final briefing for nasa ctd-subtopic 1 nra: methods of ... · 29/10/2015 · base year final...
Post on 20-Jul-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
|||||||||||
BASE YEAR FINAL PRESENTATION
NASA CTD-SUBTOPIC 1 NRA:
METHODS OF INCREASING
TERMINAL AIRSPACE FLEXIBILITY
AND CONTROL AUTHORITYSebastian Timar, Greg Carr, Architecture Technology Corporation
David Myers, Julien Scharl, Boeing
Phil Smith, Amy Spencer, Cognitive Systems Engineering & Design
Doc. #: 850-035977
Version: 1
Date: 21 October 2015
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
SAAB
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Solicitation objective was to develop concepts and
algorithms for making tactical adjustments (e.g., path
stretch, speed adjustments) to strategically-planned arrival
and departure trajectories
During the course of the project, the objective changed to
developing a “What-if” Analysis capability for Departure
Metering Programs (DMP) in support of ATD-2
A fast-time simulation-based What-if Analysis capability
was developed and tested against three DMP use cases
Preliminary findings show that the DMP What-if Analysis capability
can help the Departure Reservoir Coordinator (DRC) select values
for key parameters, i.e.,
DMP Start and End Time
Target Departure Queue Length (TDQL)
Unscheduled Demand Buffer (UDB)
Page 2COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Focus—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Use-Cases
What-if Analysis Evaluation Results
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Overview
Literature Review
Real-world Problem Selection
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Definition—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Evaluations
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
SOLICITATION OBJECTIVE
Objectives Develop concepts and algorithms for making tactical adjustments to strategically-planned arrival and departure trajectories
Path modifications such as path-stretches, and/or
Temporal trajectory modifications such as speed adjustments
Perform human-factors analysis of the developed concept
ScopeSelect a set of three real-world problems for study
Focus on terminal airspace arrival-departure interactions
Emphasis on New York TRACON interaction-cases
Completed Tasks & DeliverablesLiterature Review Report documenting relevant previous studies
Real-world Problem Report and Briefing documenting 5 real-world problems of shared resources between arrivals and departures
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 5
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Focus—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Evaluations
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 6
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
EVOLUTION OF PROJECT
OBJECTIVESDesire to align project more closely with ATD-2 objectives
Focus on departure management
ATD-2 sites unknown, shift focus to DFW as surrogate
Series of interviews with Greg Juro/D10 TRACON
Identify DFW arrival/departure/surface interactions that complicate
scheduling of departures
DFW not a good candidate for developing tactical
departure traffic management tools
Not many arrival-departure interaction problems
Significant airspace available for last minute trajectory adjustments
Numerous strategic departure problems (e.g., meeting and resolving
multiple MITs on single aircraft, scheduling takeoffs to meet MITs,
etc.), but not many tactical control problems
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEVELOP SURFACE-TERMINAL WHAT-IF
ANALYSIS CAPABILITY FOR CLT
Supports integration of NASA ATD-2 concept &
technologies with FAA Surface CDM Concept of
Operations
Allows NASA to credibly test different options before
finalizing concept of operations and exact configuration of
different components of ATD-2
E.g., what is the best choice for the target departure queue length
parameter for the departure metering component of ATD-2
In future, this capability can be converted into a tactical
what-if analysis tool for real-time departure planning
Part of ATD-2 real-time tactical what-if planning platform
Page 8COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Definition—What-if Analysis
ATD-2
Departure Metering Program (DMP)
What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Evaluations
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
ATD-2 OVERVIEWScheduling of departures within a metroplex terminal environment to increase predictability, efficiency and throughput
Compute coordinated times for pushback, spot rendezvous, takeoff, departure fix crossing
Ideal departure profile: delay at gate, unimpeded taxi, continuous climb to cruise altitude
Account for departure constraintsMerging at fixes and into overhead streams
Traffic Management Initiatives, weather impact on available fixes/routes
TMA Expected Departure Clearance
Arrival-departure flow interaction points on airport surface (e.g., shared runways, taxiways) and in terminal airspace
Page 10COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
NASA Technologies FAA Technologies
Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSS) Time Based Flow Management (TBFM)
Precision Departure Release Capability
(PDRC)
Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM)
Spot and Runway Departure Advisor
(SARDA)
Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS)
Surface Decision Support System (SDSS)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
SURFACE COLLABORATIVE
DECISION MAKING (CDM)Improve Shared Situational Awareness to Collaboratively Optimize Airport Capacity
Efficient Management of Departure Queues and Aircraft Flow on the Airport Surface
Improve Situational Awareness to Manage Arrival Traffic Flows
Improve Analysis and Measurement of Surface Operations
Global Harmonization
Notifications
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 11
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEPARTURE METERING
PROCEDURES (DMP) Target Movement Area entry Time (TMAT) for flights
Target Queue Length exceeds Upper Threshold
Metering times to maintain Target Queue Length
Departure Reservoir Coordinator (DRC)
Actively monitor traffic for future demand-capacity imbalances
(indicated by departure queue length)
Initiate departure metering based on the queue length predictions
Manage departure queue by setting the DMP parameter values
What-if Modeling Automation
Determine DMP parameters in real-time
Determine the impact of DMP parameter changes
Share the results with other Stakeholders
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DMP PARAMETERS
Parameter Description
• Planning Horizon • Time within which flights expected to depart could be
assigned metering times
• Departure Target
Queue Length
• Upper Threshold
• Lower Threshold
• Number of departures in the departure queue considered
optimal for the local airport
• Determine need for a DMP and reassignment of TMATs
• Determine need for compression or termination of a DMP
• Unscheduled Demand
Buffer
• Lower Threshold
• Upper Threshold
