# Presentation: 057611

## Baseline Future Scenarios for JPDO Evaluation and Analysis

- March 18, 2005

**mblake@seagull.com**
**(408) 364-8200**

**Matthew Blake**

## Some Impacts on Future Flight Demand 

**Some Impacts on Future Flight Demand **

**2004 **

**Total Number of Flights**

**1X **

- Note: Not to scale

**Time, years**

**Many factors have significant impact on long range demand estimates**

## Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System

**A. *****Pax/Cargo Demand***

**B. *****Fleet Mix/***** *****Aircraft Types***

**C. *****Business Model/ Schedule***

**D. *****NAS Capability***

**E. *****Disruptions /Weather***

**Major Dimensions of the ****Air Transportation System**

- Market-Driven

- “Mother Nature”

- Government-Driven
- (Technology or Policy)

**Current **
**Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025**
**2X TAF Based Constrained Growth**
**3X TAF**

**Good Weather (Wx) **
**Bad Weather**
**Airport IFR**
**En route **
**7 Wx days**
**Disruption **
**Sudden Shutdown of an airport or region**

**Current Scaled**
**More Regional Jets**
**New & Modified Vehicles**
**Microjets**
**UAVs**
**E-STOL/RIA**
**SST**
**Cleaner/ Quieter **

**Current**
**2014 OEP**
**Increased Capacity of:**
**Landside **
**Surface**
**Runways**
**Terminal**
**En route**
**4) Systemic:**
**CNS**
**SWIM**
**Wx Prediction**

**Current (mostly Hub & Spoke)**
**More Point to Point + Regional Airports**
**Massive   Small Airport Utilization**

## Major Dimensions of the Air Transportation System

**A. *****Pax/Cargo Demand***

**B. *****Fleet Mix/***** *****Aircraft Types***

**C. *****Business Model/ Schedule***

**Major Dimensions of the ****Air Transportation System**

**Current **
**Terminal Area Forecast Growth to 2014 & 2025**
**2X TAF Based Constrained Growth**
**3X TAF**

**Current Scaled**
**More Regional Jets**
**New & Modified Vehicles**
**Microjets**
**UAVs**
**E-STOL/RIA**
**SST**
**Cleaner/ Quieter **

**Current (mostly Hub & Spoke)**
**More Point to Point + Regional Airports**
**Massive   Small Airport Utilization**

_***Baseline Future Demand Scenarios***_

## Initial BaselineJPDO EA Flight Demand Sets

**Initial Baseline****JPDO EA Flight Demand Sets**

**2004 **

**Number of Flights**

**1X **

**~3X **

**~2X **

- Note: Not to scale

**Time, years**

**Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) Growth Projection**

- 2014 and later Baseline analysis will use OEP Capacities

**TAF Growth Ratios, Higher Rate**

**Current Scaled**

**Higher Growth Rate**

**Shift to Smaller Aircraft/Airports**

## Baseline Seed Day

**Baseline Seed Day**

**Target Criteria:**
**Relatively heavy traffic and relatively light weather**
**Selected Thursday, 19 February 2004**
**There were 64,276 flights in the ETMS database on this day **
**Filtered out pure international, military, various other anomalous flights**
**50,077 IFR flights **

## AvDemand Future Flight Generation Process

**   ****AvDemand**
**Seagull Technology**

**AvDemand Future Flight ****Generation Process**

**Historical Schedule**
**(ETMS)**

**Historical Flight Plans**
**(ETMS)**

**Demand Growth **

**Flight Shifting**

**Fratar Algorithm for Airport Load Balancing**

**Airport Pair Demand Profiling**

_**Schedule Generation**_

_**Flight Plan Generation**_

**Demand Growth Parameters**
**(TAF)**

## Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft

**Business Shift to ****Smaller Airports and Aircraft**

**Move Excess Demand from Major Airports to underutilized Secondary Airports**

## Business Shift to Smaller Airports and Aircraft:Specific Demand Generation Approach

**Business Shift to ****Smaller Airports and Aircraft:****Specific Demand Generation Approach**

**Selection of Flights to Shift to Auxiliary Airports**
- Shift flights only from 34 OEP airports
- Select flights from any 15 minute time interval where arrival or departure traffic exceeds airport capacity
- Only shift flights with great circle distance less than 1000 nm
- Select high frequency flights first
**Selection of Auxiliary Airports**
- Each airport must be located within 30nm of the associated OEP airport
- Each airport must be a public-use airport
- At least one runway in each airport has to be at least 5,000 ft
- Only runways that are asphalt and good-condition or better were utilized
- Enough departure/arrival slots within the same time window of the diverted flight must be available at the auxiliary airports
**Change of Aircraft Type**
- If a flight has seat capacity of 99 or less, shift the aircraft type as is to the auxiliary airport
- If a flight has a seat capacity of 100 or more, change the aircraft type to a Regional Jet with seat capacity of 100, add extra flights to capture the required number of seats in the original flight

