Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “tactical planning”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

TPSAS-NF1676L-12263-DND

The increasing presence of airport surface surveillance technologies has spawned a strong interest in airport surface traffic management research; the vast majority has assumed that the airport’s runway configuration is known and constant. Tactical Runway Configuration Management (TRCM), one component of NASA’s System Oriented Runway Management concept, plans the airport configuration to optimize traffic efficiency for the forecast weather, traffic, and other factors. While planning runway configuration can provide benefit and is required by other automation concepts, larger benefits are possible by planning other airport configuration decisions, such as runway assignment policies, that are currently made manually by controllers. A laboratory prototype of the TRCM algorithm which selects optimal airport configuration schedules has been implemented and studied within a simulation environment. The presentation will describe simulation results for several airports, under various weather and traffic conditions. The sequence of airport configurations recommended by TRCM result in significantly less delay than the airport configurations that were actually used by controllers, illustrating both the potential benefit from airport configuration optimization and the ability of TRCM to provide effective airport configuration schedules. The application to several, distinct airports demonstrates the approach is capable of handling the differences between airports with a common algorithm, while providing decision support that respects the current procedures at those airports. Consequently, TRCM is able to be deployed to any airport within the current National Airspace System. The TRCM algorithmic approach is also extensible to future operational scenarios. NASA is in the process of transferring the initial TRCM technology to the FAA. Future research will extend the concept and algorithm to provide coordinated plans for metroplex airports and study NextGen applications.

Stephen Atkins↗
DOE OSTI2022

Contentious narratives and disinformation about nuclear weapons in strategic deterrence and competition: A SOCOM perspective. Part of Section: United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) in Emerging Strategic & Geopolitical Challenges: Operational Implications for US Combatant Commands

Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine demonstrates the challenge for strategic deterrence and competition of countering contentious narratives and disinformation about weapons of mass destruction (WMD) during conventional regional wars against a nucleararmed adversary. Moscow uses both tailored, contentious narratives and targeted disinformation about WMD in Ukraine to influence and disrupt local and global perceptions in support of its deterrence and competition objectives vis-à-vis the United States and NATO. Since December 2021, Moscow has made a focal point of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons in its efforts to establish a permissive environment for its military buildup on the border with Ukraine and then its military intervention. These information tactics also demonstrate an opportunity for US Special Operations Forces (SOF). They are a case study for considering how SOF can contribute to strategic deterrence and competition objectives, specifically countering adversary gray-zone information efforts to alter regional security orders.1 Such a role is in line with the 2022 Special Operations Forces Vision and Strategy, which provides a framework for the evolution of SOF into “a force capable of creating strategic, asymmetric advantages for the nation as a key contributor of integrated deterrence” (United States Special Operations Command, 2022). This paper briefly examines this strategic challenge and SOF opportunity, focusing narrowly on the distinction between contentious narratives and disinformation about nuclear weapons and the role of SOF in countering these gray-zone information tactics. The nuclear dimension of Moscow’s contentious narratives and disinformation in the “special military operation” is of particular interest because it demonstrates the distinction between strategic efforts to influence and disrupt local and global perceptions in Moscow’s favor. This distinction between influence and disruption is less clear with Russia’s contentious narratives and disinformation about chemical and biological weapons in Ukraine, as disinformation about these two types of WMD appears to overwhelm contentious narratives. We believe this distinction is useful for policymakers and warfighters responsible for countering gray-zone information tactics because it provides a framework for crafting tailored responses to contentious narratives and disinformation about nuclear weapons and other WMD. The chapter concludes with a discussion of efforts that could be undertaken by SOF in cooperation with other relevant stakeholders to address this aspect of adversary gray-zone information tactics.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2018