• Number of unscheduled flights identified as potential demand
• Unscheduled Flights Low notification
• Unscheduled Flights High notification
• Airport Metering • Single airport queue or multiple runway queue metering
• TMAT Compliance
Window
• Window around the TMAT within which flights are considered
compliant
• Others…
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 13
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Definition—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
Components
How the simulation works
Airport surface/airspace adaptation
Departure scheduling
What-if Analysis Evaluations
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
WHAT-IF ANALYSIS CAPABILITY
OVERVIEWFast-time simulation
Link-node model of the airport surface and terminal
airspace routes
Primary and satellite airports within a metroplex
Node queue control
Departure runways, departure fixes, and en route traffic stream
merge-points
Models current-day departure management
Sequencing for fix balancing, Approval Requests (APREQs), and
miles-in-trail restrictions to constrained merge-fixes
Alternatively models ATD-2 operations
Integrated surface-airspace traffic scheduling of Target Off Block
Times (TOBTs) for departures to shift delays to the gates
Page 15COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
WHAT-IF CAPABILITY COMPONENTS
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
Airport Surface and Terminal Airspace Departure Traffic
Simulation
ATD-2 Traffic Scheduling Algorithm Emulation
• Traffic Demand Set• Runway Capacities• Departure Fix Capacities• MIT Restrictions At Runway• MIT Restrictions At Departure Fixes• Other Traffic Management Initiatives• Runway Configuration• (primary and satellite airports)
Departure leaves gate at/near airline scheduled gate departure
time
Target Off Block Times (TOBTs) for all departures
1
2
Airport Surface and Terminal Airspace Departure Traffic
Simulation
Departure leaves gate at or near its TOBT
3
Page 16
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
HOW THE SIMULATION WORKS (1)
Link-node representation of airport
surface, terminal airspace and en
route airspace
Queuing simulation with key control
nodes located at
Terminal gate groups (by airline) at
major and satellite airports
Departure runways at major and
satellite airports
Departure fixes (metering fixes at
the boundary of the TRACON)
Center-center boundary metering
fixes (merge-fixes for the overhead
enroute traffic stream)
Gate Nodes
Departure Runway Nodes
Enroute Stream Merge Node
Departure Fix Nodes
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
Surface
Terminal
Enroute
Page 17
0 I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \
\
I
/ I
I
/ /
I I
I I I
I I I \ \
\
\ \
' ' ' '
/
/
'
,, ,, ,,
/ /
/
' ' '
,,
,,
....
,, ,,
,, ,,
...
,, ,, ,, ------------- ....
.,,,.-------- ........
... __
' ' ' ' ' .... ',,
', .... ____________ _
',, .... ' '
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,
' '
/ ,,
' ' '
/ /
/
' ' \ \
\ \
\
I /
I I
I
I
\
I
\ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I
I
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
HOW THE SIMULATION WORKS (2)
Transit time & queue management models on airport
surface, terminal airspace and enroute airspace
Page 18COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
EnrouteTerminalSurface
Departure Pushback Management
Taxi Out Time Calculation
Actual Pushback Times
Departure Takeoff Queue Management
Actual Runway Queue Entry Times
Runway to Fix Transit Time Calculation
Actual Takeoff Times
Departure Fix Queue Management
Actual Dep Fix Queue Entry Times
Actual Dep Fix Crossing Times
Dep. Fix to Enroute Merge-fix Transit Time Calculation
Actual Enroute Merge-Fix Queue Entry Time
Enroute Merge-fix Queue Management
Actual Enroute Merge Time
i' t
I ,v J
'
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
ADAPTATION TO CHARLOTTE
METROPLEXParameter Source
Interacting
satellite
airports
• Concord Regional (JQF), Charlotte-Monroe Executive (EQY), Spartanburg
Downtown Memorial (SPA), Hickory Regional (HKY), Gasontia Municipal
(AKH), Rock Hill (UZA) and Statesville Regional (SVH)
• Based on FAA Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex
(OAPM) Study Reports
Runways • Lumped capacity model for CLT & satellite airports
Taxi times • Airline-specific ASQP model for CLT, fixed model for satellites
Departure
fixes
• ANDYS, BUCKL, DEBIE, GANTS, JACAL, LILLS, MERIL, SPA, SUG,
ZAVER
• Identified from CLT Standard Instrument Departure (SID) procedures and
departure fixes for flights in SOSS input file
• Assigned based on departure fix closest in bearing to destination airport
En route
merge points
• PSEUDO_15MIN_FROM_DF for flights via departure fix MERIL
Airborne
transit times
• Simple & Boeing physics-based models
Page 19COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEPARTURE TRAJECTORY MODEL737 NG Test Bench at Boeing Integrated Aircraft Simulation Laboratory (IASL) was utilized to perform a multitude of real-time departure simulations (MERIL7 – Charlotte)
737 Flight software and hardware working in closed-loop with high fidelity aircraft and environmental models
Obtained accurate aircraft state data versus time over 94 separate permutations of departure conditions from initial runway departure through achievement of cruise altitude at 35,000 ft.
time, altitude, calibrated airspeed, ground speed, rate-of-climb, fuel burn, …
data above delivered at each major waypoint (and archived at 1 sec intervals)
Able to see trends in the data for transit time and fuel usage variations to assist in the overall objectives of this NRA study
Hardware and software contained within this simulation framework enable some of the highest fidelity results on the performance of aircraft trajectory and state data time histories for test and evaluation of scenarios, but limited to real-time operations.
Fast-time medium fidelity aircraft simulations can be utilized for future studies of this nature that will produce acceptable levels of accuracy
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 20
0
0
0 0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
MERIL6/7 DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 21
MERIL
_....,..-,r .-::i. LIUC A__....- osr::J'
V ~31\
KAYFO MUNBE e,11"' ~
~-rn1°-,-___ i"~V 1,.,1\
ATIS DEP 1.n.1
CLNC DEL 127.1 5 348 . .t.
, / n2, ~-JOJ °'-.....~o~c,\ / JIM_Al ' .J. ~ f?; ~~/ FEN I.I (?J ZARKS
;; -0.>o -Po a VEAZY 1u,rs,,J ~ ...... l ( < • ~ 5; 0 o o ✓T
_$ 0 · 8 8 o/.'\ t;.)o o~Jj c
GNDCON 1 21.e 348 .6 r1 so·- 359"! 121.9 348 ,6 [360·- 1 79•1
CHARIDTTE TOWER 118.1 257.8 (Rwy~ 18L·3611!:, 5·23) ";;
126.~ 2'.57.8 [Rwy 18C-36C] z 133.35 257.B !R....,.18R·.'.l61.J )>
CHAALO-TTE DC;P CON .$ 1241.0 307. 8
h. !1/j 1260 &J U TAKEOfiF MINIMUMS: Rwys 5, I SL, l 8C, 18R, NOl E: For Turbo,j s ooly. 23, 36R, .16C, 36L: NOiE: I~ u:na'ble to occept climb rgtes,
l12Q ~ ..... ~ - QJ Struidord wiil-l 0 1 minimu,m cdvi$e ATC ori initial contoct. '-..._ V QJ O ~ climb oF 5001 per HM o 1260. NOTE: Transponder code will be issued ~ . -~ r-t via PDC or Charlotro OLNC DEL.
