Transcript C/AFT ATS Datalink Investment Analysis

The Business Case for
Digital Data Link
U.S. Domestic Analysis
ATN ‘99
September 22, 1999
www.boeing.com/caft
The CNS/ATM Focused Team
“C/AFT”
 An Informal Industry Group
• Airlines
• Airframe Manufacturers (Boeing, Airbus)
• Air Traffic Service Providers (FAA, Eurocontrol)
• Associations (ATA, IATA)
• Research Organizations (MITRE/CAASD, NASA, LMI)
 Focus is Business Case Development
• Establish Problem -- Why do we need to change?
• Quantify Solutions -- What to do, and when?
• Develop Consensus -- How do we move forward?
Airline Data Link Commitment
Key Questions
 Is there a valid economic basis for airlines to
commit to investment into ATC data link?
 What short and long term airline benefits are
there for investment in ATC data link?
 Is there a “Window of Opportunity” for
maximizing the return on this investment?
 How does ACARS fit in to this issue?
 What is the value of ATC data link as an enabling
technology for future applications?
 Does this define a “Benefits Driven” approach?
Overview
 Introduction & Assumptions
 AOC Situation
 ATC Situation
 C/AFT Modeling Process
 Model Inputs
 Investment Analysis Results
 Potential Future Data Link Benefits
 Conclusions
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Introduction
 C/AFT airlines agree that future system capacity
is a primary driver for global airspace changes.
 C/AFT proposes incremental operational
enhancements that can be enabled by CNS
technologies.
 C/AFT analyzed Digital Data Link as a primary
enabler for ATC delay reduction.
 Business case development was based on
analysis of costs and benefits from the U.S.
airlines’ perspective.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Scope of This Analysis
 This is not an alternatives analysis, as data link is
the only enabler considered.
 Analysis is for Cruise/Terminal Transition area
capacity improvements in U.S. NAS.
 Value is based on airline point of view (airlines as
an industry, not a single airline).
 Both AOC and ATC benefits considered.
 Analysis includes value of transitioning from
Plain Old ACARS (POA) to VDL Mode 2 for AOC.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Airline Operations Control
Why the Need for Change?
 ACARS Demand is Increasing
• New aircraft being delivered
• New airline users entering service
• New applications and non-airline users
 ACARS is a Shared-Access System
• Based on non-discriminatory system of FCC
frequencies
 Spectrum Availability and Congestion
• Limited number of VHF frequencies
• Interim ACARS expansion is short-lived and expensive
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Airline Operations Control
Increasing U.S. Demand for Service
 Growing number of ACARS aircraft in U.S.
• Today: Approx. 5600 U.S. + 1500 Non-U.S. = 7100
• Future: Up to 1200 more over next 3 to 5 years
 Potential new demand from new participants
• Civil: Large Scheduled (Regional), Cargo, & Business
• Military: Non-Tactical Aircraft, Air National Guard
• Estimated potential at more than 4500 additional a/c
 Increasing number of data link applications
• Aircraft Performance
• Crew Management
• In-flight Operations
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Spectrum Issues
Congestion and Availability
 New applications are the primary reason for
increasing demand for ACARS.
 New data link users entering service is the
secondary reason for increasing demand.
 Many areas of US already already experiencing
congestion on en route frequencies.
 Other industries are looking and petitioning for
available spectrum.
Managing spectrum congestion and availability will be a
growing and continuing concern for the airline industry.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
ACARS Demand Will Exceed Capacity
U.S. DATA LINK DEMAND / SPECTRUM CAPACITY
ANNUAL KBITS - AOC TRAFFIC ONLY
LEGEND
Upside Growth
Nominal Growth
Slowdown Growth
Maximum Frequency Capacity for ARI NC ACARS
8th Frequency
7th Frequency
6th Frequency
TODAY
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
YEAR
ARINC, Inc
The Digital Solution (VDL-2)
 Migration of ACARS traffic to VDL-2 will
effectively address projected frequency
congestion
 Significant costs related to expanding interim
ACARS capacity may be avoided
 ATC Data Link is a common element in most new
applications related to ATC modernization and
airspace management
CNS/ATM Focused Team
ATC Data Link Situation
 American Airlines study of impact of delay on airline schedule
• Without capacity improvements airline flight schedule critically
impacted by year 2005.
