.
Selecting flights and checking the data quality.
.
Checking the merge of flight trajectories.
Figure 8: Global view illustrating the difference between US radar data (ETMS in blue) and European flight plan data (AMOC in red) (4-5-6/10/2000).
Figure 9: Detailed view for Europe illustrating the difference between US radar data (ETMS in blue) and European flight plan data (AMOC in red) (4-5-6/10/2000).
the trajectory is defined as complete (C). Otherwise, the trajectory is characterized as incomplete (I).
En-route assessment of the trajectory:
For each legs of a trajectory, the speed and the variation of elevation are calculated. If all legs of a trajectory present a speed inferior to 10,000 nm per hour and a variation of flight level inferior to 10,000 feet per minute then the trajectory is defined as fine (F) for its en-route. Otherwise, the trajectory is declared as dubious (D).
Arrival assessment of the trajectory:
The existence of an arrival airport is first checked. In lack of arrival airport, the trajectory is characterized as incomplete (I). As for the departure assessment, the distance between the last point of the trajectory and the airport of arrival is calculated. If the flight level of the last point is inferior or equal to 30 hundred ft and the distance (last point-airport of departure) is inferior or equal to 20 nm then the trajectory is defined as complete (C). Otherwise, the trajectory is characterized as incomplete (I).
Based on this zone indicator system, the possibilities of trajectory are listed in Table 15.
Table 15: Trajectory assessment code system.
Departure En route Arrival Trajectory
C F C Trajectory complete for departure and arrival, and fine for en-route
C F I Trajectory complete for departure, fine for en-route but incomplete for arrival
I F C Trajectory incomplete for departure, fine for en-route and complete for arrival
I F I Trajectory incomplete for departure and arrival, and fine for en-route
C D C Trajectory complete for departure and arrival but dubious for en-route
C D I Trajectory complete for departure but dubious for en-route and incomplete for arrival
I D C Trajectory incomplete for departure, dubious for en-route but complete for arrival
I D I Trajectory incomplete for departure and arrival, and dubious for en-route
9.2. Trajectory listing
In order to select the trajectory to keep in the final inventory, a summary trajectory table is constituted (Table 16). To generate the table a 3-step process is required:
.
Listing all FLUID2.
.
Adding the source fields to the FLUID list table.
.
Adding the trajectory code.
2 Cf Phase 1 / Paragraphs 2 and 3 and appendix.
Listing all FLUID starts with the importation of all FLUID present in the ETMS Traffic table for the period studied. To the ETMS Traffic table are added all FLUID from AMOC Traffic table and not present in ETMS Traffic table.
If the FLUID is a good filter for identifying a flight in terms of its callsign, date and location, it is not sufficient to avoid duplicated flights. The inconsistency in the record of the departure time between sources of data leads to variation of few minutes to 30 minutes. This lack of accuracy leads to the generation of two FLUID for a unique flight listed in two sources of information with the same callsign, airport of departure, date and hour. In order to prevent such duplicates, the FLUID list was made such as a FLUID for one source faces the same FLUID except for the minutes but from another source. The face to face tolerates a difference of 30 minutes between two FLUID. Once all FLUID are listed, a field listing the source is added. Finally, for each FLUID a trajectory code is entered for each source (Table 16).
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：AERO2K Flight Movement Inventory Project Report(17)
