Request for Proposals: Transformation to Trajectory-based Operations

 Scope

• TBO integration activities and global interoperability
  • This element covers the TBO content integration activities across the programme, including development of the SESAR TBO concept of operations, integrating network, ATC and intra-European (regional) TBO processes, and update of the document based on R&I results (e.g., integration of the IR1 results after the projects conclude). The document must include a human-machine teaming annex describing the ATC TBO automation concepts and the evolution of the role of the human.
  • At global level, this element covers the international coordination, including in particular support to the TBO related activities of the ICAO ATMRPP panel.
• ANSP-triggered impact assessment
  • This research element addresses the development of NM capabilities to respond to a request from the ATC ground system to probe in real-time what the impact on the network would be of an ATC clearance that deviated from the agreed trajectory as per the eFPL. It is a support feature that does not deliver clearances but supports the ATC system in the clearance delivery process. This is an extension of the NM network impact assessment (NIA) B2B service, which is already in place today to allow ANSPs to trigger a network impact assessment for a re-routing proposal (RRP) within a pre-defined RRP catalogue.
  • This element would benefit from NM-ANSP integrated validation activities addressing the full process from the NM side and ANSP side.
• Unconstrained desired trajectory (UDT)
  • All TBO actors should aim at continuously optimising the trajectory. To do this, the FOC must ensure that the information of the optimum trajectory is made available to NM and the ANSPs, who will take it in consideration. However, the TBO Agreed trajectory represents the accepted flight plan to be taken as a reference for the flight, which often includes ATM constraints and therefore may not represent the trajectory the AU would desire.
  • The preliminary flight plan as per the FF-ICE/R1 planning services provides means to share a trajectory with fewer constraints before the submission of the flight plan. The objective of the preliminary flight plan is to support increased dynamicity in the application of constraints (e.g., preliminary flight plans could be used to get early information on traffic demand to assess which RAD measures are the best candidates for waving via the dynamic RAD concept). However, it is expected that the preliminary flight plan will still have some constraints (e.g., constraints that are considered by the AU not to be candidates for removal in the pre-departure phase). In contrast, the UDT should be completely unconstrainted.
• FF-ICE/R2 precursor for the revision of the agreed trajectory in strategic execution
  • This research element aims at defining the operational processes, services, and systems to support strategic trajectory revisions in execution that can be initiated by either the flight operations centre (FOC), the Network Manager (NM), or local air traffic flow management (ATFM) units. The trajectory revision processes concerned by this element are changes to the trajectory where the point of deviation from the current flight plan is beyond the horizon of interest ATC. This process requires all actors concerned with the revision of the trajectory to have deployed the FF-ICE/R1 services. The solution will provide to airspace users flexibility to reoptimize the trajectories in execution and will increase the network manager trajectory through the anticipation of trajectory changes.
  • This element covers only the interaction between the FOC and the NM and the intra-European coordination between NM and the concerned ANSPs. It includes the collaborative process from the moment the revision is requested by the FOC, NM or ANSPs to the moment the trajectory is agreed, and the revised flight plan is sent to all concerned actors.
• FF-ICE/R2 trajectory revision and/or update in execution for arrivals into Europe from non-FF-ICE areas (ASPs that are not eASPs)
  • This research element allows flights arriving in Europe (potentially from non-FF-ICE areas) to benefit to use FF-ICE collaborative processes for the optimisation of the route in European airspace. The element considers the discontinuity in terms of which FF-ICE services are deployed in the ATSUs that the flight will fly through. The objective is to allow the process to take place even when not all the ANSPs between the current position of the aircraft and the point of deviation from the current trajectory are at the same level of FF-ICE deployment.
• Evolution of military flight planning
  • The improved operational air traffic (iOAT) flight plan supports improved civil-military collaboration but is based on the FPL2012. The objective is to build on the iOAT flight plan to define a new FF-ICE-based flight plan and processes for mission trajectory management (including ARES CDM processes and the utilisation of features such as flexible parameters) that moves civil-military collaboration to the next level. The new format and processes should support dynamic coordination between military actors and local DAC actors, specifically national airspace management (ASM) and local air traffic flow & capacity management (ATFCM), throughout CDM on a single 4D Mission Trajectory data, but also provide means for collaboration when military needs do not allow sharing of full set of trajectory data.
• Integration of flight operations centre (FOC), electronic flight bag (EFB), flight management system (FMS) and ATC platforms
  • The main flight optimisation tool used by pilots today in the execution phase is the FMS, but emerging FOC/EFB applications are challenging this status quo. The development lifecycle of the FMS is slow in comparison, due to the strict software development conditions required by its flight path management capabilities. In contrast, FOC-EFB tools can be rapidly developed, potentially including the use artificial intelligence (AI) tools whose certification for the FMS would be very challenging.
  • The EFB-optimised trajectories may include speeds different from those planned by the FMS, which need to be implemented by the pilot by overriding FMS speeds. In some cases, this is done by manual entry into the FMS, while in other cases the flight crew enters the optimised longitudinal or vertical speeds on the flight control unit (FCU) / mode control panel (MCP). The EFB may also recommend that descent start before or after the FMS TOD downlinked via ASD-C, which is the point ATC expects descent to start if the flight is cleared to “descend when ready” or “descend at own discretion”. The use of the EFB for flight optimisation by flying selected or manual instead of in managed mode reduces the predictability of the flight for the ATM system.
• Connected aircraft Network TBO (airline information services domain (AISD))
  • This element addresses the development of AISD flight-deck connectivity to support the connection from the flight deck to:
    • NM/local ATFM units, to participate in the FF-ICE/R2 trajectory negotiations (flight-deck acting as its own FOC) or trajectory negotiations.
    • The FOC, in support of the TBO FOC trajectory negotiations (so the negotiation happens between the FOC and NM/local ATFM units): this element covers the FOC coordination with the flight deck).
• Increased dynamicity in the application of RAD/LoA constraints
  • The objective of the research is to allow for increased dynamicity in the application of one-size-fits all constraints, be them pre-departure RAD measures (with or without a corresponding LoA) or LoA constraints without a corresponding RAD measure. This concept supports the evolution from the current paradigm or managing traffic flows to the tailored management of individual flights with the objective of increasing flight efficiency. This will pave the way for the target RAD by exception concept, where the RAD is reduced to a minimum, and the AU typically submit the flight plan with the unconstrained desired trajectory (UDT). In a RAD-by-exception environment, NM replies to the flight plan submission with the UDT with a proposed trajectory where the constraints that are strictly necessary have been applied, which the AU can either accept or make a counterproposal to.
• Develop a digitalised letters of agreement (LoA) repository and their provision to NM
  • In order to deploy the Network 4DT (4D Trajectory) CONOPS, the objective of the research is to create an interactive digitalised repository of LoAs to be embedded in the Network Manager (NM) systems in order to allow for an improved processing the submitted flight plans. Electronic copies of LoA shall be provided to the NM by ANSPs in the strategic phase and maintained as appropriate. For this purpose, NM needs to establish and closely follow-up the process of LoA provision, as well as the provision of subsequent amendments and modification. The LoA effect is implemented through the addition of 4D points to the list of ordered elements within the NM Trajectory. Digital LoAs will be shared with all relevant actors
  • This research elements covers in particular the provision of LoAs to NM. NM needs to establish and closely follow-up the process of LoAs provision and as well as the provision of subsequent related amendments and modification.
  • Specific minimum requirements for this topic:
  • Integration of flight operations centre (FOC), electronic flight bag (EFB), flight management system (FMS) and ATC platforms: consortia for this topic shall:
    • Either include an established FOC system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the FOC prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.
    • Either include an established ATS system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the ATS system prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.
    • Either include an established FMS system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the FMS system prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.

