baseline future scenarios for jpdo evaluation and analysis l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 19

Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 120 Views
  • Uploaded on

Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis. March 18, 2005. Matthew Blake. mblake@seagull.com (408) 364-8200. Shift to Smaller Aircraft. Different Shaped Growth Rate. Different Growth Rates. Different Starting “Seed”. Shift to Larger Aircraft. 2025. 20??. 2014.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis' - trung


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
baseline future scenarios for jpdo evaluation and analysis

Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis

March 18, 2005

Matthew Blake

mblake@seagull.com

(408) 364-8200

some impacts on future flight demand

Shift to Smaller Aircraft

Different Shaped Growth Rate

Different Growth Rates

Different Starting “Seed”

Shift to Larger Aircraft

2025

20??

2014

Some Impacts on Future Flight Demand

Note: Not to scale

Many factors have significant impact on long range demand estimates

Total Number of Flights

1X

2004

Time, years

major dimensions of the air transportation system
Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System

A. Pax/Cargo Demand

B. Fleet Mix/Aircraft Types

C. Business Model/ Schedule

D. NAS Capability

E. Disruptions /Weather

  • Current
  • 2014 OEP
  • Increased Capacity of:
    • Landside
    • Surface
    • Runways
    • Terminal
    • En route
  • 4) Systemic:
    • CNS
    • SWIM
    • Wx Prediction
  • Current
  • Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025
  • 2X TAF Based Constrained Growth
  • 3X TAF
  • Current Scaled
  • More Regional Jets
  • New & Modified Vehicles
    • Microjets
    • UAVs
    • E-STOL/RIA
    • SST
    • Cleaner/ Quieter
  • Current (mostly Hub & Spoke)
  • More Point to Point + Regional Airports
  • Massive Small Airport Utilization
  • Good Weather (Wx)
  • Bad Weather
    • Airport IFR
    • En route
    • 7 Wx days
  • Disruption
    • Sudden Shutdown of an airport or region

Government-Driven

(Technology or Policy)

Market-Driven

“Mother Nature”

major dimensions of the air transportation system4

Current Scaled:

FAA forecast of demographics and rate of growth, current fleet mix and business model (both hub and spoke and low cost carrier point to point)

Higher Growth Rate:

Same FAA forecast demographics, higher rate of growth which achieves 2X passenger and cargo traffic by 2025

Shift to Smaller Aircraft/Airports:

Growth comes mainly in smaller aircraft (approx 100 passenger) and new flights mainly in under-utilized regional airports

Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System

Baseline Future Demand Scenarios

A. Pax/Cargo Demand

B. Fleet Mix/Aircraft Types

C. Business Model/ Schedule

  • Current
  • Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025
  • 2X TAF Based Constrained Growth
  • 3X TAF
  • Current Scaled
  • More Regional Jets
  • New & Modified Vehicles
    • Microjets
    • UAVs
    • E-STOL/RIA
    • SST
    • Cleaner/ Quieter
  • Current (mostly Hub & Spoke)
  • More Point to Point + Regional Airports
  • Massive Small Airport Utilization
initial baseline jpdo ea flight demand sets

2025 TAF

    • TAF growth rate flight schedule
  • 3X TAF
    • TAF growth to 3X
  • 2X TAF
    • TAF ratios, faster growth
  • 2X Biz shift
    • Smaller aircraft, more airports
  • 2014 TAF
    • TAF growth rate flight schedule
  • 2025 Biz shift
    • Smaller aircraft, more airports
  • 2014 Biz shift
    • Smaller aircraft, more airports
  • 2004 Baseline
    • Current Flight Schedule
    • Current Capacities

2025

20??

2014

Initial BaselineJPDO EA Flight Demand Sets

~3X

Note: Not to scale

TAF Growth Ratios, Higher Rate

~2X

Current Scaled

Number of Flights

Higher Growth Rate

Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) Growth Projection

Shift to Smaller Aircraft/Airports

  • 2014 and later Baseline analysis will use OEP Capacities

1X

2004

Time, years

baseline seed day
Baseline Seed Day

Target Criteria:

  • Relatively heavy traffic and relatively light weather
  • Selected Thursday, 19 February 2004
  • There were 64,276 flights in the ETMS database on this day
  • Filtered out pure international, military, various other anomalous flights
  • 50,077 IFR flights
avdemand future flight generation process
AvDemand Future Flight Generation Process

Schedule Generation

Demand Growth Parameters

(TAF)

Demand Growth

Flight Shifting

Airport Pair Demand Profiling

Fratar Algorithm for Airport Load Balancing

Historical Schedule

(ETMS)

Historical Flight Plans

(ETMS)

