Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1802 No 03/1203 1 February 2018 – 28 … · 2019. 4. 11. · Monitoring Report AIRAC 1802 (1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018) - 10 - 2. LIST OF PROPOSALS

No 03/1203 Edition: AIRAC 1203

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1802 1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018

European Route Network Improvement Plan

(ERNIP) Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1802 1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018

NETWORK MANAGER

Left blank intentionally

European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) - Implementation Monitoring Monitoring Report AIRAC 1802 (1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018)

- 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 1802 (1 February 2018) ..................... 10 2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 1 February 2018 ................... 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/ FRA EVOLUTION ................................................................ 18 3.6 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 19

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 1 FEBRUARY 2018 .................... 20 ANNEX B: ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................... 27


- 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 1802 (1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018). 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.

https://extranet.eurocontrol.int/ftp/?t=4df773eea3ffaea31e3d1768150125b3


- 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 via 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 via 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

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/airspace-design

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/network-operations-monitoring-and-reporting

http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications?title=&field_term_publication_type_tid=205&year%5bvalue%5d%5byear


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


- 10 -

2. LIST OF PROPOSALS IMPLEMENTED AIRAC 1802 (1 FEBRUARY 2018)

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 1 February 2018 During the AIRAC cycle 14 (fourteen) airspace improvement packages co-ordinated at network level were implemented. Apart from several ATS route network and/or RAD improvements the list below provides an overview of the major enhancements implemented on 1 February 2018.

Austria / Bosnia & Herzegovina / Croatia / Montenegro / Serbia / Slovenia

- SECSI - South East Common Sky Initiative (cross-border FRA operation between SAXFRA and SEAFRA).

Bulgaria

- DANUBE FAB - Phase 3a

(H24 FRA on seasonal basis above FL175.)

Germany

- Munich ACC - OASE Phase 1.

Greece

- Direct Route Airspace Greece H24 – Phase 3a/ 3b.

A detailed description of all improvement measures implemented 1 February 2018 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

https://ext.eurocontrol.int/ernip_database/Index.action

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 - 2017 and its evolution until 28 February 2018. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

3,53

%

3,54

%

3,45

%

3,22

%

3,04

%

2,96

%

2,80

%

2,63

%

2,55

%

2,47

%

2,36

%

2,33

%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018

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 - 2017 and its evolution until 28 February 2018. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

4,91

%

5,03

%

4,90

%

4,91

%

4,73

%

4,64

%

4,57

%

4,57

%

4,56

%

4,62

%

4,46

%

4,38

%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018

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 28 February 2018. (Note: inclusion of new measurements will be done as soon as all data will become available)

3,75

%

3,65

%

3,48

%

3,42

%

3,56

%

3,37

%

3,29

%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

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 - 2017 and the evolution until 28 February 2018. (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%

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

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

1701

1702

1703

1704

1705

1706

1707

1708

1709

1710

1711

1712

1713

1801

1802

Rou

te E

xten

sion

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycle RTE-DESRTE-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 28 February 2018. (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

1701

1702

1703

1704

1705

1706

1707

1708

1709

1710

1711

1712

1713

1801

1802

Rou

te E

xten

sion

AIRAC

Route Efficiency KPI per AIRAC cycle RTE-DESRTE-RADRTE-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 28 February 2018 by 1.12 percentage points (same in AIRAC 1801). 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 28 February 2018 by 0.52 percentage points (0.53 in AIRAC 1801). The difference between the airspace design indicator and the last filed flight plan indicator was 1.45 percentage points in 2009 and was 2.05 percentage points in February 2018 (2.04 in AIRAC 1801).

The current data indicates that the route extension due to airspace design remains at 2.33% in February 2018 (same in AIRAC 1801).

The current data show that the route extension based on the last filed flight plan went up to 4.39% in February 2018 (4.38% in AIRAC 1801).

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR As shown in Figure 3 above the impact of the RAD decreased by 0,46 percentage points in February 2018 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 1802 as well as the airspace design improvements put in place since AIRAC 1702 in connection with changing traffic patterns and structure, the additional, potential savings offered during the AIRAC cycle 1802 amount to 18 000 NMs flown less compared with the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2017. This translates into 108 tons of fuel, or 360 tons of CO2, or € 90 000.

