NAT Flight Efficiencies Flight Dispatch

North Atlantic (NAT) 2030 - Vision Workshop Paris, France, 29-30 January 2019

Sergey Vakhrushev EVP- North Atlantic, North America

Nominee to NAT SPG sergey.vakhrushev@united.com, svakhrushev@ifalda.org

Slides Courtesy Air Canada NAT2030 PR08

Agenda

» Introduction- Role of Dispatch in the NAT Landscape

» Problem & Changes ….’then and now’

» Impact of the problem

» Todays OTS

» Case Studies

» Short Term Improvements

» A way forward

» Recommendations

2

Dispatcher - Definition of Duties Definition of Duties defined in ICAO Ann.6 Part I - Ch.4 Flight Operations

–Normal Ops: A flight operations officer/flight dispatcher in conjunction with a method of control and supervision of flight operations (in accordance with 4.2.1.3) shall: a) assist the pilot-in-command in flight preparation and provide the relevant information; b) assist the pilot-in-command in preparing the operational and ATS flight plans, sign when applicable and file the ATS flight plan with the appropriate ATS unit; and c) furnish the pilot-in-command while in flight, by appropriate means, with information which may be necessary for the safe conduct of the flight.

-Emergency: a) initiate such procedures as outlined in the operations manual while avoiding taking any action that would conflict with ATC procedures; and b) convey safety-related information to the pilot-in-command that may be necessary for the safe conduct of the flight, including information related to any amendments to the flight plan that become necessary in the course of the flight.

Assignment of Duties Assignment of Duties – Ann.6 Ch.10 » Operator specific Training » Qualification flight » Demonstration of knowledge to Operator

Ops. Manual Radio equipment (COM & SUR) NAV Equipment

» Demonstration of knowledge to Operator for areas of responsibility & individual authority to exercise flight supervision Seasonal MET phenomena Effects of MET conditions on radio reception Peculiarities & limitations of each NAV system used Aeroplane Loading instructions

» Demonstration of knowledge & skills related to human performance relevant to Dispatch duties

» Demonstration of ability to perform duties

Dispatch in the NAT

» Two drivers to airline Flight Efficiencies 1. Get the Plan Right!

• Optimized Flight Planning- Airlines & the ATM System 2. Fly the Filed Plan

• Traffic Management/Collaborative Decision Making

» Flight Planning Principles contained in ICAO Doc 007 Guidelines have changed little over the years – no

more MTTs Previous ICAO efforts starting 2002, to….

• Improve coordination between EUR-NAM-NAT ANSPs • ‘One stop’ shop to understand a myriad of restrictions • Build a fuel-efficient daily OTS. Improve/change PRM process

» Flow Management Voice of the Customer, tactical CDM Post flight data analytics to measure performance

The Airline world today

6

Don’t bring me problems – bring me solutions!! But how do I know what the solution is unless I have the data?

• Statistical contingency fuel • Predictive maintenance • Connected aircraft • Predicting customer behavior &

loyalty

Costs on the rise ….. Industry demands data driven solutions

CDM - NAMEUR ATFM » NAMEUR ATFM has

improved airline/ANSP awareness of the need for efficiency

7

» Much good work has been done • Night Fuel Saving Routes in

Europe • Removal of the NARs from the

W/B OTS

Problem – Changes….’then and now’

8

What has changed • Major investments in ANS systems & technologies (increased user charges)

• Increased complexities from traffic increases

• Departing 0000 - 2359 June 13, we saw some 2000 flights between ~470

city pairs

• Operator dynamics- LCC’s/Service carriers, City Pair combinations

• Changes in Equipment Types & Capabilities (speeds, range, FL capability)

• Commercial impact of NAT operations

The legacy processes to design todays OTS do not meet todays airline business requirements

What has not changed

• Track design methodology (PRMs & Operator interaction)

• Airspace utilization- OTS vs Random, Number of Tracks, Splits etc.

• Domestic interfaces (NARs and structure)

• CDM process – pre tactical and tactical

• Post flight metrics & 360 analysis

Opportunities for Change PLANNING: OTS Design Improvements

» The Investment • Right tools for OTS design to model ‘end-to-end’ 4D trajectories • That take into account:

» Individual Aircraft-type Performance Capability » Dynamic upper winds, temperatures, ISA deviation » ATS rules of flight –including Notams & restricted areas, rules of air (FL

availability) » SIGWX, hurricanes, volcanic ash, turbulence etc » Smoothing algorithm to balance demand/capacity. Heuristics to map time

flows

9

» The Outcome • The most optimal airspace design in time, lateral coverage,

flight level utilization » The lowest fuel burn » Minimal number of core tracks (and half-tracks) » Flexible time window validity for daily OTS » Remove NARs » Accommodate ‘business trajectories’ of random traffic (lateral, FLs,

above OTS, ‘wrong’ direction’ above OTS » Post operational 360 review on Plan vs Actuals using Lateral,

Speed, Level filings

What is the opportunity worth?

