Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1613 No 03/1203 8 December … ERNIP Part 2 - ARN Version 2014 - 2018/19 also responds to the targets included in the Network Performance Plan (NPP) 2015 -

No 03/1203

Edition: AIRAC 1203

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1613

8 December 2016 – 4 January 2017

European Route Network Improvement Plan

(ERNIP) Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1613

8 December 2016 – 4 January 2017

NETWORK MANAGER

Left blank intentionally

European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) - Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report AIRAC 1613 (8 December 2016 – 4 January 2017)

- 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 ............. 9

1.4 EXTERNAL DOCUMENT RELEASE................................................................................. 9

2. LIST OF PROPOSALS IMPLEMENTED AIRAC 1613 (8 DECEMBER 2016) ................ 10

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 8 DECEMBER 2016 ............. 10

3. EVOLUTION OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS .......................................................... 11

3.1 AIRSPACE DESIGN INDICATOR EVOLUTION .............................................................. 11

3.2 FLIGHT PLANNING INDICATOR EVOLUTION .............................................................. 11

3.3 ROUTE AVAILABILITY INDICATOR EVOLUTION.......................................................... 11

3.4 FLIGHT EFFICIENCY EVOLUTION PER AIRAC CYCLE ............................................... 12

3.4.1 EVOLUTION OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL INDICATORS ......................................... 13

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR ................................................................... 13

3.4.3 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-DES AND RTE-FPL EVOLUTIONS ......... 13

3.4.4 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-RAD EVOLUTIONS ................................. 18

3.5 FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE EVOLUTION ......................................................................... 18

3.6 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 19

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 8 DECEMBER 2016 .................... 24

ANNEX B: ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................... 36



- 6 -




- 7 -

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 SUMMARY

This Report provides an update on the evolution of the environment indicators1 listed in the Network 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 1613 (8 DECEMBER 2016 – 4 JANUARY 2017).

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 two important key performance areas and associated indicators, related to the operational performance of the European ATM network for the period 2015 - 2019.

• Environment o average horizontal en-route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory, defined as

follows: - the indicator is the comparison between the length of the en-route part of

the actual trajectory derived from surveillance data and the corresponding portion of the great circle distance, summed over all IFR flights within or traversing the European airspace;

- “en-route” refers to the distance flown outside a circle of 40 NM around the airports;

- where a flight departs from or arrives at a place outside the European airspace, only the part inside the European airspace is considered;

This KPI is applicable at both network and Functional Airspace Block level.

o average horizontal en-route flight efficiency of the last filed flight plan trajectory, defined as follows:

- the difference between the length of the en-route part of the last filed flight plan trajectory and the corresponding portion of the great circle distance, summed over all IFR flights within or traversing the European airspace;

- “en-route” refers to the distance flown outside a circle of 40 NM around the airports;

- where a flight departs from or arrives at a place outside the European airspace, only the part inside the European airspace is considered;

This KPI is only applicable at network level.

• Capacity o minutes of en-route ATFM delay per flight, calculated for the full year and

including all IFR flights within European airspace and all ATFM delay causes, excluding exceptional events.

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 -

For the second performance Reference Period starting on 1st January 2015 and ending on 31st December 2019, the European Union-wide performance targets will be as follows:

• Environment target:

• Actual trajectory (KEA) - an average of 2.6% route extension by 2019, decreasing from 3.17% in 2012 (based on PRB measurements)

• Last filed flight plan trajectory (KEP) - an average of 4.1% route extension by 2019, decreasing from 5.15% in 2012 (based on PRB measurements)

• Capacity target: average en route Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) delay of 0.5 minutes per flight for each year of the second Reference Period.

The ERNIP Part 2 - ARN Version 2014 - 2018/19 also responds to the targets included in the Network Performance Plan (NPP) 2015 - 2019 as described below:

o Route extension - airspace design

• Targets:

o achieve an improvement of the DES indicator by 0.57 percentage points between the baseline year of 2012 and 2019

o Route extension - last filed flight plan

• Targets:

o This is a European-wide indicator in RP2 and the NM target for RP2 is to achieve 4.1% value for KEP indicator by 2019 for the entire NM area, fully consistent with the EU-wide target, i.e. a reduction by 1.05 pp (percentage points) between the baseline year of 2012 and 2019

o Route extension - actual trajectory

• Targets:

o The NM target for RP2 is to achieve 2.6% value for KEA indicator by 2019 for the SES area, fully consistent with the EU-wide target

o NM direct contributions to flight efficiency savings

o The NM objectives is that these FE direct savings will amount to 5% (2015 - 2016) and 7% (2017 - 2019) of the savings required to achieve the annual 0.15 pp reduction (or alternatively 5% of the actual KEP reduction) each year

o Increase the CDR1/2 usage

o NM objective is to increase the CDR availability (CD-RAI) and CDR usage (CDR-RAU) by 5% between the baseline year 2012 and 2019



- 9 -

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 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][yea

r]=

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



- 10 -

2. LIST OF PROPOSALS IMPLEMENTED AIRAC 1613 (8 DECEMBER 2016)

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 8 DECEMBER 2016

During the AIRAC cycle 34 (thirty four) 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 8 December 2016:

� Croatia/ Bosnia and Herzegovina/ Serbia

- Free Route Airspace Zagreb, Phase 5b - SEAFRA � Germany

- Preparation of Free Route Airspace Germany.

