local single sky implementation (lssip) germany · evolution of the main national and regional /...

Year 2013 ‑ Level 1

EUROCONTROL

Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) GERMANY

LSSIP Year 2013 Germany Released Issue

FOREWORD

By

Luc Tytgat Director of Directorate Single Sky

EUROCONTROL Agency December 2013

Dear colleagues,

The Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) documents all together are considered as an important tool by the European ATM community since they provide an overall picture of how any of the ECAC States and stakeholders concerned are progressing in planning and deploying the mature elements of the European ATM Master Plan, as identified in its Level 3, namely the European Single Sky ImPlementation (ESSIP) Plan, and achieving the relevant SES derived ESSIP Objectives.

In addition, the LSSIP documents provide a high level view on how ATM is organised institutionally within the States and give for each of them a detailed organisational structure of the main ATM stakeholders, i.e. Regulator, NSA, Military, ANSPs and Airports. They also contain crucial information about the evolution of the main national and regional / FAB projects which contribute to the SES Performance Areas, the ATM Master Plan Operational Improvements and the ESSIP Objectives.

As a result of the continuous improvements and adaptations of the LSSIP process and its associated tools to respond over the years to the fast changing European ATM Environment, and thanks to the uninterrupted enhancement in the reliability and quality of information provided by States and stakeholders, the documents and their associated tools are used as a vehicle for capturing relevant information by the European Commission, the Performance Review Body (for the CAPEX analysis) and, most recently, ICAO.

The LSSIP Database is now also hosting the information and data provided by the States and stakeholders within the framework of the SESAR Interim Deployment Steering Group (IDSG) activities. A number of new functions have therefore been developed to help the LSSIP and IDSG contributors to share relevant information, thus helping them to keep consistency in reporting where applicable.

In order to avoid duplication in reporting, ICAO has recently asked EUROCONTROL to use the LSSIP Database as the platform for reporting on the deployment of their Aviation System Block Upgrade (ASBU) in the European ICAO Region’s States. The Agency will enhance its LSSIP Database to meet this ICAO requirement, whilst ensuring that workload of States and stakeholders does not increase.

The set of LSSIP 2012 information related to the national projects was used as one of the inputs to the preparation of the CAPEX Report produced by the PRU on behalf of the European Commission. The LSSIP template was slightly adapted to accommodate this new requirement. This specific use of LSSIP information will be continued.

The impact on the LSSIP tool of short and medium term developments in the European ATM field, i.e. Centralised Services, SESAR Deployment and FABs consolidation, will certainly need further reflection. An adaptation of the LSSIP deliverables will be required to better meet the needs of the ATM community to ensure proper reporting on these new European and regional developments. EUROCONTROL will now start to investigate the feasibility of developing FAB or Regional Single Sky ImPlementation documents which would complement the existing LSSIPs and would also help to monitor and report on progress of only those activities falling within the FABs related areas of work.

The expansion of the scope of work and the increasing interest of the ATM stakeholders in the LSSIP deliverables will impose States/stakeholders to address with greater attention issues such as the reliability and the quality of information provided in their LSSIP document. The Agency will facilitate the achievement of this objective by simplifying and harmonising the reporting requirements to the maximum extent possible.

I would like to thank you for the substantial effort spent on your contribution to this LSSIP document. I see this as a tangible proof of your commitment to the principles of transparency and partnership, which benefits the entire ATM community.


DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET

LSSIP for GERMANY

Infocentre Reference: 14/01/07-18

Document Identifier Edition: Year 2013

LSSIP Year 2013 GERMANY Edition Date: 02 July 2014

LSSIP Focal Point - Ralf REISER E-mail:

[email protected]

DFS, Referent Eurocontrol

LSSIP Contact Person – Adriatik Kokona E-mail: [email protected]

Unit DSS/EIPR

Status Intended for

Working Draft General Public

Draft Agency Stakeholders

Proposed Issue Restricted Audience

Released Issue

Accessible via: Internet (www.eurocontrol.int)

Path: X:\03 LSSIP\1. LSSIP States\Germany (DE)\Year 2013_V0.1_DE.doc

LINKS TO REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

1 LSSIP Guidance Material http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/guidance-material

2 ESSIP Plan Edition 2013 www.eurocontrol.int/pepr

3 ESSIP Report 2012 www.eurocontrol.int/pepr

4 STATFOR Forecasts http://www.eurocontrol.int/statfor

5 Acronyms and abbreviations http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/glossaries

6 European ATM Master Plan https://www.atmmasterplan.eu/

7 LSSIP Documents http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip

8 FABEC Performance Plan RP1/2012-2014

http://www.fabec.eu/fabec_homepage/en/Media%20Download/Publications/01_fabec_performance_plan.pdf


APPROVAL SHEET

The following authorities have approved the present issue of the LSSIP document and their signature confirms the correctness of the reported information and reflects their commitment

to implement the actions laid down in the European Implementation Plan or to indicate the reasons for deviating from this Plan.


DOCUMENT PRODUCTION

The following table shows the experts who have co-ordinated the different contributions, produced and reviewed this LSSIP Document.

Stakeholder / Organisation

Name Position Date and signature

Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office, Branch I (AFSBw, Grp I)

OTL Klaus-Dieter SCHUETTE

LSSIP Focal Point German Military

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF)

Carmen GLENSK

LSSIP Focal Point German NSA

DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH

Ralf REISER LSSIP Focal Point DFS (German FP)

EUROCONTROL Agency

Adriatik KOKONA

LSSIP Contact Person for Germany


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6

Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment ................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Geographical Scope ............................................................................................................... 7

1.1.1 International Membership ........................................................................................................ 7 1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s) ................................................................................... 7 1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation ............................................................................... 9 1.2 National Stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 9

1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s) ................................................................................................................... 11 1.2.2 ANSP(s) ................................................................................................................................ 12 1.2.3 Airports .................................................................................................................................. 17 1.2.4 Military Authorities ................................................................................................................. 18 1.2.5 Accident/incident Investigation Body .................................................................................... 21

Chapter 2 - En-route Traffic and Capacity ............................................................................................. 23 2.1 Evolution of traffic in Germany ............................................................................................. 23

2.1.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019 ...................................................................... 25 2.1.2 Performance Summer 2013 .................................................................................................. 25 2.1.3 Planning Period 2014-2019 ................................................................................................... 26 2.2 BREMEN ACC ...................................................................................................................... 27

2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019 ...................................................................... 27 2.2.2 Performance Summer 2013 .................................................................................................. 27 2.2.3 Planning Period 2014-2019 ................................................................................................... 28 2.3 LANGEN ACC ...................................................................................................................... 31

2.3.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019 ...................................................................... 31 2.3.2 Performance Summer 2013 .................................................................................................. 31 2.3.3 Planning Period 2014-2019 ................................................................................................... 32 2.4 KARLSRUHE UAC ............................................................................................................... 35

2.4.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019 ...................................................................... 35 2.4.2 Performance Summer 2013 .................................................................................................. 35 2.4.3 Planning Period 2014-2019 ................................................................................................... 36 2.5 MUNICH ACC ....................................................................................................................... 39

2.5.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019 ...................................................................... 39 2.5.2 Performance Summer 2013 .................................................................................................. 39 2.5.3 Planning Period 2014-2019 ................................................................................................... 40

Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations ........................................................................................ 42

Chapter 4 - National Projects ................................................................................................................. 45 4.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 45

4.1.1 Technical Centre Langen ...................................................................................................... 45 4.1.2 Extension of Munich ACC ..................................................................................................... 45 4.1.3 Programme iCAS .................................................................................................................. 45 4.1.4 Update of Digital Voice Switching System Munich ............................................................... 46 4.1.5 P2 Langen Control Centre .................................................................................................... 46

Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination ....................................................................................................... 47 5.1 FAB Co-ordination ................................................................................................................ 47

5.1.1 FAB Projects ......................................................................................................................... 47 5.2 Other regional coordination projects .................................................................................... 58

5.2.1 SESAR .................................................................................................................................. 59 5.2.2 A6 Consortium ....................................................................................................................... 59 5.2.3 Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe (FRAMaK) .................................................. 60 5.2.4 Closer cooperation between the Netherlands and Germany ................................................ 60

Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation ....................................................................................... 61

ANNEXES

LSSIP Year 2013 Germany 1 Released Issue

Executive Summary

State Context

Germany (DE) is a Member State of the European Union. Germany participates also in all the relevant major international organisations in the field of ATM/ANS, both civil and military.

Civil aviation, including ATS for civil and regional military air traffic in Germany falls under the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development1 (MoT, “Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung”). At times of tension or war this responsibility is to be taken over by the Federal Ministry of Defence (MoD, “Bundesministerium der Verteidigung”). MoD is nevertheless responsible at all times for ATM at military aerodromes and air defence matters and delegates responsibilities to its subordinate military entities.

The regional civil and military Air Traffic Services are integrated within the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH, the main air navigation service provider in Germany, a company organised under private law.

Military personnel released to the DFS have the same legal status as other DFS staff and are thus subject to civil safety oversight and civil certification.

The Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF, “Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung”), an independent federal body subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, acts as the NSA for Germany. BAF covers all the tasks pertaining to an NSA under the SES regulations. The NSA is fully separated from German ANS providers.

The German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU, “Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung”) is a federal agency subordinated to the MoT, responsible for the investigation of civil aircraft accidents and serious incidents within Germany.

Specific airspace blocks of the German upper airspace are served by Maastricht Upper Area Centre as established under the Maastricht Agreements by the four participating States (Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands) and Eurocontrol. Maastricht UAC, which is a NL-based ATS provider, is specifically addressed in its own LSSIP document. The German MoT and NSA participate in the Maastricht Coordination Group (MCG) and in the 4 States NSA Committee, which deal with the regulatory and supervisory aspects as regards MUAC in a highly collaborative and coordinated manner.

En-route Traffic and Capacity

The year 2013 was characterised by a traffic decrease of 1.5% compared to 2012. Mainly due to the efforts in training and employment of new controllers and supported by the traffic decrease the en-route delay (all causes) could be reduced in the third consecutive year to 0.24 minutes per flight for 2013. The reasons for ATFM delay are evenly distributed between „ATC Capacity“ (26%), „ATC Staffing“ (29%) and “Weather” (38%). The ACC with the highest share of the DFS ATFM delay were Karlsruhe UAC (43%) and Langen ACC (43%).

The STATFOR medium-term forecast for traffic growth, published in September 2013, predicts an average annual increase of between 1.2% and 3.5% for ESRA. Based on the medium term forecast, DFS expects an average annual increase of between 0.9% and 3.4% for Germany (DFS-only) during the 5 year planning cycle, with an increase of 0.4% in 2013.

The postponement of the commissioning date for the new Airport Berlin to 2015 has led to the need to retrain controllers at ACC Bremen.

Due to the decline in traffic, the staffing situation has eased in 2013. The staffing situation will improve further.

The efforts regarding enhanced civil/military co-operation continues, leading to a more efficient use of airspace by both civil and military partners.

1 For the 2013 edition of the LSSIP Report Germany decided to keep the old notation of the Ministry of Transport, Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development. Since December 2013 the new name, Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure is valid.


ESSIP Objective Implementation

The large majority of ESSIP objectives, with a network or local effect, are either completed or planned within schedule as shown in the table below. In detail 16 out of 38 objectives are completed and the majority of open items are already partially completed (5) or planned (7).

The implementation of AOM and ATC objectives by the German ATM stakeholders has continued steadily.

The STCA, AMAN and APW objectives are completed, while implementation progress in the other ATS objectives is according to the agreed schedule except MTCD which will be implemented for the German ACCs beyond 2018.

The AOP objectives for Berlin Brandenburg Airport (EDDB) will be applicable only after the opening of the airport.

AOP1.2, AOP03 and AOP05 are completed. Capacity planning at Frankfurt Airport is being updated continuously but will not be published due to confidentiality reasons.

At Frankfurt Airport AOP04.2 is planned to be completed in 2014 and at Düsseldorf Airport the planning is also in line with the ESSIP target date of 12/2017.

At the airports of Munich and Düsseldorf implementation of AOP04.1 is still delayed and planned to be finished in 2014 respectively 2017.

For the Flow and Capacity Management objectives the implementation of tactical flow management services and collaborative flight planning are completed. For the new objectives introduced in 2013 with implementation dates beyond 2015 the planning processes are about to start.

The Migration to IPv6 (COM09) for DFS is completed in accordance with the respective Implementing Rule on FMTP. The German military plans to finish the migration process until the end of 2014. The implementation of AMHS (COM10) is in plan, while the implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM (COM11) in Germany has not started yet because the objective is considered to be not mature enough.

INF04 is reported late because of the decision to establish new integrated (NOTAM + MET) internet based home briefing services in 2016 by using Eurocontrols EAD system.

Progress in the SES interoperability (ITY) objectives is on-going along the required ESSIP schedule, while the objectives concerning Data Link, Flight Message Transfer Protocol and Surveillance Performance and Interoperability are already completed or partially completed. The objective concerning Coordination and Transfer (ITY-COTR) is reported late because for the military the implementation of a ground-ground automated co-ordination process is aligned with initial operation of ASR-S. The implementation is ongoing and planned to be finished after 2014. For the objective concerning Aeronautical Data Quality (ITY-ADQ) various actions to improve the already high level of data quality in Germany are ongoing. Due to the late availability of means of compliance for the ADQ Implementing Rule Germany is unable to comply with the dates set in the regulation. Respective information has been published in the German AIP.

For objective NAV03, DFS (“late”) will start P-RNAV implementation only after the completion of an assessment of the navaid infrastructure. MIL has no plans for introducing P-RNAV at any of the aerodromes controlled by MIL ATS. The implementation of APV procedures (NAV10) is on-going according to the ESSIP schedule.

All Safety Management related objectives and all Environment objectives are reported completed.


LSSIP 2013 - Germany

* FOC Date █ Planned implementation date(see legend at the bottom of the table)

State-related ESSIP Objectives

<=

2007

20

08

2009

20

10

2011

20

12

2013

20

14

2015

20

16

2017

20

18

2019

AOM13.1 Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling

[IDP] [E] *

AOM19 Implement Advanced Airspace Management [IDP] [E] *

AOM20 Implement ATS Route Network (ARN) - Version 7 [E] *

AOM21 Implementation of Free Route Airspace [IDP] [E] *

AOP03 Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions *

ATC02.2 Implement ground based safety nets - Short Term Conflict Alert (STCA) - level 2 [E] *

ATC02.5 Implement ground based safety nets - Area Proximity Warning - level 2 [E] *

ATC02.6 Implement ground based safety nets - Minimum Safe Altitude Warning - level 2 [E] *

ATC02.7 Implement ground based safety nets - Approach Path Monitor - level 2 [E] *

ATC07.1 Implement arrival management tools [E] *

ATC12 Implement automated support for conflict detection and conformance monitoring [E] *

ATC15 Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations

[IDP] [E] *

ATC16 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 *

ATC17 Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and Transfer

[IDP] [E] *

COM09 Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks or services to the Internet Protocol (IP)

[IDP] *

COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS *

COM11 Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM *

FCM01 Implement enhanced tactical flow management services [E] *

FCM03 Implement collaborative flight planning [IDP] [E] *

FCM04 Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures - phase 1 [IDP] [E] *

FCM05 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP [IDP] [E] *

INF04 Implement integrated briefing *

ITY-ADQ Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information [E] *

ITY-AGDL Initial ATC air-ground data link services above FL-285 [IDP] [E] *

ITY-AGVCS2 Implement air-ground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195 *

ITY-COTR Implementation of ground-ground automated co-ordination processes [E] *

ITY-FMTP Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) [IDP] * ITY-SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability *NAV03 Implementation of P-RNAV [E] *

NAV10 Implement APV procedures [IDP] [E] *




SAF10 Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements *

SAF11 Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions *

SRC-CHNG Implementation of Safety Oversight of Changes to ATM by National Supervisory Authorities (NSA) *

SRC-RLMK Implement the EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirements (ESARRs) *

SRC-SLRD Safety Levels and Resolution of Deficiencies *

Airport-related ESSIP Objectives

<=

2007

20

08

2009

20

10

2011

20

12

2013

20

14

2015

20

16

2017

20

18

2019

EDDB-Berlin - Brandenburg International

AOP01.2 Implement airside capacity enhancement method and best practices based on Eurocontrol capacity and efficiency implementation manual

*

AOP04.1 Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A-SMGCS) Level1

[E] *

AOP04.2 Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A-SMGCS) Level 2 *

AOP05 Implement Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) [IDP] [E] *

ENV01 Implement Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) techniques for environmental improvements

[IDP] *

ENV02 Implement Collaborative Environmental Management (CEM) at Airports *

EDDF-Frankfurt


*


[E] *




[IDP] *


EDDH-Hamburg


[IDP] *

EDDK-Cologne - Bonn


[IDP] *

EDDL-Düsseldorf


*


[E] *




[IDP] *





EDDM-Munich


*


[E] *




[IDP] *


EDDN-Nuremberg


[IDP] *

EDDS-Stuttgart


[IDP] *

EDDV-Hannover


[IDP] *

Understanding the Table

Objective Completed No Plan

Objective Partly Completed Missing Data

Objective Planned Not Applicable (Germany does not participate in this obj.)

Late

NOTE: The year where the coloured box is placed indicates the „Implementation Completion Date“ as stated in the ESSIP for each objective. The colour-code indicates the Local progress with respect to this date.


Introduction

The Local Single Sky ImPlementation documents (LSSIPs), as an integral part of the ESSIP/LSSIP mechanism, constitute a five-year plan containing ECAC States’ actions to achieve the Implementation Objectives as set out by the ESSIP and to improve the performance of their national ATM System. The LSSIP document – Year 2013 describes the situation in the State at the end of December 2013.

The LSSIP documents are structured into 6 chapters to better differentiate the Stakeholder(s) accountable for the information contained in each of them:

Chapters 1 to 5 present the key players in the State and set the institutional and geographical scenes to help the reader understand the specifics of the State and interpret the rest of the document correctly. It also presents a short description of the main national and regional projects in which the national Stakeholders are involved.

Chapter 6 contains high-level information on progress and plans of each ESSIP Objective. The information for each ESSIP Objective is presented in boxes giving a summary of the progress and plans of implementation for each Stakeholder. The conventions used are presented at the beginning of the section.

Note: Chapter 6 is completed with a separate document called LSSIP Level 2. This document consists of a set of tables organised in line with the list of ESSIP Objectives. Each table contains all the actions planned by the four national stakeholders to achieve their respective Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) as established in the ESSIP.


Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment

1.1 Geographical Scope

1.1.1 International Membership

Germany is a Member of the following international organisations in the field of ATM:

Organisation Since

ECAC November 1955

EUROCONTROL December 1960

European Union January 1958

European Common Aviation Area June 2006

EASA September 2003

ICAO June 1956

JAA 1970

NATO May 1955

FABEC December 2012

1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s)

This LSSIP edition covers information about all German UIRs/FIRs, except Hannover UIR.

Within Hannover UIR GAT is controlled by Maastricht UAC; OAT is controlled by the DFS Unit Maastricht (CC/F-UM). A separate LSSIP Document exists for Maastricht UAC which includes the DFS Unit Maastricht.

In its role of service provider for OAT the DFS CC/F-UM unit, collocated at the Maastricht UAC shares the same ATM system and facilities (the MADAP system).

