1 475 310 MIC LBE OSN DOM NOR GMH ROBEG MIC
2 410 310 AMICH HAM OSN RKN FOXTO BAM AMICH
3 345 310 AMICH DLE WERRA WRB OSN AMICH
4 390 310 ALS SWG WTM HOP ARKON DOM ALS
5 340 310 TALSA DHE JUIST MCH HOP LBE TALSA
6 245 310 TUSKA MCH DHE OBG TUSKA
7 450 310 TUSKA MCH RKN HMM BIGGE WERRA LBE TUSKA
8 455 310 HLZ DLE HOP WTM TUSKA EKERN HLZ
9 405 310 HLZ WRB NOR RKN OBG LBE HAM HLZ
10 485 310 WRB LBE LUB EKERN TUSKA MC4 WRB
11 500 310 LAU WERRA HAM LUB EKERN IND JUIST LAU
12 495 310 NOR DOM OSN LBE EKERN TUSKA WELGO NOR
13 495 310 WSK TB1 BIGGE GMH NOR LLK WSK
14 495 310 NOR TR10 LCK EKERN LUB DLE NOR
15 430 310 IND DHE LBE HLZ WERRA BAM IND
16 450 310 LAU LBE EKERN TUSKA WELGO LAU
Table 3. "En-route" Benchmark Flights for Tracking System Accuracy Measurements
Target Speed Level Banking Start Position
(kts) (FL) Angle
(deg)
Lat (North) Long (East)
1 240 310 15 53.20.59 6.35.22
2 240 310 30 52.19.33 5.53.13
3 240 310 45 51.51.40 6.29.50
4 240 310 60 51.11.00 5.27.00
5 360 310 15 50.39.00 5.51.00
6 360 310 30 50.50.31 6.41.42
7 360 310 45 51.42.48 7.35.20
8 360 310 60 52.12.06 8.17.12
9 480 310 15 53.20.56 8.52.36
10 480 310 30 54.09.15 8.00.00
11 480 310 45 52.14.00 9.16.45
12 480 310 60 51.24.20 8.23.00
13 600 310 15 51.24.17 4.21.59
14 600 310 30 50.54.15 3.38.00
15 600 310 45 53.09.54 6.40.02
16 600 310 60 52.08.03 6.45.53
Table 4. High Manoeuvring Benchmark Flights for Tracking System Accuracy Measurements
A4 Results Of The Benchmark Tests
The resulting state variables of every system track are every track update cycle (4.8 seconds) submitted to the MADAP simulator.
The simulator compares the state variables obtained from the tracker to the true values for the same point in time. Statistical analysis is performed per individual flight and in addition for the total population of flights of a particular category.
Within Tables 5 through 8 results are given for both the "Dynamic Track Selection" and "Track Fusion" techniques. For both techniques the same scenario was executed.
Table 5 depicts the aggregate results for the set of sixteen "en-route" flights, whereas the same results for the group of constant manoeuvring flights may be obtained from Table 7.
Table 6 and 8 provide for every state variable the measured frequency that the error on the estimated variable is inferior to a corresponding threshold value.
Separate thresholds are applied during the uniform straight motion and the manoeuvring flight phases. It has to be emphasised here that the decision to compare either against the one or the other threshold is taken by the simulator according to the real mode of flight. The transition phase from a manoeuvring phase to straight uniform motion is therefore integrally compared to the "straight" thresholds.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE ECAC RADAR SEPARATION(33)
