eurocontrol & european airports · 2019-02-18 · skyway 37 - summer 2005 edito rial 3 dear...

Skyway is a quarterly publication of the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation, EUROCONTROLVolume 7, Number 37, Summer 2005

EUROCONTROL &European airportsEUROCONTROL &European airports

En-route to en-routetime-ordered conceptToday’s airportin tomorrow’s environmentAirport networking

En-route to en-routetime-ordered conceptToday’s airportin tomorrow’s environmentAirport networking

Roy Griffins,Director General ACI EUROPE:Future challenges for airports

Captain Rob van Eekeren, IFALPA:Runway incursions

Roy Griffins,Director General ACI EUROPE:Future challenges for airports

Captain Rob van Eekeren, IFALPA:Runway incursions

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

Publisher: Víctor M. AguadoManaging Editor: Gerhard StadlerEditor: Lucia [email protected] Editorial Team: Christos Petrou, Jean-Jacques Sauvage Linguistic Advisers: Language Service (DGS/LSEC)Layout: Frédérique FyonPhotography and pre-presscoordination: Christian SampouxPrinting: 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.

EUROCONTROL Website:http://www.eurocontrol.int

3 Editorial

Focus4 EUROCONTROL and European airports

9 Enhanced airport throughputThe “en-route to en-route” time-ordered concept

12 The airport operations programme

20 EUROCONTROL airport research and development

23 Today’s airport in tomorrow’s environment

Stakeholder Forum26 ACI EUROPE: future challenges for airports

29 Concept – Runway incursions

Independent Platform32 Airport networking

Dateline34 Inaugural World Aviation and Environmental Summit

36 ECAC/EU Dialogue with the European Air Transport IndustryAirport Capacity – Facing the crunch

38 Joint CAA FYROM/IATA & EUROCONTROL Airport OperationsProgramme Regional Road Show, 5-6 April 2005, Skopje

39 Civil/Military Air Traffic Management Conference,23-26 May 2005, Prague

40 IATA and EUROCONTROL help E-learning take offfor airline industry, 8-10 June 2005, headquarters, Brussels

41 15th ACI EUROPE General Assembly, 23-24 June 2005, Munich

Report42 Online with EUROCONTROL – www.eurocontrol.int

43 Introducing of automatic controller-pilot data link communications breaks new ground

44 Enlarged PC President’s Bureau (PCPB-e) meetingCEATS Research and Development and Simulations centre (CRDS)

45 Alex Hendriks receives the “2005 Catherine Fargeon Award”

45 Jan Van Doorn - Director EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

46 Visits and agreements© D

FS D

euts

che

Flug

sich

erun

g Gm

bH

Skyway 37 - Summer 2005

Edito

rial

3

Dear Readers,

Over the past five years, Europe’s air

traffic management system has produced

some excellent results. Between 1999

and 2004, traffic grew by 10%, and delays

fell by 67% - yet costs have not risen in

tandem with increased performance. At

the same time, in terms of accident rates,

2004 was the safest year ever in Europe.

These results are something that all of us who are involved in air

traffic management can and should be proud of. At the same time,

we cannot fail to recognise that with air traffic in Europe expected

to more than double by the year 2025, we will have to do much

more if we are to continue with the levels of safety, efficiency and

cost-effectiveness passengers are now coming to expect.

If we are to ensure ongoing efficiency in particular, we need to

look closely at those areas that could prove to be the weaker links

in the air traffic management chain. One key area that does require

specific emphasis is airports. Despite the fall in delays over the

past five years, the share of delays attributed to airports has

remained more or less constant. While this has not prevented per-

formance in capacity from improving dramatically, it is however an

early indication of the need to address the capacity crunch in a

holistic systems approach which would include airports.

While already today airports represent one of the main limiting

factors, a recent study ‘Challenges to Growth’ carried out by

EUROCONTROL and ECAC found that by 2025, airports will

severely constrain traffic growth – with up to 3.7 million flights per

annum not being accommodated – even if the latent capacity of the

airport network is fulfilled. 75% of European airports see no possi-

bility of adding new runways in the next 20 years – despite the fact

that within 5 years the top 20 European airports will have severe

capacity shortages. Much work has already been done to address

the capacity crunch, and together with partners from across the

industry, we are looking at how we can squeeze the last drops of

capacity from the current system.

But while we need to ensure that traffic can continue to grow,

we also need to look at the other two key elements of the airport

challenge – safety and environment. Runway incursions are still

considered one of the leading hazards and addressing this issue

successfully will require the widespread application of the

European Action Plan for the prevention of Runway Incursions. With

global warming a major threat to our planet, and noise and emis-

sions of increasing public concern, airports should ensure that a

suitable environmental approach is built into all their activities.

In the three areas of capacity, environment and safety, the air

transport industry must work together, and adopt a cooperative

decision-making approach if we are to be successful. In this issue

of Skyway, together with some of the main actors, we take a closer

look at the issues surrounding this key question.

Víctor M. Aguado

Director General

Chers lecteurs,

Depuis cinq ans, le système de gestion du trafic aérien en Europe

affiche d’excellents résultats. Entre 1999 et 2004, le trafic a augmen-

té de 10% mais les retards, eux, ont chuté de 67%, sans que les coûts

ne s’accroissent en proportion de la hausse des performances. Qui

plus est, l’année 2004 a été la plus sûre jamais enregistrée en Europe

en termes d’accidents. Ces résultats constituent, pour tous ceux d’en-

tre nous qui sont chargés de la gestion du trafic aérien, un succès

dont nous pouvons et devons nous enorgueillir. Dans le même temps,

nous ne pouvons nier que le doublement prévu du trafic aérien en

Europe, d'ici à 2025, nous obligera à en faire beaucoup plus encore

si nous voulons conserver les niveaux de sécurité, d’efficacité et de

rentabilité auxquels les passagers s’attendent désormais.

Ainsi, pour maintenir un niveau d’efficacité adéquat, nous devons

étudier de près les domaines qui pourraient se révéler être les

maillons faibles de la chaîne de gestion du trafic aérien. Les aéro-

ports, en particulier, constituent l’un de ces domaines clés qui requiè-

rent une attention spécifique. Malgré la baisse des retards enregistrée

ces cinq dernières années, la part des retards imputable aux aéro-

ports demeure plus ou moins constante. Si cet état de choses n’a pas

empêché des gains considérables de capacité, il témoigne toutefois

de la nécessité de traiter le problème critique de la capacité selon

une méthode systémique globale, qui intègre les aéroports.

Alors qu'aujourd'hui déjà, les aéroports représentent, parmi nos

partenaires, l'une des principales entraves, il ressort d’une étude

récente sur les “Défis à la croissance”, réalisée par EURO-

CONTROL et la CEAC, que les aéroports constitueront, d’ici à 2025,

un frein important à la croissance, puisque 3,7 millions de vols par

an ne pourront être pris en charge, même si la capacité potentielle

du réseau aéroportuaire était pleinement exploitée. Quelque 75%

des aéroports européens déclarent ne pouvoir se doter de nouvel-

les pistes dans les 20 prochaines années, alors même que les 20

plus grands aéroports européens souffriront d'une forte pénurie de

capacité dans les cinq années à venir. De nombreuses actions ont

déjà été menées pour pallier les problèmes de capacité, et nous

étudions maintenant, avec les acteurs de l’ensemble du secteur

aéronautique, comment dégager les ultimes possibilités du systè-

me actuel.

Mais, si nous voulons assurer la poursuite de la croissance du

trafic, nous devons aussi tenir compte de deux autres éléments inti-

mement liés au défi que pose la capacité aéroportuaire : la sécurité

et l’environnement. Les incursions sur piste sont toujours considé-

rées comme l’un des principaux dangers, qui ne pourra être com-

battu avec succès que par la mise en œuvre, à grande échelle, du

Plan d'action européen pour la prévention des incursions sur piste.

Face à la lourde menace que constitue le réchauffement planétaire

et aux préoccupations croissantes du public à l’égard du bruit et des

émissions, les aéroports devraient veiller à ce que toutes leurs acti-

vités intègrent une approche environnementale appropriée.

Dans ces trois domaines que sont la capacité, l’environnement et

la sécurité, les acteurs du transport aérien doivent, pour aboutir, unir

leurs efforts et favoriser la prise de décision consensuelle. Dans ce

numéro de Skyway, nous nous penchons, avec quelques acteurs de

premier plan, sur différents aspects de cette question fondamentale.

Víctor M. Aguado

Directeur général

EUROCONTROL andEuropean airports

4

EUROCONTROL andEuropean airports

A recent and very detailed study by EUROCONTROL into the evolution of traffic demand revealed some significant information for airports.

Known as the Challenges to Growth 2004Study, this work updated a previous report that was completed in 2001.

By Paul Wilson,Head of AirportThroughput Unit

A recent and very detailed study by EUROCONTROL into the evolution of traffic demand revealed some significant information for airports.

Known as the Challenges to Growth 2004Study, this work updated a previous report that was completed in 2001.

By Paul Wilson,Head of AirportThroughput Unit

The EUROCONTROLapproach to airportsAlthough future traffic growth can bevery difficult to predict due to the possi-bility of unforeseen external factors, thehigh forecast over the period of thestudy, up to 2025, indicated that traffichas the potential to increase by a factorof 2.5. The same report also estimatedhowever, that the airport network haslong-term potential for 60% capacitygrowth using existing or planned infra-structure.

Figures such as these clearly indicatethat many airports in the future will needto engage in high-intensity runwayoperations, to ensure that the full poten-tial of the runways is realised and whererequired, that all latent capacity isunlocked.

Experience has shown that it can takemany years to reach this point where arunway can consistently deliver maxi-mum possible throughput, using mini-mum permissible separations. Thereare many issues that must be carefullyconsidered, such as controller and pilotworkload, human factors, possible con-struction of new runway exits andaccess points and environmentalrestrictions.

EUROCONTROL, which was created in1960, has traditionally devoted itsefforts towards the en-route arena,where capacity restrictions and conges-tion initially manifested themselves.Within this area there have been signifi-cant achievements. Working closelywith air navigation service providersand aircraft operators, the increase inavailable capacity has been in the orderof 50% over the last few years.Enhancements in the operation of theCentral Flow Management Unit andother pan-European projects such asthe 8.33 mHz frequency division andthe reduced vertical separation criteriahave delivered huge benefits. The factthat rapid progress was being achievedin the en-route area was recognised,

and whilst this work continues, an addi-tional EUROCONTROL focus wasplaced on airports in the 1990s.

For EUROCONTROL this was a newexperience, and certainly for the firstfew years was a very difficult road totread. EUROCONTROL had entered aworld in which airports operated in avery challenging commercial environ-ment, where there were many differinginstitutional operating arrangements,where there were growing environmen-tal pressures, and where it seemed newrestrictions and new mandatory require-ments were a regular feature. Due to thecomplex and diverse nature of airportoperations, it was obvious that in orderto make progress a team effort wouldbe needed. This would certainly involveairport operators, both with associationsand with individual airports, and to thisend many close links have been estab-lished, not least with Airports CouncilInternational – Europe, which has beeninstrumental in designing the eventualEUROCONTROL Airport Programme.Of equal importance are the air naviga-tion service providers and controllerassociations, and input from theAirlines. This latter point has beenachieved extremely effectively byestablishing close links with IATA, whohave proved very willing to provideinput from the airlines, which are ofcourse the main users of the airport air-side operation. Finally very close coor-dination was established with theEuropean Commission, which contin-ues to initiate an R&D effort on airportoperations. From the outset it was obvi-ously considered essential that theEUROCONTROL effort should not dupli-cate any activities undertaken else-where, but where possible should com-plement them.

Having established these alliances, andunderstanding the challenging natureof airport operations, the philosophy atthe outset was to generate a low-costand operationally-focused programmethat would help airports to enhancesafety, efficiency and capacity, so that

Skyway 37 - Summer 2005 5

Focu

s

wherever possible projected trafficdemand could be accommodated.EUROCONTROL was not going toidentify gold-plated and costly solu-tions, or try to solve a problem that didnot exist.

In terms of airport operations there aremany areas where significant improve-ments may be possible. Operations inpoor weather, which in 2003 accountedfor several million minutes’ delay is onesuch area, as are the existing fairlycrude wake vortex separation criteriawhich are a huge constraint to runwaycapacity.

The many prospective areas weredebated with the Airport OperationTeam, which is a group of around 70representative airport stakeholders.After this debate, and following consul-tation with other airport representatives,the first EUROCONTROL AirportProgramme was confirmed and initiat-ed in 2001. The areas selected as highpriority in this first programme were:

■ Enhancing safety by the preventionof runway incursions

■ Capacity assessment■ Capacity enhancement■ Capacity planning■ Advanced Surface Movement

Guidance and Control Systems■ Collaborative Decision Making■ The A380 wake vortex separation

criteria■ Airport environmental mitigation

procedures and measures.

Whilst it is recognised that not all areasare covered, this Programme was con-sidered to include the high-priorityitems that should be dealt with as soonas possible.

Brief details of these projects followbelow.

Runway incursion prevention

There is around one incursion per daywithin the European area, and incur-sions without doubt represent a high-risk area, evidenced by a number ofactual collisions over recent years.

A very active working group, com-posed of representatives from allorganisations involved in runway oper-ations, has produced the EuropeanAction Plan for the Prevention ofRunway Incursions. This has beenwidely distributed and implemented,and the majority of medium and large-sized airports now have local runwaysafety teams in place. This is a complexproblem, and work continues to devel-op this initiative further. There is closecooperation with the FAA and AirServices Australia, with the objective ofachieving total harmonisation of all pro-cedures. Due to the global nature of airtransport it is these regional differencesthat can result in confusion and whichcan and have resulted in many runwayincursions.

Capacity assessment

EUROCONTROL has produced a verysophisticated tool known as theCommon Agreed Methodology forAirport airside Capacity Assessment(CAMACA) designed to accuratelyassess the capacity of runways, taxi-way and apron areas. This tool is nowavailable and has already been widelyused. One important feature was incor-porated in CAMACA in recognition ofthe very high cost of building new taxi-ways or runway exits. This “what if” fea-ture can calculate the increase incapacity that would be achievedshould any new infrastructure, such asrunway rapid exit taxiways, be con-structed. The output from this featurecan provide valuable input for the cost-benefit assessment of proposed invest-ments.

Capacity enhancementAs noted earlier, there will be a require-ment for many runways to increasetheir throughput as traffic grows. This isa complex process with many elementsthat need to be considered. The EURO-

EUROCONTROL and European airports (cont’d)Fo

cus

6

CONTROL Capacity Enhancementproject has developed a step-by-stepmethodology that will facilitate capacityenhancement. Key to this project,which has already been tested and hasproduced increases in capacity, is aclose working relationship betweencontrollers, pilots and airport operators.

Capacity planningThis project covers the development ofa medium-term capacity plan that canbe implemented over a five-year periodas traffic increases. Constraints thatmay restrict capacity such as airspaceand environmental considerations areincluded. Although still under develop-ment, this process has been very successfully trialled at two Europeanairports.

Advanced SurfaceMovement Guidance andControl Systems (A-SMGCS)The problem with the first generation ofairport surface radars was that therewere no clear guidelines on how theyshould be used operationally.

Executive control is not possible, andthey are used to supplement the visualobservations of the controller or providethe ability to monitor traffic in poor visi-bility.

The new generation of surveillanceequipment, which is now commerciallyavailable, is very sophisticated and hasthe ability to carry out many functions.The EUROCONTROL activity in thisarea is the definition of air traffic controlprocedures that will allow this equip-ment to be used to its full potential. Thefirst tranche of procedures has nowbeen trialled at a number of major air-ports – it is the intention to submit theseto ICAO for global adoption towards theend of 2005.

Collaborative Decision Making (CDM)Whilst airports can be awash with dataand information, it is a fact that thisinformation is not always available tothose who need it. In simple terms thisproject is about delivering up-to-dateinformation to the people who need it atthe correct time, which will then signifi-cantly enhance the quality of decisions,so reducing delay and resulting inincreased utilisation of resources.Development of enhanced proceduresand processes continues at fourEuropean airports, whilst the earlyapplications are being implemented atmany other locations.

