Regional Cooperation in ATM - Eurocontrol · 38 Visits and agreements. Skyway 38 - Autumn 2005...

Towards a more efficient provisionof air navigation services

Maastricht UACCEATSFunctional airspace blocks

ICAO, IATA and IFATCA:Cooperation is keyto safer aviation

RegionalCooperation in ATM

Skyway is a quarterly publication of the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation, EUROCONTROLVolume 9, Number 38, Autumn 2005

RegionalCooperation in ATMTowards a more efficient provisionof air navigation services

Maastricht UACCEATSFunctional airspace blocks

ICAO, IATA and IFATCA:Cooperation is keyto safer aviation

Skyway Magazine is aEUROCONTROL publication.Articles appearing in this magazinedo not necessarily reflectEUROCONTROL’s official policy.

PPuubblliisshheerr:: Víctor M. AguadoMMaannaaggiinngg EEddiittoorr:: Gerhard StadlerEEddiittoorr:: Lucia [email protected] EEddiittoorriiaall TTeeaamm:: Christos Petrou, Jean-Jacques Sauvage LLiinngguuiissttiicc AAddvviisseerrss:: Language Service (DGS/LSEC)LLaayyoouutt:: Frédérique FyonPPhhoottooggrraapphhyy aanndd pprree--pprreessssccoooorrddiinnaattiioonn:: Christian SampouxPPrriinnttiinngg:: EUROCONTROL Logistics andSupport Services, Bureau DGS/LOG

Articles, photographs and letters fromreaders are welcome. Whilst every carewill be taken of material submitted forpublication, the Managing Editorregrets that he is unable to acceptresponsibility for any loss or damage.

EEUURROOCCOONNTTRROOLL WWeebbssiittee::http://www.eurocontrol.int

3 Editorial

Focus4 Regional cooperation in ATM:

a challenge for today and for the future

9 Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre:consolidating airspace in the heart of Europe

11 Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre:maximising the benefits of regional cooperation

14 CEATS: a regional ATM solution

20 Restructuring European airspace: functional airspace blocks

Datelines19 EUROCONTROL to launch new air-ground communications

safety action plan

News23 EUROCONTROL is recognised for excellence!

Stakeholder Forum24 ICAO’s perspective on regional cooperation:

cooperation key to safer aviation

26 IATA’s perspective on regional cooperation:addressing European airspace fragmentation

28 IFATCA’s perspective on regional cooperation:at the heart of the global ATM system

Interview30 Dynamic Italy: interview with Massimo Garbini,

Director Airport Operations Department, ENAV S.p.A.

Review32 Multilateration takes off in Europe

35 Investigation into loss of communication

Report38 Visits and agreements

Skyway 38 - Autumn 2005

Edito

rial

3

Dear Readers,

EUROCONTROL is firmly behindregional cooperation initiatives in thefield of air traffic management.

We are convinced that regionalcooperation will enable faster, morecost-effective implementation of ATMfacilities, and – as an added benefit –that it will sustain European harmoni-

sation and integration overall. EUROCONTROL holds that a regional approach is more

efficient than a local approach as it leads to a convergence ofsystems and it does much to promote safety across the con-tinent.

Yet regional cooperation is not only essential for EuropeanStates, but also for our neighbours. States involved in coop-eration initiatives are able to take equal advantage of the ben-efits offered by an efficient, wide-reaching ATM system.

Regional cooperation in ATM paves the way for theachievement of strategic European ATM objectives. I see themost important benefits of regional ATM cooperation asbeing:

Political – closer cooperation in the ATM field fosters clos-er political relations and enhances understanding on a widescale.

Economical – better use of resources and improved eco-nomic stability have a positive impact on regional economicdevelopment.

Costs – sharing resources reduces costs and, in doing so,the area becomes more attractive to airspace users.

Operational – improved organisation of ATC facilities andservices makes it possible to meet user requirements andenhance safety in general.

There are a number of regional developments in existencetoday, including those managed by States and air navigationservice providers; they are operated under the auspices ofICAO, the European Commission and EUROCONTROL. Therehave also been some recent bilateral initiatives exploring theavenues towards future functional airspace blocks. Given thevariety of current developments, it seems to me that there isan urgent need to tackle the issue of overall network coher-ence. By coordinating these developments, we will be in astronger position to contribute to the optimisation of the pan-European aviation network as a whole.

Víctor M. AguadoDirector General

Chers lecteurs,

EUROCONTROL soutient activement les initiatives decoopération régionale dans le domaine de la gestion du traficaérien.

Nous sommes convaincus que la coopération régionalepermettra une mise en oeuvre plus rapide et plus efficientedes installations ATM et qu’elle favorisera, par ailleurs, l’har-monisation et l’intégration au niveau européen.

EUROCONTROL considère l’approche régionale plus effi-cace que l’approche locale parce qu’elle conduit, à terme, àune convergence des systèmes et qu’elle contribue aussi aurenforcement de la sécurité à l’échelle du continent.

En tout état de cause, la coopération régionale n’est pasun impératif uniquement pour les États européens, mais aussipour nos voisins. Les États qui s’associent aux initiatives decoopération peuvent, eux aussi, tirer pleinement parti desavantages que procure un système ATM performant de gran-de envergure.

La coopération régionale dans le domaine de la gestiondu trafic aérien ouvre la voie à la réalisation d’objectifs straté-giques européens en matière d’ATM. Ses principaux avan-tages me semblent être les suivants :

politiques – le renforcement de la coopération dans ledomaine ATM favorise le resserrement des liens politiques etla compréhension sur une grande échelle ;

économiques – une meilleure utilisation des ressources,une intégration plus poussée et une plus grande stabilité éco-nomique ont une incidence positive sur le développementéconomique régional ;

financiers – le partage des ressources se traduit par unediminution des coûts, ce qui rend la région plus attractivepour les usagers de l’espace aérien ;

opérationnels – une meilleure organisation des installa-tions et services ATC permet de répondre aux demandes desusagers et d’améliorer la sécurité en général.

On dénombre, à l’heure actuelle, une série d’initiatives decoopération régionale, dont certaines sont gérées par lesÉtats et les prestataires de services de navigation aérienne,sous les auspices de l'OACI, de la Commission européenneet d’EUROCONTROL. Viennent s’y ajouter plusieurs initiativesbilatérales récentes, qui explorent la piste des futurs blocsd’espace aérien fonctionnels. Eu égard à la variété des déve-loppements actuels, il me paraît urgent de veiller à la cohé-rence globale du réseau. En coordonnant ces développe-ments, nous serons mieux armés pour contribuer à l’optimi-sation du réseau aéronautique paneuropéen dans sonensemble.

Víctor M. AguadoDirector General

4

A challengefor today and

for the future

A challengefor today and

for the future

Regional cooperation in ATMRegional cooperation in ATM

Together, aviation and tourismform the world’s largestindustry – contributing morethan 10% of the global econ-omy.

A safe and efficient aviationsystem is a fundamental pre-requisite for a healthy busi-ness environment. Air trans-port is a growth industry. It isexpanding 2.4% faster thanGDP rates on average.

Not surprisingly, airlines andpassengers, who are theones that finance the ATMinfrastructure, are demandingefficient solutions becausetraffic in Europe is growing –and is expected to double by2020.

Governments and serviceproviders need to ensure thatthey develop their ATM infrastructure tomeet future growth and enhance safe-ty and security levels. Isolated ATCservice providers have limited chancesof meeting the challenge because inan international environment the futurelies in regional cooperation and har-monised regional systems.

Experience has shown that there aresubstantial opportunities in increasingairspace capacity and the efficiency offlight operations through regional andsub-regional ATM cooperation. Futurenational and regional ATM strategiesmust be linked because each State isan element of the complex ATM net-work.

The ICAO Global Air Navigation Planfor CNS/ATM Systems recommendsthat “The basis of developing a global,integrated ATM system will be anagreed-to structure of homogenousATM areas and major international traf-fic flows.” The ICAO European RegionTransition Plan to CNS/ATM identifiesthe need for “efficient coordinationbetween adjacent FIRs”.

Regional ATM cooperationcovers all activities, meas-ures, agreements, plans andprogrammes by which groupsof neighbouring States and/ortheir air navigation serviceproviders (ANSPs) undertaketo achieve commonly agreedobjectives and/or to shareservices and resources inorder to enhance ATM per-formance. The role of EURO-CONTROL is to add valuethrough cooperation agree-ments so as to achieve theOrganisation's objectives ofaccelerating the establish-ment of a uniform EuropeanATM system in European air-space and at and around airports.

The institutional and strate-gic basis for stimulatingregional ATM cooperation

can be found in the revised EURO-CONTROL Convention, Statute of theAgency, the European ATM 2000+Strategy and the EC Single EuropeanSky. The EUROCONTROL Agencyincludes the regional development ele-ment in its vision and strategy.

The overall objective of the EuropeanATM, as defined within the EURO-CONTROL Convention and theEuropean ATM 2000+ Strategy, is obvi-ously of a regional cooperative nature.ICAO, EUROCONTROL and IATA sup-port the need to avoid proliferation ofATC Units and infrastructure. RegionalATM cooperation aims at performanceefficiencies consistent with this goal.

Whilst the EUROCONTROL pro-grammes adequately address the issueof harmonisation and integration ofATM in Europe, a structured approachto regional ATM cooperation is neededto achieve the ultimate objectives of theATM 2000+ Strategy (and subsequent-ly any Master Plan derived from it suchas SESAME) more expeditiously, effi-ciently and cost-effectively. Therefore,

the Agency has developed a regionalATM cooperation strategy that:

■ encourages regional ATMcooperation;

■ ensures support and facilitationfor existing initiatives;

■ identifies possible new areasof cooperation.

Regional ATM cooperation will allowfaster, more cost-effective implementa-tion of ATM facilities and will sustainEuropean harmonisation and integra-tion. The underlying rationale for asound strategy is that the ATM Strategy2000+ and the Single European Sky(SES) initiative does not need to beimplemented at the same speed inEurope due to the economical, techni-cal, operational and institutional environ-ments which vary from one sub-region toanother. Therefore, a regional approachis a more efficient tool towards conver-gence of systems implementation forEurope as a whole.

The application of regional ATM cooper-ation should not be strictly limited to theEuropean Civil Aviation Conference(ECAC) area but should also addressStates at the periphery of ECAC that areinterested. Outside the ECAC area,there is a clear wish to cooperate underthe auspices of ICAO through EURO-CONTROL in the execution of regionalactivities.

Within Europe and at its interfacesthere is a full range of initiatives on ATMcooperation. Regional ATM coopera-tion can take a wide range of configu-rations. It can result in uniform air trafficservices provision, but it can also belimited in scope to cover common pro-curement and/or shared use of ATSsystems, software and data.Furthermore, it can be restricted tocooperation in a number of ATS arease.g. planning, training and workingmethods, ATM coordination mecha-nisms or to find practical solutions toproblems related to airspace structure,routes and capacity.

Skyway 38 - Autumn 2005 5

Focu

s

By Jean-JacquesSauvage,Head of theCabinet ofthe DirectorGeneral, and

Willy Depouillon,StakeholderImplementationService (DAP/SIS)

Different regional developments arecurrently under way, either at the initia-tive of the States concerned or underthe auspices of EUROCONTROL orICAO. These differ in nature and scope.They are:

ACB(ATM Cooperation in the Balkans):a programme of ATM cooperation inthe Balkans launched in 1999 byAlbania, FYROM and Greece, with theaim of establishing common ATM plan-ning by the three States. The majorobjectives are the promotion of theATS relations to improve air navigationservice provision, the encouragementof civil-military cooperation and har-monisation and the gradual integrationof the ATS systems at the technicaland operational levels.

ACE (ATM Cooperation andCoordination in South-Eastern Europe): an initiative in South-Eastern Europefollowing the signature of aMemorandum of Understanding in2003 between Bulgaria, Moldova,Romania and Turkey with a view toimplementing regional harmonisationand integration mechanisms. With the support of ICAO and EURO-CONTROL, the parties will cooperateand coordinate their actions in the fol-lowing ATM areas: safety, capacitymanagement, ground communicationsinfrastructure, 8.33 kHz expansion,navigation, surveillance, automateddata processing, aeronautical informa-tion services, human resources man-agement and training, R&D and airnavigation charges.

AEFMP (Algeria, Espana,France, Morocco, and Portugal):an Air Navigation Systems Harmoni-sation Plan signed in December 1996by Algeria, France, Morocco, Spainand Portugal relating to the technicalharmonisation and integration between

the air navigation systems of these fiveStates. The general objectives of theAEFMP initiative are the harmonisationof air navigation service provision of thefive States, the optimisation of the sur-veillance function and radio coveragevia the updating of the installations andthe sharing of data and infrastructure,the improvement of voice communica-tions between adjacent ATC unitsthrough networking or standardisedsignalling, the harmonisation of techni-cal components of ATC systems byadopting common standards andspecifications and the improvement ofATM by means of the implementation ofnew routes, airspace structures andcommon procedures.

ASATC(Air Safety and Air Traffic Control):a project for the Western Balkansfinanced by the European Commissionand executed by EUROCONTROL withthe participation of the JAA. It aims tosupport the Western Balkan States ofAlbania, Bosnia and Herzegovina,Croatia, FYROM and Serbia-Montenegro in the establishment ofcompetent civil aviation authorities, thedevelopment of regulations and proce-dures for aviation safety, the develop-ment of air navigation services to inter-national standards, the preparing andadoption of strategies and policies fordeveloping air transport and the devel-opment of human resources by trainingof CAA and ANSP staff.

BANC(Baltic Air Navigation Cooperation):initially, a regional initiative betweenthe three Baltic States and Poland witha view to creating one common FIR inthe Baltic Sea, it has now become aninitiative between Lithuania andPoland, to be explored with the otherBaltic States aiming at coordinatingnational plans for their respectiveCAAs and ANSPs.

CASO (Trans-Caucasus AirspaceOrganisation): regional development betweenAzerbaijan, Armenia and Georgiaunder the auspices of ICAO to enableand facilitate harmonisation of the airnavigation systems of the SouthCaucasus States, to define problemareas and prioritise tasks relating to theprovision and operation of the ATSservices and facilities and to provideguidance to regional projects.

