The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation LSSIP Kick off Event 11-12 Sep 2012...

The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

LSSIP Kick off Event 11-12 Sep 2012

Welcome to participants and opening of the Kick Off Event



Review and acceptance of Kick off Event Agenda

LSSIP Kick off Event 11 – 12 Sep 2012 EUROCONTROL Brussels 3

ESSIP Report;SES Report including generic findings/recommendationsList of the LSSIP 2012 actionsOverall conclusion of lessons learnt

Predrag VRANJKOVIC, DSS/EIPROscar ALFARO, DSS/EIPRAdriatik KOKONA, DSS/EIPRDanny DEBALS, DSS/EIPR

Bernd HILL, DSS/EIPR

Ingrid FEIJT, DSS/EIPRFani TSIRANTONAKI, DSS/EIPR

Valerie OBLIN, DSS/EIPRDanny DEBALS – on behalf of UK/CAAAna Paula FRANGOLHO, DSS/EIPROscar ALFARO, DSS/EIPR

Danny DEBALS – on behalf of Luc TYTGAT, Director DSS



ESSIP/LSSIP mechanism in the changing European ATM environment


New environment

Eur. ATM M

aster P

lanNetwork Strategy Plan

ESSIP Plan

(Interim) Deployment ProgrammeCommon projects

What has this to do with LSSIP?

National LSSIPs:- Not 42 individual trains; - 42 wagons of the same train


ESSIP and the Eur. ATM Master Plan

ESSIP Plan + ESSIP Report =

Level 3 of Eur ATM MP

European ATM Master Plan

Proposals in ESSIP Plan developed by:

- EUROCONTROL Teams;

- SESAR JU WP C.02

Approved by AAB and

SESAR WPC


ESSIP in the SESAR JU work structure

WA1 European Deployment

Outlook

WA0 C.2 Project management

WA2 Short/Medium Term European Deployment Planning and Reporting

T015 - Day to Day Project management

T007 – European Deployment Reports & Assessments

T006 – ESSIP Outlines,Objectives and SLoAsdevelopment

T014 – Non-EU Statescoordination

T001 – Process descrip-tion and maintenance

T002 - PerformancePlanning

T005 - Deployment Scenarios

T003 – FinancialIncentives - Generic

T004 – FinancialIncentives - Specific

T0NN – IR/MP update coordination includingDB data maintenance

LSSIPs

ESSIP Plan

ESSIP Report


ESSIP coordination - Network Manager

New Stakeholder group in ESSIP objectives: Network Manager (NMN)• Currently no specific NMN SLoAs (Former AGY SLoAs,

where applicable)• New specific SLoAs/objectives to be coordinated with the

development of ESSIP Plan Edition 2013• Inputs: Network Strategy Plan• Use of ESSIP Plan in line with Commission Decision of

7/7/2011 on the nomination of the Network Manager


Interim Deployment Steering Group (IDSG)

• Established in Feb 2012;

• Chair: Head of SES Unit / EC;

• Members: civil & military representatives of States within SES area and from relevant ATM ops stakeholders (ANSPs, Airspace users, Airports, Network Manager), EASA, and SJU;

• A transitional arrangement to steer implementation of short term essential SESAR deployments critical to performance at European level;

• To remain active up to establishment and start of operations of SESAR deployment governance.

• Central task: steer, coordinate and monitor short term implementation activities on the basis of the Interim Deployment Programme (IDP);

• To collect and analyse relevant deployment data coming from, e.g., ESSIP and LSSIP reports, business plans, programme reports, performance plans and any additional complementary information … to support the execution of the IDP


ESSIP(/LSSIP) in the context of IDSG

IDSG

ESSIP Plan ed 2012

ATM Master Plan update 2012

Network Strategy Plan

Interim DeploymentProgramme (2012-2014)

ESSIP Plan ed 2013


ESSIP core activities in IDP outline v0.3

Relationship ESSIP objectives - IDP Activity Areas

The ESSIP Plan becomes a single reference for the deployment planning at local level


ESSIP(/LSSIP) in the context of the setting up of the Deployment Programme

• EC Mandate to SESAR JU to draft a proposal on the content of a “pilot common project”• Based on one or several essential operational changes

identified in the ATM Master Plan level 1;• Delivery of the proposal end April 2013:

• Use of SESAR JU consultation and cooperation mechanisms;

• Liaise with NM, PRB and EUROCONTROL’s DSS• Consider the experience and methodologies used by IDSG


ESSIP/LSSIP yesterday: Self-contained

EU RegulationsEUROCONTROL ATM Strategy

ESSIP Plan

ESSIP Report

LSSIPs


ESSIP/LSSIP today & tomorrow: Multiple interactions

ESSIP Plan

ESSIP Report

LSSIPs

ATM MP

IDP

NSP

Depl. Programme

EU Regulations


Conclusions

• ESSIP/LSSIP is no longer a ‘static’ business;• ESSIP/LSSIP is no longer a EUROCONTROL-centric business;• ESSIP/LSSIP is no longer a ‘simple’ business;• ESSIP(/LSSIP) is fully integrated

• into Eur. ATM MP and related decision making processes, • ultimately leading to the SESAR Deployment;

• Feeding the mentioned processes with timely and accurate information becomes crucial; and…


Conclusions (cont’d)

• 42 wagons, 1 train



ESSIP Report 2011


The position of the ESSIP Report

European ATMMaster Plan

ESSIPPlan

LSSIP (per State)

Report on SESLegislation

ImplementationESSIP Report


ESSIPPlan

LSSIP (per State)




ESSIPPlan

LSSIP (per State)




What is new in the ESSIP Report for 2011?