� Greece

- Night Free Route Airspace Greece (Phase II). � Island/ Norway

- Borealis FRA - Step 2a Enhancement of EUR/NAT interface. - Borealis FRA - Step 2b.

� Island/ UK

- Borealis FRA - Step 3 Enhancement of EUR/NAT interface. � Italy

- FRA-IT Free Route Airspace Italy, Phase 3.

� Lithuania

- Free Route Airspace Vilnius - EYSFRA, Phase 2. � Malta

- Free Route Airspace Malta - Phase 3a.

� Serbia/ Montenegro/ Bosnia and Herzegovina/ Croatia

- Free Route Airspace Beograd, Phase 5b - SEAFRA.

A detailed list of all improvement measures implemented 8 December 2016 is attached in Annex A. The list is an extract of the European Route Network Improvement Plan database accessible via:

https://ext.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



- 11 -

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 - 2015 and its evolution until 4 January 2017. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

3,5

3%

3,5

4%

3,4

5%

3,2

2%

3,0

4%

2,9

6%

2,8

0%

2,6

3%

2,5

5%

2,4

7%

2,3

7%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

RTE-DES

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 - 2015 and its evolution until 4 January 2017. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

4,9

1%

5,0

3%

4,9

0%

4,9

1%

4,7

3%

4,6

4%

4,5

7%

4,5

7%

4,5

6%

4,6

2%

4,3

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

RTE-FPL

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 4 January 2017. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

3,7

5%

3,6

5%

3,4

8%

3,4

2%

3,5

6%

3,4

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

RTE-RAD

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.



- 12 -

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 - 2016 and the evolution until 4 January 2017. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

2011

2013

2012

2014

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1

2,0%

2,5%

3,0%

3,5%

4,0%

4,5%

5,0%

5,5%

11

01

11

02

11

03

11

04

11

05

11

06

11

07

11

08

11

09

11

10

11

11

11

12

11

13

12

01

12

02

12

03

12

04

12

05

12

06

12

07

12

08

12

09

12

10

12

11

12

12

12

13

13

01

13

02

13

03

13

04

13

05

13

06

13

07

13

08

13

09

13

10

13

11

13

12

13

13

14

01

14

02

14

03

14

04

14

05

14

06

14

07

14

08

14

09

14

10

14

11

14

12

14

13

15

01

15

02

15

03

15

04

15

05

15

06

15

07

15

08

15

09

15

10

15

11

15

12

15

13

16

01

16

02

16

03

16

04

16

05

16

06

16

07

16

08

16

09

16

10

16

11

16

12

16

13

Ro

ute

Ex

ten

sio

n

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycle RTE-DES

RTE-FPL

Figure 4 : Flight efficiency (DES, FPL) evolution per AIRAC cycle

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 4 January 2017. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

2,00%

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

1501

1502

1503

1504

1505

1506

1507

1508

1509

1510

1511

1512

1513

1601

1602

1603

1604

1605

1606

1607

1608

1609

1610

1611

1612

1613

Ro

ute

Exte

nsio

n

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycleRTE-DES

RTE-RAD

RTE-FPL

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.



- 13 -

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 4 January 2017 by 1.08 percentage points (0.97 in AIRAC 1612). 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 current data indicates that, the average yearly route extension based on the last filed flight plan was reduced between 2009 and 4 January 2017 by 0.59 percentage points (0.27 in AIRAC 1612).

The difference between the airspace design indicator and the last filed flight plan indicator was 1.45 percentage points in 2009 and was 1.94 percentage points in January 2017 (2.15 in AIRAC 1612).

The current data indicates that the route extension due to airspace design decreased to 2.38 % in January 2017 (2.44 % in AIRAC 1612).

The current data show that the route extension based on the last filed flight plan went up to 4.43 % in January 2017 (4.60 % in AIRAC 1612).

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR

As shown in Figure 3 above the impact of the RAD decreased by 0,34 percentage points in January 2017 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 1613 as well as the airspace design improvements put in place since AIRAC 1513 in connection with changing traffic patterns and structure, the potential savings offered during the AIRAC cycle 1613 amount to 132 000 NMs flown less compared with the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015. This translates into 794 tons of fuel, or 2 646 tons of CO2, or € 662 000.

Based on the last filed flight plan indicator and as a result of the airline choices made, the actual gains calculated during the AIRAC cycle 1613 amount to 733 000 NMs flown less compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015. This translates into 4 398 tons of fuel, or 14 662 tons of CO2, or € 3 665 000.

No losses are recorded on the last filed flight plan data during AIRAC cycle 1613 compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015. The high actual savings recorded reflect the potential options offered by airspace design improvement measures since AIRAC 1512 and several major FRA implementations in AIRAC 1613. The actual savings are still impacted by varying traffic compositions, scenarios applied due to capacity problems in the network and 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 (while traffic to/from Tunisia remains suppressed since the terrorist attack on 26 June 2016.)