CEATS UAC (Central European Air Traffic ServicesUpper Area Control Centre):the agreement signed in 1997, aims tocreate a single unified air traffic controlsystem in Central Europe for the upperairspace of Austria, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Croatia, the CzechRepublic, Hungary, north-eastern Italy,the Slovak Republic and Slovenia. Theexact geographical scope of activitiesand date of operation are currently underdiscussion between these eight States.

EMAC (Europe-Middle EastRegional Coordination):a European/Middle East regional devel-opment initiated in 2003 by Cyprus,Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria,based on an agreement between theseStates, addressing cooperation andcoordination to be provided by EURO-CONTROL relating to the following ATMareas: ATM, safety, training, air naviga-tion charges and consultation with theusers.

FABA: an EC initiative launched in 2005 aim-ing at the early implementation of theSingle European Sky in the Balkanswith the support of EUROCONTROL,ICAO, NATO, Albania, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Italy,FYROM, Greece, Romania, SerbiaMontenegro and UNMIK1.

Focu

s

6

The main existing regional developments

Maastricht UACin operation since 1972 and responsi-ble for air traffic control in the upper air-space of Belgium, the Netherlands,Luxembourg and the North-West ofGermany. It is the first example of func-tional airspace consolidation in Europe,working on the basis of operationalrequirements and major traffic flowsrather than State boundaries.

NUAC (Nordic ANS Cooperation):under development, addressing initiallythe upper and lower airspace ofDenmark and Sweden, with the optionto also include other parts of the Nordicairspace. The agreement is aimed atthe harmonisation of ANS within the twoStates and the exchange of views andinformation.

RADA(Regional Air Navigation ServicesDevelopment Association):an initiative launched in 2003 by theANSPs of Armenia, Azerbaijan,Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova andUkraine. The primary goals of theAgreement are the exchange ofexperience and development of jointprojects on CNS/ATM systemsimplementation; the optimisation ofoperations and infrastructure, coop-eration in the field of civil/militarycoordination, of AIS developmentand of Global Navigation SatelliteSystem implementation and thedevelopment and harmonisation ofATC systems in line with ICAO andECAC policies and EUROCONTROLprogrammes.

In addition to these regional develop-ments, the EU States were invited bythe European Commission to submitbefore the end of the year proposals forthe reorganisation of their airspace intoFunctional Airspace Blocks (FABs)which should be justified by opera-tional, economic and safety cases, asprovided for in the Single European SkyRegulations. In this context, NATS2 andIAA3 commissioned a study to examinethe options for establishing an FAB inthe UK and Ireland’s joint airspaces.ROMATSA Romania and ATSA Bulgariapresented to the EC a joint proposal forcreating the prerequisites for the estab-lishment of an FAB open to the otherparties to the ACE Memorandum ofCooperation and other States in theRegion. The French and Swiss ANSPsDSNA and skyguide also launched astudy in order to evaluate the addedvalue of an FAB approach betweenthese two States. Aena of Spain andAna of Portugal as well as Naviair ofDenmark and LFV Group of Swedenadopted a similar approach.

However, the optimal solutions shouldbe assessed on the basis of sectorisa-tion, as well as operational, technical,economic and political requirements.In this respect, the EUROCONTROLAgency can assist the EuropeanCommission and States in the field ofairspace design in support of thedevelopment of FABs. This supportwould be based on:

■ the definition of a future route net-work based on traffic demand andtaking into account military require-ments;

■ the delineation of sector families(sectors closely related to oneanother, for example sectors feedingtraffic into major airports);

■ the grouping of the sector familiesinto a coherent FAB using additionalcriteria.

The most important benefits of regionalATM cooperation are mainly economi-cal and operational.


Focu

sMaastricht UACBelgiumGermany (Hanover UIR)LuxembourgThe Netherlands

Middle EastRegionalDevelopment(EMAC)CyprusEgyptJordanLebanonSyria

Baltic StatesRegionalCooperationinitiativeEstoniaLatviaLithuaniaPoland

Nordic ANSProgrammeDenmarkFinlandIcelandNorwaySweden

Regional cooperation

ATM Cooperationin the Balkans(ACB) AlbaniaFYROMGreece

ATM Cooperationin South-EasternEurope (ACE)BulgariaMoldovaRomaniaTurkey

AEFMP PlanAlgeriaFranceMoroccoPortugalSpain

Air Safety and AirTraffic Control(ASATC)AlbaniaBosnia and HerzegovinaCroatiaFYROMSerbia-Montenegro

Trans-CaucasusProject (CASO)AzerbaijanGeorgiaArmenia

CEATSAustriaBosnia and HerzegovinaCroatiaCzech RepublicHungaryItaly (Padua UIR)SloveniaSlovak Republic

RADA GroupArmeniaAzerbaijanGeorgiaKazakhstanMoldovaUkraine

1 - UnitedNations InterimAdministrationMission in Kosovo

2 - National AirTraffic Services, UK

3 - Irish AviationAuthority

The optimisation of the EuropeanATM network, a key objective in theEUROCONTROL strategy, will benefitfrom regional cooperation, throughthe:

■ progressive reduction of airspacefragmentation; including furtherincrease of airspace capacity anddevelopments towards functionalairspace blocks;

■ achievement of significant costsavings through the sharing ofknow-how, infrastructure, facilitiesand services in a rational manneramongst participating States;

■ standardisation of procedures andtraining; and

■ reduction of workload for pilotsand air traffic controllers alike,with consequent safety benefits.

Regional ATM cooperation is benefi-cial to States as it enables theachievement of strategic ATM per-formance objectives: safety, capaci-ty, cost-efficiency, security and theenvironment. The role of EUROCON-TROL is to add value through directsupport so as to achieve theOrganisation’s objectives of acceler-ating the establishment of a uniformEuropean ATM system in Europeanairspace and at and around airports.

With regard to safety, most of theexisting EUROCONTROL pro-grammes aim at enhancing safetyEurope-wide. The Agency offersregional and local support for the:

■ development and implementationof safety regulations and safetymanagement;

■ uniform adoption and applicationof safety cases and reportingschemes;

■ common organisation and opera-tion of support services;

■ application of common regula-tions.

With regard to capacity, EURO-CONTROL has already in place a

common capacity planning and man-agement process. The tools andmethodologies are used for all Statesand ANSPs and these could serve toevaluate the potential of any newregional initiative, i.e. route networkchanges, resectorisation measures,consolidation of service provision,etc. The Agency also gives full sup-port to the development of local orregional capacity plans (LCIPs).

The Agency is developing newcapacity enhancement programmesat network level (i.e. the DynamicManagement of the EuropeanAirspace) and ensures the commonapplication of existing programmesand systems. EUROCONTROLshares its experience on the utilisa-tion of common procedures incivil/military cooperation so thatcapacity enhancement based oncost-effective measures is ensured.

With regard to cost-effectiveness,EUROCONTROL is moving towardssetting pan-European processes thatwill ensure consistency between var-ious performance objectives. TheAgency will prioritise those EATMProgrammes that could bring animmediate contribution to capacityenhancement or having the potentialto contribute directly to cost reduc-tions.

Regional ATM cooperation could alsolead to benefits in connection withenvironmental sustainability. Theseconsist of cross-border solutions tooptimise arrivals/departures allowingdirect descents and climbs by trafficin particular in the case of small,multi-fragmented airspace, the coor-dinated allocation of optimum flightlevels and the possible elimination offlight level changes in such airspaceportions.

Finally, regional ATM cooperationcould also provide advantages in thesecurity domain. Well-organised col-laboration will lead to the improve-

ment of the general security climatethrough the shared use of informationand information sources and willallow the implementation of coordi-nated cross-border actions in thesecurity domain.

In conclusion, in a continent asdiverse as Europe, regional ATMcooperation is a key factor inenhancing the performance of ATMas a whole and developing a trulyintegrated and cost-effective pan-European system. The regionalapproach is the appropriate avenuetowards system convergence inEurope.

EUROCONTROL encourages region-al cooperation in ATM matters andconsiders such activities to be animportant element in improving anddeveloping the European ATM sys-tem. Regional ATM cooperation relieson these initiatives as well as on thecontinued close cooperation with thecivil and military aviation authoritiesand the ANSPs of the States con-cerned.

Indeed, as already explained,regional ATM cooperation is amechanism for achieving enhancedATM performance in Europe.Therefore, EUROCONTROL has arole to play in proactively providingsupport to regional ATM coopera-tion initiatives. This role will take theform of promoting and supportingexisting multinational regionalcooperation groups and facilitatingcoordination actions to overcomedifficulties between adjacent states,supporting the functioning of effi-cient and viable regional structuresand identifying new opportunitiesand interfacing areas where coop-eration could lead to importantimprovements and benefits for the aviation community. EURO-CONTROL’s support is aimed atadding value where a tangible con-tribution to the air navigation systemcan be made. ■

Focu

s

8


Focu

sIn operation since 1972, this avant-garde four-State regional cooperationproject, both for civil and military airtraffic control, is the first example offunctional airspace consolidation inEurope, taking due account of opera-tional requirements and major trafficflows rather than State boundaries. Ontop of the safe and efficient provision ofair navigation services, one importantmission of the Maastricht Centre is topave the way for innovative safety,capacity and efficiency-enhancing pro-grammes by conducting pre-opera-tional trials of new operational conceptsand technologies.

Consolidating airspacein the heart of Europe

Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre

The Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre is responsible for air traffic control in the upperairspace (above 24,500 feet) of Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and the north-west ofGermany. To cope with complex patterns of air traffic demand and airspace architecture inthe area, the Centre is organised on a European, rather than a national, basis.

“The Maastricht Centre wasprobably one of the boldest

air traffic management projects of the golden sixties.

It was the first trueconsolidation of airspace

in the heart of Europe, and a remarkable example of

successful Europeanconstruction”.

René Bulin, Director Generalof EUROCONTROL from

1963 to 1978.

By Mireille Roman,Communications Officer,

Maastricht UAC

This year’s developments on theEuropean scene are a poignant reminderthat European construction should notbe taken for granted. After many cen-turies of gory wars, having realised thatsurvival depended precisely on how theycould best join forces in a rapidly chang-ing geopolitical and socioeconomic envi-ronment, the European nations, at thebeginning of the fifties, made a con-scious choice to cooperate. Today, thetriumphs of European cooperation aremany, but before the benefits could bereaped, many hurdles had to be over-come – both on the ground and in theskies.

With the creation of the EUROCONTROLOrganisation at the beginning of the six-ties, the foundations for efficientEuropean cooperation in air traffic man-agement were laid. The decision, by thePermanent Commission of EURO-CONTROL, to create the MaastrichtUpper Area Control Centre on 28February 1964 was one of the early ini-tiatives aiming to cope with the rapiddevelopment of civil aviation andimprove safety, capacity and efficiencythroughout the continent.

On 29 February 1972 at23:05 UTC the newly estab-lished EUROCONTROLUpper Area Control

Centre processed the first aircraft to flythrough its area of responsibility, in theBelgian Olno Sector. It was LTU 121 – aS210 Caravelle- departure Lanzarote,inbound for Düsseldorf. For the first time,traffic in one country was controlled froman international ATC facility located inanother country. This marked the begin-ning of the first regional air traffic servic-es integration initiative in Europe – anadvanced concept for the time.

With the advent of fast jet aircraft in thelate fifties, heralding a totally new air traf-fic management environment, the origi-nal scheme to face the challengesahead was to create a small number oflarge ATC centres to cover the coreEuropean upper airspace. TheMaastricht, Shannon (IRL) and Karlsruhe(D) UACs were all conceived accordingto the same rationale and had a similarvocation: to provide efficient, seamlessair traffic services over a large portion ofmultinational airspace irrespective of

national boundaries, to achieve greatertechnical and operational synergies andto derive financial benefits from jointdevelopments.

Back in 1972, Belgium andLuxembourg were the first nations toentrust their national airspace to EURO-CONTROL. They were followed, shortlythereafter, in 1974, by Germany, whichtransferred the management of theHanover UIR to EUROCONTROL. Oneyear later, in 1975, the transfer of theGerman military sectors (“LippeRadar”) marked the start of exemplarycivil and military cooperation. It was notuntil 1986, after several years of difficultnegotiations, that the Netherlandseventually decided to follow suit andjoined the regional cooperation project.

Today, in 2005, with the strongest trafficgrowth ever experienced in its historywith least delay, the Maastricht Centre isliving proof that forward-thinkingEuropean nations could turn regional

ATM cooperation into safety,capacity, efficiency and environ-

mental benefits for one and all.

With outstanding safetystandards, a remarkableoperational productivitydeemed the highest inEurope by recent bench-marking studies and a

very good cost-effectivenessratio, the Maastricht Centre is the first

example of successful pan-Europeancooperation in the provision of

regional air navigation servicesand an example of successfulEuropean construction. ■

Focu

s

10

The MaastrichtUpper Area

Control Centrebuilding in 1972


Focu

s

A SAFE AND BUSY 2005

The first months of 2005 saw one of thestrongest traffic growths in the last tenyears spanning the whole geographicalarea of the Maastricht Upper AreaControl Centre.

With a traffic increase of 7.5% in thefirst eight months of the year and anoverall reduction of 80% in delays, theyear has yielded the capacity increasegreatly needed by the airspace users.

Daily traffic hit new record levels on 16September 2005, with 4,485 flightsprocessed in one single day, represent-ing an increase of 6% on last year’sbusiest day (4,235 flights processed on10 September 2004).

In parallel, for the first eight months ofthe year, the total economic cost perflight hour controlled was reduced by30% compared to the same period in2004. This development will provide animportant contribution to the objectiveof reducing user charges in the area.

One of the most important challengesfacing the Maastricht Centre in thefuture will be to continue to accommo-

date, with no compromise to safety, anefficient traffic growth while increasingits competitiveness, i.e. reducing thecosts for air navigation service provi-sion. At the same time, if the futurerequirements are to be met in terms ofsafety, capacity and efficiency, it isimportant to maintain investments infuture ground-breaking systems andtechnologies.

PIONEERING ADVANCESIN TECHNOLOGYThe dramatic improvements in currentsafety and capacity levels to accom-modate a possible doubling of traffic by2015/2020 can only be achieved byintroducing a new generation ofadvanced ATC systems. Leading-edge

technologies and ATM concepts will bephased in over the next few years togive controllers the ability to handle farmore aircraft than currently possible,with even higher levels of safety.

