The challenge: 1.Converting engineering into fact. 2. Engineering that will withstand the tests of everyday use in co

1. Airborne Separation Assistance System Thematic Network 2 (ASAS TN2) ”Implementing ASAS as an integral part of future ATM”The pilot perspectiveIFALPA / ECACapt. Bob Arnesen

2. The challenge: 1.Converting engineering into fact. 2. Engineering that will withstand the tests of everyday use in commercial aviation.

3. Pilots and engineers have to work together. Respect for the others’ needs and ideas. At the same time, as professional pilots, we reserve the right to say no, we don’t agree.

4. Need to make ATM safe and effective. Congestion.There is only so much airspace and only so many airports and runways to work with in Europe.

5. Pilots are end users.“What are we pilots going to get out of this?”Industry says:“You save money, you fly more effectively, you use less fuel, sector length is shortened.”

6. Industry’s dreams:Slot times and ATC delays may not be a factor any more.ADS-B in and out technology combined with ASAS may lead to safer skies.Greater safety means money saved.

7. ”If you think safety is expensive……Try and accident”

8. Step 1: ADS-B out only.Package 1 applicationsGet all the advantages of SAT NAV and ADS-B: runway incursionsexpanded surveillance

9. Package 1 is not the real issue. There is no transfer of responsibility from the controller to the pilot for separation.

10. Step 2: ADS-B in and outPackage 2 + 3 applicationsPotential for transfer of responsibility for separation from controller to pilot.

11. IFALPA policy on transfer of separation responsibility from ATC to the cockpit.

12. The pilot community should not support the transfer of separation responsibility to pilots in any but the most regulated conditions. For a multitude of human factors and technical reasons, the Federation does not recognise the ability of flight crew to perform airborne based separation on a safe and orderly basis using existing ICAO procedures or technology.

13. The IFALPA/ECA position ASAS applications which require the transfer of responsibility from the controller to the pilot …. Develop the correct technology and procedures through exhaustive study and testing

14. Document Ref: ASAS-TN2/WP3/Report/0.9eASAS separation clusterEnhanced crossing and passing operations (ASPA-C&P)Lateral Crossing and Passing (ASEP-LC&P)Vertical Crossing and Passing (ASEP-VC&P)In-Trail Follow (ASEP-ITF)In-Trail Procedure (ASEP-ITP)Airborne self-separation clusterSelf-Separation in segregated Free Flight Airspace (SSEP-FFAS)Self-Separation in Managed Airspace (SSEP-MAS)Self-separation in an Organised Track System (SSEP-FFT)

15. LanguageAviation phraseology based on English.The safety implications of using different languages in for example a Seq+Mer application are severe.

16. PhraseologyCommon phraseology must beagreed upon and exercised with great discipline.Need Standardization.Both within Europe and Worldwide.

17. Pilot Workload Issues • The bottom line ….. simplicity. • Information user friendly and simple as possible. • Pilot response and inputs to system simple. • NAV Display already has a considerable amount of information.

18. IFALPA Policy: DISPLAY FUNCTIONS1. The display should be integrated with other CRTs (navigation display, weather radar) as long as the amount of presented data does not interfere with the readability and interpretation.2. The display of traffic should be pilot selectable as a function of range and relative/absolute vertical position. 3. The altitude of proximate traffic should be displayed. Note: It may be advantageous to include a provision for selecting relative or absolute altitude displays.4. The display of the flight identification should be possible on pilot's selection, where available (Data Link, Mode S).5. The display of relative (closing) speed should be possible on pilot's selection.

19. Testing and Trials • Testing and running of trials to determine the maturity of the various ASAS applications has to move from the laboratory stage to the real life stage, with of course normal safeguards in place. • ASAS applications that are going to be used later in everyday use have to be verified in that environment. Pick a large carrier (or two) operating in core Europe as a test bed. • This also means that the navigational position source as well as the ADS-B link, both supporting the whole idea of ASAS, need to be reliable, robust and of the highest integrity. It must above all support accurate and consistent position reporting, with no deviation or error.

20. ”The Big Sky Theory” • Different airspace classifications have different radio, transponder, flight plan and reporting requirements. • The ultimate aim of the use of ADS-B and ASAS applications in remote airspace is to optimize its use. • The mix of IFR and uncontrolled VFR traffic can become unholy. There are big risks. The “big sky theory” doesn’t work anymore. • Serious consideration must be given to reclassifying airspace that is to become more saturated with IFR aircraft as a result of ADS-B and ASAS.

21. Ownership and Security • An ADS-B link as it is used today and currently envisioned for the future, is not secure. • We are convinced that the ADS-B link needs to support encryption for reasons of security.

22. The success of ASAS in the future ATM and the integrity of the future ADS-B link go hand in hand.

23. Need to be sending a message. Generation and transmission of position accuracy data (along with anything else included in the data protocol) must be of the highest integrity to ensure the success of ASAS.

24. The pilots need to know they are buying into a system that gives them a secure and safe platform to work from.Applications tested and tried.

25. Move to live onboard long term testing and trials, with all the normal safeguards in place.Use a large launch airline in and around the core Europe.