Download pdf - Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1607 No 03/1203 23 June 2016– 20 July 2016 … · 2019-02-18 · European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) - Implementation Monitoring Monitoring

No 03/1203

Edition: AIRAC 1203

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1607

23 June 2016– 20 July 2016

European Route Network Improvement Plan

(ERNIP) Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report: AIRAC 1607

23 June 2016– 20 July 2016

NETWORK MANAGER

Left blank intentionally

European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) - Implementation Monitoring

Monitoring Report AIRAC 1607 (23 June 2016– 20 July 2016)

- 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 1607 (23 JUNE 2016) ......................... 10

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 23 June 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 23 JUNE 2016............................. 20

ANNEX B: ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................... 24



- 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 1607 (23 JUNE 2016– 20 JULY 2016).

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 1607 (23 JUNE 2016)

2.1 SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED ON 23 June 2016

During the AIRAC cycle 12 (twelve) 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 23 June 2016:

� Cyprus

- Nicosia Direct Route Airspace, Phase 1B.

� Denmark / Estonia / Latvia / Finland / Sweden

- North European Free Route Airspace/ NEFRA Phase 1 (NEFAB plus DK/SE).

� Poland

- FRA Like (DCT) Warsaw FIR.

� The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

- Free Route Airspace Skopje FIR.

� UK

- Prestwick ACC iTEC (interoperability Through European Collaboration) operating system.

A detailed list of all improvement measures implemented on 23 June 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 20 July 2016. (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

9%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

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 20 July 2016. (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

8%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

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 20 July 2016. (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

7%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

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 - 2015 and the evolution until 20 July 2016. (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

Ro

ute

Exte

nsio

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 20 July 2016. (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%

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

Ro

ute

Ex

ten

sio

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 22 June 2016 by 0.96 percentage points (same in AIRAC 1606). 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 22 June 2016 by 0.22 percentage points (same in AIRAC 1606).

The difference between the airspace design indicator and the last filed flight plan indicator was 1.45 percentage points in 2009 and was 2.19 percentage points in July 2016 (same in AIRAC 1606).

The current data indicates that the route extension due to airspace design slightly decreased to 2.48 % in July 2016 (2.50 % in AIRAC 1606).

The current data show that the route extension based on the last filed flight plan went down to 4.71 % in July 2016 (4.75 % in AIRAC 1606).

3.4.2 EVOLUTION OF RTE-RAD INDICATOR

As shown in Figure 3 above the impact of the RAD decreased by 0,18 percentage points in July 2016 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 1607 as well as the airspace design improvements put in place since AIRAC 1507 in connection with changing traffic patterns and structure, the potential savings offered during the AIRAC cycle 1607 amount to 343 100 NMs flown less compared with the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015. This translates into 2 059 tons of fuel, or 6 862 tons of CO2, or € 1 716 000.

Based on the last filed flight plan indicator and as a result of the series of events indicated below, the actual losses calculated during the AIRAC cycle 1607 amount to 655 100 NMs flown more compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015. This translates into 3 931 tons of fuel, or 13 102 tons of CO2, or € 3 276 000.

The losses recorded on the last filed flight plan data during AIRAC cycle 1607 compared to the equivalent AIRAC cycle in 2015 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:

• 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.

• French industrial action on Thursday 23 June, Tuesday 28 June, and Tuesday 05 July required regulations by French ACCs as well as re-routing scenarios applied by NMOC to mitigate delays, with impact on flight planning route extension. Maastricht UAC and



- 14 -

Karlsruhe UAC required regulations caused by the disruption to normal traffic patterns resulting from the Industrial Action, with impact on network efficiency.

• Widespread capacity and staffing issues across the network required a high number of regulations and/or level-cap scenarios by Brest ACC, Bordeaux ACC, Brussels ACC, Karlsruhe UAC, Maastricht UAC, Marseille ACC, Nicosia ACC and Warsaw ACC to mitigate delays, with impact on flight planning route extension. Note: According to statistics the busiest day for the Network so far was Friday, 27 June 2008 with 34,476 flights. Friday, 1 July 2016 passed that with 34,513 flights, as the busiest day recorded in Europe.

• Scottish/ Prestwick ACC capacity problems due to iTEC FDPS system training and

familiarisation combined with unseasonable weather patterns resulting in level-cap

scenarios and transatlantic flights adopting more northerly routes, with possible impact on

network efficiency.