The operational potential of a large air-space where national boundaries longago became irrelevant has been con-stantly exploited over the last threedecades. Since it began initial opera-

tions in 1972, the Maastricht Centre hasplayed a pivotal role within Europe as apilot centre for pre-operational trials ofsome of these new concepts and tech-nologies, validating them for opera-tional use, then introducing them intoday-to-day operations – to the benefitof the entire aviation community.

The start of data link deployment overcontinental EuropeThe most fascinating technologicaladvance is epitomised by controller-pilot data link communications(CPDLC), which were trialled atMaastricht as early as 1995. The oper-ational introduction of the new commu-nications medium in the Centre’s brandnew operations room was achieved in2003, with the first CPDLC messageexchanged with Lufthansa flight 462from Frankfurt to Miami, using the newergonomic human-machine interface.

This development marked the begin-ning of operational data link deploy-ment in continental European airspaceunder the aegis of the LINK2000+Programme, a programme which isexpected to deliver, in time, a 10%capacity increase.

For many years, pilots and controllerscommunicating in continental airspacehave done so using radiotelephonyvoice communications. With the adventof controller-pilot data link communica-tions, both parties now have an alterna-tive communication medium, whichthey can use, when appropriate, toexchange routine, non-time-criticalmessages.

Currently, just 2% of all long and shorthaul flights passing through Maastricht

Maximising the benefitsof regional cooperation

Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre

In the first eight monthsof 2005, the MaastrichtUAC total economic costper flight hour controlledwent down to €250, a reduction of 30% on the previous year.It is calculated on the basisof €62 per minute delay.

Note: the figure relating to 2005 refers to the firsteight months of the yearand will change in the light of final yearly data.2002 2003 2004 2005

(first 8 months)

Total economic cost per flight hour controlled

372€ 366€339€

250€

Focu

s

12

The first flight which logged into the new operational system at Maastricht on Wednesday, 18 June 2003, was Lufthansa flight 462 from Frankfurt to Miami. CPDLC connection occurred at08:29 UTC as the aircraft entered the Luxembourg sector at an altitude of 24,000 feet. The firstCPDLC message exchanged between the controller and aircrew was the "Change Frequency"message as the aircraft departed Maastricht airspace and transferred to Reims. The messagedialogue took 32 seconds to complete. The flight left the Luxembourg sector airspace at 08:35UTC and entered French airspace to continue its journey to the USA.

The feedback from the controllers using the CPDLC menu-based messa-ging system is positive. They see savings in voice communication time, abetter workload distribution between the planning and executive control-lers, and the introduction of automation in the system all helping them intheir day-to-day work. The use of CPDLC also helps aircrew and control-lers reduce misunderstandings that can sometimes occur with traditionalvoice communications.

UAC’s airspace (1.4 million/year) usedata link communications. However,this figure will increase substantially inthe near future, as new partners committo join the operations. Currently, the air-lines participating in the data link pro-gramme include American Airlines,British Midland, Continental Airlines,Lufthansa, El Al, Japan Airlines, LTUInternational Airways, Reach, Qantas,Scandinavian Airlines, SingaporeAirlines, Singapore Cargo, UnitedAirlines and US Air, with Air Europa, AirBerlin, Airbus Transport International,Lufthansa shorthaul, Fedex Expressand several other airlines expected tojoin the operations later in 2005.

New Flight DataProcessing System

The technological advances will notend with the introduction of CPDLC. Ina few years’ time, the Maastricht Centrewill implement a new backbone to itsATC infrastructure, the new Flight DataProcessing System. A fundamentaltechnical enhancement due to becomeoperational in 2007, the new Flight DataProcessing System will contain severalkey features, which will accommodatesafely and efficiently the challengesahead in terms of airspace density andcomplexity.

Maximising the benefits of regional cooperation (cont’d)


Focu

s

The new system will deliver severalnew layers of functionality by provid-ing controllers with highly accuratetrajectory predictions – therebyenhancing safety, minimising delaysand reducing aircraft fuel-burn andemissions. It will furthermore allow aflexible sectorisation, medium-termconflict detection functionalities andwork load monitoring functions for aquantitative and complexity rating ofthe traffic load.

A true safety and capacity enabler forthe future, the new Flight DataProcessing System will support thenew operational concepts expectedto emerge in the future (e.g. DMEAN,the Dynamic Management of theEuropean Airspace Network pro-gramme).

OPTIMISING AIRSPACEMANAGEMENT FURTHERThe sixteen ATC sectors currentlyextending over the 260,000 km2 air-space have been designed for maxi-mum efficiency from the air trafficmanagement point of view and tran-scend national borders.

Unquestionable safety, capacity, effi-ciency and environmental benefitshave been generated by this multina-tional cooperation in the past.However sustained airspace optimi-sation and civil-military cooperationare central to enhancing further theperformance of the ATC operationalenvironment and keeping pace withthe inexorable traffic growth.

Current research work points towardsa more flexible and dynamic manage-ment of the airspace, using an opera-tional concept, which will exploit high-end modern ATC technology. The ideais that the future ATC methodologyshould adapt and evolve in line withthe progress in technological support,gradually moving away from a forty-year old legacy system. This ambi-tious goal will involve increasing lev-

els of collaboration between the fourStates.

PROTOTYPE FUNCTIONALAIRSPACE BLOCKThe publication of the first SingleEuropean Sky regulations has given anew, legally binding, impetus to theEuropean airspace consolidationprocess. The Single European Sky leg-islation has laid the groundwork for theestablishment of Functional AirspaceBlocks, following the example of theMaastricht Centre where operationalcriteria rather than national airspacedivisions form the basis of air trafficmanagement principles.

Becoming a certificated air navigationservice provider by the end of 2006 willauthorise the Maastricht Centre tooperate in the Single European Skyenvironment. The fact, however, thatthe political difficulties related to theconsolidation of the respective fournational airspaces were successfully

overcome in the past will certainly easeand speed up the process of creating alarge functional airspace block in thearea, which could possibly extendbeyond current boundaries.

While the cost of flight-related ineffi-ciency in Europe has been estimated at€1 billion per annum, the MaastrichtCentre has long demonstrated theoperational and economic efficiencieswhich can be achieved when nationscooperate.

That, in itself, already represents agiant leap in the direction of the SingleEuropean Sky. ■

Maastricht UAC sectors

cost-efficiency improvements"and requesting "the EURO-CONTROL Agency togetherwith the ANSPs of the CEATSregion, to develop mecha-nisms allowing coordinationand monitoring of the devel-opments of ATM services witha view to enabling integrationof the vertical and horizontalsegments of ATM".

Flexibility as ahigh-level principleThis cooperation has identi-fied a number of high-levelguiding principles for theCEATS Overall TargetArchitecture. The first is thatthis Overall Architecture mustprovide the necessary flexibil-ity to accommodate the diver-sity of national systems. Thetransition path will allowStates to evolve at their ownpace in accordance with theirneeds. The key success fac-tor is that States must be ableto choose their level of inte-gration over time. A technicaltransition will therefore bedefined in order to plan tech-nical improvements from thestart of operations at theCEATS UAC (2009) to the finalperformance of the CEATSProgramme (2015), which

cal concepts providing cost-efficient solutions for theCEATS lower airspace. It isalready stated in the CEATSStrategic Plan that "OneOverall Target Architecturewill be defined and imple-mented, while safeguardinglocal investments. […] Also,more opportunities for com-mon developments andcommon procurements willarise".

EUROCONTROL and theCEATS ANSPs have there-fore decided to develop theCEATS Overall TargetArchitecture, identifying along-term objective for thefuture CEATS CNS/ATM sys-tem, including the CEATSUAC and the national sys-tems. The recent MinisterialResolution confirms thisapproach, supporting"regional integration […] inorder to achieve measurable

PRAGUE

Strategy, Planningand Development Unit

Czech Republic

VIENNACEATS Centre

Austria

Slovakia

Hungary

BUDAPESTResearch, Developmentand Simulation Centre

SloveniaCroatia

Bosnia andHerzegovina

Italy

FORLI-RIMINI

TrainingCentre

A collaborative approach

The implementation of the ATM 2000+Strategy and of the future interoperabil-ity standards will result in a need forimproving the ATC centres in theregion. These improvements must beplanned using a step-by-stepapproach, as a continuous processinvolving both national systems and theCEATS UAC.

In parallel to the implementation of theCEATS UAC, the CEATS air navigationservice providers (ANSPs) haveexpressed their willingness to increaseregional cooperation and define techni-

A regional ATM solutionCEATS

Focu

s

14

The Central European Air Traffic Services (CEATS)project is a far-reaching solution to the sustainedgrowth of air traffic over central Europe. Launchedin 1997, it will create a single, unified, air trafficcontrol system to manage the upper airspace overthe CEATS Member States.

The Central EuropeanAir Traffic Services(CEATS) Programme

The CEATS UAC inVienna will be morethan a new centre in the area, it is alsoan opportunity pavingthe way for an integrated ATM system for the whole region.

By Yvan Fischer,Head of CEATSProgrammeManagementOffice (CMO), and

Nicolas Gautier,Expert, CEATSStrategyPlanning andDevelopmentUnit (CSPDU)

corresponds to the achievement of thestrategic objectives.

Other high-level principles

Four other high-level principles pavethe way for technical cooperation:

■ The Target Architecture is in line withthe progressive improvement of theoverall European ATM system, inparticular with the EUROCONTROLATM 2000+ Strategy, SESAME, andthe Single European Sky (SES) regu-lations and implementing rules.

■ In particular, the CEATS OverallArchitecture supports the require-ments of the SES InteroperabilityRegulation, the implementing rulesderiving from it and the emerginginteroperability standards.

■ The CEATS Overall Architecture alsosupports regional integration, aslong as it is consistent and compati-ble with the overall planning of theCEATS Programme and the imple-mentation of the CEATS UAC. Theaim of regional integration is the pro-vision of common CNS/ATM servic-es and infrastructures for the CEATSarea.

■ Lastly, the CEATS Overall TargetArchitecture takes into account theexisting technical framework andmakes the most efficient use of theexisting infrastructure and systems.It also identifies systems whichwould be more efficiently imple-mented as a single instance atCEATS level, supporting better cost-efficiency within the overall CEATSCNS/ATM system.

Interoperability and systemintegration as key technicalconcepts

The CEATS approach to interoperabilitybenefits from current developments inthe domain of interoperability, notablythe new generation of FDPSs1 (e.g.iTEC and COFLIGHT). For the initialoperation of the CEATS UAC, the inter-operability framework is based on theexisting OLDI2 standard. Following theoverall improvement at European level,the CEATS framework will migrate to fullinteroperability on the basis of theemerging interoperability standardsand the new generation of flight dataprocessing systems.

In addition, the CEATS partners haverecognised that an approach favouringregional integration will provide the fol-lowing benefits:

■ it will permit an overall reduction inthe cost of CNS/ATM at CEATS level;

■ it will contribute to an improvementin the service provided to users,notably in terms of capacity andsafety;

■ in the context of the CEATSAgreement and with the support ofcollaborating parties, the CEATSUAC presents a unique opportunityfor the CEATS area to achieve fur-ther integration.

■ Regional integration relies on theconcept of regional systems, whichwill be shared between CEATSnational systems and the CEATSUAC.

Regional systems

Regional systems are sub-systems ofCEATS CNS/ATM which are moreappropriately implemented as a singleinstance at CEATS regional level.Primarily, these systems will be need-ed for the implementation of theCEATS UAC. However, they can alsoprovide a regional service to thenational ACCs. These regional sys-tems satisfy the parallel processes ofthe implementation of the CEATS UACand harmonisation and integrationwithin the CEATS area. The redundan-cy requirements and sites involved areidentified on a case-by-case basis.Two types of system exist at regionallevel:

CNS (Communications, Navigationand Surveillance) infrastructure■ A CEATS Ground/Ground Network

will provide a link between thenational communication networks ofthe CEATS States by means of a sin-gle common high-bandwidth high-availability digital backbone net-work.


Focu

sUpper Airspace

Lower Airspace

Initial OperationsCEATS UAC

Full OperationsCEATS UAC

Final PerformanceCEATS UAC

CEATS UAC provides ATS to the CEATS Upper Airspace

Progressive integration of national ACCs

2009 2012 2015

1 - FlightData ProcessingSystems

2 - On-LineDataInterchange

■ The CEATS Air/Ground Infrastruc-ture makes the best use of existingfacilities, complemented by newradio sites as required.

■ The CEATS Surveillance Infrastruc-ture provides surveillance coveragefor both upper and lower airspacewithin the CEATS region, making themost efficient use of existing sen-sors.

DPS (Data Processing System)services■ A Regional Surveillance Data

Processing System, based onARTAS3, provides the required sur-veillance data to the CEATS users

■ The CEATS Regional ATMEnvironmental Database ensuresthat a consistent ATM environment(aeronautical information, meteoro-logical information, key ATM systemparameters and information, the lat-est airspace status and ATC con-straints) is available to all CEATSusers.

■ A Regional Flight Data ProcessingSystem ensures that integrated unitsshare consistent flight data informa-tion.

■ A Regional Air/Ground Data Proces-sing System manages CPDLC4 andDAP5 services for the CEATS inte-grated area.

The extent to which each State usesthese regional systems varies over timeand in accordance with the nationalplans of the partners.

Three levels of integrationThree levels of national ACC integrationoffer flexibility in terms of both time andscope for various integration strategies:

■ The first level of national ACC inte-gration corresponds to the minimumlevel of integration. These ACCsexchange information with otherCEATS units using existing stan-dards such as OLDI. This situationcorresponds to that of existing adja-cent units.

■ The second level of national ACCintegration offers an information-sharing environment through aShared Information Pool. It implies ahigher degree of ATM systems inter-operability, based on full interoper-ability. The second level of integra-tion also provides potential solutionsfor fall-back or contingency situa-tions.

■ The third level of national ACC inte-gration relies on shared data pro-cessing systems. These ACCs willbe remote units in which regionalsystems will be the main data pro-cessing facilities used by controllerworking positions. For this higherlevel of integration, the technicalimprovements performed at regionallevel will benefit all lower-airspaceremote units. At the same time,national ACCs may, if necessary,implement a number of additionaldata processing systems at locallevel.

