eurocontrol front cover · pdf fileeurocontrol front cover 27/2/08 15:44 page 1. ... group...

EUROCONTROL and IFATCA

Yearbook 2008

INTER

-NATIONAL

FEDERAT

ION OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER

S’ ASSNS

.

EU

RO

CO

NTR

OL a

nd

IFA

TC

A

Eurocontrol front Cover 27/2/08 15:44

Editor Simon MichellGroup editorial director Claire ManuelManaging editor Samantha GuerriniSub-editor Nick GordonEditorial assistant Lauren Rose-Smith

Group art director David CooperArt editor Nicky MacroDesigner Zac CaseyDesign consultant Daniel Vasconcelos

Group production director Tim Richards

Group sales director Andrew HowardSales manager Jim SturrockSales executives Sorin Dumitru

Tony Norton

Client relations director Natalie Spencer

Publishing director Philip HoultDeputy chief executive Hugh RobinsonPublisher and chief executive Alan Spence

Pictures: Getty, Photolibrary.comRepro: ITM Publishing ServicesPrinted by Buxton PressISBN: 1-905435-64-9

Published by Newsdesk Communications Ltd5th Floor, 130 City Road, London, EC1V 2NW, UKTel: +44 (0) 20 7650 1600 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7650 1609www.newsdeskmedia.com

Newsdesk Communications Ltd publishes a wide range of businessand customer publications. For further information please contactNatalie Spencer, client relations director, or Alan Spence, chiefexecutive. Newsdesk Communications Ltd is a Newsdesk MediaGroup company.

On behalf of EUROCONTROL Rue de la Fusée, 96, B-1130Brussels, BelgiumTel: +32 (0) 2 729 9011Fax: +32 (0) 2 729 9044www.eurocontrol.int

and IFATCA1255 University StreetSuite 408, Montreal, Quebec, H3B 3B6, CanadaTel: +1 514 866 7040Fax: +1 514 866 7612www.ifatca.org

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Contacts

3

© 2008. The entire contents of this publication are protected by copyright. All rightsreserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, mechanical, photocopying,recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. The views and opinions expressed by independent authors and contributors in thispublication are provided in the writers’ personal capacities and are their soleresponsibility. Their publication does not imply that they represent the views oropinions of EUROCONTROL, IFATCA or Newsdesk Communications Ltd andmust neither be regarded as constituting advice on any matter whatsoever, nor beinterpreted as such.The reproduction of advertisements in this publication does not in any way implyendorsement by EUROCONTRO, IFATCA or Newsdesk Communications Ltd ofproducts or services referred to therein.

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Contents

4

A CollaborativeApproach to the Future

Forewords

7 Working togetherDavid McMillan, Director General, EUROCONTROL

12 Preparing for the futurePatrik Peters, Executive Vice-President Europe, IFATCA

15 Modernising Europe’s Air Traffic Management systemJacques Barrot, European Commission Vice-President in charge of Transport

16 Safety, security and efficiency through people, procedures and technologyYvan Ouellette, President, IFATSEA

18 Providing capacity, safety and efficiencySimon Michell, Editor, A Collaborative Approach to the Future

Designing the network

20 Designing the futureAnne Paylor

24 Enhancing ATM capacityBrendan Gallagher

28 Airport capacity growthJill Taylor

33 Cooperative SeparationDr David Baker

36 FASTI – First Air Traffic Control Support Tools ImplementationDavid Learmount

41 MUAC R&DJulian Moxon

44 Single European SkyIan Goold

49 Mission possibleIan Goold

54 Safety improvement programmesJulian Moxon

57 ESARR updateMartial Tardy

60 Clearing the runwayJill Taylor

65 Avoiding the issueEdward Downs

68 Creating a safety cultureDr David Baker

71 Developing a ‘Just Culture’Brendan Gallagher

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Contents

5

Operating the network

74 FEAST not famineDavid Learmount

77 Delivering training supportJeff Apter

80 Talking the talkPierre Tran

82 Air traffic control officer licensingAndrew Beadle

84 Working in a ‘Just Culture’Simon Michell

86 Trajectory managementAnne Paylor

88 Normal Operations Safety SurveyMark Pilling

90 Critical Incident Stress ManagementGrant McDonald

92 Team Resource ManagementMartial Tardy

Profiles

94 The relationship between EUROCONTROL and IFATCASimon Michell

97 A global presenceAndrew Beadle

100 What is EUROCONTROL?

103 What is IFATCA?

106 Advertiser index

This yearbook gives us a goodopportunity to glance back at the past –and look to the future.

Looking back over the last ten years, wesee a traffic increase of over 40 per cent. Itis predicted that 2007 will have 40 percent more traffic than 1997, which in turnhad 70 per cent more traffic than 1987.The latest summer figures for Europeshow an increase of 5.3 per cent. This ismore than was expected, as growth in theregion of 3 per cent had been forecasted.This growth trend seems certain tocontinue. The forecast for 2025 is thatthere will be between 15.5 and 18.9million IFR (Instrument Flight Rules)movements in Europe – that is, between1.7 and 2.1 times the traffic handled in2005. In other words, experts areexpecting the 2005 traffic levels to doubleby 2025.

Other factors will intervene, too.Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, for instance,will increasingly require airspace in whichto operate. The advent of Very Light Jetscould lead to more air taxi operations inEurope; and, of course, the use of low-costcarriers will grow, as ever more people taketo the air and do so more frequently.

This growth in traffic presents us withsome real challenges – notably in safety,capacity, efficiency as well as in mitigating

aviation’s impact on the environment.Safety is the first consideration. When

traffic doubles, risk can grow four-fold ifpreventive action is not taken. So safetyperformance needs improving if thenumber of accidents is not to increase. Anexcellent way to bear down on accidents isto collate reliable data on possible causesand contributory factors.

EUROCONTROL firmly supports theestablishment of a Just Culture whereincident reports can be made inconfidence. In order to promote thisconcept, EUROCONTROL holds

Growth in trafficpresents us withsome real challenges –notably in safety,capacity, efficiencyas well as in mitigating aviation’simpact on the environment

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Foreword

7

David McMillan, Director General, EUROCONTROL

Working together

▼

8

the area of automation, the role of thehuman in the system will remain central.So we need to be ready to involve thosewho work in the system in the design offuture approaches. And we must standready to talk frankly and openly aboutwhat future changes could mean for theway they work. In dealing with thesechallenges, as well as putting humanfactors firmly at the beginning of anydebate or development, we have to workin partnership.

As I take up my new duties as DirectorGeneral of EUROCONTROL, I am veryconscious of the need to maintain goodrelationships with our stakeholders and Iam delighted that we have a particular andlong-standing bond with IFATCA.

workshops, issues guidance material andconducts meetings with all interestedparties. It has also developed a toolkit tofacilitate confidential reporting.

The second challenge is capacity: delaysare extremely costly and we must do allthat we can to prevent them reachingunacceptable levels – such as werewitnessed in the 1990s – once again.

The third challenge is efficiency: ourcurrent system remains fragmented and,coupled with routing inefficiencies, costsusers an additional 20 per cent of totalcharges every year.

The final challenge, but by no meansthe least, is to mitigate aviation’s impacton the environment. Political and publicpressure is growing and the aviationindustry has to demonstrate that it istaking this issue very seriously.

However, plans, regulations ortechnology alone cannot solve all ourproblems. It is absolutely essential to takehuman factors and human engagementinto account in dealing with upcomingchallenges and, in particular, we all needto be clear that the ATM system of thefuture will only work if wholeheartedlyendorsed by those responsible foroperating it.

Although many technical advances can– indeed, must, be made – especially in


It is absolutely essential to take human factors into account indealing with upcoming challenges and, in particular, we allneed to be clear that the ATM system of the future will only workif wholeheartedly endorsed by those responsible for operating it

Without our close cooperation andmutual understanding, EUROCONTROL’swork would be much less effective. Thisyearbook is an excellent symbol of ourjoint partnership and I wish every readeran informative journey through its pages.


Patrik Peters, Executive Vice-President Europe, IFATCA

Preparing for the future

Being invited by EUROCONTROL toco-produce this yearbook is not only aprivilege, it is also an opportunity todemonstrate the excellent level ofcooperation that exists between theAgency and the International Federationof Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations(IFATCA). Furthermore, it is evidence ofhow much our professional organisation’sinput to the Air Traffic Management(ATM) world has been appreciated andrespected since its foundation in 1961.

Controllers employ systems andprocedures to ensure the safe, efficient andorderly provision of air traffic control. Wedeliver a service to the general public thathas developed immensely over the past

20 years and where change is anomnipresent constant. Aviation is thebackbone of modern society.

It is expected that traffic will doublebetween now and 2025. New measuresand ideas are required to create urgentlyneeded capacity for this increase. Thedevelopment of new techniques andprocedures, as well as pressure frompoliticians and industry, demand inputfrom all involved parties. IFATCA is proudto contribute its knowledge, experienceand dedication to this world of change.

Europe has picked up a momentum,which is setting precedence. Stakeholderconsultation involving professional andsocial representation has become a vitalpart of the ongoing development. Thestructured approach to modernise andharmonise ATM in Europe will haveconsequences for other parts of the globe.The realisation of the Single EuropeanSky, SESAR and the creation ofFunctional Airspace Blocks will lay thefoundations for many initiatives in other regions.

As these developments unfold, safetymust be the prime objective. Rising trafficlevels inevitably increase risks. These risksneed to be clearly identified and mitigatedin order to implement well-organised andproperly applied safety management

▼

12

We want to live in a modern, well-organised and easily accessible world. We accept that change is inevitable and we are prepared to take on the challenges of the future

systems. Transparency and trust isimperative. The Just Culture approach andvoluntary incident reporting can assist inproviding reliable data aimed at a blame-free environment, which in turn will leadto mature safety management.

Efficiency in the provision of air trafficcontrol service can be improved throughincreased harmonisation. Europe suffersfrom a patchwork of ATM systems,where current interfaces do not allow forthe predicted traffic increase. Recognisingrecent achievements, one can see thepotential this sector has, but also theextensive work that lies before us. Apartfrom the need for revising technical andoperational borders, we need to look atharmonising European nationallegislation. The European Communityrequires the cooperation of allparticipating States to tackle theefficiency hurdle.

With increasing air-traffic, environmentalaspects also require a new mindset. Ourplanet is suffering from global warming andthe impact of pollution in general. It is ourobligation as professionals in the transportsector to, as far as practicable, developenvironmentally friendly procedures andoperating practices.

We want to live in a modern, well-organised and easily accessible world. We

accept that change is inevitable and we areprepared to take on the challenges of thefuture. What we do today will determinewhere we are tomorrow. Only throughcollaboration between all parties:politicians, regulators, providers, industry,environmental organisations, airlines andoperators, can we ensure the best possibleoutcome. The long-lasting goodcooperation between EUROCONTROLand IFATCA is one important part of this.

I invite all members and associates ofIFATCA to enjoy this yearbook.

It is our obligation as professionals in the transport sector to, as far as practicable, develop environmentally friendly procedures and operating practices.


13

Jacques Barrot, European Commission Vice-President in charge of Transport

ModernisingEurope’s Air TrafficManagementsystemThe year 2008 is an important one in thedevelopment of European Air TrafficManagement (ATM). It is the year in whichthe Commission will propose changes to theSingle European Sky (SES) legislation totake account of changes in aviation.

The High-Level Group on the futureaviation regulatory framework has delivereda sound basis for our work towards aperformance-driven ATM system. Its tenrecommendations focus on the priorities fora second legislative SES package andidentify the means of successfullyimplementing SESAR – our programme formodernising Europe’s ATM system.

Although European aviation policy is asuccess story, it must adapt quickly to thelatest demands of the global market. Thesecond SES package will have to encompasschallenging priorities: guaranteeing a‘licence for aviation to grow’, reducing theenvironmental impact of aviation, andachieving continuous improvements insafety and cost-efficiency. A proper balanceof these priorities will ensure an efficientand effective system and will also reinforcethe position of the European Union in theglobal economy.

A key precondition for the creation andimplementation of the future regulatorysystem will be the commitment of allstakeholders in the ATM value chain – the

▼

The High-LevelGroup on the futureaviation regulatoryframework hasdelivered a soundbasis for our work towards aperformance-drivenATM system


15

European Union, EUROCONTROL,Member States, the ECAA States, airspaceusers, industry, the ATM personnel andtheir professional organisations.

It is beyond discussion that technicallyand operationally, the ATM system willalways depend on human performance andhuman know-how. This system is unique inits function to be able to ensure safeseparation between aircraft in flight andprovide access to the ATM network. Eventhe long-term view of the future ambitiousEuropean ATM Master Plan (SESAR)envisages a human-centred pan-EuropeanATM network. This plan will work only ifthe people working in the system are fullyinvolved. In order to secure highlymotivated and pro-active staff, socialdialogue and wide professional consultationwill be indispensable in the implementationof the SES. Transparency and engagementwill continue to be essential for the secondphase of the SES and the developmentphase of SESAR.

This yearbook is the place to once morecongratulate the air transport industry forits high level of safety. This achievement issubstantially due to the professional skillsand devotion of its ATM personnel. Thisshould successfully serve as the platform foraddressing the urgent need to reduce theimpact of aviation on the planet through an

improved ‘gate-to-gate’ European ATMnetwork which will offer a safe, cost-efficient and sustainable service.


Yvan Ouellette, President, IFATSEA

Safety, security andefficiency throughpeople, proceduresand technology

The International Federation of Air TrafficSafety Electronics Associations (IFATSEA)is pleased to share some thoughts on thefuture of Air Traffic Management (ATM).

The aviation industry is made of people,procedures and technology. Theinteraction between these three factors isthe key for a safe, secure and efficient AirNavigation Service. Together, we have tofind a balanced approach to make skiessafer every day.

Since the early 1970s, IFATSEA hasbeen the federation of Air Traffic SafetyElectronics Personnel (ATSEP) that bringstogether Air Traffic Safety engineers,technicians and technologists from all overthe world.

In 1962, Thomas Samuel Kuhndefined the concept of “paradigm shift”.He explained in his work The Structureof Scientific Revolution, that scientificadvancement is a “series of peacefulinterludes punctuated by intellectuallyviolent revolutions”, and in thoserevolutions “one conceptual world viewis replaced by another”. It is arevolutionary change from one way ofthinking to another.

Changes in ATM technology andCommunication, Navigation, Surveillance(CNS) ATM systems are inevitable, butthe human will always play a key role in

keeping our systems safe. ATM can alwaysrely upon dedicated staff. The ATM safetychain remains the highest priority of allstakeholders. The high level ofprofessionalism of pilots, ATCOs andATSEPs will ensure that our future systemswill continue to work safely and efficiently.

Today, with the development of SESARand NextGen, the ‘paradigm shift’ hasbecome the new buzzword in aviationautomation. Moving from proceduralestimates of current and planned aircraftpositions to radar was a big step inaviation. But now we are facing the movefrom ‘knowing the current position ofaircraft and estimating their plannedposition’, to a concept of ‘trajectoryknowing and sharing’.

The ATSEP community, mostlyinvisible to the public, that maintainsCNS/ATM systems and infrastructurewill now have to adapt to newer, moresophisticated and more powerful tools.The ATSEP duties ‘shift’ from a‘supporting’ function to the human-centred core of the system. The ATSEPwill have to prepare to become thesystem’s personal lifeguard and will have toguarantee 100 per cent system reliability,required under all circumstances.

In this global ATM, security of systemsbecomes a challenge for ensuring safety.

▼

16

Changes in ATMtechnology andCNS/ATM systemsare inevitable, butthe human willalways play a keyrole in keeping our systems safe

The System-Wide InformationManagement is a global ‘internet’network that will be accessed by multiplecategories of users worldwide. ATSEPsfrom all over the world will have toensure quality, reliability, accuracy,availability and security of this globalhighway of information. Securityprotection and access control, along withother lines of defences, will guaranteesafe operation.

The International Civil AviationOrganisation (ICAO) has developed theGlobal Aviation Safety Plan and works withall stakeholders to implement it. At its 36thAssembly, held in September 2007, the 190Contracting States of ICAO recognised this‘shift’ in roles and responsibilities of pilots,ATCOs and ATSEPs. The assembly agreedto “the concept of establishing licensingrequirements for ATSEP”. Onceimplemented worldwide, the ATSEP licencewill ensure competency and qualification ofall ATSEPs at a global level, thus setting anew balance between people, proceduresand technology.

Working together will ensure the fullbenefits of a safe, secure and efficient AirNavigation Service.

Working together will ensure the full benefits of a safe, secure and efficient Air Navigation Service


17


Simon Michell: Editor, A Collaborative Approach to the Future

Providing capacity, safety and efficiency

As predicted, there is no let-up in airtraffic growth and EUROCONTROL ispreparing, alongside its aviation partners,to meet an expected 4.6 per cent rise intraffic levels in the summer period of2008. The overall complexity of the AirTraffic Management (ATM) networkduring this period will also be greatlyaffected by the European FootballChampionships in Austria andSwitzerland. The higher levels of traffic,combined with the uncertainty of flightpatterns as the Championships progressthrough the knock-out stages, will be asignificant indication of just how wellprogrammes like the DynamicManagement of the European AirspaceNetwork (DMEAN) can help the networkabsorb sudden surges in flights to andfrom European airports.

As DMEAN is put to the test, otherEUROCONTROL programmes continueto make progress, with a recent surveyreporting that several Air NavigationService Providers (ANSPs) have reached100 per cent safety maturity, and are readyto move on to the next level. There arestill challenges to address, for example, intransposing EUROCONTROL SafetyRegulatory Requirements into nationallegislation throughout the Member Statesand the uniform introduction of a Just

Culture to ease the process of incidentreporting, thereby enhancing safety levels.

That said, 2007 saw a number ofEUROCONTROL initiatives beddingdown. Use of the First European ATCOSelection Test has begun in more than halfof EUROCONTROL’s Member States,and has already screened over 8,000potential Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs).The introduction of new ATCO tools toreduce workload and enhance planningcapabilities is also underway, as part of theFirst Air traffic Control Support ToolsImplementation programme, helped bythe International Federation of Air TrafficControl Officers Associations (IFATCA),which assisted with various aspects of thedevelopment, in particular with man-machine interface issues.

EUROCONTROL invited IFATCA tobe a partner in the 2008 yearbook as ameasure of the high regard in which theyhold the organisation and the supportIFATCA gives the Agency to communicateto a wider audience. This support was infurther evidence at this year’s IFATCAEuropean Regional Meeting in Prague,where EUROCONTROL was given theopportunity to present progress reports onseveral of the Agency’s major programmes.

The two organisations are well awarethat the successful implementation of the

▼

18

Several AirNavigation Service Providershave reached 100 per cent safetymaturity, and areready to move on to the next level

future ATM network, as envisaged by theSingle European Sky ATM Researchprogramme, requires very high levels ofcollaboration and mutual support.However, as the future ATM networkbegins to take shape, air traffic continuesto evolve. The impending introduction ofmore Unmanned Aerial Vehicles intocontrolled airspace, the expectedexpansion of Very Light Jet traffic and thefuture rise of space tourism will contributeto the existing challenges.

EUROCONTROL and its partners havebegun the process of change and a greatdeal has already been achieved during2007. As always, the transition fromdevelopment to implementation willchallenge all involved. It will highlight thecontinuous need for all actors in the process(regulators, legislators, industry, ATM,airlines and airports) to work together – aprocess which has already begun.

The introduction of more Unmanned Aerial Vehicles into controlledairspace, the expected expansion of Very Light Jet traffic and thefuture rise of space tourism will contribute to the existing challenges


19

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Designing the network

Addressing human factors issues at the beginning of the SESAR programme will not onlyensure a better ‘product’, but it will also help to reduce costs. Anne Paylor finds out why

Designing the future

Integrating human factors issues into theSESAR programme at an early stage isgoing to be crucial to the success of theEuropean ATM modernisation programme,according to EUROCONTROL’s ManfredBarbarino, human factors domain managerwithin the Safety, Security and HumanFactors (SSH) unit of the ATMprogrammes directorate. This, he says, isbecause bringing in human factors expertiseat the beginning of a project not only helpsto ensure that it comes in on time and tobudget, but also that the ‘product’ isaccepted by the end user, meaning thatexpensive last-minute adjustments toaddress human factors issues are not needed.

As far as human factors issues within theSESAR programme are concerned,EUROCONTROL is working on ‘WorkPackage 1.7 Human Resources’ whosemain objective is to address integration andthe best use of human capabilities in thefuture ATM network, consideringoperational, technical and organisationalaspects. The issues around these areas arenot new; as long ago as 1993 the EuropeanATC Harmonisation and IntegrationProgramme (EATCHIP) identified threespecific issues relating to human resourceswithin air traffic management as follows:• the need for a harmonised European

licence for Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs)

• a human factors element was involved in80 per cent of all ATM occurrences(accidents/incidents)

• a shortfall in controller numbers ofbetween 10 and 15 per cent acrossEurope, contributing to capacity shortfalls.Subsequently, in 1994, EUROCONTROL

set up a human resources team to addressthese three issues, as elements ofEATCHIP, its successor programme,EATM and now as part of the SESAR programme.

European air traffic controller licenceIn 2006, the European Parliament issueddirective 2006/23/EC on the establishmentof a Community air traffic controllerlicence as part of the Single European Sky(SES) legislation. The directive, whichcame into force on 17 May 2006, requiresall member states to recognise licences andtheir associated ratings and endorsementsissued by another state’s NationalSupervisory Authority.

Conditions for obtaining a licence willinclude holding a valid medical certificate,age limitations, training and examinationrequirements, and English languageproficiency ratings.

Member states are expected to havetransposed the directive into their nationallaw by May 2008, meaning that all

▼

20

Conditions forobtaining a licencewill include holdinga valid medical certificate, age limitations, trainingand examinationrequirements, andEnglish languageproficiency ratings

ATCOs throughout the EU will have tobe able to speak and understand Englishto a satisfactory standard. ICAO hasspecified that controllers working indesignated international airspace mustdemonstrate their language proficiency by5 March 2008, while the EuropeanCommission (EC) has extended theselanguage proficiency requirements to allair traffic controllers, including students,for application not later than 17 May 2010.

Therefore, the Training, Developmentand Harmonisation, or TDH, unit atEUROCONTROL’s training institute hasproduced a tailored language proficiencytest – the English Language Proficiencyfor Aeronautical Communication – tomeet the language proficiencyrequirements for controllers laid down bythe International Civil AviationOrganisation and the EC.

Addressing shortfallsIn terms of controller recruitment, theSSH unit identified too much reliance oncalendar-year planning scenarios instead ofthe 15 to 20-year timeframe necessary. Ithas also developed some staff planningtools and an internet-based selectionpackage – the First European Air TrafficController Selection Test (FEAST) thatimproves the quality of selection by ATC

recruiters. FEAST also contributes to thecost efficiency of the overall recruitmentand selection process and to the goal ofreducing the costs associated with failureof ATC trainees. It is currently in use byboth civil and military ANSPs in 21European states and to date, a total of9,000 prospective controllers have sat theselection test, of whom some 600 havebeen recruited as trainee controllers.

The EUROCONTROL HumanResources Programme has also deliveredguidelines, methods, tools and referencematerial aimed at contributing to andenabling the timely availability ofsuitable ATM staff as well as proactivehuman performance management,

manpower planning, job marketing,recruitment selection, training and staffdevelopment. Specific human factorproducts, such as Team ResourceManagement, Human Error Analysis andCritical Incident Stress Management,have been created to contribute to safetyand efficiency enhancements in day-to-day ATM operations. In addition, thedevelopment of new ATM technologyand procedures will benefit from varioushuman factor methods (eg HumanFactors Cases) and tools which willsupport the design of ControllerWorking Positions and Human-Automation Partnerships within the lifecycle of ATM systems.

