PCP Expert Group 3Edition 23.02.13

PCP Expert Group 3Edition 23.02.13

Deployment Analysis

Network Collaborative Management, DCB and Free Route
Document information
PCP Expert Group / 3
Deliverable Name / Deployment Analysis
Edition / 00.00.00
Task contributors
BILLARD, Eric (ECTL/DSS)
BLOEM, Fred (SJU)
BOUMAN, Chris (ECTL/NM)- Chair
BRAIN, Chris (ECTL/NM)
BURGESS, Mark (BAA/Heathrow)
CANNAVICCI, Claudio (ENAV)
CONDIS, Jérome (Airbus)
COQUEL, Jacqueline (Air France)
FERRO, Daniel (Airbus)
GREENAWAY, Matt (NATS)
LABY, Mikael (Airbus)
De LANG, Noud (MUAC)
LATGE, Dominique (Thales)
LEWIS, Robert (Selex)
RICHARD, Marcel (ECTL/NM)
RIVOISY François-Xavier (ADP)
RODRIGUEZ, Andrés (Indra)
TROUSLARD, Philippe (DSNA)
Please complete the advanced properties of the document
Abstract
This document provides the assessment of PCP Expert Group 3 (EG3) of 2015-2019 deployments in the areas of dynamic Demand Capacity Balancing (in particular: STAM), NOP-AOP Integration, Free Route Airspace at Network Level, and Airspace Management (particularly A-FUA). The process followed was to establish a generic view of subject deployments and from that consider the appropriateness of the proposed OI-steps concerned and their enablers, and provide related contextual information. EG3 had 6 meetings with constructive input reflecting ANSP, AO, Airport and manufacturing industry points of view, to arrive at this description of the “What” i.e. the scope of assumed deployments in PCP time frames.

Authoring & Approval

Reviewed By - Reviewers internal to the Expert Groop.
Name & Company / Position Title / Date
Expert Group 3 / 10/12/2012
Approved for submission to the SJU By - Representatives of the company involved in the project.
Name & Company / Position Title / Date
<Name / Company> / <Position / Title> / <DD/MM/YYYY>
Rejected By - Representatives of the company involved in the project.
Name & Company / Position Title / Date
<Name / Company> / <Position / Title> / <DD/MM/YYYY>
Rational for rejection
None.

Document History

Edition / Date / Status / Author / Justification
30.11.12 / 30/11/2012 / draft / PCP EG3 / First Input
03.12.12 / 03/12/2012 / draft / PCP EG3 / Input 4 Dec’12 meeting
06.12.12 / 06/12/2012 / draft / PCP EG3 / Input to 7 Dec’12 meeting
10.12.12 / 10/12/2012 / Final proposal / PCP EG3 / Deliverable to PCP SG
23.02.13 / 23/02/13 / With new section 1 / LDO / Assembly of updated section 1 of 15/1 into original DA details

Table of Contents

Executive summary

1.1High-Level Operational impact description

1.1.1Cooperative Traffic Management (incl. STAM, CTOT=>TTO/TTA, towards i4D, CTA/CTO)

1.1.2Initial Integration AOP/NOP

1.1.3ASM/A-FUA

- Extensive use of modular areas and Introduction of mechanisms allowing the definition and use of flexible, ad hoc, reserved/segregated airspace structures within a given Airspace Configuration, and improved management of segments of CDRs.

- More flexibility in definition and operation of sector configurations taking into account not only traffic demand but also the airspace availability as result of the CDM process; indeed airspace allocation and sector configuration should offer enough flexibility in order to identify the best combination to satisfy civil and military requests, exploit resources available and minimize the need of ATFM measures, while keeping to a simple and straightforward coordination process.

- More extensive cross border operations across Europe, supported by FABs implementations, resulting in shared use of reserved/segregated areas, taking into account reasonable sharing of environmental nuisance.