The German FIRs are: The German UIRs are:

Bremen FIR Rhein UIR Langen FIR Hannover UIR München FIR

Germany FIRs for the lower airspace are surrounded by FIRs of 9 States, namely:

Germany UIRs for the upper airspace are surrounded by UIRs of 9 States, namely:

Copenhagen FIR (Denmark) Copenhagen FIR (Denmark) Sweden FIR Sweden FIR Warsaw FIR (Poland) Warsaw FIR (Poland) Prague FIR (Czech Republic) Prague FIR (Czech Republic) Vienna FIR (Austria) Vienna FIR (Austria) Switzerland FIR Switzerland UIR Reims FIR (France) France UIR Brussels FIR (Belgium) Brussels UIR (Belgium) Amsterdam FIR (The Netherlands) Amsterdam FIR (The Netherlands)

The FIR is separated from the UIR in flight level FL245.

While the division flight level between the UAC Maastricht and the ACC Langen/ACC Bremen is FL245, the division flight level between the UAC Karlsruhe and ACC Bremen is FL285.

The UAC/ACC Munich were responsible for the control of flights in Munich FIR to FL245 and in parts of the Rhein UIR to UNL. The UAC Munich was relocated at end of 2012 to UAC Karlsruhe. The ACC Munich is responsible for the Munich FIR and part of the UIR Rhein to FL315.


DE – Lower Airspace - Chart supplied by DFS Aeronautical Information Management

DE – Upper Airspace - Chart supplied by DFS Aeronautical Information Management


1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation

The classification of airspace in Germany is depicted in the diagram below.

Chart supplied by DFS Aeronautical Information Management

1.2 National Stakeholders

The main National Stakeholders involved in ATM in Germany are:

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, BMVBS2 (MoT, “Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung”) is the State federal authority for civil aviation in Germany. The Directorate General for Civil Aviation and Aerospace (LR) within the Ministry of Transport is divided into two Directorates: LR1 – concerned with aviation law, airports and air transport policy; and LR2 – concerned with aviation safety and security, meteorology and aerospace. Out of the 5 divisions/offices which constitute LR2, LR23 – Air Navigation Services is concerned with the regulatory tasks for the air navigation services.

Federal Ministry of Defence, BMVg (MoD, “Bundesministerium der Verteidigung”). The MoD is the Military Aviation Authority of Germany. Within its overall function, MoD delegates responsibilities to its subordinate military entities.

Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office (AFSBw, “Amt für Flugsicherung der Bundeswehr”) is a federal office subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Defence (MOD). AFSBw is tasked to set the standards for the provision of military ATS and is acting as Military Supervisory Authority (MSA) for all military ATS providers in Germany. This supervisory task is executed by its Branch I.

The main military Air Navigation Service Providers in Germany are German Air Force Headquarter (GAFHQ, ”Kommando Luftwaffe”), Army Aviation School, Division Development, Concept and Material (“Heeresflieger Waffenschule, Gruppe Weiterentwicklung”) and Naval Air Command (“Marinefliegerkommando”) On their behalf the local military ATS units (TWR/APP) provide Air Traffic Services at military airfields, including the joint military/civil usage of military airfields. This includes the provision of ATS to civil and military air traffic within defined areas of responsibility around the military airfields.

2 Since December 2013 the new name, Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure is valid.


Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF, “Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung”), an independent federal body subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, acts as the NSA for Germany. BAF covers all the tasks pertaining to an NSA under the SES regulations. The NSA is fully separated from German ANS providers. It has been established as the German National Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services by Federal Act, effective from August 2009.

Federal Office of Civil Aviation - Civil Aviation Authority (LBA, “Luftfahrt-Bundesamt”). LBA has been charged by law with certain tasks in German civil aviation. Among others the LBA is responsible for the supervision of aviation industry, public transportation by air and General Aviation as well as licensing of airline transport pilots.

DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH; the main Air Navigation Service Provider in Germany. DFS is a company organised under private law, responsible for the provision of air traffic control in Germany including the regional military air traffic services.

Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU; “Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung”); a federal agency subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, responsible for the investigation of civil aircraft accidents and serious incidents within Germany.

Investigations of accidents and malfunctions involving civil and military aircraft are conducted under the custodianship of the BFU, with participation of the Director, Bundeswehr Flight Safety (GenFlSichhBw, “General Flugsicherheit in der Bundeswehr”).

German Meteorological Service (DWD, „Deutscher Wetterdienst“); a public institution responsible for the German meteorological service with partial legal capacity under the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development.

Frankfurt, Munich, Berlin Brandenburg and Düsseldorf airports are also covered in this LSSIP edition.

Civil aviation, including air traffic services for civil and en-route services for military air traffic in Germany is the responsibility of the MoT. In times of tension and war, responsibility for air traffic services is to be taken over by the MoD, which in times of peace also keeps responsibility for ATM services at military aerodromes and for air defence matters. MoT and MoD represent Germany in the EC Single Sky Committee and at the Eurocontrol Provisional Council.

The relationship between the main national stakeholders is depicted in the diagram below.

Detailed organisation charts showing roles and responsibilities of the main German aviation stakeholders (the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, the Federal Ministry of Defence, the Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services, the Federal Office of Civil Aviation - Civil Aviation Authority, the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH) are available in Annex B.


1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s)

1.2.1.1 General information

Activity in ATM: Organisation responsible

Legal Basis

Rule-making Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (MoT)

German Constitution

Safety Oversight NSA BAF – Errichtungsgesetz, 29 July 2009 (Organisational Act)

Establishment of Tolerable Safety Levels

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (MoT)

German Constitution

Safety Performance Monitoring NSA BAF – Errichtungsgesetz, 29 July 2009 (Organisational Act)

Enforcement actions in case of non-compliance with safety regulatory requirements

NSA Luftverkehrsgesetz §§ 58 ff. (Federal Aviation Act) and Luftverkehrsordnung § 43 (Regulation on Aviation)

Airspace MoT Luftverkehrsordnung § 10 (Regulation on Aviation)

Economic MoT and NSA German Constitution and BAF – Errichtungsgesetz, 29 July 2009 (Organisational Act)

Environment Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU)

German Constitution

Security MoT and Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI)

German Constitution, Luftsicherheitsgesetz (Aviation Security Act)

1.2.1.2 Regulatory Authorities

The Regulatory Authorities are:

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, BMVBS3 (MoT, “Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung”) The official website is: http://www.bmvbs.de

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF, “Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung” – German NSA) The official website is: http://www.baf.bund.de/

Federal Ministry of Defence, BMVg (MoD, “Bundesministerium der Verteidigung”) The official website is: http://www.bmvg.de

Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office, Branch I (AFSBw, Grp I, “Amt für Flugsicherung der Bundeswehr”) The official website is: http://afsbw.de

Federal Office of Civil Aviation - Civil Aviation Authority (LBA, “Luftfahrt-Bundesamt”) The official website is: http://www.lba.de

Detailed organisation charts showing roles and responsibilities of the Regulatory Authorities are available in Annex B.

Annual Report published: Y The Annual Report of the German NSA is published on the following website: http://www.baf.bund.de/DE/BAF/Publikationen/publikationen_node.html

3 Since December 2013 the new name, Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure is valid.


1.2.2 ANSP(s)

1.2.2.1 DFS, the main ANSP in Germany

Name of the ANSP: DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH

Governance: Corporatised since 01.01.1993 Ownership: 100% state-owned.

Services provided Y/N Comment

ATC en-route Y ACC Bremen, ACC Langen ACC Munich UAC Karlsruhe UIR Hannover is performed by the Eurocontrol Maastricht UAC (MUAC) based on an international treaty.

ATC approach Y All ATC approach sections are integrated in the ACCs.

ATC Aerodrome(s) Y Provided for 16 International Airports in Germany

AIS Y

CNS Y DFS is the main CNS service provider. Others are indicated in the listing below

MET N Provided by DWD (see details further below)

ATCO training Y

Others

Additional information:

Provision of services in other State(s):

Y Letters of Agreement with the neighbouring States Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland

DFS is SES certified since 30.11.2006.

The official website of DFS is: http://www.dfs.de.

The organisational chart of DFS is available in Annex B

Annual Report published: Y The Annual Report of DFS is published on the following website: http://www.dfs.de/dfs_homepage/en/Press/Publications/

1.2.2.2 Other ANSPs in Germany

The table below shows the details for the other Air Navigation Services Providers in Germany:

Provider of Air Navigation Services Regulatory Authority Governance Ownership

The Tower Company GmbH Aerodrome Control Services for 10 Regional Airports The provision of ATS-APP and CNS-Services not performed yet

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF – German NSA) Certificate originally issued by: Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development SES certified since 26.03.2007 Conditionally certified for ATS-APP and CNS-Services on 02.09.2013

The Tower Company was founded on 20 December 2005 as a private law company

100% subsidiary of DFS

Deutscher Wetterdienst DWD German Meteorological Service

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF – German NSA) Certificate originally issued by: Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development SES certified since 14.03.2007

Public institution with partial legal capacity under MoT

100% public authority


Provider of Air Navigation Services Regulatory Authority Governance Ownership

Eurocontrol Maastricht UAC Upper Area Control in Hannover UIR

The 4 States’ Regulators (BE, NL, LU, DE) Certificate originally issued by: NSA NL SES certified since 08.11.2006

Ratified international convention

Organisational part of a supra-national organisation

Austro Control GmbH Aerodrome Control Services for 10 Regional Airports

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF – German NSA) Certificate originally issued by: Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology of Austria (BMVIT) SES certified since 11.12.2006

The Austrian ANS Provider; private law company

100% state-owned (Austria)

Airbus Operations GmbH Aerodrome Control Services for Hamburg-Finkenwerder and Sylt


Private law company

100% owned by Airbus S.A.S.

Rhein-Neckar-Flugplatz GmbH Aerodrome Control Services and CNS-Services for Mannheim


Private law company

100% owned by City of Mannheim

Black Forest Airport Lahr GmbH Aerodrome Control Services and CNS-Services for Lahr The provision of the services finished on 30.09.2013


Private law company

99,3% owned by Babcock & Brown

BAN 2000 GmbH CNS-Services for Regional Airports


Private law company

24,9% per Director of the company (2), 25,1% IBB mbH, 25,1% Elektro Wöhler

DLR Gesellschaft für Raumfahranwendungen (GfR) mbH The provision of the services not performed yet

Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF - German NSA) Certificate issued by: Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF - German NSA) SES Certified since 20.02.2013

Private law company

100% subsidiary of Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V.

Note: Eurocontrol MUAC is outside the scope of this LSSIP and has its own LSSIP document.


1.2.2.3 ATC system in use

According to the European Regulation 552/2004 on the Interoperability of European Air Traffic Management Network the chapter describes the ATS Systems defined under point 3 of the regulation (systems and procedures for air traffic services, in particular flight data processing systems, surveillance data processing systems and human-machine interface systems).

DFS operates different ATS systems for each of its centres. The centres are located at Bremen, Langen, Munich and Karlsruhe and serve UAC, ACC and Approach services.

For Tower Services five ATS Systems are in use. The Tower Services are organised in five sections separating the state territory. The respective sections are named Nord, Ost, Mitte, West und Süd.

All of these ATS Systems and their complex sub-systems are in a process of constant improvement. Most systems are developed in close cooperation with a variety of different manufacturing companies. For some subsystems DFS is the manufacturer itself. Anyhow, DFS system house and the respective centre and tower branches are always closely involved in the improvement processes of the DFS ATS systems.


1.2.2.4 ANS units

The chart below shows ANS units in Germany and the respective service provider.

Chart supplied by Federal Agency for Cartography and Geodesy


Abbreviation for the chart above:

ACG Austro Control GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation, Österreich)

Airbus Airbus Operations GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

AIS-C AIS-Centre (Flugberatungszentrale)

ATS Air Traffic Services (Flugverkehrsdienste)

BAN BAN 2000 GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

CNS Communication, Navigation and Surveillance (Kommunikations-, Navigations- und Überwachungsdienste)

CC Control Centre (Kontrollzentrale)

DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

DLR GfR Gesellschaft für Raumfahrtanwendungen (GfR)mbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation) im Deutschen Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt

DWD Deutscher Wetterdienst (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

FMP Flow Management Position

FWW Flugwetterwarte

LBZ Luftfahrtberatungszentrale

MET Meteorologie (Flugwetterdienst)

MUAC Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (Maastricht Kontrollzentrale oberer Luftraum)

OAT CC Operational Air Traffic Control Centre (OAT Kontrollzentrale)

Rhein UAC Rhein Upper Area Control Centre (Karlsruhe Kontrollzentrale oberer Luftraum)

RNFG Rhein-Neckar Flugplatz GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

SIS/R Systems and Infrastructure Services/Region

TTC The Tower Company GmbH (Flugsicherungsorganisation)

TWR Tower


1.2.2.5 ACCs/UACs/APPs

The following table lists the ACCs/UACs/APPs (with associated FIRs/UIRs) in the German airspace. Note that the APP sectors are integrated into the ACCs. The figures for APP are given for the sectors responsible for the "main airports" Berlin, Düsseldorf, Frankfurt, Cologne/Bonn, Munich and en-route sectors with a high share of APP traffic (e.g. Hamburg APP). The number of sectors, as indicated in this table, is the maximum number of control sectors that can be operated simultaneously by the respective unit.

ATC Unit Number of sectors Associated FIR(s) Remarks

En-route TMA

Bremen (ACC, APP)

17 4 Bremen FIR

TMA: 4 sectors APP Berlin En-route: 3 sectors with a high share of APP traffic (Hamburg, Hannover, Bremen) The maximum configuration consisted of 18 sectors, 3 sectors were always combined.

Langen (ACC, APP)

23 12 Langen FIR

TMA: 5 sectors APP Frankfurt 2 sectors APP Stuttgart, 2 sectors APP Cologne/Bonn and 3 sectors APP Düsseldorf En-route: 3 sectors with predominantly military traffic. The maximal configuration consisted of 35 sectors.

Munich (ACC,APP)

18 4 Munich FIR

TMA: 4 sectors APP Munich En-route: 3 sectors with a high share of APP traffic (Nürnberg, Dresden, Leipzig) The maximum configuration consisted of 19 sectors, 2 sectors were always combined.

Karlsruhe (UAC)

38 - Rhein UIR The maximum configuration consisted of 36 sectors.

1.2.3 Airports

1.2.3.1 General information

Germany has a decentralised airport system. Overall, Germany’s 16 international airports account for more than 70% of all flight passengers. Among these airports, there are two hub airports, Frankfurt and Munich.

Frankfurt Airport is Germany’s main hub and is one of the three busiest airports in Europe (based upon Aircraft Movements, July 2013, Airports Council International). Since October 2011, the capacity of Frankfurt Airport has been significantly increased with a new (4th) runway.

For the Berlin area, all air traffic will flow in the future through the new Berlin Brandenburg Airport and the airports Tegel and Schönefeld will then be closed.

The most important instrument for airport planning is the Planfeststellung (planning approval procedure), issued by the authorities of the Federal States (“Bundesländer”). The Federal Government’s Airport Strategy (“Flughafenkonzept der Bundesregierung”) is based on a combination of hubs, large airports and a number of smaller airports distributed across the country. Airport capacity expansion focuses on the three major airports of Frankfurt, Munich and Berlin.

Most aerodromes in Germany are operated by private law companies with the municipal authorities holding shares in most cases, whereas the Federal States and the government have significantly withdrawn their shares in the past.


1.2.3.2 Airport(s) covered by the LSSIP

APO SLoAs are contained in the following objectives: APO, ENV, FCM05, ITY-ADQ, ITY-AGVCS2 and SAF11. In addition to the Annex B of the ESSIP Plan edition 2013, it is up to the individual State to decide which additional airports will be reported through LSSIP for those objectives.

On the basis of the criteria above, the LSSIP for Germany reports on the following airports:

- Frankfurt Airport (EDDF); official website: http://www.fraport.com/en.html

- Munich Airport (EDDM); official website: http://www.munich-airport.de/en/consumer/index.jsp

- Düsseldorf Airport (EDDL); official website: http://www.dus.com/dus_en/

- Berlin Brandenburg Airport (EDDB); official website: http://www.berlin-airport.de/en/travellers/index.php

The ownership structure of these airports is as follows Airport Name Ownership

Frankfurt Airport Fraport AG (October 2013) 31,37% State of Hesse 20,04% Stadtwerke Frankfurt am Main Holding GmbH 8,46% Deutsche Lufthansa AG 3,16% Lazard Asset Management LLC 3,06% RARE Infrastructure Limited 33,91% Shares owned by diverse shareholders

Munich Airport Flughafen München GmbH (FMG) 51% Free State of Bavaria 26% Federal Republic of Germany 23% City of Munich

Düsseldorf Airport Flughafen Düsseldorf GmbH 50% City of Düsseldorf 50% AirPort Partners GmbH

40% HOCHTIEF AirPort GmbH 40% Aer Rianta PLC 20% HOCHTIEF AirPort Capital GmbH & Co. KGaA

Berlin Brandenburg International Airport

Flughafen Berlin Brandenburg GmbH (FBB) 37% State of Berlin 37% State of Brandenburg 26% Federal Republic of Germany

Other airports when identified by the State in an applicability area of an Airport or Environment ESSIP Objective – see LSSIP Part ESSIP Objective Implementation

1.2.4 Military Authorities

The Military Authorities involved in ATM in Germany are composed of:

German Air Force Headquarter (GAFHQ, “Kommando Luftwaffe ”)

Army Aviation School, Div Development, Concept, Material; (“Heeresflieger Waffenschule, Gruppe Weiterentwicklung”)

Naval Air Command; (“Marinefliegerkommando”)

Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office (AFSBw, “Amt für Flugsicherung der Bundeswehr“);

They report to the Federal Ministry of Defence, Forces Policy I 2. Their regulatory, service provision and user role in ATM are detailed below.

The organisational chart of structure of the military ATM in Germany is available in Annex B.


1.2.4.1 Regulatory role

Regulatory framework and rule-making

4 The German Military AIP is a Supplement Volume to the German Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP)

OAT GAT

OAT and provision of service for OAT governed by national legal provisions?

Y Provision of service for GAT by the Military governed by national legal provisions?

Y

Level of such legal provision: - State Law: GE Aviation Act, para 30 - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr: ZDv 57/1) - Special ATS Directives: BesAnMilFS - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr: ZDv 56/1)

Level of such legal provision: - State Law: GE Aviation Act, para 30 - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr : ZDv 57/1) -Special ATS Directives: BesAnMilFS

Authority signing such legal provision: - State Law (GE Aviation Act, para 30): signed by the president of the Federal Republic of Germany - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr (ZDv 57/1): signed by the secretary of state of the MoD - Special ATS Directives (BesAnMilFS): signed by the Director of the Bundeswehr ATS Office (AFSBw) - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr (ZDv 56/1): signed by the secretary of state of the MoD

Authority signing such legal provision: - State Law (GE Aviation Act, para 30): signed by the president of the Federal Republic of Germany - Ministerial Regulation for the Bundeswehr (ZDv 57/1): signed by the secretary of state of the MoD - Special ATS Directives (BesAnMilFS): signed by the Director of the Bundeswehr ATS Office (AFSBw)

These provisions cover: These provisions cover:

Rules of the Air for OAT Y

Organisation of military ATS for OAT Y Organisation of military ATS for GAT Y

OAT/GAT Co-ordination Y OAT/GAT Co-ordination Y

ATCO Training Y ATCO Training Y

ATCO Licensing Y ATCO Licensing Y

ANSP Certification Y ANSP Certification Y

ANSP Supervision Y ANSP Supervision Y

Aircrew Training N ESARR applicability Y

Aircrew Licensing N

Additional Information: German Military Regulations on the provision of ATS (for OAT and GAT) cover to the widest possible extent civil regulations (ICAO, EU, Eurocontrol, National), but supplement them by purely military issues, where absolutely required. Certification process in respect to a military QMS according to EU-Regulation 550/2004 (Common requirements) for all military ANSP has begun in 2010.