Increasing automationIn particular, Barbarino highlights theneed to address, at an early stage, issuessurrounding the inevitable increased use ofautomation. “Automation will definitelyincrease, but when we develop automationtools, we need to ensure that they are usedin support of the human operator and notvice versa,” he says. “There needs to be areal requirement for the automation tool,and we must ensure that the human is anautomation manager not an automationmonitor. We also need to know exactlywhat happens if the automation fails and

“When we developautomation tools,we need to ensurethat they are usedin support of thehuman operatorand not vice versa”Manfred BarbarinoHuman Factors Domain Manager, EUROCONTROL


21


23

identify the roles and responsibilities ofcontrollers and pilots in such an event.”

The SESAR ATM Target Conceptstresses that humans will continue to“constitute the core of the futureEuropean ATM System’s operations,” butit also acknowledges that there will be“drastic changes in procedures, humanroles and responsibilities”. These, it says,need to be “well understood and justified”.If responsibilities change, any associatedchanges in legal accountability (andliability) will be clarified throughappropriate analysis. The Conceptdocument also points out that in order toaccommodate both “the expected trafficincrease and the reference performanceframework, an advanced level ofautomation will be required”.

It says that the “nature of human rolesand tasks within the future system willnecessarily change. This will affect systemdesign, current staff selection, training(especially for unusual situations anddegraded modes of operations), competencerequirements and relevant regulations.”

Barbarino stresses that, if the SESARvision for the future is going to worksmoothly and effectively, human factorsissues need to be addressed as early aspossible in the design process so that theneeds and concerns of all stakeholders

and users are addressed before measuresare taken that will be costly to reverse.He stresses that a comprehensiveconsultation process would lead to realownership on the part of all partiesinvolved, which is crucial to the successof the future ATM system.

“We have to convince controllers thathuman factors issues are just part of theireveryday job and to convince ANSPs andregulators that human factors issues areimportant and need to be taken intoaccount from the outset, not addressed asan optional extra in the later stages of aproject,” says Barbarino.

If the SESAR vision for the future isgoing to worksmoothly and effectively, humanfactors issues needto be addressed asearly as possible inthe design process


Short-term improvements to the system are being implemented in advance of theSingle European Sky. Brendan Gallagher assesses what difference the DynamicManagement of the European Airspace Network programme will make and whatprogress has been achieved so far

Enhancing ATM capacity

“It’s an initiative to find capacity andflight efficiencies in the short term bylooking at existing activities, making surethey are coherent, examining how theymight be consolidated and seeking tosqueeze out the latent benefits.” As activitymanager for the Dynamic Management ofthe European Airspace Network(DMEAN) Framework Programme atEUROCONTROL HQ in Brussels, ChrisBouman is tasked with aligning ongoingand new activities of the variousEUROCONTROL units, aimed atencouraging Europe’s ATM stakeholders –the Air Navigation Service Providers(ANSPs), the civil and military aircraftoperators, the airports – to get more outof existing resources in the battle to stayahead of the remorseless rise in traffic.

DMEAN was launched at the end of2004, with the aim of delivering itsconcept of operations by 2010-11. “Thetraffic forecasts made it clear that we hadto come up with more capacity in theshort term,” recalls Bouman. “But wecouldn’t do a lot of new infrastructurethings in the time available, so it wasdecided that we would just have to pulltogether what we had and make better useof it. Making best use of the airspace andexploiting all available capacity requires agreater degree of dynamism in airspace

allocation and route activation, enabledthrough collaborative processes andtargeted information sharing.”

The whole of 2005 was devoted todefinition, with development andimplementation getting under way inApril 2006, after the OK by the Agency’sProvisional Council. “Since then we’vemade good progress,” says Bouman, whoemphasises that the programme is alreadyprompting continuous improvement andyielding practical benefits ahead of itsformal delivery date.

“Take the airports – we need to getthem on board because their capacitydirectly impacts the capacity of the entirenetwork,” he says. “The key there isCollaborative Decision Making by all theplayers at an airport. We’ve obtained anumber of significant operationalimprovements in that area, and also inboosting airport capacity to limit impactson the network.”

The organisation’s Central FlowManagement Unit (CFMU), working withthe stakeholders and otherEUROCONTROL units that contributeto DMEAN, has developed the first everfully integrated DMEAN NetworkOperations Plan for European airspace.

“It gives a complete view of all thecapacity considerations that need to be

▼

24

“The traffic forecastsmade it clear thatwe had to comeup with morecapacity in the short term”Chris BoumanActivity Manager, DMEAN Framework Programme

addressed by the aircraft operators inplanning schedules and routes,” Boumanexplains. “It’s all in one document that willbe backed up by a fully interactive websitefrom next summer. This is a very importantdevelopment and one that can be expectedto lead to ever more dynamic andresponsive network operations planning.”

Deteriorating weather conditionsIn a third quick win, DMEAN is tacklingone of the prime sources of networkdisruption – the weather. “Delays due tobad weather have increased significantly inthe last year or two,” says Bouman.“There’s not much we can do about theconditions themselves, but we can certainlyimprove how we deal with them.”

The team surveyed ANSPs and otherplayers, identified the best operationalsolutions that they have developed, andwill pass them on through a central best-practices register, open to all stakeholders.“That’s a good example of how we candeal with one type of disruption in theshort term rather than with a four-yearprogramme,” he says.

Between now and 2010-11, theDMEAN team will continue to put a largepart of their effort into what Boumandescribes as ‘enabling activities’, particularlyimproved information exchange. “I think

we can have all the enablers in place by ourdeadline,” he says. “But I also hope that abig percentage of the ATM partners inEurope will have already started using themincrementally in the intervening years.”

One key enabler is the airspace datarepository, which is linked with theexisting European Aeronautical Database,together with the environment databasethat the CFMU uses for itsdemand/capacity balancing work, andwith all the local databases in the MemberStates and ANSPs.

“There’s a lot of information inexistence on routes and the constraints inthe system, but to make things moredynamic it needs to be more readilyavailable and easier for the aircraftoperators to translate into actions,”Bouman explains. “This repository willprovide, in one place, all the data usersneed to check the availability of routes, for

instance with regard to the day-to-dayavailability of military airspace, but alsoany other airspace and airport capacityrelated operational information.”

Other enablers include a centralrepository for demand data and trafficforecasts to help ANSPs with theirplanning of sectorisation and staffing:“When they’re thinking about how tohandle the load next week and next year,there will be one place for them to seewhat’s likely to happen to the traffic intheir airspace.”

Bouman continues: “Broadly speaking,I’m happy with progress towards our 2010-11 milestone. But there are still someissues. First, we need to be even better attranslating improved enablers and workingmethods into operational network benefits.It’s all very well to have the procedureswritten down, agreed and at the ANSPs,but they must be put to use.”

Between now and 2010-11, the DMEAN team will continue to put a large part of their effort into ‘enabling activities’, particularly improved information exchange


25


He points also to the need for a change ofculture on the part of some airlines. “Someoperators still have a tendency to work theold-fashioned way and operate the routesthe same way every day because that makeslife easy for them,” he explains. “But wehave to be more dynamic if we are to takeadvantage of the latent capacity, and thatmeans a new approach to flight planning onthe part of a number of airlines.”

Airport oriented proceduresFinally, Bouman believes, the airportshave, in the main, yet to fully understandtheir role as part of the European ATMnetwork. “We have developed a number ofprocedures that are airport-oriented, andhow they are applied directly affects theCFMU’s ability to optimise the network asa whole,” he says. “The airports haveproblems and politics of their own, butthey must also give more thought to theoverall entity within which they operate.”

The DMEAN Framework Programme isdoing its work against the background ofclear targets from EUROCONTROL’sProvisional Council: average en-routedelays should not exceed one minute perflight during the summer season, betweennow and 2013, and there should be anannual 2km reduction in average routelength up to 2010.

“In 2007 we were slightly above the delaytarget, and this summer the average couldrise to between two and three minutes,mainly as a result of weather effects anddisruptions from system upgrade work bysome ANSPs,” says Bouman. “That reallyputs the pressure on us to do even more inthe short term – it’s a continuing battle.”

The route efficiency picture is morecheerful, though. “Our route developmentwork has led to a steady improvement inrecent years,” he says. “We’re now reachingthe point where improvements are moreand more difficult to obtain – if you havean almost straight line, how muchstraighter can you make it?”

As well as providing a nimble responseto capacity problems in the short term,DMEAN is creating the operationalfoundation on which the SESAR (SingleEuropean Sky ATM Research) programmewill erect its new-technology infrastructurefrom 2013 onwards. “Our job is to providea way of coping with demand growth untilSESAR starts to provide its benefits,”concludes Bouman. “We have done a lot ofgood preparatory work, but now we mustsee an accelerating implementation of theDMEAN principles. I feel a real urgencyabout the need for the operational playersto put available improvements into actionas soon as possible.”

26

Average en-routedelays should notexceed one minuteper flight during thesummer season,between now and2013, and thereshould be an annual 2km reduction in average routelength up to 2010


Jill Taylor reveals how the Airport Operations Programme is releasing capacity atEuropean airports

Airport capacity growth

Capacity growth in the terminal area andthe apron has failed to match advancesmade in the en-route sector over the lastdecade. While traffic has increased over 15per cent during the last five years, delayshave been kept in check, largely throughenhancements to upper airspace capacity.However, the last two years have seendelays start to rise again, and airports are amajor contributor.

Europe’s top 25 airports are where 80 per cent of airport delays occur. Theyare at the point where multiple playersfrom all sectors of the industry cometogether in a complex mix of operatorsand service providers. This is whereEUROCONTROL’s Airport OperationsProgramme is beginning to take effect.

The Airport Operations Programmefollow-on work was launched at the startof 2007, aimed at delivering short-term,quick-win solutions to current airportissues under the leadership of programmemanager Eric Miart. He explains: “We areimplementing existing solutions such asAir Traffic Control (ATC) procedures,Airport Collaborative Decision Making(A-CDM), and Surface MovementGuidance and Control Systems(SMGCS).” The programme is closelyallied with the objectives of the DynamicManagement of the European Airspace

Network (DMEAN) programme, includingcloser integration of airports in the ATMnetwork, and improved runway safety.

A-CDM is one of six projects in theprogramme, with early results showinggains in capacity, efficiency andenvironmental cost.

“We have already implemented bestpractices and CDM at three on the list of25,” says Miart. Two years into aprogramme to introduce A-CDM, Lisbon,Prague and Brussels airports reportfinancial benefits. “We have just startedprojects at London Heathrow and ParisCharles de Gaulle, where we expect to seesimilar results by 2011.”

In June 2007, Munich became the firstairport to operate a fully collaborativeprogramme, involving the airport, airlines,ground handlers and air traffic control.The programme has led to reduced taxitimes, and fuel savings worth a2.65million per year (and 18,700 tonnes ofCO2) as a result of A-CDM measuresintroduced over one year. “If you were tohave A-CDM implemented at the top 20-25 airports that generate the maximumdelays, I think the benefits would beenormous in terms of percentage delayreduction, like at Munich,” says Miart.

Head of apron control at Munich, PeterKanzler, says the airport began

▼

28

Europe’s top 25 airports are where80 per cent of airport delays occur.They are at thepoint where multipleplayers from all sectors of the industry cometogether in a complex mix

collaborating with stakeholders in the late1990s. “Our focus was runway capacitywhere, in winter, de-icing operationscontribute to bottlenecks. We put theright people together around the table atthe right time. We all had the same idea.”

Munich followed EUROCONTROLguidelines and developed procedures toshare data between all the partners.Matching flight-plan information,comparing times and data from differentsources was a crucial part of the process.Kanzler says the information is now muchmore precise, and as a result the airporthandles its resources much more efficientlythan before. Munich has succeeded inreducing delays during 2007, despite a 5 per cent rise in traffic.

The impact is more widespread thanjust at the airport itself. Munich sendsDeparture Planning Information (DPI)messages to the Central Flow ManagementUnit (CFMU) that manages traffic flow inEurope’s upper airspace. The data providesthe CFMU with more accurate take-off-times two to three hours before departure.At 25 minutes before take-off, theaccuracy of a predicted take-off based onflight plan data is between 9-18 minutes.This falls to between 7-12 minutes whenDPI messages are used, enabling theCFMU to optimise the existing ATM

network capacity. Zurich and Brusselsanticipate using similar messages by 2008.

EUROCONTROL published an A-CDM cost benefit analysis in late 2007,using data from participating airports:Barcelona, Brussels, Munich and Zurich.It calculates that a generic airport model,handling 280,000 movements a year, withaverage delays of ten minutes permovement and operational costs of a370million, could realise savings of a6 millionwithin two years, rising to a14 million inthree years. It estimates investment by the

airport, ground handlers, airlines and ATCof less than a10 million would realisesavings of a90 million over a ten-yearperiod – a cost benefit ratio of nine.

The analysis concludes there is “acompelling case for all partners toimplement A-CDM as a very cost effectiveoperational efficiency enabler.” It adds: “A-CDM has the potential to save tens ofmillions of euros and reduce CO2 emissionsby tens of thousands of tonnes per annum.”

IFATCA airport domain team leaderRaimund Weidemann believes A-CDM


29

“A-CDM has the potential to save tens of millions of euros and reduceCO2 emissions by tens of thousands of tonnes per annum”From A-CDM cost benefit analysis published by EUROCONTROL in late 2007,using data from participating airports: Barcelona, Brussels, Munich and Zurich


is one of the two most influentialprogrammes in the airport domain rightnow; the other being A-SMGCS: “Theairport is an extremely complex systemdue to the various stakeholders operatingthere. We came to a solution at BerlinTempelhof where we provide some, butnot all, of our radar data. Verbaltelephone coordination decreasedsignificantly from that moment on – a big win for the tower controllers.”

Miart recognises the cultural barriersthat exist between the different, oftencompeting, interests at the airport. “Ittakes three to five years to implement A-CDM,” he says. But the running costsare minimal. For Munich, the benefitsstarted from the outset. Miart expects infive years, the top 25 airports will haveimplemented airport A-CDM, withothers following their example.

Miart believes airport surfacemanagement and safety is another projectthat offers potential early payback. “Weare looking at how to use emergingtechnology to reinforce prevention ofrunway incursion, allowing the controllerto perform in a safe manner whatever theweather.” The programme is examiningways to reinforce runway incursionmonitoring through additional means,such as multilateration, microwave and

infrared surveillance, with severalvalidation trials planned at selectedairports in the next two years.

This work is being carried out in closecoordination with similar activities by theUS Federal Aviation Administration.Miart is hopeful that operations in lowvisibility conditions will benefit from thenew controller tools. “We want to providethe controllers with advance warning, andgive controllers more time to resolvepotential conflict. We are finding out thebest way to control the traffic on taxiwaysand runways.”

30

Airport surface management and safety is another project that offers potentialearly payback

Using pilots, rather than ground-based airtraffic controllers, to ensure that aircraftkeep a safe distance from one another(also known as pilot-controlled separation)is a challenge for global Air TrafficManagement (ATM) harmonisation – onethat can only be fully implementedthrough an interoperable system. There isan almost unanimous verdict that the bestagency to carry through thisinteroperability is the International CivilAviation Organisation (ICAO). It,however, will only be in a position toimplement plans and actions once aconsensus has been found between allstakeholders, including states andinternational organisations, as to whatexactly is the right way forward. In orderto help achieve this consensus, ICAO haspublished a circular to provide a high-leveloverview and concept of the AirborneSeparation Assurance System (ASAS),which takes into consideration theFAA/EUROCONTROL ‘Principles ofOperations for the use of ASAS guidelines.

Another way of attaining progress oninternational (global) agreement onseparation is to integrate the decisionprocess with the International Federationof Air Traffic Controllers Associations(IFATCA), especially as IFATCA hasalready stipulated adherence to solutions,

be they at the state, regional or globallevel, consistent with ICAO definitions.

IFATCA stresses that cooperation is thekey to successful implementation offuture ATM concepts and is promoting apragmatic approach. Patrik Peters,Executive Vice-President, Europe, is keento highlight this. He says: “IFATCA willcontinue to work with ICAO, especiallyin ICAO Panels and Study Groups aswell as with other groups involved withnew separation standards.” He adds:“IFATCA is issuing a series of papers toassist in understanding the issues.Participation of the InternationalFederation of Airline Pilot Associations(IFALPA) is also important.”

Conflict managementICAO recognises three levels of conflictmanagement: strategic, tactical andcollision avoidance. Strategic is achievedthrough the organisation and managementof the airspace, balancing demand withcapacity and traffic synchronisation. The second layer, ‘tactical’, providesseparation when the first – strategic –layer can not do this efficiently. It does itthrough an agent, who is either theairspace user or an air navigation serviceprovider. Should this second layer becompromised, then the third layer,‘collision avoidance’ is activated. This isnot part of separation as collisionavoidance systems are not included indetermining the calculated level of safetyrequired for separation provision.

The Airborne Collision AvoidanceSystem (ACAS) in ICAO terminology isthe collision avoidance layer of conflictmanagement. ICAO concepts all requirethat the collision avoidance layer is anindependent safety net system and has theuniversal agreement of IFATCA(controllers) and IFALPA (pilots) for this position.

Although ACAS is not a part of theseparation provision it is, however, vitalthat it is compatible with it. In short,when smaller separation standards/minima

IFATCA stresses thatcooperation is thekey to successfulimplementation offuture ATM conceptsand is promoting a pragmaticapproach


33

Dr David Baker looks at how pilot control of separation can be embedded in theAir Traffic Management system and the key elements that need to be in place

Cooperative separation

▼


are introduced then ACAS will need to beamended to be compatible. An example ofredefining ‘smaller standards’ may be seenwhen pilot separation minima are smallerthan controller minima, an example beingthe Reduced Vertical Separation Minima.

One area of contention among pilots isthe ASAS, defined by ICAO draftdocuments as: “An aircraft system basedon airborne surveillance that providesassistance to the flight crew supporting theseparation of their aircraft from otheraircraft.” There are seemingly some areaswhere ASAS, as defined in Europe,embraces applications that appear not tofit the concept. Moreover, applicationssuch as merging and spacing are notseparation functions. They belong to thefirst layer of conflict management and aretraffic synchronisation applications.

IFATCA supports the definition thatASAS is for use of the flight crew,however, it considers the definition islimited, as separation is not just fromother aircraft but from other hazards aswell. Says Peters: “It is not acceptable forone aircraft to avoid the other by flyinginto another hazard (such as weather orincompatible airspace activity).”

Naturally, analysis of trafficsynchronisation does not, of course, implythat course separation can be ignored.

Quite simply, synchronisation andseparation are different functions and havedifferent responsibilities. One of thedifficult and frequently avoided dilemmasis that of integrating these two elements. Itis absolutely vital that the system mustensure separation from all hazardsconcurrently and simultaneously –together. Separation modes must developfurther, as pilot separation is not the basic‘see and avoid’ type but a moredemanding application.

Pilot separation is a process in whichthe pilot decides how to separate his/heraircraft from others and where the pilotis responsible for complying with therules applicable to that separation mode(or standard) chosen by the pilot. Thepilot is responsible for monitoring thatthe separation mode continues to apply,or to implement another alternativemode before the first separation standardceases to apply. Consider first thesituation of a controller separating. Forexample, the controller’s separationstandard is five miles and the pilot isinstructed by the controller to maintaina spacing of seven miles. The controlleris still responsible for making sure theaircraft do not come closer than fivemiles separation standard (as althoughthe pilot has an instruction to remain at

seven miles, it is the controller who isresponsible for separation). If the pilotfails to maintain spacing of seven miles,the controller is required to intervenebefore the five miles is infringed (orimplement another separation standard).

Consider now the case where the pilotis delegated or assigned separation andselects the same separation standard ofsay five miles (but now with the pilotbeing responsible). In this situation,strategic conflict management of trafficsynchronisation using seven miles maystill apply, however, it will now be theresponsibility of the pilot, as separator,to intervene before the five miles iscompromised (or an alternative standardis implemented).

Cockpit displaysHowever, achieving this will imposerequirements on the information system’sCockpit Display of Traffic Information(CDTI), the flight crew (training andlicensing) and have the specific where, whenand what of the separation mode itself.

Any system must evolve from existingones incorporating protocols andoperability standards. Pilots alreadyperform self-separation, outside controlledairspace as well as delegated separationinside controlled airspace. In some

“It is not acceptable for one aircraft to avoid the other byflying into another hazard (such as weather or incompatibleairspace activity)”

Patrik PetersExecutive Vice-President Europe, IFATCA

34


35

countries, that can be mostly visualseparation. Evolution from current pilotand controller procedures will ensure asafe and orderly transition. This does notpreclude changes but, rather, requires anevolutionary process in which a series ofsteps are taken to a target state, neverignoring what has been learned and neverchanging for the sake of it.

Some of the more difficult issues affectCDTI and a number of issues need to beaddressed. There are, perhaps, four layers,or groups, of CDTI applications:1. General awareness traffic information.

This assists the flight crew withsituational awareness of trafficinformation but does not require themto act on this information.

2. Trajectory dependent trafficinformation. This requires the flightcrew to base their aircraft’s trajectory onanother aircraft’s trajectory. This is notseparation-based. For example, trafficsynchronisation (following, merging,spacing) to comply with an air trafficcontrol instruction.

3. Separation traffic information, thisinformation only being used by theflight crew to separate their aircraftfrom the traffic.

4. Collision avoidance traffic information. Each of these layers has different

requirements on the informationdisplayed. For layers two and three above,even basic issues, such as how to label thetarget, need addressing. For example, acontroller’s radar display uses labels thathave the airline operating company as acode together with the flight number. Thecontrollers then know the radio call signfor the operator and so can maketransmissions to the aircraft, relayidentification and coordinate with othercontrollers. A major issue is, therefore,that pilots are not going to know all theoperator codes and call signs. Moreover,will all the displayed information belegible in a cockpit?

Additionally, how is information to berelayed from the controller to the pilot?Some controller systems have electronicpointers. What verification systems,common to controller radar systems, arerequired for the CDTI in layers two andthree? What CDTI functions, for example,equivalents to controller bearing and rangeline, alerts and warnings will the pilotneed? And, even more problematic, whatsystems must be established to ensure thattwo or more separators (different pilots orcombination of pilots and controllers) seethe same identification? The maritimeexample of ‘radar-assisted collisions’ resultsfrom inadequate display systems for the

task at hand. It must not be repeated incommercial aviation.

Criteria for a solution must take intoaccount that there must be only oneseparator for a given hazard at any onetime. Separation must be delegated, butonly temporarily. Separation provision isnot independent of other ATMrequirements and there must be pre-defined procedures, including emergencyprocedures incorporating all availabletrajectory change options.

A safe ATM system is one in which thechosen separator for a conflict (be itcontroller or pilot) is the separator withthe best separation provision interventioncapability. That is to say, the separatorwith the highest ability to detect and solvea conflict and to implement and monitorthe solutions.

“The introduction of new technologieswill require on-going assessments as towho is the best separator – and don’tforget that in some cases (perhaps manycases) it may still be the controller,” says Peters.


EUROCONTROL’s FASTI will not only enhance safety, but also add capacity to the network. David Learmount talks to former programme controller Chris Brain for afuller explanation

FASTI – First Air TrafficControl Support ToolsImplementation

Human beings – air traffic control officers(ATCOs) – will remain central to thedelivery of ATM for the foreseeable future.For that reason – and because the demandfor air travel will continue to grow –ATCOs must be provided with supporttools that can increase their own capacityto handle the additional traffic withoutreducing safety levels.