## Example:MAJOR-HUB Airport and nearby SECONDARY Airport Departure Demand Profile

## Demand Comparison between Future Scenarios and FAA forecasts

**Demand Comparison between ****Future Scenarios and FAA forecasts**

| Category |  | Demand Created |  | Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) 2 |  | FAA Aerospace Forecast 2004-2015 3 |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Scenario |  | ETMS 2004 | Seagull 2014 | 2004 | 2014 | 2004 | 2014 | Reference |
| Flights
(Daily) | Air Carrier | 19,971 | 25,251 | 17,757 | 22,365 | 19,434 | 25,836 | Table 46 |
|  | Commuter + Air Taxi | 17,121 | 20,875 | 21,981 | 26,444 | 17,343 | 22,390 | Table 46 |
|  | GA + Other + Unknown1 | 12,986 | 13,420 | 58,185 | 63,084 | 25,575 | 29,304 | Table 46 |
|  | System | 50,078 | 59,546 | 97,924 | 111,893 | 62,352 | 77,530 | Table 46 |
| Flight Growth | Air Carrier + Freight | 1 | 1.26 | 1 | 1.26 | 1 | 1.33 |   |
|  | Commuter + Air Taxi | 1 | 1.22 | 1 | 1.20 | 1 | 1.29 |   |

- 1 The TAF General Aviation (GA) operations include both IFR and VFR itinerant operations. The FAA Aerospace Forecast GA operations include only instrument operations at primary and secondary airports as well as overflights. Thus, instrument operations total in the FAA report are higher than actual flight counts. The demand sets created (ETMS 2004 and Seagull 2014) in this practice only account for IFR itinerant GA Operations. Thus, the demand growth ratio is skewed due to the difference in the GA counts.
- 2 Terminal Area Forecast, _[http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faatafall.HTM](http://www.apo.data.faa.gov/faatafall.HTM)__, February 2005. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight)._
- 3 Federal Aviation Administration, FAA Aerospace Forecast – Fiscal Year 2004 – 2015, Department of Transportation, March 2004. Annual numbers are reported. The daily number is derived by dividing the annual numbers by 365 (days) and 2 (ops/flight).

## Future Scenarios Operations Growth 

| Scenarios | Percent Growth by User Class |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | Air Carrier | Commuter/ Air Taxi | General Aviation | Overall NAS Growth |
| 2004 – 2014 TAF  | 26% | 22% | 4% | 19% |
| 2004 – 2025 TAF  | 59% | 45% | 17% | 43% |
|   |  |  |  |  |
| 2004 – 2014 Shift | 49% | 24% | 4% | 29% |
| 2004 – 2025 Shift | 99% | 48% | 17% | 61% |

- General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

## Future Scenarios Operations Growth 

| Scenarios | Percent Growth by User Class |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | Air Carrier | Commuter/ Air Taxi | General Aviation | Overall NAS Growth |
| 2X Ops TAF | 142% | 100% | 38% | 100% |
| 3X Ops TAF | 294% | 195% | 65% | 200% |
|   |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |

- General Aviation (GA) operations only includes IFR itinerant operations

## Initial Analysis Results

**Simulation Configuration:**
- NASA Airspace Concepts Evaluation System (ACES) B2.1
- 24 hour period, good weather, 2004 has today’s capacities, future scenarios include OEP improvements
- Earlier flight demand sets (correct airport growth but slightly different mix of commercial, air taxi, GA)
**TAF Based Growth at 4 scenario demand levels:**
- 2004
- 2014
- 2025
- 2X
**Comparison at 2X Demand of 3 scenarios:**
- TAF based growth
- Business shift to smaller airports/aircraft
- Business shift and doubling airspace capacity

## Baseline TAF Based Growth ScenariosDelay During a 24 Hour Period

**Baseline TAF Based Growth Scenarios****Delay During a 24 Hour Period**

## Baseline TAF Growth ScenarioPassenger Impact of Severe Arrival Delays

**Baseline TAF Growth Scenario****Passenger Impact of Severe Arrival Delays**

- Source: ACES Analysis of NAS

**At 2X demand, nearly one million passengers are delayed more than 2 hours **

## Comparison of 2X Future ScenariosDelay During a 24 Hour Period

**Comparison of 2X Future Scenarios****Delay During a 24 Hour Period**

**Business Shift to smaller aircraft and secondary airports still leads to untenable behavior due to airspace congestion.**
**Increasing airspace capacity helps,  shows how problem is coupled.**

## Summary

- A Baseline set of future scenarios has been developed and verified against FAA projections
- Initial NAS-wide analysis indicates all future scenarios require significant airport and airspace capacity increases to avoid major constraints on growth in air transportation
- Future JPDO evaluations will be expanded to cover more possible future scenarios and solution strategies

## Acknowledgement

- This work was sponsored by Sherry Borener in support of the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis (EA) Division and the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD)
- Many JPDO EA team members helped along the way, special thanks to:
- Alex Huang, Kris Ramamoorthy, George Hunter, Greg Carr (Seagull Technology)
- Baseline day, Joe Post (CNAC)
- Review of TAF based scenarios by Roger Schaufele (FAA)
- NAS-wide ACES simulation courtesy of the NASA Airspace Systems Program (ASP), Virtual Airspace Modeling and Simulation (VAMS) Project