Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 2 Iridium NEXT Satellites

This work was supported by FAA Surveillance and Broadcast Services through contract 693KA9-18-D-00010

Presented by: Reduced Separation in US Dan Howell, Oceanic Airspace Rob Dean, and Joseph Post Benefits Analysis through Fast-Time Modeling Date: 6/20/2019 ASEPS Project Overview • The Surveillance & Broadcast Services Advanced Surveillance Enhanced Procedural Separation (SBS ASEPS) Project has been investigating the use of reduced oceanic separation to enhance operations in US oceanic airspace ➢ Space-based ADS-B (SBA) ➢ Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Contract (ADS-C, more frequent update)

• Goal: Increase the efficiency and capacity of operations in Oceanic Flight Information Regions (FIRs) through surveillance enhancements for reduced oceanic separation standards

• FAA has been conducting a cost-benefit analysis of increased ADS-C reporting and SBA

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 2 Iridium NEXT Satellites

• 66 cross-linked satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO)  11 satellites in each of 6 polar orbits • Aireon ADS-B receiver hosted payload

SpaceX Falcon 9

3 Oceanic Communications and Surveillance Operational View

Inmarsat/Iridium

Iridium NEXT GNSS

CPDLC ADS-C ADS-B

HF Voice

Service Provider ATC Facility Service Provider

Comm Nav Surveillance

4 US Oceanic Airspace

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 5 Benefits of Improved Oceanic Surveillance

• Improved Accommodation of altitude requests • Improved arrival/departure services at non-radar airports • Reduced Vertical Collision risk • Reduced convective weather impact • Improved accommodation of descents, routing, and speed requests • Improved controller situational awareness • Accurate and timely information for search and rescue

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 6 Benefits of Improved Oceanic Surveillance

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 7 Improved Accommodation of Altitude Requests

New York Oceanic Boundary Filed Cruise • Oceanic flights often long Altitude Intermediate Step (FL350) Oceanic Entry Altitude (FL330) • Strong desire to minimize Altitude (FL310) fuel Altitude Successful Profile Step climb Climb Initiated • Higher altitudes generally blocked (conflict) result in higher fuel efficiency • Aircraft frequently take off very heavy and cannot reach optimal altitude until some fuel is burned off

• Once aircraft are light enough, they often want to climb to reach a more fuel-efficient altitude • Competition for optimal altitudes frequently occurs

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 8 My Flight (PHL-LHR June 15)

My Flight to Europe 40,000

35,000

30,000 Step Climbs and 25,000 Surveillance Gap

20,000 Altitude (ft) Altitude 15,000

10,000

5,000

18 35 52 69 86

222 103 120 137 154 171 188 205 239 256 273 290 307 324 341 358 375 392 409 426 443 460 477 494 511 528 545 562 579 596 *www.flightaware.com Position Report Number 9 Simulation Model & Methodology • Global Oceanic Model (GOM)

➢ Fast-time simulation tool developed in MATLAB for examining fuel burn and flight time in oceanic airspace

➢ Time-based model that simulates individual aircraft from origin to destination along specified paths

➢ Randomness built into model through aircraft takeoff mass and equipage levels

➢ Produced under partnership between FAA and Virginia Tech

•Representative Days Flight Schedules •Growth Assumptions for future demand

•ADS-B Out Aircraft Avionics Modeled •FANS (ADS-C + CPDLC) Trajectories •Historical Flight Plans Routes •Existing Route Structure Global Altitude Request •Historical Altitude Request Information Information •Magnitude of altitude changes Oceanic •BADA Performance Model Aircraft Performance •Takeoff weight estimates Model Summary •Carrier Fleet Forecasts Fleet Evolution •Future aircraft types Metrics

Separation And Conflict •Current and Future Separation Standards Management Data •Types of resolutions used in ocean

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 10 Current Oceanic Environment • Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) System ➢ Designed to reduce manual processes controllers have historically used to ensure separation ➢ Processes oceanic aircraft and weather data and calculates separation criteria near instantaneously ➢ Provides efficient track and altitude alternatives through Conflict Prediction and Reporting (CPAR) • Mixed equipage leads to varying separation minima ➢ Current standards lead to high likelihood of preferred routings and altitudes, but expected increases in traffic in future will impact this • Procedural Separation and Control ➢ “Control By Exception”: Procedural separation whereby controller notified of possible separation situation when there is an actual or predicted violation. Controller does not continuously monitor aircraft positions and altitudes as with tactical separation in a radar environment ➢ ATOP uses 2 hour lookahead for conflicts and controllers are expected to resolve conflicts that will occur 30 minutes or less in the future

