Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1413 No 03/1203 11 … Report provides an update on the evolution of the environment indicators1 listed in the ... Enhancing European en-route airspace design

No 03/1203

Edition: AIRAC 1203

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1413

11 December 2014 - 7 January 2015

European Route Network Improvement Plan

(ERNIP) Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1413 11 December 2014 -- 7 January 2015

NETWORK MANAGER

Left blank intentionally

European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) - Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report AIRAC 1413 (11 December 2014 - 7 January 2015)

- 5 -

TABLE OF CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENT ...................................................................................................................... 5

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 7

1.1 SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 7

1.2 ACHIEVING THE EUROPEAN TARGET ............................................................................ 7

1.3 AIRSPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING ............. 8

1.4 EXTERNAL DOCUMENT RELEASE .................................................................................. 8

2. LIST OF PROPOSALS IMPLEMENTED AIRAC 1413 (11 DECEMBER 2014) ................ 9

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 11 December 2014 ................. 9

3. EVOLUTION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ........................................................... 10

3.1 AIRSPACE DESIGN INDICATOR EVOLUTION ............................................................... 10

3.2 FLIGHT PLANNING INDICATOR EVOLUTION ................................................................ 10

3.3 ROUTE AVAILABILITY INDICATOR EVOLUTION ........................................................... 10

3.4 FLIGHT EFFICIENCY EVOLUTION PER AIRAC CYCLE ................................................ 11

3.4.1 EVOLUTION OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL INDICATORS ......................................... 12

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR .................................................................... 12

3.4.3 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL EVOLUTIONS ......... 12

3.4.4 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-RAD EVOLUTIONS .................................. 17

3.5 AIRSPACE CHANGES EVOLUTION ................................................................................ 17

3.6 FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE EVOLUTION .......................................................................... 18

3.7 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................ 19

3.7.1 CDR OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 19

3.7.2 FUA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (RoCA, RAI, RAU) ........................................... 20

3.8 TRAFFIC EVOLUTION ..................................................................................................... 22

3.8.1 CDR UTILISATION ...................................................................................................... 24

4. NETWORK MANAGER CONTRIBUTION TO FLIGHT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS 26

4.1 FLIGHT EFFICIENCY EVOLUTION ASSESSMENT ........................................................ 26

4.2 INCREASED CDR AVAILABILITY AND UTILISATION ASSESSMENT ........................... 27

4.3 TOTAL BENEFITS FOR FLIGHT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS ................................. 28

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 11 DECEMBER 2014 .................. 29

ANNEX B: ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ............................................................................ 37


Monitoring Report AIRAC 1413 (11 December 2014 -– 7 January 2015)

- 6 -




- 7 -

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 SUMMARY

This Report provides an update on the evolution of the environment indicators1 listed in the Network Manager Performance Plan and plots on the progress achieved in improving airspace design and utilisation flight efficiency, in line with the improvement proposals implemented in the relevant AIRAC cycle.

This edition focuses on AIRAC 1413 (11 DECEMBER 2014 - 7 JANUARY 2015). The methodology used for assessing flight efficiency is described in WP/9 of RNDSG/64. This document can be found at: https://extranet.eurocontrol.int/ftp/?t=4df773eea3ffaea31e3d1768150125b3

1.2 ACHIEVING THE EUROPEAN TARGET

The Performance Scheme for air navigation services and network functions includes an environment/ flight efficiency Key Performance Area: Average horizontal en-route flight efficiency:

the average horizontal en-route flight efficiency indicator is the difference between the length of the en-route part of the trajectory and the optimum trajectory which is, on average, the great circle distance.

“en-route” is defined as the distance flown outside a circle of 40 NM around the airport. the flights considered for the purpose of this indicator are:

o all commercial IFR flights within European airspace; o where a flight departs or arrives outside the European airspace, only that part inside

the European airspace is considered; o circular flights and flights with a great circle distance shorter than 80NM between

terminal areas are excluded. Environment target 2012 - 2014: For the performance reference period starting on 1st January 2012 and ending on 31st December 2014, the European Union-wide and EUROCONTROL performance target is as follows: Reduction of 0,75 percentage points of the average horizontal en-route flight efficiency indicator in 2014 as compared to the situation in 2009. Objectives:

Develop and support the deployment of 500 airspace changes in 2012 -- 2014. Support the implementation of Free Route Airspace in 25 ACCs by 2014. Increase annually the number of CDRs by 5% annually (FUA). Increase annually the CDR1/2 availability and usage by an average of 5% annually

(FUA). Reduce the route unavailability (in time and quantity) by 10% in 2013 and 2014 (FUA). Reduction of vertical flight inefficiency by 5% in 2014.

Note: The FUA indicators (bullet 3-5) are reported on quarterly. Flight efficiency (bullet 6) is reported on only twice per year.

1 FPL: Flight Plan data provided by NM systems; SAAM analysis carried out by NM. DES/RAD: Traffic demand provided by NM systems; airspace environment data, profile calculations and SAAM analysis provided by NM.



- 8 -

1.3 AIRSPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

MONITORING

The Network Manager coordinates the following activities to achieve the required improvement in flight efficiency: Enhancing European en-route airspace design through annual improvements of European

ATS route network, high priority being given to: the implementation of a coherent package of annual improvements and shorter routes; improving efficiency for the most penalised city pairs; the implementation of additional Conditional Routes for main traffic flows; supporting initial implementation of free route airspace.

Improving airspace utilisation and route network availability through: actively supporting and involving aircraft operators and the computer flight plan service

providers in flight plan quality improvements; gradually applying route availability restrictions only where and when required; improving the use and availability of civil/military airspace structures.

Efficient Terminal Manoeuvring Area (TMA) design and utilisation through: implementing advanced navigation capabilities; implementing Continuous Descent Operations (CDO), improved arrival/departure routes,

optimised departure profiles, etc. Improving awareness of performance.

1.4 EXTERNAL DOCUMENT RELEASE The latest AIRAC report is available on the EUROCONTROL Airspace design website under the sub section ERNIP ERNIP Implementation Monitoring Latest monitoring report:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/airspace-design as well as on the EUROCONTROL Network Operations Monitoring and Reporting website under European Route Network Improvement Plan - Monitoring Report:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/network-operations-monitoring-and-reporting The full list of monitoring reports is available on the EUROCONTROL Media & Info Centre website:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications?title=&field_term_publication_type_tid=205&year[value][y

ear]=

A copy of the AIRAC Report of the European Route Network Improvement Plan is also available via the restricted EUROCONTROL OneSky Online websites for access by other interested members of the RNDSG, ASMSG and NETOPS (see ref sub-sections under main section "LIBRARY"): https://ost.eurocontrol.int/sites/NETOPS/SitePages/Home.aspx

https://ost.eurocontrol.int/sites/RNDSG/SitePages/Home.aspx

https://ost.eurocontrol.int/sites/ASM-SG/SitePages/Home.aspx



- 9 -

2. LIST OF PROPOSALS IMPLEMENTED AIRAC 1413 (11 DECEMBER 2014)

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 11 December 2014

During the AIRAC cycle 27 (twenty - seven) airspace improvement packages co-ordinated at network level were implemented. Apart from several ATS route network and RAD improvements the list below provides an overview of the major enhancements implemented on 11 December 2014:

Austria: - Free Route Airspace Wien, FRAW, Stage 3b.