This project is delivering significantbenefits in terms of increased efficiency.

EnvironmentalresponsibilityEnvironmental work is of such impor-tance that a separate EUROCONTROLEnvironmental Unit has now beenestablished. The environment teamcovers all phases of flight, and will beinitiating EUROCONTROL’s firstEnvironmental Programme in late 2005.This Programme will be focussed onairport issues and will include:

Continuous DescentApproaches (CDA)A multi-discipline EUROCONTROLteam is developing guidance and sup-port resources for pan-European‘capacity friendly’ Continuous DescentApproach (CDA) technique based onthe provision of distance to go informa-tion.

Initial CDA concept-proving trials areunderway at Manchester and other tri-als at Stockholm-Arlanda Airport andBucharest-Henry Coanda InternationalAirport (Bucharest) are planned.

Other environmental workThe concept of CollaborativeEnvironmental Management (CEM) isalso being developed and resourceswill be provided to airport operationalstakeholders to help them to effectivelyrespond to an airport’s environmentalchallenges.


Focu

s

CEM stakeholder liaison schematic

Aviation RegulatorOther ATSPs

Airframe andEngine Manufacturers

FMS suppliers

Community, Government, NGOsInternational Agencies (EUROCONTROL)

EU, ECAC, ICAO etc.

ATSPAircraft

Operator

AirportOperator

CEM

EnvironmentRegulator CommunityPlanning AuthoritiesLocal Govenment

CEM development model

Level 4Joint Action

Level 3Consultation

Level 2Information

Level 3Understanding

Col

lab

orat

ive

Lear

ning

Con

flict

Res

olut

ion

Working with European airports, ACIEUROPE, IATA and other key stake-holders, the Environmental Unit is alsopresently developing the beta-test ver-sion of ‘SOPHOS’, a web-based airportand environment resource. SOPHOSwill contain around 20 support resourcemodules including:

■ recommended practice guidance(quantification, evaluation and man-agement)

■ a secure benchmarking facility(being developed with ACIEUROPE)

■ guidance on the ATM-relevantaspects of undertaking an EIA

■ a European ATM and EnvironmentInformation Repository

■ simple interactive environmentalsignificance assessment tool

■ provision of basic airport-specificnoise and emissions data usingflight data

In addition, the Environmental Domain,alongside the EUROCONTROLExperimental Centre’s Society, Eco-nomy and Environment Unit is also sup-porting a range of international ‘airportand environment’ initiatives includingdata provision to policy decision- makers, ICAO-CAEP, SOURDINE,AERONET and XNOISE

A380 separation criteriaThe objective of this late addition tothe EUROCONTROL Airport Pro-gramme is to confirm the separationcriteria of the A380, which will enterinto service during 2006. The project isbeing jointly run with the JAA, FAA,ICAO and Airbus.

These then are the elements of the firstairport programme and environmentalwork which are proving to be very suc-cessful due to its highly operationalfocus. As noted earlier there are otherareas that need to be covered, andseveral of these are now being devel-oped for inclusion in a second airportprogramme. These include the use oftime-based separations on finalapproach, replacing the traditional dis-tance-based criteria. The objective isto try to overcome the significant lossof runway capacity that is inevitablewhenever there is a headwind ofgreater than 15 knots on finalapproach. This is a common weatherfeature in Europe, and is a factor thatresults in considerable disruption.Early development work is nearing anend, and the results to date indicatethat this is in a feasible concept. Otherareas of work that are in the planningstage are targeted on improving oper-ations in poor weather and, as men-tioned earlier, the updating of wakevortex separation criteria. This lastarea is important, and I believe signifi-cant improvements can be achieved insome areas. As an example, at themoment, even when there are signifi-cant crosswinds on a runway, air trafficcontrollers are required to apply thestandard wake vortex separation crite-ria. With the new generation of LIDAR-type equipment, which can actuallytrack vortices in real time, it is now

possible to determine if the cross-winds destroy or move the vorticesaway from the runway. If this is thecase, then reductions in the separationcriteria may be possible.

The EUROCONTROL approach to air-ports is to work as a team with airportoperators, air navigation serviceproviders and airlines. This approach isessential, and the collaboration is prov-ing extremely successful. All develop-ments and concepts are put beforestakeholders on a regular basis to con-firm the EUROCONTROL work remainsfocused, cost-effective and will pro-duce real benefits.

The EUROCONTROL airport visionremains to provide cost-effective solu-tions that will help all airports to operateto their maximum potential, whilstenhancing the safety levels of runwayoperations. This vision, with the activeinput of airport stakeholders, is beingrapidly achieved and the existingAirport Programme is scheduled to fin-ish in 2006, when all of the projects willbe complete. A second programme isunder development to complement theinitial activities, which again will beintended to enhance capacity and alsoassist in recovering some of the capac-ity lost in poor weather. ■

EUROCONTROL and European airports (cont’d)Fo

cus

8

© P

hoto

: D. S

met

Background

ATC operations are one (significant)component of the complex interactionof diverse actors and services whichcollectively form Airport Operations.Improvement in runway throughput hasbeen facilitated by “high-speed” exitsand they work. Airport surfacethroughput is aided by AdvancedSurface Movement and GuidanceSystems and the growing adoption ofCollaborative Decision Making is pro-viding efficiency gains.

Further capacity gains will be achievedthrough the implementation of researchconducted into the redefinition of sepa-

ration minima to accommodate wake-vortex generation and the adjustmentof distance-based separation to reflectstrong headwind conditions.

All of the above will aid airportthroughput, but except for ongoingcapacity modelling, each can beregarded as a “one-shot” gain. Thereis just so much concrete that can belaid before the physical limits of an air-port or the benefits to be obtainedfrom such an investment are reachedor exceeded.

So how can the theoretical capacity ofan airport be exploited and additionalcapacity be made available?

Time-ordered system

GeneralAirport operations constitute a complexinteraction of many dissimilar activitiesundertaken by diverse organisationsranging from airlines, air crews, han-dling agents, engineering support, fuel,catering, and the providers of safetyand security services. Many servicesare provided under contract and nophysical links exist between the part-ners. In consequence, coordinationand management of these differentactivities may be dysfunctional, and ademanding, complex task be mademore challenging by the absence of acommon situational picture. Is the air-


Focu

s

The “en-route to en-route”time-ordered concept

Enhanced airport throughput

By 2004 the cost and impact of airport-related delays had reached parity withthose for en-route and were recognised as a major constraint to growth1. The EUROCONTROL “Constraints to Growth” study published in early 2005

confirmed this. It recorded that if traffic volumes continued to grow at even theconservative predicted rate and airport throughput capacity problems were not

resolved, thirty percent of traffic demand would not be accommodated. Clearly change is needed.

1- EUROCONTROLPerformance ReviewCommission ReportPRR7 refers.

By Ken Reid,Head of Airports andEnvironment Domain

craft on schedule or not? Each partnermay use a “different” source of time todetermine when assets should bedeployed. Time sources used includethe published timetable, airport infor-mation system (FIND) and aircraftACARS messages. The absence ofthe common picture means that assetdeployment is frequently not har-monised with real-time traffic move-ment and inefficiencies are introducedand capacity lost.

Due to its “glamorous” image, it is fre-quently forgotten that aviation is just aservice industry. The task is to move acommodity or person from one prede-termined point to another. In per-forming its role, it executes specific,identified tasks in accordance with a clearly defined, pre-ordered se-quence. Other industries perform in asimilar way. Take for instance vehiclemanufacturing2.

Time-ordered processesThe vehicle production line is designedfor the efficient assembly of compo-nents through a combination of just-in-time delivery of parts and the effectiveperformance of clearly defined taskswithin a time-sequenced series ofevents. The process is planned, man-aged and potential disruptions to thesystem identified at an early stage and

mitigation instituted ahead of the event.Unforeseen events occur but the“planned” system ensures that allactors are identified, their roles clearlyspecified, and that effective means ofcommunications exist to ensure thatcollaborative decision making canapply. With a time- ordered process acompany can plan its investments inplant, machinery and people andensure that these are tailored to actualneed to efficiently use capital.Moreover, the time-ordering of thedelivery of components means that thecontracted suppliers of these goods

can likewise plan their efficient use ofcapital. Now compare this with thedysfunctional “organisation” of air-ports.

Situational awarenessThe absence of a common picture, thelack of effective in-time communicationand cooperatio and the hoarding ofinformation results in a somewhat con-fused “picture” which when events runto schedule has little impact. The con-verse is true when even minor changesto the plan occur. If effective means ofunderstanding and cooperation wereavailable, improved situation aware-ness would benefit all airport opera-tions stakeholders at little or no cost.

Effective management of assets wouldresult in reduced capacity loss, anincrease in throughput and a directreturn to the bottom-line of the airportoperator. The airlines would gain from“extra” capacity and reduced costs ofdisruption, and support services fromincreased business and the ability toredeploy contingency staff and equip-ment to operational and therefore rev-enue earning tasks. Terminal operationswould benefit from additional through-put. And the passengers would gainfrom a more faithful adherence to thetimetable.

Focu

s

10

2- Vehicle manufacturing has been used toillustrate a logical, plannedprocess only.It is acknow-ledgedthat such processesare not subject to themany and diversepoints of potentialfailure which characterise ATM.

Enhanced airport throughputThe “en-route to en-route” time-ordered concept (cont’d)

Time-ordered system

Collaborative information sharing toprovide the required data to all thepartners in the airport operations par-adigm is essential to ensure that allwho need it have the same accurate,maintained, predictive picture and it isthe foundation for CollaborativeDecision Making.

The time-ordered system will refineforecast to ultimately provide near real-time data. For example, “on-block”time. To be of real use, accurate pre-dictive time is needed some thirty min-utes or more before the event with realtime data (actual holding delays, cur-rent approach times) or statistical dataused to refine the estimated time of thefollowing event.

Yet “Gate-to-Gate” management maynot be the right basis for the time-ordered system. We would argue thatthere are just two time-block compo-nents of ATM: en-route and the airport,and that the latter forms the basis of“En-route to En-route” management.

En-route to en-routeThe individual components of such asystem already exist or are in theadvanced stages of development forthe management of the airport “en-route to en-route” operations. Arrivaland departure and gate managementsoftware are either commercial prod-ucts or close to production, and anadvanced airport surface movementmanagement system is currently in the early stages of specification3.Moreover, airports are increasinglyintroducing distributed informationsystems and Wi-Fi nets. What is gen-erally missing is the fusing of theseactivities into a single consistent con-cept.

The output of these interlinked sys-tems would be the accurate predictionof “on-block” and “off-block” times todefine the period in which the turn-around of an aircraft should be opti-

mised. The accurate prediction ofarrival at a specified gate will allow the“time-ordered” turn-around process.The asset manager, the “dispatcher”will ensure that the components areavailable and that they arrive on timeand in sequence. Likewise, a servicesupplier will manage its resources toensure its compliance with the plan.Any deviations will be identified at anearly stage, and mitigation measuresput in place.

Timely warnings of non-compliance willresult in the revision of the plan throughexecutive or collaborative decisionmaking as required. Effective interac-tion of all actors will accommodate theroutine “deviation” case. Major “sys-tem” failures will require significanteffort to resolve but with the continuousinteraction made possible by effectiveinformation sharing the basis for signif-icant decision-making will already exist.

From theory to practiceThe “time-ordered” system is a theo-retical concept which, given the manyand diverse failure points of ATM, can-not be achieved in its entirety. Yet asubstantial element of it could beestablished with the benefits flowingthrough to all but the most difficultmajor failure cases. Moreover, if theinteractive, collaborative managementsystem based on the common infor-mation pool were to be implemented,

then its continued use would lead togreater efficiencies based on thegrowing experience of all the actorsinvolved. Could this be the first stepstowards the implementation of System-wide Information Management, SWIM?

The way forwardAirports are not individual and isolatedcomponents of ATM. An event at oneairport has a “knock-on” effect withinthe ATM system as a whole. ATM mustbe managed on a “net centric” basis,each airport being considered as anode interlinked with all the others with-in the system.

The implementation of the “time-ordered system” will be challenging.Recognising this, the concept hasbeen included in the proposal for thejoint EUROCONTROL/European Com-mission ATM Master Plan project –SESAME. SESAME will take this high-level vision and develop it into moredetailed, practical concepts forchange. It is anticipated that once vali-dated these will form the basis of amajor implementation programme inaround 2010 and beyond.

The costs are estimated to be low andthe benefits are great, not least in pro-viding the means to deliver the addi-tional capacity that is so clearlyrequired. The “time-ordered system”will be a major driver for change. ■


Focu

sTime-ordered system

TimeANS/ASD

ATM performance - En-route to en-routeTurn aroundperformance

Primarilyinfluenced

by AirspaceUsers and

GroundHandlers

Taxi outand depart

Land andtaxi in

En-routeflight

Climb Descent Climb

Primarilyinfluenced by

ATS andAirspace Users

Primarilyinfluenced by

ATS andAirspace Users

Primarilyinfluenced

by AirspaceUsers and

GroundHandlers

(AIM) Aeronautical Information Management

Turn aroundperformanceATS performance ATS performance

Taxi outand depart

En-routeflight

Rampcongestion

Gateavailability

Rampcongestion

3- EuropeanCommission 6th

Framework project - EMMA

© L

.F.V

. Sw

eden

These airports have numerous partnersincluding ATC, airport operators, air-lines and, last but not least, ATFM activ-ities of the CFMU, all of which impacton daily operations. These partnershipsare further complicated by varyingtypes of airport ownership (from State-owned to fully or partially privatised)and combined civil and military opera-tions at some locations. It is essentialthat a partnership approach, a key ele-ment of the Airport OperationsProgramme, is utilised to ensure that alllatent capacity is effectively released.

Airports are a key element of local andregional development, though increas-ingly they are becoming restricted byenvironmental limitations and often theabsence of intermodality.

With all of these factors in mind, theEUROCONTROL Airport OperationsProgramme (APR) was launched inJanuary 2002 with the objective of pro-viding stakeholders with fast, easy-to-implement and cost-effective solutionsto help to enhance safety, capacity andefficiency.

APR is comprised of four highly inter-dependent projects:■ Airport airside Capacity

Enhancement (ACE);■ Advanced Surface Movement

Guidance & Control System (A-SMGCS);

■ Airport Collaborative DecisionMaking (A-CDM); and

■ Runway Safety.

The ’products’ of each project form partof a set of solutions for current airportoperational limitations. While solutionsmay be implemented independently,the simultaneous implementation ofseveral products significantly increasesthe benefits of having implementedthem in isolation.

In this context, marketing and commu-nication with our stakeholders hasbecome essential to pave the way forsuccess. To date, our activities haveincluded airport conferences, work-shops, road shows, strong participationin ACI and IATA meetings, and the pro-

12

The Airport OperationsProgramme

Focu

s

The busiest 133 airports within the ECAC region currently handle 90% of its air traffic movements

(Challenge To Growth study, December 2004). It should be noted, however, that ACI EUROPE (one of

our key stakeholders) has 450 members, and the ECACregion has more than 1000 airports with commercial

operations. As traffic increases it is inevitable that anincreasing number of these airports will also need to

engage in high-intensity runway operations.

By Eric Miart,Programme Managerof the AirportOperations Programme

duction of brochures, posters, videos,CDs, websites and newsletters.

We have paved the way for success bydelivering products tailored to ourstakeholders’ needs, with the aim ofdelivering by the end of 2006.

AIRPORT AIRSIDE CAPACITYENHANCEMENT: IMPROVINGAIRSIDE CAPACITY

Airport capacity is one of the mainconstraints to growth in air transport,particularly at major European air-ports. New runways or new airportsare long-term projects that do not alleviate short/medium-term constraints.

The ACE project was established tocreate the conditions for achievingoperational improvements in airportairside capacity enhancement in theshort to medium-term and to supportMember States in their implementa-

tion of observed best practices,capacity planning and enhancementmethods to unlock latent capacity.

Creating the conditions

Best practicesThe ACE team assessed and collatedbest practices from a number of keyEuropean airports which are alreadyengaged in high-intensity runway opera-tions (HIRO), in order to develop amethod of achieving similarly highthroughputs at other airports in theregion. The focus on HIRO techniques iscomplemented by flexible use of apronsand taxiways, hold allocation manage-ment, optimisation of departure intervalsand reduction in departure separations.