Additional Information: German Military Regulations on the provision of ATS (for OAT and GAT) cover to the widest possible extent civil regulations (ICAO, EU, Eurocontrol, National), but supplement them by purely military issues, where absolutely required. Certification process in respect to a military QMS according to EU-Regulation 550/2004 (Common requirements) for all military ANSP has begun in 2010.

Means used to inform airspace users (other than military) about these provisions:

Means used to inform airspace users (other than military) about these provisions:

National AIP N National AIP N

National Military AIP Y4 National Military AIP Y

EUROCONTROL eAIP N EUROCONTROL eAIP N

Other: Military Publications (FLIP)

Internet Homepage

Y Other: Military Publications (FLIP)

Internet Homepage

Y


Oversight

1.2.4.2 Service Provision role

Military ANSP providing GAT services SES certified?

Y If YES, since: 2010 Duration of the Certificate:

4 years

Certificate issued by: AFSBw If NO, is this fact reported to the EC in accordance with SES regulations?

Additional Information: A formal SES certification is not foreseen by the military. However Germany will, as far as practicable, ensure that any military facilities open to public use or services provided by military personnel to the public, offer a level of safety that is at least as effective as that required by the essential requirements as defined in EC1108/2009. A military certification process has started in 2010. By the end of 2013 twenty-one local military ATS units (TWR/APP incl. AIM/CMS; and Airforce School of Engineering I) were certified.

OAT GAT

National oversight body for OAT: The Federal Ministry of Defence, Forces Policy I 2, has taken over the responsibility as Military Aviation Authority (MAA). The Bundeswehr ATS Office, branch I (AFSBw, Grp I) executes under the jurisdiction of the MOD the oversight function to military ATS providers.

NSA (as per SES reg. 550/2004) for GAT services provided by the military: ATS-services provided by the Bundeswehr are provided mainly for OAT and only to a minor extent to GAT. Based on EU-Regulation 550/2004, Art. 7, military service providers in Germany are thus not yet certified. Oversight function comparable to SES-standards is executed by the Bundeswehr ATS Office (AFSBw, Grp I) for ATS services (GAT and OAT) provided by the Bundeswehr. Close cooperation between this military supervisory authority and the German Civil NSA (Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung) is established by a military liaison office co-located with the a.m. civil NSA

Additional information: Equivalent to the civil NSA, the Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office, Branch I, acts as national Military Supervisory Authority (MSA)

Additional information: Equivalent to the civil NSA, the Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office, Branch I, acts as national Military Supervisory Authority (MSA)

OAT GAT

Services Provided: Services Provided:

En-Route N DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH

En-Route N

Approach/TMA Y Approach/TMA Y

Airfield/TWR/GND Y Airfield/TWR/GND Y

AIS Y AIS Y

MET Y MET Y

SAR Y SAR Y

TSA/TRA monitoring N DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH

FIS Y

Other: RAFIS, Alerting Service

Other: RAFIS, Alerting Service Y

Additional Information: Services provided at military airports and in the delegated airspace

Additional Information: Services provided at military airports and in the delegated airspace


1.2.4.3 User role

Military ATS controlled Airspace is only available at military aerodromes and in delegated airspaces in the vicinity thereof

1.2.4.4 Flexible Use of Airspace (FUA)

1.2.5 Accident/incident Investigation Body

1.2.5.1 Technical investigations

Technical investigations following accidents and/or incidents are carried out by Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU; “Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung”). The BFU is a public institution, subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, but with autonomous decision making authority, established as an independent body within the Civil Aviation System established on 01.09.1998 by Federal Statute.

Its tasks are to investigate accidents and incidents with the sole purpose of determining the causes as far as possible with the intention of preventing future accidents and incidents, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 996/2010.

Results of the investigations and statistics (or annual reports) are made public through the following website: http://www.bfu-web.de.

Within the ANSPs incidents and occurrences are investigated in the framework of their Safety Management Systems.

1.2.5.2 Collection, Evaluation & Processing of Data

Germany is an EU Member State and Directive 2003/42/EC has been transposed into national legislation:

The BFU, LBA and BAF (for ANS matters) depending on the nature of the occurrence, perform the collection, evaluation, process and storing of all information related to accidents, incidents and occurrences, as well as making this information available to the other EU States according to Directive 2003/42/EC.

IFR inside controlled airspace, Military aircraft can fly?

OAT only GAT only Both OAT and GAT X

If Military fly OAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify the available options:

Free Routing X Within specific corridors only

Within the regular (GAT) national route network X Under radar control X

Within a special OAT route system X Under radar advisory service

If Military fly GAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify existing special arrangements:

No special arrangements Exemption from Route Charges

Exemption from flow and capacity (ATFCM) measures Provision of ATC in UHF X

CNS exemptions: RVSM X 8.33 X Mode S X ACAS X

Others: CNS exemptions are specified for certain type of aircraft, or on basis of an individual exemption request (e.g. Mode S)

Military in Germany applies FUA requirements as specified in the Regulation No 2150/2005: Y

FUA Level 1 implemented: Y




In order to carry out this function, LBA and BFU use the tools developed in the frame of the programme for the “European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incidents Reporting System” (ECCAIRS). For BAF the usage of a communication software is planned in order to, at least, upload data into or, ideally, exchange data with ECCAIRS. Due to the fact that the LBA is focal point in regard of data input to ECCAIRS, it is planned to establish a data pool concerning BFU, LBA and BAF, in order to amend missing parts of information.

1.2.5.3 Civil-Military Accidents/Incidents

Investigations of accidents and malfunctions involving civil and military aircraft are conducted under the lead of the BFU, with participation of the Director, Bundeswehr Flight Safety.

If, from the view of the MoD, predominantly military interests are concerned, the BFU may in individual cases transfer the lead of the investigation to the Director, Bundeswehr Flight Safety. However, the BFU will participate in the investigation.

Further details are specified in an Administrative Agreement between the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development and the Federal Ministry of Defence.


Chapter 2 - En-route Traffic and Capacity

2.1 Evolution of traffic in Germany

The STATFOR medium term (MTF) and short term (STF) traffic forecast is based on the whole German airspace.

The traffic assumptions for target setting for the regulation period RP2 (2015 to 2019) are based on the base case scenario of the most recent available forecast from STATFOR, which was published on 30.09.2013.

Source: STATFOR MTF (September 2013)

2013

Traffic in Germany (DFS airspace of responsibility according to the statistic of the Network Manager) decreased by 0.1% during summer 2013 compared to summer 2012. During the whole year the traffic decreased by 1.5% compared to the previous year.


2014-2019

The STATFOR medium-term forecast for traffic growth, published in September 2013, predicts an average annual increase of between 1.2% and 3.5% for the ESRA region.

The STATFOR medium-term forecast predicts an average annual increase between 0.8% and 3.2% for the whole Germany airspace, with an increase of 1.7% in 2014.

This average annual increase of IFR flights predicted by STATFOR was projected on the number of flights for the DFS area of responsibility and further refined using the results of local studies and local knowledge.

Based on the medium term forecast, DFS expects an average annual increase between 0.9% and 3.4% for the DFS airspace of responsibility during the 5 year planning cycle, with an increase of only 0.8% in 2014.

A new STATFOR Medium Term Forecast (MTF) will be available in February 2014. The Performance Plan for the regulation period RP2 (2015-2019) will be based on this forecast.

An update of this forecast will be published in September 2014 and will be used to determine the capacity requirement profiles for ACCs for the next planning cycle.

It is recommended that the capacity plans follow the baseline capacity requirement profiles.

The DFS airspace of responsibility in Germany excludes the Hannover UIR (Maastricht UAC). The forecast below is related to this airspace.

Source: DFS (October 2013) The target setting process for the first SES reference period/RP1 (2012 to 2014) is based on the traffic forecast for the year 2010 related to Network Manager data. The deviations from these forecasts are shown in the figure below.

The increasing deviation between forecast and current traffic values indicates the limitations of traffic forecasts over such a long time period.


2.1.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2009-2019

The German airspace for which the DFS is responsible excludes the Hannover UIR (Maastricht UAC). All data in this section are related to this airspace.

2.1.2 Performance Summer 2013

Sum-mer

Traffic Evolution

Capacity Baseline

En-route Delay (min/flight) Capacity

gap Optimum All reasons

Without weather & special events

Plan 0.9 % 0.40

0.75 0.37

2013 0.1 % 0.27 0.15 No


2.1.3 Planning Period 2014-2019

It is recommended that the capacity plans follow the baseline capacity requirement profiles.

The planning period 2014-2018/2019 includes the first SES reference period (2012 to 2014) and the second SES reference period (2015 to 2019) of the performance regulation. As a result, the following EU en-route delay targets were defined:

For 2014 o 0.5 minutes average en-route ATFM delay per flight for the full year and for all causes, as

adopted by the European Commission

For 2015 to 2019 o 0.5 minutes, average en-route ATFM delay per flight to be reached each year of the

reference period for the full year and for all causes

The SES II Performance Scheme requires that the capacity targets of National/FAB Performance Plans shall be assessed for consistency with the European-wide performance targets. This assessment shall be based on reference values provided the capacity planning process of Eurocontrol (Regulation 691/2010, Annex III, paragraph 4). This target values are of indicative nature and are without prejudice to the assessment of the final adopted performance plans and targets in accordance with Articles 14 and 15 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 390/2013.

The local reference value derived from the EU en-route delay target was calculated top down at ANSP and ACC level by Eurocontrol. The delay target for Germany (DFS only) and the expected delay due to the capacity provided is presented in the figure below:

For summer 2014 o The optimum delay per flight en-route for Germany (DFS only) is around 0.33 min/flight -

based on the optimum delay per flight en-route per ACC and the number of flights in each ACC & Germany (DFS only).

o The expected delay per flight en-route for Germany (DFS only) in the 2014 is in the:

Summer season 0.57 min/flight and

Whole year 0.43 min/flight (according to the FABEC bottom-up target).


2.2 BREMEN ACC


Source: DFS data


Sum-mer

Traffic Evolution

Capacity Baseline




Plan 1.1% 151 (0 %) 0.05

0,17 0,14

2013 -2.6% 151 (0 %) 0.08 0.07 No

The yearly traffic decreased by 3.0%. The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement was stable at 0.1 min/flight in summer 2013. The ADM summer was lower than expected and nearly by the optimum. There no capacity deficit was observed.

Planned Measures Achieved Comments

There were not planned measures

The commissioning of the new Berlin airport BER (expansion of Schönefeld) and closure of Berlin Tegel including new airspace structure and implementation of AMAN

The commissioning is postponed provisionally to 2015

Summer 2013 performance assessment

The traffic decreased by 2.6% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity was the same as 2012. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (51%), ATC Capacity (27%) and Weather (20%).

A maximum configuration of 14 en-route sectors and 3 en-route/APP- sectors (Hamburg, Hannover) and 4 APP/TMA- sectors (Berlin) was available. Only 12 en-route sectors were opened during the whole year. The ALLER LOW sector was combined, the sectors EIDER EAST and MÜRITZ LOW only open for military exercises.



2.2.3.1 En-route delay actual performance and EU delay breakdown 2012-2019

The EU en-route delay target was broken down at ACC level by Eurocontrol. 0.7 min per flight in 2012, 0.6 min/flight in 2013, 0.5 min/flight in 2014, 0.5 min/flight for each year of the period 2015 to 2019.

The local reference value derived from the EU en-route delay target for Bremen and the expected delay due to the capacity offer is presented in the figure below.

The optimum delay per flight en-route for Bremen ACC in summer season 2014, is around 0.10 min/flight.

The expected delay per flight en-route 2014 for Bremen ACC is for the



2.2.3.2 Summer Period – 2014-2019

The planning is focused on the summer season to reflect the most demanding period of the year from a capacity perspective. This keeps consistency with the previous planning cycles.

to meet the EU yearly delay target at European level:

0.6 min per flight in 2013 (0.85 min/flight summer season – 0.3 min/flight winter season) 0.5 min per flight in 2014 (0.7 min/flight summer season – 0.3 min/flight winter season)


Capacity Plan

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Measures planned

New airspace structure for new airport Berlin BER

Implementation AMAN Berlin (2015)

FABEC AD CBA Land /

Central-West Step 1 : New & Changed

sectorisation (15.10.2015)

FABEC AD CBA Land /

Central-West Step 2 : Full

release TRA12

(08.12.2016)

iCAS-System Bremen ACC

(Winter 2018/2019) Controller Assistance Tool CATO

Development of new

airspace structure ACC

Bremen

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM Coordination procedures

(End of 2016)

Max sectors En-route&APP

17+4 (Max Config 14+4)

17+4 (Max Config

14+4)

17+4 (Max Config

14+4)

17+4 (Max Config

14+4)

17+4 (Max Config

14+4)

17+4 (Max Config

14+4)

Reference profile p.a. 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0%

Planned profile p.a. 0% -1% 2% 2% -1% -1%

Special Impacts

ILA Berlin ILA Berlin ILA Berlin

Training and Transition for

Implementation BER and CBA Land

Training and Transition for

iCAS

New Berlin airport BER

(expansion of Schönefeld) and closure of Berlin Tegel (2015)

Additional information

Planned Capacity baseline 2014: 151 entries/hour (0%)

Only 12 en-route sectors will be opened during the whole year. The ALLER LOW sector will be combined every time. The sectors EIDER EAST and MÜRITZ LOW are planned for special conditions.


2014-2019 Planning Period Outlook

The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement is expected to be close to the reference delay value in the planning period 2014-2019.

Bremen ACC still is suffering from a lack of staff in the SF North and East. In 2015 staffing situation should reach an adequate level to meet the delay target.


2.3 LANGEN ACC


Source: DFS data


Sum-mer

Traffic Evolution

Capacity Baseline




Plan 0.6% 245 (1 %) 0.25

0.60 0.46

2013 -1.3% 254 (4 %) 0.29 0.22 No

The yearly traffic decreased by 1.7%. The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement decreased from 0.9 min/flight in summer 2012 to 0.3 min/flight in summer 2013. The ADM summer is lower than expected and close to the reference value. No capacity deficit was observed.


ATFCM measures to reduce delay in SF01 in cooperation with NMOC and Reduction of staffing problems

Upgrade of P1/ATCAS system (PSS) EBG02/08 The realisation was completed successfully on 19.11.2013


The traffic decreased by 1.3% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity increased continuously in 2013. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (36%), ATC Capacity (35%) and Weather (25%).

A maximum configuration of 23 en-route sectors (including 3 sectors with predominantly military traffic) and 2 en-route/APP- sectors (Stuttgart) and 10 APP/TMA- sectors (Düsseldorf, Frankfurt, Cologne/Bonn) were opened.





The local reference value derived from the EU en-route delay target for Langen ACC and the expected delay due to the capacity offer is presented in the figure below.

The optimum delay per flight en-route for Langen ACC in summer season 2014 is around 0.20 min/flight.

The expected delay per flight en-route 2014 for Langen ACC is for the



2.3.3.2 Summer Period – 2014-2019





Capacity Plan

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Measures planned

Upgrade of P1/ATCAS system (PSS)

Upgrade of P2/ATCAS system

(PSS)

EBG03/04 (19./20.04.14)

EBG 05 (Sep EBG 06 (Dec

2014)

EBG 10 (Mar 2017)

EBG 01/07 (Nov 2017)

Reduction of staffing

problems

New P2-System

Langen ACC (Winter

2015/2016)

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures

(End of 2016)

New Sector families concept (2017)

FABEC AD South-East Phase 1 :

SWAP Step 1(13.11.2014)


CBA22 Step 1 & Full SWAP(05.03.2015)

Implementation MOSEL

Sector (2016)

FABEC IP LUX

(2017- pending)

FABEC AD South-East

Phase 3 : Full CBA22 (2018)

FABEC AD CBA Land /

Central-West Step 1 : New & changed

sectorisation (15.10.2015)

FABEC AD CBA Land /

Central-West Step 2 : Full

release TRA12

(08.12.2016)

Max sectors En-route&APP 23+12 23+12 23+12 23+13 23+13 23+13


Planned profile p.a. 0% 0% 1% 1% 2% 1%

Special Impacts

Training and Transition of

PSS

Training and Transition of P2 System

and CBA Land


PSS and MOSEL sector


PSS



Upgrade of P1/ATCAS system (PSS) is planned for sector family EDGG 03&04 (in April 2014). A reduction of capacity starts at app. 20% and the adaption of sector capacity will be done after cut-over dynamically.

During the training period beginning 5 month before the implementation no capacity reduction is expected.

Due to staffing issues reduced configurations will continue to be operated in the EBG 01 sector families.



The increase in staff will continue. This improves the staffing situation and increases the capacity gradually. The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement is expected to reach the reference values from 2016 onwards.


2.4 KARLSRUHE UAC


Source: DFS data


Sum-mer

Traffic Evolution

Capacity Baseline




Plan 20.8 % 347 (16%) 0.30

0.43 0.13

2013 17.1% 334 (12 %) 0.27 0.16 No

The yearly traffic growth is 15.2%. The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement increased from 0.1 during summer 2012 to 0.3 during summer 2013. The significant increase in traffic and the increase of the delay are due to the relocation of the upper airspace from Munich to Karlsruhe end of 2012. The ADM summer is lower than expected and in line with the reference value. No capacity deficit was observed.


Relocation of Munich Upper airspace to Karlsruhe The realisation was completed successfully on 15./16.12.2012

Positive effects of the new ATS system (P1/VAFORIT) implemented 2012

Reduction of staffing problems


The traffic grew 17.1% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity increased continuously in 2013. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (26%), ATC Capacity (23%) and Weather (39%).

A maximum configuration of 38 en-route sectors was available.





The local reference value derived from the EU en-route delay target for Karlsruhe UAC and the expected delay due to the capacity offer is presented in the figure below.

The optimum delay per flight en-route for Karlsruhe UAC in summer season 2014 is around 0.22 min/flight.

The expected delay per flight en-route 2014 for Karlsruhe UAC is for the



2.4.3.2 Summer Period – 2014-2019





Capacity Plan

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Measures planned

SENEKA

New ATS System iCAS KAR detachment VAFORIT by iCAS

(2016/2017)

Phase I Dual ATS

routes (09.01.2014)

Phase II New airspace structure SF

West (April 2015)

FABEC FRA Step 1 : WE

DCTs (2013)

FRAMaK+ Free Route

Airspace incl. Vienna

(March 2016)

FABEC FRA Step 2: H24 DCTs with

military activity(2016)

FABEC FRA Step 3: Final goal

FRA Volume (2019)

Testing extension

ED R307 (EUFI)


SWAP Step 1(13.11.2014)

FABEC AD South-East

Phase 2: CBA22 Step 1 & Full

SWAP (05.03.2015)

Implementation MOSEL

Sector (2016)

FABEC IP LUX

(2017- pending)

FABEC AD South-East Phase 3:

Full CBA22 (2018)

Positive effects of the new ATS system (P1/VAFORIT)

FABEC AD CBA Land /

Central-West Step 1: New &

changed sectorisation (15.10.2015)

FABEC AD CBA Land / Central-

West Step 2: Full release TRA12(08.12.2016)

Reduction of staffing

problems

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2: CDM procedures

(End of 2016)

FABEC XMAN Step 1 : Basic ARR MUC and

FRA (2017)


40 (Max. Config. 39)







Planned profile p.a. 1% 5% 4% 1% 4% 3%

Special Impacts

New Berlin Brandenburg

Int. Airport BER (2015)

Training and

Transition CBA Land

Training and Transition

MOSEL sector



A cross training in the new SF South is ongoing. Staffing shortfalls are possible. The sector configuration with 2 up to 3 vertical layers enable an increase of capacity due to a higher

flexibility of sector opening in the SF West. The implementation of dual ATS route in the SF West and Central due to a lower complexity will

result in an increase of capacity in this area.