Based on the last filed flight plan indicator and as a result of the airspace design improvements put in place since AIRAC 1702 in connection with changing traffic patterns and the airline choices made, the actual losses calculated during the AIRAC cycle 1802 amount to 247000 NMs flown more compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2017. This translates into 1 482 tons of fuel, or 4 940 tons of CO2, or € 1 235 000.

The losses recorded on the last filed flight plan data during AIRAC cycle 1802 compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2017 are mainly because of different flight planning/ airline choices, traffic composition and/or scenarios applied due to capacity problems in the network as well as special events as follows:

• 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 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.

• Staffing issues in Karlsruhe UAC required regulations, with impact on flight planning route extension.


- 14 -

• Capacity issues in Karlsruhe UAC, Maastricht UAC, Reims ACC and London ACCs required regulations, with impact on flight planning route extension.

Note: The restriction for the use of Iraqi airspace/ Baghdad FIR was relaxed end of 2017 according to NOTAM by FAA.

Figure 6 below shows the airspace unavailability and closed areas in February 2018.

F Figure 6 : Airspace unavailability and closed areas in February 2018


- 15 -

Figure 7 and Figure 8 below visualise the impact of the mentioned airspace unavailability (see Figure 6 above) by comparing traffic flows in February 2014 and February 2018.

Figure 7 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday, 19 February 2014 (flight planned)

Figure 8 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday, 21 February 2018 (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).

1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1801 1802NM DES 0 212 47 266 235 305 246 226 262 179 66 39 29 18NM FPL 220 414 228 391 420 369 -19 -102 -164 -30 227 60 -97 -247

-300-200-100

0100200300400500

NM

/100

0

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

1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1801 1802TONS FUEL DES 0 1273 282 1598 1410 1830 1475 1353 1574 1075 398 236 173 108TONS FUEL FPL 1320 2486 1368 2348 2520 2214 -115 -612 -986 -180 1364 360 -582 -1482

-2000-1500-1000-500

0500

10001500200025003000

TON

S O

F 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 -

1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1801 1802TONS CO2 DES 0 4244 941,6 5325,4 4700 6100 4916 4510 5246 3582 1328 786 576 360TONS CO2 FPL 4400 8288 4560 7825,9 8400 7380 -382 -2040 -3288 -600 4546,6 1200 -1940 -4940

-6000-4000-2000

02000400060008000

10000

TON

S O

F C

O2

AIRAC CYCLE


(In CO2)

TONS CO2 DES TONS CO2 FPL

Figure 11 : Flight Efficiency savings/ losses in CO2

1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1801 1802EURO DES 0 1061 235 1331 1175 1525 1229 1128 1312 896 332 197 144 90EURO FPL 1100 2072 1140 1956 2100 1845 -96 -510 -822 -150 1137 300 -485 -1235

-1500-1000

-5000

5001000150020002500

EUR

O/1

000

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/ FRA EVOLUTION FRA implementation leads to improved flight efficiency and has an economic impact in terms of fuel savings as well as notable environmental impact on climate in terms of reduced CO2 emissions.

Full implementation has taken place in Austria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Moldova, Portugal, Serbia/ Montenegro, Slovenia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and all Scandinavian States (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden) & Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania).

Partial implementation during night, week-end or based on permission to flight plan direct/ DCT between a defined set of points has already been provided in a large number of European states (see Figure 13 below).

Figure 13 : Airspace implementation towards Free Route Airspace

Until 1 February 2018 more than 40 Area Control Centres/ ACCs in Europe have already progressed with partially and/ or fully Free Route Airspace Implementation: Athinai ACC, Beograd ACC, Bratislava ACC, Brest ACC, Brindisi ACC, Bodo 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, Tbilisi ACC, Tirana ACC, Ukraine (individual UTAs), Vilnius ACC, Warsaw ACC, Wien ACC, Zagreb ACC and Zurich ACC (see Figure 13 above).


- 19 -

3.6 ASM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT The ASM Performance Assessment for Q1 2018 will be included for AIRAC 1804. The ASM Performance Assessment for Q2 and Q3 2018 will be included for AIRAC 1810.

The ASM Performance Assessment for 2018, providing a full picture of the whole year 2018 as well as the performance (behaviour of the aircraft operators and the efficiency of the ANSPs managing the airspace) in the first, second, third and fourth quarter (Q1 - Q4) of 2018 (AIRAC 1801 – AIRAC 1813) will be included in the ERNIP Implementation Monitoring Report for AIRAC 1813.


