SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
NASA's Integrated Demand Management research activity developed a concept for a novel use of the FAA's Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) decision support software to support airspace capacity-limited arrival operations involving Time Based Flow Management (TBFM). This document provides a detailed, graphical description of the concept.
NASA Langley has developed a multi-mode decision support system for pilots operating in a Distributed Air-Ground Traffic Management (DAG-TM) environment. An Autonomous Operations Planner (AOP) assists pilots in performing separation assurance functions, including conflict detection, prevention, and resolution. Ongoing AOP design has been based on a comprehensive human factors analysis and evaluation results from previous human-in-the-loop experiments with airline pilot test subjects. AOP considers complex flight mode interactions and provides flight guidance to pilots consistent with the current aircraft control state. Pilots communicate goals to AOP by setting system preferences and actively probing potential trajectories for conflicts. To minimize training requirements and improve operational use, AOP design leverages existing alerting philosophies, displays, and crew interfaces common on commercial aircraft. Future work will consider trajectory prediction uncertainties, integration with the TCAS collision avoidance system, and will incorporate enhancements based on an upcoming air-ground coordination experiment.
The topics discussed are the UAS-NAS project life-cycle and ARMD thrust flow down, as well as the UAS environments and how we operate in those environments. NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards, CA, is leading a project designed to help integrate unmanned air vehicles into the world around us. The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System project, or UAS in the NAS, will contribute capabilities designed to reduce technical barriers related to safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS. The project falls under the Integrated Systems Research Program office managed at NASA Headquarters by the agency's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. NASA's four aeronautics research centers - Armstrong, Ames Research Center, Langley Research Center, and Glenn Research Center - are part of the technology development project. With the use and diversity of unmanned aircraft growing rapidly, new uses for these vehicles are constantly being considered. Unmanned aircraft promise new ways of increasing efficiency, reducing costs, enhancing safety and saving lives 460265main_ED10-0132-16_full.jpg Unmanned aircraft systems such as NASA's Global Hawks (above) and Predator B named Ikhana (below), along with numerous other unmanned aircraft systems large and small, are the prime focus of the UAS in the NAS effort to integrate them into the national airspace. Credits: NASA Photos 710580main_ED07-0243-37_full.jpg The UAS in the NAS project envisions performance-based routine access to all segments of the national airspace for all unmanned aircraft system classes, once all safety-related and technical barriers are overcome. The project will provide critical data to such key stakeholders and customers as the Federal Aviation Administration and RTCA Special Committee 203 (formerly the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) by conducting integrated, relevant system-level tests to adequately address safety and operational challenges of national airspace access by unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS. In the process, the project will work with other key stakeholders to define necessary deliverables and products to help enable such access. Within the project, NASA is focusing on five sub-projects. These five focus areas include assurance of safe separation of unmanned aircraft from manned aircraft when flying in the national airspace; safety-critical command and control systems and radio frequencies to enable safe operation of UAS; human factors issues for ground control stations; airworthiness certification standards for UAS avionics and integrated tests and evaluation designed to determine the viability of emerging UAS technology. Five Focus Areas of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project Separation Assurance Provide an assessment of how planned Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) separation assurance systems, with different functional allocations, perform for UAS in mixed operations with manned aircraft Assess the applicability to UAS and the performance of NASA NextGen separation assurance systems in flight tests with realistic latencies and uncertain trajectories Assess functional allocations ranging from today's ground-based, controller-provided aircraft separation to fully autonomous airborne self-separation Communications Develop data and rationale to obtain appropriate frequency spectrum allocations to enable safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Develop and validate candidate secure safety-critical command and control system/subsystem test equipment for UAS that complies with UAS international/national frequency regulations, standards and recommended practices and minimum operational and aviation system performance standards for UAS Perform analysis to support recommendations for integration of safety-critical command and control systems and air traffic control communications to ensure safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Human Systems Integration Develop a research test bed and database to provide data and proof of concept for GCS - ground control station - operations in the NAS Coordinate with standards organizations to develop human-factors guidelines for GCS operation in the NAS Certification Define a UAS classification scheme and approach to determining Federal Aviation Regulation airworthiness requirements applicable to all UAS digital avionics Provide hazard and risk-related data to support development of type design criteria and best development practices Integrated Tests and Evaluation Integrate and test mature concepts from technical elements to demonstrate and test viability Evaluate the performance of technology development in a relevant environment (full-mission, human-in-the-loop simulations and flight tests)