1.1.4FRA at Network Level

1.2High-Level System impact description

1.2.1System impact Transversal requirements

1.2.2System impact Cooperative Traffic Management

1.2.3System impact initial integration NOP/AOP

1.2.4System impact Airspace Management / Advanced-FUA

1.2.5System impact Free Route Airspace

Attachment: CTOT to target and controlled times different conceptual usage

2Short Term ATFCM Measures (OI STEP DCB-0205)

2.1OI Step description

2.2Related Enablers description

2.2.1System

2.2.2Procedural

2.2.3Institutional: None

3Enhanced Short Term ATFCM Measures (OI STEP DCB-0308)

3.1OI Step description

3.2Related Enablers description

3.2.1System

3.2.2Procedural

3.2.3Institutional

3.3Background & assumption

3.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

3.3.2Aeronautical services involved

3.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

3.3.4Actors involved

3.3.5Flows of information between actors

3.3.6Impact on airborne systems

3.3.7Impact on ground systems

3.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

3.4.1Standards

oLocal And sub-Regional Airspace Management support system (LARA) and Stanly (DFS built)

MET systems

oDiffer per State.

Not specified systems

oElectronic Flight Bag. The EFB is however just a replacement of the current printed information required on board the aircraft

oCPDLC or trajectory D-link.

oACARS

3.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

3.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

3.5Maturity and implementation considerations

3.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

3.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

4Automated support for traffic complexity assessment (OI STEP CM-0103A)

4.1OI Step description

4.2Related Enablers description

4.2.1System

4.2.2Procedural

4.2.3Institutional: None

4.3Background & assumption

4.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

4.3.2Aeronautical services involved

4.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

4.3.4Actors involved

4.3.5Flows of information between actors

4.3.6Impact on airborne systems

4.3.7Impact on ground systems

4.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

4.4.1Standards

4.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

4.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

4.5Maturity and implementation considerations

4.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

4.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

5Integration of initial Network and Airport Planning (OI STEP DCB-0103-A)

5.1OI Step description

5.2Related Enablers description

5.2.1System

5.2.2Procedural

5.2.3Institutional

5.3Background & assumption

5.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

5.3.2Aeronautical services involved

5.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

5.3.4Actors involved

5.3.5Flows of information between actors

5.3.6Impact on airborne systems

5.3.7Impact on ground systems

5.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

5.4.1Standards

5.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

5.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

5.5Maturity and implementation considerations

5.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

5.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

6Airspace Management and Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace (OI STEP AOM-0206-A)

6.1OI Step description

It is important to note that the OI Step AOM-0206A does not cover all the scope of the ASM evolutions expected in the PCP timeframe.

6.2Related Enablers description

6.2.1System

6.2.2Procedural:

6.2.3Institutional: None

6.3Background & assumption

6.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

6.3.2Aeronautical services involved

6.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

6.3.4Actors involved

6.3.5Flows of information between actors

6.3.6Impact on airborne systems

6.3.7Impact on ground systems

6.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

6.4.1Standards

oLocal And sub-Regional Airspace Management support system (e.g. LARA, Stanly)

6.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

6.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

6.5Maturity and implementation considerations

6.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

Maturity description below is derived from SJU material and updates from WP 7.5.2

AOM-0206-A (Flexible Military Airspace Structures)

Release and Roadmap analysis

The following analysis relates to AOM-0206.

Two Validation Exercises have been defined in R2, and one exercise (VP-515) is planned in R4.

6.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

7Free Routing (OI STEP AOM-0501)

7.1OI Step description

7.2Related Enablers description

7.2.1System

7.2.2Procedural

7.2.3Institutional: None

7.3Background & assumption

7.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

7.3.2Aeronautical services involved

7.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

7.3.4Actors involved

7.3.5Flows of information between actors

7.3.6Impact on airborne systems

7.3.7Impact on ground systems

7.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

7.4.1Standards

7.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

7.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

7.5Maturity and implementation considerations

7.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

7.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

8Free Route Airspace in high density traffic (OI STEP AOM-0502)

8.1OI Step description

8.2Related Enablers description

8.2.1System

8.2.2Procedural

8.2.3Institutional: None

8.3Background & assumption

8.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

8.3.2Aeronautical services involved

8.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

8.3.4Actors involved

8.3.5Flows of information between actors

8.3.6Impact on airborne systems

8.3.7Impact on ground systems

8.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

8.4.1Standards

8.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

8.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

8.5Maturity and implementation considerations

8.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

8.5.2Any other deployment considerations not covered above

9Title to be developed (OI STEP AOM-0403-A Step)

