WO1995003213A1 - Operating aircraft - Google Patents

Operating aircraft Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO1995003213A1
WO1995003213A1 PCT/GB1994/001577 GB9401577W WO9503213A1 WO 1995003213 A1 WO1995003213 A1 WO 1995003213A1 GB 9401577 W GB9401577 W GB 9401577W WO 9503213 A1 WO9503213 A1 WO 9503213A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
aircraft
fly
take
operating
parallel
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/GB1994/001577
Other languages
French (fr)
Inventor
Lloyd Ross Jenkinson
Robert Edward Caves
Original Assignee
Loughborough University Of Technology
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Loughborough University Of Technology filed Critical Loughborough University Of Technology
Priority to AU71936/94A priority Critical patent/AU7193694A/en
Priority to EP94921066A priority patent/EP0710202A1/en
Priority to JP7505013A priority patent/JPH09504390A/en
Publication of WO1995003213A1 publication Critical patent/WO1995003213A1/en

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G08—SIGNALLING
    • G08G—TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS
    • G08G5/00—Traffic control systems for aircraft, e.g. air-traffic control [ATC]
    • G08G5/0004—Transmission of traffic-related information to or from an aircraft
    • G08G5/0008—Transmission of traffic-related information to or from an aircraft with other aircraft
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B64—AIRCRAFT; AVIATION; COSMONAUTICS
    • B64C—AEROPLANES; HELICOPTERS
    • B64C37/00—Convertible aircraft
    • B64C37/02—Flying units formed by separate aircraft
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01S—RADIO DIRECTION-FINDING; RADIO NAVIGATION; DETERMINING DISTANCE OR VELOCITY BY USE OF RADIO WAVES; LOCATING OR PRESENCE-DETECTING BY USE OF THE REFLECTION OR RERADIATION OF RADIO WAVES; ANALOGOUS ARRANGEMENTS USING OTHER WAVES
    • G01S13/00—Systems using the reflection or reradiation of radio waves, e.g. radar systems; Analogous systems using reflection or reradiation of waves whose nature or wavelength is irrelevant or unspecified
    • G01S13/88—Radar or analogous systems specially adapted for specific applications
    • G01S13/91—Radar or analogous systems specially adapted for specific applications for traffic control
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G08—SIGNALLING
    • G08G—TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS
    • G08G5/00—Traffic control systems for aircraft, e.g. air-traffic control [ATC]
    • G08G5/0047—Navigation or guidance aids for a single aircraft
    • G08G5/0065—Navigation or guidance aids for a single aircraft for taking-off
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G08—SIGNALLING
    • G08G—TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS
    • G08G5/00—Traffic control systems for aircraft, e.g. air-traffic control [ATC]
    • G08G5/02—Automatic approach or landing aids, i.e. systems in which flight data of incoming planes are processed to provide landing data
    • G08G5/025—Navigation or guidance aids