Awareness campaignsA fundamental part of enhancing airportcapacity is conveying the message tostakeholders that “every movement mat-ters”. Seconds gained by, amongstother things, use of ATC best practices,operational planning and timely reaction

by flight crews to ATC clearances all addup to create additional capacity andreduce delays.

An ongoing ACE deliverable is the pro-duction of CD-Rom based awarenesspackages. Aimed specifically at pilots(Free up the Runway) and ATCOs (KeepThem Moving – currently under review),these packages (supported by majorEuropean airlines, IATA and ACI) containbest practices, backed up by case stud-ies, together with details of where theymay be applicable.

ACE support for implementation

ACE capacity enhancement process The process for implementing capacityenhancement measures was devel-oped and then tested at several majorairports. It begins by establishing thebaseline capacity of the runway (or run-way system) and determining the val-ues of key indicators such as runwayoccupancy times, pilot reaction timesto ATC clearances, approach separa-tions, etc. The ACE team then advisethe airport stakeholders throughout theprocess, starting with the best methodfor data collection depending on theinfrastructure and equipment and sys-tems available.


Focu

s

Recent application of this method at a major

European airport resultedin a 15% enhancement

of capacity.

Collected data is analysed using flexi-ble and configurable tools such asCommonly Agreed Methodology forAirport airside Capacity Assessment(CAMACA) and Performance IndicatorAnalysis Tool for Airports (PIATA), pro-viding information on the effect of vari-ations in parameters or determiningwhat value these must be to achieve agiven capacity.

Pilot Reaction Time and RunwayOccupancy Time analysis methodsprovide airlines with tailored, confiden-tial reports showing how their crewsperform in relation to similar aircrafttypes. This information is extremelypowerful, helping airlines to improvetheir method of operation in order toachieve optimum efficiency in the useof the runway.

Experienced operational stakeholdersare brought together, in a series offorums, exchanging views and explor-ing capacity enhancement proposals,based on these outputs, resulting in theformulation of a focussed, relevantaction plan for presentation to seniormanagement.

To achieve optimum efficiency, it isessential that all operational playersperform in a predictable and efficientmanner and it is vital that the key mes-sages are communicated effectively tothe local operational community.

A number of major airports have beenassisted in mounting awareness cam-paigns, targeted specifically at pilotsand controllers. These campaigns relyon the development of highly specific,localised awareness leaflets orbrochures and have resulted in demon-strable improvements in key indicators,such as line-up and runway occupancytimes.

Capacity planningA structured, low-cost, qualitativemethod has been developed, allowingstakeholders to identify the constrain-ing factors on their airport’s capacityand to determine the best remedialactions to match predicted growth. Thisapproach gives local management(including ANSPs, airport operationsand airlines) a clear, understandableframework within which they are able touse local expertise to plan for futuregrowth.

The Capacity Planning method pro-vides templates, listing factors that areexpected to constrain capacity growth,and makes possible scoring of theimpact that these will have on capacityin both normal and adverse weatherconditions. The list of typical con-straints is provided as guidance andshould be tailored to the specificrequirements of the local airport.

Complex interactions can obscure fun-

damental constraints on capacity andscoring is therefore split into fourrespective categories affecting run-ways, apron/taxiways, departure/approach and the environment.

The final step of the exercise is for thelocal management team to decide onremedial action for the constraints andthen assign impact and cost scores toeach, in order to identify the most cost-effective solutions.

The result is a strategic action planthat makes the best use of availablebudget and resources, achieving amedium to long-term capacityenhancement able to meet forecastdemand.

A-SMGCS: IMPROVINGSITUATIONAL AWARENESSFOR CONTROLLERS Air traffic control at the airport is cur-rently performed using a mixture of visu-al surveillance, supplemented by theuse of Surface Movement Radar (SMR).However, SMR is not intended to beused as the sole basis for decision-making, with visual observation and/orprocedural methods still the principalmeans used to control traffic.

The concept of Advanced SurfaceMovement Guidance and ControlSystem (A-SMGCS) has been devel-oped to help improve this situation inthe face of increasing traffic levels,and the need to maintain the highestlevel of service at all times. A-SMGCSconsists of four main functions:

■ Surveillance, which provides the posi-tion and identification of all traffic;

■ Control, providing conflict detectionand alerting;

■ Routing, through which the mostefficient route is designated foreach aircraft or vehicle; and

■ Guidance, giving pilots and driversindications enabling them to followan assigned route.

Focu

s

14

The Airport Operations Programme (cont’d)

These functions are complex andimplementation will be evolutionary,through four levels:

■ Level 1 provides surveillance, dis-play systems and procedures topermit comprehensive controller sit-uation awareness;

■ Level 2 consists of Level 1 functionstogether with automated monitoringand alerting functions, initiallyincluding the prediction of incur-sions onto runways or into restrict-ed areas;

■ Levels 3 and 4 correspond to theintroduction of routing, automaticguidance and planning functions.

Many major European airports arealready implementing basic Level 1 andLevel 2 functions. The routing and guid-ance functions of Levels 3 and 4 requirefurther research and development.

A-SMGCS project aims The EUROCONTROL A-SMGCS Projectis intended to facilitate the harmonisedimplementation of A-SMGCS Levels 1 &2 through:

■ The development and validation ofagreed operational concepts andprocedures;

■ Addressing licensing and trainingissues;

■ The development of generic safetyand human factor cases (which canbe used in support of local imple-mentations);

■ Identifying and quantifying the ben-efits of implementation.

Stakeholder involvement with theproject is ensured through the use ofworking groups, workshops, an annu-al A-SMGCS course (at IANS) as wellas regular reports to the AOT, ICAO,etc.

A-SMGCS Level 1 operational conceptThe position and identity of all aircrafton the movement area (i.e. runways,taxiways and aprons) and vehicles onthe manoeuvring area (i.e. runwaysand taxiways) is displayed. Any‘intruder’ (such as a lost vehicle) willalso be appropriately highlighted. Acooperative surveillance system isnecessary to detect and identify coop-erative traffic (i.e. equipped withtransponder), with a non-cooperativesurveillance system provided to detectnon-cooperative traffic (which mayinclude intruders). It is expected that

all participating traffic will be cooper-ative, and therefore automatically andsecurely labelled. Non-cooperativetraffic will be the exception andprocessed by special procedures.Today these requirements are com-monly met through the use of Mode Smultilateration and Surface Move-ment Radar.

ATC procedures will define how thesurveillance information provided byA-SMGCS Level 1 may be used.

A-SMGCS Level 1 implementationdoes not change the current respon-sibilities of controllers, flight crewsand vehicle drivers.

A-SMGCS Level 2operational conceptThe surveillance functions of Level 1are complemented by an automatedsystem, capable of detecting conflictsor infringements on runways andrestricted areas.

The conflicts and infringements consid-ered at Level 2 are related to the mosthazardous situations, such as:

■ Conflicts on active runways causedby aircraft or vehicles (e.g. runwayincursion);

■ Restricted area incursions by air-craft or vehicles (e.g. incursion ontoa closed taxiway).

A-SMGCS Level 2 is intended to beused as a safety net and does notchange the current roles of controllers,flight crews and vehicle drivers.

ATC proceduresProposed ATC procedures related tothe use of A-SMGCS in an aerodromecontrol service are being developedusing existing ICAO-approved proce-dures as a basis. The main principlebeing assessed is the use of A-SMGCSsurveillance data to replace visualobservation (when appropriate, suchas at night or in reduced visibility).

Validation processThe agreed concepts and proceduresdeveloped by the project are being val-idated through simulations and opera-tional trials, focussing on areas suchas:

■ Safety;■ Human factors;■ Capacity and throughput; and■ Environmental impact.

The validation process includes verifi-cation of technical requirements, safetyand human factors case developmentand assessment of benefits in the areasof safety, capacity, efficiency and envi-ronment.


Focu

s

Basic SMR display A-SMGCS display

Results will be used to finalise the con-cepts and procedures, forming thebasis of ECAC-wide implementationand proposals to ICAO for global adop-tion.

SimulationsReal-time simulations of Paris CDG andOrly airports were conducted, duringthe autumn of 2004, to compare A-SMGCS Levels 1 and 2 with currentoperations. A total of 45 simulation ses-sions were organised, involving 15 con-trollers from CDG and Orly airports.

In order to ensure an effective compar-ison, various experimental conditionswere included in the simulation ses-sions (e.g. varying visibility conditionsand the insertion of special events suchas runway incursions, etc.).

Results indicated that there may be sig-nificant benefits from the implementa-tion of A-SMGCS, with improved situa-tional awareness of air traffic controllers(ATCOs), enabling better detection ofconflicts and hazards. Controllers alsoreported reduced workload, enablingthem to handle more traffic. Finally,improved planning of the movement oftraffic resulted in a reduction in averagetaxi times and hence environmentalimpact.

Operational trialsThe results of the simulations will nowbe further validated through operationaltrials taking place at five EuropeanAirports (London Heathrow, ParisCharles de Gaulle, Frankfurt, Viennaand Zurich) during the next 12 months.Controllers, pilots and drivers will beengaged in real-life implementation ofA-SMGCS concepts and procedures,while system functional testing andlong-term recording of the technicalperformance will also be carried out.

Project results &the future…Early indications are that the implemen-tation of A-SMGCS Levels 1 and 2 willdeliver significant benefits in terms ofsafety, workload and throughput. It mayalso contribute to a reduction in theenvironmental impact of airport opera-tions. These benefits areexpected to be particularly sig-nificant during periods ofreduced visibility, at night andwhen traffic is distant from thecontroller.

The results from theEUROCONTROL A-SMGCSproject will lead to the deliveryof a common set of operational

concepts and procedures for A-SMGCS Levels 1 and 2. These con-cepts and procedures will be integrat-ed with those of relevant EC R&D proj-ects (such as the 6th FrameworkProgramme EMMA Project) into a com-mon set of European proposals foramendments to ICAO documents.Also, on the basis of agreed benefits,the final concepts and procedures willbe used as the foundation for a har-monised implementation of A-SMGCSthroughout ECAC.

CDM: WORKING TOGETHER IN A COST-EFFECTIVE MANNER AT AIRPORTS …

Airport Collaborative Decision Making(CDM) is an essential element of thegate-to-gate approach to the manage-

ment of flights and isintended to improvethe way airport part-ners work togetherat an operationallevel. It covers theincreasing involve-ment of aircraft oper-ators, airport opera-tors and other serv-ice providers in theair traffic manage-

ment and developing information man-agement systems and procedures tomake full use of available data. Theobjective of the project is to producegeneric functional requirements andprocedures, so that the Airport CDMelements are implemented in a har-monised way throughout ECAC air-ports. Benefits will be achievable onlywith well-established and respectedprocedures.

In this context, Airport CollaborativeDecision Making is seen as an importantenabler for achieving best use of avail-able infrastructure (runways, taxiways,aprons, stands and gates, etc.), usageof scarce resources (equipment andmanpower) and maintaining both airport

Focu

s

16


and ATFM slot compliance.Furthermore, it aims to give aircraft oper-ators more flexibility to maximise theirown efficiency and improve the way inwhich aircraft operators, ground han-dling aagents, airport operations, ATCand the Central Flow Management Unit(CFMU) work together, emphasising theimportance of global collaboration inplanning and managing air traffic.

Project deliverablesA key project deliverable has been theconsolidation of information into a user-friendly Airport CDM ImplementationManual. A comprehensive toolkit, con-taining all the information needed toimplement CDM and enhance opera-tional efficiency. The manual provides adetailed checklist explaining, step bystep, the implementation process andincludes chapters on strategy, market-ing, key performance indicators, proce-dures, frequently asked questions,risks, mitigation and how to measuresuccess.

The manual has been distributed to anumber of European airports and isavailable upon request to every airportin the ECAC area. Alternatively, thecomplete, up-to-date contents of themanual are available via the airportCDM website www.euro-cdm.org.

All deliverables from the first years ofthe project (i.e. Operational Conceptand Functional Requirements docu-

ments, reports from research activitiesand local implementation trials) carrythe three logos of IATA, ACI and EURO-CONTROL, demonstrating the essentialcollaboration of the main airport part-ners, are regularly updated and areavailable on the airport CDM website.

Airport CDMimplementation

Field trials are being conducted at sev-eral major European airports (Brussels,Barcelona, London Heathrow andStockholm), to develop the Airport CDMprocesses. Initial results have alreadyidentified improvements in stand andgate allocation, resource management

and slot adherence, leading to a reduc-tion in costs, delays and passengercomplaints concerning displayed flightinformation.

Local CDM studies / implementationsare also being carried out at the follow-ing airports: Amsterdam, Athens,Budapest, Frankfurt, Lisbon, MilanMalpensa, Munich, Paris CDG andZurich.

Many of the above airports are currentlydeveloping CDM procedures and modi-fying their existing systems to enableCDM implementation. A Target Off-BlockTime (TOBT) procedure became opera-tional in Brussels National Airport during2004.

Airport CDM – benefits for ALLInitial studies show considerable bene-fits for ALL airport partners in terms ofimproved efficiency, better use ofresources and increased punctuality. Aninitial Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) hasindicated substantial benefits for lowinvestment. This initial CBA will be com-plemented during 2006 with a moredetailed analysis of the benefits from theadvanced implementation at airports.


Focu

s

Expected benefitsfor partners ofAirport CDM

RUNWAY SAFETY:IMPLEMENTING THEEUROPEAN ACTION PLANFOR THE PREVENTION OFRUNWAY INCURSIONS

The European Action Plan for thePrevention of Runway Incursions waslaunched in the spring of 2003 withthe full endorsement of theProvisional Council. Two years laterthe Agency is asking for informationon the scale of implementation. Thesigns are positive and an insight intothis work of the aerodrome communi-ty is given below.

Awareness

“Every effort should be made to reachoperational pilots,controllers and drivers”

Steering Committee for Runway Safety

The number of reports of runway incur-sions increased dramatically in 2003,compared to previous years. Despiteinitial appearances an increase inreports does not indicate a worseningsafety record. It represents a success-ful outcome of the local runway safetyawareness campaigns. One Member

State reported only one runway incur-sion in 2002. Following a local runwaysafety awareness campaign in 2003,100 reports were made.

One important achievement to dateregarding data collection and lesson-sharing has been the ICAO definitionof a runway incursion (applicable from25 November 2004):

Communication,error management and situational awarenessA common link between many of thecontributory factors is communication.A breakdown in communicationbetween pilots, air traffic controllersand airside vehicle drivers is said to bethe reason that more than 50% of air-crew and drivers find themselvesinvolved in a runway incursion; they arenot lost. They believe that they havepermission to be on the runway.

Aerodrome resourcemanagement –train the trainer

An aerodrome resource managementtraining course has been introduced, atthe Institute of Air Navigation Servicesin Luxembourg, in order to improveunderstanding of the breakdown incommunication during operations con-ducted on the manoeuvring area. Thecourse is intended to raise awareness

Focu

s

18

"Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle or person on the protected

area of a surface designated for the landing and take off of aircraft".

1998 1999

Runway incursions(occurrence per million flights and severity)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

A B C D E Not classified

2000 2001 2002 2003

Phot

o: J

an M

ogre

n


of the operational hazards faced whenworking on or around a runway. Focuson human factors issues reveals theimportance of communication, errormanagement and situational aware-ness. It is primarily designed for ATCstaff (especially those involved in train-ing), aerodrome operators, airlinestaff (especially aircrew) and local run-way safety team members. By the endof the course, participants will be readyto facilitate and instruct mixed groupsof staff at their local airport by provid-ing awareness of runway incursions,understanding how they occur andwhat can be done to prevent them.Participants will also be aware of how toimplement the European Action Plan forthe Prevention of Runway Incursions.

Award-winning RunwaySafety Awareness CD-RomThe CD Runway Safety AwarenessMaterial of the European Action Plan forthe Prevention of Runway Incursionshas been awarded "Merit" in the cate-gory "Online Tutorials and Training" inan annual pan-European competitionon documentation arranged by theSociety for Technical Communicators(STC).