Bulgaria / Romania:

- SOMOV area re-organisation.

Germany: - Further expansion of the Free Route Airspace Concept within Karlsruhe UAC

(new/ extended DCT options).

Maastricht UAC: - Variable division flight level at Maastricht UAC DECO sector group.

Romania:

- Time application expansion for Night Free Route within Bucuresti FIR (N-FRAB).

A detailed list of all improvement measures implemented on 11 December 2014 is attached in Annex A. The list is an extract of the European Route Network Improvement Plan database accessible via:

https://extranet.eurocontrol.int/http://prisme-web.hq.corp.eurocontrol.int/ernip_database/Index.action A description of the airspace changes and improvements together with an orientation map due for implementation on the relevant AIRAC cycle is provided in the RNDSG Airspace Improvements Synopsis (RAIS) via the restricted EUROCONTROL OneSky Online website for RNDSG.

The latest situation of the European route network structure is available and updated at each AIRAC cycle through the publication of Regional Electronic Charts that can be found here: http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/eurocontrol-regional-charts



- 10 -

3. EVOLUTION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

3.1 AIRSPACE DESIGN INDICATOR EVOLUTION

The graph below shows the yearly evolution of airspace design flight efficiency (RTE-DES2) over the period 2007 - 2013 and its evolution until 7 January 2015.

Figure 1 : Airspace Design indicator evolution

3.2 FLIGHT PLANNING INDICATOR EVOLUTION

The graph below shows the yearly evolution of the last filed flight plan indicator (RTE-FPL3) over the period 2007 - 2013 and its evolution until 7 January 2015.

Figure 2 : Airspace Design indicator evolution

3.3 ROUTE AVAILABILITY INDICATOR EVOLUTION

The impact of the civil route restrictions included in the Route Availability Document (RAD) is measured through a specific RAD indicator (RTE-RAD4). The graph below shows the yearly evolution of the RTE-RAD indicator between January 2012 and 7 January 2015.

Figure 3 : Route Availability indicator evolution

2 RTE-DES (Flight Extension due to Route Network Design) This KPI will be calculated by measuring the difference between the shortest route length (from TMA exit and entry points) and the great circle distance. For this KPI the RAD will not be taken into account and all the CDR routes will be considered as open. 3 RTE-FPL (Flight Extension due to Route Network Utilisation - last filled FPL) This KPI will be calculated by measuring the difference between the route from the last filed flight plan for each flight (from TMA exit and entry points) and the great circle distance. 4 RTE-RAD: (Flight Extension due to Route Network Utilisation - RAD active) This KPI will be calculated by measuring the difference between the shortest plannable route length (from TMA exit and entry points) and the great circle distance. For this KPI the RAD will be taken into account and all the CDR routes will be considered as open.

3,53%3,54%3,45%3,22%3,04%2,96%2,80%2,63%2,54%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

RTE-DES

4,91%5,03%4,90%4,91%4,73%4,64%4,57%4,57%4,42%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

RTE-FPL

3,75% 3,65% 3,48% 3,35%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2012 2013 2014 2015

RTE-RAD



- 11 -

3.4 FLIGHT EFFICIENCY EVOLUTION PER AIRAC CYCLE The graph below shows the evolution per AIRAC cycle of the two main flight efficiency indicators RTE-DES and RTE-FPL over the period 2010 - 2013 and the evolution until 7 January 2015.

Figure 4 : Flight efficiency (DES, RAD) evolution per AIRAC cycle (French/ Belgium strike included)

The graph below shows the evolution per AIRAC cycle of the two main efficiency indicators RTE-DES and RTE-FPL in relation to the RTE-RAD indicator between January 2012 and 7 January 2015.

Figure 5 : Flight efficiency (DES, RAD, FPL) evolution per AIRAC cycle

The difference between the three indicators (DES, FPL, RAD) clearly indicate that additional efforts must be made to further improve the efficiency of airspace utilisation and to ensure that the indicator based on the latest filed flight plan/ FPL and the RAD indicator follow similar to the airspace design indicator/ DES.

2010

2012

2011

2013

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1

2,5%

3,0%

3,5%

4,0%

4,5%

5,0%

5,5%

1001

1002

1003

1004

1005

1006

1007

1008

1009

1010

1011

1012

1013

1101

1102

1103

1104

1105

1106

1107

1108

1109

1110

1111

1112

1113

1201

1202

1203

1204

1205

1206

1207

1208

1209

1210

1211

1212

1213

1301

1302

1303

1304

1305

1306

1307

1308

1309

1310

1311

1312

1313

1401

1402

1403

1404

1405

1406

1407

1408

1409

1410

1411

1412

1413

Ro

ute

Ext

en

sio

n

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycle RTE-DES

RTE-FPL

2,50%

3,00%

3,50%

4,00%

4,50%

5,00%

5,50%

1201

1202

1203

1204

1205

1206

1207

1208

1209

1210

1211

1212

1213

1301

1302

1303

1304

1305

1306

1307

1308

1309

1310

1311

1312

1313

1401

1402

1403

1404

1405

1406

1407

1408

1409

1410

1411

1412

1413

Ro

ute

Ext

ensi

on

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycle

RTE-DES

RTE-RAD

RTE-FPL



- 12 -

3.4.1 EVOLUTION OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL INDICATORS

The current data indicates that, the average yearly route extension due to airspace design was reduced between 2009 and 7 January 2015 by 0.91 percentage points (0.81 in AIRAC 1412). The evolution of the airspace design indicator is on the right path and the contributions of the airspace design projects are key for improving flight efficiency. The 2014 Network Manager/ NM target (2.70%) for the RTE-DES indicator has already been met, as this indicator reached a value of 2.54%.

The current data indicates that, the average yearly route extension based on the last filed flight plan was reduced between 2009 and 7 January 2015 by 0.48 percentage points (0.32 in AIRAC 1412). The 2014 Network Manager/ NM target (4.15%) for the RTE-FPL indicator has not yet been met, as this indicator reached only a value of 4.42%.

The difference between the airspace design indicator and the last filed flight plan indicator was 1.45 percentage points in 2009 and was 1.88 percentage points in January 2015, recording a slight decrease compared to the previous AIRAC cycle (1.94 in AIRAC 1412).

The current data indicates that the route extension due to airspace design decreased to 2.54% in January 2015 (2.57% in AIRAC 1412). The current data show that the route extension based on the last filed flight plan went down to 4.46% in January 2015 (4.58% in AIRAC 1412), further decreasing compared to previous AIRAC cycles, despite of the heavy impact of several crisis situations.