Shared Information PoolThe Shared Information Pool will allowthe various participating stakeholdersto share information, thereby improvingdata consistency within the CEATSregion. It will provide services in orderto manage the following data:

■ ATM environmental data, supportedby the Regional ATM EnvironmentalDatabase;

■ flight data, supported by the futureFlight Data Interoperability Concept;

■ surveillance data, supported by thesharing of surveillance informationand data processing.

Although the Shared Information Pool isprimarily designed for CEATS stake-holders, airport operators and aircraftoperators will contribute to it whenCDM and SWIM6 concepts are imple-mented at CEATS level.

Expected benefitsThe concepts developed in the CEATSOverall Target Architecture provide aflexible integrated framework for theCEATS region. It will contribute to thecost-efficiency of ATM servicesthrough the sharing of data process-ing functions, thereby minimisinginvestments and maintenance costs. Itwill also improve the consistency ofinformation between CEATS stake-holders. This will improve the level ofsafety in the region. Lastly, the inte-grated framework provides an oppor-tunity for concrete and powerful con-tingency-planning solutions for theCEATS area.

Focu

s

16

UpperAirspace

LowerAirspace

SharedProcessingShared Data

CNS RegionalSystems

CNS Services

OLDI

Integrated Level 3(Remote Unit)

Typical User National ACCCompliant SES IOP

Low CostAdapted to local needs

Integrated Level 1(Current Standard Unit)

Typical User National ACCTransitional phase

Optional Target

Integrated Level 2(Interoperable Unit)

Typical User National ACCCompliant SES IOP

Local Data processingAdapted to local needs

ExternalSystems

MilitaryUnits

ADUnits

CEATS UACDPS Service Provision

DPS Regional SystemsDPS Service Provision

3 - ATM SurveillanceTracker and ServerSystem

4 - Controller-PilotData LinkCommunication

5 - Downlink AircraftParameter

6 - System-WideInformationManagement

CEATS: a regional ATM solution (cont’d)

The CEATS Overall Target Architectureand regional concepts will require sig-nificant changes in the way systemsare operated. This will involve address-ing new institutional and legal chal-lenges which are not completely cov-ered by the current CEATS Agreement.At the same time, this regionalapproach provides a number of con-crete perspectives for future develop-ments in relation to the Single EuropeanSky and functional airspace blocks.

INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS

The issueThe CEATS Agreement states that theCEATS UAC should be a unit of theEUROCONTROL Agency, as is theMaastricht UAC today.

As early as 2001, the Resolution of thefirst Ministerial Conference on CEATSrequested the EUROCONTROLAgency to "develop proposals withinthe framework of the CEATSAgreement and the revised EURO-CONTROL Convention for the partici-pation of the national air navigationservice providers of the CEATS Statesin the operation of ATS in the upperairspace of the CEATS region". Furtherdevelopments relating to the separa-tion of service provision and regulato-ry functions and the development ofthe Single European Sky tend to favourthe corporatisation of service provi-sion.

The studiesThe Legal Service and the CEATSProject Team have put their creativityto good use and investigated severalpossibilities. The first avenue was tolook at the possibilities offered byArticle 2.5 of the revised EURO-CONTROL Convention stating: “Inorder to facilitate the execution of itstasks, the Organisation may, by deci-sion of the General Assembly, createundertakings governed by specificarticles of association governed either

by public international law or by thenational law of a Contracting Party, oracquire majority shareholdings in suchundertakings.” It gives the Organisa-tion the legal framework to create pri-vate law entities if it is felt that thiswould be a more appropriate way ofdischarging its responsibilities.

It should be noted that although therevised Convention is not yet in forcethe legal situation allows the earlyimplementation of the provisions ofArticle 2.5.

Under the terms of Article 2.5, theundertaking may be governed by inter-national law or by the law of one of theMember States. Both options werestudied and a first conclusion was thatthe international-law option did notpresent noticeable advantages. Thenational-law option, on the other hand,did not appear to create any specificproblems. Lastly, the acquisition of amajority shareholding was investigatedbut deemed irrelevant in the context.

Another option investigated was thecreation of a European EconomicInterest Group. Again, no real advan-tage could be identified; on the con-trary, there were several legal impedi-ments. In the same way, the creation of

a European Company ("SocietasEuropaea") was analysed and dis-carded, at least as an initial step.

Lastly, national law was furtheranalysed. The first question was easi-ly answered: given that the CEATSUAC was located near Vienna,Austrian law appeared to be the obvi-ous choice, and no legal impedimentsunder the national laws of Austria wereidentified with respect to the require-ments of CEATS. The second questionwas the corporate form of the under-taking. Again, a number of possibili-ties were investigated and the bestoption appeared to be a limited liabili-ty company (GmbH).

The above conclusions were present-ed to the CEATS States and air navi-gation service providers. There was amajority in support of the CEATSGmbH as the institutional model.

The role and expectations of the airnavigation service providers were alsodiscussed. The message was tobecome shareholders of the GmbH,accepting that EUROCONTROL wouldretain the majority of the shares. Withthis model the ANSPs will be able toplay an active role in the governance ofthe company.


Focu

s

The Vienna Ministerial Resolution of 1June 2005 supports further work in thisarea, requesting that the Agency sub-mit proposals for the creation of theCEATS GmbH to the relevant decision-making bodies under the CEATSAgreement and the EUROCONTROLConvention by 1 June 2006. The under-taking will be established in 2007. Theair navigation service providers are toparticipate in the shareholding andgovernance of the CEATS GmbH. It isalso stated in the Resolution that anamending protocol will become neces-sary in order to make slight modifica-tions to the CEATS Agreement, but thatthe early implementation of this amend-ing protocol must be compatible withthe above target dates.

What does the CEATS GmbHmean for the Organisation?First of all, it is a pioneeringapproach – the first time theOrganisation will perform its tasksthrough an entity other than theAgency. In fact, there will be noAgency involvement once implemen-tation is complete. This constitutes amajor change which is still to beapproved by the EUROCONTROLCommission – indeed, the proposalfor approval will include not only theprinciple but also the detail of theArticles of Association and the deci-sion-making structures between the

Organisation, the CEATS Agreementand the shareholders.

The shareholders would only decideon the major orientations of the CEATSGmbH, and not on the day-to-dayoperations. The management of theGmbH will have a level of autonomyand flexibility necessary to conductthe business of the company, withinthe frame set by the stakeholders andunder scrutiny of the SupervisoryBoard.

The way aheadSetting up the CEATS GmbH is a chal-lenging task. It is a new experience forus in the Agency and for theOrganisation, but it is also a new expe-rience for the air navigation serviceproviders. Extensive work remains tobe done in major areas: defining therelations between the Organisationand the GmbH, writing the Articles ofAssociation, preparing the employ-ment conditions, writing a businessplan and so on, all of it in a very shorttime, since the first proposals must bepresented to the CEATS WorkingArrangements Task Force at the end of2005. Another challenging topic to beaddressed is the transition from thecurrent situation, in which theAgency’s CEATS ProgrammeDirectorate is leading the implementa-tion, to the CEATS GmbH's participa-

tion in the implementation and itsgradual assumption of certain tasks;this transition will last until the start ofoperations.

All this should happen taking care ofthe social impact on the individualsinvolved.

The resolution signed at the MinisterialConference in Vienna has also createdthe possibility of establishing what iscalled the “CEATS Social Forum”. Thisplatform will include representativesfrom the States, air navigation serviceproviders, and European and nationalfederations of trade unions and inter-national professional associations,with the aim of exchanging informa-tion, communicating and consultingon common social issues resultingfrom the implementation of the CEATSUAC.

There are only a few of us working onthe matter, but we like challenges. Wewill do our utmost to make it happen,believing that partnership with theservice providers will ultimately be theinstitutional model providing the bestvalue to the airspace users. ■

Focu

s

18

The building ofthe CEATSResearch,

Developmentand SimulationCentre (CRDS)

in Budapest,Hungary


Date

lines

At a workshop held on 30 September2005 at EUROCONTROL’s premises inBrussels, some 200 participants from awide range of organisations and coun-tries showed strong and unanimoussupport and agreed on the key issuesthat the plan must address. Theseinclude call-sign confusion, undetectedsimultaneous transmissions, radio inter-ference, use of standard phraseologyand prolonged loss of communication.EUROCONTROL will now intensify itswork on causal factors for these issues,and to establish remedial measures.

“Air-ground communications issuesare among the key safety risk areas inair traffic management and for this rea-son we need to redouble our efforts to address them urgently,” said

Initiative which was launched in 2004and addresses a range of communi-cations issues contributing to haz-ardous scenarios including runwayincursions and level bust. It is expect-ed that the action plan will be ready byearly 2006, and implementation willstart immediately. ■

EUROCONTROL to launch a newair-ground communicationssafety action plan

EUROCONTROL, together withstakeholders from across theaviation industry has agreedon the outlines of a new air-ground safety action planto address the safety issuesin this field.

Tzvetomir Blajev, Safety Expert atEUROCONTROL. “At the same time,by improving air-ground communica-tions, we will help to improve the pro-ductivity of air traffic management – a win-win situation where we canaddress both safety and efficiency atthe same time.”

The workshop is part of the ongoingAir-Ground Communications Safety

The EUROCONTROL safety experts: from left, Erik Merckx, Head of the Safety EnhancementBusiness Division, George Paulson, Director of ATM Programmes, and Tzvetomir Blajev.

Regional cooperationhas ever since fea-tured high on theagenda for EURO-CONTROL and itsvarious programmes/projects. Therefore, itis not surprising thatthe Single EuropeanSky (SES) Regulationpicked up on theissue, now providingthe regulatory frame-work required to

enable the restructuring of airspaceon the basis of traffic flows instead of

national frontiers, thereby promotingregional cooperation in ATM.

The main facilitator for regional coop-eration in the SES Regulation is themandatory requirement for the estab-lishment of functional airspaceblocks. With the intention of enablingair traffic control to operate efficient-ly, the SES Regulation calls uponStates to reconfigure upper airspaceinto functional airspace blocks. Thishas become an important factor tobe considered in any discussionsregarding regional cooperation inATM.

Focu

s

20

Regional cooperation in the field of air traffic

management (ATM) has longbeen considered a crucial

component in moving towardsa more efficient provision of

air navigation services.

As early as the 1960s, studies performed by a EURO-

CONTROL Technical WorkingGroup highlighted the impor-

tance and the potential ofregional cooperation.

The Maastricht Upper AreaControl Centre (MUAC) is a

visible result of those earlyefforts to enhance regionalcooperation and harmonise

and integrate ATM in Europe.However, although the

Working Group proposed a reorganisation

of the airspace of the EUROCONTROL Member States

with a view to additional initiatives similar to theestablishment of MUAC,

nothing has so far materialised.

Functional airspaceblocks

Restructuring European airspace

By AndersHallgren,Airspace,

FlowManagement

and Navigation(DAS/AFN)

But what is a functional airspace block?There is no easy answer to this ques-tion, although the Regulation itselfgives some indications by definingwhat actually makes a particular blockof airspace functional. From this defini-tion (see Framework Regulation, Article 2), it is apparent that futureimplementation of functional airspaceblocks will need to fulfil three overridingattributes which are central to the func-tionality of an airspace block, namely:

■ design on the basis of operationalrequirements;

■ more integrated management of theairspace; and

■ delineations free from the con-straints of national borders.

In addition, the Airspace Regulationstates that the functional airspaceblock should take account of trafficflows, and meet a set of seven criteria,including criteria such as optimum useof airspace and overall added value.

Over and above this, the SESRegulation gives no indication of whatmay constitute a functional airspaceblock. Furthermore, during the stake-holder consultation undertaken in sup-port of the development of a responseto a mandate issued by the EuropeanCommission to EUROCONTROL (ask-ing for support for States in their prepa-rations for the establishment of func-tional airspace blocks), it was agreedthat there is no single blueprint for whata functional airspace block may be. Itwould be considered a functional air-space block, providing it fulfils theattributes of the definition and is able tomeet the seven criteria of the AirspaceRegulation.

The issue of reconfiguring airspace intofunctional airspace blocks isaddressed in the airspace part of theSES Regulation, and it is clear from thedefinition that the design of airspace isa key issue in the development of func-tional airspace blocks. However, it is at

the same time widely recognised thatfunctional airspace blocks are muchmore than an airspace design issue.The establishment of functional air-space blocks, like any regional cooper-ation in ATM, is a complex process,containing a variety of issues that needto be solved. States have to addressissues of an economic/financial as wellas institutional/legal nature. Coopera-tion with military authorities and adher-ence to an established social dialogueneed to be considered.

Technical compatibility is anotherimportant aspect. It is well known thatcontroller-controller coordination is eas-ier and more effective inside an ATCunit than between ATC units. Anyestablishment of a functional airspaceblock must have as its objective thecreation of a technical framework thatwill ensure the same degree of techni-cal interoperability between all sectorsof a functional airspace block, whetherthey are situated within one centre ornot.

Airspace design also needs tobecome more flexible. Currently, FIR1

boundaries and national borders arecreating artificial constraints on theflexibility of sector and route design.Of course, we will still have bound-aries between functional airspaceblocks. However, in the reconfigura-tion process there is a window ofopportunity to make sure that theseboundaries are flexible, and moreimportantly, that they are situated inareas of low interaction, so that theboundaries do not become artificialconstraints on an efficient flow of traf-fic.

Looking at the previous description ofwhat could constitute a functional air-space block, it can safely be conclud-ed that ongoing initiatives with regardto regional cooperation in ATM, such asCEATS2, can be seen as steps towardsfunctional airspace blocks. It can beargued that CEATS is not delineated in

such a way as to be totally free from theconstraints of national borders, andthat it still needs to prove that it satisfiesthe seven criteria of the AirspaceRegulation. However, it was recognisedduring the work on the mandate that theestablishment of functional airspaceblocks is a step-by-step process, sothe current progress in the develop-ment of CEATS can be seen as one ofthe steps towards an optimum function-al airspace block.

