Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Episode 3
Single European Sky Implementation support through Validation
Document information
Programme
Sixth framework programme Priority 1.4 Aeronautics and Space
Project title
Episode 3
Project N°
037106
Project Coordinator
EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre
Deliverable Name
Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Departure - High and Medium/Low
Density Operations - E5
Deliverable ID
D2.2-047
Version
3.00
Owner
Rosalind Eveleigh
EUROCONTROL
Contributing partners
Page 1 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
- This page is intentionally blank -
Page 2 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Approval
Role
Organisation
Name
Document owner
EUROCONTROL
Rosalind Eveleigh
Technical approver
EUROCONTROL
Giuseppe Murgese
Quality approver
EUROCONTROL
Catherine Palazo
Project coordinator
EUROCONTROL
Philippe Leplae
Version history
Version
Date
Status
1.00
10/12/2009
Approved
2.00
29/01/2010
Approved
Author(s)
De Garis R
Ramsay I
Eveleigh R
Justification - Could be a
reference to a review form or a
comment sheet
Approved by the Episode 3
consortium
Final Alignment with ATM Process
Model
Alignment of data types across DODs
3.00
15/04/2010
Approved
Eveleigh R
Update of SADT diagrams.
Approved by the Episode 3
consortium
Page 3 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 7
1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 8
1.1
PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT .................................................................................... 8
1.2
INTENDED AUDIENCE .............................................................................................. 10
1.3
DOCUMENT STRUCTURE ......................................................................................... 10
1.4
BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 10
1.5
GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................................. 11
2
OPERATING CONCEPT-CONTEXT AND SCOPE........................................................ 13
2.1
SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 13
Timeframe and Associated Capability Levels .................................................. 13
2.1.1
Airspace ............................................................................................................ 13
2.1.2
Business Trajectory Lifecycle ........................................................................... 15
2.1.3
ATM PROCESSES DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENT .................................................... 15
2.2
2.3
SESAR CONCEPT ADDRESSED IN THE DOCUMENT .................................................. 20
2.3.1
Trajectory-based operations ............................................................................. 21
Trajectory lifecycle ............................................................................................ 21
2.3.2
Airspace Capacity ............................................................................................. 23
2.3.3
Separation Modes ............................................................................................ 24
2.3.4
Queue Management ......................................................................................... 25
2.3.5
Information sharing and Air-Ground Datalink ................................................... 26
2.3.6
Related SESAR Operational Improvements (OIs) ........................................... 26
2.3.7
Related SESAR Performance Requirements ................................................... 26
2.3.8
3
CURRENT OPERATING METHOD AND MAIN CHANGES .......................................... 31
3.1
ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL REMAIN ............................................. 32
3.2
ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL CHANGE ............................................ 32
3.3
ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL DISAPPEAR ........................................ 33
4
PROPOSED OPERATING PRINCIPLES ....................................................................... 34
4.1
ARRIVAL QUEUE MANAGEMENT (A3.2.3) ................................................................. 34
Scope and Objectives....................................................................................... 34
4.1.1
Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 35
4.1.2
Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints ...................................................... 35
4.1.3
Overview of Operating Method ......................................................................... 36
4.1.4
4.1.4.1
4.1.4.2
Optimise Arrival Queue (A.3.2.3.1) ............................................................ 36
Implement Arrival Queue in TMA (A.3.2.3.2.1) ........................................ 39
4.1.5
Enablers............................................................................................................ 43
Transition issues ............................................................................................... 43
4.1.6
TERMINAL AREA EXIT QUEUE MANAGEMENT (A.3.2.2) ............................................. 44
4.2
4.2.1.1
4.2.1.2
4.2.1.3
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
Optimise Terminal Exit Queue (A.3.2.2.1) ................................................. 44
Implement Terminal Exit Queue (A.3.2.2.2)............................................... 45
Manage Terminal Area Exit Queue Principles ............................................ 45
DE-CONFLICT AND SEPARATE TRAFFIC IN ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE OPERATIONS
(A.3.3.2) ................................................................................................................ 47
Scope and Objectives....................................................................................... 47
Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 48
Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints ...................................................... 48
Overview of Operating Method ......................................................................... 49
4.3.4.1
4.3.4.2
Detect and Solve Conflicts in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.1) ............................ 49
Implement Separation in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.2) .................................... 50
4.3.5
Enablers............................................................................................................ 52
Transition issues ............................................................................................... 52
4.3.6
Transition to Low-Density Procedures ............................................................. 52
4.3.7
APPLY SAFETY NETS (A.3.4.2) ............................................................................... 53
4.4
Page 4 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
4.4.4
4.4.4.1
Scope and Objectives....................................................................................... 53
Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 53
Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints ...................................................... 54
Overview of Operating Method ......................................................................... 54
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA Airspace (A3.4.2) ...................................... 54
4.4.5
Enablers............................................................................................................ 55
Transition issues ............................................................................................... 55
4.4.6
5
ENVIRONMENT DEFINITION ......................................................................................... 56
5.1
AIRSPACE CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................. 56
5.2
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................... 56
6
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................. 57
7
REFERENCES AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS ....................................................... 60
7.1
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 60
7.2
APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS ........................................................................................ 61
A. ANNEX: OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS ......................................................................... 62
B.
ANNEX: DETAILED USE CASE .................................................................................... 66
C.
ANNEX: OI STEPS TRACEABILITY TABLE ................................................................. 68
D.
ANNEX: HOT TOPICS .................................................................................................... 81
Page 5 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Scope of the document within the SESAR vision (SESAR ConOps)............9
Figure 2: ATM Capability Levels addressed ..............................................................13
Figure 3: Airspace and flight phase boundaries.........................................................14
Figure 4: ATM Model Phase Level diagram...............................................................15
Figure 5: Overall ATM Process Model in the Execution Phase .................................17
Figure 6: Life cycle of the Reference Business Trajectory.........................................22
Figure 7: Manage Arrival Queue low-level processes................................................34
Figure 8: Manage Terminal Area Exit Queue low-level processes ............................44
Figure 9: De-Conflict & Separate Traffic in Terminal Area low-level processes ........47
Figure 10: Apply Safety Nets low-level processes .....................................................53
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: ATM Model low-level processes addressed.................................................20
Table 2: Classification of Trajectory Modifications .....................................................23
Table 3: Key Performance Areas addressed .............................................................30
Table 4: Use Cases for Optimise Arrival Queue ........................................................39
Table 5: Use Cases for Implement Arrival Queue in TMA .........................................43
Table 6: Use Case for Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue.......................................45
Table 7: Use Cases for Implement Terminal Area Exit Queue ..................................45
Table 8: Use Cases for Detect and Solve Conflicts in Terminal Area........................50
Table 9: Use Cases for Implement Separation in Terminal Area...............................52
Table 10: Use Cases for Apply Safety Nets in the TMA Airspace .............................55
Table 11: Actors roles and concerned processes ......................................................59
Table 12: Operational Scenarios identified for Arrival and Departure operations ......65
Table 13: Use Case summary....................................................................................67
Table 14: Operational Improvements addressed .......................................................80
Page 6 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The objective of this document is to describe the SESAR 2020 concept related to the
execution phase of arrival/departure operations, in high and medium/low density
environments. The level of details provided permitted the definition of validation exercises
within Episode 3. This document was afterwards refined in order to take into account the
lessons learned during the exercises.
The ATM system and operational descriptions are supported by an ATM process model that
describes the whole system and allows defining the scope and interface between the
complete set of SESAR Detailed Operational Descriptions. Operational Scenarios (“what”)
and Use Cases (“how”) are developed from this approach.
This document is directly, or indirectly, linked with:
 SESAR General Detailed Operational Descriptions providing overall context;
 SESAR Detailed Operational Description L, M1, M2: Collaborative layered planning,
including Collaborative Decision Making and User Driven Prioritisation Process
aspects, taking place in the long and medium/short term planning phases;
 SESAR Detailed Operational Description E6, E1: En-route traffic management
and/or Runway operations in the execution phase;
 SESAR Detailed Operational Description E4: Dynamic Demand and Capacity
Balancing/Complexity Management for the terminal area in the execution phase.
The business or mission trajectory of an airspace user of any kind represents their intention to
operate in a desired way. In the SESAR concept, air traffic service providers and airports will
facilitate the execution of these trajectories and will ensure that this service is delivered in a
safe and cost effective way within the infrastructural and environmental constraints.
Trajectory-based operations, represented by the Reference Business Trajectory (RBT), form
the basis of the concept. A degree of pre-de-confliction of traffic flows, improved conflict
management enabled by improved trajectory prediction and automation support will result in a
reduction of controller task load per flight and fewer last-minute tactical interventions during
flight execution. These are the principles on which SESAR will deliver greater airspace
capacity than today.
The Air Traffic Management model offers, for the execution phase, a process split which is
globally layered according to different time horizons. Three levels have thus been identified
for arrival-departure operations, in decreasing order of strategic applicability: Queue
management, Separation provision, and Collision avoidance. These processes may all have
an impact on the Reference Business Trajectory, and in particular trigger Reference Business
Trajectory revisions.
Page 7 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT
The purpose of this document is to refine the SESAR operational concept for the execution
phase in terminal airspace, according to the processes detailed in this document. Referred as
“Conflict Management in Arrival & Departure High & Medium/Low Density Operations – E5”,
this document is part of a set of Detailed Operational Description (DOD) documents which
refine and clarify the high level SESAR ConOps concept description in order to support the
Episode 3 exercises, which have the objective of developing a better understanding of the
SESAR Concept. This set of DODs can be considered as step 0.2 of E-OCVM [1] - i.e. the
description of the ATM Operational Concept(s). The DOD document structure and content is
derived from the one of the OSED (Operational Service and Environment Definition)
described by the ED-78A guidelines [2]. According to the ED-78A, “the OSED identifies the
Air Traffic Services supported by data communications and their intended operational
environment and includes the operational performances expectations, functions and selected
technologies of the related CNS/ATM system”. The structure of the DOD has been defined
considering the level of details that can be provided at this stage – i.e. the nature and maturity
of the concept areas being developed.
The current version of this DOD has been reviewed and updated to its final form by the
addition of the results of the relevant validation activities, namely WP5.3.1 TMA Expert Group
final report.[33] It may be considered as an input document to the SJU WPB and the
associated operational threads WPs.
The complete detailed description of the mode of operations is composed of 10 documents
according to the main phases defined by SESAR – i.e. Long Term Planning phase,
Medium/Short Term Planning and Execution Phase (the complete set of documents is
available from the Episode 3 portal home page [3]):
 The General DOD (G DOD) [4];
 The Long Term Network Planning DOD (L DOD) [5];
 The Collaborative Airport Planning DOD (M1 DOD) [6];
 The Medium & Short Term Network Planning DOD (M2DOD) [7];
 The Runway Management DOD (E1 DOD) [8];
 The Apron & Taxiways Management DOD (E2/3 DOD) [9];
 The Network Management in the Execution Phase DOD (E4 DOD) [10];
 The Conflict Management in Arrival & Departure High & Medium/Low Density
Operations DOD (E5 DOD), this document;[11]
 The Conflict Management in En-Route High & Medium/Low Density operations DOD
(E6 DOD) [12];
 The Episode 3 Lexicon (Glossary of Terms and Definitions) [13].
The operational enhancements described in this document are related to the execution and
management of the Business Trajectory in the Arrival and Departure phases of flight in both
High and Medium/Low Complexity situations.
The document addresses the 2020 horizon environment and operations that will be
incorporated in the end state system - i.e. transition elements are not taken into account. In
other words, the operations described below are mainly related to ATM Service Level 3 to
ATM Service Level 4 capabilities (refer to Figure 1 below). However, mixed equipage
Page 8 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
situations involving levels 0-1 were considered as part of the exercises conducted by WP5.3.5
and the resulting recommendation is replicated below 1 .
The figure below gives an overview of the scope of the document within the SESAR vision.
SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT
Figure 1: Scope of the document within the SESAR vision (SESAR ConOps)
The SESAR target concept of operations is a trajectory-based concept. All partners in the
ATM network will share trajectory information in real time to the extent required from the
earliest trajectory development phase through operations and post-operation activities. ATM
planning, collaborative decision making processes and tactical operations will always be
based on the latest trajectory data. A trajectory integrating ATM and airport constraints is
elaborated and agreed for each flight, resulting in the trajectory that a user agrees to fly and
the ANSP and Airports agree to facilitate.
Considering the scope of the present document within the SESAR Collaborative Layered
Planning processes, and in terms of airspace, the traffic presentation at the terminal airspace
boundaries is expected to be the result of a number of operational processes in various
phases:
 Collaborative layered planning, including CDM and UDPP aspects, taking place in
the long or medium/short term planning phases (refer to L DOD [5], M1 DOD [6] and
M2 DOD [7]);
 En-route traffic management and/or Runway operations in the execution phase
(refer to E1 DOD [8] and E6 DOD [12]);
 Dynamic DCB/complexity management for the terminal area in the execution phase
(refer to E4 DOD [10]);
 Queue Management in the execution phase - in the context of an enlarged arrival
management horizon, and possibly management of terminal area exit queues
closely linked to departure queues (refer to §4.1 and §0 below).
For the execution phase in the Terminal Airspace, the main impacts of SESAR will be:
 Trajectory based operations and the use of 4D trajectories;
1
“Precise handling of traffic mix will be determined by the different mixes and different capabilities as
well as designing needs. The way a conflict is solved depends on many aspects (for example % of
capabilities).” [36]
Page 9 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 The extended temporal scope of arrival queue management;
 The introduction of new types of airspace structures;
 The introduction of new separation modes;
 The introduction of initial ASAS based operations.
These improvements will be made possible through:
 Better planning through the introduction of the NOP;
 Data sharing through the SWIM infrastructure – including the use of air-ground
datalink;
 Enhanced CNS aircraft and ground capabilities;
 Enhanced ground tools and automation support.
1.2 INTENDED AUDIENCE
The intended audience includes:
 Episode 3 partners;
 The SESAR community.
1.3 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE
The structure of the document is as follows:
 §2 of this document provides an overview of the functions addressed in this
document;
 §3 provides a description of how today's operation will be changed with the
implementation of the concept area under analysis;
 §4 gives a description of the future operating principles by looking at Arrivals and
Departures main processes. It details the benefits, the constraints, the human
factors aspects, the enablers, the actors and the operating methods;
 §5 describes the environmental characteristics and constraints specific to this DOD
(global/common environmental issues are presented in a high level document [4]);
 §6 lists roles and responsibilities applicable to this concept area;
 §7 details references and applicable documents cited along this document;
 Annex A provides the list of the various scenarios relevant to this document;
 Annex B provides the summary of the Use Cases defined in this document;
 Annex C contains the traceability table of the SESAR Operational Improvement (OI)
steps addressed by this document;
 Annex D lists Hot Topics raised during Episode 3 and concerning E5 DOD.
1.4 BACKGROUND
The Episode 3 project, also called "Single European Sky Implementation Support Through
Validation", was signed on 18th April 2007 between the European Community and
EUROCONTROL under the contract N° TREN/07/FP6AE/S07.70057/037106. The European
Community has agreed to grant a financial contribution to this project equivalent to about 50%
of the cost of the project.
Page 10 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
The project is carried out by a consortium composed of EUROCONTROL, Entidad Publica
Empresarial Aeropuertos Espanõles y Navegacion Aérea (AENA); AIRBUS France SAS
(Airbus); DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS); NATS (EN Route) Public Limited
Company (NERL); Deutsches Zentrum für Luft und Raumfahrt e.V.(DLR); Stichting Nationaal
Lucht en Ruimtevaartlaboratorium (NLR); The Ministère des Transports, de l’Equipement, du
Tourisme et de la Mer de la République Française represented by the Direction des Services
de la Navigation Aérienne (DSNA); ENAV S.p.A. (ENAV); Ingenieria y Economia del
Transporte S.A (INECO) ISA Software Ltd(ISA); Ingeneria de Sistemas para la Defensa de
Espana S.A (Isdefe); Luftfartsverket (LFV); Sistemi Innovativi per il Controllo del Traffico
Aereo (SICTA); THALES Avionics SA (THAV); THALES AIR SYSTEMS S.A (TR6); Queen’s
University of Belfast (QUB);
The Air Traffic Management Bureau of the General
Administration of Civil Aviation of China (ATMB); The Center of Aviation Safety Technology of
General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAST); Austro Control (ACG);
Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland (LVNL). This consortium works under the co-ordination of
EUROCONTROL.
With a view to supporting SESAR Development Phase activities whilst ensuring preparation
for partners SESAR Joint Undertaking activities, Episode 3 focuses on:
 Detailing key concept elements in SESAR;
 Initial operability through focussed prototyping exercises and performance
assessment of those key concepts;
 Initial supporting technical needs impact assessment;
 Analysis of the available tools and gaps for SESAR concept validation; and
 Reporting on the validation methodology used in assessing the concept.
The main SESAR inputs to this work are:
 The SESAR Concept of Operations (ConOps): T222 [17];
 The description of scenarios developed: T223 [18] & [19];
 The list of Operational Improvements allowing to transition to the final concept: T224
[20];
 The definition of the implementation packages: T333 [20] & [21];
 The list of performance assessments exercises to be carried out to validate that the
concept delivers the required level of performance: T232 [22];
 The ATM performance framework, the list of Key Performance Indicators, and an
initial set of performance targets: T212 [23].
