FLIGHT VALIDATION OF DOWNLINKED FLIGHT MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM 4D TRAJECTORY
Keith D. Wichman and Joel K. Klooster, GE Aviation, Grand Rapids, Michigan USA
Okko F. Bleeker Rockwell Collins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Richard M. Rademaker, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Abstract
4-Dimensional (4D) Trajectory-Based
Operations (TBO) are viewed as a key enabler for
future air operations by both SESAR1 and
NextGen2. The European Commission project NUP
2+3 has created a unique infrastructure that provides
the networking of real-time 4D Trajectory (4DT)
data created by GE Aviation’s (formerly Smiths
Aerospace) B737 Flight Management System
(FMS) with air traffic management functions during
revenue flights. This FMS has been modified to
output and downlink an implementation of the
ARINC 702A-1 “Trajectory Bus”, making the
FMS-predicted 4DT available to controllers on the
ground. This provision of the aircraft 4DT to the
Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) has
enabled a set of TBOs in Sweden including 4DT-
based arrival management with time-based
metering to the runway threshold, application of
Required Time of Arrival (RTA) to fine-tune this
arrival management, and 4DT enabled Advanced--
Continuous Descent Arrivals (A-CDA) , referred to
as “Green Approaches” by the project.
The NUP2+ project goals include facilitating
the study of 4DT performance requirements,
associated 4DT air/ground networking requirements
and producing operational flight data to support
further studies. To begin to produce such study
data, a series of controlled Trajectory Evaluation
Flights was conducted by the NUP2+ project in
December 2006. This paper presents an overview
of the motivation, objectives, experiment conduct,
and preliminary data analysis of this initial set of
1
Single European Sky ATM Research program in Europe
2
NextGen refers to the USA’s Next Generation Air
Transportation System program led by the Joint Planning and
Development Office (JPDO)
3
NUP2+ is a European Commission partially-funded program
and whose full name is the “Northern European ADS-B
Network Update Program phase 2+”.
1-4244-1108-4/07/$25.00 ©2007 IEEE.
1.D.1-1
flights. Plans for the project’s expansion of these
experiments are also discussed.
Introduction
Trajectory-Based Operations utilize the 4D
Trajectory of the aircraft; i.e. the planned location
of the aircraft in space and time. This is a change
from the present ‘clearance-based control’
dependent on observation of the aircraft current
state, to trajectory-based control, with the goal of
allowing the aircraft to fly along the user-preferred4
trajectory. This concept is fundamental to several
NextGen Operational Improvements, such as:
• Continuous Descent Approach (CDA)
• Enhanced Arrival/Departure Routing and
Access
• Arrival Time-Based Metering via
ANSP/Aircraft Collaboration
TBO is called a ‘critical NextGen capability
that addresses current performance gaps in the
areas of capacity, productivity, efficiency, and
safety’ [1]. TBO is based on the concept that
aircraft can generate an accurate prediction of the
complete 4D path to be flown and then guide the
aircraft to this reference path with precision. An
unambiguous representation of this reference
trajectory may also be delivered via suitable
network mechanisms to other users in the airspace
system - including the ANSP - where it can be
unambiguously reconstructed. This trajectory then
forms the basis for traffic flow management, de-
confliction with other aircraft trajectories, and other
system services. Through this exchange of aircraft
trajectories, today’s first-come, first-served ATC
system will be replaced by a system comprising
4
User “preferred” in the sense of optimized to operator
economical criteria
coordinated 4D trajectory plans which are then
executed, monitored, and managed. Any conflicts
between these trajectories are resolved ahead of
time via the negotiation of trajectory revisions
(controller vectoring by exception only), thus
allowing the operator to preserve the original,
economically optimized flight profile to the
maximum extent possible.
The necessary trajectory exchange is expected
