2nd Annual Workshop
Innovations In NAS-Wide Simulation
In Support Of NextGen Benefits
January 2010
Kenny Martin
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NextGen Requirements
Functional Requirements Of NextGen
Cross-Cutting Infrastructure/Enabler Programs
ADSB
SWIM
DataComm
NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW)
NAS Voice Switch
RNAV/RNP
Solution Sets
TBO
Trajectory Based Management
CATM Collaborative ATM
HD
High Density Airports
FLEX
Flexible Terminals & Airports
RWI
Reduce Weather Impacts
SSE
Safety, Security, Environmental Performance
FAC
Transform Facilities
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ISA Software Modeling Approach
ISA Software NextGen Activities
Cross-Cutting Infrastructure/Enabler Programs
ADSB
SWIM
DataComm
NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW)
NAS Voice Switch
RNAV/RNP
Solution Sets
TBO
Trajectory Based Management
CATM Collaborative ATM
HD
High Density Airports
FLEX
Flexible Terminals & Airports
RWI
Reduce Weather Impacts
SSE
Safety, Security, Environmental Performance
FAC
Transform Facilities
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ISA Software Modeling Approach
Approach To System-Wide Analysis
Simulation Platform
CHILL
Simulation Components
RAMS Plus NAS-Wide Fast-Time Model
Multi-Sector Planner
Trajectory Builder
Conflict Detection & Resolution Components
MONACO user-preferred flight plan optimization
Complexity Analysis tool
Evaluator Metrics Assessment
Recent Example Applications
MSP Coordination Analysis
TBO in High Performance Airspace (HPA)
SESAR Collaborative Network Planning (Gaming)
ADSB 3nm Separation Assessment
DataComm Segment 1 Benefits
Supersonic Aircraft Impact Assessment
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
CHILL Agent-Based Modeling
What is CHILL?
Collaborative Human In the Loop Laboratory, supporting
System-wide, Networked Agent-based Modelling Platform
Implements SWIM and NNEW Functionalities
Model-based and/or HITL (Gaming) Studies
Collaborative ATM
Trajectory-Based Operations
Multi-Sector Planner
MONACO system-wide DCB optimization
User-Preferred Problem Solving
Evaluator Metrics Assessment
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
CHILL Main Features
Features of CHILL
Versatile collaborative platform for validation of advanced Air Traffic Management
concepts
Evaluate traffic demand and airspace/airport conditions, to support collaborative
decision-making processes
Promoting common situational awareness through SWIM
Rapid sharing of changes to airspace, airport and traffic conditions to all subscribers
Adapt CATM service based on operator preferences
Maximize user opportunities to propose problem solutions
Identify optimal solutions from multiple agents / participants
Provide up to date and timely picture of the entire ATM network in support of
collaborative traffic management initiatives that maximize airspace capacity and
improve operational efficiency
On-Demand NAS-Wide metrics
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
CHILL : Flexible Situation Awareness
Flow Oriented Analysis
Providing instantaneous information on a system-wide perspective
Within any 4-dimensional element (airport, sector, FEA, FCA, waypoint, SUA,
weather volume etc.)
