1 / 30

Introduction

Introduction. IFALPA – International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations Founded in 1948 with 13 Member Associations Today it represents more than 120,000 pilots in near 100 countries globally. The Global Voice of Pilots. Overview. Challenge: The Human Factor

fmeza
Télécharger la présentation

Introduction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introduction • IFALPA – International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations • Founded in 1948 with 13 Member Associations • Today it represents more than 120,000 pilots in near 100 countries globally. • The Global Voice of Pilots.

  2. Overview • Challenge: The Human Factor • Challenge: Flexibility and Dynamic Reaction • Challenge: Buffers and Margins

  3. What is: Future ATM?

  4. FOCUS AREA Near Term Medium Term Long Term 2005 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2015 2025 FLEXIBLE AIRSPACE MANAGEMENT ENROUTE EFFICIENCY DYNAMIC AIRSPACE MANAGEMENT ENHANCE ROUTE FLEXIBILITY ATM Operational Concept ENHANCE TMA MANAGEMENT TMA EFFICIENCY DYNAMIC TMA MANAGEMENT ENHANCE RUNWAY OPERATIONS AIRPORT EFFICIENCY/ CAPACITY INTEGRATED TMA/AIRPORT MANAGEMENT ENHANCE AIRPORT MAMANGEMENT INCREASE VERTICAL CAPACITY ENROUTE CAPACITY COLLABORATIVE SPACING INCREASE HORIZONTAL CAPACITY INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IMPROVE INFORMATIONEXCHANGE SWIM 1 Baseline 01 Jan 2005 Industry ATM TRANSITION ROADMAP Note: Blocks left of the baseline indicate implementation has already begun.

  5. Global Harmonization • Everyone promises it • The reality is different An example: CPDLC procedures & message sets • The only (¿?) truly globalreference: ICAO

  6. ICAO Future ATM Doc 9854 Global Air Navigation Plan for CNS/ATM Systems Doc 9750

  7. Challenge: Human Factor IFATS – “Innovative Future Air Transport System Concept” postulates that an “extremely automated” air transport system - without pilots and controllers - would be more efficient and safer at the same time than the current ATM System.

  8. Challenge: Human Factor • Is automation “per se” a more efficient and safer “modus operandi” than a system architecture which uses the capabilities of the human to its best? • In reality, to achieve generally accepted low probability levels for some RNP approach operations, the only solution is: Mitigation by procedures. Mitigation to an extent that some members of certification authorities feel uneasy about it. • “Extreme automation” will solve everything, “safer”? • This type of presumption cannot be accepted from scientific organisations “per se” it must be proven!

  9. ADS-B • BAW012 • M78 • MAVOR • EMG Challenge: Human Factor • The Human Roll • Mitigate shortcomings in Technology with Operational Procedures? • Special Purpose Codes in ADS-B (NRA) Unlawful interference: 7500 Generic Emergency Flag RCF: 7600 Emergency: 7700 SPI/IDENT

  10. Challenge: Human Factor • Our position – your position? • Future system development should be based on identified operational requirements. • Consequential system functions should then be realized by applying the optimum level of automation. • The pilot community is ready to support the scientific groups in identifying this “optimum level of automation” – but we are not going to accept “extreme automation” without any type of human control as a “white sheet starting point”.

  11. ICAO OCD 2.5.4 “There will be dynamic 4-D trajectory control and negotiated conflict-free trajectories.” • Is the qualification “dynamic” reflected in currently foreseen implementations of 4-D trajectory negotiation and control?

  12. Challenge: Flexibility • Any “future system” must be able to react timely and adequately to disturbances like late passengers / security of luggage / unforecast WX changes! • Adequate dynamic negotiation and control requires appropriate communications and planning tools!

  13. Challenge: Buffers & Margins An example: Lateral Navigation • The 50ies & 60ies: ATS Route = Air Corridor • The 70ies & 80ies:VOR Route Structures: Adherence to centre line required -ICAO Annex 2 (3.6.2.1.1) • The 90ies and on:GPS input to navigation solution

  14. Challenge: Buffers & Margins Any accidental loss of vertical separation inevitably results in a critical situation, if not a collision, because of the extreme accuracy of GPS based navigation.

  15. IFALPA POLICY • IFALPA believes that the availability of accurate airborne navigation systems with the capability to navigate automatically along lateral offset tracks should be used so as to reduce the collision risk in the case of possible loss of vertical separation in suitable ATS environments.