10

One minute of flight time saving per flight per day is worth USD$39.7M per annum and >170M Kgs/CO2 emissions savings – Data sample (Eurocontrol) Jun 11-19 2018

1. Fuel Savings

2. Time Savings

3. Emissions Savings

4. Commercial Impact

Count of Aircraft Id Column Labels Row Labels 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410

Grand Total

NATA 5 18 37 11 44 48 30 35 24 2 254 NATB 10 15 47 30 93 89 52 49 23 3 411 NATC 3 10 14 38 81 90 122 81 48 30 1 518 NATD 1 11 28 37 30 47 42 73 39 4 312 NATE 1 1 3 8 28 25 54 45 53 29 2 249 NATF 1 2 5 5 30 16 49 31 50 32 1 222 NATG 3 17 14 10 41 14 13 19 131 NATH 2 1 1 1 2 2 9 NATJ 2 4 5 2 8 2 3 2 28 NATP 3 9 20 6 14 1 4 57 NATQ 2 3 12 34 15 31 6 15 3 121 NATR 8 16 29 32 15 38 13 12 4 167 NATS 1 5 29 37 29 20 84 28 49 3 1 286 NATT 6 18 20 28 26 70 40 37 1 1 247 NATU 21 11 44 70 48 156 50 66 6 472 NATV 2 9 26 62 120 62 172 75 86 8 622 NATW 1 2 18 14 35 68 58 87 68 36 3 390 NATX 9 14 9 22 46 26 28 16 1 171 NATY 13 7 17 26 16 17 3 7 106 NATZ 4 3 2 14 1 23 3 4 54 Grand Total 3 6 33 164 330 493 753 795 993 675 527 53 2 4827

The value of data…. 11 – 18 Jun Count of Aircraft Id

Column Labels

Row Labels 11-Jun 12-Jun 13-Jun 14-Jun 15-Jun

16-Jun 17-Jun

18-Jun

Grand Total

785 806 792 760 815 810 870 27 5665 NATA 75 78 18 10 10 20 44 255 NATB 75 134 16 26 46 58 56 411 NATC 71 69 62 72 127 96 21 518 NATD 21 13 58 86 46 58 30 312 NATE 25 5 47 63 25 59 25 249 NATF 38 7 37 59 18 29 34 222 NATG 36 21 28 7 39 131 NATH 6 3 9 NATJ 18 10 28

11

Westbound Track Occupancy

Count of Aircraft IdRow Labels NATA NATB NATC NATD NATE NATF NATG NATH NATJEGLL-KJFK 2 8 19 13 24 19 1EGLL-KORD 4 7 7 7EGLL-KLAX 1 2 2EGLL-KEWR 11 11 4 4 8 3 1LFPG-KJFK 2 7 4 2 14EDDF-KORD 8 6 1EGLL-CYYZ 3 2 11 4 5 5EGLL-KSFO 3EGLL-KBOS 4 3 2 8 7 1EGLL-KIAD 5 4 3 10 7 1

Westbound Track Occupancy by city pair

Track Occupancy by Flight Level

Simple BI tools required – not excel

Todays OTS

12

» Today with a quantum leap in technology the same aircraft

operate in the same airspace Eastbound and Westbound » Yet, ANSPs have different tools, data sources and

`methodology to design the OTS

Todays OTS is not an optimal solution and airline costs are increasing

Airlines started sending PRMs back in the 70s to support design of the OTS when core traffic was between NE EUR and NE USA & Canada with B707s, DC8s B747-100, L10s, DC10s.

» Opportunities; Cost Index iso Fixed Mach Step climbs Split tracks constrain thousands of miles of airspace Fixed NARS Lack of effective CDM

Case Study - Westbound OTS 12 July

13

• Split Tracks • Min Cost Track LHR-JFK - South

• Looked at TDA • Very little traffic on southerly tracks • Where is the core traffic going?