Quantify demand against available service levels in support of collaborative DemandCapacity management
Simple (GUI-based) or declarative language based flows
Management solutions applied to all/part of any flow
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
CHILL : Traffic Management Planning
Service-Oriented Solutions
Matching service levels to demand
Allow all participants including airspace users to assess potential overload issues
together
Supporting other capacity metrics
Workload, Complexity, Fuel, Emissions…
Applying user-preferred management initiatives
Providing interactive trial planning features
Assisting capacity balancing through automated tools
Diverse set of solutions supported:
Dynamic Airspace Allocation
User-preferred rerouting
Optimization of multiple rerouting portfolios
Multi-pass flight dispatching and slot management
MIT or Time-base Metering
Equitable distribution of penalties
Fine-tuning capabilities for improving efficiency
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
CHILL Mixed Fidelity Modeling
Macroscopic and Microscopic Agents
Matching fidelity of the model(s) to the validation requirements
Example: RAMS Plus representing a range of fidelity
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
Recent Validation Experiments
FAA Multi-Sector Planner (MSP)
High Performance Airspace : TBO Assessment
NASA N+3 Supersonic Aircraft Impact Assessment
ADSB 3nm Separation
DataComm Benefits Analysis
SESAR Trajectory-based ATM Concepts
SESAR ‘Episode III’ Collaborative Airspace/Network
Management Validation
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
MSP acting in Area Flow Manager role
 Previous RTS participants felt Area Flow was more efficient (solve more problems further in advance)
 Multi-D could become unmanageable with high traffic loads potential for loss of situational awareness
Investigate multiple MSP working across ATC Centers




Innovative Solutions for Aviation
Fort Worth, Kansas City and Memphis centers
150 sectors, long inter-center boundaries, complex mix of traffic
Dallas-Fort Worth, St. Louis and Memphis airports
Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Denver adjacent
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Modeled 50 adjacent MSP’s
 Sectors grouped based on traffic flows for high and super-high airspace
 Major terminal regions excluded as they would have their own DST’s
FL240-245
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
FL345+
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Complex Experimental Platform







Innovative Solutions for Aviation
150 executive ATC controllers modeled using RAMS Plus agents
4 Major airports (DFW, DAL, STL, MEM) also modeled with RAMS Plus
CHILL’s MSP Component: 50 MSPs
MSP Workload Model
Many agents with different levels of fidelity
SIM-C (SWIM) Component
Underlying Messaging Via SENS for service discovery / message exchange
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
MSP Responsibilities
 Knowledge of traffic 45 minutes in advance
 If overload predicted, the MSP:
– Finds flight(s) in sector during overload
– Attempts to find suitable reroutes to reduce overload
– If successful, coordinate with impacted MSPs
» Upstream MSP, if reroute begins in another MSA
» Downstream MSPs, if reroute enters a sector not previously in flight plan,
within 40 minutes of start of reroute
 Other MSPs will accept reroute unless:
– Reroute creates or worsens an overload in other MSA
– Other MSP is too busy (using new MSP workload model)
 Executive controller action (conflict resolution) always cancels pending MSP trial
plans
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Key Findings
 Traffic balance improved with MSP: Stdev of peak % of MAP reduced by 50%.
ZKC30 Timeline
Plus40 MSP/NoMSP Scenarios
NFlights In Sector
30
25
20
15
10
NoMSP
MSP
0:15
23:45
23:15
22:45
22:15
21:45
21:15
20:45
20:15
19:45
19:15
18:45
18:15
17:45
17:15
16:45
16:15
15:45
15:15
14:45
14:15
13:45
13:15
12:45
5
MAP (=19)
Change in Peak Number of Flights Per 15 Minute Period
ZKC30, Plus40 NoMSP to MSP Scenarios
Change as % of MAP
8
Change as % of MAP
Change as % of MAP
Change in Peak Flights
6
25%
15%
4
2
0
5%
-5%
-2
0:15
23:45
23:15
22:45
22:15
21:45
21:15
20:45
20:15
19:45
19:15
18:45
18:15
17:45
17:15
16:45
16:15
15:45
15:15
14:45
-45%
14:15
-8
13:45
-15%
-25%
-35%
13:15
-4
-6
12:45
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
45%
35%
© 2010 – ISA Software
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
Key Findings
 Overloads for entire region significantly reduced by MSP in all scenarios – More than 10x Reduction with
traffic+40% scenario
Minutes Above the MAP
All Centers Combined
5000
1 Minute Periods
4880
250
4000
200
3000
150
243
6+ Minute Periods
109
2089
100
2000
650
1000
210
0
18
92
387
39
50
10
1
4
Plus20
Plus40
0
ETMSInitial
Baseline
Plus20
Plus40
No MSP
Only
Tactical
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
ETMSInitial
MSPMSP
With
Baseline
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Key Findings
 Traffic Demand across region is significantly better balanced
– Example: Core 12-hour analysis period with traffic+40% scenario
Plus40 NoMSP
S
E
C
T
O
R
S
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
Plus40 MSP
© 2010 – ISA Software
FAA Multi-Sector Planner
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
Key Findings
 Around 50% of flight plan uplinks require coordination with ATC in another ATC center
Inter-Center Coordination
Percent of Trial Plans Uplinked by Center
for each Initiating Center
ZKC
ZFW
1% 0% 4%
17%
ZME
6%
17%
2%
3%
18%
18%
8%
8%
1%
51%
1%
17%
1%
63%
5%
7%
49%
5%
ZFW
ZDV
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
ZKC
ZHU
ZME
ZID
ZAB
ZMP
ZAU
ZTL
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
High Performance Airspace: TBO
FAA TBO in High Performance Airspace
HPA ConOps relies heavily on TBO
HPA is defined as FL 340+
Airspace based on generic sectors and flexible airspace design principles
TBO aircraft are RNAV and DataComm equipped
4D Trajectories
– Basis for planning and control
– Sent and received independently of ground navaids.
