Accurate trajectory prediction can improve General Aviation safety in non-towered terminal airspace, where high traffic density increases accident risk. We present ASCENT, a lightweight transformer-based model for multi-modal 3D aircraft trajectory forecasting, which integrates domain-aware 3D coordinate normalization and parameterized predictions. ASCENT employs a transformer-based motion encoder and a query-based decoder, enabling the generation of diverse maneuver hypotheses with low latency. Experiments on the TrajAir and TartanAviation datasets demonstrate that our model outperforms prior baselines, as the encoder effectively captures motion dynamics and the decoder aligns with structured aircraft traffic patterns. Furthermore, ablation studies confirm the contributions of the decoder design, coordinate-frame modeling, and parameterized outputs. These results establish ASCENT as an effective approach for real-time aircraft trajectory prediction in non-towered terminal airspace.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Comparison between a CVAE-based decoder, widely applied in aircraft trajectory prediction, and our ASCENT model employing a query-based decoder. The scenario shows an aircraft take-off: our model, leveraging learnable mode queries, predicts a diverse set of trajectories that also capture the actual aircraft movement, while the baseline only predicts the common traffic pattern at the data-collection airport.
Fig. 2: Overview of our ASCENT architecture. For clarity of presentation, visualizations are reduced to 2D. First, we normalize the historical 3D flight path with respect to the current aircraft pose. Next, we encode this local history using attention blocks and combine it with global context through positional embeddings. To generate multi-modal future trajectories, we employ learnable mode queries that capture potential actions, such as landing or turning.
Fig. 3: Comparison of different coordinate system normalization approaches on trajectories from the TrajAir dataset [ 8 ] . We show the current aircraft position (circular markers), along with historical (11 s) and future (120 s) trajectories. We compare global coordinates (left), object-centered normalization (middle), and our combined positional–angular normalization (right). For each method, the bird’s-eye view is shown on top, with vertical trajectories below. The global coordinate visualization shows aircraft approaching and departing from the runway, which is aligned with the x-axis. Normalizing with respect to the aircraft position moves all centers to the origin, while angular normalization aligns orientations, producing structured clusters of similar maneuvers, such as left and right turns. The top-right plot highlights a higher frequency of left turns, reflecting the left-traffic pattern at the KBTP airport.
Input: 11 s
7Days-1
7Days-2
7Days-3
7Days-4
7Days-Avg
Method
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
Constant Velocity
1.79
4.08
1.90
4.31
1.92
4.30
1.82
4.16
1.86
4.21
TransformerTF [ 45 ]
1.58
3.85
1.69
4.10
1.97
4.36
1.79
4.19
1.76
4.13
STG-CNN [ 46 ]
1.19
2.35
1.36
2.70
1.33
2.67
1.17
2.29
1.26
2.50
Nearest Neighbor
3.13
2.70
1.92
1.99
3.41
2.69
2.59
2.58
2.76
2.49
TrajAirNet [ 8 ]
0.73
1.42
0.81
1.63
0.86
1.72
0.71
1.41
0.78
1.55
TABLE I: Trajectory prediction results on the dedicated TrajAir splits, along with average results across all four splits. All models predict K=5 trajectories. The upper group follows the experiment setup of [ 8 ] (using 11s input). The lower group compares to results from [ 12 ] , using their setup ( 16s input). Models are sorted by average minFDE 5 . Errors are reported in km.
Fig. 4: Qualitative results on scenarios from the TrajAir [ 8 ] 111Days validation set. Visualizations show 11 s of historical aircraft movement (black), 120 s of ground truth future (gray) and predictions from our model (colored). For clearer visualization we exclude predictions with scores below 0.1.
Input: 40 s
111Days
Method
minADE 20
minFDE 20
Constant Velocity
1.85
4.16
TransformerTF [ 45 ]
1.67
3.94
Nearest Neighbor
1.97
2.70
STG-CNN [ 46 ]
1.37
2.35
S-PEC [ 51 ]
1.04
2.18
TABLE II: Prediction results on the full TrajAir test set ( 111Days ). Upper group: following the setup of [ 13 ] , all models use h=40s input and predict K=20 trajectories. Lower group: additional results for our model using the standard setup from the dataset paper [ 8 ] . Errors reported in km.
Input: 11 s
KBTP S1
KBTP S2
Method
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
Constant Velocity
1.83
3.91
1.77
3.80
ASCENT (Ours)
0.36
0.60
0.32
0.56
Input: 11 s
KAGC S1
KAGC S2
Method
minADE 5
minFDE 5
minADE 5
minFDE 5
Constant Velocity
1.77
3.78
1.86
3.96
TABLE III: Trajectory prediction results on the TartanAviation dataset [ 9 ] . The dataset contains additional data from the KBTP airport (same location as TrajAir dataset) as well as data from the towered KAGC airport. Errors reported in km .