to be enabled by System Wide Information
Management (SWIM). SWIM is described as ‘a
framework enabling authorized applications and
services to reliably and securely share information’
[2]. This network-centric trajectory-based system is
discussed in detail by Erik Theunissen, et al
elsewhere in this conference’s proceedings [3].
Background
In 2001, Smiths Aerospace (now GE Aviation)
conducted a series of flight trials with Scandinavian
Airlines (SAS) evaluating the use of their Four-
Dimensional Flight Management System (4-D
FMS) and its Required-Time-of-Arrival (RTA)
function for a future Air Traffic Management
(ATM) environment [4, 5]. The results from the 33
trial flights and subsequent analysis indicated that
aircraft equipped with the current generation Smiths
FMS5 can reliably predict and maintain a 4-D
trajectory over an entire flight in real-world fleet
operations. Time-of-arrival errors at waypoints
located at the top of the arrival procedures were
demonstrated to be less than 7 seconds with a
standard deviation of 4.8 seconds. In cases targeting
the runway with an RTA constraint, errors were
bounded to 21 seconds with a standard deviation of
12.7 seconds. This precise “runway-to-runway”
trajectory prediction and control capability is a
critical building block in the evaluation of 4D TBO.
Following the 2001 flight trials, updates to the
FMS have been performed. The U10.6 FMS
includes an implementation of the ARINC 702A-1
Trajectory Bus, allowing the FMS’s predicted
trajectory to be transmitted via an ACARS datalink.
This capability enabled the TBO evaluation in the
NUP2+ program. FMS update U10.7 was recently
5 7
The current generation Smiths FMS during the 2001 trials
was Update 10.3.
1.D.1-2
installed throughout the SAS B737 fleet and
includes improved RTA and predictions capabilities
to support further TBO evaluations.
The NUP2+ Project
Supported by the European Commission,
NUP2+6 is an ATM project focusing on validating
and performing pre-operational activities in the
field of 4D trajectories in combination with
Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast
(ADS-B). The initial project work dates back to
1996 when the term ADS-B was first introduced.
The program includes airlines (SAS and
Austrian Airlines), industry (Rockwell-Collins
France, GE Aviation, AVTECH, AIRBUS, Boeing,
and C4S), ANSP providers (Luftfartsverket and
AustroControl) and the Eurocontrol Experimental
Centre. The work includes real time trials in
revenue flights and operational premises in both
Sweden and Austria. The applications include:
• 4DT-enabled advanced CDAs.
• Enhanced Collaborative Decision
Making using ADS-B and 4D
information
• Advanced-Surface Movement Guidance
and Control System levels 3 & 4
• Departure Management
In addition, important conceptual elements,
technical support systems, cost-benefit analysis, and
safety systems are evaluated.
The FMS and 4D Trajectory-Based
Operations
The FMS onboard modern commercial
transport aircraft generate the 4D ‘business
trajectory’7. Based on the airline flight plan and
any additional constraints, this trajectory defines the
planned lateral and vertical profile of the aircraft,
including speeds and times along that profile. The
flight crew selects various airline preferred options,
including the cost index – a relationship between
6
The NUP2+ project website is: www.nup.nu/nup2plus/ .
Business Trajectory, the European SESAR expression
referring to the operator economically optimized flight profile
time and fuel allowing the crew to balance the value
of time and fuel for a particular flight. Constraints
such as altitude and speed restrictions may be added
or cleared as needed.
The FMS uses the current aircraft state and
atmospheric data along with all crew-entered or
AOC up-linked data to generate the 4D Trajectory.
The individual aircraft performance (optimal
speeds, maximum and idle thrust values, fuel flow,
etc) is computed to create a user-preferred
trajectory subject to applicable constraints. The
FMS’s LNAV and VNAV features will then guide
the aircraft along this trajectory by way of the
automatic flight control system (AFCS). The
relationship between various components is
summarized in Figure 1.

