A METHOD OF SEPARATION ASSURANCE FOR INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCE(7)

曝光台 注意防骗 网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者

For Departing Aircraft: As for arrivals, departures would use the specific on-condition request report, containing Aircraft ID, intended airport facility, and request code (departure).  “Priority granted” messages will be received through data link, and will consist of airport ID, aircraft ID, time, departure runway, and a single priority bit.  “Priority denied” messages will consist of airport ID, aircraft ID, EFC time (or equivalent, as discussed in Section 2.2.2), and a single denial-of-priority bit.  The denied aircraft would re-request at the expect further clearance time to minimize message traffic. An “operations complete” message could be used to unlock the airspace or ADS-B surveillance data transmitted from the priority aircraft indicating aircraft position outside the ACV, could perform this function. State data will be sufficient input for the ground-based arbitrator to calculate priority
2.2.4 Traffic separation outside the ACV

Another significant operational element necessary for a feasible system is some form of traffic separation in the vicinity of the ACV.  While the AACV concept is primarily intended to compliment the development of self-separation capabilities, it could be implemented within the existing ATC architecture.  In such a case, ATC would likely provide separation outside of ACV by controlling arrivals and assigning each aircraft a discrete holding area where it would be required to remain until clearance into the ACV is granted.
When self-separation tools such as CDTI and CD&R become available, the simplest approach would be to require pilots to use these tools to provide their own separation from other aircraft operating in the vicinity of the ACV.  A number of studies have suggested that pilots can be provided appropriate tools to enable self-separation in these circumstances7, 8, 9, but the matter requires careful consideration.  While the effectiveness of self-separation tools in the enroute environment has been demonstrated, the application of these tools to a situation where multiple aircraft are attempting to execute holding maneuvers in close proximity is less well established.  Aircraft trying to remain close to a particular point are constrained in a way that aircraft enroute are not.  Moreover, the pilot workload immediately in advance of executing an approach is significantly higher than during the enroute phase, leaving less time to attend to traffic avoidance.
It is beyond the scope of this study to establish specific requirements for separation assurance outside the ACV, but further research must be undertaken to answer this question before a complete description of an operational AACV system is possible.  It may turn out that additional constraints must be placed on self-separating aircraft outside the ACV akin to the holding assignments used by ATC today, but to do so would be to remove some of the simplicity inherent in the AACV concept and advance the system significantly closer to a full-scale automated traffic control system.
　
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：A METHOD OF SEPARATION ASSURANCE FOR INSTRUMENT FLIGHT PROCE(7)