NEW WAY OF WORKINGSESAR WP C.02: European

Deployment Reports and Assessments (D07)

NEW CUSTOMERS IDSG, SESAR JU

NEW STRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

Noracon - contributorENAV - contributorIndra - reviewerThales - reviewer


Main developments in 2011: positive

Implementation progress of 'Active' ESSIP objectives over the years

Implementation progress to plan

Implementation progress slower

than plan

Implementation inconsistent w ith

plan

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

Implementation progress has improved in 2011 (green line). Number of ESSIP objectives progressing slower then plan has reduced (orange line). On the downside, number of ESSIP objectives reported as late in implementation has increased (red line) but at much lower rate then it was the case since 2007.



• Most of the airports that are in the applicability area of airport related ESSIP objectives now integrated in the LSSIP reporting.

• The process of raising awareness should continue.

34

5145

57

45

57

41

53

33

51

22

4 14

2

14

2

16

3

23

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

LSSIP2010

LSSIP2011

LSSIP2010

LSSIP2011

LSSIP2010

LSSIP2011

LSSIP2010

LSSIP2011

LSSIP2010

LSSIP2011

AOP01.2 AOP04.1 AOP04.2 AOP05 AOP08

ESSIP objectives

No

. o

f A

irp

ort

s

Reported Not reported



Airspace Users participation in ESSIP objective questionnaire:

• Air Astana• Air France• Bluejet• BMW• Continental Airlines• Czech Airlines• Condor• Jet Air Fly• Edelweiss Air• KLM• Malev• Qantas• South African Airlines• Blue Panorama• Martinair• Thomas Cook

AGDL compliance

39

256

676

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

AGDL equiped Equipage plans exist No equipage plans exist

AGVCS compliance

627

16

328

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

AGVCS compliant Equipage plans exist No equipage plans

Total fleet: 971 aircraft


Main developments in 2011: negative

• 20 out of 49 ESSIP objectives recorded delays in the implementation (average 3 years)

• Commitment issues for 6 ESSIP objectives (range 1-13 States per objective)

• Data availability: 4 States reported missing data for one or more ESSIP objectives


ESSIP Implementation Monitoring (Ch. 4)

ESSIP Implementation Rate for 2011 - All ESSIP objectives

21%

28% 28%

34%36%

38%

41% 41%

45% 45% 45%47%

48%50% 51%

52% 53%54% 54% 55% 56% 56% 56% 56% 57%

59%61%

63% 63% 63%

66%68% 68%

69%

73%75%

76%77% 78%

79% 79%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

GE

BA

GR

UA

AZ

ME

AL

EE

HR

NO

MD

PT IT HU

DK SI

AM

LU

CZ

RS

TR

MT

ES

RO FI

CY

PL

UK

BG

AT

LV

SE

BE

DE

FR

MA

S

NL

SK

LT

CH IE

States

ES

SIP

Im

ple

men

tati

on

Rate

(%

)

ESSIP Implementation Monitoring: A new indicator showing the level of reported adherence of national local plans to the European plan in the implementation of applicable ESSIP objectives.

55%

~ 25%

~ 75%Different interpretation of the objective progress


SESAR Deployment Baseline View (Ch. 5)

Operational Packages

Operational Sub- Packages

Operational Focus Areas

Operational Improvement Steps

ESSIP objectives

Level 2

Level 3

European ATM Master Plan Operational Hierarchy

Operational Package: Efficient and Green Terminal Airspace Operations


Essential OI steps View (Ch. 6)

• 35 Essential Operational Improvements (OI steps) as defined in the SESAR WP C/ Project C.02, Task 2.2 “Short-Term Deployment Scenario Maintenance”

• All ESSIP objectives related to essential OIs (20) recommended to IDSG for inclusion in the Interim Deployment Programme

• Objectives analysed in detail: AOP05, AOP08, ATC07.1, COM10, FCM03, NAV03, ITY-AGDL

For all 35 essential OI Steps


Stakeholder Segment View (Ch. 7)

• National Regulators (covered in the SES Report)• ANSPs• Airports• Military Authorities • Airspace Users

Ensure coordinated involvement of all national stakeholders in the LSSIP to harmonise the understanding of all ESSIP objectives’ implementation steps and status, thus ensuring a reliable assessment.


FAB View (Ch. 8)

FABCE: ESSIP Implementation Rate per functional area

0,00%

20,00%

40,00%

60,00%

80,00%

100,00%AOM

ATC

COMFCM

ITY

FABCE: ESSIP Implementation Rate per participating State

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AT BA CZ HR HU SI SK

• Produced jointly with Stakeholders participating in FAB projects• Focus on ANSPs using ESSIP Implementation Monitoring method• Objectives with FAB dimension only:

• Airspace Organisation and Management: AOM13.1, AOM19+20• Air Traffic Control: ATC02.2/.5/.6/.7, ATC12+15• Communication: COM06, COM0911• Flow Control Management: FCM01+03• Interoperability: ITY-ADQ, -AGDL, -AGVCS, -FMTP, -COTR.