• 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.

• Capacity issues and staffing issues required regulations by Brest ACC, Canarias ACC, Maastricht UAC and Nicosia ACC, with impact on flight planning route extension.



- 14 -

Figure 6 below shows the airspace unavailability and closed areas in January 2017.

F

Figure 6 : Airspace unavailability and closed areas January 2017



- 15 -

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 2016.

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

Figure 8 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday, 21 December 2016 (flight planned)



- 16 -

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).

1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613

NM DES 311 257 299 219 401 337 368 343 370 232 198 132 29 132

NM FPL -565 -187 -116 -575 322 -383 -541 -655 -104 -182 -238 -31 374 733

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

1000

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

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

1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613

TONS FUEL DES 1866 1543 1794 1314 2407 2025 2206 2059 2223 1389 1188 789 174 794

TONS FUEL FPL -3388 -1121 -693 -3450 1933 -2296 -3246 -3931 -626 -1092 -1429 -187 2243 4398

-5000-4000-3000-2000-1000

010002000300040005000

TO

NS

OF

FU

EL

AIRAC CYCLE


(In Tons of Fuel) TONS FUEL DES

TONS FUEL FPL

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



- 17 -

1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613

TONS CO2 DES 6220 5144,1 5980 4380 8023,5 6749,8 7352 6862 7409,2 4631 3959,6 2630 580 2646,2

TONS CO2 FPL -11292 -3737 -2310 -11502 6443,4 -7652 -10820 -13102 -2088 -3638 -4762 -623,4 7477,6 14662

-15000

-10000

-5000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

TO

NS

OF

CO

2

AIRAC CYCLE


(In CO2)

TONS CO2 DES

TONS CO2 FPL

Figure 11 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in CO2

1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613

EURO DES 1555 1286 1495 1095 2006 1687 1838 1716 1852 1158 990 658 145 662

EURO FPL -2823 -934 -578 -2875 1611 -1913 -2705 -3276 -522 -910 -1190 -156 1869 3665

-4000-3000-2000-1000

010002000300040005000

EU

RO

/1000

AIRAC CYCLE


(In Thousands of EURO)

EURO DES EURO FPL

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 NM Monthly Network Operations Reports, accessible via: http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications?title=&field_term_publication_type_tid=207&year[value][year]=.



- 18 -

3.4.4 BENEFITS AND ASSESSMENT OF RTE-RAD EVOLUTIONS

The 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 FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE EVOLUTION Until 10 November 2016 Free Route Airspace has been partially and/ or fully implemented in the following ACCs: Athinai ACC, Beograd ACC, Bratislava ACC, Brest ACC, Brindisi ACC, Bordeaux ACC, Bucuresti ACC, Budapest ACC, Chisinau ACC, Finland ACC, Geneva ACC, Karlsruhe UAC, Kobenhavn ACC, Lisboa ACC, London ACC, Ljubljana ACC, Maastricht UAC, Madrid ACC (SAN and ASI sectors), Makedonia ACC, Malmo ACC, Malta ACC, Marseille ACC, Milano ACC, Nicosia ACC, Norway ACC, Padova ACC, Praha ACC, Prestwick ACC, Reims ACC, Riga ACC, Roma ACC, Shannon ACC, Skopje ACC, Sofia ACC, Stockholm ACC, Tallinn ACC, Ukraine (individual UTAs), Vilnius ACC, Warsaw ACC, Wien ACC and Zagreb ACC, Zurich ACC (see Figure 13 below).

Figure 13 : Airspace implementation towards Free Route Airspace



- 19 -

3.6 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

The FUA indicators are calculated separately for two CDR basic categories: CDR1 and CDR2.

Those CDRs, defined as CDR1/2, CDR1/3 or CDR2/3, are measured over time for each category and their individual contribution is added to either CDR1 or CDR2 type reports. The method allows us to align the calculation of the indicators with the way the CDRs’ availability is presented in AUP/UUP Lists A and B respectively.

The values for each AIRAC cycle were aggregated by measuring the indicators on a daily basis. By doing this, we could differentiate between each CDR1/2, CDR1/3 or CDR2/3 routes, categorising CDR1 and CDR2 routes with the appropriate metrics.

We measure airspace utilisation with the Rate of Aircraft Interested (RAI) and Rate of Aircraft using CDRs (RAU). The first indicator shows which flights could potentially use available CDRs; the second one indicates the actual CDR uptake.

3.6.1 CDRs OVERVIEW

Figure 14 below is an ECAC map of published CDRs for the last AIRAC cycle in Q4 2016 quarter in 2016. It is worth noting the diversity of CDR categories: this is one of the consequences of establishing night routes; they are often CDR1 at night but CDR3 by day. A similar situation may be observed for CDR1/2: CDR2 by day and CDR1 by night and at weekends.

One element that adds a significant level of complexity to the calculation of ASM performance indicators is the published timesheet or activation schedule of various categories of CDRs. The way this schedule is described in the national AIP varies significantly from State to State, and especially so when referring to the switchover from winter/summer, week/weekend and day/night time.