As an example, CEATS provides with itsset-up an immediate opportunity tobenefit from increased technical com-patibility. Although the Regulation itselfdoes not require any immediate consol-idation of service provision, it is obviousthat a consolidation of service provisionmay prove to be the most beneficialalternative in meeting the criteria of theSES Regulation, thus enabling a partic-ular block of airspace to be called func-

tional. Through this technical compati-bility together with the already estab-lished forum for an integrated manage-ment of airspace through the CEATSAirspace Planning and ImplementationGroup (CAPIG), CEATS constitutes animpressive first step towards an opti-mally designed functional airspaceblock, and together with the experiencegathered during operations at MUAC, itprovides a wealth of best practices forEuropean States to take into accountwhen entering into discussions on the


Focu

s

1 - FlightInformationRegion

2 - CentralEuropean AirTraffic Services

establishment of a functional airspaceblock.

As stressed by the Functional AirspaceBlocks (FAB) mandate final report, mil-itary involvement in the participation ofStates in the FAB project should beensured from the outset in order tocope with the differing aspects of civiland military use of airspace. In thisrespect, and in line with the generalStatement of EU Member States,CEATS represents a good example ofwillingness to enhance civil/militaryand military/military cooperation,despite the complexity of the varyingstatuses3 of the CEATS Member States.Based on the close involvement of themilitary community in the CEATSProgramme, military representatives

are playing a pro-active role in CEATSairspace planning and implementationactivities, looking for cross-bordersolutions better matched to future mili-tary airspace requirements. At thesame time, efforts are being concen-trated on the development of a militaryadvanced concept that will meet therequest of the Member States “….todevelop proposals within the frame-work of the CEATS Agreement and therevised Convention for the advancedlevel of integration of civil and militaryATM at CEATS UAC….”4

The traffic demand forecast shows asteady increase in traffic. A myriad of

European projects and programmesprovide constant improvements tosupport the service providers in keep-ing up with an ever-increasingdemand. But these improvements canonly alleviate the situation to a certainextent. Meeting the expectedincrease in demand needs a radicalnew and fresh look at the ATM infra-structure and ATS provision. Regionalcooperation and the establishment offunctional airspace blocks are a keycomponent in this task. The cominginto force of the SES Regulations, andin particular the reference to themandatory requirement to establishfunctional airspace blocks, will nodoubt be complementary to the devel-opment of regional ATM cooperationprojects such as CEATS. TheRegulation was developed to supportthese initiatives and it provides theregulatory framework required fortheir execution.

Needless to say, a great deal morework needs to be done, in particularby the States themselves, as they areresponsible for the establishment offunctional airspace blocks. Any majorairspace change is complex and time-consuming, and, in the context of afunctional airspace block, whenaccount is taken of all the otheraspects associated with regionalcooperation, such as economic andinstitutional issues, it is clear that thereconfiguring of European airspaceinto optimally designed functional air-space blocks must be viewed as a

Focu

s

22

4 - Resolutionsigned by 5 States at the MinisterialConference held in Vienna on 1 June 2005

5 - UpperInformationRegions

long-term project. The EUROCON-TROL final report on the EuropeanCommission mandate to support theestablishment of functional airspaceblocks highlights key issues in thevarious areas of interest. The reportdoes not provide the answers, but ithighlights and analyses the major keyissues associated with the develop-ment of functional airspace blocks,and thereby provides a sound basisfor States in their deliberations.

It has taken some time, but with initia-tives like CEATS under way, support-ed by the SES Regulations, we canexpect an acceleration in the initia-tives associated with regional devel-opments. The report from the EURO-CONTROL Technical Working Group,issued some 40 years ago, stronglyrecommended that “the organisationand rearrangement of UIRs5 so as toproduce an international air trafficcontrol system should be exclusivelybased on the technical requirementsof military and civil aviation and thatacceptance of the resulting solutionshould not be obstructed by nationalfrontiers questions”. EUROCONTROLassumed its role in the harmonisationand integration of ATM in the 1960s.Today it reaffirms its commitment andresponsibility by providing the sup-port and expertise necessary andrequired by the States in their effortsto reconfigure European airspace intofunctional airspace blocks with theultimate aim of a more coherent anduniform pan-European ATM system. ■

3 - Five of the eightStates are NATOmembers. Croatia is a PfP country participating in theMembership ActionPlan for fully-fledged NATO membership. The Republic ofAustria is a PfPcountry, while maintaining its neutrality. Based on the DaytonPeace Agreement,Bosnia &Herzegovina has a spatial relationshipwith NATO.


New

s

The Recognised forExcellence site visitThe four EFQM assessors spent theweek of 26 September visiting theAgency and assessingthe degree of deploy-ment of its approachesas described in the Recognised forExcellence submissiondocument. This visit tookthem to the variousEUROCONTROL sitesand they interviewed, infocus groups and indi-vidually, more than 150EUROCONTROL staff.One of the strikingpoints the assessorsnoted was the high levelof pride the interviewees displayed inthe Agency and in their work. They werealso impressed with the very high levelof expertise, innovation, motivation andprofessionalism they encountered. They

recognised that EUROCONTROL oper-ates in a very challenging and complexenvironment and remarked on the factthat its commitment to continuous

improvement is ledeffectively. Finally theyrated the Agency’sstakeholder consulta-tion processes and itswillingness to embraceand manage change asexcellent.

The EUROCONTROLAgency is the first pan-European public sectororganisation to receivethis prestigious recog-nition

Read more about the full EFQM feed-back report and the official handing-over of the R4E certificate by Mr. ChrisLebeer, the CEO of the EFQM in the nextissue of Skyway. ■

Regardless of sector, size, structure ormaturity, organisations need to estab-lish an appropriate management frame-work if they are to be successful. Likemany leading organisations and com-panies in Europe, EUROCONTROLdecided to equip itself with the propertools to face the challenges of the 21stcentury. By becoming a member of theEuropean Foundation for QualityManagement in 1997 and adopting itsExcellence Policy in 2001, the Agencyaligned itself with best managementpractice in Europe. Its Journey toExcellence will take the Agencythrough active and continuousimprovement from this first milestone,‘Recognised for Excellence’, towardsthe European Quality Award (EQA).

Recognised for Excellence is an inter-nationally acknowledged level of excel-lence. It is designed for organisationsthat are well managed and welladvanced on their way to organisation-al excellence. It is based on the fullEFQM Excellence Model. The EFQMExcellence Model was introduced atthe beginning of 1992 as the frameworkfor assessing organisations for theEuropean Quality Award. It is now themost widely used organisational frame-work in Europe and it has become thebasis for the majority of national andregional Quality Awards. It offers appli-cants the benefits of a structuredapproach to identify organisationalstrengths and areas for improvement.Organisations confirmed as Reco-gnised for Excellence are consideredto be one step away from the EuropeanQuality Award Finalist level.

EUROCONTROL isrecognised for excellence!On Friday 30 September, the EUROCONTROL Agency was declared to be a ‘worthy recipient’ of the 'Recognised for Excellence’ accolade by a team of four assessors from the EuropeanFoundation for Quality Management (EFQM). The assessors had spent a week at the variouslocations of the Agency to assess the degree of deployment of its excellence approaches. This achievement represents a major milestone in EUROCONTROL’s Journey to Excellence.

The Agency Directors, the assessors and the “Recognised for Excellence” task force toast ona successful outcome

The European and NorthAtlantic Office of ICAOThe International Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO), which now has189 Member States, operates a num-

ber of Regional Offices withthe primary tasks of assistingthe States in planning andimplementation and of man-aging the Regional AirNavigation Plans (ANP). Toaccommodate the coordina-tion and cooperation betweenthe States in their planningand implementation efforts, aPlanning and ImplementationRegional Group (PIRG) wasestablished in each Region.The ICAO Regional Office inParis serves two Regions,

namely the European (EUR) Regionand its European Air NavigationPlanning Group (EANPG) and theNorth Atlantic (NAT) Region and itsNorth Atlantic Systems PlanningGroup (NAT SPG). We are accreditedto 53 ICAO Member States, includingall EUROCONTROL Member States.

Although the overall goal of ICAO isglobal planning and implementationof harmonised and transparent airnavigation systems, it is at the sametime recognised that regional, sub-regional or in specific cases evennational conditions warrant specialprovisions that would be applicable toa specific area only. It is the role andresponsibility of the Regional Officesto ensure that such special provisionsare implemented only when absolute-ly necessary and within the frameworkof the global provisions that are con-tained in the ICAO Convention and itsAnnexes and associated Standardsand Recommended Practices(SARPs).

Cooperation betweenEUROCONTROL and ICAOTo carry out this function between 53States individually would be an over-whelming task for the Paris Office, andtherefore we fully support the formationof sub-regional organisations andgroupings of States that would coordi-nate and agree on their ideas and pro-posals before bringing them to theappropriate PIRG for further processingwithin the ICAO machinery. EURO-CONTROL is such an organisation, andwe have an excellent cooperation in allareas of air navigation services.

This cooperation normally takes placein three different ways:

■ In some areas, the EUROCONTROLMember States have decided toestablish common regulations thatare detailed to a much higher levelthan the ICAO provisions. This is thecase with the EUROCONTROLSafety Regulatory Requirements(ESARRs) and with the draft imple-menting rules that EUROCONTROLis developing on behalf of theEuropean Commission in follow-upto the Single European SkyRegulations of the European Union.The Paris Office of ICAO followssuch activities closely through par-ticipation in the appropriate EURO-CONTROL working parties andgroups and through coordinationdirectly with the EUROCONTROLtechnical expertise involved.

■ Some of the programmes carried outby EUROCONTROL require amend-ment of ICAO provisions, such as theEuropean Air Navigation Plan(EANP) or the European RegionalSupplementary Procedures (SUPPS)and would therefore have to followthe established ICAO procedures for

such amendments. EUROCONTROLparticipates in the network of theEuropean Air Navigation PlanningGroup (EANPG) as mentioned aboveand of its Programme CoordinatingGroup (COG), and EUROCONTROLis authorised to submit amendmentproposals. The Paris Office of ICAOcooperates with EUROCONTROL inthe preparation of such proposals aswell as in the follow-up actions there-on.

■ It happens quite often that experi-ences already gained or materialalready developed by EURO-CONTROL would satisfy the needsand requirements of other parts ofthe EUR Region or of neighbouringRegions. To avoid 're-inventing thewheel' and to prevent implementa-tion of un-harmonised systems, wewould in such cases call for theassistance from EUROCONTROLand the 'copyright' of EURO-CONTROL systems. An example ofthis cooperation was the implemen-tation of reduced vertical separationminimum (RVSM) over the CaucasusStates and in parts of Rostov FlightInformation Region (FIR) over theBlack Sea on 17 March 2005, inwhich EUROCONTROL played aninstrumental role.

Safety before anything else

EUROCONTROL and ICAO share thegoal of the promotion of aviation safety,and it is our common target to have noaccidents at all. Both parties realised along time ago that through investigationof and learning from accidents thathave happened we shall never meetthat target, and therefore much morepro-active roles have been adopted.EUROCONTROL has not only devel-oped the Eurocontrol Safety RegulatoryRequirements (ESARRs) for its ownMember States but has made valuablecontributions to the development ofICAO global programmes such as theRunway Safety Tool Kit.

Cooperation keyto safer aviation

ICAO’s perspective on regional cooperation

Stak

ehol

derF

orum

24

By Karsten Theil,ICAO Regional

Director –Europe and

North Atlantic

In the Autumn of 2004, the Assembly ofICAO took important decisions withregard to the promotion of aviationsafety when it was recommended toexpand the Universal Safety OversightAudit Programme to cover all safety-related ICAO provisions and to estab-lish the Unified Strategy to RectifySafety Related Deficiencies. TheResolution A35-7 recognizes the chal-lenges faced by States in the imple-mentation of their safety oversight sys-tems, and endorses the concept of aunified strategy to resolve safety-relat-ed deficiencies based on the principlesof increased transparency, coopera-tion, assistance and partnerships,where appropriate.

In keeping with the strategic objectivesof the Organization, the unified strategycomprises two main elements. It aims,firstly, to provide assistance to States,or groups of States, in resolving identi-fied safety-related deficiencies.Secondly, it aims to ensure increasedtransparency and sharing of safetyinformation for use by States when per-forming their safety oversight functions.A key element of the unified strategy isfostering partnerships among States,the industry, regional safety oversightorganizations, financial institutions andother international organizations. In thisrespect, ICAO played a leading role atthe recent Global Summit on RegionalAviation Safety Oversight on 1-3February 2005, Washington D.C. Thesummit was sponsored by the GeorgeWashington University Consortium andthe Federal Aviation Administration(FAA). The unified strategy, as reflectedin Resolution A35-7, is considered tobe a high priority for the Organization.Cooperation of Contracting States isessential towards the success of theprogramme.

Safety is paramount in each and everysector of civil aviation activities coveredby ICAO. Provisions requiring theestablishment of either safety pro-

grammes or safety management sys-tems have already been introduced insome annexes. ICAO is taking the safe-ty management concept one step fur-ther by introducing a proposal to havea single Safety Management Systemapproach covering aircraft, air trafficservices and aerodrome operations. Tothat end, a proposal to amend the exist-ing safety management and safety pro-gramme related provisions contained inAnnexes 6, 11 and 14 will be reviewedby the Air Navigation Commission dur-ing its next session and then circulatedto States for comments. ICAO is also

developing a Safety Management System manual which will provide guid-ance to regulators, operators and serv-ice providers for the implementation ofSafety Management Systems.

Contingency procedures

Should we really have procedures forall contingencies? – The answer to thatquestion is yes and no. – Yes becausesome contingencies are relatively pre-dictable, and no because it is impossi-ble to imagine and plan for all kinds ofcontingencies.

One of the relatively predictable eventsthat will eventually affect the air traffic inthe European Region is a volcaniceruption. On the surface of the Earth,the geographical area affected by avolcanic eruption is normally not verybig, but a volcanic eruption produces

ash that is pushed high up in theatmosphere, where it spreads on theupper winds and has far-reachingeffects. This was experienced when theGrimsvotn volcano in Iceland eruptedon 1 November 2004 – the ash plumerapidly reached flight level 400, and theupper part of the plume entered a jetstream, which transported the ashcloud as far as the Black Sea andTurkey in a few days. In the last stage ofthe eruption, the ash cloud coveredlarge parts of the European Region’sairspace, resulting in considerable re-routings, delays and cancellations offlights.