• By reducing separation, airline schedules can be maintained.
 Results from FAA study of Cruise/Terminal Transition area data
link shows significant delay reduction potential
• Reduce voice frequency congestion.
• Off-loads routine comm from radar controller, allowing improved ATC
services for increased sector productivity and efficiency.
 FAA has funding baseline for Builds 1 and 1a CPDLC
• Based on ATN over VDL Mode 2.
 PETAL-II trials in Europe underway to evaluate data link
operational implementation issues.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
C/AFT Modeling Process
Transition Logic Diagrams
 C/AFT is proponent of incremental operational
enhancements
 Transition Logic Diagrams
• separate diagram for each phase of operation
• developed for both capacity and efficiency
• operational enhancements “enabled” by technology or
procedural improvements
 C/AFT analysis focuses on capacity-related
improvements
• Reduced separations
• Additional routes
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Aircraft Separation Rings
Resource-Constrained
Prevention
RNP, RMP, RCP
Display
Weather
Medium-Term Intent
Data Controller
Comm: g/g
Pilot
Flow Rates
Airspace Complexity
Effective
Theoretical
Intervention
RMP, RCP
Effective
Resource-Constrained
Detection
RMP
Sensor
Display
Short-Term Intent
Controller
Comm: a/g
Pilot
Closure Rate
Sensor
Display
Controller
Pilot
Required Element Performance
RxP = f (sensors, decision support, human)
Required System Performance sets Separation Standard
RSP = g ( RCP, RMP, RNP )
CNS/ATM Focused Team
The First Step:
Controller Communications Workload
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Strip Mgmt Ext Coord Int Coord Conf Srch
R/T
Rdr Coord Rdr Super Rdr Interv
"SYSCO" Approximate Controller Workload Distribution
CNS/ATM Focused Team
5. Cruise/Terminal Transition Area Transitions
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
Reduced Prevention Buffer
Redistributed Controller
Comm Workload
System-Level Capacity Effects
Atlanta study baseline.
Data Link used for Clearances
and Transfer of Comm
More Vertical Profiles
More Published
SIDs and STARs
 FAA Atlanta Study
Reduced Prevention Buffer
State Vector Prediction
Reduced Intervention
Buffer
Reduced Separation
Minima
 Cruise/Terminal Transition Sector handles
arrival sequencing, overflight traffic, and
departures
 Restrictions are enforced due to
communication volume saturation
 Problem: During peak periods 20 Miles in Trail
(MIT) for departures entering sector, resulting
in ground delays
 Result: Using data link for routine voice
communications allowed reduction from 20 MIT
to 5 MIT (62% delay reduction)
14
C/AFT Modeling Process
Probabilistic Economic Model
 Determines
• Costs
• Benefits (converted to dollars)
• Risk
• Rules
 Builds Deterministic Sensitivity Analysis
• Identifies influence of each uncertainty on NPV
• Used to calculate overall risk and return
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Data Link Investment Model
Full Influence Diagram
Data Link Investment Model
Structured Influence Diagram
Equipage
Model
Infrastructure Timing
Infrastructure
Model
Forward Fit and
Infra Effectiveness
Retrofit Equipage Rates
AOC Readiness
New
Total Planes
Delay Growth
Deliveries
FF Planes
Curr Delay/Flight
Net Benefits Model
Upfront Investment
Retrofit Planes
Model
(+)
Airplanes
Delay Reduction
(-)
(-)
Retired
AOC Savings
Equipage Costs
ATC S/W Maint
FF POA Penalties
S/W Upgrade Costs
Annual Message Costs
Non-AOC
Availability
Airline Host Costs
Cash Flows
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Constants