Definitions

  • This invention relates to operating aircraft.
  • the number of passengers carried to and from any one airport is a matter of the seating capacity of the aircraft used and the frequency of flights.
  • the flight frequency is at or near the capacity of air traffic control (ATC) operations, and so larger aircraft are being designed as the only means of coping with the demand.
  • ATC air traffic control
  • the present invention provides an alternative solution to the problem of growing traffic volume, while avoiding at least the major snags and, hurt, at relatively moderate cost.
  • the invention comprises a method for operating aircraft, in which two aircraft are controlled by a common control arrangement to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.
  • the aircraft may take off and/or land on parallel runways, and may take off and/or land simultaneously.
  • the aircraft may fly together to pick up parallel automatic landing system guidance beams and then land under independent on-board control using such beams.
  • One aircraft may slave to the other, and may do so during take off, climb, cruise and/or descent.
  • the aircraft may have a relative position-error feedback spacing arrangement.
  • the aircraft may have an absolute position control system, which may be determined by satellite reference and/or by inertial guidance systems such for example as ring-laser gyroscope systems.
  • the aircraft may fly the same course together from and to parallel runways, and may be, after take off and before landing, more widely spaced apart than the runway separations or fly in close formation to take advantage of vortex air currents.
  • the aircraft may take off together then fly to different destinations, or may converge from different originating airfields to land together - landing aircraft may fly together in a landing stack.
  • the invention also comprises equipment for operating aircraft adapted to control two aircraft to fly a parallel course within a common ATC slot.
  • the equipment may comprise transmitter means adapted for a master aircraft and receiver means adapted for a slave aircraft, said transmitter means transmitting control signals to be received by said receiver means.
  • Said transmitter means may be of such short range or otherwise adapted (as for example by unique "handshake" codes) to transmit signals receivable by said slave aircraft alone (or said slave aircraft and another or other slave aircraft in the event three or more aircraft are flown in a single slot) and not to be received by any other aircraft in the vicinity.
  • the equipment may comprise transmitter/receiver or transponder means for each aircraft, which may be capable of
  • the equipment may include suitable interfacing arrangements to allow the collision avoidance system to acknowledge the presence of the other aircraft but issue no warning or initiate no evasive action in regard to it.
  • the equipment might even be incorporated into such a collision avoidance system (or such system incorporated into the equipment).
  • the collision avoidance system would in any event be required to calculate collision avoidance procedures on the basis of two (or more) aircraft flying in formation, possibly avoiding a collision with two (or more) other aircraft also flying in formation.
  • Figure 1 is a plan view of two aircraft taking off on adjacent, parallel runways
  • Figure 2 is a diagrammatic illustration of a flight path for two aircraft
  • Figure 3 is a diagrammatic illustration of a flight path scheme involving three aircraft.
  • FIG. 1 illustrates methods for operating aircraft 11 ( Figure 1) in which two aircraft 11 are controlled by a common control arrangement 12 to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.
  • Figure 1 illustrates two aircraft 11 taking off simultaneously from adjacent runways 13.
  • the runways will be separated by a some 150 metres, but this may not always be possible, and it may be necessary instead to contemplate a single, perhaps a wide, runway on which the aircraft can take off in formation - in echelon, say, as is often done with military aircraft.
  • the aircraft 11 may fly together to pick up parallel automatic landing system guidance beams from ALS ground stations 14 ( Figures 2 and 3) - which should be arranged to be capable of resolving the aircraft on simultaneous approach - and then land under independent on-board control using such beams.
  • ALS ground stations 14 Figures 2 and 3
  • take-off cruise and/or descent one or more aircraft may slave to any other.
  • the control arrangement 12 will, for the sake of maximum flexibility, be capable of operating in both master and slave modes - this would mean that aircraft need not be permanently paired, and that control can be passed from one aircraft to the other in flight.
  • take-off is effected manually but (for those aircraft suitably equipped) almost everything else from climb to touch-down is automatic, the occasional landing being effected manually for pilot practice.
  • the control arrangement 12 can include a relative position-error feedback spacing arrangement, and the nature of that arrangement may depend on the spacing which it is decided should be maintained.
  • the spacing could be so small that an optical system could be effective even in cloud.
  • Radar and collision avoidance bearing and range measuring systems could be used, but, for reasonable spacings, satellite or inertial (e.g. ring laser gyroscope) systems could be used to determine the absolute position of both aircraft, from which relative positioning can be deduced.
  • the aircraft can, as illustrated in Figure 2, fly the same course together from and to parallel runways 11R and L of airfield I and 11' R and L of airfield II. It would, of course, be possible to land sequentially on a single runway if that is all the destination airfield boasted, and this would be feasible for flights from a busy field like Heathrow to a less busy airport.
  • two aircraft can, as illustrated in Figure 3, take off together from parallel runways 11R and L of airfield I and climb together the cruise height CH then fly separate courses Cl to different airfields II, III.
  • the aircraft on course C can be joined for descent and landing by a third aircraft flying course C" from another airfield, not shown.

Abstract

There is disclosed a method for operating aircraft, in which two aircraft (11) are controlled by a common control arrangement (12) to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.