. ,-G ' IRGY' . 1260 / ,.... UNCOi ' -- NOTE: DME DME/ IRU or GPS required. " o A n I ,_,. ,.. ~ HISOR li-OiE; Rodor Required, ~ ~ 2 / . -,,.,. NOTE: RNAV l . "' 'o '" · . =>,.._. / r,.:,,, ,...0 ...-J.< 7 _., N01E: Aooeler-ate lo 250 l<IAS, ii =In ~ d) 0 ..Vo uooble,adviuiATC. N o=1 rn ::c ·JI'": :cm d"0 ;0 WEKJ[N I ,Qgo . ~ 090~- a'lo ~ NOTE: Do not e.xcead 280 IKIA.S unlil ,....: --....8 n \' Qci.., odvi"'d by ATC, §_;;l (?) . ·. E E.· AATHTH~R \I
1 ~,i~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ -----~ NIKI IE !!l z ~~ ~~ 0~ t~ ._,Si~ (NARRATIVE ON FOLLOWING PAGE) S...::, .,. NOT!;; ClnQlrt n,;,t tQ = I,;,, ... ...,, .__ _____________________________________ ....:..:.::.:.::~:.:..:::::..:.:::..::::::J i,; . .._,
8E,2, 28 MY 20115 m 25 JUN 2011
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEPARTURE PROCEDURE /
GENERAL TRENDSTwo overlapping MERIL Routes were simulated
RW18L through HISOR, EATHR, TIBLE, MUNBE, LILIC, MERIL
RW18R through WEKIN, EATHR, TIBLE, MUNBE, LILIC, MERIL
Modified CDU “Legs” pages during simulation pre-flight procedures to affect routing changes
Simulation of these two routes with superimposed variations on aircraft initial conditions
Varied aircraft initial take-off weights (minimum, medium and maximum 737-700 aircraft weights)
Varied powered flight cost index values entered into CDU (0, 250 and 500)
Varied initial ground temperatures (affecting air densities and thus lift characteristics in early flight)
Wind variations (no wind, a forecast wind, a deviation of the forecast wind)
Higher cost indices (i.e., 500) cause aircraft FM logic to burn fuel faster and arrive at given respective waypoint destinations in shorter intervals of time
Superimposed weight variations show some transit time variability, with higher weight aircraft tending to arrive at destinations later, but with less of an impact on performance when compared to cost index variations
Modest (realistic) wind variations empirically show lower levels of transit time influence, given the conjecture that powered flight during the departure phase likely overwhelms these wind differences.
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 22
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
EXAMPLE AIRCRAFT STATE DATA AT
WAYPOINTS FOR ONE CASE
Time
(sec)
Altitude
(ft)
CAS
(knots)
Ground
Speed
(knots)
Fuel
Burn
(lbs)
Ground
Distance
(nmi)
Flight
path
Angle
(deg)
Rate of
Climb
(ft/sec)
HISOR 115.0 4087.7 168.5 177.0 526. 3.9 8.0 42.1
EATHR 224.7 7994.5
(in level)
254.3 285.0 955.6 11.3 0.38 3.2
TIBLE 357.0 8004.5
(in level)
248.2 278.3 1140.7 21.5 -0.11 -0.9
MUNBE 548.8 7999.3
(in level)
249.7 279.9 1407.3 36.3 -0.12 -1.0
LILIC 764.8 11106.3 298.6 349.1 1910.9 53.6 1.5 15.3
MERIL 1079.1 23393.6 334.3 465.2 3028.4 90.6 2.06 28.3
State
Waypoint
Case: 133 klbs (medium Wt);Cost Index=500; rw18L; 10min Level Off
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 23
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
EMULATION OF ATD-2 DEPARTURE
SCHEDULINGATD2 scheduler computes Target Off Block Times (TOBTs) for departure flights in order to
Absorb most delays at the gate
Enable departure flights to fit into available slots at the runway, with minimum taxi delays
Orchestrate the merging of departures from multiple airports to commonly shared departure fixes with minimum possible airborne delays
Coordinate takeoff times of departures to “hit” enroute merge stream gaps
Predict unimpeded times to the runway, departure-fix and enroute stream merge point
Determine earliest runway departure timesAdhere to ration-by-schedule principle
Space flights sufficiently at the runway
Delay runway departure time to “hit” enroute merge stream gaps
Apply Order of Consideration algorithm to determine sequence of departure-fix merging, back propagating delay to the surface
Emulate TMA’s Dynamic Planner algorithm
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 24
0 0 0
0
0 0 0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Definition—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Evaluations
DMP Start & End Times
DMP Target Departure Queue Length
DMP Unscheduled Demand Buffer
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
WHAT-IF ANALYSIS USE CASES
Defined three Use Cases (UCs) based on hypothesized DRC activities:
UC1: DMP Start and End TimesDRC assesses candidate DMP start and end times, selects values
Time period for ATD2 scheduling of departure flight TOBTs/TMATs, accounting for all other traffic
UC2: Target Departure Queue Length (TDQL) (and Upper/Lower Bounds)
Given DMP start and end times, DRC assesses candidate departure queue lengths, selects value
TDQL of X: number of minutes of departure delay shifted from gate holding to taxiing during DMP