– Include Controlled Time of Arrivals (CTA) at the entry and the exit of the high
altitude airspace
 Intermediate waypoints CTA’s, if optionally defined, have less restrictive timing
constraints





Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
High Performance Airspace: TBO
Study Objectives
 Understand the expected benefits and risks on both users and service providers in
terms of:
– Capacity and throughput
– Users operational cost in terms of punctuality, travel distance and fuel consumption
– Sector conflict density and traffic complexity inherent to freedom to navigate outside
structured routes.
 Implement a set of metrics to quantify:
– Conflict geometry and attitude distribution
– Traffic density and controlled flight hours in a given volume
– Variation of demand and average transit time in a given volume
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
High Performance Airspace: TBO
Modeling Approach
 Use of Navigation Reference System (NRS) as the primary blueprint
for direct routing in the high altitude airspace
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
High Performance Airspace: TBO
TBO Application




Every TBO aircraft follows a direct route in the high altitude airspace
The two nodes of the direct routes are located by their respective NRS points
TBO aircraft may still contain structured routes when passing through non-high altitude airspace
Separation standards remain the same: 5 miles laterally/ 1000 feet vertically
Entry
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
Exit
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
High Performance Airspace: TBO
Validation Status
 Initial (baseline and variant) scenarios completed
 Metrics being reviewed with sponsors
 Initial report in progress
 Work will continue through 2010
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Objectives
 NASA research contract to investigate environmentally friendly supersonic airframe and
propulsion concepts
 Develop technology maturation plans to make the concept a reality
Goals:
 Achieve a NextGen Integrated Advanced Vehicle Concept
- Operational in the 2030 – 2035 timeframe
 Assess the impact of the introduction of such vehicles within the NAS
- Benefits, complexity, interaction with other traffic, possible ATC issues…
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Experimental objective
 Develop N+3 aircraft performance models
 Incorporate N+3 operations in the traffic forecast
 Evaluate the impact of N+3 aircraft in the NAS
 Assuming the re-introduction of supersonic aircraft in the future NAS,
what is the likely impact on:
–
–
–
–
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
Traffic in the initial acceleration phase (around 10000ft)
Traffic in the second acceleration phase (23000ft and climb to supersonic)
Air traffic complexity due to the N+3 traffic
Controller workload due to special procedures required to handle supersonic aircraft
© 2010 – ISA Software
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
N+3 Aircraft Performance
 Introduce supersonic aircraft performance models
- based on N+3 aircraft mission profiles supplied by LM-Aero team
- carefully calibrated to be representative of expected performance
300
70000
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Altitude
(Clim b Phase)
60000
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Distance
(Clim b Phase)
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Speed
(Clim b Phase)
1000
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
"RAMS Mission Profile"
250
"RAMS Mission Profile"
"RAMS Mission Profile"
"RAMS A320 Mission Profile"
"RAMS A320 Mission Profile"
"RAMS A320 Mission Profile"
800
50000
Speed (Kts)
Altitude (Ft)
40000
Distance (NM)
200
600
30000
150
400
100
20000
200
50
10000
0
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Mission Tim e (s)
1200
1400
1600
1800
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Mission Tim e (s)
1200
1400
1600
1800
0
200
N+3 fast/time model climb-phase mission profiles (compared to A320 in orange)
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
400
600
800
1000
Mission Tim e (s)
1200
1400
1600
1800
© 2010 – ISA Software
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
N+3 Aircraft Performance
 Descent Phases Also Represented
70000
2200
1100
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Altitude
(Descent Phase)