Tactical Surface Metering Procedures for Charlotte Douglas International Airport

NASA has been collaborating with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aviation industry partners to develop and demonstrate new concepts and technologies for the Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) traffic management capabilities under the Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project. The primary goal of the ATD-2 project is to improve the predictability and the operational efficiency of the air traffic system in metroplex environments while maintaining or improving throughput by enhancing and integrating arrival, departure and surface prediction, scheduling, and management systems. In the Phase 1 Baseline IADS Demonstration, the tactical surface scheduling capability and the user interfaces for ramp controllers and ramp traffic managers were implemented for ramp operations. The purpose of the tactical surface scheduling capability is to provide the airline ramp controller with aircraft pushback advisories that prevent surface congestion and to respond to surface and airspace constraints that become known over relatively short time horizons. For this purpose, the tactical surface metering tool first estimates the capacity of current and near-future runway resources from flight schedule and surveillance data. With demand forecasts and predicted taxi trajectories, this tool computes an efficient runway schedule of aircraft in the planning horizon based on their readiness, Earliest Off-Block Times (EOBTs), and a ration by schedule (RBS) rule. Details on the implementation of the Tactical Surface Metering tool will be provided in the full paper. Both pushback and recommended hold times advisories provided by this surface metering tool are shown on the user interfaces for the ramp controller and the ramp traffic manager, called Ramp Traffic Console (RTC) and Ramp Manager Traffic Console (RMTC), respectively. There is excess queue time in the system due to demand capacity imbalance, this time can be taken as a hold on the runway queue or at the gate and was referred to as the Metering Value. This metering value can be adjusted by the Ramp Manager in collaboration with Air Traffic Controller-Tower Traffic Management Coordinator (TMC). They selected a set of metering values as default values for the tool during human-in-the-loop simulation. As the metering value increases, there is a decrease in the gate hold and increase in the queue time at the runway. Procedures and Information needs related to managing the surface metering procedures were researched in the simulated environment. These procedures will be compared to the procedures adopted at Charlotte Douglas International Airport when the tools were deployed and adopted in November 2017 for one departure push bank per day. Feedback regarding initial issues, information needs such as the need to see EOBTs on the flight data tags and how they compare to scheduled times will also be discussed in the full paper. Initial results will be provided regarding the choice of the metering value and how it was adjusted on a daily basis and what procedures evolved will also be presented in the paper.

surface metering↗
NASA NTRS2005

Automated Planning and Scheduling for Space Mission Operations

Research Trends: a) Finite-capacity scheduling under more complex constraints and increased problem dimensionality (subcontracting, overtime, lot splitting, inventory, etc.) b) Integrated planning and scheduling. c) Mixed-initiative frameworks. d) Management of uncertainty (proactive and reactive). e) Autonomous agent architectures and distributed production management. e) Integration of machine learning capabilities. f) Wider scope of applications: 1) analysis of supplier/buyer protocols & tradeoffs; 2) integration of strategic & tactical decision-making; and 3) enterprise integration.

scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2019

Management by Trajectory: Improving Predictability for Airspace Operations

In the present-day National Airspace System, the air traffic management system attempts to predict the trajectory for each flight based on the flight plan and scheduled or controlled departure time. However, gaps in trajectory data and models, coupled with tactical control actions that are not communicated to automation systems or other stakeholders, lead to trajectory predictions that are less accurate than they could be. This affects traffic flow management performance. Management by Trajectory (MBT) is a NASA concept for air traffic management in which every flight operates in accordance with a 4D trajectory that is negotiated between the airspace user and the FAA to account for the airspace user’s goals while complying with NAS constraints. The primary benefit of MBT is an improvement in system performance due to increased trajectory predictability and stability, which result from managing traffic in all four dimensions (2D route, vertical, and time), ensuring that changes to the flight’s trajectory are incorporated into the assigned trajectory, and utilizing improved time or arrival control standards. Importantly, the performance improvements support increasing efficiency without increasing collision risk. This paper provides an overview of MBT and describes fast-time simulation results evaluating the safety, performance, and efficiency effects of MBT.

