network operations report 2017 - eurocontrol · reasons, including weather and special events e.g....

NETWORK OPERATIONS REPORT 2017

EUROCONTROL

Network Managernominated by the European Commission

ANNEX II - ACC

NETWORK OPERATIONS REPORT – 2017

February 2018 2017 NOR ANNEX 2

©2018 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

ANNEX I: ACC ACC VIEW ON PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 4

ACC CAPACITY EVOLUTION................................................................................................................. 6

1. ALBANIA - TIRANA ACC ............................................................................................................. 7

2. ARMENIA - YEREVAN ACC ....................................................................................................... 8

3. AUSTRIA - vIENNA ACC ............................................................................................................. 9

4. AZERBAIJAN - BAKU ACC ........................................................................................................10

5. BELGIUM - BRUSSELS ACC ....................................................................................................11

6. BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA - SARAJEVO ACC ..................................................................12

7. BULGARIA - SOFIA ACC ............................................................................................................13

8. CROATIA - ZAGREB ACC..........................................................................................................14

9. CYPRUS - NICOSIA ACC ...........................................................................................................15

10. CZECH REPUBLIC - PRAGUE ACC ......................................................................................16

11. DENMARK - COPENHAGEN ACC ..........................................................................................17

12. ESTONIA - TALLINN ACC ..........................................................................................................18

13. EUROCONTROL - MAASTRICHT ACC .................................................................................19

14. FINLAND - TAMPERE ACC .......................................................................................................20

15. FRANCE - BORDEAUX ACC ....................................................................................................21

16. FRANCE - BREST ACC ..............................................................................................................22

17. FRANCE - MARSEILLE ACC ....................................................................................................23

18. FRANCE - PARIS ACC ................................................................................................................24

19. FRANCE - REIMS ACC ...............................................................................................................25

20. FYROM - SKOPJE ACC ..............................................................................................................26

21. GEORGIA - TBILISI ACC ............................................................................................................27

22. GERMANY - BREMEN ACC ......................................................................................................28

23. GERMANY - KARLSRUHE ACC ..............................................................................................29

24. GERMANY - LANGEN ACC .......................................................................................................30

25. GERMANY - MUNICH ACC .......................................................................................................31

26. GREECE - ATHENS ACC ...........................................................................................................32

27. GREECE - MAKEDONIA ACC ..................................................................................................33

28. HUNGARY - BUDAPEST ACC..................................................................................................34

29. IRELAND - DUBLIN ACC ............................................................................................................35

30. IRELAND - SHANNON ACC ......................................................................................................36

31. ITALY - BRINDISI ACC ................................................................................................................37

32. ITALY - MILAN ACC .....................................................................................................................38

33. ITALY - PADOVA ACC ................................................................................................................39

34. ITALY - ROME ACC ......................................................................................................................40




35. LATVIA - RIGA ACC .....................................................................................................................41

36. LITHUANIA - VILNIUS ACC .......................................................................................................42

37. MALTA - MALTA ACC ..................................................................................................................43

38. MOLDOVA - CHISINAU ACC ....................................................................................................44

39. THE NETHERLANDS - AMSTERDAM ACC .........................................................................45

40. NORWAY - BODO ACC ..............................................................................................................46

41. NORWAY - OSLO ACC ...............................................................................................................47

42. NORWAY - STAVANGER ACC ................................................................................................48

43. POLAND - WARSAW ACC .........................................................................................................49

44. PORTUGAL - LISBON ACC .......................................................................................................51

45. ROMANIA - BUCHAREST ACC ................................................................................................52

46. SERBIA-MONTENEGRO - BELGRADE ACC ......................................................................53

47. SLOVAK REPUBLIC - BRATISLAVA ACC............................................................................54

48. SLOVENIA - LJUBLJANA ACC .................................................................................................55

49. SPAIN - BARCELONA ACC ......................................................................................................56

50. SPAIN - CANARIAS ACC ..........................................................................................................57

51. SPAIN - MADRID ACC ...............................................................................................................58

52. SPAIN - PALMA ACC ..................................................................................................................59

53. SPAIN - SEVILLA ACC ...............................................................................................................60

54. SWEDEN - MALMO ACC ............................................................................................................61

55. SWEDEN - STOCKHOLM ACC ................................................................................................62

56. SWITZERLAND - GENEVA ACC .............................................................................................63

57. SWITZERLAND - ZURICH ACC ...............................................................................................64

58. TURKEY - ANKARA /ISTANBUL ACC....................................................................................65

59. UKRAINE - DNIPROPETROVSK ACC ...................................................................................66

60. UKRAINE - KYIV ACC .................................................................................................................67

61. UKRAINE - L’VIV ACC .................................................................................................................68

62. UKRAINE - ODESA ACC ............................................................................................................69

63. UNITED KINGDOM - LONDON ACC ......................................................................................70

64. UNITED KINGDOM - LONDON TC .........................................................................................71

65. UNITED KINGDOM - PRESTWICK ACC ...............................................................................72




ACC VIEW ON PERFORMANCE

ATC capacity and staffing issues in six ACCs (Marseille, Nicosia, Brest, Bordeaux, Karlsruhe and

Maastricht) were the main cause of the en-route ATFM delays in the network (in addition to

weather), particularly over the summer, and over the weekends. A detailed analysis (provided to

NDOP1) on the performance of these ACCs is described in the main document under 5.4.1

Demand and Capacity Monitoring – summer. The ACC’s feedback as well as their own

performance assessment is published in the next paragraphs.

Marseille ACC view

LFMM current roster has been built to offer the maximum number of sectors during the demand peak (0900-1300) in order to avoid reactionary delays. But the consequence is a lower number of sectors between 1600 and 2000. That roster came to its limit with the evolution of SW Axis, especially during week-end that concentrates the SW Axis traffic increase. That situation is worsen by the decrease number of ATCOs

Marseille had also a non-expected traffic issue. As a matter of fact LFMM FMP regularly faced a non-expected demand in some layers due to FL adherence issue and a lack of traffic in some others. Combined with the staff issue after 1600 Marseille, regulations created huge delays during summer 2017.

And to enter in more details, there are differences between east and west zone;

A figure or graph of the whole ACC does not give a clear picture of the situation at Marseille since Marseille West and Marseille East are different qualification zones, as if 2 ACCs. For example, you could think of opening a sector to face a late afternoon peak, but the peak concerns east ACC and the available staff is in West ACC's rooster (this is a basic case). Rerouting via Marseille East has not been chosen by AOs.

The increase of delays between 2016 and 2017 of Marseille East ACC is much higher than it could be regarding the increase of traffic. First of all, there are some levels of traffic which trigger an exponential delay. Moreover Marseille's regulations prevent its neighbour from some measures and offload their delays accounts.

Only 23% of Marseille East's delays are due to nominal sectors. That means that combined sectors would have needed to be split in 77% of delays' occurrence to limit or cancel the regulations involved. So staff issue is responsible of 77% of Marseille’s east delays.

Nicosia ACC view

Nicosia ACC has faced a very significant rise in traffic demand all through the year reaching up to a level of 12.5% and despite the difficult operational environment the ACC has provided with a 3% of capacity increase compared to 2016. This increase was a result of several actions (included also in the Capacity Plan for 2016) like the addition of 12 ATCOs on the roster (3 more than hat was agreed) and the opening of more sector hours. The statistics show a 62% increase in the opening hours of a 5th sector and a 32% increase in the opening hours of the 4th sector. The opening hours were supported by a staff performance scheme that was in place since mid-April 2017 until the end of the year. Additionally sector opening flexibility was increase by 14%.

An additional operational issue that worked against capacity performance for 2017 was the great variability between predicted traffic and actual (tactical) traffic and the slot violations recorded out of neighbouring airports. It must be noted that due to the geographic proximity of neighbouring countries airports, most sectors provide a combination of enroute and terminal control where ATC complexity is significant.

2017 was a very active year with regards to military activities within Nicosia FIR (mostly over high seas) registering 1786 of continuous activities, 1344 of which had an extremely high impact on

1 NDOP 18/19/12 20.03.18 Item 6.2 Action Paper: Analysis of the Network Delay Causes 2017




capacity since they interfered directly with ATC provision (US Carrier operations in the Middle East excluding the operational missions out of LCRA).

Karlsruhe

Due to the unforeseen high increase of traffic in the years 2016 and 2017, partly above the STATFOR High Scenario, Karlsruhe UAC faced staffing constraints in all sector groups. Several mitigation measures were taken and communicated, e.g. changes of airspace structure and RAD measures. Moreover, a trial with NM was executed to optimise resources and delay. The maximum of overtime and extra shifts was assigned to the ATCOs, however at the end of summer the potential was exhausted.

There was a close watch on the delay spread especially between weekdays and weekends. No hot spot was detected. Instead, a delay simulation proved that the best feasible allocation of ATCOs, especially weekdays to weekends) was used.

Brest

Due to EEE implementation, the rates have increased. But the traffic increase requires more capacity and Brest still had a first rotation issue during the beginning of the summer. To tackle that special issue, a new roster has been implemented from September 2017. As it was not in service during the heart of the summer, its effect is only partially visible on summer 2017 figures. Brest also worked with all DSNA ACC in a summer plan to optimise capacity, and try and find capacity gap to use them. Its plan with RAD measures, scenarios and CAP and STAM measures was aiming at organising the traffic so as to use the available capacity in all layers and all sectors. With all those efforts Brest managed to decrease its Capacity + Staffing delays by 30% (during summer) with a traffic increase of 8 to 9% traffic increase.

Bordeaux

Bordeaux ACC has put in place new rostering beginning of summer to be able to cope with the important traffic increase. That evolution added to EEE implementation resulted in a 30% delay decrease. However it is still above planned NOP delays. One important reason for that situation is the interface issue with Barcelona ACC. The evolutions in Barcelona airspace resulted in such an ATC complexity in French ACC for the integration of Barcelona area departures, that the capacities of that area decreased a lot. Globally, one third of the total amount of delays is due to industrial actions which occur mainly on Tuesday (reason why the amount of delays is therefore dramatically higher on that day).

Maastricht

The above reflections (see main report) are true for MUAC airspace as a whole, but there are large differences between the sector groups. At sector group level, capacity and staffing delays are not evenly spread but show differences between the days – in the overall picture however this combines to give the impression of an even spread.

The overall lower sector count in the weekends is indeed for all three sector groups. However, for the DECO and Hannover sector groups this is because of the (significantly) lower demand in the weekends; for the Brussels sector group the demand in the weekend is close to the peak demand of the Fridays, but it is concentrated in the first half of the day (especially on Saturdays). Delay in this case is incurred because of capacity constraints (airspace saturation), not because of a lack of open sectors. In the Hannover sector group the highest staffing delay is on Sundays (w/ Mondays a close second place), but this is only a minor portion of the total delay in the weekends.

For 2017, the main special events for MUAC were the introduction of a third layer in the Brussels sector group and the operational introduction of a new Voice Communications System (all sector groups). MUAC’s main issue is indeed airspace saturation in many of its sectors in combination with the very limited possibilities (both internal and external) to off-load traffic.




ACC CAPACITY EVOLUTION The following annex provides a detailed analysis of ATC capacity evolution in 2017 for ACCs within the ECAC States for which data is available. The source of statistics is the NMOC unless otherwise indicated. The analysis covers:

• Traffic & Delay

The chart and data table provide comprehensive information concerning the evolution of traffic and delay from 2013 to 2017 (where data is available). It includes the following values:

─ Peak day traffic: the number of flight entries on the peak day of each year.

─ Summer & Yearly Traffic: the daily average number of flight entries during the summer season (May to October inclusive) and over the whole year (January to December inclusive).

─ Summer & Yearly En-route Delay: the average En-route delay per flight (for all reasons, including weather and special events e.g. industrial action), attributed to the ACC during the summer season (May to October inclusive) and over the whole year (January to December inclusive).