Current Flight Management Systems (FMS) do a good job of constructing and flying an optimal trajectory for a single aircraft. Unfortunately, flight crews are often unable to fly these FMS routes during arrivals at busy airports. The Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS) has been designed to aid Center and TRACON (Terminal Radar Approach Control) controllers in assigning runways, sequencing and vectoring all classes of aircraft. CTAS bases its advisories on trajectory predictions for arriving aircraft using algorithms very similar to those in airborne FMS systems. This paper presents near and far term operational concepts for how a ground ATM (air traffic management) automation system like CTAS could work more effectively with the airborne automation in FMS equipped aircraft. The concepts for a more compatible air-ground system include: 1) a common route databases for both CTAS and FMS; 2) datalink to downlink information on aircraft weight, final approach speed and trajectory intent and to uplink wind information; 3) new FMS functions to allow flight crews to easily update their FMS trajectory to match the trajectory suggested by the ground automation with voice clearances, and 4) in the far term, datalink to downlink user preferred trajectories and to uplink trajectory clearances in the terminal area. The paper analyses some of the human factors issues that may result in allowing aircraft to fly FMS routes during enroute descent and in the terminal area. A series of linked human in the loop flight deck and air traffic control simulations and a field test with the NASA 757 are being conducted at NASA's Ames and Langley Research Centers to address these issues and to evaluate the operational feasibility of these approaches to more efficient flight and increased airport throughput.
The Titan-Centaur was launched from Kennedy Space Center on February 11, 1974 at 0948 eastern daylight time. Ground level effluent measurements were obtained from the solid rocket motors for comparison with NASA diffusion models for predicting effluent ground level concentrations and cloud behavior. The results obtained provide a basis for an evaluation of such key model inputs such as cloud rise rate, stabilization altitude, crosswind growth, volume expansion, and cloud trajectory. Ground level effluent measurements were limited because of changing meteorological conditions, incorrect instrument location, and operational problems. Based on the measurement results, operational changes are defined. Photographs of the ground exhaust clouds are shown. The chemical composition of the exhaust gases was analyzed and is given.
Pairwise Trajectory Management (PTM) is a concept that utilizes airborne and ground-based capabilities to enable airborne spacing operations in procedural airspace. This concept makes use of updated ground automation, Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and on board avionics generating real time guidance. An experiment was conducted to examine the potential benefits of implementing PTM in the Central East Pacific oceanic region. An explanation of the experiment and some of the results are included in this paper. The PTM concept allowed for an increase in the average time an aircraft is able to spend at its desired flight level and a reduction in fuel burn.
The motivation behind Integrated Demand Management (IDM) research is to explore possible improvements to United States National Airspace System (NAS) performance that could be realized through procedural integration of strategic traffic flow management capabilities, such as the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP), and tactical capabilities, such as Time Based Flow Management (TBFM). An initial IDM concept for clear weather operations was developed and evaluated for potential benefits, including efficiency, delay reduction, predictability and throughput, and to identify any major issues that might represent a showstopper for a fielded application. Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) arrival operations provided a use case for concept development. EWR uses miles-in-trail (MIT) metering to regulate demand into TBFM during high volume operations, and short-haul flights are often penalized with excessive, last-minute ground delays when the overhead stream is saturated. IDM addresses this problem by replacing MIT conditioning with CTOP to better manage the demand delivery to the TBFM entry points. A quasi-real time high-fidelity simulation that would normally involve participants was conducted using heuristic-based procedures that mimicked operators behaviors instead. Five total conditions were compared: two baseline conditions with MIT delivery to TBFM entry points using two different TBFM settings; and three IDM conditions: one with airborne speed control using an Required Time of Arrival (RTA) capability, a second without RTA, and a third with no wind forecast errors. Results suggest that the IDM concept can deliver traffic more efficiently by shifting the delays from airborne to ground for both RTA and non-RTA conditions, while maintaining a target throughput rate. The results also suggest that with good predictability of airport capacity, excessive TBFM ground delay can be minimized by applying more strategic CTOP delay, increasing predictability for the airline operators. Overall, the results indicate that the implementation of an IDM concept under clear weather conditions can improve NAS system performance. Future IDM research aims to expand the concept to address demandcapacity imbalance d severe weather.
