Operational Context and Use Case Focus Group Use

Operational Context and Use Case Focus Group Use Case November 29, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration

Agenda • Document Delivery Schedule • Flight Use Case Document – Closeout • Flow Use Case Document – Storyboard – – – Flow Domain Problem Statement Flow Domain Data Elements Flow SWIM Services by Phase of Flight Current NAS Operations Future NAS Operations Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 2

Delivery Schedule • Use Case and Ops Context documents will continue to be worked on concurrently • Deliver one domain Use Case Document every two months • Continue delivering one SWIM service Operational Context Document per month Nov. 2019 TAIS OCD Closeout Flight UCD Closeout FNS OCD ITWS OCD Storyboard Flow UCD Storyboard Dec. 2018 Jan. 2019 Feb. 2019 March 2019 April 2019 FNS OCD Closeout ITWS OCD Closeout ADPS OCD Closeout TFMS Status OCD Closeout SFDPS General OCD Closeout ITWS OCD Flow UCD Closeout ADPS OCD Flow UCD ADPS OCD Storyboard TFMS Status OCD Storyboard MET UCD Closeout TFMS Status OCD MET UCD SFDPS General OCD Storyboard ISMC OCD Storyboard Aero UCD Storyboard ISMC OCD Aero UCD ------- May 2019 ISMC OCD Closeout Aero UCD Closeout ------- *OCD – Ops Context Document, UCD – Use Case Document Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 3

Use Case Document Domains Flight Flow Meteorological Aeronautical TFMS – Flow ITWS SFDPS – Airspace TBFM STDDS – ADPS FNS STDDS – SMES STDDS – TAIS TFMS – Flight SFDPS – General Closeout – 11/29 Storyboard – 11/29 Draft – 12/27 or 1/3 Closeout – 1/24 Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 4

Closeout FLIGHT USE CASE Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 5

New Reality Based on New Information Service Future State • Aircraft pushes back • AOC receives notification of aircraft pushback • AOC receives updated surface movement, surveillance data and estimated departure time • AOC receives departure time • AOC receives continuously updated schedule route and aircraft position data Delay information, route, speed, altitude changes are communicated as they happen. Changes to SAA activity are communicated in real time. International flight data available • • Departure Pre-Flight Push Back / Take-off / Taxiing Out Departure En route Cruise / En route / Oceanic Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 AUs will have clear picture of flow programs (metering, fix balancing, MIT, etc. ) impacting arrival time AOC is able to reallocate ground resources as needed based on accurate flight information Airport staff are able to better plan for identified delays Surface congestion is minimized Arrival Approach Federal Aviation Administration Landing / Taxiing In 6

Feedback • “This is the best use case document so far! I like the way that the document shows how the use of multiple SWIM data sources can be combined together to create a comprehensive picture of the actual operating environment. I also liked the way that the document shows a series of interdependent actions that should impact or inform the others. ” • Document received a tech edit is posted on the portal with no significant changes to the draft version Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 7

Storyboard FLOW USE CASE Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 8

Problem Statement • A data gap exists between what ANSP knows about “Flow” and what AU knows: – – – Departure plans Flight State of aircraft (position, speed, altitude) Planned metering delays for flights at metering points Scheduled Times of Arrival (STA) at destination More • This causes a disconnect between – What the ANSP is planning for each flight, and – What the AU is expecting for each flight. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 9

Incomplete Data Flows • When an AU has incomplete data, the actions of the AU do not coincide with the plans and activities of the ANSP. • This results in: – – Poorly timed operations Inefficient Operations Wasted resources Diminished passenger experience Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 10

Incomplete Data Flows • Incomplete data is a problem because AU is unaware of ANSP plans/activities. • When AU is unaware of ANSP plans/activities, it cannot accurately manage flights. • When AU Plans are not harmonized with ANSP Plans – AU Operations are not harmonized with ANSP Operations – Problems Occur Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 11

Outline of “Flow” Use Case • A Use Case will be developed for “Flow” data. – For each portion of a flight, the ANSP has Flow data that is not being shared with AU. – This Flow information has impacts on AU operations. • Use Case will show “before and after” scenarios – “Before” scenario will highlight inefficiencies that exist now. – “After” scenario will show sharing Flow data with AU improves flight operations during each portion of a flight. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 12

