The invention is in the field of air traffic control for aviation, specifically related to the process of submitting and negotiating flight plans and flight plan clearance.
In General Aviation (GA) pertinent to smaller aircraft, the pilots have numerous methods of filing flight plans to the Flight Service Station (FSS) and typically receive clearances through Clearance Delivery (CD) at bigger airfields or via the FSS at smaller airfields. The flight plans can be filed via smartphone or a tablet computer, such as an electronic flight bag.
In the vast majority of cases, the resulting clearance that would allow the pilot to fly the filed flight plan is made over the radio when the pilot is already sitting in the aircraft with engines running or is very close to starting engines. At this time any changes made to the flight plan will involve a time consuming and frustrating process to negotiate a cleared flight plan, delaying the pilot from becoming airborne. The cleared route may bear no resemblance to the filed route so significant work needs to be done by the pilot to work out whether the new route in the clearance still works in terms of fuel and reserve requirements.
According to an aspect of the invention, a method of obtaining flight plan clearance includes the steps of: following submission of an initial flight plan, receiving in a wireless communication device (for example a portable wireless communication device) a response regarding revisions and/or clearance of the initial flight plan; and following the receiving, negotiating flight plan changes and/or clearance using the wireless communication device until an accepted flight plan clearance is obtained. The receiving and the negotiating include communicating with an air traffic control (ATC) automation system using digital messages.
According to another aspect of the invention, a method of handling flight plan clearance includes the steps of: receiving an initial flight plan; associating a wireless communication device with the initial flight plan; and following receiving and the associating, conducting subsequent flight plan clearance communications through digital messages sent to and received from the wireless communication device.
To the accomplishment of the foregoing and related ends, the invention comprises the features hereinafter fully described and particularly pointed out in the claims. The following description and the annexed drawings set forth in detail certain illustrative embodiments of the invention. These embodiments are indicative, however, of but a few of the various ways in which the principles of the invention may be employed. Other objects, advantages and novel features of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description of the invention when considered in conjunction with the drawings.
The annexed drawings, which are not necessarily to scale, show various aspects of the invention.
A method of obtaining flight plan clearance allows a general aviation pilot to negotiate flight plan clearance directly with an air navigation service provider (ANSP), exchanging digital messages, with the pilot using a wireless communication device, such as a smartphone or a tablet computer. After an initial flight plan has been submitted, the pilot receives a message regarding clearance of the initial flight plan. If, as is often the case, clearance for the initial flight plan is not granted, and changes to the flight plan are proposed, the pilot may receive the proposed changes using the wireless communication device, and may send messages, such as digital messages, to the ANSP accepting the proposed flight plan alteration, or proposed other possible changes. The messages sent from the wireless communication device may use a format that is suitable for use by the ANSP, for integration with other flight plans already in the system, with the messages for example able to be processed by the air traffic control (ATC) system (part of the ANSP) without human intervention (such as interpretation). There may be security features provided to ensure that flight plan changes are negotiated only by an authorized user, such as the pilot who submitted the original flight plan. The method allows the general aviation pilot to be able to bypass intermediaries, such as flight service stations, and communicate more directly with the ANSP. The resulting system and method may improve efficiency, saving pilot time and reducing fuel burned while waiting for clearance, and improve operation of the ATC automation system.
The wireless communication device 16 may be any of a variety of devices able to send and receive digital communications. Examples of wireless communication devices include smartphones, other cellular phones, tablet computers, electronic flight bags, laptop computers, and other types of computing/communication devices. Smartphone, as the term is used herein, refers to a cellular telephone with an integrated computer that is capable of running software applications. A tablet computer, as the term is used herein, refers to a mobile general-purpose computer with a touchscreen display, circuitry, and battery in a single unit, capable of running software applications. An electronic flight bag is an electronic information management device configured to aid a member of a flight crew to perform flight management tasks. A laptop computer is a mobile general-purpose computer, usually capable of running on battery power.
An ANSP is an organization that manages air traffic, and/or provides air traffic control (ATC), for a region or country. An example of an ANSP is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which is responsible for providing ATC in the United States. An ANSP is responsible for managing flight plans submitted to it, for providing clearance for flight plans, and for negotiating changes to flight plans, if necessary. In the description that follows, ANSP will be used in some instances in general to refer to parts of the ANSP or the ATC automation system.