11 FANS Equipage • Future Air Navigation System (FANS) interfaces with ATOP and includes avionics to support Performance-Based Navigation, Data Link, and ADS-C position reporting

• FANS equipage is primary constraint of SBA-usage since ADS-B Out (required) will soon be mandated in US airspace

• Current FANS equipage levels (by aircraft type) were obtained from an analysis of flight plans provided by MITRE

• Logistics curve fitted to the percentage of Datalink equipped aircraft time trend in each ocean to specify overall equipage levels for future years

• FANS equipage randomly assigned to unequipped flights until overall target level was achieved

• Remaining unequipped flights passing through Gander, Shanwick, and Santa Maria were equipped to reflect upcoming mandate

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 12 Separation Standards and Schedules

•Separation Standards for US Oceanic Airspace

More Frequent Aircraft Equipage Legacy Case SBA ADS-C FANS via SATCOM 30/30 NM 23/23 NM 15/15 NM with RNP No FANS 50/80 NM 50/80 NM 50/80 NM

•Schedules And Traffic Growth ➢20 representative days from FY16 used in model ➢2016, 2020, 2025, 2030 and 2035 were modeled ➢Results linearly interpolated for intervening years ➢Using current FAA policy on traffic growth for investment decisions, growth was capped in 2028 based on a 10 year sliding window.

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 13 Aircraft Altitude Requests • In controlled airspace, aircraft must request an ATC clearance to deviate from their assigned altitude • Historical altitude requests and requests cleared were analyzed in ZAN/ZOA and ZNY • A regression was used to determine whether pilot requests increased as a result of separation changes in ZNY and ZAN

➢ Two independent variables: monthly trend variable and separation change variable

➢ ZNY: Change was significant, indicated a 15% increase in requests handled over the previous average

➢ ZOA/ZAN: 11% over the previous average

➢ Monthly trend variable was not significant in Atlantic, negative in Pacific

• A similar increase in altitude requests was applied in GOM to approximate possible effect of reduced separation on pilot behavior

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 14 Other Model Considerations

• Aircraft Performance ➢ Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) model used ➢ Assumes nominal take-off weight related to aircraft type and distance to be flown ➢ No consideration of actual flight planning process

• Fleet Evolution ➢ SWAC model incorporates a fleet evolution algorithm that replaces old aircraft types with newer ones as specified by FAA’s Carrier Fleet Forecast for 2016-2037 ➢ Some types are not supported in GOM. In these cases, we assumed an increase in fuel efficiency of 40% compared to previous type of the same size/range

15 Other Model Considerations • Interaction with neighboring FIRs ➢ Agreements with surrounding international Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) are a major factor in how the US controls flights in oceanic airspace ➢ Example: if neighboring ANSP requires higher longitudinal separation than U.S., U.S. controllers must plan and respond appropriately ➢ FAA must consider this when deciding if and when to approve reduced separation standards

• Model Validation ➢ Number of Altitude Change Requests ➢ Percentage of altitude change requests granted ➢ Distribution of flight times and distances traveled across oceanic regions ➢ Distribution of cruise altitudes upon entry to U.S. oceanic airspace

• Limitations ➢ Only conflicts in oceanic airspace considered ➢ No adjustments of wheels-off times for foreign departures ➢ GOM does not model convective weather or turbulence

16 Modeled Airspace and Trajectory Data

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 17 Results

• 480 simulations conducted to get a full set of results across years, representative days, oceans, and alternatives ➢ 4 years ➢ 20 unique days ➢ 2 oceans ➢ 3 alternatives • Annual Direct Fuel Savings (kg) SBA Enhanced ADS-C FY Atlantic Pacific Atlantic Pacific 2020 16,265,582 18,547,428 13,030,382 16,086,360 2025 21,524,161 24,156,380 16,342,274 18,475,954 2030 25,429,404 25,586,382 18,357,171 19,258,831 2035 25,926,102 24,885,958 18,722,780 18,753,088

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 18 Additional Cost-To-Carry Benefit • Oceanic Flights long in duration, ranging up to 14 hours in the Pacific and 10 hours in the Atlantic • To account for reduced fuel loading and a consequent additional reduction in fuel burn, we adjusted the results using a method to quantify the incremental fuel impact of reducing takeoff mass[1] ➢Incremental fuel Savings = Weight Savings × flight hrs × 0.005 • Annual Indirect (Cost-to-Carry) Fuel Savings (kg)

SBA Enhanced ADS-C FY Atlantic Pacific Atlantic Pacific 2020 4,259,587 6,013,700 3,441,648 5,226,565 2025 5,575,130 7,865,542 4,302,496 6,000,308 2030 6,587,617 8,312,610 4,847,205 6,281,038 2035 6,695,970 8,070,657 4,927,289 6,106,602

[1] FAA Office of Policy and Plans, “Economic Values for FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide,” September 2015.

