Airspace Conflict Resolution via Sector Segmentation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current air traffic management systems are inadequate in detecting and resolving conflicts, particularly in converging traffic scenarios, as they focus on maximizing throughput and often propagate delays, and fail to consider the 'domino effect' of conflicts, leading to inefficient conflict resolution.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that receives user-preferred aircraft intent data, performs initial conflict detection and resolution, and iteratively revises aircraft intent data to remove conflicts, using conflict-dependent networks to strategically manage airspace and distribute changes in trajectories fairly among aircraft.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If existing conflict detection and resolution methods are used, then throughput of traffic on airspace resource is maximized, but delays are propagated to all other aircraft in a domino effect

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvethroughput of trafficVSAvoiddelay propagation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The method segments the airspace into multiple sectors and processes conflict detection and resolution in each sector independently and simultaneously, rather than treating all conflicts as a single sequential problem. This segmentation prevents delay propagation across the entire airspace by localizing resolution actions to specific sectors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The method performs preliminary conflict detection and resolution actions in each sector before conflicts can propagate to other sectors. By proactively resolving conflicts at their source in localized sectors, the system prevents the domino effect of delays from spreading to all other aircraft.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If conflicts are resolved sequentially without considering domino effect, then individual conflicts are resolved, but delays feed back and cause cascading conflicts

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconflict resolution effectivenessVSAvoidcascading delays
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The method implements a feedback mechanism where conflict resolution actions in one sector are monitored for their impact on adjacent sectors. If delayed aircraft from one sector are detected to potentially create new conflicts in neighboring sectors, the system adjusts resolution strategies to prevent cascading delays, ensuring reliable conflict resolution without time loss propagation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Ease of operation

If arrival sequence is planned first before detecting and resolving conflicts, then traffic flow is organized, but delays are propagated backwards to all other aircraft

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraffic organizationVSAvoidbackwards delay propagation
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of planning arrival sequences first and then resolving conflicts (which propagates delays backwards), the method inverts the approach by first detecting conflicts through trajectory comparison and then determining arrival sequences based on conflict-free trajectories. This inversion prevents backwards delay propagation by organizing traffic flow after conflicts are already identified and resolved.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

4Reliability

If aircraft intent data is revised to remove conflicts, then safe separations are ensured, but changes in trajectories need to be distributed fairly among aircraft

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafe separationVSAvoidtrajectory revision coordination
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The method merges conflict detection and trajectory revision processes within each sector, allowing simultaneous evaluation of multiple aircraft trajectories and coordinated revision of aircraft intent data. By combining these functions in a unified sector-based framework, the system ensures safe separations while fairly distributing trajectory changes among affected aircraft without excessive coordination complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentEP2667364B1Conflict detection and resolution using predicted aircraft trajectories
Publication Date: 2017.11.08 THE BOEING CO
  • EP2667364B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2667364B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2667364B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

This disclosure is concerned with a method of detecting conflicts between aircraft passing through managed airspace, and resolving the detected conflicts strategically. The method may include obtaining intended trajectories of aircraft through the airspace, detecting conflicts in the intended trajectories, forming a set of the conflicted aircraft, calculating one or more revised trajectories for the conflicted aircraft such that the conflicts are resolved, and advising the conflicted aircraft subject to revised trajectories of the revised trajectories.