Awareness of the possibilities for pre-venting runway incursions is high with-in the whole of the aerodrome commu-nity. Implementation actions are a prior-ity for all. The improving situationregarding runway incursion reports ismaking a positive difference. ■

More information on APR can beobtained through our web site: www.eurocontrol.int/airports


Focu

s

APR projects are supported by a wide range of stakeholders from across the aerodromeoperations community:

AIRPORTS COUNCILINTERNATIONAL

EUROPEA I

EU

RO

PE

AN

RE

G

IONS AIRLINE

AS

SO

CIA

TIO

N

eraera

The EUROCONTROL ExperimentalCentre (EEC) had already anticipatedthis development, and had establishedan Airport Research Area (APT) in2003, initially targeted at supporting theEUROCONTROL Airport OperationsProgramme.

The APT Research Area has continuedto provide support to short-term activi-ties like the Airport Programme, but hasalso undertaken the establishment ofan R&D programme to work on medium

and long-term applications. APT wasactively involved in the development ofthe second ACARE Strategic ResearchAgenda, and has been supporting theEUROCONTROL Airport Domain withthe establishment of an Airport Domainaction plan to address the issues iden-tified in PRR 7.

The initial focus was and understand-ably remains centred on Air TrafficControl (ATC) operational improve-ments such as runway and surface

movement throughputs, the exceptionbeing Collaborative Decision Making(CDM). ATC operations are one (signif-icant) component of the increasinglycomplex interaction of diverse actorsand services which collectively formairport operations.

Capacity improvements will be achievedthrough the conclusions and recommen-dations of research conducted into theredefinition of separation minima toaccommodate wake-vortex generationand the proposal of a method to adjustdistance-based separation to reflectstrong headwind conditions.

All activities are supporting an airportoperational concept which is beingdeveloped together with internal andexternal partners through the OATA1

and C-ATM2 projects.

In the longer term, a shift from an ATC-centric approach to an airport opera-tions approach is envisaged. Thisencompasses the activities of all majorelements related to the functioning ofan airport. This concept regards the air-port as one important element of the airtransport system functioning in an en-route to en-route mode.

A description of the planned R&D activ-ities is provided in this article. Theseactivities will be undertaken in supportof the EUROCONTROL Airport Domainactivities.

EUROCONTROL airportresearch and development

Focu

s

20

The EUROCONTROL Performance Review Report (PRR 7) published in mid-2004 noted that thecost and impact of airport-related delays had reached parity with en-route delays and notedthat airports were now a major constraint on growth. The EUROCONTROL “Constraints toGrowth” study reached the same conclusion. It predicts that if traffic demand continues togrow at even the conservative predicted rate and airport throughput capacity problems are notresolved, some thirty percent of traffic demand will not be accommodated.

1- EUROCONTROLOverall ATM/CNSTarget Architecture

2- EuropeanCommission 6th Framework project

By Peter EriksenHead of AirportResearch Area

Wake vortex turbulence

The strategy for the projects related towake vortex is to:

■ Conduct or support research in thenature of wake vortex ;

■ Conduct or support research intoways of detecting and predictingwake vortices;

■ Identify procedures related to wakevortex separation that can increaseairport safety and efficiency by utilis-ing state-of-the-art technology;

■ Develop meteorological forecast toolswhich are sufficiently precise toexploit the WV information.

The projects are divided into short, medi-um and long-term project depending onthe maturity of the operational concept andthe availability of enabling technologies.

The WakeSep project covers allresearch activities in which EURO-CONTROL is involved concerning theimplementation of reduced wake vortexseparation standards.

The Time-Based Separation (TBS) proj-ect defines and investigates the rele-vance of a new concept of operationapplied to the arrival phase of flights. Theactual distance-based separations are tobe replaced by time intervals, and/orspeed compensation as applicable.

More specifically, the Time-BasedSeparations project will investigate thepossibilities of preventing loss of runwaycapacity under strong wind conditionswhile maintaining the required level ofsafety by:

■ Assessing a new concept of separa-tion based on time intervals asopposed to current RADAR or ICAOwake vortex separation criteriadefined as distances;

■ Investigating use of longitudinalseparations of less than 3 NM (or aslow as 2.5 NM if this is in use);

■ Exploring the possibilities of com-pensation of wind effect by aircraftspeed adjustment and associatedrequired ATC techniques.

The Crosswind Departures researchwill define a concept of operations for areduction in the time separationsbetween departures under crosswindconditions. The initial emphasis will beon single runway configurations,although there is also a potential appli-cation for parallel runway operations.EUROCONTROL will coordinate an EC-funded project to validate the feasibilityof this concept. The objectives of theCrosswind Reduced Separations forDeparture Operations (CREDOS)Project is to develop an operationalconcept for single runway crosswinddepartures using an approach similarto that successfully employed in the S-Wake project:

■ Modelling of extensive departuredata covering WV behaviour andmeteorological conditions

■ Identifying safe separations basedon quantitative risk assessment ofWV encounter severity.

■ Validation of Concept of Operationsthrough Safety and Human Factorstudies

The initial Concept of Operations will bedeveloped by the European CONOPSTeam (ECT) from the work of the FAACONOPS Evaluation Team (CET) and,where suitable, will be proposed forinsertion into an ImplementationProgramme.

The European CONOPS Team compris-es operational experts from acrossEurope. Its role is to follow the develop-ment of new procedures in the USA

and Europe, and to evaluate the poten-tial for implementation in Europe. TheECT and CET work in close cooperationto ensure better harmonisation ofEuropean and US procedures.

In support of the OCD Domain in themedium to long-term, ATC-Wake is todevelop and build an evaluation plat-form that integrates all the necessarysubsystems for building a high-technol-ogy WV detection and prediction ATCenvironment.

Surface movementmanagementIn support of the Domain Strategy forSurface Movement Management, theA-SMGCS level 3-4 Project will contin-ue the development of A-SMGCS appli-cations with a focus on Planning,Routing and Guidance. The project willsupplement the EMMA project andassure that EUROCONTROL is in aposition to provide baseline material forEMMA and set up the necessary frame-work to ensure that deliverables fromEMMA can be exploited and imple-mented in a harmonised way through-out Europe.

European Airport MovementManagement by A-SMGCS (EMMA) isa project of the 6th FrameworkProgramme of the European Commis-sion (EC).

Whereas the aim of the first phase ofEMMA was to install and validate oper-ational prototype systems of existingproducts, the second phase will focuson advanced onboard support to pilotsand planning support to controllers.Extensive operational live trials provingthe usefulness and completeness ofthe operational and technical require-ments frame will form the basis for effi-cient A-SMGCS production and imple-


Focu

s

mentation throughout Europe in a time-to-market approach.

EMMA will provide an opportunity forEATM concepts and procedures toform the basis for major trials andpre-implementation experiments. Theproject will ensure that the EC andEATM activities will be harmonisedand geared towards a uniform appli-cation of the A-SMGCS concept inEurope.

Agreement on the distribution of workhas been reached within the consor-tium. EUROCONTROL’s participationin EMMA will focus on three items:

■ Transfer and further developmentof the operational concept andprocedures developed withinEATMP;

■ Development of functionality andhuman machine interface for theplanning and alerting support tocontrollers together with industrypartners;

■ Support for the validation of theprocedures and technical applica-tions, development of conclusionsand dissemination of results.

Human factors studiesAir traffic controllers working in controltowers are surrounded by a number ofsystems, each with their own interface,monitor, keyboard etc. It is fair to saythat the system integration takes placeinside the controller’s head.

The need for the controller to work ondifferent interfaces to control traffichas often been identified as a con-tributor to accidents and incidents.This working environment must besimplified and integrated to meetpresent and future needs.

System integration must take place atsystem level; the controller shouldhave just one working interface wherethe necessary information and inputneeds are available.

This will release controller resources toperform more high-level tasks. In addi-tion the controller will be tasked withmore system-wide responsibilities.

The objectives of this project are todevelop the requirements for the inte-grated tower controller working posi-tion, and to develop and validate proto-types based on human factors studiesof the controller’s role in the future air-port. To achieve this, the AOP Domainand the EEC will work closely with theHUM Domain and Team.

Approach and departureproceduresOptimised Procedures and Techniquesfor Improvement of Approach andLanding (OPTIMAL) is an air/groundcooperative project designed to:

■ define new/enhanced operationalprocedures for approach and land-ing for aircraft and rotorcraft in orderto increase capacity, efficiency andsafety, and decrease noise expo-sure, using advanced navigationfunctions and enhanced ATM;

■ assess in full scale/real size theshort-term approach and landingprocedures and functions (airborneand on the ground);

■ study and test longer-term functions(airborne and on the ground).

Based on ILS, MLS, GBAS and SBAS,the following procedures will be devel-oped and validated:

■ (Advanced) Continuous DescentApproach;

■ ILS look-alike procedures;■ Curved/Segmented approaches;■ RNP 0.1 RNAV approach proce-

dures;■ Non-precision approaches.

Generic procedures will be developedbut individual airports will also be con-sidered. Specific detailed procedureswill be developed for Malaga, SanSebastian, Toulouse, Bremen,

Frankfurt, Amsterdam Schipol andMalpensa.

Initial land-side studiesA scoping study to consider whichaspects of airport landside operationsare likely to have an impact on (or beimpacted by) airport throughput andthe overall air transport system hasbeen conducted in the form of a stu-dent thesis.

The aim is now to develop a referenceland-side model where the processesare identified and demonstrated, andwhere the impact of e.g. improvedinformation management and the intro-duction of emerging technologies e.g. in the security area, can be vali-dated. An additional objective is tovisualise how the ACARE vision ofreduced passenger waiting time at theairport could be materialised.

Airport of the futureAirport of the future or central link ofintermodal transport is a project explor-ing the possibility that transport modescould be collaborative instead of onlycompetitive, and exploring transportintermodality as a way of tackling whatATM/ATC could become in an attemptto envision the airport of the future.

This project has been included in orderto give an overview of airport-relatedactivities at the Agency. The EURO-CONTROL part of this project is spon-sored by the EEC.

ConclusionThe EEC has developed a strong posi-tion through airport R&D. About 15 peo-ple are involved in the work, constitut-ing a considerable base of expertiseready to address the future challengesof European airports. ■

EUROCONTROL airport research & development (cont’d)Fo

cus

22

Aircraft noise and jet engine emissionsaffect the quality of life of communitiesclose to an airport and result in con-straints being imposed on operations.These include restrictions on the num-ber of movements, hours of operation,use of runways, arrival and departureprocedures and even the types of air-craft permitted to operate. These arekey reasons why airports are now themost capacity-critical component in theEuropean ATM system. The Winter 2003edition of Skyway pointed the way todealing with environmental concerns inATM and introduced EuropeanConvergence and Implementation Plan(ECIP) objectives ENV01 – to implementBasic Continuous Descent Approach(CDA) for environmental improvementsand ENV02 – to implement Collabo-rative Environment Management (CEM)at ECAC airports. The work done byEUROCONTROL Environment Domain(ENV) has progressed these to the pointof live trials of CDA and CEM plus beta-test versions of web-based supportresources.

Aviation's adverse environmentalimpacts at airports have significantsocial and economic costs relating tohealth, education, house prices and soon. Fuel-use is a fundamental socio-economic issue both from finite globalresource and emissions perspectives.

Fuel is also a major airline cost ele-ment and environmental mitigationand constraint related costs are borneby the entire aviation industry. In themedium- term, we cannot expect any“silver bullet” step changes, either inATM or aircraft environmental perform-ance. It is now generaly recognisedthat technological advances will notoffset the increase in effects fromgrowth in air-transport demand. And

it's not just aircraft in the air that causeconcern. On the ground, the use of air-craft Auxiliary Power Units (APU) onstand, poorly maintained ground equip-ment, queuing at the holding point andengine run-ups can all result inincreased noise and emissions levels.In the longer term the environmentalimpact of increased ground transporta-tion will also grow with the expectedrise in the number of flights. The poten-tial for aircraft noise, fuel use andatmospheric emissions to constraingrowth in Europe's ATM system willtherefore increase and it follows thatenvironmental management remains ahigh priority for airport operationalstakeholders.

Much has already been done to reduceaircraft noise, fuel use and emissionsduring departure, through improvedaircraft and airspace design and spe-cific operational procedures. However,there are fewer opportunities to controlnoise and emissions from arriving air-craft due to safety, capacity and otheroperational issues. For a number of air-ports the noise contours under the pre-ferred runway approach will extend out-wards as traffic levels grow, risking theimposition of further constraints.


Focu

s

Today’s airportin tomorrow’s environment

Historically, aviation’s biggestenvironmental issues – aircraft noiseand local air quality – have beenassociated with airports.

The more solutions we can offerthe ATM industry to reduceenvironmental impact... themore opportunities there will be for sustainable growth.

By Alan Melrose,Airport Sustainability ExpertEnvironment Domain

and Dick Smith,ATM EnvironmentConsultant

EUROCONTROL's Environment Domain(ENV), working closely with the Airspaceand Navigation Domains, and with thecooperation and support of ACI EUROPE's Environmental StrategyCommittee, is currently conducting flighttrials to test EUROCONTROL's continu-ous descent approach concept atManchester International Airport. Otherflight trials are about to start atBucharest (Henri Coanda) andStockholm (Arlanda) airports. Collabo-rative Environmental Management(CEM), noise and emissions databases(SOPHOS and PAGODA) plus web-based training and awareness material,all of which are in the Domain's 'productpipeline', will produce more solutions foroperational stakeholders.

Continuous DescentApproach (CDA)Continuous Descent Approach is a fly-ing technique which offers significantreductions in aircraft noise onapproach. It also generates fuel sav-ings for the airlines. In its basic form itrequires ATC to delay the point atwhich descent clearance is issuedand to keep pilots informed of dis-tance to touchdown in order that theycan calculate their optimum rate ofdescent to avoid unnecessary periodsof level flight. By keeping their aircraftas high as possible for as long as pos-sible the noise impact on the ground isminimised.

A joint ECAC/European Commission/EUROCONTROL workshop that tookplace at EUROCONTROL's Institute ofAir Navigation Services, Luxembourg inDecember 2004 highlighted the impor-tance of the operational noise workbeing done by the Agency. The ECACDGs have enacted the workshop's rec-ommendations which include EURO-CONTROL being the focal point for har-monisation of noise abatement opera-tional procedures in Europe.

Collaborative EnvironmentManagement (CEM)The only way to effectively manage theenvironmental issues around airports isby operational stakeholders acting col-laboratively. The airport operator is usu-ally the 'accountable' body for the envi-ronment, is the main conduit with thelocal community and planning authori-ties and also operates the airport'senvironmental monitoring system. Airnavigation service providers (ANSP)facilitate aircraft operations and are theconduit with the safety regulator whileaircraft operators perform the opera-tions and are the main conduit withindustry. The actions of each can sig-nificantly affect the others. Only when acommon vision is achieved and each ofthese elements is fully coordinated, will environmental performance be optimised.

Several major airports, includingBrussels National, have expressed akeen interest in CEM and Stockholm(Arlanda) will trial the process as thebasis for the introduction of CDA.Stakeholder collaboration for the CDAtrials at Manchester and Bucharest isalready highlighting the potential forsuccess of CEM in an operational envi-ronment.

Another example of how CEM mightoffer development solutions is the pro-posed additional runway at London'sHeathrow Airport. The UK governmenthas imposed a constraint which, broad-ly, requires that the number of people

Focu

s

Fig 2. An actual CDA profile from flight trials

Fig 2 is an example of a CDA where changes of aircraft attitude are used to reduce speed while engines remain at very low thrust settings. Flight trials are being under-taken on behalf of EUROCONTROL at Manchester,Stockholm and Bucharest airports with the aim ofharmonising procedures across the ECAC States.

Fig 1. A conventional approach profile

Continuous Descent Approach (CDA) is a technique that avoids periods of level flight – a common featurein conventional approach procedures.

In Fig 1 each level-off means application of thrust leading to increased noise and emissions.