9.1OI Step description

9.2Related Enablers description

9.2.1System

9.2.2Procedural: None

9.2.3Institutional: None

9.3Background & assumption

9.3.1Related SESAR Specifications

9.3.2Aeronautical services involved

9.3.3Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

9.3.4Actors involved

9.3.5Flows of information between actors

9.3.6Impact on airborne systems

9.3.7Impact on ground systems

9.4Related standardization and regulatory activities

9.4.1Standards

9.4.2Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks

9.4.3Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks

9.5Maturity and implementation considerations

9.5.1Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy

Any other deployment considerations not covered above-

END OF DOCUMENT-

Executive summary

The following sections provide a summary description of the improvements that have been considered by EG3, based on agreed overviews of improvement directions, and then linked to the OI-steps that can be found in this document.

Collaborative Traffic Management

Improving the ATC-ATFCM-Airport operations interaction will improve traffic predictability and provides the cornerstone for delivering traffic to downstream ATC sectors in a ‘shape’ (rate, sequence, complexity) that allows best use of available resources, and for network support to airport arrival sequencing processes, thus reducing the need for ATFCM measures and reducing the need for excessive airport holding.

The 2015-2020 improvements addressed in this deployment analysis aim to:

-improve predictability by achieving an adherence to (improved) planning to the extent possible without affecting the flexibility required for ATC/AU operations,

-reduce the need for ATFCM measures (generating delays and re-routings) by stepwise assessing alternative solutions and, as required, manage specific flights in quasi real-time (STAMs)

-improve predictability by cooperatively managing ATCFM congestions at the point of congestion rather than only at departure (moving from CTOT to a target time at a given congested node), and

-using target times to support airport arrival sequencing processes in the en-route phase, optimising the use of available ATC arrival capacity and minimising flight inefficiencies resulting from vectoring and holding activity

Complexity management tools, basic and enhanced, will increase the accuracy and effectiveness of the processes to align traffic demand with available capacity and associated ATFCM measures.

This improvement area is supported by the Performance Scheme Implementing Rule. The maturity of preparation work (incl validation) for the essential elements of these deployments is considered medium to high. A risk is reduced maturity due to confusion on the objectives of target times, which is addressed in this deployment analysis. In terms of the ICAO ASBU’s, this area is covered by Module’s B0-35, B1-35, B2-35.

Initial Integration of Network and Airport Planning

In 2015-2020, the integration between network and airport planning will be progressively improved through better exchange of data, and strengthened airport-network coordination processes to address ATFCM measures and optimisation of arrival sequencing.

Airport Planning information will enhance the predictability at network level and support collaborative decision making processes e.g. for STAMs in terms of departure sequencing and will be enhanced with severe weather information impacting capacity and airport constraints on day of operation.

The maturity of preparation work (incl. validation) for the essential elements of these deployments is considered medium to high. A risk is achieving the A-CDM baseline objective and convincing airports to invest in integration with network operations. There is no explicit link with the ICAO ASBU’s.

Airspace Management/Advanced-FUA

For Enhanced Flexible Use of Airspace/Airspace Management, the first steps towards airspace configurations will be deployed anddirect actions with the military partners will be promoted to achieve the following improvements at local level:

Inclusion of future civil/military airspace requirements
Update ASM procedures and processes, when required, to change from procedures and processes based on a fixed ATS route structure to civil/military airspace structures (CDRs, airspace volumes, etc.)
Following a gradually harmonized application of FUA at local level, initiate consistent data sharing with respect to the availability of civil/military airspace structures in support of a more dynamic ASM and FRA implementation
The deployment of ASM solutions in support of the airspace users
Enhanced cooperation at pre-tactical and tactical level
Getting closer together planning and operations
Integrating ASM/ATFCM
Enhanced ASM network assessment in cooperation with NM

This improvement area is supported by EC Regulations No 551/2004 (Airspace Regulation) andNo 2150/2005 (Flexible Use of Airspace). The maturity of preparation work (incl. validation) for the essential elements of these deployments is considered medium to high. A risk is the readiness of military authorities to change processes and invest for the advantage of civil flights. In terms of the ICAO ASBU’s, this area is covered by Module’s B0-10 and B1-10.