Description

OPERATINGAIRCRAFT
This invention relates to operating aircraft.
The growth in air passenger transportation is essentially steady at some 5 to 7% per year, effectively doubling in some twelve years.
Clearly, the number of passengers carried to and from any one airport is a matter of the seating capacity of the aircraft used and the frequency of flights. At present, in many cases, and in particular at the principal international airports, the flight frequency is at or near the capacity of air traffic control (ATC) operations, and so larger aircraft are being designed as the only means of coping with the demand.
Unfortunately, the larger aircraft are not viable for a variety of reasons. Prime among these reasons is the requirement that an aircraft is evacuable within 90 seconds. Currently favoured large aircraft designs (capacity twice that of the largest passenger aircraft now flying, the Boeing 747) have full length upper and lower passenger decks - the present 747 range has a forward upper deck bubble only. Timely evacuation demands passengers from a full length upper deck evacuate on slides, but the ground-contacting speed is unacceptable at some 50 kph. In any event, such double deck designs would require major reconstruction of airport gate arrangements and, unless the wings folded for ground operation, major redesign of apron and taxiway arrangements as well. Folding wings are a mechanical complication best done without.
For these and other reasons aircraft substantially larger than those flying today are unlikely to be operated from existing facilities and within existing safety regulations.
Another solution to the problem would be the construction of new airports, or extending existing airports, both long term and in any event unlikely solutions bearing in mind the difficulties of locating and obtaining planning consent for suitable sites and the very major costs involved.
The present invention provides an alternative solution to the problem of growing traffic volume, while avoiding at least the major snags and, happily, at relatively moderate cost.
The invention comprises a method for operating aircraft, in which two aircraft are controlled by a common control arrangement to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot. The aircraft may take off and/or land on parallel runways, and may take off and/or land simultaneously. The aircraft may fly together to pick up parallel automatic landing system guidance beams and then land under independent on-board control using such beams.
One aircraft may slave to the other, and may do so during take off, climb, cruise and/or descent.
The aircraft may have a relative position-error feedback spacing arrangement.
The aircraft may have an absolute position control system, which may be determined by satellite reference and/or by inertial guidance systems such for example as ring-laser gyroscope systems.
The aircraft may fly the same course together from and to parallel runways, and may be, after take off and before landing, more widely spaced apart than the runway separations or fly in close formation to take advantage of vortex air currents.
The aircraft may take off together then fly to different destinations, or may converge from different originating airfields to land together - landing aircraft may fly together in a landing stack. The invention also comprises equipment for operating aircraft adapted to control two aircraft to fly a parallel course within a common ATC slot.
The equipment may comprise transmitter means adapted for a master aircraft and receiver means adapted for a slave aircraft, said transmitter means transmitting control signals to be received by said receiver means. Said transmitter means may be of such short range or otherwise adapted (as for example by unique "handshake" codes) to transmit signals receivable by said slave aircraft alone (or said slave aircraft and another or other slave aircraft in the event three or more aircraft are flown in a single slot) and not to be received by any other aircraft in the vicinity.
The equipment may comprise transmitter/receiver or transponder means for each aircraft, which may be capable of
(a) reporting the relative positioning of the aircraft;
(b) controlling the adjustment of the relative positioning for station-keeping purposes.
Where a collision avoidance system such as TCAS (Bendix/King) is in operation the equipment may include suitable interfacing arrangements to allow the collision avoidance system to acknowledge the presence of the other aircraft but issue no warning or initiate no evasive action in regard to it. The equipment might even be incorporated into such a collision avoidance system (or such system incorporated into the equipment). The collision avoidance system would in any event be required to calculate collision avoidance procedures on the basis of two (or more) aircraft flying in formation, possibly avoiding a collision with two (or more) other aircraft also flying in formation.
