WN3E Session 3 Treve - Wakenet · 2010. 7. 19. · First meeting 28 May Kick-off P 6.8.1 11 May Concept review workshop OKT Task 3 delivered OCD ready for formal review Refinement

SJU P6.8.1

WakeNet 3 EUROPE – 29th of June 2010

P6.8.1 Flexible and Dynamic Use of Wake Turbulence Separations

The objective of P6.8.1 is to develop solutions to:

• Permanently provide arrival capacity resilience to challenging wind conditions to redress the current impact of such conditions on the achieved capacity (TBS)

• Conditionally provide arrival and departure throughput increases in favourable prevailing meteorological conditions to more efficiently handle peaks and queues in arrival and departure demand (WDS)

• Permanently provide arrival and departure capacity increases across all conditions for both more contingency provision for non-nominal conditions and more provision for capacity declaration across all conditions (PWS)

20172010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

RECAT

WIDAO

TBS

CROPS

20092008

SJU P6.8.1 Phase 2 - WDS

SJU P6.8.1 Phase 3 - PWS

SJU P6.8.1 Phase 1 - TBS DPWSPhase 0

ImprovedWV models

WV databases

Improved ATC HMI

WV assessment methodology

2016

Improved weather sensor

SJU P.6.8.1 and short term projects

Project officially accepted on the 9th of March

Project’s partners

System Project’s partners

P6.8.1

P9.11

P9.30

P10.4.4

P12.2.2

P12.7.5

P15.4.9a

Aircraft system for Wake Vortex Encounter alleviation

Time based separation

Runway Wake Vortex decision support tools

Improved weather operations at airports

Aircraft system for Wake Vortex Encounter avoidance

Weather sensing technologies specifications

Ops Project’s partners

P6.8.1

P5.6.4

P5.6.7

P5.7.4

P5.9

P6.8.2

P6.8.3

P6.9.2Tactical TMA and En-route Queue Management

Integrated Sequence Building / Optimization of Queues

Full Implementation of PRNAV in TMA

Usability requirements on Human Factors aspects for the TMA Controller

Working Position

Brake to Vacate

Separation minima reductions across flight

phases

Advanced integrated CWP

(A-iCWP)

Validation process

TBS

WDS

PWS

2013 2015 2017

Project phases

Project tasks in 2010

Task 3 – High Level OCD Definition (EUROCONTROL)

– Covering all 3 phases

– Requiring Airspace Users and Stakeholders review

Task 4 – High Level OSED Definition (EUROCONTROL)

– Translate the OCD in User requirements to be provided to Sys WPs

Task 5 – S1 (TBS) - State concept and assumptions (NATS)

– Refine the OCD and OSED for S1 (TBS)

– Requiring Airspace Users and Stakeholders review

Task 6 – S1 (TBS) - Set validation strategy (EUROCONTROL)

– Identify the stakeholders

– Identify the current an target levels of maturity

– Describe case expectations (HF, Safety, Environmental, Business Cases)

– Identify key performance areas

– Establish initial validation strategy

– Select validation tools and technique

On

go

ing

Project tasks in 2010

Task 7 – S1 (TBS) - Determine the exercise needs (NATS)

– Identify Stakeholders' Acceptance Criteria

– Identify Project and Exercise Validation Objectives

– Refine Validation Strategy

– Identify Indicators and Metrics

– Specify Validation Scenarios

– Produce Validation Exercise Plan

– Prepare the Platform or Facility

– Conduct Pre-Exercise Testing and Training

Task 8 – Research on WV Encounter Severity Metrics (AIRBUS)

– Results to be incorporated probably in the validation of the phase 2

Task 9 – Permanent Data Collection (NATS & EUROCONTROL)

– LIDAR, MET and OPS data collection ongoing

– LIDAR relocation at the end of the summer time

On

go

ing

Task 3 – High Level OCD Definition

The team

EUROCONTROL, NATS, Thales and Airbus

Timeline

9 March

PIR accepted

MAR APR MAY AUG

2010

JUN SEPJUL

30 April

First meeting

28 May

Kick-off P 6.8.1

11 May

Concept review workshop

OKT

Task 3 delivered

OCD ready for formal review

Refinement

Late July

First stake holder workshop

Internal Task 3 review

Milestone:Coordina-tion with WP 6.8

Milestone: External stakeholder review

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Final concept

+HMI Separationsystem

+


+


TBS

WDS

PWS

P 10.4.4P 6.8.6

P12.2.2P 9.30 P 9.11 other

Dynamic PWS

Stand alone concepts


Vapp are known fix values per aircraft type and will be placed in a look-up table for the calculation of the threshold target chevron.