• 2017 Realisation of Capacity Plan

─ Traffic Evolution (2017 v 2016)

o Traffic forecast: the traffic forecast for 2017 compared to 2016, as published in the European Network Operations Plan 2017-2019/21

o Actual traffic: the percentage difference between the total traffic (number of flight entries) in 2017 compared to 2016, for the summer and the full year.

─ En-route Delay (min per flight)

o All reasons: the en-route minutes of delay per flight for all causes, for the summer and the full year.

o ACC Reference value: the delay per flight to achieve the European delay target of 0.5 min/flight for the full year, as published in the European Network Operations Plan 2017-2019/21, for the summer and the full year.

─ Capacity gap?: Network Manager assessment of the capacity offered in 2017

─ ACC Capacity Baseline (% difference 2017 v 2016): the capacity actually offered by the ACC during Summer 2017, and the comparison with the 2016 capacity baseline.

─ Capacity Plan: the capacity planned in Summer 2017 versus Summer 2016, as published in the European Network Operations Plan 2017-2019/21.

─ Capacity enhancement measures: reporting for each measure planned to be implemented before Summer 2017 in the European Network Operations Plan 2017-2019/21.

─ Summer 2017 Performance Assessment: analysis of the observed performance versus peak traffic demand.

• Allocation of and reasons for En-route delay

The table lists the reference locations causing most of the en-route delay in 2017, the average daily minutes of en-route delay attributed to each reference location and the percentage of the total ACC en-route delay. The graph shows the average daily en-route delay, broken down into the 5 most significant reasons given for the delay in 2017 compared to 2016.

Note: The scale on all graphs varies from ACC to ACC - graphs should not be directly compared.




1. ALBANIA - TIRANA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 984 959 1020 1014 994

Summer Traffic 704 692 705 670 691

Yearly Traffic 550 543 553 510 531

Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yearly enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LAAAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays

2017 Realisation of Capacity Plan

The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

Capacity Plan +5% Achieved Comments

Free Route Yes As of AIRAC of May night FRALB

ATS route network improvements No

Reduction of longitudinal separation No

Stripless system Yes As of 1st of June 2017

Maximum configuration: 3/4 ENR + 1 APP sectors Yes 3 ENR + 1 APP

Summer 2017 performance assessment

The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 65, the same level as last year. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 54 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 47.

Tirana

LAAA ACC

Traffic Evolution

(2017 v 2016)

En-route Delay (min. per flight)

Capacity gap?

ACC Capacity Baseline

(% difference

2017 v 2016)

Traffic Forecast Actual Traffic

All reasons ACC Reference

Value Current Routes

Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.5%

B: 3.4%

L: 1.0%

-6%

+4.2% 0.00 0.09

Summer +3.1% 0.00 0.13 No 65 (0%)




2. ARMENIA - YEREVAN ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Summer Traffic 143 140 120 117 170

Yearly Traffic 143 139 116 107 149

Summer en-route delay (all causes) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Yearly en-route delay (all causes) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

En-r

ou

te d

elay

(m

inu

tes

per

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UDDDACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays

Data Source: STATFOR


The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero in Summer 2017.

Capacity Plan: Sufficient Capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

Night FRA Yes FL285-FL660; 20:00-02:00 UTC.

Effective date 07.12.2017


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 40. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 16 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 11.

Yerevan

UDDD ACC

Traffic Evolution

(2017 v 2016)


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)


All reasons ACC

Reference Value

Current Routes

Shortest Routes

Year H: 9.5%

B: 7.7%

L: 6.0%

+36%

+39.3% 0.00 0.01

Summer +45.0% 0.00 0.01 No 40 (0%)




3. AUSTRIA - VIENNA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2733 3060 2946 2906 3249

Summer Traffic 2275 2481 2493 2499 2754

Yearly Traffic 1916 2057 2092 2099 2301



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LOVVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.12 to 0.48 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

71% of the delays were due to Weather, 16% due to ATC capacity and 13% due to staffing.


Stepwise increase of FAB CE wide cross border FRA applications No SECSI Planned February 2018

ASM No Not applicable

Improved ATFCM techniques, including STAM Yes

Enhanced sectorisation according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Yes

Stepped improved sectorisation according to on-going projects Yes

Improved operational procedures including FMP/AMC Yes

Recruitment to maintain staff level Yes Recruitment conducted to increase staff levels to increase capacity to meet forecast demand

Additional sectors as required, depending on traffic demand levels Yes

Maximum configuration: 14 sectors No 12 sectors were open, 14 not necessary


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 196. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 193 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 183.

Allocation of and Reasons for En-route Delay

YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LOVVE15 101 15.0%

2017 LOVVS15 96 14.3%

2017 LOVVB15 91 13.6%

2017 LOVVW35 65 9.6%

2017 LOVVN15 48 7.1%

2017 LOVVW12 45 6.7%

0

200

400

600

CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER

Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Vienna ACC en-route delays in 2017

Vienna

LOVV ACC

Traffic Evolution (2017 v 2016) En-route Delay (min. per flight)

Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.5%

B: 3.4%

L: 1.0%

+12%

+9.6% 0.29 0.20

Summer +10.2% 0.48 0.32 No 196 (+1%)




4. AZERBAIJAN - BAKU ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Summer Traffic 410 353 367 388 407

Yearly Traffic 352 348 353 371 388

Summer en-route delay (all causes) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Yearly en-route delay (all causes) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Enro

ute

Del

ay (

min

ute

s p

er f

ligh

t)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rag)

e

UBBAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays

Data Source: STATFOR


The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero in Summer 2017.

Capacity Plan: Sufficient Capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

ATS route network optimisation - an on-going process in co-operation with neighboring States

Yes

Maximum configuration: 5 + 3APP Yes


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 65. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 33 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 24.

Baku

UBBA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.6%

B: 2.5%

L: 1.0%

No significant

impact

+4.6% 0.00 0.01

Summer +4.6% 0.00 0.01 No 65 (0%)




5. BELGIUM - BRUSSELS ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1916 1964 2039 2072 2167

Summer Traffic 1634 1691 1769 1789 1894

Yearly Traffic 1483 1525 1602 1605 1709



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EBBUACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.71 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.26 minutes per flight in 2017.

39% of the delays were due to Weather, 30% due to ATC staffing, 27% due to ATC capacity and 4% due to equipment.


Enhanced Civ/Mil ASM procedures No

Improved use of the route network as a result of FUA enhancement No

Enhancement of ATFCM procedures, including STAM Yes

ATFCM 2.0 Project (enhanced Pre-Tact) Yes

Segregation of EBCI and EBBR flows No Postponed to end of 2018

Recruitment of new ATCOs to maintain level of staffing Yes

Requalification of operational experts Yes

New rostering tool Partially

Dynamic roster Partially

Reassessment of sector capacities following CAPAN Ongoing

Maximum configuration: 6 sectors Yes 6 sectors opened


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated to be at 133 in summer 2017. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 129 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 119.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EBBUEEC 104 41.3%

2017 EBBUNWC 80 31.6%

2017 EBBUWSC 24 9.6%

2017 EBBUESC 20 8.0%

2017 EBBUHLC 14 5.7%

2017 EBBUWLS 3 1.2%

0

200

400

600

800


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Brussels ACC en-route delays in 2017

Brussels

EBBU ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.3%

B: 2.9%

L: 1.7%

No significant

impact

+6.4% 0.15 0.06

Summer +5.9% 0.26 0.05 Yes 133 (+13%)




6. BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA - SARAJEVO ACC Traffic & Delay

2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 174 177 204

Summer Traffic 121 127 143

Yearly Traffic 96 101 114

Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yearly enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

50

100

150

200

250

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LQSBACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

Planned capacity increase: sufficient capacity Achieved Comments

Further cross-border FRA evolutions Yes

SEAFRA (H24 FRA Zagreb and Beograd ACC above FL 325) Yes

Enhanced ATFM techniques, including STAM Yes

Measures applied when needed in tactical

phase.

Jahorina Radar upgrade, DPS/TDS and SIM upgrade Yes

New VCS procurement and implementation No Postponed to 2018/19.

Maximum configuration: 2 sectors Yes


The capacity baseline was estimated with ACCESS at 27. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 18 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 15.

Sarajevo

LQSB CTA


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.7%

B: 2.9%

L: 0.9%

No significant

impact

+13.6% 0.00 0.01

Summer +12.8% 0.00 0.01 No 27 (+8%)




7. BULGARIA - SOFIA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2316 2875 3179 2915 2997

Summer Traffic 1871 2355 2513 2405 2490

Yearly Traffic 1460 1822 2046 2010 2076



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LBSRACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The en-route delay decreased from 0.01 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to zero minutes per flight during the same period in 2017.

Planned capacity increase: +4% Achieved Comments

Stepped implementation of full FRA Yes SEEN FRA implemented in March 2017. Seasonal FRA implementation in Sofia FIR initially planned for 7th of Dec 2017, but postponed by 2 AIRACs due NM request

Gradual implementation of AFUA functionalities No

RNAV procedures with vertical guidance at Bulgarian airports Yes LBGO achieved. LBPD in progress.

Improved ATFCM, including use of occupancy counts and STAM

Yes Operational decision making is based on Occupancies only.

Implementation of Traffic Complexity Tool Yes Project on track. Final implementation in 2019.

ATS route network development No No new developments needed. Focus is on FRA.

Airspace changes at the interface with Turkey resulting from the implementation of the Istanbul new airport and of the second runway at Sabiha Gökçen airport.

No New Istanbul airport postponed.

Cross sector training Yes Continuous.

Additional ATCOs Yes

Modernisation of En-route Radar Yes Fully achieved.

WAM in west part of FIR Yes Project on track

Gradual increase of maximum sector configurations available up to 18 sectors

Yes

Maximum configuration: 18 sectors Yes 9 sectors were sufficient. 18 sectors were available, but can be sustained for a short period only during critical events.


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS and was assessed to be at 189. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 167 flights and the average peak 3 hour demand was 151 flights. However, the actual maximum values remain outside the studied period and are 208 for the peak 1 hour and 180 for the peak 3 hour.

Sofia

LBSR ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.5%

B: 3.6%

L: 2.1%

-5%

+3.3% 0.00 0.05

Summer +3.5% 0.00 0.07 No 189 (+2%)




8. CROATIA - ZAGREB ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2410 2498 2486 2462 2675

Summer Traffic 1666 1775 1746 1781 1942

Yearly Traffic 1281 1355 1366 1363 1489



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LDZOACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.07 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.19 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

53% of the delays were for the reason weather, 36% for ATC Capacity and 12% for ATC Staffing.

Capacity plan: +3% Achieved Comments

Further cross-border FRA evolutions Yes SEAFRA H24 Implemented

AMC – rational use of ASM

CDM MIL-CCL (LARA Implementation)

Yes

Integration of TMAs in the network through the implementation of the FABCE concept of seamless operations for the TMAs within Zagreb FIR

Yes

Enhanced ATFM techniques (STAM Phase I) Yes Implemented at FAB CE level

Enhanced sectorisation according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Yes

Further optimisation of ATS route network Yes

Long Range DCTs (LRD) CROSS BORDER evolution Yes Included as part of cross-border FRA

Datalink operations CPDLC Yes

Extra OLDI MSG REV with all adjacent units Yes Implemented with all neighbouring ANSPs except

Belgrade and Sarajevo ACCs

Optimization of manpower planning Yes

Additional ATCOs as required (~6 per year) No

Frequency Coupling Yes

Full dynamic DFL management Yes

Improved sector opening times Yes

Maximum configuration: 11 sectors Yes 11 sectors were opened


The capacity baseline was measured using ACCESS at 155. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 146, and the average peak 3 hour demand was 136.

Zagreb ACC showed a 7% capacity increase during summer 2017 compared to the planned 3% average per year (based on local capacity plans 2015-2022).


