At the end of this year the SWIM-SUIT user forum took place in Rome. The consortium leader SELEX organised this forum and gave several informative presentations about the work performed and issues encountered in the course of the project. As the Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) initiative will continue work in this area, a large number of SESAR representatives also attended the meeting.
From the technical side it was explained that System-wide Information Management (SWIM) was based on three SESAR-defined domains, the flight data domain (FDD), the surveillance data domain (SDD) and the aeronautical information domain (AID). In the FDD a so-called flight data object (FDO) is created, updated and read through publish-and-subscribe mechanisms. The same mechanism is used for SDD (working on the ASTERIX-62 format). For AID a request-and-report mechanism is applied. The SWIM services that are implemented in so-called SWIM boxes expose web services. Legacy systems are adapted to the SWIM boxes and communicate in a VPN SWIM network (through SOAP/XML). The different adapters observe the legacy systems and translate data to the FDO.
A number of legacy platforms are tested and validated for performance (feasibility, inetroperability, flexibility), safety and security. These systems can be found at the Italian and Portuguese ATC centres, CFMU, Heathrow Airport (BAA-CDM), Alitalia and Air France OCCs, Frequentis (EAD) and even in Alitalia Boeing cokpits (FMS). Thus, SWIM can be called the intranet of aviation.
Open issues discussed included, among others, US-European interoperability that could be achieved through translation services between the SWIM clouds (mainly ICOG to ERAM and ASTERIX to ASDI), legal aspects concerning liability (e.g. setting up a compensation fund) and data model standardisation for the different domains.
Showing posts with label ATM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ATM. Show all posts
Monday, December 14, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
German Aerospace Congress 2009
The German Aerospace Congress is organised annually by DGLR, the German Society for Aeronautics and Astronautics. This year it took place at the Eurogress Conference Centre in Aachen, Germany, from September 8 to 10, 2009.
On the second day of the conference, DLR presented the AT-One paper on Virtual Block Control and Separation Bubbles. In contrast to the paper presented at ICNS 2009 in Arlington, this paper had a focus on evaluation of the concepts in cockpit simulator trials.
The conference sessions were generally set up with a broad range of topics so that there were not too many presentations directly focussing on ATM. Some of the presentations were mere descriptions of work approaches and used facilities, but they were nonetheless interesting. The sessions I attended described new approaches to avionics and control systems, especially for small private aircraft, knowledge management, simulator development, data analysis, and last but not least ATM.
A very interesting presentation from one of my AT-One colleagues described a revolutionary approach to controlling aircraft, referred to as sectorless ATM. In that scenario several tactical controllers share one giant airspace sector and control or rather guide a number of aircraft (between 3 to 8) through that sector. Although the concept still has some weaker points (controller communication, priority rules) it is an interesting starting point for innovative research in that area.
On the second day of the conference, DLR presented the AT-One paper on Virtual Block Control and Separation Bubbles. In contrast to the paper presented at ICNS 2009 in Arlington, this paper had a focus on evaluation of the concepts in cockpit simulator trials.
The conference sessions were generally set up with a broad range of topics so that there were not too many presentations directly focussing on ATM. Some of the presentations were mere descriptions of work approaches and used facilities, but they were nonetheless interesting. The sessions I attended described new approaches to avionics and control systems, especially for small private aircraft, knowledge management, simulator development, data analysis, and last but not least ATM.
A very interesting presentation from one of my AT-One colleagues described a revolutionary approach to controlling aircraft, referred to as sectorless ATM. In that scenario several tactical controllers share one giant airspace sector and control or rather guide a number of aircraft (between 3 to 8) through that sector. Although the concept still has some weaker points (controller communication, priority rules) it is an interesting starting point for innovative research in that area.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
NARSIM Simulations on Virtual Block Control and Separation Bubbles
During the last two weeks NLR successfully carried out simulations on Virtual Block Control and the use of Separation Bubbles for Taxiway Conflict Alerting under low visibility conditions. The project was carried out by AT-One, the ATM research alliance between the Dutch and German Aerospace Research Institutes NLR and DLR, for Eurocontrol, the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation.
The objective of the project was to evaluate operational improvements that would support air traffic controllers in more efficiently and more safely handling airport ground traffic when visibility conditions are so bad that pilots cannot avoid collisions by looking outside the cockpit (VIS-3). Furthermore, it was assumed that there were no additional means in the cockpit that would increase pilot situational awareness, such as moving map displays.
In an earlier workshop with controllers from several European airports it was concluded that a concept for Virtual Block Control in combination with a safety net for separation (Separation Bubbles) would most probably be the most effective improvement for ground control under the specified conditions.
