Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Automated Air Traffic Management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors in Space Exploration

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et ai, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et aI., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et ai, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on sorne of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

FROM↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗
NASA NTRS2005

Multi-Center Traffic Management Advisor Operational Field Test Results

The Multi-Center Traffic Management Advisor (McTMA) is a research prototype system which seeks to bring time-based metering into the mainstream of air traffic control (ATC) operations. Time-based metering is an efficient alternative to traditional air traffic management techniques such as distance-based spacing (miles-in-trail spacing) and managed arrival reservoirs (airborne holding). While time-based metering has demonstrated significant benefit in terms of arrival throughput and arrival delay, its use to date has been limited to arrival operations at just nine airports nationally. Wide-scale adoption of time-based metering has been hampered, in part, by the limited scalability of metering automation. In order to realize the full spectrum of efficiency benefits possible with time-based metering, a much more modular, scalable time-based metering capability is required. With its distributed metering architecture, multi-center TMA offers such a capability.

Farley, Todd↗
NASA NTRS2015

The String Stability of a Trajectory-Based Interval Management Algorithm in the Midterm Airspace

NASA's first Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) was created to facilitate the transition of mature ATM technologies from the laboratory to operational use. The technologies selected for demonstration are the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering (TMA-TM), which provides precise time-based scheduling in the terminal airspace; Controller Managed Spacing (CMS), which provides terminal controllers with decision support tools enabling precise schedule conformance; and Interval Management (IM), which consists of flight deck automation that enables aircraft to achieve or maintain a precise spacing interval behind a target aircraft. As the percentage of IM equipped aircraft increases, controllers may provide IM clearances to sequences, or strings, of IM-equipped aircraft. It is important for these strings to maintain stable performance. This paper describes an analytic analysis of the string stability of the latest version of NASA's IM algorithm and a fast-time simulation designed to characterize the string performance of the IM algorithm. The analytic analysis showed that the spacing algorithm has stable poles, indicating that a spacing error perturbation will be reduced as a function of string position. The fast-time simulation investigated IM operations at two airports using constraints associated with the midterm airspace, including limited information of the target aircraft's intended speed profile and limited information of the wind forecast on the target aircraft's route. The results of the fast-time simulation demonstrated that the performance of the spacing algorithm is acceptable for strings of moderate length; however, there is some degradation in IM performance as a function of string position.

Swieringa, Kurt A.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Monitoring for Flight Path Management: Inputs to Pilot Monitoring Training

The commercial aviation industry world-wide has identified a need for improved pilot monitoring (e.g., ICAO, 2016). More specifically, aviation safety data indicate that failures in pilots' monitoring for flight path management (FPM) have contributed to a range of undesired outcomes: accidents, major upsets, and non-compliance with ATC guidance. The FAA has further stated that these types of FPM failures are likely to worsen with the increasingly complex air traffic control systems and FPM concepts proposed for NextGen (https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/what_is_nextgen/) operations (e.g., see Hah et al., 2017). An important element of this additional complexity will be the introduction of new automation or artificial intelligence that is intended to work with the flight crew but can add additional monitoring burdens. One potential mitigation for this situation is to enhance pilot training for effective monitoring. NASA Ames Research Center was asked to identify and evaluate training approaches that have the potential to enhance pilots' ability to effectively monitor for FPM (with the result of improved awareness). The focus of this work is to identify, develop or validate training guidance to improve pilot monitoring/awareness regarding FPM and mitigate the recent trend of accidents and incidents, especially Loss of Control (LOC) events. The result of this work should be guidance for FAA training and standards organizations—such as the Air Carrier Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ACT ARC)—to aid in reducing the risk of incidents and accidents due to inadequate pilot monitoring/awareness.

Feary, Mike↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Airspace Operations

NASA is exploring a proposed new operating mode called digital flight, a complement to VFR and IFR. Under digital flight rules, the aircraft operator would use automation, traffic awareness, information services, and cooperative practices to ensure separation from other flights in VMC and IMC. The presentation describes how digital flight safely increases airspace access and operating flexibility for qualified operators, and its harmonizing approach to emerging future operations.

Airspace↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Airspace Operations

NASA is exploring a proposed new operating mode called digital flight, a complement to VFR and IFR. Under digital flight rules, the aircraft operator would use automation, traffic awareness, information services, and cooperative practices to ensure separation from other flights in VMC and IMC. The presentation describes how digital flight safely increases airspace access and operating flexibility for qualified operators, and its harmonizing approach to emerging future operations.

Airspace↗
NASA NTRS2016

Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool Development

NASA is developing the Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool (FACT) to support airline and airport operations during winter storms. The goal is to reduce flight delays and cancellations due to winter weather. FACT concentrates relevant information from the Internet and FAA databases on one screen for easy access. It provides collaboration tools for those managing the winter weather event including the airline operations center, airport authority (runway treatment), the Federal Aviation Administration air traffic control tower, and de-icing operators. Prediction tools are being added to improve FACT capabilities including one that anticipates changes in airport departure rates from weather forecasts. We have formed two user teams from affected airports to guide the design and evaluate the web-based prototype. Future work includes adding more automated capabilities and conducting a simulation to evaluate FACT in a realistic environment.

