Part one: Oslo Airport is Norway’s biggest airport. It has two parallel runways and had more than 21 million passengers and 223.500 movements in 2011. In peak periods, prior to Point Merge implementation, the maximum capacity was 60-65 movements/hr. The traffic is predicted to increase significantly. To respond to this challenge a long term process was initiated to increase the airspace capacity. The project was termed Oslo ASAP (Advanced Sectorisation & Automation Project).
Part three: To meet future demand independent parallel approaches (IPA) was chosen as concept hence giving the physical size of the system due to separation criteria between aircraft. As of today the demand for capacity is however less. Extending the current terminal and changing the airport layout (T2 project) OSL will not be able to utilize the potential arrival rate built in to the IPA concept before 2017.
Last: This gives the option to adjust the Point Merge system to reflect current demand in short term. Proposal to “shrink” the system size and move the merge points closer to the airport is evaluated. Adjustments for entry points to TMA will also have to be reconsidered to optimize descent profiles. Furthermore IPA will be considered after the construction period, either based on todays approach standards (ILS) or with curved approaches (RNP), potentially with less impact on the environment.
Part two: After fast time simulations in collaboration with EUROCONTROL, the new and experimental concept of Point Merge was chosen for arrivals. Several real time simulations documented increased safety by eliminating so-called “hot spots” where arriving and departing aircraft trajectories intercept. The simulations indicated that Point Merge would enable Oslo ATCC to be in compliance with the SESAR Master Plan of “best in class” with 96 movements per hour at dual runway airports.
One point though : the description says the arcs are further away than today's procedures, which means longer flight distances and flight times. In that case, you would reduce your fuel consumption per mile, but what's the ppoint if you have to fly a longer distance for that ? Plus, longer flight times = higher costs for the operators, and the fuel economy is negligible compared to the price of the airframe. (see next comment)
For example, tke the plane I fly now : 30€/minute, among which 6€ are due to fuel burn. If you save 20% of fuel, just considering the arrival, you will save 1.20€/min of the arrival just on fuel. But if to get that result the arrival is just 3 minutes longer, you'll spend 3 x 30€ = 90€ extra !
Exceptionally clear description of operational method of making air traffic safer and more efficient - well done Avinor!
Part one: Oslo Airport is Norway’s biggest airport. It has two parallel runways and had more than 21 million passengers and 223.500 movements in 2011. In peak periods, prior to Point Merge implementation, the maximum capacity was 60-65 movements/hr.
The traffic is predicted to increase significantly. To respond to this challenge a long term process was initiated to increase the airspace capacity. The project was termed Oslo ASAP (Advanced Sectorisation & Automation Project).
Thank you. Good to hear that you find the information useful.
Hilde/ OSL
Thank you for posting this interesting and very clear description of the new system.
Part three: To meet future demand independent parallel approaches (IPA) was chosen as concept hence giving the physical size of the system due to separation criteria between aircraft. As of today the demand for capacity is however less. Extending the current terminal and changing the airport layout (T2 project) OSL will not be able to utilize the potential arrival rate built in to the IPA concept before 2017.
Last: This gives the option to adjust the Point Merge system to reflect current demand in short term. Proposal to “shrink” the system size and move the merge points closer to the airport is evaluated. Adjustments for entry points to TMA will also have to be reconsidered to optimize descent profiles. Furthermore IPA will be considered after the construction period, either based on todays approach standards (ILS) or with curved approaches (RNP), potentially with less impact on the environment.
Part two: After fast time simulations in collaboration with EUROCONTROL, the new and experimental concept of Point Merge was chosen for arrivals. Several real time simulations documented increased safety by eliminating so-called “hot spots” where arriving and departing aircraft trajectories intercept. The simulations indicated that Point Merge would enable Oslo ATCC to be in compliance with the SESAR Master Plan of “best in class” with 96 movements per hour at dual runway airports.
One point though : the description says the arcs are further away than today's procedures, which means longer flight distances and flight times. In that case, you would reduce your fuel consumption per mile, but what's the ppoint if you have to fly a longer distance for that ? Plus, longer flight times = higher costs for the operators, and the fuel economy is negligible compared to the price of the airframe. (see next comment)
For example, tke the plane I fly now : 30€/minute, among which 6€ are due to fuel burn. If you save 20% of fuel, just considering the arrival, you will save 1.20€/min of the arrival just on fuel. But if to get that result the arrival is just 3 minutes longer, you'll spend 3 x 30€ = 90€ extra !