Flow Data • Flow Data is comprised of data from two sources: – The Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS) – The Time Based Flow Management System (TBFM). • Provides a comprehensive view of the system. • Output is an accurate reflection of the state of the NAS in terms of Traffic Flow Management. • Flow Data is sent as it is updated or when there is a commanded or computed change. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 13

Decomposition of Flow Domain Data Elements TFMS and TBFM Flow Information Surface En Route Terminal TFMS Data • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re. Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP: Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. TBFM Data • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations TBFM Data • Extended Metering to En-Route Metering Points. (TBFM) • ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. (TBFM) • STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. (TBFM) • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. (TBFM) • • TBM to Close-in Fixes and Runway ETA at Runway STA at Runway AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • EDC Scheduling of Departures • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 14

Decomposition of TBFM and TFMS Flow Data by Phase of Flight • • • TBFM Data Scheduling of Departures AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. TFMS Data Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. GDP: Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Deicing Event Data Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) Runway Configuration at Destination Departure Route Availability. • • TBFM Data Extended Metering to En-Route Metering Points. (TBFM) ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. (TBFM) STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. (TBFM) AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. (TBFM) TFMS Data Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) En route Departure Pre-Flight Push Back / Taxiing Out Take-off / Departure Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Cruise / En route / Oceanic • • TBFM Data TBM to Close-in Fixes and Runway ETA at Runway STA at Runway AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. TFMS Data Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Deicing Event Data Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) Airport Runway Configurations Arrival Approach Federal Aviation Administration Landing / Taxiing In 15

Current State: Data Gap Exists • When AU is unaware of ANSP plans: – AU plans do not complement ANSP plans – AU operations do not complement ANSP operations • ANSP and AU operations are not harmonized Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 16

“Flow” Data in Present State: Data Gap ANSP Knows: • EDCT, EDC and IDAC Departure Schedule • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. AOC Knows: • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Departure ANSP Perspective Complete Data ANSP Knows: • Extended Metering times to En-Route Metering Points. • ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) AOC Perspective Partial Data • • ANSP Knows: Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway ETA at Runway STA at Runway AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Deicing Event Data Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) Airport Runway Configurations AOC Knows: • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off • Deicing Event Data • Airport Runway Configurations AOC Knows: • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. En Route Arrival

Current State Operations: Departures 1. 2. 3. 4. AU prepares a flight for departure, pushes back, and taxies to runway. At runway, flight crew is advised of delay. ANSP has known about delay for some time. AU did not know about delay. Aircraft holds on ground with engines running until CDT, then departs. Time, fuel, resources are wasted. Passenger experience is diminished. Incomplete Data was Shared ANSP knew of departure delay in advance Data Gap AU had no knowledge of departure delay AU operation did not align with ANSP plan AU Operation was not Harmonized with ANSP Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 18

Result of Incomplete Data Sharing: Departures AU Knew: ANSP Knew: • EDCT, EDC and IDAC Departure Schedule • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. Data Shared • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Result AU Did Not Know: Data Not Shared • • • Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 EDCT, EDC and IDAC Departure Schedule EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. Deicing Event Data Restrictions from NTML Airport Runway Configurations Departure Route Availability. Operations Not Harmonized: • Aircraft taxied without knowledge of departure Plan • Resources wasted waiting at runway for departure time • Passenger experience diminished Federal Aviation Administration 19

Current State Operations: En Route 1. Aircraft departs and climbs to altitude. 2. Because flight was delayed, flight crew flies at high speed to make up time, adding cost. 3. When aircraft approaches destination, aircraft is slowed, assigned holding or metering delay. 4. Resources were wasted “making up time” en-route because metering delay data was not shared. Incomplete Data was Shared ANSP possessed STA and metering plan Data Gap AU did not know of STA or metering plan AU operation did not align with ANSP plan AU Operation was not Harmonized with ANSP Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 20

