Evaluating Airfield Capacity (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 33-48
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 33... ...
31 Existing Airfield Capacity Evaluation Tools The purpose of this chapter is to identify the various levels of current modeling sophistication for analyzing airfield capacity and to describe typical examples and features of each level. Although they are out-of-date, FAA's AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay (the AC)
|
From page 34... ...
32 evaluating airfield Capacity • Modeling assumptions: Fixed, built-in assumptions within the level of modeling sophistication that cannot be altered through input parameters (i.e., what assumptions are hardwired into the model and cannot be changed?
|
From page 35... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 33 Level 1 -- Table Lookup This level of modeling sophistication refers to capacity analyses completed by table reference, as exemplified in Chapter 2 of the AC and the prototype Airfield Capacity Spreadsheet Model described in Chapter 4 of this guidebook. The table reference mainly involves looking up an airport's runway configuration along with certain other airport characteristics, most commonly fleet mix, to determine hourly runway capacity and annual service volume (ASV)
|
From page 36... ...
34 evaluating airfield Capacity the effects of a partial parallel taxiway or no parallel taxiway are not provided in this section of the AC, although a figure is provided in Chapter 4 (Figure 4-26) for this purpose.
|
From page 37... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 35 the airport do not match the built-in assumptions, a higher level of modeling sophistication must be used. Nevertheless, the existing table lookup method is adequate for the purposes of calculating a quick, broad-brush, runway-focused capacity estimate for an airport with an airfield configuration available in the lookup table and with operating characteristics that follow the underlying assumptions.
|
From page 38... ...
36 evaluating airfield Capacity percentages of arrivals. The capacity can then be further adjusted to account for (1)
|
From page 39... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 37 Data Requirements The data requirements for this method are minor, requiring airport runway configuration and airport geometry/layout information, specified percentages of large and heavy aircraft in the fleet mix, and exit locations and percentage of arrivals. Nearly all of this information is readily available from airport records, the OAG, or FAA's ETMSC.
|
From page 40... ...
38 evaluating airfield Capacity A typical analytical airfield capacity model can accept input assumptions and information on the following factors affecting airfield capacity: • Runway configuration • Types of operations (arrivals, departures, or both) assigned to each runway • Aircraft mix on each runway • Aircraft performance characteristics (e.g., minimum separation requirements, final approach speed, and runway occupancy times for arrivals and departures)
|
From page 41... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 39 runway configurations with moderate complexity and straightforward arrival and departure runway use procedures. Modeling Assumptions To use this model, the runway configuration must be available in the model, or be able to be represented by externally combining available configurations.
|
From page 42... ...
40 evaluating airfield Capacity outputs, and representing airport-specific conditions implicitly. In addition, the Level 3 user must be more computer literate, because, at least in the case of the ACM, the model is not very user-friendly.
|
From page 43... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 41 the models can provide both. A typical output chart from the runwaySimulator is shown in Figure 3-4.
|
From page 44... ...
42 evaluating airfield Capacity Time and Cost Requirements The investment required to apply a Level 4 model is somewhere between the investment required for the Level 3 analytical models and the investment required for the Level 5 aircraft delay simulation models, depending on the complexity of the problem. Because of their computational efficiency and simple input structures, the runwaySimulator and FLAPS models are characterized by a very low cost per computer run compared with Level 5 models.
|
From page 45... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 43 Animation (Proof) software used by the current simulation engine (i.e., runwaySimulator 2010)
|
From page 46... ...
44 evaluating airfield Capacity Modeling Assumptions Very few built-in assumptions are associated with Level 5 models; most inputs are variables, so that users can define their specific airfield and airspace situation through the model inputs. Data Requirements Simulation models require a high level of detail about aircraft operations and airfield and airspace configurations, which requires an extensive data gathering and analysis effort.
|
From page 47... ...
existing airfield Capacity evaluation tools 45 operating conditions and proposed changes. However, once a simulation model has been set up and calibrated, it can be run for additional cases fairly quickly.
|
From page 48... ...
46 evaluating airfield Capacity back, waiting to depart, and so forth. Calibration is critical to ensure that the logic in the model, most often related to runway loadings and aircraft separation, is not more efficient or precise than what human controllers and pilots could realistically achieve.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.