Aircraft Trajectory Prediction
Literature Review
Aircraft Trajectory Prediction
By Cameron Sheridan
I. Abstract
The purpose of this review is to identify and analyse work that is currently being done on aircraft trajectory prediction (ATP); particularly the approach of modern day researchers to the problematic issue of the growingly clustered airspace. The benefits of this review include the exploration of several sub-topics of the literature. Through examining the current methods towards trajectory modelling validation and the techniques that are now employed to neutralise error sources, it was found that with the modern-day approaches an algorithm and its trajectory prediction (TP) can be assessed and consequently improved upon. A number of systems pertinent to conflict are discussed and results are presented which illustrate and compare the effectiveness of heading and altitudinal resolution manoeuvres. Additionally, a number of recent developments and innovations in the field pertinent to the technologies and techniques used are discussed, thus illustrating a clear indication of research still moving forward in this field. II. Introduction
An ATP is a ‘mapping of points over a time interval [a,b] to the space R³’ (Tastambekova et al. 2010, p.2). Although this is correct in many senses, this explanation fails to acknowledge the intricacy and designed purpose. More accurately, a TP module has the capacity to calculate the future flight path of an aircraft given that it has been supplied with the required data, i.e. the flight intent, an aircraft performance model, and finally, an estimation of the future atmospheric/environmental conditions (Swierstra and Green 2004). An aircraft trajectory is a future path of an aircraft that can be represented visually in three forms: 2D, 3D and 4D (x, y, altitude and time) with 4D the more frequently used nowadays by air traffic control (ATC) and air traffic management (ATM) due to its far more realistic representation and ease of
Aircraft Trajectory Prediction
By Cameron Sheridan
I. Abstract
The purpose of this review is to identify and analyse work that is currently being done on aircraft trajectory prediction (ATP); particularly the approach of modern day researchers to the problematic issue of the growingly clustered airspace. The benefits of this review include the exploration of several sub-topics of the literature. Through examining the current methods towards trajectory modelling validation and the techniques that are now employed to neutralise error sources, it was found that with the modern-day approaches an algorithm and its trajectory prediction (TP) can be assessed and consequently improved upon. A number of systems pertinent to conflict are discussed and results are presented which illustrate and compare the effectiveness of heading and altitudinal resolution manoeuvres. Additionally, a number of recent developments and innovations in the field pertinent to the technologies and techniques used are discussed, thus illustrating a clear indication of research still moving forward in this field. II. Introduction
An ATP is a ‘mapping of points over a time interval [a,b] to the space R³’ (Tastambekova et al. 2010, p.2). Although this is correct in many senses, this explanation fails to acknowledge the intricacy and designed purpose. More accurately, a TP module has the capacity to calculate the future flight path of an aircraft given that it has been supplied with the required data, i.e. the flight intent, an aircraft performance model, and finally, an estimation of the future atmospheric/environmental conditions (Swierstra and Green 2004). An aircraft trajectory is a future path of an aircraft that can be represented visually in three forms: 2D, 3D and 4D (x, y, altitude and time) with 4D the more frequently used nowadays by air traffic control (ATC) and air traffic management (ATM) due to its far more realistic representation and ease of
References: 1. Denery, D., Robinson, J., Tang, H (2011). Tactical Conflict Detection in Terminal Airspace. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. 34 (2), pp. 403-413. 2. Alonso-Ayuso, A; Escudero, L; Martín-Campo, F. (2011). Collision avoidance in air traffic management: A mixed-integer linear optimization approach. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems. 12 (1), pp. 47-57. 3. Mujumdar, A; Padhi, R. (2011). Evolving philosophies on autonomous obstacle/collision avoidance of unmanned aerial vehicles. Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information and Communication. 8 (2), pp. 17-41. 4 5. Huang, Y; Chung, T. (2011). Modelling and analysis of air traffic control systems using hierarchical timed coloured Petri nets. Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control. 33 (1), pp. 30-49. 6 9. Jackson, M. (2010). Role of Avionics in Trajectory-Based Operations. IEEE a&e systems magazine. 25 (7), pp. 12-19. 10 11. Vivona, R., Paglione, M., Cate, K., Enea, G. (2010). Definition and Demonstration of a Methodology for Validating Aircraft Trajectory Predictors. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. pp. 1-22. 12 13. Lymperopoulos, I. and Lygeros, J. (2010). Improved Multi-Aircraft Ground Trajectory Prediction for Air Traffic Control. Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics. 33 (2), pp. 348-362. 14. Tastambekova, K., Puechmorela, S., Delahayea, D., Rabutb, C. (2010). Trajectory Prediction by Functional Regression in Sobelev Space. Manuscrit auteur. 1 (1), pp. 1-5. 15. Lymperopoulos, I., Chaloulos, G., Lygeros, J. (2010). An advanced particle filtering algorithm for improving conflict detection in Air Traffic Control. Preprint 4th International Conference on Research in Air Transportation, June 2010, pp. 1-8. 16. Russell, C. (2010). Predicting Airspace Capacity Impacts Using the Consolidated Storm Prediction for Aviation. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. 10th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference, pp. 11. 17. Santiago, C; Lehman, J; Crowell, A. (2010). Accuracy Comparison of an Operational and Experimental Strategic Conflict Probe. AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference 2 - 5 August 2010, Toronto, Ontario Canada. ( ), pp. 1-14. 18 19. Graffica. (2009). eDEP TCT (Tactical Controller Tools) - Concept of Operations Document. Eurocontrol, pp.1-26. http://www.eurocontrol.fr/projects/edep/documents/8.3/eDEP_TCT_ Concept_of_Operations.pdf 20 21. Paglione, M. and Oaks, R. (2009). Effectiveness of Pairing Flights When Evaluating The Accuracy of a Conflict Probe. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. (1), pp. 1-17. 22 23. Garcia, J., Besada, J., Soto, A., De Miguel, G. (2009). Opportunity trajectory reconstruction techniques for evaluation of ATC systems. International Journal of Microwave and Wireless Technologies. 1 (3), pp. 1-8. 24 25. Fredrick, J; Jaggard, C; Paglione, M; and, Baldwin, C. (2009). Verification and Validation Standards to Test and Evaluate New Complex Systems for the National Airspace System. International Test and Evaluation Association. 30 (2), pp. 1-11. 26 27. Paielli, R. (2008). Tactical Conflict Resolution Using Vertical Manoeuvres in En Route Airspace. Journal of Aircraft. 45 (6), pp. 2111-2119. 28. Ryan, H., Chandler, G., Santiago, C., Paglione, M., Liu, S. (2008). Evaluation of En Route Automations Trajectory Generation and Strategic Alert Processing, Analysis of ERAM Performance. pp. 1-114. 29. Poretta, M., Dupey, M., Schuster, W., Majumdar, A., Ochieng, W. (2008). Performance Evaluation of a Novel 4D Trajectory Prediction Model for Civil Aircraft. The Journal of Navigation. 61, pp. 393-420. 30 31. Paglione, M, Oakes, R. (2007). Implementation and Metrics for a Trajectory Prediction Validation Methodology. AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit 20 - 23 August 2007, Hilton Head, South Carolina. pp. 1-18. 32. Shakarian, A., Haraldsdottir, A. (2001). Required Total System Performance and Results of a Short Term Conflict Alert Simulation Study. 4th US/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar, Santa Fe, December 3-7, 2001, pp. 1-9.