The objective of detailing the operational concept [25] is achieved through the development
of the DODs. These documents are available for the SESAR development phase and are
produced through the System Consistency work package of Episode 3. The life cycle of the
DOD documents is defined through three main steps:
 Initial DODs provided as the first inputs to the Episode 3 project;
 Interim DODs containing first refinement and consolidation from Episode 3 partners
aligned to the prototyping/evaluation work, provided by mid-project duration;
 Final DODs updated by the findings and reports produced
prototyping/evaluation activities, provided at the end of the project.
by
the
1.5 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
The Episode 3 Lexicon contains lists of agreed acronyms and definitions [13].
Page 11 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
To complement the existing definition of RBT and to provide clarification on the use of the
terms “update” and “revision” the following definitions are proposed for inclusion in the
Lexicon:
o RBT update: whenever the RBT exceeds the ‘ deltas’ of the TMR, an update of the
RBT will automatically be initiated by the ground system:
o RBT revision: whenever there is a mutually agreed change to the RBT, the RBT will
be revised and will replace the previously agreed RBT.
Note: Throughout this document references to SBT and RBT also mean the military context of
Shared Mission Trajectory (SMT) and Reference Mission Trajectory (RMT) which have not
generally been referred to in the interests of clarity. A more detailed view of SMT/RMT may
be found in the EUROCONTROL SJU Early Project 2 deliverable “Understanding Trajectory
Management V2.01”.
Page 12 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
2 OPERATING CONCEPT-CONTEXT AND SCOPE
2.1 SCOPE
2.1.1 Timeframe and Associated Capability Levels
The context targeted by this document is SESAR's 2020 environment. At least for some parts
of the concept described, a step by step implementation can be envisioned during the
transition period until 2020. Whenever possible, this will be explicitly indicated in this
document.
ATM Capability Levels are defined to describe the on-going deployment of progressively more
advanced ATM Systems for aircraft, ground systems and airports (refer to Figure 2).The main
capabilities required by the key SESAR target date of 2020 are described as ATM Service
/Capability levels 3 to 4 (scope of DODs). More advanced capabilities for the high-end
capacity target of the SESAR Concept (2025 and beyond) are described as ATM
Service/Capability Level 5.
5
Available 2025+: Trajectory Sharing Air-Air;
Met data sharing (Air-Air/Air-Ground) ;
Avionics enabling 4D Contract and Airborne
Self-Separation
4
ATM Capability Level
SESAR 2020 Requirements: Trajectory Sharing meeting ATM
requirements; avionics with VRNP capability, 3D-PTC (User Preferred
Route) and airborne separation capability (“ASEP-C&P”)
3
Aircraft Delivered 2017 onwards: avionics enabling multiple CTO,
3D-PTC (published route) and initial airborne separation capability
(“ASEP –ITP”)
2
Aircraft Delivered 2013 onwards: ADS-B/IN and avionics enabling PTC-2D,
TC-SA & airborne spacing (“ASAS S&M”); Datalink: Link 2000+ applications
1
“Current Aircraft”: ADS-B/out (position/aircraft/met data); Avionics with 2D-RNP,
vertical constraint management and single RTA; Datalink: Event reporting
and Intent sharing
0
2013
2017
2020
Date of Initial Operating Capability
2025
Figure 2: ATM Capability Levels addressed
2.1.2 Airspace
Two categories of arrival and departure operations are addressed in this document “High
Complexity” and “Medium/Low Complexity”.
Page 13 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
The airspace boundaries associated with arrival and departure correspond roughly to the
following flight events:
 From the top of descent to the final approach for the arriving flights;
 From initial climb to the top of climb for departing flights.
This is intended to clarify the respective scopes of the en-route, Arrival/Departure and Airport
DODs, and is not intended to reflect the geographical boundaries between the different air
traffic control authorities. The airspace associated to Arrival/Departure operations will
sometimes be referred to as “terminal area” within this document.
This document also covers arriving flights that are still in the en-route phase as far as Queue
management is concerned.
APT
DOD
ARR/DEP
DOD
ENR DOD
ARR/DEP
DOD
APT
DOD
Figure 3: Airspace and flight phase boundaries
While the SESAR concept prioritises the ambition of the user to plan flights unconstrained by
route networks, it recognises that fixed route structures may be needed to maximise capacity,
and, more specifically, that route structures may be essential in vicinity of major airports, and
may there extend from/to cruising levels. ([17], §D.5, §D.7 and §F.3.3) 2 The SESAR ConOps
([17], §F.3.3.1) also mentions the use of dynamic routes. Pre-defined routes would be
contained within predefined airspace volumes, such as cones and tubes shapes, designed to
apply strategic de-confliction and separate flows, while also enabling to the maximum extent
possible efficient vertical profiles - e.g. CDA. For medium/low complexity arrival/departure
operations, dynamic routes as agreed between the User and the service Provider in the RBT
may be used in some areas and pre-defined routes in other ones within the TMA.
2
§D.5 “It is recognised however that in especially congested airspace, the trade off between flight
efficiency and capacity will require that a fixed route structure will be used to enable the required
capacity. […] Where major hubs are close, the entire area below a certain level will be operated as an
extended terminal area, with route structures eventually extending also into en-route airspace to
manage the climbing and descending flows from and into the airports concerned”.
§D.7 “The SESAR concept will increase capacity by reducing the requirement for tactical intervention. In
highly congested areas dominated by climbing and descending traffic flows this will be achieved by
deploying route structures that provide a greater degree of strategic de-confliction and procedures that
capitalise on the greater accuracy of aircraft navigation.”
§F.3.3 “For high-complexity operations, an efficient airspace structure combined with advanced airborne
and ground system capabilities will be deployed to deliver the necessary capacity and ensure separation
is maintained. The concept recognises that when traffic complexity is high, the required capacity can
only be achieved at the cost of some constraint on individual optimum trajectories […] High-complexity
terminal operations will feature separated 3D departure routes and 3D arrival routes […]”.
Page 14 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
2.1.3 Business Trajectory Lifecycle
Amongst the ATM planning phases identified in the SESAR concept, this document is
specifically focused on the execution phase. In terms of business trajectory lifecycle, this
corresponds to the management of the reference business trajectory (RBT), as illustrated by
Figure 1 above.
2.2 ATM PROCESSES DESCRIBED IN THE DOCUMENT
The ATM Process Model has been developed as part of the Episode 3 definition phase. It is
intended to capture the whole ATM process. It is to be aligned with the SESAR concept and
provides a mechanism for scoping the DODs.
The execution phase is related to the safe and efficient facilitation of the airspace users RBTs
in the managed airspace by ensuring provision of separation to prevent collision. This is
described in the Manage Execution Phase of the Process Model (Figure 4 below, concerned
processes identified with light blue background).
Figure 4: ATM Model Phase Level diagram
Note: details about input/output flows, actors and triggers for each process can be found in
the SESAR/Episode 3 Information Navigator [14]. In particular, these are not repeated in
section 4 below. The reader is referred to the ATM Model for more details.
Page 15 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
There are three major activities defined in the model (Figure 5 below) which will be further
described in section of this document:
 Manage Traffic Queues:
Queue management is the process establishing and maintaining a safe, orderly and
efficient flow of traffic. This process aims at managing the cases where demand will
still excess capacity – despite all measures that would have been taken in previous
phases - due to limited resources. This is especially the case for runways. In the
execution phase, it involves metering and sequencing of the traffic, refining the
planned queues that have been created in the short term planning phase, by taking
into account the actual traffic situation and various additional parameters such as
e.g. wake turbulence categories. The scope of this process extends, for arrivals, to
the en-route phase of flights – as far as metering is concerned. Queue management
is also closely related to the separation process – in the context of the present
document, we considered the separation between aircraft in the same arrival queue
to be part of Queue management (refer to §4.1 below).
 De-Conflict and Separate Traffic:
This process provides traffic de-confliction and separation. Despite measures taken
in planning phases, strategic de-confliction will be required in high complexity
operations to ensure that the task of separation provision remains manageable.
 Apply Safety Nets:
This process will enable to assist the Sector Controller and Pilots with the
appropriate safety nets (ACAS or ground-based STCA), in order to be able to carry
out the appropriate actions in case of collision risk.
All three above processes will impact the RBT – at the air or ground initiative - according to
the separation mode and the look-ahead time. Actions for queue management purposes will
result in new or updated constraints on the arrival time at a merging point – i.e. a CTA (refer
to §4.1). Actions to provide separation should generally result in closed loop trajectory
changes from the original RBT (to ensure downstream trajectory integrity) or if unavoidable, a
tactical open loop instruction. In all cases, the direct consequence will be a revised RBT.
Collision avoidance, when a risk is detected, will result in tactical open loops.
In all cases, it is anticipated that the look-ahead time associated with these processes may
not be sufficient to enable CDM to take place – i.e. in the general case, RBT revisions there
will be immediate ones. On the other hand, the results of previously conducted CDM
processes could be taken into account – in particular as an input to Arrival Queue
Management (refer to ConOps [17], §F4.2.4.2: “The AMAN will work with shared data that
enables the automatic consideration of the output of UDPP.” ).
Page 16 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Figure 5: Overall ATM Process Model in the Execution Phase
The branch of the ATM process model concerned with the present document has been further
detailed in a trajectory oriented perspective. Processes have therefore been classified
according to their potential impact on the trajectories:
 Processes potentially having a direct impact on trajectories: these processes
encompass the orderly organization of the traffic flows and their safe and efficient
execution – these two kinds of processes being typically performed at different time
horizons (within the execution phase scope);
 Processes not having a direct impact on trajectories 3 , such as the transfer of control
and the monitoring.
Processes which do not have a direct impact on the trajectories will not be detailed in the
main sections of this document, but will appear as use cases in the relevant annex (§B).
The inputs and outputs of the high level processes depicted on the previous figure are shortly
described in the next sections.
3
On the other hand, trajectory sharing is an essential enabler to simplification of transfer of control.
Page 17 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
The lowest level of decomposition of the ATM Processes to be covered by the
Arrival/Departure DOD is shown in the following table, along with the related SESAR ConOps
references:
Code 4
A.3.2.3
A.3.2.3.1
A.3.2.3.2
A.3.2.2 5
ATM Process
Description
SESAR ConOps
References
Arrival Queue
Management
Arrival queue management is meant
as the process establishing and
maintaining a safe, orderly and
efficient flow of traffic down to the
runway (or runways). This flow of
traffic is established on the basis of
the Reference Business Trajectories
(RBT), and is targeted to comply with
the destination airport requirements in
terms of runway throughput.
Optimise Arrival
Queue
This process deals with all the
activities related to creation of a final
optimised arrival sequence, ensuring
an arrival sequence that is going to
be executed by the Executive
Controllers.
F.2.3, F.2.6.4,|
F.2.6.5.4, F.3.1, F.3.2,
F.3.3, F.4.2.1, F.4.2.2,
F.4.2.3, F.4.2.4,
F.4.2.4.2, F.4.2.4.3,
F.5.1.4, F.5.1.4.1,
F.5.1.4.3, F.5.1.4.4,
F.5.1.4.5, F.6.2
Implement Arrival
Queue
This process aims to include all the
activities of the Executive Controller
to execute the arrival sequence in the
TMA, including giving the appropriate
instructions to the flight crew. The last
activity covered by this process is the
handover from the Executive
Controller to the Tower Runway
Controller.
F.2.3, F.2.6.4,
F.2.6.5.4, F.2.7, F.3.1,
F.3.2, F.3.3, F.4.2.1,
F.4.2.2, F.4.2.3,
F.4.2.4, F.4.2.4.2,
F.4.2.4.3, F.5.1.4,
F.5.1.4.1, F.5.1.4.3,
F.5.1.4.4, F.5.1.4.5,
F.6.2
F.4.2.4.1
Terminal Area Exit
Queue Management
This process deals with all the
activities related to the creation and
execution of an optimised Terminal
Area Exit queue - i.e. the sequencing
at Terminal Area Exit points of flows
coming from one or several airports in
the Terminal Area.
F.2.3, F.2.6.4,
F.2.6.5.4, F.2.7, F.3.1,
F.3.2, F.3.3, F.4.2.1,
F.4.2.2, F.4.2.3,
F.4.2.4, F.4.2.4.2,
F.4.2.4.3, F.5.1.4,
F.5.1.4.1, F.5.1.4.3,
F.5.1.4.4, F.5.1.4.5,
F.6.2
4
This refers to the code associated to the process in the ATM Process Model SADT diagrams.
Note: The existence of this process is being debated. The corresponding section in this document is
not developed, but only kept as a placeholder.
5
Page 18 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Code 4
A.3.3.2
ATM Process
De-Conflict and
Separate Traffic in
High Complexity
Arrival and
Departure
Operations
Description
This process aims at maintaining a
6
safe separation between aircraft .
Part of the separation provision is
ensured by other processes (e.g.
queue management in the execution
phase for “same flow” arrivals, and
other processes striving to provide a
level of strategic de-confliction even
before the execution phase), and this
process is consequently concerned
with steps coming afterwards:
SESAR ConOps
References
F.2.3.3, F.2.4, F.2.4.1,
F.2.6.5.4, F.3.3, F.4,
F.4.3, F.6, F.6.2.1,|
F.6.2.3
• Segregation of traffic flows (arrivals
versus departures, but also amongst
different arrival flows and amongst
different departure flows);
• Medium term or tactical conflict
detection and resolution.
This process aims to detect conflicts
in Terminal Area, monitor trajectory
conformance and provide conflict
resolution advisory(ies) - possibly
involving a change in the separation
mode - taking into account the
context and ATM capability level(s) of
involved aircraft.
A.3.3.2.1
Detect and Resolve
conflicts
F.2.3.3, F.4, F.4.3,
F.6, F.6.2
It is expected that strategic deconfliction and complexity
management will not solve all
separation aspects, i.e. all routes and
profiles in the Terminal Area cannot
be separated from each other in all
cases.
Detect/Solve conflicts is triggered
either through continuous traffic
monitoring, or by specific events such
as an RBT update or revision, a pilot
or Airspace User request - or the fact
that it is time to clear for the next
portion of the RBT. Depending on the
separator, it could be ground-based
or airborne-based.
6
For all conflict detection in TMA the precision of the avionics/or ground-based must be good enough to
predict a standard separation between flights in a specific point – e.g. 30s » 2NM, standard separation
in TMA could be 5NM or 3NM.
Page 19 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Code 4
ATM Process
Description
This process aims to implement the
most appropriate separation solution
in Terminal Area, according to the
output of the "Detect and Solve
Conflict" process.
SESAR ConOps
References
F.2.4, F.2.4.1,
F.2.6.5.4, F.3.3, F.4,
F.6, F.6.2, F.6.2.3
This process can be ground-based or
airborne-based depending on the
separation mode.
A.3.3.2.2
Implement
Separation solution
It may involve:
• authorisation of the next segment(s)
of the RBT, through RBT clearances
(including TMR when applicable), if
no conflict has been detected;
• an RBT revision process;
• or (if it cannot be avoided) a timecritical action using closed loop
instructions.
A.3.3.2
A.3.4.2
De-Conflict and
Separate Traffic in
Medium/Low
Complexity Arrival
and Departure
Operations
Apply Safety Nets in
the TMA Airspace
See above the description for the
"De-Conflict and Separate Traffic in
High Complexity Arrival and
Departure Operations" process.
This process will allow the Controller
to be informed with the actions of the
embarked ACAS system or groundbased safety nets (i.e. Short term
Conflict Alert, Area Proximity Warning
and Minimum Safe Altitude Warning)
to be able to monitor and carry out
with the appropriate actions (i.e. an
open-loop tactical instruction given to
the Flight Crew) in order to prevent
collision with other aircraft or terrain.
F.2.3.3, F.2.4, F.2.4.1,
F.3.5, F.4, F.4.3, F.6,
F.6.2.2,| F.6.2.3
F.7
Note: There is no discontinuity in the
service provided by on-board safety
net equipment while flying through
different volumes of airspace - e.g.
from an en-route to a TMA sector.
Table 1: ATM Model low-level processes addressed
2.3 SESAR CONCEPT ADDRESSED IN THE DOCUMENT
The following leading characteristics of the SESAR 2020 concept are especially addressed in
the present document:
 Trajectory-based operations (refer to §2.3.1 below);
 Airspace Capacity (refer to §2.3.3 below);
 New Separation Modes (refer to §2.3.4 below);
 Information managed on a system-wide basis and air-ground datalink (refer to
§2.3.6 below);
Page 20 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 Another key characteristic of the SESAR concept, namely Queue Management, is
also described below (refer to §2.3.5 ).
2.3.1 Trajectory-based operations
The SESAR trajectory-based approach reconfirms three important characteristics of
trajectories while also enhancing their significance and effects as a result of much improved
data quality:
 The Business/Mission Trajectory: Expressing the Specific Needs of Airspace Users:
The trajectories represent the business/mission intentions of the airspace users. By
safeguarding the integrity of the trajectories and minimising changes the concept
ensures the best outcome for all users. Airlines, business, General Aviation and the
military all have ‘business’ or ‘mission’ intentions, even if the terminology is different
and their specific trajectories have different characteristics. The trajectory is always
associated with all the other data needed to describe the flight. (ConOps)
Through a collaborative layered planning system and prior to agreeing to facilitate a
requested trajectory Network Management assesses the impact of the additional flight on the
overall traffic situation, ensuring that the proposed flight is within the capacity limitations of the
System and where an imbalance is identified proposes solutions whereby the flight can be
accommodated, e.g. issues a TTO for which the user determines how best to meet, if
necessary, in coordination with the Network Manager using NOPLA services. This
collaborative process results in minimising the increase of complexity through the optimum
use of ATM assets.
 Trajectory Ownership:
The airspace user owns the Business Trajectory, thus in normal circumstances the
users have primary responsibility over their operation. In circumstances where
(including
those
arising
from
infrastructural
and
environmental
restrictions/regulations) need to be applied, the resolution that achieves the best
business/mission outcome within these constraints is left to the individual user.
Typically constraints will be generated/released and taken into account by various
ATM partners through CDM processes. The owners’ prerogatives do not affect ATC
or Pilot tactical decision processes (for example separation provision, weather
avoidance etc). (ConOps)
 4D trajectories:
The business/mission trajectories will be described as well as executed with the .
precision in all 4 dimensions. The trajectories will be shared and updated from the
source(s) best suited to the prevailing operational circumstances and capabilities
and the sources include the aircraft systems, flight operational control systems and
ANSP trajectory predictors... The ability to generate trajectories in the ATM system
from flight plan data will be retained for those flights that are unable to comply with
SESAR trajectory management requirements. (ConOps)
2.3.2 Trajectory lifecycle
During flight execution, ground-based system tools will continuously probe the next portion of
the RBT to be flown to verify that there will be no infringement on the separation minima
applicable to the next portion of the RBT to be flown. .At any given time, the RBT can be
decomposed into 3 main components/states (Figure 6):
 Executed: already flown portion of the RBT - i.e. prior to the current position of the
aircraft;
Authorised: portion of the RBT for which controller tools have verified remains free of conflict as
described above - i.e. a conflict-free segment ahead of the current aircraft position.
Page 21 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Agreed 7 : the remaining portion of the RBT.
Authorised RBT
Agreed RBT
Executed RBT
(Executed trajectory)
Figure 6: Life cycle of the Reference Business Trajectory
In addition, either the Flight Crew or the Service Provider may initiate a proposed RBT
revision which contains changes to the current, agreed trajectory for the purposes of, for
example, separation management, complexity management (from the Service Provider), or
for weather avoidance from the Flight Crew. Only when these changes are issued in the form
of a clearance or instruction by the Service Provider and accepted by the Flight Crew will the
proposed trajectory become the new agreed RBT and be instantiated within the FMS. There
can only be one valid RBT.
Trajectory Management will be supported via:
 Enhanced monitoring, conflict detection and resolution tools fed by the shared
airborne predictions;
 Separation provision will be aided by enhanced aircraft capabilities (level and/or
time constraints, initial 8 ASAS applications).
RBT updates processed onboard will be broadcast via the SWIM architecture when their
evolution is larger than thresholds specified in the Trajectory Management Requirements
(TMR). This will ensure consistency between air and ground views of the RBT, while avoiding
saturation of the SWIM network with unnecessary information exchanges. TMR thresholds
can be defined in a flexible manner in accordance with needs, which in turn depend for
example on such aspects as the traffic complexity.
7
It is the initial state, immediately after RBT has been initially agreed, and also after proposals for
revisions have been accepted.
8
Initial ASAS applications meant here as e.g. Airborne Spacing (ASPA) and Airborne Separation
(ASEP) applications, but excluding e.g. Self Separation (SSEP).
Page 22 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Trajectory modifications can be triggered due to a variety of reasons, resulting in various
mechanisms. The table below provides some examples:
Category
RBT revision with CDM (i.e.
RBT owner is involved prior
to the "authorisation to
proceed")
Closed-loop instruction
(immediate RBT revision,
without CDM)
Open-loop instruction
(immediate revision,
without CDM)
Typical time horizon 9
Possible Causes