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 19 Results (Graphical)

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 20 Model Variability

• Additional runs performed to examine the variability of the results ➢ Random seed affecting take-off weights built into the model ➢ Manually randomized which flights for a particular aircraft type were equipped when equipage was not 100%

• Developed distribution of ratios between variability and default simulations ➢ Considerable variability (up to 25% in inner-quartile range) ➢ Default results near middle of range

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 21 Conclusions

• Results from this analysis suggest that reduced separation in oceanic airspace produces significant benefits through improved accommodation of altitude requests • Results vary greatly by airspace volume. Factors include: ➢ Route length ➢ Traffic density ➢ Equipage • Results sensitive to modeling assumptions ➢ Aircraft gross weight ➢ Avionics capability ➢ Climb Request Behavior • Continuing to explore the potential for SBA to save fuel and provide other benefits to airspace users and the FAA

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 22 ASEPS Going Forward

LONG-TERM (5+ years)

ZAN

Anchorage

ZAN New York Oakland ZNY ZOA

NEAR-TERM (1-3 years) MID-TERM (3-5 years) Miami New York Oceanic Center 40 58 60 63 Miami Oceanic 43 62 Havana San Juan

Port au Prince Santo Domingo

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 23 Acknowledgements

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 24 THANK YOU

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 25 References

▪ ICAO FIR viewer available at website http://gis.icao.int/flexviewer ▪ Lockheed Martin, “Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) Operational Concept,” FAA-ATOP-2004-0395, November 2004. ▪ SBS Program Office, “Concept of Operations Document for Advanced Surveillance - Enhanced Procedural Separation (ASEPS),” SBS-071, Rev. 02, September 2016. ▪ Aireon LLC, Global Air Traffic Surveillance, information available at website: https://aireon.com/services/global-air-traffic-surveillance/, viewed January 2019. ▪ FAA, “14 CFR Part 91 Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Out Performance Requirements To Support Air Traffic Control (ATC) Service; Final Rule,” May 28 2010. ▪ FAA, Air Traffic Organization 2012 Safety Report, 2015. ▪ FAA, ATO Top 5 Fact Sheet, 2015. ▪ Skybrary, Use of Selected Altitude by ATC, 2011. ▪ Aireon LLC, ALERT, information available at website: https://aireon.com/services/aireonalert/ viewed January 2019. ▪ Trani, A., Li, T., Spencer, T., Tsikas, N., Hinze, N., and Gunnam, A., “Global Oceanic Model Development,” presentation to IATA, January 2016. ▪ Cheng, F., Gulding, J., Baszczewski, B., Galaviz, R., Chow, A., “Modeling the effect of weather conditions in sample day selection using an optimization method,” 2012 Integrated Communications Navigation and Surveillance conference, April 2012. ▪ FAA Office of Performance Analysis, “FY2016 Sample Day Selection,” February 10 2017. ▪ FAA Office of Policy and Plans, FAA Aerospace Forecast 2016-2036, website: https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/. ▪ Post, J., Gulding, J., Noonan, K., Murphy, D., Bonn, J. and Graham, M, “The Modernized National Airspace System Performance Analysis Capability,” 8th AIAA Aviation, Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference, Anchorage, Alaska, September 2008. ▪ Post, J., “FAA Employs New Model in Benefits Calculation,” Journal of Air Traffic Control, Air Traffic Control Association, Washington D.C., Summer 2013. ▪ Eurocontrol, Base of Aircraft Data (BADA) website, available at http://www.eurocontrol.int/eec/public/standard_page/proj_BADA.html ▪ US DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Air Carrier Statistics Database, available at website https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=293 ▪ Antonio Trani, “BADA Model,” presentation to FAA, April 15 2016. ▪ FAA Office of Policy and Plans, Fleet Forecast, September 2015. ▪ International Air Transport Association, “IATA Technology Roadmap 4th Edition,” June 2013. ▪ FAA Office of Policy and Plans, “Economic Values for FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide,” September 2015. ▪ FAA, “Air Traffic Control,” FAA Order 7110.65, Washington, D.C., December 2015.

Reduced Separation in US Oceanic Airspace 26