• Brest ACC, Shanwick Oceanic and Santa Maria Oceanic Airspace capacity issues due

to French Military operation BELLEROPHON required protective measures, with impact

on flight planning route extension.

• Langen ACC Radar system problem and Karlsruhe UAC OLDI line failure required regulations with impact on network efficiency.

Figure 6 below shows the airspace unavailability and closed areas during July 2016.

F

Figure 6 : Airspace unavailability and closed areas July 2016



- 15 -

Figure 7 and Figure 8 below visualise the impact of the mentioned airspace unavailability (see Figure 6 above) by comparing traffic flows in July 2014 and July 2016.

Figure 7 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday, 9 July 2014 (flight planned)

Figure 8 : 24h traffic situation Wednesday, 6 July 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).

1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607

NM DES 490 458 383 270 131 186 311 257 299 219 401 337 368 343

NM FPL 334 729 516 357 166 -62 -565 -187 -116 -575 322 -383 -541 -655

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

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

1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607

TONS FUEL DES 2940 2748 2297 1620 786 1115 1866 1543 1794 1314 2407 2025 2206 2059

TONS FUEL FPL 2004 4374 3096 2142 996 -372 -3388 -1121 -693 -3450 1933 -2296 -3246 -3931

-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 -

1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607

TONS CO2 DES 9800 9160 7656 5400 2620 3718 6220 5144,1 5980 4380 8023,5 6749,8 7352 6862

TONS CO2 FPL 6680 14580 10320 7140 3320 -1240 -11292 -3737 -2310 -11502 6443,4 -7652 -10820 -13102

-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

1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607

EURO DES 2450 2290 1914 1350 655 930 1555 1286 1495 1095 2006 1687 1838 1716

EURO FPL 1670 3645 2580 1785 830 -310 -2823 -934 -578 -2875 1611 -1913 -2705 -3276

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

EU

RO

/10

00

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

3.5 FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE EVOLUTION Until 23 June 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

Not reported for this AIRAC cycle (reporting interval 4 times per year).

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

The ASM Performance Assessment for 2016, providing a full picture of the whole year 2016 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 2016 (AIRAC 1601 – AIRAC 1613) will be included in the ERNIP Implementation Monitoring Report for AIRAC 1613.



- 20 -

ANNEX A: DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS IMPLEMENTED 23 JUNE 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


- 21 -

Proposal ID : 86.050 / 23.006 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

1.

Description: To allow DEP UGTB via DISKA.

Objective: To further improve ATS route or flight planning options for traffic UGTB - UBBB.

Implemented 23 JUN 2016

Project Group: SG BLACK

Project Category: DCTs RAD

AZE GEO

Originator(s): EUROCONTROL

• Aside of airspace design solution - SID DISKA allowance of DCT as per Doc 4444 is also possible via RAD Appendix 5.

• Saving for city pair UGTB - UBBB is around 60NM.

• Further discussions on allowance of ADEKI for city pair UGTB - UBBB shall be considered by both States.

Proposal ID : 86.018 Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

2.

Description: To withdraw the following existing waypoints: NENAD, SUDIM and DRVAR and re-align the corresponding ATS routes accordingly.

Objective: To further simplify airspace organisation within Sarajevo FIR and release unnecessary waypoints.


Project Group: RFG SE

Project Category: 5LNC

BIH HRV


• These points are crossings between lower and/or upper ATS routes allowing only illogic turns. There is no difference in lower or upper ATS route limits before and after these points and their existence is not operationally required.

• In case being withdrawn these 5LNCs will be release in ICARD as part of simplification project initiated by ICAO and EUROCONTROL.

Proposal ID : 86.056b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

3.

Project Name: Project Name: Nicosia Direct Route Airspace - Phase 1B

Description: To allow 6 (six) NIGHT "Direct" flight planning options above FL285.

Objective: To further improve flight planning options within Nicosia FIR.


Project Group: FAB BLUE MED RFG SE

Project Category: DCTs RAD

CYP

Originator(s): CYP FAB BLUE MED

• DCT options are approved and included in the Blue Med document “OPS-D2.1 - BLUE MED BM DCT _AVBL Night Wkend_ Catalogue version Nov 2015_rev 1.2” produced by the BM RNC & FR TF.

• Night period 21:00 - 04:00.

Related proposals:

• 71.088a

• 71.088b

• 86.056a

• 86.056c

• 86.056d

• 86.056e


4.