Robots operating in the microgravity environment of an orbiting laboratory should be capable of manipulating payloads such that the motion of the robot does not disturb adjacent experiments. The current results of a NASA Lewis Research Center technology program to develop smooth, reaction-compensated manipulation based on both mechanism technology and trajectory planning strategies are present. Experimental validation of methods to reduce robot base reactions through the use of redundant degrees of freedom is discussed. Merits of smooth operation roller-driven robot joints for microgravity manipulators are also reviewed.
Robots operating in the microgravity environment of an orbiting laboratory should be capable of manipulating payloads such that the motion of the robot does not disturb adjacent experiments. The current results of a NASA Lewis Research Center technology program to develop smooth, reaction-compensated manipulation based on both mechanism technology and trajectory planning strategies are present. Experimental validation of methods to reduce robot base reactions through the use of redundant degrees of freedom is discussed. Merits of smooth operation roller-driven robot joints for microgravity manipulators are also reviewed.
From the late 1960s through 1997, the leadership of NASAs Intermediate and Large class unmanned expendable launch vehicle projects resided at the NASA Lewis (now Glenn) Research Center (LeRC). One of LeRCs primary responsibilities --- trajectory design and performance analysis --- was accomplished by an internally-developed analytic three dimensional computer program called DUKSUP. Because of its Calculus of Variations-based optimization routine, this code was generally more capable of finding optimal solutions than its contemporaries. A derivation of optimal control using the Calculus of Variations is summarized including transversality, intermediate, and final conditions. The two point boundary value problem is explained. A brief summary of the codes operation is provided, including iteration via the Newton-Raphson scheme and integration of variational and motion equations via a 4th order Runge-Kutta scheme. Main subroutines are discussed. The history of the LeRC trajectory design efforts in the early 1960s is explained within the context of supporting the Centaur upper stage program. How the code was constructed based on the operation of the AtlasCentaur launch vehicle, the limits of the computers of that era, the limits of the computer programming languages, and the missions it supported are discussed. The vehicles DUKSUP supported (AtlasCentaur, TitanCentaur, and ShuttleCentaur) are briefly described. The types of missions, including Earth orbital and interplanetary, are described. The roles of flight constraints and their impact on launch operations are detailed (such as jettisoning hardware on heating, Range Safety, ground station tracking, and elliptical parking orbits). The computer main frames on which the code was hosted are described. The applications of the code are detailed, including independent check of contractor analysis, benchmarking, leading edge analysis, and vehicle performance improvement assessments. Several of DUKSUPs many major impacts on launches are discussed including Intelsat, Voyager, Pioneer Venus, HEAO, Galileo, and Cassini.
From the late 1960's through 1997, the leadership of NASA's Intermediate and Large class unmanned expendable launch vehicle projects resided at the NASA Lewis (now Glenn) Research Center (LeRC). One of LeRC's primary responsibilities --- trajectory design and performance analysis --- was accomplished by an internally-developed analytic three dimensional computer program called DUKSUP. Because of its Calculus of Variations-based optimization routine, this code was generally more capable of finding optimal solutions than its contemporaries. A derivation of optimal control using the Calculus of Variations is summarized including transversality, intermediate, and final conditions. The two point boundary value problem is explained. A brief summary of the code's operation is provided, including iteration via the Newton-Raphson scheme and integration of variational and motion equations via a 4th order Runge-Kutta scheme. Main subroutines are discussed. The history of the LeRC trajectory design efforts in the early 1960's is explained within the context of supporting the Centaur upper stage program. How the code was constructed based on the operation of the Atlas/Centaur launch vehicle, the limits of the computers of that era, the limits of the computer programming languages, and the missions it supported are discussed. The vehicles DUKSUP supported (Atlas/Centaur, Titan/Centaur, and Shuttle/Centaur) are briefly described. The types of missions, including Earth orbital and interplanetary, are described. The roles of flight constraints and their impact on launch operations are detailed (such as jettisoning hardware on heating, Range Safety, ground station tracking, and elliptical parking orbits). The computer main frames on which the code was hosted are described. The applications of the code are detailed, including independent check of contractor analysis, benchmarking, leading edge analysis, and vehicle performance improvement assessments. Several of DUKSUP's many major impacts on launches are discussed including Intelsat, Voyager, Pioneer Venus, HEAO, Galileo, and Cassini.