Mogford, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2019

Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool Development

NASA is developing the Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool (FACT) to support airline and airport operations during winter storms. The goal is to reduce flight delays and cancellations due to winter weather. FACT concentrates relevant information from the Internet and FAA databases on one screen for easy access. It provides collaboration tools for those managing the winter weather event including the airline operations center, airport authority (runway treatment), the Federal Aviation Administration air traffic control tower, and de-icing operators. Prediction tools are being added to improve FACT capabilities including one that anticipates changes in airport departure rates from weather forecasts. We have formed two user teams from affected airports to guide the design and evaluate the web-based prototype. Future work includes adding more automated capabilities and conducting a simulation to evaluate FACT in a realistic environment.

Mogford, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2023

Monitoring Airspace Complexity and Determining Contributing Factors

The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand while simultaneously maintaining air travel as one of the safest forms of transportation. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the air traffic control system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt normal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators’ ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues, and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene — ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions, complexity increases. This is because, under these conditions humans are required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors. This results in a departure from the original strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators manage airspace complexity under rigid regulations but in a constantly changing environment. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. Some prior studies devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload. The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic — including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to ours that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns.

Precursor↗
NASA NTRS2019

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3): Dynamic Routes for Arrivals in Weather (DRAW) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 2.0

Airspace Technology Demonstration – 3 (ATD-3) is part of NASA’s Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) – specifically, its Airspace Technology Demonstrations (ATD) Project. ATD-3 is a multi-year research and development effort which proposes to develop and demonstrate automation technologies and operating concepts that enable air navigation service providers and airspace users to continuously assess weather, winds, traffic, and other information to identify, evaluate, and implement workable opportunities for flight plan route corrections that can result in significant flight time and fuel savings in en route airspace. In order to ensure that the products of this tech-transfer are relevant and useful, NASA has created strong partnerships with the FAA and key industry stakeholders. This summary document and accompanying technology artifacts satisfy the third Research Transition Product (RTP) defined in the Applied Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Research Transition Team (RTT) Plan, which is Dynamic Routes for Arrivals in Weather (DRAW). This technology transfer consists of artifacts for DRAW Arrival Metering (AM) Operations delivered in June 2018, DRAW AM updates, and DRAW Extended Metering (XM) Operations. Blue highlighting indicates the new or modified deliverables. Some of the artifacts in this technology transfer have distribution restrictions that need to be followed. Distribution information is noted in each section. DRAW is a trajectory-based system that combines the legacy Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) weather avoidance technology with an arrival-specific rerouting algorithm and arrival scheduler to improve traffic flows on weather-impacted arrival routes into major airports. First, DRAW identifies flights that could be rerouted to more efficient Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) that may have previously been impacted by weather. Second, when weather is impacting the arrival routing, DRAW proposes simple arrival route corrections that enable aircraft to stay on their flight plan while avoiding weather. The DRAW system proposes reroutes early enough to allow Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) to make the necessary schedule adjustments. As a result, metering operations can be sustained longer and more consistently in the presence of weather because the arrival schedule accounts for the dynamic routing intent of arrival flights to deviate around weather. The first DRAW tech transfer in June 2018 focused on arrival metering operations with the DRAW algorithm implemented in the NASA Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS) automation software. This tech transfer delivery includes updates for DRAW implemented in FAA’s TBFM 4.7 automation software and preliminary research into DRAW for XM operations.

Isaacson, Douglas R.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Air System Information Management

I flew to Washington last week, a trip rich in distributed information management. Buying tickets, at the gate, in flight, landing and at the baggage claim, myriad messages about my reservation, the weather, our flight plans, gates, bags and so forth flew among a variety of travel agency, airline and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) computers and personnel. By and large, each kind of information ran on a particular application, often specialized to own data formats and communications network. I went to Washington to attend an FAA meeting on System-Wide Information Management (SWIM) for the National Airspace System (NAS) (http://www.nasarchitecture.faa.gov/Tutorials/NAS101.cfm). NAS (and its information infrastructure, SWIM) is an attempt to bring greater regularity, efficiency and uniformity to the collection of stovepipe applications now used to manage air traffic. Current systems hold information about flight plans, flight trajectories, weather, air turbulence, current and forecast weather, radar summaries, hazardous condition warnings, airport and airspace capacity constraints, temporary flight restrictions, and so forth. Information moving among these stovepipe systems is usually mediated by people (for example, air traffic controllers) or single-purpose applications. People, whose intelligence is critical for difficult tasks and unusual circumstances, are not as efficient as computers for tasks that can be automated. Better information sharing can lead to higher system capacity, more efficient utilization and safer operations. Better information sharing through greater automation is possible though not necessarily easy.