• NATS build OTS from airline PRMs - only 6 or 7 received • UK Met Office D-1 prediction for select city pairs • Controller experience

• Difference between PRMs and actual traffic flow – not new ! • But why the difference? • Hurricane Chris off East Coast US?

• How many other days like this – we don’t know? • The answers are in the data and effective CDM but… • ANSPs/Airlines do not have tools or resources to do post

operational data analysis

Time to use the years of available data and predictive analytics to design the OTS

Case Study - Eastbound OTS 02 Jul

14

• Nav Can build OTS from airline PRMs - only 6 or 7 received • Canadian Met Office data • MTTs from GAATS select city pairs • Controller experience

• 12 Eastbound tracks ! • Three split tracks to the North with 2 degree separation –

results in at least 5 tracks – constrains 1000s miles of airspace • Majority of traffic used the N tracks with very little traffic on

the core tracks to south – why? • Only 19 flights on 3 tracks from NY – why?

• This scenario happened on consecutive days – why? How many other days like this –we don’t know

• The answers are in the data and effective CDM but… • ANSPs/Airlines do not have tools or resources to do post

operational data analysis Same story – OTS tracks should come from one single entity and associated post

operational data analysis should come from same data sources

Optimized vs NARs

Optimized Route

NAR Route

15

Comparison: Optimized vs. NAR

Savings…. » 98 Kilos of Fuel » 1 minute airtime » $77 Fuel / ATC Charges

Potential Revenue / Savings » Extra Passenger / Cargo » Crew Costs

16

CDM - NAMEUR ATFM • BUT….

• Lack of coordinated industry position

results in continued outdated processes and lack of data driven solutions

• What's missing?

17

UAL - How can this happen?

Short Term Improvements – Start NOW !

» Revisit NARs in Canadian and US Airspace

» Augment and improve TDA to improve CDM Immense amount of intelligence & answers latent in 15 years of data Improve user interface Make available on mobile devices Use data to review track occupancy rates, by time, by aircraft type, city

pair etc etc

» Why do we need lower flights levels on the OTS? Westbound 6th June 1 flight @ FL310 and 1 @ FL320 Westbound 7th June 0 flights @ FL310

Flight level occupancy issue was tabled by IATA to NAT IMG in 2005 Start trials

» Why do we need OTS in the Nav Can/Greenland ADS-B

corridor and Iceland/UK areas

19

A way forward….

4D Optimal Trajectory

Global Airline Schedules

Aircraft Performance

NOTAMS

Weather

ANSP Constraints

ARINC 424

20

NAT OTS

Polar Routes

PACOTS

Business Intelligence analytical tools make it relatively easy to support planning decisions based on rules based scenarios

» We need to know city pair flows,

core route trajectories and timings

» Accurate aircraft performance models

» Accurate weather data » Shared and transparent ANSP

constraints – demand and capacity scenarios

» Published Tracks where operationally beneficial – time/altitude/geography

The future is data science ( AI ) – predictive analytics from data mining, statistics and modelling to predict where the tracks should be – guess work/assumptions not required

Recommendations » Include Dispatcher-related flight planning aspects into the core planning elements under

the NAT 2030 vision goals. » SPG leadership under a one system approach and multi-disciplinary inputs from all

stakeholders to develop an implementation plan (including funding) that supports the required paradigm shift to allow a data driven NAT OTS design and improved CDM solutions that are available to all stakeholders

» Consider a collaborative process sponsored by the NAT SPG and supported by strategic guidance from the members of the NAT IMG with technical and regional contributions from the ANSPs under the auspices of the Procedures & Operations Group (POG)

» A centralized data warehouse is required where business analytics for pre-flight and post flight study becomes the new planning norm.

» Build capability to model 4D trajectories using dynamic flight parameters such as individual aircraft performance, NOTAMs, restricted airspace, significant weather and upper meteorological influences in producing a combined array of 4D flight trajectories ‘of the day’ in an end-to-end fashion.

» Subsequent activities prior OTS finalization would necessarily include mechanisms for Dispatchers to pro-actively participate in a CDM process. The CDM dialog would also provide insights into capacity balancing requirements and any ATM Flow and Capacity requirements

» Criteria and technology solutions developed as above should be harmonized for use in global ATM and flexible track planning.