Sense-and-avoid (SAA) is a critical research topic for enabling the operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in civilian airspace. SAA involves two planning related problems: 1) plan-recognition to predict the future trajectory of nearby aircraft, and 2) path planning to avoid conflicts with nearby aircraft that pose a threat. We have designed and built components of a novel intelligent sense-and-avoid (iSAA) reasoning framework that takes into account information about aircraft type, transponder code, communications, local routes, airports, airspace, terrain, and weather to more accurately predict near- and medium-term trajectories of nearby aircraft. By using this additional information both the on-board control software and the ground-based UAS operator can make more informed, intelligent decisions to effectively predict and avoid conflicts and maintain separation. While this capability benefits all categories of UASs operating under both Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and Visual Flight Rules (VFR), it is absolutely essential for allowing smaller UASs to operate VFR at low altitude in uncontrolled airspace for operations such as survey work, wildlife tracking, aerial photography, utilities inspection, crop dusting, and package delivery.
The Origins Spectral Interpretation Resource Identification Security Regolith Explorer (OSIRISREx)is a NASA New Frontiers mission to the near-earth asteroid Bennu that will rendez vousin 2018, create a comprehensive and detailed set of observations over several years, collect a regolith sample, and return the sample to Earth in 2023. The Orbit Determination (OD) team isa sub-section of the Flight Dynamics System responsible for generating precise reconstructions and predictions of the spacecraft trajectory. The OD team processes radiometric data, LIDAR, as well as center-finding and landmark-based Optical Navigation images throughout the proximity operations phase to estimate and predict the spacecraft location within several meters. Stringent knowledge requirements stress the OD teams concept of operations and procedures to produce verified and consistent high quality solutions for observation planning, maneuver planning, and onboard sequencing. This paper will provide insight into the OD concept of operations and summarize the OD performance expected during the approach and early proximity operation phases,based on our pre-encounter knowledge of Bennu. Strategies and methods used to compare and evaluate predicted and reconstructed solutions are detailed. The use of high fidelity operational tests during early 2017 will stress the teams concept of operations and ability to produce precise OD solutions with minimal turn-around delay.
An area in aviation operations that may offer an increase in efficiency is the use of continuous descent arrivals (CDA), especially during dependent parallel runway operations. However, variations in aircraft descent angle and speed can cause inaccuracies in estimated time of arrival calculations, requiring an increase in the size of the buffer between aircraft. This in turn reduces airport throughput and limits the use of CDAs during high-density operations, particularly to dependent parallel runways. The Interval Management with Spacing to Parallel Dependent Runways (IMSPiDR) concept uses a trajectory-based spacing tool onboard the aircraft to achieve by the runway an air traffic control assigned spacing interval behind the previous aircraft. This paper describes the first ever experiment and results of this concept at NASA Langley. Pilots flew CDAs to the Dallas Fort-Worth airport using airspeed calculations from the spacing tool to achieve either a Required Time of Arrival (RTA) or Interval Management (IM) spacing interval at the runway threshold. Results indicate flight crews were able to land aircraft on the runway with a mean of 2 seconds and less than 4 seconds standard deviation of the air traffic control assigned time, even in the presence of forecast wind error and large time delay. Statistically significant differences in delivery precision and number of speed changes as a function of stream position were observed, however, there was no trend to the difference and the error did not increase during the operation. Two areas the flight crew indicated as not acceptable included the additional number of speed changes required during the wind shear event, and issuing an IM clearance via data link while at low altitude. A number of refinements and future spacing algorithm capabilities were also identified.
A research and development (R&D) approach is proposed for developing and validating concepts and technologies to achieve vehicle autonomy goals of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) through Simplified Vehicle Operations (SVO). The approach applies resilience-engineering and human-automation teaming (HAT) principles to a framework for defining vehicle-based functions for the management of missions and flight trajectories, focusing initially on the en route flight domain. To achieve the SVO goal of reducing pilot training requirements and thereby increasing the pilot pool for AAM, while at the same time promoting ever-safer operations, a framework for identifying essential functions is proposed. In this framework, functions are first categorized by high-level functional purpose (mission management, flightpath management, tactical operations, and vehicle control) and then subcategorized by attributes of resilient-performing systems (abilities to monitor, respond, learn, and anticipate). The categorization by functional purpose provides structure within which HAT designs can be holistically explored and total levels of human vs. automation responsibility can be varied. The subcategorization by resilient-system attributes provides a mechanism for capturing safety-critical functions that may not be codified in current operational procedures and training curricula, particularly those where humans proactively enhance safety in currently undocumented ways. An R&D approach consisting of seven strategies is proposed in which automation engineering and human-factors communities can collaborate in the research, development, and design of an SVO roadmap to enable the ambitious objectives of AAM.