The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement will be close to the reference value. A continuous capacity increase as a result of the new ATS System P1/VAFORIT is expected in the planning period.


2.5 MUNICH ACC


Source: DFS data


Summer

Traffic Evolution

Capacity Baseline




Plan -19.1 % 218 (-24 %) 0.24

0,39 0.14

2013 -28.8 % 246 (-14 %) 0.08 0.00 No

The yearly traffic decreased by 26.8%. The significant decrease in traffic is due to the relocation of the upper airspace from Munich to Karlsruhe end of 2012. The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement decreased from 0.5 minutes/flight during summer 2012 compared to 0.1 minutes/flight in summer 2013. The ADM summer 2013 was below the reference value.


Relocation of Munich Upper airspace to Karlsruhe The realisation was completed successfully on 15./16.12.2012

Implementation of C-PDLC procedure (D/-Link Karlsruhe above FL285) The realisation was completed

successfully on 01.02.2013

Implementation of the TEEGERNSEE sector instead of CHIM Low sector The realisation was completed


Re-structure airspace – FÜSSEN, ZUGSPITZE and STARNBERG sector The realisation was completed



The traffic decreased by 28.8% to last year's level. The delays were mainly due to Weather (95%), ATC Capacity (5%).

A maximum configuration of 15 en-route sectors and 3 en-route /APP- sectors (Nürnberg, Dresden and Leipzig) and 4 APP/TMA- sectors (Munich) was available.





The local reference value derived from the EU en-route delay target for Munich ACC and the expected delay due to the capacity offer is presented in the figure below.

The optimum delay per flight en-route for Munich ACC in summer season 2014 is around 0.24 min/flight.

The expected delay per flight en-route 2014 for Munich ACC is for the



2.5.3.2 Summer Period – 2014-2019


to meet the EU yearly delay target at European level: 0.6 min per flight in 2013 (0.85 min/flight summer season – 0.3 min/flight winter season) 0.5 min per flight in 2014 (0.7 min/flight summer season – 0.3 min/flight winter season)


Capacity Plan

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Measures planned

Testing extension

ED R207 (EUFI) (2014)

Implementation FMTP REV/MAC

(2015)

Integration SF North-South to

SF West (INSEL)(End of 2015)

Split of sector ALLERSBERG (West /East)

and new sector REGEN

above RDG/EGG

(2018)

Implementation iCAS Munich

(Winter 2019/2020)

Restructuring airspace – FÜSSEN,

ZUGSPITZE and

STARNBERG sector (2013)

Upgrade of P1/ATCAS

system (PSS) SF APP

(end of 2015)

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM coordination procedures

(End of 2016)

3. RWY MUC AMAN Munich

Add. Dep North & South and 3 Monitor

positions (2018/2019)


17+4 (Max. Config. 19)




19+6 19+6


Planned profile p.a. 0% 1% 2% 0% -1% 3%

Special Impacts

3. RWY MUC (2018/2019)


PSS

Training and Transition of 3.

RWY MUC

Training and Transition of iCAS System



Temporary capacity reduction to familiarization with the new structure after the relocation of the upper airspace to Karlsruhe.

Cross training of the controllers will continue to capacity in 2015.


The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement is expected to reach the reference value during planning period 2014-2019.


Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations

Recommendations issued from the ESSIP Report for 2012 applicable to Germany for all items that require corrective actions and improvements during the 2013 reporting exercise and beyond.

Number Recommendation Ownership

REC-2012-03 To ensure that all Stakeholders report the expected completion dates as defined in their National business plans.

All States

Germany has established the ESSIP/LSSIP reporting system and informs all stakeholders about the guidelines of the reporting process. (See also REC-2012-06)

REC-2012-05 To ensure correct application of LSSIP guidance material and to implement the results of mandatory LSSIP in-cycle check.

All States

The correct application of LSSIP guidance material especially in regards of the status of objectives/SLoAs is implemented and if necessary adjusted to the results of the LSSIP Expert Group dealing on this issue.

REC-2012-06 To ensure completeness of information reported in LSSIP 2013. CH, DE, DK, ES, MT, NL, NO, SI

Germany is providing complete information according to the requirements laid down in the ESSIP objectives. As a matter of continuing improvement of the reported information cases of deficiency are checked and if necessary amended.

REC-2012-15 To ensure actions for overcoming present delays in the implementation of remaining SLoAs for implementation of P-RNAV (ESSIP objective NAV03).

AL, AZ, BA, BE, BG, CY, DE, EE, ES, GE, GR, HR, HU, IT, LV, ME, MT, NO,

PT, RS, SI, UA, UK

In order to overcome deficiencies Germany has established a high level ministerial task force. The efforts for implementation of RNAV arrival and departure procedures in Germany are ongoing. The respective navaid infrastructure assessment is a prerequisite for implementation processes. The Hannover Airport will be the first candidate for implementation in 2014.

Interim Deployment Programme View


REC-2012-22 States are encouraged to speed up the AFP implementation and to schedule AFP testing with Network Manager

All States

In 2013 Germany has finished implementation of all functions required to support collaborative flight planning in DFS current ATS systems. This covers also all military aspects as DFS is an integrated service provider and as well responsible for ATS en-route service to Operational Air Traffic flights.

REC-2012-27 Airports are encouraged to establish performance committees and implement information sharing and performance reporting processes in line with A-CDM guidelines (AOP05 objective).

Airports in applicability area reported other than “completed”

All German airports in the applicability area are reported “Completed” in the actual LSSIP 2013. With the opening of the Berlin-Brandenburg airport A-CDM will be implemented.

REC-2012-28 To revise deployment plans and as much as possible speed up the implementation of CPDLC requirements

ANSPs of core area States


Data link functions are provided in accordance with the Data Link Services Implementing Rule. The respective ATS system is upgraded accordingly.

Stakeholders View


REC-2012-40 ANSPs are encouraged to publish more APV routes. All ECAC ANSPs

In general the consideration of the use of APV approach procedures is an integral part of procedure design. All international airports with APV/Baro-VNAV equipment according to ICAO Doc 8168 are using APV/Baro and/or APV/SBAS procedures. In order to overcome deficiencies Germany has established a high level ministerial task force.

FAB View


REC-2012-41 To update the FABs plans and establish a more appropriate roadmap to improve the current lack of coordination and ensure a common response to deployment needs.

FAB States

ANSP level:

The “FABEC ANSP Strategic Agenda”, contains, amongst others, all agreed FABEC initiatives, enablers and opportunities. Based on this Strategic Agenda the FABEC 5-Year-Work-Plan (5YWP) detailing all the activities, the time schedule and the required budget is developed. Both the Strategic Agenda and the 5YWP are revised twice a year. In this way, it is made sure that an agreed ANSP work plan and roadmap is available. Furthermore, a bimonthly progress report allows to assess planned against actual progress.

States level:

The DGCAs from their side issue a 3-Year-Work-Plan, taking due account of the ANSP plan (and vice versa).

REC-2012-42

The ANSPs should coordinate system deployment (including system upgrades) and capabilities implementation plans with FAB partner first, and then follow on with coordination to adjacent FABs and ANSPs.

FAB States

ANSP level:

Within FABEC:

the Standing Committee Operations is responsible for all operations activities

the Standing Committee Tech is responsible for all technical activities

These two Standing Committees address all operational and technical matters and make sure that proper coordination is done among FABEC ANSPs. Agreed initiatives, enablers and opportunities are forwarded to the Strategic Task Force (see REC-2012-41).

The coordination with adjacent FABs and ANSPs is done on a case-by-case basis if so required.

States level:

The FABEC States Airspace Committee is responsible for the


coordination with the Standing Committee Operations for all operations activities and prepares the decision-making on these topics for the FABEC Council.

Other FABEC States Committees are responsible for the coordination on harmonisation, financial and performance activities with the FABEC ANSP Standing Committees.

REC-2012-43 Ongoing work to harmonise reporting culture between States in the FAB should be continued to ensure alignment of reporting principles.

FAB States

ANSP level:

Within FABEC, the ANSP FABEC Group (AFG) is the focal point for all FABEC data and FABEC reporting. In the context of the yearly LSSIP update, the AFG proposes a common answer on the FABEC topics.

States level:

In the context of the yearly LSSIP update, the FABEC States Harmonisation and Advisory Committee coordinates a common answer on the FABEC topics to make sure that the different LSSIPs are aligned.


Chapter 4 - National Projects

4.1 Overview

The following chapter lists the top five capital expenditure projects in 2013 that Germany undertakes to improve the performance of the German ATM system.

Name Schedule Description – Scope Status Link with European Master Plan.

Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas5

Technical Centre Langen

2009-2016 See details in 4.1.1 Ongoing - -

Extension of Munich ACC


Programme iCAS 2009-2018 See details in 4.1.3 Ongoing ATC12 Positive effect on safety, capacity, cost-efficiency and environment

Update of Digital Voice Switching System Munich

2010-2015 See details in 4.1.4 Ongoing - Positive effect on cost-efficiency

P2 Langen Control Centre


4.1.1 Technical Centre Langen

Construction of the Langen technical centre, where DFS constructed a new technical centre for the set-up of ATC test and reference installations as well as the housing of the administrative computer centre.

4.1.2 Extension of Munich ACC

The extension to the Munich Control Centre building was required because of the increase in space required for the installation of the P2/ATCAS air traffic management system. This is the successor system to P1/ATCAS (P1 air traffic control automation system) in the control centres for lower airspace. The building work covers a control room with roughly 100 controller working positions, office and functional rooms for operations. In addition, two equipment rooms and two centres each for the provision of air-conditioning, cooling and electricity were fitted out.

4.1.3 Programme iCAS

Within the iCAS programme the future control centre system is developed and implemented. iCAS will in particular meet the interoperability requirements of the SES regulations.

iCAS (iTEC Centre Automation System) is the strategic future of the ATS systems in the control centres of DFS. It is designed as an ATS system for lower and upper airspace and will replace in the long term the previous generations of ATS systems (P1/ATCAS and P2 to P1/VAFORIT).

iCAS will be a joint acquisition and development of system components from Indra within the framework of iTEC International, a multinational co-operation with NATS and AENA. This makes iCAS a European project which interacts directly with the work done in SESAR Joint Undertaking for the design of future European air traffic management network.

The iCAS programme combines all projects, subprojects and individual measures for the development of the future ATS system. It controls both the actual procurement and development activities for the control centres of the DFS as well as to control the numerous bilateral and multinational cooperation activities at European level (see also chapter 5.2.4 Closer cooperation between the Netherlands and Germany).

Due to the economic climate and the downturn in traffic forecasts the iTEC deployment schedule is revised. This results in changes to the sequence and timescale of deployment.

5 Capacity, safety, cost-efficiency and environment – as defined in Recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 691/2010.


4.1.4 Update of Digital Voice Switching System Munich

As part of the MUSE project, the voice switching system in Munich is being replaced. DFS operates a voice switching system of the same type in the centres in Bremen and Karlsruhe. This system type is to be installed in all DFS control centres in the future to achieve a homogeneous system landscape through the use of one product family. By using a uniform user interface and concept, training time and expenses will decline and the conditions prepared for the transfer of services (e.g. consolidating control centres at night) and for new contingency concepts.

4.1.5 P2 Langen Control Centre

The goal of the project is the installation and commissioning of the Air Traffic Control Automation System P2 in the new control room of the Langen Control Centre. At the moment Frankfurt and Düsseldorf operate separate systems supporting the provision of air traffic services (ATS), communication (COM) and air traffic flow management (ATFM). These are to be integrated into one ATS, COM and ATFM system respectively.


Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination

5.1 FAB Co-ordination

FAB Europe Central (FABEC) consists of the following states: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and Switzerland.

The FABEC Feasibility Phase (2006-2008) led to the conclusion that FABEC is feasible. The Implementation Phase (2008-2013) demonstrated that the FABEC structure was compliant with SES regulations.

After the ratification of the FABEC Treaty by all FABEC States, FABEC formally entered into force on the 1st of June 2013. This means that FABEC is now operational.

FABEC will deliver on the goals set by SES II and as laid down in the FABEC Performance Plan – to provide capacity, avoid bottlenecks, reduce costs and emissions, make flying more efficient and ensure military mission effectiveness, while maintaining the high safety standards that exist over Europe. It will do so by developing a set of projects which are described in the next section.

5.1.1 FAB Projects

The overview table below lists all ongoing FABEC projects and indicates for each project which ANSPs and military partners are participating.

Thereafter a table details for each ongoing FABEC project:

the scope and objectives

the planning schedule

the performance statement, i.e. the contribution to the different KPAs (the SES KPAs capacity, safety, cost-efficiency, environment and the additional FABEC KPA military mission effectiveness)

the status end 2013

ANA Lux Belgoc. DFS DSNA LVNL MUAC skyguide B CH D F NL

AIM Harmonisation no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no

AIM Publication no yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no

Airspace Design CBA Land/ Central West no no yes no yes yes no no no yes no yes

Airspace Design South-East yes yes yes yes no yes yes

only in airsp. dsgn

groups

only in airsp. dsgn

groups yes yes

only in airsp. dsgn

groups

ATFCM/ASM yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

Extended Arrival Management no yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no

Free Route Airspace no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes

Horizontal Flight Efficiency via Belgo yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no

Implementation of Common Cost Management Levels I and II yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no

Planning of FABEC CNS Services yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no no no no no

FABEC projects/studies

Military partners

status December 2013Participation

Civil ANSPs


Project: AIM Harmonisation

Scope and objectives

The objective of the AIM Harmonisation project is to provide a consistent dataset for direct usage by airspace design in the (FABEC) area. The AIM Expert Team Harmonisation will:

Identify for each of the FABEC ANSPs the official national AIP database / repository; Perform a gap analysis in order to identify the delta between the available data and the data required for the

AD projects; Analyse and assess the identified repositories with respect to their compatibility with the envisaged central

database/repository (model, format and content); Validate the data, incl. identification and resolution of inconsistencies, especially in the vicinity of the border

with one Nm buffer on each site; Develop the most efficient and pragmatic proposal (concept, working methods and procedures) for the

implementation and continuous management of a common FABEC-wide AIS reference data set (Airspace and airspace geometry information, Significant points (designated points and en-route navaids), Route segment information and Aerodrome information);

Develop a FABEC MoU which clarifies the data ownership and data publication responsibility; Implement the approved proposal and make the common FABEC-wide reference data set available for

further processing (e.g. chart production for AD projects); Consider existing initiatives between FABEC partners and develop best practices.

The AIM ETH will deliver: ETH D1: Analysis and assessment of the official national AIP data repositories; ETH D2: Proposal for the implementation and continuous management of a common FABEC-wide AIS

reference data set; ETH D3: Provision of the validated FABEC-wide common data set; ETH D4: Establishment of multilateral formal agreements (within FABEC then with FABEC neighbour)

Implementation planning

The project will be implemented and finalised by end of 2016.

Initial performance statement

Capacity N/A

Safety Harmonised aeronautical information, avoiding duplications or ambiguities, significantly contributes to ATM safety.

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

FABEC wide harmonised data sets available from a single source will allow for improved flight planning.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

The overall impact is considered positive as both, civil and military partners will benefit from readily available harmonised and integrated aeronautical information.

Cost efficiency Expected: A significant positive impact on the cost efficiency of e.g. Airspace Design Projects as cross-border data becomes readily and seamlessly available

Status end December 2013

A data comparison between the respective national databases and EAD has been performed, analysed and corrected where necessary. In order to maintain all the national databases harmonised, a concept of AIM Area of Common Interest (ACI) backed by a Multinational Agreement has been endorsed by SC OPS. SC OPS agrees that a Multinational Agreement should also apply (later) to neighbouring FABEC countries.


Project: AIM Publication


The aim of the project is to facilitate a common “single source” compilation of all ATM related AIP content within FABEC, comprising both, civil and military. The proceedings of the Expert Team Synchronisation (ETS, closed 28.06.2013) and of the Expert Team on Harmonisation (ETH, ongoing) will be combined and ultimately result in an identifiable “data set entity” stored on a common platform, carrying all ATM relevant aeronautical information at FABEC level. The AIM Expert Team Publication (ETP) will:

Perform a context analysis, addressing e.g. o The relating legal background (EU, EASA, …); o ICAO and other international recommendations and requirements; o Identification of the parties involved (stakeholders); o The impact of present developments in this field (e.g. CS#.5).

Assess the relevant aeronautical information as published in National (FABEC) AIP and define a corresponding inventory. o This inventory shall include information deemed required in a (future) more dynamic AIM environment

(e.g. sector co-ordinates). o Further, requirements originating from ANSPs (e.g. related to the flight data processing systems

implemented in the Centres) and AOs shall be considered. From this inventory

o Define those parts immediately relevant to ATM; o Where deviations in the publication method exist, describe and subsequently propose required

alignments. Determine the options available in the present EAD implementation and in this context –

o Propose changes where required; o Investigate other platforms (including industry (COTS products)); o From a user perspective, prepare a System Requirements Document (SRD).

Prepare the ground for a corresponding formal agreement between all FABEC parties concerned (civil & military), formalising the processes required.




Capacity n/a

Safety

Harmonised aeronautical information, avoiding duplications or ambiguities, significantly contributes to ATM safety.

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

FABEC wide harmonised data sets available from a single source will allow for improved flight planning.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

The overall impact is considered positive as both, civil and military partners will benefit from readily available harmonised and integrated aeronautical information.

Cost efficiency Expected: A significant positive impact on the cost efficiency of e.g. Airspace Design Projects as cross-border data becomes readily and seamlessly available.


The project was launched in July 2013. The PMP v1.0 has been agreed. The boundaries between AIM Harmonisation and Publication have been clarified.


Project: Airspace Design Cross Border Area Land/Central West


The objective of the Cross Border Area (CBA) Land/Central West project is to design and implement an optimised ATS structure of the FABEC Central West area and of the North area which also includes a Cross Border Area Land.Based on known constraints in current airspace design, the objectives of the project are to: 1. Release military airspace in the south of the Netherlands, to create increased civil capacity and more direct civil

routes for the hub airports London, Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam. 2. To compensate the military airspace users, to implement a larger consolidated Cross-border exercise area to

accommodate legacy as well as fifth generation fighter training operations.


The work of CBA Land / Central West will be implemented in two steps: Step 1 – implemented by Q4 2015 This step implements the new and changed sectorisation and ATS route structures related to the Northern area and the core area of CBA Land military cross-border area over Northern Netherlands and Germany. The implementation also requires improved ASM arrangements and initial GAT route network improvements in the southern part and it will also implement the required cross-border ATM legislation, rules and procedures. Step 2 – implemented by Q4 2016 This step will be implemented at least 1 year, with a maximum of 14 months, after Step 1 and completes the full implementation of CBA Land/Central West project. It will implement the restructuring of the airspace structure in the southern part and allow full release of a MIL training area (TRA12) in the South-East of the Netherlands and the implementation of the 4th IAF for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, resulting in direct routings in the lower and upper airspace. At the same time the end state of the CBA will be implemented, including all the balconies around the CBA.


