Pre-departure flight uncertainty of U.S. Oceanic boundary crossing time

M. Ohsfeldt, Kangyuan Zhu, Jianfeng Wang
{"title":"Pre-departure flight uncertainty of U.S. Oceanic boundary crossing time","authors":"M. Ohsfeldt, Kangyuan Zhu, Jianfeng Wang","doi":"10.1109/ICNSURV.2011.5935351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) will rely on “negotiated flight paths” to satisfy objectives of both individual users (exemplified in their user preferred trajectories) and the whole system to the fullest extent possible in an equitable and efficient manner (optimally). If the strategic negotiation of the flight profiles occurs in the pre-departure phase of flight and the negotiated flight plans are executed strictly, maximum system efficiency and user equity may be expected. However, inherent differences exist when accounting for uncertainty in strategic, pre-departure trajectory prediction and tactical, in-flight trajectory prediction. Namely, differences in time horizons and uncertainty sources: Pre-departure planning has a longer look-ahead time and more uncertainty sources compared to the relatively short look-ahead time (typically less than 30 minutes) and less uncertainty sources for in-flight planning. Short time horizon and tactical uncertainty has been thoroughly studied in the literature. A longer look-ahead time and additiona l sources of uncertainty in pre-departure planning contribute a larger uncertainty associated with the planned trajectory. In this paper, we focus on the trajectory crossing time uncertainty at U.S. Oceanic Flight Information Region (FIR) boundary (entry or exit), which are metering points for tracks and congestion points for flights off the track system. We analyze real data from six months of operations and present the flight crossing uncertainty analysis by comparing the actual crossing times with the flight planned estimates. We also use linear regression models to explain the uncertainty with related factors. It is found that, compared to the in-flight (shorter horizon) uncertainty, which is typically assumed to be a normal distribution; the uncertainty for pre-departure planning is less like a normal distribution and is less well explained with linear regression models.","PeriodicalId":263977,"journal":{"name":"2011 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference Proceedings","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNSURV.2011.5935351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) will rely on “negotiated flight paths” to satisfy objectives of both individual users (exemplified in their user preferred trajectories) and the whole system to the fullest extent possible in an equitable and efficient manner (optimally). If the strategic negotiation of the flight profiles occurs in the pre-departure phase of flight and the negotiated flight plans are executed strictly, maximum system efficiency and user equity may be expected. However, inherent differences exist when accounting for uncertainty in strategic, pre-departure trajectory prediction and tactical, in-flight trajectory prediction. Namely, differences in time horizons and uncertainty sources: Pre-departure planning has a longer look-ahead time and more uncertainty sources compared to the relatively short look-ahead time (typically less than 30 minutes) and less uncertainty sources for in-flight planning. Short time horizon and tactical uncertainty has been thoroughly studied in the literature. A longer look-ahead time and additiona l sources of uncertainty in pre-departure planning contribute a larger uncertainty associated with the planned trajectory. In this paper, we focus on the trajectory crossing time uncertainty at U.S. Oceanic Flight Information Region (FIR) boundary (entry or exit), which are metering points for tracks and congestion points for flights off the track system. We analyze real data from six months of operations and present the flight crossing uncertainty analysis by comparing the actual crossing times with the flight planned estimates. We also use linear regression models to explain the uncertainty with related factors. It is found that, compared to the in-flight (shorter horizon) uncertainty, which is typically assumed to be a normal distribution; the uncertainty for pre-departure planning is less like a normal distribution and is less well explained with linear regression models.
美国大洋边界过境时间的起飞前飞行不确定性
基于弹道的操作(TBO)将依靠“协商的飞行路径”,以公平和有效的方式(最佳)最大限度地满足个人用户(以用户偏好的轨迹为例)和整个系统的目标。如果在航班出发前阶段对飞行剖面进行战略协商,并严格执行协商后的飞行计划,则有望获得最大的系统效率和用户公平。然而,在考虑不确定性时,战略、起飞前轨迹预测和战术、飞行中轨迹预测存在内在差异。即时间范围和不确定性来源的差异:与相对较短的前视时间(通常少于30分钟)相比,出发前计划具有较长的前视时间和更多的不确定性来源,并且飞行计划的不确定性来源较少。短时间视界和战术不确定性在文献中得到了深入的研究。在出发前规划中,较长的预测时间和额外的不确定性来源导致与计划轨迹相关的更大的不确定性。本文主要研究美国海洋飞行情报区(FIR)边界(入口或出口)的轨迹穿越时间不确定性,该边界是轨道的测量点和偏离轨道的航班的拥塞点。我们分析了六个月运行的真实数据,并通过比较实际穿越时间和飞行计划估计时间,给出了飞行穿越不确定性分析。我们还使用线性回归模型来解释与相关因素的不确定性。研究发现,相对于通常假设为正态分布的飞行中(较短视界)不确定性;出发前计划的不确定性不太像正态分布,也不太能用线性回归模型很好地解释。
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