Presentations text content in RAD evolutions workshop, 12/13 Dec 2018, Brussels
Slide1
RAD evolutions workshop, 12/13 Dec 2018, Brussels
CFSP’s view on the current RAD
Slide212th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
2
01
Current handling of the RAD
03
Some proposals for the
way
forward
02
Issues with the current
RAD
Slide3Current handling
of
the RAD
LSY is currently still inserting the restrictions published in the RAD in a mainly manual process
Automatic insert is highly preferred and worked on but still discrepancies are regularly detected between data in RAD vs. IFPS
Discrepancies between AIPs and data in CACD revealed during SESAR 4D FPL exchange trials are discouraging
Manual adjustments required to tweak certain restrictions for better processing by the optimizer as the restrictions usually are prepared for human usage and not machines.
12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
3
Slide4Issues with
the
current RAD12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
4
With
the amount of restrictions in
the
RAD today
it is
no longer suited for pure human usage but
it is also not
optimized for machine usage
yet.
The interaction between different restrictions published across the network are causing side-effects like yoyo-profiles, inefficient trajectories and unexpected turns.
Many restrictions aren’t actually restricting the availability of routes (not available or only available) but aim for an enforcement of specific routes or behaviors (compulsory).
The intention for Free Route was to provide operators more efficient routing options but due to the lack of a fixed route network a lot of RAD restrictions are introduced to often just enforce the previous streams.
A compulsory restriction enforcing a combination of waypoints in theory
isn’t different
than a published route but causes potentially more efforts for computation not only for the flights using this segment before but also others.
Slide5Issues with
the
current RAD12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
5
Forcing flights through specific sectors is very problematic – for a human being a restriction like
looks easy to understand at first glance but for a system trying to fulfill the restriction it can be very hard to achieve as it has to find the “no-go areas” itself if the optimum is not via the prescribed sector. Here it looks like the “busy sectors” could be easily closed with “not available” but this might be hard for the publisher to define.
PTRs
are currently considered prior to the actual validation of the FPL which will not lead to direct REJ due to these PTRs but
they can
push the profile into other restrictions which then cause REJs
.
Slide6Issues with
the
current RAD12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
6
Multiple or single dependent applicability restrictions are often problematic if the reference to check the dependency is unclear or unbalanced. This can lead to situations where estimations of abeam positions are required to decide if an object not directly on the trajectory is open or closed and therefore the trajectory is valid or not. This is specifically a problem if the restriction is of an enforcing nature – so either “compulsory” or “not available except”.
Such restrictions should be challenged to be broken into smaller pieces with less dependencies.
Slide7Flight planning
challenges considering
the RAD
12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
7
With Free Route, flexible use of airspaces, full rolling ASM etc. all stakeholders expect to take advantage of as many opportunities as possible. This in turn will lead to an increase of or even to constant re-optimizations
also horizontally.
This needs to be taken into consideration for the future RAD as otherwise the discrepancy between planning and execution will just increase.
RAD restrictions are designed for the flight planning phase but planning and execution are closely connected (“file it – fly it”).
Already before the usage of airspaces got more flexible cases like re-clearance or inflight re-calculations brought up the question of how to deal with RAD restrictions for these cases:
Totally ignoring them usually results in an much better routing which wouldn’t be acceptable by ATC
Full application on the other hand often leads to ridiculous results as the restrictions don’t fit to the route in case of deviations.
Therefore today most re-optimizations are intentionally limited to vertical options.
Slide8Some proposals for the way forward
12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
8
We need to find a way forward that suits all sides and recognizes the fact that flight planning without computer assistance isn’t feasible anymore in a dense IFR environment like we have in Europe.
We need blueprints for restriction publication on how to address common use-cases to get rid of as many compulsory type restrictions as possible - ideally completely removing the need for this type.
ERNIP Part 1, 8.3.2 could then even be changed to only support “not available” type restrictions as any “only available” restriction can be converted into “not available”.
Slide9Some proposals for the way forward
12th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
9
RAD restrictions not to be adhered to during flight execution should be removed.
Last minute changes to the RAD via increment shall be kept to an absolute minimum only for safety related cases.
RAD data for large scale changes as well as
neighboring countries
should also be provided with double AIRAC procedure to allow extensive testing for detection of side-effects.
If PTRs are optional for the AOs to be considered they shall only be applied after validation of the trajectory.
The RAD evolution workshop should be followed up by a series of smaller workshops to develop best-practices and blue prints between RAD experts from ANSPs and algorithm specialists from CFSPs under facilitation of NM
.
Slide1012th December 2018
NM RAD evolution workshop - CFSP's view
10
Questions
?
Thank
you
for
your
attention
Michael Krause
Product
Owner
Optimizer – Lido/FlightLufthansa Systems GmbH & Co. KG
RAD evolutions workshop, 12/13 Dec 2018, Brussels
Download Presentation - The PPT/PDF document "RAD evolutions workshop, 12/13 Dec 2018,..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.