Departure queue slot = runway time-slot, ~1 minute
Hasten TBOT or TMAT
UC3: Unscheduled Demand BufferGiven DMP start and end times and TDQL, DRC assesses candidate capacity allocations for unscheduled demand
Reduce airport departure quarterly capacity during DMP to accommodate unscheduled traffic
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 26
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
BASELINE PERFORMANCE
Two departure demand peaks, 17:00 – 20:00
Active departures exceeds 15 in 1-minute period
Runway queue exceeds 15 in 1-minute period
Options: 1 longer DMP, 2 short DMPs or other…
Consider operational complexity, other constraints besides target departure
queue length alone in specification
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 27
Departue Queue Length Baseline
--'Active Departures ' --Queued Departures
40 ~-----------------------------111
~ 35 ,3 30 -+----------------+------,1--------------,f-----'O---------... [ 25
~ 20 -+-------------~1---------------tf----+- -½----
0 15 ~ 10 +----------r----------11--------.f-=-- ---l-----+-- l----~1---
.c 5 E ~ 0 -lmm!111111111111111111111111111111111111111111i!mmnllfflmiinmmnllllllllimnnfllinlmlmmmmmmmmmmmm,MiiiiiiiMn•A111111111l111111111l111111111l1Illmmffll!IIIII z rl
0 LI) rl
0
0
CV) LI) rl N LI) LI) rl rl
0
0
0
" CV)
LI) rl
en rl CV) LI) " en rl <t ~ rl ~ ~ ':'I: ~ LI) <D <D <D <D <D " rl rl rl rl rl rl rl
CV) LI) " en rl CV) LI) " en rl CV) LI) " en rl CV)
rl ~ ~ ':'I: 0 rl N CV) <t ~ rl ~ ~ ':'I: 0 rl
" " " " cio cio cio cio cio en en en en en 0 0 rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl N N
Local Time
12.0
VI a, .. 10.0 ~ C:
2 8.0
> ..!!! a, 6.0
C a,
4.0 tl.O IU ... a,
~ 2.0
0.0
Average Delay for Baseline
Avg. Gate Delay Avg.Taxi Delay
Transit Phase
Avg. Airborne Delay
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
UC1: START & END TIME SELECTION
Maintain number of active departures to acceptable level,
e.g., 15
Maintain gate delay to a level acceptable with occupancy
considerations for airlines
Minimize taxi delay to extent possible
Maintain airport departure throughput
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 28
0
0
Vers
ion: 1
Date
: Octo
ber 2
1, 2
015
Doc. #
: 850-0
35977
US
E C
AS
E 1
: STA
RT
& E
ND
TIM
ES
Page 2
9C
OM
PA
NY
UN
CLA
SS
IFIE
D -
NO
T E
XP
OR
T C
ON
TR
OLLE
D
•E
valu
ate
d 1
6:0
0-2
0:0
0, 1
7:0
0-2
0:0
0, 1
7:0
0-1
9:0
0, 1
7:0
0-1
8:0
0
•S
ele
cte
d 1
7:0
0-2
0:0
0 to
min
imiz
e d
ura
tion o
f DM
P w
hile
meetin
g a
ccepta
ble
num
ber o
f activ
e d
epartu
res a
nd m
ain
tain
ing d
epartu
re th
roughput
I
0 V,
Number of Departures fa-' fa-' N 0 Vl 0
N W W V, 0 V,
_p,. 0
15: 01 =l-----l---+-------jf---+--1--------+---l--____j
r-
15:11
15:21
15:31
15:41
15:51
16:01
16: 11 ~ -i---r
16:21
16:31
16:41
16:51
17:01
17:11
17:21
g 17:31 Ill
:::; 17:41
~- 17:51
18:01
18:11
18:21
18:31
18:41
18:51
19:01
19:11
19:21
19:31
19:41
19:51
20:01
20:11
20:21
I • (") -~-0 (1)
"C
"' ;:i. C ...., (1)
"'
0 C (1) C (1)
Cl..
0 (1)
"C
"' ...., -C ...., (1)
"'
Cc s: t'D "'0 'tJ • • Q,J
~ '"" -..J .... • • C: 0 t'D 'F? 0 0 C: 0 t'D
C: t'D
~ r-• • t'D 0::::, OOQ ...... 0 :::r 0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
USE CASE 1: START & END TIMES
• Departure scheduling shifts taxi & airborne delay to gate
• DMP start & end times impact distribution of delay among gate, taxi,
airborne flight phases
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 30
"' QI .. 3.5
~ 3.0 :§ > 2.5 "' ai C 2.0 QI tll)
"' ai 1.5 > <(
1.0
0.5
0.0
Average Delay for Different DMP Start & End Times
Avg. Gate Delay Avg.Taxi Delay
Transit Phase
• DMP: 16:00 - 20:00
• DMP: 17:00 -20:00
• DMP: 17:00 - 19:00
• DMP: 17:00 - 18:00
Avg. Airborne Delay
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
USE CASE 2: TARGET DEPARTURE
QUEUE LENGTHAvoid starving the runway of flights while there are active
departures
Maintain number of active departures to an acceptable
level
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 31
Vers
ion: 1
Date
: Octo
ber 2
1, 2
015
Doc. #
: 850-0
35977
US
E C
AS
E 2
: TA
RG
ET
DE
PA
RT
UR
E
QU
EU
E L
EN
GT
H
Page 3
2C
OM
PA
NY
UN
CLA
SS
IFIE
D -
NO
T E
XP
OR
T C
ON
TR
OLLE
D
•E
valu
ate
d T
arg
et D
epartu
re Q
ueue L
ength
s o
f 0, 3
, 5, 8
min
ute
s o
f dela
y
apportio
ned to
taxi tra
nsit fro
m g
ate
hold
ing
•S
ele
cte
d 3
to m
axim
ize d
epartu
re th
roughput w
hile
meetin
g a
ccepta
ble
num
ber o
f activ
e d
epartu
res
Number of Departures fa-' fa-' N N w
0 V, 0 V, 0 V, 0
15:01
15:11
15:21
15:31
15:41
15:51
16:01
16:11
16:21
16:31
16:41
16:51
17:01
17:11
17:21 r-g 17:31 Ill
:::; 17:41 §" 17:51 (I)
18:01
18:11
18:21
18:31
18:41
18:51
19:01
19:11
19:21
19:31
19:41
19:51
20:01
20:11
20:21
I
w .j:,. V, 0
I l> n -~-0 (!)