Result of Incomplete Data Sharing: En Route AU Knew: ANSP Knew: • Extended Metering times to En. Route Metering Points. • ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML Data Shared • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. Operations Not Harmonized: Result AU Did Not Know: Data Not Shared Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 • Extended Metering times to En. Route Metering Points. • ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML • AU had no knowledge of ANSP metering plan or STA. • Resources wasted flying fast to make up time, then holding for metering. Federal Aviation Administration 21

Current State Operations: Arrival 1. 2. 3. 4. AU uses inaccurate ETA because planned delays were unknown. Inaccurate ETA is shared with gate, schedulers, and passengers. ANSP has known the STA for 90 minutes but it was not shared with AU. Gate and ground resources wasted waiting on delayed flight. Schedules disrupted. Passenger experience diminished. Incomplete Data Was Shared ANSP knew the metering plan and STA Data Gap AU did not know metering times and STA AU operation did not align with ANSP plan AU Operation was not Harmonized with ANSP Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 22

Result of Incomplete Data Sharing: Arrival AU Knew: ANSP Knew: • Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway • ETA at Runway • STA at Runway • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML • Airport Runway Configurations Data Shared Operations Not Harmonized: • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off • Deicing Event Data • Airport Runway Configurations Result AU Did Not Know: Data Not Shared Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 • Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway • ETA at Runway • STA at Runway • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML • Inaccurate STA Used for AU Planning • Gate and ground resources wasted waiting on delayed flight. • Schedules disrupted. • Passenger experience diminished Federal Aviation Administration 23

Desired State: Harmonized Operations • When AU is aware of the plans of the ANSP: – AU plans complement ANSP plans – AU operations complement ANSP operations • ANSP and AU operations are Harmonized Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 24

Flow Data In Future State: Shared Perspective ANSP Perspective Both Know: • EDCT, EDC and IDAC Departure Schedule • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. • • Both Know: Extended Metering times to En-Route Metering Points. ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • • Both Know: Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway ETA at Runway STA at Runway AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. Deicing Event Data Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) Airport Runway Configurations AOC Perspective Departure Arrival En Route

Future State: Departures 1. 2. 3. 4. AU prepares flight for departure. Departure delay Flow Data is shared with AU. AU delays boarding and pushback to align with anticipated delay. Aircraft boards and pushes back in time to meet departure slot. Aircraft taxies to runway and departs with no further delay. Complete Data is Shared ANSP creates departure plan and shares with AU Shared Data AU plans align with ANSP departure plan AU operations align with ANSP operations Harmonized Operations Result Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 26

Future State: Departures ANSP Knows: • EDCT, EDC and IDAC Departure Schedule • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. AU Knows: When Full Data is Shared • EDCT, EDC Departure Schedule • AAR, Configuration, Metering On/Off at Destination. • Flow Data: TFM Initiatives, GS, AFP, Re-Routes, CTOP, FCA. • GDP Start time, End Time, AAR, Revisions, Cancellations. • EDCT and Arrival Slot for each aircraft. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations • Departure Route Availability. Harmonized Operations: Result • AU has full knowledge of ANSP departure plan • AU Operations align with ANSP plans • Harmonized Operations Result • Harmonization occurs when AU and ANSP are using the same data. • Data sharing allows decisions to be made with full knowledge. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 27

Future State: En-Route 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Aircraft departs and climbs to altitude. AU is aware of arrival slot and metering delays. AU anticipates delay, and advises flight crew. Flight crew flies at economical speed knowing delays will be incurred. When aircraft is 90 minutes from destination, STA is determined. ANSP shares STA with AU. Metering delays align with expectations so there are no surprises. Aircraft complies with meter times and continues toward destination. Complete Data is Shared ANSP creates metering plan and shares with AU Shared Data AU plans align with ANSP metering plan AU operations align with ANSP operations Harmonized Operations Result Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 28

Future State: En-Route ANSP Knows: AU Knows: • Extended Metering times to En. Route Metering Points. • ETA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • STA at Meter Fixes and Runway. • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flow Data: AFP, Re-Routes, FCA. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Restrictions from NTML When Full Data is Shared Harmonized Operations: Result • AU is aware of arrival slot and metering delays. • AU anticipates delay, advises flight crew. • Flight crew flies at economical speed. • ANSP determines STA. • ANSP shares STA with AU. • Metering delays align with expectations. • Aircraft complies with meter times and continues toward destination. • Harmonized Operations Result • Harmonization occurs when AU and ANSP are using the same data. • Data sharing allows decisions to be made with full knowledge. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 29