Minimum time separation calculated based on preceding aircraft’s past position

Minimum target time separation at threshold based on difference between GS at preceding aircraft’s past position, and Vapp minus ground headwind for preceding aircraft divided by the anticipated compression distance (last 4 Nm or less as aircraft progress towards landing)

�

Time Based Separation

��

4 Nm10 Nm

Head wind component at

threshold

Controlled speed regime by ATC

IAS>220 IAS >160 Vapp

Aircraft reduces to Vapp

AFR120

148

J A380

AFR120158


Approach: Derive “simple” models for roll axis disturbance

- Sufficiently simple for generalization (any aircraft type)

- Sufficiently accurate to include relevant characteristics of thegenerator and follower aircraft, incl. new systems

1. Wake-induced max. static roll acceleration on follower A/C:

2. Maximum bank angle upset on follower A/C:(to include controllability aspects of follower aircraft)

( )

Γ

+Λ=

f

c

f

vfcWV

fXff

f

WVb

r

b

bCt

RGM

Vp ,,)(

4

4,2

λρ

&

( )ξppp pWVWV&&& ++Φ ~max,

Roll controlRoll damping

Static wake-induced roll acceleration

Task 8 – Research on WV Encounter Severity Metrics

WVE piloted simulations

(Airbus, others?)

WVE piloted simulations

(Airbus, others?)

Validation of "simple" models against Airbus' Vortex Encounter Severity Assessment (VESA)

VESA 6-DoFdynamic(Airbus)

VESA 6-DoFdynamic(Airbus)

Simple model (1)(6.8.1)




WVE Flight Tests(Airbus?, others?)WVE Flight Tests(Airbus?, others?)

Aircraft Flight Dynamics

In scope SESAR 6.8.1

Severity Criteria

Task 8 – Research on WV Encounter Severity Metrics

Phase 1 – Near-Ground-Effect / In-Ground-Effect – Current setup– Data sources and data processing

Phase 2 – Out-of-Ground-Effect measurements– Site identified and surveys carried out

Task 9 – Permanent Data Collection

Primary objectives– Investigate wake vortex behaviour IGE and OGE

especially in strong headwind conditions to support validation of the TBS concept at LHR in close co-operation with NATS

– Aim to recover loss of arrival capacity under head wind conditions

Secondary objective– Enhance the existing EUROCONTROL LIDAR

database with substantial amount of wake vortex (NGE and OGE) and MET data to support short-term implementation projects (SESAR IP1) and mid-term operational improvements (SESAR IP2 and IP3 - WP6.8.1)


19 / 57

27R 008

27L 168~1550m

~1516m

~635m

~796m

20 / 57

Altitude = ca. 80 meters

21 / 57

LIDAR

Phase 2 27R + 27L

LIDAR

Measurement might be required in higher altitudes

(OGE)

+ WV behaviour modelling

LIDAR locations are for illustration purpose only (not

precise)

NGEOGE

LIDAR and Aircraft data correlated for first 16 months of measurements– 82,127 vortex tracks in first 16 months of the

campaign (Nov08-Feb10)• A380 – 385 tracks

• Heavy – 28,901 tracks• Medium – 52,887 tracks

METAR & Wind data processed– RWY anemometers– LIDAR headwind data along the glide slope– LIDAR cross- and head-wind data reconfigured

(scan elevation from 3 to 15 degrees between the two runway centrelines)

– Correlation of vortex and MET data


Questions?

Documents

WN3E Session 3 Treve - Wakenet · 2010. 7. 19. · First meeting 28 May Kick-off P 6.8.1 11 May Concept review workshop OKT Task 3 delivered OCD ready for formal review Refinement