  16. IFALPA POLICY • RNAV LATERAL OFFSET TRACKING • Aircraft with navigation equipment certified and operated to P-RNAV standards [at least RNP-1 accuracy] should be allowed and required to navigate offset one nautical mile right of centerline. Note: This policy is not in opposition to the current ICAO SLOP Guidance. In fact, based on this earlier policy statement IFALPA had supported the development of the ICAO provisions, and calls now for the extension of its applicability to areas other than “oceanic and remote continental”. • On Precision RNAV routes [in RNP-1 en-route airspace], to allow for safe offset tracking, the offset value should be taken into account when establishing such routes.

  17. IFALPA POLICY • GNSS EMBEDDED DEFAULT LATERAL OFFSET • Furthermore, because of the high accuracy and increased risk of head-on collision invoked by GNSS, to mitigate this risk IFALPA requires that GNSS referenced airborne navigation systems have an embedded default lateral offset. • This embedded offset, residing in whichever part of the equipment calculates the tracking, should be • large enough to reduce the risk of head-on GNSS-to-GNSS collisions, and • yet be small enough to be insignificant to the pilots, and the ATC system, in en-route and terminal procedures.

  18. The Tragic Truth There have been mid-air collisions that probably could have been averted if offset tracking had been applied!

  19. 62nd IFALPA Conference Statement • IFALPA calls for urgent implementation of Strategic Lateral Offset Procedures; • All States and ICAO Planning and Implementation Regional Groups (PIRGs) to authorize the ICAO SLOP in all appropriate airspaces at the earliest opportunity, and • ICAO to support States and PIRGs in their efforts to implement SLOP, and • ICAO to continue developing advanced offset tracking procedures (such as the embedded lateral offset concept).

  20. Strategy • Relax Annex 2 (3.6.2.1.1), the “on centre line” rule, to allow offset tracking as reasonable in the circumstances • Recognize lateral offset tracking and cater for it in airspace design and air traffic management functions of any future ATM system

  21. 4D Trajectories Remember ICAO OCD 2.5.4: “There will be dynamic 4-D trajectory control and negotiated conflict-free trajectories.”

  22. 4D Trajectories • Can a conflict-free trajectory be calculated over several hours of flight? • “Disturbances” – as mentioned previously in the “flexibility” section - make such an extreme implementation unreasonable from an operational perspective. For example, it does not make sense to delay the departure of a flight by 30 seconds to resolve a predicted en-route conflict a couple of hours ahead, or to achieve a better arrival sequence.

  23. ATS Committee Position (1) • “4D trajectories” based advanced air traffic management is supported under the following two conditions: 1) It must be recognized and accepted that the accuracy of the trajectory prediction will degrade with the extent of look ahead. Some people call this “granularity”, some others rather relate the control mechanisms to appropriate “time horizons”.

  24. ATS Committee Position(2) 2) The 4D clearance it self should always indicate the necessary compliance value, depending on the traffic situation. This may be called a type of “breathing” 4D definition or spacing requirement (in legacy terms). Note: It is recognized that to achieve higher capacity in high demand situations, the user-preferred 4D trajectory will be subject to modifications through CDM.

  25. Evolution: “Breathing” Compliance • Adherence to speed in general is subject to a 5% margin (ICAO Annex 2, 3.6.2.2). • To achieve higher capacity, the application of the “Mach number technique” may be required. Temporary changes of speed, for example, when turbulence is encountered, require amendments to the clearance. • In a future 4D environment, it should be obvious from the “contract” to what extent a deviation from the nominal target value is possible without creating a conflict with other traffic. It may even be advantageous to base the overall planning on reasonable buffer margins to reduce the communication and coordination workload when short-term deviations are required.

  26. IFATS & 4D Trajectories • A kind of “breathing” compliance is part of the IFATS program 4D trajectory management:

  27. IFATS & 4D Trajectories • The individual aircraft operates within a “freedom bubble”, allowing reasonable trajectory and speed modifications without negotiating a new contract This allows maintaining variable, optimum Mach numbers, and reaction to unforeseen events to some degree. • Separation from other traffic is effected by conflict-free outer “safety bubbles”

  28. Conclusion • Global Harmonisation - needs to be achieved on System Planning level as well as during local / Regional implementations • Automation not being a value “per se” • “Flexibility” and ability for “Dynamic Reaction” as properties of ATM • Recognition of the benefits of appropriate “buffers and margins” for both: • Safety, and • Stability of Operation

  29. Gracias Captain Miguel Marín IFALPA ATS Committee Chairmanmiguel@emarin.org

More Related