The key to enabling controllers tohandle more aeroplanes safely, accordingto EUROCONTROL, is to provide a toolthat gives them instant access to predictiveinformation that they have previously hadto compute in their own heads. Leading aEUROCONTROL scheme known asFASTI – the First Air Traffic ControlSupport Tools Implementationprogramme – former controller ChrisBrain has been responsible for helping AirNavigation Service Providers (ANSPs)select and operate tools that will providebenefits to controllers. The generic namefor the principal tool that has beenapproved to deliver this advance is MediumTerm Conflict Detection (MTCD), butbefore explaining what it does, it is worthlooking at the fundamentals of how mostof today’s fully-trained European ATCOscurrently do their job.

Under the legacy system, using familiartools such as secondary radar displays and

the continually updated information onindividual flight progress strips for eachaircraft, ATCOs have to conjure up amental forecast of the results of everyinstruction they pass to flight crew beforethey do it. Ahead of each decision tochange an aircraft’s trajectory, or evenclearing it to continue further on itsexisting path, controllers have to picturewhere the aircraft will be relative to allthe others in the sector a few minutesahead, and scan the display for potentialconflicts – a bit like chess. Now MTCD

can perform this task for the controller,but more accurately and much furtherahead in time than even the best ATCOcould do.

For many years ANSPs have workedwith a system known as Short TermConflict Alert (STCA), which is simply a“safety net”. If a controller has failed tonotice a developing conflict, STCA alertsthe controller up to a couple of minutesbefore it would take place so he/she cantake action to prevent it. It has no place asa planning tool, however. MTCD, on theother hand, allows controllers to checkwhether there might be a conflict up toabout 20 minutes ahead.

The MTCD today is ground-basedequipment. It is a computer that receivesconstantly updated information abouteach aircraft’s position and currentlycleared trajectory, and its software canpredict where all of them will be in 20minutes’ time. The computer tracks eachaircraft’s real-time progress, knows whattype of aircraft each is, and is programmedwith each type’s performancecharacteristics, so its predictions aboutmedium-term trajectories are accurate towithin a few seconds, says Brain, whereasATCO’s mental calculations of futurescenarios had to build in much moreroom for error, reducing the amount of

▼

36

The computer trackseach aicraft’s real-time progress,knows what type of aircraft each is,and is programmedwith each type’sperformance characteristics

traffic they could safely handle. Whenplanning ahead, an ATCO with MTCDalso has at their disposal a ‘what if ’function to question the system and get aforecast of any potential conflicts. AsBrain explains, the system “improvespredictability and reduces uncertainty”.

The word ‘First’ that heads the FASTIacronym refers to the fact that this form ofMTCD will eventually be succeeded by asystem that receives real-time downloadeddata from all the aircrafts’ FlightManagement Systems. So any time thepilots reprogramme the flight’s trajectory –or indeed if they fail to do so despitehaving been passed a new clearance byATC – the system can predict even moreaccurately where the aircraft will be evenfurther ahead in time.

But such a system will not be inoperation for many years yet. TheMTCD they have already is a massiveadvance on traditional systems, insistsBrain, and controllers at the Area ControlCentres (ACCs) that are already using itas such. The International Federation ofAir Traffic Control Officers Associations(IFATCA) worked closely withEUROCONTROL during developmentof the man-machine interface forMTCD, and controllers were kept in theloop so as to gain the fullest possible

Switzerland’s skyguide, which controls one of the most intensepieces of airspace in Europe, says that the use of MTCDincreased its capacity by 15 per cent in the first 12 months of use


37


understanding of all the human factorsaspects of the change.

MTCD is already in operation in theBalkans, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, theNetherlands, Sweden and Switzerland –Brain points out that these ‘pioneers’ areproviding system validation and ideas forcontinual improvement. This is not justthe case in the equipment function, butalso for better controller training inpreparation for other ANSPs who have yetto introduce the system. Within two yearsit will go live in several major EuropeanACCs, including Germany’s Karlsruhe,UK’s NATS Swanwick ACC,EUROCONTROL’s Maastricht UpperArea Control Centre, and France’s Brestand Bordeaux ACCs. Announcing NATS’plans in March 2007, the company’s chiefexecutive claimed that the MTCD system– to be known as iFACTS – would be “thebiggest change in air traffic control sinceradar”. Starting from 2010, Austria, Italy,Malta, Portugal and Turkey will also beginintroducing MTCD.

Switzerland’s skyguide, which controlsone of the most intense pieces of airspacein Europe, says that the use of MTCDincreased its capacity by 15 per cent in thefirst 12 months of use, and NATSestimates iFACTS will increase its en-routeATM capacity by about 13 per cent.

Brain explains that MTCD iscomplemented by a tool called MONA –short for monitoring aid. If an aircraftdeviates from its predicted position bymore than one nautical mile, thecontroller is provided automatically withan update, and even potential level-bustscan be predicted and notified immediatelyto the controller, says Brain.

Another controller support aid in theFASTI toolbox will make aircrafthandover from one ACC to anothereasier. Known as SYSCO – system-supported coordination, Brain explains:“This will improve coordination betweencentres. It doesn’t yet exist, but we areworking hard to promote it forintroduction from 2010.”

EUROCONTROL has developed thestandards for it, based on improving anexisting system called the On-Line DataInterchange. SYSCO says Brain, is atactical messaging tool that permitscontrollers to exchange information aboutflights being transferred between ACCs.SYSCO will reduce the need to use thetelephone and the corresponding workloadinvolved, and it will also provide directscreen-to-screen coordination.

FASTI keeps controllers fully in thedecision-making loop and gives them thetools required to effortlessly bring hugeimprovements to predictive data.

38

SYSCO will reducethe need to use the telephone andthe correspondingworkload involved,and it will also provide directscreen-to-screencoordination

The Maastricht Upper Area ControlCentre (MUAC) was the world’s first trulyinternational air traffic control centre,providing a seamless airspace area coveringthe upper airspace of Belgium,Luxembourg, the Netherlands andnorthern Germany. Its entry into operationmarked the first time in history that airtraffic in one country had been controlledfrom a centre located in another.

From the beginning, the MUAC haspioneered numerous advances inoperational concepts, which have enabledthe safe and efficient management of therising levels of air traffic in Europe.Today, it is one of the main buildingblocks in the creation of the SingleEuropean Sky (SES).

The New Flight Data ProcessingSystem (N-FDPS)On an operational level, the MUACintroduced a fully paperless electronicflight information system as long ago as1993, eventually enabling the removal ofpaper strips in the primary system. Thisapplication of technology has significantlyimproved controller productivity.

“We have paperless primary, standbyand fallback systems,” says Herman Baret,Programme Manager for the New FlightData Processing System (N-FDPS) about

to enter service at the MUAC. “We’re sureit will be the norm elsewhere within fiveto ten years,” he says.

In November 2002, the MUACactivated its new Operator Input andDisplay System (ODS), a Human-Machine Interface presenting air trafficcontrollers with a clear overview of thetraffic situation. Since the introduction ofthe former ODS in 1981 the latest ODShas become one of the most significantenablers for increasing safety and capacity.“We believe it is what has allowed theMUAC to maintain adequate capacity tohandle traffic growth in the last fiveyears,” says Baret.

One of the most fundamental technicaladvances within the MUAC infrastructure,the N-FDPS, is due to becomeoperational in 2008. Baret says the system,which is the largest undertaking at thecentre in 30 years, will enable thereplacement of the existing route-basedflight data processing system with a farmore dynamic trajectory-based version. “It will also provide extremely flexiblesectorisation, resulting in far more efficientand flexible management of the airspace,”he adds.

The N-FDPS trajectories will becontinuously updated with radar data andinputs from the controller in order to

MUAC haspioneerednumerousadvances inoperationalconcepts, whichhave enabled thesafe and efficientmanagement ofthe rising levels of air traffic in Europe


41

The Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre pioneers the development and implementation of new operational concepts and technologies. Julian Moxonreviews its successes

MUAC R&D

▼

MUAC has the enviable reputation of being one of themost cost-effective ACCs in Europe, with by far the highestcontroller productivity

Communications (CPDLC) have beenused operationally since the end of the1990s and a major milestone was achievedin July 2001, when an American Airlinesflight to Paris Charles de Gaulle airportwas controlled by the MUAC usingcomputers to transmit clearances andinstructions via the AeronauticalTelecommunications Network – a first inaviation history.

In February 2005, the MUACintroduced Automated CPDLC forsecondary radar code changes, furtherreducing controller workload. Today, up to35 different airlines are equipped toexchange CPDLC messages with theMUAC and do so on a daily basis. Thenumber of CPDLC log-ons is steadilygrowing, reaching more than 33,000 in2007 – a 50 per cent rise on 2006.

The MUAC has also been central to thedevelopment of the Short-Term ConflictAlert (STCA) system, a vital safety net, firstintroduced in 1980, designed to maintainhigh safety standards in the face of risingtraffic. A re-engineered STCA system wassuccessfully implemented and went intooperation in January 2007. It predictspotential conflicts likely to occur within thenext 120 seconds and warns the controllervia a visual alert. The new system, whichincludes a number of innovative features to

42

reflect the clearances provided to theaircraft and to plan the most efficient andsafe flight profile. The trajectory can alsobe updated by external sources, including,for example, adjacent centres using theOn-Line Data Interchange system.

From a safety perspective, the N-FDPSwill facilitate the implementation ofadvanced tools such as Medium-TermConflict Detection (MTCD), which willhelp controllers detect and analysepotential conflicts as much as 20 minutesin advance. The MUAC is one of threeArea Control Centres (ACCs) – the othertwo were Malmö and Rome – to havecarried out MTCD trials between 2002and 2004, and in doing so demonstratingthat MTCD has “technical andoperational benefits as well as the potentialto improve safety and cost-efficiency”.Operational implementation at MUAC isplanned for 2008.

Controller Pilot Data LinkCommunications (CPDLC)The last ten years have also seen majoradvances in data link technology atMUAC, mainly through the PreliminaryEUROCONTROL Test of Air/GroundData Link trials, which started in the mid-1990s, and now through the LINK 2000+programme. Controller Pilot Data Link


support air traffic controllers in their day-to-day work, has reduced the number ofnuisance alerts significantly.

The Maastricht Centre is currentlylooking into new Airspace Managementand Air Traffic Flow and CapacityManagement tools to produce safety andcapacity benefits in the coming years.

Maastricht ATC New Tools andSystems (MANTAS)An internal project, MANTAS (MaastrichtATC New Tools and Systems) laid thegroundwork for an entirely newoperational concept based on afundamentally different, capacity-drivenair traffic control methodology. Itrepresents a shift from a reactive, tacticalmethodology to a more effective andefficient flow and capacity management.The MUAC has already updated itsoperational activities as a result ofpreliminary MANTAS findings.

Implementation of new operationalconcepts and technologies is part of dailylife at the MUAC. The success withwhich it has done so is clearly evident inits performance statistics. For example,despite an increase in traffic close to 55per cent between 1997 and 2007, lastyear the Centre managed to process 96per cent of flights through its airspace on

time. In addition, costs have been on adownward trend since 2002, resulting in anaverage decrease of 13 per cent per annum.

Not only that, but in spite of the hightraffic density and complexity of its airspacethe MUAC has the enviable reputation ofbeing one of the most cost-effective ACCsin Europe, with by far the highestcontroller productivity. “We are very proudof our achievements,” says Baret, addingthat besides controlling traffic safely andeffectively, the MUAC “will continue toimprove its technology infrastructure toallow testing of new concepts central to theachievement of the SES”.


43

Today, up to 35 different airlines areequipped toexchange CPDLCmessages with theMUAC. The numberof CPDLC log-ons is steadily growing,reaching more than33,000 in 2007


Ian Goold assesses the progress of the Single European Sky and the SESAR Definition Phase

Single European Sky

The Definition Phase (DP) of the SingleEuropean Sky Air Traffic Management(ATM) Research (SESAR) programme isrunning ‘generally according to schedule,’says Bernard Miaillier, head ofEUROCONTROL’s SESAR and ATMStrategy Division.

Although there was a slight slippage inthe intermediate stages, the last of the sixmilestone deliverables, which will establishthe framework for implementing the ATMMaster Plan, is still planned for March2008, as envisaged when the contract wassigned – more than two years earlier inNovember 2005.

The third milestone, D3 – definition ofthe future ATM target concept – wasdelivered in July 2007 and accepted inSeptember, just as the programme movedtoward December’s scheduled review of

D4, covering the selection of the bestdeployment scenario.

Miaillier emphasises the need for strictprogramme discipline: “It is essential tostick to the schedule for the last twodeliverables.” D5 will provide technicalsubstance and priorities for theDevelopment Phase, the workprogramme of the SESAR JointUndertaking in particular, and D6 willdefine and size the work packages.

In accepting the D3 milestonedeliverable, EUROCONTROL agreed thatthe ATM target concept described thefuture for European operations, includingtechnologies and supporting architecture,from 2020 onward. According to Miaillier:“It provides a first assessment of theexpected ability to meet performance targetsand their cost and benefit aspects.”

As the SESAR DP continued through2007, stakeholders provided feedbackthrough specific presentations, a process thatis set to continue. For example, apresentation to National SupervisoryAuthorities and the SES Committee wasfollowed by the Berlin D3 StakeholderForum on 11 October, which was attendedby 300 participants. This forum precededfeedback from the EUROCONTROLProvisional Council in November.

Miaillier characterises the feedbackreceived so far as having been generally‘very positive’ although, in late 2007,many aspects of work remained to bedefined in greater detail. This furtherdefinition would be done during thecoming SESAR DP and then be thesubject of intensive validation in theDevelopment Phase. In addition, a

▼

44

In accepting the D3 milestone deliverable, EUROCONTROLagreed that the ATM target concept described the future for European operations, including technologies and supporting architecture, from 2020 onward

number of alternative options were still tobe finalised. Inevitably, the quest forexcellence has led to serious discussionamong interested parties. “Some optionshave been the subject of passionate debatein the SESAR consortium, and it is notpossible to make a definite choice on allconcepts on paper alone. Nevertheless, theproportion of the commonly agreed part isremarkable,” says Miaillier:

Feedback was being followed up byactions in late 2007, with work alreadystarted, for example, on reinforcing thedescription of the weather aspects and theinteraction of SESAR with themeteorological world.

Although EUROCONTROLacknowledges that the D3 ATM targetconcept contributes positively to achievingSESAR performance targets, the agencynevertheless confirms that capacity andcost-effectiveness targets in, for example,major hub airports or high-densityairspace will require supplemental action.Such extra work includes the introductionof additional runways and FunctionalAirspace Blocks (FABs). Airlines see thecreation of FABs as the route to the SES,providing airspace users with lessfragmentation, more flexibility andimproved efficiency, based not on nationalborders, but on traffic flow requirements.

FABs also take account of safety, airspacecapacity, cost-reduction objectives and,not least, environmental improvements.

As defined by the SES frameworkregulation, such blocks should ensurebetter integration of airspace managementirrespective of existing politicalboundaries, points out EUROCONTROLATM Strategies Deputy Director, AlexHendriks. By providing better routestructures and airspace design, FABs offerairlines additional annual savings in directoperating costs and potentially reduceduser charges as a result of improved ATM rationalisation.

According to Miaillier, a FAB isconsidered in the SESAR concept ofoperations to be an ATC organisationalentity similar to en-route centres. He says:“FABs, because of larger volumes ofairspace, facilitate the application ofaspects of the concept, for exampletrajectory management or flexible use ofcontrol sectors. FABs are one of theexpected SES benefits that are considerednecessary to make the cost-effectivenesstarget achievable through better resource/capacity management and a reducednumber of developments, as well ascommon procurement.”

Hendriks explains that, in 2004, theEuropean Commission mandated

“Some options havebeen the subject of passionatedebate in the SESAR consortium, and it is not possible tomake a definitechoice on all concepts on paper alone” Bernard MiaillierHead of EUROCONTROL’s SESAR and ATM Strategy Division


45


EUROCONTROL to analyse allrequirements, investigate issues arisingfrom FAB establishment, and to organisediscussion to promote FAB acceptance.EUROCONTROL’s subsequent reportsaid FABs should be driven by operationalrequirements and benefits, leading to

harmonised (but flexible) design andevolutionary and incrementalimplementation. Four steps leading to aproposed clustering of existing ATM areasto make up a possible future network havebeen proposed as follows: • a structure based on traffic demand; • grouping of closely interdependent ATM

sectors into families;• further grouping of emerging families

into various scenario for possible FABs; • the selection by States of one scenario

for a FAB (based on ‘pan-Europeandimension’ of the SES). By 2007, several FAB areas were being

discussed, including the UK and Ireland,Portugal and Spain, Europe Central(Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg,Netherlands and Switzerland), CentralEurope (Austria, Bosnia & Herzegovina,Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary,Slovakia and Slovenia), and South EastEurope (including Bulgaria and Romania).

The future ATM system represents aparadigm shift from airspace-based to afour-dimensional trajectory-basedenvironment, allowing the safe andenvironmentally friendly execution of eachflight as close as possible to the intentionof its owner. The whole SESARprogramme will reduce the impact ofaviation on the environment, according to

Miaillier. But, he acknowledges thetremendous challenge to be negotiated inmeeting the political goal of reducingemissions per flight by 10 per cent.

He says: “One should not forget thatATM only facilitates aviation and is notaviation as a whole. SESAR, therefore,aims at nothing less than making ATMalmost 100 per cent efficient.” Perhapsinevitably, there must be some trade-offs inreaching a compromise solution. “Forexample, achieving a greater airspace orrunway capacity will likely imply a need toorganise traffic flows slightly away fromwhat would be the individual optimum ofeach flight.” Miaillier also points out thatsome environmental goals may be inconflict – noise and emissions at take-off,for example.

The SESAR project recognises the needfor ATM to deliver its maximumcontribution to environment, saysMiaillier. “For the shorter-term, a numberof initiatives are already creating savings asthey will allow better efficiency ofindividual flights.” What is more, theSESAR notion of performance partnershipcan help to meet environmentalmanagement objectives “in particular,through dialogue with stakeholders andthe involvement of local communities tofind the best possible options”.

46

There is a tremendous challenge to benegotiated inmeeting the political goal ofreducing emissionsper flight by 10 per cent

If real-estate agents’ creed is famously‘location, location, location’, thenperhaps that for the Air TrafficManagement (ATM) community shouldbe ‘cooperation, cooperation,cooperation’. At least that is very muchthe gospel according to the InternationalFederation of Air Traffic Controllers’Associations (IFATCA).

Put another way, its mantra might besummarised as ‘People matter more thanthings’. In IFATCA’s contributions andinput to the debate about the SingleEuropean Sky (SES), the organisation –which represents some 50,000 controllersin more than 130 countries – hasunderlined the need for all stakeholdersin the SES ATM Research (SESAR)programme to communicate.

In 2007, European Transport Vice-President Jacques Barrot’s High-levelGroup (HLG) of regulators and industrynoted IFATCA’s opinion on EuropeanATM, while IFATCA was also representedin the Industry Consultation Board,which advises the European Commission(EC) on technical issues relating to theSES. IFATCA also presented its views onimplementation of the International CivilAviation Organization (ICAO) globalATM operational concept. “Moreimportant than particular technology or

procedures is a commitment to a highlevel of cooperation among all membersof the ATM community – cooperationthat requires pragmatism andcompromise,” says IFATCA’s Presidentand CEO, Marc Baumgartner. “It is alsoimportant to understand the evolvingATM environment and what practicalissues must be addressed in areas such asperformance expectations, as well as therole of humans and technology.”

Trusted partnersIn addressing many of the issues raised bythe SES project, IFATCA has published‘SESAR – Mission Possible?’ It alsocontributed to the third SESAR milestone(D3) work that was accepted byEUROCONTROL in September 2007.

“One of the prime tasks is to guaranteethat ATC staff are not only consulted andlistened to, but that they are also included,”says Baumgartner. “All the stafforganisations representing the controllers,technicians and pilots need to becometrusted partners in the change process.”

Confirming IFATCA’s readiness to bepart of the solution, Baumgartner explainsthat this requires a level of maturity indialogue by the other actors andstakeholders, particularly as change willonly be successful if it is in line with

“More importantthan particulartechnology orprocedures is acommitment to a high level ofcooperationamong allmembers of theATM community”Marc BaumgartnerPresident and CEO, IFATCA


49

Ian Goold talks to the President and CEO of the International Federation of Air TrafficControllers’ Associations about the Federation’s support for the Single European Sky

Mission possible

▼

role will change as ATM automationevolves. The IFATCA President says thisshould include an increasing ability forcontrollers to delegate tasks to others –humans and automation systems, sinceboth are required. He says: “The humanshould at all times be the manager, not theservant, of technology.” IFATCA is alsokeen to see the human elementrepresented in all stages of technologydevelopment, while underliningcontrollers’ willingness to participate.“ATCOs are not against change. They aresimply not happy with changes imposedon them, where technology fails to deliveras promised,” insists IFATCA.

Turning specifically to the EC’sexpectations of SESAR, Baumgartner saysthe improved safety, enhanced performance,reduced environmental impact and muchlower service charges are all achievable,perhaps even in a shorter time frame thanoriginally envisaged. But all these objectivesraise questions. “What is expected after2020? Are these performances sufficient? Dothey represent value for money?”

IFATCA recognises progress in safetymeasurement, but says that safetymanagement is, in fact, risk managementwith no buffer or margins forunpredictable or uncontrollable eventsthat can overtake the ATM system. “There

50

solution for addressing safety andefficiency, among other things, is toosimply stated as ‘the airspace user willplan their preferred four-dimensionaltrajectory and the ATM will modify thetrajectory to the minimum extentpossible’. The difficulty is that manyStates and Air Navigation ServiceProviders believe that is what they arealready doing.” This led the Federation tooutline practical considerations in early2007 in a 55-page document, one ofseveral publications produced byIFATCA. “Our inputs to the ongoingSESAR work were simply ignored,”IFATCA told the High-Level Group.

Cooperation requires not just a sharingof information, but action to ensurepredictability in performance by bothairspace users and service providers,according to IFATCA.

Humans should not be servants to technologyNoting the part played by people,Baumgartner says that human strengthsare seen in the rational and flexiblemanagement of technological systems,especially during unforeseen events. “It is often this that has allowedautomation to be implemented in real-world ATM environments.” The human

ICAO’s future vision of the ATM concept.This, he says, means all stakeholders mustagree on a common and shared vision,translated in agreed and sharedperformance plans. Underlining theworldwide context for such developments,IFATCA therefore suggests thatEUROCONTROL, the EC and SESARhave to fit into the global picture.

A major concern for IFATCA is adifference in perception amongstakeholders. “We are concerned therewere misunderstandings about what ATMis and how it is evolving. The proposed


The human role will change as ATM automationevolves. The IFATCAPresident says thisshould include anincreasing abilityfor controllers todelegate tasks to others

should be safety management systems totrack when automation does not performas expected, or is unavailable.”

The Federation is also concerned aboutfuture capacity definitions and calls on thewhole ATM community to collaborate inagreeing what is reasonable capacity anddelay. It wants to see a review of aircraftseparation standards ahead of a redesign ofroutes, accompanied by trajectorymanagement to obtain greater capacity.“The choice about which flights arehandled at which destination aerodromesis one of the big challenges ofCollaborative Decision Making,” says IFATCA.

As far as cost savings are concerned,IFATCA says targets really indicate adesire by airspace users to reduce all costs.The Federation considers that there willneed to be evaluation of, for example,what is the true value of ATM services andwhat is a reasonable price to pay.

Acknowledging the apparent good workin reducing environmental impact,IFATCA nevertheless points out thedownside. “With three times the traffic,additional measures will be needed toachieve an overall reduction in gaseousemissions.” In addition, the overall noisegenerated will increase, despite a 10 percent reduction of sound levels per aircraft.