Discrete inputs MCDU

• Flight plan data Ref trajectory
• Profile options • Embodies airline preferences
• Drag/thrust options FMC • Geometrically, time correct
• Derating options • Drives aircraft flight control
• Cost index
• Constraints AC
AC and
and engine
engine
• AFCS Mode matrix Performance
Performance
model
model
Variables
• Aircraft weight (running) Mode ctl
• Environmental state Ref
Ref Trajectory
Trajectory
• Aircraft config (lift, drag)
• Engine config (thrust, bleed) AFCS
Guidance
Guidance
Dead Reckoning generation
generation Roll
Roll
• Air data
• Inertial data
• time Position
Position Pitch
Pitch
Fixing estimator
estimator
• VOR
Thrust
Thrust
• DME-
DME-DME
• GNSS

Figure 1. Summary of FMS and AFCS Relationships

One key benefit to using the FMS-generated shown in Figure 2. The FMS is able to accurately
trajectory relates to Continuous Descent Arrivals compute this optimum 4D descent trajectory.
(CDAs), also known as “Green Approaches”. A
Another potential benefit offered by some
CDA approach allows the aircraft to fly at idle or
FMSs is time-control. This allows the aircraft to
near-idle thrust until the final approach which
adjust and regulate its speed in order to arrive at a
compared to traditional arrivals can dramatically
specified waypoint (potentially the arrival runway)
reduce fuel burn and greenhouse gas emissions.
at a specified time, thus improving the predictability
They also have the effect of reducing noise
of the arriving aircraft. This in turn leads to an
production (as a result of lower engine thrust
improvement in runway throughput and controller
settings) as well as reducing noise projected to the
efficiency while enabling other ‘time related’
environment (as a result of keeping the aircraft
optimizations, such as collaborative decision
higher). An approach plate developed by the
making on best use of assets (gate assignments,
NUP2+ project for this type of “Green” approach is
supporting equipment and personnel).