An FSS is an air traffic facility that provides information and services to pilots. An FSS does not manage flight plans, or provide clearance for flight plans.
Flight plans may be initially submitted any of a variety of ways, including through computer applications that allow submission of flight plans via an FSS. Flight plan clearance may be issued by in general by Clearance Delivery (a position that is part of the ATC automation system) at larger airfields, or by an FSS (at smaller airfields). Flight plan clearance also may be issued by ground controllers at an airport if there is no clearance delivery available, or if clearance delivery has not received clearance. In addition, clearance may be delivered by a tower controller when the tower controller is taking care of ground movements. At untowered airports it is usually the FSS that conveys clearance to aircraft. However negotiation of flight plan changes is often necessary close to take off time, and negotiations through an intermediary such as FSS can be time consuming, causing frustration and wasting time and fuel. The direct negotiation between the GA pilot and the ANSP provides an alternative that accomplishes flight plan negotiation directly, more quickly and more efficiently.
In step 54 a decision is made whether to clear the initial flight plan. This decision is made by the ANSP. If the flight plan is cleared, then this clearance is communicated to the pilot in step 58. The acceptance (clearance) may be communicated to the pilot in any of a variety of ways. For example, the acceptance may be communicated to the pilot over the aircraft's radio. Alternatively, a digital message may be sent to the wireless communication device 16 (
If the flight plan is not initially accepted, a response is communicated from the ANSP 14 to the pilot in step 60. This communication may be by the same process as in step 58. However, it may be preferable for proposed changes to the flight plan to be communicated directly to the wireless communication device 16 (
The response communicated in step 60 may take the form of proposed changes to the flight plan, or deletion of the plan from the system, such as because a maximum number of submissions has been reached, as described in greater detail below. If the plan is deleted from the system, the process ends and the pilot needs to begin the process anew by submitting a new flight plan.
Alternatively, if proposed changes to the flight plan are communicated in step 60, the pilot makes a decision in step 66 whether to accept the proposed revisions to the flight plan that were received in step 60. If so, the process ends with the pilot accepting the flight plan (step 68), the ANSP 14 (
If the pilot 12 (
In step 84 a determination is made about whether the initial flight plan is cleared. Flight plans may be submitted hours or even days prior to flight, yet the decision regarding clearance may be held until close to the intended takeoff time. The clearance (acceptance) of the initial flight plan is based on numerous factors, including other flight plans that have been submitted, and deviations from those flight plans that occur for any of a number of reasons, such as weather or airport congestion, to name only two. It will be appreciated that general aviation flight plans may be a low priority relative to flight plans for commercial passenger and cargo aircraft. Therefore a high percentage of initial flight plans from general aviation pilots may require mediations. Nonetheless, for those initial flight plans that are accepted, a clearance message may be sent to the pilot in step 86. The clearance message may be sent in any of a number of ways, such as by a text message (or other message) to the wireless communication device 16 (
When the initial flight plan is not accepted, the pilot is informed in step 90 of proposed changes to the flight plan. The changes in the flight plan may involve alternations to the flight plan in any of a number of parameters, such as timing (e.g., departure time), routing, and altitude. The proposed changed flight plan may be sent to the pilot in a digital message (such as a text message) sent to a wireless communication device associated with the initial flight plan. In addition, the pilot may be alerted to the proposed changes in other ways.
After receiving the proposed flight plan changes, the pilot makes a response that is received in step 94. In step 98 a security check may be made, before processing the response. The security check may be made to prevent unauthorized submittals related to flight plans and/or proposed alterations of flight plans. One way of providing security is to require that the same device that was used to submit an initial flight also be used in any negotiations for changes in the flight plan. An initial flight plan may be associated with an identifier corresponding to the device 16 (
Other sorts of methods of security may be used, as alternatives to or in addition to the identifiers described above. For example, the user may need to submit an alphanumeric password or other security code when proposing changes to an already submitted flight plan. The application on the wireless communication device 16 (
If the security check in step 98 results in an error, an error message may be sent in step 100 to the device that was used to submit the response, indicated that the response was rejected by the system, with possibly other information included. The method then reverts to waiting for a response to the proposed flight plan changes sent in step 90.
