Toulouse, 28‐29 October 2014 Day 1: Final project results ATC FULL DATALINK
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Toulouse, 28‐29 October 2014Day 1: Final project results
ATC FULL DATALINK
ATC Full Datalink – The consortium
2
Introduction
3
ATC Full Datalink project is ademonstration project of theSJU that performed a certainnumber of flight trials, withcommercial aircraft,controlled in UK and ItalianAirspace, using the datalinkas primary means ofcommunication for almost allphases of flight.
Outlook of Plan
Phase 1
• October 2012 – February 2013• Operational and technical feasibility study• Two role gaming sessions
Phase 2
•March – July 2013• Setup of ATN over PENS communication infrastructure• Setup of AFD platform• Communication End‐to‐End test between AFD platform and Airbus/Boeing Test Bench
Phase 3
• August – December 2013• Setup of Shared Virtual Sky server/client• Setup of AFD platform, able to receive flight track from SVS wrapper• Airbus Simulated flight conducted by real pilots and controlled by ATCOs• New release of AFD platform, adding RTA capability
Phase 4
• December 2013 – January 2014• Operational procedures• Feedbacks and conclusions• Safety assessment• Human Factor methodology
EXE• February– June 2014• Execution of AFD Flight Trials
4
Experimental Phase 1
• Operational and Technical feasibility study• Role gaming sessions• Initial safety assessment• Start to design operational procedures for flight trials
5
Experimental Phase 2
6
Test Bench
Setup of ENAV and SITA PENS networks, with the installation of an AFD router that allows communications between those domains;
End‐to‐End communication tests between AFD platform and Airbus/Boeing Test Benches, with the usage of the full set of CPDLC messages need for AFD purpose.
Experimental Phase 2 ‐ Output
7
AFD platform was correctly managing loggin phase and CPDLC exchange of messages;Airbus Test Bench was correctly managing loggin phase and CPDLC exchange of messages;SITA PENS network was correcly rerouting datalink instructions, realizing an ATN over PENS network;A first test of SVS gave us confidence of a success result of phase 3
Experimental Phase 3 – Step 1‐ 2
8
AFD platform was connected with the Airbus Cockpit Simulator, using Shared Virtual Sky software for the airplane track and real VDL2 channel for comms.in the OPS room of Rome ACC, the EXE ATCO will control a real flight as usual, with voice as primary means of communication. in the simulation room, where AFD platform is located, a simulated flight will act as a ghost of the target flight. Supervisor OPS will repeat on the phone to the AFD Supervisor and AFD ATCO those instructions that are referred to the target flight AFD ATCO will send the above instructions via datalink to the simulated flight. The pilot of Airbus Cockpit Simulator will react accordingly and the behavior of simulated flight will be very similar to the real flight. RTA messages used for test
Experimental Phases 4
• AFD ground platform capable to communicate the full set of messages with both Airbus and Boeing aircrafts, equipped with different avionics models;
• ATCOs and Pilots increases their level of confidence on such new way of communication, developing together the AFD operational procedures for the conduction of flight trials;
• A complete Safety Assessment has been developed, needed also for the NSA autorization;
• Human Factor methodology for Airborne and Ground segments has beenstructured, with the help of online questionnaires;
• Technical procedures has been designed, in order to track the behaviour of datalink communications on both application and communication layers.
9
Experimental Phases – List of different avionicmanufacturer used
10
Experimental Phases – Differences in interpretationof ED‐110B Standard
Field Local System NSEL and TSEL is composed by different parts of the ATN NSAP address:• LOC (2 octets)• SYS (6 octets)• NSEL (1 octets)• TSEL (1 or 2 octets)Being TSEL either 10 or 11 can create different interpretations.In having ground and airborne systems using a different number of octets (10 or 11) poses the concrete risk (more than a risk) of non‐communication between ground and airborne systems.Therefore we think it would be useful to address this issue considering that, based on ENAV experience, this could be solved in having the ground system verifying the parameters and adapt itself consequently.General statement: too many optional fields complicate the certainty to have a ground platform able to communicate with all models of avionics.
11
Experimental Phases – Lesson learnt
12
• Due to some room of interpretation on standards, ground system needs to be tested with as manyavionic models as possible, possibly using realaircrafts (this allow to test VDL2 GS as well);
• ATCOs and Pilots familiarization sessions helpedto reduce a general diffidence that surrounds «the datalink» .
AFD Flight Trial Campaign
13
The picture explain the configuration adopted for the conduction of the operations for selected revenue flights during trials, in the Demonstration Campaign. Such solution has been chosen mainly upon the following considerations:
To provide the operations with the required level of safety, so to obtain the National Authority permission to conduct the trialsTo decouple AFD project from the full operational readiness of the Italian implementation project LinkIT, the local instance of Link2000+, so to de‐risk the possibility to delay the execution of the trials beyond the contractual obligations and AFD Consortium commitment to conclude the Demonstration Campaign by mid 2014.