Update in Airspace User constraints

Crew/airborne system request

Conflict detection – MTCD

Possibly: Arrival queue
optimization 10

Crew request - e.g. weather;

Arrival queue optimisation;

Strategic de-confliction;

Separation provision.

Crew request - e.g. traffic, weather;

Separation provision;

Collision avoidance - e.g. STCA or
MSAW alarm.
15 - 30 minutes ahead.
5-20 minutes ahead.
Less than 5 minutes ahead.
Table 2: Classification of Trajectory Modifications
In the context mentioned above, trajectory modifications resulting from an action of the crew
following an ACAS resolution advisory are deliberately not taken into account as they are the
only ones which do not necessarily follow an instruction given by the ground ATC authority.
2.3.3 Airspace Capacity
According to the SESAR ConOps §E.2.6.2.2.4, “it is an assumption that the SESAR concept
will create sufficient terminal area and en-route capacity so that it is no longer a constraint in
normal operations. This capacity is a function of controller task load. To meet the capacity
goal there must therefore be a substantial reduction in controller task load per flight if this is to
be realised while meeting the safety, environmental and economic goals.
Controller task load is generated from two different sources: there is the routine task load
associated with managing a flight through a sector (such as co-ordination in and out, routine
communications, data management) and the tactical task load associated with separation
provision (conflict/interaction detection, situation monitoring and conflict resolution).”
The ConOps further states in §E.2.6.2.2.5 “To address the controller task load issue, without
incurring a significant increase in ANSP costs, three lines of action are included in the
concept:
 Automation for the routine controller task load supported by better methods of data
input and improved data management.
 Automation support to conflict/interaction detection and situation monitoring and
conflict resolution.
 A significant reduction in the need for controller tactical intervention:
9
These are not definitive, absolute, figures; they are provided only for illustration.
Would also cover FOC request (or more generally UDPP), as far as execution phase is concerned
(typically an airline giving a wished priority list within a bunch of flights scheduled to arrive at about the
same time in hub operations).
10
Page 23 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
o
Reduce the number of potential conflicts using a range of de-confliction
methods;
o
Redistribute tactical intervention tasks to the pilots: Cooperative separation or
Self-separation”.
Finally according to ConOps §D.7 “The SESAR concept will increase capacity by reducing the
requirement for tactical intervention. In highly congested areas dominated by climbing and
descending traffic flows this will be achieved by deploying route structures that provide a
greater degree of strategic de-confliction and procedures that capitalise on the greater
accuracy of aircraft navigation.”
2.3.4 Separation Modes
The following separation modes are envisioned for high complexity terminal area operations
(ConOps [17], §F.6.2.3):
 Surveillance (conventional, ANSP is the separator);
 Precision Trajectory 2D and Precision Trajectory 3D Clearances (new ANSP modes
– see below – the separator is the ANSP);
 ASAS Airborne Separation (new airborne mode – the separator is the aircrew).
Notes:
 The ConOps mentions “ASAS Cooperative separation” which would actually refer to
“Airborne Separation” as per P.O. ASAS [16]. Airborne spacing (e.g. sequencing &
merging) can also be used as a tool which transfers the workload to the cockpit for
establishing and maintaining a specified distance or time interval between
successive flights but leaves the responsibility for the separation with the ANSP;
 In Terminal Airspace, the pre-determined separator is the ANSP according to the
ConOps.
The selection of separation mode will depend on the environment and on the aircraft
capability.
Pre-defined Routes in Performance Based Navigation Operations
2D and 3D routes are envisioned as pre-defined and published routes which require defined
precision navigation. Aircraft established upon these assigned routes would be considered
geographically separated from aircraft navigating upon adjacent precision trajectory routes.
From the TMA perspective they may be issued as part of either the arrival or the departure
route and as such are similar in function to the current SIDs and STARs; albeit with much
greater detail. Because they constrain the performance of the aircraft it is possible that they
may only be issued during periods of medium to heavy traffic loads as a capacity
enhancement tool: allowing aircraft to follow a user-preferred trajectory at all other times.[29]
The routes are geographically separated from adjacent routes: meaning that an aircraft
established on one route is always considered separated from one operating on an adjacent
route. In a TMA environment this type of structured route will permit climb and descent with
respect to other aircraft and without the requirement for issuing intermediate
clearances/instructions. Once the adjacent flights have reported established, the ATCO is
free to focus on other flight interactions without the requirement for continuous monitoring.
Continuous Descent Approaches (CDA) are one example of a PTC and are potentially
beneficial from both an operating efficiency and from an environmental perspective[31].
2D Routes: 2D routes (with lateral containment) may be defined for a given airspace volume.
Depending on the airspace and operational environment 2D routes may be fixed or temporary
in nature (c.f. Flex tracks or NAT tracks).
Page 24 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
The allocation of 2D routes is a de-confliction method providing vertical and longitudinal
separation from adjacent routes. Separation between flights operating on the same route (if
required) is obtained through.
3D Routes: 3D routes (with lateral and vertical containment) may be defined for a given
airspace volume. The use of such routes is dependant upon the airspace, the traffic
complexity, the ATM Service level of the service provider and the ATM Capability level of the
aircraft concerned. 3D routes may be fixed or temporary in nature with the route selected and
agreed in the RBT.
The separation mode using 3D is applicable to ATM CL-3/4 aircraft. They are applied
dynamically to best match the aircraft’s performance capability and “contain” the vertical
evolution of the trajectory. This has the potential to provide significant gains in airspace
capacity and will be supported by automation tools to assess trajectories and propose 3D
separation provision solutions under time critical conditions.
The allocation of 3D routes is a powerful de-confliction method since adjacent routes are
geographically separated. Longitudinal separation between flights on the same route is
provided by ATC to complement the 3D route. This may be achieved through surveillance
based separation and/or the dynamic application of constraints or delegated to flights that can
utilise appropriate ASAS capabilities.”
2D/3D route allocation, as well as the use of precision trajectory clearances in either two or
three dimensions (PTC-2D/3D), is expected to provide strategic de-confliction between
arrivals and departures whilst enabling continuous climb/descent and be major contributors
to increased capacity in high density TMAs. The present DOD will consider:
 PTC-2D and possibly PTC-3D on pre-defined routes for arrivals and departures –
typically for high density operations in terminal airspace;
 PTC-2D on User-preferred trajectories (dynamic routes) for arrivals and departures
– typically for medium/low density operations in terminal airspace;
 PTC-3D on user-preferred routes 11 corresponds to a proposed Operational
Improvement with an initial operational date of 2025, and is thus excluded from the
scope of this document.
2.3.5 Queue Management
'All phases of DCB prepare the traffic for arrival in the TMA, but in particular Dynamic DCB
(dDCB) will reduce the requirement for queuing for both arrivals and departures. By
maintaining a balanced flow of aircraft that does not exceed the runway capacity excessive
queuing will become a procedure that is imposed primarily to cope with a sudden and
unexpected change in airport capacity (e.g. loss of an approach system or a sudden change
in wind requiring a runway change). At some airports where airspace configuration does not
permit linear patterns, limited queuing will remain to ensure that there are no breaks in the
arrival flow thus ensuring optimised runway throughput. Similarly, for departure, taxi out and
departure will be completed with a minimum of delay since the numbers will be controlled
through the dDCB process to ensure that there are no surges beyond the capability of the
runway to cope. [27],[33]
For the arrival queue management, constraints are thus referred to as runway metering
constraints in the document. They consist mainly in the targeted landing rate, which may be
complemented by time intervals blocked for departing flights movements depending on the
airport configuration.
11
'In this case User Preferred Route refers to those segments of the RBT that are not on a Pre-defined
Route
Page 25 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
As far as outbound flights are concerned, and thanks to the en-route airspace capacity
increase foreseen in the SESAR concept, constraints on terminal airspace exit due to limited
downstream en-route airspace throughput should no longer exist. However, complexity
issues, e.g. related to crossing flows originating from several airports within the terminal
airspace, might still create some constraints.
Note: this point seems to be somewhat controversial within the SESAR community and it has
to be clarified whether those issues would still exist and/or be solved in the execution phase
thanks to dynamic DCB. Thus, at this stage of the development of the ATM Process Model
and of the present DOD, the document kept a “Terminal Area Exit Queue” Process and
associated section below as placeholders, pending further clarification.
2.3.6 Information sharing and Air-Ground Datalink
The SESAR concept is underpinned by System Wide Information Management, in which the
ATM network – including the aircraft - is a series of nodes providing and/or consuming
information. This covers all information of potential interest to ATM, including, but not limited
to: 4D Trajectories, Surveillance data, Aeronautical Information (all types), Meteorological
data, results of CDM processes.
Information sharing enables among others the reduction of uncertainty, air-ground
consistency, in turn resulting in better performance for support tools.
2.3.7 Related SESAR Operational Improvements (OIs)
A table listing the SESAR Operational Improvements steps that are relevant to this DOD, and
the associated processes is provided in Annex C (§C).
2.3.8 Related SESAR Performance Requirements
SESAR has defined several Key Performance Areas (KPAs) and Performance Requirements
(objectives, indicators and targets) which are defining system wide effectiveness and thus, for
most of them, affect the various components of the future 2020 ATM target system. The KPAs
and performance requirements are shown here with the description of how the scope of
arrival and departure operations addresses them (refer to [23] and [24]
Key Performance Area (KPA)
Safety
Definition and Description 12
This KPA addresses the risk, the prevention and the occurrence
and mitigation of air traffic accidents.
The number of ATM induced accidents and serious or risk bearing
incidents do not have to increase and, where possible, have to
decrease, as a result of the introduction of SESAR concepts. In
order to maintain a constant accident rate the overall safety level
would have to increase an improvement factor of x3 in order to
meet the safety objective of traffic levels in 2020.
The overall safety level should reach an improvement factor 3 in
order to meet the safety objective [SAF1.OBJ1.IND1].
12
SESAR Performance Requirements (as defined by SESAR D2 [23]) are presented in this column;
Performance objectives in black, performance targets in blue, along with the corresponding performance
indicator ID in brackets.
Page 26 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Key Performance Area (KPA)
Definition and Description 12
Security
This KPA covers a subset of aviation security. It addresses the
risk, the prevention, the occurrence and mitigation of unlawful
interference with flight operations of civil aircraft and other critical
performance aspects of the ATM System. This includes attempts
to use aircraft as weapons and to degrade air transport services.
Unlawful interference can occur via direct interference with aircraft,
or indirectly through interference with ATM service provision (e.g.
via attacks compromising the integrity of ATM data or services).
ATM security also includes the prevention of unauthorised access
to and disclosure of ATM information.
Security is not directly addressed by Arrival/Departure operations
(and, more generally speaking, not addressed by Episode 3);
however improvements made will not degrade the current
situation.
Environmental Sustainability
This KPA addresses the role of ATM in the management and
control of environmental impacts. The aims are to reduce adverse
environmental impacts (average per flight); to ensure that air traffic
related environmental considerations are respected; and, that as
far as possible new environmentally driven non-optimal operations
and constraints are avoided or optimised as far as possible. This
focus on environment must take place within a wider
“sustainability” scope that takes account of socio-economic effects
and the synergies and trade-offs between different sustainability
impacts.
Environmental benefits are expected to be delivered thanks to
shorter path lengths and less holding from better predictability,
decrease in fuel consumption, with 4D trajectories based on
optimum fuel usage, CDAs and optimum 3D routes.
Cost Effectiveness
This KPA addresses the cost of gate-to-gate ATM in relation to the
volume of air traffic that is managed.
Better planned, more efficient trajectories and use of aircraft
capabilities should provide cost-effectiveness. The cost of
equipping resulting better adherence to plans and preferred
business trajectories.
Halve the direct European gate-to-gate ATM costs through
progressive reduction [CEF1.OBJ1.IND1].
Capacity
This KPA addresses the ability of the ATM System to cope with air
traffic demand (in number and distribution through time and
space).
Increased by reduced controller task load per flight (thanks to
strategic de-confliction, and enhanced support tools). Also better
aircraft trajectory containment.
The European ATM system will need to be able to handle 70%
more flights per year than in 2005 [CAP3.OBJ1.IND1].
The daily number of IFR flights that can be accommodated in
Europe should be 49 000 flights [CAP3.OBJ1.IND3].
Page 27 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Key Performance Area (KPA)
Definition and Description 12
This KPA addresses the actually flown 4D trajectories of aircraft in
relationship to their Shared Business Trajectory.
Better adherence to the BT due to more efficient ATM.
More than 95% of flights will have normal flight duration 13
[EFF1.OBJ2.IND1].
Efficiency
The average flight duration extension of flights with extended flight
duration 14 will not exceed 10 minutes [EFF1.OBJ2.IND2].
Less than 5% of flights will suffer additional fuel consumption of
more than 2.5% [EFF2.OBJ1.IND1].
For flights suffering additional fuel consumption of more than 2.5%,
the average additional fuel consumption will not exceed 5%
[EFF2.OBJ1.IND2].
Flexibility
This KPA addresses the ability of the ATM System and airports to
respond to “sudden” changes in demand and capacity: rapid
changes in traffic patterns, last minute notifications or cancellations
of flights, changes to the Reference Business Trajectory10 (predeparture changes as well as in-flight changes, with or without
diversion), late aircraft substitutions, sudden airport capacity
changes, late airspace segregation requests, weather, crisis
situations, etc.
Flexibility to modify operator preferences as well as more flexible
approach to operational decision making are characteristics of the
NOP as implemented by ATC. Utilising, for example, dynamic
processes, capacity headroom.
At least 95% (European-wide annual average) of the (valid)
requests for full RBT redefinition of scheduled and non-scheduled
flights will be accommodated, albeit possibly with a time penalty
[FLX1.OBJ2.IND1].
At least 98% (European-wide annual average) of the VFR-IFR
change requests will be accommodated without penalties
[FLX2.OBJ2.IND1].
13
Normal flight duration is defined as actual block-to-block time less than 3 minutes longer than the
block-to-block time of the SBT.
14
Extended flight duration is defined as actual block-to-block time more than 3 minutes longer than the
block-to-block time of the SBT.
Page 28 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Key Performance Area (KPA)
Definition and Description 12
This KPA addresses the ability of the ATM System to ensure a
reliable and consistent level of 4D trajectory performance. In other
words: across many flights, the ability to control the variability of
the deviation between the actually flown 4D trajectories of aircraft
in relationship to the Reference Business Trajectory.
Predictability is enhanced for all users based on common
information sharing. Using, for example dynamic processes,
capacity headroom.
Predictability
The variability of flight duration (off-block to on-block) shall have a
15
coefficient of variation of maximum 0.015 [PRD1.OBJ2.IND1].
Reduce, at a regional level, diversion rates by 50% compared to
2010 baseline [PRD2.OBJ1.IND2].
Reduce, at a regional level, total disruption delay by 50%
compared to 2010 baseline [PRD2.OBJ1.IND3].
Reduce, at a regional level, reactionary delay by 50% compared to
2010 baseline [PRD3.OBJ1.IND1].
Participation
Interoperability
At the level of overall ATM performance, the KPA “Participation by
the ATM Community” covers quite a diversity of objectives and
involvement levels.
Participation by the ATM community can be considered in the
following dimensions:
a) Separate involvement issues and approaches apply for each of
the ATM lifecycle phases: planning, development, deployment,
operation and evaluation/improvement of the system.
b) “Meeting the (sometimes conflicting) expectations of the
community” implies that participation and involvement should be
explicitly pursued for each of the other Key Performance Areas.
c) Involvement should be monitored and managed per segment of
the ATM community.
Fundamental to the concept is the participation of the user
community on the decision making process through collaborative
planning. The new concept includes trajectories pre-defined and
owned by the airspace users. At a sector level the controllers
perform separation functions in cognisance of the user
preferences.
At the level of overall ATM performance, the main purpose of
interoperability KPA is to facilitate homogeneous and nondiscriminatory global and regional traffic flows. Applying global
standards and uniform principles, and ensuring the technical and
operational interoperability of aircraft and ATM Systems are to be
seen as supporting (enabling) objectives for the above main
objective.
All aircraft with the minimum equipage requirements will be
integrated into the terminal airspace. There will be no segregation,
although there may be prioritisation for higher capability aircraft.
Provide a seamless service to the user at all times
[IOP3.OBJ2.IND1].
Operate on the basis of uniformity throughout Europe
[IOP3.OBJ3.IND1].
15
This means that for a “100 minute flight duration” more than 95% flights arrives on-time.
Page 29 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Key Performance Area (KPA)
Access & Equity
Definition and Description 12
Access: This Focus Area covers the segregation issue: whether or
not access rights to airspace and airports are solely based on the
class of airspace user. In other words, is shared use by classes of
airspace user allowed, and how much advance notice of this
accessibility is provided?
Equity: The scope covers the subject of equitable access, i.e. the
prioritisation issue: under shared use conditions (i.e. access is
possible), to what extent is access priority based on the equipage
of airspace user. Dissatisfaction of airspace users regarding
equitable treatment arises when there are no prioritisation rules, or
the rules are not applied correctly.
Access to specific Terminal Airspace resources for airspace users
should be provided in an equitable, transparent and more efficient
manner.
This should be irrespective of variations in equipage above the
minimum level required and enabled by the SESAR CDM/UDPP
processes in the NOP.
Table 3: Key Performance Areas addressed
Page 30 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
3 CURRENT
CHANGES
OPERATING
METHOD
AND
MAIN
In terminal airspace, the goal to enable a safe, expeditious and orderly flow of air traffic
translates into five main tasks for the controller (not mentioning management of over flights):
 Separate arrivals from other arrivals;
 Separate arrivals from departures;
 Integrate arrivals into an efficient landing sequence to each runway;
 Separate “same route” departures;
 Separate departures from different runways whose trajectories intersect.
Currently, aircraft approaching one or more aerodrome(s) from surrounding sectors typically
follow a number of Standard Arrival Routes (STARs) providing the transition from the en-route
structure, and are progressively merged into a single flow for each active landing runway.
Conversely, aircraft departing from one or more aerodrome(s) are allocated Standard
Instrument Departures (SIDs) so as to join the en-route network according to their planned
destination.
The separation of arrivals and departures is generally facilitated by strategic segregation of
flows through airspace structure. However, the extent of this strategic de-confliction is often
limited by space, aircraft navigation capabilities, and complexity in terminal airspace re-design
(including the growing influence of environmental constraints on the time needed to deploy
new routes in those areas). In high traffic situations, together with a generally tactical traffic
management, this results in high complexity and high workload. The separation of arrivals
from other arrivals is often closely related to the building and maintenance of the sequence.
These tasks are performed in current day operations through the use of open-loop vectoring:
air traffic controllers typically issuing heading, speed and level instructions with the number of
instructions issued increasing as the approach control phase progresses in order to achieve
the optimised approach and separation for each flight in the final sequence. Departures are
also subject to a number of tactical open loop instructions, such as intermediate level
clearances, to maintain separation from other interacting flows in the Terminal Area. Although
this method is highly flexible it results in high workload both for flight crews and controllers,
and requires an intensive use of R/T.
Open-loop vectors disrupt crew situational awareness of the future flight path, and disable
some FMS functions (such as maintaining the Distance to Go). Using open-loop vectors also
prevents the controllers from being supported by a variety of ground systems: ground-based
tools involving trajectory prediction (e.g. conflict detection tools, AMAN) cannot be updated
appropriately since the time when aircraft will resume their normal navigation is not known.
16
In some European TMAs, RNAV procedures have been defined to replace open-loop
vectors. In such procedures ideally the principle is to keep aircraft on their route; the
procedures are designed so that the trajectory can be stretched or shortened through predefined/fixed route modifications if this is needed for the merging of arrival flows. However,
these procedures are generally fully applied only under low to medium traffic loads; according
to EUROCONTROL Guidance Material for the Design of Terminal Procedures for Area
Navigation (refer to [15] §10.2.2): “The main disadvantage of RNAV procedures is that they
reduce the flexibility that radar vectoring affords the controller and experience has shown that,
without the help of a very advanced arrival manager, controllers tend to revert to radar
vectoring during the peak periods”. Further, according to EUROCONTROL TMA2010+
Business Case for an Arrival Manager with PRNAV in Terminal Airspace Operations (AMAN-
16
See also [13].
Page 31 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
P), “In recent times, Precision Area Navigation (P-RNAV) applications in the terminal area
have not realised all the anticipated benefits of reduced cost, improved environment and
increased capacity. PRNAV procedures can be integrated with conventional procedures and
can bring environmental, financial and operational benefits in light and medium traffic loads.
However, at high traffic loads, the controllers inevitably revert to radar vectoring in order to
maximise capacity.”
Formally, an “efficient landing sequence” refers both to an optimised sequence order - e.g.
according to wake turbulence constraints, and to the achievement of appropriate spacing
between flights, both aspects contributing to maintaining the throughput as close as possible
to the available runway capacity. This involves:
 Planning the sequence - i.e. allocate landing runway if needed, and define
sequence order;
 Building the sequence, including order and appropriate spacing;
 Maintaining the sequence, including optimisation of inter-aircraft spacing.
In some European TMAs, basic Arrival Management tools (AMAN) have been deployed to
support these functions. However, due to uncertainty on aircraft trajectories, these tools are
only offering a limited anticipation, with an operational horizon in the range of 35 minutes
before touchdown.
Holding patterns may be used for arrivals, subject to local practices, either when the TMA
capacity is exceeded at peak times, or more systematically to maintain the pressure at the
runway.
Regarding departures, limited sharing of information, including the departure sequence,
makes it difficult for the controllers to apply regulations in an efficient manner; control actions
often tend to cope with these uncertainties by adding sometimes unnecessary margins or
taking protective actions. Differences in aircraft performance in the climbing phase also
contribute to adding uncertainty on trajectories and complexity. Currently, there are no
separation standards which rely upon aircraft performance characteristics. Before the full
benefits of Trajectory Management can be realised it will be necessary to develop, validate
and implement performance based separation standards.
3.1 ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL REMAIN
Most of today’s practices remain. In particular, the following aspects of today's operations are
assumed to remain unchanged:
 Separation Minima – surveillance separation minima will remain unchanged
(usually 5-3 Nm in terminal airspace), and minima imposed by wake turbulence. For
the latter situation, separation minima could however be slightly modified thanks to a
better knowledge of the actual wake turbulence and will be expressed in terms of
time rather than distance, (link to Airport DOD E1 [8]), which will have an impact on
the (distance) separation and assist in maintaining capacity under strong headwinds
conditions;
 It will still be possible to use conventional separation modes although there will be
less tactical intervention – open loop trajectory changes being avoided as far as
possible.
3.2 ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL CHANGE
The key SESAR improvements in 2020 will impact operations in the way that:
 Improved aircraft navigation capabilities will enable optimised trajectories, increased
strategic de-confliction and terminal airspace capacity increase; this will in turn
reduce the need for tactical interventions;
Page 32 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 Controllers and Pilots will subscribe to the same goal of achieving the RBT;
 Better planning and use of the NOP will result in more regular flows entering the
terminal area;
 Trajectory sharing will reduce uncertainties in ground tools and air-ground
inconsistencies, and enable ground tools improvements, e.g. increase the time
horizon of queue management tools; It is expected that controller tools for conflict
detection and resolution, and for queue management, will also be more advanced,
accurate and reliable;
 R/T will be increasingly replaced by Data link, which will support trajectory
management - with voice communications available as a back up or in some timecritical situations;
 The scope for temporary allocation of spacing and separation tasks to the cockpit
will be increased through the introduction of ASAS (ASPA or ASEP).
3.3 ASPECTS OF TODAY'S OPERATIONS THAT WILL DISAPPEAR
Extensive use of open loop radar vectoring, as well as use of R/T for routine routing
instructions or to make ATC aware of certain flight parameters, air-ground inconsistencies in
the trajectory predictions, limited anticipation/planning, are expected to disappear.
Page 33 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4 PROPOSED OPERATING PRINCIPLES
As already mentioned in section 2.2 above, the ATM model offers, for the execution phase, a
processes split which is globally layered according to different time horizons. Three levels
have thus been identified, in decreasing order of strategic applicability:
 Queue management;
 Separation provision;
 Safety Nets.
These processes are detailed in the following sub-sections. They may all have an impact on
the RBT, in particular trigger RBT revisions, with or without CDM taking place – as described
in §2.3.2 above.
Some additional tasks, such as transfer of control and communications, will appear in the
description of scenarios (refer to §A) and use cases (refer to §B).
4.1 ARRIVAL QUEUE MANAGEMENT (A3.2.3)
Figure 7: Manage Arrival Queue low-level processes
4.1.1 Scope and Objectives
Arrival queue management is meant as the process establishing and maintaining a safe,
orderly and efficient flow of traffic down to the runway (or runways). This flow of traffic is
established on the basis of the Reference Business Trajectories (RBT), and is targeted to
comply with the destination airport requirements in terms of runway throughput.
Page 34 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
In the SESAR concept, anticipated planning is expected to take account of limited resources
(especially runway usage and terminal airspace capacity constraints) well in advance, and
queue management will in effect start in the planning phase, which will generally result in a
more regular flow entering the terminal area. Arrival queue management is consequently
influenced by preceding processes, and dependent on the quality of overall optimisation of
the processes within the context of DCB (refer to E4 DOD [10]). A robust DCB process,
based upon realistic capacity figures, that targets both the timing and the volume of aircraft is
considered as an essential enabler.(ref:[34] [33])With airports operating at or near capacity
there is will be little spare capacity available to absorb extra flights once the established quota
is reached. From an efficiency viewpoint, there will remain a need to refine arrival queue
management in the execution phase, especially at busy airports/during busy hours - e.g.
taking into account actual landing rates, wake turbulence categories. It is currently not
possible to strategically plan the interlacing of trajectories to the degree required to ensure
separation whilst meeting capacity objectives nor is this capability foreseen within the SESAR
timeframe of 2025. In a complex TMA achieving individual flight efficiency will be subordinate
to the objective of achieving maximum capacity commensurate with flight safety.
The objective is met through metering, then sequencing the incoming flights. The metering
process actually begins with long-term airport traffic planning processes and is further refined
as Aircraft Operators publish the SBT for each flight. During flight operations the sequencing
process is simplified through the use of several merge points facilitating a gradual
development of the queue rather than having all traffic converging on a single fix. In the
SESAR concept, the result of the sequencing and metering target for a given flight is
communicated to the air crew through a Controlled Time of Arrival, which then becomes a
constraint for the RBT, inducing a RBT revision. The updated RBT is ultimately made
available to all concerned parties via the SWIM infrastructure.
4.1.2 Assumptions
Arrival flows will be progressively integrated using one or more merging points as part of the
dynamic or pre-defined routes (refer to ConOps [17], §F.3.3.1).
In addition to the data sharing mentioned in the previous section, this process assumes that a
seamless coordination is in place with the adjacent en-route control authorities, as a
significant part of the possible adjustments required to meet the assigned time constraints
resulting from queue management will occur in their airspaces. This is consistent with SESAR
concept's assumption that, by 2020, the European airspace will be a single continuum.
4.1.3 Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints
The benefits resulting from the arrival queue management are threefold:
 A more efficient use of the limited runway capacity;
 An improved management of limited terminal airspace capacity;
 An improvement of the arrival times predictability;
 More efficient airborne delay management minimising the additional fuel burn
caused by airborne holding.
The objective of the process is to perform a global optimisation for the arrival flow. In this
specific context of high complexity terminal area, the arrival queue management may mean
that not all flights can follow their ideal profile of a continuous descent approach with idle
thrust.
Page 35 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
In 2020, the adherence to a CTA (see below) is expected to be realized with the RTA
function of airborne equipment 17 or, where a CTA cannot be met solely by speed adjustment,
through lateral and/or vertical changes to the trajectory. These aspects are discussed below
(refer to §s 4.1.4.2).
4.1.4 Overview of Operating Method
The ‘Manage Traffic Queues’ process is mainly fed by the planning process - i.e. RBTs and
Activated Resources and Planned Queues, and any needed “adaptations” due to event
management made to adjust the traffic demand and resources during the execution phase i.e. DCB Solution and Resources Configuration.
The major constraint is the runway acceptance rate: a finite number determined by wake
turbulence standards, approach speed, and runway occupancy times. DCB ensures that the
number of approved flights does not exceed this number 18 .
The TTA is part of the RBT that has been agreed and is set by the arrival management
process. In the context of high complexity terminal airspace the initial actual sequence will be
set by the ETA (that will be within the agreed TTA tolerance) estimated by the aircraft FMS
which is then revised as more refined information is received as described in Operational
Improvement steps IS-0302 and AO-0301 to optimise the queue with respect to wake vortex
requirements. Controllers and Flight Crew implement the optimised arrival queue determined
by the AMAN through revisions to the RBT.
Two main activities can thus be highlighted:
 The arrival queue optimisation – which is based on the knowledge of current and
planned trajectories, on user preferences 19 and on environment constraints - e .g.
runway utilization constraints;
 The implementation of the optimised arrival queue – which potentially impacts the
planned trajectories.
4.1.4.1 Optimise Arrival Queue (A.3.2.3.1)
The process Manage Arrival Queue (A3.2.3.) is split into two sub-processes, Optimise Arrival
Queue (A3.2.3.1) described here and Implement Arrival Queue (A3.2.3.2.2) described in part
in the following section and in part in the Runway Management DOD E1.
The main drivers for the process are the following:


Inputs:
o
Activated Plan (RBTs + Activated Resources);
o
Optimised Departure Sequence (including advisories);
o
Resource Configuration;
o
Planned Terminal Area Exit Sequence.
Constraints/Triggers:
o
Runway Metering Constraints;
17
In the transition period, or for aircraft which may not have this capability in 2020, the same objective
can still be reached, but this will impose additional workload to the aircrew.
18
The TMA Expert Group determined that the value of achieving the identified sequence was
subordinate to getting the initial DCB numbers correct.[36]
19
User preferences may for example define priority in a bunch of (same airline) flights arriving on an
airline hub airport.
Page 36 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5


o
AU Originated RBT Revision Request;
o
AU Preferences and Constraints;
o
Revised RBTs.
Human Actors:
o
APOC Staff;
o
AOC Staff;
o
Planning Controller;
o
Sub-regional Network Manager;
o
Complexity Manager;
o
Tower Ground Controller;
o
Flight Crew;
o
Executive Controller.
Outputs:
o
ANSP Originated RBT Revision Request;
o
Optimised Arrival Sequence (including Advisories).
The arrival queue optimisation will be performed with the support of an advanced Arrival
Management Tool (AMAN). Such a tool will include functions such as:
 Factoring-in of Approach/aerodrome constraints;
 Runway allocation;
 Sequencing and metering to the runway or the merging point(s), taking into account
the constraints as well as additional information enabling to refine the sequence
optimisation (such as wake turbulence categories);
 Computation and display of advisories: the main considered advisory will be a time
advisory - i.e. the planned sequence time (derived from the target time received
from the aircraft) over a merging point. Although other advisories, such as speed
and route advisories, can be considered;
 Computation and display of time-based constraints – i.e. Controlled Times Over
(CTO) (e.g. waypoints) and Controlled Times of Arrival (CTA) (e.g. Initial Approach
Fix).
There are several regulatory areas under review where change will have a direct impact upon
the overall capacity of an airport. It is possible that provided the behaviour of vortices
generated by heavy aircraft can be predicted, the required distance between aircraft types
may be reduced. These investigations are described in Operational Improvement steps AO0301, AO-0303 and AO-0304. Since vortex behaviour is dynamic, such improvements will be a
part of the tactical aspects of queue management.
Individual aircraft capabilities will still vary in 2020. Current production aircraft will be
considered as legacy aircraft and will not necessarily have been retrofitted to achieve the
degree of navigational accuracy of later models. The issuance of a time constraint may be
effective with the first flight in sequence but subsequent aircraft may require a speed
reduction to ensure separation whilst still achieving the desired sequence. It is important
therefore not to consider a single tool as the complete solution. .
Constraints on intermediate metering points, if any, take account of the limited airspace
capacity. Some optimisation parameters - such as runway allocation strategy - should then
be set so as to comply with the outcome of the Dynamic DCB and Complexity management
Page 37 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
processes (refer to E4 DOD [10]). Any runway constraints will be established in real time by
(or in coordination with) Tower Controllers.
CTAs will be computed, and allocated to flights after they enter the AMAN active advisory
horizon 20 when needed according to traffic demand. According to the ConOps [17], the CTA
should ideally be set at a merging point as close as possible to the runway. However, in the
case when multiple merging points are used (especially under high complexity conditions),
either successive issuance of CTAs on intermediate merging points, then on the final merging
point - or use of multiple time constraints would be required. Current aircraft systems are only
capable of meeting a single time constraint. Also, once merged with the fixed route structure
and potentially, in trail to other aircraft, the relative position of the aircraft with respect to those
it follows is of greater importance than is achieving a second time. The remainder of the RBT
that follows the merging should contain the necessary agreed speeds, and possibly descent
rates required to maintain separation provided the flight’s progress is monitored.
Conformance monitoring tools and the TMR established for updating the RBT will assist the
controller in performing this task. The most efficient use of CTA is still under investigation.[33]
The ConOps [17] mentions TTA allocation for the purpose of delaying aircraft taking off from
those close airports (within the AMAN horizon) while still on the ground. This “TTA
mechanism” also ensures that uncertainty on trajectory predictions for those late appearing
flights will be reduced to the extent feasible and contributes to enlarging the AMAN horizon as
well. Naturally, for those flights that are delayed on the ground, the TTA will also book a place
in the arrival sequence - not as accurately as a CTA though (ConOps [17] §F.4.2.2) -, so as to
effectively stabilise the sequence.
There is no technical reason prohibiting the AMAN from receiving the ETA 21 as soon as it is
available regardless of the timing with respect the “active advisory horizon.” Indeed, it is
anticipated that a significant degree of coordination and cooperation procedures will be
developed between the en-route and TMA sectors[36] in support of queue management
efficiencies as described in Operational Improvement: TS-0305 Except in exceptional
circumstances, e.g.. s sudden reduction in capacity theses initial times would not be issued to
the flights but would serve to enhance planning by the Complexity Manager and enable
AMAN to identify natural intervals between now known trajectories and would also assist in
allocating the TTA for those flights that depart within the horizon: improving the efficiency of
the procedure. Until the TTAs are actually issued as a constraint (CTA) AMAN would
continue to shuffle the order, optimising the sequence for the best results for all aircraft.
When required a flight for which priority is required, e.g. emergency or medical flight
(medevac), will be allocated the time as indicated by its ETA and other flights re-ordered
around it. Without this pre-loading there is the risk that late appearing flights would be
automatically prioritised in the sequence. Formally this would reflect the existence of an
AMAN “operational horizon” in addition to the “active advisory horizon” – and/or the need for
certain continuity between the “planned queues” produced by short term planning processes
(refer to M2 DOD [7]) and the AMAN.[31]
It is expected that the first issuance of a CTA for Queue management purposes will concern
the en-route phase of flights (except those flights departing from close airports). In addition,
although the CTA should remain quite stable thanks to improvements brought by SESAR,
there may be further updates until the flight reaches the final merging point, when it’s still in
en-route or in the terminal area.
20
The AMAN active advisory horizon is defined in [13].
ETA- Estimated Time of Arrival. For IFR flights, the time at which it is estimated that the aircraft will
arrive over that designated point, defined by reference to navigation aids, from which it is intended that
an instrument approach procedure will be commenced, or, if no navigation aid is associated with the
aerodrome: ICAO DOC 4444.
21
Page 38 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
In summary where an arrival management process is in place for busy airports, the flow and
sequencing of traffic into the airport will be managed through the times agreed or available in
the RBT as follows:

Initially a space in the arrival queue is reserved through agreeing a TTA which is a
planning time and hence has some flexibility, typically +/- 2 minutes;

The arrival management process monitors the ETA (also available in the RBT at this
time) and revises RBT (including the TTA) if required for air or ground purposes;

