Publications

Knowledge of present and future winds and temperature is important for air traffic operations in general, but is crucial for Decision Support Tools (DSTs) that rely heavily on accurately predicting trajectories of aircraft. One such tool is the Center-TRACON Automation System (CTAS) developed by NASA Ames Research Center. The Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) system is presently the principal source of weather information for CTAS. RUC provides weather updates on an hourly basis on a nationwide grid with horizontal resolution of 40 km and vertical resolution of 25 mb in pressure. However, a recent study of RUC data availability showed that the NWS and NOAA servers are subject to frequent service interruptions. Over a 210 day period (4/19/00-11/11/00), the availability of two NOAA and one NWS RUC server was monitored automatically. It was found that 60 days (29%) had periods of one hour or more where at least one server was out, with the longest outage lasting 13 hours on 9/21/00. In addition, there were 9 days (4%) for which all three servers were simultaneously unavailable, with the longest outage lasting 6 hours on 5/7/00. Moreover, even longer outages have been experienced with the RUC servers over the past several years. RUC forecasts are provided for up to 12 hours, but these are not currently used in CTAS as back up sources (except that the 1 or 2 hour forecasts are used for the current winds to compensate for transmission delays in obtaining the RUC data). Since RUC outages have been experienced for longer than 12 hours, it is therefore necessary to back RUC up with another weather source providing long-range forecasts. This paper examines the use of the Eta model forecasts as a back-up weather sources for CTAS. A specific output of the Eta km model, namely Grid 104, was selected for evaluation because its horizontal and vertical resolution, spatial extent and output parameters match most closely those of RUC. While RUC forecasts for a maximum of 12 hours into the future, Eta does so for up to 60 hours. In the event that a RUC outage would occur, Eta data could be substituted. If Eta data also became unavailable, the last issued forecasts could allow CTAS to continue to function properly for up to 60 hours. The approach used for evaluating the suitability of the Eta model and RUC forecasts was to compare them with the RUC analysis output or 0 hour forecast file, at the forecast time. Not surprisingly, it was found that the RUC model forecasts had lower wind magnitude errors out to 12 hours (the limit of the RUC forecasts) than the Eta model had. Hosever, the wind magnitude error for the Eta model grew only from 9 ft/s at 12 hours (comparable with RUC) to 11 ft/s at 48 hours. We therefore conclude that RUC forecasts should be used for outages up to 12 hours and Eta model forecasts should be used for outages up to 60 hours.

Many major airports in the U.S. rely on simultaneous approaches to closely-spaced parallel (CSP) runways to maintain a high airport acceptance rate. During Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC), aircraft are able to utilize both runways by making side-by-side landings and are able to meet the demands of heavy volume. However, when conditions deteriorate to marginal-VMC or Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC), side-by-side approaches are not possible due to the inherent safety concerns associated with lowered ceilings and visibilities. This situation is severely limiting to an airport's capacity and can create large delays and increased costs. Various ideas have been suggested that would facilitate the simultaneous use of CSP runways during low ceiling and visibility (LCV) conditions at capacity-restricted airports. This report addresses the specific scenario of a pair of approaching aircraft being staggered by some longitudinal distance. This situation alleviates the collision hazard presented by LCV conditions, but also introduces the hazard of a wake vortex encounter, particularly if the following aircraft is downwind of the leading aircraft.

Aviation weather refers to any type of weather that can affect the operation of an aircraft – anything from a brief delay in departure to a catastrophic accident during flight. Wind shear and events associated with convective weather were recognized as an aviation hazard long before Dr. Theodore Fujita began publishing his now-famous treatises. On July 28, 1943, American Airlines Flight 63 from Cleveland, Ohio, USA to Nashville, Tennessee crashed after the pilot lost control of the Douglas DC3. The pilots and numerous passengers were fatally injured. The aircraft was destroyed by impact and post crash fire. The weather report at the time included warnings for storms, heavy rain, lightning and severe turbulence. The Civil Aeronautics Board found that the probable cause was a loss of control of the aircraft due to unusually severe turbulence and violent downdraft caused by a thunderstorm. In the ten-year period from 1987 through 1996, 24% of all U.S. accidents were judged to be "weather related". For the twenty-year period 1976 to 1996 fully 43% of U.S. accidents were judged to have involved wind or wind shear, and 2.3 % thunderstorm, although the two data elements are not mutually exclusive. In the U.S., approximately 82% of accidents are general aviation; the rest are air carriers and commuters of various types. When general aviation accidents are negated, and only air carriers are considered, wind and wind shear issues account for 9.5% of accidents. The Weather Systems Processor (WSP) has been developed to reduce the impact of severe weather conditions on air traffic by providing information concerning weather conditions in the airport terminal environment. WSP provides warnings to air traffic controllers and supervisors of hazardous wind shear and microburst events in the terminal area, forecasts the arrival of gust fronts, and tracks thunderstorms, providing a complete picture of current and future terminal area hazardous weather conditions that may impact runway and airport usage. Common weather situation awareness allows Terminal Approach, Tower Controllers and other traffic management personnel to jointly plan with confidence and safely manage more arrivals and departures with less delay. Knowledge of the location, severity and movement of hazardous weather allows dynamic adjustments to be made in routing aircraft to runways, approach and departure corridors, terminal arrival and departure transition areas (i.e. gate-posts) and other air routes.