Ensure coordinated approach to the ESSIP in order to achieve harmonised understanding of all ESSIP objectives’ implementation steps and status, thus ensuring a reliable assessment, comparable throughout the FAB.


Recommendations

REC-2011-30 REC-2011-14

REC-2011-21 REC-2011-33 REC-2011-18

REC-2011-01

REC-2011-02

REC-2011-17 REC-2011-13

REC-2011-03

EUROCONTROL

EIPR DNM DSS

REC-2011-31

REC-2011-04

REC-2011-16

REC-2011-15

IDSG EC SJU

REC-2011-19

REC-2011-20

REC-2011-40

REC-2011-35

• Relevant recommendations distributed to EC/IDSG, SESAR JU, DNM and DSS (Support to States)

• EIPR has already addressed its recommendations


Recommendations REC-2011-41 REC-2011-22 REC-2011-05 REC-2011-04

National Stakeholders

FAB Airports ANSP’s NAA’s

REC-2011-42 REC-2011-24

REC-2011-25

REC-2011-09

REC-2011-08

REC-2011-07

REC-2011-06

REC-2011-10

REC-2011-23

REC-2011-11

REC-2011-12

REC-2011-36

REC-2011-39

REC-2011-26

REC-2011-27

REC-2011-28

REC-2011-29

REC-2011-32

REC-2011-34

REC-2011-37

REC-2011-38

To be considered in the LSSIP 2012


What is next?

• ESSIP Report for 2011 to be presented to AAB/4 in October 2012

• The planning of ESSIP Report for 2012 will start soon in coordination with SESAR WPC.02 partners

DATA QUALITY - ESSENTIAL

And at the end:



SES Report including generic findings/recommendations


The position of the SES Report


ESSIPPlan

LSSIP (per State)




ESSIPPlan

LSSIP (per State)




2011 Cycle:SES Legislation Implementation Report

- Highlights -


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2010 Highlights

The institutional framework – i.e. separation regulation from service provision and NSA establishment, is in place, however:

• Level of progress in 2010 has slowed compared to previous years;

• Reported staff shortages by many NSAs remain worryingly high;

• Legal arrangements required for cross border ANS are not being put in place in the majority of States;

• Safety oversight of ASM/ATFM remains an issue;

• FABs/FAB initiatives have not yet started the process of inter-FAB coordination and cooperation;

• The lack of activity by NSAs in Interoperability (IOP) supervision is a matter of concern;

• No progress in establishment of enforcement measures for collection of air navigation charges;

• Monitoring of FUA performance remains low.


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (I)

NSA Resources

• Progress has been made in recruitment during 2011.

• NSAs reporting being adequately staffed or reporting a shortage below 15% has increased from 8 to 11.

Additional Resources

Needed (+104 FTEs)

+24%

Total Available Resources (437 FTEs)

• A number of NSAs remain understaffed.

• Overall 24% staff shortage.

• 8 NSAs still report recruitment plans on hold or under consideration

• Recruitment plans for 3 NSAs are now approved (on hold in 2010).

• Still shortage of qualified auditors but no NSA reports now ‘0’ auditors.


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (II)

Cross-Border Service Provision

• Large improvement in information reported; better NSA awareness.

• Significant improvement (for the first time) in the conclusion of NSA-NSA arrangements.

• Improvement is largely within FABs.

35

23

12

3

3

4

41

48

118

19

44

15

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

2009

2010

2011

Case A Case B Case C Incoherent Cases

22

32

78

69

66

40

9

20

31

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

2009

2010

2011

Yes No Inconsistent Reporting

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

2009

2010

2011

Yes No Inconsistent Reporting

0 25 50 75 100 125 150

2009

2010

2011

Case A Case B Case C Incoherent Cases


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (III)

Safety Oversight

• Significant improvement in oversight of ASM/ATFM.

• Still 8 NSAs (9 in 2010) reported deficiencies in their processes for safety oversight

22

27

19

26

8

3

11

4

1

1

1

1

2009-2010

2010-2011

2009-2010

2010-2011

2009-2010

2010-2011

ASM

ATFM

ANS

Yes No N/A


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (IV)

Interoperability

• 26 States (24 in 2010) indicated that processes for verification of compliance with IOP Regulation have been developed (and encouraging signs for the 3 remaining States).

• More NSAs having received DoVs (24 vs 18 in 2010) suggests that effectiveness of the oversight is improving.

• Verification of compliance with IRs by the NSAs has improved.

• Inconsistencies with ANSPs plans reported in other LSSIP sections remain.

• Difficult to assess the effectiveness of the current IRs (only 3 should be fully implemented), however indications of delays in COTR and DLS.


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (V)

Enforcement measures for the collection of air navigation charges

Little progress made. Some States remain recalcitrant.