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR

As shown in Figure 3 above the impact of the RAD decreased by 0,40 percentage points in January 2015 compared with 2012. More actions will be required to further diminish this impact still further and to ensure that the target set in the Network Manager Performance Plan is reached.

3.4.3 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL EVOLUTIONS

Thanks to the airspace enhancements implemented during AIRAC 1413 as well as the airspace design improvements put in place since AIRAC 1313 in connection with changing traffic patterns and structure, the potential savings offered during the AIRAC cycle 1413 amount to 157 000 NMs flown less compared with the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2013. This translates into 942 tons of fuel, or 3 140 tons of CO2, or € 785 000.

Based on the last filed flight plan indicator and as a result of the series of events indicated below, the actual losses5 calculated during the AIRAC cycle 1413 amount to 167 000 NMs flown more compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2013. This translates into 1 002 tons of fuel, or 3 340 tons of CO2, or € 835 000.

The losses recorded on the last filed flight plan data during AIRAC cycle 1413 compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2013 are a result of a combination of flight planning/ airline choices, traffic composition and/or scenarios applied due to capacity problems in the network as well as special events:

Overall crisis situation in Ukraine that lead a significant number of flights to avoid the entire Ukrainian airspace moving to neighbouring countries (Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Slovakia, etc.); as a result of the Ukrainian crisis adjacent ACCs/ UACs were on-loaded by Far Eastern traffic avoiding the Ukraine airspace leading to increased route extensions.

Closure of Libyan airspace for over flights due to the security situation required procedures with impact on flight efficiency for traffic between Europe and Africa re-routed via Egypt and Tunisia.

Avoidance of Syrian and Iraqi airspace due to the security situation with impact on flight efficiency for traffic between Europe and Middle East and Asia re-routed via Iran and Turkey with additional impacts on the flows from the Ukrainian crisis situation.

5 Including the savings resulting from the Benefits for Flight Efficiency Improvements (see chapter 4).



- 13 -

Capacity and staffing issues in Nicosia ACC required regulations with impact on flight planning route extension.

The Industrial action in Italy on the 12 December 2014 and in Belgium on 15 December 2014 resulted in hundreds of flight cancellations with impact on operations: Capacity issues in Amsterdam ACC and Langen ACC required regulations as a result of re-routings and unusual flight profiles of traffic avoiding Belgium airspace with impact on network efficiency.

Capacity and/or staffing shortage in Langen ACC (partially due to PSS implementation) and Bremen ACC required measures with impact on network efficiency.

Capacity issues in Reims ACC and Brest ACC required regulations with impact on flight planning route extension.

Figure 6 below shows the unchanged airspace unavailability and closed areas during December 2014/ January 2015.

Figure 6 : Airspace unavailability and closed areas December 2014/ January 2015



- 14 -

Figure 7 and Figure 8 below visualise the impact of the mentioned airspace unavailability (see Figure 6 above) by comparing traffic flows in December 2013 and December 2014. Considering the disruptions listed above most of the flights are not only avoiding the closed areas but avoiding the entire Ukrainian airspace.

Figure 7 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday,18 December 2013 (flight planned)

Figure 8 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday,17 December 2014 (flight planned)



- 15 -

The comparison between the potential (RTE-DES) and actual (RTE-FPL) savings/ losses related to the different parameters is depicted in the graphs below (see Figure 9 to Figure 12).

Figure 9 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in Thousands of Nautical Miles

Figure 10 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in Tons of Fuel

1313 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413

NM DES 406 328 314 627 352 560 449 453 434 406 360 228 188 157

NM FPL -28 35 161 590 -81 -33 100 -391 -918 -779 -593 -602 -242 -167

-1000-800-600-400-200

0200400600800

NM

/10

00

AIRAC CYCLE

FLIGHT EFFICIENCY SAVINGS COMPARED TO EQUIVALENT AIRAC CYCLE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR

(In Thousands of Nautical Miles)

NM DES

NM FPL



- 16 -

Figure 11 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in CO2

Figure 12 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in Thousands of EURO

Note: For additional information on ATFM delay that could impact on network efficiency consult the DNM Monthly Network Operations Reports, accessible via: http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications?title=&field_term_publication_type_tid=207&year[value][year]=.

1313 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413

TONS CO2 DES 8110,2 6569,4 6271,7 12540 7040 11206 8980 9064,5 8682,4 8116 7200 4552,8 3764 3140

TONS CO2 FPL -559,4 709,28 3210,4 11800 -1620 -662,2 2005,3 -7823 -18355 -15576 -11860 -12040 -4834 -3340

-20000-15000-10000-5000

05000

1000015000

TO

NS

OF

CO

2

AIRAC CYCLE

FLIGHT EFFICIENCY SAVINGS COMPARED TO EQUIVALENT AIRAC CYCLE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR

(In CO2)

TONS CO2 DES

TONS CO2 FPL



- 17 -

3.4.4 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-RAD EVOLUTIONS

The constant decrease of the RAD indicator is due to improvements in airspace design and the removal of RAD restrictions. More actions will be required to ensure that the KPI based on the RAD indicator follows trends similar to the airspace design indicator/ DES as well as to ensure that the target set in the Network Manager Performance Plan is reached.

3.5 AIRSPACE CHANGES EVOLUTION

The NM Performance Plan target for the period 2012-2014 is to implement 500 airspace improvement packages over this period. From January 2012 until 7 January 2015, 689 (six hundred and eighty-nine) airspace improvement packages coordinated at network level have been implemented. For the reference period 2012 - 2014 the implementation of a total of 694 (six hundred and ninety-four) airspace packages were currently planned. The 2014 Network Manager/ NM target has already been met with reaching a number of 689 airspace packages implemented.

Figure 13 : Airspace Improvement Packages Implementation

689

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Packages Implemented

2012/ 2014 Target 2014



- 18 -

3.6 FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE EVOLUTION

The NM Performance Plan target for 2014 is to fully or partially implement Free Route Airspace within 25 ACCs within the ECAC area. Until 11 December 2014 Free Route Airspace has been partially and/or fully implemented in the following ACCs: Beograd ACC, Brest ACC, Brindisi ACC, Bordeaux ACC, Bucuresti ACC, Chisinau ACC, Karlsruhe UAC, Kobenhavn ACC, Lisboa ACC, London ACC, Ljubljana ACC, Maastricht UAC, Madrid ACC (SAN and ASI sectors), Malmo ACC, Malta ACC, Marseille ACC, Milano ACC, Padova ACC, Praha ACC, Prestwick ACC, Reims ACC, Roma ACC, Shannon ACC, Skopje ACC, Sofia ACC, Stockholm ACC, Tampere ACC, Warsaw ACC, Wien ACC and Zagreb ACC (see Figure 14 below). The 2014 Network Manager/ NM target has already been met with reaching a number of 30 ACCs.