Decoder
Coordinate
Normalization
Positional
Flight Parameter
7Days-Avg
Architecture
System
Positional
Angular
Embeddings
Prediction
minADE 5
minFDE 5
CVAE Baseline
Local
✓
✓
✗
✗
0.68
1.33
Mode Queries
Local
✓
✓
✗
✗
0.52
0.98
CVAE Baseline
Global
-
-
-
-
0.48
0.82
CVAE Baseline
Local
✓
✓
✓
✗
0.44
0.80
Mode Queries
Global
-
-
-
-
0.38
0.60
TABLE IV: Ablation study on using different decoder modules (a CVAE-based baseline and our mode query-based model) and output prediction strategies (directly predicting xyz-positions vs. predicting flight parameters). Furthermore, we compare different coordinate modelings: global coordinates vs. local coordinates with different types of normalization. Errors given in km.
Train Dataset
Test Dataset
minADE 5
minFDE 5
TrajAir 111days
TA KBTP S1
0.69
1.25
TrajAir 111days
TA KBTP S2
0.64
1.19
TrajAir 111days
TA KBTP S1*
0.33
0.58
TrajAir 111days
TA KBTP S2*
0.36
0.60
TA KBTP S1
TrajAir 111days
0.32
0.57
TA KBTP S2
TrajAir 111days
0.33
0.57
TABLE V: Cross-dataset evaluation using the TrajAir and TartanAviation (TA) datasets. *Trajectories exceeding the TrajAir dataset recording radius are filtered out.
Latency in ms
Method
B=1
B=4
B=8
B=16
B=32
TrajAirNet [ 8 ]
57
118
191
350
673
ASCENT (Ours)
11
0 13
0 14
0 18
0 17
TABLE VI: Inference latency analysis on a single NVIDIA V100 GPU across different numbers of aircraft ( B ).
Autonomous aerial vehicles operating in shared airspace must predict the future positions of non-cooperative obstacles to plan evasive maneuvers before a collision becomes unavoidable. Unlike cooperative systems that share intent, non-cooperative obstacles such as birds, uncontrolled drones, or debris exhibit multi-modal motion that deterministic predictors cannot adequately represent. Existing methods either rely on recurrent encoders that propagate temporal information sequentially, limiting their ability to capture long-range kinematic precursors of maneuver initiation, or produce point forecasts that provide no distributional information to downstream planners. This paper presents AeroCast, a probabilistic trajectory prediction framework that combines a Transformer encoder with a Mixture Density Network output head to predict per-timestep Gaussian mixture distributions over future three-dimensional displacements. A translation-invariant consecutive displacement encoding and a calibration-oriented training objective address the input design and mode-degeneracy challenges specific to mixture-based aerial trajectory prediction. On a hybrid real-and-synthetic quadrotor corpus spanning nine motion categories, AeroCast reduces Average Displacement Error and Final Displacement Error by approximately 50% relative to the baselines over a five-second horizon, and achieves the lowest negative log-likelihood and Continuous Ranked Probability Score among all compared methods. Ablation analysis identifies velocity input and model capacity as the primary contributors to prediction quality, and positional encoding as essential for long-horizon trajectory coherence. AeroCast inference completes in 0.1ms per sample, compatible with real-time onboard deployment at 100Hz.
Syed Izzat Ullah, Jose Baca
Department of Engineering, Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX 78412 USA
Advanced automation is a key technology for enhancing the safety of ground operations amidst the increasing density of commercial air traffic. While motion forecasting is a well-studied task in autonomous driving, its application to airport surface movements remains underexplored. To enable efficient and accurate prediction in this domain, we propose DESCENT, a transformer-based architecture designed to handle heterogeneous dynamics and strict topological constraints. Our approach features a Potential Reachable Set (PRS) context sampling mechanism that adaptively collects airfield environment context across diverse operational phases. Combined with a detection transformer-based decoder, DESCENT generates accurate trajectory forecasts. Extensive evaluations on the Amelia-10 benchmark demonstrate significant performance improvements over state-of-the-art baselines. These gains are especially pronounced in safety-critical scenarios, where our domain-aware sampling provides critical long-horizon context necessary for safe navigation.
Alexander Prutsch, David Schinagl, Horst Possegger
Institute of Visual Computing, Graz University of Technology, Austria
Building accurate decision-support tools for next-generation air traffic control requires robust trajectory prediction models. We present a flow-matching architecture trained exclusively on historical aircraft trajectories, with no route labels or chart supervision. Trained on 1.15 million Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast trajectory windows collected over the San Francisco Bay Area, the model generates aircraft trajectory distributions that closely match historical traffic, reproducing known airspace structure around San Francisco Airport such as the shape of SFO's published NIITE FOUR departure procedure. Our model is trained directly on the native, irregular ADS-B sampling interval. Trajectory prediction is cast as sequence inpainting using a block-causal Transformer that denoises future state tokens conditioned on the observed history using Conditional Flow Matching or Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models. We compare our architecture against constant-velocity, deterministic-Long Short Term Memory, and Conditional Variational Autoencoders baselines. At matched parameter count, CFM outperforms DDPM by 11-26% in minADE@20, and both generative objectives surpass the CVAE baseline by 31-41%. We further show that the error degrades gracefully with prediction horizon, and the architecture remains effective when retrained on temporally decimated feeds. Lastly, we sample K independent completions, yielding spatial probabilistic occupancy estimates that can serve as input to downstream conflict-risk estimation.
Mathurin Petit, Emir Torun, Louis Brusset +2
École Polytechnique, Palaiseau, 91128, France · Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, 10623, Germany · Mines Paris–PSL University, Paris, 75006, France +2