 Start Year of Model
2000
 Final Year for Equipage
2015
 Final Year for Benefit
2020
 Discount Rate
12%
 Inflation Rate
3.5%
 Direct Operating Cost (DOC)
$25 per minute
(Not including ownership costs)
 Fuel % of DOC
30%
 Fuel inflation rate
5%
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Delay Growth
 Derived from Free Flight, Preserving Airline
Opportunity, by American Airlines, Fig. 4
 Large range of this variable due to:
• AA study was using conservative good weather day
estimate
• This represents delay over optimum (not schedule)
• This accounts for value of unmet traffic growth due to
capacity constraints
Variables
Delay Growth Per Year
10
2.5%
50
7%
90
11%
Model Inputs
Traffic Growth
 Number of planes at start of model:
• 5194 (Source: ATA)
 Number of planes in 2015:
• Low Estimate:
8054
• Medium Estimate:
8943
• High Estimate:
9289
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Infrastructure
 Model includes both AOC and ATC Infrastructure
 CPDLC Builds have an associated “Delay
Reduction Effectiveness” which represents the
percentage of data link-related delay that is
affected with each build.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Infrastructure
Variables
ARINC VDL-2 Infrastructure Readiness Year
10
2000
50
2001
90
2002
ATC Infrastructure
Build 1 Start Yr
Duration of Build 1 (years)
Duration of Build 1a (years)
Duration of Build 2
2002
1
2
2
2003
2
3
4
2004
3
4
8
Build 1 Delay Reduction Effectiveness
Build 1a Delay Reduction Effectiveness
Build 2 Delay Reduction Effectiveness
0%
50%
70%
0%
70%
90%
0%
85%
95%
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Three Stages of Equipage
 Stage 0
• Tied to AOC infrastructure readiness
• AOC benefits biggest driver (message cost reduction and penalty
avoidance)
• No ATC delay reduction benefits
• High forward fit of VDL-2 equipment, low retrofit
 Stage 1
•
•
•
•
Tied to ATC infrastructure readiness
Both ATC delay reduction and AOC benefits
Increased forward fit, med retrofit
Ends when airlines equip more aggressively due to infrastructure
maturity and realized benefits
 Stage 2
• Tied to ATC infrastructure maturity
• Both ATC delay delay reduction and AOC benefits
• Increased forward fit, high retrofit
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Equipage Relationship to FAA Program
Equippage Rates by Stages
Equippage Rate
1
0.8
0.6
Retrofit
0.4
Forw ard Fit
0.2
0
Stage 0
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stages of Equippage
Equipage
Stages
Stage 0
ATC Bld 1 Start (2002,2003,2004)
ATC Bld 1/ATC Bld 1A/ATC Bld 2 End
Stage 1
Stage 2
Infrastructure
Builds
Bld 1
2000
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Bld 1A
2005
2015
Bld 2
2010
Note: All graphics
reflect base case values
2015
Model Inputs
Equipage Percentages
Variables
10
50
90
ACARS-equipped airplanes %
85% 90% 95%
Equipage Scenarios
Max Retrofit Total (over life of model)
Stage 0 Forward Fit % per yr
Stage 0 Retrofit % per yr
Stage 1 Forward Fit % per yr
Stage 1 Retrofit % per yr
Stage 2 Forward Fit % per yr
Stage 2 Retrofit % per yr
Low
50%
25%
2%
50%
7%
75%
15%
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Med
75%
60%
3%
85%
10%
95%
20%
High
90%
75%
4%
90%
13%
100%
25%
Model Inputs
Costs
 ATM Infrastructure costs not included
 Equipment costs assumes minimal avionics and
flight deck impact
• CMU, VDR, wiring
 Equipment Costs
• Aircraft Forward Fit and Retrofit for AOC
• CMU Software upgrade for ATC
• Airline host or router upgrade for AOC
 ATC Message Costs
• Who will pay? FAA, airlines, or both?