Flight Plan Generation

AvDemand

Seagull Technology

business shift to smaller airports and aircraft

Flight Demand Shift to Smaller Airports

Secondary Airport

AvDemand

Seagull Technology

Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft

Move Excess Demand from Major Airports to underutilized Secondary Airports

business shift to smaller airports and aircraft specific demand generation approach
Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft:Specific Demand Generation Approach

Selection of Flights to Shift to Auxiliary Airports

  • Shift flights only from 34 OEP airports
  • Select flights from any 15 minute time interval where arrival or departure traffic exceeds airport capacity
  • Only shift flights with great circle distance less than 1000 nm
  • Select high frequency flights first

Selection of Auxiliary Airports

  • Each airport must be located within 30nm of the associated OEP airport
  • Each airport must be a public-use airport
  • At least one runway in each airport has to be at least 5,000 ft
  • Only runways that are asphalt and good-condition or better were utilized
  • Enough departure/arrival slots within the same time window of the diverted flight must be available at the auxiliary airports

Change of Aircraft Type

  • If a flight has seat capacity of 99 or less, shift the aircraft type as is to the auxiliary airport
  • If a flight has a seat capacity of 100 or more, change the aircraft type to a Regional Jet with seat capacity of 100, add extra flights to capture the required number of seats in the original flight
example major hub airport and nearby secondary airport departure demand profile

MAJOR-HUB 2X Baseline DeparturesMAJOR-HUB 2X After Bizshift, DeparturesSECONDARY 2X After Bizshift, Departures

MAJOR-HUB Departure Capacity Target

Number of Flights per 15 minutes

Example:MAJOR-HUB Airport and nearby SECONDARY Airport Departure Demand Profile
demand comparison between future scenarios and faa forecasts
Demand Comparison between Future Scenarios and FAA forecasts

1 The TAF General Aviation (GA) operations include both IFR and VFR itinerant operations. The FAA Aerospace Forecast GA operations include only instrument operations at primary and secondary airports as well as overflights. Thus, instrument operations total in the FAA report are higher than actual flight counts. The demand sets created (ETMS 2004 and Seagull 2014) in this practice only account for IFR itinerant GA Operations. Thus, the demand growth ratio is skewed due to the difference in the GA counts.

2 Terminal Area Forecast, http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faatafall.HTM, February 2005. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight).

3 Federal Aviation Administration, FAA Aerospace Forecast – Fiscal Year 2004 – 2015, Department of Transportation, March 2004. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight).

future scenarios operations growth
Future Scenarios Operations Growth

General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

future scenarios operations growth13
Future Scenarios Operations Growth

General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

initial analysis results
Initial Analysis Results
  • Simulation Configuration:
    • NASA Airspace Concepts Evaluation System (ACES) B2.1
    • 24 hour period, good weather, 2004 has today’s capacities, future scenarios include OEP improvements
    • Earlier flight demand sets (correct airport growth but slightly different mix of commercial, air taxi, GA)
  • TAF Based Growth at 4 scenario demand levels:
    • 2004
    • 2014
    • 2025
    • 2X
  • Comparison at 2X Demand of 3 scenarios:
    • TAF based growth
    • Business shift to smaller airports/aircraft
    • Business shift and doubling airspace capacity
baseline taf based growth scenarios delay during a 24 hour period

Excessive congestion even in 2014 leads to some flights not completing by end of day.

Airline Operations untenable at this level of delay.

2004

2014

2025

2X

Baseline TAF Based Growth ScenariosDelay During a 24 Hour Period
baseline taf growth scenario passenger impact of severe arrival delays

Greater than 2 hours

1 to 2 hours

15 minutes to 1 hour

Less than 15 minutes

Baseline TAF Growth ScenarioPassenger Impact of Severe Arrival Delays

At 2X demand, nearly one million passengers are delayed more than 2 hours

Source: ACES Analysis of NAS

comparison of 2x future scenarios delay during a 24 hour period
Comparison of 2X Future ScenariosDelay During a 24 Hour Period

Business Shift to smaller aircraft and secondary airports still leads to untenable behavior due to airspace congestion.

Increasing airspace capacity helps, shows how problem is coupled.

summary
Summary
  • A Baseline set of future scenarios has been developed and verified against FAA projections
  • Initial NAS-wide analysis indicates all future scenarios require significant airport and airspace capacity increases to avoid major constraints on growth in air transportation
  • Future JPDO evaluations will be expanded to cover more possible future scenarios and solution strategies
acknowledgement
Acknowledgement
  • This work was sponsored by Sherry Borener in support of the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis (EA) Division and the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD)
  • Many JPDO EA team members helped along the way, special thanks to:
    • Alex Huang, Kris Ramamoorthy, George Hunter, Greg Carr (Seagull Technology)
    • Baseline day, Joe Post (CNAC)
    • Review of TAF based scenarios by Roger Schaufele (FAA)
  • NAS-wide ACES simulation courtesy of the NASA Airspace Systems Program (ASP), Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project