Description: To allow new Direct flight planning option BOMBI DCT SIPVU and

change of flow restrictions for ARR ELLX, EBLG, EHBK (and others)


Project Category:

DEU

Originator(s): DEU



- 22 -

via OKG (UL984) or UPALA (UL610). To update the flow restrictions within EDUUERL sector.

Objective: To improve flight efficiency within FABEC (higher FL, shortcut) by offering better profile (late descent) / new shorter routing and optimizing capacity for ERL sector.

DCTs RAD

FAB EC


5.

Description: To re-designate the existing ATS route Z/UZ713 OSN - SUVOX as Z/UZ718.

Objective: To rationalise the existing ATS route designators within Germany in order to further facilitate flight planning and avoid duplicate RDs use.


Project Category: Route Redesignation

DEU



6.

Project Name: New Waypoint on T718 TRA - RIGVI

Description: To establish new waypoint ALINE on ATS route T718 between Trasadingen VOR (TRA) and GATPI.

Objective: To facilitate "direct to" instructions without the requirement for verbal coordination.


Project Category: ATS Routes

DEU CHE FAB EC

Originator(s): CHE FAB EC

Proposal ID : 69.064b / 16.035b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

7.

Project Name: NEFAB and DK/SE FAB Free Route Airspace - NEFRA Phase 1

Description: To implement H24 cross border Free Route Airspace between DK-SE FAB and NEFAB, except Norway, above FL285.

Objective: To further improve the airspace structure between Finland FIR, Sweden FIR, Tallinn FIR, Riga FIR and Kobenhavn FIR.


Project Group: FAB Denmark/Sweden FAB NEFAB SG BALTIC

Project Category: Free Route Airspace

FIN EST LVA DNK SWE

Originator(s): FAB NEFAB

• NEFRA: North European Free Route Airspace (NEFAB plus DK/SE).

• ATS routes will be kept.

• Norway plans to implement cross-border Free Route Airspace spring 2017.

Related proposals:

• 67.046 / 16.024

• 69.064a / 16.035a

• 85.118

Proposal ID : 69.095b Impl. Status: State(s) & Org. Comments:

8.

Project Name: Prestwick ACC

Description: To introduce new operating system iTEC (interoperability Through European Collaboration) within Prestwick ACC.


Project Category: ATM System

GBR

Originator(s): GBR



- 23 -

Objective: The iTEC project will introduce a Trajectory Based FDP and associated Controller Tools to the Prestwick Upper Airspace Sectors.


9.

Project Name: City Pair Level cap

Description: To raise the City Pair Level Cap from FL270 to FL290 for traffic ex Severn and Midlands Groups to EBBR.

Objective: To further improve flight efficiency within UK.


Project Category: RAD Vertical FE

GBR

Originator(s): GBR


10.

Description: To allow proper flight planning options via RAD Appendix 5 for ARR UGTB via TISOT and DEP UGTB via DISKA.

Objective: To further improve flight planning options for flights to/from UGTB.


Project Group: RFG SE SG BLACK

Project Category: RAD

GEO


• These points will be allowed as Connecting Points until proper SIDs/STARs being designed.

• By using current ATS route connections to existing SIDs and STARs penalization varies up to 70NM.

• Currently design of SID/STAR is in progress.


11.

Project Name: Free Route Airspace Skopje

Description: To introduce H24 Free Route in Skopje ACC above FL245.

Objective: To further improve airspace organisation within Skopje FIR.


Project Group: RFG SE

Project Category: Free Route Airspace

MKD

Originator(s): MKD

• Free Route implementation depends on neighbouring States developments and requirements.

• Full co-operation should be expected.

• ATS route network will remain.


12.

Project Name: FRA Like (DCT) Warsaw FIR - Phase 2

Description: To allow new 16 "Direct" (DCT) flight planning options within Warszawa FIR: REGLI - DENKO, GRUDA - DEVEL, USTIL - OLILA, LENOV - GOVEN, LENOV - BADUP, BADUP - BINKA, RONEX - BINKA, ROLKA - DEVEL, ELPOL - ROLKA, PIXOR - AMTEK, SORIX - DIBED, KARTI - RILAB, RILAB - DIBED, ELPOL - LUGOL, LUGOL - BINKA, LUGOL - BABEN.

Objective: To improve the airspace organisation & flight efficiency in Warszawa FIR.


Project Group: SG BALTIC

Project Category: DCTs Free Route Airspace RAD

POL

Originator(s): POL

Related proposals:

• 76.052 / 23.029

• 78.028a

• 86.041 / 22.046



- 24 -

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



- 25 -

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.



- 26 -




- 27 -