Figure 14 : Free Route Airspace Implementation



- 19 -

3.7 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

The ASM performance analysis for the year 2014 is based on the major FUA KPIs as they are described in detail in Section 7 of the ERNIP Part 3 - ASM Handbook. For the analysis two classes of indicators are considered:

indicators to highlight the effectiveness of ASM process in terms of airspace made available for airspace users;

indicators to focus on the utilisation of available airspace which give the measure of how the airspace users react to the airspace made available.

The FUA indicators are calculated separately for two CDR basic categories: CDR1 and CDR2. The difference from the methodology used so far consists in integrating the CDR1/2 routes in one of the basic categories. The reason is that a CDR1/2 route is either CDR1 or CDR2 at a certain moment. Therefore, the snapshot of the network at any time will contain CDR1 and CDR2 routes. Following this approach the measurement and calculation of FUA KPIs becomes more realistic.

The aggregation of values for the entire year 2014 has been carried out using daily measurements of the indicators. This way it was possible to differentiate the status of each CDR1/2 route, when it is CDR1 and when CDR2 and using the appropriate metrics.

The main ASM indicator to assess the airspace made available during the ASM process is the Rate of CDR Availability (RoCA) and represents (in %) the ratio of the total CDR segment opening, whatever the category may be, to the total time during a given period. The higher this indicator is the longer the airspace (route) is made available for civil use.

The airspace utilisation is measured by the Rate of Aircraft Interested (RAI) and Rate of Actual Use of CDR (RAU). The first indicator gives a measure of the CDR potential of being used in flight planning (flights which could flight-plan on an available CDR), while the second one indicates the actual uptake of the CDRs (flights which flew on a CDR).

3.7.1 CDR OVERVIEW

In the analysis performed for the year 2014 the different CDR categories were considered in accordance with their basic definition from the national AIP.



- 20 -

Figure 15 : ECAC map of published CDRs for AIRAC cycle 1413 (end 2014,only CDRs above FL245 are represented)

For the scope of the present assessment only the CDRs which could be used in the flight planning process have been considered, which are CDR1 and CDR2. For the CDRs with multiple category definition (CDR1/3, CDR2/3 etc.) only the portion of CDR1 or CDR2 was considered when FUA KPIs were measured.

The number of published CDRs was calculated taking into consideration the environment data contained in the current NM CACD database (former CFMU ENV database).

The calculation of the availability and usage of the CDRs and the FUA KPI values were derived from the data generated with the FIND tool using the daily EAUPs for each AIRAC cycle.

Flights interested are the maximum number of flights that could have planned on an available CDR. The chart visualises the very low impact on CDR2s, resulting in a minimal contribution to the RAI final value.

The absolute numbers averaged for an AIRAC cycle in 2014 are:

27355 IFPS flights per AIRAC cycle on average 12034 interested flights on CDR1s 7426 effectively planning at least one CDR1 segment 2254 interested flights on CDR2s 1413 effectively planning at least one CDR2 segment

3.7.2 FUA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (RoCA, RAI, RAU)

The aggregated values of the three FUA KPIs (RoCA, RAI, RAU) for the whole year 2014 compared with 2013 and for each CDR category are presented in Figures 16 and 17 below.

For CDR1 the RoCA is lower in the first quarter of 2014 compared with the same period of 2013 (64% in 2013 versus 61% in 2014). RAI and RAU have decreased in the last quarter 2013 and they are maintaining the same trend in 2014. RAI has dropped from 73% in 2013 to 70% in 2014. RAU has dropped from 78% in 2013 to 76% 2014.

The situation for CDR2 similar, the availability (RoCA) has slightly increased from 60% in 2013 to 61% in 2014. RAI and RAU have dropped as well in 2014 compared to 2013. RAI decreased from 65.7% to 62.5% and RAU - from 79.5% to 75.4%.

72 72 71 71 72 73 73 73 73 72 7173 72 71 72 72 73 72 73 73 72

70 71 71 72 73 73 72 72 72 7173

7173 72 72

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Ro

CA

, R

AI,

RA

U v

alu

es (

%)

AIRAC_cycle

2013-2014 comparison by AIRAC FUA KPIs for CDR1: RoCA, RAI, RAU

RoCA_2013 RoCA_Q_2013


RAI_2013 RAI_Q_2013

RAI_2014 RAI_Q_2014

RAU_2013 RAU_Q_2013

RAU_2014 RAU_Q_2014



- 21 -

Figure 16 : CDR1 RoCA, RAI and RAU per AIRAC cycle in 2014 compared with 2013.

Figure 17 : CDR2 RoCA, RAI and RAU per AIRAC cycle in 2014 compared with 2013.

The comparison with 2013 shows the same value for CDR1 RoCA and a slight increase of 1% for CDR2 RoCA. Both Rate of Aircraft Interested (RAI) and Rate of Actual Use of CDR (RAU) have decreased in 2014 compared to the 2013. This is the result of new opportunities created by FRA regions and the implementation of a significant number of plannable DCT, which in many instances offer better route options than current CDR.

6765

61

5658

56 58 57 5759

56

63 6164

57 5760 60

62

57

63 63 61 62 61 61 6158

62 6159 61 62 61 60 61

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Ro

CA

, R

AI,

RA

U v

alu

es (

%)

AIRAC_cycle

2013-2014 comparison by AIRAC FUA KPIs for CDR2: RoCA, RAI, RAU



RAI_2013 RAI_Q_2013

RAI_2014 RAI_Q_2014

RAU_2013 RAU_Q_2013

RAU_2014 RAU_Q_2014



- 22 -

3.8 TRAFFIC EVOLUTION

To see the impact of the CDRs on the traffic it is worth to compare the total IFPS traffic with the number of flights that have at least one CDR segment in the flight plan. The Figure 18 below shows the values averaged per AIRAC cycle for the year 2014.

Figure 18 : Flights on CDR1 and CDR2 vs total IFPS traffic in 2013

The flights interested are the maximum number of flights that could have planned on an available CDR. The Figure 18 above shows a very low impact of CDR2s. However, half of the daily traffic ECAC-wide could use an available CDR to optimise its route, hence the prerequisite of an efficient ASM process. Almost one quarter of the current traffic is actually flying at least one CDR segment, having a positive impact on network efficiency.

The CDR1s offer a much better stability and predictability than CDR2s in terms of airspace management. CDR1s have a positive impact on flight planning and the usage of the available opportunities in terms of airspace management. However, the impact of the CDR2s is much less significant than for CDR1s.

The tables below summarise the evolution in absolute numbers (annual average) of the traffic, the CDRs and the ASM KPIs:

Daily flights (averaged) 2013 2014 Variation in 2014

ECAC (IFPS) flights 26337 27355 +3.9%

Interested flights on CDR1 12033 12034 +0.0%

Planning on CDR1 7770 7426 -4.4%

Actual on CDR1 5110 5199 +1.7%

Interested flights on CDR2 1742 2254 +29.4%

Planning on CDR2 959 1413 +47.3%

Actual on CDR2 549 841 +53.2%

Figure 19 : Traffic evolution

Total IFPS traffic

Flights interested CDR1

Flights interested CDR2

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413

Nu

mb

er o

f fl

igh

ts

AIRAC_cycle

Traffic on CDR1 and CDR2 in 2014 (daily average per AIRAC cycle)

Flights planned on CDR1

Flights planned on CDR2

Figure 1 : Flights interested/ planned on CDR1 and CDR2 versus total IFPS traffic in 2014.