Regarding the basic definition of CDRs, CDR is mostly made up of several elementary segments, spatially sequenced. There are cases when this definition was modified for various reasons, leading to a change in the number of CDRs counted, although the number of elementary segments remained the same.

Figure 14 : ECAC map of published CDR1, CDR2, CDR1/2, CDR1/3 and CDR2/3

for the last AIRAC (1613) of the Q4 year 2016.



- 20 -

3.6.2 FUA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Figure 15 and Figure 16 below show the aggregated values of the three FUA KPIs5 (RoCA, RAI, RAU) for Q4 in 2016 compared with the same period in 2015 for CDR1 and CDR2.

Figure 15 : CDR1 RoCA, RAI and RAU per AIRAC cycle for Q4 in 2016 compared with 2015.

The CDRs’ availability is quantified by the RoCA indicator (rate of CDR availability – as defined by the ASM Handbook) and represents (in percentage terms) the ratio of the total opening of the CDR segment, no matter which category, in a given period.

5 RoCA (Rate of CDR availability) represents the average CDR availability according to the EAUP/EUUP related to a given time period.

RoCA (in %) is calculated as the ratio of the total CDR segment opening, whatever category it may be, to the total time of days (D).

RAI (Rate of Aircraft Interested) represents the average number of aircraft interested in filing flight plans to take advantage of an available CDR. RAI represents (in %) the ratio of the number of flights planned on an available CDR to the number of potential users of this CDR.

RAU (Rate of Actual Use of CDR) represents the average number of aircraft having actually used an available CDR during a given time period. RAU represents (in %) the ratio of the number of flights (AU) having actually used an available CDR to the number of potential users (PU) of this CDR.



- 21 -

Figure 16 : CDR2 RoCA, RAI and RAU per AIRAC cycle for Q4 in 2016 compared with 2015

For CDR1 the RoCA is higher (98%) in the last quarter of 2016 compared with the same period of 2015 (76%). RAI slightly decreased in Q4 2016 compare with previous year, from 76% in Q4 2015 to 71% in Q4 2016. RAU has dropped significantly from 55% in Q4 2015 to 27% in Q4 2016.

The situation for CDR2 is different. The availability (RoCA) has increased from 54% in Q4 2015 to 80% in Q4 2016. RAI maintains the value of 77% and RAU dropped from 45% to 35% in Q4 2016.

The indicators characterising the utilisation of the available CDRs are represented by the Rate of Aircraft Interested (RAI) for flight planning using available CDRs and the Rate of Actual Use of CDR (RAU).

The AIRAC variation is shown by Figures 15 and 16 above, whereas averaged values (% of flights) for Q4 in 2016 which could have planned (interested flights) on CDR1 and CDR2 are shown in Figures 17 and 19 below.



- 22 -

Figure 17 : RAI for CDR1 averaged for Q4 2016 Figure 18 : RAI for CDR2 averaged for Q4 2016

Figure 17 shows the average percentage of flights for the last quarter/ Q4 in 2016, which could potentially have made use of CDR1 in their flight plans (interested flights). The percentage of flights interested on CDR2s is shown in Figure 18. For CDR1, around 29% of flights did not make use of a CDR1, so missing an opportunity. The percentage of flights missing planning opportunities on CDR2s is slightly lower, with a figure between 22,7%.

The figures 19 and 20 below represent the percentage of flights averaged for Q4 in 2016 which actually flew on a CDR. For CDR1 there were 73.3% of the flights which did not fly on CDR1 and 65.4% for CDR2.

Figure 19 : RAU for CDR1 averaged for Q4 2016 Figure 20 : RAU for CDR2 averaged for Q4 2016

The data originated from NM data warehouse, the utilization of FIND together with other internally developed tools allowed to get a comprehensive view of the evolution for the major FUA KPIs used for ASM performance reporting. The increased complexity of CDR environment requires additional effort to carry out the adequate assessment.

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.

There is still a gap between the options offered by CDRs availability and the actual flight planning activity: 29% for CDR1s and 23% for CDR2s, which is less than one third of the available opportunities taken into consideration for flight planning.



- 23 -

The comparison Q4 2016 vs. Q4 2015 shows high values of RoCA but low values for RAI and RAU. This is the result of Free Route Airspace/ FRA implementations over large regions of the ECAC area, adding Austria, Slovenia, FYROM, Serbia and NEFAB to the already existing FRA areas.

As a consequence, the route network and implicitly CDRs in these areas have no more relevance and low values of RAI and RAU have to be looked upon under these new conditions.

The ASM Performance Assessment for Q1 of 2016 is included in the ERNIP Implementation Monitoring Report for AIRAC 1604. The assessment for Q2 and Q3 is available in the ERNIP Implementation Monitoring Report for AIRAC 1610.



- 24 -

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 8 DECEMBER 2016 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


- 25 -

Proposal ID : 89.058 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

1.

Project Name: ECAC States AIP en-route publication issues

Description: To adapt the lower vertical limits, expressed in FL, of ATS routes within Tirana FIR (change of IFR FL to VFR FL).

Objective: To adapt the ATS routes vertical limits in the State AIP.

Implemented 08 DEC 2016

Project Category: AIP ATS Routes

ALB

Originator(s): ALB

Currently the lower limit is set to FL110.

