Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-17T21:33:46.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Horizontal flight trajectories optimisation for commercial aircraft through a flight management system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

R. S. Félix Patrón ,
A. Kessaci  and
R. M. Botez
R. M. Botez*
Affiliation:
ETS, Laboratory of Research in Active Controls, Avionics and AeroServoElasticity, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
*
ruxandra.botez@etsmtl.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To reduce aircraft emissions to the atmosphere, the fuel burn from aircraft has to be reduced. For long flights, the cruise is the phase where the most significant reduction can be obtained. A new horizontal profile optimisation methodology to achieve lower emissions is described in this article. The impact of wind during a flight can reduce the flight time, either by taking advantage of tailwinds or by avoiding headwinds. A set of alternative trajectories are evaluated to determine the quickest flight time, and therefore, the lowest fuel burn. To determine the expected amount of fuel reduction, the performance databases used on actual FMS devices, were used. These databases represent the flight performance of commercial aircraft.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1210 , December 2014 , pp. 1499 - 1518
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. ICAO. Aviations contribution to climate change, Environmental report. International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal, Canada, 2010, p 260.Google Scholar
2. Avery, D. The evolution of fight management systems, IEEE Software, 2011, 28, (1), pp 11–13.Google Scholar
3. Clarke, J.-P.B., Ho, N.T., Ren, E., Brown, J.A., Elmer, K.R., Tong, K.-O. and Wat, J.K. Continuous descent approach: design and fight test for Louisville international airport, J Aircr, 2004, 41, (5), pp 1054–1066.Google Scholar
4. Schoemig, E.G., Armbruster, J., Boyle, D., Haraldsdottir, A. and Scharl, J. 3D path concept and fight management system (FMS) trades, 2006 IEEE/AIAA 25th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 15-19 October 2006. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2006, p 12.Google Scholar
5. Tong, K.-O., Schoemig, E.G., Boyle, D.A., Scharl, J. and Haraldsdottir, A. Descent profle options for continuous descent arrival procedures within 3D path concept, 26th DASC Digital Avionics Systems Conference – 4-Dimensional Trajectory-Based Operaions: Impact on Future Avionics and Systems, 21 October 2007 – 25 October 2007. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc, Dallas, TX, USA, 2007, pp 3A31–3A311.Google Scholar
6. Reynolds, T.G., Ren, L. and Clarke, J.-P.B. Advanced noise abatement approach activities at Nottingham East Midlands Airport, UK, USA/Europe Air Traffc Management R&D Seminar, 7th ed, 2007, pp 1–10.Google Scholar
7. Kent, T.E. and Richards, A.G. On optimal routing for commercial formation fight, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference, 19 August 2013 – 22 August 2013. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc. Boston, MA, USA, 2013, Draper Laboratory.Google Scholar
8. Nangia, R. and Palmer, M. Formation Flying of Commercial Aircraft, Variations in Relative Size/Spacing – Induced Effects & Control Induced Effects & Control, 25th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007.Google Scholar
9. Félix patrón, R.S., Botez, R.M. and Labour, D. New altitude optimisation algorithm for the fight management system CMA-9000 improvement on the A310 and L-1011 aircraft, Aeronaut J, 2013, 117, (1194).Google Scholar
10. Dancila, B., Botez, R.M. and Labour, D. Fuel burn prediction algorithm for cruise, constant speed and level fight segments, Aeronaut J, 2013, 117, (1191).Google Scholar
11. Gagné, J., Murrieta mendoza, A., Botez, R.M. and Labour, D. New method for aircraft fuel saving using Flight Management System and its validation on the L-1011 aircraft, AIAA Aviation 2013. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.Google Scholar
12. Lovegren, J. Estimation of potential aircraft fuel burn reduction in cruise via speed and altitude optimisation strategies, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Vol. Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011, p 97.Google Scholar
13. Murrieta Mendoza, A. Vertical and lateral fight optimisation algorithm and missed approach cost calculation. Ecole de Technologie Superieure (Canada), Canada, 2013.Google Scholar
14. Chakravarty, A. Four-dimensional fuel-optimal guidance in the presence of winds, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 1985, 8, (1), pp 16–22.Google Scholar
15. Franco, A. and Rivas, D. Minimum-cost cruise at constant altitude of commercial aircraft including wind effects, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2011, 34, (4), pp 1253–1260.Google Scholar
16. Campbell, S. Multi-scale path planning for reduced environmental impact of aviation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States, Illinois, USA, 2010, p 190.Google Scholar
17. Sridhar, B., Ng, H. and Chen, N. Aircraft trajectory optimisation and contrails avoidance in the presence of winds, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2011, 34, (5), pp 1577–1584.Google Scholar
18. Gagné, J. Nouvelle méthode doptimisation du coût dun vol par lutilisation dun système de gestion de vol et sa validation sur un avion Lockheed L-1011 TriStar. Ecole de Technologie Superieure (Canada), Canada, 2013, p 133.Google Scholar
19. Bonami, P., Olivarea, A., Soler, M. and Staffetti, E. Multiphase mixed-integer optimal control approach to aircraft trajectory optimisation, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2013, 36, (5), pp 1267–1277.Google Scholar
20. Félix patrón, R.S., Botez, R.M. and Labour, D. Low calculation time interpolation method on the altitude optimisation algorithm for the FMS CMA-9000 improvement on the A310 and L-1011 aircraft, AIAA Aviation 2013. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.Google Scholar
21. Yoshikazu, M., Navinda, K.W., Akinori, H. and Yuto, M. Dynamic Programming Application to Airliner Four Dimensional Optimal Flight Trajectory, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.Google Scholar
22. Visintini, A.L., Glover, W., Lygeros, J. and Maciejowski, J. Monte Carlo optimisation for confict resolution in air traffc control, intelligent transportation systems, IEEE Transactions on Vol 7, (4), 2006, pp 470–482.Google Scholar
23. Fays, J. and Botez, R.M. Algorithm for the aircraft trajectories considering no fly zones for a fight management system, INCAS Bulletin, 2013, 5, (3), p 77.Google Scholar
24. Kanury, S. and Song, Y.D. Flight management of multiple aerial vehicles using genetic algorithms, 38th Southeastern Symposium on System Theory, 5 March 2006 – 7 March 2006, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Cookeville, TN, USA, 2006, pp 33–37.Google Scholar
25. Kouba, G. Calcul des trajectoires utilisant les algorithmes genetiques en trois dimensions pour un avion modelise en six dimensions. Ecole de Technologie Superieure (Canada), Canada, 2010, p 93.Google Scholar
26. Félix patrón, R.S., Oyono Owono, A.C., Botez, R.M. and Labour, D. Speed and altitude optimisation on the FMS CMA-9000 for the Sukhoi Superjet 100 using genetic algorithms, AIAA Aviation American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2013.Google Scholar
27. Canada E. Weather maps – Environment Canada, Vo l 2013.Google Scholar