Embodiments of equipment and methods according to the invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which :-
Figure 1 is a plan view of two aircraft taking off on adjacent, parallel runways;
Figure 2 is a diagrammatic illustration of a flight path for two aircraft;
and Figure 3 is a diagrammatic illustration of a flight path scheme involving three aircraft.
The drawings illustrate methods for operating aircraft 11 (Figure 1) in which two aircraft 11 are controlled by a common control arrangement 12 to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.
Figure 1 illustrates two aircraft 11 taking off simultaneously from adjacent runways 13. Ideally, the runways will be separated by a some 150 metres, but this may not always be possible, and it may be necessary instead to contemplate a single, perhaps a wide, runway on which the aircraft can take off in formation - in echelon, say, as is often done with military aircraft.
The aircraft 11 may fly together to pick up parallel automatic landing system guidance beams from ALS ground stations 14 (Figures 2 and 3) - which should be arranged to be capable of resolving the aircraft on simultaneous approach - and then land under independent on-board control using such beams.
While simultaneous landing is probably best done in that fashion, as errors involved in one aircraft approaching and in that aircraft controlling the other will be additive, thus putting the controlled aircraft outside the permitted error range, it may be the case that the control can be enhanced overall to cover that situation. In any event, for take-off, cruise and/or descent one or more aircraft may slave to any other. The control arrangement 12 will, for the sake of maximum flexibility, be capable of operating in both master and slave modes - this would mean that aircraft need not be permanently paired, and that control can be passed from one aircraft to the other in flight. At present, take-off is effected manually but (for those aircraft suitably equipped) almost everything else from climb to touch-down is automatic, the occasional landing being effected manually for pilot practice.
Certainly the practice of having dual flight crew on long haul flights - even the practice of having cruise-only capable pilots to give the Captain and First Officer a rest break - may be dispensed with.
The control arrangement 12 can include a relative position-error feedback spacing arrangement, and the nature of that arrangement may depend on the spacing which it is decided should be maintained. The spacing could be so small that an optical system could be effective even in cloud. Radar and collision avoidance bearing and range measuring systems could be used, but, for reasonable spacings, satellite or inertial (e.g. ring laser gyroscope) systems could be used to determine the absolute position of both aircraft, from which relative positioning can be deduced. The aircraft can, as illustrated in Figure 2, fly the same course together from and to parallel runways 11R and L of airfield I and 11' R and L of airfield II. It would, of course, be possible to land sequentially on a single runway if that is all the destination airfield boasted, and this would be feasible for flights from a busy field like Heathrow to a less busy airport.
However, two aircraft can, as illustrated in Figure 3, take off together from parallel runways 11R and L of airfield I and climb together the cruise height CH then fly separate courses Cl to different airfields II, III. The aircraft on course C can be joined for descent and landing by a third aircraft flying course C" from another airfield, not shown.
Thus the idea of electronically "connecting" two similar aircraft together to be equivalent to one aircraft of twice the size and capacity is seen to have wider application generally to the more efficient use of ATC slots enabling airports to handle larger traffic volumes without drastic changes in ground handling facilities - building an extra close-coupled runway and expanding ground facilities at one airport site will usually be preferable to building an entire new airport to handle traffic with which the first can no longer cope. Further increase in capacity can of course be accommodated by flying three or four aircraft electronically connected. It is not necessary that the aircraft fly line abreast, but it is probably better to do that, in close-coupled flying, than line astern. Echelon or V-formation flying can take advantage of vortex air currents.