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LDZON 53 27.8%

2017 LDZOULW 43 22.4%

2017 LDZOHW 19 10.0%

2017 LDZOULA 18 9.5%

2017 LDZOUW 12 6.3%

2017 LDZOHA 9 4.8%

0

50

100

150


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Zagreb ACC en-route delays in 2017

Zagreb

LDZO ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.2%

B: 1.9%

L: -0.2%

No significant

impact

+9.3% 0.13 0.25

Summer +9.0% 0.19 0.35 No 155 (+7%)




9. CYPRUS - NICOSIA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1095 1175 1298 1246 1405

Summer Traffic 844 944 991 1001 1116

Yearly Traffic 760 834 874 880 985



0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.02.22.42.62.8

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LCCCACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.72 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 1.46 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

46% of the delays were due ATC capacity, 46% due to ATC Staffing 7% due to airspace management and 1% due to ATC Routeing.

Capacity Plan +5 % Achieved Comments

FRA New batch in Spring 2017

Establishment of DCT routes with LGGG Yes Expansion to 24 hrs of a number of DCTs

New Cyprus TMA implementation No Plans to be re-considered

Improved ATFCM, including STAM Yes

Continuous improvement of ATS route network Yes

Redesign of lower airspace No Postponed to 2018

9 additional ATCOs Yes 12 additional ATCOs available in 2017

Implementation of staff performance scheme Yes

More flexibility in sector configuration openings Yes More opening hours with 4 and 5 sector configurations; better adaptation to traffic demand of the opening schemes envisaged for the next period

Improve Civil-Military cooperation in the South-East part of the FIR Yes

Revision of sector capacities Partially Higher monitoring and maximum rates consistently applied

Transition to the new ACC No Implementations pending final decision by local authorities



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 61, 3% higher than in 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 68 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 61.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LCCCES0 502 46.1%

2017 LCCCS1 202 18.5%

2017 LCCCS12 157 14.4%

2017 LCCCS2 85 7.8%

2017 LCCCW 61 5.6%

2017 LCCCS12W 51 4.7%

0

200

400

600


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Nicosia ACC en-route delays in 2017

Nicosia

LCCC ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 10.3%

B: 7.8%

L: 5.7%

No significant

impact

+11.9% 1.11 0.25

Summer +11.5% 1.46 0.32 Yes 61 (+3%)




10. CZECH REPUBLIC - PRAGUE ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2358 2416 2561 2690 2731

Summer Traffic 2063 2120 2280 2403 2440

Yearly Traffic 1804 1849 1976 2098 2139



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LKAAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increase from 0.01 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.07 minutes per flight in the Summer 2017.

62% of the delays were due to Weather, 29% were for the reason ATC Capacity and 8% due to ATC Staffing.

Capacity Plan: 0% Achieved Comments

Additional FRA DCTs Yes

Improved coordination with military Yes

Improved flow and capacity management techniques, including STAM Yes

Improved ATS route network Yes Implementation in Nov. 2017

Enhanced sectorisation according to the FABCE Airspace Plan Yes Implementation in Nov. 2017 at the interface with Austria

CPDLC Yes

Optimised opening schemes Yes

Datalink Yes

Adaptation of sector opening times depending on available staff Yes

Monitoring of traffic evolution and evaluation of possible scenarios Yes

Maximum configuration: 9/10 sectors Yes 10 sectors were opened


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS and was assessed to be at 187. The peak 1 hour demand was 180 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 169 flights.

Allocation of and Reasons for En-route Delay Year

Reference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LKAAL 33 31.7%

2017 LKAANSHT 22 21.8%

2017 LKAANSM 20 18.9%

2017 LKAAWHT 10 9.7%

2017 LKAANSL 9 8.9%

2017 LKAAWM 3 2.8%

0

20

40

60


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Prague ACC en-route delays in 2017

Prague

LKAA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 5.6%

B: 4.1%

L: 2.3%

-18%

+2.0% 0.05 0.09

Summer +1.5% 0.07 0.16 No 187 (+3%)




11. DENMARK - COPENHAGEN ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1781 1765 1792 1879 1913

Summer Traffic 1580 1571 1592 1622 1655

Yearly Traffic 1459 1464 1488 1513 1539



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EKDKACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays




Possible alignment with FRA within NEFAB Yes

Optimizing the use of FRA when military areas are active Yes

LPV (Localiser Performance with Vertical guidance) Procedures at EKCH

Yes Ongoing expected 2018

New arrival concept for EKCH including PBN procedures, Extended AMAN, TBS (Time Based Separation)

Yes Ongoing final target 2023

Improved ATFCM, working with occupancy counts Yes

Continuous improvements on the ATS route network and FRA sectorisation

Yes

Maintain appropriate level of staffing to open up to 8 sectors Yes

Minor updates of COOPANS Yes

Sector configurations adapted to traffic demand Yes

Maximum configuration: 4/5 (E) + 3 (W) Yes 3 (E) + 2 (W) were sufficient


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 127, same as in 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 119 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 110.

Copenhagen

EKDK ACC

Traffic Evolution

(2017 v 2016)

En-route Delay

(min. per flight)

Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.5%

B: 2.6%

L: 1.5%

No significant impact

+1.7% 0.00 0.07

Summer +2.0% 0.00 0.11 No 127 (0%)




12. ESTONIA - TALLINN ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 621 651 649 674 715

Summer Traffic 537 567 569 583 642

Yearly Traffic 485 508 516 530 570



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EETTACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight remained at 0.04 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

87% of the delays were for the reason ATC capacity, 8% due to Weather and 4% due to Equipment.

Capacity Plan: Sufficient capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

Cross-border sectorisation Estonia, Finland, Latvia (NEFAB) No

SYSCO OLDI with Latvia, Sweden No However, Tallinn ATCC &ATM System is functionally available to use SYSCO OLDI with Latvia and Sweden.

Additional staff and controller rating Yes

Adaptation of sector opening times Yes

Maximum configuration: 2 (+1 FEEDER) Yes 2 sectors opened


The capacity baseline was estimated to be 67. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 62 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 53.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EETTEST 10 73.7%

2017 EETTWES 3 20.0%

2017 EETTALL 1 4.2%

2017 EETTFEEDER 0 2.1%

0

5

10

15


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Tallinn ACC en-route delays in 2017

Tallinn

EETT ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 5.7%

B: 4.9%

L: 2.5%

No significant

impact

+7.7% 0.02 0.03

Summer +10.1% 0.04 0.04 No 67 (+2%)




13. EUROCONTROL - MAASTRICHT ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 5349 5526 5552 5760 5937

Summer Traffic 4941 5043 5096 5330 5549

Yearly Traffic 4474 4579 4664 4863 5065



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EDYYUAC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.86 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 1.04 minutes per flight in 2017.

42% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 36% for Weather, 11% for Special event (NVCS and Brussels 3rd layer implementation), and 5% for ATC Staffing.


FRAM2 Step 1: FRA during night No To be implemented 7 December 2017

Initial FUA Implementation above FL365 No MUAC ready, waiting for neighbouring authorities agreement

Improved ATFCM including STAM Yes

ATC2ATM Program On-going

Brussels UIR 3rd Layer Yes

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures No Operational benefits not demonstrated

Advanced tactical ATFCM measures Yes

Cross training of ATCOs Yes

iFMP (integrated Flow Management Position) Yes

N-VCS Yes

RDFS Yes

Stepped implementation of XMAN (possible negative impact on capacity)

Yes

Maximum configuration: BRU 7, DECO 6, HANN 8 Yes BRU: 7 / DECO: 5 / HANN: 8


The capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 330. During the same period, the peak 3 hour demand was 342 and the peak 1 hour was 360.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EDYYBOLN 609 18.0%

2017 EDYYD5WL 380 11.3%

2017 EDYYB3EH 368 10.9%

2017 EDYYD5WH 348 10.3%

2017 EDYYHMNS 199 5.9%

2017 EDYYSOLX 153 4.5%

0

500

1000

1500


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Maastricht UAC en-route delays in 2017

Maastricht

EDYY UAC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 5.1%

B: 4.2%

L: 2.8%

No significant

impact

+4.1% 0.67 0.17

Summer +4.1% 1.04 0.27 Yes 330 (+2%)




14. FINLAND - TAMPERE ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 592 594 579 590 646

Summer Traffic 451 465 452 451 483

Yearly Traffic 451 459 445 451 486



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EFINCTA - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017.


NEFRA (EN to join) Yes

Maintain number of controllers Yes

Partial move of ACC functions to new ACC at EFHK (5 ATCOs) Yes

Maximum configuration: 5/6 sectors Yes 4 sectors were sufficient


The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as last year. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 44 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 36.

Tampere

EFIN CTA


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.3%

B: 3.4%

L: 2.2%

No significant

impact

+7.6% 0.00 0.09

Summer +7.1% 0.00 0.07 No 58 (0%)




15. FRANCE - BORDEAUX ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3066 3183 3197 3394 3570

Summer Traffic 2615 2668 2744 2936 3097

Yearly Traffic 2238 2282 2349 2476 2627



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LFBBALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.79 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.63 minutes per flight during the same period in 2017.

45% of the delays were due to ATC Capacity, 21% due to Industrial action,17% due to Weather, 9% due to Other, 3% due to Equipment, 2% due to Special Events, 2% due to ATC Staffing, 1% due to Airspace Management and 1% due to ATC Routeing

Capacity Plan: +14 % Achieved Comments

FRA Step 2: H24 DCTs with military activity Partially

Some DCTs implemented, a new stepped FRA implementation plan is developed

Improved Airspace Management / FUA Yes

FUA TSA 10 Yes

“New TSA 6” (more dynamic ASM) Yes

Improved ATFCM Procedures and STAM Yes

CDM processes and procedures Yes

MAC (Collaborative ATFCM Measures) Yes

“New TSA 6” Yes

SWFAB/FABEC Barcelona interface GIROM-OKABI Yes New interface to be reviewed – capacity decrease in LFBB

5th layer in R&L sectors No Postponed to 1st March 2018

Flexible rostering Partially

ERATO (stripless, MTCD) Yes

Enhanced Mode S No Postponed to Spring 2018

Re-evaluation of sector capacities Yes

Maximum configuration: 21 UCESO No 20 sectors opened


The ACC capacity baseline was assessed with ACCESS/Reverse CASA to be at 207. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 217 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 204.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LFBBNH12 160 12.4%

2017 LFBBUS34 116 9.0%

2017 LFBBPT 103 8.1%

2017 LFBBUS12 82 6.4%

2017 LFBBT1234 76 5.9%

2017 LFBBZX4 68 5.3%

0

500

1000


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Bordeaux ACC en-route delays in 2017

Bordeaux

LFBB ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.1%

B: 4.3%

L: 3.0%

No significant

impact

+6.1% 0.63 0.13

Summer +5.5% 0.49 0.20 Yes 207 (+3%)




16. FRANCE - BREST ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3345 3550 3429 3632 3977

Summer Traffic 2850 2980 2975 3169 3409

Yearly Traffic 2457 2559 2538 2697 2914



0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LFRRACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay decreased from 1.60 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 1.05 minutes per flight over the Summer period in 2017.

70% of the delays were due to the reason ATC Capacity, 14% due to Industrial Actions, 7% due to ATC Staffing, 5% due to Weather, 1% due to Equipment, 1% due to ATC Routeing, 1% due to Airspace Management, 1% due Special Events and 1% due to Other.

Capacity Plan : +13% Achieved Comments

Improved airspace management / FUA Yes

“New TSA 6” (more dynamic ASM) Yes

Improvement of ATFCM procedures and STAM Yes

CDM processes and procedures Yes


Reorganisation of airspace below FL145 No Postponed to Autumn 2018

“New TSA 6-8-9” Yes

Flexible rostering Yes


Re-evaluation of sector capacities Yes

Maximum configuration: 18 UCESO Yes 19 sectors were opened




YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LFRRMZSI 236 9.2%

2017 LFRRQXSI 170 6.6%

2017 LFRRG 149 5.8%

2017 LFRRMZU 146 5.7%

2017 LFRRVKWS 131 5.1%

2017 LFRRNU 123 4.8%

0

1000

2000

3000


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Brest ACC en-route delays in 2017

Brest

LFRR ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.6%

B: 5.2%

L: 3.8%

+4%

+8.0% 0.88 0.10

Summer +7.6% 1.05 0.17 Yes 224 (+10%)




17. FRANCE - MARSEILLE ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3999 4032 4030 4178 4253

Summer Traffic 3271 3269 3270 3456 3619

Yearly Traffic 2746 2730 2743 2871 3020



0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LFMMACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay increased from 0.46 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 1.61 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

60% of the delays were due to the reason ATC Capacity, 19% due to Weather, 14% due to Industrial Actions, 4% due to Staffing 1% due to Airspace Management and 1% due to Equipment.