In order to evaluate the new tools and the associated operational procedures, the NARSIM Tower simulation environment of NLR was equipped with prototype virtual stop bars on a ground traffic radar display and appropriate alerting services for stop bar and separation violations. Rotterdam Airport (EHRD) was chosen as the geographic location as it was considered to have an ideal layout for evaluating all operational challenges when using the new tools. Above that the Rotterdam set-up was already successfully used for controller training.
Two teams of controllers (from Rotterdam and Stockholm) took part in the evaluation sessions that assessed operational procedures and, in a later stage, traffic throughput together with automation trust, impact on mental workload, situational awareness, and general system usability. Results will be reported to Eurocontrol in a final report at the end of this year. It is expected that Eurocontrol will publish that report in early 2009.
The objective of the project was to evaluate operational improvements that would support air traffic controllers in more efficiently and more safely handling airport ground traffic when visibility conditions are so bad that pilots cannot avoid collisions by looking outside the cockpit (VIS-3). Furthermore, it was assumed that there were no additional means in the cockpit that would increase pilot situational awareness, such as moving map displays.
In an earlier workshop with controllers from several European airports it was concluded that a concept for Virtual Block Control in combination with a safety net for separation (Separation Bubbles) would most probably be the most effective improvement for ground control under the specified conditions.
In order to evaluate the new tools and the associated operational procedures, the NARSIM Tower simulation environment of NLR was equipped with prototype virtual stop bars on a ground traffic radar display and appropriate alerting services for stop bar and separation violations. Rotterdam Airport (EHRD) was chosen as the geographic location as it was considered to have an ideal layout for evaluating all operational challenges when using the new tools. Above that the Rotterdam set-up was already successfully used for controller training.
Two teams of controllers (from Rotterdam and Stockholm) took part in the evaluation sessions that assessed operational procedures and, in a later stage, traffic throughput together with automation trust, impact on mental workload, situational awareness, and general system usability. Results will be reported to Eurocontrol in a final report at the end of this year. It is expected that Eurocontrol will publish that report in early 2009.
Monday, August 18, 2008
EMMA2 Airport Simulations (Milan)
In July 2008 real-time simulations for a safety assessment of the Milan Malpensa tower controller working environment were carried out with the NARSIM-Tower validation platform at NLR Amsterdam as part of the EMMA project.
The objective of the simulations was to obtain results that support a safety assessment of the Italian prototype A-SMGCS components developed within the project timeframe.
The following analysis methods were applied during the experiments:
- Observation and Improved Operational Expert Elicitation
- Insertion of Hazards in the Simulations
- Measurement of Parameters for Risk Uncertainty Reduction
Results of the real-time experiments will become available as part of the EMMA2 Validation Analysis Report at the beginning of 2009.
The objective of the simulations was to obtain results that support a safety assessment of the Italian prototype A-SMGCS components developed within the project timeframe.
The following analysis methods were applied during the experiments:
- Observation and Improved Operational Expert Elicitation
- Insertion of Hazards in the Simulations
- Measurement of Parameters for Risk Uncertainty Reduction
Results of the real-time experiments will become available as part of the EMMA2 Validation Analysis Report at the beginning of 2009.
Friday, March 14, 2008
ATC Global
This year the major European event in air traffic control known as ATC Maastricht moved to Amsterdam's RAI and consequently changed its name to ATC Global. With the exhibition area being almost twice as large as the one in Maastricht's MECC also the number of visitors seemed to have increased.
Some of the stands were quite impressive regarding the effort spent to give demonstrations of the latest developments in ATM technology. However, from a research point of view not much innovative tools and facilities were shown. Of course, there were highlights again from companies like Saab, AviBit , SELEX or Frequentis. They showed quite interesting tower control tools, such as Electronic Flight Strips (EFS) and Departure Managers (DMAN). Innovative developments, however, such as route planning and conformance monitoring were mostly not on public display yet, as some of these tools are either still in stages of development or not mature enough to be sold. And selling still is one of the major drivers of this exhibition.
AT-One presented themselves as one of the leading research alliances in Europe and caught much attention with their hourly demonstration of ASAS flights. These flights were carried out by two flight simulators, one from NLR and one from DLR, approaching Prague airport. Another great feature of the AT-One stand was the flexible NARSIM-Tower simulator which was displayed in a small, moveable version, however, with all the functionality of its larger brother at the NLR premises.
Although I might have missed some of the items at display in Amsterdam this year, as time was limited, there was a demonstration at the Eurocontrol stand that caught my attention: Skybrary. I will dedicate another post to this new aviation safety wiki site soon.