Proposal ID : 89.057 / 25.007 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

2.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Baku FIR

Description: To implement northbound ATS route T443 BATEV - MOSUM.

Objective: To further improve ATS route network within Baku FIR for flights to/from Baku airport (UBBB).


Project Group: SG BLACK

Project Category: ATS Routes

AZE

Originator(s): AZE

Publication done by NOTAM.

Proposal ID : 89.019a Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

3.

Project Name: Unnamed Significant Points

Description: To remove from ENR 3 in AIPs unnamed significant points from ATS routes N/UN852, UZ112, T181, UN857, UM615, UL608 and TG1.

Objective: To further improve the AIP airspace data publication.



BEL DEU

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL

Detailed information is attached as separate doc file in ERNIP.


4.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Praha FIR/ Munich FIR

Description: To change the alignment of P27 as follows: 1. To delete the current P27 ATS route segments AGNAV – SOTUM –

VOZ (remaining P27 segments unchanged). 2. To create bi-directional ATS route segment Z410 AGNAV – ROXUL

– VAKLA – NELPA – USUPA, FL95 - FL245. 3. To re-designate the current P27 segment RODIS – AGNAV in

Germany to pick the same new designator as indicated in item 2 above.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure at the interface between Praha FIR and Munich FIR, allowing a better connection to military TRAs in the area and avoiding triple clipping of the extended TMA Prague.


Project Category: Airspace Structure

CZE DEU

Originator(s): CZE

• The new segments will remain for state flights only.

• ROXUL 49 25 05 N 013 50 34 E will be a new intersection point on Z39.

• VAKLA 49 18 02 N 014 44 03 E will be a new intersection point on Z30.

• USUPA 49 31 14 N 015 07 44 E will be a new intersection point on Z401 to allow joining the new segments from different directions. USUPA to be used for new STARs and SIDs for LKCV airbase.



- 26 -


5.

Project Name: RDs collocation resolution

Description: To simplify ATS routes designation and remove RDs collocation of T358 and T159 - Phase 1.

Objective: To resolve spotted RDs collocation within Germany.



DEU


• Detailed information is attached as separate doc file in ERNIP.

• ICAO Annex 11 (and also current EASA NPA draft on airspace design) proposes explicitly the use of different RDs on common segments if more feasible. There are cases where the different RDs are used for traffic flow managementa and a single RD (e.g. Z1 – Z5) at an interface would create either major problems or a very complex RAD restriction. In this case collocated RDs are not necessarily to be removed (L610).

Related proposals:

• 89.025b

Proposal ID : 87.005b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

6.

Project Name: FRA Germany

Description: To continue preparation of Full Free Route Airspace Germany by: 1. lowering the MIN FL of some existing DCTs into AoR Munich ACC; 2. introducing first set of compulsory transition/connecting points for

ARR/DEP to/from some German airports; 3. if required introduction of first set of compulsory transition routes

linked to each transition point/connecting point.

Objective: To support implementation of Full Free Route Airspace and simplify the RAD.


Project Group: FAB EC

Project Category: ATS Routes Free Route Airspace RAD

DEU

Originator(s): DEU FAB EC

Related proposals:

• 87.005a

• 87.005c

• 87.005d

• 87.005e

• 87.005f


7.

Project Name: RDs collocation resolution

Description: 1. To-realign the following existing ATS route N603 as … TESPI -

ROSBI – INPUN - TNO. 2. To re-designate existing ATS route T57 GESKA - MONAK - CDA as

Z711 (release of T57). 3. To withdraw the following existing ATS route segments:

a. T298 MONAK - CDA; b. Q296 MONAK - CDA; c. T550 CDA - MARIP (release of T550); d. N581 RAM - EVAKI;


Project Category: ATS Routes Route Redesignation

DNK




- 27 -

e. T55 TESPI - ROSBI - INPUN - TNO.

Objective: To further simplify ATS routes designation and resolve existing RDs collocated issues.


8.

Project Name: DCTs France UIR

Description: To allow the following “Direct” flight planning options: a. ELVET DCT BEGAR (FL245/FL660); b. DOLAX DCT MOROK (FL245/FL660); c. GTQ DCT ERADI (FL195/FL245); d. EPL DCT LIPNI (FL315/FL660).

Objective: To further extend flight planning options within France UIR.


Project Category: DCTs Night Routes

FRA

Originator(s): FAB EC FRA

• DCTs are created in parralel of the existing night routes UQ244, UQ252, UQ344 and UQ760.

• The hours and conditions of use are identical to the published ATS routes in French AIP.


9.

Project Name: ATS Route redesignation Scottish UIR

Description: To re-designate existing ATS route N580 GOW - TIR as L602 (release of N580).

Objective: To rationalise the existing ATS route designators within Scottish FIR in order to further facilitate flight planning and release RDs.


Project Category: Route Redesignation

GBR


• Adaptation of RDs in lower and upper airspace.

• Currently the ATS segment GOW - TIR is designated both as N580 and UL602.

• RD N580 exists only along the GOW - TIR segment and by re-designation it can be released for use by other State/s.