- 23 -

This table in Figure 19 above compares the number of flights planning and flying CDR1 and CDR2 segments in 2013 vs. 2012. A significant increase in planning on CDR2 is recorded that might be a consequence of the flight efficiency/ FE improvement campaign (described in chapter 4 of this report), including the increasing awareness of the shortest route available.

CDR routes (segments) 2013 2014 Variation in 2014

CDR1 published 1678 1968 +17.3%

CDR1 used for planning 999 983 -1.6%

CDR1 actually flown 945 925 -2.1%

CDR2 published 840 851 +1.3%

CDR2 used for planning 170 230 +35.3%

CDR2 actually flown 161 210 +30.4%

Figure 20 : CDR number evolution

The table in Figure 20 above is an illustration of the evolution of the CDR number and their uptake for planning and actual usage. Noticeable is the increased number of CDR2 segments in 2013; however the total number of CDR2 segments used for planning is slightly lower leading to the conclusion that the traffic concentrates on almost the same CDR2 segments as in the previous year.

FUA KPIs (annual average) 2013 2014 Variation in 2014

CDR1 RoCA (%) 72.1 72 -0.1%

CDR1 RAI (%) 73.1 69.1 -5.5%

CDR1 RAU (%) 82.5 76.3 -7.5%

CDR2 RoCA (%) 59.5 60.9 +2.4%

CDR2 RAI (%) 65.7 62.5 -4.9%

CDR2 RAU (%) 79.5 75.3 -5.3%

Figure 21 : ASM KPIs variation

The table in Figure 21 above shows a decrease of the RAI and RAU values for CDR1s. In contrary for CDR2s a small increase is observed based on the increased number of CDR2s published (+11%) and an increase of the number of flights interested in a CDR2 (+13.6%).



- 24 -

3.8.1 CDR UTILISATION

The indicators characterising the utilisation of the available CDRs are represented by Rate of Aircraft Interested (RAI) for the flights planning on available CDRs and Actual Rate of Usage of available CDRs (RAU) for the uptake. The Figures 22 and 23 below illustrate the annual averaged values for RAI and RAU indicators.

Figure 22 : RAI for CDR1 and CDR2 averaged for the entire year 2013.

The graph above shows the percentage of the flights averaged for the year 2013 that have planned to use at least one CDR1 or CDR2 out of the total number of flights that could have used at least a CDR in their flight plans. There is still a gap between the options offered by CDRs availability and the actual flight planning activity: 30.2% of flights which could have planned on an available CDR1 missed this opportunity. The same, 37.5% of the interested flights missed to fill in a flight plan on a CDR2.

There is still a gap between the available options offered by CDRs availability and the actual flight planning activity: 30% for CDR1s and 38% for CDR2s. Therefore, more than one third form the available opportunities are missed.

Figure 23 : RAU for CDR1 and CDR2 averaged for the entire year 2013.

The Figure 23 above represents the percentage of flights which actually flew on a CDR. There were 23.5% of the flights which could have used the opportunity of flying an available CDR1 (and 24.6% for CDR2) but didn’t, either because they did not plan or due to ATC intervention.

The analysis points out that there are flights which did not plan on an available CDR but actually flew on it. In case of CDR1s there was a percentage of 6.7% of the flights (30.2% not planning minus 23.5% not flying) which even though they did not plan to fly on an available CDR1, finally flew on a CDR1. Same applies for CDR2 where a percentage of 13.1% of the interested flights did not plan on an available CDR2 but flew on it. The reason might be either a tactical intervention or a last minute change of route.

Part of this gap is covered by ATC and last minute change of route - but both solutions are reducing the predictability factor which has a negative impact on capacity.



- 25 -

Figure 24 below shows that CDR1 type represents 81% of all CDRs used for flying and the proportion is identical for the CDRs used for flight planning. Considering the fact that CDR1s number represents 75% of all published CDRs, the higher usage of CDR1s (81%) leads to the conclusion that establishing CDR1s (or converting CDR2s into CDR1s) should be the priority.

Figure 24 : CDR1 versus CDR2 used for planning in 2014 and actually flown in 2014.

The analysis shows that the CDR1s offer a much better stability and predictability than CDR2s in terms of airspace management. CDR1s have a positive impact on flight planning and the usage of the available opportunities in terms of airspace management.



- 26 -

4. NETWORK MANAGER CONTRIBUTION TO FLIGHT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS

4.1 FLIGHT EFFICIENCY EVOLUTION ASSESSMENT

The NM flight efficiency (FE) initiative focuses on the improvement of flight planning quality. From AIRAC 1305 to AIRAC 1311 it involved only the invalid flight plans affecting 5% of the total traffic in Europe. Those flights were corrected manually and where possible, improvement proposals made for shorter route options.

Since AIRAC 1312 the valid flight plans have been included as well, re-processed using the Group Re-routing Tool at regular intervals during the day in order to detect and suggest better route opportunities for all flights. Re-routing propositions are offered to the airline operators by telephone or AFTN/SITA message after the flight plan was filed.

Figure 25 below illustrates the difference between the proposed potential savings identified during the full AIRAC 1413 (amounting to a total of 58 748 NM) being offered to the airspace users through the Flight Efficiency Initiative, compared to a total amount of 5 306 NM effectively saved through the accepted proposals (improvement of CDR availability and its utilisation not included). Only 9% of the re-route proposals were accepted by the operators compared with the potential improvement proposals offered directly by the NMOC.

Figure 25 : AIRAC overview distance proposed versus distance realised

The flight plan originators acceptance rate of the re-routing propositions is increasing in absolute value as more airline operators become aware of the process and identify the potential of the tool. However, the ratio between the amount of re-route proposals sent versus the amount of re-route proposals accepted seems to decrease due to the significant increase of re-route proposals sent since AIRAC 1312 (including the valid flight plan data) but recording the same or slightly higher level of acceptance with an average level of 9% in AIRAC 1413 (10% in AIRAC 1412, 15% in AIRAC 1411, 12% in AIRAC 1410 and AIRAC 1409, 14% in AIRAC 1408, 13% in AIRAC 1407, 14% in AIRAC 1406, 18% in AIRAC1405, 19% in AIRAC1404, 25.5% in AIRAC1403, 27% in AIRAC1402, 25.5% in AIRAC 1401, 35% in AIRAC 1313, 33% in AIRAC 1312, 61% in AIRAC 1311, 77% in AIRAC 1310 and 81% in AIRAC 1309).