6

6

7

7

7

7

5

10

6

11

6

9

2009

2010

2011

Measures effectively applied in the context of the Multilateral Route Charges SystemMeasures not yet applied in the context of the Multilateral Route Charges SystemMeasures still to be clarified or not fully effectiveNo effective measures in place

2009

2010

2011

Measures effectively applied in the context of the Multilateral Route Charges SystemMeasures not yet applied in the context of the Multilateral Route Charges SystemMeasures still to be clarified or not fully effectiveNo effective measures in place


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (VI)

FUA Performance Assessment

2218

812

7

149

41

Establishmechanisms to

assess performanceof FUA Operations

Perform theassessment at least

yearly

Define and applycommonly agreed

KPA/KPIs

Formal process toconsult the

outcome with theairspace users

Yes No Ad-hoc


SES Legislation Implementation Report – 2011 highlights (VII)

Additional 2011 highlights:

NSAs should use their fora (e.g. NCP) to find a common approach to:• Certification and designation of AFIS providers.• Oversight of the software safety assurance system Regulation.• Various areas of the ATFM Regulation: handling critical events; monitoring adherence to ATFM departure slots and penalties for infringements.• FUA performance assessment, FUA compliance monitoring (and the NSAs role in it).

Additionally, further guidance is required for supporting the NSAs in:• Establishing risk based approaches to ongoing oversight of the common requirements.• Ensure a common approach is adopted to safety oversight, and in particular to ANS, ASM and AFTM audits.


2011 Cycle:Lessons Learnt


Lessons Learnt – States’ Reports

• Steady improvement by States in understanding, awareness and reporting quality over the four cycles.

• Consultation of the State Annual report with Agency LSSIP Contact Person before signature is advisable.

• The size of the reports remains at the limit of what is manageable both for States to report and EUROCONTROL to analyse.

• Some issues have reached a maturity level of implementation that would allow to extend the ‘simplified-version-for-compliant-States’ principle already used in the 2010 reporting cycle.

• Time and quality-wise States managed to deliver, so working arrangements seem to work.


Lessons Learnt - SES Legislation Implementation Report

• 2011 Report better than ‘10, ’09 & ’08 (deeper analysis by experts, LSSIP cross-check, maturity of data allows some benchmarking, etc.)

• Recommendations are more and more specific, the majority now focus on specific issues within individual States better common understanding of the legislation.

• The overall SES Reporting process (including EC follow-up) shows improvements in key areas.


Follow-up actions

• The Commission to inform States…



List of LSSIP 2012 Actions


Background of the Actions List

• 82 Actions in the list inherited from the previous LSSIP Workshops;

• 10 new Actions (83 to 92) added by EIPR Team;• EIPR evaluated the progress made & proposed the

way forward for each of the actions;• Updated list including EIPR proposals was sent to the

National FPs by end April 2012 for feedback


State’s Responses

• 16 National Focal Points out of 42 responded and commented on the List (around 35%);

• On average 42 out of 92 Actions were commented (around 46%);

• The highest figure of responses given by a state was 99% (91 actions) while the lowest one only 10% (9 actions);

• 3 new actions (93 to 95) proposed by a National FP reaching the total number of 95 actions.


Action List for 2012

• Most of the comments made by the FPs were taken into consideration in the final action list;

• This new list contains 28 actions, significantly less than the previous one with 82;

• 13 Actions planned to be finalised by 11 Sep 2012; 3 by end of 2012, 11 by end of June 2013;

• 1 Action (No 4) to be activated when requested by any FAB.


Most important topics addressed by the list of actions

• LSSIP Template quality improvements, No 1, 2, 25;• Further improvements on the LSSIP document

quality control, No 6-9, 24;• Establishment of better links between ESSIP

Objectives, OIs steps and KPAs/KPIs, No 12-16, 26;• Enhancement of the LSSIP Database functionalities,

No 5, 10, 11, 21, 27;• Further quality improvement of LSSIP Level 2

information, No 17-20, 28


Where are we & what should be done to implement successfully the list

• 2 of the 13 actions planned to be finalised by 11 Sep remain in progress (No 3 & 5)

• Further improve collaboration and coordination between EIPR and all national representatives;

• Regular exchange of information on the progress made on the implementation of the actions by relevant actors i.e. every 3 or 4 months;

• Update of the list based on the progress made as necessary



Wrap up of lessons learnt


Wrap up

REC-2011-01

REC-2011-02

REC-2011-03

ESSIP Report

EIPR

REC-2011-04

REC-2011-16

See Item 7

Action List 17

CP-FP

Ensure coordinated involvement of all national stakeholders in the LSSIP to harmonise the understanding of all ESSIP objectives’ implementation steps and status, thus ensuring a reliable assessment.

Ensure coordinated approach to the ESSIP in order to achieve harmonised understanding of all ESSIP objectives’ implementation steps and status, thus ensuring a reliable assessment, comparable throughout the FAB.