• This proposal reflects the ideal re-designation with use of only one RD - L/UL602 despite that presumably there will be a “RD break” of L602 between TLA - GOW.

• Another possibility is to have two or three RDs on that segment by designating it as N572 and/or Y958 and UL602.


10.

Project Name: DCT Hellas UIR

Description: To allow "Direct "flight planning options TANSA DCT TRL and TRL DCT LATAN.

Objective: To further improve flight planning options within Hellas UIR.


Project Category: DCTs RAD

GRC FAB BLUE MED

Originator(s): GRC




- 28 -

11.

Project Name: Night Free Route Airspace Greece (Phase II)

Description: To extend hours of availability of existing Night DCTs within HELLAS UIR.

Objective: To align the airspace structure with real operations and operational DCTs to be made flight plannable.


Project Category: DCTs

GRC

Originator(s): GRC FAB BLUE MED

Proposal ID : 74.016c / CE0096 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

12.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Zagreb, Phase 5b - SEAFRA

Description: To introduce H24 Free Route Airspace in Zagreb ACC AoR above FL325.

Objective: To further improve airspace organisation within Sarajevo FIR and Zagreb FIR.


Project Group: FAB CE RFG SE

Project Category: Free Route Airspace

HRV BIH SRB

Originator(s): HRV

• In coordination with FRA-IT Free Route Airspace in Italy above FL335.

• In coordination with Free Route introduction in Beograd ACC.

• FRA cross border application in Zagreb ACC and Beograd ACC AoRs.

• Implementation depends on BH ATM, Phase 2 implementation.

• RTS in Jan/Feb 2016.

Related proposals:

• 69.086a

• 74.016a

• 74.048a

• 74.048b

• 74.059b

• 75.013


13.

Project Name: Borealis FRA - Step 2a Enhancement of EUR/NAT interface

Description: To implement FRA for flights departing/arriving within Reykjavik FIR via Bodø FIR and Norway FIR.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure and the flight planning options within Borealis FRA Area States.


Project Group: FAB Denmark/Sweden FAB NEFAB FAB UK/Ireland RFG NW


ISL NOR

Originator(s): FAB Denmark/Sweden FAB NEFAB FAB UK/Ireland ISL

• These flights will be able to fly direct tracks via defined TMA/airport entry/exit points in Reykjavik FIR and the NAT oceanic control area boundary.

• The oceanic boundary waypoint will be in LAT/LONG degrees and minutes or 5LNC (in compliance with current IFPS requirements).

• Iceland confirmed FRA implemention for flights departing/arriving within Reykjavik FIR via Bodø FIR and Norway FIR.

• Requirement for a COP on the border between Reykjavik FIR and Bodø OFIR / Norway FIR.



- 29 -

• New boundary points on the interface BI-EG and BI-EN (both Norway FIR and Bodo OFIR). In Scottish airspace these new points will be linked with new DCTs. In Norwegian airspace, the points will be published as FRA E/X points. LoAs will be updated accordingly.

Related proposals:

• 87.028a

• 87.028c

• 87.028d

• 87.028e

• 87.028f

• 87.028g

• 88.048

Proposal ID : 87.028c Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

14.

Project Name: Borealis FRA - Step 3 Enhancement of EUR/NAT interface

Description: To implement FRA for flights departing/arriving within Reykjavik FIR via Scottish FIR (EGPX).

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure and the flight planning options within Borealis FRA Area States.



Project Category: Free Route Airspace High Seas

ISL GBR

Originator(s): FAB Denmark/Sweden FAB NEFAB FAB UK/Ireland ISL

• These flights will be able to fly direct tracks via defined TMA/airport entry/exit points in Reykjavik FIR and the NAT oceanic control area boundary.

• The oceanic boundary waypoint will be in LAT/LONG degrees and minutes as coordinates OR 5LNC (in compliance with current IFPS requirements).

• In Scottish airspace the new points will be linked with new DCTs.

• High Seas Coordination (Serial No.:EUR/NAT-B 16/24-HS-GBR; EUR/NAT-B 16/25-NAT) Circulation Letter 16-0562 of 7 November 2016; Approval Letter 16-0602 of 6 December 2016.

Related proposals:

• 87.028a

• 87.028b

• 87.028d

• 87.028e

• 87.028f

• 87.028g

Proposal ID : 52.025b / BM0078 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

15. Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Brindisi UIR Implemented ITA • Planned to be reassessed during works



- 30 -

Description: To implement the following bidirectional ATS route segments: a. BRD - CDC; OR b. CDC - CRAYE

Objective: 1. To further improve the ATS route network within Brindisi UIR. 2. To allow new flight planning options for operators flying between

airports in the north Africa (DTMB, DTNH, DTTA), Malta (LMML) and south Italy (LICB, LICC, LICJ) on one side and Scandinavian States and Russian Federation on the other.

08 DEC 2016

Project Group: FAB BLUE MED RFG SE


Originator(s): IATA

about reorganisation of military areas for strike fighter F35 needs (Ionian sea and Sicily areas combined) .

• Linked to FRA IT Free Route Airspace Italy implementation.

Related proposals:

• 71.085c


16.

Project Name: Removal U prefix Milano, Roma and Brindisi UIR.