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Distance
(Descent Phase)
Com parison of LM-NASA & RAMS Mission Profile Speed
(Descent Phase)
1000
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
60000
"RAMS Mission Profile"
2150
"RAMS Mission Profile"
900
"RAMS A320 Mission Profile"
"LM/Nasa Mission Profile"
"RAMS Mission Profile"
"RAMS A320 Mission Profile"
800
50000
2100
A320 'adjusted'
arrival time
30000
Distance (NM)
40000
Speed (Kts)
Altitude (Ft)
700
600
500
A320 'adjusted'
arrival time
2050
A320 not included
(still in enroute phase)
400
2000
20000
300
200
1950
10000
100
0
7800
8000
8200
8400
8600
8800
Mission Tim e (s)
9000
9200
9400
9600
0
7800
8000
8200
8400
8600
8800
Mission Tim e (s)
9000
9200
9400
9600
1900
8000
8200
N+3 fast/time model descent-phase mission profiles (compared to A320 in orange)
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
8400
8600
8800
9000
Mission Tim e (s)
9200
9400
9600
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
N+3 Potential Operations
 Operational Range around 6500NM with 200 passengers
 Potential Applications
» Major International Routes
» Economically Viable Domestic Routes
 Research from the US OTA ‘Impact of Advanced Aircraft Technology’
report [Princeton, 1980] chapter 3 (variables affecting a supersonic
transport market) suggests that
“ An aircraft’s product is passenger (/ cargo) miles”
“ There are 2 ways to improve productivity:
1) larger aircraft (more seats – same flying time)
2) faster aircraft (same seats – shorter flying time)”
 Both will improve the metric “PAX miles per hour”
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Traffic based on 2008 ASDI recordings
 Cloned based on MITRE forecasts (approx 2% growth per year) to achieve
2030 traffic
Airspace from current NAS (2008)
 5NM separation standard
 No additional ATC/ATM concepts included
Metrics to evaluate
 Traffic interactions (N+3 vs Conventional conflicts, particularly in
acceleration phases)
 ATC Complexity
 ATC Controller workload
 Delays / On-Time arrival (particularly for N+3 operations)
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
NASA ‘N+3’ Supersonic
Current Status
 Baseline 2030 (no supersonic) and variant (conventional + supersonic)
scenarios completed
 Results being reviewed with contractual partners
 Final report due for publication end Feb 2010
Examples of potential International and Domestic Supersonic routes
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ADSB 3nm Separation
ADSB 3nm Separation
 Problem Statement: Quantify Benefits of ADS-B In Terms of Reduction
in En-route Separation
 Questions To Be Answered
 In terms of system throughput, do flights get through the system
with less delay?
 How Do The Delay Benefits Reduce As With 3nm Flight Level
Ceiling is lowered?
 Key Assumptions
 Enroute Separations Drive The Alternative Cases
 ADSB Is Modeled As An Enabler
 However: No Future Anticipated NextGen ConOps Behavior Is
Introduced
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ADSB 3nm Separation
ADSB NAS-Wide Scenario
 Traffic Demand
 2012: 60,699 Flights
 2017: 67,180 Flights
 Full NAS Sectorization
 4D Flight Profiles
 4D Conflict Probe
 Wake Separations
 Conflict Resolutions
 Closely Spaced
Parallel Routes
 Airport Capacity Model
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ADSB 3nm Separation
Airport Capacity Modelling
 Focus On OEP Airports For Metric Generation
 Used ATO-F FACT2 Arr/Dep Rates (arr/dep ops/hr)
 Rates => Input To Airport’s Time-Based Metering Feature
 Benefits
 Ensures Aircraft Enter Enroute At Realistic Rate
 Eliminates Need For Detailed Airport/Runway Operations In An Enroute
View
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
ADSB 3nm Separation
ADSB Results
 ADSB Metrics
 Enroute & Arrival Delay
 Sector Loadings
 ADSB Findings
 Reduced Separations Allow Flights To Get Through the Enroute Faster.
 Some of the gain/benefit is lost in transition from Enroute to Airport.
 Overall System Benefits Remains With Reduced Separations
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
DataComm – Segment 1 Benefits
Datacomm Segment 1 Benefits
 Focus On Controller Communications
 Voice Vs DCL
 Revised Departure Clearance
 Scope: IAH Airport Ground Movements
 Gate, Runway , SID/STAR Operations
 Question To Answer: Do DCL-Equipped Aircraft Take Off Any Faster
Than Non-Equipped Aircraft in a revised departure clearance situation?