• Multiplying Factor takes into account this uncertainty
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Costs
Variables
10
50
90
Equipment Costs
Retrofit
Retrofit Installation costs
Forward Fit
ATC Upgrade
Average host upgrade, all airlines
$ 50,000
$100,000
$ 30,000
$ 10,000
$100,000
$ 80,000
$160,000
$ 60,000
$ 30,000
$200,000
$120,000
$240,000
$100,000
$100,000
$300,000
Message Costs
ATC Messages per equipped flight
Average bytes per message
200
40
229
56
260
75
Multiplying Factor on Message costs
0.0
0.5
1.0
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Costs
 Maintenance costs
• 10% per year of ATC software upgrade cost
 Message costs
• $.18 per Kbit for 0 - 1 million Kbits/year
• $.14 per Kbit for 1 - 4 million Kbits/year
• $.10 per Kbit for 4 - 8 million Kbits/year
• $.06 per Kbit for 8 - 15 million Kbits/year
• $.05 per Kbit for > 15 million Kbits/year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
AOC Benefits
 AOC Non-Availability
• Cost to an airline of not having full ACARS capability
($16, $32, $48 per flight)
 AOC message cost reduction
• Cost-per-Kilobit savings and message length reduction
(discount factor 0.67, 0.8, 0.86)
 AOC Penalty Avoidance for VDL-2 equipage
• Cost-per-Kilobit penalty (3%, 5%, 10% increase per year)
• Monthly Surcharge ($900, $1000, $1100 per month)
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
ATC Benefits
 Delay reduction benefits applied to all airplanes,
not just those equipped
 ATC Delay Reduction Benefit
• Based on Atlanta study; scaled study benefits
• Assigned delay reduction % to each FAA Build
 Uses the following formula:
• Atlanta NAS-wide benefits * discount factor * annual delay
growth
• Atlanta NAS-wide benefits = 11,491,387 minutes saved in
Cruise/Terminal Transition phase of flight
• Discount Factor = 30%, 50%, or 80% of Atlanta-study benefits
• Annual Delay Growth = 2.5%, 7%, 11% per year
Model Inputs
Delay vs. Equipage Curve
% of Full-Up Delay Reduction Achieved per
Equipped Flight
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0
0.1
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
% of Fleet Equipped
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Data Link Scenario Comparison
Return on Investment
Scenario
Expected
Productivity
End
Equippage
%*
Expected
NPV
IRR *
AOC Only
50%
$1019M
4.8
41%
2007
Full Datalink
78%
$2563M
5.6
45%
2008
ATC Only
78%
$410M
1.7
19%
2016
AOC Only Retrofit
25%
$401M
2.9
30%
2009
Full Datalink Retrofit
39%
$984M
3.4
35%
2009
ATC Only Retrofit
39%
$339M
0.8
8%
After 2020
AOC Only Forward Fit
27%
$603M
9.2
62%
2006
Full Datalink Forward Fit
39%
$996M
7.7
59%
2006
ATC Only Forward Fit
39%
$202M
1.1
13%
2019
Net Expected
Benefit
Net Expected Inv.
