In 2015, KDC worked on twelve projects. These twelve projects included eight short-term studies and four long-term projects of longer than one year. Of the twelve projects worked on, ten were completed in 2015 (seven short-term and three long-term). Two studies will continue in 2016.
The figure below illustrates the fields in which projects were completed in 2015. 
The completed projects were divided in three different research clusters from KDC’s Research Agenda for 2015:
- The research cluster “Airline Operational Efficiency”, chapter 4 of the research agenda;
- The research cluster “Airport Capacity”, chapter 6 of the research agenda;
- The research cluster “Arrival Management”, chapter 8 of the research agenda.
The results achieved are highlighted for each research cluster.
A. Airline Operational Efficiency
Four studies were carried out in this cluster:
A1. Inbound sequencing based on Airline Priorities
A2. Insight into Operational Efficiency
A3. Capacity and Runway Predictions
A4. Applications of SWIM
The following results were achieved:
A1. Inbound sequencing based on Airline Priorities
This study was carried out using the combined expertise of MovingDot, To70 and Ferway. The starting point was that an arrival manager with an extended planning horizon can and must take into account the priorities of airlines. The first practical step was to consider the swapping of flights from the same airline, on the basis of priority during an inbound peak. It should be possible to add this “intelligence” to an improved arrival manager with an extended planning horizon. The study led by MovingDot focused on short-term solutions based on case studies.
The results are encouraging and give the impression that “airline priorities” could be implemented quite rapidly. An important first step could be taken by implementing a “flexible TP”, a trajectory predictor that takes the actual flight speed into account. It is expected that a follow-up study will be necessary to test an experimental arrival manager that takes airline priorities into account.
A2. Insight into Operational Efficiency
This study was carried out by MovingDot and To70. On the basis of the current traffic management concept and existing flight profiles, insight was created into where inefficiencies occur in the operation. The goal of the study was to clarify how flight operations in Dutch airspace could be improved. The report has laid the foundations for using a number of efficiency indicators that will be recognised by LVNL and KLM. In the study, a number of KLM city pairs (combinations of origin and -destinations) were chosen and the set of indicators used to make suggestions for increasing efficiency. These recommendations are largely in line with foreseen adjustments to the airspace strategy.
A3. Capacity and Runway Predictions
The objective of this study was to focus on predicting runway use and associated capacity at Schiphol Airport more accurately. Flight planning for intercontinental flights commences 15 to 20 hours before the landing time. An accurate prediction of the runway which is in use and the expected traffic in the TMA is used to determine the amount of fuel necessary for the flight. To70 has developed a web-based application that makes a prediction for the coming 30 hours, based on forecast weather conditions, historical trajectory and capacity figures. This tool was evaluated by KLM dispatch. The performance of the algorithm is impressive. A number of shortcomings need to be resolved in order to actually put this capacity and runway prediction tool into production. This will happen during a KDC follow-up study in 2016. KLM is considering using the capacity and runway prediction tool after this period.
A4. Applications of SWIM
In July 2014, the Pilot Common Project Implementing Regulation (PCP IR) came into effect. This IR requires the implementation of six functionalities relating to air traffic control in the period until 1 January 2025. System Wide Information Management (SWIM) is one of the functionalities required in the PCP IR.
Under the SWIM functionality, the PCP IR lists a large number of systems for which data needs to be disclosed. This data longlist has raised the question within the sector as to which data disclosure would be most beneficial and thus should be carried out as a priority.
The study has yielded recommendations for KLM, AAS and LVNL, including requirements that need to be met in the period up until 2024. The recommendations also include opportunities for SWIM in the short term. These are applications that could generate benefits in the short term and for this reason should be included in the implementation strategy of KLM, AAS and LVNL. Decisions still need to be made about putting the implementation steps for SWIM into place.