Thunderstorms are dynamic obstacles to the flow of air traffic. Aircraft routing in the presence of thunderstorms is as dynamic as the position and intensity of the storms. The question of where pilots will and will not fly is relevant to the decisions made by human air traffic managers as well as to the development of automated decision aid tools. In order to accurately anticipate which routes will be useable one needs to be able to 1) forecast the relevant weather variables, and 2) convert those weather variables into a quantitative probability that pilots will request deviations from the nominal route. The Convective Weather Integrated Product Team at the FAA is improving the accuracy and lead time of forecasts of thunderstorm products. This paper provides an update on our examination of the issue of probability of deviation. In our recent examination of 63 hours of weather and flight track data from the DFW airspace (Rhoda and Pawlak, 1999a,b) we combined several weather variables (measurements, not forecasts) to correctly predict pilot deviation and penetration behavior for 70-85% of the encounters between thunderstorms and aircraft arriving at DW and Dallas Love (DAL) airports. We also found that pilots were more likely to penetrate strong precipitation when they: 1) were near the arrival airport, 2) were following another aircraft, 3) were flying after dark, 4) had been delayed in the air by 15+ minutes upstream of the DFW airspace. We did not find any statistically significant difference between the percentages of thunderstorm penetrations by various airlines. We also found that persistent penetration of storms near the airport is sometimes abruptly interrupted presumably by wind shear alerts from air traffic controllers or cautionary pilot reports from the penetrating aircraft. When the arrivals cease, aircraft on the final approach course may turn suddenly to the left or right to avoid the weather that caused the interruption. Aircraft that abort the approach sometimes fly through very intense precipitation-sometimes through downdrafts that are causing microburst outflows at the surface. The work described in this paper applies the methodology from the DFW study to data collected in the Memphis Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). The methodology is described briefly here and in more detail in (Rhoda and Pawlak, 1999b). We developed several probability of deviation classifiers using a portion of the Memphis data and tested them on the remaining data to determine if it is possible to predict whether pilots will penetrate or deviate around the storms. We also tested the classifiers that were developed in the DNV study on the MEM data and vice versa. We repeated the DFW hypothesis tests for various dichotomies of encounters: near/far, leading/following, light/dark, delayed/undelayed.

On June 1, 1999, American Airlines flight 1420 , arriving at Little Rock, AR from Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, was involved in a fatal accident upon landing, on runway 4R at Adams Field (LIT). There were eleven casualties, including the pilot, and numerous injuries among the 145 passengers and crew on board. At the time of the accident, 0451 UTC (11:51 PM CDT), severe thunderstorms existed in the vicinity of the airport. These storms were initiated by an approaching cold front and pre-frontal trough and were developmentally aided by veering low-level wind and warm air advection, which helped to further destabilize the atmosphere. This report will focus on the meteorological conditions preceding and immediately following the accident that could have played a contributing role in the crash. However, no theories on the actual cause will be put forth.

Currently, the prototype Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) displays six-level precipitation data generated from the Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-9) and the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD). The ASR-9 data are updated every 30 seconds and provide a 0.5 nm spatial resolution to a distance of 60 nm (Weber, 1986). Since the ASR-9 is a fan beam radar, the data represent the average precipitation within the vertical column. As reported by Isaminger, et al., (1999), this sensor can significantly underestimate the precipitation intensity and areal coverage due to precipitation processing limitations and hardware failures. In particular, storms located near the sensor can be underestimated or missed entirely (Crow& et al., 1999). The NEXRAD data are updated every 5-6 minutes with a spatial resolution of 0.5 nm (2.2 nm) and a coverage region of 100 nm (200 nm). The maximum reflectivity value in the vertical column at each grid point is used to create the product. This sensor can overestimate the precipitation intensity near the surface due to bright band contamination and the composite technique (Crowe and Miller, 1999). The update rate can also become an issue if the storms are moving rapidly or developing quickly. In order to confront these issues, the specified ITWS product suite will include six-level precipitation derived from the Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR). The data from this sensor will be depicted in a high-resolution window (5-nm) around the airport. The TDWR one-minute update rate will provide timely information on rapidly moving or developing storm cells. In many regards, the data will be complimentary to that provided by the ASR-9 and NEXRAD. In others, the weather levels could vary significantly. This report will focus on a discussion of the 5-nm product capabilities and limitations based on an analysis of data collected in Memphis (MEM) and New York City (NYC). A discussion of key product enhancements will serve to illustrate the modifications required to improve this product suite. Finally, a list of recommendations will be presented to assist in product development.

