 0% 2.5 nm Sep 3.0 nm Sep -5% 4 Airport (ICAO Code)

Preliminary Phase 2 ConOps Establish a matrix of pair-wise safe wake separations (~100 by 100) Includes aircraft representing 99% or more of operations worldwide Granularity of ½ nm, perhaps less Single and parallel runway separations Airports may customize Optimized for their traffic mix Likely the same for all airports in a Terminal Area Must remain safe, separations rounded up to the largest of any aircraft in the category Automation could assist in implementation If Airport/Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) chooses > 6 categories If separation resolution is < 0.5nm 5

Comparative Length of Final Single Runway US Baseline ICAO RECAT RECAT 23 NM 18.5 NM 18 NM Baseline Phase I Phase II 1,700 feet between 36L and 36R 36L 36R 36L 36R 36L 36R 36L 36R 4 NM 4 NM 5 NM 5 NM 3.5 NM 3 NM RECAT Phase II values are initial will be further refined before implementation

Comparative Length of Final Closely Spaced Parallel Runways US Baseline ICAO RECAT RECAT 21 NM 16.5 NM 13.5 NM Baseline Phase I Phase II 4 NM 4 NM 5 NM 36L 1,700 feet between 36L and 36R 36R 5 NM 36L 36R 36L 36R 3.5 NM 36L 36R 2 NM 3 NM 2 NM 2 NM 1.5 NM Diagonal Separation = Note: 2.5 nautical miles (NM) separation will only be applied between aircraft within of the landing runway. RECAT Phase II values are initial will be further refined before implementation

Phase II Operational Considerations Arrivals versus Departures Airspace Configuration - Sorting arrivals Airport Configuration Single / Parallel Runways Crossing Runways Minimum Radar Separation (MRS) Runway Occupancy Time (ROT) and Collision Avoidance Weather IMC, VMC, MMC Typical Fleet Mix Arrival/Departure Ratio 8

Airspace Considerations Can Enable or Limit Sequencing Flights reassigned to the other parallel runway Atlanta Airspace Washington Dulles Airspace Graphics produced by MITRE, Flight Tracks from National Offload Program No changes in runway assignment due to airspace design/constraint 9

Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft ATL BOS CLT DCA DEN DFW EWR IAH JFK LAS LAX LGA MIA MSP ORD PHL SEA SFO Percent of OpDay Fleet Mix at MRS Current separation standards have most aircraft pairs at minimum radar separation (MRS) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Percent of Aircraft Pairs at MRS - Select U.S. Airports - % of Aircraft Pairs at MRS, Currently % of Aircraft Pairs at MRS, Under RECAT Phase I U.S. Separation Matrix _ Super Heavy B757 Large Small Super MRS 6 7 7 8 Heavy MRS 4 5 5 6 B757 MRS 4 4 4 5 Large MRS MRS MRS MRS 4 Small MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS Airport RECAT Phase 1 Separation Matrix _ CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatA MRS 5 6 7 7 8 CatB MRS 3 4 5 5 7 CatC MRS MRS MRS 3.5 3.5 6 CatD MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 5 CatE MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 4 CatF MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS MRS 10

Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft Leading Aircraft * At airports with a 2.5 nm waiver Delineating wake from other constraints permits benefits from other non-wake related operational improvements Collision Avoidance CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatA <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 CatB <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 CatC <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 CatD <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 CatE <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 CatF <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 ROT Matrix* CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatA 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatB 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatC 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatD 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatF 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Illustrative Example from Phase 1 RECAT MRS Matrix* Matrix for RECAT CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatA 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatB 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Phase 1* _ CatC 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 + CatD 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatF 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatA 2.5 5 6 7 7 8 CatB 2.5 3 4 5 5 7 + CatC 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 6 CatD 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 5 Wake Matrix CatE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4 CatF 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CatA CatB CatC CatD CatE CatF CatA 2.5 5 6 7 7 8 CatB <2.5 3 4 5 5 7 CatC <2.5 2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5 6 CatD <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 5 CatE <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 4 CatF <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 11

Decrease in U.S. Average Minimum Separation 30% Reducing MRS for certain pairs at specific airports would allow significant RECAT benefit Potential Pool of Benefits for Separation Schema 25% 20% 20.44% 25.14% 15% 10% 7.44% 9.21% 9.47% 5% 12 0% 0.00% U.S. Baseline RECAT Phase 1 Pairwise Rounded to 0.5 NM, 2.5 Minimum Pairwise Rounded to 0.1 NM, 2.5 Minimum Separation Matrix Used A 50-second ROT is assumed for these aircraft Further analysis and refinement of matrices is required Pairwise Rounded to 0.5 NM, 2.0 Minimum Pairwise Rounded to 0.1 NM, 2.0 Minimum plans to expand use of current metrics, adding additional metrics, updated models and data

Conclusions and Next Steps RECAT Phase 2 provides an opportunity to explicitly define wake constraints separate from Minimum Radar Separation. This can benefit: Approaches to closely spaced parallel runways in IMC Could lead to a possible reduction below 2.5 nm for single runway spacing for certain pairs RECAT Phase 2 pairwise separations will result in benefits at all airports. More for some, less for others Phase 2 ConOps and Implementation Strategy documents are under development Need to engage international community for inputs including operators, manufacturers, and ANSPs Initial drafts, looking for input, ideas, participation 13

This is the copyright work of The MITRE Corporation and was produced for the U.S. Government under Contract Number DTFAWA-10-C-00080 and is subject to Federal Aviation Administration Acquisition Management System Clause 3.5-13, Rights in Data-General, Alt. III and Alt. IV (Oct. 1996). No other use other than that granted to the U.S. Government, or to those acting on behalf of the U.S. Government, under that Clause is authorized without the express written permission of The MITRE Corporation. For further information, please contact The MITRE Corporation, Contract Office, 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, VA 22102, (703) 983-6000. The contents of this material reflect the views of the author and/or the Director of the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or Department of Transportation (DOT). Neither the FAA nor the DOT makes any warranty or guarantee, or promise, expressed or implied, concerning the content or accuracy of the views expressed herein. 2012 The MITRE Corporation. The Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this document, or to allow others to do so, for Government Purposes Only. Public Release Case Number 12-0870 This template is in compliance with FAA Logo and Branding Order 1700.6C 14