If the incoming message (response) passes the security check of step 98 (which may be omitted if desired), then the message is checked in step 101 to see whether it is an acceptance of the changes to the flight plan proposed in step 90. If so, then a simple confirmation may be sent in step 102, and the flight plan is cleared, ending the process.
If the pilot does not accept the proposed changes to the flight plan, then the further (or different) changes proposed are checked in step 104 for proper syntax and/or formatting. The message may be configured to have a format corresponding to or emulating a standard format for flight plan submissions to the ANSP 14 (
The correctly-formatted revised proposed flight plan is then entered into the ATC automation system 13 (
If further changes are still needed, then a check may be made in step 126 whether the pilot has exceeded a maximum number of submissions for revisions of the flight plan. This step, which may be omitted if desired, keeps the pilot from submitting more than a predetermined number of changes, such as providing a maximum of four submissions of revised proposed flight plans. If the maximum number of allowed revisions is exceeded, then the flight plan is deleted in step 130, and the pilot is informed of the deletion in step 134, such as by a digital message to the wireless communication device.
If further changes are still allowed, then the method reverts to step 90 of further changes to the flight plan that would be acceptable to the ATC. The pilot may accept, or make other proposed revisions, continuing the negotiation.
It will be appreciated that other steps may be performed, and that the steps above may be performable in a different order from what is described above. The communications between the pilot 12 (
Other functions may be available to a pilot. For example, the pilot may be able to send a message to cancel a previously-submitted flight plan or a pending proposed revised flight plan, or to revise a previously-submitted plan.
As noted above, the digital messages used in the negotiation may be text messages sent from and to the wireless communication device 16 (
Table 1 shows various flight plan states and actions of the flight plan negotiation process:
The flight plan status indicates the status and acceptance of flight plans prior to clearance.
What follows now are some examples of flight plan negotiation processes.
In the situation shown in
In addition to the flight plan states shown in Table 1, and the examples of
An advantage in emulating AFTN messaging is that no change to the ATC automation system 13 (
The functions described above may be embodied in software and/or hardware run on the wireless communication device 16 (
The software may be executed by, such as stored in, read, and run by, any suitable computer-readable medium, which herein refers to any suitable medium that participates in directly or indirectly providing signals, instructions, or data. The computer-readable medium may take forms, including, but not limited to, non-volatile media, volatile media, and/or transmission media.
In the flow diagrams, blocks and/or steps denote “processing blocks” that may be implemented with logic. The processing blocks may represent a method step or an apparatus element for performing the method step. A flow diagram does not depict syntax for any particular programming language, methodology, or style (e.g., procedural, object-oriented). Rather, a flow diagram illustrates functional information one skilled in the art may employ to develop logic to perform the illustrated processing. It will be appreciated that in some examples, program elements like temporary variables, routine loops, and so on, are not shown. It will be further appreciated that electronic and software applications may involve dynamic and flexible processes so that the illustrated blocks can be performed in other sequences that are different from those shown or that blocks may be combined or separated into multiple components. It will be appreciated that the processes may be implemented using various programming approaches like machine language, procedural, object oriented or artificial intelligence techniques.
Although the invention has been shown and described with respect to a certain preferred embodiment or embodiments, it is obvious that equivalent alterations and modifications will occur to others skilled in the art upon the reading and understanding of this specification and the annexed drawings. In particular regard to the various functions performed by the above described elements (components, assemblies, devices, compositions, etc.), the terms (including a reference to a “means”) used to describe such elements are intended to correspond, unless otherwise indicated, to any element which performs the specified function of the described element (i.e., that is functionally equivalent), even though not structurally equivalent to the disclosed structure which performs the function in the herein illustrated exemplary embodiment or embodiments of the invention. In addition, while a particular feature of the invention may have been described above with respect to only one or more of several illustrated embodiments, such feature may be combined with one or more other features of the other embodiments, as may be desired and advantageous for any given or particular application.