Description: To remove "U" prefix for Upper ATS routes within Milano, Roma and Brindisi UIR, FL335+.

Objective: To simplify Air Traffic Management within Milano, Roma and Brindisi UIR.


Project Category: Airspace Structure

ITA

Originator(s): ITA

Related proposals:

• 71.085c

Proposal ID : 69.100 / BM0006 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

17.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Tunis UIR/ Roma UIR

Description: To implement bidirectional ATS route segment TRP - TUC.

Objective: To offer a shorter route option at the interface between Tunis UIR and Roma UIR.


Project Group: FAB BLUE MED


ITA TUN

Originator(s): FAB BLUE MED

• Planned to be reassessed during works about reorganisation of military areas for strike fighter F35 needs (Ionian sea and Sicily areas).


Related proposals:

• 71.085c

Proposal ID : 69.128a / BM0041 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

18.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Tunis UIR/ Roma UIR

Description: To implement bidirectional ATS route segment PININ - PNZ - PES.

Objective: To offer a direct route to traffic between Tunisia/Italy and East Europe.




ITA

Originator(s): FAB BLUE MED

• Continuation PES - NIT requires further study for full benefits.


Related proposals:

• 69.128b

• 71.085c




- 31 -

19.

Project Name: FRA-IT Free Route Airspace Italy, Phase 3

Description: To implement Full Free Route Airspace, initially above FL335.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure and the flight planning options within Milano, Roma and Brindisi UIR.




ITA

Originator(s): ITA

• In coordination with SEAFRA Free Route Airspace in Zagreb ACC and Beograd ACC AoRs above FL325.

• Co-operation inside BLUE MED with all the partners involved, to extend FRA-IT at FAB level, starting from 2015.

• Cross-border with Malta.

• For the vertical connectivity in/out of FRA, the transition layer is FL295 - FL335 for the vast majority of the horizontal entry/exit points, with specific levels for some points ranging from F155, F165, F195, F265.

Related proposals:

• 52.025a

• 52.025b

• 65.080

• 65.081

• 69.100

• 69.128a

• 71.085a

• 71.085b

• 71.085d

• 71.089c

• 85.022

• 88.021

Proposal ID : 52.025a / BM0129 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

20.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Brindisi UIR/ Roma UIR

Description: To implement the following bidirectional ATS route segments: a. CRAYE - TUPAL; OR b. PAL - CRAYE.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network between Brindisi UIR and Roma UIR.




ITA

Originator(s): ITA

• Option usable by traffic to/from the new Enfhida airport in Tunisia.

• To add the following comment: “Planned to be reassessed during works about reorganisation of military areas for strike fighter F35 needs (Ionian sea and Sicily areas).


Related proposals:

• 71.085c


21. Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Roma UIR


ITA

• To add the following comment: “Planned to be reassessed during works about



- 32 -

Description: To implement northbound RNAV route DIRED - PNZ.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network within Roma ACC while offering a shorter route option for traffic LICC - LIRF (50MPCPE).


Project Category: ATS Routes PBN

Originator(s): ITA

reorganisation of military areas for strike fighter F35 needs (Ionian sea and Sicily areas).


Related proposals:

• 71.085c


22.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Roma UIR

Description: To implement, as CDR, RNAV route DELER - NEKPI northbound only.

Objective: To further improve the ATS route network in Roma UIR while offering a shorter route option for traffic LICC - LIRF.




ITA

Originator(s): ITA

• To add the following comment: “Planned to be reassessed during works about reorganisation of military areas for strike fighter F35 needs (Ionian sea and Sicily areas).


Related proposals:

• 71.085c


23.

Description: To allow the following Night “Direct” flight planning options for traffic type MIL: a. NAXAV DCT ROTAR; b. AIOSA DCT TIGRA.

Objective: To further improve the flight planning options within Italy.


Project Category: Civil/Military Airspace DCTs RAD

ITA

Originator(s): U.S.A.F.E

• The use of both DCTs is planned in combination with SEAFRA allowed option ROTAR DCT AIOSA.

• The whole DCTs option NAXAV - ROTAR - AIOSA - TIGRA will reduce route distance by 31NM compared to current routing saving €1000 per flight.

Related proposals:

• 71.085c


24.

Project Name: FRA points Vilnius FIR/ Riga FIR

Description: To implement 2 (two) new FRA significant points on Vilnius FIR / Riga FIR boundary: a. DOKOT FRA E/X; b. VETAS FRA E/X.

Objective: To further imporve FRA operations between LTUFRA and NEFRA EAST between Lithuania and Latvia.


Project Category: Airspace Structure Free Route Airspace

LTU LVA

Originator(s): LTU LVA

Proposal ID : 75.040b / 15.042b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:



- 33 -

25.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Vilnius - EYSFRA, Phase 2

Description: To expand the already implemented H24 Free Route Airspace FL245+ in Vilnius ACC down to FL095.

Objective: To further improve airspace organisation within Vilnius FIR.


Project Group: SG BALTIC


LTU

Originator(s): LTU

To introduce the following new waypoints with FRA relevance: a. DOKOT FRA E/X; b. GIGIN FRA I; c. VETAS FRA E/X.