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
DataComm – Segment 1 Benefits
Datacomm Segment 1 Benefits
 Revised Departure Clearance Situation
 High TMI Day When Departure Gates Are Closed
 Example: Northern Flows (departure gates) from IAH into DFW
are closed.
 Revised departure clearances necessary for all flights using the
closed gates who have received their PDC (pre-departure
clearance)
 Today’s situation requires controller to go sequentially down a list
of flights and transact the revised clearance departure by voice.
 This results in a significant taxi-out delay.
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
DataComm – Segment 1 Benefits
Datacomm Segment 1 Benefits
 Locations Of Flights When Revised Departure Clearances Are Needed
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
DataComm – Segment 1 Benefits
Datacomm Segment 1 Process
 Scenarios
 Equipage at 0%, 30%, 60% and 100%
 Baseline against “good” day, and then instigate convective
weather impacts.
 Simulate IAH, and metroplex IAD/BWI/DCA
 Design Extrapolation Process For NAS-Wide Benefits in support of
FID.
 Current Status
 Airport Simulation Results In Progress
 Extrapolation Process Being Designed
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
SESAR Trajectory-based ATM
Objectives
 Based on 2012 traffic in the European Airspace investigate the feasibility, impact and
potential benefit of 4D Trajectory-based operations:
– Using pre-flight Target Time of Arrival (TTA) for Capacity Demand Planning
(Reference Business Trajectory RBT-Constraints)
– Using revised TTA’s following take-off
– Allocating dynamic Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) for key points during flight (e.g.
entry to arrival management systems)
– Using aircraft performance variation to try to respect TTA’s of all kinds.
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
SESAR Trajectory-based ATM
Modeling Features
 RBT (pre take-off) constraint modelling
 TTA model including heuristic and deterministic a/c performance management to
respect target time ‘windows’
 FMS model to incorporate different TTA capabilities
 Dynamic CTA modeling including time-base meters for entry to TMA system models
 Unexpected weather / other noise modeling to perturb TTA plans
 Impact of Non-homogeneous traffic mix (e.g. FMS-based CTA capable, Manual CTA
with ATC assistance, non-compliant)
 TTA compliance cancelled during ATC separation intervention
 TTA recovery mode (if possible) following resolution
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
SESAR Trajectory-based ATM
Typical Metrics Considered
 Conformance to initial target time constraints
 Conformance to TTA following take-off
 Impact of departure (taxi/take-off queue) delay
 Dynamic CTA conformance
 Failures to achieve dynamic CTA (+ reasons)
 Impact of ATC Intervention
 Ability to recover TTA following interventions
 Compliance rates
– With speed management
– Without speed management
– Average speed changes
 Impact of ‘unexpected weather’ + recovery rates
 Impact on fuel use
 ATC workload due to target time management
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
SESAR Trajectory-based ATM
Status
 Initial report delivered to client
 Awaiting formal feedback
 Recommendations include
– Additional experiments to include improved TFM / AMAN models
– Improved fuel assessment models
– Enhancement of modeling features
Innovative Solutions for Aviation
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
SESAR Episode II Gaming Exercises
Gaming Exercises For SESAR/EP3 Validation of Concepts





Innovative Solutions for Aviation
Analysis of SESAR Airspace Management Concepts using Interactive Gaming Scenarios
Evaluation of different gaming strategies
Supported 6-8 operational (HITL) positions
1 Game master, 1 Network Manager, 1 Regional Manager, 1 Military, 2 AOC positions
Final report currently in review by European Commission
© 2010 – ISA Software
Innovations In NASWide Simulation
GMU Jan 27/28 2010
Future Activities
What’s Planned For 2010?
 Additional MSP Simulations
– Expand 2008 MSP Analysis to NAS-Wide
– Consider Data Com between Flight deck and MSP
 Assessment of UAV impacts in The NAS
 Continue TBO Validation
 Data Com Segment 1 & Segment 2 Benefits
 Support to SESAR system-wide TBM concept validation
Benefits To NextGen Modeling Efforts
 Continued Development & Enhancement Of CHILL-compatible tools
 Integration of 3rd Party Tools Within CHILL
 Cross-Program (USA/Europe) Sharing Of Applications
– Scenarios, metrics, behaviour, etc.
Innovative Solutions for Aviation