The experience gained from this erup-tion indicated■ that effective early warning systems

to predict eruptions exist;■ that certain procedures concerning

the prediction of the ash cloudmovement and the distribution ofinformation did not work as planned;and

■ that ATM contingency procedureswere in place for the North AtlanticRegion only.

From the Paris Office of ICAO, we havebrought the global issues identified tothe attention of the InternationalAirways Volcano Watch OperationsGroup, the entity that is responsible forthe procedures for prediction of ashcloud movement and distribution ofinformation. At the same time, we haveestablished a special task force todevelop ATM volcanic ash contin-gency procedures for the EuropeanRegion. The task force is composed ofexperts nominated by Iceland, Italy,Norway, the Russian Federation andIATA, and EUROCONTROL hasaccepted to lead the work and to con-tribute with experience from theCentral Flow Management Unit(CFMU). Thus, this is just anotherexample of EUROCONTROL's partici-pation in activities that covers a lotmore than the EUROCONTROL area. ■


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

In 2004, Member States of theEuropean Union adopted theSingle European Sky initiative.The creation of Function AirspaceBlocks (FABs) was seen as themajor enabler for addressingproblems of European’s frag-mented airspace. Regional coop-eration was advanced in a newinstitutional context which pro-moted transparency, innovationand the restructuring necessaryto sustain a vibrant, successfuland competitive European avia-tion industry.

IATA, together with its member airlines,have long been of the opinion that thecreation of FABs has to be coordinatedfrom a top level by an independent enti-ty in order to cover essential objectivesrelated to the safety, cost effectivenessand efficiency of the European ATMnetwork as a whole.

The creation of FABs is, at present,being addressed by States and theirANSPs, in a combination of bottom-up1

or top-down2 approaches. Althoughprogressive developments are beingconsidered, there is growing concernthat each FAB is being driven by differ-ing principles and commitments.

An IATA Task Force was assigned todevelop a firm position on the expecta-tions from the creation of FABs, irre-

spective of whether abottom-up or top-downapproach is pursued. Inperforming its function,the Task Force reviewedall existing FAB propos-als and developments across Europe.The following outlines the findings ofthe Task Force and the expectations ofFABs from the airline community.

Urgent need to deliverThe success of the Single AviationMarket has resulted in many newentrants to the sector. There is intensecompetition in all segments of theindustry. Fares have fallen significant-ly, attracting even higher demand andstimulating further economic growth.Passengers now demand cheaper airtravel and the whole industry is mak-

ing dramatic changes tocompete in a low-costenvironment.

However, many obstaclesremain as airline losses

2001-2004 exceed US$36 billion andthe cost of fuel continues to put enor-mous pressure on the industry. This isdespite an overall labour productivityimprovement of 34% and 2% to 3%annual non-fuel unit cost reductionssince 2001. This year non-fuel unit costswill drop by 4.5%.

Airlines expect governments andANSPs to play their roles by realisingefficiency gains, responding effectivelyto the needs of a changing industry andenhancing European competitivenessin the context of the Lisbon agenda.

IATA’s perspective on regional cooperation

26

IATA and its member airlines consider it essential that the European Commission’s Single European Sky Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs)concept deliver a more rational and efficient organisation of Europe’s fragmented airspace. The success of the FAB concept will be judgedby the ability of service providers and regulators to agree on a set of basic principles and commitments required for the creation of an ATMnetwork which is safe, cost effective, efficient and meets the demands of longer term traffic growth. All FABs must meet the inherentdynamics of traffic flows and future growth, while ensuring optimum integration of the main hubs. The current FAB developments shouldonly be considered as a first step towards an integrated management of Europe’s airspace and the rationalisation of the associated infra-structure. The objective must be to achieve no more than six FABs in the longer term, covering both upper and lower airspace across Europe.The degree of success of the FABs will be determined by the measurable improvements in overall performance.

Addressing Europeanairspace fragmentation

By Cees Gresnigt,IATA Director Safety,

Operations andInfrastructure –

Europe,North Atlantic and

North America

Stak

ehol

derF

orum

1 - Ireland and theUK; Nordic States,France andSwitzerland, Spainand Portugal,Germany, Belgium,Netherlands andLuxembourg.

2 - EUROCONTROL’sCentral EuropeanAir Traffic Services(CEATS) Upper AreaControl Centre.

3 - PRR no4 April 2001

EUROCONTROL’s Performance ReviewCommission (PRC) has compared theperformance of the European ATM sys-tem against that of the USA. The resultsare dramatic, particularly given thedegree of improvement needs that arenow acknowledged in the USA3.Although, these two markets account formost of the world’s traffic, the differencesillustrate both the scale and scope ofEurope’s fragmentation.

Despite repeated calls for efficiencyimprovements from the airlines, the actu-al costs of service provision haveincreased by 3.1% between 2001 and2003. In 2003 alone, the service provi-sion costs amounted to almost €7 billion,a substantial proportion of the global billfor international traffic. The differences inAir Traffic Controller productivity can beup to 10 times from best to worst whilehorizontal flight inefficiencies are esti-mated to cost airlines an additional €1 billion per annum.

The way forward

Airlines require the Single EuropeanSky to deliver enhanced safety, costeffectiveness and efficiency, whilstensuring an optimum level of capacityto meet demand. The transfer of certaincompetencies by the EU MemberStates to the European Commissionmust result in a radical improvement inATM performance throughout Europe.

The assessment for the reconfigurationof Europe’s airspace into FABs, basedon the major traffic flows, determinesthat no more than 6 FABs may berequired and that current proposalsmust seek further development tomigrate towards this enhanced level ofintegration and rationalisation. Any FABimplementation proposal should com-ply, as a minimum, with the listed basicprinciples and commitments that areoutlined below.


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

27

CommitmentANSPs move towards a single managementand operate under a single operationalconcept and safety case

Common safety, economic, airspace andcompetition rules ensuring a level playingfield

Common infrastructure planning leading toa rationalisation of ATC facilities

Common ATCO training and measurableproductivity and flexibility improvements

Efficiencies in support costs through common systems and working practices

Cost effectiveness improvements achievedand shared by all stakeholders

Community funds made available to support any accelerated implementation

Constructive dialogue with social partnersthroughout the transition

PrinciplesTransparent enhancement of safety levelsthroughout the network

Airspace redesign based on traffic flowswith the optimum integration of major hubs

Integration of both upper and lower airspace, with no artificial boundaries

Dynamic and flexible management of airspace both within and between FABs

Assurance of enhanced intra and inter FABinteroperability to optimise network performance

Clear Business Case driven approach withfull User consultation

Implementation via phased transition whileutilising existing investments

Transition to a single unit rate reflectingthe efficiency gains achieved

IATA’s principles and commitments for FABs

The extent to which each FAB proposalcontributes towards the success of theSingle European Sky will be judgedagainst measurable airspace userobjectives. The IATA Task Force willcommunicate these objectives so allstakeholders understand airline expec-tations and work progressively towardsthe redesign and long overdue de-frag-mentation of Europe’s air traffic man-agement system.

A European level body should beassigned to oversee progress towardsthese expectations. Further Community-led developments will be required tosupport this modernisation and includefurther institutional enablers such as theconsolidation of national supervisoryauthorities and the extension of the roleof EASA to ATM. These developmentswill ensure the uniform application ofsafety, economic, airspace and compe-tition rules. ■

IFATCA is an inde-pendent, non-politi-cal, non-industrialprofessional federa-tion representing, forover 40 years, morethan 50,000 Air TrafficControllers in over130 countries world-wide. Our goalsinclude the promotionof safety and regulari-ty in international airnavigation, and the

protection and safeguarding of theinterests of the Air Traffic Control pro-fession. In this respect, we cooperateclosely with international and nationalaviation authorities and institutions con-cerned with air navigation.

We all know that Air Traffic Control (ATC)is a global issue. In today’s world, poli-tics and economics, the word “global”has taken on a very potent meaning. Ithas become synonymous with someeconomic successes but also someexcesses. Until recently ATC was wide-ly viewed as a State issue, but harmon-isation programmes such as CNS/ATM,ATM 2000+ and the EU Single SkyInitiative are slowly but surely takingissues away from individual States andplacing them in the “global” arena.

In order to sustain the predicted trafficgrowth, whether Continental orOceanic, we need to make sure that asustainable airspace system is avail-able at national, regional and globallevels.

The air traffic management methods,air traffic services, and aircraft capabil-ities will have to evolve further in orderto support this continued growth.

To accommodate growth, one has toinvest in hardware and resources, bothfinancial and human. Let us leave asidetechnical and hardware solutions, thereare plenty of those around, althoughimplementation has not lived up to theinitial promises.

For now, let us consider humanresources, particularly at shop floorlevel, as it will be the people who will bepart of the solution to provide the addi-tional capacity required in the next 10-15 years. By people we mean air trafficcontrollers.

Over the past few years, internationalair traffic has increased considerably.It is estimated that in Europe there areapproximately 8.5 million flights peryear. This figure is expected to doubleevery 15 years. Both ICAO at interna-tional level and EUROCONTROL andthe EU at European level, as well asother international bodies, encourageregional cooperation on ATM mattersand consider such activities as animportant element in improving anddeveloping the global ATM system.

IFATCA’s perspective on regional cooperation

Stak

ehol

derF

orum

28

IFATCA is the worldwide Federation of air traffic controllerswith more than fifty thousand members representing 138countries. Among its goals are the promotion of safety, effi-ciency and regularity in international air navigation, and theprotection and safeguarding of the interests of the air trafficcontrol profession.

By Nicolas Y. Lyrakides,

IFATCA Executive Vice-President

Europe

At the heart of the globalATM system

A first attempt to identifythe major existing (includ-ing dormant) regional ATMcooperation initiatives andsupport programs world-wide, includes:

■ Maastricht UAC■ ASECNA, ■ Roberts FIR ■ COSECNA ■ CEATS■ ACE■ CARDS./ASATC■ NordicUAC:■ BALTINT■ Trans-Caucasus Project■ RADA Group ■ Justiniano■ EMAC■ AEFMP, etc.

IFATCA, in principle, welcomes andsupports the establishment of suchmechanisms of regional coordinationaround the world, which will enable allparties to cooperate and coordinatebetween themselves as well as withininternational aviation organisations, theairspace users and other institutions,on all matters relating to ATM, undercertain conditions.

Change is inevitable and essential inATM as is the case in all other industries.The perspective of regional cooperationestablishments presents a window ofopportunity for improvements in han-dling air traffic and airspace, generatingimproved efficiencies for all airspaceusers, as long as the competence, qual-ifications, expertise and skills of allstakeholders, their motivation and com-mitment is a major enabler and driver forthe necessary changes in Regional ATMcooperation. This must allow an effectivetransition towards a possible concept ofFunctional Airspace Blocks (FABs), atleast under the SES regulation. IFATCAis a major stakeholder in the ATM systemand is committed to the inclusion of thecontrollers’ viewpoint in all future region-

al developments of the ATM.

The overall objectives of anyregional cooperation should beto enhance coordinationbetween the participating

states with a view to increasing the col-lective performance of air traffic systemsin their respective FIRs, while satisfyingthe users’ needs at lowest possible costand enhancing the safety of air naviga-tion. The actions taken to achieve thisobjective should take into account thestrategies and programmes of ICAO,EUROCONTROL and other organisa-tions as well as the particular concernsand requirements of the participatingstates.

In order to achieve the above overallobjectives, coordination should bedeveloped in the following areas:

■ Air Traffic Control and ATFM■ Training■ Collection of Air Navigation Charges■ Navigation including satellite navi-

gation■ Route network development■ Consultation with the users / staff■ Safety management and regulation

Looking at the concept of FABs underthe current SES regulation, it has to bemade clear that the efficient creationand management of a Functional Blockof Airspace (FAB) does not necessarilyrequire the physical concentration of allANS functions within a single multina-tional organisation. Contrary to wide-spread belief, the economies of scale oflarge ATC centres appear to be margin-al. A study conducted by EURO-CONTROL in respect of a planned bi-national centre expected to be set up byFrance and Switzerland has demonstrat-ed that the major benefits from multina-tional structures derive much less fromeconomies of scale than from opera-tional savings the airspace users gain interms of significant reduction of delaysand increase in capacity.

IFATCA’s provisional policy on FABs is:

“The creation of Functional Blocks ofAirspace should achieve the expectedoperational benefits. It should alsocomprise a clear and full evaluationand definition of all the legal implica-tions in service provision by multina-tional ATCOs employed in countrieswith different legislations. Legal liabili-ty and jurisdiction must be clearlydefined. The efficient creation andmanagement of a FAB does not nec-essarily require the physical concen-tration of all ANS functions within a sin-gle multinational centre.

Through stable evolutionary process-es, the pros and cons of creating com-mon ACCs should be compared to acontinuation of the ongoing harmo-nization of existing ACCs, especiallywith regard to the social implications.All details of any plan to create an FABhave to be fully transparent to all.

In conclusion, IFATCA believes that,whatever form of regional cooperationis chosen, it has to be properlyassessed by the decision makersbefore the go-ahead is given. Issuessuch as sovereignty, civil-military coor-dination, the financial viability of ATMprovision, legal liability and compati-bility with the ICAO convention andannexes has to be assessed in a for-ward-looking way. It has to be estab-lished that they are sustainable tocope with the predicted growth of traf-fic. All the above, without jeopardizingsafety and costing a lot of money tothe users. The social dimension ofsuch regional cooperation is prone tohardship and has to be looked at verycarefully.

Current studies available on the possi-ble impact of possible FABs in the SESshow that none of the above elementscan currently be assessed with thelevel of clarity which could alleviate thedoubts of our membership in Europe. ■


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

There are a total of 38 airports (interna-tional, national and military airportsopen to civil aircraft operations) underhis leadership, including RomeFiumicino, Milan Malpensa and Linate,Catania, Palermo, Cagliari, Bergamo,Turin, Bologna, Venice, Naples andFlorence.

Annual movements at the 38 ENAV air-ports total around 1,700,000, includingcommercial, scheduled and generalaviation traffic as well as “round robin”and “local movements” (i.e. low pass,touch and go, ATZ overflights).

The two major Italian airports are RomeFiumicino and Milan Malpensa

because they exceed 200,000 IFRmovements per year.