Alti

tud

e (A

MIS

L) (

1000

Fee

t)

Distance from Threshold (nm)

00

5

10

5 10 15 20 25

Alti

tud

e (A

MIS

L) (

1000

Fee

t)


00

5

10

15

5 10 15 20 25 25 25 25

Alti

tud

e (A

MIS

L) (

1000

Fee

t)


00

5

10

5 10 15 20 25

non-CDA

CDA

Graphics reproduced by kind permission of ManchesterInternational Airport

Fig 3. Manchester CDA Trial profiles

24

Today’s airport in tomorrow’s environment (cont’d)

living within the (57 dbA) noise contourmust not increase with the addition of anew runway. If by working collabora-tively, the airport, the airlines and ATCcan produce procedures that willreduce the size of the existing contour(and therefore the size of populationcontained within it) they will significant-ly improve the chance of the extra run-way becoming a reality.

EUROCONTROL's support resources,SOPHOS and PAGODA, will be config-ured to offer up-to-date performancedata to airports and airlines. SOPHOSis a web-based environmental toolkitfor airport operational stakeholdershelping them to quantify, evaluate andmanage an airport's adverse impacts.It is being developed closely with ACIEUROPE. PAGODA is a facility thatdelivers environmental performanceindicators for ATM. It can support theestablishment or verification of emis-sions inventories whether for regional,national or airport stakeholders andcould even serve airlines in bench-marking their operational environmentalperformance. The PAGODA prototypeis currently providing the vital dataupon which the European Commissionis assessing various policy scenariosinvestigating how to reduce aviation'sclimate change impact.

In an ideal world airports would besited in areas of low, or no, population.That is often unrealistic and, for manyairports, land-use planning restrictionslimit residential development in severe-ly affected areas. There is evidencethat controls are not always effectivelyimplemented, resulting in airport con-straint and avoidable communityimpact. EUROCONTROL is therefore

exploring a tentativeresearch proposalunder its Agreementof Cooperation withthe European SpaceAgency (ESA) on thepossible use of EarthObservation to pro-vide long-term moni-

toring of encroachment. Several air-ports have already indicated stronginterest in this area.

'Environment' is clearly an ATM issuethat is here today and growing fast.The more ATM-related solutions wecan offer the air transport industry toreduce the environmental impact ofday-to-day flight operations, the moreopportunities there will be for sustain-able growth. ■

For the latest information visit theEnvironment section on the EUROCONTROLwebsite.


CEM process schematic

Aviation RegulatorOther ANSPs

Airframe andEngine Manufacturers

FMS suppliers

Government,International Agencies (EUROCONTROL)

EU, ECAC, ICAO etc.

ANSPAircraft

Operator

AirportOperator

CEM

EnvironmentRegulator CommunityPlanning AuthoritiesLocal Government

4 500 000 A310

A320

A330

A340

B727

B737 100

B727 400

A747 100-300

B747 400

B757

B767 300 ER

B777

BAC1-11

BAE146

DC10

DC9

EQV_200T

EQV_40T

F100

F28

MD81-88

4 000 000

3 500 000

3 000 000

2 500 000

2 000 000

1 500 000

1 000 000

500 000

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

PAGODA - Estimated fuel burn by aircraft type for departuresfrom EU25 in tonnes (2004)

Focu

s

I would like first to acknowledge thegood work underway at the interfacebetween ATM and airports. One ofEUROCONTROL’s primary objectives isto work closely with airports, ICAO, theEU and other international and nationalbodies to bring about improvements inATM. A good example of this is theEnvironmentally Sustainable AirportOperations (ESAO) project. We wel-come how ESAO helps ATM at eachairport to achieve its objectives,depending on that airport's local cir-cumstances, namely to minimise envi-ronmental impact for each aircraftmovement; enhance operationalcapacity; avoid or mitigate environmen-tal constraint; and maximise airportcapacity within environmental constraints.

As common needs are identified how-ever, there will be opportunities todevelop standards and universal pro-cedures. Potential candidates forfuture harmonisation, include noiseand air quality related metrics andmeasurement methodologies, noiseand air quality related modellingmethodologies and assumptions, newATM procedures and formal guidancematerial, and the definition andassessment of 'airport environmentalcapacity'.

These are examples of areas whereEUROCONTROL can help because ithas the expertise to embark onresearch, testing and eventually propos-als for adapted tools and procedures.Yet, it is essential that all future opera-tional enhancements are based uponcommonly agreed, harmonised method-ologies in order to reduce confusion forpilots and air traffic controllers.

We also remain convinced that theSingle European Sky initiative providesan excellent opportunity forimproving the efficiency andsafety of the ATM system.However, there is a risk thatcapacity will be freed up in theair, but that ground traffic flowsmight well form the next con-straint to growth. This is whyACI EUROPE puts a great dealof effort into cooperation withthe European Commission through theIndustry Consultation Body, as well ascollaborating with the SESAME initiativethrough the Airports Consortium.

The ‘capacity crunch’In terms of the bigger picture,Europe’s airports are facing chal-lenges on many levels: safety devel-opments, airport privatisation, therights of persons with reduced mobili-ty, slots, open skies, airport retail,preparations for the A380 and guide-lines on what incentives Europe’s air-ports may and may not offer in futureairline agreements. A hand grenade inthe hold, the shoe bomber, knives andimitation pistols successfully smug-gled on board as hand luggage…sharp reminders that security alsoremains a major challenge for ourindustry. Right now I would like tofocus on two other main issues facingEuropean airports: getting permission

to expand facilities to meetthe increasing demand forair traffic and paying for theinvestment.

Across Europe, airports fallbroadly into two categories:those with insufficient trafficand those with insufficient

capacity. It is at Europe's larger airportswhere the 'capacity crunch' will hit first.We are already witnessing the firstsigns of this. EUROCONTROL researchindicates that in 2000, 23% of delaysoccurred at airports versus 77% ofdelays attributable to the en-routephase of a flight. This ratio hasincreased dramatically so that in 2003,46% of delays occurred at airportswhile delays attributable to en-routewent down to 54%. This trend leads tothe conclusion that airports will becomethe main bottleneck beyond this year.

EUROCONTROL has also forecastthat by 2010, over twenty Europeanairports will have a capacity shortageif the demand evolution for air trans-port follows the high growth scenario –as seems likely today. Assuming anaverage growth of 4.3% per annum,using 2003 as the base year, air trafficwould grow 2.5 times by 2025.Consequently, by 2025, despite a 60%

26

ACI EUROPE

Future challengesfor airports

Roy Griffins,Director General, ACI EUROPE

Stak

ehol

derF

orum

capacity increase in the European air-port network, over 60 European air-ports will be congested, with the top20 airports being saturated at least 8to 10 hours of the day. This wouldleave Europe's airports unable toaccommodate some 18% of the totaldemand for air transport.

Building for the futureA major new ACI EUROPE study enti-tled: ‘Building for the future: Paying forthe airports of tomorrow’ (available atwww.aci-europe.org) addresses theability of airport operators to build sus-tainably the terminals and runways tokeep pace with the massive growth inair traffic – now expected to double by2020. If airports are unable to developfacilities to meet this demand, air trav-ellers will soon face widespread delaysas massive congestion, delays andpoor service standards hit Europe'smain airports.

The reality is that regardless of how faryou squeeze the most out of existing air-port capacity – new runways and termi-nals are the only way to accommodatefuture demand. Without capacity, therewill be less competition, less choice,higher air fares, less economic growth,fewer jobs, more social exclusion.

Already playing catch-up, Europe’s air-port operators are having to make long-term decisions about investment.European airports plan to invest someUS $60 billion in new infrastructure andfacilities by 2025. Airport planningcycles are upwards of ten, twenty, eventhirty years. Airlines, however, havemuch shorter planning cycles and maynot even be around by the time an air-port’s plans are implemented, or if theyare – they may well have changed theirown strategies a number of times.

Thus far, the financial independence ofEurope’s airports has been critical inallowing airport operators to developthe capacity (runways, terminals) tomeet the demand for air transport andto allow airports to deliver massivesocial and economic benefits to thecommunities they serve. To ensure thatairports are able to continue to growinto the future, it is important that anyactual and proposed controls on airportcharges reflect the realities of the air-ports business and that any legislativeinitiative at EU level – if one is deemedappropriate – does no more than laydown the principles and a frameworkfor charging.

It must be left to individual countries todecide how best to implement theseprovisions, thus giving airports theessential commercial freedom consis-tent with the internationally recognisedprinciples of transparency, non-dis-crimination and cost-relatedness. Thefact is that airport charges are alreadysubject to regulation, complying withthese principles. In accordance with its


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

own national law, it is for each countryto ensure the involvement of the threeprime parties with a direct interest inestablishing airport charges: the airportoperator, the regulatory power and theairlines.

Airlines have immense power andlobby very successfully in their owninterest. Our new research provides arational balance to airline argumentsthat claim a lack of transparency indetermining charges and question theprofitability gap between airlines andairports. What is not sufficientlyacknowledged is that airport charges,in themselves, fall well short of beingable to pay for future capacity projects.

A further reality is that airport chargesare a relatively small proportion of air-line costs. Europe’s network carriersacknowledge that airport charges haveremained stable at about 4% of airlineoperating costs on average over thelast 30 years. It cannot be right to targetairport costs as a killing factor in ailingairlines’ balance sheets – especiallywhen labour and fuel generally makeup almost 50% of airlines’ operatingcosts. The main reason has more dowith the airlines themselves and theirinternal workings and efficiencies.

Meeting the environmental challengeBut building new airports or expandingcurrent facilities has become anincreasingly difficult and lengthy under-taking. Getting permission and payingfor the investment are massive tasks:they encapsulate both the green (envi-ronmental) and the brown (economic)challenges of the sustainable develop-ment scorecard. Gone are the days ofsimplistic ‘predict and provide’ and ofgovernment largesse.

To get the permission to grow, the avi-ation industry as a whole needs to rise

to the environmental challenge. Eventhough airport operators are not themain polluters in the air transport sec-tor, the industry must take theseresponsibilities seriously. The benefitsof technological progress must be har-nessed to address noise impacts,local air quality and climate change.Airport operators must have the flexi-bility to impose local rules thataddress these concerns.

The noise footprint of each aircraftmovement must continue to bereduced over time. Local air qualityrules must be respected – and thisinvolves more than just the aviationindustry. And global warming must betackled through market mechanisms –notably the establishment of an openemissions trading system – and waysto address other global emissionsmust be researched. Sustainabledevelopment is the key to futuregrowth.

It is at airports – the interface betweenthe sky and the human community –that aviation’s negative products aremost noticed and measured. Airportsare always in the front line as targetsfor policies directed at reducing theenvironmental effects of air transport.If we cannot grow our facilities sus-tainably – then the entire industry willclog, passengers will not fly, communi-ties will be stranded and commercewill stall. ■

Stak

ehol

der F

orum

28

ACI EUROPE – Future challenges for airports (cont’d)


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

History

The worst aviation accident in historywas a runway incursion (Tenerife1977). One might think that enoughlessons were learned but Europe suf-fered another dramatic accident 24years later the 2001 Milan Linatecrash. This accident resulted in aninitiative by Eurocontrol to host aninternational two day workshop on

Concept

runway incursion in 2002. Unique inthis workshop was that all playerswere brought together, AviationAuthorities, Regulators, Accidentinvestigators, Industry representa-tives, Manufacturers, Operators,Airports, Air Traffic Controllers andPilots.

Why do statistics indicatethat runway incursions are caused by pilots?In the traditional distinction, onlythree parties are mentioned as acause for a runway incursion (vehicledrivers, air traffic controllers orpilots). Is this the whole story, or isthere more to it? If an airport isdesigned with multiple runway cross-ings, where aviation English is onlypartly spoken, with a very complex

taxiway structure, with high densitytraffic, with time pressure to meetyour slot, with complicated flight pro-cedures, with non-ICAO standards inplace, with poor signage, with numer-ous exemptions to standard operat-ing procedures, with a one mile longNOTAM list, with a fair chance to getbad weather, etc., then it should notbe surprising that runway incursionsare occurring. The last line ofdefence, the pilot, is tested too manytimes at these airports.

These inherent system faults are oftencompensated by adding anotheroperational procedure to pilots in thebelief that this will solve the problem,but that leads to even more complexprocedures at often complex airportsresulting in an increasing number ofpossible pitfalls for pilots.

Runway incursions

By Captain Robvan Eekeren, Vice-Chairman of theIFALPA AerodromeGround Environment(AGE) Committee andIFALPA Representativefor the EuropeanSteering Committeeon Runway Safety

Figures indicate that runway incursions (RIs)

are caused by pilots (55%), air traffic con-

trollers (23%) and vehicle drivers (27%).

These figures have one thing

in common. They identify the factors

as being the cause of a runway

incursion, with pilots being the most

frequent cause. Human factors

science teaches us that people DO

make mistakes and if enough

pitfalls are there, eventually

somebody will get trapped.

This article summarises what pilot

representatives are doing and what

individual pilots can do to minimise

the risk of a runway incursion.

unusual procedures, etc. Although allthese special measures might soundlogical to the individual airport or evento their national aviation authority, thefact is that pilots fly to other destina-tions and are therefore continuouslyfaced with adapting themselves to non

ICAO standards or unusual applicationof procedures. This deviation of normalprocedures is also an underlying causeof runway incursions.

The International Federation of Air LinePilots' Associations (IFALPA) believes

30

Stak

ehol

derF

orum

Complicated high-capacity airportsResearch by the FAA clearly showsthat the number of runway incursionsat these complicated airports is farhigher and that the risk is thereforehigher. In the same period that LosAngeles (LAX) had 29 runway incur-sions, whilst Washington Dulles (IAD)had only 4. A glance at the airport lay-out shown below clearly shows whythese figures differ so much.

Non-ICAO standardAnother area of primary concern is thenon-adherence to International CivilAviation Organization (ICAO) standardprocedures. A number of airports and/or ATC centres consider themselvesso unique that they think that ICAOstandards do not apply to them. Theresult is non-standard ICAO markingsand signs, non ICAO-standard or

LAX IAD

LinateCrash

Concept - Runway incursions (cont’d)


Stak

ehol

derF

orum

Treat and cure the diseaseIf pilots and air traffic controllers continue to accept operationalprocedures to compensate for bad airport design or non-ICAOcompliant airports, then they will be continue to be identified asbeing the cause of a runway incursion. Especially when after vol-untarily reporting possible omissions they are prosecuted. IFALPAbelieves that compensatory procedures are just pills for reducingthe effect of a fundamental disease, but are not the cure. The curehas to be found in good airport design, in ICAO-compliant airportsand worldwide standard procedures. The best solution is an inte-grated one. Reduce the effects of the disease by pills (short-termactions) and in the meantime start to cure the disease (long-termaction).

What IFALPA does to prevent runway incursions?IFALPA is working with all relevant parties to find practical, workablesolutions and set goals for structural improvements. IFALPA endors-es and actively participates in getting the European Action Plan forthe Prevention of Runway Incursions items implemented, whilst atthe same time taking initiatives to improve ICAO documents. IFALPAstrongly believes that the prevention of a runway incursion should bethe primary goal. To this end, the number of pitfalls should bereduced. Although IFALPA realises that even at a perfect airport,with perfect ATC, perfect rules and a perfect crew, there still mightbe a chance of a runway incursion occurring, it believes that chancecan be reduced significantly. What should be done? Eliminate run-way crossings, improve situational awareness (e.g. visual aids,cockpit design, etc.), end intersection take-offs from rapid exit taxi-ways, use stop bars as a traffic light principle and use a commonaviation language. Th

e so

lutio

nsthat it is imperative that ICAO standardsand recommendations should beadhered to – in every place, everywhereand every time. Until this is done, thefinal acceptance of these non standarditems remains with the pilot. Guess whowill then be identified as the cause of arunway incursion?

Punitive approachAnother major factor is the punitiveapproach to the well-established high-quality voluntary reporting system. Thissystem has, undoubtedly, allowed avia-tion to achieve its exceptionally highsafety standard. After Milan Linate’srunway incursion accident, the Italiancourt handed down prison sentences to

the Air Traffic Controller (8 years), theAirport Director (8 years), the Head ofAir Traffic Services (61/2 years) and anAuthority's employee (61/2 years). Otherrunway incursion incidents are known toresult in legally punitive consequences,including those where the court casewas based on a purely voluntary inci-dent reporting system (!.....). Punitiveactions erode the trust and confidenceessential to the healthy functioning of avoluntary reporting system, so that thevoluntary safety reports, essential forgenerating the data required for lessonlearning are reduced in number or, insome cases, stopped altogether.Punitive actions may run counter to theEuropean Directive on SafetyOccurence Reporting in ATM.