"Cl Q.)
;:::i. C .... (!) <.I)
0 C (!)
C (!)
c.. 0 (!)
"Cl Q.) .... -C
ril <.I)
C tD
'tJ Q,J
'"" .... -I C: C tD oo r- C: II tD w C: tD
rtD ::::,
OQ .... ::::r
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
USE CASE 2: TDQL SELECTION
• TDQL shifts gate delay to taxi & airborne phases
• Selected 3 to retain gate holding benefits while meeting acceptable
number of active departures
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Avg. Gate Delay Avg.Taxi Delay Avg. Airborne Delay
Ave
rage
De
lay,
Min
ute
s
Transit Phase
Average Delay for Different Target Departure Queue Lengths
TDQL_0
TDQL_3
TDQL_5
TDQL_8
Page 33
•
•
• •
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
USE CASE 3: UNSCHEDULED
DEMAND BUFFERAt lower levels, UDB has minimal impact on departure
queues and taxi delays
May be more appropriate to specify this parameter a priori
based on typical unscheduled demand levels and apply to
DMP rather than design on the fly
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 34
Vers
ion: 1
Date
: Octo
ber 2
1, 2
015
Doc. #
: 850-0
35977
US
E C
AS
E 3
: UN
SC
HE
DU
LE
D
DE
MA
ND
BU
FF
ER
Page 3
5C
OM
PA
NY
UN
CLA
SS
IFIE
D -
NO
T E
XP
OR
T C
ON
TR
OLLE
D
•E
valu
ate
d U
nschedule
d D
em
and B
uffe
rs o
f 1, 3
, 5, 8
% o
f departu
re c
apacity
•S
ele
cte
d 3
to a
fford
as m
uch d
epartu
re c
apacity
as p
ossib
le w
ithout
incre
asin
g d
ela
y
I
15:01
15:11
15:21
15:31
15:41
15:51
16:01
Number of Departures f-.> f-.> N N W W ./:>
0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
16:11 I 16:21 )> c 16:31 Q. C tD 16:41 ~- C "g 16:51 ~ C:, ""' 17:01 ~ II 2' 17:11 ~ ~ tD 17:21 ._.,._.....__ V, ~ 0
:;- 17•31 0 C [ . I ...... tD -1 17:41 n C §" 17:51 0 DJ tD ~ C -
18:01 ~ a:j ~ 18:11 c.. n """
0 -· ..., 18·21 ro r1' OQ
• "O < .... 18:31 ~ ::T 18·41 ~ • Cl)
18: 51 V,
19:01
19:11
19:21
19:31
19:41
19:51
20:01
20:11
20:21
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
USE CASE 3: UNSCHEDULED
DEMAND BUFFER
• UDB has minimal impact on transit delay at low buffer levels
• Select value which maintains gate delay
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 36
2.0
"' ~ ::I .5 2 1.5 > "' ai C ~ 1.0 "' .. QI ::, <t
0.5
0.0
Average Delay for Different Target Departure Queue Lengths
Avg. Gate Delay Avg.Taxi Delay
Transit Phase
Avg. Ai rborne Delay
• UDB 0
• UDB 1
• UDB 3
• UDB 5
• UDB 8
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
IMPACT OF UNCERTAINTY
Initial evaluation of the impact of transit time uncertainty on
effectiveness of DMP
Incorporate transit time uncertainty models into CLT surface traffic
simulation, conduct 100 simulation runs
Evaluate resulting performance of airport surface traffic under
specified DMP parameters
Data sources
Taxi transit time
Airline-specific ASQP taxi-time data for CLT up to 10th percentile
Terminal airspace transit time
Adapt & apply data from Boeing simulations of MERIL7 SID
En route airspace transit
10-minute mean transit time, standard deviation based on
Boeing terminal airspace transit data
Assume each is Normally distributed as per mean and standard
deviation for each
Page 37COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
0 0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
NUMBER OF DEPARTURES
Page 38COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
• Modest range of number of aircraft on the airport surface with differences of
~3-5 aircraft during peak demand periods
Variability in Number of Active Departures 2s~-~--~-~-~-~-~-...,.c--~-~-~-~-~--'--~-~-~~-~-~~----~------_~_-~~
20
Ill I!! ,E 15 ns CL
8 0 ... GI
~ 10 ::, z
5
~ Minimum ----- Maximum
15:30 15:45 16:00 16:15 16:30 16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45 20:00
Time, Hours
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEPARTURE QUEUE LENGTH
Page 39COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
• Modest range of the number of aircraft in the departure queue with
differences of ~2-5 aircraft during peak demand periods
Variability in Departure Queue Length 15~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~-_,,._-~-~~
Ill 10 l!! :, t: co 0.