As with all airports in the world, Italianairports are facing increasing growth intraffic, with limited possibilities ofincreasing capacity and achievingtheir primary goal, which is to maintainor improve safety. Local initiatives arecombined with European solutionssuch as collaborative decision-makingand runway safety to get the best outof every airport. Stakeholder involve-ment is ensured by working together inpartnership whenever possible withENAC (the Italian aviation regulator), awide variety of aerodrome operators(both Italian and non-Italian), local sup-pliers to aerodromes such as the emer-gency services, a wide variety of tradi-

tional and low-cost airlines and the fullrange of other aircraft operators. Italianresearch and development activitiescontinue to seek out and apply solu-tions to today’s operational problems.

CapacityIn general, airport-related delaysdecreased in 2004, because of theinvolvement of local stakeholders,including airport operator companies, inthe planning process. For most Italianairports an agreed capacity baselinehas been created, as well as a medium-term capacity enhancement plan.Capacity studies are underway inRome, Milan, Venice, Bologna, Naples,Turin, Olbia and Bergamo to ensure aminimum of delays for future operations.

Airport CollaborativeDecision-Making (CDM)Airport CDM is being tested at MilanMalpensa. Initial results have alreadyidentified improvements in stand andgate allocation, resource managementand slot adherence, leading to areduction in costs, delays and passen-ger complaints relating to displayedflight information.

ENAV is now developing local CDMprocedures to enable implementation.

Advanced Surface MovementGuidance and Control System(A-SMGCS)

Surface Movement Radar has nowbeen implemented at seven airports.A-SMGCS is being tested at MilanMalpensa and Bologna where the rele-vant ATC procedures, based uponexisting ICAO procedures, are beingdeveloped.

Interview withMassimo Garbini

Dynamic Italy

Inte

rvie

w

30

In 2004 Massimo Garbiniassumed responsibility for airport operations in Italyon behalf of ENAV.

ENAV S.p.A.

Director AirportOperations Department,ENAV S.p.A.

All work is being carried out in line withthe EUROCONTROL A-SMGCS Pro-gramme, including the development ofgeneric safety and human factor casesthat can be used in support of all localimplementations.

A new system, RSAMS – Runway SafetyArea Monitoring System – to preventrunway incursions has been installed byENAV at a number of Italian airports.

Runway safety

Italian representatives are members ofthe Steering Committee and WorkingGroup for Runway Safety. They partici-pate actively to ensure that runwaysafety remains high on the safety agen-da in Italy and across the ECAC1 area.To implement the European ActionPlan for the Prevention of RunwayIncursions, as part of the EURO-CONTROL Strategic Safety Action Plan,all the essential operational and regula-tory partners are working together.

The European Action Plan forthe Prevention of RunwayIncursions (EAPPRI)Concerning the activities carried outduring 2003 and 2004 to improve run-way safety, Local RWY Safety Teams(LRSTs) have been established at theItalian airports open to civilian traffic

together with ENAC, airport operatorsand airlines.

The LRSTs have been set up in accor-dance with the EAPPRI Terms ofReference. To facilitate the applicationof EAPPRI from the air navigation serv-ice provider perspective, ENAV’s AirportOperations Department translated theAction Plan into Italian, making its owndocument, incorporating all the recom-mendations addressed to ATC. Four ofthese have been made effective imme-diately as “standards”, viz.:

■ the use of full call sign for aircraftand vehicles that are involved in run-way crossings operations;

■ the issuance of en-route clearancebefore starting taxiing;

■ instructions not to cross a red stopbar;

■ clearance procedure to cross activerunways and non-active runways.

The establishment of these recommen-dations in Italian as “standards”enables Mr Garbini to assess howmany airports are compliant with theNational Plan, and where intervention isneeded from an ENAV perspective.

Communications

All recommendations are taken seri-ously in Italy. In particular, the commu-

nication recommendations are imple-mented by ENAV through the endorse-ment of Doc 4444 in cooperation withENAC. ENAV continuously assessesthe correct use of standard ICAOphraseologies and the correct use ofread-back procedures during opera-tions. A significant improvement in theradio-telephony error rate has beenachieved at little or no cost.

Awareness campaignsHot Spot maps, brochures and postershave been published, normally withinPre-Flight Bulletins (PIBs) in order toplace emphasis on such importantaeronautical information. A reduction inthe number of runway incursions isnoticeable at airports following this typeof awareness campaign.

Safety management systemsA voluntary reporting system wasestablished by ENAV, internally, at the end of 2003. Pursuant to the ENACRegulation for Airports, the airportoperator will implement a local safetymanagement system from 24November 2005.

Conclusion The cooperation that Massimo Garbiniis building to create safe and economi-cally viable airport operations in Italydraws from the experience and wisdomof all the stakeholders. Progress isbeing made as a result of the time andenergy invested by these people inimplementing new ways of working,whilst respecting the need to continueto comply with ICAO provisions toensure that a globally harmonised sys-tem will be available to all airport users.In this way pilots will be able to givedirect feedback through the LocalRunway Safety Teams to the air naviga-tion service providers and airport oper-ators about what it is really like to useItalian airports, giving everybody achance to take positive action. ■


Inte

rvie

w

1 - EuropeanCivil AviationConference

Multilateration has been winning sup-port in Europe and other leadingregions of the aviation world with itsability to enhance control of aircraft andvehicle movements on the ground atairports. Improving on the coveragetraditionally provided by surface move-ment radar and providing the possibili-ty to identify aircraft unambiguously is apressing need.

Given the continent’s inexorable growthin air traffic, European aviation authori-ties regard such improvement asessential in maximising airport through-put and efficiency, maintaining opera-tions in low visibility and ensuring safe-ty – not least by preventing runwayincursions. But certain forward-lookingair navigation service providers(ANSPs) are going one step further.Austria, the Czech Republic andGermany, for instance, are showing thatthe technique can be extended beyondairport boundaries into the third spatialdimension and can be applied to airtraffic control within the terminal areaand en-route. As a result, Wide AreaMultilateration (WAM) has alreadytaken off.

The Multilateration systems are basedon a well known measurement tech-nique, the so called Time Difference ofArrival (TDOA). The reader can think ofthis as “inverted GPS”. Instead of havingmoving satellites transmitting their timestamp signals and the receiver calculat-ing its own position from these signals,Multilateration triangulates on a movingtransmitter – like the aircraft SSRtransponder – by detection and timestamping of the transponder squitter orreply signals at well known, fixed receiv-er stations. A set of equations at a cen-tral processing site derives the accurateposition of the aircraft transponder. Thiscalculation is performed more than onceper second, a measurement update ratea conventional SSR never can achieve.The principle of the TDOA technique isshown in Figure 1.

Multilaterationtakes off in EuropeRe

view

32

Multilateration – a system that can track aircraft and ground vehicles at airports, provided they are equipped with RF-emitting transponders – has been winning its European spurs by monitoring surface movements at the continent’s busiest airports. But now air navigation serv-ice providers see that this technique could also be an important surveillance tool for ATC in theterminal area and en-route as a substitute for secondary surveillance radar (SSR).The EUROCONTROL Agency has recognised this development and actively supports its stakeholders with the introduction of Multilateration techniques.

By Dr Werner Langhans,Chairman of the EUROCONTROLMultilateration TaskForce, and Head of TechnologyDevelopment,Austro Control GmbH

One of the nine Remote Unit Antennas of theInnsbruck Wide Area Multilateration System

For Multilateration purposes, the timesynchronisation precision of thereceived signals is of great importance.There are several synchronisationmethods being used by the differentmanufacturers, all having their advan-tages and drawbacks. The techniqueused in the TMA of Innsbruck Airport,Austria, is depicted in Figure 2. Themain advantage of this transponderbased synchronisation is its independ-ence from GPS signals.

The accuracy of this type of system isdetermined by the geometric dilution ofprecision and the ground stationreceiver front end electronics. At air-ports, accuracies of 3-7m and in WideArea Multilateration (WAM), 10-50measily can be achieved.

Another benefit of the Multilaterationsurveillance technique is its independ-ence from the airborne navigation andthe use of the existing airborneequipage without the need of any retro-fit. Analogous to SSR Mode-S radar,Multilateration enables all kind of basic,elementary and enhanced surveillancecapabilities as foreseen in the EURO-CONTROL Mode-S Programme.Furthermore, Multilateration equipmentdoes not only support the Mode-SProgramme’s applications, also theground element of the ADS-B1

Programme’s applications are automat-ically provided by the Multilaterationsystem hardware. And, thinking innova-tively again, Multilateration offers to bethe complementary surveillance tech-nique for ADS-B to overcome its air-borne navigation dependability issuesin high complexity European core air-space.

Last but not least, Multilateration alsopromises to be a cost-effective solutionin comparison to SSR, being underdetailed investigation in Europe. AustroControls WAM System in Innsbruck withnine remote stations and a fully redun-dant central processing system, for


Revi

ew

Remote Unit 1 (Rx)

Remote Unit 2 (Rx)

c*(TOA1-TOA2)

c*(TOA2-TOA3)

c*(TOA1-TOA3)

TOAncXnRx

Time of Arrival at Remote Unit nSpeed of lightCalculated distance from TDOA algorithmReceiver

Remote Unit 3 (Rx)X3 = c TOA3

X1 =

c T

OA1

X2 =

c T

OA2

LocalClock

Remote Unit 1

Central ProcessingSystem

Digitisation andTDOA

Measurement+opt. Preprocessing Digital Link 64kb

Mode A/C/SReply orSquitter

Squi

tter

Squitter

Squitter

Digi

tal L

ink 6

4kb

Digital Link 64kb

cat. 20AsterixPlot/Trackdata

BasebandReceiver

1090 MHz

LocalClock

Remote Unit n


Measurement+opt. Preprocessing

BasebandReceiver

1090 MHz

ReferenceTransponder

LocalClock

Remote Unit 2


Measurement+opt. Preprocessing

BasebandReceiver

1090 MHz

ReferenceClock

Correlation,TDOA andTracking

Figure1: The principle of the Time Difference of Arrival (TDOA) technique used in passiveMultilateration Systems requires the exact information of all Remote Unit (RU) Receiverpositions at the central processing system. The arrival time of the Reply/Squitter signal fromthe aircraft is measured at each receiver and a system of equations is solved to calculate theintersection point of the hyperbolas between each pair of RUs [c*(TOAx-TOAy)=constant].The solution is the point were the aircraft transponder is located. To derive a two-dimensionalposition three RUs are needed, to compute a three-dimensional solution four RUs are needed.

Figure 2: Transponder synchronised Wide Area Multilateration (WAM) is used in the Innsbrucksurveillance system. The SSR transponder reply/squitter-messages transmitted from the aircraftare digitised, time stamped and pre-processed in the remote unit receivers (RU). Via narrowband digital data links each RU is connected to the central processing system (CPS), where theposition of the aircraft is calculated. The output of the CPS is a standardised ASTERIX Data for-mat which contains plot or track information of all aircraft in the coverage area, together withaccuracy information. Each RU has its own system-clock. To synchronise the time stamping ofthe individual RUs, the squitter signals of a well known Reference Transmitter (RT) are used tocalculate the necessary timing offsets.

Note: For areas where no interrogation signal triggers a Mode A/C only transponder, theInnsbruck WAM system uses integrated omni-directional interrogator signals at 1030MHz whichcan also transmit all the Mode-S uplink messages.

1 - AutomaticDependentSurveillance -Broadcast

instance, only cost approximately€1.5 million for the planning, invest-ment, implementation and testing withactual operating cost less than€150,000. A comparable solution builton standard SSR would have costabout €13 million, taking into accountthe difficulties for logistics and cover-age requirements of the Inn valley mak-ing two radar stations necessary. Inaddition, such an investment wouldhave faced enormous environmentalpolitical difficulties and technical diffi-culties caused by multipathing andreflections from steep mountain faces.

In the course of last year, EURO-CONTROL gave considerable impetusto the wide spread introduction ofMultilateration in Europe by the creationof the Multilateration Task Force. Thistask force coordinates the standardisa-tion and the necessary fact-findingactivities within Europe and ICAO. Itbrings together the interested stake-holders and acts as a platform for infor-mation exchange. The SurveillanceDomain has already initiated detailed

studies into the error behaviour, thestandardisation, the surveillance dataprocessing issues and some specificitems determined by the Task Force.

EUROCONTROL, together with someinnovative stakeholders, has embarkedon the exploration of the benefits of thissurveillance technique. It is engaged inthe standardisation at protocol level(ASTERIX), ICAO level and inEUROCAE2, it considers Multilaterationin the operational concepts, the strate-gy and the architecture work.

On a sensor level, the Multilaterationhas matured a lot in the last decade.The integrated EUROCONTROL surveil-lance data processing product (ARTAS)and the associated data analysis toolsare still somewhat behind this develop-ment. It is of utmost importance for theairspace users, that they can makeoperational use of such ground basedtechnology as early as possible, andthus the full surveillance chain needsthe capability to accommodate datafrom this sensor technique.

Austro Control has been using a WAMsystem for ATC purposes fully opera-tional in the TMA and en-route airspacesurrounding Innsbruck since November2004 with great success. The Innsbrucksurveillance system exhibits an updaterate of 1.5 updates per second in a cov-erage area shown in Figure 3. The prob-ability of detection is better than 99.4%when counting gaps larger than 4s andthe position accuracy was measured tobe 13m mean error and 22m rms error.All of these WAM performance parame-ters are much better than any SSR radarstation could deliver.

To build on this experience and toexplore the behaviour of Multilaterationin super wide areas of more than400km x 700km, Skyguide, DFS andAustro Control have started a feasibilityproject, called CEWAM (CentralEuropean WAM), based on coveragefrom Zurich via Nürnberg, Salzburg toInnsbruck. This project that will last forthe next 24 months will analyse thesafety, technical engineering aspectsas well as the commercial aspects ofWAM-intercell-coupling.

It can be concluded that the use ofMultilateration systems at airports andfor surveillance for en-route purposes isconsiderably gaining momentum inEurope. EUROCONTROL invites allstakeholders interested in the coordinat-ed international introduction ofMultilateration techniques to activelycontribute to the Multilateration TaskForce activities and to bring forwardideas, concerns and proposals to thisforum. ■

Further reading:www.eurocontrol.int/surveillanceFor further questions, please contact theauthor:[email protected]

Revi

ew

34

Figure 3: Horizontal and vertical coverage area of the Innsbruck WAM System at 6000 and 9000ftMSL. The coloured dots represent the number of remote units visible at 6000ft MSL. Green, blueand pink colours have three or more sensors in their visibility, thus the central processing station can calculate at least a 2D-position. The simulation was run on a GIS systemwith a 50m grid size terrain model.