Capacity Plan: +12% Achieved Comments


Airspace management procedures for D54 during Summer season Yes

Improvement of ATFCM procedures and STAM Yes

CDM Processes and procedures Yes


Flexible rostering No Planned before Summer 2018


Maximum configuration: 28 UCESO Yes 28 sectors open


The ACC capacity baseline was assessed with REVERSE CASA to be at 239, 4% lower compared to Summer 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 263 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 252.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LFMMAB12 250 7.7%

2017 LFMMGY12 204 6.2%

2017 LFMMSBAM 203 6.2%

2017 LFMMFDZ 199 6.1%

2017 LFMMWM 157 4.8%

2017 LFMMGY 148 4.5%

0

500

1000

1500

2000


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Marseille ACC en-route delays in 2017

Marseille

LFMM ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 5.0%

B: 3.5%

L: 2.0%

No significant

impact

+5.2% 1.08 0.15

Summer +4.7% 1.61 0.24 Yes 239 (-4%)




18. FRANCE - PARIS ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3863 3904 3925 4122 4022

Summer Traffic 3309 3353 3502 3574 3595

Yearly Traffic 3107 3125 3205 3266 3313



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LFFFALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay decreased from 0.40 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.17 minutes per flight over the same period in 2017.

67% of the delays were due to the reason Weather, 15% due to ATC Capacity, 14% due to Industrial Action, 3% due to Equipment and 1% to Special Events.



Improved ATFCM procedures and STAM / GF project Yes GF project is part of iStream



Flexible rostering Partially


Maximum configuration: 21 UCESO Yes 20 sectors were sufficient


The ACC capacity baseline was assessed with ACCESS to be at 283, 1% higher than in Summer 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 272 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 252.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LFFFLMH 91 23.2%

2017 LFFFTE 55 14.0%

2017 LFFFUJ 32 8.1%

2017 LFFFTNTB 25 6.3%

2017 LFFFDOGS 22 5.7%

2017 LFFFAPTE 19 4.9%

0

200

400

600


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Paris ACC en-route delays in 2017

Paris

LFFF ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.6%

B: 2.1%

L: 1.0%

No significant

impact

+1.4% 0.12 0.14

Summer +0.6% 0.17 0.19 No 283 (+1%)




19. FRANCE - REIMS ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3030 3193 3267 3377 3480

Summer Traffic 2719 2832 2899 3021 3096

Yearly Traffic 2430 2522 2574 2668 2753



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LFEEACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay slightly decreased from 0.40 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.38 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

64% of the delays were due to ATC Capacity, 20% due to Weather, 10% due to Industrial Action, 3% due to Staffing, 2% due to Airspace management, and 1% due to Special Event.


Additional DCTs Partially Work in progress


FABEC XMAN Yes

Improved ATFCM procedures and STAM Yes





Maximum configuration: 19 UCESO No 18 sectors


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 215. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 224 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 207.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LFEEHYR 92 13.0%

2017 LFEE4N 87 12.2%

2017 LFEE4E 63 8.9%

2017 LFEEKHN 50 7.0%

2017 LFEE2F 46 6.5%

2017 LFEE4H 44 6.2%

0

200

400

600


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Reims ACC en-route delays in 2017

Reims

LFEE ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.2%

B: 2.8%

L: 1.4%

+3%

+3.2% 0.26 0.19

Summer +2.5% 0.38 0.25 Yes 215 (+8%)




20. FYROM - SKOPJE ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 661 834 859 769 897

Summer Traffic 424 566 568 542 633

Yearly Traffic 301 389 401 379 448



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LWSSACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The delays increased from 0.01 minutes per flight in during Summer 2016 to 0.04 minutes per flight during Summer 2017.

69% of the delays were due to the reason ATC Capacity and 31% were due to ATC Staffing.




The ACC capacity baseline was estimated to be at 61. During the measured period the average peak 1 hour was 52 and the average peak 3 hour was 45.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LWSSLOW 9 68.8%

2017 LWSSALL 4 31.2%

0

5

10


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Skopje ACC en-route delays in 2017

Skopje

LWSS ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.4%

B: 1.6%

L: -0.5%

+38%

+18.2% 0.03 0.20

Summer +16.9% 0.04 0.26 No 61 (+3%)




21. GEORGIA - TBILISI ACC

Traffic & Delay

2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 404 453 522

Summer Traffic 346 365 419

Yearly Traffic 328 340 385

Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yearly enroute delay (all causes) 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UGGGACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero during Summer 2017.

Capacity Plan : Sufficient capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

FRAG implementation of the Step One Yes Has been implemented from FL255 and above

Implement ATFCM measures and improve FMP issues Yes Monitor of demand and capacity is in progress by Tbilisi FMP and in case of imbalance appropriate actions are taken

Improved ATFCM Yes ATFM is continuously improving in close cooperation with NM

Enhanced ATFM techniques through cooperative traffic management

No Enhanced ATFM techniques are under consideration. The implementation is premature for the current operational environment.

Further optimisation and implementation of ATS route network

Yes Optimization of ATS route is continuous process

Enhancement of current of sectorisation No In cooperation with Eurocontrol, the sectorisation is currently being evaluated to be enhanced

Implementation of RNAV1 (GNSS) for SID/STAR’s No Implementation of RNAV1 is planned by mid of 2019

Optimization of manpower planning Yes Activity completed

Technical implementation of new ATM system No New ATM system is operating in shadow mode

Transfer to new ATM system No The project is ongoing

Traffic management improvements Yes Monitoring of demand and capacity balance on pre-tactical and tactical phases

Maximum configuration: 2 sectors Yes Planned to be changed by 2019


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated to be 50. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 37 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 24.

Tbilisi

UGGG ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.5%

B: 2.6%

L: 1.7%

No significant

impact

+13.5% 0.00 0.01

Summer +14.9% 0.00 0.01 No 50 (0%)




22. GERMANY - BREMEN ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2136 2192 2185 2293 2294

Summer Traffic 1777 1839 1864 1927 1973

Yearly Traffic 1628 1683 1720 1778 1778



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EDWWACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Capacity Plan: -1% Achieved Comments

New communication system (BRISE) Yes Successfully completed on 06/12/2017

Maximum configuration (Ops Config): 11 ENR + 6 APP Yes 17 sectors were opened


The summer traffic increased by 2.4%; the Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement increased to 0.20 min/flight in Summer 2017. The delays were mainly due to “Weather” (66.2%), “ATC Capacity” (24.5%) and “ATC Staffing” (7.3%).

The maximum opened configuration consisted of 11 en-route sectors, 3 en-route/APP- sectors (Hamburg, Hannover and Bremen) and 3 APP/TMA- sectors (Berlin). The en-route sectors Eider East and Eider West were always combined except in case of military exercises. The approach sectors Berlin Departure North and South were always combined.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EDWWFLG 67 31.6%

2017 EDWWDBANS 51 24.3%

2017 EDWWDBAS 34 16.3%

2017 EDWWHAMC 17 8.0%

2017 EDWWSOUTH 12 5.9%

2017 EDWWHEI 6 2.7%

0

50

100

150


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Bremen ACC en-route delays in 2017

Bremen

EDWW ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.7%

B: 3.7%

L: 2.7%

No significant

impact

0.0% 0.12 0.07

Summer +2.4% 0.20 0.08 Yes 151 (0%)




23. GERMANY - KARLSRUHE ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 5600 5746 5710 5953 6039

Summer Traffic 5088 5245 5305 5481 5680

Yearly Traffic 4501 4631 4719 4889 5079



0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21.31.41.5

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EDUUUAC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



FABEC XMAN: AMAN Frankfurt – UAC Karlsruhe Yes Successfully completed on 02/02/2017

Staff shortages in the SF South Network Delay Optimisation Trial

Yes Scenarios were applied from 23/05/2017 until 23/09/2017

Training and transition iCAS Yes Training, 3 Night Live Operations and 5 Weekend Live Operations from 02/2017 until 11/2017

New ATM system iCAS KAR Replacement VAFORIT by iCAS

Yes Successfully completed on 11/11/2017

Sectors planned (Ops Config): 36 ENR Yes 36 sectors were opened


The summer traffic growth reaches 3.6%; the Average ATFM Delay en-route per Movement strongly increased to 1.48 min/flight compared to the previous summer period (0.58 min/flight). The delays were mainly due to “ATC Staffing” (38.4%), “Weather” (30.2%) and “ATC Capacity” (24.3%). A particularly strong traffic increase in the Central and Western sector families (annual growths of 7.5% and 7.3%, respectively) along with lack of staff and difficult weather conditions in the summer influenced the capacity situation.

A maximum opened configuration of 36 en-route sectors was available; these were distributed among the sector families as follows: 10 in Central SF, 9 in Eastern SF, 9 in Western SF and 8 in Southern SF (3 in South-North and 5 in South-South).


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EDUUFUL1U 408 8.6%

2017 EDUUSLN13 280 5.9%

2017 EDUUDON1D 277 5.9%

2017 EDUUWUR3C 233 4.9%

2017 EDUUWUR24 227 4.8%

2017 EDUUERL12 213 4.5%

0

1000

2000

3000


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Karlsruhe UAC en-route delays in 2017

Karlsruhe

EDUU ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.7%

B: 3.7%

L: 2.0%

+3%

+3.9% 0.93 0.25

Summer +3.6% 1.48 0.34 Yes 341 (-2%)




24. GERMANY - LANGEN ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 4073 4122 4179 4110 4279

Summer Traffic 3640 3642 3679 3689 3822

Yearly Traffic 3319 3317 3343 3361 3472



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EDGGALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



FABEC XMAN:

AMAN Frankfurt – UAC Karlsruhe

AMAN Frankfurt – ACC Munich

AMAN Frankfurt – ACC Bremen

AMAN Munich – ACC Langen (100 NM)

AMAN Zurich – ACC Langen

Yes

Successfully completed on:

25.05.2017

25.05.2017

12.10.2017

12.10.2017

02.03.2017

New SF concept NRW1d – New DLDS Yes Successfully completed on 30.03.2017

Upgrade of P2/ATCAS system (PSS) SF10 Yes Successfully completed on 15.01.2017

Sectors planned (Ops Config): 21 ENR + 11 APP Yes 32 sectors were opened


The summer traffic increased in 2017 compared to 2016 by 3.6%. The Average ATFM Delay en-route per Movement significantly decreased to 0.33 min/flight in summer 2017 compared to the last year (0.46 min/flight), but it was still above the reference value (0.30 min/flight). The delays in the summer period were mainly due to “ATC Capacity” (36.8%), “Weather” (34.2%) and “ATC Staffing” (24.4%).

The maximum opened configuration consisted of 21 en-route sectors (including 3 sectors with predominantly military traffic), 2 en-route/approach sectors (Stuttgart) and 9 APP/TMA- sectors (Düsseldorf, Frankfurt and Cologne/Bonn). The en-route sectors Neckar High + Neckar Low and Hamm Low + Hamm Medium were always combined.

