Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:03:11.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TMSIM: A Runway Capacity Study for Frankfurt and Chicago O'Hare Airports

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2009

Dionyssios Trivizas
Dionyssios Trivizas
Affiliation:
(EUROCONTROL, Brussels)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A realistic runway capacity study for two major airports, namely Frankfurt (EDDF) and Chicago O'Hare (ORD) is presented, assessing the effect of optimal scheduling on the runway capacity and air traffic delays. The maximum position shift (MPS) runway scheduling algorithm, used in the study, was developed by Trivizas at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1987).

EDDF is studied in the context of 160 major European airports, with a real traffic sample from 6 July, 1990. ORD is studied in the context of 26 major US airports using a large traffic sample from 1 March, 1989. Secondary airport traffic has been assigned to the geographically nearest major hub and time compression has been used to extrapolate to an artificially denser scenario.

The results show that optimal scheduling can bring about capacity improvements of the order of 20 percent, which in turn reduce delays up to 70 percent. These results are the product of a dynamic traffic management process which has been visually validated by observing animated runway operations and monitor functions.

The study has been conducted with TMSIM, a comprehensive, object-oriented simulation tool that allows one to build an understanding of the structure and functionality of the air traffic control system, by modelling its components, their functionality and interactions, and measuring component and system performance. It features interactive route network editing (using menu/mouse techniques), complete route and airport structure modelling, independent flight and ATC objects, 3-D animation, advanced algorithms for scheduling, routeing, flow management, airspace restructuring (sectorization) and performance (capacity and communications workload) analysis.

Keywords

1. Air traffic control2. Terminal area navigation.
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , January 1994 , pp. 70 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1Odoni, A. R. (1969). An Analytical Investigation of Air Traffic in The Vicinity Of Terminal Areas. MIT, Operations Research Center, Technical Report no. 46, Dec.Google Scholar
2Pararas, , John, D. (1982). Decision Support Systems for Automated Terminal Area Air Traffic Control. MIT, Flight Transportation Laboratory, FTL (R82–3).Google Scholar
3Simpson, , Robert, W. (1982). Critical Examination of Factors which determine the Operational Capacity of Runway Systems at Major Airports. MIT, Flight Transportation Laboratory, Nov. 84.Google Scholar
4Terrab, M. (1990) Ground Holding Strategies for Air Traffic Control. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT, Operations Research Center, Feb.Google Scholar
5Trivizas, , Dionyssios, A. (1987). Parallel Parametric Combinatorial Search - Its Application to Runway Scheduling. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT, Flight Transportation Laboratory, Feb.Google Scholar
6National Airspace System Plan (1988). FAA, U.S.Department of Transportation.Google Scholar