Capacity KPI Average en-route ATFM delay per controlled flight: 0.5 min./flight or less from 2017 onwards.

Safety Approved safety case.

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

KPI Percentage of route extension represented in distance flown compared to the great circle distance: no change until 2016, 5% reduction from 2017 onwards.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

KPI Published vs optimum SUA dimension: not lower than current level. KPI Percent of SUA capacity allocated: not lower than current level. KPI Training time vs airborne time: not lower than current level

Cost Efficiency Total economic cost per flight hour: unchanged until 2017, improvement afterwards.


Step 1: CBA Land Design finalised and validated Implementation planned Q4 2015

Step 2: Central West Design finalised, to be validated during Real Time Simulation in March 2014 Implementation planned Q4 2016

Step 1 is an intermediate step that is essential in reaching Step 2 (the end state). The interrelation between these steps is as such that the implementation of Step 1 needs a validated Step 2 design. There is a maximum period of 14 months in between the implementation of these steps.


Project: Airspace Design South-East


The objective of the project is to improve performance in the Nattenheim (NTM) and Diekirch (DIK) areas by an improved airspace design in the central and southern parts of the FABEC airspace (two of the original three hotspots). These areas are considered as „interface areas“ between FABEC States/ANSPs. The overall scope of the project includes the „SWAP and CBA22 packages“.


The project is implemented in three phases: Phase 1: SWAP step 1 – Implemented by Q4 2014 For the SWAP, upper air routes UN852 and UN853 are de-conflicted by swapping the directions of the traffic flows and creating parallel routes allowing segregation of climbing/descending flights. In this phase, a SWAP step 1 is implemented utilising a CDR route for the route directly north of GTQ. This route is only available during times when German MIL (TRA 305) is off. New Geneva SIDs and STARs are implemented and CBA25 is modified to allow for these changes. Modifications are made to SIDs and STARs for Brussels, Strasbourg and Basel. Changes are made to the ATS delegations between France and Switzerland, between France and Belgium, between France and Eurocontrol Maastricht and between Germany and Eurocontrol Maastricht. Phase 2: Full SWAP & CBA22 step 1 – Implemented by Q1 2015 The German TRA305/205 is modified to release part of the training area in the west for civil use. This allows the earlier implemented CDR route directly north of GTQ to become a permanent route and as such the Full SWAP is implemented. The northern part of the French TSA22 is released from France for GAF use to compensate the loss of the western part of TRA305/205. A new military training area, east of the current TSA22, for FAF use is created in Germany over the Rhine valley to compensate France. Phase 3: Full CBA22 – Implementation estimated to take place in 2018 The design modifications are extended. New airspace management and technical solutions will be introduced to allow the area to be operated as a multi-user Cross-border Area. The implementation of these changes completes the full CBA 22 solution.

Performance Case Summary

Capacity The implementation of the SE project is not expected to have any significant impact on the published capacity values for each ATC sector within the affected area.

Safety The implementation of the SE project is expected to positively influence the Separation Infringements performance indicator. The simplification of the network conflict points should reduce the number of separation infringement incidents within the affected sectors.

Environment

(Horizontal flight

efficiency)

The implementation of the SE project is expected to positively influence the horizontal flight efficiency of flights within the FABEC. The changes that the SE project makes to the network will reduce the distances flown by flights in the SE project area. The DNM analysis shows that the SE project will reduce the total number of nautical miles flown in the FABEC area by 800,000 per year. This will also have a respective positive impact on emission savings as the aircraft will use less fuel and emit less exhaust gases.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

The implementation of the SE project is expected to positively influence this Key Performance Area. The overall result indicates that the new CBA22 with its substructures will offer more capabilities for military missions requiring either very big or smaller airspace volumes. For the medium-sized mission types, the result depends very much on the necessary flight level range or required depth.

Cost Efficiency The implementation of the SE project is expected to positively benefit the users of the FABEC airspace and particularly those aircraft operating within the area of the SE project. The changes that the SE project makes to the network will reduce the distances flown by flights in the SE project area. The DNM analysis shows that this reduction in distances flown provides a direct cost saving of 7,5 M € per year to the airspace users. As the SE project has no direct impact on the ANSP cost base, the project as such does not intend to influence the Unit Rate of participating ANSPs at all.

Status end November 2013

Phases 1 and 2: The solution design is on track to be finalized in January 2014.

Phase 3: The concept development is on ongoing and will be finalised in September 2014.


Project: ATFCM/ASM


The aim of this project is to develop and implement a FABEC ASM function addressing both civil and military airspace user’s needs. The FABEC ASM function will rely on CDM only. AMC responsibilities are remaining as they currently are but AMCs should use interoperable tools and updated operational procedures to enhance data exchange/sharing and coordination between stakeholders. The project will:

contribute to and follow the general initiative to establish common principles of ASM for FABEC countries. refine a concept of operation for a FABEC ASM function and develop associated procedures and

requirements. consider the findings from the FUA Harmonisation Task. carry out a thorough analysis of the existing tools (STANLY, DIANE, LARA, MICAMS, ...) and taking on

board on-going initiatives. The project is to be implemented in an incremental approach to the FABEC ASM function concept. A stepped approach will give sufficient time to take advantage of future achievements of on-going FUA related activities (e.g. FUA Harmonisation, Booking Principles and Priority Rules (D7.1)) and to acquire the necessary confidence in and the appropriate knowledge of working methods between stakeholders. This project will achieve the following objectives in a stepped approach:

enable a FABEC airspace overview; create a set of harmonized ASM procedures (data sharing) across FABEC States; define CDM coordination procedures to provide ASM solutions.


Step 1: Provide a FABEC airspace overview and enhance the cooperation between AMCs by end of 2014: benchmark ASM daily practices that are currently in place; take into account the recommendations contained in the D7.1 document, aiming at establishing

harmonized “Booking Principles and Priority Rules”, and to use this as a basis for the establishment of harmonized procedures to enhance the current ASM, as presently contained in the current ASM Handbook;

initiate a FABEC wide coordination process between AMCs; introduce FABEC wide data sharing to enable a FABEC Airspace overview.

Step 2: Define CDM coordination procedures to provide ASM solutions by end 2016: take on board lessons learnt from step1. establish processes of cross-border coordination to provide ASM solutions.


Step 1 The main objectives of Step 1 of the FABEC ATFCM/ASM Project focus on the preparation of Step 2: analysis and description of local working methods, defining additional working methods, and set-up of an information sharing process. As such Step 1 will not deliver any performance benefits as far as it concerns the 5 KPAs contained in the FABEC Performance Plan. Step 1, however, is the necessary foundation upon which Step 2 will be built. Step 1 will not deteriorate the current ASM operational working methods of each AMC. On top of laying the basis for Step 2, Step 1 will contribute to deliver the following:

build a common understanding of ASM procedures across FABEC; create a first set of harmonized procedures (data sharing) across FABEC

States; elaborate strategy for Step 2 implementation and help mitigate risks for this

second step.

Step 2

Capacity A collaborative decision-making process and cooperation between AMCs should result in an improvement due to better use of additional capacity provided through released airspace/CDR2. Airspace management based on Civil and Military needs. Benefits expected.

Safety An improved cooperation between AMCs and the operational use of shared ASM data cross-border should optimize the utilization of airspace which would reduce the number of hotspots, complexity, or workload to be processed by the controllers and in consequence reduce the risk of incident (indirect consequence from more capacity).


Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

Through better information sharing and improved planning, there will be more opportunities for CDR2 openings and tactical re-routings resulting in a possible reduction of fuel burn and reduction of gaseous and noise emissions. Benefits expected.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

The performance of military mission effectiveness shall be maintained or improved. The indicators for the various parameters concerning MME are defined in the FABEC Mil Performance Handbook. Improvement expected.

Cost efficiency Financial benefits expected for users through a better management of available capacity as well as a better network

efficiency – notably with an increased rate of CDR2 a balance to be found in Cost Efficiency between costs generation to man

the function and a better management of airspace which reduces traffic complexity. Improvement expected.


Step 1: The concept development is on track to be finalised in March 2014.

Step 2: Not yet started.


Project: Extended Arrival Management


The XMAN/AMAN project will develop and implement a harmonised approach to arrival management in the core area of Europe because it has to rely on cross-centre and cross-border processes and procedures. The implementation of XMAN will improve and optimise arrival management operations for the major 5 airports/TMAs as well as for a number of selected intermediate airports. One of the main characteristics of the XMAN/AMAN project is the extension of the planning horizon of arrival management systems (AMAN) from the local TMA into the airspace of upstream control centres. The final extension of arrival management operations is expected to reach as far as 200 NM or even beyond, depending on the operational environment and the needs of the stakeholders. Together, these horizons will cover almost the entire FABEC airspace and, as a consequence, most of the FABEC control centres will be affected by extended AMAN operations and some of them will need to feed several arrival streams for different airports/TMAs.


The XMAN project envisages 3 implementation steps: Basic - from 2013 to 2017 The Basic Step uses the currently available systems and technologies in order to establish cross-centre arrival management in the airspace controlled by DFS, LVNL, MUAC, DSNA and NATS. Advanced - from 2013 to 2019 The Advanced Step will take into account validated SESAR results concerning Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) in order to improve the en-route part of cross-centre arrival management in the overall FABEC airspace. This step also requires enhanced data exchange between ACC/UAC in order to support a delay sharing strategy. This step has potentially an impact on all FABEC ACCs. Optimised - from 2015 to 2021 The Optimised Step will take into account further validated SESAR results and will develop a close link between arrival management and Airport-CDM, Aircraft Operators and Network Management in order to share Arrival Management (AM) information between all partners and to process and to apply Arrival Management information where needed.


Capacity Improved average punctuality: small positive effect. Better forecast for sector loads: small positive effect. Reduced controller workload: no significant effect.

Safety Improved situational awareness: small positive effect. Reduced tactical interventions: small positive effect.

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

Reduction of: Track miles and holdings: small positive effect; Fuel burn: large positive effect; CO2/NOX emissions: large positive effect.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

No impact.

Cost efficiency From ANSP point of view: large negative effect (investment cost without financial return for ANSP).


Step 1: Basic The solution design is on track to be finalised in June 2014.

Step 2: Advanced The concept development is on track to be finalised in June 2014.

Step 3: Optimised Not yet started.


Project: Free Route Airspace


The Free Route airspace (FRA) project aims to improve the FABEC airspace structure and utilisation in the upper airspace. The objective of the FRA implementation is to give users opportunities to improve the efficiency of projectable direct routes and preferred trajectories within FABEC airspace and between FABEC and neighbouring FABs. The FRA programme defines a stepped and gradual implementation approach where FABEC ACCs will develop and implement Free Route Airspace cross border and FABEC wide.


The FRA roadmap defines three major implementation steps. The project’s current main focus is on the first two steps. The concept of Step 3 is not sufficiently mature to implement as it encompasses the development and implementation of User Preferred Route.

Step 1 encompasses implementation of Free Route outside military activities. It focuses on extending the Night Network and Weekend direct routings (DCTs). Cross-border and FABEC wide implementation will be favoured. Step 2 encompasses implementation of Free Route in airspace with military activity. Where possible cross centre/border or FABEC wide implementation will be favoured too. Step 2 requires to implement and execute all levels of Flexible Use of Airspace, including booking principles and priority rules for military training areas in a harmonised way. Step 3 encompasses the development and implementation of User Preferred Route within the FABEC Free Route Airspace Volume. The deployment of SESAR deliverables for this phase is required. Steps 2 and 3 need a close coordination on FUA requirements with the ATFCM/ASM project which is in charge of the interface with the Airspace Committee FUA TF.

For DSNA and skyguide, step 1 implementations have begun in 2012 and are ongoing. For all ANSPs, step 2 implementations are foreseen until the end of 2022. Step 3 implementation is expected to begin by 2020 (dependence with the SESAR activities).


Capacity Capacity benefits are expected since it is foreseen that reduced average transit times should result in an increase in capacity. Capacity benefits may also be due to a reduced number of conflicts, fewer redirects, and the resulting impact on controller tools. Conversely, conflicts may become more complex and other or new choke points may emerge. The overall impact of FRA on sector capacity cannot be determined without simulations.

Safety No impact.

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

FRA allows airspace users to fly direct routes, thus reducing flight distance flown, with consequent savings in fuel and direct and strategic operating costs. There are environmental benefits from savings in CO2-emissions.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

No impact.

Cost efficiency Significant investments for all the involved ANSPs. The sensitivity analyses show that even with the most pessimistic scenarios of low traffic, lower benefits, delayed benefits, higher costs, low airline adoption and a low cost of distance flown, the NPV of the project remains positive.


Step 1: The concept of operations was approved in November 2013. The solution design is ongoing.

Step 2 has been described with three levels: Step 2 Level 1: implementation of FRA DCTs (RAD Appendix 4) available H24/D7 and not interfering with

AMC manageable areas (AMA) and non AMC manageable areas (NAM). Step 2 Level 2: implementation of FRA DCTs (RAD Appendix 4) potentially available H24/D7, according to

military activity, applying FUA practices. Step 2 Level 3: implementation of FABEC-wide direct routings potentially available H24/D7 according to

military activity, above a defined FL and lower where possible. The concept development is on ongoing and will be finalised by:

end 2014 for level1/2 mid 2015 for level 3 .

Step 3: Not yet started.


Project: Horizontal Flight Efficiency


The main goal is to monitor and analyse the FABEC Horizontal Flight Efficiency (HFE) KPI for RP2 in order to: double check PRU/NM results (aiming for consistency); develop FABEC expertise and independence; have tools in place for future KPIs (VFE…); support SES RP2 target reaching.

The HFE project includes: the collection of the required data (including RDPS data from FABEC ANSPs and CPR data from

EUROCONTROL); an agreement on a detailed common methodology to calculate HFE; a comprehensive analysis of the current FABEC performance with regard to HFE; the definition of the content for a monthly report; the definition of a process to handle requests for HFE calculations; the establishment of the required agreement(s).




Capacity N/A

Safety N/A

Environment

(including flight efficiency)

Improve the insight in the Horizontal Flight Efficiency.

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

N/A

Cost efficiency N/A


The project was officially launched end of November 2013.


Project: Implementation of Common Cost Management levels I and II


The objective of the Common Cost Management (CCM) project is to pave the way towards four main goals: Managing and achieving one single cost efficiency target on FABEC-level; Achieve optimum solutions on FABEC-level (not on national level) and balance all 4 KPIs (Performance

regulation); Enable cross-border-projects e.g. shifts of Service Units, bilateral negotiations not sufficient; Enhance cost efficiency (provide service more efficient).

FABEC ANSPs have defined four levels of financial cooperation of which the first two levels will be implemented by July 2015:

1. Transparency of financial data (“Open Books”/ “common reporting”) 2. Transparency of future financial data (“common planning”), Optimised decisions based on knowledge of

the other plans The already defined levels 3 and 4 (limited and unlimited common accountability) are not endorsed for implementation yet and hence outside the scope of this project. The work to be executed will enable FABEC ANSPs to:

Check if FABEC meets EC targets; Have a database to influence future KPIs; Regularly report well-defined data according to a predefined template to the process owner; Use a coherent data basis for future projects or CBAs; Increase confidence/ more transparency due to shorthanded availability of data; Share a better understanding of cost bases, revenues, unit rates and cost efficiency indicators of all

ANSPs; Enable a database for financial compensations of delegated airspaces; Give ASB proper insight in the financial situation of FABEC.


Level 1 will be ready by January 2014. Level 2 will be ready by July 2015.

Performance Contribution

Capacity N/A

Safety N/A

Environment

(including flight

efficiency)

N/A

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

N/A

Cost Efficiency The project is the baseline for future financial cooperation and hence an enabler for future benefits in Cost Efficiency without actually delivering own elements of cost saving.


The work for level 1 has been finalized. Level 2 work will be started.


Project: Planning of FABEC CNS Services


The CNS Services project develops the FABEC cooperation in the CNS domain (Communications-Navigation-Surveillance). The cooperation concept has been presented in 2012. The cooperation will focus on CNS Project and Product Management (CPPM). The proposal is to establish a FABEC CPPM function, initially under a contractual cooperation model. This does not exclude future steps for deeper integration.


An implementation plan will be developed by Q1/2014. The actual implementation decision will be taken in Q1/2014, based on a proposal for concrete action packages complemented with a CBA update.


Capacity N/A

Safety N/A

Environment

(including Flight

Efficiency)

N/A

Military Mission

Effectiveness (MME)

N/A

Cost efficiency Reduce the FABEC CNS cost by 20%


The CBA and the final report -the implementation plan- is under review. It will be presented to ASB in March 2014.

5.2 Other regional coordination projects

The following chapter lists Regional Co-ordination and Projects that Germany takes part in to improve the performance of the European ATM system

Name Schedule Description – Scope

Status Link with ESSIP Obj.

Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas6

SESAR Until 2016 ATM Research Programme under Single European Sky initiative See details in 5.2.1

Development phase is ongoing

Multiple All Key Performance Areas will be influenced

A6 Consortium Ongoing activity See details in 5.2.2

Ongoing - -

Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe (FRAMaK)

Ongoing activity See details in 5.2.3

Ongoing - All Key Performance Areas will be influenced

Cooperation between the Netherlands and Germany

Ongoing activity See details in 5.2.4

Ongoing - Positive effect on safety, capacity, cost-efficiency and environment

6 Capacity, safety, cost-efficiency and environment – as defined in Recital 2 of Regulation (EU) No 691/2010.


5.2.1 SESAR

As part of Single European Sky, SESAR (Single European Sky ATM Research, www.sesarju.eu) represents its technological dimension. This key international programme is aimed at achieving the modernization of the European ATM system by coordinating and concentrating all relevant research and development efforts in the Community. SESAR will give Europe a high-performance ATC infrastructure, one that will enable the safe and environmentally friendly development of air transport. SESAR can also be regarded as the standard-setting instrument for the common future European ATM network.

The Definition phase of SESAR delivered the ATM master plan and was finalized in 2008. The current Development phase (started 2008) will design the required new generation of technological systems, components and operational procedures as defined in the ATM Master Plan and Work Programme. Finally, the Deployment phase (starting 2014) will yield the large scale production and implementation of the new ATM infrastructure guaranteeing high performance air transport in Europe.

DFS has been a steady contributor to SESAR since the inception of the programme and is one of the 17 members of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU), which was created under Article 171 of the Treaty establishing the European Community. In addition to the contribution to a broad spectrum of R&D work packages in SESAR, DFS leads work package B called “Target Concept and Architecture Maintenance”.

German military experts were involved in certain Work Packages with military relevancy.

The scope of the “Target Concept and Architecture Maintenance Work Package” covers the maintenance and refinement of the high-level ATM. It defines and ensures the consistency of an ATM service-oriented architecture. Work package B also includes the execution of a performance analysis of the ATM Target Concept throughout SESAR development phase

5.2.2 A6 Consortium

The “A6 Group” was set up informally in 2007 between the ANSPs interested in accessing the SJU membership, i.e.:

AENA, the Spanish ANSP;

DFS, the German ANSP;

DSNA, the French ANSP;

ENAV, the Italian ANSP;

NATS, the British ANSP;

Noracon, the NORth European and Austrian CONsortium, which consists of nine members: Swedavia (Swedish airports) and eight European ANS providers: Austro Control (Austria) and the North European ANS Providers (NEAP) including AVINOR (Norway), EANS (Estonia), Finavia (Finland), IAA (Ireland), ISAVIA (Iceland), LFV (Sweden) and Naviair (Denmark).