Free Route Airspace

Free Route Airspace (FRA) is defined as a specified airspace within which users may freely plan a route between a defined entry point and a defined exit point, with the possibility to route via intermediate (published or unpublished) way points, without reference to the ATS route network, subject to airspace availability. Within this airspace, flights remain subject to air traffic control. The target by 2019/2020 is to achieve the maximum possible number of FRA implementations, as defined above, along with cross border operations in low, medium complexity airspace and at least one implementation in complex airspace.

The current Free Routeand FRA-like developments and deployments at local and network level have reached a good level of maturity. Future deployment is mostly planned in incremental phases according to local ANSP/FAB capabilities. Typically initial implementation starts with the publishing of DCT-routes or constraints, progressing to more flexible operation over time. This is seen as a logical process on the way to reaching the target concept. In periods of high traffic demand, in complex airspace areas, it may be necessary to have systemised traffic flows or routes in a specific airspace volume in order to maintain capacity.

This improvement area is supported by the European Route Network Implementation Planning (as referred to in the NM IR). The maturity of preparation work (incl validation) for the essential elements of these deployments is considered medium to high. A risk is the readiness for deployment of specific enablers that are considered to be required in the more demanding FRA environments. In terms of the ICAO ASBU’s, this area is covered by Module’s B0-10 and B1-10.

1.1High-Level Operational impact description

As an overall direction towards 2020 and as context for the deployments addressed in this analyses, the network development, while delivering safer ATM operations, aim to reduce existing ATM constraints to airspace users, exploiting existing and emerging aircraft and ground (CNS, ATC) system capabilities, and exploiting opportunities in the Single European Sky context. Its major purpose is to support Airspace Users, Airport Operator and ANSP in meeting their business objectives by increasing cost-efficiency through improved network performance, notably capacity and flight efficiency. This approach, addressing the overall SESAR direction, is characterised by:

To provide the basis for optimal business/mission trajectories and reduction in route length extensions and increase of capacity, Free Route Airspace (FRA) will be available in the airspace where the majority of enroute portions of flight is conducted. Airports and multi-hub TMAs will be linked to FRA by dedicated fixed routes aimed at maximising arrivals to and departures from airports in a sequence which prioritises the top hub airports. Restricted/reserved airspaces will be modular to provide built-in flexibility.

ATC sectors, reserved/restricted airspace, and airport infrastructures are configured & managed to optimise network performance, and to provide Airspace Users with operational options balancing capacity with flight efficiency and mission effectiveness. This is achieved through collaborative decision making at local (incl. airports), FAB and network level, using (real-time) what-if assessments, aligning resource planning, and minimising adverse effect of individual responsibilities or requirements on network performance.

To maximise the usage of available network capacity and to allow the airspace user to continuously optimise their operational business performance, network constraintsare managed by 4D measures (time, route, level) focused at the constraint. Targets are continuously delivered to reflect the operational situation and users’ capabilities. This is based on procedures for the operational use of targets and on the continuous sharing of real-time traffic and operational decision and capability data between all actors. All flights are linked, and capacity or routing issues can be now solved with micro measures to the 4D-trajectories of several flights.

To reduce the workload and to allow increase in both safety and capacity, Airports, ATC and Airspace Users manage together issued targets with the support of appropriate ATM (prediction) tools and aircraft navigational capabilities, thus increasing the predictability of network operation. This will also develop the trust in network operations’ planning leading to better use of available resources. Where opportunities or disruptions emerge, ATC and flight crew can adapt flight trajectories through network coordination.

The above overall direction can be seen as driver for the following high level description of the PCP improvement areas addressed by EG3.

1.1.1Cooperative Traffic Management (incl. STAM, CTOT=>TTO/TTA, towards i4D, CTA/CTO)

Cooperative Traffic Management minimises ATM constraints on individual flights and increases cost-effectiveness, by better utilising ATC and Airport resources through the collaborative optimisation of traffic delivery into congested sectors and airports during the executive phase of flight.