“Both States and the EC should decidewhether the future approach should becompetition or cooperation,” concludesIFATCA. “Stakeholders need a commonunderstanding of what has to be achieved,otherwise the current confusion willcontinue and the expected performance willnot be achieved.” Of course, IFATCAfavours a cooperative solution, which it

says, has provided a well-functioningsystem for the past 20 years. “Cooperationhas provided 29,000 air traffic controlledflights a day in Europe, with delays nothigher than 18 per cent of all the flightsduring the peak summer months. Thisperformance has been carried out byATCOs, who have not really changed innumbers since the late 1990s.”

Turning specifically to the EC’s expectations of SESAR,Baumgartner says the improved safety, enhancedperformance, reduced environmental impact and much lower service charges are all achievable


51


Ensuring that the European Air Traffic Management system functions safely has alwaysbeen at the heart of EUROCONTROL’s raison d’être, and indeed is enshrined in its title– the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation. Julian Moxon looks atthe status of safety work within the Agency

Safety improvement programmes

The current effort to strengthen ATMsafety management can be traced back tothe two ATM-related accidents in 2001and 2002, at Milan Linate and Überlingenrespectively. A major review of ATM safetywas launched immediately after thesetragic accidents, which led first of all tothe development of the Strategic SafetyAction Plan (SSAP), implementedbetween 2003 and 2006. This achieved amajor improvement in awareness amongEUROCONTROL Member States of therequirements for ATM safety.

The SSAP was recognised in the Jane’sAward at Maastricht ATC Symposium, in2007, in the Contribution to EuropeanATM category, as having provided anexcellent foundation for ongoing work toreduce risks and improve the integrity ofthe European ATM system.

EUROCONTROL’s contribution toglobal air traffic management safety hasalso been applauded by the InternationalFederation of Air Traffic Safety ElectronicsAssociations (IFATSEA). Its president,Yvan Ouellette, says: “IFATSEA stronglysupports the development of a safe, secureand efficient safety culture and works withall stakeholders, includingEUROCONTROL, to ensure itsimplementation. Safety is the sharedresponsibility of all players.”

With traffic growth projected to doubleby 2020 it was considered essential tomaintain this hard-won momentum.Accordingly, in February 2006EUROCONTROL launched its EuropeanSafety Plan (ESP) following approval fromthe EUROCONTROL ProvisionalCouncil in November 2005. ESPprogramme manager Tony Licu says: “Thenew initiative provides a focus on what wedidn’t achieve in the SSAP programme.SSAP provided the foundations. Now wecan build on that.”

The ESP has as its target the raising ofthe maturity levels of ATM safety acrossthe 42 European Civil AviationConference states to a minimum of 70 percent by 31 December 2009. It is also seenas an essential element to meeting theemerging requirements of the SingleEuropean Sky (SES) and the growingcomplexity of the European ATM system.

The ESP is based around five Activity Fields: 1. Implementation and Support of

European Safety Legislation/Regulation.2. Incident Reporting and Data Sharing.3. Risk Assessment and Mitigation in

Day-to-Day Operations.4. System Safety Defences.5. Safety Management Enhancement.

Implementation of the ESP is now well

▼

54

The SSAP wasrecognised in theJane’s Award atMaastricht ATCSymposium, in2007, in theContribution toEuropean ATMcategory

underway and is, according toEUROCONTROL, maintaining anupward trend. Indeed, the recent ATMSafety Framework Maturity survey, whichfollowed similar surveys in 2002, 2004and 2006, found that several AirNavigation Service Providers (ANSPs) hadreached 100 per cent maturity. “TheseANSPs have mature and robust safetysystems and are able to move on to thenext level in a spirit of continuousimprovement,” says the report.

However, according toEUROCONTROL’s mid-2007 report tothe Provisional Council onimplementation progress, there remainsignificant hurdles to overcome. Thesecentre on transposing EUROCONTROL’ssafety regulatory requirements, known asESARRs (EUROCONTROL SafetyRegulatory Requirements), into nationallegislation, the lack of fully qualified safetyregulatory staff in some states, and theestablishment of a Europe-wide JustCulture incident reporting system.

The ESP contains 71 recommendationsin all, says Licu, which are aimed at all ofthe stakeholders in the field of ATM: theEUROCONTROL agency, its SafetyRegulatory Unit, the EUROCONTROLExperimental Centre, ANSPs and stateregulators. “Dividing the work into five

Activity Fields has helped peopleunderstand the Safety ManagementSystem (SMS) requirement. We havetrained 800 experts in implementation ofSMS and held a number of workshops,”says Licu.

Activity Field 1 has seen thetransposition of ESARR 1 (SafetyOversight in ATM) into EuropeanCommunity law, while the transpositionof ESARR 6 (software in ATM systems) isongoing. Of the remaining ESARRs,EUROCONTROL says: “Significantprogress is still needed at national level toenforce ESARR implementation.”

In Activity Field 2 the emphasis is onimproving the quality, quantity andfrequency of incident reporting data byboth voluntary and mandatory means, inorder that states can establish Just Cultureprinciples of reporting confidentiality.However, EUROCONTROL reports onlypatchy progress in this all-important field,owing to the lack of suitably qualified staffand the difficulties of persuading states toexchange safety data and legalimpediments.

Activity Field 3 continues the work ofdeveloping an acceptable SafetyAssessment Methodology in line withESARR 4 (risk assessment and mitigationin ATM), with final guidelines due to be

“Dividing the workinto five ActivityFields has helpedpeople understandthe SafetyManagementSystem requirement.We have trained 800 experts inimplementation of SMS and held a number of workshops” Tony LicuESP Programme Manager


55


released during 2008, while Activity Field4 has seen the release of specific guidancematerial for ground-based safety nets,again in compliance with ESARR 4.Specifications for minimum safe altitudereporting, approach path monitoring andarea proximity warning are also ongoing.

The Safety Management Enhancementprogramme, which is at the heart ofActivity Field 5 has seen progress in threeimportant areas: the European Action Planfor the Prevention of Runway Incursions,Reduction in Level Busts and Reductionof Air-Ground Communication Errors.Further work foresees the development ofa European Action Plan to reduce the riskscaused by airspace infringements.

EUROCONTROL reports an upwardtrend in the maturity of safetymanagement and safety regulatoryrequirements, but adds: “Much workremains to be done, particularly as thetendency is that states which have themost difficulty implementing the ESPrecommendations are among those withthe highest rate of traffic growth.”

Airports: a new EUROCONTROL domainAirport operations, particularly the safetyaspect, are so complex and challengingthat in early 2007 EUROCONTROL set

up an entirely new domain, the AirportsOperations Domain, charged withestablishing, maintaining and promoting avision and future technical concepts andstrategies for airport operations. Activities within the domain related tosafety include the European Action Planfor the Prevention of Runway Incursions(EAPRI), the Advanced SurfaceMovement Guidance and Control Systemand Low Cost Safety Nets.

The domain also maintains links to theAirport Operations Programme (APR)launched in 2002, within which theAirport Surface Management and Safetyproject is ongoing. The APR II (2007-2009) project is now underway andincludes continued work of the AirportSurface Management and Safety project.Deliverables centre on identification anddevelopment of best practices in runwayincursion reduction, providing support tolocal runway safety teams, standardisationof training for airport surface operations,provision of aerodrome resourcemanagement courses and furtherdevelopment of EAPRI.

Safety, therefore, remains the toppriority for EUROCONTROL and theESP will continue to set the benchmarkon safety issues for all the Member Statesand beyond. The challenge, however, is

for the 38 Member States to achievecomparable high levels of safety, whiledealing with the constant increase intraffic levels. Licu cites the need forimproved incident reporting as a centralissue. “We’ve made a good start with theairlines, but the ANSPs are stillsuspicious. The good news is that they’restarting to move in the right direction.”

56

Safety remains the top priority for EUROCONTROL and the ESP willcontinue to set the benchmark on safety issues for all the MemberStates and beyond

“The statistics don’t reflect the true story,”says Peter Stastny, EUROCONTROL’shead of Safety Regulation Unit. Eventhough only a minority of States hasformally declared to have fullypromulgated national regulations totranspose EUROCONTROL SafetyRegulatory Requirements (ESARRs) intotheir own legislation, ESARRs havebecome a reality throughout a widerEurope – and are poised to set highstandards for safety in air transportmanagement beyond Europe.

“Drafting ESARRs started at thebeginning of the decade. At that timeour role was very much in a rule makingvein,” recalls Stastny. The SafetyRegulation Commission (SRC),EUROCONTROL’s independentadvisory body on safety in ATM, hasdeveloped and published six ESARRs todate: they cover Safety Oversight inATM (ESARR 1); Reporting andAssessment of Safety Occurrences inATM (ESARR 2); Safety ManagementSystems in ATM (ESARR 3); RiskAssessment and Mitigation in ATM(ESARR 4); Safety RegulatoryRequirement for ATM Services’Personnel (ESARR 5); and Software inATM Systems (ESARR 6). “Ourobjective was to put in place a set of

rules that would act as the regulatorybenchmark for safety across Europe,”adds Stastny.

These rules were designed to meetobjectives set at the end of the 1990s, whenthe transport ministers of the EuropeanCivil Aviation Conference (ECAC)outlined a strategy aimed at addressing theissues raised by the expansion of air trafficand the growing pressure on Europe’sexisting national ATM systems.

Since then, the face of the air transportsector has changed radically with – among

other developments – the boom of low-cost operations, which are putting anunprecedented strain on previouslyunderused infrastructure. At the sametime, the authorities in charge of theimplementation of ESARRs had to dealwith profound economical, political andstructural shifts.

“Throughout this period, the aviationinfrastructures within States have beenchanging markedly, from a whollygovernment-oriented basis to a market-oriented one, where commercialised ATMservice providers operate under the safetyoversight of a government regulator,” saysStastny. The new context implied thatmost European countries were required toaugment their regulatory bodies with anATM component.

Some newly independent nations haveeven had to create an aviation regulatorybody from scratch. Subsequently, the newstructures have had to build up theappropriate expertise and infrastructure.“It’s not an overnight task,” says Stastny.“The establishment of the safety culture,the safety procedures and structureswithin the organisation concerned is along-term development.”

EUROCONTROL is providing supportto national authorities in charge ofimplementing ESARRs and their successor

“Our objective wasto put in place a set of rules thatwould act as the regulatorybenchmark for safety acrossEurope”

Peter StastnyHead of Safety Regulation Unit, EUROCONTROL


57

Martial Tardy reviews progress on EUROCONTROL’s Safety Regulatory Requirements work

ESARR update

▼

As nations bracedto adapt to a changingenvironment, theEuropean institutionsalso worked onnovel solutions toimprove theefficiency of thecontinent’s ATMsystem and toavoid a predictedcapacity crunch

the SRC are now embedded in a numberof different SES regulatory measures.Regulation 550/2004/EC on the provisionof air navigation services in the SingleEuropean Sky contains the bulk ofESARR 3 and ESARR 4, as well assignificant elements of ESARR 5. Thecertification of Air Navigation ServiceProviders against those requirements wasobligatory by June 2007. Directive2003/42/EC on occurrence reporting incivil aviation integrates substantial parts ofESARR 2. Directive 23/2006/EC on airtraffic controller licensing takes up thecontroller requirements of ESARR 5.Additional recent developments in EU lawmaking will effectively result in thetransposition of ESARR 1 and 6.

“For all sorts of legislative reasons, itwas not just a question of taking theESARR regulations and ‘cutting andpasting’ them into European law,” saysStastny. As a consequence, there aresome unaddressed issues which still needto be cleared up. EUROCONTROL hasset up a committee, which has carriedout a detailed analysis of every ESARRrequirement and will make proposals forthe further legislative changes that willensure complete consistency betweenESARRs and EU legislation.

The European Union’s Single EuropeanSky is embedded into a pan-European

58

requirements. “There is a lot of guidanceneeded to enable States to actually takethem up,” says Stastny. Specific vocationaltraining for regulators has been, forinstance, organised at EUROCONTROL’sInstitute of Air Navigation Services inLuxembourg. Says Stastny: “We need toinform States how to regulate on the basisof a new set of rules, what must they lookout for and what should they expectservice providers to do to comply with thenew regulations?”

As nations braced to adapt to achanging environment, the Europeaninstitutions also worked on novel solutionsto improve the efficiency of the continent’sATM system and to avoid a predictedcapacity crunch. The EuropeanCommission (EC) launched its SingleEuropean Sky (SES) initiative, whichresulted in the adoption of Europeanlegislation in 2004. The eradication ofnational borders from European skies wasto be underpinned by a new set of rulesaddressing multiple issues, which extendedbeyond safety: airspace use, ATM serviceprovision, charging systems andequipment interoperability.

“About safety, the position adopted wasthat ESARRs should remain as thestandard-setting requirements, but theyneed to be transposed into European law,”says Stastny. The obligations defined by


approach, which results from the EU’smembership of EUROCONTROL andthe conclusion of aviation agreementsbetween the EU and a number of thirdcountries. ESARRs will play a part inthat approach, as they are intended forapplication in all 38 Member States of EUROCONTROL.

Importantly, throughEUROCONTROL, ESARRs are appliedto both civil and military operations in allEUROCONTROL Member States.Additionally, those of the 43 ECACMember States, which are notEUROCONTROL members, alsocomply with ESARRs on a voluntarybasis, which further extends their scope.

In addition, the International CivilAviation Organisation’s (ICAO’s)European Office has beenrecommending the implementation ofESARRs to its wider membership. Thatwill cover further areas beyond ECAC,the Russian Federation and (by furtherextension) to a number of north Africanstates. This is also consistent with awider intention “to get theMediterranean region surrounded byneighbouring states, which operatebasically to the same set of rules asEurope, ensuring a smooth transition forflights into Europe from neighbouringregions, including Africa,” says Stastny.

Also in cooperation with ICAO,EUROCONTROL is undertaking acomprehensive audit programme to ensurecompliance by governments with safetyregulatory requirements. The ESARRImplementation Monitoring and Support(ESIMS) programme covers allEUROCONTROL members, as well asthe voluntary ECAC Member States, andis now being enhanced to meet the needsof the Single European Sky – Peer ReviewSystem. “We are going to publishappropriate, aggregated results of ESIMSaudits within the SRC’s Annual safetyReport,” says Stastny. The audits alsogenerate recommendations for action,which are a fruitful basis for specificinteraction with national regulators,allowing the SRC to contribute to thecontinuous improvement of ATM safety.

EUROCONTROL is undertaking a comprehensive audit programme to ensure compliance by governments with safetyregulatory requirements


59


Jill Taylor finds out how Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systemswill deliver improved safety and enhanced efficiency

Clearing the runway

The fatal collision at Milan-Linate in2001 turned runway safety into a priority.The subsequent European Action Plan forthe Prevention of Runway Incursions hashelped more than 98 per cent of 120major European airports establish localrunway safety teams, and many airportsmake use of the implementation ofguidance material, which is now availableon the worldwide web. Yet incursions arestill occurring at a rate of between one andfour per day in the European CivilAviation Conference area.

“For pilots on the tarmac, the overridingrule is see and be seen,” says RaimundWeidemann, IFATCA Airport DomainTeam leader. “The controller is alwaysmultitasking. You may be doingcoordination at the same time as talking toaircraft, and watching several screens atonce. You cannot monitor full time, so it isalways useful to have electronic support.”

Europe’s busiest airports are investing inAdvanced Surface Movement Guidanceand Control Systems (A-SMGCS) thattrack aircraft and vehicles on the airfield,and can alert controllers to potentialconflict situations. “The interesting pointfor IFATCA is service providers focusingon major hub airports like Frankfurt,Heathrow and Amsterdam. However,Milan-Linate is not a hub. With the basic

components of A-SMGCS, the accidentcould most probably have been prevented,”says Weidemann.

While costly A-SMGCS may not beeconomic for many regional airports, thereare alternative emerging surveillancetechnologies that bring safety benefits forcontrollers and pilots, especially in lowvisibility conditions, for all airports.

The EUROCONTROL Airport SurfaceManagement & Safety project is funding aseries of trials to validate new technologyat selected airports. The first of thesecovers low-cost technology like themillimetre wave sensors installed atFrankfurt-Hahn and London-Lutonairports. Two airports are likely toparticipate starting in 2008. Other trialswill demonstrate automated detection ofdebris on the runway, vehicle navigationsystems and other developments to A-SMGCS systems and procedures. Thesetrials will involve a number of airportsincluding Frankfurt, Leipzig, Heathrowand Bordeaux, with additional airportsbecoming involved in the future.

“The current ICAO [International CivilAviation Organisation] recommendationsonly focus on SMR [Safety MonitoringReport],” explains Paul Adamson, AirportSurface Management and Safety projectmanager for EUROCONTROL. “There

▼“The controller isalways multitasking.You may be doingcoordination at thesame time as talking to aircraft,and watching several screens atonce. You cannotmonitor full-time, so it is always useful to have electronic support”Raimund WeidemannAirport Domain Team Leader, IFATCA

60

may be other technologies that fit the bill.We hope to develop an operationalconcept for a basic surveillanceenvironment that is not as complex as A-SMGCS, that fulfils the requirements ofthe ICAO recommendations and satisfiesthe needs of smaller airports.”

The project is also intending toestablish a steering group, involvingrepresentatives from EUROCONTROL,the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) and key stakeholders, in 2008.“We have set up a roadmap for a full setof safety nets for the airport surface. Weare coordinating with the FAA andaircraft manufacturers to build a commonpicture. With everything we do,ultimately we have our eye on ICAO, andas systems become more complex, theglobal aspect becomes more important.”

Among coordinated initiatives, theproject is looking for common proceduresfor use with A-SMGCS tools in lowvisibility. Also, FAA trials at Dallas FtWorth are testing the use of automaticstatus lights to warn of infringements, sowhen a warning is delivered to acontroller, it is also communicated to thepilot via in-pavement lights. The workbuilds on the set of operational conceptsand procedures delivered to ICAO underthe first Airport Operations Programme in

2006 and similar trials will be undertakenin Europe.

IFATCA calls for red stop bars to be inoperation everywhere. The Federation alsorecommends that they be operated fromthe tower. They should always be switched off once an aircraft is cleared to pass. “At some airports there are no stop bars, at others they just stay on red all the time. How can you teach a pilotnever to cross red stop bars when someairports authorise crossing them?” asks Weidemann.

The very recent introduction ofelectronic flight information in sometowers, relieving controllers of someroutine tasks, also offers potential toimprove procedures in a basic A-SMGCSenvironment. Automatic conflict detectioncan help to identify inconsistencies, andcould buy a few seconds more warningtime for the controller.

“The data shows 50 per cent ofincursions are due to a breakdown incommunication between the pilot andcontroller, or vehicle driver andcontroller,” adds Paul Wilson, head ofEUROCONTROL’s Airport OperationsBusiness Division. “Ultimately, now whatwe are looking for are technology-basedsafety nets. High integrity, high fidelitysafety nets which will stop an accident

happening. The present process will notdo this. You cannot resolve a conflict inten seconds.”

Wilson identifies two main areas oftechnology. Positional awareness is thefirst, where even simple navigation devicescan play a part in preventing incursions inpoor weather conditions. Secondly,surveillance systems that monitor surfacemovement can issue an alarm thatprompts avoiding action. Wilson wouldlike to see this warning go straight to the


61

“The data shows 50 per cent ofincursions are dueto a breakdown incommunicationbetween the pilotand controller, orvehicle driver and controller” Paul WilsonHead of EUROCONTROL’s AirportOperations Business Division


cockpit, as it does with a traffic collisionadvisory system.

IFATCA supports a solution where thesituational awareness would be the samefor tower controllers as for pilots andvehicle drivers operating in themanoeuvring area. “We would havedisplays with maps, and aircraft positioninformation, similar to a radar screen,” hesays. “New aircraft like the A380 havecockpit tools, and more new-generationaircraft will follow.”

The Airport Surface Management andSafety project published a cost benefitanalysis for A-SMGCS in 2006. Based ontwo generic airports, handling 450,000movements and 150,000 movements ayear, the study demonstrated that anairport that introduced basic A-SMGCScould cut the risk of runway incursionaccidents by as much as 50 per cent. Thereis an additional benefit of up to 14 percent increase in efficiency. Additionalbenefits are expected as A-SMGCS isfurther developed.

Paul Adamson believes that while A-SMGCS does not set out to delivermore capacity, it certainly gives controllersbetter situational awareness, and enablesmore efficient control of traffic on theairport surface, particularly at night and inadverse weather. He says: “A-SMGCS also

delivers confidence in the system, and thatin itself can lead to small incrementalimprovements in the capacity of thesystem. We take a step-by-step approach,to improve what we have now, improve onthe systemic errors, and at all times we areworking to the ultimate goal outlined inthe roadmap.”

62

“A-SMGCS also delivers confidence in the system, and that in itself can lead to small incremental improvements in the capacity of the system”Paul AdamsonAirport Surface Management and Safety Project Manager for EUROCONTROL

The UK Civil Aviation Authority CivilAir Publication 393, the Air NavigationOrder, has the following to say about anaircraft commander’s responsibilities withregard to the avoidance of collisions:“Notwithstanding that a flight is beingmade with air traffic control clearance, itshall remain the duty of the commanderof an aircraft to take all possible measuresto ensure that his aircraft does not collidewith any other aircraft.” Clear enough,and essentially the same directive given topilots all over the world.

‘All possible measures’ covers manyaspects, including adherence to the Rulesof the Air and prompt and accuratecompliance with Air Traffic Control(ATC) instructions when in controlledairspace. For its part, ATC has afundamental obligation to maintainadequate separation between aircraft andthus to prevent collisions. Under normalcircumstances, the partnership of pilot andATC, in combination with detailed androbust flight planning and clear andconcise communications, is sufficient toensure separation between aircraft, even inthe crowded skies of Europe. However, theconsequences of a breakdown in thispartnership can be catastrophic.

Since 1 January 2005, all civil fixed-wing turbine engine aircraft operating in

European airspace (with a take-off massexceeding 5,700kg or a maximumapproved passenger seating configurationof more than 19) are mandated to carry anAirborne Collision Avoidance System(ACAS) system, to the current ACAS IIstandard, the associated hardware knownas TCAS II. TCAS II provides a ‘last lineof defence’ against mid-air collision viapilot alerts known as Traffic Advisories(TA), which identify possible conflictingtraffic, and Resolution Advisories (RA),which provide positive guidance, in thevertical plane, to one or both conflictingaircraft to avert a possible collision.

TCAS operates by interrogating

ICAO-compliant transponders of aircraftin the vicinity and, based on the repliesreceived, calculating a time for theaircraft to reach the Closest Point ofApproach (CPA) with the intruder. Thistime value (or Tau) is the basis forissuing alerts to the crew. Furthermore, ifa transponder reply from a nearbyaircraft includes altitude, TCAS alsocomputes the time to reach co-altitude.A TA may be issued between 20-48seconds from CPA, with an RA between15-35 seconds from CPA.

The latest significant change to TCAS IIwas the introduction of Version 7.0, whichis the only equipment configuration fullycompliant with ICAO’s ACAS IIStandards And Recommended Practicesand, therefore, the version required tomeet the ACAS II mandate in ECACMember States. This change introduced ahost of improvements to the performanceand operational efficiency of TCAS, withthe most significant enhancements being:• Coordinated RA sense reversals in

TCAS-TCAS conflicts.• Replacement of the previous version’s

100-ft vertical tracker with a new 25-fttracker, allowing Version 7.0 to producesignificantly better estimates of thevertical rate for Mode S-equippedintruder aircraft.