- 27 -

The effort to improve the quality of flight planning has to be enhanced in order to result in net savings. Therefore the Network Manager made a conscious effort to treat the valid flight plan database as well so as to identify further potential improvements in flight planning for the remaining 95% of the traffic for various flows and city pairs, taking the latest network situation into account.

4.2 INCREASED CDR AVAILABILITY AND UTILISATION ASSESSMENT

Since the beginning of the flight efficiency initiative in May 2013 the NM network impact assessment also looks at improving CDR availability and its utilisation. On D-1 the military liaison officer/ MILO looks at the Airspace Use Plan/ AUP in order to identify potential traffic/demand that could benefit from a CDR opening. The traffic identified is validated with the Aircraft Operator Liaison Officer/ AOLO who initiates co-ordination with the flight plan originator. A re-route proposal is generated after a second x-check on the day itself/D-day.

No Graph available.

Note: The MILO position was not manned during the season break and therefore this AIRAC covers only 2 weeks.

Figure 26 : CDR utilisation savings

The NM initiatives to improve the utilisation of CDR routes during AIRAC 1413 proposed potential savings of 1 797 NM (2 998 NM AIRAC 1412, AIRAC 1411 5865NM, 5 300 NM in AIRAC 1410, 9 443 NM AIRAC 1409, 8 190 NM AIRAC 1408, 8 628 NM AIRAC 1407, 6,843 NM AIRAC 1406, 10,032 NM AIRAC 1405, 7,051 NM AIRAC 1404, 9,584 NM AIRAC 1403, 8200 NM AIRAC 1402, 6815 NM AIRAC1401, 3801 NM AIRAC 1313, 4361 NM AIRAC 1312, 4 923 NM AIRAC 1311, 5 200 NM AIRAC 1310, 12 051 NM AIRAC 1309).

The network impact assessment reports showed more or less the same amount of flights that could benefit from additional CDR availability. However, due to a low acceptance rate of the re-route proposals by the airline operators/ AOs the average actual uptake during AIRAC 1413 is only 25% (29% in AIRAC 1412, 22% in AIRAC 1411, 19% in AIRAC 1410, 26% in AIRAC 1409, 30% in AIRAC 1408, 23% in AIRAC 1407, 14% in AIRAC 1406, 12,5% in AIRAC 1405, 14% in AIRAC 1404, 15% in AIRAC 1403, 11% in AIRAC 1402, 10% in AIRAC 1401, 18% in AIRAC 1313 and 1312, 10% in AIRAC 1311, 26% in AIRAC 1310, 20,6% in AIRAC 1309 and 33% in AIARC 1308), representing 450 NM effective gain (see Figure 26 above).

One reason for the low rate of potential flights that could benefit from additional CDR opportunities might be the change from repetitive flight planning/ RPL to automatic flight planning systems, calculating the best route available while taking into account all flight-relevant information and thus improving the quality of flight planning significantly. Another reason could be the deployment of Free Route Airspace improvement measures (H24, Night + H24 Week-end Free Route, Night Free Route, DCTs) since AIRAC 1310 in September 2013 that led to a change in the airline operator’s behaviour. Additionally some operators do not plan on CDRs due to company policy or the fact that some shorter route options using CDRs are not cost efficient. AIRAC 1413 shows a decrease in number of flights that could benefit from potential opportunities resulting from additional CDR availability compared to the previous AIRAC cycle. The response from operators to re-route proposals decreased and stays low. If the airline operators would be ready and prepared to flight plan on conditional routes/ CDRs the unused potential of shorter route options available through CDRs could contribute further to improving flight efficiency.



- 28 -

4.3 TOTAL BENEFITS FOR FLIGHT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS

As a result of the flight efficiency initiative the savings achieved6 through re-filing of shorter route options during AIRAC 1413 amount to a total of 5,756 NM flown less (9,024 NM in AIRAC 1412, 11,839 NM in AIRAC 1411, 13,700NM in AIRAC 1410, 15,075NM in AIRAC 1409, 18,910NM in AIRAC 1408, 17,956 NM in AIRAC 1407, 19,462 NM in AIRAC 1406, 21,831 NM in AIRAC 1405, 19,568 NM in AIRAC 1404, 23,741 NM in AIRAC 1403, 14,830 NM in AIRAC 1402), including the Flight Efficiency initiative of NMOC on the improvement of CDR availability and its utilisation (5,306NM + 450NM).

The graph below shows the evolution of the flight efficiency improvements since the initiative started in AIRAC 1305 until 7 January 2015.

The effective savings since the beginning of the flight efficiency initiative in May 2013 have resulted in a total gain of 422,748 NM flown less than flight planned. This translates into 2,536 tons of fuel, 8,455 tons of CO2 and €2,113 740.

Figure 27 : Flight efficiency improvements evolution

The significant drop of savings between AIRAC 1307 and AIRAC 1308 is mainly linked to the composition of summer traffic, this increased slightly once again during AIRAC 1310.

The variations in savings depend on the number of flight plans manually treated in the IFPS units (IFPU 1/ Brussels and IFPU 2/ Bretigny) as well as staff resources to be dedicated to the flight efficiency task. As of AIRAC 1403 IFPU 2 in Bretigny has fully joined the process, explaining the increase in mileage being proposed (58% more compared to AIRAC1402). Staff working on the Group Re-routing Tool is doubled, ensuring that at least one IFPS unit is daily dedicating working force to the flight efficiency project.

6 Included in the Benefits and Assessment of the RTE FPL Evolutions (see chapter 3.4.2)



- 29 -

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 11 DECEMBER 2014 The following table presents detailed information about each of the improvement proposals developed within the RNDSG and implemented during the relevant AIRAC cycle. The description of the proposals is based on the information available from different sources (e.g. AOs, ANSPs and EUROCONTROL). The table includes:

Proposal ID number: A reference number to identify each proposal allowing tracing at which RNDSG it was initiated.

Project Name: Dedicated Name and Phase/ Step of the improvement project.

Description: A detailed description of the planned improvement proposal.

Objective: A brief description of the purpose of the enhancement measure.

Implementation Status: The implementation status defined as Proposed, Planned, Confirmed or Implemented.

Project Group: The Functional Airspace Block Group (FAB), Regional Focus Group (RFG), Sub-Group (SG) or any other Project Group(s) involved directly or indirectly by the proposed enhancement measure.

Project Category: The nature of the proposed enhancement measure defined through Project Categories (e.g Airspace Structure, ATC Sectors, ATS Routes, Free Route Airspace, TMA etc.).

States and Organisations: The States and/or Organisations involved directly or indirectly by the proposed enhancement measure.

Originator(s): The States and/or Organisations who have originated the proposal.

Comments: The conditions and/or pre-requisites which have to be met in order to implement the proposal or any other relevant comment(s).