~ 0 ... QI JJ E :,
z 5
_,._ Minimum _,._ Maximum
15:3015:4516:0016:1516:3016:4517:0017:1517:3017:4518:0018:1518:3018:4519:0019:1519:3019:4520:00
Time, Hours
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
AVERAGE DELAY BY FLIGHT PHASE
Page 40COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLED
• Modest range of taxi delays experienced with differences of ~1.0 minutes in
mean taxi delay of aircraft
Variability in Average Transit Delay 3.5 ~----~---------~-~---~---~-~--------,::-~~======::;-a
- Minimum • Maximum
3
0.5
0 Gate Taxi Terminal Enroute
Transit Phase
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Solicitation Objective
Evolution of Project Objectives
New Problem Definition—What-if Analysis
What-if Analysis Simulation Platform
What-if Analysis Evaluations
Conclusions and Discussion
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 41
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSION
Evaluation of the What-if Analysis capability indicates the
potential to improve the DMP parameter selection process
Use Case Evaluation
Number of flights in the ramp + movement area is a key control
parameter
Above N is a good indicator of when to start a DMP
Below N is a good indicator of when to end a DMP
May not be possible to precisely control the departure queue length,
but TDQL is effective in tuning departure throughput
The unscheduled demand buffer may not have any positive effect
without an estimate of when unscheduled flights might appear
Transit time uncertainties introduce some variability in the surface
traffic levels and flight delays realized with a DMP
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 42
C 0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
BACKUP
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 43
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
LITERATURE REVIEW
Focus on precision methods of arrival and departure
management in the terminal area
Summary of literature in areas including
scheduling concepts
schedule conformance
off-nominal situations
evaluations of tools and gaps identified
technological requirements for tools
management of arrival-departure interactions
airport surface traffic management
metroplex operations
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 44
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
REAL-WORLD PROBLEM SELECTION
Select five high-priority arrival-departure interactions from
metroplex or single-airport sites
Literature review, subject matter expert consultation, data
analysis to identify & evaluate
Compared & selected sites via numerous factors
Presence of significant departure delays
Presence of significant arrival delays
Dependent runway usage
Problem site in the FAA FACT-2 Report
Complexity of arrival-departure TRACON airspace
Others
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 45
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
REAL-WORLD PROBLEM SITESSite Reason for Selecting
New York
metroplex
High departure and arrival delays at all component airports; highly complex terminal airspace; multiple
runway interaction geometry-types present at different metroplex airports; interest from NASA; SMEs
identified multiple existing problems that can be solved by tactical scheduling decision support tools
Charlotte
International
Airport
High departure delays; significant potential for saving departure delays by better traffic management;
intersecting arrival-departure runways; multiple points where taxiing aircraft cross active arrival and
departure runways; restricted ramp area causing arrival-departure interactions; presence of
interactions between departure flows and overhead en route streams; interest from NASA; SMEs
identified airspace interaction problems that can be solved by strategic/tactical temporal scheduling
Southern
California
metroplex
Presence of significant departure delay, mixed-use runway at LAX, limited space for building queues to
hold aircraft while they wait to cross active runways identified as a major problem; SMEs identified
number of high-priority terminal airspace interactions that may be resolved by strategic or temporal
trajectory control methods
Atlanta
Hartsfield
International
Airport
High departure delays; significant potential for saving departure delays by better departure
management; two closely spaced parallel runway pairs, frequently used for simultaneous arrival and
departure operations
Northern
California
metroplex
Three airports within close proximity display multiple interdependencies, intersecting runway pairs at
SFO create a unique scheduling problem, limited space for building queues to hold aircraft while they
wait to cross active runways identified as a problem
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 46
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
REAL-WORLD PROBLEMS
PROPOSED
Problem Description
1) JFK 22R departures interacting with
JFK 22L/22R arrivals
JFK 22R departures tunnel under the JFK 22L/22R
arrivals at 5000 feet for 20-25 miles
2) JFK Arrivals on VOR 13L, interact
with LGA 13 ILS arrivals and LGA 13
departures
Indirect routing of LGA 13 departures to avoid JFK
13L arrivals via VOR approach using Coney
airspace; significant source of delay
3) EWR Arr-22L, Dep-22R; TEB Dep-
19: TEB departures interact with EWR
arrivals
TEB 19 departures via noise abatement procedure
require 10 MIT gaps in EWR 22L arrivals
4) CLT runway operations—integrated