Thus, the A6 group involves ANSPs from 7 different FABs out of 9.

After a successful cooperation for the accession to the SJU membership, it was decided to formalise the A6 Group through a Memorandum of Cooperation concluded in June 2011.

The aim of the cooperation and coordination between the 6 parties is to provide customer value through improving the ATM performance at European Network Level and increasing the pace of the Single European Sky. The main areas of cooperation are related to general fields of mutual interest (best practices, harmonised strategy…), the SESAR R&D phase and SESAR deployment phase.

The governance of the A6 Group is ensured by a Steering Board composed of CEOs. The Steering Board meets on a quarterly basis and it is supported by a Strategic Board composed of senior managers. A R&D Working Group and a Deployment Working Group were set up to organise the cooperation at expert level.

The A6 Group has very quickly become an important player and a key stakeholder of the Single European Sky. The A6 has made very significant contributions to the SESAR JU in a number of areas, such as the ATM Master Plan update.

A6 consortium leads European-wide technical activities validated and co-funded by the EC for their consistency with SES framework: ANSPs coordination for Interim Deployment Steering Group (CFP Ten-T 2011, 3,6 M€, co-funded 50%), ANSPs coordination for Interim Deployment Programme (CFP Ten-T 2012, 233,9 M€, co-funded 20%) and Advanced Flight Data Processing (CFP Ten-T 2012, 13,3 M€, co-funded 50%)


The A6 has also developed a strong relationship with the A4 (Airlines), the airports and the manufacturing industry, thus laying the groundwork for a robust and strict coordination and cooperation in the view of the upcoming SESAR deployment.

5.2.3 Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe (FRAMaK)

Following the initial introduction, in 2011, of Free Route Airspace in the areas controlled by the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung Karlsruhe Upper Area Control Centre and Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC), 298 new direct routes have been implemented on 13 Dec 2012, bringing the amount of direct, flight-planable routes in the area to a total of 656.

103 of these direct routes starting in MUAC airspace are now linked with direct routes in the Karlsruhe area, creating a large-scale free routing airspace over Belgium, most of Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

This milestone is the first tangible achievement of the “Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe” (FRAMaK) project, a programme of SESAR Solutions Demonstrations to deliver concrete, innovative solutions which generate benefits for all air transport stakeholders. In particular, FRAMaK aims to offer cross-border direct routes in the busy and complex core area of Europe, essentially doing away with inefficient route connections caused by the boundary between the areas of responsibility of MUAC and Karlsruhe for those aircraft operators taking advantage of the new, direct routes. On top of introducing direct cross-border routes, FRAMaK will also demonstrate the feasibility of user-preferred routings, allowing aircraft operators to fly the most efficient routes.

The activities of FRAMaK are already being closely coordinated with the FABEC partners to provide a seamless extension of free route airspace in the center of Europe.

The direct routes and the findings of FRAMaK will be a major input to the FABEC Free Route Airspace Programme starting in 2014

5.2.4 Closer cooperation between the Netherlands and Germany

As from March 2011 LVNL participates in the existing consortium of DFS, NATS and AENA for the development of the new Flight Data Processing System iTEC. Indra will develop and supply this system. LVNL and DFS have entered into an alliance for this purpose on the basis of a cooperation agreement. They will also jointly expand iTEC further into a complete system (iCAS) which can replace their current air traffic control systems. In 2013, LVNL and DFS have been in the process of setting up common specifications together with the manufacturer.

Furthermore a new arrival management system will support air traffic controllers in organising incoming air traffic at Schiphol Amsterdam Airport. The Advanced Arrival Management System (A-AMAN) from DFS has been adapted to the LVNL system environment and passed its functional acceptance test in December 2013. It will be put into service at the beginning of 2015.


Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation

Conventions

Two colour codes are used for each ESSIP Objective „box“:

o one colour code is used to show the Objective Scope in the Objective ID cell, and

o another colour code is used to show the Objective Progress in the State and for each national stakeholder.

Obj. ID (*) Obj. Title (By mm/yyyy of overall objective, inc non-State SloAs) Obj. Progress (**)

State’s high level progress statement State Impl. Date

REG (By:mm-yyyy) REG high level progress statement

APO. Progress (**)

APO Impl. Date

ASP (By:mm-yyyy) ASP high level progress statement

ASP. Progress (**)

ASP Impl. Date

MIL (By:mm-yyyy) MIL high level progress statement

MIL. Progress (**)

MIL Impl. Date

APO (By:mm-yyyy) APO high level progress statement

APO. Progress (**)

APO Impl. Date

(*) Objective Scope Code: (**) Objective/Stakeholder Progress Code:

ECAC Completed No Plan

EU+ Partly Completed Not Applicable

Multi-N Planned Missing Data

APT Late


AOM13.1 Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling (By:12/2018)

[IDP] [Essential] Completed

The handling of OAT over Germany, the principles and procedures are the main elements of the civil‐military integration in Germany. The achieved high degree of harmonisation of OAT and GAT is the result of nearly 20 years of co‐operative civil‐military service provision. Military ANS are subject to local APP and TWR functions and these units cooperate likewise with civil service provision. Air defence radar units cooperate with the civil service provider on well‐established and highly accepted harmonised principles and procedures. The framework of EUROAT/OATTS is mainly based upon German rules and experiences. By law BAF constitutes the regulator (NSA) for GAT and OAT in regional (en‐route) services, all aspects of regional military traffic where both organizations, BAF and AFSBw, are concerned, are handled in close coordination between them. AFSBw is the responsible authority for the ANS at military airports.

12/2013

REG (By:12-2018)

Both MoT and MoD participate in CMIC and MoD Germany is participating in the MILHAG where this topic is dealt with. DFS is responsible for OAT and GAT handling. German MoD and MoT are participating in CMIC (Civil Military Interface Committee) where this topic is dealt with from both sides. GAT and OAT are largely harmonised in Germany. Applicable regulations and procedures are laid down in the military AIP Germany.

Completed

12/2011

ASP (By:12-2018)

Common principles, rules and procedures for OAT handling and OAT/GAT interface are established. DFS is responsible for OAT and GAT handling. German MoD and MoT are participating in CMIC (Civil Military Interface Committee) where this topic is dealt with from both sides.

Completed

12/2013

MIL (By:12-2018)

Principles, rules and procedures for OAT and GAT are harmonised to the widest extent and are laid down in the German AIP and Mil AIP. The EUROCONTROL specification on EUROAT has been analysed and the relevant documents have been developed. EUROAT was implemented 3rd May 2012.

Completed

12/2012

AOM19 Implement Advanced Airspace Management (By:12/2016) [IDP]

[Essential] No Plan

DFS, as main service provider, and the German military have implemented an improved ASMA/ATFCM process as part of the civil‐military integration in Germany. Due to the fact that DFS is not using the Eurocontrol CIAM (Collaboration Interface for Airspace Managers) system the interoperability with the ADR (Airspace Data Repository) is not planned to be implemented. Therefore the status of the objective has to be set to "No Plan".

12/2015

ASP (By:12-2015)

The current UUP‐process (UUP1&2) is very limited concerning Procedure 3. As the German national protocol allows Procedure 3 continuously only. A national UUP process is applied by the German AMC for defined areas. A B2B interface between the local ASM tool and NM system is not yet available. The interface is necessary to support the process.

No Plan

12/2014

MIL (By:12-2015)

The German military support the implementation of advanced airspace management as part of the civil‐military integration in Germany and is working together with the DFS in close cooperation.

Partly Completed

12/2015

AOM20 Implement ATS Route Network (ARN) ‐ Version 7 (By:10/2013)

[Essential] Completed

The Implementation of ATS Route Network (ARN) ‐ Version 7 is completed. 10/2013 ASP (By:10-2013) The Implementation of ATS Route Network (ARN) ‐ Version 7 is completed.

Completed

10/2013

MIL (By:10-2013)

ATS Route Network (ARN) ‐ Version 7 is implemented by DFS. Therefore the objective is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐


AOM21 Implementation of Free Route Airspace (By:12/2017) [IDP]

[Essential] Planned

The implementation of Free Route Airspace is ongoing for FABEC. Civil and military stakeholders are involved, however Air Traffic Services for OAT flights in Germany were provided by DFS.

12/2017

REG (By:12-2017)

The notification of acceptance or non‐acceptance of changes is implemented within the framework of established oversight processes. Any request for change will be handled within this framework as soon as it is received from the applicant. Until then the SLoA is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2017)

The implementation of Free Route Airspace is ongoing and planned to be finished after the publication of required charts in the AIP.

Planned

12/2014

MIL (By:12-2017)

German Military is taking part in the FABEC Free Route Airspace project, however as ATS for OAT flights in Germany is provided by DFS, therefore the SLoAs concerning updates for systems, procedures and proceses are considered as "Not Applicable".

Planned

12/2017

AOP01.2 Implement airside capacity enhancement method and best practices based on Eurocontrol capacity and efficiency implementation manual (By:12/2013)

Completed

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. In Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year. A capacity planning process for BER is established and will be formalised until the opening of BER Airport.

12/2010

ASP (By:12-2011)

The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. Nevertheless the SLoAs for the ASP are completed because they are part of the DFS procedures covering airports with slot coordination. In Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2011)

The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. A capacity planning process for BER is established and will be formalised until the opening.

Not Applicable

‐


Completed

EDDF - FrankfurtIn Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year.

12/2010

ASP (By:12-2011)

In Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2011)


Completed

12/2010


Completed

EDDL - DüsseldorfIn Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year.

01/2011

ASP (By:12-2011)


Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2011)


Completed

01/2011



Completed

EDDM - MunichIn Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year. Munich Airport has a Performance Monitoring System and Key Performance Indicator System based on A‐CDM project. An action plan is being developed and continuously updated in the Performance Review Board.

12/2010

ASP (By:12-2011)


Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2011)

In Germany, it is mandatory for airports with slot coordination to be part of a local steering group in which suggestions for the hourly movements are made twice a year. Munich Airport has a Performance Monitoring System and Key Performance Indicator System based on A‐CDM project. An action plan is being developed and continuously updated in the Performance Review Board.

Completed

12/2010

AOP03 Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions (By:12/2013)

Completed

At all 16 airports where ATS is provided by DFS, Runway Safety Teams are established. DFS has also implemented the other recommendations of the EAPPRI addressed to ANSPs. For DFS and the military a cross‐check against EAPPRI 2.0 was done in 2012. Compliance was fully confirmed. All providers operating at IFR airports have been addressed to cohere with EAPPRI.

12/2009

REG (By:12-2013)

All providers operating at IFR Airports report to the NSA through their Runway Safety Teams or as a result of the work conducted by these Teams.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2013)

At all 16 airports where ATS is provided by DFS, Runway Safety Teams are established since Q1/2006. EAPPRI recommendations are implemented at aerodromes where ATS is provided by DFS. A cross‐check against EAPPRI 2.0 was done in June 2012. Compliance was fully confirmed.

Completed

12/2006

MIL (By:12-2013)

On each military aerodrome local Flight Safety Committees (Flugsicherheitsausschuss) are established, which deal with all issues in connection with flight operations on the airport. This applies also for Civil Use of Military Aerodrome along the CUMA Concept. Cross‐check against EAPPRI 2.0 was done in 2012.

Completed

12/2006

APO (By:12-2013) ‐

Completed

12/2009

AOP04.1 Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐SMGCS) Level1 (By:12/2011)

[Essential] Not Applicable

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable for BER only after the opening of BER Airport. Implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for the new BER Airport.

‐

REG (By:12-2010)

The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. Implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for the new BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2011)

For DFS the objective is completed since 04/2013. Until the opening of BER Airport the status for this objective is kept to "Not Applicable". At Schoenefeld Airport (SXF) an A‐SMGCS (Level 1) system is installed and fully operational. With the extension of the airport as the new BER Airport the capabilities will be enlarged for the additional areas.

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12-2010)

The objective becomes applicable for BER only after the opening of BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2010)


Not Applicable

‐




EDDF - FrankfurtAt Frankfurt Airport MLAT (CAPTS; operated by Fraport) and three SMR sites (operated by DFS) are installed as sensor systems. DFS and Fraport are using a combination of these sensor systems for different purposes in Surface Movement Guidance.

12/2012

REG (By:12-2010) The provision of level 1 service is under continuous oversight.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2011)

At Frankfurt Airport the sensor systems CAPTS ‐ Cooperative Area Precision Tracking System (Multilateration) and ASR sites are operational. DFS is using HITT, a system to combine the two sensor types.

Completed

06/2011

MIL (By:12-2010) The respective military aircraft are certified and mandated.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2010)

At Frankfurt Airport the sensor systems CAPTS ‐ Cooperative Area Precision Tracking System (Multilateration) and SMR sites are operational. Fraport is using FAST MS (Frankfurt Airport Surface Traffic Management System) to combine the two sensor types. FAST MS is operational as A‐SMGCS level 1 in taxi control on the apron.

Completed

12/2012


[Essential] Late

EDDL - DüsseldorfFor Duesseldorf Airport a Multilateration Radar System is intended to be installed by 12/2017. 12/2017 REG (By:12-2010) ‐

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2011)

For Duesseldorf Airport a Multilateration Radar System is intended to be installed by 12/2017.

Late

12/2017


Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2010)

For Duesseldorf Airport a Multilateration Radar System is intended to be installed by 12/2017.

Late

12/2017


[Essential] Late

EDDM - MunichAt Munich Airport the installation of the surface movement radar antennas and the system is completed. The installation of the multilateration system (ERA) is also completed. It is used as a level 1 system. The procurement of equipment for ground vehicles is planned to be finished in 05/2014.

05/2014

REG (By:12-2010) The provision of level 1 service is under continuous oversight.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2011)

At Munich Airport in cooperation with the airport operator the multilateration system is implemented in addition to the existing primary radars.

Completed

12/2009


Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2010)

At Munich Airport the installation of the surface movement radar antennas and the system is completed. The installation of the multilateration system (ERA) is also completed. It is used as a level 1 system. The procurement of equipment for ground vehicles is planned to be finished in 05/2014.

Late

05/2014

AOP04.2 Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐SMGCS) Level 2 (By:12/2017)

Not Applicable

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. Implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for the new BER Airport.

‐

REG (By:12-2017)


Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2017)

At Schoenefeld Airport (SXF) an A‐SMGCS (Level 2) system is installed. With the extension of the airport as the new BER Airport the capabilities will be enlarged for the additional areas. The implementation of A‐SMGCS Level 2 is planned for 10/2017.

Planned

10/2017

APO (By:12-2017)


Not Applicable

‐



Planned

EDDF - FrankfurtAt Frankfurt Airport the Fraport system FAST MS (Frankfurt Airport Surface Traffic Management System) is operational. FAST MS is not covering the runway system. The A‐SMGCS functionalities for the runway system fall under the responsibility of DFS. A system upgrade for warning functionality is already implemented and operational implementation is planned for 12/2014.

12/2014

REG (By:12-2017)

A‐SMGCS Level 2 implementation has been successfully approved at Frankfurt. Other airports will follow with similar approval processes. The regulatory approval was given through the regular safety assessment process. Furthermore, these systems and upgrades for them are part of the safety oversight.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2017)

At Frankfurt Airport HITT will be upgraded to A‐SMGCS level 2. Sensor systems are currently in operational use. A system upgrade for warning functionality is already implemented and operational implementation is planned for 12/2014.

Planned

12/2014

APO (By:12-2017)

At Frankfurt Airport the FAST MS (Frankfurt Airport Surface Traffic Management System) is operational and covers A‐SMGCS Level I. It is the successor of TACSYS/CAPTS.

Completed

12/2009


Planned

EDDL - DüsseldorfFor Dusseldorf Airport the implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for 12/2017. 12/2017

REG (By:12-2017)

A‐SMGCS Level 2 implementation will be approved in approval processes according to Frankfurt Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2017)

For Duesseldorf Airport the implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for 12/2017.

Planned

12/2017

APO (By:12-2017)

For Duesseldorf Airport the implementation of A‐SMGCS is planned for 12/2017.

Planned

12/2017


Completed

EDDM - MunichAt Munich Airport the multilateration system is implemented in addition to the existing primary radar. 12/2013

REG (By:12-2017)

A‐SMGCS Level 2 implementation has been approved in approval processes according to Frankfurt Airport.

Completed

12/2013

ASP (By:12-2017)

At Munich Airport in cooperation with the airport operator "Flughafen München GmbH" the multilateration system is implemented in addition to the existing primary radar.

Completed

03/2013

APO (By:12-2017) At Munich Airport the implementation of A‐SMGCS Level 2 is implemented.

Completed

03/2013

AOP05 Implement Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) (By:01/2016)

[IDP] [Essential] Not Applicable

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. At BER Airport implementation of A‐CDM is ongoing.

‐

ASP (By:01-2016)

At Schoenefeld Airport (SXF) an A‐CDM will be installed. With the extension of the airport as the new BER Airport the capabilities will be enlarged for the additional areas. For DFS the objective is planned with an overall target date of 06/2014. Until the opening of BER Airport the status for this objective is kept to "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:01-2016) The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:01-2016)

The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. At BER Airport implementation of A‐CDM is ongoing.

Not Applicable

‐




EDDF - FrankfurtAt Frankfurt Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed. 01/2013 ASP (By:01-2016) At Frankfurt Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed.

Completed

02/2011

MIL (By:01-2016)

The military uses Frankfurt Airport only in very exceptional cases, so this SLOA is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:01-2016) At Frankfurt Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed.

Completed

01/2013



EDDL - DüsseldorfAt Duesseldorf Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed. 04/2013 ASP (By:01-2016) At Duesseldorf Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed.

Completed

04/2013

MIL (By:01-2016)

The military uses Duesseldorf Airport only in very exceptional cases, so this objective is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:01-2016) At Duesseldorf Airport implementation of A‐CDM is completed.

Completed

04/2013



EDDM - MunichAt Munich Airport A‐CDM is fully operational since 7th June 2007. 06/2007 ASP (By:01-2016) At Munich Airport, Airport CDM is fully operational since 7th June 2007.

Completed

06/2007

MIL (By:01-2016)

The military uses Munich Airport only in very exceptional cases, so this SLOA is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:01-2016) At Munich Airport, Airport CDM is fully operational since 7th June 2007.

Completed

06/2007

ATC02.2 Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Short Term Conflict Alert (STCA) ‐ level 2 (By:01/2013)


STCA level 2 is effectively implemented in all German UAC/ACCs. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs. Eurocontrol specifications have the value of an AMC and, therefore, will not be made mandatory by the REG Authority. Specifications are subject to safety oversight by BAF. Any new safety significant changes to the existing system must meet the requirements of EC Regulation 1315/2007 and are assessed by BAF prior to putting into service. The integrated civil‐military DFS systems also cover the MIL SLoAs. The objective is deemed "Not Applicable" for the other MIL ATS units.

12/2009

REG (By:01-2013)

Eurocontrol specifications have the value of an AMC and, therefore, will not be made mandatory by the REG Authority. Specifications are subject to safety oversight by BAF. Any new safety significant changes to the existing system must meet the requirements of EC Regulation 1315/2007 and are assessed by BAF prior to putting into service.

Completed

12/2008

ASP (By:01-2013)

STCA level 2 is implemented in all German UAC/ACCs. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs.

Completed

12/2008

MIL (By:01-2013)

The integrated civil‐military DFS systems also cover the MIL SLoAs. The objective is deemed "Not Applicable" for the other MIL ATS units.

