Central Authority–Controlled Air Traffic Flow Management: An Optimization Approach

Sadeque Hamdan, Ali Cheaitou (), Oualid Jouini (), Tobias Andersson Granberg (), Zied Jemai (), Imad Alsyouf (), Maamar Bettayeb () and Billy Josefsson ()
Additional contact information
Ali Cheaitou: Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management Department, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, 27272, United Arab Emirates
Oualid Jouini: Laboratoire Genie Industriel, CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France
Tobias Andersson Granberg: Division of Communication and Transport Systems, Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Norrköping 601 74, Sweden
Zied Jemai: Optimisation et Analyse des Systèmes Industriels et de Service (OASIS), Ecole Nationale d’ingénieurs de Tunis (ENIT), University of Tunis Elmanar, Tunis 1002, Tunisia
Imad Alsyouf: Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management Department, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, 27272, United Arab Emirates
Maamar Bettayeb: Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Sharjah, Sharjah 27272, United Arab Emirates; Center of Excellence in Intelligent Engineering Systems (CEIES), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 22254, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Billy Josefsson: Swedish Civil Aviation Administration (Luftfartsverket: LFV), Norrköping 601 79, Sweden

Transportation Science, 2022, vol. 56, issue 2, 299-321

Abstract: Despite various planning efforts, airspace capacity can sometimes be exceeded, typically because of disruptive events. Air traffic flow management (ATFM) is the process of managing flights in this situation. In this paper, we present an ATFM model that accounts for different rerouting options (path rerouting and diversion) and preexisting en route flights. The model proposes having a central authority to control all decisions, which is then compared with current practice. We also consider interflight and interairline fairness measures in the network. We use an exact approach to solve small- to medium-sized instances, and we propose a modified fix-and-relax heuristic to solve large-sized instances. Allowing a central authority to control all decisions increases network efficiency compared with the case where the ATFM authority and airlines control decisions independently. Our experiments show that including different rerouting options in ATFM can help reduce delays by up to 8% and cancellations by up to 23%. Moreover, ground delay cost has much more impact on network decisions than air delay cost, and network decisions are insensitive to changes in diversion cost. Furthermore, the analysis of the tradeoff between total network cost and overtaking cost shows that adding costs for overtaking can significantly improve fairness at only a small increase in total system cost. A balanced total cost per flight among airlines can be achieved at a small increase in the network cost (0.2%–3.0%) when imposing airline fairness. In conclusion, the comprehensiveness of the model makes it useful for analyzing a wide range of alternatives for efficient ATFM.

Keywords: air traffic flow management; mathematical modeling; flight cancellation; flight diversion; path rerouting; ground holding; airborne delay; flight overtaking (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2021.1087 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ortrsc:v:56:y:2022:i:2:p:299-321

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Transportation Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().