Fernandes, Alicia B.↗
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 NTRS2012

The HAL 9000 Space Operating System Real-Time Planning Engine Design and Operations Requirements

In support of future deep space manned missions, an autonomous/automated vehicle, providing crew autonomy and an autonomous response planning system, will be required due to the light time delays in communication. Vehicle capabilities as a whole must provide for tactical response to vehicle system failures and space environmental effects induced failures, for risk mitigation of permanent loss of communication with Earth, and for assured crew return capabilities. The complexity of human rated space systems and the limited crew sizes and crew skills mix drive the need for a robust autonomous capability on-board the vehicle. The HAL 9000 Space Operating System[2] designed for such missions and space craft includes the first distributed real-time planning / re-planning system. This paper will detail the software architecture of the multiple planning engine system, and the interface design for plan changes, approval and implementation that is performed autonomously. Operations scenarios will be defined for analysis of the planning engines operations and its requirements for nominal / off nominal activities. An assessment of the distributed realtime re-planning system, in the defined operations environment, will be provided as well as findings as it pertains to the vehicle, crew, and mission control requirements needed for implementation.

Stetson, Howard↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Traverse Planning Process for the Drats 2010 Analog Field Simulations

Traverse planning concentrates on optimizing the science return within the overall objectives of planetary surface missions or their analog field simulations. Such simulations were conducted in the San Francisco Volcanic Field, northern Arizona, from Aug. 26 to Sept 17, 2010 and involved some 200 individuals in the field, with some 40 geoscientists composing the science team. The purpose of these Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) is to exercise and evaluate developmental hardware, software and operational concepts in a mission-like, fully-integrated, setting under the direction of an onsite Mobile Mission Control Center(MMCC). DRATS 2010 focused on the simultaneous operation of 2 rovers, a historic first. Each vehicle was manned by an astronaut-commander and an experienced field geologist. Having 2 rovers and crews in the field mandated substantially more complex science and mission control operations compared to the single rover DRATS tests of 2008 and 2009, or the Apollo lunar missions. For instance, the science support function was distributed over 2 "back rooms", one for each rover, with both "tactical" teams operating independently and simultaneously during the actual traverses. Synthesis and integration of the daily findings and forward planning for the next day(s) was accomplished overnight by yet another "strategic" science team.

Horz, Friedrich↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Final Report

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows that may be subject to constraints that create localized demand/capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) and Frontline Managers (FLMs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center 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 time 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 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 improves tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions and departure runway assignments to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept reduces uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs and FLMs 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 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 research results from the PDRC research activity. Companion papers present the Concept of Operations and a Technology Description.

tactical departure scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC): NASA to FAA Research Transition

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) and Frontline Managers (FLMs) 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 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 time 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 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 improves tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions and departure runway assignments to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept reduces uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs and FLMs 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 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.

ATM↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Simulation Activities for Evaluating UAM Concept of Operations

NASA’s vision for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is to help emerging aviation markets to safely develop an air transportation system that moves people and cargo between places previously not served or underserved by aviation using revolutionary new aircraft types. Urban Air Mobility (UAM), the concept of expanding transportation networks by serving short flights to transport people and goods around metropolitan areas, is part of a larger paradigm shift toward AAM, in which new technologies and business models are enabling transformational applications of aviation. In NASA’s Concept of Operations for UAM, Providers of Services for UAM (PSU) play a key role to enable safe and efficient UAM operations by sharing operational data among UAM operators. PSUs provide a pre-departure strategic conflict management service that establishes operational plans for new flights and coordinates them with all relevant operations in shared airspace. The strategic conflict management aims to minimize the need for tactical separation provision, while considering anticipated traffic demand, vertiport capacity and availability, forecasted weather, and airspace restrictions. NASA is currently preparing a new lab evaluation activity with aviation industry partners, called the X4 simulation, to demonstrate their airspace services and capabilities and test new information exchange requirements for UAM operations. This simulation activity will support NASA’s National Campaign (NC) flight tests which are planned over the next several years to guide the collective community and stakeholders through a series of scenario-based test activities that involve vehicles and airspace management services operating in a live test environment. This presentation will provide an overview of the X4 simulation, including objectives, scenarios, assumptions, system architecture, and test schedule. The X4 simulation will evaluate the interconnectivity and operational intent sharing between PSUs for multiple operators, as well as the performance of strategic conflict management.