Allocation of and Reasons for En-route Delay Year

Reference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EDGG7 265 34.0%

2017 EDGGKNG 85 10.9%

2017 EDGG1 77 9.9%

2017 EDGGDLSN 64 8.3%

2017 EDGGDLDN 57 7.3%

2017 EDGGDLA 34 4.4%

0

100

200

300

400


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Langen ACC en-route delays in 2017

Langen

EDGG ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 2.7%

B: 1.2%

L: -0.2%

No significant

impact

+3.3% 0.22 0.23

Summer +3.6% 0.33 0.30 No 256 (+5%)




25. GERMANY - MUNICH ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3593 3543 3560 3724 3803

Summer Traffic 3126 3099 3204 3245 3373

Yearly Traffic 2876 2846 2923 2974 3077



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EDMMACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



Integration SF North + SF South to SF West (Insel) Partially Ongoing

FABEC XMAN:

ACC Munich – AMAN Frankfurt

AMAN Munich – ACC Zurich (100 NM)

AMAN Munich – ACC Langen (100 NM)

ACC Munich – AMAN Zurich

Yes

Successfully completed on:

25.05.2017

02.03.2017

12.10.2017

02.03.2017

AirMagic Yes Successfully completed on 01.01.2018

Sectors planned (Ops Config): 14 ENR + 4 APP Yes 18 sectors were opened


The Average ATFM Delay En-route per Movement amounted in summer 2017 to 0.08 min/flight, as in the previous summer period. The delays were mainly due to “Weather” (94.5%); “ATC Capacity” accounted for 1.9%. ADM in summer 2017 was below the reference value.

The maximum opened configuration consisted of 14 en-route sectors, 3 en-route /APP- sectors (Nuremberg, Dresden and Leipzig) and 4 APP/TMA- sectors (Munich). The sectors Sachsen Low + Sachsen High were always combined; the sector Lech (SF Approach) mainly operates military traffic.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EDMMCN2 36 26.4%

2017 EDMMTRGH 26 19.0%

2017 EDMMALB 19 13.7%

2017 EDMMTEG 11 7.7%

2017 EDMMFRKHU 8 6.1%

2017 EDMMFUE 8 6.0%

0

50

100

150


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Munich ACC en-route delays in 2017

Munich

EDMM ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.9%

B: 2.8%

L: 1.1%

-5%

+3.5% 0.04 0.20

Summer +4.0% 0.08 0.25 No 255 (+2%)




26. GREECE - ATHENS ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2306 2419 2430 2492 2566

Summer Traffic 1561 1720 1779 1774 1934

Yearly Traffic 1195 1291 1365 1342 1465



0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21.31.41.5

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LGGGACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight slightly increased from 0.24 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.26 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

57% of delays were due to the reason of ATC capacity, 38% due to ATC Staffing and 4% due to Industrial Action.


Stepped implementation of FRA Yes Additional DCTs implemented

Improved civil/military coordination Yes

Stepped Implementation of LARA Yes

PBN procedures (Heraklion, Santorini, Mikonos) Partially

Santorini and Mikonos – design finalised and implementation foreseen in Spring 2018


Improved ATS route network and airspace management Yes

Airspace reorganisation/resectorisation project No

Expected implementation depending on the new system; design finalised

New Back-up System Yes

7 additional OLDI messages for silent radar transfers Yes

Maximum configuration: 6/7 sectors Yes 8 sectors open


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 134, 8% higher than 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 133 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 123.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LGGGRDSL 89 34.9%

2017 LGGGRDS 50 19.7%

2017 LGGGMILL 43 16.8%

2017 LGGGMIL 39 15.1%

2017 LGGGAL1 10 4.1%

2017 LGGGKFPL 5 1.9%

0

50

100

150

200


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Athens ACC en-route delays in 2017

Athens

LGGG ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.9%

B: 2.6%

L: 1.2%

No

significant impact

+9.1% 0.17 0.19

Summer +9.0% 0.26 0.28 No 134 (+8%)




27. GREECE - MAKEDONIA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1721 1942 1996 1960 2035

Summer Traffic 1264 1413 1452 1415 1518

Yearly Traffic 939 1032 1075 1041 1127



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LGMDACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay increased from 0.06 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.21 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

77% of delays were due to the reason of ATC staffing, 19% due ATC capacity, 3% due to Weather and 1% due to Equipment.


Stepped implementation of FRA Yes Additional DCTs implemented


Stepped Implementation of LARA Yes

PBN procedures (Heraklion, Santorini, Mikonos) Partially

Santorini and Mikonos – design finalised and implementation foreseen in Spring 2018


Improved ATS route network and airspace management Yes

Airspace reorganisation/resectorisation project No

Expected implementation depending on the new system; design finalised

New Back-up System Yes

7 additional OLDI messages for silent radar transfers Yes

Maximum configuration: 3/4 sectors Yes 5 sectors opened




YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LGMDW 107 65.2%

2017 LGMDEL 51 31.4%

2017 LGMDLMOL 4 2.3%

2017 LGMDEU 1 0.6%

2017 LGMDWU 1 0.5%

2017 LGMDALL 0 0.1%

0

50

100

150


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Makedonia ACC en-route delays in 2017

Makedonia

LGMD ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.0%

B: 2.0%

L: 0.3%

No significant

impact

+8.3% 0.15 0.15

Summer +7.3% 0.21 0.21 No 109 (+5%)




28. HUNGARY - BUDAPEST ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2353 2808 2893 2915 3119

Summer Traffic 1904 2147 2364 2405 2561

Yearly Traffic 1566 1754 1951 2016 2135



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LHCCACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.13 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.02 minutes per flight during the same period in 2017.

Capacity Plan +2.5% Achieved Comments

Optimization of airspace structure Ongoing

3 geographical ACC sectors Yes Achieved

Recruitment and training of controllers and possible extra work Yes

The new licenced controllers barely replace the retired ones.

Sector optimization tool FMP/Supervisor Ongoing

Maximum configuration: 10 sectors No

The number of ACC controllers allows maximum 8 sector configuration from the potential 10.


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 211, 8% higher than in 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 191 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 176.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LHCCENU 12 42.5%

2017 LHCCENH 12 40.7%

2017 LHCCWESTH 1 4.7%

2017 LHCCWLM 1 2.9%

2017 LHCCENLM 1 2.7%

2017 LHCCWESTU 1 2.2%

0

50

100


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Budapest ACC en-route delays in 2017

Budapest

LHCC ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.5%

B: 3.4%

L: 1.4%

-14%

+5.9% 0.01 0.05

Summer +6.5% 0.02 0.08 No 211 (+8%)




29. IRELAND - DUBLIN ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 634 659 715 778 821

Summer Traffic 568 595 642 708 738

Yearly Traffic 509 537 578 635 664



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EIDWACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average En-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017 as in 2016.



UK / Ireland FAB initiatives Yes

On-going recruitment to maintain staff levels Yes

Cross rating training Yes



The ACCESS measured baseline of 64 indicates the capacity available during the measured period. The peak 1 hour demand was 60 and the peak 3 hour demand was 49.

Dublin

EIDW ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.6%

B: 2.7%

L: 1.2%

No significant

impact

+4.6% 0.00 0.04

Summer +4.2% 0.00 0.03 No 64 (0%)




30. IRELAND - SHANNON ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1467 1578 1495 1632 1641

Summer Traffic 1199 1250 1279 1378 1386

Yearly Traffic 1074 1086 1127 1211 1233



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EISNACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average En-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017 as in 2016.


LARA Implementation No Postponed to 2018



R-LAT Phase 2 Ongoing

CPDLC (FANS and ATN) Yes

Developing Queue Management programme (London Heathrow XMAN) Yes

On-going recruitment to maintain staff levels Yes

Terrestrial ADS-B No Under evaluation

Extra sectors as required – Dynamic sectorisation available Yes



The ACCESS measured baseline of 128 indicates the capacity available during the measured period. The peak 1 hour demand was 115 and the peak 3 hour demand was 101.

Shannon

EISN ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.4%

B: 3.5%

L: 2.6%

No significant

impact

+1.8% 0.00 0.05

Summer +0.5% 0.00 0.05 No 128 (0%)




31. ITALY - BRINDISI ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1377 1273 1226 1247 1360

Summer Traffic 961 884 864 924 1018

Yearly Traffic 786 730 697 733 803



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LIBBACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight remained at zero, the same as during Summer 2016.


Free-route implementation program Yes

Improved airspace management Yes

PBN Program Yes


Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements

according to network needs, Airspace Users expectations, ENAV’s Flight Efficiency Plan and BLUEMED FAB implementation

Yes

TMA reorganisation & CTA implementation Yes

Recruitment of ATCOs if necessary No Not applicable

ADSB No Planned 2019

LINK IT Yes

MTCD No Planned 2018

Flexible opening scheme according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation

Yes

Maximum configuration: 6 sectors Yes 5 sectors were sufficient


The ACC capacity baseline was measured at 96. During the measured period (June and July), the average peak 1 hour demand was 77 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 71.

Brindisi

LIBB ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 2.8%

B: 1.7%

L: 0.4%

+17%

+9.5% 0.00 0.01

Summer +10.2% 0.00 0.01 No 96 (+10%)




32. ITALY - MILAN ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2020 2893 2843 2943 3110

Summer Traffic 1754 2441 2496 2579 2651

Yearly Traffic 1567 1973 2166 2226 2276



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LIMMACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight remained at zero, the same as during Summer 2016.




PBN Program Yes

Trombone LIMC/LIML/LIME No Planned end 2018

Evaluation and implementation of AMAN//Extended AMAN No Planned 2019


Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, Airspace Users, ENAV’s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation

Yes


Recruitment of ATCOs if necessary No Planned 2018



LINK IT (Data Link implementation) No Planned 2018

Flexible opening scheme according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation Yes



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 197. During the measured period (June and July), the average peak 1 hour demand was 193 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 183.

Milan

LIMM

ACC

Traffic Evolution (2017 v 2016) En-route Delay

(min. per flight)

Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.3%

B: 2.7%

L: 0.9%

No significant

impact

+2.2% 0.00 0.08

Summer +2.8% 0.00 0.13 No 197 (0%)




33. ITALY - PADOVA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2869 2904 2694 2839 2901

Summer Traffic 2207 2264 2129 2218 2265

Yearly Traffic 1821 1854 1764 1815 1862



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LIPPACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight decreased to zero minutes per flight during summer 2017.




PBN Program Yes


Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, Airspace Users expectations, ENAV’s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation

Yes


Recruitment of ATCOs if necessary No





Yes



The ACC capacity baseline was measured at 199. During the measured period (June and July) the average peak 1 hour demand was 174 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 165.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LIPPALL 8 41.1%

2017 LIPPN34 3 15.1%

2017 LIPPN46 2 9.5%

2017 LIPPNCS56 2 8.4%

2017 LIPPCSE12 1 6.7%

2017 LIPPSWD34 1 5.3%

0

5

10


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Padova ACC en-route delays in 2017

Padova

LIPP ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.3%

B: 3.0%

L: 1.3%

No significant

impact

+2.5% 0.01 0.09

Summer +2.1% 0.00 0.13 No 199 (+3%)




34. ITALY - ROME ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3799 3060 3070 3105 3283

Summer Traffic 3054 2477 2512 2568 2705

Yearly Traffic 2565 2239 2144 2164 2257



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LIRRACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017.




PBN Program Yes

Trombone for LIRF Yes

Evaluation and implementation of AMAN/Extended AMAN No Planned 2019


Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements

according to network needs, Airspace Users expectations, ENAV’s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation

Yes

TMA reorganisation & CTA Implementation Yes





Yes



The ACC capacity baseline was assessed measured at 214. During the measured period (June and July), the average peak 1 hour demand was 202 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 189.

Rome

LIRR ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 2.6%

B: 1.0%

L: -0.3%

No significant

impact

+4.3% 0.00 0.04

Summer +5.3% 0.00 0.06 No 214 (0%)




35. LATVIA - RIGA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 831 841 843 856 908

Summer Traffic 714 738 739 741 817

Yearly Traffic 642 659 664 667 728



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EVRRACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



Capacity Plan Sufficient capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

Various ATM system improvements

1- OLDI with Tallinn ATCC including FRA aspects in ADEXP format

2- OLDI with Malmo ATCC including FRA aspects in ADEXP format

3- OLDI with Stockholm ATCC in ADEXP format

Yes

Maximum configuration: 3 + 2 APP Yes


The capacity baseline was estimated with ACCESS to be 90. The average peak 1 hour demand was 69 and the peak 3 hour demand was 63 flights during the measured period, indicating that the ACC offered sufficient capacity to meet the demand.