- 20 -

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 1 FEBRUARY 2018 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 1802 (1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018)

- 21 -

Proposal ID : 90.010 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

1.

Project Name: SECSI - South East Common Sky Initiative

Description: To allow cross-border FRA operation between SAXFRA and SEAFRA areas.

Objective: To further improve the airspace organization and flight options by expanding of cross-border FRA application in South East Europe.

Implemented 01 FEB 2018

Project Category: Free Route Airspace High Seas

AUT SVN HRV BIH MNE SRB

Originator(s): AUT SVN HRV BIH MNE SRB

1. The South East Common Sky Initiative will include the airspace part of the AoRs of Wien ACC, Ljubljana ACC, Zagreb ACC and Beograd ACC.

2. High Seas Coordination (Serial no: EUR/NAT 17/35-HS-MNE) circulation letter ref: EUR/NAT 17-0641.TEC of 7 December 2017 circulated with deadline on 8 January 2018

Proposal ID : 92.006a / 26.039a Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

2.

Project Name: DANUBE FAB - Phase 3a

Description: To extend time availability of Free Route in Sofia CTA to H24 on Seasonal basis above FL175.

Objective: To further improve the Free Route Airspace operations within Sofia CTA.


Project Group: RFG SE SG BLACK

Project Category: Free Route Airspace High Seas

BGR

Originator(s): BGR

3. Seasonal bases: 1 FEB 2018 - 23 MAY 2018.

4. This implementation reduces the scope of DANUBE FAB FRA - Phase 3 (deleted proposal 82.031) to national level within Sofia CTA. ROMATSA postponed implementation of seasonal FRA due to new ATM system implementation. SEEN FRA will continue to operate during the night.

5. High Seas Coordination (Serial no: EUR/NAT-B 17/20-HS-BGR) circulation letter ref: EUR/NAT 17-0442.TEC of 18 August 2017 circulated with deadline on 8 September 2017.

Related proposals: • 92.006b / 26.039b • 92.006c / 26.039c


3.

Project Name: Munich ACC - OASE Phase 1

Description: 1. Project OASE at EDMMACC (sector changes FRKH to BBG/HOF). 2. To implement new ATS route T189 BAMKI - NIBIL 3. To re-align Y103 EKSOS - ERETO - TILMO - LASGA as EKSOS -

LONLI.


Project Category: Airspace Structure

DEU

Originator(s): DEU

The „OASE“ project results in some changes of Munich ACC sector structures, requiring the shifting of a sector boundary and consequently a shifting of some traffic flows and airways.

Related proposals: • 93.036


- 22 -

4. To delete ATS route T943 TABAT – NEPEG (release of RD T943) 5. To change CDR UQ341 to CDR1 H24 to support Swiss SCC trial. 6. To open N851 southbound TEDGO - RAUTA (new waypoint/

intersection with T732) for ARR LSZR/EDNY. 7. To allow L179 MEVEL – OSN northbound only. 8. To add new waypoint KOGOL - LENIZ - TULSI on N/UN871

(minimum FL on N871 adjusted). 9. To add waypoint KUBAB - NUVEN - TAGOB on L23. 10. To adjust UQ863 CDR times. 11. To adjust minimum level on T884.

Objective: To further improve the airspace organisation within Munich ACC.


4.

Description: To add the FRA relevance (D) to significant point INTET.

Objective: To further improve NEFRA area flight planning options.


Project Category: Free Route Airspace

DNK

Originator(s): DNK


5.

Project Name: ECAC States AIP en-route publication issues Spain

Description: To publish all SIDs / STARs in AIP Spain, ENR 2 in accordance with Annex 11: 1. coded designator to contain maximum 7 (seven) characters; 2. after the validity indicator only 1 (one) letter indicating the route

indicator is allowed.

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


Project Category: AIP

ESP

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL

6. In accordance with AIP Spain, part AD2, LEMD P-RNAV SIDs are identified by coded designator containing 8 (eight) characters - BARDI1AX, BARDI1AY, NANDO3AR, etc. coming from additional letter added. All other P-RNAV SIDs also contain similar additional letter - SIE1AL, VTB2AS, etc.

7. In accordance with AIP Spain, part AD2, all LEMD and LEBL instrument arrivals - continuous descent (CDA) STARs are identified by coded designator containing 9 (nine) characters - MORAL3DCC or ORBIS1DCC or ALBER1DCN or PUMAL2DCN, etc.