AFD Flight Trials Campaign in numbers
• 12/02/2014: start of the Flight Trials Campaign
• 27/06/2014: end of the Flight Trials Campaign
• 90 target flights, operated by EasyJet, SAS, AirFrance
• 20 ATCOs involved in the conduction of flight trials
• 4 HF experts for the collection of feedbacks
14
AFD – ENAV logs activity
15
Message timestamp
Message UL/DL
Message Msg ContentMsg
IdNumberRef Msg IdNumber
08:20:27 downlink 98LOGON REQUEST CallSign: AFR1205 ICAO Address: 3746536 Departure: LIRF Destination: LFPG
1
08:20:27 uplink 183LOGON RESPONSE - ICAO Address: 3746536 - LOGON ACCEPTED
2 1
08:21:17 uplink 183 CPDLC START REQUEST SENT 308:21:21 downlink 98 CONNECTION CONFIRM 4 308:21:23 downlink 99 CURRENT DATA AUTHORITY 508:21:23 uplink 183 CURRENT ATC UNIT LIRR,ROMA,CENTER 608:26:19 uplink 183 CPDLC NOT IN USE 708:27:09 uplink 183 CPDLC IN USE 808:27:42 uplink 20 CLIMB TO 200 908:28:17 downlink 0 WILCO 10 908:28:17 uplink 74 PROCEED DIRECT TO ELB 1108:28:39 downlink 0 WILCO 12 1108:29:11 uplink 20 CLIMB TO 240 1308:29:29 downlink 0 WILCO 14 1308:30:21 uplink 117 CONTACT LIRR124.800 1508:30:35 downlink 0 WILCO 16 1508:30:46 uplink 183 CPDLC IN USE 17
08:30:46 uplink 79CLEARED TO LFPG VIA LIR2F-DCT-ELB-M729-BETEN-UM729-AOSTA-DCT
18
08:31:25 downlink 1 UNABLE 19 1808:31:16 uplink 20 CLIMB TO 300 2008:31:46 downlink 0 WILCO 21 2008:32:30 uplink 74 PROCEED DIRECT TO NORNI 2208:33:00 downlink 0 WILCO 23 2208:33:10 uplink 20 CLIMB TO 360 2408:33:32 downlink 0 WILCO 25 2408:38:53 downlink 22 REQUEST DIRECT TO AOSTA 2608:39:15 uplink 1 STAND BY 27 2608:40:42 uplink 74 PROCEED DIRECT TO IDONA 2808:41:06 downlink 0 WILCO 29 2808:41:28 uplink 74 PROCEED DIRECT TO AOSTA 3008:41:50 downlink 0 WILCO 31 3008:42:28 downlink 6 REQUEST 380 3208:42:40 uplink 1 STAND BY 33 3208:43:29 uplink 20 CLIMB TO 380 3408:43:55 downlink 0 WILCO 35 3408:48:51 uplink 117 CONTACT LIRR132.905 3608:49:12 downlink 0 WILCO 37 3608:49:30 uplink 183 CPDLC IN USE 3808:49:30 uplink 79 CLEARED TO LFPG VIA LIR2F‐AOSTA‐DCT 3908:50:15 downlink 1 UNABLE 40 3908:51:24 uplink 79 CLEARED TO LFPG VIA DCT‐AOSTA‐DCT 4108:51:48 downlink 0 WILCO 42 4108:53:30 uplink 190 FLY HEADING 325 4308:53:54 downlink 0 WILCO 44 4308:55:40 uplink 79 CLEARED TO LFPG VIA DCT‐AOSTA‐DCT 4508:56:04 downlink 0 WILCO 46 4509:06:34 uplink 160 NEXT DATA AUTHORITY 4709:10:21 uplink 161 DISCONNECTION REQUEST 4809:10:27 downlink 98 DISCONNECTION CONFIRM 49 48
ATC Full Datalink ‐ Report of the flight trialDate Leg Time zulu Airline Model Call Sign ICAO code Radio CMU GS used09/04/2014 FCO‐CDG 08:20/10:30 AirFrance A320 AFR1205 3746536 Rockwell Collins P/N 822‐1287‐120 ATSU CSB6‐5 LIN2,FCO2
Results
Event details
The CPDLC connections was established on ground, about 5 minutes before take off. ATCOs used datalink as primary mean of communication from FL100.
The automatic messabe UM79 is affected by a small bug on the definition of VIA points, where he could transmit a fix already flown. Pilots was aware of that, and in fact they replied with UNABLE if that occurred.
Following a target
16
SAS Flight
SK1842
B738
FCO – ARN(LIRF – ESSA)
Test procedure
LOGON(gnd)
CPDLC msgs (FL 100 ‐ FL 400)
Network
MGS HO(FCO 33S – VCE
Twr)
Milan ATN A/G router
Rome ATN G/G router
SAS/System performance (1/3)
17
SAS/System performance (2/3)
18
SAS/System performance (3/3)
19
AFD – ENAV Performance Monitoring 1/3
20
round trip delay calculated at AVLC level (just Air segment between airborne radio and ground stations) on messages exchanged using FCO2 and LIN2 VDL2 Stations
AVLC= Aviation VHF Link Control, comms protocol
21
Round trip delay calculated at application layer end‐to‐end (of course it includes AVLC round trip delay). So it measures round trip delay between AirServer and the aircraft.
