© 2003 the mitre corporation. all rights reserved. cockpit display of traffic information (cdti)...

© 2003 The MITRE Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Cockpit Display of Traffic Information(CDTI) Enhanced Flight Rules (CEFR)

Randall Bone

October 7, 2003

2 © 2003 The MITRE Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Overview

• Review of Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) and CDTI Enhanced Flight Rules (CEFR)

• CEFR during Visual Approaches Example

• CEFR Purpose

• Simulations– Objectives

– Overview

– Results

• Status


Acronyms

• ASAS – Airborne Separation Assurance Systems

• ATC – Air Traffic Control

• CDTI – Cockpit Display of Traffic Information

• CEFR – CDTI Enhanced Flight Rules

• IFR – Instrument Flight Rules

• IMC – Instrument Meteorological Conditions

• MVA – Minimum Vectoring Altitude

• OSED – Operational Service and Environment Description

• UPS – United Parcel Service

• VFR – Visual Flight Rules

• VMC – Visual Meteorological Conditions

© 2003 The MITRE Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

CEFR

• What?– Visual separation including the CDTI, i.e., CDTI is authorized for use in lieu

of visual out-the-window contact (ASAS Application Category: Airborne Separation)

– No other operational changes to current visual approach procedures other than the use of flight identification, when appropriate, during traffic advisories and the flight crew use of the CDTI to maintain visual contact with the traffic to follow.

• Where?– Terminal Area - Class B or C airspace

• Why?– To increase capacity under deteriorated weather conditions

• When?– An inability to continue the conduct of visual approaches but weather at least

VMC (1000 feet and 3 miles)

• Who?– Safe Flight 21 & RTCA SC-186 WG 1


Visual Separation

• Visual separation can be applied by ATC to separate aircraft by a pilot who sees the other aircraft involved

• Traffic advisories are issued by ATC to the pilot who must search for the traffic, acquire the traffic, and accept responsibility for maintaining separation from that aircraft

• Pilot acceptance of visual separation includes:– Maintaining constant visual surveillance;

– Maneuvering the aircraft as necessary to avoid the other aircraft or to maintain in-trail separation;

– Avoiding wake;

– Not passing the other aircraft until it is no longer a factor ; and

– Promptly notifying ATC if visual contact with the other aircraft is lost

• Pilot acceptance of visual separation relieves the controller of separation responsibility for that particular aircraft and allows for more flexible operations


CDTI & Selected Target

Groundspeed

Call Sign

Closure Rate

Range from Ownship

Weight Category


Not to scale

• Controller provides traffic advisory

• Initial out-the-window acquisition and correlation with CDTI

• Target selection on the CDTI

• Clearance to maintain “visual” separation

• Controller clearance for visual approach

Visual Approach CEFR Concept Example (1 of 3)

Set-Up

270

5

DAL210-10

DEF112-10

+10CAL34

DEF112 R 5.2GS183 LRG

. .33

GS 188 R 4.9UPS927 LRG

CR 33




Call Sign Use

• Louisville Approach: “Abaco 235, Louisville Approach, traffic 12 o’clock, 6 miles, southbound, Boeing 737, 4000.”

• Abaco 235: “Louisville, Abaco 235, Defiant one twelve is in sight.”

• Louisville Approach: “Abaco 235, maintain visual separation from that traffic.”


Not to scale

• Once lead aircraft is lost out-the-window, CDTI only is used for separation (CEFR concept)


CDTI for Separation

270

5

DAL210-10

DEF112-10

+10CAL34


. .23



CR 23


Not to scale

• Continue to normal landing using both visual and / or CDTI information


Landing

Reacquisition

270

5

DAL210-10

DEF112-10

+10CAL34


. .6



CR 6


CEFR Purpose (1 of 3)

Increased capacity

Reported Visibility at Airport (miles)

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

1 765432

IMC

Visual App

Reported Ceiling at

Airport

(feet)

Visual approaches suspended - Facility Specific

Visual Approach Minimums by FAA Order – Facility Specific (MVA + 500’)Basic VMC

Mins

Delay

s in

crea

se a

s wea

ther

conditi

ons wors

en

Initial CEFRPotentialBenefit



Controller flexibility



Increased pilot situational awareness when conducting visual approaches in marginal conditions

270

5

DAL210 -10

DEF112 -10

+10 CAL34

DEF112 R 5.2 GS183 LRG


Simulations


Development Objectives

• Develop the CEFR application description– ~ Operational Service and Environment Description (OSED)

– Participation by pilot & controller unions, certification and flight standards authorities, other FAA offices, etc.

• Evaluate the CEFR concept in simulation addressing pilot and controller operational issues

• Provide data and analysis of results to support decision on next development stage


Overview of Four MITRE Simulations

• Participants– 56 Pilots

– ~10 Air Traffic Controllers

• Simulation Environment– Medium fidelity, twin jet aircraft

• CDTI (Primary field of view & throttle quadrant)

– Terminal ATC display

– Louisville, Kentucky USA

• Procedure– Conditions: Day and night; Instrument and visual approaches

– Independent Variables: Cloud thicknesses, spacing assignment, CDTI size and location, throttle control / workload, spacing alert, failure condition, 2 crew member operations

– Data: Subjective- pilot and controller acceptability, displays, workload, call sign procedures; Objective- pilot spacing performance


Results of Four MITRE Simulations (1 of 2)

• CEFR concept / separation based on a CDTI is viable from a pilot (N=56) perspective based on feedback on the following topics:– General difficulty of the procedure

– CDTI use for spacing and separation

– Safety

– Workload (about the same as current visual approaches)

– Head down time

– Comparison to current operations (day and night visual approaches)

• Time on CDTI for separation not issue


Results of Four MITRE Simulations (2 of 2)

• No difficulty with aggressive slow-downs of lead aircraft

• Able to handle data degradation of lead aircraft on CDTI

• Throttle console CDTI implementation is acceptable and did not show performance difference

• Willing (and able) to perform with either autothrottles or manual throttle control

• Call sign use could have potential

• Visual approach operations likely to be the initial application of CEFR

• ATC continues to play key role


Status (1 of 2)

• 2002 (Completed efforts)

– Initial application description

– Initial business case

– MITRE simulations

– Call sign procedure approved

– Formal decision to continue research

• 2003– Updated business case (Completed)

– MITRE simulations (Completed)

– Formal decision to continue research (Completed)

– Initial operational safety assessment (Completed)

– Operational approval planned to be sought by UPS


Status (2 of 2)

• Acceptability– Operation – Acceptable concept

– Cost benefit – Benefit exists but must consider other operational enhancements

– Technical – AT2000 meets software requirement (Level C)

– Stakeholder Buy-In – FAA Flight Standards as well as controller and pilot unions support continued research


Further Information

• For further information on the concept or the simulations, contact:

– Randy Bone – [email protected]– John Marksteiner, FAA Safe Flight 21 -

[email protected]

© 2003 the mitre corporation. all rights reserved. cockpit display of traffic information (cdti)...

Documents

visual contact

mitre corporation

conduct of visual approaches

cdti clearance

traffic advisories

constant visual surveillance

trail separation

cdti target selection