1.D.1-3

Figure 2. “GREEN” Approach Plate
FMS 4D Trajectory Evaluation
Flights
Several dedicated revenue-service 4D
Trajectory data-gathering flights have been
conducted with SAS as part of the NUP2+ program.
This has allowed for a validation of the FMS 4D
Trajectory behavior and its suitability for Trajectory
Based Operations.
Motivation
Both SESAR and NextGen aim to increase
capacity and safety while reducing the impact
aviation has on the environment. Conceptually it is
clear that TBOs can play a major role in achieving
these objectives. However, a clear and concise
definition of what an aircraft trajectory
encompasses and how to implement it are lacking.
1.D.1-4
Also, there are currently no standard
methodologies to evaluate or specify the
performance of a 4D Trajectory. While Required
Navigation Performance (RNP) standards exist for
the lateral domain, and to an extent for the vertical
domain, there are no such standards for the
temporal dimension of an aircraft trajectory.
Some key questions that should be addressed
in order to more completely understand what role
TBO may play in the future ATM system are
summarized below:
• What is the necessary and sufficient data-
set to define a trajectory?
• What is the best method of sharing this
trajectory in a SWIM environment?
• What are the trajectory update- or
refresh-rates necessary for TBO?
• How can the accuracy of a trajectory be
measured?
• What level of accuracy is necessary for
TBO, and what level of accuracy can be
achieved with current equipment?
Objectives
Although this experiment cannot definitively
answer all the questions presented above, it
attempts to lay the ground-work to understand how
these questions may be answered. The main
objectives of this evaluation can be summarized as:
• Generate basic data for 4D Trajectory
studies.
• Support the development of networking
requirements for the 4D trajectory with a
view to 4D application cycle times.
• Refine flight procedures for the
remaining NUP2+ data collection of
flight operations.
This basis set of flight data will come from
controlled experiments capturing the trajectory
prediction of the FMS at numerous points
throughout the flight as well as the actual 4D path
flown. This will allow the evaluation of the
assumption that the FMS-generated 4D flight
trajectories computed during a flight will accurately
predict the flight profile for the remaining flight
portion. It is also assumed that this trajectory –
barring large un-forecast winds and pilot or
controller generated disturbances from the
trajectory – will be stable (slowly varying at most)
and be reliably executed by the FMS/AFCS system.
Experiment Procedure
The experiment was conducted in December,
2006 using SAS Boeing 737NG aircraft. The FMS
onboard these aircraft were GE Aviation FMSs,
Update 10.6. For the experiments, aircraft wiring
changes had to be kept to the minimum, while
network access to the Swedish Air Navigation
Service Provider (Luftfartsverket – LFV) had to be
arranged using existing data link. As a result, it was
decided to use the SAS ACARS networks via the
airline operational communications (AOC)
functions, including the SAS/Rockwell Collins
HERMES data link application portal, to form the
necessary interface with LFVs application
infrastructure. In order for the trajectory data to be
available to ACARS, the FMS U10.6 software
“copies” the Intent bus data content to a number of
words on the ACARS bus, so that network access
Figure 3. Depiction of Downlinked 4D FMS Trajectory
1.D.1-5
could be facilitated with almost no change to any of
the currently operational functions.
The infrastructure at LFV comprises the
Collaborative Information Exchange System
(CIES), which is used to collect the aircraft
trajectory data, perform the coordination functions
and generate any applicable constraints associated
with preserving proper conflict free operation. In
the experiments, freedom of conflicts was arranged
by constraining the lateral aspect of the flight to a
standard arrival routing (STAR), while assigning a
time slot to the respective operation, issued in the
form of an RTA. The vertical aspect was ‘open’ in
order for a CDA to be planned by the aircraft. The
resulting construct is a 4D TBO, even though in this
case effectively only the time dimension was
controlled by the air traffic management function,
the other 3 dimensions being constrained. A
graphical depiction of this shared trajectory is
shown in Figure 3. The U10.6 FMS version also
implements the RTA feature so that the CIES RTA
could be accepted, thus permitting the evaluation of
aircraft time-control.
 Due to the variability of individual pilot
actions during a flight, it was important that the
flights under evaluation be managed consistently
for experimental value. To this end, a jump-seat
observer (JSO) was present in the cockpit during
the flight to instruct and assist the crew regarding
the goals of the trial. Data was collected using a
digital audio-video camera to facilitate
conformance with test goals, identification of
anomalous behavior (such as flight plan changes,
ATC intervention, etc), actual and entered winds,
FMS prediction update events, cockpit
communications, and other events that might affect
the trajectory computation and/or stability.
In addition, the ANSP designated these flights
as “Trials Flights”, including a number of specific
procedures associated with those flights which
included refraining from speed or altitude
constraints and vectoring unless necessary for
reasons of safety. This ensured not only the desired
data quality by allowing the FMS to conduct the
entire flight with lateral and vertical navigation
coupled, but also avoided invalidating earlier
instantiations of the trajectory prediction by
subsequent tactical interventions. Green Approach
clearances were issued whenever possible, allowing
a CDA approach to be evaluated.
As mentioned, network access of the 702A-1
4D trajectory data was enabled via SAS AOC using
ACARS. Given that ACARS would not broadcast Figure 4. Flight Trials Checklist
the data, AOC issued requests for the exchange at
an interval of 3 minutes during the flight, storing
each transmission for later evaluation.
Preliminary Results
Six (6) trial flights were performed from 4 – 6
A pre-flight crew brief was conducted to December, 2006. As shown in Figure 5, the flights
assure flight deck coordination just prior to the occurred between city-pairs comprised of
flight. The JSO collected all necessary data using a Stockholm-Arlanda (ARN), Sundsvall (SDL),
digital video camera, following the general Kiruna (KRN), and Frösö (OSD). Some flights
evaluation procedure presented in Figure 4. included an “enhanced predictions” manual
procedure similar to that now automated in Update
10.7. The structure of these flights is summarized in
Table 1.