DATA QUALITY - ESSENTIAL

CP-FP

SES Report


Wrap upSee Item 6See Item 7

See Item 8aSee Item 8b



Overall changes in the LSSIP 2012 Process + Deliverables + Tools


LSSIP Process

One Common Kick-off Event

One local meeting

All LSSIP Parts single Working Level Agreed and single signature page

One mandatory review of LSSIP level 2

Freezing of LSSIP Database 01/03/2013


Valérie, Ana Paula, Oscar

Deliverables, Guidance & Tools

Changes in the LSSIP Template

OctavianChanges in the ESSIP Plan

IngridChanges to Guidance Material

Avoiding repetitions & overlap

Significant changes & New Objectives

Updated LSSIP Guide & ppt slides (tips & tricks)Implementation progress definition

FaniChanges to LSSIP Tools

Upgraded LSSIP Map Tool & New functionalities


Better reporting

Have a nice Lunch

Stay tuned

LSSIP Process



Changes in the LSSIP Template - overall


LSSIP: Structure

• Same reporting set-up as previous Editions: Documents (Level 1 – Level 2) / Infrastructure (LSSIP Database - Web)

• New picture on the cover page• Level 1 document remains in four parts, but

• Parts not more identified by numbers• Former Parts III & IV swap position with each other (impacting

also Executive Summary)• One signature page covering all parts of LSSIP Level 1 (except

SES + FUA Reports)• Traffic & Performance Part further slimmed down eliminating all

repetitions or overlapping with PRU Report and NOP


LSSIP: Naming of parts

• Former Part I = State Context (no change of title)• Former Part II = ESSIP Objective Implementation

(formerly: Implementation of ESSIP Objectives)• Former Part IV = Traffic and ATM Performance

(no change of title)• Former Part III = Legislation Implementation

(formerly: Implementation of SES Legislation)


UK LSSiP Signature Process

2012 Kick-off Meeting

Eurocontrol 11/12 Sep 12


LSSiP Signature Process

Fundamental Issues

• Too many signatories• Tight deadlines• Labour intensive• Cost prohibitive


Changes Required to Streamline Signature Process

• Agreement from Stakeholders for one signature at State level

• Part II Approval Sheet provides the explanation for the governance

• Validation of all stakeholders’ submission is provided by confirmation email to Focal Point

• Validations are maintained for audit and to satisfy State signatory



Stakeholder Perspective

• Fundamentally

• Fully briefed at Focus Groups by the Focal Point and Data Manager at start of cycle

• Governance issues are accommodated

• Support provided throughout the process as and when required


In Conclusion

• What have we gained?

• Satisfactory process

• Efficient process

• Acceptable governance process

• Increased flexibility



Changes in the LSSIP Template - Traffic and ATM Performance


Traffic and ATM Performance

Is a unique compilation of relevant performance data, organised at State level, and a quick overall reference to stakeholders and general public on performance matters

It may constitute the foundation for aligning and linking the technical and operational implementation progress with relevant performance targets and overall European ATM performance

LSSIP chapter 3 (National Projects) can provide an important source of information if completely reported, detailed and enhanced


Three chapters:

1. Cost Efficiency – Small changes

2. En-route Traffic & Capacity – No change in structure

3. Airport Traffic & Capacity – No change in structure

EIPR is responsible for coordinating and assembling the content and ensuring overall quality.

Most data and information elements are not provided and filled in by States (unlike the other LSSIP parts), but are coming from various EUROCONTROL Units. This entails an extensive coordination effort and dependence upon the release of data.

Traffic and ATM Performance dataLSSIP year 2012


Cost Efficiency

IR 691 July 2010 (Performance Scheme) is in place Performance Plans were delivered PRB monitoring activity will start soon

• For EU 27+: a common text will be developed with a link to monitoring activities done by PRB

• For non-EU States: it will include monitoring of the national cost-efficiency Performance Indicator (PI) for 2012-2014• Enlarged Committee for Route Charges data will be used (meeting

November 2012)• Georgia & Azerbaijan will provide their data

• PRU provides support • Estimated timing:

• Chapter available for distribution by December 2012


En-route Traffic & Capacity

• Chapter coordinated with DNM/OPL (Operations Planning) who will gather and process the data

• Capacity Planning data to be available after coordination meetings with States (from mid November 2012 till mid January 2013)

• Same structure and content as in previous editions

• EUROCONTROL Contact Persons will send the chapter to national Focal Points and coordinate the final validation


Airport Traffic and Capacity (1)

This chapter is based on a tailored list of airports built around the following criteria:

1. The main national airport of each State

2. Airports with more than 150 000 movements

3. Airports identified as critical and having an impact in the network in terms of ATFM delays


Airport Traffic and Capacity (2)

• Chapter includes information on Airport Traffic, Airport Delays, Capacity and Planned developments/delay reduction plan

• Three main sources of data:• STATFOR MTF – available early October 2012• NM/CODA - delay section for critical airports• Airport Corner (Airport Unit) - November 2012

• Chapter will be distributed to national Focal Point by the second fortnight of November 2012



Changes in the LSSIP Template – SES and FUA report


2012 Template – Drivers for Change

• Lessons learnt from the 2011 reporting exercise

• New Regulations

• EC and EASA’s priorities


2012 Template – Lessons Learnt

• Cross-Border: Maturity and level of implementation much improved Reporting can be much simplified.

• Safety Oversight: Use of ‘short versions’ for compliant States to continue. Better link with ongoing compliance needed.