Claims

1. A method for operating aircraft, in which two aircraft are controlled by a common control arrangement to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.
2. A method according to claim 1, in which the aircraft take off and/or land on parallel runways.
3. A method according to claim 1 or claim 2, in which the aircraft take off and/or land simultaneously.
4. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, in which the aircraft fly together to pick up parallel automatic landing system guidance beams and then land under independent on-board control using such beams.
5. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, in which one aircraft slaves to the other.
6. A method according to claim 5, in which one aircraft slaves to the other during take off.
7. A method according to claim 5 or claim 6, in which one aircraft slaves to the other during climb, cruise and/or descent.
8. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 7, in which the aircraft have a relative position-error feedback spacing arrangement.
9. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 8, in which the aircraft have an absolute position control spacing arrangement.
10. A method according to claim 9, in which the absolute position is determined by satellite reference.
11. A method according to claim 9, in which the absolute position is determined by inertial guidance systems.
12. A method according to claim 11, in which the inertial guidance systems comprise ring-laser gyroscope systems.
13. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 12, in which the aircraft fly the same course together from and to parallel runways.
14. A method according to claim 13, in which the aircraft are, after take off and before landing, more widely spaced apart than the runways.
15. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 12, in which the aircraft take off together then fly to different destinations.
16. A method according to any one of claims 1 to 12, in which the aircraft caverage from different originating airfields to land together.
17. A method according to any one of claims 13, 14 and 16, in which the aircraft fly together in a landing stack.
18. Equipment for operating aircraft adapted to control two aircraft to fly parallel courses within a common ATC slot.
19. Equipment according to claim 18, comprising transmitter means adapted for a master aircraft and receiver means adapted for a slave aircraft, said transmitter means transmitting control signals to be received by said receiver means.
20. Equipment according to claim 19, in which said transmitter means are of such short range or otherwise adapted to transmit signals receivable by said slave aircraft alone and not to be received by any other aircraft in the vicinity.
21. Equipment according to claim 19 or claim 20, comprising transmitter/receiver or transponder means for each aircraft.
22. Equipment according to claim 21, in which the transmitter/receiver or transponder means on each aircraft are capable of
a) reporting the relative positioning of the aircraft,
b) controlling the adjustment of the relative positioning for station-keeping purposes.
23. Equipment according to any one of claims 18 to 22, incorporated in (or incorporating) a collision avoidance system suitably adapted to give warning of and if appropriate compute avoidance measures for impending collision.
24. In combination, a dual runway arrangement, two airplanes and equipment according to any one of claims 18 to 23.
25. For operating a method according to any one of claims 1 to 17, from an airport with adjacent, parallel runways or a single runway adapted for dual landing, equipment according to any one of claims 18 to 23, comprising automatic landing system guidance beam arrangements capable of resolving two aircraft approaching simultaneously.
26. Arrangements according to claim 25, operating at different frequencies for the separate approaches.
27. Arrangements according to claim 25 or claim 26, operating using electronic handshake arrangements for resolving the aircraft.
PCT/GB1994/001577 1993-07-24 1994-07-21 Operating aircraft WO1995003213A1 (en)

Priority Applications (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU71936/94A AU7193694A (en) 1993-07-24 1994-07-21 Operating aircraft
EP94921066A EP0710202A1 (en) 1993-07-24 1994-07-21 Operating aircraft
JP7505013A JPH09504390A (en) 1993-07-24 1994-07-21 Aircraft control

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
GB939315389A GB9315389D0 (en) 1993-07-24 1993-07-24 Operating aircraft
GB9315389.8 1993-07-24

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO1995003213A1 true WO1995003213A1 (en) 1995-02-02

Family

ID=10739401

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/GB1994/001577 WO1995003213A1 (en) 1993-07-24 1994-07-21 Operating aircraft

Country Status (5)

Country Link
EP (1) EP0710202A1 (en)
JP (1) JPH09504390A (en)
AU (1) AU7193694A (en)
GB (1) GB9315389D0 (en)
WO (1) WO1995003213A1 (en)

Cited By (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2000010064A1 (en) * 1998-08-11 2000-02-24 Dfs Deutsche Flugsicherung Gmbh Aircraft approach method and instrument landing system for realising this method
WO2000041154A1 (en) * 1998-12-30 2000-07-13 Honeywell Inc. Tcas display and system for intra-formation control with vertical speed indicator
US6641082B2 (en) * 2002-04-01 2003-11-04 Lockheed Martin Corporation Aircraft ferrying system and method thereof
WO2004023426A1 (en) * 2002-09-05 2004-03-18 Massachusetts Institute Of Technology Surveillance system and method for aircraft approach and landing
EP1531340A1 (en) 1998-12-30 2005-05-18 L-3 Communications Corporation Close/intra-formation positioning collision avoidance system and method
EP2597034A1 (en) 2011-11-28 2013-05-29 Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Counterbalanced control stick system

Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
FR2391908A1 (en) * 1977-05-25 1978-12-22 Wieczorek Julien Control of pilotless combat aircraft - uses optical fibres to connect combat aircraft to piloted command aircraft
FR2632755A1 (en) * 1988-06-08 1989-12-15 Thomson Csf System for assisting the movement of mobile units in a grouped formation

