AP23%20briefing%20on%20D3:%20ASAS%20Concept%20of%20operations

1
AP23 briefing on D3 ASAS Concept of operations

• ASAS-GN Seminar
• 13 Nov 08, Rome
• By
• Ken Carpenter, QinetiQ

2
AP23 Overview Deliverables

• Five deliverables from AP23
• D1 General data exchange
• D2 Methodology to prioritize applications for
  AP23
• D3 Operational Role of Airborne Surveillance in
  Separating Traffic
• D4 Draft proposal for a second set of
  ADS-B/ASAS applications
• D5 Draft White Paper on Issues Surrounding
  Airborne Separation

3
Background

• The operational role of airbornesurveillance in
  separating traffic
• Work started in 2005 (ASAS SG)
• The world was different then
• We were trying to avoid saying ASAS
• Emphasised the use of airborne surveillance
• The word separation in ASAS looked like a
  mistake
• SESAR and NextGen have changed all that
• Now discuss the use of ASAS in a TM environment
• and emphasise new ASAS-based separation modes

4
Objective

• Overall picture of ASAS in the ATM paradigm
• Common sense of direction for ASAS community
• Explain ASAS to wider community
• The document is conceptual
• Tries not to state requirements
• Tries not to design equipment nor procedures
• Discusses many applicationsbut not in order to
  propose them
• It introduces application elements
• Discusses airborne separation
• airborne separation self-separation
  applications

5
Application categories

• We suggest no change in the PO-ASAS categories
• Situational awareness applicationscould have
  been called traffic information applications
• Airborne spacing applicationsthe controller
  continues to provide separationthe flight crew
  provide a specified spacing from specific
  reference aircraft
• Airborne separation applications subject
  aircraft is receiving a separation servicebut
  is cleared to provide airborne separation from
  specific reference aircraft
• Self-separation subject aircraft is
  not receiving a separation service

6
Status of the document

• The document is complete
• Will deliver imminently
• You can all see the document please!
• I would like to tell you where to get it (and now
  I can!)
• It should be circulated as widely as possible
• all 100 pages of it
• It will be submitted to ASP/1 in December
• To be reported by ASP as Work in progress, not
  yet for adoption by ICAO
• ASP will do what it determines
• Further work by AP23 depends on feedback

7
Contents

• Part I Concept
• Airborne separation
• Airborne surveillance applications
• The elements of applications
• Some minimal technical information
• Part II Operational use
• Describes the potential evolution of ATM and use
  of ASAS
• Looks at 2010, 2020 and 2030 (but dont be too
  literal)
• Discusses terminal areas, en-route operations,
  procedural airspace and the surface

8
Concept terminology

• Airborne Separation is used to refer
• to any separation mode in which
• the flight crew is the separator
• This definition includes airborne separation and
  airborne self-separation applications
• No change proposed (yet?) in PO-ASAS category
  names
• We keep the name airborne separation
  applications
• AP23 plans to address this ambiguity (D5)
• Alternatives?
• NextGen use delegated separation for more than
  the PO-ASAS airborne separation applications
• We use the plain language word delegate
• but the controller cannot be responsible for the
  pilots actions

9
Concept airborne separation

• Separation
• The tactical process of keeping
• aircraft away from hazards by at least
• the appropriate separation minima
• from ICAO Doc 9854, The Global ATM Operational
  Concept
• The definition of separation applies equally to
  airborne separation and ground-based separation
• Airborne separation is not collision avoidance

10
Concept airborne separation

• Airborne separation will work well with
  trajectory management
• Self-separation does not need to exclude
  trajectory management
• (Delegated) airborne separation applications are
  tools for controllers
• So they will be used only in controlled airspace
• Benefits need to be mutual
• Benefits are mutual
• Self-separation is a manner of operation
• Flexible and efficient for operators
• Permitted by ANSPs (or airspace managers)

11
Concept application elements

• AP23 asked for candidate applications
• Over 100 separate suggestions
• We grouped them by categoryfound elements common
  to many applications
• Decided to base work on application elements
• These elements are operational
• PANS-OPS and PANS-ATM might need to discuss
  elements
• They do not need to discuss anything else
• The functional and performance requirements for
  each element will depend on context
• A later talk will tell you much more about
  application elements

12
Identifying designated aircraft
13
Use terminal areas

• SM, aka MS, as a separation application
• The use of ASAS is part of a larger story
• The big benefits come from airspace
  reorganisationand good trajectory management,
  arriving on time
• Using ASAS gives predictable and reliable
  throughput
• Task of managing the interval is in the right
  place
• CSPA
• Has yet to be developed
• A central and demanding application
• Climb out
• Use ASAS to fan out, or pass aircraft in front

14
Use en-route

• Trajectory Management dominates
• but it is not realistic to expect no conflicts
• ASAS will be used to resolve tactical conflicts
• Delegated airborne separation
• can resolve crossing and passing encounters
• minimal deviation from the desired trajectory
• Four variants of self-separation
• unmanaged airspace
• dedicated airspace, with no TM
• dedicated airspace, a/c on agreed trajectories
• managed airspace, some a/c self-separating and
  others not (SESAR scenario)
• Flow corridors

15
Use procedural airspace

• Airspace that is not under ground surveillance
• Whole family of applications being studiedfor
  oceanic airspace
• Self-separation and cruise climbing
• Self-separation on dedicated tracks in the OTS
• but
• Procedural separation should simply disappear

16
Use the surface

• The surface is different
• There is no accepted concept of separation
• The surface is important
• Runway incursions big safety issue
• ASAS provides knowledge of the offence
• Main benefits likely to be at un-towered airports
• Operational use at non-towered airports
• autonomous runway crossing (safe window of
  opportunity)
• assess take-off times wrt local traffic
  (integrated with TM)

17
Conclusion

• Airborne separation should be regarded as an
  embedded part of trajectory management
• TM and ASAS are complementary
• A concept of use for ASAS is available
• Get it from
• One Sky Team
• ICAO www.icao.int/anb/panels/scrsp/indexp.html
  (click information/documents)
• and . ?

18
Thank you
ken.carpenter_at_atc.qinetiq.com