Not Applicable

12/2008


ATC02.5 Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Area Proximity Warning ‐level 2 (By:12/2016)


APW level 2 is implemented in all German ACCs/UACs. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs. Eurocontrol specifications have the value of an AMC and, therefore, will not be made mandatory by the REG Authority. Any new safety significant changes to the existing system must meet the requirements of EC Regulation 1315/2007 prior to putting into service. These changes to the ATM system are subject to the EC 1315/2007 regulation and the safety assessment. The verification is subject to the safety oversight. The integrated civil‐military DFS also covers all military SLoAs from the perspective of ATS provided to GAT. The objective is deemed "Not Applicable" for the other military ATS units.

12/2010

ASP (By:12-2016)

APW level 2 is implemented in all German ACCs/UACs. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs.

Completed

06/2009

MIL (By:12-2016)

Due to the civil‐military integration DFS also covers all military SLoAs from the perspective of ATS provided to GAT. The objective is deemed "Not Applicable" for the other military ATS units. For progress see DFS feedback.

Not Applicable

‐

ATC02.6 Implement ground based safety nets ‐Minimum Safe Altitude Warning ‐ level 2 (By:12/2016)

[Essential] Planned

MSAW level 2 function is under development in cooperation with the French ANSP (DSNA). It will be implemented at all German ACCs in time. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs. Any new safety significant changes to the existing system must meet the requirements of EC Regulation 1315/2007 prior to putting into service. The verification will be subject to the safety oversight. For the military a basic MSAW functionality will be available with the new ASR‐S system, however the decision how to use it has not yet been taken. Present systems will not be retrofitted.

12/2016

ASP (By:12-2016)

MSAW level 2 function is under development in cooperation with the French ANSP (DSNA). It will be implemented at all German ACCs in time. German APP units which are responsible for TMAs are integrated in the ACCs. ATCOs will be trained in time.

Planned

12/2016

MIL (By:12-2016)

A basic MSAW functionality will be available with the new ASR‐S system, however the decision how to use it has not yet been taken. Present systems will not be retrofitted.

Planned

12/2014

ATC02.7 Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Approach Path Monitor ‐level 2 (By:12/2016)

[Essential] Planned

APM function is under development. Any new safety significant changes to the existing system must meet the requirements of EC Regulation 1315/2007 prior to putting into service. The verification will be subject to the safety oversight. For the military there is no operational need for APM functions.

12/2016

ASP (By:12-2016)

APM function is under development in cooperation with the French ANSP (DSNA). While France has not decided about the implementation, Germany will implemented this function at all German ACCs in time.

Planned

12/2016

MIL (By:12-2016)

For regional ATC see ASP comment. For local ATC an APM functionality is not integrated in new ASR‐S systems due to missing operational demand. Therefore the objective is considered "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐

ATC07.1 Implement arrival management tools (By:12/2015)


AMAN provides enhanced arrival management functionalities for Frankfurt Airport and Muenchen Airport. A third AMAN system will be implemented with the opening of the new Berlin Brandenburg Airport (BER).

02/2008

ASP (By:12-2015) Same as in the overall comment.

Completed

02/2008


ATC12 Implement automated support for conflict detection and conformance monitoring (By:12/2016)

[Essential] Late

Conformance Monitoring (MONA) and Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD) are important functions of the DFS P1/VAFORIT system, which became operational in 12/2010 at UAC Karlsruhe. Implementation of MONA and MTCD in the ACCs is planned with the introduction of iCAS. The monitoring of the functions and associated ATC procedures for UAC Karlsruhe are subject to the oversight process.

01/2018

REG (By:12-2016)

The approval of the use of MTCD and associated ATC procedures for UAC Karlsruhe are completed since 2010 and subject to the oversight process. For the three ACCs with the expected completion date in 2018 the approval process will be conducted in due time.

Late

01/2018

ASP (By:12-2016)

Conformance Monitoring (MONA) and Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD) are important functions of the DFS P1/VAFORIT system, which became operational in 12/2010 at UAC Karlsruhe. Implementation of MONA and MTCD in the ACCs is planned beyond 2017 with the introduction of iCAS.

Late

P1/VAFORIT / VOLMuK / iCAS

01/2018

ATC15 Implement, in En‐Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations (By:12/2017)

[IDP] [Essential] Planned

In line with the FABEC XMAN project, it is planned to extend the planning horizon of the AMAN systems serving Frankfurt and Munich airport into upstream control centres. This will be provided by sending and processing of the AMA message. Implementations are planned to be completed by the end of 2017.

12/2017

REG (By:12-2017)

New exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures will be part of the safety oversight when they are available.

Planned

12/2017

ASP (By:12-2017)

In line with the FABEC XMAN project, it is planned to extend the planning horizon of the AMAN systems serving Frankfurt and Munich airport into upstream control centres. This will be provided by sending and processing of the AMA message. Implementations are planned to be completed by the end of 2017.

Planned

12/2017

ATC16 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 (By:12/2015)

Partly Completed

ACAS monitoring system is in place. The CAA has evidence on the status of compliance with regulatory provisions for ACAS II (TCAS 7.1) for aircraft and aircraft operators in the State of Registry under the NSA oversight. The German military is regarding the implementation of this objective with the procurement of new transport‐type aircraft. The delivery of the A 400 M starts in 2014.

12/2015

REG (By:12-2015)

The CAA has evidence on the status of compliance with regulatory provisions for ACAS II (TCAS 7.1) for aircraft and aircraft operators in the State of Registry under the NSA oversight.

Completed

12/2011

ASP (By:03-2012) ACAS monitoring system is in place.

Completed

03/2012

MIL (By:12-2015)

With the procurement of new transport‐type aircraft the objective was regarded. The new A 400 M transport aircraft will be delivered starting 2014 with a compliant ACAS equipment.

Planned

12/2015


ATC17 Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and Transfer (By:12/2018)

[IDP] [Essential]

Partly Completed

Messages to support basic procedures (PAC, COD) are implemented for communication between control towers and ACCs. P1/VAFORIT system will be upgraded to support the transfer of communication process with capable adjacent centres by introducing the transfer of communication message SDM and the electronic coordination messages. There are presently no indications for further operational benefits by introduction of new OLDI messages to support transfer of communication and electronic coordination process in Lower Airspace. Therefore upgrades of P1/ATCAS system are not planned.

12/2015

REG (By:12-2018)

Approval process will be initiated when ANSP proposes for formal acceptance.

Planned

12/2015

ASP (By:12-2018)

Messages to support basic procedures (PAC, COD) are implemented for communication between control towers and ACCs. P1/VAFORIT system will be upgraded to support the transfer of communication process with capable adjacent centres by introducing the transfer of communication message SDM and the electronic coordination messages. There are presently no indications for further operational benefits by introduction of new OLDI messages to support transfer of communication and electronic coordination process in Lower Airspace. Therefore upgrades of P1/ATCAS system are not planned.

Partly Completed

12/2015

COM09 Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks or services to the Internet Protocol (IP) (By:12/2014)

[IDP] Late

The objective and the respective SLoAs and their implementation dates have to be rewritten according to the revised FMTP Implementing Rule. The implementation of IPv6 services will be in accordance with the modified Implementing Rule on FMTP. All new applications will be using IPv6 services as a standard. For the military data networking facilities and services have been contracted out to BWI (Bundeswehr Informations‐ und Kommunikationstechnik GmbH) in regard to the Flight Information System (FSInfoSys). Migration to IPv6 is in progress or consideration in regard to other systems.

12/2014

REG (By:12-2010)

The information about the planned means & dates of compliance of the national ANSPs was send to the EC in November 2011.

Completed

11/2011

ASP (By:12-2014)

DFS has subscribed to PENS services. The implementation of IPv6 services is completed in accordance with the modified Implementing Rule on FMTP. All new applications will be using IPv6 services as a standard.

Completed

10/2013

MIL (By:12-2014)

For the military data networking facilities and services have been contracted out to BWI (Bundeswehr Informations‐ und Kommunikationstechnik GmbH) in regard to the Flight Information System (FSInfoSys). Migration to IPv6 is in progress or consideration in regard to other systems. The Bundeswehr is using PENS services and follows the respective regulations and procedures.

Late

12/2014

COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS (By:12/2014)

Partly Completed

The German COM‐Centre was upgraded to become AMHS capable and act as a national AMHS/CIDIN gateway. Conformity for basic services and associated procedures is ensured and in operational use. For the enhancement of AMHS capabilities the planning process will start in 2014. For the German military extended ATSMHS is implemented.

12/2014

ASP (By:12-2014)

The German COM‐Centre was upgraded to become AMHS capable and act as a national AMHS/CIDIN gateway. Conformity for basic services and associated procedures is ensured and in operational use. For the enhancement of AMHS capabilities the planning process will start in 2014.

Partly Completed

12/2014

MIL (By:12-2014) Extended ATSMHS is implemented.

Completed

12/2011


COM11 Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM (By:12/2020)

No Plan

The objective is considered to be not mature enough for implementation. As a result of the ETSI VoIP plug test events and from pre‐operational validation trials between European ANSPs, some EUROCAE ED documents will require further amendments. Finalised Eurocae documents can be the input for a European Standardisation Organisation to produce reference material assuring interoperability. The conclusions of these activities are seen as a prerequisite in conducting activities to achieve the ASP objectives. Depending on the outcome of the necessary underlying activities target date of 12/2020 might be feasible. Furthermore the security aspects of VoIP communication for ATM voice services are not covered in standardised format ensuring interoperability. For the military no decision on the implementation has been taken yet.

‐

REG (By:12-2018)

Due to the fact that the implementation of VoIP in ATM has not started, no actions from the NSA were required.

No Plan

‐

ASP (By:12-2020)

The objective is considered to be not mature enough for implementation. As a result of the ETSI VoIP plug test events and from pre‐operational validation trials between European ANSPs, some EUROCAE ED documents will require further amendments. Finalized Eurocae documents can be the input for a European Standardisation Organisation to produce reference material assuring interoperability. The conclusions of these activities are seen as a prerequisite in conducting activities to achieve the ASP objectives. Depending on the outcome of the necessary underlying activities target date of 12/2020 might be feasible. Furthermore the security aspects of VoIP communication for ATM voice services are not covered in standardised format ensuring interoperability. In addition, no operational requirements exist, there is no CBA for a premature implementation. Implementation can be undertaken on a case by case basis for replacements related to the system life‐cycle.

No Plan

‐

MIL (By:12-2020) A decision to implement VoIP has not yet been taken.

No Plan

‐

ENV01 Implement Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) techniques for environmental improvements (By:12/2013)

[IDP] Not Applicable

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. ‐ ASP (By:12-2013) The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2013) The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐


[IDP] Completed

EDDF - FrankfurtAt Frankfurt Airport CDO procedures are possible but most often not applicable due to heavy traffic load. 12/2011

ASP (By:12-2013)

At Frankfurt Airport CDO procedures are possible but most often not applicable due to heavy traffic load.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2013)

At Frankfurt Airport CDO procedures are possible but most often not applicable due to heavy traffic load.

Completed

12/2011


[IDP] Completed

EDDH - HamburgAt Hamburg Airport CDO procedures are published. 12/2013 ASP (By:12-2013) At Hamburg Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2013

APO (By:12-2013) At Hamburg Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2013



[IDP] Completed

EDDK - Cologne - BonnAt Cologne‐Bonn Airport CDO procedures are published. 12/2010 ASP (By:12-2013) At Cologne‐Bonn Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2013) CDO procedures are implemented at Cologne‐Bonn Airport.

Completed

12/2010


[IDP] Not Applicable

EDDL - DüsseldorfNo CDO procedures published for Duesseldorf Airport. Therefore the SLoA is considered as "Not Applicable".

‐

ASP (By:12-2013)

CDO procedures are published for, Stuttgart, Nuernberg, Hannover, Leipzig/Halle, Munich and Cologne Airport (see AIP Germany) Although CDO procedures are published, at some airports they are not used due to high traffic density.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2013)

Using CDO as descent technique is within the responsibility of the ANSP. Duesseldorf Airport is supporting the local ANSP as required. Therefore the SLoA is considered as "Not Applicable".

Not Applicable

‐


[IDP] Completed

EDDM - MunichAt Munich Airport CDO procedures are established and mainly used at night. 12/2010

ASP (By:12-2013)

At Munich Airport CDO procedures are established and mainly used at night.

Completed

07/2009

APO (By:12-2013)

At Munich Airport CDO procedures are established and mainly used at night.

Completed

12/2010


[IDP] Completed

EDDN - NurembergAt Nuernberg Airport CDO procedures are published. 12/2013 ASP (By:12-2013) At Nuernberg Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2013

APO (By:12-2013) At Nuernberg Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2013


[IDP] Completed

EDDS - StuttgartAt Stuttgart Airport CDO procedures are published. 12/2010 ASP (By:12-2013) At Stuttgart Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2013) CDO procedures are implemented at Stuttgart Airport.

Completed

12/2010


[IDP] Completed

EDDV - HannoverAt Hannover Airport CDO procedures are published. 12/2010 ASP (By:12-2013) At Hannover Airport CDO procedures are published.

Completed

12/2010

APO (By:12-2013) CDO procedures are implemented at Hannover Airport.

Completed

12/2010


ENV02 Implement Collaborative Environmental Management (CEM) at Airports (By:12/2016)

Not Applicable

EDDB - Berlin - Brandenburg InternationalThe objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. Germany has a strict federal legislation on protection against aviation noise. In this context Noise Abatement Commissions are established at airports where, inter alia, the environmental impact of air traffic procedures is being discussed. Environmental implications of aircraft operations are also part of the initial tower controller training.

‐

ASP (By:12-2016)

For DFS the objective is completed since 12/2010. Until the opening of BER Airport the status for this objective is kept to "Not Applicable". DFS, as main Service Provider, is part of the Noise Abatement Commission for Berlin airports. DFS initial tower controller training includes environmental implications of aircraft operations.

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12-2015)

In regard to a military participation at BER, once it is in use, the objective will be followed.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2016)

The objective becomes applicable after the opening of BER Airport. Respective actions will be initiated until the opening of BER Airport.

Not Applicable

‐


Completed

EDDF - FrankfurtGermany has a strict federal legislation on protection against aviation noise. In this context Noise Abatement Commissions are established at airports where, inter alia, the environmental impact of air traffic procedures is being discussed. Environmental implications of aircraft operations are also part of the initial tower controller training.

12/2012

ASP (By:12-2016)

DFS, as main Service Provider, is part of the Noise Abatement Commission for Frankfurt Airport. DFS initial tower controller training includes environmental implications of aircraft operations.

Completed

07/2007

MIL (By:12-2015) The military is neither operator nor significant user of Frankfurt Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2016)

All flights are monitored by a noise monitoring system. Reported or observed violations against the noise abatement regulations or flight tracks leaving the published arrival and departure routes are investigated by an especially established commission. Flight tracks of arriving and departing aircrafts at FRA are accessible via the internet. Main priority mitigation measures are noise emission related airport charges and a carbon accreditation scheme (mainly focussing on infrastructure and ground handling).

Completed

12/2012


Completed

EDDL - DüsseldorfGermany has a strict federal legislation on protection against aviation noise. In this context Noise Abatement Commissions are established at airports where, inter alia, the environmental impact of air traffic procedures is being discussed. Environmental implications of aircraft operations are also part of the initial tower controller training.

01/2013

ASP (By:12-2016)

DFS, as main Service Provider, is part of the Noise Abatement Commission for Duesseldorf International Airport. DFS initial tower controller training includes environmental implications of aircraft operations.

Completed

07/2007

MIL (By:12-2015) The military is neither operator nor significant user of Duesseldorf Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2016)

A noise and air quality monitoring system is installed in order to record and monitor locally significant environmental impacts such as noise, emissions and air quality. A noise and air quality modelling is realised since the mid ‐seventies respectively 1997. With implementation of A‐CDM in 2013 an additional Performance Monitoring and Key Performance Indicator System is available. All movements are permanently documented. Violations against the published arrival and departure routes are investigated by the local Air Navigation Service Provider, supported by the airport. Reports will be given to a local noise abatement commission. Landing and Take‐off Charges imply NOx charge as well as noise surcharges.

Completed

01/2013



Completed

EDDM - MunichGermany has a strict federal legislation on protection against aviation noise. In this context Noise Abatement Commissions are established at airports where, inter alia, the environmental impact of air traffic procedures is being discussed. Environmental implications of aircraft operations are also part of the initial tower controller training.

07/2007

ASP (By:12-2016)

DFS, as main Service Provider, is part of the Noise Abatement Commission for Munich Airport. DFS initial tower controller training includes environmental implications of aircraft operations.

Completed

07/2007

MIL (By:12-2015) The military is neither operator nor significant user of Munich Airport.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2016)

The flight tracks of all movements are permanently traced as regards their compliance with published arrival and departure routes, while a noise detection system is monitoring the noise level of each aircraft. All violence against the flight tracks and noise abatement law is discussed and prosecuted in an especially established noise abatement commission. CEM is established. The main mitigation measures are CDO, noise abatement procedures and airfield fuel and emissions reduction.

Completed

11/2005

FCM01 Implement enhanced tactical flow management services (By:12/2006)


The ETFMS Programme consists of 4 phases (milestones). Germany is participating in Phase 1, the adaptation of ATS systems to provide data to ETFMS. This work is currently on time: reception and processing of ATFM data and provision of information on flight activation is implemented in the STANLY System, which connects all German ACCs with the CFMU. There is an intention to provide additional data. The primary benefit will be the optimised utilisation of unused capacity through a better availability of information in the CFMU (CFMU will be able to take ATFM decisions based on actual traffic rather than planned traffic), with additional safety benefits and the reduction of costs by reduced delays. ATFM measures from the CFMU apply only for GAT, which lies in the responsibility of the DFS. In case of military flights are concerned the information will be shared by the DFS.

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2006) Same as in the overall comment.

Completed

12/2009

MIL (By:12-2001)

ATFM measures from the CFMU apply only for GAT, which lies in the responsibility of the DFS. In case of military flights are concerned the information will be shared by the DFS.

Completed

12/2001

FCM03 Implement collaborative flight planning (By:12/2015) [IDP]


All functions required to support collaborative flight planning are implemented in DFS current ATS systems. DFS is an integrated service provider and as well responsible for ATS enroute service to OAT flights. For the military IFPLID is used by FSInfoSysBw generated/formatted messages.

11/2012

ASP (By:12-2015)

All functions required to support collaborative flight planning are implemented in DFS current ATS systems.

Completed

P1/VAFORIT 11/2012

MIL (By:12-2015) IFPLID is used by FSInfoSysBw generated/formatted messages.

Completed

12/2009

FCM04 Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures ‐ phase 1 (By:12/2015)

[IDP] [Essential] No Plan

At present in Germany there are no plans to implement procedures which support STAM phase 1. ‐

REG (By:12-2015)


Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2015)

At present there are no procedures or tools implemented or planned which support STAM phase 1.

No Plan

‐


FCM05 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP (By:12/2016) [IDP]

[Essential] No Plan

Several implemmentation activities are ongoing in germany. Earliest availability of services will be achieved in 2015. The German military has not decided about implementation.

‐

REG (By:12-2016)


Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12-2016)

The automated data exchange is planned to be implemented within the DFS ADQ project. The aeronautical database is planned to migrate to AIXM 5.1 in 04/2014. Full B2B functionality is planned to be implemented in 07/2015.

Planned

07/2015

MIL (By:12-2016)

Prototype testing of support system has taken place 2013. Final decision about implementation is expected for 2014.

