Data processing: vehicles – navigation – and relative location – Vehicle control – guidance – operation – or indication – Traffic analysis or control of aircraft
Reexamination Certificate
2001-05-14
2003-01-14
Cuchlinski, Jr., William A. (Department: 3661)
Data processing: vehicles, navigation, and relative location
Vehicle control, guidance, operation, or indication
Traffic analysis or control of aircraft
C701S123000, C701S204000, C244S182000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06507782
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to systems for planning and adjusting the mission profiles of aircraft and more particularly to systems and methods for planning the mission profiles of aircraft so that the controlled aircraft reaches a predetermined waypoint at a required time of arrival.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
In today's world, transportation by aircraft is extremely popular. This popularity has resulted in dramatic increases in air traffic and caused a variety of related difficulties including airborne traffic congestion and overburdening of aircraft ground support facilities. It is estimated that air traffic will continue to grow, causing the further exacerbation of these problems. To effectively manage aircraft traffic congestion, both in the air and on the ground, various authorities are exercising, or are seeking to exercise, increasing control over the operation of aircraft within their jurisdictions. This increasing level of control already extends to the assignment of aircraft flight paths and the imposition of specific time constraints upon aircraft operators.
Contemporaneously with the increase in flight volume, competition between commercial aircraft operators has also increased and is expected to increase further. This competition has created a situation where aircraft operators must exercise tight control over their operating expenses to remain profitable. Experience has shown that aircraft operating expenses are significantly impacted by consumption of fuel, as well as utilization of aircraft equipment, flight crew and other personnel. These, in turn, are significantly impacted by factors that combine to form the aircraft mission including the flight duration, flight speed, flight path, and takeoff and landing cycles. Thus, to effectively control operating costs, aircraft operators are demanding increased control over the planning and execution of their missions. It naturally follows then, that aircraft operators who enjoy greater autonomy and control over the planning and execution of their missions will be rewarded in the marketplace.
Typically, an aircraft operator's use of an aircraft may be described in terms of the execution of a series of missions, each mission comprising one takeoff from an origination location, one landing at a destination location, and a period of airborne flight between the takeoff and the landing. The set of flight positions and flight velocities traversed by the aircraft in the performance of a particular mission may then be described as a mission profile. Typically, the position of an aircraft during flight may be described in terms of a three dimensional translation from some arbitrary reference point. Typically, the aircraft's latitude, longitude and altitude are used. Further, the aircraft's orientation may be described in terms of its angular rotation about three reference axis, for example, pitch, yaw, and roll. The aircraft's velocity may be described as a vector having a direction or heading component and a magnitude or speed.
The portion of the mission between the takeoff and the landing may be further described in terms of a series of flight phases. The first of these phases is typically referred to as the climb phase. In climb, the vertical component of the aircraft's position increases substantially as the aircraft ascends from the takeoff elevation to a cruise altitude. A second phase is frequently referred to as cruise. In the cruise phase, the vertical component of the aircraft's position remains relatively constant at the cruise altitude. Cruise is typically the phase during which the aircraft occupies the majority of the duration of its missions. A third phase is commonly referred to as descent, wherein the vertical component of the aircraft's position decreases substantially as the aircraft descends from the cruise altitude to an approach altitude. An approach phase typically follows descent and is followed by the landing phase. Typically, an aircraft in the approach phase follows a flight path that is substantially level or that is declining in altitude. The altitudes followed in approach are typically between 5000 and 10000 feet above sea level, often depending on the elevation of the destination airport.
In approach, aircraft has entered the near proximity of their destination airport. This proximate region is called the terminal area. The terminal area extends approximately 30 miles in radius from most major airports and is defined in large part by predetermined boundaries prescribed by the relevant authority, in some part by the range of the airport's terminal approach radar. When an aircraft enters the terminal area, authority for its control transfers from an air traffic control center to the terminal area controller. The point at which control is transferred is called the transition point.
In addition to exhibiting the distinctive characteristics described above, each phase may also entail aircraft operational limitations that are inherent in the specific combination of the aircraft and its powerplant. These aircraft operational limitations may be influenced by a variety of factors including aircraft structural considerations such as wing loading and flutter; aircraft powerplant considerations such as thrust, fuel consumption, life, air-starting and/or bleed pressure; aircraft aerodynamic considerations such as lift, drag and stall; as well as system control and stability characteristics. These aircraft operational limitations have the capability to inhibit aircraft autonomy and affect aircraft controllability.
As briefly mentioned above, aircraft operators typically desire to retain or regain maximum autonomy with respect to the planning and execution of their missions. Aircraft operators who enjoy full aircraft autonomy are free to select and/or adjust the combination of flight positions and velocities that make up their mission profile to suit their individualized objectives. Those objectives may relate to considerations such as time, payload, position, and/or cost. Operators enjoying full autonomy will be more capable to continually improve their operating efficiencies as well as their payload capacity, range and/or profitability.
To improve safety and reduce congestion, however, it has become increasingly necessary to impose restrictions and constraints upon aircraft operators, tending to diminish the scope of their aircraft autonomy. Some limitations may have been operator-imposed, such as instrument-only flight restrictions, under which operators who are unable to operate safely and efficiently without the aid of instrumentation may voluntarily restrict their operations. Other limitations may have been legislated, for example, through the imposition of air traffic restrictions by designated authorities. Due to increased air traffic, the expansion of both the scope and duration of legislated restrictions is commonly viewed as the only currently viable means of reliably ensuring aircraft separation, preventing airport congestion, maintaining special-use airspace zones, and in general, ensuring flight safety. This solution, however, is inherently undesirable due to its infringement upon aircraft autonomy.
As a result, significant efforts have been directed toward the development of technology that would accommodate increased air traffic and ensure safety without unnecessarily imposing upon aircraft autonomy. One solution has been the development of control systems that enable operators to reliably reach a predetermined waypoint at, or close in time to, a negotiated, predetermined time of arrival. Admittedly, it is an intrusion upon the autonomy of the aircraft operators to be required to commit to reaching specific waypoints at predetermined times. Nevertheless, some concession of autonomy may be tolerated for the sake of maintaining safety. Required time of arrival control systems are able to satisfy the needs to reduce ground and air-based congestion while simultaneously providing aircraft operators with a relatively high degree of aircr
Jackson Michael R.
O'Laughlin Brian E.
Rumbo Jim R.
Cuchlinski Jr. William A.
Honeywell International , Inc.
Marc-Coleman Marthe Y.
LandOfFree
Aircraft control system for reaching a waypoint at a... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Aircraft control system for reaching a waypoint at a..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Aircraft control system for reaching a waypoint at a... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3036372