B. Airport Capacity
Four studies were carried out in this cluster:
B1. Operational requirements for Schiphol Ground Infrastructure 2016-2020
B2. Schiphol Ground Control Workload Model
B3. Common GND Safety Model
B4. Time Based Separation
The following results were achieved:
B1. Operational requirements for Schiphol Ground Infrastructure 2016-2020
In this study, simulations for Schiphol Airport were carried out to gather information for a road map of investments that need to be made in order to make 500,000 aircraft movements possible in 2020. These were carried out in two phases:
1. The identification of bottlenecks coupled with the expected increase in traffic
for the period 2016-2020;
2. The study of possible solutions for these bottlenecks in order to manage
ground traffic as safely and efficiently as possible.
Based on the available flight schedules for 2016 and 2020, a list of bottlenecks was drawn up which was validated in brainstorming sessions with operational personnel. In addition to the increased traffic volume, a number of bottlenecks were examined more closely. For the following six infrastructural adjustments, the possible effects are quantified for northern and southern runway use:
· Extra taxiway parallel to taxiway Quebec;
· Extra entry RWY24;
· Combined stand taxy lane configuration in bay G/H;
· Rebuilt and extend C pier;
· Rebuilt and extend F pier;
· Double stand taxy lane D pier extension.
The results of the study have been incorporated into the recommendations for necessary investments in the road map and have contributed to choices between asset and non-asset solutions.
Further steps can be taken in expanding the runway combinations already studied, as well as other infrastructural solutions.
B2. Schiphol Ground Control Workload Model
This project established a first version of the workload model for the work of the Ground Controller at Schiphol Airport. With the input of experts, a model structure was set up with typical Ground Control factors for four different runway combinations.
The starting point for this project was that the workload model would be developed on the basis of the existing workload model for ACC. The structure of the model, in which workload per flight is determined based on “set” routes, remained the same. The interaction between flights on different routes that cross or merge was modelled in the same manner. The interaction between flights on the same route has disappeared in the current model. This may return in a version of the model suitable for Limited Visibility Conditions. The factors that determine the workload per flight have been considerably adjusted, given that these are fundamentally different for Ground Control compared to ACC.
The result in the form of a model structure with GC WL factors and an effort matrix with workload coefficients was recognised by the experts involved as being a good representation of the GC efforts. The proposed validation methodology was used to carry out an initial validation which did not directly demonstrate the value of the model compared to practical traffic situations. The validation techniques were insufficient for this. Improvements to the model on the basis of sensitivity analyses and validation materials based on better, subjective workload measurements are therefore essential.
This initial version of the workload model will form the basis for further validation and applications, such as modelling the effects of the implementation of a third ground controller at Schiphol.
B3. Common GND Safety Model
In the Schiphol manoeuvring area, a complex ground operation is carried out by a number of parties which depend upon each other to ensure that the operation is conducted properly and safely. However, uncontrolled manoeuvres lead to operational disruptions in the Schiphol manoeuvring area. These operational disruptions limit traffic capacity and efficiency and produce safety risks.
During this project, in close consultation with LVNL and AAS, the structure of a Common Ground Safety Model (CGSM) was developed that gives insight into the main causes and risks of uncontrolled manoeuvres in the Schiphol manoeuvring area involving aircraft, tugs and vehicles, with the exception of the runways.
The CGSM utilises the bow-tie methodology and currently consists of the following components:
• Uncontrolled manoeuvres (by aircraft, tugs or vehicles);
• Main causes of uncontrolled manoeuvres;
• Encounters caused by uncontrolled manoeuvres;
• Resolution model.
The CGSM delivers input for the separate safety management systems of the organisations involved. By entering information about reported encounters and uncontrolled manoeuvres involving multiple parties into the CGSM, a collective picture can be formed of the main causes, after which focused action can be undertaken to mitigate or prevent these occurrences. During the development of the CGSM, much attention was given to striking the right balance between a logical, exemplary structure on the one hand, and the recognisability of causes on the other, so that it suits those who will quantify the model in later stages and use it to mitigate the risks. The model will probably require adjustment in the future, and for this reason a number of issues, such as underlying causes and severity classification, were proposed but not in detail.
This model will be applied as a starting point for the collective monitoring of the safety of ground operations in a Ground Movement Safety Team under the direction of the Safety Platform Schiphol.