Filman, Robert E.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Fact Sheets of CTAS and NASA Decision-Support Tools and Concepts

Distributed Air/Ground (DAG) Traffic Management (TM) is an integrated operational concept in which flight deck crews, air traffic service providers and aeronautical operational control personnel use distributed decision-making to enable user preferences and increase system capacity, while meeting air traffic management (ATM) requirements. It is a possible operational mode under the Free Flight concept outlined by the RTCA Task Force 3. The goal of DAG-TM is to enhance user flexibility/efficiency and increase system capacity, without adversely affecting system safety or restricting user accessibility to the National Airspace System (NAS). DAG-TM will be accomplished with a human-centered operational paradigm enabled by procedural and technological innovations. These innovations include automation aids, information sharing and Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) / ATM technologies. The DAG-TM concept is intended to eliminate static restrictions to the maximum extent possible. In this paradigm, users may plan and operate according to their preferences - as the rule rather than the exception - with deviations occumng eyond the year 2015. Out of a total of 15 concept elements, 4 have been selected for initial sutidies (see Key Elements in sidebar). DAG-TM research is being performed at Ames, Glenn, and Langley Research Centers.

Lee, Katharine↗
NASA NTRS2004

DAG-TM Concept Element 11 CNS Performance Assessment: ADS-B Performance in the TRACON

Distributed Air/Ground (DAG) Traffic Management (TM) is an integrated operational concept in which flight deck crews, air traffic service providers and aeronautical operational control personnel use distributed decision-making to enable user preferences and increase system capacity, while meeting air traffic management (ATM) safety requirements. It is a possible operational mode under the Free Flight concept outlined by the RTCA Task Force 3. The goal of DAG-TM is to enhance user flexibility/efficiency and increase system capacity, without adversely affecting system safety or restricting user accessibility to the National Airspace System (NAS). DAG-TM will be accomplished with a human-centered operational paradigm enabled by procedural and technological innovations. These innovations include automation aids, information sharing and Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) / ATM technologies. The DAG-TM concept is intended to eliminate static restrictions to the maximum extent possible. In this paradigm, users may plan and operate according to their preferences - as the rule rather than the exception - with deviations occurring only as necessary. The DAG-TM concept elements aim to mitigate the extent and impact of dynamic NAS constraints, while maximizing the flexibility of airspace operations

Raghavan, Rajesh S.↗
NASA NTRS1974

Navigation and guidance requirements for commercial VTOL operations

The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) has undertaken a research program to develop the navigation, guidance, control, and flight management technology base needed by Government and industry in establishing systems design concepts and operating procedures for VTOL short-haul transportation systems in the 1980s time period. The VALT (VTOL Automatic Landing Technology) Program encompasses the investigation of operating systems and piloting techniques associated with VTOL operations under all-weather conditions from downtown vertiports; the definition of terminal air traffic and airspace requirements; and the development of avionics including navigation, guidance, controls, and displays for automated takeoff, cruise, and landing operations. The program includes requirements analyses, design studies, systems development, ground simulation, and flight validation efforts.

Hoffman, W. C.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Concept of Operations

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demandcapacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center TMC to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that uses this technology to improve tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept helps reduce uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station (NTX) in DallasFort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations. This paper presents the Concept of Operations. Companion papers include the Final Report and a Technology Description. ? SUBJECT:

tactical departure scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2002

Use of Traffic Intent Information by Autonomous Aircraft in Constrained Operations

This paper presents findings of a research study designed to provide insight into the issue of intent information exchange in constrained en-route air-traffic operations and its effect on pilot decision-making and flight performance. The piloted simulation was conducted in the Air Traffic Operations Laboratory at the NASA Langley Research Center. Two operational modes for autonomous flight management were compared under conditions of low and high operational complexity (traffic and airspace hazard density). The tactical mode was characterized primarily by the use of traffic state data for conflict detection and resolution and a manual approach to meeting operational constraints. The strategic mode involved the combined use of traffic state and intent information, provided the pilot an additional level of alerting, and allowed an automated approach to meeting operational constraints. Operational constraints applied in the experiment included separation assurance, schedule adherence, airspace hazard avoidance, flight efficiency, and passenger comfort. The strategic operational mode was found to be effective in reducing unnecessary maneuvering in conflict situations where the intruder's intended maneuvers would resolve the conflict. Conditions of high operational complexity and vertical maneuvering resulted in increased proliferation of conflicts, but both operational modes exhibited characteristics of stability based on observed conflict proliferation rates of less than 30 percent. Scenario case studies illustrated the need for maneuver flight restrictions to prevent the creation of new conflicts through maneuvering and the need for an improved user interface design that appropriately focuses the pilot's attention on conflict prevention information. Pilot real-time assessment of maximum workload indicated minimal sensitivity to operational complexity, providing further evidence that pilot workload is not the limiting factor for feasibility of an en-route distributed traffic management system, even under highly constrained conditions.

Wing, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Technology Description

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demand-capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center TMC to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that uses this technology to improve tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept helps reduce uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station (NTX) in Dallas-Fort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations. This paper presents the Technology Description. Companion papers include the Final Report and a Concept of Operations.

tactical departure scheduling↗