1.D.1-6
 from approximately the last 75-80 minutes was
examined, while for the shorter flight the last 25-35
minutes of data was used.
The FMS-predicted time at the destination is
shown as a function of flight time remaining in
Figure 6. Observing the ETA of the first 4DT and
the last instance of the 4DT for a given flight,
differences of 93 and 66 seconds can be seen for the
long flights and differences of 34, 24, and 61
seconds during the short flights. A positive
difference means that the flight actually arrived
later than originally predicted in the previous 4DT;
a negative difference represents an earlier arrival.
On average, this would encompass an absolute
shift of 1.1 seconds per minute of the flight;
however, the shifts were not uniformly distributed
over the length of the flight.
Significant jumps of the ETA of up to 80
seconds within a 3 minute iteration cycle were
Figure 5. Location of Flight Trials observed. These jumps are caused by changes in the
flight plan, such as removal of a waypoint, or
Table 1. Trial Flight Summary changes in the cruise altitude, resulting a
corresponding reduction or increase in flight time.
Flight # City RTA Downlink / Length The biggest jumps appear mainly in the transition
Pair Video (min) from departure to cruise, or within the first 30
1 ARN No Yes / Yes 50 percent of these relatively short flights. At that
SK0044 SDL point in the flight up to an hour of time would be
2 SDL Yes Yes / Yes 50 available to ATC to coordinate and de-conflict the
SK0043 ARN movement with any other movements en route to
3 ARN No Yes /No 95 the same destination8. Of more interest are the
SK1042 KRN jumps of 1 to 6 seconds of the ETA that are seen
4 KRN No e Yes / No 95 along the whole span of the flight, which are likely
SK1045 ARN related to differences in actual and planned
5 ARN Yes e No / Yes 55 performance.
SK0072 OSD
6 OSD Yes e No / Yes 55 From Figure 6 it is visible that the actual
SK0061 ARN destination time-of-arrival is reasonably well
e predicted by the FMS. The closer the flight gets to
– Enhanced predictions procedure used.
the destination, the less deviation the ETA has from
Approximately every 3 minutes the current the actual arrival time, which means that the
FMS-generated 4DT was provided to ATC through prediction becomes more and more relevant to ATC
the network, providing an update relative to the for use in tactical evaluation.
previous instance and allowing ATC to monitor and
In addition to the ETA at destination, the
verify freedom from conflict with any other
stability of the vertical profile was also examined.
movements.
Figures 7 and 8 show the FMS-generated altitude
For these flights the dynamic behavior of the
4DTs received by ATC was studied to investigate
the stability and usability as well as conformance of 8
This is in contrast with today’s tactical vectoring, where
the actual flight. For the two longer flights the data adjustments are made at the current time, with no aircraft
control authority remaining.

1.D.1-7
trajectory at various times during Flights 2 and 3, descent path as the FMS speed was adjusted
respectively. During Flight 2 an RTA time between trajectory iterations. In the non-RTA
constraint was entered at the destination, resulting flight, the vertical profile remained very stable.
in some differences in the idle portion of the
100

80
Difference between waypoint ETA reported in 4DT and

60
waypoint ETA last reported (seconds)

40

20 SK0044
SK0043
SK1042
0 SK1045
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0

-20

-40

-60

-80
Time before destination reached (minutes)

Figure 6. Behavior of the Destination ETA in the 4DTs over Time of Flight (Flights 1-4)

30000

25000
Altitude (feet)

20000

15000

10000

5000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Dis tance from De s tination (NM )

Figure 7. FMS-Generated Vertical Trajectory with RTA (10 Prediction Profiles Shown - Flight 2)

1.D.1-8
 45000

40000

35000

30000
Altitude (feet)

25000

20000

15000

10000

5000

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Distance to Destination (NM)

Figure 8. FMS-Generated Vertical Trajectory with No RTA (11 Prediction Profiles Shown – Flight 3)

