Ken WrightSensis Corporation

January 28, 2010

Modeling and Simulation Challenges and the New

Vehicle NRA

2

Background Analyze the combined impacts of advanced vehicles and

NextGen

3

Vehicles

Cruise @ M 0.78, 35k – 40k ft

2000 nm

Cruise @ M 1.641k ft to 53k ft

4000 nm

1200 nm

Cruise @ M 0.5, 25k ft

CESTOL

SST

LCTRUAS

750 nm

400 nm

VLJ

Cruise @ M 0.28, 15k ft

Cruise @ M 0.6, 35k ft

4

Background (Continued) Timeframe

– 2025– 2040 (roughly 2 times today’s traffic levels)– 3X (3 times today’s traffic levels)

Tasks– Design vehicles– Develop usage scenarios– Compute delay– Compute environmental impacts– Compute metroplex impacts– Compute safety impacts– And much more

5

New Vehicle Regional Airport

and AirspaceDesign Impacts

AvDemand

FACETSIMMOD

JPDO-providedNextGen

configuration

Regional Airport and

Airspace Performance

NextGen CONOPS,SAE 1845 AIR procedures (<10kft),

BADA Performance (>=10kft) conv. AC

EDS

Vehicle Market Penetration, Fleet Mix Changes

AEDTSystem

Wide

TARGETS

SafetyImpacts

APMT

ACES

PDARS Safety Metrics

GTSafety Models

New Vehicle Aircraft Design

Impacts

BADA AC Performance, New VehiclesD

eman

d fil

es

4D Trajectories System-wide

Dem

and

BA

DA

Dem

and

BA

DA

BA

DA

AC

Per

form

ance

Procedure Design

Arrival, departure procedures for new

vehicles

Pro

cedu

res

Pro

cedu

res

BA

DA

Procedures

Dem

and

Pro

cedu

res

BA

DA

BA

DA

AEDTRegional

4D Trajectories Regional

BA

DA

Pro

cedu

res

FlyabilityAnalysis

TSAM

PopulationGrowth

TravelCosts

Air

Tax

iD

eman

d F

ile

BADA AC Performance, New Vehicles

BA

DA

Flight Demand Growth

JPDO-providedNextGen

configuration

Key:Text in black Input or output to a model

Text in blue Result from a model

Pro

cedu

res

NAS-Wide Airport and Airspace Performance with and without New Vehicles for NextGen

EmissionImpacts

NoiseImpacts

SafetyMetrics

Sensis New Vehicle NRA Model

Interaction Diagram

Em

issi

ons

Inve

ntor

ies

Noi

se

Con

tour

s

Model Infrastructure

6

The Focus of this Presentation is ACES

• To do NAS-wide simulation in ACES we need:• BADA Data• Schedules/Capacities

• ACES tracks used by AEDT to compute environmental impact

7

General Modeling Simulation Observations Designing good experiments is tough

– Results often seem obvious– Difficult to translate concepts into hypotheses that leverage model

strengths

Difficult to spot erroneous results– Large datasets, complex interactive models– Figuring what’s going on below the surface is difficult

Some modules don’t work well with large datasets– Results not significantly impacted– New features can increase run time, without affecting results– ACES 5.0 vs ACES 6.2 compatibility issues

Challenge: Demand Generation

9

JPDO-Provided Demand Sets

Huge delays at LAS and ATL due to capacity-demand imbalance dominatesystemwide-results

12

13

ACES-Specific Observations

MPAS (physics model) currently can’t fly unconventional vehicles

– Cruise-Efficient STOL Aircraft (cruises too slow)– Supersonic transport (cruises too fast)– Tiltrotor (takes off like a helicopter)

Tail-tracking

Terminal area tracks

Conflict Detection and Resolution

Weather obstacles (Back-up)

14

Tail-Tracking One-third of all delay is propagated delay

ACES tail-tracking doesn’t quite work

15

Sensis Itinerary-Creation Algorithm gives 5-6 Stages per Airframe

16

Increase in delay due to tail-tracking too small to be realistic

Aircraft is in two placesat the same time

1 2

43

18

Short flights show discontinuous tracks

Flights having great circle distance less than about 60 nm fly discontinuous “X” routes

Affects 3,000 to 3,500 ACES flights in 2040 dataset (about 3.5% of total)

Because flights fly longer routes than necessary, amount of time spent airborne is too long.

19

20

21

22

Flight from TEB to LGA is Airborne for 31 Minutes.Average speed = 21 mph

23

Conflict Detection and Resolution

Not used in New Vehicle project

Causes about as many conflicts as it resolves

CDR Causes Collision

26

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

Aircraft sense impending 5-nm conflict

CDR Causes Collision

Aircraft move to avoid 5-nm conflict

CDR Causes Collision

Aircraft move to avoid 5-nm conflict

CDR Causes Collision

Boom!

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

CDR Causes Collision

57

3X-Dataset No restrictions on international arrivals leads to large sectors

exceeding capacity limits

2086

Name CapacityZNY87 25ZBW01 35ZHU79 25ZNY90 25

Foreign arrivals choke offdomestic departures. (175k flights)

60

Conclusions Big project; tested lots of models; pushed limits of ACES and AEDT

It’s probably more fun to be a developer than a user

Coming up with interesting experiments is tough– Experiments should leverage model strengths to find novel results

Difficult to spot erroneous results

Some modules/capabilities did not work as expected for our large-scale experimental configuration

Ken Wright

Sensis Corporation

Questions?

Back up

63

Rerouting around Weather Mostly worked, but number of weather polygons scenario could use

was unnecessarily limited

Peculiar reroutes due to lack of airborne holding capability in ACES

64

Clusters of Storm Cells (>=50 DBZ)

Replaced by Rectangles

65

Clusters of Storm Cells (>=50 DBZ)

Replaced by Rectangles

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

Final fix blocked

81

Final fix blocked

82

Final fix blocked

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

It appears that the flight turns around only when it bounces off another weather cell

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100