Although European initiatives to estab-lish a fair reporting system are beingdeveloped, and in a number of coun-tries accepted, the legal basis for suchnon-punitive reporting is not acceptedworldwide. As a consequence of suchlegal action, it is expected that thenumber and quality of incident reportswill deteriorate, eroding the flight safetylessons which could be learned.

Summary and conclusionRunway incursions pose a real threat toaviation safety. A complex number offactors are known to contribute to thefact that pilots are considered to be thenumber-one cause of runway incur-sions. These factors are generally divid-ed into non-ICAO standard or non-compliant airports and procedures, andcomplex airports and procedures. It isimperative that ICAO standards areimplemented throughout the world.

The initiatives of ICAO, EURO-CONTROL and IFALPA have joinedtogether to revise and develop opera-tional procedures and to eliminate run-way crossings from the design of run-ways and taxiways in the future. In themeantime it is important for all pilots tobe fully aware of the potential dangersof a runway incursion. Often the bestaction they can take is to stop, recap,rethink, get organised and start again.■

There is no single solution to the airportcapacity issue, especially given theenvironmental, political and sociologi-cal constraints airports face. So theproblem has to be approached instages.

There are relatively simple short-termmeasures – where they have notalready been applied – for extractingmore capacity from existing infrastruc-tures with minimal investment. Thisapplies to most airports in Europe, and

they consist basically of using"best practice" operating tech-niques and optimising movement

area design. EUROCONTROL'SDirector of Air Traffic Management(ATM) Strategies Bo Redeborn usuallycites London Gatwick as an example ofwhat can be done to extract 50 move-ments per hour from a single runway –not a feat replicated anywhere else atpresent. Redeborn comments: "This isa short term issue, but very important,"and he points out that no large invest-ment is required to become a sharperoperator.

Apart from making uncomplicatedchanges like optimising runway usageby providing fast-exit taxiways wherethey do not already exist, Redebornsays that enough is now understoodabout aircraft wake vortex behaviour toenable aircraft approach and departurespacing to be reduced without anyundesirable effect on safety margins,under certain wind conditions relativeto the runway direction. This wouldrequire the training of controllers indynamic decision-making based onknowledge of real wake-vortex behav-iour, and of course approval by aviationauthorities. Easily said, but if it is tohappen, the airports and EURO-CONTROL need to be working now toturn the theory into practice.

To get really smart, airports need tomove away from acting as individualunits – however efficient they may be –and start operating as active compo-nents in a total integrated system.Research to determine the best way tomake this happen is a part of the termsof reference for the team working on thedefinition phase for a Single EuropeanSky (SES) implementation programme,

codenamed SESAME. This is the feasi-bility study for the European ATM mas-ter plan, in which airports are a crucialfeature.

"Gate-to-gate ATM" has been a statedEUROCONTROL objective for someyears. This describes a seamless ATMsystem where airports and the en-routeair navigation service providers (ANSP)become totally integrated. While eachaircraft is moving on the ground or inthe air it is like a vital cell in an intelli-gent, organic whole.

Now the concept of organic integrationhas expanded beyond the "moving"phase to encompass the period whilethe aircraft is stationary during a turn-around. EUROCONTROL'S Head ofAirports and Environment ManagementKen Reid calls the stationary phase the"en-route to en-route" operational section,describing how an aircraft turnaround orrelease-to-service after maintenance fitsinto the total system. Taking a leaf fromthe modern military's book of current bat-tlefield-management best practice, hedescribes the ideal total ground-and-airintegrated ATM system as "net-centric".This describes a system in which everyplayer in the network has access not onlyto what every other player is doing, butwhat its performance capability is, what itwants to do next and when it will beready to do it. This implies a pooling ofreal-time operational data, plus informa-tion on system and individual unit capa-bilities. Although this has so far beenexpressed here as if it were a human-centric cognitive system, clearly it relieson a centralised smart processor with acapability that would put the existingCentral Flow Management Unit (CFMU)to shame.

Again, the potential for – and shape of –a function like this will be for SESAME todefine and industry to develop. Reid esti-mates that a fully functioning system isunlikely to be ready before about 2010,

32

Airport networkingBy David Learmount,Operations and Safety Editor, Flight International

It is no secret to operators usingEuropean airports that the system as

whole faces a capacity crisis. The major airports are already close

to their limits, and it is only a matterof time before the rest confront

their own limitations.

but that does not preclude airlines andairports from buying-in to the concept inadvance and thinking of their operationsas organic units in a total system.Referring to the total organic concept,Reid observes: "The biggest challenge isnot technology; it is creating a sea-change in people's attitudes. We have toget them to recognise the benefits ofcooperating and information sharing."

The essential component of this net-cen-tric approach, apart from the central dataprocessing capability, is the supply ofinformation from every cell in the organicwhole. Introducing the idea as a principlerather than a process, Reid andRedeborn say that any such systemdepends on what they call "CollaborativeInformation Sharing" (CIS) and "Collabo-rative Decision Making" (CDM). Reidadds to the definition by describing whatthe end-product of such a system wouldbe. He calls it a "time-ordered system".That normally implies a system with pre-ordained timings, but in an organic oper-ation it would be flexible. If any cell (air-craft) suddenly cannot meet its estimat-ed slot, the availability of the slot wouldnot be wasted but immediately filled.

Normally, Reid explains, "Airports pro-vide a very low utilisation rate forassets...If you can improve throughput, itall gets better used, and all stakeholdersbenefit."

At an individual airport level, moresophisticated data handling could free-up capacity by having a system that ispro-active rather than reactive. Airportoperations centres do not have to be lim-ited to reacting to real-time occurrences,he says. If each airport had the capabili-ty to simulate 30 minutes in advancewhat is planned, this could be a part ofthe input to its operations centre. "Youdon't need a crisis centre if you have acapable, single operations centre," Reidcontends. Meteorological data could bea part of the system too, he says, includ-

ing real-time data from additional airportsensors, plus forecasts. If an airport canpredict wind-direction changes, trafficpatterns can be reorganised to antici-pate a runway change.

If the major airports succeed in inte-grating so efficiently into the total sys-tem that they are able to increase theirthroughput considerably, they face adifferent, potentially movement-limitingenvironmental problem. The head ofthe European Commission's clean airand transport unit Peter Gammeltoft,speaking at the April 2005 EuropeanCivil Aviation/European Union(ECAC/EU) Dialogue seminar inEdinburgh, Scotland, warned the majorairports that they would definitelybecome victims of air quality laws thatbecome binding in 2010, unless theydo something radical to abate aircraftengine emissions.

Nitrous oxide pollution, an undesirableby-product of today's more fuel-efficient,quieter engines, is on track to exceedprescribed limits at busy airports,Gammeltoft warns. MeanwhileStockholm's Arlanda airport has estimat-ed, according to Redeborn, that if an air-craft pushes back into a perfectly time-managed, net-centric system the sav-ings in fuel-burn for the airport as a wholewill amount to a staggering 5,000kg perhour. Arlanda is not one of Europe'sbiggest airports. Imagine the fuel-burnreductions the really big players mightproduce. If nitrous oxide – rather thannoise – threatens to be the movement-limiting factor in the near term for someairports, then the closer they can get tooperating a time-ordered, CDM systemin advance of its official introduction, themore efficient they can be. This wouldenable them to exercise their potential toreduce or stabilise emissions totals onthe ground.

Until recently, all the studies of systemsfor overcoming emissions and for reduc-

ing noise had considered airborne pro-cedures; e.g. adopting a continuousdescent approach system or time-man-aged approach systems. Now it is recog-nised that surface movement efficiencyhas the potential to contribute.

There are plenty of other potential meth-ods for improving throughput withoutradically altering ground infrastructure.Some of them, like reducing – or prefer-ably eliminating – the effects of badweather on traffic flow, require invest-ment in sophisticated surface move-ment monitoring systems and, in flightdecks, systems like synthetic vision or atleast taxiing guidance displays. Thedecline of accuracy in InstrumentLanding System (ILS) signals throughfrequency encroachment is also anissue. But if these can be handled at theairports that are predictably – if season-ally – affected, the domino effects of traf-fic interruptions can be dramaticallyreduced. Meanwhile an organic, net-centric system would, if an individual air-port were disabled, have the capabilityto use instantly to best effect the capac-ity released by a blockage elsewhere inthe network.

So far the concept of getting local per-mission to build new runways and termi-nal capacity has not even been men-tioned. The need for it is clear, and pro-vided the industry does all it can toensure that decision-makers at local andnational government level fully realisethe cost to cities and countries of lettingtheir air transport connections becomedysfunctional, they will have done whatthey can.

EUROCONTROL'S Director of ATMProgrammes George Paulson has thelast word: "It is essential that we send aclear message to the civil industry thatwe have to press on with capacityexpansion. Let's make sure we knowwhat we are doing; let's make sure weknow where we are going." ■

33

Inde

pend

ent P

latf

orm


The inaugural Aviation &Environment Summit andExhibition took place on 17-18 March in Geneva. Co-organised under the umbrel-la of the Air Transport ActionGroup (ATAG), together withIATA, ACI WORLD, ICCAIAand CANSO, it broughttogether aviation leadersand experts to share experi-

ences and further improve the aviationindustry’s environmental performance.Several key personalities spoke includ-ing Dr. Assad Kotaite, President of theICAO Council, Mr Giovanni Bisignani,Director-General and CEO of IATA, Mr Robert J. Aaronson, Director-General of ACI WORLD and Dr.Philippe Rochat, Executive Director ofATAG. EUROCONTROL’s DirectorGeneral, Mr Víctor M. Aguado, was thelead speaker in the Climate ChangeSession, outlining what Air TrafficManagement in general, and EURO-

Date

line

34

AVIA

TIO

N & ENVIRON

MEN

T SUMMIT

Inaugural WorldAviation &Environmental Summit

CONTROL in particular, can do toensure the sustainability of air trans-port.

This was the first occasion at which aDirector General of EUROCONTROLhad devoted an entire speech to envi-ronmental issues. EUROCONTROL’spresence was reinforced through astand at the Summit Exhibitionfocussing on the Environment Domainand Airport Operations Programme.

Over 300 delegates representingalmost all stakeholder groups within theindustry attended. In the Summit con-clusions, industry reaffirmed its com-mitment to work in partnership to:

■ further develop and use new tech-nologies and operational proce-dures aimed at minimising noise,fuel consumption and emissions;

■ share and voluntarily apply bestenvironmental practices; and

■ establish and build constructive dia-logues with local communities andauthorities around airports to ensurethat their needs and expectationsare duly taken into consideration.

Summit participants also urged govern-ments to actively contribute to industryefforts and commitments by:

■ adopting and implementing effec-tive land-use management policiesin the vicinity of airports;

■ working with airports and air naviga-tion service providers to ensureenvironmentally responsible airportexpansion and air route efficiency;and

■ continuing to work through theInternational Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO) to developeffective and efficient policies toaddress the environmental impactsof aviation.

In his speech, the Director Generalacknowledged the paradox betweensociety’s demands for more mobilitywhile expecting an improved environ-ment. With the entry into force of theKyoto Protocol on 16 February 2005,

By Andrew Watt,Environment

Domain Manager

society had taken a fundamental stepforward in tackling its overall impacton the climate. The Protocol, whichcovers greenhouse gas emissionsfrom domestic flights, gives ICAO aspecific role to establish mechanismslimiting emissions from internationalcivil aviation.

Mr Aguado emphasised EURO-CONTROL’s work on capturing the envi-ronmental impact of RVSM and the ver-tical expansion of 8.33kHz channelspacing. He emphasized the role of theCFMU which, by holding aircraft on theground, avoids the unnecessary fuelburn and emissions associated with en-route delays. This is estimated to savethe airlines approximately 500,000tonnes of fuel annually – equivalent toalmost 1.6 million tonnes of carbondioxide, a critical greenhouse gas.Given the emphasis IATA has placed onbetter fuel management, this is clearlywelcome news.

The Director General also touched uponthe efficiency improvements expectedof DMEAN, emphasising that it is thefirst programme in which EURO-CONTROL has embedded an environ-mental case from the start. He alsoannounced that the Agency would beprepared to provide data and expertiseto support the work of the atmosphericscience and climate change researchcommunity, to help ensure that deci-sions on climate change mitigation aremade on the basis of solid evidence.

The EUROCONTROL stand was popu-lar with delegates; promotional materialfrom the Airport Operations Programmewas particularly welcome. Andrew Watt,Environment Domain manager stated:“the presence of the Director General atthis key event, together with our stand,demonstrated to stakeholders EURO-CONTROL’s commitment to improving

our industry’s environmental perform-ance. As a result, stakeholders werevery willing to provide effective feed-back on two of our pan-European envi-ronmental management support tools,whose capabilities clearly supportindustry’s environmental intentions asset out in the Summit’s conclusions.”

SOPHOS is a web-based managementsupport tool for airport environmentalstakeholders that is being developed inpartnership with ACI EUROPE’sEnvironmental Strategy Committee.Several features are available to allowairports to benchmark their environmen-tal performance against peer groups.SOPHOS will also provide noise loadinventories for airports and best prac-tice guidelines.

PAGODA will provide ATM environmentalperformance indicators, such as annualgreenhouse gas inventories, for MemberStates, air navigation service providers,airspace users and other stakeholders.The inventories can be assessed fromseveral perspectives, including aircrafttype, country of departure or arrival oreven geographical area. Under theMemorandum of Cooperation with theEuropean Commission, EUROCONTROLis supplying data from PAGODA to sup-port DG Environment’s study into assess-ing how aviation’s climate change impactcould be incorporated into the EU’sEmissions Trading Scheme.

A second Summit is being organised forMarch 2006, building on the success ofthis inaugural event. ■


Pre-Post RVSM Traffic Distribution FL260-FL410Vertical Traffic Distribution - August

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

Before After

FL26

0

FL27

0

FL28

0

FL29

0

FL30

0

FL31

0

FL32

0

FL33

0

FL34

0

FL35

0

FL36

0

FL37

0

FL38

0

FL39

0

FL40

0

FL41

0

Date

line

Victor M.Aguado,Director

General ofEUROCONTROL,

lead speaker in the

ClimateChangeSession

As its name suggested, the meetingfocused on the impending capacityshortage at European airports. The tim-ing of this dialogue was particularlyappropriate given that if current trendscontinue, airports are likely to overtakeen-route and become the major causeof delays some time in 2006. Clearly, ifwe are to ensure the capacity that willbe necessary to fulfil the growing trafficdemand, we need to deal with airportcapacity shortage – and in order tounderstand the very particular chal-lenge we face with regard to airports,we need first to understand what ishappening with regard to the currentperformance of air navigation servicesin Europe today.

Based on reports from the PerformanceReview Commission, and using the fourkey indicators of safety, capacity, cost-efficiency and unit rates, we know thatair traffic management performancehas improved steadily over the last fiveyears. Safety as always has been highon the agenda, and 2004 in terms ofaccident rates was the safest year everfor all categories of aviation with no

ATM-related accidents in Europe. Thisfact is thanks in no small part to thework being done on airspace and run-way safety in particular. With regard tocapacity the figures speak for them-selves. Between 1999 and 2004, trafficincreased by 10% while delays fell by67%. With delays at an all-time low, anden-route flow management delay at 1.2minutes in summer 2004, the airlineshave been able to save millions ofeuros in delay costs. (insert graphic onflights/AFTM delay). Though the ATMsystem has clearly progressed over thepast five years, the growth in the cost ofthese improvements has been lowerthan expected. Unit rates in 2004 fell by2.2%, and in 2005 they are expected todrop by 6.9%. Total en-route costs in2004 grew significantly less than traffic.Despite this positive indicator, weagree with airlines that much more canand should be done to enhance costeffectiveness and flight efficiency.