• FABs: Approach to be discussed with Commission.

• FUA: Section can be simplified. Link with performance scheme needs to be developed.


2012 Template – New Regulations

• Regulation (EU) No 677/2011 - Rules for the Implementation of ATM Network Functions (not new but not covered last year)

• Regulation (EU) No 1206/2011 - Requirements on Aircraft Identification for Surveillance (ACID)

• Regulation (EU) No 1207/2011 - Requirements for the Performance and Interoperability of Surveillance (SPI)


2012 Template – EC and EASA’s priorities

TBD…


2012 Template – Non-EU, Non-ECAA States

• Coverage does not change (ESARRs and FUA implementation).

• Simplifications implemented for EU States (e.g. safety oversight, FUA) will be replicated.



ESSIP Plan 2012 significant changes (New Objectives, significant changes of the existing ones, etc)


Outline

• Development context

• What has changed…

• Facts and figures

• More details…

• Questions


ESSIP Plan Edition 2012- Part of WPC.2

EUROCONTROL does not develop any more ESSIP objectives in isolation.

• The ESSIP plan is an official deliverable of SESAR JU

• EUROCONTROL is Task Leader within WP C.02• 7 contributors (AIRBUS, ALENIA, DFS, ENAV, NATS, SEAC, THALES)

• 1 reviewer (INDRA)

WPC.02 (Deployment/Performance planning and reporting) Partners provide:

• Input in developing Outline descriptions

• Feed-back in developing an ESSIP objective

• Feed-back in drafting an ESSIP Plan Document

• Review of ESSIP Plan Document


Significant changes (1/2)

• Modified objectives - 28• Changed references to OI Steps• Dates aligned with OI Steps• Change of scope, to align with SESAR• Change of geographical scope (ex-SRC objectives)• Changes triggered by the “Action list” (18 -changes to the

applicability area for the airport ESSIP Objectives, 26 - the new Master Plan category of "essential" OI Steps)

• New objectives - 2

• Closed objectives - 2

• Removed objectives - 3

• Listed in Annex A to the ESSIP Plan – Edition 2012


Significant changes (2/2)

• In cooperation with SESAR JU WP C02;

• Reviewed by the relevant EUROCONTROL Teams;

• Approved by AAB and SJU WPC;

• Endorsed by the PC.




2011

2012


Modified objectives (1/5)

• AOM13.1 (Harmonize OAT and GAT handling)

• FOC aligned with OI step AOM-0301 (2015 → 2018)

• SLoA MIL 03 & 05 removed following the Eur ATM MP Update campaign

• AOM19 (Implement Advanced Airspace Management)

• Removed wrong reference to OI step DCB-0204

• AOM20 (Implement ARN 7))

• Removed references to OI Steps AOM-0203, DCB-0204, SDM-0103

• AOP01.2 (Implement airside capacity enhancement method)

• FOC aligned with OI step AUO-0701 (2011 → 2013)

• More explicit links with OI Steps

• AOP03 (Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions)

• Link to OI Step AO-0103 removed



• AOP04.1 (Implement A-SMGCS Level 1)

• FOC aligned with OI step AO-0201 (2010 → 2011)• AOP04.2 (Implement A-SMGCS Level 2)

• FOC aligned with OI step AO-0102 (2013 → 2017)• AOP05 (Implement A-CDM)

• FOC aligned with OI steps AO-0601, AO-602a/b, AO-0603, DCB-0302 (2013 → 2016)

• AOP08 (Implement Airport Airside Capacity Planning Method)

• FOC aligned with OI step DCB-0201 (2011 → 2015)• ATC02.5, 02.6, 02.7 (Implement APW, MSAW, APM Level 2)

• Scope changed to “SESAR/ECAC” (deployment according to local needs)

• FOC changed (2013 → 2016)• Removed the references to the EUROCONTROL draft Specifications

from the objectives description (but left as Supporting Material!)


Modified objectives (3/5)• ATC07.1 (Implement AMAN tools)

• Scope changed to “SESAR/ECAC” (at selected Airports and TMAs)• FOC aligned with OI step TS-0102 (2010 → 2015)

• ATC12 (Implement automated support for conflict detection and conformance monitoring)

• FOC aligned with OI step TS-0203 (2015 → 2016)• ATC15 (Implement, in En-route, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in

support of Basic AMAN operations)

• FOC aligned with OI step TS-0305 (01/2017 → 12/2017)• ATC16 (Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1)

• FOC aligned with EU Regulation 1332/2011 on common airspace usage requirements and operating procedures for airborne collision avoidance (01/2015 → 12/2015)

• COM09 (Migrate from X 25 to IP)

• FOC aligned with EU Regulation 283/2011 amending the FMTP Regulation (EC) No 633/2007 as regards the transitional arrangements (2011 → 2014)

• ENV02 (Implement Collaborative Environmental Management at Airports)

• Included link with OI step AO-0705 and 2 SLoAs to reflect this link• FOC aligned with OI step AO-0705 (2013 → 2015)


Modified objectives (4/5)• FCM03 (Implement collaborative flight planning)

• FOC aligned with OI step IS-0102 (2010 → 2012)