Riga

EVRR ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.2%

B: 4.5%

L: 2.6%

No significant

impact

+9.1% 0.00 0.04

Summer +10.3% 0.00 0.05 No 90 (0%)




36. LITHUANIA - VILNIUS ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 738 804 776 763 818

Summer Traffic 633 672 664 675 718

Yearly Traffic 566 598 599 607 641



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EYVCACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays




Gradual Full Implementation of FRA within Baltic FAB No



The ACC capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 2016. The peak 1 hour demand was 62 and the peak 3 hour demand was 53 during the measured period.

Vilnius

EYVC ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.0%

B: 4.6%

L: 2.2%

No significant

impact

+5.6% 0.00 0.03

Summer +6.4% 0.00 0.02 No 77 (0%)




37. MALTA - MALTA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 415 392 379 425 435

Summer Traffic 331 297 312 333 348

Yearly Traffic 298 277 279 298 314



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LMMMACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays




Free route airspace Phase II No This will be achieved in May 2018

New ATM system Yes Completed in June 2017

Maximum configuration: 2 sectors Yes 2 sectors


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS. During June and July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 28 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 24 flights per hour.

Malta

LMMM ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.7%

B: 1.0%

L: 1.6%

No significant

impact

+5.2% 0.00 0.02

Summer +4.5% 0.00 0.02 No 42 (0%)




38. MOLDOVA - CHISINAU ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 330 279 190 193 227

Summer Traffic 241 165 146 131 160

Yearly Traffic 198 149 119 108 130



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LUUUACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average En-route delay per flight remained at zero, as in Summer 2016.




The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 40. The peak 1 hour demand was 14 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 12.

Chisinau

LUUU ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 10.3%

B: 7.9%

L: 6.4%

+40%

+20.3% 0.00 0.01

Summer +21.9% 0.00 0.02 No 40 (0%)




39. THE NETHERLANDS - AMSTERDAM ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1657 1698 1764 1885 1922

Summer Traffic 1534 1565 1632 1733 1773

Yearly Traffic 1408 1441 1499 1582 1631



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EHAAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight slightly increased from 0.14 minutes per flight during Summer 2016 to 0.17 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

76% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, and 22% for the reason Weather.

Capacity Plan + 0.5% Achieved Comments

Improved FUA for TMA-C through CivMil co-location No Too early to see benefits from co-location.

Improved insight in departures EHAM due to A-CDM Yes Together with an updated workload assessment this has resulted in an increased capacity of sector 3 during outbound peak modes.



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 148, representing the delivered capacity. This was sufficient to accommodate the traffic demand, with an average peak 1 hour of 140 during the measured period and an average peak 3 hour of 121.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EHAACBAS 122 57.9%

2017 EHAASECT3 81 38.4%

2017 EHAASECT2 8 3.7%

0

50

100

150

200


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Amsterdam ACC en-route delays in 2017

Amsterdam

EHAA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.5%

B: 3.4%

L: 2.9%

No sig. impact

+3.1% 0.13 0.14

Summer +2.3% 0.17 0.14 No 148 (+1%)




40. NORWAY - BODO ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 753 753 765 749 783

Summer Traffic 588 609 614 616 618

Yearly Traffic 565 589 590 597 599



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

ENBDACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight slightly increased from zero min/flight in Summer 2016 to 0.01 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

95% of the delays were due to the reason Equipment and 5% were due to ATC Capacity.

Capacity Plan: Sufficient capacity to meet expected demand Achieved Comments

Flexible rostering of ATC staff Yes

Recruitment and training to maintain number of air traffic controllers Yes

Maximum configuration: 7 + 1 oceanic Yes 4 sectors were sufficient


The ACC capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 2016. During the measured period, the average peak hour demand was 51 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 46.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 ENBD19 2 40.7%

2017 ENBD1819 1 29.7%

2017 ENBDNLE 1 15.7%

2017 ENBDALL 0 5.8%

2017 ENBDCHETA 0 5.0%

2017 ENOBOA80 0 3.0%

0

2

4

6


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Bodo ACC en-route delays in 2017

Bodo

ENBD ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: -0.7%

B: -2.0%

L: -2.9%

No sig. impact

+0.3% 0.01 0.10

Summer +0.2% 0.01 0.05 No 57 (0%)




41. NORWAY - OSLO ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1200 1224 1184 1249 1234

Summer Traffic 1018 1025 982 1050 1064

Yearly Traffic 949 961 931 985 994



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

ENOSACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight decreased from 0.20 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.03 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

74% of the delays were for reason ATC Staffing and 26% for ATC capacity.

Planned Capacity Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments

Recruitment and training of air traffic controllers Yes




The capacity baseline of 88 was measured with ACCESS, indicating the capacity actually offered. During the measured period, the average peak demand was 80 (peak 1 hour) and 76 (peak 3 hour).


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 ENOSE345 17 60.1%

2017 ENOSE67 4 13.5%

2017 ENOS8 3 11.2%

2017 ENOSE3458 3 9.2%

2017 ENOSE34 1 4.7%

2017 ENOSW9012 0 0.9%

0

50

100

150


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Oslo ACC en-route delays in 2017

Oslo

ENOS

ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 0.7%

B: -0.2%

L: -1.3%

No significant

impact

+0.9% 0.03 0.14

Summer +1.4% 0.03 0.13 No 88 (0%)




42. NORWAY - STAVANGER ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 880 900 883 867 845

Summer Traffic 696 708 697 682 675

Yearly Traffic 663 677 661 641 626



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

ENSVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight decreased from 0.09 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to zero minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

Capacity Plan: sufficient capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments

Recruitment and training to maintain number of air traffic controllers Yes


Maximum configuration: 4 + 2 helicopter Yes 5 sectors were opened


The capacity baseline of 64 was measured with ACCESS, indicating the capacity actually offered. During the measured period, the average peak demand was 56 (peak 1 hour) and 50 (peak 3 hour).

Stavanger

ENSV ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 1.2%

B: 0.5%

L: -0.1%

No significant

impact

-2.3% 0.00 0.12

Summer -1.0% 0.00 0.13 No 64 (0%)




43. POLAND - WARSAW ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2414 2456 2333 2589 2690

Summer Traffic 2063 2107 2073 2256 2366

Yearly Traffic 1829 1851 1841 1974 2073



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EPWWACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.66 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.13 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

55% of delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 23% for ATC Staffing, and 21% for the reason Weather.


Stepped implementation of FRA Yes

Development and implementation initiated with full H24 implementation expected in 2019

Advanced ATFCM techniques, including STAM Yes

Polish 2010+ airspace project Yes

Stepped implementation of vertical sectorisation Yes

Introduction of WEST-EAST concept of operations matched with traffic distribution Yes

Increased number of sectors in peak hours (maximum 11 sectors) Yes

Additional controllers Yes

10 additional ATCOs compared to 2016 Yes 13 new controllers + 3 extra by December 2017

Continuous and extensive OJT training for new licenses Yes 16 new students doing OJT

Roster plan extended by additional ATCOs from June to avoid unexpected situations

Yes Optimized staff, 4 more controllers daily

3 senior controllers & Traffic Manager daily back-up for unexpected lack of staff

Yes

Optimized summer ATCOs availability – summer 2016 lessons learned Yes

Re-evaluation of sector capacities in new vertical split airspace; CAPAN study completed in March with proved potential for the new capacities, New sectorization and reliable ATM system allowed then to consider changes, Recalculation of all sector capacities is ongoing and will be incorporated soon

Yes

Improved flexibility in vertical sectorisation, new configurations responding to flow demand, new sector borders resulting in less workload, new elementary sectors added

Yes

Warsaw

EPWW ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.5%

B: 4.7%

L: 2.4%

-11%

+5.0% 0.12 0.23

Summer +4.9% 0.13 0.34 No 168 (+17%)




Less complexity of reconfigured sectors, better hotspot allocation, more reliable traffic prediction, efficient traffic handover between sectors, more balanced throughput and lower sector’s saturation

Yes

Continuous development of sector configurations and management Yes

Adapted and flexible sector opening schemes, Simulated (NEST) configurations and opening schemes tested for efficiency, 180+ efficient configurations to build tactically optimal opening schemes, Two month operational period allowed to prepare open list of various opening schemes, ATC weekdays and weekend days ATC dynamic roster adjustment, Pretactical opening schemes are prepared by FMP in D-1, Opening schemes are modified when necessary for tactical usage, Post operation analysis of opening schemes

Yes

Traffic growth daily monitoring, Long and short peaks prediction and identification; FMP Staff enlargement and training; FMP Staff provides pretactical analysis; Operational awareness on daily basis in FMP – Traffic Manager cooperation; FMP daily reports improved for further analysis; Evaluation of FMP tools – additional CHMI working position; Post Operations analysis NEST team

Yes

Maximum configuration: 10/11 sectors Yes 11 sectors opened




YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EPWWBD 60 24.9%

2017 EPWWTC 26 10.7%

2017 EPWWTCL 23 9.6%

2017 EPWWJL 16 6.6%

2017 EPWWRL 14 5.8%

2017 EPWWBDL 13 5.6%

0

200

400

600


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Warsaw ACC en-route delays in 2017




44. PORTUGAL - LISBON ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1448 1669 1672 1783 1973

Summer Traffic 1213 1312 1370 1528 1664

Yearly Traffic 1150 1229 1292 1429 1566



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LPPCACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



47% of the delays were for the reason Equipment, 27% for ATC Capacity, 13% for the reason Weather, 10% for Special Events, 3% for Other, and 1% for ATC Routeing.


Enhanced ASM/AFUA System Support Partially

Enhanced ATFCM procedures, including STAM Yes

Training and full implementation of STAM Yes

Reconfiguration of North and Central upper into Middle and Top sectors Yes

Resectorisation actions including vertical split of South sector Yes


Availability of ATCOs to open up to 9-11 ENR sectors Yes Up to 12 sectors (9 ENR + 3 TMA) were opened

Increase capacity in MAD sector Yes

Flexible sector opening schemes Yes

Maximum configuration: 11 (8 ENR+3 TMA) Yes Up to 12 sectors (9 ENR + 3 TMA) were opened


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 119. During the measured period (June and July AIRAC cycles), the average peak 1 hour demand was 118 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 108.

Traffic demand was in line with the High traffic forecast of +9.1% (EUROCONTROL Seven Year forecast, February 2017), and higher than the EUROCONTROL Seven Year forecast, September 2016 High forecast (+5.7%).


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LPPCWEST 65 20.4%

2017 LPPCSOUTH 55 17.6%

2017 LPPCCEU 53 16.7%

2017 LPPCNXUPP 35 11.1%

2017 LPPCNOU 33 10.6%

2017 LPPCNOL 29 9.2%

0

50

100

150

200


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Lisbon ACC en-route delays in 2017

Lisbon

LPPC ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 9.1%

B: 7.5%

L: 6.2%

No sig. impact

+9.6% 0.20 0.11

Summer +8.9% 0.07 0.11 No 119 (+13%)




45. ROMANIA - BUCHAREST ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2057 2362 2403 2307 2486

Summer Traffic 1676 1975 2021 1915 2125

Yearly Traffic 1383 1617 1717 1671 1817



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LRBBACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute ATFM delay per flight increased from zero minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.02 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

95% of the delays were due to the reason Industrial action (ATC).

Capacity Plan : 0% Achieved Comments

Stepped Implementation of FRA in accordance with Danube FAB plans Yes

Full Implementation of LARA Yes A process of planning and allocation is in place.