Patent Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
FR2391908A1 (en) * 1977-05-25 1978-12-22 Wieczorek Julien Control of pilotless combat aircraft - uses optical fibres to connect combat aircraft to piloted command aircraft
FR2632755A1 (en) * 1988-06-08 1989-12-15 Thomson Csf System for assisting the movement of mobile units in a grouped formation

Cited By (9)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2000010064A1 (en) * 1998-08-11 2000-02-24 Dfs Deutsche Flugsicherung Gmbh Aircraft approach method and instrument landing system for realising this method
WO2000041154A1 (en) * 1998-12-30 2000-07-13 Honeywell Inc. Tcas display and system for intra-formation control with vertical speed indicator
US6271768B1 (en) 1998-12-30 2001-08-07 Honeywell Inc. Vertical speed indicator/traffic resolution advisory display for TCAS
EP1531340A1 (en) 1998-12-30 2005-05-18 L-3 Communications Corporation Close/intra-formation positioning collision avoidance system and method
US6641082B2 (en) * 2002-04-01 2003-11-04 Lockheed Martin Corporation Aircraft ferrying system and method thereof
WO2004023426A1 (en) * 2002-09-05 2004-03-18 Massachusetts Institute Of Technology Surveillance system and method for aircraft approach and landing
US6809679B2 (en) 2002-09-05 2004-10-26 Massachusetts Institute Of Technology Surveillance system and method for aircraft approach and landing
EP2597034A1 (en) 2011-11-28 2013-05-29 Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Counterbalanced control stick system
US9152165B2 (en) 2011-11-28 2015-10-06 Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Counterbalanced control stick system

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU7193694A (en) 1995-02-20
EP0710202A1 (en) 1996-05-08
JPH09504390A (en) 1997-04-28
GB9315389D0 (en) 1993-09-08

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US7093801B2 (en) Positioning system, device, and method for in-flight refueling
US8965671B2 (en) Aircraft taxiing system
US20180181125A1 (en) On-ground vehicle collision avoidance utilizing unmanned aerial vehicles
US10502584B1 (en) Mission monitor and controller for autonomous unmanned vehicles
CN112189226B (en) System and method for controlling ground guidance of aircraft by using unmanned aerial vehicle
US3572619A (en) Airport and runway system therefor
Midkif et al. Air carrier flight operations
WO1995003213A1 (en) Operating aircraft
US9530324B2 (en) Systems and methods for providing optimal taxi clearances
De Reyes et al. Can cargo drones solve air freight's logjams? A drone startup says its big vertical-takeoff flier would be quick to land, load, and take off again
US6498981B1 (en) System for sequencing traffic
US5368257A (en) Variable one way airport
US5441217A (en) Variable one way airport
Holcombe Integrating drones into the us air traffic control system
Vogel Flying the Airbus A380
Weber et al. Avionics to enable UAS integration into the NextGen ATS
Cotton Formulation of the air traffic system as a management problem
Rabe et al. High Altitude: Among and Above Commercial Transport
Delgado et al. An assessment for uas depart and approach operations
Hoffman et al. Navigation and guidance requirements for commercial VTOL operations
Toratani et al. Study on Urban Air Mobility Corridor Design in the Vicinity of Airports
Duke et al. Six hours and 26 minutes into a four hour, 40 minute flight
Weber Airborne Technology for Advanced Vehicle Operations in the Next Generation ATS.
Andrew Subsonic and supersonic operations in the years ahead
Vagner et al. Procedures for Refuelling in Flight in the Airspace of Slovakia

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT AU BB BG BR BY CA CH CZ DE DK ES FI GB HU JP KP KR KZ LK LU MG MN MW NL NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SK UA US UZ VN

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT BE CH DE DK ES FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN ML MR NE SN TD TG

DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 1994921066

Country of ref document: EP

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref country code: US

Ref document number: 1996 578545

Date of ref document: 19960314

Kind code of ref document: A

Format of ref document f/p: F

WWP Wipo information: published in national office

Ref document number: 1994921066

Country of ref document: EP

REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: CA

WWW Wipo information: withdrawn in national office

Ref document number: 1994921066

Country of ref document: EP