No Plan

‐

APO (By:12-2016)

The provision of airport slot information will be realized via EUACA (European Airport Coordination Association). The EUACA will establish a centralized platform to collect the data from coordinated airports and deliver them to DDR.

Planned

12/2016

INF04 Implement integrated briefing (By:12/2012) Late

New integrated (NOTAM + MET) internet based home briefing services will be established in 2016 by using Eurocontrol's EAD system. For the military the parts concerning AIS, ARO and ATFCM are completed. In the Bundeswehr, MET does not belong to ATM and will not become part of the integrated briefing. At military airfields also used by civil aircraft, it is not foreseen, to provide briefings to civil operators.

12/2016

ASP (By:12-2012)

New integrated (NOTAM + MET) internet based home briefing services will be established in 2016 by using Eurocontrol's EAD system.

Late

EASI Project 12/2016

MIL (By:12-2012)

For AIS, ARO and ATFCM this objective is completed. In the Bundeswehr, MET does not belong to ATM and will not become part of the integrated briefing. At military airfields also used by civil aircraft, it is not foreseen, to provide briefings to civil operators.

Completed

12/2007


ITY‐ADQ Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information (By:07/2017)

[Essential] Late

Various actions to improve the already high level of data quality in Germany are ongoing. Due to the late availability of means of compliance for the ADQ Implementing Rule Germany is unable to comply with the dates set in the regulation. Respective information has been published in the German AIP. Reassessment of data in stock by 07/2017 is seen as an issue.

07/2017

REG (By:07-2017)

ANSP, states, airports and surveyors are informed about the IR on Aeronautical Data Quality and its deadlines. An ADQ implementation project headed by DFS is ongoing. Due to the late availability of means of compliance for the ADQ Implementing Rule Germany is unable to comply with the dates set in the regulation. Respective information has been published in the German AIP. The reassessment of stock data by 2017 is seen as an issue.

Late

07/2017

ASP (By:07-2017)

The ADQ implementation project in DFS is ongoing. Due to the late availability of means of compliance for the ADQ Implementing Rule DFS is unable to comply with the dates set in the regulation. Respective information has been published in the German AIP.

Late

ADQ Project 07/2017

MIL (By:07-2017)

A generic formal arrangement between AFSBw and DFS is established. Due to the late availability of means of compliance for the ADQ Implementing Rule the German military is unable to comply with the dates set in the regulation. The Bundeswehr implemented a QMS that understands the ISO demands as a basic level entry. A security management system is also available. The Safety Objectives are under development. A programme to ensure competency of personnel involved in handling of aeronautical data is in place.

Late

07/2017

APO (By:07-2017)

Frankfurt Airport, Munich Airport, Duesseldorf Airport and Berlin Brandenburg Airport have already started to work on the ADQ subject. The German Airports Association (ADV) and the Association of Regional Airports (IDRF) have created a task force to deal with the requirements of the ADQ Implementing Rule. IT software is under development as basis for information provision at Frankfurt and Munich.

Late

07/2017

ITY‐AGDL Initial ATC air‐ground data link services above FL‐285 (By:02/2015) [IDP]


Data link functions are provided in accordance with DLS IR. The respective ATS system is upgraded accordingly.

02/2013

REG (By:02-2015)

ANSPs within the area of responsibility of the BAF (German NSA) are informed about new applicable regulations. Information about the implementation status is part of the national oversight process.

Completed

02/2013

ASP (By:02-2015)

Data link functions are provided in accordance with DLS IR in Karlsruhe UAC. Training programs and operations manuals are available and in use.

Completed

12/2012

MIL (By:-)

Systems procurement by the military differs from the civil stakeholders, in particular as regards budgetary constraints, political decisions, longer procurement cycles and no fleet management, enabling the military to buy COTS products. These shortcomings may cause delays. According Art 3, para 5, of EU 29/2009 German MoD decided to equip new transport aircraft A 400 M with AGDL, however VDL Mode 2 Standard, according Annexx 4, Part B will be available with system upgrade SOC 3 in 2019.

Completed

02/2013


ITY‐AGVCS2 Implement air‐ground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195 (By:12/2020)

Planned

The implementation of air‐ground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195 in Germany is ongoing and planned to be finished until the end of 2018.

12/2018

REG (By:12-2018)

Following Annex II of Commission Regulation (EU) No 677/2011 ‐The radio frequency fucntion‐, Part A, Germany has nominated the NSA as the national frequency manager. The NSA assures that aeronautical frequency assignments are made, modified and published in accordance with EU regulations. The correct an efficient usage is ensured as well.

Planned

12/2018

ASP (By:12-2018)

DFS plans to finish the implementation of air‐ground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195 until 12/2018.

Planned

12/2018

MIL (By:12-2020)

New generation of military aircraft, e.g. transport aircraft A 400 M, rollout planned 2014, will be equipped with 8,33 kHz equipment.

Planned

12/2017

APO (By:12-2018)

The SLoAs AOP01 and AOP02 are considered as "Not Applicable" for the airports because frequency management falls under the responsibility of the German ANSP and for the equipment of vehicles relevant airport areas are strictly restricted to vehicles that are properly equipped. The respective personnel is trained according to the requirements. All personnel operating aviation radios hold Radio telephony certificates as it is mandatory in Germany.

Completed

01/2012

ITY‐COTR Implementation of ground‐ground automated co‐ordination processes (By:02/2015)

[Essential] Late

FDP systems capable of providing information required for display, processing and compilation of exchanged system information are implemented at all DFS Control Centres. OLDI messages ABI and ACT/ are in operational use. The messages REV and MAC are technically available. Stepwise introduction will be achieved in cooperation between adjacent ATC units. Due to the existing civil‐military integration flight data BFD/CFD is only provided for information purposes to air defence units. The data link supporting OLDI messages LOF/NAN are implemented. For the regulator the service providers are responsible for developing safety assessments and actions are subject to the regulatory safety oversight. For the military the implementation of a ground‐ground automated co‐ordination process is aligned with initial operation of ASR‐S. The implementation is ongoing and planned to be finished after 2014.

12/2014

REG (By:12-2012)

Service providers are responsible for developing safety assessments. Inspection is part of the regulatory safety oversight.

Completed

12/2010

ASP (By:02-2015)

FDP systems capable of providing information required for display, processing and compilation of exchanged system information are implemented at all DFS Control Centres. OLDI messages ABI and ACT/ are in operational use. The messages REV and MAC are technically available. Stepwise introduction will be achieved in cooperation between adjacent ATC units. Due to the existing civil‐military integration flight data BFD/CFD is only provided for information purposes to air defence units. The data link supporting OLDI messages LOF/NAN are implemented.

Completed

12/2012

MIL (By:12-2012)

With the rollout of ASR‐S military ATS units will be able to send ACT messages to DFS centres according to OLDI standards. Initially military TWR connected to Bremen ACC are planned for ground‐ground automated coordination by end of 2014. Military TWR connected to ACC Langen and Munich will follow 2014 ff. The decision on how to implement the Basic Flight Data process is still ongoing.

Late

12/2014

ITY‐FMTP Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) (By:12/2014)

[IDP]

Partly Completed

The German implementation of FMTP is ongoing and the relevant oversight processes are already established. All connections within Germany use FMTP IPv4.

12/2014

REG (By:12-2014)

Usage and compliance will be checked in the frame of the established oversight process/review. All connections within Germany use FMTP IPv4.

Partly Completed

12/2014

ASP (By:12-2014) Implementation of FMTP on IPv4 is completed, upgrade to IPv6 is ongoing.

Partly Completed

12/2014

MIL (By:12-2014) FMTP will be implemented further to procurement of ASR‐S.

Planned

12/2014


ITY‐SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability (By:12/2019)

Partly Completed

The implementation of the requirements derived from Regulation (EU) No 1207/2011 is ongoing. The conduction of safety assessments for changes is already part of the DFS Safety Management System and training programmes are currently updated. For the NSA the acceptance of safety assessments for changes is part of the oversight process.

12/2014

REG (By:12-2013)

The acceptance of safety assessments for changes is part of the oversight process.

Completed

12/2012

ASP (By:02-2015)

The implementation of the requirements derived from Regulation (EU) No 1207/2011 is completed. The conduction of safety assessments for changes is part of the DFS Safety Management System and training programmes are updated.

Completed

12/2013

MIL (By:12-2019)

Most of the military aircraft are equipped with Mode S Elementary Surveillance. An exemption regulation is agreed with German NSA. A list of non‐compliant aircraft is updated regularly.

Partly Completed

12/2014

NAV03 Implementation of P‐RNAV (By:12/2012)

[Essential] Late

DFS starts RNAV 1 implementation after completion of navaid infrastructure assessment. The first airport will be Hannover Airport. The accreditation of database suppliers and the quality assurance of published Navigation Data fall under the responsibility of EASA. There are no military aerodromes with P‐RNAV procedures. Only aircraft of the MOD special air transport wing (Flugbereitschaft BMVg) are equipped with RNAV equipment. Respective aircrews are trained in RNAV TMA procedures.

12/2014

REG (By:01-2005)

The accreditation of database suppliers and the quality assurance of published Navigation Data fall under the responsibility of EASA. The EASA has the oversight over EGNOS effective from 7th November 2012.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2012)

DFS starts RNAV 1 implementation after completion of navaid infrastructure assessment. The first airport will be Hannover Airport.

Late

12/2014

MIL (By:12-2012)

There are no military aerodromes with P‐RNAV procedures. Only aircraft of the MoD special air transport wing (Flugbereitschaft BMVg) are equipped with RNAV equipment. Respective aircrews are trained in RNAV TMA procedures.

Not Applicable

‐

NAV10 Implement APV procedures (By:12/2016) [IDP]

[Essential] Planned

APV/Baro and/or APV/SBAS procedures are published and implemented in accordance with ICAO Assembly resolution A37‐11. There is no military SBAS service provided at military aerodromes. With the procurement of new aircraft, this SLOA will be regarded.

04/2016

REG (By:04-2016)

Germany has published relevant regulatory material on APV procedures for aircraft operators.

Completed

04/2011

ASP (By:12-2016)

APV/Baro and/or APV/SBAS procedures are published and implemented in accordance with ICAO Assembly resolution A37‐11.

Completed

12/2010

MIL (By:12-2016)

There is no military SBAS service provided at military aerodromes. With the procurement of new aircraft, this SLOA will be regarded.

Planned

04/2016


SAF10 Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements (By:12/2011)

Completed

Regarding the DFS as main service provider, the relevant parts of the European Action Plan for Airspace Infringement Risk Reduction were examined. The recommended and proposed actions which are considered as appropriate are covered by existing procedures and measures. Their implementation is monitored and documented in a data base. The German Mandatory Reporting System provides for the reduction of risks to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements. For the military the recommended and proposed actions of the EAP AIRR are implemented, except for an automated area proximity warning function.

12/2011

REG (By:12-2011)

The existing German Mandatory Reporting System provides for this. Verification is done by continuous monitoring of the reports and regular meetings with the stakeholders.

Completed

12/2009

ASP (By:12-2011)

Regarding the DFS as main service provider, the relevant parts of the European Action Plan for Airspace Infringement Risk Reduction were examined. The recommended and proposed actions which are considered as appropriate are covered by existing procedures and measures. Their implementation is monitored and documented in a data base.

Completed

12/2011

MIL (By:12-2011)

For the military the recommended and proposed actions of the EAP AIRR are implemented, except for an automated area proximity warning function.

Completed

12/2009

SAF11 Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions (By:01/2018)

Completed

The required actions for the improvement of runway safety by preventing runway excursions are considered completed for DFS and the reported airports.

12/2013

REG (By:01-2018)

The required actions for the improvement of runway safety by preventing runway excursions have been finished by 12/2013.

Completed

12/2013

ASP (By:12-2014)

Regarding the DFS as main service provider, the European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Excursions (EAPPRE) has been examined. The relevant recommendations in section 3 are covered by existing procedures and measures (e.g. Local Runway Safety Teams; adherence to ICAO provisions; Safety Training and Briefings). Their implementation is monitored and documented in a data base.

Completed

12/2013

MIL (By:01-2018)

The objective is considered as "Not Applicable" because the European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Excursions is not mandatory for the Military. Nevertheless military aerodromes have a military flight safety committee and the practices and procedures relating to runway operations are in compliance with ICAO provisions. Where military necessity require different handling, it may be possible to deviate from ICAO provisions.

Not Applicable

‐

APO (By:12-2014)

The implementation of the appropriate parts of the European Action Plan for the prevention of Runway Excursions is completed for the reported airports.

Completed

12/2013

SRC‐CHNG

Implementation of Safety Oversight of Changes to ATM by National Supervisory Authorities (NSA) (By:12/2010) (Outside Applicability Area)

Not Applicable

‐ ‐ REG (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐

SRC‐RLMK Implement the EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirements (ESARRs) (By:12/2010) (Outside Applicability Area)

Not Applicable

‐ ‐ REG (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐


SRC‐SLRD Safety Levels and Resolution of Deficiencies (By:12/2010) (Outside Applicability Area)

Not Applicable

‐ ‐ REG (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12-2010) ‐

Not Applicable

‐


Annexes

Annex A – Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process

LSSIP Co-ordination

LSSIP Focal Point for Germany Ralf REISER Assigned by Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF)

LSSIP Focal Point for DFS Ralf REISER DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH

LSSIP Focal Point for MIL Klaus-Dieter SCHUETTE Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office, Branch I (AFSBw, Grp I)

LSSIP Focal Point for REG/NSA Carmen GLENSK Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services (BAF)

LSSIP Contact Person for Germany Adriatik KOKONA Eurocontrol Agency

ESSIP Objective Implementation

ESSIP Objective

EUROCONTROL Objective Owners EUROCONTROL EIPR Objective Coordinator

National Stakeholder Specialist(s)

AOM13.1 R. BUCUROIU, O. MROWICKI, E. REUBER

O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section I 1

AFSBw Section I 2

AOM19 G. ACAMPORA, O. MROWICKI O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section II 1

AOM20 R. BUCUROIU O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AOM21 R. BUCUROIU O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

BAF: SOP

AFSBw Section I 1

AOP01.2 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC DFS: Torsten Wortmann

AFSBw Section I 1

AOP03 T. LICU P. VRANJKOVIC DFS: Torsten Wortmann

AFSBw Section I 1



AFSBw Section I 1

BAF: SOP

AOP05 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC DFS: Torsten Wortmann

AFSBw Section I 1

ATC02.2 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT DFS: Günter ACHATZ


AFSBw Section I 2


AFSBw Section I 2


AFSBw Section I 2

ATC07.1 N. GAUTIER L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Günter ACHATZ


ESSIP Objective



ATC12 N. GAUTIER L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Günter ACHATZ

BAF: SOP

ATC15 N. GAUTIER L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Günter ACHATZ

BAF: SOP

ATC16 S. DROZDOWSKI L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Günter ACHATZ

AFSBw Section I 1

ATC17 S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

BAF: SOP

COM09 L. POPESCU O. ALFARO DFS: Egon KOOPMANN

AFSBw Section I 3

COM10 Y. EYUBOGLU A. KOKONA DFS: Egon KOOPMANN

AFSBw Section II 3

COM11 L. POPESCU A. KOKONA DFS: Egon KOOPMANN

AFSBw Section I 3

ENV01 P. ADAMSON B. HILL DFS: Torsten Wortmann

ENV02 S. MAHONY, A. WATT B. HILL DFS: Torsten Wortmann

FCM01 H. KOOLEN O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section II 1

FCM03 S. SMIDT O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

DFS: Wolfgang GAEBEL

AFSBw Section II 3

FCM04 M. RICHARD O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

FCM05 N. AGACDIKEN O. CIOARA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section II 1

INF04 P. MATERN A-P. FRANGOLHO DFS: Hardy POLEVKA

AFSBw Section I 2

ITY-ADQ M. UNTERREINER A-P. FRANGOLHO BAF: ST

DFS: Hardy POLEVKA

AFSBw Section I 2

ITY-AGDL S. DISSING A. KOKONA DFS: Günter ACHATZ

AFSBw Section I 1

BAF: ST

ITY-AGVCS2 TBD O. ALFARO DFS: Egon KOOPMANN

BAF: ST

AFSBw Section I 3

ITY-COTR S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO DFS: Günter ACHATZ

AFSBw Section I 3

ITY-FMTP L. POPESCU O. ALFARO DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section II 3

BAF: SOP/ST

ITY-SPI M. BORELY, R. STEWART A-P. FRANGOLHO DFS: Egon KOOPMANN

NAV03 F. PAVLICEVIC A. KOKONA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section I 5

NAV10 R. FARNWORTH A. KOKONA DFS: Andre BIESTMANN

AFSBw Section I 1

AFSBw Section I 3

SAF10 T. LICU I. FEIJT DFS: Jürgen MORSCHECK

AFSBw Section I 2

SAF11 S. LAWRENCE I. FEIJT DFS: Jürgen MORSCHECK

BAF: SOP


ESSIP Objective



SRC-CHNG M. DEBOECK A. DYBOWSKA N/A

SRC-RLMK M. DEBOECK A. DYBOWSKA N/A

SRC-SLRD M. DEBOECK A. DYBOWSKA N/A


Annex B – National Stakeholders Organisation Charts B1. Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development

Here below is an overview of the part of MoT, which manages ATM matters in Germany

B2. Federal Ministry of Defence


B3. Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services


B4. Federal Office of Civil Aviation - Civil Aviation Authority

A high level overview of the Federal Office of Civil Aviation - Civil Aviation Authority is shown below


B5. DFS Management Organisation


Annex C – Glossary of Abbreviations The acronyms and abbreviations which are specific to ESSIP and LSSIP are available in Annex A of the European Single Sky Implementation Plan – Detailed Objective Description – 2011-2015. Please refer to this document for more information and explanations.

Specific abbreviations for Germany

AFSBw Amt für Flugsicherung der Bundeswehr Bundeswehr Air Traffic Services Office

BAF Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Navigation Services

BFU Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation

BMI Bundesministerium des Innern Federal Ministry of the Interior

BMVBS (until 12/2013)

Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development

BMVI (since 12/2013)

Bundesministerium für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur

Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure

BWI BWI Bundeswehr Informations- und Kommunikationstechnik GmbH

BWI Service Alliance

DFS DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH German Air Navigation Services

DWD Deutscher Wetterdienst German Meteorological Service

ECCAIRS - European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incidents Reporting System

ESRA Eurocontrol Statistical Reference Area

FAF - French Air Force

FRAMaK - Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe

FSInfoSysBw Flugsicherungsinformationssystem der Bundeswehr

Military ATS Information System

GAF Luftwaffe Deutschland German Air Force

GAFHQ Kommando Luftwaffe German Air Force Headquarters

iCAS - iTEC Centre Automation System

iTEC - Interoperability Through European Cooperation

LBA Luftfahrt-Bundesamt Federal Office of Civil Aviation – Civil Aviation Authority

LR Abteilung Luft- und Raumfahrt Directorate General for Civil Aviation and Aerospace

MoD Bundesministerium der Verteidigung Federal Ministry of Defence

MoT Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung

Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development

MUSE München Sprachvermittlung Erneuerung Replacement of the voice switching system in Munich

MVPA - Military Variable Profile Areas

P1/ATCAS - Air Traffic Control Automation System

P1/VAFORIT - Very Advanced Flight Data Processing Operational Requirement Implementation

TTC The Tower Company – Tochtergesell-schaft der DFS

The Tower Company – Subsidiary of DFS