2012 FPL TF6 24 April 2012
ICAO-EUROCONTROL 2012 FPL Task Force/6
24 April 2012
Notes of the TF/06 Meeting (Draft Version)
Chairman: Mr. Kim Breivik, Eurocontrol NMD
Secretary: Mr. Christian Andrzejewski, Eurocontrol NMD
Place: EUROCONTROL, Haren, Belgium.
Actions from the meeting are summarised in Annex A of these Notes.
The list of attendees is provided at Annex B.
The chairman welcomed all of the participants, with a special welcome to the representatives of States who are attending the Task Force for the first time.
1 Agenda & Action List
The list of actions from the last Task Force meeting was reviewed without comment. All actions were considered to be either complete or under work.
The proposed Agenda was adopted without change.
2 Test Activities
The Chairman presented a report about EUR2012 Testing Activities detailing the different OPT sessions , the testing participation, the results, the queries, the requirements issues after OPT1 (30 January – 3 February 2012) and OPT2 (20 – 24 February 2012) exercises.
A spreadsheet, provided at Annex C, containing a list of incidents raised during the OPT1 & 2 sessions, as well as those raised by the IFPS Test Team since OPT2, was presented to the attendees.
The spreadsheet also contained some frequently asked questions received as a result of the testing activity. It was explained that the spreadsheet is a living document and while it could be distributed to the Task Force members it would very quickly become out of date and therefore misleading.
The Chairman explained the difficulties to provide a definitive report after an OPT session due to the time needed for analysis firstly by the participant, then feedback to the Test Team followed by further analysis to determine whether or not an error exists and if so whether it is software related or a requirements issue. Nevertheless it was accepted that an initial feedback would be provided indicating whether or not incidents had been raised, their nature and if possible their status. More importantly it was made clear that prior to the start of an OPT session the Test Team will provide all participants with an indication of any known problems within the software together with a list of the registered participants.
The meeting was informed that all incidents raised to date which impact external stakeholders had already been fixed in the release that will be used for OPT3. Although it was further explained that not all fixes had, by the time of the meeting, been verified by the Test Team as being successful.
In response to some remarks both during the meeting and also reported following the OPT session the Chairman reminded the audience that IFPS does not perform a total flight plan validation which would ensure that every aspect of the flight plan is correct and consistent. He pointed out that IFPS only performs the necessary validation required by European States and that there are many examples of possible inconsistencies that are not validated by IFPS because they are not considered a priority within Europe. Most of the remarks concerned aspects of the IFPS processing that have existed for many years and have little or nothing to do with the ICAO 2012 changes.
In response to a question about differences between regions it was pointed out that considerable coordination had taken place, and continues to take place, informally between regions to discuss, and if possible, harmonise our requirements and specifications. Nevertheless it had to be recognised that different regions and different types of airspace have different needs that cannot always be harmonised and that some differences are inevitable.
Translation Tables
The meeting was informed that the 16.5 release will include a correction to the translation tables which will ensure that the letter ‘Z’ will be added in Field 10 in all circumstances where one or more of the indicators COM/, NAV/ or DAT/ is added to Field 18. This correction will be visible in the OPT5 & 6 sessions in September.
Field 18 modification via ACH
It was reported that the ACH message was currently not providing complete Field 18 information when modifying the field via ACH. The meeting was informed that this will be corrected for OPT3 but only in the case of ACH due to AFP processing. Following the availability of the 16.5 release in June the complete Field 18 will be provided when modified via ACH due to FNM and/or MFS message processing.
Test Scenario
The standard test scenario used in all OPT sessions was discussed and in particular a proposal to move the ‘IFPS Switch’ and ‘2012 Ready’ parameters forwards by a day so that they would be applied at 0700UTC on Tuesday and 1000UTC on Wednesday respectively. The Chairman pointed out that many participants, both current and future, have prepared or are in the process of preparing their test data and test scenarios according to the published timings and that any change therefore should only be accepted if there is a very strong consensus. It was also pointed out that the ‘2012 ready’ parameter can be requested, via the registration form, to be set to an earlier time thereby enabling reception of New format over a longer period.
It was concluded that the published test scenarios should remain unchanged.
Participation
An inventory of the participants already registered for the next OPT session (OPT3) was provided and the procedure of registration was explained to the “newcomers”. The participants were kindly reminded that the registration for an OPT should be delivered at least two weeks prior to the respective testing session, in order to allow the Test Team sufficient time for preparation.
The importance of participation within a test session(s) was again underlined pointing out that only rigorous testing will provide assurance that the requirements and specifications have been understood in the same way and implemented correctly. They also provide the opportunity to determine possible impact on operational procedures and staff training needs reducing the danger of any last minute surprises.
3 Deployment Activities
Transition
A presentation was provided in which the EUR deployment policy was reviewed together with the IFPS deployment. The 15 Nov roll-over period was reviewed and the impact of the different parameter settings available to addressees receiving an IFPS service were described. In particular it was explained how the minimum period of time during which it is unavoidable to have both Old and New formats in an ATC units database is dependant upon the flight plan distribution time parameter for the unit concerned. A unit that receives FPLs from IFPS two hours in advance will have fewer Old format messages in the system prior to transition and therefore a shorter period of mixed mode formats than a unit that receives FPLs six hours in advance.