PBN Procedures implementation at Romanian airports No Planned

Improved ATFCM, including use of occupancy counts Yes Preliminary assessments ongoing, including participation to CPSG trial for capacity base definition using occupancy counts

ATS route network and sectorisation improvements Yes New sectorisation planned following the new ATM System implementation

LoAs and ATS Instructions for Bucharest ACC Sectors review on regular basis

Yes

Staff increased in line with capacity requirements Yes

Automated Support for Traffic Load (Density) Management (FCM06) Yes Preliminary assessments ongoing

Automated Support for Traffic Complexity Assessment (FCM06) Yes Preliminary assessments ongoing

Improved sectors’ configurations

Yes

DINAR (LRBBDNR) collapsed sector implemented

Sectors’ configurations codification improved

New sector configurations implemented



The ACC capacity baseline was assessed to be at 183 the same level as in Summer 2016. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 144 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 134.

Bucharest

LRBB ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 7.5%

B: 6.4%

L: 4.8%

+4%

+8.8% 0.01 0.01

Summer +11.0% 0.02 0.01 No 183 (0%)




46. SERBIA-MONTENEGRO - BELGRADE ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2441 2610 2943 2744 2873

Summer Traffic 1792 1930 2080 2125 2215

Yearly Traffic 1393 1491 1621 1650 1740



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LYBAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


En-route delay increased from 0.01 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.06 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

62% of the delays were for Weather, 16% for Other, 12% for Airspace management, and 9% for Equipment (ATC).


Improved VHF/UHF No Completion envisaged for 2025

Improved OLDI Controller support tools No Implementation postponed for 2018

Improved MTCD No Implementation cancelled

New Radar Station No Implementation postponed for 2020



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 181. The peak 1 hour demand was 157 and the peak 3 hour demand was 146 during the measurement period.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LYBAUWS 12 19.2%

2017 LYBAUN 9 13.2%

2017 LYBATWES 8 11.7%

2017 LYBATWS 5 8.1%

2017 LYBATN 5 7.8%

2017 LYBAMIL01 5 7.8%

0

20

40

60


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Belgrade ACC en-route delays in 2017

Belgrade

LYBA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.3%

B: 2.3%

L: 0.3%

-3%

+5.4% 0.04 0.10

Summer +4.3% 0.06 0.14 No 181 (0%)




47. SLOVAK REPUBLIC - BRATISLAVA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1563 1924 1832 2002 2058

Summer Traffic 1276 1419 1500 1596 1658

Yearly Traffic 1055 1161 1243 1323 1370



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LZBBACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight remained at 0.05 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

58% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, and 42% for weather.


Free Route Concept gradual implementation for FAB CE No

Rolling ASM/ATFCM process No

Improved ATFCM techniques, including STAM Yes

Continuous improvements of the route network and sectorisation No

Enhanced sectorisation according to FABCE airspace plan No

Continuous recruitment to increase staff level Yes

Optimisation of sector opening times Yes



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 136, 2% higher than in 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 128 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 118.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LZBBU3 28 61.3%

2017 LZBBU38 4 8.6%

2017 LZBBU36 4 8.2%

2017 LZBBL35 3 7.0%

2017 LZBBU37 3 5.7%

2017 LZBBL33 2 3.6%

0

10

20

30


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Bratislava ACC en-route delays in 2017

Bratislava

LZBB ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.6%

B: 3.6%

L: 1.8%

-29%

+3.6% 0.03 0.10

Summer +3.9% 0.05 0.15 No 136 (+2%)




48. SLOVENIA - LJUBLJANA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1254 1351 1305 1242 1438

Summer Traffic 890 962 914 952 1073

Yearly Traffic 703 743 725 745 841



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LJLAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.02 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.01 minutes per flight during Summer 2017.


Stepped implementation of FRA according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan, SAXFRA project and new FRA related initiatives, if any, will be reflected in FAB CE Airspace Plan

Yes Implementation of SECSI FRA planned for February 2018.

Enhanced ATFCM techniques, including STAM Yes STAM 1 implemented

ATS route network deleted with SAXFRA, traffic organisation changes will depend on the changes in flows resulting from FRA projects in the region (FRAIT, SEAFRA…)

Yes

Enhanced sectorization according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Yes

Additional ATCOs will be recruited as necessary Yes 6 new ATCOs in 2018

Minor system upgrades as necessary Yes Continued process

Flexible sector configurations Yes Dynamic vertical sectorization in place



The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as last year. The peak 1 hour demand was 105 and the peak 3 hour demand was 91 during the Summer 2017.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LJLAONE 3 100.0%

0

2

4

6


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Ljubljana ACC en-route delays in 2017

Ljubljana

LJLA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.4%

B: 2.6%

L: -0.2%

No significant

impact

+12.9% 0.00 0.22

Summer +12.6% 0.01 0.31 No 87 (0%)




49. SPAIN - BARCELONA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3187 3333 3294 3553 3632

Summer Traffic 2533 2599 2628 2857 3003

Yearly Traffic 2007 2042 2085 2261 2393



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LECBACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight slightly decreased from 0.69 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.66 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

69% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 29% for Weather and 1% for Special Events.


Revision of Airspace structures Yes


SWFAB/FABEC Bordeaux interface GIROM-OKABI

(Partial implementation)

No

SOPS for ENR Coordination No Postponed to Summer 2018

Staff increase Partially

Optimised sector configurations & sector capacities Yes

Splitting of LECBP1U Yes



The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 164. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 166 and the peak 3 hour demand was 156.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LECBBAS 166 17.4%

2017 LEBLDDI 99 10.4%

2017 LEBLT1E 89 9.3%

2017 LECBP1U 70 7.3%

2017 LECBLVU 62 6.5%

2017 LECBLVL 57 6.0%

0

500

1000


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Barcelona ACC en-route delays in 2017

Barcelona

LECB ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 7.0%

B: 5.4%

L: 3.6%

No significant

impact

+5.8% 0.45 0.23

Summer +5.1% 0.66 0.32 Yes 164 (+5%)




50. SPAIN - CANARIAS ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1066 1221 1261 1274 1384

Summer Traffic 688 746 736 819 869

Yearly Traffic 724 774 767 846 909



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

GCCCACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.22 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.05 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

80% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 18% for Weather and 2% for the reason ATC Routeing.


Revision of Airspace Structures No Pending design of interface with Morocco

Advanced TWR in GCTS Yes


Improve capacity in GCLP. Redesign of MAP No Postponed to April 2018

Improve arrivals/departures in GCFV & GCRR (south config) No Impact of airlines GNSS operational approval

SACTA version 3.Z5.60. AGDL FANS Yes

Optimised sector configurations & sector capacities Partially

Maximum configuration: 10 (5 APP/4+1ENR) Yes 9 sectors (5 APP + 4 ENR) were sufficient


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 78. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 65 and the peak 3 hour demand was 57.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 GCCCRNE 178 75.7%

2017 GCCCINB 14 5.8%

2017 GCCCIGC 10 4.5%

2017 GCCCRC2 9 3.6%

2017 GCCCAAC 7 3.0%

2017 GCCCNWW 4 1.8%

0

100

200

300


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Stockholm ACC en-route delays in 2017

Canarias

GCCC ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.6%

B: 5.2%

L: 4.3%

No significant

impact

+7.4% 0.26 0.27

Summer +6.1% 0.05 0.21 No 78 (+4%)




51. SPAIN - MADRID ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2794 2951 3062 3250 3500

Summer Traffic 2578 2720 2840 3019 3251

Yearly Traffic 2395 2514 2616 2777 2990



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LECMALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average en-route delay per flight slightly increased from 0.14 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.18 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

73% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 16% for the reason Other, 7% for Weather, 3% for ATC Routeing and 1% for ATC Staffing.


Revision of Airspace Structures No







YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LECMSAN 87 22.0%

2017 LECMZGZ 67 16.9%

2017 LEMDALL 61 15.4%

2017 LECMDGU 37 9.3%

2017 LECMPAU 35 8.9%

2017 LECMTLU 15 3.8%

0

100

200

300


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Madrid ACC en-route delays in 2017

Madrid

LECM ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 6.8%

B: 5.4%

L: 4.0%

No significant

impact

+7.7% 0.13 0.15

Summer +7.7% 0.18 0.20 No 228 (+7%)




52. SPAIN - PALMA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1573 1651 1697 1802 1831

Summer Traffic 1009 1058 1084 1214 1268

Yearly Traffic 674 695 721 804 849



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LECPACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight slightly decreased from 0.32 minutes in Summer 2016 to 0.31 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

85% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 10% for Weather and 4% for Special Events.


A-CDM at LEPA (Nov 16) Yes


RNAV1 SID/STAR LEIB Yes

NEW LEPA SIDs Yes

Changes in arr/dep LEIB procs Yes

Optimised sector configurations Partially

Maximum configuration: 8 (4 APP + 4 ENR) Yes 8 sectors were opened


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 104. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 103, the peak 3 hour demand was 96.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LECPMXX 184 84.4%

2017 LECPALL 18 8.0%

2017 LECPIRX 10 4.4%

2017 LECPGMX 3 1.3%

2017 LECPGXX 1 0.7%

2017 LECPGOX 1 0.5%

0

100

200

300


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Palma ACC en-route delays in 2017

Palma

LECP ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.9%

B: 3.2%

L: 1.4%

No significant

impact

+5.6% 0.26 0.19

Summer +4.5% 0.31 0.23 Yes 104 (+3%)




53. SPAIN - SEVILLA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1190 1164 1237 1312 1354

Summer Traffic 986 998 1015 1091 1182

Yearly Traffic 879 901 909 972 1058



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LECSACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay slightly decreased from 0.13 min/flight in Summer 2016 to 0.10 min/flight in Summer 2017.

87% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 8% for Weather, 4% for equipment, 1% for ATC Routeing, and 1% for Other.


Revision of Airspace Structures Yes

Improved ATFCM, including STAM No Postponed to 2018


Maximum configuration: 8 (6 ACC+2 APP) Yes 8 sectors were opened




YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LECSMA4 49 63.1%

2017 LECSCEN 10 12.7%

2017 LECSSEV 7 9.6%

2017 LECSCES 5 6.0%

2017 LECSNO1 3 4.0%

2017 LECSSUR 2 2.1%

0

50

100


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Seville ACC en-route delays in 2017

Sevilla

LECS

ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H:6.5%

B: 5.1%

L: 3.9%

No sig. impact

+8.8% 0.07 0.12

Summer +8.3% 0.10 0.16 No 96 (+5%)




54. SWEDEN - MALMO ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1713 1729 1742 1758 1890

Summer Traffic 1488 1505 1517 1539 1637

Yearly Traffic 1377 1386 1401 1425 1503



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

ESMMACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight decreased from 0.07 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to zero in Summer 2017.






Yes




Maximum configuration: 12 (2 sector groups) Yes 7 (Y) + 4 (R) sufficient to meet traffic demand.


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated with ACCESS to be at 130, 5% higher than in Summer 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 126 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 119.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 ESMML 5 29.9%

2017 ESMMK 3 20.2%

2017 ESMMW 3 17.7%

2017 ESMM4 1 8.6%

2017 ESMMY 1 7.5%

2017 ESMM3 1 5.1%

0

20

40

60


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Malmo ACC en-route delays in 2017

Malmo

ESMM ACC

Traffic Evolution

(2017 v 2016)


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.5%

B: 2.5%

L: 1.6%

No sig. impact

+5.5% 0.01 0.07

Summer +6.4% 0.00 0.10 No 130 (5%)




55. SWEDEN - STOCKHOLM ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1451 1426 1422 1436 1520

Summer Traffic 1113 1119 1124 1140 1226

Yearly Traffic 1069 1078 1077 1104 1175



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

ESOSACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays



76% of the delays were for the reason Weather, and 19% for the reason Airspace Management.