It seems fair therefore to assert that airtraffic management in Europe hasreached a respectable level of perform-ance when judged against all of its

main indicators. This however does notmean that there are no significant chal-lenges facing us. Traffic in Europe isanticipated to more than double by theyear 2025. While this in itself is excel-lent news, it does confront us with anumber of major challenges which areof a different nature than those thathave been seen in the recent history ofair navigation services.

EUROCONTROL has establishedobjectives to ensure that the good per-formance to date can continue in thefuture. Based on recent experience weknow that these will be achieved only ifwe take an industry-wide pan-European approach, and as theseobjectives clearly pertain to the wholeair traffic management network they willbe difficult to achieve without ensuringthat both airspace and airports aremaking a contribution.

As regards airspace, targets have beenidentified and programmes are beingimplemented with a view to increasingcapacity by some 4% per annum. Onekey federating programme in this

Facing the crunchin Europe

ECAC/EU Dialogue with the EuropeanAir Transport Industry Airport Capacity

36

At the end of April 2005, theEuropean Civil Aviation Conference

(ECAC) hosted a dialogue meeting in Edinburgh to discuss how to face the airport capacity

crunch in Europe. The meeting brought together perspectives from across the

aviation industry – with speakersfrom ECAC, ACI Europe,

the European Commission and EUROCONTROL, and a number of

representatives from different airports, airlines and

airline associations.

Date

line

process is the Dynamic Managementof the European Airspace Network(DMEAN). DMEAN provides a short tomid-term solution and will pave the wayfor the subsequent implementation of aEuropean Air Traffic ManagementMaster Plan, which will seek a quantumleap in ATM performance over thelonger term. The European ATM MasterPlan will start with a definition phase forthe Single European Sky implementa-tion, also referred to as SESAME. So, asfar as the airspace element is con-cerned, a series of steps forward in airtraffic management performance is wellunderway, and we are implementing apan-European approach for the short,medium and long-term.

The fundamental question is thereforewhether the situation regarding airportsis in any way comparable to that of air-space. Are airports as well positionedas the airspace component in meetingthe challenges of growing traffic? Inparticular, can they provide therequired capacity?

In 2004, ECAC and EUROCONTROLreleased a study ‘Challenges toGrowth’. This identifies three compo-nents of the airport challenge – safety,environment and capacity growth whilefocusing on capacity challenges.Clearly runway incursions are still oneof the leading hazards for European air-ports, and though clear signs ofimprovement have already been regis-tered in this area, much more remainsto be done. Addressing the issue suc-cessfully will require widespread appli-cation of the European Action Plan forthe Prevention of Runway Incursions,and in particular improvements in air-port situational awareness and runwayincursion alert systems.

With regard to the environment, therequirement is for airports to addressand contribute to the balanced environ-mental approach as defined by ICAO.Some of the elements of this approachare not in the hands of the airports

themselves making managing ‘environ-mental capacity’ effectively at airports adefinite challenge. Nonetheless, a suit-able environmental dimension must bebuilt into all airport activities. ATM canplay a role by promoting a number ofactions including the introduction ofcontinuous descent approach, bench-marking and sharing of best practicesand being part of collaborative environ-mental management.

‘Challenges to Growth’ also asks anumber of fundamental questionsfocusing on the actual impact of growthin demand and the ability of airports toprovide increased capacity. Some ofthe conclusions are somewhat alarm-ing. The study identifies that under anunconstrained long-term forecast, traf-fic will grow at an annual rate ofbetween 2.5% and 4.3%. If demandgrows at 4.3%, the study finds that air-ports will severely constrain trafficgrowth by 2025. In fact, a potential 3.7million flights per annum will not beaccommodated, even if the existinglatent capacity of the airport network isfulfilled. The study does identify a num-ber of ways forward. It notes that onaverage 30% of existing airport capac-ity remains unused at today’s typicalpeak hour traffic levels, though themajority of this latent capacity does liein small and mid-size airports.

Further improvements to airport capac-ity will be difficult, owing to physicallocation, infrastructure, airspace andgeographical limitations as well asenvironmental issues. This aspect is allthe more worrying when we note that75% of European airports see no possi-bility of adding new runways in the next20 years. As a result of growth andcapacity shortfall, by 2025 more than60 airports could be congested, andthe top 20 airports could be saturated 8to 10 hours per day. Under the highest-growth scenario, even with the imple-mentation of maximum achievablecapacity enhancements this situation isexpected to gradually deteriorate into a

major capacity imbalance with short-age in some parts of the airport networkand a surplus in others. As a result,additional flights will be possible only atsecondary airports, generally at lessfavourable times. There will be strongpressure to accelerate the switch tolarger aircraft in order to accommodatemore passengers while keeping thenumber of flights constant. By smooth-ing schedules and using secondary air-ports, it could be possible to findcapacity for up to 2.6 of the potential3.7 million unaccommodated flights.

So what lessons should we take fromthis report? One is that we must baseour planning on the highest-growthscenario – of an average 4.3% growthper annum. In essence, the way for-ward in addressing the airport capacitycrunch will have to involve the unlock-ing of latent capacity, new infrastruc-ture in existing airports, and more useof regional airports. We have alreadybegun a number of ATM-related activi-ties in support of this approach. Theseinclude review of best practices inoperational procedures, airport collab-orative decision making, and arrivaland departure support. Following arecommendation from the PerformanceReview Commission, we are also work-ing on introducing more pro-active airtraffic flow and capacity management.

However, more work is needed if we areto ensure that good air traffic manage-ment performance can continue. Weshould not forget that in 2000, the EU’sairlines, airports and the aerospacemanufacturing industry had an estimat-ed total output of 526 billion euros –some 6% of EU GDP. Under the 4.3%growth scenario, this share will grow50% by 2020 to some 9% of EU GDP. Inthe context of gate-to-gate air trafficmanagement which is being developedthrough the European Air TrafficManagement Master Plan, Europe’s airtraffic management network must cometogether to enable this growth to hap-pen in a sustainable manner. ■


Date

line

Skopje

MACEDONIA

EUROCONTROL presented four proj-ects of the Airport OperationsProgramme – Airport CollaborativeDecision Making (A-CDM), Airport air-side Capacity Enhancement (ACE),Runway Safety and Advanced SurfaceMovement Guidance and ControlSystem (A-SMGCS). The four projectscovered a broad spectrum of airsideoperations. All four projects will influ-ence the long-term strategy of airportsand target improved safety, capacity

and cost efficiency while remainingenvironmentally friendly.

Presentations from IATA focused onPlanning for the future and Training andconcluded with an interactive sessionwith IATA specialists, in order toaddress participants’ specific prob-lems and issues.

In parallel, the following EURO-CONTROL demonstrations and exhibi-

tions were held throughout the event:Airports Operations Programme,Airport airside Capacity Enhancement(ACE), Runway Safety, Pilot Reactionand Runway Occupancy Times,CAMACA, Airport CDM, AdvancedSurface Movement Guidance andControl System (A-SMGCS). ■

Joint CAA FYROM/IATA &EUROCONTROL Airport OperationsProgramme Regional Road Show

5-6 April 2005, Skopje

Date

line

38

The joint CAA FYROM / IATA & EUROCONTROL AirportOperations Programme Regional Road Show tookplace in Skopje, FYROM. More than 60 operationaland technical experts and managers, and safetyexperts and managers within ANSP organisations, airport operators, airlines and ground handlersattended from Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria,Croatia, FYROM, Greece, Serbia and Montenegro,and Slovenia.

1

Projects featured on the EURO-CONTROL stand included EnhancedFlexible Use of Airspace (FUA), AirportOperations Programme (APR), AirsideCapacity Enhancement (ACE),Advanced Surface MovementGuidance and Control System Project(A-SMGCS), Collaborative DecisionMaking at Airports (CDM), theCommonly Agreed Methodology forAirport Capacity Assessment(CAMACA), the European Action Planfor the Prevention of RunwayIncursions, and the Single EuropeanSky Implementation Programme(SESAME).

In parallel, the EUROCONTROL Agencytook part in the ATCA Civil/MilitaryConference entitled "CMAC 2005 –Transforming and Harmonizing theWorld Air Transportation System" duringwhich the Director General delivered anopening address, Joe Sultana, HeadNetwork Capacity Business Divisionpresented Dynamic Management ofEuropean Airspace Network (DMEAN)Releasing Latent Capacity in Europe,Bo Redeborn, Director ATM Strategies,presented ATM TransformationInitiatives and Coordination –Integration of Civil and Military ATMProgrammes, Kevin Harvey, ExpertAirspace and ATS Route NetworkDesign presented Civil/ Military AirTraffic crisis response, Colonel JanPlevka, Military Unit, presentedCivil/Military CNS/ATM InteroperabilityRoadmap, Peter Stastny, Head of SafetyRegulation, presented SafetyRegulation in Air Traffic Managementand Alex Hendriks, Head ofAirspace/Flow Management andNavigation presented Integration ofUAV Operations respectively. ■


Date

line

EUROCONTROL participated in the ATCA Civil/Military Air Traffic Management Conference andExhibition which took place on 23 to 26 May 2005 in Prague, Czech Republic.

Civil / Military Air TrafficManagement Conference

23-26 May 2005, Prague

1. Bo Redeborn, Director ATM Strategies2. Joe Sultana, Head Network Capacity

Business Division3. Alex Hendriks, Head of Airspace Flow

Management and Navigation

2 3

E-learning is increasingly being usedthroughout the airline industry as acost-efficient means of training staff.During the conference, which was co-sponsored by EUROCONTROL andIATA, delegates from airlines, airportsand air navigation service providerswere able to discuss how best to cap-italise on the opportunities offered by e-learning as well as see demon-strations of different software andcourses offered by those companiesand organisations already implement-ing e-learning. A key focus was onlessons learnt and best practices inthe development and deployment of e-learning programmes. Throughoutthe three days of sessions, delegatesheard an in-depth review of e-learn-

ing’s benefits and pitfalls as well asdiscussing solutions to overcomeobstacles.

“During the conference, we heard con-crete examples of how e-learning deliv-ery can be very efficient, saving anorganisation both time and money,”said Michel Pistre from EUROCON-

TROL. “Clearly, in the drive to make theaviation industry ever more cost-effec-tive this is a useful route to pursue.”

“Efficiency is the focus as air transportevolves into a low-cost industry,” saidClaude St-Hilaire from IATA. “E-learningis a cost-effective way to build expert-ise, improve operational efficiency andcut costs.”

The conference, called ASSET: AviationStandards and Solutions in ETraining,was co-organised by EUROCONTROLand IATA in the context of the two organ-isations’ Memorandum of Cooperation,signed in October 2004. ■

IATA and EUROCONTROL help e-learning take off for airline industry

8-10 June, Headquarters, Brussels

Date

line

40

The airline industry’s first-ever e-learning conferencetook place in Brussels from

8 to 10 June with 83 delegates from 35 countriesdiscussing best practices in

the development and deployment of e-learning

programmes.

15th

The relationship between ACI andEUROCONTROL was reinforced by thepresence of EUROCONTROL’s DirectorGeneral at the 15th ACI Europe GeneralAssembly in Munich. Mr Víctor Aguadomoderated the fourth working sessioncalled “Airports – a licence to grow,optional or vital?” During that session,discussions centred on the followingissues:

■ Is airport growth a necessity or aluxury?

■ How can it be financed, how can itbe sustainable and what are theenvironmental factors to consider?

■ How can point to point or hub air-ports address these factors andwhere will the greatest growth takeplace?

Joining the Director General in the panelwas: Jan Skeels (Secretary General ofthe European Low Fares AirlineAssociation), Randi Flesland (ManagingDirector Avinor and First Vice-Presidentof ACI Europe) and Andrew Sentance(Chief Economist British Airways).

During the session, emphasis wasplaced on current and future growthforecasts, where if demand keeps grow-ing at the current rate of 4.3% perannum, airports will severely constraintraffic growth in 2025. Other issues cov-ered were the existing latent capacity(the need to unlock this capacitythrough capacity assessment method-ologies and enhancement principlesalong with a partnership approach withairport operators and airlines) and theimpact on safety (by implementing theEuropean Action Plan for the Preventionof Runway Incursions) and environment.With this in mind, the future will holdmany challenges for airport and aircraft

operators, air navigation serviceproviders and the ATM network workingin close cooperation.

The Director General also addressedissues regarding the Single EuropeanSky framework, in particular with regardto a new Single European Sky imple-mentation programme known asSESAME. The structure of SESAME willconsist of two main phases; Definition(with the production of an Air TrafficManagement Master Plan for Europe)and Implementation (development anddeployment of the Master Plan). Workon the Definition phase will commencein a few months time and will run until2007. This phase will be jointly fundedby the European Commission andEUROCONTROL under a Trans-European Network – Transport (TEN-T)scheme. One of the major challengesto be addressed by SESAME will be tounite all the ATM partners so that theyshare the same view and agree oncooperative actions.

To conclude, the Director General confirmed;

EUROCONTROL, in close partnershipwith its stakeholders, is facilitating aEuropean air transport system that willfunction smoothly as a network,besides being globally interoperable.

Airports are an increasingly importantpart of that network.

In order to manage the future effective-ly, we need to foster a much more col-laborative way of working with eachother.

Working closely together, EURO-CONTROL, airports, airlines, air navi-

gation service providers and regula-tors, have three goals:

■ We must enhance operational safety;■ We must do our best to address

growth constraints and free latentcapacity;

■ We have to balance our environmen-tal approach.

The event was supported by a EURO-CONTROL stand in the exhibition hall toraise awareness on the Agency airport-related activities. The activities exhibitedwere:

■ Airport Operations Programme (APR)products – offering solutions for airportand ATM current and future issues;

■ Environmentally Sustainable AirportOperations (ESAO) – aiming to pro-vide Europe’s airport operationalstakeholders with practical supportand guidance in order to make theirairports more sustainable;

■ Aerodrome Mapping Database(AMDB) – to supply accurate, reliableand up-to-date airport mapping infor-mation to improve common situationalawareness and expeditious move-ment of aircraft and vehicles at aero-dromes under all visibility conditions.■


Date

line

ACI EUROPEGeneral Assembly

23-24 June 2005, Munich

Repo

rt

42

The greater the web visitor’sinvolvement in ATM, the greater thevolume of information accessible.

■ Internet: the website is aimed at thegeneral public and non-identifiedgeneralists from the stakeholdercommunity (142,000 visits in May2005).

■ Extranet: a means of accessingsecure information, web-basedapplications and services for allidentified and approved (and there-fore trusted and accountable) stake-holders, including Agency staff. TheExtranet makes it possible to targetspecific audiences, in particularspecialists from the stakeholdercommunity.

For external stakeholders, the publicWebsite and the Extranet should beviewed as a seamless resource.

■ Intranet: holds purely internal infor-mation for Agency staff and pen-sioners.

Taken together, the three elements ofthe web-based communication networkmay be regarded as EUROCONTROL’scorporate web presence.

What is 'OneSky Online'?

OneSky Online is the name of EUROCONTROL's Extranet, the part of our websitewhere content can be accessed only by EUROCONTROL staff and other autho-rised users. This is usually the case for information that is too detailed or complexfor the general public.

By means of an Extranetclearly separated from thepublic website, we want toprovide our stakeholders withthe ability to work with usonline and access more ofour expertise without runningthe risk of detracting from thepolished public image whichwe wish to convey on theInternet.

This online service therefore needs to be made secure, which means that accessto OneSky Online has to be authorised by EUROCONTROL on an individual basis.

OneSky Online visits■ More than 280 virtual teams■ Up to 4,200 information requests received daily■ Up to 400 Mbytes of information transmitted daily

Current indicators show a strongupwards trend in visits (these fig-ures deliberately ex-clude visitsby EUROCONTROL staff).

250,000 visits per month by theend of 2005 is a challengingobjective that the Agency isendeavouring to achieve. ■

For more information,contact EUROCONTROL Online Corporate Communications Support (OCCS)[email protected]

OCCS also welcomes any suggestions from SKYWAY readers concerning EUROCONTROLonline communication.

Online with EUROCONTROL www.eurocontrol.int

Putting a link to EUROCONTROL’s site on your website would enhanceEUROCONTROL's visibility on the Internet. Thank you for helping us!


