Relative Trajectory Cost Iterative Calculation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Airlines face difficulties in determining the most advantageous route preferences under the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) due to challenges in comparing trajectory options and translating operational impacts into a single number, such as fuel burn, schedule, passengers, and crew impacts, which affects their ability to communicate beneficial trajectory priorities to Air Traffic Management.
Innovation Solution
A method is developed to calculate the full operational impact of Relative Trajectory Cost (RTC) values by iteratively incrementing ground delays until Network Costs for different trajectories are approximately equivalent, allowing airlines to determine preferred trajectory options that consider fuel burn, schedule, passengers, and crew impacts, and communicate these effectively to Air Traffic Management.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If airlines manually evaluate multiple trajectory options considering fuel burn, schedule, passengers, and crew impacts, then they can make informed route selections, but the complexity and time required for decision-making increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the complex trajectory evaluation process into distinct components: Network Cost calculation, Relative Trajectory Cost determination, and iterative ground delay adjustment. Each component handles a specific aspect of the evaluation, making the overall system more manageable and systematic rather than requiring holistic manual assessment of all factors simultaneously
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces Relative Trajectory Cost (RTC) as an intermediary metric that mediates between multiple trajectory options. RTC serves as a standardized comparison value that encapsulates the complex interplay of fuel burn, schedule, passenger, and crew impacts, allowing airlines to compare different trajectories through a single unified measure rather than evaluating multiple separate factors
2Ease of operation
If airlines use a single number metric like RTC to compare trajectory options, then the ease of communication with Air Traffic Management improves, but the difficulty in accurately translating multiple operational impacts into that single number increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple operational impact factors (fuel burn, schedule adherence, passenger connections, crew availability) into a single unified metric called Relative Trajectory Cost. This consolidation allows airlines to communicate trajectory preferences efficiently with Air Traffic Management while the iterative calculation process ensures that all underlying factors are properly considered in determining the RTC value
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the RTC value is calculated based on Network Costs that incorporate ground delays, and this RTC value then feeds back into the trajectory selection process. The iterative adjustment of ground delays continues until the RTC accurately reflects the true operational impacts, ensuring that information is not lost in the translation to a single number
3Productivity
If ground delays are reduced to improve operational efficiency, then passenger and crew misconnections decrease, but the difficulty in selecting optimal trajectories without adequate evaluation tools increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent performs preliminary evaluation of multiple trajectory options before final selection by calculating Network Costs and Relative Trajectory Costs for each option. This advance analysis allows airlines to identify the most efficient trajectories that minimize ground delays and operational disruptions, rather than making selections without adequate evaluation
Data Source
AI summary
Methods and systems for determining routes in a Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) enabled Air Traffic Management system are disclosed. A first trajectory with a lowest Network Cost and having an assumed ground delay is identified. A Relative Trajectory Cost of zero is assigned to the first trajectory. A second trajectory is identified and the assumed ground delay of the first trajectory is iteratively incremented until a Network Cost for the second trajectory is approximately equivalent to the Network Cost of the first trajectory. A Relative Trajectory Cost for the second trajectory is determined based at least in part on the iteratively incremented assumed ground delay of the first trajectory.