Gust front detection is an important Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS). The Machine Intelligent Gust Front Algorithm (MIGFA) being deployed for ITWS uses multi-dimensional, knowledge-based signal processing techniques to detect and track gust fronts in Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR) data. Versions of MIGFA have also been developed for the ASR-9 Weather Systems Processor (WSP) and NEXRAD, and within the past year MIGFA was installed as the primary gust front detection algorithm for operational TDWRs throughout the United States. (Not complete.)

Major terminals and the surrounding en route airspace are critical elements of the US National Air System (NAS). A large fraction of the US population lives near these terminals, and the bulk of the hub connecting operations are at these airports as well. Adverse weather in these terminal areas and surrounding en route airspace is a major safety concern for the NAS as well as causing a large fraction of all US aviation delays. The principal weather decision support tool for these terminals is the Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) which commenced full-scale development by the FAA in 1995, with first articles to be deployed shortly. In this paper, we discuss how the initial ITWS operational capability needs to be extended to address performance problems identified in operational use and to meet the many new user needs that have developed in the past five years. The paper proceeds as follows. In Section 2, we provide some necessary background on the ITWS operational capability, followed by a discussion of new capabilities to meet urgent user needs. Section 3 discusses refinements to the initial capability to address problems/issues that have been identified based on five years of operational use of ITWS products from ITWS demonstration systems at eight major airports. Next, we consider extending planned ITWS coverage to other major terminals. The final section summarizes the paper's results and suggests additional studies.

Air traffic delay due to convective weather reached historically high levels in 1999, as passengers blamed airlines and airlines blamed the FAA for the massive inconveniences. While coordination between the FAA's System Command Center and the regional centers and terminals can be expected to improve with the FAA's new initiatives, it is clear that air traffic management and planning during convective weather will ultimately require accurate convective weather forecasts. In addition to improving system capacity and reducing delay, convective forecasts can help provide safer flight routes as well. The crash of a commercial airliner at Little Rock, AR in June 1999 after a one-hour flight from Dallas/Ft. Worth illustrates the dangers and potential tactical advantage that could be gained with frequently updated one-hour forecasts of convective storms. The Terminal Convective Weather Forecast (TCWF) product has been developed by MIT Lincoln Laboratory as part of the FAA Aviation Weather' Research Convective Weather Product Development Team (PDT). Lincoln began by consulting with air traffic personnel and commercial airline dispatchers to determine the needs of aviation users (Forman, et. al., 1999). Users indicated that convective weather, particularly line storms, caused the most consistent problems for managing air traffic. The "Growth and Decay Storm Tracker" developed by Wolfson et al. (1999) allows the generation of up to 1-hour forecasts of large scale, organized precipitation features with operationally useful accuracy. This patented technology. represents a breakthrough in short-term forecasting capability, providing quantitative envelope tracking as opposed to the usual cell tracking. This tracking technology is now being utilized in NCAR's AutoNowcaster (Mueller, et al., 2000), the National Convective Weather Forecast running at the Aviation Weather Center (Megenhardt, et al., 2000) and by private sector meteorological data vendors. The TCWF has been tested in Dallas/Ft. Worth (DFW) since 1998, in Orlando (MCO) since 1999, and in New York (NYC) since fiscal year 2000 began. These have been informal demonstrations, with the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center (WJHTC) assessing utility to the users, and with MIT LL modifying the system based on user feedback and performance analyses. TCWF has undergone major revisions, and the latest build has now been deployed at all sites. The TCWF is now in a formal assessment phase at the Memphis international Airport as a prerequisite to an FAA operational requirement. The FAA Technical Center will make a recommendation on whether TCWF is suitable for inclusion in the FAA's operational integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS), which has an unmet requirement for 30+ minute forecasts of convective weather. Memphis was selected for the TCWF Assessment since it has not been exposed to the forecast product during prior demonstrations. Operations began on March 24, 2000 and operational feedback is being assessed by the FAA Technical Center (McGettigan, et al., 2000) and MCR Corporation is performing a quantitative benefits assessment (Sunderlin and Paull, 2000). This paper details the refined TCWF algorithm and display concept, gives examples of the operational impact of terminal forecasts, and analyzes the technical performance of the TCWF during the early stages of the Memphis Assessment.

Wind shear and lightning are classically associated with summertime convective weather events at airports east of Reno, NV. However, a recent study concluded that severe wind shear and lightning strike events occasionally occur during winter storms at west coast airports. One of the most surprising findings was that the Portland Oregon International Airport (PDX) has operationally significant vertical wind shear and a surprisingly high number of lightning strikes to aircraft within the terminal area during winter storms. The FAA has for a number of years planned to install an ASR-9 Weather System Processor (WSP) at PDX to provide protection against wind shear from microbursts and gust fronts. However, in view of the findings of the west coast weather study (conducted after the FAA's wind shear deployment study was completed, a research program was undertaken to: Better understand the phenomenology associated with the Portland winter storms; Determine whether the baseline ASR-9 Weather System Processor planned for PDX would adequately address operationally significant wind shear and other safety-related weather phenomena; and Identify alternative sensing/data fusion approaches to providing PDX terminal weather decision support if the WSP alone could not adequately provide safety warnings.