Breakeven
Year*
(Cum Disounted
Cash Flow)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
Full Datalink Costs by Category
Full Data Link Scenario
Cost Drivers by Category
Retrofit Costs
ATC S/W Costs
New Equip Costs
ATC Message Costs
ATC S/W Maintenance
Airline Host Costs
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
($000’s)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
$350
$400
Full
Data
Link
Scenario
Full Datalink Benefits by Category
Benefit Drivers By Category
Delay Savings
Cost per Flt AOC NA
AOC Message Svngs
POA Surcharges Avoid
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800
($000’s)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
Full Data Link Scenario
Deterministic Sensitivity
Full Data Link Scenario
Cumulative Probability of Return (NPV)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
Full Data Link Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Cash Flow Summary
10000
$9.0 Billion
9000
8000
Net Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
7000
Cum Cash Flow
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
-1000
2000
0
Full Data Link Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Forward Fit - Cash Flow Summary
4000
$3.6 Billion
3500
3000
Net Cash Flow
Cum Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
2500
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
2000
1500
1000
500
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
-500
2000
0
Full Data Link Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Retrofit - Cash Flow Summary
4000
$3.8 Billion
3500
3000
Net Cash Flow
Cum Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
2500
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
2000
1500
1000
500
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
-500
2000
0
Full Data Link Scenario
Value of Perfect Information and Control
Selected Chance Variables
Equipage Scenario
Delay Incr % per Yr
ATC Build 1A Eff %
Atlanta Discount Factor
AOC NA Strt Yr
ATC SW Upgrade $K
AOC NA ($ per Flt)
VOPI
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
VOPC
$520M
512
25
452
242
177
575
Value of Perfect Information: The value of knowing the outcome of an uncertainty before
you make the investment decision.
Value of Perfect Control: The value you of ensuring that the outcome of an uncertainty
comes out to the most favorable outcome for your decision.
Note: These calculations assume a 25% chance of the 10th percentile event occurring, a
50% chance of the 50th percentile event occurring, and a
25% chance of the 90th
percentile event occurring.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Outputs
AOC Only
 AOC-only scenario uses Stage 0 equipage rates
• Forward Fit per Year
25%, 60%, 75%
• Retrofit per Year
2%,
CNS/ATM Focused Team
3%,
4%
AOC Only Scenario
Cost Drivers by Category
Retrof it Costs
New Equip Costs
Airline Host Costs
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
($000’s)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
AOC Only Scenario
Benefit Drivers by Category
Cost per Flt AOC NA
AOC Message Savings
POA Surcharge Avoid
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
$800
($000’s)
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
$900
AOC Only Scenario
Deterministic Sensitivity
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
AOC Only Scenario
Cumulative Probability Distribution
CNS/ATM Focused Team Data Link Analysis (April 1999)
AOC Only Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Cash Flow Summary
4000
$3.5 Billion
3500
3000
Net Cash Flow
Cum Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
2500
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
2000
1500
1000
500
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
-500
2000
0
AOC Only Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Forward Fit - Cash Flow Summary
2500
$2.1 Billion
2000
Net Cash Flow
Cum Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
1500
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
1000
500
-500
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
0
AOC Only Scenario
Cash Flow Summary
Retrofit - Cash Flow Summary
1600
$1.5 Billion
1400
1200
Net Cash Flow
Cum Cash Flow
Dollars in Millions
1000
Cum Discounted Cash Flow
800
600
400
200
Year
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
-200
2000
0
AOC Only Scenario
Value of Perfect Information and Control
(Stage 0 Equipage Rates)
Selected Chance Variables
Equipage Scenario
AOC NA Strt Yr
AOC NA ($ per Flt)
AOC Cost per Flt
VOPI
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
VOPC
$301M
148
349
98
Value of Perfect Information: The value you should be willing to pay to know the outcome of an
uncertainty before you make the investment decision.
Value of Perfect Control: The value you should be willing to pay to ensure that the outcome of an
uncertainty comes out to the most favorable outcome for your decision.
Note: These calculations assume a 25% chance of the 10th percentile event occurring, a 50%
chance of the 50th percentile event occurring, and a 25% chance of the 90th percentile event
occurring.
Conclusions
 Data link is a strategic, long-term investment.
 Data link has a reasonable return on investment.
 The value of maintaining AOC data link capability
is one of the primary cost-avoidance drivers.
 AOC drives forward fit, ATC drives retrofit.
 The AOC benefits enable airline equipage.
 Risks associated with investing in ATC data link
are mitigated by the need to preserve AOC.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Conclusions
 Forward Fit equipage must start ASAP to avoid
the high retrofit costs.