Future Experiments GE Aviation manufactures a Data Acquisition

and Replay Tool (DART), which is capable of
The flight trials performed generated a set of
capturing, storing, and replaying all message data
basis data that can be used to support future
present on up to 16 separate ARINC 429 channels
operational trials. Although the amount of data
connected to the FMS. The DART will be installed
collected was limited, it is valuable to show which
on one SAS B737 to facilitate the future
additional information would be useful and to refine
experiments. The DART system stores this data
the test procedures for future flight experiments.
along a time-line. Thus, data such as GPS
Moreover, since the previous flight trials occurred a
information (track angle, latitude, longitude), ADC
new version of the FMS, Update 10.7, has been
Data (Altitude, MACH, TAS), and other data such
certified. The U10.7 FMS contains improvements
as flap angle, distance to go, and vertical path
in the RTA time-control for time-constraints in
deviation can be recorded and compared to the
approach, as well as improved energy management
FMS-generated trajectory at a given time during the
in RTA descent.
flight. This will allow a much more complete
The flight trials recorded data useful in analysis of the 4DT accuracy and stability.
forming a basis for the FMS generated ETA
Finally, the flight trials performed in 2006
stability and accuracy, and to a smaller extent the
consisted of only a small number of flights. While
vertical trajectory stability. However, no
this is useful in generating a basis set, future trials
quantitative data was recorded to analyze the
should involve a significantly larger set of
accuracy of the 4DT. In future flight trials, it will
operational flights. This will provide a larger data
be desirable to record the actual lateral and vertical
set for quantitative analysis. In addition, this will
path flown by the aircraft as well as the FMS 4DT.
give a broader exposure to different operating
Also, the location and speed at which the crew
conditions and crew behavior that may affect the
configures the aircraft for landing (flaps, slats, and
4DT.
landing gear extensions) should be recorded as this
is a large contributor to deviation from the FMS’s
4DT late in approach.

1.D.1-9
Summary
The potential of 4-Dimensional Trajectory
Based Operations is recognized as a key operational
improvement in the future Air Traffic Management
System. However, much research is still needed to
define and evaluate these types of operations. The
NUP2+ project is making use of the networking of
an FMS’s 4DT to begin to address some of the
questions relating to TBO.
The project performed flight trials with SAS
B737NG aircraft in Sweden during December,
2006. These trials have generated some preliminary
results regarding the sensitivity and stability of the
FMS’s vertical trajectory and time predictions.
Several of the flights also evaluated the behavior of
time-control by establishing an RTA constraint at
the runway. The results of these trials form a basis
set that can be used for further evaluations.
Based on the results of these preliminary flight
trials, further evaluations are deemed useful and
necessary to gain a more complete understanding of
these types of TBOs. Additional flight trials will be
performed using an updated FMS with improved
time control in descent. More information, such as
the actual path flown by the aircraft and the actual
winds encountered, should be recorded to facilitate
a more complete analysis of the FMS trajectory and
the aircraft’s execution of that trajectory.
1.D.1-10
References
[1] Operational Evolution Partnership – Executive
Overview version 1.0, Federal Aviation
Administration, Washington, D.C. 2007
[2] Taylor, M.S. (2004). System-Wide Information
Management for Aeronautical Communications.
Proceedings of the 23rd Digital Avionics System
Conference, 11D2, Salt Lake City, Utah.
[3] Theunissen, Erik, Richard Rademaker, Okko
Bleeker, Keith D. Wichman, “Aircraft Trajectory
Based Network Centric Applications”, 26th Digital
Avionics Systems Conference, Dallas, Texas,
October 2007.
[4] Wichman, Keith D., Göran Carlsson, Lars G.V.
Lindberg, "Flight trials 'Runway-to-Runway'
Required Time of Arrival Evaluations for Time-
Based ATM Environment", IEEE 0-7803-7034-
1/01 2001, 20th Digital Avionics Systems
Conference, Daytona Beach, Florida, October 2001.
[5] Wichman, Keith D., Göran Carlsson, Lars G.V.
Lindberg, "Flight trials 'Runway-to-Runway'
Required Time of Arrival Evaluations for Time-
Based ATM Environment -Final Results", AIAA
2002-4859, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and
Control Conference and Exhibit, Monterey,
California, August 2002.
26th Digital Avionics Systems Conference
October 21, 2007