Some of the stands were quite impressive regarding the effort spent to give demonstrations of the latest developments in ATM technology. However, from a research point of view not much innovative tools and facilities were shown. Of course, there were highlights again from companies like Saab, AviBit , SELEX or Frequentis. They showed quite interesting tower control tools, such as Electronic Flight Strips (EFS) and Departure Managers (DMAN). Innovative developments, however, such as route planning and conformance monitoring were mostly not on public display yet, as some of these tools are either still in stages of development or not mature enough to be sold. And selling still is one of the major drivers of this exhibition.
AT-One presented themselves as one of the leading research alliances in Europe and caught much attention with their hourly demonstration of ASAS flights. These flights were carried out by two flight simulators, one from NLR and one from DLR, approaching Prague airport. Another great feature of the AT-One stand was the flexible NARSIM-Tower simulator which was displayed in a small, moveable version, however, with all the functionality of its larger brother at the NLR premises.
Although I might have missed some of the items at display in Amsterdam this year, as time was limited, there was a demonstration at the Eurocontrol stand that caught my attention: Skybrary. I will dedicate another post to this new aviation safety wiki site soon.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Requirements Engineering
Just at the start of the new year NLR finished a study for Eurocontrol investigating the role of requirements within the different life cycle phases of ATM operational concept validation as described by the European Operational Concept Validation Methodology (E-OCVM).
A survey of relevant standards (IEEE, ESA-ECSS, EUROCAE) and terminology related to operational concept validation and requirements engineering was performed. This survey resulted in a strategy for the development of requirements along the E-OCVM life cycle composed of three major processes called requirements elicitation or capture process, requirements analysis or specification process, and requirements management process.
The study describes the requirements strategy in detail and refers to the relevant standards that can be used as guidelines for the processes. An analysis of actors and their roles within the validation process emphasised the role of a central manager overseeing the development processes that lead to a gradual refinement of the requirements. Finally, the study analysed three European R&D projects regarding their requirements engineering processes and compared their approaches with the suggested strategy.
Thus, if you have lost your way in the underbrush of ATM standards and requirements documents, this study might be interesting reading material.
The report was published as NLR report CR-2007-702 and is publicly available.
A survey of relevant standards (IEEE, ESA-ECSS, EUROCAE) and terminology related to operational concept validation and requirements engineering was performed. This survey resulted in a strategy for the development of requirements along the E-OCVM life cycle composed of three major processes called requirements elicitation or capture process, requirements analysis or specification process, and requirements management process.
The study describes the requirements strategy in detail and refers to the relevant standards that can be used as guidelines for the processes. An analysis of actors and their roles within the validation process emphasised the role of a central manager overseeing the development processes that lead to a gradual refinement of the requirements. Finally, the study analysed three European R&D projects regarding their requirements engineering processes and compared their approaches with the suggested strategy.
Thus, if you have lost your way in the underbrush of ATM standards and requirements documents, this study might be interesting reading material.
The report was published as NLR report CR-2007-702 and is publicly available.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
What is the E-OCVM?
E-OCVM stands for the European Operational Concept Validation Methodology and is a framework that has been developed in 2004 by Eurocontrol in collaboration with several R&D partners including the ATM & Airports Department of NLR. Generally, the E-OCVM is based on the methodological approach described by the Master European Validation Plan (MAEVA) project in its Validation Guideline Handbook (VGH).The MAEVA VGH suggests a five-step approach to validation that was originally defined in the Eurocontrol Development of EATCHIP/EATMP Validation Methodologies (DEVAM) project. As refined and expanded, these five steps form the core of the VGH. In order to address each of the steps at the appropriate level and for the appropriate audience, the VGH contains three parts, each describing the steps at different levels of detail. Despite the general acceptance of the VGH within the ATM community, several adaptations of the framework were proposed within European R&D initiatives (especially the Gate-to-Gate and C‑ATM projects) concentrating on the initial approach to validation activities and the related life cycle of the concept or technology to be validated.
Eurocontrol together with the Co-operative Approach to Air Traffic Services (CAATS) project team (responsible for co-ordinating validation approaches within the current European Commission Framework Programme) consolidated all change proposals in the first edition of the E-OCVM, which has become the mandatory methodological framework for concept validation within the European ATM community.
The E-OCVM addresses validation at the highest two levels of the MAEVA stepped approach, and additionally introduces a concept life cycle model as well as a so-called case-based approach. The latter integrates validation exercise results into key cases that directly address stakeholder issues about ATM performance and behaviours. More information can be found at the Eurocontrol Validation Forum website.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Barcelona
The inspiring city of Gaudi: a vibrant, self-centred metropolis right on the Mediterranean Sea. This week the European-US ATM R&D conference was held in the direct neighbourhood of las Ramblas, Barcelona's amusement strip crowded day and night with its endless streams of tourists.