Related proposals:

• 75.040a / 15.042a

• 76.052 / 23.029


26.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Malta - Phase 3a

Description: To implement H24 Free Route Airspace above FL335 within Malta UIR.

Objective: To further improve the flight planning options within Malta UIR.




MLT

Originator(s): MLT

Co-operation/synchronisation with Free Route Airpsace Italy/ FRA-IT, Phase 3.

Related proposals:

• 71.085c

• 71.085d

• 71.089a

• 71.089b

• 71.089d

• 71.089e


27.

Project Name: Borealis FRA - Step 2b

Description: 1. To establish two new COPs - BARUD and ERSER on the ISL/NOR

border. 2. To realign the following ATS routes:

a. P607 as ... PEMOV - BARUD; b. Z267 as ... BATPA - BARUD.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure and the flight planning options within Borealis FRA Area States and to harmonise ATS route structure in Norway with the implementation of Borealis Step 2.




NOR ISL

Originator(s): NOR

Related proposals:

• 87.028b


28.


Description: Adjustment of coordinates in accordance with WGS84 Manual, Annex 15 and Doc 8168.

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


Project Group: RFG SE

Project Category: AIP

SRB MNE


Together with H24 Free Route Airspace implementation in Beograd ACC.

Related proposals:

• 74.059b

• 80.081b




- 34 -

29.

Project Name: Lower/ Upper Route Network adjustment Beograd FIR/UIR

Description: To change the following ATS route segments: L614: RAMAP-NISVA into RAMAP-GINAM-NISVA; P738: RAMAP-VAGEN into RAMAP-IBISI-VAGEN; UP129: NIK-TORTO into NIK-BUNEX-GENLU-TORTO.

Objective: To prepare the ATS route network for the planned removal of U prefix while resolving discrepancies between the Lower and Upper route network.



SRB

Originator(s): SRB

Related proposals:

• 89.013


30.

Project Name: ATS Route Improvement Beograd FIR/UIR

Description: 1. To replace VOR/DME BEO with VOR/DME BGD for en-route

purposes. 2. To change the following ATS route segments accordingly:

a. M/UM173: ELGEB-BEO as ELGEB-BGD and BEO-TISAK as BGD-TISAK

b. M/UM749: NEVAK-BEO as NEVAK-BGD and BEO-KOTUS as BGD-KOTUS

c. N/UN732: VAL-BEO as VAL-BGD d. N/UN739: OKLOP-BEO as OKLOP-BGD and BEO-NIVIS as

BGD-NIVIS e. Y/UY505: RAVAK-BEO as RAVAK-BGD f. Y520: DEREG-BEO as DEREG-BGD g. UY520: ESIRI-BEO as ESIRI-BGD and BEO-TADAM as BGD-

TADAM h. Y/UY575: IDABO-BEO as IDABO-BGD

Objective: To further improve the ATS route structure within Beograd FIR/ UIR.



SRB

Originator(s): SRB


31.

Project Name: ATS Route re-designation Beograd FIR

Description: To re-designate the following airways 1. R45 as L187 with same parameters. 2. W47 as Y400 with addition of ATS route segment TAZ – POD –

RETRA.

Objective:


Project Category: Route Redesignation

SRB

Originator(s): SRB



- 35 -

To rationalise the existing ATS route designators within Beograd FIR in order to further facilitate flight planning and resolve double RDs use in ICAO EUR Region.


32.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Beograd, Phase 5b - SEAFRA

Description: To introduce H24 Free Route Airspace in Beograd ACC AoR above FL325.

Objective: To further improve airspace organisation within Sarajevo FIR and Beograd FIR.


Project Group: FAB CE RFG SE


SRB MNE BIH HRV

Originator(s): SRB

• In coordination with FRA-IT Free Route Airspace in Italy above FL335.

• In coordination with Free Route introduction in Zagreb ACC.

• FRA cross border application in Zagreb ACC and Beograd ACC AoRs.

• Implementation depends on BH ATM, Phase 2 implementation.

• RTS March 2016.

Related proposals:

• 69.086a

• 74.016a

• 74.016c

• 74.048a

• 74.048b

• 75.013

• 80.081a


33.


Description: Change of en-route navigational requirements above 9500ft from RNP5 (B-RNAV) to PBN RNAV5 and RNAV routes adaptation.

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


Project Group: RFG SE

Project Category: AIP

SRB MNE


Changes in AIP ENR 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3.

Related proposals:

• 80.081a


34.

Project Name: RNAV/RNP Procedures

Description: To introduce RNP 1 SIDs, STARs and RNP APCH procedures for Igdir (LTCT) and Hakkari Selahaddin Eyyubi (LTCW) Airports.

Objective: To further improve the airspace organisation within Istanbul FIR and Ankara FIR.


Project Category: Airspace Structure PBN

TUR

Originator(s): TUR



- 36 -

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



- 37 -

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.



- 38 -




- 39 -

Documents

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1613 No 03/1203 8 December … ERNIP Part 2 - ARN Version 2014 - 2018/19 also responds to the targets included in the Network Performance Plan (NPP) 2015 -