For its part, ATC has a fundamentalobligation to maintain adequateseparation betweenaircraft and thus toprevent collisions


65

Commercial pilot Edward Downs looks at the progress being made on AirborneCollision Avoidance Systems

Avoiding the issue

▼

• The criteria for removing a TA have beenmade more stringent, to reduce thelikelihood that TCAS will issue multipleTAs against the same target.

• The TA altitude threshold has beenreduced from 1,200ft to 850ft foraltitudes between 30,000ft and 42,000ft.This change supports Reduced VerticalSeparation Minima (RVSM), where,without this change, many ‘nuisance’TAs would be generated, thus reducingthe overall effectiveness of the system.

• A new multi-aircraft logic, which ismuch more versatile and robust than theold version, allowing ‘Increase Rate’ RAsto deal with worsening situations.So far, so good, but, unfortunately, the

implementation of TCAS II Version 7.0has not eradicated the threat of mid-aircollisions entirely. Both aircraft involved inthe accident over Überlingen on 1 July2002 had TCAS II Version 7.0 equipmentand both crews had received the requiredtraining. Nonetheless, the crashinvestigation revealed deficiencies in bothATM and the aircrew’s response to thesubsequent RA. As a result of theÜberlingen accident, it was recommendedthat PANS-OPS Doc 8168 be amended toreinforce that TCAS RAs should takeprecedence over ATC instructions andpilots are to obey RAs until the aircraft is

66


The crash investigation revealed deficiencies in both ATM andthe aircrew’s response to the subsequent Resolution Advisoriesclear of conflict. However, Doc 8168 alsostates that should the pilot consider that,by following TCAS instructions, thesubsequent manoeuvre would jeopardisethe safety of the aircraft (eg, EnhancedGround Proximity Warning System), hemay ignore the RA.

Operationally, the implementation ofACAS on civilian aircraft has been a greatsuccess, and the introduction of TCAS IIVersion 7.0 was unquestionably asignificant step forward over the earlierVersion 6.04 in making the system more‘user friendly’ in the increasingly crowdedskies over Europe. However, there is scopefor more training for both pilots and ATCoperators. For example, in RVSM airspace,there are still a significant number of TAsissued due to the high rates of climb anddescent employed by aircrews – goodairmanship should dictate more moderaterates of change in areas of high trafficdensity; when a TA is generated againstlower traffic, particularly during a rapiddescent from medium level, this shouldautomatically prompt a reduction in ratefrom the crew – not always the case,resulting in an ‘adjust vertical speed’ RA.

Similarly, ATC should be prepared togive an indication of requiredclimb/descent rates against possibleconflicting traffic to minimise potential

for a TCAS alert. While the change toVersion 7.0 reduced the number of‘nuisance’ TAs, the aforementioned pilot-induced TA/RAs can mitigate thisenhancement by similarly reducing pilotconfidence in the system through nuisancewarnings. For the system to be mosteffective, crews must have the utmostconfidence in its integrity.

So, where does the current ACAS IIstandard fit in with future ATM plans? Asalluded to earlier, there is still some workto be done in terms of integrating ACASII more completely into the ATM system.In this respect, more performance datashould be collected and analysed beforeany move to a new standard.

Undoubtedly, with this fact in mind, arecent Feasibility of ACAS RA Downlinkstudy by EUROCONTROL found thatRA Downlink is technically feasible andmay deliver safety benefits in that it would

provide an automatic notification to thecontroller about RAs generated in thecockpit. Meanwhile, further refinementsto the system are coming. A new TCASstandard, which may be designated TCASII Version 7.1 (or 8.0), will bring safetyperformance improvements to TCASreversal logic and modification to the‘Adjust Vertical Speed, Adjust’ RA. Suchrefinements to this already highly effectivesystem, together with enhanced trainingfor both ATC operators and pilots, willundoubtedly maximise the effectiveness ofACAS and further reduce conflicts whichcould lead to mid-air collisions.


67


Dr David Baker examines the work being undertaken by the EUROCONTROLExperimental Centre to see why and how it is enhancing the overall safety of the Air Traffic Management System

Creating a safety culture

Safety in the air is the prime objective forEUROCONTROL and the creation of a‘safety culture’ is key to optimising safetyperformance and avoiding accidents. Thesuccessful delivery of a Single EuropeanSky (SES) is integral to both efficiencyand performance, converging at anoptimised safety and reliability value. As avital element in its structure, theEUROCONTROL Experimental Centre(EEC) has more than four decades ofexperience in research and development,aiding the development of Air TrafficControl (ATC) systems, and was set up asthe first facility in the world to performdigital, real-time ATC simulations.

From the very outset its value lay indefined responsibilities for operationalresearch into existing ATC systems and forevaluating methods of operability andintegration across global conventions. Toaccomplish this it performed analysis, anddemonstrations, of proposed ATC systems.In addition, it had responsibility fortesting and evaluating various items ofequipment developed for ATC systems attechnical, engineering and operationallevels. Within the framework requirementsof the United Nations’ International CivilAviation Organisation (ICAO) mandatefor every nation to be responsible for itsown air navigation services, Europe is

unique in having a diverse range ofgeographically compact countries, eachwith its own highly limited air space. Thecomplexity of airspace management worksonly through close coordination andcooperation between separate States, butthe limitations on operability and safetyimposed by separate structures impedesefficiency and safety.

Because EUROCONTROL leads andcoordinates the implementation of acollaborative and high performance pan-European Air Traffic Management (ATM)system, the EEC is an essential tool in pre-formatting system configurations and

simulating performance and operability ofdifferent functional ATM designs. Theglobal aerospace community has, overseveral decades, developed complex andefficient simulations and digitallycontrolled analysis techniques inprojecting the plausibility of design in allaspects of aero-engineering for airframesand propulsion units. The EEC enhancessafety through transferring that rationaleacross to ATM in general andEUROCONTROL proposals in particular.One example of this is in the DynamicManagement of the European AirspaceNetwork (DMEAN) as a short-termsolution to shortages in air traffic capacityover European skies.

A challenge within the system lies in therapidly changing nature of air trafficdensity. Some airports are experiencingyear-on-year expansion in excess of 20 percent and the enlargement of the EU canonly increase these fluid traffic rates. Toreduce airport delays, currently accountingfor 40 per cent of all flight delays, it isessential to empower stakeholders to inputdirectly timely and dynamic data regardingactual operations. Only by working to real-time data, about real-time traffic flows, candelays be reduced and only through trafficvolume and rates projection can capacitybe handled in an efficient and safe manner.

▼

68

Europe is uniquein having adiverse range ofgeographicallycompactcountries, eachwith its own highlylimited air space

Focusing on the Single European SkyThe EUROCONTROL NetworkOperations Plan consolidates traffic andcapacity forecasts and establishes acommon reference for both ATM usersand airspace users on the pan-EuropeanNetwork Plan. Increasingly, this requiressimulation and the technical evaluation ofhardware and software, together with theirintegrated operating systems, to not onlyensure the viability of projected solutionsand performance capabilities, but also toguarantee the safety of ATM concepts andhandling formats. Digital real-timesolutions for ATC challenges carried outby the EEC benefit from the dynamicreal-time simulation replicating two ATCcontrol rooms linked to a pilot room.With a staff of around 250 people, theEEC is now focused primarily on thedevelopment of the Single European Skyand the SES ATM Research (SESAR)programme, with safety a paramountobjective. To achieve this, cooperativenetwork design involves strategicplanning, R&D, programmeimplementation and advanced planning.

The EEC is developing a centralised setof control functions to exploit economiesof scale and to improve safety. Based uponintegrated functions in other large-scalenetworks, the USA being one example

analysed by the EEC, a higher fidelity ofsimulation is possible and a greater degreeof safety ensues.

Currently, SESAR is tasked withdefinition (2005-2008), development(2008-2013) and deployment from 2014,and safety is a core of planning anddeployment. Awareness is a cornerstone ofsafety and a full understanding of networkbehaviour is a pivotal element in turningthe system from mature research into aviable, safe system. Thinking ahead is keyto this being accomplished and the EEC isresearching how new vehicles of the future(UAV and VLJ types, for example) will

impact the system, given that increasingnumbers of highly automated vehiclesdriven by non-professional pilots will beintegrated in the air traffic. Theautomation of ATC conflict avoidancefunctions will provide an opportunity toresearch ways in which these obstacles canbe overcome.

While the current ATM system isreliant on the human air traffic controller,an element some might say is a constrainton both capacity and safety, it is possibleto envisage that role evolving into amanager of flows and not the controllerof individual aircraft. The EEC is

A challenge within the system lies in the rapidly changing nature of air traffic density. Some airports are experiencing year-on-year expansion in excess of 20 per cent


69


particularly important in developingfuture traffic flow models that canintegrate and simulate system automation,ensuring safety as a prerequisite fordevelopment. To achieve this, the EEC isin the vanguard of redefining the rolesand responsibilities of future operators,including controllers, pilots and airlineoperations staff.

Managing safety – top-down and bottom-upAccording to Barry Kirwan, Head of SafetyImprovement Research at the EEC: “TheEEC has developed a top-down model ofATM risk, incorporating real incident andaccident data where possible, called theIntegrated Risk Picture.” This bringstogether safety and human factors andhelps to identify where the safety ‘hotspots’are and where we need to invest in safety.

Based on this, for the next three years asafety roadmap and monitoring process isto be developed for implementation,building on the Risk Picture, which willconsider the ATM system as a whole anddetermine where increases in safety mustcome from and when they should bevisible. Kirwan says: “At the same time,the EEC safety assessors will be evaluatingthe entire SESAR Concept of Operations(ConOps) to check it is safe not only as a

whole package, but also at a deeper levelacross individual elements and clusters.Significantly, Kirwan points out that:“This requires some improvements insafety methodology, particularly in thearea of human reliability.” Therefore, anew tool has been developed calledCARA (Controller Action ReliabilityAssessment) to help estimate thereliability of the key component in theATM system – the controller.

Safety culture“Safety management, or ‘knowing how todo safety’ is one thing,” says Kirwan. “Butsafety culture – believing it needs to be doneand making sure safety happens – is anotherthing, and remains a constant challenge.”

The EEC is testing a procedure oftraditional safety culture questionnaires,adapted to ATM, followed by probinginterviews and, if necessary, by on-siteguidance. So far this work has involvednine European Air Navigation ServiceProviders (ANSPs), and will lead to aSafety Culture Enhancement Toolbox in2009 for ANSPs. In 2008 there will be aspecial workshop on safety culture forANSP chief executives, to ensure that theright key messages and understanding canbe passed down from the very top ofEurope’s ATM delivery organisations.

70

The EEC is testing a procedure of traditional safetyculture questionnaires, adapted to ATM, followed byprobing interviews and, if necessary, by on-site guidance

Accidents happen, but they are much lesslikely to be repeated if the communityaffected makes a systematic effort to learnfrom the errors of the past. While aviationunderstands this as well as any industry inthe world, there is still some way to gobefore we can be reasonably sure that mostof the relevant lessons are being capturedmost of the time.

On the one hand, ingrained nationalhabit may make controllers reluctant toreport incidents. On the other, there arethose who see the value of reporting, butfear the consequences for themselves. Inparts of Europe they have recently hadgood reason to do so – witness thesevere punishments inflicted on the fourpeople held responsible for the MilanLinate runway incursion accident inOctober 2001.

An earlier case was less catastrophic buteven more instructive about what canhappen if the full force of the law is usedagainst controllers who make mistakes.This was the 1998 incident in which thecrew of a Delta Airlines Boeing 767safely aborted a take-off from AmsterdamSchiphol when they spotted a 747 beingtowed across the runway. Though noharm was done, a full report wassubmitted. This led ultimately to threecontrollers being judged guilty of causing

the incident. The case was first taken upby the Dutch legal authorities in 2000 –immediately, the volume of incidentreports by controllers in the Netherlandsfell by 50 per cent and it has takenseveral years to recover.

EUROCONTROL has long recognisedthat various national differences militateagainst the creation of a Europe-wide ‘JustCulture’ in which controllers reportinghonest mistakes need not worry abouttheir professional future, while those whoare indeed negligent are dealt withappropriately. “It’s not about immunity,”emphasises Tony Licu, manager ofEUROCONTROL’s European SafetyProgramme (ESP). “If there is a wilfulviolation, if an incident or accident resultsfrom gross negligence, there should beconsequences.”

Launched in February 2006, the ESP isdesigned to bring safety disciplines withinthe 42 European Civil AviationConference (ECAC) States up to acommon minimum level. It calls for high-priority action in five areas of safetymanagement and regulation, withparticular emphasis on incident reportingwithin a Just Culture, and on effectivesharing of the resulting information.

The result will be a Europe-widecommon safety framework for Air

Various nationaldifferences militateagainst the creationof a Europe-wide‘Just Culture’ inwhich controllersreporting honestmistakes need notworry about theirprofessional future


71

As some States struggle to adopt regulations and procedures to make incidentreporting easier and less of a career risk, others have made impressive progress.Brendan Gallagher examines what EUROCONTROL is doing to foster a unifiedapproach within the European ATM community

Developing a ‘Just Culture’

▼

mistake and action will be taken only toimprove safety. There is also a guarantee offeedback to the reporter. Unless you putthat sort of thing on paper I don’t thinkyou can build trust, and in the endeverything comes back to trust.”

The guidelines, along with those ondealing with the judicial system, werereleased at the end of 2007. They will befollowed this year by a third set, on howthe ATM community should deal with themedia. “The guidelines address how tocommunicate at three essential levels,” saysLicu. “First, when everything is going well.Second, when there’s been an incident butyou are not yet in crisis. And finally, whenan accident has happened. One of thefundamental elements to building anygood relationship with the media isopenness, and this means that if you don’tknow something, say so. We want to makeit clear to the media that no controller evercomes to work with the intention ofcausing two aircraft to collide.”

The purpose of an incident-reportingsystem is to generate a flow of safetyintelligence that then needs to be sharedeffectively so that mistakes are notrepeated. “In Europe the principles fordata-sharing are all understood,” says Licu.“Now we need to develop a commonapproach to the description and analysis of

72

southern Europe, in the past, reporting justwasn’t in the blood,” observes Licu.

“In the ATM world we think we broadlyunderstand the concept of a Just Culture,”says Licu. “But judges and prosecutors areeducated in a totally different system, sowe have to enter into a dialogue with themin an effort to arrive at a commonunderstanding. At EUROCONTROL wehave made a start by producing guidanceon the best way for ATM organisations tointerface with their judicial systems andmake the case for Just Culture.”

In other areas, however, the ATMcommunity has its destiny in its ownhands. “There must be more transparencyat individual ANSP level,” Licu insists. “Iwas a controller myself, and I never hadany feedback about what had happened asa result of any of my reports. If you wanta healthy reporting culture, you have toshow people that their reports will beacted on with a clearly defined process,and that they will get feedback.”

To promote such transparency Licu’steam is creating a second set of guidelinesderived from existing best practice. “Wehave worked with unions and staffassociations to produce a list of a fewsituations that are not acceptable and whichwill lead to management taking action,” hesays. “Anything else is treated as an honest

Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs)and national regulatory authorities.

Progress towards this ideal is beingmeasured in terms of the percentage ofthe framework that is in place withineach national jurisdiction, with a short-range target of at least 70 per cent inevery state by 2009. “The latestmeasurements show that 14 ANSPs and19 regulators are still short of thatfigure,” says Licu. “But I expect mostStates to meet the 2009 deadline, andthat every one will have reached at least46 per cent by that date.”

It is, therefore, likely that the ultimateaim of 100 per cent maturity in every Statewill not be achieved until well into thenext decade. When it comes to incidentreporting and data sharing there are anumber of reasons for this, Licu believes.

“At the simplest level, the size of acountry and its air traffic management(ATM) bodies has an impact on reporting,”he says. “When there’s an incident in asmall State everyone knows immediatelywho was involved, and so there’s areluctance to submit a report. Conversely,in the larger States the organisations are sobig that it can be difficult to achievechanges in attitude and behaviour acrossthe board.” In addition, differences innational culture also play their part. “In


“If you want a healthy reporting culture, you have to show people that their reports will be acted on with a clearly defined process, and that they will get feedback”Tony Licu Manager of EUROCONTROL’s European Safety Programme

incidents, so that we don’t end upcomparing apples with pears. Whetheryou are investigating in the east, west,north or south of Europe, you should getconsistent results every time.”

Continent-wide consistency in safetydisciplines, with a particular focus onincident reporting and just treatment ofthe reporters, is the goal of the ESP.While it will certainly be some timebefore this is achieved, Tony Licu isconfident of ultimate success. He says:“In 1999 European ATM mandatory

safety reporting and sharing was governedby a gentlemen’s agreement, with justnine States participating at first.

“Now, following ESARR 2 regulationprogression, as many as 28 States of the 42in ECAC are involved. So I’m optimisticthat we could see a completely unifiedregime within the next decade.”

The purpose of an incident-reporting system is to generate aflow of safety intelligence that then needs to be shared effectively so that mistakes are not repeated


73

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Operating the network

David Learmount assesses EUROCONTROL’s new air traffic controller selection system,designed to standardise best practice procedures and reduce drop-out rates

FEAST not famine

Until recently, there has been acomponent missing in the process ofharmonising controller standards acrossEurope’s Air Navigation Service Providers(ANSPs). For some years there have beenagreed performance measurement systemsfor air traffic control officers (ATCOs),but there was no common aptitude testingsystem to help organisations select suitableapplicants for controller training.

Unless a selection system is purpose-designed and proven, the resulting failure ofa high proportion of the student ATCOs tocomplete the training course is a waste oftime, money and human resources.

In 1999, EUROCONTROL recogniseda need to research an ab-initio ATCOselection system. The major ANSPsalready had mature selection systems, butmany did not have a purpose-designedone and made it clear they would use sucha system if it were developed. So the nextyear EUROCONTROL began to developthe First European ATCO Selection Test(FEAST). Fidel Chetcuti, a humanresources specialist in the Agency’s Safety,Security and Human Factors department,reveals that by the end of 2007 the newFEAST service had helped civil andmilitary ANSPs from 21 of the 38EUROCONTROL Member States screensome 8,500 applicants and recruit about

600 trainee controllers. One of theorganisations that has adopted FEAST asthe basis for its selection tests is the jointScandinavian ATCO recruiting andtraining organisation known as EntryPoint North.

Chetcuti explains that once the FEASTconcept had been agreed, the departmentbegan analysing the job controllers do, inorder to identify all the competencies, skills,abilities and knowledge they need. He says:“We did not want to re-invent the wheel.”Therefore, this process included identifyingexisting best practice as well as carrying outtask and human factors research.

Then the FEAST team set aboutdesigning the tests. Chetcuti describes thetask as “getting the right tests and gettingthe tests right”. There are five ability tests,he says, one knowledge test, and a final,more difficult test for checking multi-tasking ability that is called the ‘stripdisplay management test’. Unlike theother tests, for which there is a shortexplanation and a small number ofpractice items before each test begins, thelatter is preceded by a more extensivecomputer-based training module thatexplains the more complex tasks theapplicant will be expected to perform.

All the exercises – except the stripdisplay management test and one other

▼

74

By the end of 2007the FEAST servicehad helped civiland military ANSPsfrom 21 of the 38 EUROCONTROLMember Statesscreen some 8,500applicants andrecruit about 600trainee controllers

test – measure cognitive ability. The othertest is plain English language, which isclassed as a knowledge test, not a cognitiveone. The candidates do not need any priorknowledge of aviation, let alone air trafficcontrol, to take any of the tests.

FEAST is still working on anappropriate tool for measuring behaviouraland personality attributes. Chetcutiexplains that this will be about predictingwhether the applicant is likely to be ableto handle the type of training that he/shewill have to undergo. An ATCO trainingcourse is intense, multi-disciplinary,stressful and very long – it can take up tothree years. It takes a determined anddogged personality to persevere with it, hesays. They will have, on occasions, to beable to take criticism from their mentors,suffer loss of confidence and have theability to recover from it. They also needat times to be able to suppress their ownideas about how the task should beperformed in favour of standard operatingprocedures, and be able to work in aclosely interdependent team.

FEAST became a fully fledged service inearly 2006, although it will continually beimproved and updated, says Chetcuti. It isfunded by member contributions, so theservice is provided at no extra cost.Accredited ANSPs or recruiters can access

the tests on-line, logging in via theEUROCONTROL extranet portal, whichprovides an assurance of security. But theirapplicants have to come into a centre totake the tests so the potential employercan ensure they are carried out in acontrolled and standardised environment.All the tests are performed by thecandidate sitting at a computer in theANSP’s test centre and accessing theexercises that are hosted in servers atEUROCONTROL’s Brussels base.

FEAST uses web-based technology,increasing ease of administration andsecurity of test materials. Results of allthe tests are recorded in real time, andwithin seconds of the final test the total

report will be computed. Within aboutfive minutes of test completion theANSP can retrieve a detailed assessmentof the candidates. Although the system isfairly new, there is already a statisticalbasis for assessing scores as average, aboveor below among FEAST users, which isimportant because there is not a specifiedpass/fail score.

As part of the FEAST service for newusers, Chetcuti explains, a member of hissmall team – only three people at theAgency’s Brussels headquarters – visits theANSP’s site to provide ‘implementationsupport’. That entails ensuring therecruiter has the right technical andsoftware infrastructure to enable the

An ATCO training course is intense, multi-disciplinary, stressful and very long – it can take up to three years. It takes a determined and doggedpersonality to persevere with it


75


FEAST system to work, and the testcentre is suitable in practical terms toenable undisturbed testing to be carriedout. EUROCONTROL also provides atwo-day training course for FEAST users’supervisors, and a helpdesk that canprovide advice and technical support.

“Naturally,” says Chetcuti, “ANSPssometimes have their own recruitingpractices, including educationalachievement requirements, their ownpsychometric tests, and interviews, so theFEAST team helps the ANSP toincorporate the new screening processesinto the system they already operate.” Inthe end, Chetcuti explains, FEAST is atool, and once the team has helped a userto set the system up, “we leave them tomake their own selection decisions in theknowledge that professional support isonly a phone-call away if they request it.”

Of the ‘big three’ ANSPs, (DFS, DSNAand NATS) Germany’s DFS has long hadtesting systems and has invested much inthem, so they have not taken up FEAST’sservices, admits Chetcuti.

France’s DSNA has a more academicapproach to selection with a different setof selection criteria. NATS is nowundergoing a trial with FEAST to assesswhether they will use it. DFS and NATSboth took part in designing and

developing FEAST so they know what is involved. A simple difference – although this may change – between theirsystems and FEAST is that they do notuse web-based testing via an authorisedinternet connection.

“Feedback is positive,” says Chetcuti.Users have found the system easy to applyand there is an expectation ofaccumulating about 25 users by the end of2008. Since the programme is so new, andATCO training takes three years, fullvalidation data in terms of the predictiveability of FEAST tests to select successfulATCO trainees is not yet available. Buttraining officers are complimentary aboutthe results, he says, and initial reports in anumber of ANSPs already suggest areduction in the number of drop-outsfrom training.

76

EUROCONTROL also provides a two-day trainingcourse for FEASTusers’ supervisors,and a helpdesk that can provideadvice and technical support

Safe and efficient Air Traffic Management(ATM) is essential to the aircraft industry,but cost efficiency is also a criticalelement. EUROCONTROL’s Institute ofAir Navigation Services (IANS), foundedin 1969, has identified that initiatives suchas the Single European Sky, SESAR andpotential institutional changes in theEuropean ATM environment significantlyinfluence the need for trainingdevelopment, delivery, standards, tools andadvice amongst stakeholders. Therefore, itsstrategy is to support all stakeholders andprovide them with training programmeswith a common content to enable them tomeet their requirements. The Institute isalso developing English-language tests inthe context of the SENSE programme tomeet the International Civil AviationOrganisation and European Unionrequirements for a certain level of proficiencyin the language. Since its first course inJanuary 1970, IANS has trained morethan 35,000 people and has significantlyexpanded its portfolio of courses.