The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand [1] while simultaneously maintaining one of the safest forms of transportation [2], [3]. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt optimal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene, ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions this can be viewed as an increase in complexity. The reasoning for this is because humans are now required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors, resulting in a departure from the strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators control airspace complexity under rigid regulations that are constantly changing. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. There has been past work that devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload (e.g., [4],[5]). The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic, including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly [6]. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to our proposed effort that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns. To define the scope we are proposing to measure complexity from the viewpoint of the Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACON) controller’s perspective. In particular we are analyzing arrivals into KSFO. With safety as the top concern for airspace operators, it is important to recognize that as density and heterogeneity grow, the focus of the system will change. Times of the day when the airspace has low density and heterogeneity, the flights will follow more efficient paths where the aircraft move on established routes that are more or less directly to the destination. However, when density and heterogeneity increases, the system will begin changing focus to avoiding conflicts and collisions and route the flights in a more flexible way. Higher flexibility requires more communication and coordination between controllers and pilots which the current automation is unable to handle. This paper proposes a novel approach that monitors airspace complexity at multiple scales, uses a Machine Learning-based tool that predicts when operations will transition to a regime of greater complexity, and identifies actions that can reduce the complexity while still maintaining efficient and safe operations. We demonstrate our proposed approach using data from multiple complementary sources. This includes, but is not limited to: historical aircraft surveillance data from NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse [7], METAR weather data, and airport configuration data from Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM). The surveillance data flight paths are sampled at a variable sample rate — increasing as the aircraft approaches the airport. This is due to how Sherlock manages flight track stitching between different radar facilities which have different sampling rates. The weather and performance data are logged at defined intervals throughout the day at a courser refresh rate. In addition to the logged data and metrics, we leverage pre-defined Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) procedures to characterize the path of each flight. Each flight files for one of these routes in the flight plan well before entering the terminal airspace, and approximately follows the route until it leaves the STAR, typically on the final fix of a runway transition. However, most flights do not always fly the full STAR procedure to completion [8], but the majority do adhere to the fixes within the common route of the procedure. Our approach leverages fixes in the common route of each of the STARs to build a reference path to the airport. This allows us to characterize the flight paths in what we are defining as the “maneuvering area” (the airspace between the STAR and before the flight is lined up on the runway’s final approach) to determine how off nominal the flights are to calculate its complexity score. Determining airspace complexity is a concept that does not have a concrete answer. In designing this metric, we consider what increases the workload for the air traffic controllers. Consequently more specialized vectoring maneuvers results in higher workload. Accordingly, we start with a theory: each flight has a direct path it takes from the STAR’s common route to the final approach’s outer marker fix for the flight’s landing runway. It is important to note that the direct path is only used as a reference. If the majority of the flights have a large consistent offset as compared to other routes it does not necessarily mean that those flights have higher complexity. We are merely building a distribution based on this direct path for that particular STAR and runway pair to determine the normal mode of operations for that route. Flights that are in the upper tail of these distributions will result in higher complexity scores and flights that fly in the median will represent the normal mode of operations and therefore will have lower complexity scores. Since flights following each STAR route take different paths to the airport, we have a different distribution for each STAR route and therefore can model these distributions to compute a complexity score from their respective normalized distributions. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed airspace complexity metric we will compare against an established approach based on trajectory clustering [9]. This unsupervised learning technique consists of the following steps: (1) identify the general maneuvering areas (waypoints) by performing $\kappa$-means or DBSCAN clustering on locations where aircraft frequently turn based on the surveillance radar track data, (2) map flight trajectories onto sequences of waypoints, and (3) cluster the sequences based on their common subsequences. From a high-level perspective, this baseline model learns nominal operations in the airspace through the sequence of waypoints that are representative of where aircraft change direction and defines deviations from the nominal operations as “complex.” Therefore, more deviations from the nominal operations correspond to higher complexity values. For our validation, we re-implemented this technique and tune model hyper-parameters to correctly detect waypoints for the arrival traffic into the San Francisco bay area. We will compute the complexity measure over a one-year period using our proposed technique as well as the baseline. Our validation will be based on each technique’s ability to detect a set of undesirable outcomes (e.g., go-arounds, holding patterns, average time in the airspace, etc.). Since our current complexity metric is derived from the offset from the direct reference path, it’s important to understand what causes these offsets. In many of the flights with high offset distance, flights performing holding patterns and S turns can be observed. These maneuvering tactics are utilized to add distance between the aircraft and the destination runway to prevent multiple flights from having conflicting arrival times. In order to predict a rise in complexity (or the precursor to complexity), it’s necessary to be able to identify these potential conflicts (which in turn, result in higher offsets). To do this, we define a “representative flight” for each STAR route and runway pair. This flight is approximately the path the flight would take if there was a clear path with no other flights in the airspace — including the time remaining to the airport. We first identify the flights for a given STAR runway pair using the offset to the reference path distributions that fall between the 44-55 percentiles. This yields the flights that conform to the most normal mode of operation. Each of these flights is partitioned based on the percent complete from the entry point into the maneuvering areas from 0\% – 100\% complete. Then for each percent “bin”, we take the median value of the flight’s latitude/longitude coordinates, airspeed, and (non causal) time remaining to the airport to construct a lookup table for each percent complete bin on a given route. As a flight enters the maneuvering area, we can find the estimated arrival time of a flight to the airport by finding the closest point to the representative path’s percent complete bin (relative to the flight’s current position at any snapshot in the airspace) and therefore retrieve the corresponding remaining time left on the “representative path”. We assume that the flight will follow the representative path to completion when deriving these estimates. We can then compare these estimated arrival times against other flights for the same snapshot in time to identify potential conflicts. If more flights are estimated to arrive within a tolerance window than there are runways available, then we have a potential conflict. We can use this derived measure along with other factors expected to add disruption to the operation such as weather and runway configuration changes as an input to machine learning tools to detect precursors that increases in our complexity measure. This novel method will assist in uncovering insights into the contributing factors that lead to increased complexity that may allow for in-time responses to avoid reaching a high complexity state in the airspace.
To address the Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) challenge, NASA is developing and demonstrating trajectory-based departure automation under a collaborative effort with the FAA and industry known as Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2). ATD-2 builds upon and integrates previous NASA research capabilities that include the Spot and Runway Departure Advisor (SARDA), the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC), and the Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSAS) capability. The ATD-2 field demonstration is organized into three phases. Phase I illustrates a Baseline IADS demonstration and includes all components of ATD-2 running in operational environments. Subsequent phases will fuse together strategic scheduling components as well as take into account metroplex considerations. This paper describes the baseline IADS system that was deployed at the end of 2017 and is continuing to run as part of the ATD-2 demonstration taking place at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport (CLT). The primary areas of deployment and system use are in the CLT Air Traffic Control Tower, CLT TRACON, CLT American Airlines ramp tower, Washington Center facility and American Airlines Integration Operations Center (IOC). In addition to describing the functions and capabilities that are part of the baseline IADS system, this paper also provides metrics regarding operational use as well as initial benefits metrics. Benefit metrics continue to be collected and aggregated across the areas of system delay, throughput, taxi time, fuel burn savings, and emissions savings. Furthermore, benefits as a result of common awareness of delays and the impact of takeoff and departure restrictions stemming from traffic flow management initiatives are described. The overall benefit of improved predictability and efficiency as a result of the baseline IADS system demonstration is also discussed.
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Advanced Reusable Technologies/Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC) program has enabled: (1) the creation of unique trajectory simulation facility; (2) development of basic operability and performance data; (3) results to date: (a) rocket thrusters performing as designed (P(sub c), MR, q, etc); (b) AAR performance data measured at M = 0 and 3; (c) rocket mode performance at simulated vacuum conditions; and (d) data reduction in progress; (4) completing testing; M = 0, 3 and trajectory M = 3 to 3.7; and (5) next logical steps: build flight type engine and flight demonstrate RBCC.