 ATC benefits are particularly dependent on
successfully managing those factors with the
most variance of NPV (deterministic sensitivity).
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Potential Future Benefits
Enabled by ATC Data Link
A Rough-Order of Magnitude Analysis
CNS/ATM Focused Team
1. Planning Capacity Transitions
National / Local / Airport
International / National
C1-1
Improved
TFM
ADS intent information allows
for improved terminal area
arrival flow planning.
Enhanced
Arrival Planning
C1-4
C1-2
Collaborative
Traffic
Management
Integrated Airport
Flow Planning
C1-5
Coordinated TFM
System
CNS/ATM Focused Team
C1-3
2. Surface Capacity Transitions
Good Visibility
Low Visibility
C2-4
C2-1
Additional
Gates, Taxiways
and Aprons
Reduce
Schedule
Uncertainty
C2-5
C2-2
Improved Surface C2-3
Sequencing,
Scheduling and
Routing
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Improved Surface
Guidance
and Control
Visual Throughput
in CAT IIIb
Detroit Digital Taxi Clearance baseline. Use
CPDLC to provide taxi clearance.
3. Final Approach / Initial Departure Capacity Transitions
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
System-Level Capacity Effects
C3-1
Reduced Prevention
Buffer
C3-7
Increased Availability
of
Approaches/Departures
C3-6
C3-2
Reduced Intervention
Buffer
Additional Runways
C3-8
3-Dimensional Approaches
Only
Reduced Separation
Minima
Increased Runway
Utilization
C3-3
C3-4
Reduced Separation Minima
Reduced lateral spacing
between runways
Reduced Separation
Minima
Reduced longitudinal
spacing
CNS/ATM Focused Team
C3-5
Use ADS to reduce lateral separation
for independent operations to 2500’.
4. Approach / Departure Transition Capacity Transitions
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
System-Level Capacity Effects
C4-1
C4-6
Reduced Prevention
Buffer
Reduced
Intervention Buffer
More Transitions
C4-2
Ground Vectoring
C4-3
Reduced Intervention Buffer
Ground Guidance with
A/C trajectories
Use ADS with CTAS for
more efficient sequencing.
C4-4
Reduced Intervention Buffer
A/C Guidance
Use CPDLC with 4-D Nav for accurate
arrival at the final approach fix.
C4-5
Reduced Separation
Minima
CNS/ATM Focused Team
TBD
C4-7
Increased Availability of
Existing Transitions
5. TMA Arrival/Departure Capacity Transitions
System-Level Capacity Effects
C5-5
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
More Vertical Profiles
C5-6
More Published
SIDs and STARs
C5-1
Reduced Prevention Buffer
Redistributed Controller
Comm Workload
C5-2
Reduced Prevention Buffer
State vector prediction
C5-3
Reduced Intervention Buffer
Newark study baseline. Data Link used
for Clearances and Transfer of Comm
ADS used to provide med-term state vector
information to CTAS for improved
sequencing and spacing.
4-D contract: ADS for intent, and CPDLC for trajectory coordination.
OR
Improved performance of CPDLC allows for reduced controller
intervention.
C5-4
Reduced Separation
Minima
CNS/ATM Focused Team
TBD
6. En-Route Capacity Transitions (Procedural Separations)
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
System-Level Capacity Effects
C6P-7
C6P-1
Reduced Prevention
Buffer
More Flight Levels
C6P-2
Reduced Intervention
Buffer
C6P-3
Reduced Separation Minima
50/50 Horizontal
C6P-4
Reduced Separation Minima
30/30 Horizontal
ADS used to provide position data to ATC.
C6P-5
Reduced Separation Minima
15NM radius
TBD
C6P-6
Reduced Separation Minima
< 15NM radius
TBD
C6P-8
More Published
Routes
6. En-Route Capacity Transitions (Radar Separations)
System-Level Capacity Effects
Airplane-Level Capacity Effects
C6R-5
More Flight Levels
C6R-6
More Published
Routes
C6R-1
Reduced Prevention Buffer
Redistributed Controller
Comm Workload
C6R-2
Reduced Prevention Buffer
State vector prediction
C6R-3
Reduced Intervention Buffer
Atlanta study baseline. Data Link used
for Clearances and Transfer of Comm
ADS used to provide state vector
information for medium-term
trajectory prediction.