At the active advisory horizon the RBT is revised with a CTA (replacing the TTA and
ETA) that is implemented as an RTA in the FMS, this gives the exact place in the
sequence and smoothens the arrivals on to final approach.
The Use Cases identified for “Optimise Arrival Queue” are listed below:
Use Cases
Optimise Arrival Queue with the support of an AMAN
Optimise Arrival queue with the support of aircraft capabilities, i.e. RTA
and/or ASAS Spacing
Cancel Holding
Clear and Execute Holding Procedure
Notification to establish Holding Procedure
Provide DTG or RNAV Waypoint.
Table 4: Use Cases for Optimise Arrival Queue
4.1.4.2 Implement Arrival Queue in TMA (A.3.2.3.2.1)
The process Implement Arrival Queue (A3.2.3.2) is split into two sub-processes, Implement
Arrival Queue in TMA (A3.2.3.2.1) described here and Implement Arrival Queue at the Airport
(A3.2.3.2.2) described in the Runway Management DOD E1.
The main drivers for the process are the following:

Inputs:
o

Constraints/Triggers:
o


Optimised Arrival Sequence (including Advisories).
Pilot Request.
Human Actors:
o
Tower Runway Controller;
o
Flight Crew;
o
Executive Controller.
Outputs:
o
Traffic Sequence (Traffic to be Separated);
o
Tactical Instruction (Open Loop);
o
Trajectory Change Instruction (Closed Loop).
To achieve the desired throughput at capacity constrained airports DCB regulates the number
of flights permitted per unit of time (the unit dependent upon the system in place). The
balancing process starts with the bi-annual slot conference. The slot time provides each flight
Page 39 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
with a target time of arrival (a window) around which the AO plans the Business Trajectory for
the flight. Each SBT that is published enhances the balancing process to reduce the potential
for a prolonged over-demand scenario.
In the tactical phase, the Arrival Manager Tool (AMAN) will receive the ETA for each inbound
flight and commence sequencing based initially upon the ETA as received from the RBT. The
output of the AMAN will consist of an arrival sequence of flights, compatible with the runway
constraints (refer to Airport E1 DOD [8]), and composed initially of the TTA allocated to each
flight in the sequence. The TTA could be set at the Final Approach Fix but at major airports is
generally an intermediate merging point. Regardless of the fix position, the TTA issued is
predicated upon the sequence on final: thus a slower aircraft may be issued a time at the
intermediate fix that is in advance of the aircraft which it will eventually follow.
Runway usage optimisation is the prime factor in the TTA’s computation. Nevertheless this
process, as seen from the explanation above, is based upon the ETA output of .the RBTs – or
at least takes into account as far as possible the outcome of CDM processes having already
taken place in upstream phases 22 , attempting to modify only speed when adjustments are
required, but possibly also resulting in lateral or vertical revisions in the RBT. This is not
explicitly detailed in the ConOps and may need some refined operational description and
validation. In that case, a new, and ‘as conflict free as possible’ RBT with lateral/vertical
changes may have to be dynamically allocated, if needed with the support of a ground tool
based on - e.g. Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD), and incorporating the knowledge of
the CTA.
The arrival queue will be periodically optimised within AMAN. This optimisation may be
triggered by modifications affecting an incoming flight’s RBT (particularly for short-haul flights
which may not yet have taken off when they appear in the arrival sequence), and by RBT
revision requests received from Air Crew or by updates to the ETA received from the
incoming flights as the airborne systems take into account wind, unexpected track deviations
from weather and any other factors that can affect the progress of a flight.[30]
At some point inside the AMAN horizon the Traffic/Complexity Manager will determine that
the sequence is optimal for the current conditions and initiate change of TTA to a CTA.
Besides the issuance of CTAs, the implementation of the optimised arrival queue implies a
continuous monitoring activity and may require RBT revisions. Conversely, RBT revision
requests received from air crew or RBT updates as a result of crossing a TMR boundary may
still require an action from the controller in order to fine tune the sequence. Operational
Improvement step IS-0305 explains TMR principles and the anticipated benefits to all aspects
of Queue Management.
It is anticipated that the implementation of the arrival queue according to the optimisation
advisories will consist in a mix of:
 Issuance of a CTA for metering purposes;
 Changes to the RBT to establish and maintain separation;
 Reduction and revision of current separation standards;
 Addition of Time Based Separation standards;
 Application of conventional separation techniques; or
 Use of ASAS sequencing and merging for separation purpose between “same
queue” suitably equipped aircraft where an advantage is to be gained for either the
individual flight or the System as a whole.
22
[17] §F4.2.4.2: “The AMAN will work with shared data that enables the automatic consideration of the
output of UDPP.”
Page 40 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
It is expected that the look ahead time will be insufficient to perform CDM and thus queue
management constraints will result in immediate RBT revisions at the ground initiative.
For a given flight, the CTA will be communicated by ground controller (possibly in an en-route
sector) to the air crew, generally via data link. .The Roles and Responsibilities may need to be
further clarified regarding issuance of the CTA.
More accurate navigational capability will permit reductions in lateral spacing for dependent
parallel approaches: resulting in higher capacity values at affected airports.
The ability to predict the behaviour of wake vortices may also lead to a system in which the
required distance between two aircraft for vortex purposes becomes dependent upon current
meteorological conditions. These aspects and others are under evaluation.
Time based separation standards in the approach area will result in a more consistent
capacity that does not fluctuate with winds. Higher winds currently result in lower capacity
simply because the time required to travel the current separation standard (i.e. 3 or 5 NM)
varies directly with the speed of the wind on final. Time based standards will also enhance the
use of tools including AMAN and ASAS. [34]
Time Based Separation (TBS) will also provide a direct link between AMAN tools and final
approach spacing which can then be coupled with the aircraft type/weight category. To
enable this, tactical changes to the proposed sequence provided by the AMAN tools result in
an update to the tool. Apart from the requirement to develop new procedures, TBS
operations will require:

a radar display tool showing the appropriate minimum time requirement between a
specific radar pair’s respective weight categories displayed as a minimum interval to
the preceding aircraft;

an advisory tool displaying the optimum turn-on point to centre line according to
aircraft weight categories and minimum separation time to be applied;

a non-conformance advisory tool that provides an alert whenever there is a risk that
minimum separation in time will be infringed;

an Arrival Management Tool (AMAN) that provides the time interval required between
successive arrivals adjusted for weight turbulence minima and that is paired logically
with other TBS tools.
A fixed route environment is foreseen only as a means of resolving traffic complexity in high
density airspace. At other times aircraft will be following their agreed trajectories. Thus,
when approaching a capacity constrained airport there will be a point at which aircraft will
have to transition to a fixed route structure. The point at which each flight joins the fixed route
structure may be coincidental with the point for which the CTA is issued since it is from this
point onwards that the queue is established. For converging flights optimum spacing cannot
be ensured solely by the application of a CTA and it is expected that, from a certain distance
to the merge point, a suitable separation technique will be used - e.g. ASAS sequencing and
merging, either in the context of airborne separation or airborne spacing - refer to P.O. ASAS
[16], or using more conventional ground-based separation and spacing techniques as stated
above.
Thus, in the targeted environment, ASAS applications, detailed in Operational Improvement
steps TS-0105, TS-0107 and CM-0702 are foreseen as one enabler, contributing towards the
process of maintaining a safe arrival flow of traffic. This will particularly be the case in the
following situations:
 Around points where distinct arrival flows are merged – there, sequencing and
merging applications will help in achieving the optimal arrival sequence;
 Along segments supporting merged traffic (mainly the final approach segment for
arrivals, and initial flight segments for departures), where ASAS will help maintaining
Page 41 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
the required time-based spacing; reducing the requirement for monitoring and
intervention by the Service Provider.
Air-ground datalink is expected to be used to uplink the CTA and ASAS instructions as
described in Operational Improvement step AUO-0303
Note: the ConOps mentions a CTA with +/- 5 seconds accuracy; this accuracy is only at the
metering point (with time limits in the form of a cone prior reaching the metering point) and
may be needed in particular for the smooth transition from absolute to relative spacing
(subject to upcoming validation). However the CTA cannot be used for the purpose of spacing
same flow aircraft to a merge point in high traffic density, because there is no guarantee of
separation along the intermediate segments especially with ATM service level 4 23 . Currently,
Service Providers use speed assignment coupled with monitoring to establish and maintain
separation between closely spaced aircraft. Future concepts may see the introduction of
ASAS ASPA/S&M (Operational Improvement step: TS-0105) used at some distance from the
merge point for spacing purposes to provide the required accuracy but for the near-term, the
CTA will be employed in conjunction with more traditional separation techniques.
In summary, efficient queue management in the SESAR context will require a DCB process
that delivers manageable traffic loads at useable intervals. The intent is to enable aircraft to
follow an efficient trajectory, including a Continuous Descent Approach (CDA Operational
Improvement step: AOM-0702) in moderate traffic loads 24 and, in all cases, provides for as few
interim levels as is safely practical without affecting the capacity. The following reinforces the
requirement for planning and an adherence to the concept of Trajectory Management during
all phases of flight.
The early phase of creating the arrival sequences will provide a planned conflict-free routing
up to the threshold and will provide Time-Based Separation (TBS) at the threshold, introduced
through Operational Improvement step AO-0302, ensuring the required wake-vortex separation.
Different kinds of planning information can be made available:

An established ground-based 4D planning will be the starting point to plan a conflict-free
routing for each flight. The stability of planning may increase if planning of “staggered”
approaches over specific RNAV tracks can be supported. A received down-linked
RTA/CTA might have been applicable to confirm a consolidated planning between air and
ground.

Ground-based 4D planning is considered mandatory in order to preserve integrity and
consistency of data. Down-linked trajectory information can be used by ATC to adopt or to
find a best match with a 3D profile and up-linked trajectories can be used by the pilot to
adopt a 3D constrained descending trajectory.

A down-linked RTA by the aircraft and an up-linked CTA constraint by ATC can be used
to update the planning on the ground and in the air by speed adjustments. 25
23
ATM service level 5 with 4D contracts may provide the necessary containment for this – but it may
have a cost.
24
Simulation results confirmed that A-CDA should produce benefits in terms of flight efficiency but not in
capacity.[35]
25
E3-WP5-D5.3.4-01 FTS Experimental Plan on Multi-Airport TMA operations in the core area of
Europe
Page 42 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
The Use Cases identified for “Implement Arrival Queue in TMA” are listed below:
Use Cases
Meter Arrival flows with CTA
Merge Arrival Flows using ASPA S&M
Merge Arrival Flows using ASEP S&M
Clear the next portion of the RBT with additional constraints in the TMA
Issue and execute prescribed CDA in TMA
Table 5: Use Cases for Implement Arrival Queue in TMA
4.1.5 Enablers
As mentioned in the previous sections, the following SESAR environment elements act as
enablers to support the arrival queue management process:
 the SWIM infrastructure, allowing a more efficient data sharing amongst the
concerned parties - e.g. airlines, handling agents, airport authorities, ANSPs;
 the RBTs, continuously providing up to date information on current situation and
future intentions.
The aircraft equipment, especially in terms of RTA capability has also been mentioned. The
sharing of trajectory data via datalink can also be considered as a general background
enabler. The capability to upload efficiently a CTA concerns most particularly the arrival
queue management.
Finally, as explicitly stated above, an enhanced AMAN tool can probably be considered as the
single most important enabler.
4.1.6 Transition issues
Controllers will be impacted by the new procedures. As part of the implementation there will
be the requirement for specific training for all operational personal (including flight crew) that
operate in the EACAC area and has global applicability. This must be accomplished through
ICAO to ensure a common viewpoint
Page 43 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4.2 TERMINAL AREA EXIT QUEUE MANAGEMENT (A.3.2.2)
Figure 8: Manage Terminal Area Exit Queue low-level processes
4.2.1.1 Optimise Terminal Exit Queue (A.3.2.2.1)
The process Manage Terminal Area Exit Queue (A3.2.2) is split into two sub-processes,
Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue (A3.2.2.1) described here and Implement Terminal Area
Exit Queue (A3.2.2.2) described in the next section.
The main drivers for the process are the following:



Inputs:
o
Activated Plan (RBT + Activated Resources);
o
Optimised Departure Sequence (including advisories);
o
Resource Configuration;
o
Planned Arrival Sequence;
o
Trajectory Change Instruction (Closed Loops).
Constraints/Triggers:
o
AU Originated RBT Revision Request;
o
Revised RBTs
o
AU Preferences and Constraints.
Human Actors:
o
AOC Staff;
Page 44 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5

o
Planning Controller;
o
Flight Crew;
o
Sub-Regional Network Manager;
o
Executive Controller.
Outputs:
o
Optimised Terminal Area Exit Sequence (including Advisories).
The Use Case foreseen for “Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue” is listed below:
Use Case
Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue
Table 6: Use Case for Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue
4.2.1.2 Implement Terminal Exit Queue (A.3.2.2.2)
The main drivers for the process are the following:

Inputs:
o

Constraints/Triggers:
o


Optimised Terminal Area Exit Sequence (including Advisories).
Pilot Request.
Human Actors:
o
Planning Controller;
o
Flight Crew;
o
Sub-Regional Network Manager;
o
Executive Controller.
Outputs:
o
Traffic Sequence (Traffic to be Separated);
o
Tactical Instruction (Open Loop);
o
Tactical Change Instruction (Closed Loop).
The Use Cases foreseen for “Implement Terminal Area Exit Queue” are listed below:
Use Cases
Meter departures using PTC 2D or 3D
Meter departures using CTO
Separate same flow or merging departures using ASAS/airborne
spacing
Separate same flow or merging departures using ASAS/airborne
separation
Table 7: Use Cases for Implement Terminal Area Exit Queue
4.2.1.3 Manage Terminal Area Exit Queue Principles
The concept of terminal area exit queue management, related to departures from
close/multiple airports, is still under development. However, it is currently assumed that, for
most situations:
Page 45 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 Capacity increase in the en-route airspace will be such that it will no longer impose
constraints on upstream terminal areas;
 Unavoidable flow crossings and/or merging in terminal areas surrounding several
major airports is a complexity issue which can be solved with such means as: DCB,
queue management and executive de-confliction (refer also to e.g. DOD E4,
Dynamic DCB).
 Integration of AMAN and DMAN tools will facilitate the planning required to meld the
outbound planning for one airport with the inbound planning for an adjacent facility
as planned for in Operational Improvement step TS-0304.
Segregation of airspace dedicated to either arrival or departure operations results in reduced
coordination but climb and descent profiles must be developed which permit the two traffic
flows to cross through each other. These will hinge primarily on the ability of aircraft to
conform to specified performance criteria and are described in Operational Improvement
steps AOM-0703, AOM-0705.
Two scenarios have been developed to further explain the processes envisioned. The first,
OS-27 [28] proposes one method by which an alternative, conflict free departure profile might
be assigned whilst the second, OS-28 [29] details the route selection process.
On the other hand, in circumstances where those assumptions would not be valid, specific
solutions may have to be developed (refer to e.g. SESAR OI ref. TS-0302, and ConOps [17]
§F.4.2.4.1).
In any case the need will remain to ensure separation between aircraft from the same
departure flows, which is described in the following section.
Page 46 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4.3 DE-CONFLICT AND SEPARATE TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS (A.3.3.2)
IN
ARRIVAL
AND
DEPARTURE
Figure 9: De-Conflict & Separate Traffic in Terminal Area low-level processes
4.3.1 Scope and Objectives
Strategic de-confliction and complexity management processes occurring before the flights
enter terminal airspace will not solve all separation aspects. In particular, all routes and
profiles cannot be separated from each other in all cases, and there is no guarantee that
conflict free routes can be allocated in advance. Separation assurance is an on-going process
and there will still be the requirement to act on individual trajectories within terminal airspace.
For the most part these actions will be in the form of RBT revisions at the Separator’s
initiative. It is most unlikely that it will involve a CDM process given the time horizon involved.
This process aims at maintaining a safe separation between aircraft. Within the TMA,
separation between traffic flows, e.g. arrivals and departures, is assured through geographic
separation. Provided that a departing aircraft remains established upon the assigned
departure route it cannot conflict with an arriving aircraft providing again that the arriving flight
remains on the assigned route. The primary separation workload is between converging
arrivals as one group and same direction departures. Part of the separation provision is
ensured by other processes (e.g. queue management in the execution phase, and other
processes striving to provide a level of strategic de-confliction even before the execution
phase), and this process is consequently concerned with tactical aspects. [28]
This process can be triggered by:
Page 47 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 The constant monitoring of the situation and/or detection of a trajectory deviation by
ground tools;
 The sharing of an RBT update (includes cases where deviation is more or less
significant and can reflect the fact that a particular constraint cannot be met
anymore 26 );
 A pilot request or Airspace User-initiated RBT revision;
 The need to act on the 2D profile for queue management purposes;
 Change in ground speed.
Without such a route structure each departing aircraft must be individually separated not only
from sequential departures but from each inbound flight as well: requiring significant
coordination. Separation between arrivals and departures becomes based upon individual
trajectory management.
4.3.2 Assumptions
For all terminal areas it is expected that route structures will be systematically deployed (refer
to ConOps [17] §D.5, §D.7 and §F.3.3). When traffic conditions permit and there are no
conflicting trajectories aircraft will be able to depart and to arrive on a more direct route.
4.3.3 Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints
When compared to today's situation, the main benefit expected from running this process at
SESAR's 2020 horizon is a performance improvement, which can be expressed in the
following terms:
 Increased terminal area airspace capacity – using more stringent trajectory
management (containment) requirements frees airspace for additional trajectories;
 Increased flight efficiency, reducing the negative impact on environment, by clearing
trajectories closer to optimum flight profiles;
 Reduced controller task load per flight thanks to enhanced support tools (e.g. a
complexity monitoring tool), and to the adoption of practices less demanding than
current radar vectoring based operations reducing the need for last-minute tactical
interventions.
For the controller, the need to take into account heterogeneous aircraft equipment levels is a
serious issue (workload increase, safety concerns, associated e.g. to the need to get/decode
information from HMI relating to aircraft equipment level). This will be further developed in
section 4.3.6 below. The change in controlling methods allows reducing the workload, as
stated above, but it raises issues of maintaining skills whilst developing new ones.
Controllers and pilots also face some issues about communications respective to routes.
Whilst data link would appear to be the most efficient means of communicating when working
in a trajectory management environment, the time element within a TMA may be very short
and does not allow for a delay in reacting to instructions. Because of this, R/T will remain an
essential communication mode but earlier planning, made possible by more advanced
planning tools, coupled with new skills in trajectory management may enable greater use of
data link and reduce the requirement to resort to R/T to resolve short-notice potential losses
in separation.
Conflict management and separation provision should disrupt the optimal profile as little as
possible - e.g. continuous descent approach and continuous climb departure.
26
An explicit message might be required in such cases.
Page 48 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4.3.4 Overview of Operating Method
As mentioned above, route structures are expected to be required in the high complexity
terminal areas. This partly ensures a segregation of the different flows, and conversely links
the segregation of flows to the route structure, which, in turns, is necessarily linked to the area
layout (e.g. number of airports and runways concerned, their respective locations,
environmental constraints) and to the traffic pattern (distribution of traffic flows).
Consequently, some of the operating methods discussed in this paragraph may also depend
on the specific situation of a given terminal area - e.g. existence of multiple merge points or of
a single one.
4.3.4.1 Detect and Solve Conflicts in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.1)
The process De-conflict and Separate Traffic in Terminal Area (A3.3.2) is split into two subprocesses, Detect & Solve Conflict in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.1) described here and Implement
Separation in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.2) described in the next section.
The main drivers for the process are the following:




Inputs:
o
Activated Plan (RBT + Activated Resources);
o
Traffic Sequence (Traffic to be Separated).
Constraints/Triggers:
o
AU Originated RBT Revision Request;
o
Pilot Request;
o
Updated RBTs;
o
Revised RBTs.
Human Actors:
o
Planning Controller;
o
Executive Controller;
o
Flight Crew.
Outputs:
o
Detected Conflict + Advisories.
In the context studied, the route structure cannot by itself ensure that traffic will always be free
of conflicts. Part of the workload required to maintain a safe flow of traffic will thus still consist
in detecting potential conflicts as a result of a trajectory change approval. It is anticipated that
the controller will be assisted by dedicated tools to perform this task, and that more advanced
versions of these tools (similar to conflict detection tool, with a time horizon to be validated)
may also propose resolution advisories when conflicts are detected. Current surveillance
techniques will be augmented by additional tools to verify that the aircraft’s current trajectory
remains conflict free. In addition to regular (periodic) checks, the tools will be systematically
triggered by RBT updates, Flight Crew or Airspace User Requests, and will allow probing of
any trajectory clearance before it is shared with an aircraft. The development and
deployment of these tools is outlined in Operational Improvement steps CM-0203, CM-0204, CM28
27
0401, CM-0404,, CM-0405 and CM-0406.
This process will also be triggered when determining
that separation will be maintained prior to allocating a 2D or 3D route; providing strategic de-
27
Simulation results indicated that new tools bring the potential for significant capacity gains but
changes to the route structure may not have a similar effect if implemented without the tools.[35]
28
Recommendations regarding tool functionality were made by the TMA Expert Group [36].
Page 49 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
confliction prior to the clearance of the next portion of the RBT. As is apparent from the
number of improvement steps, improvements will be on-going throughout the SESAR
timeframe with each step leading to the next and dependent upon technology improvements
before implementation.
Where time permits, the output of this process will consist of RBT revisions issued as
clearances and instructions. When response is essential to the safety of the manoeuvre, R/T
will be used: still remaining consistent with the RBT and closed-loop whenever possible but
always returning the aircraft to the RBT. Such clearances may also consider different
separation modes according to airspace, and to aircraft capability level.
The Use Cases identified for “Detect and Solve Conflicts” are listed below:
Use Cases
Transfer of Control and/or Air-Ground communications
Handle pilot requests in the Terminal Area
Handle Military Flight
Detect Conflict in the Terminal Area using MTCD
Detect Conflict in the Terminal Area using TCT
Resolve conflict in the Terminal Area using MTCD/R
Table 8: Use Cases for Detect and Solve Conflicts in Terminal Area
4.3.4.2 Implement Separation in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.2)
The process De-conflict and Separate Traffic in Terminal Area (A3.3.2) is split into two subprocesses, Detect & Solve Conflict in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.1) described in the previous
section and Implement Separation in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.2) described here.
The main drivers for the process are the following:




Inputs:
o
Detected Conflict + Advisories;
o
Traffic Sequence (Traffic to be Separated).
Constraints/Triggers:
o
Updated RBTs;
o
Revised RBTs.
Human Actors:
o
Executive Controller;
o
Flight Crew.
Outputs:
o
ANSP Originated RBT Revision Request;
o
Trajectory Change Instruction (Closed Loop);
o
Tactical Instruction (Open Loop);
o
RBT clearances & TMR.
The definition of the route structure within the terminal area must also be consistent with the
capability level of the majority of aircraft serving the concerned airport(s). At the 2020 horizon,
2D or 3D departure and arrival routes are expected to be available with the supporting
separation standards; the selection dependent upon aircraft capability. These routing
Page 50 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
improvements are outlined in Operational Improvement steps [The aircraft
determines the dimensions of the “tube” (refer to definition of tubes below as
[17]) within which the trajectory remains contained. All aircraft will nevertheless
adequate level of performance at that time, and routes with less stringent
requirements will still have to be assigned 29 [33]
performance
per ConOps
not have the
containment
The ConOps [17], section F3.3, states that: “High-complexity terminal operations will feature
separated 3D departure routes and 3D arrival routes the vertical component of which may be
defined by either: 30
 Level windows for crossing points (3D ‘cones’ with min/max levels) enabling aircraft
to fly closer to optimum trajectories when traffic complexity allows, or
 Vertical containment with aircraft being required to fly within ‘tubes’ to focus on the
runway and airspace throughput when traffic complexity is high.
These two options may be combined. The size of the level windows and where ‘cones’
transition to ‘tubes’ will be location and/or time dependant.”
This will be even more frequent for the transition period. Such routes may consist of:
 3D routes with level windows at specific points, resulting in "cones" (as defined
above);
 2D routes with level constraints and RNAV components (path segments);
 Conventional SID/STAR – this will be maintained to accommodate aircraft with
legacy equipment.
These improvements are the result of several successive Operational Improvement steps
including CM-0601, CM-0602, CM-0603.
It is anticipated that the separation solutions will mainly induce:
 Ground-initiated lateral RBT revisions, involving e.g. PTC-2D clearances;
 And/or ground-initiated vertical RBT revisions, involving e.g. PTC-3D clearances
(possibly interrupting continuous descents or continuous climb profiles);
 Or the use of ASAS Separation applications, where the implementation of the
separation solution for a particular conflict is delegated to the flight crew.
The Use Cases identified for “Implement Separation in Terminal Area” are listed below:
Use Cases
Clear the next portion of the RBT using PTC-2D or PTC-3D in the Terminal
Area
Solve a conflict by 2D or vertical RBT revisions at the ground initiative
Solve a Conflict by Revising the RBT at ground initiative in the Terminal
Area – using PTC-2D or PTC-3D
Solve a conflict by using ASAS Airborne Separation in the Terminal Area
Solve a Conflict by using Conventional Separation modes in the Terminal
Area
29
[17] states that “conventional SID/STAR will be used for non-capable aircraft”, which may assume that
there will be enough space within the terminal area to separate such conventional routes from those
used by better equipped aircraft.
30
Simulation results indicated that the introduction of 3D routings without corresponding tools might
actually lead to a degradation in safety but with tools show potential for a significant capacity gain[35]
Page 51 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Separate same flow or merging departures
Handle Airspace User Originated RBT revision request in the Terminal
Area
Issue Open Loop Clearances and Resume own Navigation
Table 9: Use Cases for Implement Separation in Terminal Area
4.3.5 Enablers
The major enablers identified for this process are as follows:
 Aircraft equipment – more specifically:
o
the capability to fly the cleared trajectory portion in conformance with the
navigation requirements appropriate to 3D PTC issued;
o
the capability to update the RBT in accordance with the TMR;
o
ADS-B (out and in functions), in support of ASAS S&M application.
 Advanced automation support for controllers: tools for conflict detection and
resolution, featuring “what if” scenario probes, and conformance monitoring tools. It
includes MTCD and Tactical Controller Tool (TCT), as well as ground conformance
monitoring tools, ASAS systems and deviation alerting tools in the cockpit;
 SWIM enabling sharing of planned and actual trajectory data, thus resulting in
improved input data for the tools mentioned above.
4.3.6 Transition issues
All aircraft will not simultaneously gain the capability level required to benefit from the most
advanced applications. In the transition period to 2020, and probably for some time thereafter,
controllers will thus have to deal with traffic composed of heterogeneous aircraft equipments.
They will therefore have to take into account the capability of each aircraft for trajectory
clearances. This potentially raises both workload and safety issues.
4.3.7 Transition to Low-Density Procedures
During periods of low complexity a pre-defined route structure in the TMA is recommended to
ensure ATC has the necessary predictability. However, these pre-defined routes could be
more direct than those defined during high complexity situations, with fewer restrictions, and
taking into account the flight trajectories within the neighbouring En-Route sectors. 31 These
low complexity routes could be part of a user-preferred trajectory as users can choose their
preferred TMA entry/exit point and conditions, as well as the procedure to use. The selection
of the procedure will be done well in advance (Ref: [33]) so that it can be published in the
RBT and therefore TMA Controllers are aware of how traffic will behave within their area of
responsibility.
31
Data storage capacity of the aircraft systems may limit the number of route choices since they must
be publicized in advance and not ad hoc selections.[35]
Page 52 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
4.4 APPLY SAFETY NETS (A.3.4.2)
Figure 10: Apply Safety Nets low-level processes
4.4.1 Scope and Objectives
This process is relative to both ground and air based safety nets, which will still constitute an
important component of the ATM system in the SESAR 2020 concept. It is designed to alert
controllers and pilots of collision risks which would have remained undetected by other
(longer term) processes. It encompasses STCA and ACAS systems (risk of collision with
other traffic) and MSAW and GPWS types of systems (to prevent terrain collision). The
general Operational Improvement step requirements are outlined in CM-0801.
The scope of this document is restricted to the TMA environment, Area Proximity Warning
systems (APW) may also be considered here.
Because of the short term nature of the risk, it is anticipated that the action taken when an
alert is notified in the event a safety critical situation is detected, will generally result in a
trajectory change through an open-loop tactical instruction.
4.4.2 Assumptions
It is assumed that data sharing via the SWIM infrastructure will allow all parties concerned to
gain a better knowledge of collision alerts and resolution advisories - e.g. the sector controller
could be automatically informed of an ACAS RA thus maintaining or regaining situational
awareness (Operational Improvement step CM-0802. However, in order to avoid common
mode failures, it is also assumed that the safety critical systems (e.g. ACAS and STCA) will
remain as independent as possible - i.e. avoiding, whenever possible, to have these systems
Page 53 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
sharing their input data. Parallel developments in aircraft equipage is explained in
Operational Improvement step CM-0803
4.4.3 Expected Benefits, Issues and Constraints
The improved data sharing envisioned in SESAR concept should bring the following benefits:
 Better data accuracy, which helps reducing the false alerts rate and enhancing the
tools efficiency, which in turns increases the users' confidence;
 Better understanding for both air and ground operator of the counterpart's
behaviour.
The variety of flight profiles and precision trajectories foreseen for 2020 in a high complexity
terminal area will need to be considered to adapt the logics of STCA and ACAS if necessary.
It is indeed essential for such tools to maintain a low level of false alerts rate, and current
logics might not be adequate: Operational improvement CM-0807
Because of the short term notice and the stress situation associated to alerts generated by
collision avoidance tools, the resolution advisories need to be unambiguous and
straightforward.
The increase in traffic planned for in SESAR will result in more aircraft operating
simultaneously with reduced separation between them. Ground-based Safety nets will be
required to distinguish between aircraft that are self-separating (ASAS); for which the ground
system is not responsible and all others (Operational Improvement steps CM-0804 and CM0805). Safety net development will have to including the linking of Ground and Air-based
technology whilst maintaining the independence of both as outlined in CM-0806
4.4.4 Overview of Operating Method
4.4.4.1 Apply Safety Nets in the TMA Airspace (A3.4.2)
The process De-conflict and Separate Traffic in Terminal Area (A3.3.2) is split into two subprocesses, Detect & Solve Conflict in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.1) described here and Implement
Separation in Terminal Area (A3.3.2.2) described in the next section.
The main drivers for the process are the following:

Inputs:
o

Constraints/Triggers:
o


None.
None.
Human Actors:
o
Executive Controller;
o
Flight Crew.
Outputs:
o
Tactical Instruction (Open Loop).
The time horizon of this process is significantly shorter than that of queue management and
separation provision processes. As a consequence, the operating methods tend to differ as
resulting RBT modifications will occur:
 Generally according to an open loop tactical instruction, when the sector controller
has been alerted of a collision risk;
Page 54 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
 Without prior request and clearance, when the flight crew has received an ACAS
RA.
The Use Cases identified for “Apply Safety Nets in the TMA Airspace” are listed below:
Use Cases
Handle ACAS resolution advisory
Handle STCA alert
Handle MSAW alert
Handle GPWS alert
Handle APW alert
Table 10: Use Cases for Apply Safety Nets in the TMA Airspace
4.4.5 Enablers
As mentioned in the previous sub-sections, this process is heavily dependent on the
performance of the following tools:
 Short Term Conflict Alert (STCA);
 Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS);
 Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (MSAW);
 Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS);
 Area Proximity Warning (APW).
Additionally, the SWIM infrastructure will also be an enabler for improved detection of short
term collision risks.
4.4.6 Transition issues
None identified.
Page 55 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
5 ENVIRONMENT DEFINITION
5.1 AIRSPACE CHARACTERISTICS
This section is covered by the General DOD [4].
5.2 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
This section is covered by the General DOD [4].
Page 56 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
6 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The list of actors, their main roles and responsibilities, and the processes (refer to §4) they
are concerned with, is synthetically presented in the following table.
Organisation/Unit
Air Navigation
Service Provider –
arrival/departure
operations
(civil & military)
Individual
Actor
Planning
Controller
Related
Process(es)
4.1 Arrival Queue
Management (A3.2.3)
Terminal Area Exit
Queue Management
(A.3.2.2)
4.3 De-Conflict and
Separate Traffic in
Arrival and Departure
Operations (A.3.3.2)
Main Role(s) & Responsibilities
The principal tasks of the Planning Controller are
to check the planned trajectory of aircraft
intending to enter the sector for potential
separation risk, and to co-ordinate entry/exit
conditions leading to conflict free trajectories.
Planning Controllers will in particular support the
co-ordination of AMAN 4D solutions with
concerned en-route centre(s).
In the SESAR long term the role of the Planning
Controller will evolve towards a multi-sector
planning role, which is supported by various tools
like MTCD. Thus one multi-sector planner will
serve various Executive Controllers.
The Planning Controller provides services for
arrival/departure operations in both civil and
military units.
The main interactions of the Planning Controller
are with adjacent Planning Controllers and the
appropriate Executive Controllers and also with
the Complexity Managers within the domain of Air
Traffic Control.
Page 57 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Organisation/Unit
Individual
Actor
Executive
Controller
Related
Process(es)
4.1 Arrival Queue
Management
(A3.2.3)
Terminal Area Exit
Queue Management
(A.3.2.2)
4.3 De-Conflict and
Separate Traffic in
Arrival and Departure
Operations (A.3.3.2)
4.4 Apply Safety Nets
(A.3.4.2)
Main Role(s) & Responsibilities
The principal tasks of the Executive Controller
are to separate and to sequence known flights
operating within his/her area of responsibility, and
to issue instructions to pilots for conflict
resolution. He/she is also responsible for the
transfer of flights to the next appropriate
Executive Controller and for co-ordination with
the appropriate Planning Controller.
Compared as today’s situation, the Executive
Controller’s workload per flight will decrease
thanks to better pre-planning and de-confliction,
and automation support - e.g. datalink
communication; the main activity will evolve from
tactical control to the monitoring of Reference
Business Trajectories.
Under specific circumstances, separation
responsibility will be delegated to flight crew
(airborne separation), but Executive Controller’s
monitoring of these flights will remain in such
cases.
The Executive Controller will be assisted by
queue management tools (e.g. AMAN) for the
elaboration of an optimum arrival sequence and
the associated provision of constraints and
advisories.
The Executive Controller provides services for
arrival/departure operations in both civil and
military units.
The main interactions of the Executive Controller
are with adjacent Executive Controllers and
appropriate Planning Controllers within the
domain of Air Traffic Control and with the pilots
(Flight Crew).
In summary, the main tasks of the Executive
Controller are to:
• Facilitate Flight according to RBT and
applicable rules;
• Assure Separation (if Separator);
• Avoid Collisions;
• Optimise Queuing.
Page 58 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Organisation/Unit
Airline, BA, GA,
Military
Individual
Actor
Flight Crew
Related
Process(es)
4.1 Arrival Queue
Management (A3.2.3)
4.2
Terminal Area Exit
Queue Management
(A.3.2.2)
4.3 De-Conflict and
Separate Traffic in
Arrival and Departure
Operations (A.3.3.2)
4.4 Apply Safety Nets
(A.3.4.2)
Main Role(s) & Responsibilities
The Flight Crew remains ultimately responsible
for the safe and orderly operation of the flight in
compliance with the ICAO Rules of the Air, other
relevant ICAO and CAA/JAA provisions, and
within airline standard operating procedures. It
ensures that the aircraft operates in accordance
with ATC clearances and the agreed Air-Ground
Reference Business/Mission Trajectory (RBT).
Responsibilities to assure airborne separation
with regard to other aircraft may be delegated by
ATC to the Flight Crew under specific
circumstances. The Flight Crew will then be the
separator using ASAS methods where safety or
ATM system design does not require a
separation provision service.
The Flight Crew will be supported by the airborne
systems concerning automatic monitoring of
trajectory management, automatic execution of
spacing or separation, conflict detection and
resolution and execution of self separation
manoeuvres.
In commercial operations, the Flight Crew tasks
are dominated by systems monitoring and
exception handling roles. Military Pilots/Aircrews
depend to higher extent on ground based support
by ATC/ADF except on VFR missions.
Main interactions of the Flight Crew are with the
Airline Operations Control Centre within the
domain of Airspace Users Operations and with
Air Traffic Control.
In summary, the main task of the Flight Crew is to
conduct Flight according to RBT and applicable
rules.
Table 11: Actors roles and concerned processes
Page 59 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
7 REFERENCES AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
7.1 REFERENCES
[1] E-OCVM
E-OCVM version 2, EUROCONTROL, March 2007.
[2] Guidelines for Approval of the Provision and Use of Air Traffic Services Supported by
Data Communications, EUROCAE ED-78A, December 2000.
[3] Episode 3
Single European Sky Implementation support through Validation portal,
www.episode3.aero.
[4] Episode 3
SESAR DOD G - General Detailed Operational Description, D2.2-040
[5] Episode 3
SESAR DOD L - Long Term Network Planning Detailed Operational
Description D.22-041
[6] Episode 3
SESAR DOD M1 - Collaborative Airport Planning Detailed Operational
Description, D2.2-042
[7] Episode 3
SESAR DOD M2/3 - Medium/Short Term Network Planning Detailed
Operational Description, D2.2-043
[8] Episode 3
SESAR DOD E1 - Runway Management Detailed Operational
Description, D2.2-044.
[9] Episode 3
SESAR DOD E2/3 - Apron and Taxiways Management Detailed
Operational Description, D2.2-045.
[10]Episode 3
SESAR DOD E4 - Network Management in the Execution Phase
Detailed Operational Description,D2.2-046
[11]Episode 3
SESAR DOD E5 - Conflict Management in Arrival and Departure High
& Medium/Low Density Operations Detailed Operational Description, D2.2-047
(this Document).
[12]Episode 3
SESAR DOD E6 - Conflict Management in En-Route High &
Medium/Low Density Operations Detailed Operational Description, D2.2-048
[13]Episode 3
Glossary of Terms and Definitions (Lexicon), D2.2-049.
[14]Episode 3
SESAR/Episode 3 Information Navigator.
[15]EUROCONTROL Guidance Material for the Design of Terminal Procedures for Area
Navigation (DME/DME, B-GNSS, Baro-VNAV & RNP-RNAV), Edition 3.0, March
2003,
[16]PO-ASAS, “Principles of Operations for the Use of Airborne Separation Assurance
Systems”, version 7.1, FAA/EUROCONTROL Co-operative R&D, Action Plan 1.
Page 60 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
7.2 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
[17] SESAR
Concept of Operations, WP2.2.2 D3, DLT-0612-222-02-00 v2.0
(validated), October 2007.
[18]SESAR
Operational Scenarios and Explanations – Network Airline Scheduled
Operation, v0.6, November 2007.
[19]SESAR
WP2.2.3/D3, DLT-0707-008-01-00 v1.0, July 2007.
[20]SESAR
2008.
The ATM Master Plan (D5), DLM-0710-001-02-00 (approved), April
[21]SESAR
The ATM Deployment
(approved), January 2008.
Sequence
(D4),
DLM-0706-001-02-00
[22]SESAR
Investigate Needs for New Appropriate Modelling and Validation Tools
and Methodologies, DLT-0710-232-00-01 v0.01, May 2008.
[23]SESAR
The Performance Target (D2), DLM-0607-001-02-00a (approved),
December 2006.
[24]SESAR
Performance Objectives and Targets RPT-0708-001-01-02 (approved)
15 November 2007
[25]Episode 3
Description Of Work (DOW), v3.1, July 2009.
[26]Episode 3
Operational Scenarios - Annex to SESAR DOD G, D2.2-050
[27]Episode 3
OS-21 Departure from Non-Standard Runway Operational Scenario part of Annex to SESAR DOD G – Operational Scenarios - D2.2-050
[28]Episode 3
050
OS-27 Allocation of the Departure Profile Operational Scenario, D2.2-
[29]Episode 3
OS-28 Allocation of the Departure Route Operational Scenario- part of
Annex to SESAR DOD G – Operational Scenarios - D2.2-050
[30]Episode 3
OS-31 Handle Unexpected Closure of an Airport Airside Resource
Operational Scenario, D2.2-050
[31]Episode 3
OS-35 High Density TMA Arrival – Flying CDA Merging Operational
Scenario - part of Annex to SESAR DOD G – Operational Scenarios - D2.2-050
[32]Episode 3
Use Cases - Annex to SESAR DOD G, D2.2-051
[33]Episode 3
En-Route Expert Group Report, D4.3.1-02
[34]RESET
Separation goals settings. WP1 final report – V1.4
[35]Episode 3
Separation Management in the TMA Simulation Report D5.3.5-02
Version 1.00
[36]Episode 3
TMA expert Group Report D5.3.1-02 Version 2.00
Page 61 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
A. ANNEX: Operational Scenarios
The detailed description of those scenarios is provided as Annex to DOD G [26].
The following table is summarising the dedicated scenarios for Conflict Management in Arrival
& Departure Operations. This list could be refined according to the specific needs of Conflict
Management in Arrival & Departure exercises.
Scenario
Summary
3D Departure and arrival
routes (3D Cones or Tubes)
Status
Not Started
The SESAR concept of queue management
foresees Arrival Management (AMAN)
techniques involving the use of Controlled
Time of Arrival (CTA) techniques. Aircraft
will be issued with a CTA which will be
respected by the flight crew using the RTA
function of the avionics. Whilst it is feasible
that a CTA could be used to meter traffic to
the runway threshold, it is considered more
likely that CTA techniques will be used to
meter traffic to a point during the approach
after which relative spacing will be applied
with respect to the preceding aircraft in the
approach sequence. This will enable the
two aircraft to merge with a required spacing
at a common merge point in the vicinity of
the airport.
ASPA S&M
The ASPA-S&M technique fits smoothly with
a CTA technique as follows. Prior to the
point at which the CTA is applicable, an
aircraft can commence the establishment of
relative spacing in relation to a leading
(target) aircraft by identifying the target and
receiving ATC clearance.
Not planned within
Episode 3
After the CTA point, the merging phase
commences. Here, the instructed aircraft
adjusts speed to achieve the required
spacing expressed in time or distance (time
is considered in this example as offering
advantages on final approach under all wind
conditions) at the moment the target aircraft
passes the common merging point. From
this point onwards the instructed aircraft
maintains the required spacing as the two
aircraft follow compatible arrival trajectories
towards the runway.
Page 62 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Scenario
Non-Severe (No UDPP)
Capacity Shortfalls
impacting Arrivals in the
Short-Term
Summary
Status
The operational scenario describes the
resolution of a local imbalance facing a
European airport in 2020 on the day of
operations (that is to say during the shortterm planning phase and execution phase).
The imbalance is subsequent to a capacity
shortfall resulting from sudden adverse
weather conditions. The imbalance, albeit
non-critical, is identified at short notice and
occurs during a busy time period. Therefore,
actions have to be taken to rebalance the
situation at the airport and in the vicinity i.e.
terminal airspace. Those actions result from
the application of a predefined DCB
Solution, primarily impacting arrivals and
taking the form of a queue management
process. Those actions are described
below, together with the operational events
they respond to. The processes relevant to it
are addressed in the Detailed Operational
Description related to network management
on the day of operations.
Produced (OS-11)
Page 63 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Scenario
Summary
Status
This operational scenario describes the
prioritisation for departure in the event of
reduced capacity and is the result of a
collaborative process involving all partners
Airspace users among themselves can
request a priority order for flights affected by
delays caused by an unexpected reduction
of capacity.
This process will be needed in case of
disruptions at congested airports. This
process leaves room for airspace users to
trade slots if they individually agree to do so,
based on agreements and rules that are
transparent to the other actors but that
respect sets of rules agreed by all parties.
The process is permanently monitored by
the Regional Network Manager in order to
make sure that an acceptable solution is
available in due time and that all concerned
parties are aware of any adverse network
wide effects that may develop.
Severe (No UDPP)
Capacity Shortfalls
impacting Departures in the
Short-Term
This specific scenario is related to the
departures during the reduced capacity
period and during the recovery time after the
capacity shortfall. During those periods
there is more departure demand than
departure capacity at the airport level
without en-route constrictions. Two typical
situations can be identified:
o
during reduced departure capacity
which is less than schedule
(demand) due to weather
conditions or runway restrictions.
o
or during recovering from a period
of capacity shortfall when several
aircrafts exceeding the normal
capacity are waiting at the apron
for the departure clearance.
Produced (OS-19)
In both situations, more than one aircraft is
requesting the same departing time and new
SBTs/RBTs have to be allocated to each
flight without the presence of any relevant
En-Route restriction.
Due to the imbalance between the departure
demand and capacity, a new AOP has to be
built taking into account the possibilities
from the network and the needs or
preferences from the users following the
previously agreed procedures and according
to the airport agreed performance targets.
The AOP evolution is continuously
monitored and the performance indicators
are updated accordingly and are forecasted
for the next hours. The UDPP process starts
as soon as the capacity restriction affects
the real time or forecasted performance
targets producing an unacceptable result.
Page 64 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Scenario
Summary
Status
The Operational Scenario describes the
processes and interactions among actors for
the nominal case of solving a non-severe
capacity shortfall impacting departures on
the day of operations (short term planning
phase and execution phase), within the
context of SESAR 2020 concept of
operations.
Non-Severe (No UDPP)
Capacity Shortfalls
impacting Departures in the
Short-Term
The Scenario focuses on how the APOC
Staff, the Tower Ground Controller and the
ATS Tower Supervisor, in coordination with
the Sub-Regional Network Manager, interact
with the AOC Staff, the Airline Station
Manager and the Ground handling Agents to
solve an airport capacity shortfall impacting
departures by the activation of a departure
queue management process.
The Scenario description takes place at one
European airport (Riviera Airport), which is
strongly connected to a close airport
(Sunshine Airport). Actions described by the
present scenario at Riviera Airport are
triggered by a previous capacity shortfall
impacting arrivals at Sunshine Airport
resulting from sudden adverse weather
conditions (See Scenario “Non-Severe (No
UDPP) Capacity Shortfalls impacting
Multiple Nodes of the Network in the ShortTerm” for further detailed description). The
application of a Demand and Capacity
Balancing (DCB) queue for arrivals at
Sunshine creates an imbalance at Riviera
Airport impacting departures.
Severe (UDPP) Capacity
Shortfalls impacting Arrivals
in the Short-Term
High Density TMA Arrival –
Flying CDA Merging
Produced (OS-26)
Not Planned within
Episode 3
This scenario covers a Continuous Descent
Approach (CDA) procedure description
within the context of the SESAR Operational
Concept. Originating from current CDA
definitions several options are identified.
They describe how these procedures can be
applied before and after the Initial Approach
Fix (IAF). Wind impact, holding procedures
and non-nominal situations are also briefly
described. It is assumed that CDA will be
applied in a Point Merge airspace structure.
Produced (OS-35)
Table 12: Operational Scenarios identified for Arrival and Departure operations
Page 65 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
B. ANNEX: Detailed Use Case
The Use Cases provide the lowest level of operational detail in the present document. They
are included in the Annex to DOD G – Use Cases [32].
They are identified by considering the low level processes in the Process Model, and
considering one or more technique(s) or mean(s), depending on ATM capability level and/or
the considered timeframe.
The detailed description of those Use Cases are provided in the Annex to DOD G – Use
Cases [32]. 32
Use Case
Status
Optimise Arrival Queue with the support of an
AMAN
Not Planned within Episode 3
Optimise Arrival queue with the support of aircraft
capabilities, i.e. RTA and/or ASAS Spacing
Not Planned within Episode 3
Cancel Holding
Not Planned within Episode 3
Clear and Execute Holding Procedure
Not Planned within Episode 3
Notification to establish Holding Procedure
Not Planned within Episode 3
Provide DTG or RNAV Waypoint.
Not Planned within Episode 3
Meter arrival flow using with CTA
Not Planned within Episode 3
Merge Arrival Flows using ASPA S&M
Produced (UC-44)
Merge Arrival Flows using ASEP S&M
Not Planned within Episode 3
Clear the next portion of the RBT with additional
constraints in the TMA
Not Planned within Episode 3
Issue and execute prescribed CDA in TMA
Not Planned within Episode 3
Optimise Terminal Area Exit Queue
Not Planned within Episode 3
Meter departures using PTC 2-D or 3D
Not Planned within Episode 3
Meter departures using CTO
Not Planned within Episode 3
Separate same flow or merging departures using
ASAS/Airborne spacing
Not Planned within Episode 3
Separate same flow or merging departures using
ASAS/Airborne separation
Not Planned within Episode 3
Transfer of Control and/or Air-Ground
Communications
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle Pilot Requests in the Terminal Area
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle Military Flights
Not Planned within Episode 3
Detect Conflict in the Terminal Area using MTCD
Not Planned within Episode 3
Detect Conflict in the Terminal Area using TCT
Not Planned within Episode 3
Resolve conflict in the Terminal Area using MTCD/R
Not Planned within Episode 3
Clear the next portion of the RBT using PTC-2D or
PTC-3D in the Terminal Area
Not Planned within Episode 3
32
Where Use cases have been described as not planned, this is due to resource issues.
Page 66 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
Use Case
Status
Solve a conflict by 2D or vertical RBT revisions at
the ground initiative
Not Planned within Episode 3
Solve a Conflict by Revising the RBT at ground
initiative in the Terminal Area – using PTC-2D or
PTC-3D)
Not Planned within Episode 3
Solve a Conflict by using Conventional Separation
modes in the Terminal Area
Not Planned within Episode 3
Solve a conflict by using ASAS Airborne Separation
in the Terminal Area
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle Airspace User- Initiated RBT revisions in the
Terminal Area
Not Planned within Episode 3
Issue Open Loop Clearances and Resume own
Navigation
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle ACAS resolution advisory
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle STCA alert
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle MSAW alert
Not Planned within Episode 3
Handle GPWS alert
Not Yet Developed within EP3
Handle APW alert
Not Planned within Episode 3
Table 13: Use Case summary
Page 67 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
1
2
3
4
C. ANNEX: OI Steps Traceability Table
The following table captures the SESAR Operational Improvements (OIs/OI Steps) addressed by Arrival and Departure – High and Medium/Low Density Operations.
Although most of the OI Steps should be IP2, some of them might be IP1 (if their implementation is still part of the target system context) or IP3 (if their
implementation starts in 2020).
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Airspace User Data to Improve Ground Tools Performance [L01-05]
Use of Aircraft Derived Data (ADD) to
Enhance ATM Ground System
Performance
[IS-0302]
Use of Predicted Trajectory (PT) to
Enhance ATM Ground System
Performance
[IS-0303]
Automatic RBT Update through TMR
[IS-0305]
Continued improvement of ground TP accuracy using
ADD (state vector, weight, wind, then intent data next N waypoints ) subject to quick variations and/or
frequent updates.
The objective is to improve ATC decision support
tools and especially ground based safety nets
performance.
The trajectory sharing process is automatic and
transparent to the crew and the controller unless the
update results in a new interaction for the aircraft.
RBT revision is triggered at air or ground initiative
when constraints are to be changed (modified by
ATC, or cannot be achieved by a/c)
The objective is to improve ground trajectory
prediction by use of airborne data.
The event-based Trajectory Management
Requirements (TMR) logic is specified by the ground
systems on the basis of required time interval and
delta of current PT versus previously downlinked PT.
TMR parameters can be static/globally defined or
dynamic/flight-specific. This process is transparent to
ATCOs and pilots.
The objective is to improve ground trajectory
prediction by use of airborne data while optimising
the communication bandwidth. The improvement
may be in several steps starting with fixed/predefined periodic downlink.
Page 68 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Virtually all Queue
Management and separation
provision – related processes
in E5. 4.1.4.1
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Optimising Climb/Descent [L02-08]
Advanced Continuous Descent
Approach (ACDA)
[AOM-0702]
Continuous Climb Departure
[AOM-0703]
Advanced Continuous Climb
Departure
[AOM-0705]
33
This improvement involves the progressive
implementation of harmonised procedures for CDAs
in higher density traffic. Continuous descent
approaches are optimised for each airport arrival
procedure. New controller tools and 3D trajectory
management enable aircraft to fly, as far as possible,
their individual optimum descent profile (the definition
of a common and higher transition altitude would be
an advantage).
Clean environmental approach paths, reduced noise
level and emissions (although the accuracy with
which paths are flown may exacerbate the impact for
those directly under the route).
When traffic permits, Continuous Climb Departure is
used to reduce noise by a higher altitude trajectory
around the airport. Fuel consumption is reduced by
flying optimized profile (no vertical containment
required).
Managed Departures, managed thrust on take off,
continuous climb departure routes all contribute to
fuel efficiency and noise reductions.
Use of continuous climb departure in higher density
traffic enabled by system support to trajectory
management.
Managed Departures, managed thrust on take off,
continuous climb departure routes all contribute to
fuel efficiency and noise reductions.
Provided this process is kept in the scope.
Page 69 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Implement Terminal Area Exit