In addition to traditional coursedelivery, IANS is also heavily involved inthe development of new trainingprogrammes, standards and tools thatsupport the implementation of theEuropean Safety Plan, theEUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory

The Institute tends to deliver training for thetrainers and to disseminate concepts andprojects, working hard to avoid duplicationwith any national training activities


77

Jeff Apter examines how EUROCONTROL’s Institute of Air Navigation Services helps toeducate the European Air Traffic Management community

Delivering trainingsupport

▼

the Institute to develop a European e-learning master plan which offers a seriesof modules covering a range of ATM-related subjects, including ATC refreshertraining based on its own experience oftraining controllers for the MaastrichtUpper Area Control Centre.

Significantly, about 80 per cent of airtraffic controllers’ refresher training needsare the same in all Member States andEUROCONTROL has developed a newOn-the-Job-Training Instructor (OJTI)course that combines online learning andclassroom tuition in accordance with theESARR 5 training standard for the issue ofan OJTI licence endorsement.

Says Simoens: “A student can nowcomplete part of a training course onlinebefore attending the remainder of thecourse at the Institute’s premises inLuxembourg. In this way, thousands ofpeople are able to participate whileavoiding travel costs.”

Over the years, IANS has significantlyincreased its output, thanks to acombination of new training methods andefficiency gains. But, despite continuousefforts, Simoens believes there is still a gulfbetween the number of requested placeson courses offered by the Institute and thenumber of places actually available. Butthis is not the only problem. He says:

78

the core training programme, ensuring thatall controllers, engineers and regulatorsattain the required standards. In turn, thisshould mean that a professional trained inone State has the appropriate skills andcompetences employed throughout Europe.

The power of e-learningFor Simoens, it is neither efficient norlogical for Member States to developsimilar training packages in anuncoordinated way. “The Institute is tryingto act as a point of coordination both fortraditional ATM training programmes andfor electronic learning – which areexpensive to develop – by aiming toproduce various modules that attractinterest and that respond to the commonneeds of the Member States.” Accordingly,in 2005, IANS embarked on an ambitiouse-learning programme, which is fastbecoming a key learning tool and one thatSimoens believes will soon become a majorsource of training delivery.

To achieve this goal, the Institute hasmade a learning server available toMember States that allows participants tolog-on and choose whatever course theyrequire. Simoens says: “E-learning is aneffective way of meeting new EC refreshertraining requirements under ESARR 5.”EUROCONTROL has therefore asked

Training Programme and the Agency’sCooperative Network Design activities.The development of new courses in thesefields not only requires significantresources, but also poses a challenge toknowledge management at the Institute.The question arises, however, whether theInstitute can invest in all aspects of ATMtraining. Rik Simoens is Head of theBusiness and Administration Unit atEUROCONTROL’s Institute of AirNavigation Services. He says: “Clearly theanswer to this is no, as the Institute aloneis not able to deliver the completespectrum of ATM training requirements.”

Member States take responsibility fortraining civil and military controllers,engineers and regulators in their owncountries, so the Institute tends to delivertraining for the trainers and to disseminateconcepts and projects, working hard toavoid duplication with any nationaltraining activities.

A prime example of this is the commoncore content package for basic training thathas been approved by the Agency Regulatorand is now being adopted by numeroustraining schools. The EUROCONTROLSafety Regulatory Requirement (ESARR) 5covers training and competency skills andMember States have to convince their ownregulator that they are in compliance with


“The challenge of today is to meet theincreasing demand for its courses andproducts with almost no increase inresources. And, as in so many other sectorsof aviation, the Institute is facing acapacity gap with the introduction ofadditional courses limited by the numberof instructors and classrooms available.”

Concentrating on its core missionThe Institute’s well-documented policyclearly states that it provides commoncourse material for the Member States butwill not compete with them or theirservice providers. This policy is confirmedannually during the meetings of theAdvisory Group for ATM Training, theMember States’ consultative body of theInstitute and, in effect, means the Institutewill not normally include in its portfoliocourses that are available on thecommercial market.

This ‘no-competition’ principle hasenabled IANS to concentrate on its coremission of supporting theEUROCONTROL Agency activities withtraining programmes while establishing aclear demarcation between the Instituteand service providers in the MemberStates. However, this has not prevented thedevelopment of partnerships between theInstitute and some Member States that

help it to close the capacity gap and makemore effective use of available resources.These derive from the commonEUROCONTROL budget financed bythe Member States to guarantee equal andfair access to unique and essential training.

The Institute began exploringpartnerships in a systematic way in 2002and in September 2004 it signed aMemorandum of Understanding with theInternational Air Transport Association,IATA, on the provision of training to setand achieve ATM efficiency targets.However, the partnership concept requireda change in mentality, as training materialwas seen as a EUROCONTROL-ownedasset that needed to be protected fromcommercial use, Simoens says. “Requests

for EUROCONTROL courses wouldhave been viewed with suspicion. But itbecame increasingly clear that AirNavigation Service Providers and Statesshould be able to capitalise on theinvestments made in supporting thedevelopment of the Institute’s trainingmaterials. Consequently, the Institute hasencouraged them to use this materialoutside its traditional scope.”

“A student can now complete part of a trainingcourse online before attending the remainder of the course at the Institute’s premises in Luxembourg”

Rik SimoensHead of Business and Administration Unit at EUROCONTROL’s Institute of Air Navigation Services


79


Pierre Tran assesses the role of the English language in air traffic control and outlinesthe contents of EUROCONTROL’s English Language Proficiency for AeronauticalCommunication test

Talking the talk

Clear communication is key to air safety –a concern addressed by a new test forEnglish language proficiency in the airtraffic controller (ATCO) community.

“Communication is the vital linkbetween controllers and pilots,” says PatrikPeters, Executive Vice-President forEurope, International Federation for AirTraffic Controllers’ Associations(IFATCA). “Without this link there is noair traffic control.”

In the complex environment of air trafficmanagement, the human factor loomslarge, so anything that reduces uncertaintyin voice communication must be a plus inthe equation.

As the international airline industry tooka hard look at communication betweenpilots and air traffic controllers, it becameclear there was work to be done in the areaof language proficiency.

“Demands for language proficiency to enhance air safety led toEUROCONTROL’s work on the EnglishLanguage Proficiency for AeronauticalCommunication [ELPAC] test,” saysMichel Pistre, head of the TrainingDevelopment and Harmonisation Unitwhich developed it in the framework ofthe EUROCONTROL SENSEprogramme. Since pilots can ask thecontroller for English to be used, if they

do not speak the local language, this shiftsthe linguistic problem to the level ofEnglish spoken by the controller at theATC microphone.

Adrian Enright, project manager forEUROCONTROL’s English languageproficiency test, as well as a member of theInternational Civil Aviation Organisation(ICAO) Study Group that developed thenew Standards, notes that althoughEnglish has become the de facto languageof international aeronauticalcommunication, there has been a lack ofany defined level of proficiency.Furthermore, Enright says: “US airlinesand the Federal Aviation Administrationwere notable in pushing for improvedinternational standards in radiotelephonycommunications, in light of accidents inAsia and other regions of the world, wherepoor voice communication betweenaircrew and ground control were identifiedas a weak link.”

Development work on ELPAC began inFebruary 2005 and, after trialling some 700air traffic controllers, EUROCONTROLformally launched the ELPAC test on 6September 2007. The assessment tool isnow available to National SupervisoryAuthorities and air navigation serviceproviders of EUROCONTROL and theEuropean Civil Aviation Conference

Member States. The test comes just intime. ICAO has stipulated that, as of 5March 2008, air traffic controllers andpilots must demonstrate proficiency in thelanguages used in aeronauticalcommunication. English shall also beavailable on request to pilots flying ininternational airspace and on internationalroutes. The European Commission,meanwhile, has set 17 May 2010 as its datefor English language proficiency under theCommon European ATC licence. This willapply to all holders of an air trafficcontroller or student controller licence inthe European Union (EU).

At the recent 36th assembly of ICAO,it was recognised that although Statesmade efforts to comply with the March2008 deadline, some encountereddifficulties complying with the targetdate. Therefore, it has been decided toallow them a three-year extension,provided they make their implementationplans and risk mitigation measuresavailable to all other contracting States.

The social implications of the newrequirements are far reaching because afailure in the test potentially meanssuspending or revoking the controller’slicence, and loss of employment. Thus,taking the test means playing for highstakes; not just for the individual

▼

80

controller, but the level of service providedby the national organisation. But it is notall negative. Apart from the obviousbenefits to flight safety, improved jobmobility within the EU is seen as one ofthe positives of passing the test. And astandardised assessment will focus officialattention on vocational language training,which will hopefully lead to an overallimprovement in voice communication.

“Our main concern is the training for thetest and the possible repercussions once thetest has not been passed by the individualcontroller,” says Peters. IFATCA fullyrecognises the importance of Englishlanguage proficiency and adopted thefollowing policy at its 2005 Melbourneconference: “Sufficient training must beavailable for current ATCOs of all Englishlanguage ability so as to be able to meet therequired ICAO level, and subsequently toretain (or improve) that competency. Staffmembers who are unable to achieve andmaintain the English language requirementsmust have their positions protected. Theymust be given opportunities to reach therequired ICAO level. Therefore, theFederation calls for a proper trainingprogramme to be set up and contingenciesto be prepared in the event of failure.”

A major concern of the Federation isthat there is a need for States and service

providers to speed up the implementationof English language testing andcertification, says Peters. There areworries about a lack of information aboutthe knowledge required by controllers.“What happens after passing the test, ormore to the point, failing the test?” asks

Peters. “Implementation scales andtimeliness are not yet known, whereas thedeadline is coming very close.” Hecontinues: “We therefore urge all Statesto take on this task, to develop andcommunicate openly to achieve a betterand safer ATC for the future.”

“Sufficient training must be available for current ATCOs of all Englishlanguage ability so as to be able to meet the required ICAO level,and subsequently to retain (or improve) that competency”IFATCA 2005 Melbourne conference


81

The ELPAC test As developed by EUROCONTROL’s Institute of Air Navigation Services, the ELPAC test is designed

for operational air traffic controllers. The test will certify language proficiency, not knowledge of

ATC operational procedures, and, therefore, a grasp of standard phraseology and plain English

used in aeronautical communication is covered. ELPAC is a web-based and interactive test,

making the test economic to administer and offering a high level of security and

confidentiality of data. The test was submitted to Professor Charles Alderson, head of Lancaster

University’s Department of Linguistics and English Language. Alderson, co-author of the

international journal Language Testing, deemed the test to be academically valid.

A core development team drawn from controllers and English language experts in six

European countries and EUROCONTROL assisted in the construction of the test, working to the

ICAO language proficiency requirements. The ELPAC test is designed to assess proficiency in

English at ICAO level 4 (Operational) and level 5 (Extended). The test is delivered in two parts:

Paper 1 covers listening comprehension using the internet; while Paper 2, which relies on oral

interaction, uses a live, structured interview-type test with two examiners.

In Paper 1, the controller listens to recordings of authentic transmissions, ranging from short

standard pilot transmissions to longer communications dealing with unusual situations.

In Task 2 of Paper 2 the controller has the opportunity to demonstrate level 5 (Extended)

proficiency by giving opinion, hypothesising or speculating on issues in an aviation

context. Before national organisations begin using the test, they must sign a licence

agreement with EUROCONTROL, undertaking to respect test security, confidentiality of data

and maintaining standards.

82

Licensing will continue to be important forAir Traffic Management (ATM) as it ensuresthat personnel (and organisations) meetrequired standards and provides mechanismsfor protecting the performance of the ATMsystem by temporary suspension orcancellation of licences (in part orcompletely). Licensing has, in the past, beenmainly for pilots (and other flight crew), airtraffic controllers (ATCOs) and airlineoperating companies. More recently, theimportance of ensuring the performance ofthe whole ATM system has resulted in someextension of licensing areas. However, a recentEuropean Commission (EC) study hasproposed that in some cases this issue can bebetter handled through formal competenceassessment schemes, especially in the technicaland engineering fields.

Additional organisational licensing is nowrequired for Air Navigation Service Providers(ANSPs), who have separated from theregulator, in order for them to obtain a licenceto operate. The consequence of this being thatthe regulator, in some countries, is now able tosuspend or cancel the ANSP licence and hasrequired ANSPs (as part of the licensingprocess) to nominate another ANSP toprovide services should their licence besuspended or cancelled.

The International Federation of Air TrafficControllers’ Associations (IFATCA) is very

concerned that some countries still allownon-licensed personnel to act as air trafficcontrollers. IFATCA considers that for safetyand professional reasons air traffic controlmust only be performed by licensed airtraffic controllers.

Licensing to cover more areasCurrently, it is commonplace for licences notto be required for those involved in the designof ATM systems (whether whole or partialsystems), accident/incident investigation or forthe preparation or approval of safety casesrelating to ATM changes. In the past, some ofthese roles have been undertaken simply as aremit of a job title, frequently a managementposition, and more recently, these roles havebeen performed by a series of delegations ofauthority within, for example, a licensedANSP. However, the increasing requirementsfor interoperability between ANSPs and theneeds of performance-based ATM may wellrequire personnel licensing of those engaged inthese and other activities that directly affectATM operational areas.

The European Manual of Personnel Licensing– Air Traffic Controllers is an evolution of thepreceding International Civil AviationOrganisation (ICAO) ATCO licensing system.Ratings have been retained to indicatedisciplines within which ATC services areprovided (Aerodrome, Approach and Area)

but have been expanded or modified wherenecessary. Endorsements are in three forms: • licence endorsement for generic skills; • rating endorsement for specific skills, in this

case, the technology used such as radar orAutomatic Dependant Surveillance-Broadcast(ADS-B);

• unit endorsements for the geographical area. The European ATCO licence is an

improvement, especially as it addresses thepreviously technology-based ratingdescriptions – for example, Area Radar is nowArea Surveillance with an endorsement forradar. The evolution to licensing by pan-national regulators like the European AviationSafety Agency (EASA) will further harmonisestandards and assessments.

A comprehensive licensing document alreadyexists in Europe, entitled The EC Directive onATCO Licensing. There is also theaforementioned European Manual of PersonnelLicensing – Air Traffic Controllers, whichdescribes how to put licensing requirementsinto effect. This manual is currently beingreviewed to become a means to comply withthe EC Directive.

The European Manual of Personnel Licensing –Air Traffic Controllers states: “The use of ratingendorsements to indicate specialist skill areas willalso enable individual States to develop theirown State rating endorsements where they havea particular requirement to provide specialist air


Air Traffic Management licensing must continue to evolve alongside the advances ofthe ATM system. Andrew Beadle considers both the improvements to the EuropeanATCO licence and more general ATM licence-related changes that may occur overthe next 20 years

Air traffic control officer licensing

▼

traffic control services not recognised in theEuropean license requirements.” However, iffull regional interoperability is to be achievedthen further work is required to monitor theadditional ratings implemented by States.These licensing requirements should then beadapted so that a licensing document existswhich States can implement without the needfor exceptions. In this way it is hoped thatglobal requirements, including the need towork with and through ICAO, will continueso that ATCO licensing improvements can beshared globally.

The evolution of ATCO licensingFuture concepts for ATM make it clear thatthe skill set of controllers will need to evolvewith the ATM system and therefore licensingmust evolve as well. Furthermore, issuesincluding technology, services, geography andsimulation will also need to be addressed.

The European ATCO licence has movedthe surveillance technology aspects fromratings to endorsements. However, from aglobal perspective the division betweenprocedural and surveillance (or radar) isbecoming blurred. In addition, astechnology evolves in another area, that ofdatalink communications, specific datalinkendorsements may be required to cover theskills needed to safely use Controller PilotData Link Communication. This

highlights how technology can also resultin the merging of endorsements.

The services provided by ATM may nolonger be viewed simply in terms ofAerodrome, Approach and Area. Not only willservices need to be considered as disciplineswithin the ICAO Concept components, butalso the skill sets required for the services willalso evolve. It is not reasonable to expect thatbecause someone has ratings andendorsements for a group of sectors theynecessarily have sufficient ability to be a multi-sector planner. Similar cases exist for pilots;they cannot be assumed to be able to self-separate (especially electronically) in highdensity environments, nor can it be assumedthat pilots and controllers will automaticallyhave the skills necessary to blend trajectory-contract aircraft with non-contract aircraft.

Regarding unit endorsements, The EuropeanManual on Personnel Licensing – Air TrafficControllers states: “Unit endorsements areendorsements associated with specific ratingsand rating endorsements, which indicate theair traffic control unit where the license holderprovides an air traffic control service and theindividual sectors, groups of sectors oroperational positions on which a controller iscompetent to provide the appropriate airtraffic control service. Unit endorsements mayalso indicate the specific types of surveillanceequipment used by the unit in the provision

of air traffic control services on specific sectors,groups of sectors or operational positions.”

Although there are valid reasons today forunit endorsements, some of theseendorsements can inappropriately createdifferences which inhibit interoperability ofthe ATM system. For example, futureconcepts of ATM require that traffic flows notbe constrained by sector, facility or Stateboundaries, but ATCOs are still licensedusing unit endorsements. Consequently,ATCO training and licensing will need to, onthe one hand, cater for the existing airspaceboundaries and, on the other, prepare for theintroduction of the Functional AirspaceBlocks, which will feature in the SingleEuropean Sky ATM network.

It is still somewhat unclear as to howcurrent and future changes will contributetowards safety and efficiency of ATM. The fullextent to which ANSPs will be affected by thecost of harmonisation is still unknown. Thepossibility that ATCOs may be disadvantagedby the use of licensing changes to force changeor discriminate inappropriately (for exampleon ethnic grounds) must also be considered.In short, all change involves opportunities andthreats and the only way that ATM safety andefficiency can be properly addressed is bywisely applying the changes. Wisdom, in thiscase, is working together and not against eachother to achieve mutually beneficial change.


83


Simon Michell talks to IFATCA’s Executive Vice-President Europe, Patrik Peters, about the challenges involved in implementing and working in a ‘Just Culture’ environment

Working in a ‘Just Culture’

At the ICAO 11th Air NavigationConference in 2003, IFATCA submitted aWorking Paper entitled The Need for a JustCulture in Aviation Safety Management. Thepaper invited States to review their existingaviation laws in order to remove thoseimpediments which were preventing thecollection and analysis of some extremelyvaluable safety-related information. Thepaper also called for the development oflegislation that would protect peopleinvolved in reporting incidents frompunitive legal action and punishment. Inaddition, EUROCONTROL’s Safety DataReporting and Data Flow Task Force(SAFREP) 1 proposed recommendations toits Provisional Council that stress the needfor implementation of a ‘Just Culture’.These recommendations have since beenendorsed by EUROCONTROL’sProvisional Council as well as its Permanent Commission.

The reason for this is obvious; the morepeople feel that their mistakes could getthem into trouble, the less likely they areto admit to them. This results in aworking environment in which safetyimprovement becomes more difficultbecause of a lack of communicationrelating to those areas where there is aknown safety risk but an unwillingness totackle it.

Trust is paramount. Despite somewhatdisappointing progress to date, with someStates more reluctant than others to amendtheir laws, there is a gradual movementtowards the creation of Just Cultureenvironments based upon the nationalcharacteristics and culture of theorganisations setting them up. Patrik Petersexplains: “First of all, there are differentapproaches to this topic at the moment.There isn’t a one size fits all solution.”

This is because there are differentnationalities and, more importantly,different mentalities to contend with. SaysPeters: “What works for a northernEuropean mindset might not work for acolleague from a Mediterranean country.”What is universal, however, is the need fortrust. The control room personnel need tohave absolute faith in the system from thebeginning. “This trust can be a fragilecommodity and it only takes one instancein which confidentiality is broken for thattrust to be lost for an entire generation ofATC staff,” says Peters.

That said, trust can be established andcontinuously improved by providing properfeedback and follow-up. “Staff will believethat this is a good mechanism to evolve theprofession, working conditions andenvironment. This will enhance the overallwellbeing of control staff and atmosphere

in the control room, which in turn willimprove safety records,” says Peters.

Just Culture does not seek to change theway an incident is reported, but to supportthat system in such a way as to discourage aculture of blame. As Peters acknowledges:“Making mistakes is a very normal thing todo even though it is not desirable.Everybody makes mistakes, but as long asthey are not down to negligence or theconsumption of ‘illegal substances’ we arebetter off not blaming people, but rathertrying to find out why they happen so thatthey can be prevented in the future.”

Every Air Navigation Service Provider(ANSP) has slightly different procedures forhandling an incident report. In general,however, depending on the severity of theincident and the state of the respective AirTraffic Controller (ATCO), the individualinvolved in the incident is relieved ofhis/her position immediately and offeredCritical Incident Stress Management if thisis available. The incident is theninvestigated and the incident investigator’steam, together with the ATCO’s supervisorand management, decide on remedialaction, which could, for example, beretraining. It is often not possible tomaintain confidentiality in the more high-profile incidents because other people areusually already aware that the incident has

84

▼

taken place. The same is not the case forvoluntary incident reporting.

Voluntary incident reportingWhen an ATCO wants to report ashortcoming in procedures, traffic handlingor sector manning, for example, he may doso using the voluntary reporting procedure.Peters says: “Here, confidentiality is anabsolute. It is needed in order to engenderthe required level of trust from the ATCOs,which is essential to make it work.”Therefore, it is important that the process ismanaged by a set of ‘trustees’ who areselected by the control room personnel andnot imposed on them by management.

Once a report has been submitted, it isexamined and classified according to itspriority level and severity. The identity ofthe reporting staff member is strippedfrom the report to make it anonymous. Itis then handed to a manager with thenecessary skills, knowledge and authorityto be able to look into the problem,clarify exactly what it is, and thenprovide feedback to the incidentreporting manager. He will then providefeedback to the ‘Ops staff ’ in the mostappropriate manner, which could be via anewsletter for example. Peters says:“Should more information be needed ona specific incident, only the manager

dealing with the voluntary incidentreporting is able – via the trustees alone –to contact the individual ATCO whowrote the report, as only the trusteesknow the identity of the reporter.”

Peters is convinced that, for the systemto remain intact, the reportees must feelsecure and not threatened in any way. Hesays: “They want to be taken seriously.They want feedback. Solutions, whereappropriate, must be implemented.” Petersbelieves that if these measures are nottaken, the system will start to unravel and

all the hard work that has been done insetting it up will be lost.

Experience so far with theimplementation of Just Cultures indicatesthat those societies with a high anxietyfactor find it most difficult to develop theprocess. These cultures often have amulti-layered hierarchy within theirorganisations, which again can make itmore difficult. Nordic countries havefound it easier than many others to adaptto the Just Culture environment.

As far as the future is concerned,mindsets need to be adjusted so thatpeople are more open to their ownvulnerabilities and accept that they makemistakes, and that as long as they arehonest mistakes, there is no shame inthem. Peters is convinced that it is theduty of ANSPs, who have started toimplement Just Culture, to communicatewith the wider community in general andwith other ANSPs in particular. They needto share their experiences, especially thepitfalls and miscalculations they madealong the way, so they are not repeated byothers. “There is still a long way to go andthere are many problems which could alltoo easily ruin that which has already beenachieved, but we need to go there in orderto serve the paramount goal of our work –safety,” says Peters.