Funding Information

• The total indicative budget for this work area is EUR 14.00 million
• The maximum project duration is 36 months.
• Maximum expected EU contribution per project: 10 million

Requirements 

• Specific minimum requirements for this topic:
  • Integration of flight operations centre (FOC), electronic flight bag (EFB), flight management system (FMS) and ATC platforms: consortia for this topic shall:
  • Either include an established FOC system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the FOC prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.
    Either include an established ATS system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the ATS system prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.
  • Either include an established FMS system manufacturer or provide evidence that the consortium has the operational and technical capability to build the FMS system prototypes required for the research at the required maturity level.

Eligibility Criteria

• Any legal entity, regardless of its place of establishment, including legal entities from no associated third countries or international organisations (including international European research organisations) is eligible to participate (whether it is eligible for funding or not), provided that the conditions laid down in the Horizon Europe Regulation have been met, along with any other conditions laid down in the specific call/topic.
• A ‘legal entity’ means any natural or legal person created and recognised as such under national law, EU law or international law, which has legal personality and which may, acting in its own name, exercise rights and be subject to obligations, or an entity without legal personality.
• Entities eligible for funding:
  • To be eligible for funding, applicants must be established in one of the following countries:
    • the Member States of the European Union, including their outermost regions:
      • Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.
    • the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs) linked to the Member States:
      • Aruba (NL), Bonaire (NL), Curação (NL), French Polynesia (FR), French Southern and Antarctic Territories (FR), Greenland (DK), New Caledonia (FR), Saba (NL), Saint Barthélemy (FR), Sint Eustatius (NL), Sint Maarten (NL), St. Pierre and Miquelon (FR), Wallis and Futuna Islands (FR).
    • Countries associated to Horizon Europe;
      • Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Kosovo, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Tunisia, Türkiye, Ukraine, United Kingdom.

For more information, visit EC.