The conference featured many interesting ATM research results. These came from the areas of Innovative Research, Performance Management, Safety, Airport Management, Airspace Management, Human Factors, Environment, Air-Ground Integration, Network Management, and the new category of Finance and Deployment.
In the concluding session it was noted that much of what was presented concerned research on already existing concepts and technologies, which could be a sign of rather market-driven R&D. Nevertheless, about a third of the papers looked at innovative ideas generated on the basis of the needs of SESAR and NextGen, the European-US future air transportation system initiatives calling for major changes in the current ATM system to cope with future demand.
Plenary discussions following the concluding remarks of Eurocontrol and the FAA discussed the reasons for the current focus of ATM research on more market-driven topics and whether a more integrated approach between the US and Europe was possible despite the somewhat different kind of innovation needs in both regions of the world. Certainly, knowledge and awareness of what has been done in recent years on both sides of the Atlantic was considered desirable. The conference helped to promote the issue, however, this was not really reflected in the papers. Therefore, future research activities should also highlight common achievements, also for the sake of harmonising the approaches for solving the imminent problems in air traffic congestion in both systems.
The paper on Resolution Advisory Downlink that was written by Stan Drozdowski and Doris Dehn from Eurocontrol together with Bernd Lorenz and myself won the best paper award in the ATM safety conference track. The best conference paper award was attributed to a paper on an analysis method for new ATM concepts being applied to a multi-sector planner in US airspace. It was written by Kevin Corker, Paul Lee, and Tom Prevot from San Jose State University together with Diana Liang from the FAA.
The conference featured many interesting ATM research results. These came from the areas of Innovative Research, Performance Management, Safety, Airport Management, Airspace Management, Human Factors, Environment, Air-Ground Integration, Network Management, and the new category of Finance and Deployment.
In the concluding session it was noted that much of what was presented concerned research on already existing concepts and technologies, which could be a sign of rather market-driven R&D. Nevertheless, about a third of the papers looked at innovative ideas generated on the basis of the needs of SESAR and NextGen, the European-US future air transportation system initiatives calling for major changes in the current ATM system to cope with future demand.
Plenary discussions following the concluding remarks of Eurocontrol and the FAA discussed the reasons for the current focus of ATM research on more market-driven topics and whether a more integrated approach between the US and Europe was possible despite the somewhat different kind of innovation needs in both regions of the world. Certainly, knowledge and awareness of what has been done in recent years on both sides of the Atlantic was considered desirable. The conference helped to promote the issue, however, this was not really reflected in the papers. Therefore, future research activities should also highlight common achievements, also for the sake of harmonising the approaches for solving the imminent problems in air traffic congestion in both systems.
The paper on Resolution Advisory Downlink that was written by Stan Drozdowski and Doris Dehn from Eurocontrol together with Bernd Lorenz and myself won the best paper award in the ATM safety conference track. The best conference paper award was attributed to a paper on an analysis method for new ATM concepts being applied to a multi-sector planner in US airspace. It was written by Kevin Corker, Paul Lee, and Tom Prevot from San Jose State University together with Diana Liang from the FAA.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Shortcut
When I started my work in the fields of air traffic management and safety several years ago, one of the most intriguing facts was that this area of research had come up with a language of its own.
Welcome to the world of ATM abbreviations!
At that time it took me a while to find a conclusive list of acronyms and abbreviations somewhere on the internet. When I finally found something it wasn't really an exhaustive list and it didn't include many of the acronyms I heard around me. So, eventually I decided to make a list of my own, adding to it whatever I could find in the research papers piling up on my desk (including the standard office culture abbreviations such as KISS, SMART, TBD, and NA).
Apart from a link to the ATM abbreviations list, which sometimes includes links to related webpages, I'll also add some links to important glossary documents in the permanent link section of this weblog. Furthermore, I'll add a link to a webpage with ATM-related links that I maintain and that is also worth having a look at.
Well, TTYL...
Welcome to the world of ATM abbreviations!
At that time it took me a while to find a conclusive list of acronyms and abbreviations somewhere on the internet. When I finally found something it wasn't really an exhaustive list and it didn't include many of the acronyms I heard around me. So, eventually I decided to make a list of my own, adding to it whatever I could find in the research papers piling up on my desk (including the standard office culture abbreviations such as KISS, SMART, TBD, and NA).
Apart from a link to the ATM abbreviations list, which sometimes includes links to related webpages, I'll also add some links to important glossary documents in the permanent link section of this weblog. Furthermore, I'll add a link to a webpage with ATM-related links that I maintain and that is also worth having a look at.
Well, TTYL...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)