arrival-departure-surface interaction
18C arrivals & departures, 18L & 18C departures
with 23 arrivals, 18R arrivals crossing 18C
departures & arrivals, call for release of departures
5) LAX runway system interactions Arrivals to outboard runways crossing inboard
departure runways, mixed-use of inboard runways
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 47
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
AIRPORT SURFACE/TERMINAL
AIRSPACE ADAPTATIONInteracting satellite airports
Identified from FAA Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex (OAPM) Study Reports
Departure fix & enroute merge point locationsBased on CLT Standard Instrument Departure (SID) procedures and departure fixes for flights in SOSS input file
Departure fix/runway assignmentBased on actual assignment data where available
Otherwise, assign flight to departure fix closest in bearing to destination airport, relative to origin airport
Runway assignment based on departure fix
Taxi TimesUnimpeded times based on ASQP taxi time data
Airborne transit timesPhysics based model: Simple Model, Boeing Model
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 48
0 0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
SIMULATION CONTROLS AND
EVALUATION METRICS
Calculations within simulated traffic management DSTs are controlled by the parameters such as Target Departure Queue Length, Static Time Horizon, etc.
What-if analysis capability allows fast evaluations over different values of individual parameters and combinations
Manual mode: Test performance at a few user-defined points in the parameter space
Auto mode: Sweep over a range of parameter values
Key metrics are computed by simulating traffic over a user-defined time-horizon for each combination of parameter settings
Metrics are displayed on a succinct display that is easy for a Departure Reservoir Coordinator (DRC) to comprehend quickly and make informed decisions
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 49
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
UC1: DMP START AND END TIMES
DRC determines start and end times of DMP
Detects demand-capacity imbalance for runways
Baseline simulations
Analyzes Departure Queue Graph, Departure Fix Load Graph, Enroute Merge
Point Load Graph
Determines candidate start/end times to evaluate
Selection criteria
Conducts what-if analysis for discrete start/end time combinations
ATD-2 scheduling and simulations
Selects discrete start/end times based on airport traffic performance criteria
Start/end times to 15-minute precision, similar to JFK DMAN
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 50
0 C
C
C
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
UC2: TARGET DEPARTURE QUEUE
LENGTH (TDQL) AND UPPER/LOWER
BOUNDS
DRC determines the TDQL and its upper/lower bounds,
airport-wide or per-runway
DMP start and end times established
Determines candidate TDQL and bounds to test
Conducts what-if analysis for discrete TDQL and upper/lower bound
values
ATD-2 scheduling and simulations
Selects TDQL and upper/lower bound values based on airport traffic
performance criteria
ATD-2 performance evaluation
Selects policy to manage event of excessive mismatch between
actual and target departure queue length
ATD-2 performance evaluation
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 51
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
UC3: UNSCHEDULED DEMAND
BUFFERDRC determines Unscheduled Demand Buffer (UDB) of
DMP
DMP start and end times, TDQL and upper/lower bounds established
Determines individual or range of UDB values to test
Conducts what-if analysis for discrete UDB values
Selects UDB values based on airport traffic performance criteria
ATD-2 performance evaluation
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 52
0
0
0
0
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
DEPARTURE METERING PROGRAM
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 53
Dt.tP~allJ
22L Propand (Dl!m•nd Capacity lm~1l1ra Nali1i tio~)
1~~'" 11E~ TI111 1$;~, 11Dur1tion
1~!1in 11 $titi"e r: 1 ~ori11>~
1108!.Jrl
'Avg Gitt 1~otrJ T, IFlig~~ou ~11Prolllbi lit 1~ ultmionl l'vg Tnt i.11 ~"; Befort:Afttrl D Oep,rll!Je Ou ;,u e &.!pll
R.uaurc11/22L: ~ ~ rlJ Non-Metered [I Range I~ F'H
l!i
31)
2,
~~ I\ • .rJp;w rlnrhdd
20 • Ttugel~e l ength
I L""'W T/rr.:,hdd 15
lr'I Pmj. ~• 'flii/11 DMP 10
A. - - -• '" ' I\. .,,,.,.., _. • Pm}. Q1.1e1Je P.>e-nllf P
li - .. \ I \ "' ...., .. \ -- -
0 II\ I \.I \~ ...J \-..IV ' 12:00 13:00 14:00 t~:00 16:00 1 :00 1S:OO 19:00 20:00 21:00 2200 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 :00 5:00 ll:00 7:00 8:00 1, - Fl1ght5 Afll!dM'
ACID OG.ate Spot EOBT l"OBT l"MAT ETD EDCT TTOT DRwy
S A5643 F V.. . 13-Cli 1JC!i 13; 5 1l31 13;31 l2L #
u~r B8 . 111!9 11 5 13:24 13:41) 13:.io 22L -UAJ..St9 C22 - 13.C9 1112 1:l:17 12:$ 12:36 12L
6 Po737 &2 - 13 D 13"13 1J,21 13i37 1:Ji37 J:2L .. !4 ' 1-1 0 of 147 •
I [ Cklie 'f'Ji ndDW I Affirml Reje,i:tl I
Vers
ion: 1
Date
: Octo
ber 2
1, 2
015
Doc. #
: 850-0
35977
UC
1: D
MP
STA
RT
& E
ND
TIM
ES
CO
MP
AN
Y U
NC
LA
SS
IFIE
D -
NO
T E
XP
OR
T C
ON
TR
OLLE
DP
age 5
4
Number of Departures 1--' 1--' N N W W
o u, o u, a u, a u,
11:00 11:23
11:46 12:09
12:32 12:55 13:18 13:41
14:04 14:27 14:50
15:13 15:36
15:59 -16:22
,.. 16:45 g 17:08 f .. :; 17:31 3" 17:54 (D
18: 17 18:40
19:03
~ - >
s r
19:26 -- ~ -19:49 -20:12 20:35
20:58 21:21 21:44
22:07 22:30
22:53 23:16 23:39