B4. Time Based Separation
The Pilot Common Project Implementing Regulation (716/2014) requires the implementation of Time Based Separation for Final Approach at the large European airports from 1 January 2024. Schiphol Airport is one of the airports to which this requirement applies.
Time Based Separation (TBS) is a concept by which aircraft making their final approach are separated by time, rather than distance. This means that under strong headwind conditions, the loss of runway capacity as a result of this wind can be limited. KDC carried out a study to find out the answers to the following questions:
1. What are the distinguishing characteristics of headwind conditions at Schiphol?
2. What is the loss of landing capacity as a consequence of headwind?
3. How much of this loss of capacity can be prevented by applying TBS?
The study concluded that Time Based Separation could prevent a significant proportion of the capacity loss arising from headwind conditions. TBS shows its greatest potency during the first inbound peak, due to the high percentage of heavies.
C. Arrival Management Cluster
Four studies were carried out in this cluster:
C1. AMAN 1.0 Development
C2. 4D Business Case: Benefits of SESAR Concept (VP-030)
C3. AMAN (AIO)
C4. Night Optimal Way to Land – Trajectory Predictor
The following results were achieved:
C1. AMAN 1.0 Development
The development of the arrival management function is a KDC activity taking place over a number of years. Alongside simulations and trials, KDC supports this development by hiring in expertise for the construction and specification of prototype software. The development of the arrival management function serves a new processing concept for the Schiphol approach area (TMA), based on set approach routes and CDAs. In order to be able to implement this new processing concept, it is necessary for the traffic to be delivered to the TMA in a more even manner. The first version of the new AMAN (version 1.0) supports this improved precision in delivery, which is necessary for the gradual expansion of the use of set approach routes.
The support activities commenced in 2013 were completed in 2015:
- Development and specification of the interface between ASAP and the AAA system;
- Evaluation of the ASAP user interface.
The implementation of AMAN 1.0 is awaiting an AAA release into which the change can be integrated.
C2. 4D Business Case: Benefits of SESAR Concept (VP-030)
In 2015, the KDC completed preparations for VP-030. The work involved coordinating activities carried out by the NLR in the role of trial leader. It was agreed that the VP-030 experiment would be completed with the planned and available SESAR funds for VP-030, after which the results of the experiment, scheduled for June 2016, will be outlined in the validation report. The validation report, which will be available from the end of 2016, will be made available to the KDC.
C3. AMAN (AIO)
In 2015, Maarten Tielrooij, a Trainee Research Assistant from TU Delft, carried out tasks in the field of arrival management. This concerned two research areas:
- Research into further extension of the planning horizon and dealing with uncertainties in arrival times the longer the remaining flight time;
- Practical support for the AMAN prototype evaluation and the research questions arising from this.
The contract with TU Delft, in support of the AMAN Trainee Research Assistant, ran for four years and was concluded in 2015. Maarten Tielrooij is expected to receive his PhD in the second quarter of 2016.
C4. Night Optimal Way to Land – Trajectory Predictor
The current system that LVNL uses for planning Schiphol’s inbound traffic is not optimised for night flight operations. The system works with standard speeds and altitude profiles that are flown during the day. As other speeds and altitude profiles are flown at night, the planning system makes incorrect predictions about arrival times. This means that traffic controllers cannot rely on the planned arrival times and the system is in fact unusable at night. For this reason, air traffic controllers determine the landing order by judgement, utilising greater separation because of the uncertainty about arrival times. Current night operations typically have unnecessarily large separation between aircraft and inefficient approach profiles.
As part of the collaboration with KDC, Boeing has developed a prototype system that accurately predicts arrival times at night. The hallmark of this prototype system is that traffic controllers can introduce speed and route deviations for aircraft to the standard approach profile. This enables accurate estimations of arrival times and therefore also allows for stable planning.
KDC’s tasks consist of facilitating the operational evaluation of operations at Schiphol. A demonstration environment will be delivered for this, including the technical requisites to connect Boeing’s prototype system to the AAA system. The Boeing prototype system will be tested in a live trial in the period February – May 2016.