• INF04 (Implement integrated briefing)

• FOC aligned with OI step IS-0201 (2007 → 2012)

• SLoA INF04 – ASP01 revised

• ITY-ADQ (Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information)

• Removed reference to OI Step IS-0203

• NAV03 (Implementation of P-RNAV)

• Scope changed to “SESAR/ECAC”

• Removed reference to OI Step AOM-0602

• FOC aligned with OI step AOM-0601 (2010 → 2012)

• NAV10 (Implement Approach Procedures with Vertical Guidance - APV)

• Removed wrong reference to OI step AOM-0603



• SRC-AUDI, -CHNG, -OVCA, -RLMK, -SLRD• Overtaken by events

• Within the scope of Regulation (EU) 1034/2011 on safety oversight in air traffic management and air navigation services and amending Regulation (EU) No 691/2010

• For EU+ States, local planning and compliance reporting included in the generic EU reporting mechanisms

• Scope changed to Multi National to allow the reporting by the non-EU+ States


New objectives (1/2)• ATC17 (Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and

transfer)

• Linked to the OI step CM-0201 Automated Assistance to Controller for Seamless Coordination, Transfer and Dialogue

• Complements the ITY-COTR Objective

• Includes the voluntary processes defined in Regulation (EC) 1032/2006 laying down requirements for automatic systems for the exchange of flight data for the purpose of notification, coordination and transfer of flights between air traffic control units

• Based on the EUROCONTROL OLDI Specification (v. 4.2)

• Implementation based on local needs, local business cases and bilateral agreements

• List of OLDI messages to be chosen from, included in the objective description


New objectives (2/2)• ITY-SPI (Surveillance performance and interoperability)

• Derived from Regulation (EU) 1207/2011 laying down requirements for the performance and the interoperability of surveillance for the single European sky

• But NOT all the regulatory requirements transposed in SLoAs

• Focussed on implementation actions by ANSPs and Airspace Users

• Compliance information to be complemented in the SES Annual Report

• Choice of the technology left at the level of ANSP

• Potential evolution of ITY-SPI once the technical choice will be made by the ANSPs


Closed objectives

• COM06 (Migration to ATS-Qsig digital signalling for ground telephone applications) and ITY-AGVCS (Air-Ground voice channel spacing above FL 195)

• Closed as “achieved”

• At least 80% of the SLoAs have been finalised by 80% of Stakeholders

• But… an ITY-AGVCS 2 may be expected in the near future (deployment of 8.33 kHz below FL 195)


Removed objectives

• SUR02, 04, 05• Original objectives, including timescales, overtaken by

publication of Regulations (EU) 1206/2011 (ACID IR) and 1207/2011 (SPI IR)

• Implementation progress remains modest, with only one third of States having fully completed the actions required. A number of Administrations already aligned their National Plans to the Regulations

• Partially covered by ITY-SPI• Potential evolution towards an extension of ITY-SPI



LSSIP Guidance Material Changes


Why changes were needed?

• All identified issues of the Action’s List are being reviewed and will be updated in the Guide to LSSIP Production.

• Specific update to the “definition of implementation progress” Guidance


Implementation Progress definition - Why changes were needed?

• Need for more coherence & consistency throughout the document;

• Increased pressure on LSSIP to reliably reflect the progress on implementation of ESSIP objectives as more and more LSSIP information is used as an input to the SESAR work and IDSG;

• Need to establish a common playing field for all states/stakeholders in monitoring and reporting progress of the ESSIP objectives and hence have a reliable indicator of the level of adherence of states plans to ESSIP objectives (ESSIP 2011);

• Avoid marginalisation of any specific stakeholders within a state for any Objectives.


Implementation Progress definition - What are the major changes?

• Elimination of the term ‘low key stakeholder’ in the assessment of the objective’s progress. Hence consider all stakeholders equally important in assessing the progress of the objective at overall state level;

• Only exception: in case where the objective is ‘Not applicable’ to a stakeholder - hence not considered in the assessment of the objective’s progress;

• Better definition of ‘Partially Completed (PC)’ SLoA’s progress by the determination of the exact phase of implementation when the SLoA should be considered as PC;

• Two significant changes related to the ‘Not Applicable’ implementation progress definition.


Implementation Progress definition - When should an SLoA be PC?

• Hardware/Software is in operation but still in test mode waiting to be certified by appropriate authority;

• Any documentation released as a ‘Proposed Issue’ and waiting for approval by appropriate authority;

• Training has been conducted by the relevant personnel but still waiting to be formally certified/licensed by appropriate authorities as necessary;

• National legislation/regulation/directive/mandate developed/modified and finalised but still to be formally approved/endorsed/promulgated by appropriate authorities


Implementation Progress definition - When should an objective/SLoA be N/A?

• State/Stakeholder is not part of ESSIP ‘Applicability Area’;• Stakeholder does not provide the required service i.e. number of

SLoAs related to the Military or MUAC;• Stakeholder has reviewed the SLoA and there is no intention to

implement it because it is not justified particularly in terms of the ratio cost/benefit or there are national/local restrictions in terms of environment, legislation which prevent the Stakeholder to implement it;

• Stakeholder is implementing alternative solution (e.g. not following proposed EUROCONTROL guidelines) to the one described in the SLoA.



