One of the most important paradigm shifts in the SESAR air traffic management operational concept of the future is the move from an airspace based approach to a trajectory based one. It would be a bit lengthy to explain the difference here (there will be a blog article on the subject soon) so let it suffice to say: trajectory based operations are the key to the required predictability and efficiency of the new system.
During the creation of the SESAR Concept of Operations (CONOPS) our military colleagues at first had some difficulty in accepting this new approach. After all, most military operations tend to require a huge piece of real estate that equates to airspace rather than trajectories.
Another bone of contention had been the concept of the business trajectory. The business trajectory is the expression of an airline’s intentions with a
flight, designed to result in the best possible business outcome of the operation. A military operation has nothing to do with “business” was the argument. In the end, we agreed to introduce the term “mission trajectory” to cover those cases where an operation was on a mission rather than having to worry about any business considerations.
In the end, the SESAR CONOPS came off the press with a rather good compromise in respect of reconciling the civil and military requirements and conceptual thinking. Nevertheless, it was not completely clear how the SESAR trajectory based operations approach would be digested by the military planners and what would come back from them in the end.
With this background, I was really interested to see the contents of a video, entitled “The Military and SESAR: an introductory video”, available here.
I was not sure what to expect but what I saw was cause for celebration. Once the video gets through the rather lengthy introductory part dealing with the present situation, it jumps right into the importance of the business trajectory and then explains why the military needs the mission trajectory instead. OK, no big news there. But then the life-cycle of the mission trajectory is explained and it follows that of the business trajectory almost verbatim! The story does highlight the need for more flexibility in the mission trajectory than what airlines need (this is correct) but other than that, the concept is identical!
They even explain why a trajectory based system, with its higher level of predictability, is even better for missions like refueling than the old airspace based paradigm!
I do not know how much input may have come from the USAF and the trajectory based concept also integral to NextGen, but it is not important.
The important thing is: this video correctly reflects what the CONOPS was trying to say. Great job!