Repo

rt

Following a recent upgrade, the air traf-fic control (ATC) system now has thecapability to uplink fully automatically(i.e. without the need for any humanintervention) a secondary radar (SSR)code change to any CPDLC–equippedaircraft that requires it. The air trafficcontroller monitors and verifies theinformation automatically uplinked bythe system to the aircraft in the normalway. Importantly, the air traffic controlleralso has over-ride of the functionality,and can stop the automatic uplink ifrequired.

The new data link service is available toall aircraft that are currently conductingdata link operations with the MaastrichtCentre. This automatic messaging sys-tem will save valuable voice communi-cation time for air traffic controllers andallow them to concentrate more on theircore tasks. "Mentally, this is a big stepfor controllers, but one they are keen totake" says Paul Conroy, who coordi-nates data link implementation at theCentre. "They have happily adapted tothis new way of working, delegating

some of their workload to the system."On average, 1000 aircraft exchangedata link messages on a monthly basiswith the Maastricht Centre. The numberof participating airlines has beensteadily increasing since June 2003,and new partners are regularly joiningthe programme.

Controller-pilot data link implementationin Europe is being coordinated byEUROCONTROL's LINK 2000+Programme. Support for the introduc-tion of automatic CPDLC will be provid-ed by the new CASCADE Programme,that coordinates the implementation ofa first set of ADS-B applications andmore CPDLC services building on theinfrastructures deployed by the Mode Sand LINK 2000+ Programmes.

"This is a good illustration of how ourprogrammes build on each others’achievements", says George Paulson,Director of ATM Programmes, "and weare pleased to see that Maastricht con-tinues to play a leading role in theimplementation of new technologies." ■

Introduction of automatic controller-pilot data link communications

breaks new ground

Automatic data link communications between the cockpitand the ground have recently been implemented atEUROCONTROL’s Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre.

This groundbreaking development comes just 20 monthsafter the operational introduction of controller-pilot datalink communications (CPDLC) in all sectors.

Introduction of automatic controller-pilot data link communications

breaks new ground

Press release published 14 March 2005:

44

Repo

rt

The President’s Bureau was enlarged to include the military partners,PC Members from Germany, Norway,Italy and the European Community and EASA representatives. EURO-CONTROL was represented by DirectorCRCO, Massimo Fusco.

The meeting was called by thePresident to prepare the EURO-CONTROL Agency Strategy as seen inthe context of the wider strategic issuesfacing the main players in EuropeanATM in the years to come, and in par-ticular beyond the timeframe of the cur-

CEATS Research and Developmentand Simulations Centre (CRDS)

Enlarged PC President's Bureau (PCPB-e) Meeting

The President of the Provisional Council, Mr David MacMillan (UK); and the Vice-Presidents, Mr László Kiss (H) and Mr Michel Wachenheim (F), convened a meeting of the enlarged PC President's Bureau(PCPB-e) at the CEATS Research and Development andSimulations Centre (CRDS) at Ferihegy Airport in Budapest (H).

from front left to rear right:Ann Godfrey (UK);David McMillan (PC President);Salvatore Sciacchitano (I);Per-Arne Skogstad (N);Ben Van Houtte (EC);Michel Wachenheim (F);Massimo Fusco (EUROCONTROL);László Kiss (H);Wolf Liedhegener (D);Philippe Debels (H-CRDS);Gerard Krol (Acting PC Secretary).

rent set of SES implementation rulesand mandated activities.

The PCPB(e) Members received acomprehensive explanation from MrPhilippe Debels, Head of the CRDS, ofthe Centre's main tasks and activitiesand how it fits into the larger CEATSProgramme. The visit to the CRDSconcluded with a live demonstration of the Simulation OPS room facilities. ■

The international UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) community,organised through UVS International, at their AnnualConference in Paris on 10 June 2005, paid tribute to three peo-ple for their forward-looking global vision and "in recognition oftheir personal commitment and contribution to promoting theinsertion of UAV systems into non-segregated airspace.

During the formal ceremony, Nick Sabatini (FAA AssociateAdministrator), Yves Morier (EASA Certification Director) andAlex Hendriks (EUROCONTROL Head of Airspace/FlowManagement and Navigation) received the prestigious "2005Catherine Fargeon Award" from Mr Peter van Blyenburgh,President of UVS International. ■


Jan Van DoornDirector EUROCONTROLExperimental Centre

Alex Hendriksreceives the“2005

Jan

Van

Door

n

Jan Van Doorn has been appointedDirector, EUROCONTROL ExperimentalCentre, as from 1 June 2005.

Jan was formerly EUROCONTROL’sDirector Infrastructure, ATC Systemsand Support then our Senior R&DCoordinator and, latterly, ManagerR&D Coordination and Validation.

Jan holds degrees in AerospaceEngineering from Delft University inthe Netherlands, his native country.He spent 32 years working in theNational Aerospace Laboratory in theNetherlands before joining EUROCON-TROL in 1999.

Thoroughly conversant with theresearch domain and with a solidbackground in managing a good num-ber of projects, Jan also has consid-erable experience in working oninternational platforms.

He brings a wealth of per-tinent knowledge andhighly-honed skills tothis new position andORBITe wishes him andthe Experimental Centrea period of highly suc-cessful development. ■

Award”

2005

Cat

herin

e Fa

rgeo

n Aw

ard

Catherine Fargeon

46

Repo

rt

On 30 March, the Director General welcomed Mr Salvarani, Head of Unit DG TREN/F/3, European Commission and the members of his team. The delegation was briefed on therelationship between EUROCONTROL and the European Community, safety regulation andoversight, and safety management. The visit concluded with a discussion on EC/EUROCONTROL/EASA relations.

On 1 April, the Director General welcomed Mr Otto Lagarhus, DirectorGeneral of the Norwegian CAA.

The Director General gave an overview ofEUROCONTROL, ATM performance indicators, EUROCONTROL objectives andthe Agency’s Business Plan, emphasising the role of Norway in EUROCONTROL.

On 7 April, the Director General welcomed the 2005 President of theEUROCONTROL Permanent Commission,the Romanian Minister for Transport, Mr Gheorghe Dobre.

On 20 April, the Director Generalreceived the Members of theEuropean Parliament TransportCommittee.

The delegation was briefed on theEUROCONTROL Organisation, including its mission, functions andfunding, the activities and challengesof European ATM and the EuropeanCommunity in EUROCONTROLincluding the Single European Sky.

The meeting concluded by coveringmajor future institutional develop-ments in particular EASA, SESAME and Galileo.

On 25 May, the Director General welcomedMr Tim Fenoulhet, the new EC Permanent

Representative to ICAO.

Discussions were held on the introduction to theEUROCONTROL Organisation, the performance

and challenges of ATM and the EuropeanCommunity in EUROCONTROL including the

Single European Sky and concluded with therelationship between ICAO and EUROCONTROL.

visits &agreementsMeeting our stakeholders

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .


Repo

rt

On 3 June, the Director General welcomed Mr Raymond Cron, Director General, Federal Office for Civil Aviation (FOCA),Switzerland. Mr Cron and his delegation werebriefed on the history, constitutional basis andorganisation of the decision-making process atEUROCONTROL, the role of Switzerland and therelationship between FOCA, Skyguide and EUROCONTROL, ATM performance indicators andEUROCONTROL objectives and the Agency’sBusiness Plan. The programme concluded with a visit to the CFMU operations room.

On 29 June, EUROCONTROL welcomedAmbassador Soo-Tae Rhee of South-Korea.

The Ambassador, Member of the ICAO Council,was briefed on the activities of the Agency inclu-ding international relations, the ATM situation inEurope and the role of EUROCONTROL, relationswith the European Commission and visited theCFMU operations room. The programme concluded with a visit to Maastricht UAC.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

On 17 June, the Director Generalwelcomed Messrs Manuel Bautista,

Director General de Aviación Civil andFrancisco Quereda Rubio, Director de

Navegación Aérea (AENA).

The delegation was briefed on ATM performance indicators and

EUROCONTROL objectives, institutional models including serviceprovision and supervisory authorities

and ratification issues, the AgencyBusiness Plan, Safety Regulation,ESARRs transposition and Safety

Management, EASA and SESAME.

The programme concluded with a visitto the CFMU operations room.

48

Repo

rt

visits &agreementsMeeting our stakeholders (cont’d)

On 17 March 2005, EUROCONTROL and ICAO signeda Memorandum of Cooperation under which they willwork together on safety oversight.

The ICAO safety audits fall under the remit of the Universal SafetyOversight Audit Programme (USOAP). This Programme verifies theimplementation by States of ICAO Standards and RecommendedPractices (SARPs) as well as the safety oversight capability of Statesacross all aviation domains, using a comprehensive system approach.

The EUROCONTROL safety audits fall under the remit of the ESARRsImplementation Monitoring and Support (ESIMS) Programme designedand operated by the Safety Regulation Commission (SRC). ThisProgramme monitors the timely, uniform and effective implementationof ESARR (EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirements) at Statelevel as well as the safety oversight capability of States in Air TrafficManagement.

Both ICAO and EUROCONTROL carry out safety oversight audits in the41 States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC). Under theMoC, ICAO and EUROCONTROL audits will alternate in order to ensureconsistency and complementarity of approaches between the twoorganisations. Information of common interest will be shared in orderto minimise the amount of auditing work needed and to maximise theuse of scarce auditing resources. Overall, this Memorandum ofCooperation will allow ICAO and EUROCONTROL to coordinate theirsafety oversight programmes, removing any overlap of activities,minimising the impact on States of oversight intervention in Air TrafficManagement and maximising the usefulness of programme activitiesand information. This represents a cost-effective approach to international safety oversight activities.

On 13 April,a Cooperation Agreement between ECAC and EUROCONTROL on the support of EUROCONTROL in the ECAC SAFA-Programme was signed in Paris by the Director General of EUROCONTROL and thePresident of ECAC, László Kiss.

Lithuania signs EUROCONTROLmembership documents

Lithuania took an important step towards becoming a Member of EUROCONTROL on 5 April 2005.

At the Organisation’s Headquarters, the country’s Ministerfor Transport and Communications, Mr Zigmantas Balcytis,accompanied by the State Secretary of the Ministry ofTransport, Mr Alminas Maciulis, signed the EUROCONTROLrevised Convention and the Protocol for the Accession of theEuropean Community, in the presence of representativesfrom the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

This move follows the acceptance by the PermanentCommission of the application for membership of EURO-CONTROL submitted by Lithuania on 9 December 2004.

Relations between EUROCNTROL and Lithuania have intensified since July 1992 when the country joined theECAC (European Civil Aviation Conference). Since then,Lithuania has benefited from technical assistance providedby EUROCONTROL and has contributed to the LocalConvergence and Implementation Plan since 1994.

. . . . . . . . . . .


Repo

rt

On 1 June 2005, Ministers from eight Central and EasternEuropean countries signed a Declaration welcoming the decision ofthe Republic of Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Hungaryand Slovakia to proceed without delay with the implementation ofthe Central European Air Traffic Services (CEATS) project.

At a meeting in Vienna, these five States agreed modalities for the implementation of the CEATS Agreement covering a range ofissues including regulation and institutional arrangements, implementation of the CEATS Control Centre, civil/military coordination matters and the creation of a Social Forum.

The CEATS project, which is coordinated by EUROCONTROL, aims to create a safe and efficient single air traffic control centrefor the upper airspace (above 28,500 feet) in Austria, Bosnia andHerzegovina, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, the northernpart of Italy, Slovakia and Slovenia. With air traffic in the CEATScountries predicted to nearly double by 2015, CEATS provides acost-effective solution to the capacity limitations posed by fragmented air traffic services in a limited geographical area. It is estimated that implementing the CEATS project will result insavings for airlines and airspace users of up to 200 M in 2015alone due to reduced air traffic control delays. The CEATS projectis supported by the European Commission as part of its SingleEuropean Sky initiative, in particular in the context of the development of Functional Airspace Blocks, contributing to part of its financing.

Speaking at the Conference, its Chairman, Dr. Dokic, Minister ofTransport of Bosnia and Herzegovina said “We are very pleasedthat a progressive implementation of the CEATS project will startwithout delay. This project is central to achieving safe, efficientand cost-effective air transport in the CEATS region in the future.”

“We welcome the agreement signed here today which lays out how to move ahead with the implementation of the CEATS project and indicates long-term objectives,” said Víctor M. Aguado, Director General of EUROCONTROL.“Through this text, the CEATS States have agreed on themodalities for implementing the CEATS project in line with the Single European Sky and with the ultimate aim of a more coherent and uniform pan-European air traffic management system.”

Ministerial meeting welcomes agreement onmodalities for the implementation of the CEATS project

PRAGUE

Strategy, Planningand Development Unit

Czech Republic

WIENCEATS Centre

Austria

Slovakia

Hungary

BUDAPESTResearch, Developmentand Simulation Centre

SloveniaCroatia

Bosnia andHerzegovina

Italy

FORLI-RIMINI

TrainingCentre

49

Press release published 2 June 2005:

On the right,Dr. Dokic,Minister ofTransport ofBosnia andHerzegovina

Vice-chancellorGorbach,Federal Ministerfor Transport,Innovation andTechnology ofAustria

Repo

rt

50

Enhanced Cooperation between EUROCONTROL and Cyprus

On 15 and 16 June 2005 a delegation from Cyprus headed by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry

of Transport, held a meeting with the Director of theGeneral Secretariat and other Agency officials to discuss

issues relating to cooperation between EUROCONTROL and Cyprus.

The outcome of these discussions was the amendment ofthe current Agreement and the initialing of a new Special

Agreement between the two parties.

The new Agreement provides, inter alia, for the provisionof Agency support services to Cyprus relating to the

implementation of ESSARs and the adoptionof the SES Regulations.

The Cypriot Permanent Secretary also held a brief meetingwith the Director General. It was agreed that the signing of

the new Agreement will take place in Cyprus between theCypriot Minister for Transport and the Director General,

on a mutually agreed date.

On 1 July 2005, Serbia and Montenegro becomes35th EUROCONTROL Member State

This move follows the acceptance by the Organisation’s supreme policymaking body, the Permanent Commission, of the application for EUROCONTROL membership submitted by Serbia and Montenegroon 18 June 2003.

Relations between EUROCONTROL and Serbia and Montenegro have intensified since 2002when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (as it was then known) became a Member of theEuropean Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC). Since then, the country has benefited fromtechnical assistance provided by EUROCONTROL.

“We are delighted to welcome Serbia and Montenegro as our 35th Member State,” said Víctor M. Aguado, Director General of EUROCONTROL. “The accession of Serbia andMontenegro means that all the countries of southeastern Europe and the Balkans are nowMembers of EUROCONTROL. Given the growth in traffic that we expect in the region over the coming years, this is of tremendous strategic importance and will be crucial in enabling the development of regional cooperation.”

visits &agreementsMeeting our stakeholders (cont’d)

EUROCONTROL Website:www.eurocontrol.int

Forthcoming Events

■ 30 September 2005Air-Ground Communications Safety Workshop,Brussels

■ 14-16 October 2005IFATCA Regional Meeting,Rhodes

■ 18-20 October 2005CAATS Safety R&D Workshop,Brussels

■ 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 Autumn 2005 issue of Skyway will focus on:

RegionalCooperation in ATM


Repo

rt

CorrigendumIn the previous edition of SKYWAY which focussed on ATM Training (Volume 7, Number 36, Spring 2005), in an article entitled, “Working partnerships to meet the challenge of limited capacity” (p14-17), the contribution by ENAC was wrongly portrayed as Ente Nazionale per l’Aviazone Civile. The correct title should read ENAC – Ecole Nationale de l’Aviation Civile.

Apologies from SKYWAY.

© European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)April 2003

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.

For more information,contact EUROCONTROL External and Public Relations,General Secretariat Directorate96, rue de la Fusée, B-1130 Brussels, BelgiumTelephone: +32 2 729 90 11Fax: +32 2 729 91 98

© European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)July 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.

For more information,contact EUROCONTROL External and Public Relations,General Secretariat Directorate96, rue de la Fusée, B-1130 Brussels, BelgiumTelephone: +32 2 729 34 20Fax: +32 2 729 91 98e-mail: [email protected]

eurocontrol & european airports · 2019-02-18 · skyway 37 - summer 2005 edito rial 3 dear...

Documents