In response to a question it was confirmed that any unit, having just transitioned to New format at their ‘2012_Ready’ parameter time may, following the transition, send RQP messages for each Old format FPL in their system at that time. The IFPS will respond by providing the FPL in New format. Of course it has to be appreciated that if the unit concerned has opted for a transition time earlier than the default (0000UTC on 16th Nov) there is a greater chance that the FPL may have been received by IFPS in Old format in which case the RQP will return the same Old format FPL.
RPLs
The procedure concerning the submission of RPLs for the Winter 2012/2013 was questioned. It was explained that the winter season submissions should be provided in New format. If that was not feasible for an operator then it would be necessary to split the validity period of each RPL such that Old format was applicable before 15 Nov. and New format from 15 Nov. onwards.
Parameter Settings
The meeting was reminded that States receiving an IFPS service should provide their requirements with regard to the setting of the ‘2012_Ready’ parameter, and/or any other related change, via their Environment Coordinator. The next ENV Coordinators meeting will take place at the end of May and will discuss this process.
Item 10 & PBN Filing Guidance
The meeting was provided with a presentation, reproduced at Annex D, which proposes guidance material designed to assist flight plan filers to provide the necessary & correct indications with regard to the CNS capabilities of a flight. In particular, the need to provide no more than eight PBN indications, the limit allowed by Amendment 1, when a particular flight may qualify for more than eight.
Part of the proposal is based upon a rationalisation of certain indications where, for example, if a particular capability exists there is no need to include other capabilities within the same function.
In the case of RNAV 5 capability it is proposed that the removal of LORAN C, which is no longer required, from within the single ‘all sensors’ indication would reduce significantly the required number of indications in a flight plan.
It was explained that the PBN proposal had been developed by the Navigation Team and discussed within the latest NSG meeting on 18th April where it was supported from the technical navigational specification perspective. Ms. Carole Stewart-Green, of the EUR/NAT Office of ICAO, expressed her concern that the use of ‘all sensors’ without inclusion of LORAN C was not in accordance with the PANS-ATM provisions.
The Task Force was informed that the same proposal was being put to other regions with the objective of achieving widespread consensus.
The meeting was in general agreement with the proposal but due to the lack of advance notice the Chairman invited the members to provide comment by the end of May.
Current Operations
The meeting was provided with feedback concerning the current IFPS operations with regard to 2012 issues. It was reported that on average 50 FPLs per day fail due to the presence of New indications within Old format FPLs. Errors also occur due to the provision of partial information when modifying Field 18 via CHG.
The meeting was informed that during the 15th November roll-over period IFPS staffing will be increased. The meeting was also informed that IFPS has the ability to automatically reject specific errors and/or specific errors received from a specific address and that, if necessary, these methods may need to be employed if the manual workload becomes too high.
Training
The Task Force was provided with a demonstration of the Computer Based Training (CBT) module developed by EUROCONTROL to support the 2012 Flight Planning changes. It provides a complete description of the data exchanges and procedures impacted by the 2012 changes and is freely available via the 2012 web page or the Training Zone under ‘Catalogue’ – ‘Direct Access’ .
The meeting was also informed that, in addition to the complete module, direct access is available to the ‘guide’ which is a part of the training module and allows users to search for the correct format to be used for the different fields of the new ICAO Flight Plan.
FPL 2012 : http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/icao-flight-planning-modifications-2012
Training Zone : https://trainingzone.eurocontrol.int
Post Meeting Update : The EUR/NAT Office of ICAO sent a State Letter to advise about the availability of this training. In addition, coordination was initiated with ICAO Headquarters to support global awareness.
4 Awareness and Publications
4.1 Draft AIC
The draft generic AIC (AP 1) as presented was discussed and a number of corrections or clarifications were agreed.
The meeting was informed that for at least one IFPS State the presence of a RMK/ indication in a flight plan triggered a manual processing. As the translation function makes widespread use of RMK/ it was suggested that early submission to IFPS of New format FPLs ahead of the 12 Nov date should not be widely encouraged. Early submission of New format and the potential problems associated with an extended period of mixed mode i.e. the reception of both Old and New format messages for the same flight, were discussed. It was felt that the agreed European policy, the 3-day transition beginning 12 Nov, should be adhered to in so far as possible when conveying the message to the airspace users.
It was concluded that an updated AIC incorporating the agreed changes would be provided shortly after the meeting.
Post Meeting Update : The agreed version was distributed by ICAO Paris the following day and via the TF on 28th April. Coordination was also initiated with ICAO Headquarters for global awareness.
5 Date of Next Meeting
Next meeting: 10th October 2012
Notes of 2012 FPL Task Force 120424_D2
Annex A: Summary of Actions 2012 FPL TF6 24 April 2012
Annex A: Summary of Actions
Action Ref. / Description / By / Date / Status /6/1 / to update the EUR2012_Ready Parameter to 16 Nov. at 00:00 UTC in all Eurocontrol documents concerned / Project Team / May
2012 / New
6/2 / to update in the CFMU 2012 REQUIREMENTS document the ANNEX 1 COM/NAV/SUR TRANSLATION TABLE / Project Team / May
2012 / New
6/3 / to provide an updated version of the AIC / Project Team / May
2012 / Done
6/4 / to perform an awareness campaign within each State aimed primarily at airspace users / All States / May
2012 / New
6/5 / to update the EUR Implementation Plan to reflect the latest feedback from States / Project Team / May
2012 / New
6/6 / to undertake further actions to obtain the status of those States not having responded to State Letters / Project Team / May
2012 / Ongoing
6/7 / to provide feedback to the proposed guidance material concerning the filing of PBN indications / Project Team / June 2012 / New
Notes of 2012 FPL Task Force 120424_D2