Queue33
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Management / Revision of Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) [L05-01]
Successive Authorisation of
Reference Business/Mission
Trajectory (RBT) Segments using
Datalink
[AUO-0302]
Revision of Reference
Business/Mission Trajectory (RBT)
using Datalink
[AUO-0303]
Controller's clearances are sent to the pilot by
datalink for the successive segments of the
Reference Business/Mission Trajectory (RBT) along
the flight progress (this includes taxi route in case of
surface operations). Pilot's requests to controller for
start-up, push back, taxi, take-off clearances, etc. are
also transmitted by datalink.
The SESAR concept of operations utilises digital
data communication applications and services as the
main means of communication even though there
will remain circumstances in which clearances and
instructions are issued by voice. In the shorter term,
datalink will be used in non-time critical situations
and may be applied instead of or in combination with
voice communications.
Implement Terminal Area Exit
Queue33
The pilot is automatically notified by datalink of
trajectory change proposals (route including taxi
route, altitude, time and associated performance
requirements as needed) resulting from ATM
constraints arising from, for example, ad hoc airspace
restrictions or closing of a runway. ATM constraints
may also be expressed in terms of requests such as
RTA in support of AMAN operation or runway exit in
support of BTV operation. On the other hand, the
controller is notified by datalink of aircraft preferences
in terms of STAR, ETA, ETA min/max, runway exit,
etc.
This improvement may be in two steps starting with
the uplink of simple flight specific constraints
displayed on a dedicated cockpit screen as any
datalink message. In a next stage, more complex
constraints can be automatically generated by
ground tools (incl. MTCD, AMAN, DMAN) and
proposed to the controller for approval; on the
cockpit side, the agreed constraints may be
automatically loaded into the FMS, leading to a new
trajectory computed and proposed to the flight crew.
Implement Terminal Area Exit
Queue33
Page 70 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Introducing Ground based Automated Assistance to Controller34 [L06-01]
Automated Flight Conformance
Monitoring
[CM-0203]
Automated Support for Near Term
Conflict Detection & Resolution and
Trajectory Conformance Monitoring
[CM-0204]
The system provides the controller with warnings if
aircraft deviate from a clearance or plan, and
reminders of instructions to be issued.
The objective of this automation is to assist the
controller in maintaining situational awareness and
relieving him from some routine tasks. Conformance
monitoring is also essential for triggering trajectory
re-calculation for the detection of potential conflicts.
Side Processes (monitoring)
The system provides assistance to the Tactical
Controller to manage traffic in his/her sector of
responsibility and provides resolution advisory
information based upon conflict alert tool information
within the tactical ATC environment.
The objective is to provide some support the
controller in order to bridge the 'automation gap'
between the medium term conflict detection tool and
the safety alert.
Detect and Solve Conflicts
ATC Automation in the Context of Terminal Area Operations [L06-03]
Use of Shared 4D Trajectory as a
Mean to Detect and Reduce Potential
Conflicts Number
[CM-0401]
34
The use of shared trajectory (RBT/ predicted 4DT)
will increase the performance of conflict detection
tools, reduce the number of false conflicts and reduce
the controller workload
This application will reduce the uncertainty of the
trajectory, allow better conflict detection, increase
safety by air-ground common trajectory, and reduce
controller workload routine to monitor the trajectory
and to detect conflict.
The main objective is to reduce ATCO’s task load so as to increase ATC capacity.
Page 71 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Detect and Solve Conflicts
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Enhanced Tactical Conflict
Detection/Resolution and
Conformance & Intent Monitoring
[CM-0404]
Automated Assistance to ATC
Planning for Preventing Conflicts in
Terminal Area Operations
[CM-0405]
Automated Assistance to ATC for
Detecting Conflicts in Terminal Areas
Operations
[CM-0406]
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Advanced automation support for controllers
including conflict detection and resolution,
conformance monitoring (CM), intent monitoring (INT)
and complexity monitoring. In combination these tools
detect almost all aircraft/aircraft conflicts, aircraft
penetrations of segregated airspace and potential
task overloads with sufficient time to allow an orderly
resolution. The tools also effectively monitor the ATM
system for human error.
Cf. SESAR Concept of Operations.
Detect and Solve Conflicts
Ground system route allocation tools that
automatically select the optimum conflict-free route
when triggered by a specific event are implemented
to assist the ANSP in managing the potentially large
number of interacting routes.
In the most complex TMAs it is assumed that many
of the per-defined arrival and departure routes (2D
and 3D) will interact. To assist with the efficient
utilisation of this route network an MTCD-based tool
will be required to allocate flights to routes in real
time ensuring that each flight remains conflict-free.
Detect and Solve Conflicts
Ground system situation monitoring, conflict detection
and resolution support is deployed to ensure safety
and assist with task identification in Terminal Area
Operations.
Even if conflict-free route allocation is deployed,
there will still be circumstances when flights have to
deviate from their clearance. This tool will assist the
ANSP in detecting and assessing the impact of such
deviations.
Side Processes (monitoring)
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Page 72 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Detect and Solve Conflicts
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Arrival Traffic Synchronisation [L07-01]
Arrival Management Extended to EnRoute Airspace
[TS-0305]
The system integrates information from arrival
management systems operating out to a certain
distance (e.g. 200 NM) to provide an enhanced and
more consistent arrival sequence. The system helps
to reduce holding by using speed control to absorb
some of the queuing time.
Optimize Arrival Queue
4.1.4.1
Implement Arrival Queue
Departure Traffic Synchronisation [L07-02]
Managing Interactions between Departure and Arrival Traffic [L07-03]
Integrated Arrival / Departure
Management in the Context of
Airports with Interferences (other
local/regional operations)
Integration of AMAN and DMAN with the CDM
processes between airports with interferences.
The effectiveness of AMAN-DMAN will improve by
including the operations of close airports with
interferences.
[TS-0304]
Precision Trajectory Operations [L08-02]
Precision Trajectory Clearances
(PTC)-2D Based On Pre-defined 2D
Routes
[CM-0601]
After allocation of 2D routes, vertical constraint and
longitudinal separation is provided by ATC to
complement the 2D route. This may be achieved
through surveillance based separation and/or the
dynamic application of constraints. New support tools
(incl. MTCD) and procedures and working methods
have to be put in place.
Link with CDA and tailored arrivals.
Page 73 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Optimize Arrival Queue
4.1.4.1
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Precision Trajectory Clearances
(PTC)-3D Based On Pre-defined 3D
Routes.
[CM-0602]
Precision Trajectory Clearances
(PTC)-2D On User Preferred
Trajectories
[CM-0603]
Rationale
After allocation of 3D routes, longitudinal separation
is provided by ATC to complement the 3D route. This
may be achieved through surveillance based
separation and/or the dynamic application of
constraints. New support tools and procedures and
working methods have to be put in place. This mode
relies on aircraft capabilities enabling barometric
vertical navigation (VNAV) with the required accuracy
(3D cones).
Link with CDA and tailored arrivals.
Vertical constraint and longitudinal separation is
provided by ATC to complement the 2D route. This
may be achieved through surveillance based
separation and/or the dynamic application of
constraints. New support tools and procedures and
working methods have to be put in place.
Cf. SESAR Concept of Operations.
Related ATM Model
Processes
(Probably for low/medium
density arrival-departure
operations)
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Terminal Area Exit
Queue33
Page 74 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Precision Trajectory Clearances
(PTC)-3D On User Preferred
Trajectories (Dynamically applied 3D
routes/profiles)
Description
Rationale
Longitudinal separation is provided by ATC to
complement the 3D route. This may be achieved
through surveillance based separation and/or the
dynamic application of constraints. New support tools
and procedures and working methods have to be put
in place. This mode relies on aircraft capabilities
enabling the vertical containment of the trajectory (3D
tube).
Precision trajectory clearances take advantage of
the capabilities offered by ATM Capability Level
1/2/3 aircraft in terms of navigational performance
and constraint management. The goal is to enable
controllers, supported by conflict prediction and
resolution tools and conformance and intent
monitoring, to manage a significant increase in traffic
while keeping total task load at acceptable levels.
Related ATM Model
Processes
(Probably for low/medium
density arrival-departure
operations)
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Terminal Area Exit
Queue33
ASAS Spacing and ASAS Cooperative Separation [L08-04]
Ad Hoc Delegation of Separation to
Flight Deck - Crossing and Passing
(C&P)
[CM-0702]
ASAS Sequencing and Merging as
Contribution to Traffic
Synchronization in TMA (ASPA-S&M)
[TS-0105]
The Crossing and Passing applications (incl. Lateral
crossing and passing; Vertical crossing and passing)
allow an aircraft to cross or pass a 'target' aircraft
using ASAS.
Controllers are able, under defined conditions, to
delegate the responsibility for specific separation
tasks to the flight deck of suitably-equipped aircraft.
Such delegations will be part of the clearance
resulting from mutual agreement between controllers
and pilots. It is cooperative separation. The benefits
will be to discharge the controller, by delegation of
tasks to the flight crew and to minimize the impact of
conflict resolution on trajectory.
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
The flight crew ensures a spacing from designated
aircraft as stipulated in new controller instructions for
aircraft spacing. The spacing could be in time or
space. The controller remains responsible for
providing separation between aircraft. The crew is
assisted by ASAS and automation as necessary.
The benefit is to decrease controllers' workload, and
to allow more regular flow to the runway, and
increase the runway throughput.
Implement Arrival Queue
Page 75 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
ASAS Manually Controlled
Sequencing and Merging
[TS-0107]
Description
Rationale
When the ASAS Sequencing and Merging application
is installed in EFBs it is necessary for the flight crew
to follow the speed command manually in order to
achieve the necessary spacing. This has been
proven to be as easy (and probably simpler) than
following a controller’s instructions during radar
vectoring. This method of control would be used
during the transition to a fully integrated and
automated system.
The ASAS Sequencing and Merging application is
used by the flight crew to merge behind an identified
target aircraft and then to maintain a defined spacing
during descent and approach. Its use reduces
controller task load, assists in the conduct of
Continuous Descent Approaches, and improves the
predictability and stability in the flow of traffic for
optimum use of an airport runway. The application
can either be integrated into the aircraft systems or
be installed separately in Electronic Flight Bags
(EFBs). If installed in EFBs, it can be done more
easily and more cheaply (and is easier to retrofit)
than when integrated into the aircraft systems.
Page 76 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Related ATM Model
Processes
Implement Arrival Queue
Implement Separation in
Terminal Area
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
Safety Nets Improvements (TMA, En Route) [L09-01]
Ground Based Safety Nets (TMA, En
Route)
[CM-0801]
ACAS Resolution Advisory Downlink
[CM-0802]
Ground based Safety Nets provide an alert to air
traffic controllers when separation minima may be
infringed or when a potentially threatening situation to
the safe conduct of the flight is developing. The
following safety nets are deployed where radar
services are provided: Short Term Conflict Alert
(STCA) in all ECAC airspace, Area Proximity
Warning (APW) in all ECAC airspace to GAT from
civil or military ATS Units, Minimum Safe Altitude
Warning (MSAW) where the potential for
infringements exists, and Approach Path Monitor
(APM) where the potential for deviations from the
glide path exists.
Safety Assurance Tools.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
Controllers are automatically informed when ACAS
(airborne collision avoidance system) generates an
RA (resolution advisory). This improvement is
intended to complement the voice report by the pilot.
The objective is to inform controllers of an RA event
faster, more reliably and in a structured way, and
hence increase controller's situational awareness in
critical situations.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
Page 77 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Enhanced ACAS through Use of
Autopilot or Flight Director
[CM-0803]
ACAS Adapted to New Separation
Modes
[CM-0804]
Short Term Conflict Alert Adapted to
New Separation Modes
[CM-0805]
Related ATM Model
Processes
Description
Rationale
ACAS is combined with Auto Pilot (automatic control
of aircraft) or Flight Director (display of commands to
assist the flight crew in controlling the aircraft) in
order to provide a vertical speed guidance using
ACAS target. This would be an automatic manoeuvre
if the autopilot is on (or a manual manoeuvre through
flight director cues if autopilot is off). Monitoring is
ensured through the display of the vertical speed
indicator and at any moment the pilot can override
the automatism.
The objective is to provide controllers with a reliable
alerting system based upon all the surveillance
information available.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
The ACAS function is adapted to new separation
modes, in particular if lower separation minima are
considered.
In part as a result of the introduction of the
delegation of the role of separator, aircraft may fly in
close proximity to each other with geometries that
would trigger ACAS as we know it today unless the
system is made capable of recognising situations
where such new separation modes are being
applied.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
The STCA is adapted to new separation modes, in
particular if lower separation minima are considered.
In part as a result of the introduction of the
delegation of the role of separator, aircraft may fly in
close proximity to each other with geometries that
would trigger ACAS as we know it today unless the
system is made capable of recognising situations
where such new separation modes are being
applied.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
Page 78 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Description
Improved Compatibility between
Ground and Airborne Safety Nets
[CM-0806]
Enhanced Ground-based Safety Nets
Using System-Wide Information
Sharing
[CM-0807]
Rationale
Related ATM Model
Processes
ACAS and STCA are and need to stay independent
at functional level. There is a need to have better
procedures to avoid inconsistent collision detection
and solution. Information sharing is to be considered
cautiously, to avoid common mode of failure.
The aim is to ensure that in accordance with the
predefined rules and the prevailing circumstances
the pilot, the controller or both get a warning and
resolution advisory in a way which preserves their
common situational awareness.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
System Wide Information Sharing, in particular
through new surveillance means like ADS-B which
provides both the aircraft computed position and its
trajectory intent, is used to improve the safety net
performance, e.g. to detect that the separation mode
has been compromised and to provide/propose
resolution action. The safety nets must remain robust
against information error or missing.
The objective is to provide controllers with a reliable
alerting system based upon all the surveillance
information available.
Apply Safety Nets in the TMA
Airspace
Maximising Runway Throughput [L10-05]
Crosswind Reduced Separations for
Departures and Arrivals
[AO-0301]
Under certain crosswind conditions it may not be
necessary to apply wake vortex minima.
The objective is to reduce dependency on wake
vortex operations which under suitable weather
conditions, will lead to reduced arrival / departure
intervals, with a positive effect on delays and runway
throughput.
This OI step is indirectly
related as it will provide input
to:
Optimise Arrival Queue
(runway metering constraints
adjustment) 4.1.4.1
Implement Arrival Queue
Page 79 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
OI Step
Time Based Separation for Arrivals
[AO-0302]
Fixed Reduced Separations based
on Wake Vortex Prediction
[AO-0303]
Dynamic Adjustment of Separations
based on Real-Time Detection of
Wake Vortex
Description
Rationale
Constant time separations (LIV & STIV) independent
of crosswind conditions and wake vortex existence
are introduced. Time based separation is an option to
replace the distance criteria currently used to
separate trailing aircraft on the approach beyond the
wake vortex of the leading aircraft.
The intent is to mitigate the effect of wind on final
approach sequencing so as to achieve accurate and
more consistent final approach spacing, and recover
most of the capacity lost under strong headwind.
In the applicable situations, the controller uses
reduced aircraft separations derived from forecasted
wake vortex behaviour.
Separation standards are too conservative for a
variety of meteorological situations. Use of a
statistical model giving wake-vortex behaviour with
fixed aircraft separations - e.g. from collection of all
relevant combinations of wake vortex behaviours in
meteorological situations - could be an intermediate
step towards individual wake-vortex forecasting.
The controller optimises aircraft separations taking
account of the actual wake-vortices strength.
[AO-0304]
1
Related ATM Model
Processes
Implement Arrival Queue
Optimise Arrival Queue
(runway metering constraints
adjustment) 4.1.4.1
Implement Arrival Queue
(runway metering constraints
adjustment)
Table 14: Operational Improvements addressed
Page 80 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3 consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
D. ANNEX: HOT TOPICS
The following list identifies those areas of ConOps definition where either, a consensus
amongst partners is not yet reached or, where the concerned topic needs elevating to the
SJU for resolution by WPB and/or the operational/technical threads WPs. To assist in
identification of the concept detail under discussion, each topic is hyperlinked to the
appropriate text in the document.
1. How will the aircraft return to the RBT after an open loop instruction? The confidence in
the downstream portion of the RBT is not clear. After an open loop instruction the RBT
will be held in abeyance until such times as the integrity of the RBT is restored or a
revised RBT agreed. The open loop instructions are limited to updates, i.e. noncompliance with TMRs.
Two kinds of open loops are envisaged: one that the ground system will automatically close
after a defined time parameter, and another that is a permanent open loop (e.g. fixed
heading.) This last one will not be used in SESAR environment, i.e. no open loop will be used.
The question remains, however, of how the aircraft systems will handle an open loop
instruction. (Ref. ATM Processes Described in the Document [15]).
2. ConOps does not regard a TTA as a time constraint but rather a goal to be achieved by
the Flight Crew. However, for a TTA to be meaningful, there must be seen to be a
commitment to achieve the goal and WP4 EG has proposed that the RBT be managed
under these circumstances within parameters of about -2/+3 minutes. In which case does
the TTA therefore effectively become a constraint? (Ref:4.1.4.1 Optimise Arrival Queue
(A.3.2.3.1)[36])
3. Will “successively cleared” imply a clearance limit with regard to the RBT meaning that
the flight crew will need to receive and acknowledge a succession of clearances, or will it
imply a seamless process only constrained by the horizon of the controller tools which is
transparent to the flight crew? [Ref: 4.1.1 Scope and Objectives [34])
4. There is a requirement to define the obligations implied with the issuance and acceptance
of a CTA. The issue concerns the accuracy tolerance and the results of non-compliance?
[Ref: 4.1.4.1.2 Implement Arrival Queue in TMA (A.3.2.3.2.1 [39])
5. The criteria and rationale for updating the RBT during temporary delegation of the
separation task to the cockpit needs further investigation and elaboration. For example,
what will be the impact on TMR (will the tolerances be larger or smaller), and the use of
this RBT be used in the controller tools. (Ref: 4.1.4.1.2 Implement Arrival Queue in TMA
(A.3.2.3.2.1)[39])
6. WP4 Expert Group has questioned the feasibility and nature of CDM during the execution
phase itself. Further research may be required regarding the effectiveness, or even
desirability given the limited time window that might be available, of this procedure. (Ref:
4.1.4.2 Implement Arrival Queue in TMA [39])
7. TMR (Trajectory Management Requirements): It is accepted that the FMS will provide an
update to the RBT whenever certain tolerances (to be determined) to the current RBT
contained within the NOP are exceeded. Assuming the introduction of Time Based
Separation, the expressed concern relates to the degree to which it will be possible to
base separation upon an agreed constraint; relying on a combination of RBT updates due
to deviations beyond the TMR supplying Ground System track deviation detection as the
primary means of detecting the deviations. A second topic relating to the TMR is the
establishment of the actual TMR requirements. Refresh criteria that is suitable for the en
route cruise portion of an RBT may be inadequate for the approach/departure portions.
Will there be two sets of values? Will the values be variable or a function of the issued
constraint? (Ref: 4.1.4.1 Optimise Arrival Queue [36]; 4.1.4.2 Implement Arrival Queue
in TMA [39])
Page 81 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
8. Time Based Separation will require the development of new separation standards that
must be agreed on at the international level. Such regulatory changes will require
significant research and lead time for implementation. Can TBS be linked with ASAS
applications or should they be treated as separate items and only linked casually after the
case for each has been validated? TBS can be linked to wake turbulence minima as well
but there is a requirement to then determine the standard by which these new values can
be assessed. (Ref. 4.1.4.2 Implement Arrival Queue in TMA [39])
9. Wake turbulence categories are currently the subject of on-going research. The current
standard applies a fixed distance between successive flights that is dependent upon the
aircraft weight category. Applying a variable standard as proposed complicates the task
for the Arrival Controller, the tools at his disposal, and for the pilot as well: particularly if
ASAS techniques are being utilized. Determining the standard to be applied, the liability
issues, and the value of such a sliding scale are issues to be addressed (ref. 4.1.4.1
Optimise Arrival Queue [36])
10. With current FMS technology an aircraft is only able to achieve a single RTA. As
envisioned in the SESAR concept, the future ATM system may require an aircraft to meet
multiple constraints on a single point e.g. time and speed, it is not clear to what extent a
future FMS can deliver this capability. (ref. 4.1.3 Expected Benefits, Issues and
Constraints [35])
11. During periods of low complexity a pre-defined route structure in the TMA is
recommended to ensure ATC has the necessary predictability. This recommendation,
resulting from the findings of the Expert Group, is contradictory to SESAR objectives and
should be the subject of further investigation. (ref. 4.3.7 Transition to Low-Density
Procedures [52])
Page 82 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.
Episode 3
D2.2-047 - Detailed Operational Description - Arrival and Version : 3.00
Departure - High and Medium/Low Density Operations E5
END OF DOCUMENT
Page 83 of 83
Issued by the Episode 3 consortium for the Episode 3 project co-funded by the European Commission and Episode 3
consortium.