Urban Air Mobility, Simulation, Advanced Air Mobil↗
NASA NTRS1999

Experimental Evaluation of CTAS/FMS Integration in TRACON Airspace

A CTAS/FMS integration project at Ames Research Center addresses extensions to the CTAS air traffic management concept, among them the introduction of arrival routes specially designed for the use with a Flight Management System. These FMS arrival routes shall allow for the use of the INS' lateral and vertical navigation capabilities throughout the arrival until final approach. For the use in this project CTAS controller support tools that compliment the concept have been created. These tools offer controllers access to CTAS' prediction and planning capabilities in terms of speed and route advisories. The objective is to allow for a more strategic way of controlling aircraft. Expected benefits are an increase in arrival rate and a reduction of average travel times through TRACER airspace. A real time simulation is being conducted at Ames to investigate how FMS arrivals and approach transitions - with and without the support of CTAS tools - effect the flow of arriving traffic within TRACER airspace and the controllers' task performance. Four conditions will be investigated and compared to today's technique of controlling traffic with tactical vectoring: 1. FMS arrivals and approach transitions are available for controllers to issue to equipped aircraft - traffic permitting; 2. Speed advisories that match CTAS' runway balancing and sequencing plan are displayed to Feeder controllers; 3. Approach transition advisories (e.g., location of the base turn point) are displayed to Final controllers for tactical clearances ("Turn base now"); and 4. Approach transition advisories (voice and data link) are generated by CTAS and displayed to final controllers for strategic voice clearances ("Turn base five miles after waypoint xyz") or prepared in terms of a trajectory description for strategic data link clearance. Scenarios used in the study will represent current traffic and vary in density of arriving traffic and the kind and mix of equipage of arriving aircraft. Data will be collected from experiment runs with active TRACON controllers on the final approach spacing, the aircraft's speed profiles, the controllers interaction with CTAS tools, and number and timing of pilot controllers communications under the described conditions.

Romahn, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2002

ANTS: Applying A New Paradigm for Lunar and Planetary Exploration

ANTS (Autonomous Nano- Technology Swarm), a mission architecture consisting of a large (1000 member) swarm of picoclass (1 kg) totally autonomous spacecraft with both adaptable and evolvable heuristic systems, is being developed as a NASA advanced mission concept, and is here examined as a paradigm for lunar surface exploration. As the capacity and complexity of hardware and software, demands for bandwidth, and the sophistication of goals for lunar and planetary exploration have increased, greater cost constraints have led to fewer resources and thus, the need to operate spacecraft with less frequent human contact. At present, autonomous operation of spacecraft systems allows great capability of spacecraft to 'safe' themselves and survive when conditions threaten spacecraft safety. To further develop spacecraft capability, NASA is at the forefront of development of new mission architectures which involve the use of Intelligent Software Agents (ISAs), performing experiments in space and on the ground to advance deliberative and collaborative autonomous control techniques. Selected missions in current planning stages require small groups of spacecraft weighing tens, instead of hundreds, of kilograms to cooperate at a tactical level to select and schedule measurements to be made by appropriate instruments onboard. Such missions will be characterizing rapidly unfolding real-time events on a routine basis. The next level of development, which we are considering here, is in the use of autonomous systems at the strategic level, to explore the remote terranes, potentially involving large surveys or detailed reconnaissance.