Mindsets need tobe adjusted so thatpeople are moreopen to their ownvulnerabilities andaccept that theymake mistakes, and that as long as they are honestmistakes, there is no shame in them


85

86

To date, controllers have not had a greatdeal of hands-on experience of trajectorymanagement in an operationalenvironment, and most trials have been solimited as to offer little indication of howeffective it will be in a dense trafficenvironment. But early indications arepromising, although there is someconcern that the European model needsto more closely reflect the InternationalCivil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO’s)proposed model because controllers feelthat would offer a more predictable andstable environment.

A great deal of work was done ontrajectory management as part ofEUROCONTROL’s Programme forHarmonised ATM Research inEUROCONTROL (PHARE). As part ofthis programme, an Experimental FlightManagement System was developed todemonstrate, in simulation and flighttrials, the capabilities of an advancedFlight Management System to predict 4Dtrajectories. In doing so, it had to takeinto account possible Air Traffic Control(ATC) constraints and airline operatingprocedures, negotiate a user preferredtrajectory with ATC (via data link) andguide the aircraft to that trajectory.

Despite encouraging results, thePHARE demonstration did not

demonstrate one of the key aims oftrajectory management, namely, a decreasein controller workload. Much of this,however, can be attributed to the trialsenvironment. Insufficient training ofcontrollers, lack of controller trust in thetools, airspace not optimised for usingthose tools, and operational proceduresand working methods not optimised forthe tools are some of the reasons cited.

Contract approachAndrew Beadle, the InternationalFederation of Air Traffic Controllers’Associations’ (IFATCA’s) representative toICAO’s ATM Requirements andPerformance Panel is confident that toolswill be developed to ensure that trajectorymanagement will become a beneficialaddition to the Air Traffic Manager’stoolkit. He stresses that controllers would

prefer to see Europe adopting a contractapproach to trajectory management, alongthe lines of the ICAO concept. IFATCAdefines a trajectory contract as “anagreement for the airspace user to be at aparticular location at a particular timeand, in return, the services and resourcesneeded by the airspace user will beavailable” on an “on time, first served”priority basis. The airspace userguarantees the promised performance,even if, for example, the winds are slightlydifferent to those predicted.

IFATCA says the trajectory contract“also allows more strategic conflictmanagement, so that inefficient tacticalsolutions do not suddenly occur”. Thetrajectory contract is modified duringflight – both at the request of the airspaceuser and the service provider. The numberof modifications requested would be anindication both of the predictability of thesystem and its flexibility.

In the SESAR model, most timesindicated in an operational trajectory(commonly referred to as the ReferenceBusiness Trajectory (RBT)) are estimates.Some may be target times to facilitateplanning and some may be constraints toassist, for example, queue management.

The RBT evolves during the flight andis modified either when an automatic

The trajectory contract is modifiedduring flight – bothat the request of theairspace user andthe service provider


Despite a degree of inherent scepticism, there is also guarded acceptance of thepositive potential of trajectory management – if a number of issues can be ironed out.Anne Paylor looks at the challenges facing its introduction

Trajectory management

▼

few contract positions are required.Whereas, in reality there may have to bemultiple trajectory points in order tomanage multiple trajectories.

Beadle also stresses that trust in thesystem and confidence in the toolsprovided is fundamental to controlleracceptance of trajectory management, andhe concedes this is something that willonly happen in time, through increasingfamiliarity and experience.

Ultimately, though, IFATCA believesthat “the best way to address the problemsbeing experienced in ATM is by allmembers of the ATM communitycooperating. The cooperation needed is aserious collaboration requiring pragmatismand compromise by all involved. It alsoneeds commitment to change and a will toact at all levels including at state level.” Inessence, IFATCA believes that cooperationand commitment to act “is moreimportant than the final technology orprocedures that will be implemented”.

stresses that as far as controllers areconcerned, several major issues remain tobe addressed. For example, advances inaircraft systems have been predominantlyfocused on optimising aircraftperformance on an individual flight basis.Advances are now needed in the handlingof the interaction between the flighttrajectories of several aircraftsimultaneously. Additionally, systems stillrely too much on prediction of aircraftposition and, therefore, are affectedsignificantly by factors such as differencesbetween forecast winds and actual winds.This can rapidly lead to uncertainty aboutexactly when contracting aircraft willarrive at specific locations, owing to thefact that the ATM network is not a closedsystem and so is subject to uncontrollableand unpredictable events. To counteractthis, the ability of the ATM system torespond to and mitigate uncontrollable/unpredictable events using 4D trajectoriesneeds to be clearly specified in any ATMsystem design.

Furthermore, the mix of 4D aircraft andnon-4D aircraft requires much moredefinition within the ATM system designrather than a simplistic expectation thatthe controller will be able to resolve anyproblems in a reactionary manner. Finally,there is often a simplistic view that only a

update is triggered by specific events orwhen the predicted trajectory differs fromthe RBT. In either case, the amended RBTbecomes the new common reference, andis subsequently analysed from a conflictmanagement and network viewpoint bythe ANSP, who will take any actionsnecessary to deconflict. IFATCA isconcerned this approach does not allowsufficient predictability or stability, leavingthe controller playing a reactionary role,much as at present.

“There are too many variables forprediction to be completely accurate,” saysBeadle. “We need to get away from thereactionary approach to control and moveto something more strategic. If an aircraftis tied to a trajectory contract, it is up tothe flight crew to either speed up or slowdown to ensure they keep to the contract,or to otherwise notify the controller as farin advance as possible about any deviationfrom the contract. The controller can thentake a more strategic approach tomodification. If we don’t move away fromreactionary modification, controllerworkload will not decrease.”

Future challengesWhile research programmes havedemonstrated the high navigationcapabilities of modern aircraft, Beadle


87


How do you assess the safety of air traffic control operations under normal workingconditions? Mark Pilling examines how a new tool being developed by ICAO, in collaboration with ATC providers and civil aviation bodies, could provide the answer

Normal OperationsSafety Survey

It has been standard practice in almost anysafety critical industry to learn the lessonsof an accident after it occurred.Investigators pore over the chain of eventsthat led to a disaster, and every minuteaspect of the incident, related to eitherman or machine, is examined. From thepicture that emerges, operators andregulators make changes to ensure theaccident cannot happen again.

It is a tried and tested method, and ithas worked. But in an industry like airtransport, where accident rates haveconsistently fallen for years, is it enough?“In ATC we have developed a number ofgood techniques to analyse accidentswhen they happen,” says ManfredBarbarino, human factors domainmanager at EUROCONTROL. “Butfrom this you can never grasp what kindof situations controllers are handling inday-to-day operations.”

Drawing on experience from airlines,the ATC world is working on a way toplug this gap with a safety data collectiontool called Normal Operations SafetySurvey (NOSS). The equivalent airlinetool is called Line Operations Safety Audit(LOSA). “NOSS is almost a copy ofLOSA and is premised on its success,” saysBert Ruitenberg, who is writing the NOSSmanual for ICAO as a consultant to its

Flight Safety and Human FactorsProgramme. He is also the human factorsspecialist for IFATCA and a controllerfor ATC Netherlands at AmsterdamSchiphol Airport.

“LOSA is a programme where trainedpilot observers sit on the flight deck andobserve the operational context in whichthe crew is working,” says Ruitenberg.“They write a narrative of the flight andattach codes to what they see. Throughanalysis of a sufficiently high number ofthese reports a profile emerges of thesafety of the airline,” he says.

In NOSS, local ATC operatives aretrained to make the same observations innormal controller operations, with the aimof identifying any safety deficiencies in aproactive manner prior to an incident oraccident. Existing safety strengths are alsoidentified. “In a way it is a qualityassurance process,” says Barbarino.

Just as LOSA is done with the fullcooperation of airlines and pilots, NOSSsurveys must be conducted in league withcontrollers and air navigation serviceproviders and are confidential. “It is veryimportant to stress that it is not done fordisciplinary reasons or to pick out anyindividuals,” says Barbarino. “We learnedfrom a NOSS trial in Finland howimportant it is to get the combined

sponsorship of the controller associationsand management. You need to get buy-infrom the top level for it to work.”

There is a rigorous methodology behindthe survey process to ensure the results areconsistent and meaningful. Both airlineand ATC audits, as well as others inindustries like rail transport, use theThreat and Error Management Modeldeveloped by the Human FactorsResearch Project at the University ofTexas. “This provides a sound scientificbackbone,” says Ruitenberg.

NOSS is defined by ten operatingcharacteristics as drawn up by an ICAOstudy group working with ATC providersand controllers:1. Over-the-shoulder observations during

normal shifts.2. Joint management/association

sponsorship.3. Voluntary controller participation.4. Trained and trusted observers.5. Anonymous, confidential and non-

punitive data collection.6. Trusted and secure data collection site.7. Systematic data collection instrument.8. Data verification process.9. Data-derived targets for safety

enhancement.10. Feedback results to controllers.

For a NOSS survey to be considered

▼

88

compliant with ICAO guidelines it mustmeet all of these ten characteristics.States will be encouraged to use NOSS,but it will not be compulsory. “The hopeis that it will catch on, and that Stateswill start using it in their normaloperations,” says Ruitenberg.

The first trials of NOSS were conductedin Australia, Canada and New Zealand in2005 and 2006. It was a successfulexperience, and all three countries haveadopted NOSS into their safetymanagement regimes. For example,AirServices Australia took NOSS into its

normal business operations in May 2006.“From all of the trials the air trafficprovider was able to obtain someimmediate feedback and take away somefindings they could instantly use toimprove their operation,” says Ruitenberg.Some of the typical findings from theAustralian, Canadian and New Zealandtrials were:• Airspace design systemically leading to

traffic conflicts.• Automation providing frequent, spurious

alarms.• Flight strips not indicating the cleared

altitude of aircraft.• Uncoordinated movements in other

controllers’ airspace.• Frequent read-back and phraseology

errors.EUROCONTROL coordinated the first

European survey using NOSS in Finland.It took place at two Finavia locations inAugust 2006 and involved 63 observationsmade by six observers across tower, controland approach centres. This is about half ofthe observations likely to be carried out ina full NOSS.

“Over the next one to two years we arelooking to establish another two to threetrials in Europe,” says Barbarino. The ideais to conduct trials in different countriesin the west, east and south of Europe. “We

want to see how NOSS works in a varietyof regions and cultures,” he says.

A NOSS survey should be carried out ona periodic basis, perhaps every four years,to conduct a safety ‘health-check’ of theATC facility and assess how controlleroperations have changed since the previoussurvey. Regular surveys using the samemethod will detect trends in how anorganisation is operating. The surveyreport itself will not make safetyrecommendations: it is up to the providerto take the results and, through its ownsafety processes, put in place new practices.

In terms of timing, ICAO is planning tocomplete its NOSS manual by the end of2007. After that, it goes into the editingphase before being formally published,probably in 2009. A soft copy will beavailable on the internet, most likely in2008, enabling air traffic providers tobegin their own NOSS surveys.

Both airline and ATCaudits, as well asothers in industrieslike rail transport, usethe Threat and ErrorManagementModel developedby the HumanFactors ResearchProject at theUniversity of Texas


89


Grant McDonald reveals how Critical Incident Stress Management not only helps tomaintain the health of air traffic controllers, but can also result in financial savings andsafety improvements

Critical Incident StressManagement

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder does notnecessarily develop following anoperational incident, but air trafficcontrollers (ATCOs) do needpsychological support measures, says theInternational Federation of Air TrafficControllers’ Associations (IFATCA). Thisis to ensure that operational errors are notembedded in the ATCO psyche. And,though air traffic control personnel arerarely confronted with the sight ofaircraft accidents, they can cause a“symbolic confrontation with theunthinkable” in the mind of the ATCO,according to IFATCA.

At an IFATCA conference in San Joséin 1986, delegates adopted a policyproposing psychological support to begiven to ATCOs involved in an accidentor a critical incident, and so CriticalIncident Stress Management (CISM) was launched.

Less than three years later, the effect ofthe 1989 Sioux City crash involving aDC-10 raised further questions on theissue of whether the appropriatepsychological support was in place for theATCOs involved, who carried onworking, not knowing if there were anysurvivors. Subsequently, four of the fiveATCOs working in the control towerresigned after the accident.

How CISM worksManfred Barbarino, human factors domainmanager at EUROCONTROL, explains:“CISM is based on the fact that in aviation,as in other domains such as the militaryand police, people are sometimesconfronted with extremely abnormalsituations.” Following an incident,therefore, those involved should beimmediately released from duty and aCISM intervention should be carried outby ‘CISM peers’ within 24 hours. Theintervention is undertaken by other ATCOswho have undergone training to become aCISM peer. According to Barbarino: “Thishelps to stabilise the situation and reducesthe stresses. The crisis is acknowledged,people can release facts and stress reactionsand encourage coping methods andstrategies to help those involved recover andresume their normal functions within ashort period of time.

“These and other things are initiallydone by ATC staff, but there are alsomental health professionals and familieswho have a role to play. This is not aprocess undertaken by one person alone,but by a complete system. In this way itis possible to help those involved in anincident or accident get back to theirnormal way of working and normalphysical and mental status,” says Barbarino.

Following a EUROCONTROLawareness campaign, which included thepublication of a framework document in1997, a number of Air NavigationService Providers (ANSPs) haveimplemented CISM programmes. Theseinclude Deutsche Flugsicherung (DFS),ENAV of Italy, Maastricht UAC, NAVPortugal and Switzerland’s skyguide. InOctober 2004, IFATCA andEUROCONTROL arranged a CISMWorkshop at IFATCA’s EuropeanRegional Meeting (ERM) in Bucharest,where representatives from DFS, NAVand skyguide were able to give valuablefeedback on the experiences they had,resulting from the Überlingen mid-aircollision. Discussions also includedprogress reports of CISMimplementation with various serviceproviders, including theEUROCONTROL Maastricht UAC. Following this, in 2005EUROCONTROL published CISMUser Implementation Guidelines tosupport ANSPs in developing their ownCISM programne.

EUROCONTROL also leads a CISMuser group. Barbarino says: “The greatbenefit is that it allows States or serviceproviders, who have alreadyimplemented CISM programmes, to

▼

90

share experiences and best practices andidentify what additional developmentsand features they need to introduce.”

This group also supports newcomerswho are considering implementing CISM by providing support for theimplementation steps. Barbarino says: “Wehave just received an official commitmentby one of the EUROCONTROL steeringboards allowing us to extend this usergroup by three years to 2010.”

He goes on to point out that if ANSPsare to implement a CISM programme, itis of the utmost importance that there issupport from the operational staff, staffassociations and unions, but it is alsoimportant that the whole of theorganisation’s management is fullybehind such an initiative. Barbarino says:“If this is not the case, then such aprogramme is very likely to fail.”

In order to keep up with the quality ofCISM in an organisation, there needs tobe regular refresher courses for the CISMpeers and they should have anopportunity to have an annualconference and workshop where they canlearn from each other to maintain thequality of their work. This is essentialbecause the benefits of CISM have to beevaluated and assessed in the short,medium and long term, not only on the

individual and operator’s level but alsoon the strategic and corporate level.

CISM improves safety and efficiencyExperience of a number of ANSPs hasalready shown that a CISM programmehelps to achieve other corporateobjectives. Controllers often suffer adecrease in their mental and performancecapabilities after an incident. The longerpeople are not working at their normalperformance levels, the more this has aneffect on the performance of the overallsystem, resulting in delays and a loweringof capacity. If only one person is involved,the effect may not be too dramatic, but ifyou have quite a large number ofincidents several people might be affected,and this can begin to generate a largefinancial burden.

Cost benefit studies have shown thepositive effects of having implemented aCISM programme. Barbarino says: “It’spositive for the individual and thecompany because it pays off. Forexample, studies which have been done inDeutsche Flugsicherung (DFS) inGermany have demonstrated a positivecost benefit factor of 1:3. You spend oneeuro implementing and maintaining aCISM programme, but the return oninvestment is a factor of three.”

Supporting each otherCISM-trained controllers and peers fromDFS went to Switzerland to support theSwiss air navigation service provider,skyguide, following the Überlingenaccident in July 2002. Another, morerecent, example is the Portuguese CISMteam who supported its Brazilian colleaguesafter the accident in 2006 in which aBoeing 737-800 collided in mid-air with anEmbraer Legacy 600 jet over the Amazonjungle. This highlights an evolving networkthat is building up where CISM teams,groups and peers from one country go tothe aid of those in need in other countries.

Perhaps an even more compellingargument for CISM is the fact that serviceproviders also report that CISMprogrammes have a positive effect onsafety culture. Barbarino explains: “CISMallows people to deal with incidents moreopenly and this promotes a learningculture and a more open reporting culture.It’s normal that errors are made and it isalso normal that we are affected byincidents, but we have a chance to learnfrom that. CISM is offering a learningopportunity not only for the individualand for the teams, but also on theorganisational level. We are trying tominimise the idea of a blame and punitiveculture in order to achieve a Just Culture.”

CISM is based on the fact that in aviation, as in otherdomains such as the military and police, people aresometimes confronted with extremely abnormal situationsManfred Barbarino Human Factors Domain Manager, EUROCONTROL


91

92


A decade ago, a prominent aircraftmanufacturer predicted that trafficexpansion would inevitably lead to aspectacular growth in the number of aircraftdestroyed in accidents. That dauntingprognosis has not materialised. However,it remains an indisputable concern.

“If traffic goes up, then the likelihoodthat there will be more errors increases,”says Mariann Hintz, ATM training expertat EUROCONTROL’s Institute of AirNavigation Services in Luxembourg andchairman of the EUROCONTROL TRMUser Group. “We need to work on themitigation of the consequences or on thereduction of the number of errors,” saysHintz. A variety of safety-enhancinginitiatives relating to air traffic control(ATC) equipment or processes alreadyaddress the observable issues. “But we arealso aware that air traffic controllers[ATCOs] make errors, which their systemsdo not know about, because not all theerrors that they produce have negativeconsequences.”

It is estimated that each ATCO makesten errors every hour, notes the IrishAviation Authority (IAA). Although thedefinition of ‘error’ in the ATC context isstill subject to debate, that observationmight be sufficient to send chills down thespine of any air transport passenger.

probabilities, Europe has developed TeamResource Management (TRM), a trainingprogramme which tackles the millions ofsmall mistakes that occur in day-to-dayATC operations.

EUROCONTROL launched aninitiative in 1994 addressing the humanerrors in ATC that have no statisticallyrelevant consequences, with a studyinvestigating the possible benefits of atool that could be modelled on theairlines’ Crew Resource Management(CRM) techniques. The air transportsector has been very successful inpromoting enhanced team workingprinciples through CRM, whoseprinciples are now implemented by nearlyevery airline in the world.

EUROCONTROL’s analysis indicatedthat failures in teamwork contribute toincidents and have a negative effect on theperformance of ATCOs. The studypointed to a need for a TRM programmespecifically tailored for air traffic services.It was subsequently developed under theaegis of EUROCONTROL, incooperation with national aviationauthorities, the International Federation ofAir Traffic Controllers’ Associations(IFATCA), as well as a mixed team ofactive controllers, training staff andhuman factors experts.

“TRM is a process to capture thecontrollers’ ownunderstanding ofwhere and why they produceinconsequentialerrors”

Mariann Hintz ATM training expert at EUROCONTROL’sInstitute of Air Navigation Services inLuxembourg, and Chairman of the EUROCONTROL TRM User Group

Small errors usually go unnoticed, but can, over time, lead to more serious situations.Martial Tardy looks at how Team Resource Management seeks to understand howthese mistakes are produced and how to put an end to them

Team ResourceManagement

Hundreds of errors are being committeddaily in any ATC installation, but the vastmajority are harmless. The number ofATC incidents and accidents remainscomparatively infinitesimal: millions of‘mistakes’ can be made without resultingin an actual accident.

“Statistically speaking the more errorsyou produce, the greater the likelihood isthat something serious happens,” saysHintz. In an effort to ward off these

▼

inconsequential exercises helps traineesidentify the relevance of the experience fortheir day-to-day operations. But somesessions also directly recreate real-lifeprofessional situations. TRM expertsobserved that the use of local occurrences,close to the personal experience oftrainees, generated better in-depthdiscussions, and the learning experiencesfrom local incidents and case studies weremore powerful.

Maesen recalls a situation where twoBelgian ATCOs with different mothertongues enacted an argument. He says:“They argued, one in French and the otherin Dutch, and they didn’t understand eachother. It’s a critical example for Brussels.”The exercise revealed the benefits of usingEnglish as a common language. “When theprotagonists changed languages they paidmore attention to the words and reallystarted listening to each other,” says Maesen.

TRM enables trainees to find collectivesolutions which can be implemented in reallife. Says Hintz: “They will actually committo solutions at the end of the session.” Thevalue of such exercises is that they result inapplying social pressure, which enhancesthe efficiency of the course.

The benefits of TRM are now beingextended beyond the ATCO community,with courses for engineers, administrative

“TRM is a process to capture thecontrollers’ own understanding of whereand why they produce inconsequentialerrors,” explains Hintz. The aim is to “getcontrollers to loosen up to such an extentthat they can reflect on their own actions,with the consequences they have had, andto draw conclusions from that,” she says.In short, TRM is a safety learning toolthrough which the individual is able tounderstand why he or she has beenmaking certain errors and how he or shecan prevent these particular errors fromoccurring again.

A typical TRM course, as proposed byEUROCONTROL, would last three days.Groups of eight to 15 trainees carry outteambuilding exercises during which theyare requested to enact situations wherethey are challenged to take a stand andmaintain their point of view by reasoning,even though other participants see thingsdifferently. Geert Maesen, a supervisor atBrussels airport’s ATC tower, believes thatTRM has taught him to manage conflictsbetween individuals and improve theinteraction between individuals.

One of the simple exercises thatimpressed him reproduced a situationwhere two car drivers were trying to getinto the same spot in a parking lot.Debriefing after such seemingly


93

staff or airport fire fighters, for instance.Specific training sessions can also bedeveloped for mixed groups, to help thembridge gaps and address joint issues. Onenational aviation organisation is deployinga huge programme with all controllers andall pilots of the main airline. “Theyanalyse past errors. They scrutinise theirprejudices about the other group and theylearn to deal with the issues,” says Hintz.

EUROCONTROL’s TRM programme,which is implemented on a voluntarybasis by national aviation authorities, hasbeen operational since 1996. It hasspread throughout the continent and isbeing utilised beyond Europe,contributing to the prevention of errorsand their possibly dramatic consequences.But the impact of TRM on individualstends to diminish over time. That is whyTRM ‘booster injections’ – like invaccination campaigns – would be a verygood idea, according to Maesen.

EUROCONTROL / IFATCA 2008: a collaborative approach to the future > Profiles

Ever since the early 1960s, EUROCONTROL and IFATCA have been working together toimprove the European ATM network. Simon Michell finds out how the relationship works

The relationship between EUROCONTROLand IFATCA

Alexander Skoniezki, Head ofEUROCONTROL’s Safety, Security andHuman Factors Division, describes thepartnership between his Agency andIFATCA as a very close, constructive andprofessional relationship. Over the eightyears that Skoniezki has been atEUROCONTROL he has acted as thefocal point for IFATCA and has seen theclose working relationship develop intoone which is not only mutually beneficial,but also a significant element within theoverall ATM network development. Therelationship is underlined by a number offactors, with IFATCA functionariesactively involved in many of the Agency’sStakeholder Consultation bodies. SaysSkoniezki: “We invite IFATCArepresentatives to all the major eventswhich take place during the year.”