Future State: Arrivals 1. AU is aware of delays and STA and plans accordingly. 2. Aircraft is metered to meet STA according to plan. 3. AU uses STA to adjust schedules, gates, personnel and connections. 4. Aircraft lands at STA. Complete Data is Shared AU creates metering plan and STA and shares with AU Shared Data AU plans align with ANSP metering and arrival plan AU operations align with ANSP operations Harmonized Operations Result Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 30

Future State: Arrivals AU Knows: ANSP Knows: • Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway • ETA at Runway • STA at Runway • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations When Full Data is Shared • Meter times to Close-in Fixes and Runway • ETA at Runway • STA at Runway • AAR, Airport Configuration, Metering On/Off. • Flight Data: Position, Altitude, Speed, Trajectory, etc. • Deicing Event Data • Restrictions from NTML (MIT, etc) • Airport Runway Configurations Harmonized Operations: Result • AU is aware of STA delays. • Metering is used to prepare arrival sequence to meet STA. • AU uses STA to adjust schedules, passenger connections, gates, and personnel. • Aircraft lands at STA. • Harmonized Operations Result • Harmonization occurs when AU and ANSP are using the same data. • Data sharing allows decisions to be made with full knowledge. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 31

Future State: Sharing “Flow” Data • Flights will be harmonized from gate to gate. – When Flow plans are shared, ANSP and AU activities are complementary. – AU is aware of departure plans, metering times and arrival slot (STA). • The arrival slot (STA) becomes the target for the entire flight. – Every AU/ANSP activity is geared toward meeting the STA • Sharing “Flow” data harmonizes AU and ANSP activities Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 32

Harmonized Operations • Awareness is Key • Harmonization occurs when “Flow” plans are shared. • Delays will still occur however: – – – – AU can anticipate impacts and adjust plans and schedules. More cohesive operations will occur. Unanticipated problems will decrease. Fewer tactical responses will be required. Efficiency and effectiveness will improve. Passenger experience will improve. Flights will perform as predicted. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 33

Benefits of Sharing Flow Data • Sharing Flow data with will allow Airspace Users and airports to know when aircraft will depart and arrive. This facilitates: – – – – – Improved decision making concerning aircraft fuel efficiency Improved diversion management Improved gate management Improved flight crew management Improved ground crew management Improved delay management Improved fleet management Improved customer experience Improved TFM system performance Improved airport effectiveness Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 34

Many Objectives, One Mission: Harmonized Operations Data Driven Real-time Decisions & Post-Ops Analysis • Air Traffic Control: – Responsible for safe and efficient use of airspace, maximizing airspace use and runway efficiency – Success is defined by maximum use of runways and airspace, effective strategic planning, and minimal use of tactical interventions that add delay to flights • Airline Flight Ops: – Responsible for ensuring regulatory compliance, ensuring on-time operations, managing gate and crew resources, maintaining flight schedules, fleet management, and applying the airline business model – Success is defined by predictable on-time operations, adherence to schedules, effective gate, crew, and fleet management. End result is a positive customer experience. • Airports: – Provide a safe environment for flight and surface operations, provide ramp control, ensure airport resources are available (runways, taxiways, ramps) at times that meet Airspace Users and ATC requirements. Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 35

References • SWIFT Focus Group Website – http: //connect. lstechllc. com/index. cfm/main/opconfocusgroup • Flight Use Case Document v 1. 0 Final – http: //connect. lstechllc. com/files/Flight%20 Use%20 Case%20 v 1. 0_20181129_Final. docx • Next meeting will be December 27 th, 2018 or January 3, 2019 – Will present Flow Use Case Document Draft • Please have Flow SMEs available for comment • Contacts – Jay Zimmer (jay. zimmer@lstechllc. com) – Felisa White (felisa. white@faa. gov) Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 36

