CTAS TRAJECTORY INTEROPERABILITY REQUIREMENTS THREE SCENARIOS: AIR-GROUND, GROUND-GROUND, AIR-AIR. FOR EACH…

Public award description

CTAS TRAJECTORY INTEROPERABILITY REQUIREMENTS THREE SCENARIOS: AIR-GROUND, GROUND-GROUND, AIR-AIR. FOR EACH, A RANGE OF INTEROPERABILITY SITUATIONS ARE DESCRIBED BY PROVIDING THE DIFFERENT TRAJECTORY PREDICTOR (TP)-RELATED SYSTEM FUNCTIONS THAT NEED TO BE SYNCHRONIZED AND THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES (INCLUDING TRAJECTORY DATA SHARING RESPONSIBILITIES) FOR EACH SYSTEM. EACH SCENARIO ALSO DESCRIBES THE EXPECTED STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESS OF THREE TRAJECTORY DATA SHARING OPTIONS: INTENT DATA, 4D TRAJECTORY DATA, AND BEHAVIOR MODEL DATA. EACH TRAJECTORY DATA OPTION IS DESCRIBED SEPARATELY, BUT THE EXPECTED STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF COMBINING DIFFERENT DATA SHARING APPROACHES (E.G., SHARING BOTH INTENT AND 4D TRAJECTORY DATA) CAN BE DETERMINED FROM THE INDEPENDENT DESCRIPTIONS. MORE ADVANCED SCENARIOS CAN BE CREATED BY COMBINING THE BASIC SCENARIO TYPES. DETAILED EXAMPLE SCENARIOS, INCLUDING HIGH LEVEL OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS, SPECIFIC AIRCRAFT MANEUVERING AND EXISTING TRAJECTORY-DEPENDENT SYSTEMS ARE PROVIDED FOR THE AIR-GROUND AND GROUND-GROUND CASES. AFTER THE THREE SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS, TWO RELATED TOPICS ARE DISCUSSED. FIRST, AN ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT TRANSFER MECHANISMS FOR SHARING BEHAVIOR MODEL DATA IS PROVIDED. TWO POSSIBLE MECHANISMS, AIDL AND TPML, ARE IDENTIFIED AS THE MOST PROMISING OPTIONS, BUT BOTH HAVE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES. STATE-OF-THE-ART GROUND AND AIRBORNE SYSTEMS THAT ARE DEPENDENT ON A TP TO SUPPORT THEIR FUNCTIONALITY ARE PROVIDED. THE DIFFERENT SYSTEM FUNCTIONS (DESCRIBED IN THE EXAMPLE SCENARIOS) PROVIDED BY EACH SYSTEM ARE IDENTIFIED. THESE SYSTEMS ARE CANDIDATES TO PROVIDE THE TP-DEPENDENT SYSTEM FUNCTIONS DESCRIBED IN THE SCENARIOS DURING INTEROPERABILITY EXPERIMENTS. THE SYSTEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE DETAILED EXAMPLE SCENARIOS ARE TAKEN FROM THIS LIST OF CANDIDATE SYSTEMS.