@6000ft MSL

2 - EuropeanOrganisation forCivil AviationEquipmentManufacturers

A BRIEF HISTORY

One communication loss problem wasknown as the “sleeping receiver”.

Radios went silent, only to be reactivat-ed when the pilot pressed his transmitkey. Initially, back in1998, these eventswere flagged, inves-tigated and reportedby just a few airlines,such as BritishAirways (BA) andKLM. It is unclearwhether this kind ofevent started priorto, or in parallel with,the introduction of8.33 kHz radios.However, someevents had alreadybeen observed bythen, but withoutdrawing too muchattention. The num-ber of reportedevents increasedand in the UK themajority of incidentsreported occurredover the LondonTerminal Area eitherin the stack or during

unacceptable since it represents asecurity risk. The UK SRG invitedEUROCONTROL through its SafetyRegulatory Unit and CommunicationsDivision (COM) to support the widerinvestigations and expand them toEuropean level. More recently, a com-plementary Safety ImprovementInitiative was launched by the EURO-CONTROL Safety Team. Thisaddressed operations-related safetyissues like call-sign confusion, blockedtransmissions, radio interference, stan-dard phraseology and prolonged lossof communications.


Revi

ew

DefinitionTwo acronyms can be used when describing loss of communications. The military prefer“COMLOSS”, standing for communications loss, while the civil sector tends to prefer “PLOC”for prolonged loss of communications.

Loss of communications between aircraft and air traffic control (ATC) may actually occur fora variety of reasons, some technical, others relating to the human-machine interface. Thelength of the loss of communications can vary considerably. However, it is those that impactday-to-day ATC functions that have drawn the most attention and have instigated studiesaimed at resolving the problem.

Loss of communicationbetween controllers and pilots

is a key issue for aviationsafety. This article reports on

the main causes currentlyidentified, what EUROCONTROL

and its stakeholders are doing to investigate how to

resolve the problem andwhat the next steps might be.

the descent and approach phase. BAthen started its own internal investiga-tion into the subject. It could not, how-ever, identify any common explanationor isolate any specific technical failure.

In May 2002, BA, NATS and the UK-Safety Regulatory Group (SRG) organ-ised a forum to bring communicationloss events to the wider attention of var-ious European aviation safety stake-holders, including the EUROCONTROLAgency. From 11 September 2001,silence from any aircraft lasting morethan a few minutes became clearly

Investigation into lossof communications

‘PLOC’ and ‘COMLOSS’are nowadays used

interchangeably to define thoseair-ground communications

incidents whose duration affectsthe normal ATC processes

By PatrickDelhaise,CurrentSystemsManager(DAS/CSM),and

MassimilianoEsposito,TelecomsEngineer(DAS/CSM)

EUROCONTROL CONTRIBUTION

Common PLOC databaseand reporting

Since 2002, the EUROCONTROLCommunications Domain has takenover the investigative task from UKSRG. Their database of incidents wastransferred to the EUROCONTROLAgency and extended to enable thelogging of any prolonged loss of com-munications events reported by civil ormilitary controllers and by aircrews. Thereporting forms have been standard-ised and enhanced in conjunction withstakeholders’ suggestions. The pur-pose of the database is to quantifyPLOC phenomenon acrossEurope and to scrutinise thereports in search for commonelements in order to pro-gressively identify new pro-files of communicationsloss incidents.

Information in the databaseincludes:

■ Flight details, e.g. airline, call-sign, flight number and route

■ Aircraft details, e.g. type and regis-tration number

■ Incident details, e.g. time and dateof incident, location, phase of flight, speed and altitude of aircraft whenPLOC occurred

■ ATC information, e.g. frequency,ATC sector, whether air-to-air relaywas attempted and successfully re-established communication.

■ Information about the loss of com-munications, e.g. duration, possibleobserved silence on the channel,remedial actions.

■ Details of the aircraft equipment inuse during the PLOC, e.g. headset,VHF transceiver and audio manage-ment unit.

The database contains over 1,050events recorded since 1999. Most ofthem are concentrated in the last yearsdue to the initial lack of awareness and

reporting; 191 events in 2002, 121 in2003, 307 in 2004, and already 355 for2005 (position on 1 September 2005).

Identification of recurrentincident profilesBased on the reported symptoms andwith the support of IATA for interrogat-ing airlines shortly after each PLOC,about 32% of the reported PLOC (forthe years 2004 and 2005) can be allo-cated to one of the identified PLOC pro-files (see pie chart).

The importance of each profile in thisdatabase is of course influenced by theprofiles of a few major contributors. AsCOMLOSS awareness and reportingare expanding, the relative importanceof each PLOC profile is expected toevolve.

Revi

ew

36

Airborne radio failure

Frequency tuned incorrectly

Inadvertently changed radio selector

Radio volume too low or off

Suspected MultiCarrier - related issue

Suspected PLOC Type A(silent channel; if relay attempted, no success)

ATC forgot to hand over, or Wrong Freq assignedby ATC, or Readback/Hearback error

Radio selection error by aircrew(e.g.: still on previous sector)

4%3%

7%

8%5%

17%

22%

34%

4%3%

7%

8%5%

17%

22%

34%

Unfortunately some 68% of the report-ed events still do not contain enoughdetail to be explained and categorised.Recurrent profiles emerging from thereport database include:

■ Airborne radio failure (with identifiedrepair action required).

■ Human factors related profiles – e.g.human errors where the pilot tunedto an incorrect frequency, inadver-tently changed radio selector or setthe radio volume too low. On theATC side, there are incorrect fre-quencies assigned by ATC or errorsin voice readback/hearback; ATCforgetting to call and hand over air-craft, etc. Call-sign confusions oroverload of pilots or controllers areof course other possible operationalfactors contributing to the humanerrors described here.

■ Communications technical causes,e.g. PLOC Type A (the sleepingreceiver) and multicarrier/squelchrelated issues.

More technical or operational profilescould be identified in the future throughimproved reporting and refined analysis.

Communication loss is affectingall aviation segments:

The phenomenon is not restricted to a few airlines or radio types.In the thousand reported events that have affected

air traffic control since 1999, more than 300 airlines, 12 radio types, 180 sectors and

90 channel frequencies are represented.

Remedies found fortwo technical PLOC profiles

PLOC Type A: Thanks to BA’s sustained efforts overthe years in keeping their aircrewsaware and accurately reporting events,a Service Bulletin for retrofitting theirVHF1 receivers has finally been deliv-ered to BA by the radio manufacturerconcerned.

Since January 2005, BA has recordeda clear decrease in the number ofPLOC type A occurrences, as theService Bulletin deployment has pro-gressed throughout the fleet.

It is now anticipated that the PLOC typeA will progressively be cleared from thewhole BA fleet and the few other affect-ed airlines; it has now become a ques-tion of time.

Multi-carrier related PLOCsRecent laboratory and flight trials confirmed that the squelch operationof some receivers may be disturbed ina multi-carrier environment. According to the current MOPS (MinimumOperational Performance Specifica-tion), receiver sensitivity in multi-carrieroperation must not be worse than –85 dBm.

One type of analogue radio retrofittedfor 8.33 kHz operations was identifiedduring these trials as not being compli-

ant with the MOPS require-ment.

A PLOC might be experi-enced by this type of radiowhen flying in multi-carrierequisignal areas (same signalstrength originating from dif-ferent offset ground transmit-ters). Work is currently inprogress to include a test formulti-carrier operation sensi-tivity in the relevant airbornetransceiver standards inorder to prevent aircraftradios with limited squelchperformance being installed.Awareness of avionics manufactures ofthis issue is considered essential.Recently, multi-carrier operation in 8.33kHz channel spacing was proven to befeasible and standardisation activitieshave been initiated.

Raising awareness

Since its involvement, EUROCONTROLhas steadily worked towards increasingPLOC awareness among airlines, theavionic and aircraft industry as well aswithin civil and military ATC organisa-tions.

Progress reports are presented in work-shops and working groups such asEATM SISG (Safety Improvement Sub-Group), CMIC (Civil Military InterfaceStanding Committee), and NEASCOG

(NATO/EUROCONTROL ATM SecurityCoordinating Group).

The diagram below depicts the currentflow of PLOC incidents reports involvingEUROCONTROL

To ensure that PLOC resolution is mademore efficient, all the stakeholdersinvolved need to share commonlyupdated information and their actions.To this end, the NEASCOG group is cur-rently working to establish a definition ofloss-of-communications common toboth civil and military control centres,based on operational aspects.

Furthermore, EUROCONTROL hassuggested sharing its reporting formsand procedures with IATA and NATO. Itwill also share the existing PLOC data-base, and especially work to identifycauses and develop more remedies forall PLOC profiles, whether the causesare technical, operational or both.

Once that has been established, the EUROCONTROL CommunicationsDomain will exploit its expertise,focusing more on technical profiles ofPLOC and their resolution acrossEurope. For its part, the Agency SafetyTeam will continue to manage the Air-Ground Communication SafetyInitiative, aiming to deliver an industri-al Action Plan in 2006 jointly with IFATCA2, IFALPA3, ERA4 and the FlightSafety Foundation. ■


Revi

ew

EventsInvestigation &

Likely Explanations

EUROCONTROLDAS/CSM

NATS

ATC(e.g. SCOACC)

Airlines(e.g. BA, FlyBe,...)

Others ...

NATO

IATA

Data Gathering& Analysis

Technical Issues& Analysis

A typical example of PLOC Type A

A pilot reported: “During our usual arrival preparation, we realised that our VHF1 radio, whichwas assigned to the Paris control frequency, had been silent for several min-utes. When we managed by a brief radio check to establish contact withLondon FIR, we were told that several calls had been left unanswered; air-airrelay attempted by ATC hadn’t work either. Then we were transferred to theappropriate sector frequency and the flight continued normally.

During that period, the flight was on its assigned route and level, but we gota call from a French Mirage fighter closing our left wing on 121.5MHz. Weexplained to him that we were back in contact with London and that every-thing was OK with our radio, and then we continued our flight and approachin the usual manner.”

According to the current procedures, when a certain time of communicationloss has elapsed, the military units are alerted. Every time the fighters arescrambled, other air traffic is affected and has to be moved aside; the costof a fighter launch is about € 6,000 each time.

1 - Very HighFrequency

2 - InternationalFederation of AirTraffic Controllers’Association

3 - InternationalFederation of AirlinePilots Association

4 - EuropeanRegional AirlinesOrganisation

Repo

rt

38

On 29 September 2005, the Director General welcomedMr Janez Potocnik, the European Commissioner for Science and Research.

Discussions were held on the institutional arrangements between theEuropean Community and EUROCONTROL, air traffic management research,

including security, and current research and development initiatives by theEuropean Commission and EUROCONTROL.

On the same day, the Director General welcomed Mr Savides, Chairman of Cyprus Airways, and Mr Kervelis,

Councillor at the Cyprus Permanent Representation to the EU.

An overview of EUROCONTROL, a briefing on the Central RouteCharges Office and the Central Flow Management Unit were

all part of the programme.

On 13-14 July 2005, the Director of the General Secretariat, Dr Gerhard Stadler,met with Mr Gorodcovs, Director General of Civil Aviation of Latvia to discuss support forimplementation of the Single European Sky and his country’s membership of EUROCONTROL.

visits &agreementsMeeting our stakeholders

On 7 October, the Director General welcomedMrs Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic, the Croatian Ministerfor Foreign Affairs and European Integration.

On 6 September 2005, the Director General welcomed Mr Renaat Landuyt,Minister for Mobility of Belgium. The Minister and his delegation were briefed onEUROCONTROL institutional developments, emphasising the ratification of the revisedConvention, European ATM performance, EUROCONTROL strategies and development atthe Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre. The programme was concluded with a visit of the CFMU operations rooms.

EUROCONTROL Website:www.eurocontrol.int

Forthcoming Events

■ 30 October – 2 November 200550th ATCA Annual Conference & Exposition,Dallas

■ 16-17 November 2005CFMU User Forum, Brussels

■ 24-25 November 2005Dynamic Management of the EuropeanAirspace Network (DMEAN) Workshop,Luxembourg

■ 5-7 December 20052nd ACI Global Airport Operations Summit,Budapest

■ 14-16 February 2006ATC Maastricht 2006

. . . . . . . . . .The Winter 2005 issue of Skyway will focus on:

The Central FlowManagement Unit


Repo

rt

©© EEuurrooppeeaann OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn ffoorr tthhee SSaaffeettyy ooff AAiirr NNaavviiggaattiioonn ((EEUURROOCCOONNTTRROOLL))AApprriill 22000033

This document is published by EUROCONTROL in the interests of exchange of information.It may be copied in whole or in part, providing that the copyright notice and disclaimer are included.The information contained in this document may not be modifiedwithout prior written permission from EUROCONTROL.

EUROCONTROL makes no warranty,either implied or express, for the information contained in this document,neither does it assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,completeness or usefulness of this information.

FFoorr mmoorree iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn,,contact EUROCONTROL External and Public Relations,General Secretariat Directorate96, rue de la Fusée, B-1130 Brussels, BelgiumTTeelleepphhoonnee:: +32 2 729 90 11FFaaxx:: +32 2 729 91 98

© European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)October 2005

This document is published by EUROCONTROL in the interests of exchange of information.It may be copied in whole or in part, providing that the copyright notice and disclaimer are included.The information contained in this document may not be modifiedwithout prior written permission from EUROCONTROL.

EUROCONTROL makes no warranty,either implied or express, for the information contained in this document,neither does it assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,completeness or usefulness of this information.

FFoorr mmoorree iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn,,contact EUROCONTROL External and Public Relations,General Secretariat Directorate96, rue de la Fusée, B-1130 Brussels, BelgiumTTeelleepphhoonnee:: +32 2 729 34 20FFaaxx:: +32 2 729 91 98ee--mmaaiill:: [email protected]

Date post:	07-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Regional Cooperation in ATM - Eurocontrol · 38 Visits and agreements. Skyway 38 - Autumn 2005...

Documents