BACKUP Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 37

Definitions • Service – A mechanism to enable access to one or more capabilities, where the access is provided using a prescribed interface • Data Service – A service which provides access to source data • Business Service – Business function or capability offered as a service – Functionality delivered to business/operational decision-makers • Information Service – A service which provides tailored access to data or information defined by a set of user configurable rules Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 38

TFMS Messages TFMS Message Name Description Flow Information GDP definition which includes start time, end time, program rate, scope, etc. of a Traffic Management Initiative. Flight Data Which flights are impacted and what their controlled times of departure (CTD), Expect Departure Clearance Time (EDCT) and arrival (CTA) are. General. Advisory GDP Advisory (flow) ncsm Flight Control (flight) A general purpose message for sending a traffic management advisory. These advisories are not associated with specific TMIs, which have their own advisory message types. . Provides all of the parameters that define the GDP, including arrival airport, start and end times, program (desired arrival) rate, scope, inclusions, revisions and exclusions. This message is issued for every flight that was assigned an EDCT as a result of the initial GDP being issued. It includes the flight identifying data, the EDCT, CTA, and assigned arrival slot. gdp. Compression Compress the GDP: This method preserves current slot assignments, for the most part, and moves flights only as needed to fill unused arrival slots. gdp. Blanket Applies a blanket change: This method applies a fixed change in assigned delays to all flights in the program. gdp. Cancels a GDP prior to the issued end time. A GDP cancellation is sent with a new ncsm. Flight. Control (flight) message for each affected flight. . gs. Advisory Implements a Ground Stop. gs. Cancels a Ground Stop. fea. Fca Creates or modifies an FEA/FCA. FCAs are created in support of a TMI, such as an AFP, CTOP, or Reroute. Message does not specify the flights that TFMS determines to be in the FCA afp. Advisory Sent when a traffic manager issues an AFP. Once issued, individual flight control times are updated through more ncsm. Flight. Control (flight) messages. fadt. Bcast Fuel Flow Advisory Delay Time Message for Fuel Advisory Delay Table (FADT) for TFMS ingestion. Specifies delays for unscheduled flights affected by GDP and AFP. If the Traffic Manager revises the AFP, TFMS sends either a new afp. Advisory (flow) message or an afp. Compression (flow) message, followed by new ncsm. Flight. Control (flight) messages. afp. Compression afp. Cancel Sent if the Traffic Manager cancels an AFP prior to its end time. reroute Sent for all types of Reroutes. The traffic manager may include flight list when issuing a Reroute. If this option is chosen, message will include the list of flights ncsm. Flight. Route If a Reroute is Required, TFMS sends out the assigned route used for modeling flight. Plan. Information Once a flight plan is filed, TFMS will use the flight plan route for modeling the flight. When this happens, this message is sent. ctop. Definition When a traffic manager issues or revises a CTOP, TFMS sends this message which provides all the parameters defining the CTOP program. ctop. Cancel When a traffic manager cancels a CTOP, TFMS sends this message. deicing Deicing events are sent using this message for an airport going into, or out of, deicing. Communicated in real-time with no start and end times. restriction Restrictions are sent using this message. Define mile-in-trail (MIT), altitude, and speed restrictions and have start end and times. airport. Congfig. Message Airport runway configurations are sent using this message. rapt. Timeline. Message Departure route availability information is sent using this message.

TBFM Messages TBFM Message Name Aircraft Information Configuration Information Other Information Adaptation Information Synchronization Information Description Provides metering information about an aircraft; specifically: flight plan, STAs, ETAs, MRE Assignments, and scheduling group information Provides metering information about the configuration of the system; specifically: airport configurations, airport acceptance rates, TRACON acceptance rates, gate acceptance rates, Meter Point acceptance rates, runway acceptances rates, super stream class configurations, and satellite airport configurations Provides metering information about the status of metering and the status of system interfaces Provides information about applicable system adaptation to include TRACON names, gate names, configuration names, Meter Reference Point names, and stream class names This message includes no body, it is sent only to indicate an impending refresh of all TBFM data, either as a result of system startup or a periodic synchronization event Operational Context / Use Case Focus Group September 27, 2018 Federal Aviation Administration 40