Note: The list of implemented changes for this AIRAC cycle does not claim to be complete. For the correctness and verification of the relevant aeronautical information consult official State AIP publications. The data from this document should not be used for operational purpose

European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) – Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report AIRAC 1413 (11 December 2014 – 7 January 2015)

- 30 -

Proposal ID : 77.072c Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

1.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Wien, FRAW, Stage 3b

Description: 1. To implement new DCTs. 2. To delete the following Night ATS Routes - substituted by DCTs -

UQ233, UQ250, UQ254, UQ863, UQ985. 3. To adapt DCTs time of availability. 4. To lower the limits of DCTs, where feasible.

Objective: To further improve the flight planning options within Wien FIR as a third step for FRAW (Free Route Airspace Wien) implementation.

Implemented 11 DEC 2014

Project Group: FAB CE

Project Category: 50 MPCPEs DCTs Free Route Airspace

AUT

Originator(s): AUT

Phased implementation: Stage 1 implemented 18 October 2012 (37

DCTs). Stage 2 implemented 7 MAR 2013. Stage 3a/b planned 6 MAR 2014 - end

2014. Stage 4 planned 2015. Stage 5 planned Q1 2016.

Related proposals: 75.029 76.047 77.066a 77.072a 77.072b 77.072d 77.072e

Proposal ID : 82.056 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

2.

Description:To create a new intersection ABRIB between ATS routes L173 and M19.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network while providing low level traffic a shorter route option to ERKIR, in case those flights are not entitled to use the most direct way via GIMIX L608 due to terrain (today those flights have to file the longer way via SBG).


Project Category: ATS Routes

AUT

Originator(s): AUT


3.

Project Name: SOMOV area re-organisation

Description: To reorganise ATS routes around SOMOV due to establishment of new LRD area.

Objective: To further improve ATS route network between Sofia FIR and Bucuresti FIR.


Project Group: RFG SE


BGR ROU

Originator(s): ROU

The proposed location of the new Danger area (planned JAN 2015) will infringe existing ATS routes N/UN618 and Y/UY553 North West of SOMOV.

Proposal ID : 83.004 / 20.039 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

4.

Description:1. To re-designation the following existing ATS routes:

a. UL620 REBLA - ADINA as UM977; b. M977 REBLA - RIVOS as L620;



BGR ROU

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL

Proposal 69.072 / 13.046 / DN0016 covered implementation of new eastbound ATS route UM977 REBLA - ADINA.

On the time of proposal RD UL620 was till



- 31 -

c. UM977 REBLA - RIVOS - DINRO as UL620. 2. To re-designate the existing ATS route segment N616 DINRO -

RIXEN also as L620.

Objective: To adapt the existing ATS route designators and avoid ATC system flight plan processing problems.

SG BLACK

Project Category: Route Redesignation

DINRO, it was withdrawn by Bulgaria along DINRO - RIXEN but then continuing in Turkey, Cyprus and Lebanon down to Beirut (KAD).

The new ATS route REBLA - ADINA was implemented on 5 MAY 2011 and was designated as UL620 while existing, on that time UL620 was re-designated as UM977.

This issue with designation of ATS routes and negative influence on automated ATC system flight planning process was reported by Bulgaria. The ATC systems experience severe difficulties close to crashing when processing flight plans with “broken” RDs.


5.

Description:To re-designate the following existing ATS routes: a. P184 ABRED - OSTOV - GOL as M748; b. P184 GOL - NIKTI as N181.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network within Sofia FIR in order to adapt existing route designators with major traffic flows and facilitate flight planning.



Project Category: Route Redesignation

BGR ROU

Originator(s): ROU

Proposed at DANUBE FAB ADODEG/24.


6.

Project Name: Introduction of RNAV1 Transitions for LSZH RWYs 28 & 34

Description: To introduce RNAV Transitions to final approach for runways 28 & 34 at LSZH airport.

Objective: To replace radar vectoring by pre-defined flight tracks.


Project Category: TMA

CHE DEU

Originator(s): CHE

RNAV Transitions for other runways are planned for a later stage


7.

Description:To implement a new H24 eastbound ATS route option UZ205 for arrivals to LOWW, LZIB and LHBP via OSBIT- EKSOS - LULAR _ ABUDO.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network between Munich FIR/ Karlsruhe UIR and Praha FIR while providing an additional shorter route



CZE DEU

Originator(s): CZE



- 32 -

option.


8.

Description:To re-align/ straighten the airspace boundary between RAPET and ENITA along the border of Czech Republic (ANS CZ) and Germany (DFS).

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure between Praha FIR and Munich FIR/ Karlsruhe UIR enabling better DCTs northbound after point ARMUT within EDUU/ EDMM.


Project Category: Airspace Structure

DEU CZE

Originator(s): CZE


9.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Karlsruhe

Description: To implement the following airspace changes: 1. New South East-bound Direct Route Options for flows: DEP EG**, EH**, North Atlantic, Düsseldorf area to SE Europe or beyond Turkey e.g. OM** 2. New H24/Weekend North East Bound DCTs and new Seasonal Weekend Direct Route Option ARR LFP* 3. New Night Options DEP LFP*and ARR EGKK via LUPEN 4. New Options for late evening DEP EDDF avoiding RWY 18 5. New / Amended Direct Route Options DEP EDDW via LARET 6. New Direct Route Options in North East Germany (area of Roenne) 7. Withdrawal of Flight Level Cap for departures EDDF via UZ650 VEMUT / UL984 OKG

Objective: To further expand implementation of Free Route Airspace Concept within Karlsruhe UAC


Project Group: FAB EC

Project Category: Free Route Airspace

DEU FAB EC

Originator(s): DEU

1. Including (forced) routing UZ205 for ARR LOWW/LHBP/LZIB (flows: listed ARR coming from North Atlantik, EG**, EI**, EH**, EB**, LF**, ED** e.g. Düsseldorf Area) 2.(e.g. LI** to EDDL, EH**, EG**) and (e.g. SE Europe or beyond Turkey -such as OM**- to LFP*, MIN FL380) 3. (Interface France/Germany) 4. (towards LKAA airspace e.g. with ARR OM**)


10.

Description:To replace 5LNC TURBO.

Objective: To avoid 5LNCs duplication within the ECAC area of the ICAO EUR/NAT region, to improve the aeronautical information provided and be compliant with ICAO Annex 11.


Project Category: 5LNC

ESP

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL ICAO

Annex 11 stated that the 5LNCs shall be unique.

TURBO is used 2 times worldwide and in ICARD is created by USA in 2006.

ICAO DM sent relevant message to ESP. ESP will co-ordinate through planning unit.


11. Description:To replace 5LNC BARAX.


ESP




- 33 -



Originator(s):EUROCONTROL ICAO

BARAX is used by and is allocated in ICARD to France.

ICAO DM sent relevant message to ESP.


12.

Description:To replace 5LNC AGNES.




ESP



AGNES is used by Japan but is allocated in ICARD to Russian Federation and USA.



13.

Description:To replace 5LNC SOFIA.




ESP



SOFIA is used 3 times worldwide with no record in ICARD.Name retained by the ICAO SAM Office.



14.

Description:To replace 5LNC LANDA.