22

Thoughts for SOTS

» Biggest Benefit - Safety » Fuel Predictability for Operators » Airspace Capacity

23

backup

Origin Destination EQPTCount of

EQPT

Fuel - Kgs per

Min

Total Flight Cost-kg

Total Flight Cost USD$

Total W/B - per extra minute

Jet Fuel Price

2.164USD$ per

Galo0.73291

USD$ per KG

EGLL KJFK B744 46 170.5 7,843.00 $5,748.22 USD$ $53,319 per dayEGLL KIAH B772 27 101.3 2,735.10 $2,004.58 USD$ $19,461,346 per yearEDDF KJFK A388 14 191.7 2,683.80 $1,966.98EGLL KLAX A388 14 191.7 2,683.80 $1,966.98 KGS 72,749 per day

OMDB KJFK A388 14 191.7 2,683.80 $1,966.98 KGS 26,553,514 per yearEDDF KORD B748 16 160 2,560.00 $1,876.25EGLL KLAX B789 27 93.3 2,519.10 $1,846.27 Flights weekly 5331LFPG KJFK A388 13 191.7 2,492.10 $1,826.49EGLL KIAD B744 14 170.5 2,387.00 $1,749.46EGLL KMIA B744 14 170.5 2,387.00 $1,749.46LLBG KJFK B744 14 170.5 2,387.00 $1,749.46EGLL KDFW B77W 21 113 2,373.00 $1,739.20EGLL KEWR B764 28 84 2,352.00 $1,723.81

OMAA KJFK A388 12 191.7 2,300.40 $1,685.99EGLL KJFK A333 25 92 2,300.00 $1,685.69EGLL CYYZ B77W 20 113 2,260.00 $1,656.38EGLL KJFK B772 22 101.3 2,228.60 $1,633.36

EHAM KMSP A333 24 92 2,208.00 $1,618.27EGLL KORD B788 27 81.7 2,205.90 $1,616.73LFPG CYUL B77W 17 113 1,921.00 $1,407.92

EHAM KDTW A333 20 92 1,840.00 $1,348.56

Fuel computations

Traffic & Savings computations 2.164 0.732910386

per day per year per day per year per day per year per day per year per day per year

Eastbound 75,574 27,584,650 166,613 60,813,755 55,389 20,217,124 238 86,892 524,831 191,563,327Westbound 72,749 26,553,514 160,385 58,540,488 53,319 19,461,346 229 83,644 505,212 184,402,537Total NAT 148,324 54,138,164 326,998 119,354,243 108,708 39,678,471 467 170,535 1,030,043 375,965,864

Weekly Yearlysampling projections

Eastbound 5,506 286,312Westbound 5,331 277,212Total NAT 10,837 563,524

Flight Counts

CO2 Savings

tonnes/CO2- kgs lbs/CO2

USD$ per KG

Kilograms Pounds USD$

Total Fuel - Opportunity Cost North Atlantic flying - per minute

USD$ per GalonJet Fuel Price

What is 1min of SOTS worth? minute worth?

YEARLY PROJECTIONS

nt South America Europe Total weekly FLIGHT COUNT

Fuel Savings CO2 Savings USD$

Savings

de Airbus) 55 56 111 5,772 531,024 1,672,726 $424,819 0 (A330 - Wide

99 100 199 10,348 889,928 2,803,273 $711,942 0 (A330 - Wide

6 2 8 416 38,272 120,557 $30,618

de Airbus) 59 61 120 6,240 773,760 2,437,344 $619,008 0 (A340 - Wide

33 34 67 3,484 355,368 1,119,409 $284,294 0 (A340 - Wide

52 52 104 5,408 719,264 2,265,682 $575,411 0 (B747 - Wide

34 34 68 3,536 551,616 1,737,590 $441,293

de Boeing) 3 3 6 312 48,672 153,317 $38,938 0 (B767 - Wide

19 28 47 2,444 180,856 569,696 $144,685 0 (B767 - Wide

7 7 14 728 53,872 169,697 $43,098

de Boeing) 12 10 22 1,144 84,656 266,666 $67,725 0 (B777 - Wide

36 36 72 3,744 415,584 1,309,090 $332,467 0 (B777 - Wide

14 14 28 1,456 165,984 522,850 $132,787

de Boeing) 17 17 34 1,768 201,552 634,889 $161,242 0ER (B777 -

eing) 9 9 18 936 106,704 336,118 $85,363 Wide McDonnell

6 6 12 624 74,256 233,906 $59,405 Tupolev - upolev) 7 7 364 54,600 171,990 $43,680 Total Flights per

Week 468 469 937 48,724 5,245,968 16,524,799 $4,196,774