8. Furthermore with AIRAC AMDT 01/15 (WEF 05 MAR 2015) Spain continued to publish new CDA STARs for Gran Canaria AD containing 9 characters such as COSTI1DCC, ODEGI1DCC, REMGI1DCC and VIDRI1DCC.

9. This 8 (eight) or 9 (nine) characters


- 23 -

publication of designators is not compliant with ICAO and has an impact on aeronautical database systems. As an example in EAD SDO (Static Data Operations) STAR PUMAL2DCN is converted and coded as MAL2DCN due to 7 characters limit.

10. Spain (ENIACA ATM and AIS part) as well as ICAO were approached on clarifying the justification of this publication.

Related proposals: • 84.056a


6.

Project Name: Airspace structure improvement Madrid FIR/UIR - Brest FIR

Description: 1. To create a new point BALDA 443635N 0053311W at the interface

between Brest and Madrid ACCs. 2. To extend existing UN480 with segment ERWAN 455613N

0051317W – BALDA 443635N 0053311W.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure at the interface between Madrid FIR/UIR and Brest FIR.


Project Category: ATS Routes High Seas

FRA ESP

Originator(s): FRA

High Seas Coordination (Serial No.:EUR/NAT-B 17/21-HS-FRA) Circulation Letter 17-0443 of 3 August 2017, approval letter ref: EUR/NAT 17-0501.TEC of 6 September 2017.


7.

Project Name: IAM Interface Aix Marseille re-organisation

Description: a. To extend the Provence SIV and junction with Lyon SIV and

Montpellier SIV. b. To define a new airspace organisation for Marseille approach.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure within France FIR and the service for the users.


Project Category: Airspace Structure

FRA

Originator(s): FRA

Related proposals: • 69.089a • 69.089c • 69.089e • 69.089f • 75.073a


8.

Description: To introduce new FRA significant point BKU as (I).

Objective: To further improve FRA Georgia area flight planning options.



GEO

Originator(s): GEO


- 24 -

Proposal ID : 91.018c Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

9.

Project Name: Direct Route Airspace Greece H24 - Phase 3b

Description: To allow the following new H24 "Direct" flight planning options FL355 - FL460 within Hellas UIR. 1. RDS - PAXIS; 2. SKP - EVIVI;

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


Project Group: FAB BLUE MED

Project Category: DCTs

GRC

Originator(s): FAB BLUE MED GRC

Proposal ID : 91.018b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

10.

Project Name: Direct Route Airspace Greece H24 - Phase 3a

Description: To allow the following new H24 "Direct" flight planning options FL355 - FL460 within Hellas UIR. a. ABILO - AKINA; b. DINOB - PEREN; c. LURUS - KUMBI; d. MONUV - RDS; e. SUTIS - RUTOM; f. RDS - PAXIS; g. SKP - EVIVI;

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


Project Group: FAB BLUE MED

Project Category: DCTs

GRC

Originator(s): GRC FAB BLUE MED

Related proposals: • 91.018a • 91.019 • 91.020a • 91.020b


11.

Project Name: SEAFRA operations improvement

Description: To allow point BAREB as FRA (EX).

Objective: To further improve FRA options within Zagreb FIR.


Project Group: RFG SE


HRV


11. BAREB was allowed for HUFRA operation as from 25 JUN 2015

12. Discussed at SE Axis/19: 28 - 29 MAR 2017.


12.

Description: To remove FRA relevance (I) from FRZ and add FRA relevance (I) to significant point LOMED.

Objective: To further improve FRA-IT area flight planning options.



ITA

Originator(s): ITA


- 25 -


13.

Description: To review publication of FRA significant points in ENR 4.4.

Objective: To adapt in accordance with ERNIP FRA significant points publication in AIP Lithuania.


Project Category: AIP Free Route Airspace

LTU



14.

Description: To introduce new FRA significant point IPSEN as (I).

Objective: To further improve NEFRA area flight planning options.



NOR

Originator(s): NOR


- 26 -



- 27 -

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


- 28 -

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.


- 29 -



- 30 -

Documents

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1802 No 03/1203 1 February 2018 – 28 … · 2019. 4. 11. · Monitoring Report AIRAC 1802 (1 February 2018 – 28 February 2018) - 10 - 2. LIST OF PROPOSALS