Clark, P. E.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Practical Operational Readiness Gambits: Operations Training Simulations for the Curiosity Rover

The Mars Science Laboratory team had been puttingin effort to make a Training Venue to allow for parallel shadowtactical operations for trainees to actively work alongside theprime tactical operations personnel without affecting operations,since staffing constraints and shortened operations timelineswere straining the tactical process in supporting operationstrainees in the traditional way. The COVID- 19 Pandemic presentedfurther challenges in continuing on-console training forMSL operations trainees. The MSL operations team switched tofully remote operations, thus hampering the direct mentorshipa trainee would normally receive while on site at JPL. TheMars 2020 training team had developed a concept for roveroperations training simulations based on Johnson Space Center’sextensive simulations training program for astronauts andflight controllers. The MSL team borrowed this idea, and implementedthese training simulations which are called PracticalOperational Readiness Gambits (PORGs). The PORGs so farhave focused on the Science Planner and Rover Planner roles,which are two crucial roles in tactical operations that engagein key interactions throughout a shift. PORGs are based onactual sol scenarios that have occurred on Mars and follow thetactical operations process and timeline as closely as possible.However, unlike an operations shift, PORGs can slow down orpause to allow for more mentoring time. PORGs can focus onparticular skills to test the trainees on their understanding ofa concept. PORGs increase in complexity with each scenario toease the trainees into more typical tactical operations workloads.As more trainees join the MSL operations team, more roles arebeing incorporated into PORGs. There are plans to incorporatecertified operations personnel into PORGs to practice anomalyresponse situations. PORGs have become an essential part of theMSL operations training program and will continue even afterthe return to on-site operations at JPL.

Gajeway, Jocelyn↗
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↗
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 NTRS2006

Implementing Distributed Operations: A Comparison of Two Deep Space Missions

Two very different deep space exploration missions--Mars Exploration Rover and Cassini--have made use of distributed operations for their science teams. In the case of MER, the distributed operations capability was implemented only after the prime mission was completed, as the rovers continued to operate well in excess of their expected mission lifetimes; Cassini, designed for a mission of more than ten years, had planned for distributed operations from its inception. The rapid command turnaround timeline of MER, as well as many of the operations features implemented to support it, have proven to be conducive to distributed operations. These features include: a single science team leader during the tactical operations timeline, highly integrated science and engineering teams, processes and file structures designed to permit multiple team members to work in parallel to deliver sequencing products, web-based spacecraft status and planning reports for team-wide access, and near-elimination of paper products from the operations process. Additionally, MER has benefited from the initial co-location of its entire operations team, and from having a single Principal Investigator, while Cassini operations have had to reconcile multiple science teams distributed from before launch. Cassini has faced greater challenges in implementing effective distributed operations. Because extensive early planning is required to capture science opportunities on its tour and because sequence development takes significantly longer than sequence execution, multiple teams are contributing to multiple sequences concurrently. The complexity of integrating inputs from multiple teams is exacerbated by spacecraft operability issues and resource contention among the teams, each of which has their own Principal Investigator. Finally, much of the technology that MER has exploited to facilitate distributed operations was not available when the Cassini ground system was designed, although later adoption of web-based and telecommunication tools has been critical to the success of Cassini operations.

Cassini Mission↗
NASA NTRS2006

Implementing distributed operations : a comparison of two Deep Space Missions

Two very different deep space exploration missions—Mars Exploration Rover and Cassini—have made use of distributed operations for their science teams. In the case of MER, the distributed operations capability was implemented only after the prime mission was completed, as the rovers continued to operate well in excess of their expected mission lifetimes; Cassini, designed for a prime mission of four years, had planned for distributed operations from its inception. The rapid command turnaround timeline of MER, as well as many of the operations features implemented to support it, have proven to be conducive to distributed operations. These features include: a single science team leader during the tactical operations timeline, highly integrated science and engineering teams, processes and file structures designed to permit multiple team members to work in parallel to deliver sequencing products, web-based spacecraft status and planning reports for team-wide access, and near-elimination of paper products from the operations process.

Larsen, Barbara↗