Analysis of the contribution of flight plan route selection to delays and conflicts

Akshay Belle, L. Sherry
{"title":"Analysis of the contribution of flight plan route selection to delays and conflicts","authors":"Akshay Belle, L. Sherry","doi":"10.1109/ICNSURV.2011.5935338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The absence of predictability of flight operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) is a significant source of excess cost, requiring airlines to pad flight schedules, staff for worst-case scenarios, and build and maintain mitigation plans and equipment. Flight plan routes are selected by airlines to optimize their operations (e.g. minimize crew time, fuel burn and delays). In the absence of coordination of 4-D flight plan route selection, flights can converge at the intersection of the flight plan routes, creating delays and fluctuations in A ir Traffic Control (ATC) workload. Furthermore, due to the high degrees of freedom available in flight plan route selection and the varying constraints in the NAS, flight plan route selection can contribute to the stochasticity of the NAS. This paper evaluates the role of flight plan route selection in the stochasticity and performance of the NAS. One hundred simulations were run using Reorganized Air Traffic Control (ATC) Mathematical Simulator (RAMS). For every run, flights were randomly assigned flight plan routes. The results indicated that by randomly varying flight plan routes for 32% of the flight, the overall total delay had a standard deviation of 6849 minutes about the mean total delay of 161358 minutes The maximum total delay was 174559 minutes (8% above the mean) and the minimum total delay was 141876 (12% below the mean). The total number of en-route conflicts had a standard deviation of 201 about a mean of 29202 conflicts. The maximum number of conflicts recorded was 29751 (2% above the mean) and the minimum number of conflicts recorded was 28760 (2% below the mean). There was no correlation between the number of en-route conflicts and the total delays though the variance in total delays was more than en-route conflicts. An analysis of conflicts showed that about 80% of the conflicts were between flights flying in opposite direction to each other; about 15% were between flights flying in same direction, and the remaining 5% were between flight flying in perpendicular to each other.","PeriodicalId":263977,"journal":{"name":"2011 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference Proceedings","volume":"152 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNSURV.2011.5935338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The absence of predictability of flight operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) is a significant source of excess cost, requiring airlines to pad flight schedules, staff for worst-case scenarios, and build and maintain mitigation plans and equipment. Flight plan routes are selected by airlines to optimize their operations (e.g. minimize crew time, fuel burn and delays). In the absence of coordination of 4-D flight plan route selection, flights can converge at the intersection of the flight plan routes, creating delays and fluctuations in A ir Traffic Control (ATC) workload. Furthermore, due to the high degrees of freedom available in flight plan route selection and the varying constraints in the NAS, flight plan route selection can contribute to the stochasticity of the NAS. This paper evaluates the role of flight plan route selection in the stochasticity and performance of the NAS. One hundred simulations were run using Reorganized Air Traffic Control (ATC) Mathematical Simulator (RAMS). For every run, flights were randomly assigned flight plan routes. The results indicated that by randomly varying flight plan routes for 32% of the flight, the overall total delay had a standard deviation of 6849 minutes about the mean total delay of 161358 minutes The maximum total delay was 174559 minutes (8% above the mean) and the minimum total delay was 141876 (12% below the mean). The total number of en-route conflicts had a standard deviation of 201 about a mean of 29202 conflicts. The maximum number of conflicts recorded was 29751 (2% above the mean) and the minimum number of conflicts recorded was 28760 (2% below the mean). There was no correlation between the number of en-route conflicts and the total delays though the variance in total delays was more than en-route conflicts. An analysis of conflicts showed that about 80% of the conflicts were between flights flying in opposite direction to each other; about 15% were between flights flying in same direction, and the remaining 5% were between flight flying in perpendicular to each other.
飞行计划航路选择对延误和冲突的贡献分析
在国家空域系统(NAS)中,缺乏飞行操作的可预测性是超支的一个重要来源,要求航空公司调整航班时刻表,为最坏情况配备人员,并建立和维护缓解计划和设备。航空公司选择飞行计划路线,以优化其运营(例如,最大限度地减少机组时间、燃油消耗和延误)。在缺乏4-D飞行计划航路选择协调的情况下,航班可能在飞行计划航路的交叉点汇聚,造成空中交通管制(ATC)工作量的延误和波动。此外,由于飞行计划航路选择的高度自由度和NAS中不同的约束条件,飞行计划航路选择会导致NAS的随机性。本文评价了飞行计划航路选择对NAS的随机性和性能的影响。利用重组空中交通管制(ATC)数学模拟器(RAMS)进行了100次模拟。对于每次运行,航班被随机分配飞行计划路线。结果表明,随机改变32%航班的飞行计划路线,总延误时间与平均总延误时间161358分钟的标准差为6849分钟,最大总延误时间为174559分钟(高于平均值8%),最小总延误时间为141876分钟(低于平均值12%)。途中冲突总数的标准差为201,平均冲突数为29202。记录的最大冲突数为29751例(高于平均值2%),记录的最小冲突数为28760例(低于平均值2%)。途中冲突数与总延误数之间不存在相关性,但总延误数的方差大于途中冲突数。一项对冲突的分析显示,大约80%的冲突发生在飞行方向相反的航班之间;大约15%发生在同一方向飞行的航班之间,剩下的5%发生在垂直飞行的航班之间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信