4-D contract: ADS for intent, and CPDLC for trajectory
coordination.
OR
Improved performance of CPDLC allows for reduced controller
intervention.
C6R-4
Reduced Separation
Minima
CNS/ATM Focused Team
TBD
Future Data Link Model Assumptions
(1 of 2)
This analysis provides only a rough-order-of-magnitude of some of the enabling
benefits of future data link. With that in mind, these are the assumptions we made:
 12% discount rate and 3.5% inflation
 Cash flows start in 1998 and end in 2015
 Assumed no revenue enhancement
 No costs are included
 The following model assumptions are the same as the baseline data link analysis,
including:
•
Equipage and infrastructure timing
•
Relationship between equipage and delay reduction
•
Airplane deliveries and airplanes removed
•
Growth in delay
 Assessed an 11% full-up delay reduction (vs. 5% for baseline data link)
[See next page]
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Future Data Link Model Assumptions
(2 of 2)
Source of Delay:
 % of Delay Surface =
5.75%
 % of Delay Final App/Init
Dep = 41.85%
 % of Delay App/Dep
Transition = 19.8%
 % of Delay TMA
Arrival/Departure = 20.5%
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Delay Reduction %:
 Surface Delay Red = 69.5%
 Final App/Init Dep Delay
Red = 19.3%
 App/Dep Transition Delay
Red = NA
 TMA Arrival/Departure
Delay Red = 13.1%
Future Data Link
Deterministic Sensitivity
Future Data Link
Cumulative Probability Distribution
Conclusions
 The magnitude of the potential value enabled by
ATC data link are substantial.
 A more complete economic analysis will not be
possible until operating concepts, along with
associated benefits and costs, are better defined.
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Questions?
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Backup Information
ATN ‘99
September 22-23, 1999
www.boeing.com/caft
CNS/ATM Focused Team
Model Inputs
Traffic Growth
 Start with current number of airplanes, add new
deliveries and subtract retiring planes each year
• 1997 Total Number of Airplanes
5194 (ATA)
• New Deliveries per Yr (1998 to 2007)
233 (Boeing CMO)
• New Deliveries per Yr (2008 to 2017)
326 (Boeing CMO)
Variable
Retired Planes as % of New
CNS/ATM Focused Team
10 50 90
15% 22% 40%
Model Inputs
Equipage Timing Variables
Variables
10
50
90
Stage 0
Stage 0 Start Yr
Stage 0 End Yr
2000
Build 1 Build 1 Build 1
Start
Start
Start
Stage 1
Stage 1 End Yr
Build Build 2 Build 2
1a Start Start
End
Stage 2
Stage 2 End Yr
CNS/ATM Focused Team
2015
Model Inputs
AOC Benefits
Variables
10
50
AOC Benefits (Penalty and Non-Availability Avoidance)
90
Forward Fit POA Penalty Avoidance
ARINC I/F
start
Average cost per kilobit at start of model
$
0.10
Forward Fit POA Per Kilobit Penalty per yr
3%
Forward Fit POA Monthly Surcharge
$
900
Average Kilobits per flight
30
Lower messages costs for AOC
0.67
Average AOC cost per flight segment ($)
$
5
AOC Non-Availability Avoidance
Forward Fit POA Penalty Start Year
Start Yr of AOC Non-Availability Problems
Cost per flight of AOC Non-Availability
ARINC I/F
start
$
0.12
5%
$ 1,000
37
0.8
$
10
ARINC I/F
start
$
0.15
10%
$ 1,100
50
0.86
$
15
2006
2010
2002
$
16
$
32
$
48