Apart from the Consultation Groups,IFATCA is also active in a number of otherareas within the Agency’s ProvisionalCouncil and the various managementboards. IFATCA’s CEO and President MarcBaumgartner is, for example, a member ofthe Agency Consultation Group Researchfor EUROCONTROL’s ExperimentalCentre (EEC) in Brétigny-sur-Orge,France. Furthermore, in 2006EUROCONTROL established a EuropeanATM Staff Representatives Conference

(EASC) within which IFATCA plays amajor role alongside the EuropeanTransport Federation, the Air TrafficControllers European Unions Coordinationand the International Federation of AirTraffic Safety Electronics Associations. Eachyear the EASC holds meetings withEUROCONTROL’s Director General anda number of other Directors to discuss andexchange views on activities related to thepan-European ATM environment.Skoniezki concedes that they encounteredone or two teething problems, but that therelationship is going well. He says: “Wehave established a very constructivedialogue on where we go in the future as faras European ATM is concerned.”

A significant landmark in the relationshipcame at IFATCA’s 37th Toulouse AGM in1998, when EUROCONTROL’s thenDirector General, Yves Lambert, wasinvited to speak. In recognising IFATCA’sglobal influence, he accepted that theassociation had a role to play in thedevelopment of the structure ofEUROCONTROL, including the newProvisional Council and the SafetyRegulation Commission. The account inUnder Control, which outlines the historyand development of IFATCA, quotesLambert: “You have specialised knowledgein the field. Your astute professional

94

The partnershipbetween IFATCAand EUROCONTROLis a very close, constructive andprofessional relationship

▼

Since IFATCA is a professional association and not a union, it does not engage EUROCONTROL or its Member States in negotiations over salaries and conditionsunderstanding of the issues affecting ATMis of the greatest interest to us and ofbenefit to all players in ATM affairs. Wevalue your partnership highly and lookforward to continued close cooperation.”

This led to IFATCA receiving an official invitation to contribute to theATM2000+ Strategy Board, which wasEUROCONTROL’s engine for designingthe ATM structure for the 21st century andgave rise to the Performance EnhancementProgramme for European Air TrafficManagement in Europe, known by theacronym EATM. Since that time, IFATCAhas sent delegates to EUROCONTROLHigh-Level Stakeholder Consultationmeetings, special task forces and workinggroups as well as lending its own technicalexpertise at a more tactical level.EUROCONTROL, on the other hand, isinvited to all of IFATCA’s major events,including the Annual Conference and theEuropean Regional Meeting. IFATCA hasbeen seeking the input of the Agency toallow a better distribution of the specialisedwork, studies and information materialEUROCONTROL is able to offer to theair traffic controller community.

IFATCA’s technical experts contribute toa variety of programmes in EATM, such asDMEAN, European Safety Programme,Airport Operations and CASCADE, to

name just a few. They were, for example,involved in the Critical Incident StressManagement (CISM) Task Force.

Skoniezki enthusiastically highlights thesupport they received from IFATCA,which was instrumental in developingguidance material, and the work thatBaumgartner undertook to promote theimplementation of the CISM structureamong the Air Navigation ServiceProviders (ANSPs) community.

Another technical area in whichEUROCONTROL and IFATCA have aclose working relationship is in the field ofresearch simulations, where controllers areused in real-time simulations at the EECin Brétigny. Here they carry out simulatedsessions in order to check and verify newtechnologies or operational concepts.

Skoniezki also explains how the twoorganisations cooperate in cases such asthe 2002 Überlingen mid-air collisionbetween a Tu-154 and B757 aircraft. Hecoordinated with his counterparts inIFATCA to discuss what kind of supportcould be given by bothEUROCONTROL and IFATCA withinthe realms of their two separate roles andresponsibilities, as well as the twoorganisations’ separate mandates.

EUROCONTROL has become avaluable source of information at several

IFATCA European Regional Meetings(ERMs) and associated workshops. Theworkshop on CISM, at the ERM 2004 inBucharest, and an airports domain event inRhodes 2005, are evidence of IFATCA’scontinued efforts to have the Agencyinvolved. More recently EUROCONTROLand IFATCA collaborated on a ‘LegalIssues’ event in 2006 in Sofia and with the2007 Prague ‘Quo vadis?’ workshop on thefuture of the air traffic control professionup to the year 2020.

Since IFATCA is a professionalassociation and not a union, it does notengage EUROCONTROL or its MemberStates in negotiations over salaries andconditions. That said, however, the twoorganisations do take part in discussionscovering Social Dialogue in an effort toprotect the Air Traffic Controllers’ (ATCOs)interests at a professional level – something,for which EUROCONTROL is, on thewhole, very grateful. For its part, IFATCAwill approach EUROCONTROL if there isa specific safety operational problem or astaffing problem in certain areas of Europe.They also have close contacts withEUROCONTROL in order to coordinatehow – on a political level or bi-lateral level –certain items can be raised in order to findan appropriate solution.

IFATCA is a member of the Social


95


Dialogue Working Group established bythe European Commission (EC) as alobby for the ATM community to makethe Commission aware of theimplications of EC legislation affectingATM. In particular, this covers topicssuch as how Functional Airspace Blockswill affect ANSPs and their ATCOs.The working group makes the EC awareof its attitude and opinions and whetherit is for or against various legislativepackages; for example what wouldhappen if the EC brought forward theEuropean Directive for EuropeanATCO licences? What are the specificrequirements for training andmaintaining competences? How far doesthis affect staffing levels in controlcentres and to what degree shouldlegislation contain these aspectsanyway? EUROCONTROL hascontributed to this Working Group onan informal basis and on request sinceits inception.

Although the relationship betweenEUROCONTROL and IFATCA is close,professional and constructive, that does notmean that they always see eye to eye. Thereare significant areas where IFATCA hasobjected to some of EUROCONTROL’sopinions and plans. A high profileexample of this is IFATCA’s critical review

of EUROCONTROL’s findings in thePerformance Review Report, whichcompared European ATM efficiency andrelated costs unfavourably with that ofthe US ATM service provision system ofthe FAA.

IFATCA also held different views onthe Central European Air Traffic Services(CEATS) programme. IFATCA ExecutiveVice President Europe Patrik Peters says:“Misunderstandings and problems relatedto the CEATS project could have beenprevented if there had been a higherdegree of transparency, and if all thestakeholders had been involved at anearlier stage. A clearer consensus betweenthe national service providers andEUROCONTROL, respecting roles andresponsibilities as well as well-definedproject requirements, would also havehelped. Political and military pressurefurther complicated the issues. Thoughinvolvement and subsequent agreementcannot be a guarantee for success, itcertainly helps in the search for amutually acceptable solution. On theother hand CEATS was a learningexperience for both the Agency and our Federation.”

Says Skoniezki: “Not everything in thegarden is rosy but when IFATCA iscritical, it is always very constructive.”

96

Although the relationship between EUROCONTROL and IFATCA is close,professional andconstructive, thatdoes not mean that they always see eye to eye

Promote safety, efficiency and regularityin international air navigation; and assistand advise in the development of safeand orderly systems of air traffic control.These core tasks are the raison d’être ofthe International Federation of Air TrafficControllers’ Associations (IFATCA). TheFederation actively pursues theseobjectives and considers that it has theknowledge (including global perspectives)and skills (especially at the level ofpractical application) to contributesignificantly to further improvements inAir Traffic Management (ATM).

IFATCA considers that it provides animportant, and sometimes unique,perspective and works in the spirit ofconsensus to achieve globally applicablestandards. The Federation is officiallyrecognised by the International CivilAviation Organisation (ICAO) andstrongly supports its work by involvingIFATCA members in work panelscovering diverse subjects such asseparation standards, surveillance,aerodromes, operational issues and futureconcepts. The Federation maintains thatICAO continues to have an essential rolein global and regional improvements toATM. It provides working papers toAssemblies and Air NavigationConferences as well as speakers for ICAO

safety seminar workshops, and it alsocomments via the state letter process.

Recognising that there are importantchanges occurring within ATM, IFATCAdoes not oppose change, but ratherparticipates to achieve the best outcomes.The organisation believes that cooperationwithin the ATM community is the key tofuture success – even more so thantechnology – and that the cooperationrequired is a serious collaboration thatneeds pragmatism and compromise by allinvolved. Accordingly, IFATCA hasprepared a Global Statement on theFuture of ATM to assist understanding ofthe next steps required.

The Federation seeks to work withother global international organisations,such as the International Federation ofAir Line Pilots’ Associations as well asother organisations within the aviationarena, including the International AirTransport Association. Theseorganisations have collaborated on safetyrelated programmes, including preventionof runway incursions, and IFATCAprovides speakers at events such as theGlobal NavCom symposia.

Global representation through four regionsGlobal policies sometimes need to be

IFATCA believes thatcooperation withinthe ATM communityis the key to futuresuccess – evenmore so thantechnology


97

Andrew Beadle examines how IFATCA is currently involved at global and regional levels

A global presence

▼

technical standards and procedures,IFATCA also seeks to promote thedevelopment of legal systems that bothsupport aviation safety and protectcontrollers from unreasonable reactions toevents. This is represented within twomain areas, those of just culture andCompulsory Reporting.

The need for a Just CultureAt the global, regional and national levelsIFATCA seeks to provide a constructiveand calm ‘voice of reason’, especially whenincidents and accidents happen thatsometimes leave controllers at the centreof a media storm. Not surprisingly,IFATCA strongly supports theimplementation of a Just Culture, one inwhich controllers are held accountable formisconduct such as gross negligence, butare supported at all other times. It is onlyby addressing system issues thatimprovements can be implemented toATM that can prevent recurrence ofproblems and therefore enhance safety.Everybody involved in a tragic event needssupport and IFATCA assists whereverpossible in Critical Incident StressManagement for controllers.

Unfortunately, even if service providerssupport a Just Culture, the legal system inmany countries does not reflect this. It is

98

supplemented by procedures applicable toparticular areas because of their uniquegeography, economic or social-politicalfeatures. Therefore, IFATCA is organisedinto four regions: Africa and Middle East,Americas, Asia and Pacific, and Europe.Annual regional meetings, aroundOctober, and global conferences, aroundMarch, help to ensure both regional andglobal cooperation between its memberassociations. Although there are differenttraffic and equipment levels in the variouslocations, the issues facing controllers havemany common threads.

Having originated in 1961 from 12European air traffic controller associations,IFATCA continues to be significantlyinvolved with work in the Europeanregion, especially with EUROCONTROLactivities, and has 24 IFATCArepresentatives within that organisation.It also has a liaison officer to theEuropean Union.

Since its early days the Federation hasquickly moved to a global perspective. Inthe other IFATCA regions mostrepresentation is through the regionaloffices of ICAO, and includes work inPlanning and Implementation RegionalGroups, Working Groups and InformalCoordination Groups. In addition toparticipation in the development of


IFATCA strongly supports the implementation ofa Just Culture, one in which controllers are heldaccountable formisconduct such asgross negligence,but are supportedat all other times

clear that a robust event-reporting systemis needed to proactively reduce incidentsand accidents, but, until the reporters tosuch a system have legal protection, manyevents will never be reported. As aresponse to this, IFATCA has processeswhere deficiencies can be reported viaICAO, but is aware that it is still verydifficult in many States for controllers toreport events without retribution.

The Controller magazine (www.the-controller.net) is the official journal ofIFATCA and is issued four times a year to140 countries. The journal addresses allaspects of air traffic control, with anemphasis on human factors and newtechnology. Developments in avionics,control techniques and new airborne andground-based equipment also stronglyfigure. The readership is not limited toIFATCA members, and articles are readand used by a range of aviationprofessionals. IFATCA also shares itsexperience and knowledge in air trafficcontrol with articles in a number ofinternational aviation publications.

The Federation has global internalworking groups involved in technicalresearch and professional issues, whichreport annually to its conference. Thiswork assists member associations in theirinteractions in their own countries and is

used by IFATCA representatives at theglobal and regional level withorganisations like EUROCONTROL.

As a volunteer-based organisation, itsrepresentatives are controllers withconsiderable experience of air trafficcontrol. This experience is kept current asthe representatives continue to work as

controllers during their stints as IFATCAofficers. The dedication of the volunteersworking together as a global body ensurescommitment to finding practical solutionsto the issues affecting air traffic control.

More information on IFATCA is availableat www.ifatca.org

IFATCA has processes where deficiencies can be reported via ICAO, but is aware that it is still very difficult in many States for controllers to report events without retribution


99


What is EUROCONTROL?

EUROCONTROL overviewEUROCONTROL is anintergovernmental organisation,established in 1960 to develop a seamless,pan-European Air Traffic Management(ATM) system for its six foundingMember States (Belgium, France,Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlandsand the United Kingdom).

Today, EUROCONTROL works onbehalf of its 38 Member States to pioneeradvances in ATM technology, operationalprocedures and system interoperability.

EUROCONTROL missionEUROCONTROL’s mission is toharmonise and integrate air navigationservices in Europe, aiming at the creationof a uniform air traffic managementsystem for civil and military users, inorder to achieve the safe, orderly,expeditious and economic flow of trafficthroughout Europe.

To achieve its mission,EUROCONTROL works closely withMember States, Air Navigation ServiceProviders, civil and military airspace users, airports, the aerospace industry,professional organisations and European institutions. EUROCONTROL’s specific goals are to:• raise air traffic safety levels

• increase airspace capacity• reduce air traffic delays• enhance the air traffic management

system’s cost-effectiveness• minimise the impact of air traffic on the

environment.

EUROCONTROL activitiesWith some 2,400 experts based in sevenEuropean countries, EUROCONTROL’score activities are:1. Design of the European air trafficmanagement network. EUROCONTROLworks together with a wide range ofstakeholders to ensure that the EuropeanATM system develops along the lines laiddown in the ATM 2000+ Strategy, aimingat a Single European Sky (SES).

Design of the European air trafficmanagement network covers ATMstrategies and concepts (developed in theEuropean Air Traffic Managementprogrammes in Brussels); research,development and simulation (carried outat the EUROCONTROL ExperimentalCentre, at Brétigny-sur-Orge in France);and specialised training (at the Institute ofAir Navigation Services, Luxembourg).2. Pan-European functions. Bydefinition, EUROCONTROL’s work iscarried out on a European level, with theaim of maximising the safety and

100

EUROCONTROLworks closely withMember States, AirNavigation ServiceProviders, civil andmilitary airspaceusers, airports, theaerospace industry,professional organisations and European institutions

▼

efficiency of the civil and military ATMnetworks. Substantial economies of scaleare gained by working on a pan-Europeanbasis. EUROCONTROL brings essentialadded value through its impartial,transparent and accessible services.

The dynamic management of air trafficflows in the short, medium and long termis carried out by the Central FlowManagement Unit, which beganoperations in 1995, paving the way for acommon European Air Traffic Flow andCapacity Management System within auniform European ATM System. Keyinterdependent functions include flow andcapacity management, flight planning,airspace data operations and dataprovision and reporting.

Another key activity is the billing andcollection of route charges for MemberStates and, upon request, for non-membercountries. The system used by the CentralRoute Charges Office (CRCO) is based onrecommendations for air navigationcharges as set down by the InternationalCivil Aviation Organisation. The CRCOworks closely with nationaladministrations and charging offices.3. Provision of regional air traffic control services on behalf of MemberStates requesting such services is currently undertaken at the Upper

Area Control Centre (UAC) at Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Regional cooperation makes forconsiderably improved safety, greatercapacity and better efficiency.

The Maastricht UAC can be seen as a precursor of the Functional

Airspace Blocks (FABs), which are now being planned and so will form part of the overall design for a SES. The FABs are integrated areas of airspace formed according to operational requirements, regardless of national boundaries.

Regional cooperation makes for considerably improved safety, greatercapacity and better efficiency


101


4. Support to regulatory activities coversthe development of EUROCONTROL’ssafety regulations, known as ESARRs(EUROCONTROL Safety RegulatoryRequirements), and also the workundertaken to assist EC regulation,through the drafting of ImplementingRules for a Single European Sky.

EUROCONTROL structureThe EUROCONTROL Organisationcomprises: • a Commission at ministerial level;• a Provisional Council of civil and

military representatives;• the Agency, under the responsibility of

the Director General.

Member StatesAlbania, Armenia, Austria, Belgium,Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic,Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania,Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta,Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, theNetherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal,Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia,Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, theUkraine and the UK.

102

Key personnelDirector General: David McMillan Director, Air Traffic Management Strategies: Bo RedebornDirector, Air Traffic Management Programmes: Guido KerkhofsDirector, Central Flow Management Unit: Jacques DopagneDirector, Central Route Charges Office: Adriaan HeerbaartDirector, Human Resources and Administration: Volker ThiemDirector, EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre: Jan Van DoornDirector, Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre: Karl-Heinz KloosDirector, Institute Air Navigation Services: Lars Wedbäck

IFATCA overviewThe International Federation of Air TrafficControllers’ Associations (IFATCA) is anon-political, non-industrial, non-profit-making organisation registered inSwitzerland. It is a voluntary body and,apart from one permanent and one part-time member of staff, the organisation ismade up of serving air traffic controllerswho use much of their free time to carryout the Federation’s business. IFATCA wasfounded in 1961 by air traffic controllersfrom 12 European nations and since thenhas grown steadily. The Federationcurrently represents over 50,000 airtraffic controllers from 132 memberassociations worldwide. Additionally 33corporate members represent the supplyand airline industries.

IFATCA enjoys a worldwide reputationamong all partners in Air TrafficManagement (ATM) with representationin many areas, including the InternationalCivil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) andEUROCONTROL, as well as havingexcellent relationships with otherorganisations such as the InternationalFederation of Airline Pilots’ Associations(IFALPA), the European Union, theInternational Air Transport Association(IATA) and the International TransportWorkers’ Federation (ITF).

Goals of the Federation are:• To promote safety, efficiency and

regularity in international air navigation.• To assist and advise in the development

of safe and orderly systems of air traffic control and new procedures and facilities.

• To promote and uphold a high standardof knowledge and professional efficiencyamong air traffic controllers.

• To closely cooperate with internationaland national aviation authorities and institutions concerned with air navigation.

• To sponsor and support the passage of legislation and regulations which will increase and protect the safety of air navigation.

• To strive for a worldwide federation ofair traffic controllers’ associations.

IFATCA history1

The idea of a world body for air trafficcontrollers was first proposed in 1956 byJacob Wachtel, who identified a pressingneed for national ATC associations toform an international grouping. Hisvision was taken up by the President ofthe German Air Traffic Controllers’Association (VDF – Verband DeutscherFlugleiter), Hans Thau, who invited allEuropean ATC associations to attend the

The Federation currently representsover 50,000 air traffic controllersfrom 132 memberassociations worldwide.Additionally, 33 corporate members representthe supply and airline industries


103

What is IFATCA?

▼

VDF’s annual assembly in 1959. At thisconference, a resolution to form aworldwide organisation was passed.However, before this took place a further20 associations had expressed an interestin joining the federation, includingorganisations from the US and Canada.This led to the foundation meeting inOctober 1961 of the EuropeanFederation of Air Traffic Controllers’Associations, in which it was decided tocreate IFATCA.

IFATCA structureThe Federation comprises memberassociations from all over the world,divided into four regions – Africa and theMiddle East, Americas, Asia and Pacificand Europe. Each of these regions ispresided over by an elected ExecutiveVice-President, who is a member of thegoverning body – the Executive Board(EB) – which is responsible for themanagement of the Federation and electsits members on a biennial basis. The EBconsists of the President and ChiefExecutive Officer, the Deputy President,Executive Vice-President (EVP) Finance,EVP Professional and EVP Technical.Meetings to discuss the Federation’smanagement and business are held everythree months.

IFATCA activitiesThe Federation cooperates with nationaland international aviation authorities andother institutions active in the field of airnavigation to assist in developing newprocedures and facilities promoting thesafety of international air traffic. It collectsand distributes information onprofessional problems and developmentsaround the world and seeks to supportand sponsor the passage of legislation andregulations, which will improve andprotect the safety of air navigation throughthe development of appropriate workingconditions in air traffic control. IFATCAparticipates on a regional basis in allICAO regions through its own regionalrepresentatives in order to comparedevelopments and monitor progress.

The Controller quarterly magazine is theFederation’s voice to the outside world andcovers all aspects of air traffic control, withan emphasis on human factors and newtechnology. Developments in avionics andcontrol techniques, as well as new airborneand ground-based equipment are alsoclosely monitored in the publication,which has its own website: www.the-controller.net.

IFATCA has recently published TheGlobal Statement on the Future of ATM.This working document details the

Federation’s current position on thefuture of ATM with regards toperformance expectations, the role ofhumans and technology, the use ofICAO’s global operational ATM conceptcomponents and trajectory management.The global statement is IFATCA’s secondsuch publication, having previouslypublished a Vision Statement, whichunderlined its support of thedevelopment of a future seamless globalATM system as proposed by ICAOCNS/ATM (Communications,Navigation, Surveillance/Air TrafficManagement) systems and highlights thekey areas in which air traffic controllerscan help to make the future conceptwork. Both statements are available fromthe IFATCA website www.ifatca.org.

Each spring the organisation holds anannual conference in which the delegatesdiscuss and pass resolutions to further thecause of the controller in the context ofthe emerging ATM system. Eachconference is organised by thevolunteering member association and iswell covered by the host country’s newsmedia. Member associations from all overthe world attend the annual conference, asdo observers from international partnerorganisations, including ICAO, ITF,EUROCONTROL, IFALPA and IATA.

104


IFATCA participates on a regional basis in all ICAOregions through its own regional representatives in order to compare developments and monitor progress

IFATCA facilitiesIFATCA headquarters are in Montreal,Canada, close to ICAO’s headquarters.

IFATCA MembersMember AssociationsAfrica and Middle-EastAlgeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, BurkinaFaso, Cape Verde, Cameroon, Chad,Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo,Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), Coted’Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea,Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana,Guinea-Bissau, Jordan, Kenya, Mali,Mauritania, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger,Nigeria, ROBATCA*, Rwanda, Senegal,Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa,Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo,Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates,Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

*ROBATCA – comprises associationsfrom Guinea, Liberia and Sierra-Leone.

Americas regionAntigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Aruba,Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, Bolivia,Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica,Dominican Republic, Ecuador, ElSalvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana,Haiti, Jamaica, Mexico, NetherlandsAntilles, Panama, Peru, St Lucia, Suriname

Trinidad and Tobago, United States ofAmerica, Uruguay.

Asia Pacific regionAustralia, Fiji, Hong Kong, India,Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Macau, Malaysia,Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand,Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan.

European regionAlbania, Austria, Armenia, Belarus,Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina,Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, CzechRepublic, Denmark, Egats*, Estonia,Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg,Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,Malta, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway,Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Romania, Russia,Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden,Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, UnitedKingdom.

*EUROCONTROL Guild of Air TrafficServices

Corporate MembersAir Traffic and Navigational Services Co.Ltd, Airways Corporation of NewZealand, Arinc Inc, Aviation ServicesTraining & Consultancy, BAE Systems

C-ITS AB, Barco Orthogon GmbH,Boeing Company – Air TrafficManagement, British Airways, CarnegieSpeech Inc, FrequentisNachrichtentechnik GmbH, FR-HiTEMPLtd, Helios Technology, IATA AviationTraining and Development Institute,Indra, INEO Engineering & Systems,Institute for International Research,Linfair Engineering (HK) Co Ltd, MicroNav Ltd, NICE CTI Systems UK Ltd,Northrop Grumman Corporation, PanAm International Flight Academy, ParkAir Systems AS, Raytheon Company,Raytheon Canada Ltd, Schmid TelecomAG, SELEX Sistemi Integrati, SensisCorporation, Serco IAL Ltd, SkySoftATM, Swedavia AB, Terma A/S, ThalesATM, United Business MediaInternational, WX-Systems.

1Source: Under Control, The Story of The

International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’

Associations, by Neil Vidler.


105

eurocontrol front cover · pdf fileeurocontrol front cover 27/2/08 15:44 page 1. ... group...

Documents