LSSIP Tools


LSSIP Database

• No changes in the functionalities or layout but the DB has been moved to a more powerful server and it is quite faster than before;

• New rules for errors and warnings will be integrated.


LSSIP MapTool (I)

• New layout;• New functionalities;• Thermometer

integrated.

‘This Tool allows you to view the implementation progress for all ESSIP Objectives and SLoAs, at the level of State/Airport, Stakeholder and SLoAs, on a map’.


LSSIP MapTool (II)

In one click, you have a global view of the implementation status of an ESSIP objective.


LSSIP MapTool (III)

Click on any State

You get info for that State (at the level of the map i.e. Objective/Stkh/SloA)


LSSIP MapTool (IV)

Click on ‘Raw Data’…


LSSIP MapTool (V)

Click on Raw Data…

You get table with all States info (at the level of the map i.e. Objective/Stkh/SloA) exportable to Excel


LSSIP MapTool (VI)

Click on ‘Thermometer’…


LSSIP MapTool (VII)Click on ‘Thermometer’…

You get a pie chart and statistical graphs that show evolution in % or absolute figures



Wrap-up of day 1, preparation of day 2


Conclusions day 1

1. Good networking2. Good presentations – few questions3. Good attendance: 36 States – 70 repr4. Good start for tomorrow5. Quality ….6. But also timeliness…


Schedule (I)

Deadline

Start Kick-Off Event 11/12 Sep 2012

Re-Start (if needed) On-site kick-off meetings (Up to) 15 Oct 2012

Part - State Context Final 31 Dec 2012

Part - Implementation of ESSIP Objectives (Database)

In-cycle review by EIPR experts

(before WLA) Not later than 10 Feb 2013

Final (Database closed) 28 Feb 2013

Part - Traffic and ATM Performance

(Where required) On-site capacity visits

Mid-November 2012 to Mid-January 2013

Cost-Efficiency Chapter available for distribution

December 2012

Airport Chapter distributed to FPs

End November 2012

All Chapters Final 28 Feb 2013


Schedule (II)

Deadline

Part (EU+ States) – Implementation of Legislation

Template ready and strawman distribution

Depending on EC decision

Final 31 Jan 2013

Part (non-EU+ States) - Implementation of Eurocontrol Regulatory Requirements & Specifications


In line with EU+ States

Final 28 Feb 2013

All Parts but Legislation Part


Final = after all final actions and checks

21 Sep 2012

28 Feb 2013

Signature Part (EU + States) – Implementation of Legislation –

All Remaining Parts

31 Jan 2013

31 Mar 2013


Practicalities day 2

1. Meet with your CP - when2. Meet with your CP - where


No State Contact Person Timing No of Participants Room1 Albania Bernd 0900-1500 2 Pegase2 Armenia Octavian 1400-1700 2 528523 Austria Fani 1000 - 1100 2 Her office4 Azerbiadjan Predrag No meeting 05 Belgium Valerie 09:30-12:00 2 Her office6 Bosnia & Herzegovina Ingrid No meeting 0 544457 Bulgaria Ana Paula 0900 - 1100 1 532718 Croatia Fani No meeting 09 Cyprus Bernd 0900-1500 1 Pegase

10 Czech Republic Fani 1100 - 1300 2 Her office11 Denmark Danny 1300-1500 1 5424512 Estonia Luca 0900-1100 3 Mercure13 Finland Luca 0900-1100 3 Mercure14 France Tiku 1300-1500 9 Jupiter 15 FYROM Octavian 0930-1030 3 5285216 Georgia Predrag 0900-1100 2 His office17 Germany Tiku 1100-1300 2 Jupiter 18 Greece Bernd 0900-1500 2 Pegase19 Hungary Fani No meeting 120 Iceland Danny No meeting 021 Ireland Oscar No meeting 022 Italy Bernd 0900-1500 5 Pegase23 Latvia Luca 0900-1100 2 Mercure24 Lithuania Ingrid 0930-1100 2 5444525 Luxembourg Danny 0930-1100 1 5424526 Malta Bernd 0900-1500 2 Pegase27 Moldova Ana Paula No meeting 128 Montenegro Octavian 1045-1245 3 5285229 MUAC Tiku 1500-1700 1 Jupiter 30 Netherlands Tiku 0900-1100 4 Jupiter 31 Norway Luca 0900-1100 2 Mercure32 Poland Ingrid 1115-1245 3 5444533 Portugal Oscar 0900-1200 2 Phebus34 Romania Ana Paula 0900 - 1100 3 5327135 Serbia Octavian 1045-1245 2 5285236 Slovak Republic Fani ? 137 Slovenia Ingrid ? 2 5444538 Spain Oscar 0900-1200 4 Phebus39 Sweeden Danny 1300-1500 2 5424540 Switzerland Tiku No meeting 241 Turkey Predrag No meeting 0 42 Ukraine Ana Paula 1100 - 1300 2 5327143 United Kingdom Oscar No meeting 0

Blue Med Bernd 09-1500 12NEFAB 10

Date post:	27-Mar-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	patrick-fletcher
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times