AFD – ENAV Performance Monitoring 2/3
22
SQP=Signal Quality Parameters
The signal drops during the Hand Over between FCO2 and LIN2 stations.
AFD – ENAV Performance Monitoring 3/3
AFD/ENAV COM Network behaviour
23
The COM Network performed very well and no PAs due to it were registered
~13 seconds, with some cases of ~5 seconds to close CPDLC loop (fromthe click on the HMI to the reception of the WILCO)
Round‐Trip Delay < 3 sec @ 95%
During Flight Trials Campaign the network worked also for AoA andPoA at the same time.In numbers (Jan‐Apr 2014):
Total Managed Aircraft133.9K (VDLM2 circuits)
Total AOA traffic exchanged34.7 MByte (only payloads)
Total POA traffic exchanged106.1 MByte (only payloads)
01020304050
jan feb mar apr
ARINC ACARS (Mbyte)
AOA
POA
AFD/ENAV Network HO report
24
Perceived workload impact on AFD operation
25
Using CPDLC, ATCOs report that the effortrequest to manage the air/groundcommunications is slightly higher that in r/t
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Num
ber o
f Respo
nses
Controller Assessment of Workload
Low
High
No ATCOs indicated a level of workload that would impact their primary ATM task. More than half indicated they had enough spare capacity for all desirable additional tasks.
ENAV NATS
Pilots
19 out of 32 respondents indicated a reduced level of workload, whereas for the remaining the workload was slightly higher or higher.
Acceptability of CPDLC below FL 285 (ENAV)
26
300 300 300 310
195
345
200150
285340
280 280
0
100
200
300
400
Minimum Flight Level where CPDLC could be applied?
ATCOs FEEDBACK: AFD is perceived as less suitable in the approach phase (both before landing or after take‐off) due to the working methods of this area (e.g. frantic flow of instructions, number for restrictions and airspace complexity) , plus because of some technical issues faced with the ATM platform, not ready for the operations yet, that was not providing to ATCOs the expected level of reliability
Acceptability of CPDLC below FL 285 (NATS)
27
0
2
4
6
8
10
N/A Stronglydisagree
Disagree Neither agree ordisagree
Agree Strongly agree
Nun
ber o
f Respo
nses
I felt comfortable using CPDLC between FL195 and FL285
02468
101214161820
N/A Stronglydisagree
Disagree Neither agree ordisagree
Agree Strongly agree
Nun
ber o
f Respo
nses
I felt comfortable using CPDLC between FL100 and FL195
Acceptability of CPDLC below FL 285 (Pilots)
28
The majority of the pilots perceive the use of CPDLC acceptable. Few pilots dosomewhat disagree on CPDLC acceptability for such operational situations, and twopilots disagreed.The major perceived benefit of CPDLC communication below FL285 compared to RTis the clarity of the message set (n=28 out of 32), followed by availability of messageset and easy integration with pilot’s tasks (n=13 each), ATC responsiveness (n=10),Time available for message management (n=6) and other benefits (n=3).
Impact of the available message set
29
Recommended to improve the flexibility of CPDLC messages without impair safety
• Need to foreseen specific restrictions and/or additional clearances in terms of rate of climb/descent to be maintained until a specific level, or limit and “reason” of vector/hdg
• Need to broadcast to a/c relevant messages (e.g. turbulence/ bad weather , congested situation, restricted area etc.)
• Instruction of “Stop Climb/Stop Descend” should be foreseen
Acceptability of “unusual” messages
30
• In general, in case of critical/unexpected event revert to R/T is strongly expected
AFD Reccomandations ‐ Pilots
• VHF Data Link Ground Station /avionic investigations are needed in order to identify explained technical issues
• Support the Multi frequency trial to validate if the new VDL plus Airbus ATSU upgrade (permits multi‐frequency) could give a contribution to improve reliability to acceptable level
• ATN B2 timeout changes should be investigated more thoroughly to address the controller / Pilot anxiety about the current logical acknowledgement (ACK) timer with B1 up to 2 minutes.
• Procedures among the various airspaces of the European countries must be harmonized to provide the flight crew with seamless procedures all over Europe. For instance, the logon time interval (45' to 15' before take‐off or when entering the airspace?), the message set, the altitude used as a floor for CPDLC, and even the designation of the system should be consistent whenever it is possible in the various countries of the European airspace.
31
AFD Reccomandations ‐ ATCOs
32
• R1: Test the system with experimental flight legs should last more
• R2: Test the system with more that one flight connected by CPDLC (at list 5 a/c)
• R3: Test the system across more complex sectors/scenarios (e.g. MI sectors and higher traffic load)
• R4: Test the system increasing the number of instructions exchanges between ATCO and FC
33
THANK YOU!
Michele CarandenteInternational StrategiesSESAR Unit
ENAV S.p.AVia Salaria, 713 - 00138 Rome - ItalyPh. +39 06 81662774Mob. +39 335 [email protected]
Related Documents