Yes




Maximum configuration: 6 (N) + 5 (S) Yes

8 sectors (4(N) + 4 (S), sufficient to meet traffic demand


The ACC capacity baseline was estimated to be at the same level as in Summer 2016. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 92 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 84.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 ESSATMA 24 62.0%

2017 NILUG 6 16.0%

2017 ESOS2 6 15.0%

2017 ESOS3 2 4.4%

2017 ESOS12679 1 2.0%

2017 ESSAEWS 0 0.2%

0

20

40

60

80


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Stockholm ACC en-route delays in 2017

Stockholm

ESOS ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 2.5%

B: 1.4%

L: 0.5%

No significant

impact

+6.5% 0.03 0.07

Summer +7.5% 0.05 0.02 No 112 (0%)




56. SWITZERLAND - GENEVA ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2050 2145 2154 2173 2313

Summer Traffic 1837 1876 1890 1937 2061

Yearly Traffic 1627 1654 1676 1710 1813



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LSAGACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.12 minutes per flight in summer 2016 to 0.31 minutes per flight in summer 2017.

43% of delays were for the reason Weather, 26% for ATC Capacity, 24% for the reason ATC Staffing and 6% for Equipment.


FABEC FRA Step 2 : H24 DCTs with military activity Yes

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures Yes Implemented at Airspace Request Level 1


Crystal – Traffic and complexity prediction tool Yes

Cross qualification of ATCOs (Upper/Lower) Yes 14 in 2018, 4 in 2019

Recruitment as necessary to maintain the required staffing levels Yes New class of trainees started in 2017

Harmonisation Release Yes

Virtual centre

Yes

- CRYSTAL tested in production on our Service Oriented Infrastructure (SOI) and Architecture (SOA) - NetBASE, improvement of the network between Dübendorf and Geneva

- Cross-site multicast of radar data

Reassessment of sector capacities following CAPAN study

Yes CAPAN study delivered, capacity increases planned in March 2018

Maximum configuration: 8/9 sectors (5/6 + 2/3) Yes 9 (6 upper sectors + 3 lower sectors)


The capacity baseline was measured using ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 157, which represents the capacity delivered during the Summer season in the ACC. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 155, and the peak 3 hour demand was 146.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LSAGL12 82 20.2%

2017 LSAGL5 61 15.1%

2017 LSAGL34 57 14.1%

2017 LSAGL4 55 13.5%

2017 LSAGSE 40 9.8%

2017 LSAGN 26 6.4%

0

50

100

150

200


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

Geveva ACC en-route delays in 2017

Geneva

LSAG ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.7%

B: 3.4%

L: 1.5%

+5%

+6.0% 0.22 0.19

Summer +6.4% 0.31 0.28 No 157 (+2%)




57. SWITZERLAND - ZURICH ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2485 2499 2508 2573 2701

Summer Traffic 2211 2241 2249 2309 2425

Yearly Traffic 1975 1984 2004 2039 2132



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LSAZACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The average en-route delay per flight slightly increased from 0.10 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.15 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

53% of delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 19% for Weather, 14% for ATC Staffing, and 13% for Equipment.


FABEC FRA Step 2 : Additional DCTs with military activity Yes

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures Yes Implemented at Airspace Request Level 1


Crystal – Traffic and complexity prediction tool Yes

Harmonisation Release / Upper Airspace Harmonisation and Optimisation (UHO)

Yes

Recruitment as necessary to maintain the staffing levels Yes New class of trainees started in 2017

Virtual centre

Yes

- CRYSTAL tested in production on our Service Oriented Infrastructure (SOI) and Architecture (SOA) - NetBASE, improvement of the network between Dübendorf and Geneva - Cross-site multicast of radar data

Maximum configuration: 10 sectors Yes 10 sectors opened (4 lower + 6 upper)


The capacity baseline was measured using ACCESS at 185. During the period June/July, the peak 1 hour demand was 180, and the peak 3 hour demand was 168.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 LSAZM12 57 22.9%

2017 LSZHTMA 52 20.7%

2017 LSZBTA 33 13.2%

2017 LSAZM5 26 10.6%

2017 LSAZM567 23 9.3%

2017 LSAZM34 17 6.8%

0

50

100

150


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Zurich ACC en-route delays in 2017

Zurich

LSAZ ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.2%

B: 2.9%

L:1.4%

+12%

+4.5% 0.12 0.18

Summer +5.0% 0.15 0.29 No 185 (+4%)




58. TURKEY - ANKARA /ISTANBUL ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 2587 2993 3370 4377 4629

Summer Traffic 2312 2626 2893 3842 4128

Yearly Traffic 2037 2302 2574 3443 3631



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

LTAAACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The enroute delay per flight in Ankara ACC remained at zero minutes per flight as in Summer 2016.



DMAN at LTBA No Technical problems solved. Tests ongoing. Planned implementation 2018.

Airport CDM at LTBA No Technical problems solved. Tests ongoing. Planned implementation 2018.


ATS route structure development Yes

Gradual upper airspace re-sectorisation (20 to 25 sectors + FL235) Yes

Additional controllers (45 per year for en-route) Yes

MINI project for interface within Turkey – additional CWPs Yes Ongoing

Capacity Assessment through a CAPAN study Yes



The capacity baseline of 221 was calculated with ACCESS for the new area of responsibility of Ankara ACC. During the same period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 225 and the peak 3 hour demand was 211.

Ankara

LTAA ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)

Traffic Forecast

Actual Traffic All reasons ACC

Reference Value Current

Routes Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.2%

B: 2.8%

L: 1.4%

No sig. impact

+5.5% 0.00 0.15

Summer +7.4% 0.00 0.23 No 221 (+6%)




59. UKRAINE - DNIPROPETROVSK ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 645 476 72 73 84

Summer Traffic 540 200 49 55 60

Yearly Traffic 467 233 43 48 51



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UKDVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average En-route ATFM delay remained at zero, as in Summer 2016.


Free Route Airspace development Yes Following a FRA Ukraine project (FRAU)

Sector configurations management, ATFCM measures development Yes




Dnipro-petrovsk

UKDV ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 14.7%

B: 12.5%

L: 11.1%

+17%

+8.2% 0.00 0.01

Summer +9.7% 0.00 0.01 No 54 (0%)




60. UKRAINE - KYIV ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 1004 945 603 533 572

Summer Traffic 783 604 496 386 484

Yearly Traffic 666 544 410 332 411



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UKBVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays









Kyiv

UKBV ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 19.4%

B: 16.6%

L: 13.8%

+43%

+23.5% 0.00 0.02

Summer +25.6% 0.00 0.01 No 73 (0%)




61. UKRAINE - L’VIV ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 796 697 411 405 448

Summer Traffic 574 379 289 315 361

Yearly Traffic 503 364 240 260 301



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UKLVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays








The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 72, the same level as last year. The peak 1 hour demand was 30 flights, and the peak 3 hour demand was 26 flights.

L’viv

UKLV ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 9.9%

B: 8.6%

L: 4.3%

+21%

+16.0% 0.00 0.01

Summer +14.7% 0.00 0.01 No 72 (0%)




62. UKRAINE - ODESA ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 543 556 413 382 401

Summer Traffic 387 361 315 243 311

Yearly Traffic 302 287 245 198 249



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

UKOVACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays








The ACC capacity baseline was estimated at 61, the same level as last year. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 23 flights and the the peak 3 hour demand was 19 flights.

Odesa

UKOV ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 19.1%

B: 16.4%

L: 13.7%

+37%

+25.8% 0.00 0.01

Summer +28.0% 0.00 0.01 No 61 (0%)




63. UNITED KINGDOM - LONDON ACC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 6040 6206 6300 6617 6898

Summer Traffic 5534 5655 5784 6076 6336

Yearly Traffic 4927 5033 5172 5411 5641



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EGTTACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight slightly increased from 0.11 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.14 minutes per flight in Summer 2017 (May to October inclusive). 47% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 37% for Weather, 13% for ATC Staffing and 2% for the reason Airspace Management.




RP2 Airspace Development Programme Yes


CPDLC Yes

Developing Queue Management programme Yes

Flexible use of existing staff (including cross-sector training) more closely related to sector demand Yes

On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Yes

Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Yes

Traffic Management Improvements Yes

Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Yes



The capacity baseline of 460 was calculated with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak hour demand was 468, the peak 3 hour demand was 410.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EGTTNOR 91 18.6%

2017 EGTT02LUE 52 10.6%

2017 EGTT01LUW 46 9.5%

2017 EGTTCLW 35 7.1%

2017 EGTTDTY 23 4.7%

2017 EGTT17LYD 22 4.4%

0

100

200

300


Avg

dail

y d

ela

y

(min

)

London ACC en-route delays in 2017

London

EGTT ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 4.8%

B: 3.8%

L: 2.6%

No significant

impact

+4.2% 0.09 0.18

Summer +4.3% 0.14 0.26 No 460 (+6%)




64. UNITED KINGDOM - LONDON TC Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 4071 4198 4319 4563 4615

Summer Traffic 3714 3819 3935 4109 4235

Yearly Traffic 3408 3511 3626 3767 3883



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EGTTTC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


Average enroute delay per flight decreased from 0.22 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 to 0.16 minutes per flight in Summer 2017.

66% of the delays were for the reason Weather, 18% for ATC Capacity, 13% for the reason ATC Staffing, 2% for Special Events and 1% for other.



RP2 Airspace Development Programme Yes


Flexible use of existing staff Yes





Maximum configuration: 44 (27 ENR + 17 APP) Yes


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 304. During the period June/July, the peak hour demand was 304, the peak 3 hour demand was 275.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EGTTLOR 127 28.0%

2017 EGTTSAJ 82 18.0%

2017 EGTTWEL 54 11.9%

2017 EGTTDAR 51 11.1%

2017 EGTTLAM 29 6.4%

2017 EGTTTCS 26 5.7%

0

100

200

300


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

London TMA TC en-route delays in 2017

London

EGTT TC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.4%

B: 2.5%

L: 1.4%

No significant

impact

+3.1% 0.12 0.11

Summer +3.0% 0.16 0.11 No 304(+6%)




65. UNITED KINGDOM - PRESTWICK ACC

Traffic & Delay

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Peak Day Traffic 3205 3079 3169 3353 3589

Summer Traffic 2682 2657 2700 2893 3104

Yearly Traffic 2398 2400 2441 2603 2784



0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Enro

ute

De

lay

(min

ute

s p

er

flig

ht)

IFR

flig

hts

(D

aily

Ave

rage

)

EGPXACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays


The delay per flight decreased from 0.51 minutes per flight in summer 2016 to 0.11 minutes per flight during the same period in 2017.

66% of the delays were due to ATC capacity, 32% to ATC staffing, 1% due to weather and 1% due to airspace management.




PC Lower Airspace Phase 1 and 2 Yes


CPDLC Yes


Flexible use of existing staff Yes







The capacity baseline of 237 was measured with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak 1 hour demand was 231, the peak 3 hour demand was 208.


YearReference

Location

Avg Daily

ER Delays

% of Total ACC

ER Delay

2017 EGPXDCS 42 20.9%

2017 EGPXHUM 36 17.9%

2017 EGPXDXS 32 16.0%

2017 EGPXCNS 17 8.4%

2017 EGPXMON 15 7.6%

2017 EGPXXTLA 13 6.7%

0

100

200

300

400


Avg

daily d

ela

y

(min

)

Scottish ACC en-route delays in 2017

Prestwick

EGPX ACC


Capacity gap?


(% difference

2017 v 2016)




Shortest Routes

Year H: 3.9%

B: 3.1%

L: 2.0%

No significant

impact

+7.0% 0.07 0.13

Summer +7.3% 0.11 0.18 No 237 (+17%)

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

EUROCONTROL

© April 2018 – European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

This document is published by EUROCONTROL for information purposes. It may be copied

in whole or in part, provided that EUROCONTROL is mentioned as the source and it is not used for

commercial purposes (i.e. for financial gain). The information in this document may not be modified

without prior written permission from EUROCONTROL.

www.eurocontrol.int

Network Managernominated by the European Commission

network operations report 2017 - eurocontrol · reasons, including weather and special events e.g....

Documents