Number of Departures 1--' 1--' N N W W
0 U1 0 U1 0 U1 0 U1
11:00
11:23 11:46 12:09
12:32 12:55
13 :18 13:41
14:04 14:27
14:50 15:13 15:36
15:59 16: 22
,.. 16:45 0 17:08 n ., f :; 17:3 1 3" 17:54 (D
~ - r?c 18: 17 ..... 18:40 b 19:03
19:26 ...... c=-~
19:49 20:12
20:35 20:58
21:21 21:44
I 22:07 22:30
22:53 23:16 23:39
I ~ ~· 0 ro
-c:,
"' ;:+ ,; iJi
I 0 C ro C ro C. 0 ro
-c:,
"' ;:+ C
~
I ~ ~· 0 (1)
-c:,
"' ;:+ ,; iJi
I 2 (1) C
"' C. 0
"' -c:,
;!, ,; iJi
Cc s: t'D "'tJ "C • • DJ .... ;::::. ....i C 0 t'D ~/:) oc 0 t'D
C t'D
~ r-• • t'D 0 ::::s 0 (1Q • • r+ 0 ::I" 0
Cc s: t'D "'tJ "C • • DJ .... ;::::. ....i C 0 t'D ~/:) oc 0 t'D
C t'D
~ r-• • t'D 0 ::::s 0 (1Q •• r+ 0 ::I" 0
Number of Departures 1--' 1--' N N W W a u, a u, a u, a u,
11:00 ~ ---t-,-t---r7-1 11: 23
11:46 12:09
12:32 12: 55 13:18
13:41 14:04 14:27
14:50 15:13
15:36
15:59 ~ 16:22 16:45
g 17:08 ~ ~ 17:31 3" 17: 54 (D
18:17 18:40
19:03
19:26 ~ r 19:49 20:12 20:35
20:58 21:21
21:44 22:07 22:30
22:53 23:16 23:39
Number of Departures 1--' 1--' N N W W
0 U1 0 U1 0 U1 0 U1
11:00 ..--+-------,f----+--+--+--+-----1 11:23 11:46 12:09
12:32 12:55
13:18 13:41
14:04 14:27
14:50 15:13 15:36
15:59 16:22
,.. 16:45
~ 17:08 :; 17:31
~- 17: 54 18:17
18:40 19:03
19:26 ~ 19:49 20:12
20:35 20:58
21:21 2 1:44
22:07 22:30
22:53 23:16 23:39
I ~ ~-0 ro
-c:,
"' ;:+ ,; iJi
I 0 C (1) C (1)
C. 0 (1)
-c:,
"' ;:+ C
~
I ~ ~-0
"' -c:,
"' ;:+ ,; iJi
I 2 "' C
"' C. 0
"' -c:,
;!, ,; iJi
Cc s: t'D "'tJ "C • • DJ .... ;::::. en C 0 t'D ~/:) oc 0 t'D
C t'D
~ r-• • t'D 0 ::::s 0 (1Q • • r+ 0 ::I" 0
Cc s: t'D "'tJ "C • • DJ .... ;::::. ....i C 0 t'D ~/:) oc 0 t'D
C t'D
~ r-• • t'D 0 ::::s 0 (1Q • • r+ 0 ::I" 0
*
Vers
ion: 1
Date
: Octo
ber 2
1, 2
015
Doc. #
: 850-0
35977
UC
2: T
DQ
L S
EL
EC
TIO
N
CO
MP
AN
Y U
NC
LA
SS
IFIE
D -
NO
T E
XP
OR
T C
ON
TR
OLLE
DP
age 5
5
I
Number of Departures Number of Departures ....,.....,.NNW ....,.....,.NNWW
o u, o u, au, a ouiou,ou,ou,
11:00 ----+---+---+---+---+----, 11:00
11:23 11:23
11:46 11:46 12:09 12:09
12:32 12:32 12:55 12:55 13:18 13:18
13Af I 13Af I ~M ~M 14:21 • C 14:21 • C
n l'D n l'D 14: 50 [· "C 14: 50 [ "C 15:13 0 DJ 15:13 o DJ 15:36 .f!l ~ 15:36 .f!l ~ 15:59 a;::;:l=:::.j ;!. -4 C 15:59 s;;;:::;:i:::=,"'1 ;!. -4 C 1&:22 ~ C l'D 1&:22 ~ C l'D
,- 16:45 "' {:) {:) ,- 16:45 "' {:) {:)
£ 17:08 r- ; £ 17:08 r- ; :::; 17:31 c--1--+--...L I II C :::; 17:31 a..:::'-1--+--...L I II C 3· 11:54 !ll.--1----t--r o ui l'D 3· 11:54 ..J--,.-, o o l'D m c m c
18:17 ~ ~ 18:17 ~ ~ 18:40 c. ::I 18:40 c. ::I 19:03 S:~:t:=-+--1--.L_ ;ii' C1Q 19:03 -,-....,._.,1 ;ii' C1Q
'O r+ 'O r+ 19:26 i,..,,.,.~;;::~-t--i-T ;!. :::r 19:26 i.,..aiia-+-r7 ;!. :::r 19:49 :; 19:49 :;
ro ro 20:12 "' 20:12 "' 2~35 2~35
20:58 20:58 21:21 21:21 21:44 21:44
22:07 22:07 22:30 22:30
22:53 22:53 23:16 23:16 23:39 23:39
11:00 11:23
11:46 12:09 12:32
12:55 13:18
13:41 14:M
14:27 14:50
15:13 15:36 15:59
16:22 ,- 16:45
£ 17:08 :::; 17:31 ~- 17:54
18: 17 18:40
19:03 19:26 19:49
20:12 20:35
20:58 21:21
21:44 22:07
22:30 22:53 23:16
23:39
Number of Departures ....,. ....,. N N W W
0 U1 0 u, 0 u, 0 u,
-
f ~ - ~~ -~ ..... == ~
11:00
11:23 11:46 12:09
12:32 12:55
13 :18
Number of Departures ....,. ....,. N N W W
a u, a u, a u, a u,
I 13:41 I 14:M
• C 14:21 • C ~ m ~ m ~- "C 14: 50 ~- "C o DJ 15:13 o DJ
.f!l ~ 15:36 .f!l ~ ;!_ -4 C 15·59 m;;;;.:i:=:=., ;!. -4 C ~ C l'D 1&:22 ~ C l'D "' {:) {:) ,- 16:45 "' {:) {:)
r- ; £ 17:08 r- ; I II C :::; 17:31 C"'-1--+-..L I II C ;? 00 l'D ~- 17:54 _.-....,.- {? IN l'D ~ ~ 18: 17 ~ ~ c. ::I 18:40 c. ::I ;ii' C1Q 19:03 ir':'"""1--+-L ;ii' C1Q ~ ~ ~ ~
;!_ :::r 19:26 ..... 3a!=-+---t-, ;!_ :::r ~ 19:49 ~ ro ro "' 20:12 "'
20:35 20:58
21:2 1 21:44
22 :07 22:30
22 :53
23:161 I~ 23:39 ~
Version: 1
Date: October 21, 2015
Doc. #: 850-035977
UC3: UDB SELECTION
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
11
:00
11
:23
11
:46
12
:09
12
:32
12
:55
13
:18
13
:41
14
:04
14
:27
14
:50
15
:13
15
:36
15
:59
16
:22
16
:45
17
:08
17
:31
17
:54
18
:17
18
:40
19
:03
19
:26
19
:49
20
:12
20
:35
20
:58
21
:21
21
:44
22
:07
22
:30
22
:53
23
:16
23
:39
Nu
mb
er
of
De
par
ture
s
Local Time
Departue Queue LengthUDB = 1% of Capacity
Active Departures Queued Departures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
11
:00
11
:23
11
:46
12
:09
12
:32
12
:55
13
:18
13
:41
14
:04
14
:27
14
:50
15
:13
15
:36
15
:59
16
:22
16
:45
17
:08
17
:31
17
:54
18
:17
18
:40
19
:03
19
:26
19
:49
20
:12
20
:35
20
:58
21
:21
21
:44
22
:07
22
:30
22
:53
23
:16
23
:39
Nu
mb
er
of
De
par
ture
s
Local Time
Departue Queue LengthUDB = 3% of Capacity
Active Departures Queued Departures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
11
:00
11
:23
11
:46
12
:09
12
:32
12
:55
13
:18
13
:41
14
:04
14
:27
14
:50
15
:13
15
:36
15
:59
16
:22
16
:45
17
:08
17
:31
17
:54
18
:17
18
:40
19
:03
19
:26
19
:49
20
:12
20
:35
20
:58
21
:21
21
:44
22
:07
22
:30
22
:53
23
:16
23
:39
Nu
mb
er
of
De
par
ture
s
Local Time
Departue Queue LengthUDB = 5% of Capacity
Active Departures Queued Departures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
11
:00
11
:23
11
:46
12
:09
12
:32
12
:55
13
:18
13
:41
14
:04
14
:27
14
:50
15
:13
15
:36
15
:59
16
:22
16
:45
17
:08
17
:31
17
:54
18
:17
18
:40
19
:03
19
:26
19
:49
20
:12
20
:35
20
:58
21
:21
21
:44
22
:07
22
:30
22
:53
23
:16
23
:39
Nu
mb
er
of
De
par
ture
s
Local Time
Departue Queue LengthUDB = 8% of Capacity
Active Departures Queued Departures
COMPANY UNCLASSIFIED - NOT EXPORT CONTROLLEDPage 56
*
top related