ESP



LANDA is used 6 times worldwide and is allocated in ICARD to Central American FIR, Colombia and Argentina.


Proposal ID : 61.005b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

15.

Description:a. To implement the following southbound ATS route segments:

i. Y/UY59 XXXXX - DCS; ii. T/UT256 NGY - DCS;

b. To re-align ATS route N615 as GOW - FENIK - DCS; c. To re-designate N515 GOW - FENIK - DCS as L612.

Objective: To implement changes to UK ATS route structure in order to further facilitate the flight planning and simplify the UK SRD and RAD.



GBR

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL GBR




- 34 -

16.

Description:To implement the following bi-directional ATS routes as CDRs: a. UN96 NEXUS - ROKAN; b. UN610 NATEB - LONAM.

Objective: To further improve the ATS structure within Scottish UIR and provide shorter route options for North Atlantic traffic.


Project Group: RFG NW


GBR MUAC

Originator(s): GBR

Possible re-alignment of the routes at the interface between the London FIR/UIR and the Netherlands FIR along TOPPA - GODOS - MIMVA to be revised by MUAC and in line with proposal 50.014 RKN - ROKAN or RKN - LONAM.

Facilitates iTEC (interoperability Through European Collaboration).

Related proposals: 50.014


17.

Project Name: Midlands improvements

Description: To amend CHASE STARs via MCT to route MCT - VEGAR - CHASE (save 5NM)

Objective: To amend the STAR to reflect what is routinely tactically provided.



GBR

Originator(s): GBR


18.

Project Name: SID Truncation

Description: To truncate EGCC SIDs as follows: 1. DESIG 1Y/1R to be truncated at SONEX and become SONEX 1/1R; 2. WAL 1Y/1R to be truncated at new waypoint LIVSU (intersection of

Y53) and become LIVSU 1Y/1R; 3. NOKIN 1Y/1R to be truncated at new waypoint KUXEM (intersection

of P17) and become KUXEM 1Y/1R; 4. WAL 1S/1Z & NOKIN1S/1Z to be truncated at new waypoint

ASMIM and become ASMIM 1S/1Z.

Objective: To reduce portion of flight plan route fuelled at SID Altitude.


Project Category: Airspace Structure ATM System

GBR

Originator(s): GBR


19.

Project Name: Midlands Improvements

Description: To remove EGNX ASNIP & WAL SIDs and have all traffic to north-west file a TNT SID then Q4.

Objective: To reduce flight plannable track mileage at SID altitude by significantly shortening the portion of of the route flight planned (and on occasions



GBR

Originator(s): GBR



- 35 -

fuelled for but never actually flown) at 6000ft.


20.

Description:To replace 5LNC TROUT.




GBR



TROUT is used 4 times worldwide and in ICARD is created by USA in 2005.

ICAO DM sent relevant message to GBR.


21.

Description:To replace 5LNC BEREK.




GBR



BEREK is currently shared code prioritized for Algeria.

ICAO DM sent relevant message to GBR.


22.

Project Name: ECAC States AIP en-route publication issues

Description: To change the PBN navigation specification of area navigation routes within Vilnius FIR from RNP 5 to RNAV 5 (ENR 3.3 publication).

Objective: To adapt in AIP the PBN navigation specification in accordance with Doc 7030 and Doc 9613.


Project Category: AIP PBN

LTU



23.

Project Name: Variable DFL MUAC DECO sector group

Description: To create a variable division level in the Maastricht UAC DECO sector group depending on planned traffic prediction.

Objective: To further improve workload balance within the sector group in order to improve capacity.


Project Category: ATC Sectors

MUAC NLD DNK GBR

Originator(s): MUAC


24.


Description: To publish in ENR 3.3 all name-code designators when point is FIR BDRY outside of brackets and insertion there the term FIR BDRY.


Project Category: AIP

NOR




- 36 -

Objective: To resolve airspace data publication inconsistencies in State AIP.

Proposal ID : 82.029 / 20.031 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

25.

Project Name: Night Free Route Bucuresti FIR - N-FRAB

Description: Phase 2: To expand the time application of the N - FRAB.

Objective: To further improve the Free Route Airspace operations within Bucuresti FIR.


Project Group: FAB DANUBE RFG SE SG BLACK

Project Category: Free Route Airspace

ROU

Originator(s): ROU

Currently Night FRA period is 22.00 - 03.00 (23.00 - 04.00).

Possible expansion by 1h to 22.00 - 04.00 (23.00 - 05.00).


26.


Description: To change the PBN navigation specification of area navigation routes within Sweden from RNP 5 to RNAV 5.

Objective: To adapt in AIP the PBN navigation specification in accordance with Doc 7030 and Doc 9613.


Project Category: AIP PBN

SWE



27.

Description:a. To introduce PBN SIDs/STARs (RNP1, based on GNSS)

procedures for Cardak (LTAY) airport. b. To implement the following westbound ATS routes to accommodate

the procedures: i. T/UT30 ATGIT - KARGI; ii. T/UT58 ATGIT - KFK.

Objective: To further improve airspace organization in Turkey.



Project Category: ATS Routes PBN

TUR

Originator(s): TUR

ATGIT 381205N 0294457E will be new waypoint in Turkey.



- 37 -

ANNEX B: ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY

1. The following ISO-3 coding of States is used in the column States and Organisation: ALB Albania IRN Iran, Islamic Republic of ARM Armenia IRQ Iraq AUT Austria ITA Italy AZE Azerbaijan LBY Libyan Arab Jamahiriya BEL Belgium LTU Lithuania BGR Bulgaria LUX Luxembourg BIH Bosnia and Herzegovina LVA Latvia BLR Belarus MAR Morocco CHE Switzerland MDA Moldova, Republic of CYP Cyprus MKD The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia CZE Czech Republic MLT Malta DEU Germany MNE Montenegro DNK Denmark NLD Netherlands DZA Algeria NOR Norway EGY Egypt POL Poland ESP Spain PRT Portugal EST Estonia ROU Romania FIN Finland RUS Russian Federation FRA France SRB Serbia GBR United Kingdom SVK Slovakia GEO Georgia SVN Slovenia GRC Greece SWE Sweden HRV Croatia SYR Syrian Arab Republic HUN Hungary TUN Tunisia ISL Iceland TUR Turkey IRL Ireland UKR Ukraine

MUAC Maastricht UAC



- 38 -

2. BLUMED FAB, DANUBE FAB and FAB CE proposals referenced in proposal number box are coded with a unique identification number abbreviated as BM or DN or CE, respectively, following by four digits (XXXX) (example BM0001 or DN0001 or CE0001).

3. The content of each proposal is an indication of State’s intention to implement the relevant airspace improvement but don't represent a copy of any official publication. For the correctness and verification of the relevant aeronautical information consult official State AIP publication. The data from this document should not be used for operational purposes.



- 39 -


Documents

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1413 No 03/1203 11 … Report provides an update on the evolution of the environment indicators1 listed in the ... Enhancing European en-route airspace design