Global Air Navigation Services Performance Report 20152010 – 2014 ANSP Performance Results

Executive Summary

civil air navigation services organisation

The CANSO Global Air Navigation Services Performance Report 2015 is the collective effort of CANSO Member air navigation service providers (ANSP), which participate in this benchmarking effort on a voluntary basis.

Editorial TeamPaul Cripwell, NAV CANADA, Chair Global Benchmarking Workgroup (GBWG)Helios - CANSO Performance Benchmarking Project Team

ContributorsAEROTHAI - Siree Vatanavigkit, Kunthinee KarunratanakulAirways New Zealand - Nigel FitzhardingeATNS - Josia Manyakoana, Sibusiso Nkabinde, Mulomoni NesenganiCAAS - Carol Teo, Ho Man LuiCANSO - Eugene HoevenDANS - Richard SmithFAA-ATO - Dina Dolan, Aleksandra Damsz, Kristin StadumGACA - Yousef BagisHungaroControl - Diana GalgocziIsavia - Sigurleifur KristjanssonJANS - Masaaki ShojiLGS - Liva Krigere, Anda SivinaLPS SR - Bronislava KubickovaNAV Portugal - Nuno Simoes, Ana Pinto, Catia SantosSE Oro Navigacija - Mindaugas GustysSakaeronavigatsia - Tamuna Rekhviashvili

DisclaimerThis report has been compiled using data provided by the participating ANSPs. In order to facilitate comparability, data for each ANSP has been transformed to be consistent with standard definitions. The resulting data and comparisons have been produced solely for the use by ANSPs, and other interested parties, to assess and appraise performance in air navigation services provision. It is not intended that the data are used for any wider purpose, nor do the data provide a definitive assessment of any number, cost, time period or other metric relating to any ANSP’s process.

December 2015

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

2

Foreword

Measuring the performance of CANSO’s air navigation service provider (ANSP) Members is an important core activity for CANSO. It supports CANSO’s strategic objective of transforming global ATM performance and is a central value-creating activity of Vision 2020. This is the sixth year that CANSO has produced this report which discusses and compares the cost efficiency, productivity, pricing and revenues of ANSPs.

The 2015 Report also marks the second year of our partnership with Helios, which has contributed to the successful development of this activity and to the growing participation of CANSO Members, which this year is the highest recorded. However, the value of the Report can be further enhanced with even greater participation. As this is the only global ANS performance report of its kind, a broader base for the timely and up-to-date analysis would enhance its benefits to CANSO Members and the wider aviation community. We therefore urge all CANSO ANSP Members to participate in future.

At an industry level, 2014 saw the majority of ANSPs reduce their cost per IFR flight hour in the context of rising traffic. These findings seem to show that the key trends in 2013, increasing traffic levels and improved efficiency, have continued during 2014. The experience of participating members aligns with the global data showing rising passenger numbers (up 5.7%) and airport movements. While all regions experienced growth in the number of passengers, there was a marked difference between the continued strong growth in the Middle East, Asia Pacific and Latin America and the slower growth in other regions. ANSPs play an important role in enabling this growth through investment in, and provision of, increased capacity.

Last year’s report identified ATCO employment costs as an important area for further research. This year the integration of input from the CANSO Human Resources Workgroup provides valuable insight for the analysis of ANS cost efficiency performance, highlighting the common industry challenges faced by our Members, including the long time scale required for training ATCOs and the 30% failure rate. I am encouraged by this coordination which clearly shows the benefits of cross-group collaboration: a complete picture of ANS performance should cover all areas from safety to cost effectiveness.

The continued development of this activity and the increase in participation also represent important steps towards creating a further improved industry view on ANS performance and demonstrates CANSO Member commitment to performance improvement.

I would like to thank the Global Benchmarking Workgroup (GBWG) and the Helios team for their hard work, and especially all the participating CANSO Members that made possible this report and its more detailed counterparts.

Jeff PooleDirector General CANSO

3

Published December 2015 Contents

© CANSO 2015

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, or transmitted in any form, without the prior permission of CANSO. www.canso.org

Foreword by CANSO Director General page 3List of figures page 4Introduction page 5Performance in ANS provision page 62014 Participation page 8Global Context page 9Key messages - Financial Cost Efficiency page 11Human Resources page 13Summary page 16Evolution of the Report page 17Sources page 18Acronyms and abbreviations page 19

Figure 1 – ANS Performance Analysis page 6Figure 2 - ATCO Costs page 7Figure 3 – Participating ANSPs page 8Figure 4 – Global Airport Passenger Traffic page 9Figure 5 – Airport movements page 10Figure 6 – IFR Flight Hours page 11Figure 7 – Traffic Elasticity page 11Figure 8 – ATCO Productivity page 12Figure 9 – Staff Costs page 12

LIST OF FIGURES

4

5

Introduction

Building on the 2014 Report

Performance benchmarking is a complex activity that requires comparable, consistent, and validated data to be meaningful. As a voluntary exercise, it also requires anonymity to encourage high levels of participation if the results are to be in the public domain. This year we have achieved a greater contribution rate than any previous year and we have welcomed two new ANSPs (COCESNA and IDAC) to the process. In addition, we have welcomed back six ANSPs which took part in previous years but did not participate last year. It is especially positive to note the increase in Latin America and Caribbean Members taking part. The goal for future years is to achieve similar increases in other regions, so we can perform statistical analysis on a regional level. We aim to continue to build on this success and further grow participation through development of this activity in line with the demands of Members.

This year we have continued with the structure developed in 2014 with an executive summary, supported by detailed analysis at the industry and ANSP levels. The 2015 Report is published in three sections, preserving all the content of 2014, but separating the key messages from the detailed data provided in the ANSP View and Industry View reports. The Executive Summary report (this document) delivers: the key messages; information on participation; the global context; the evolution of the report: and a new section, which includes input from the HR Workgroup. This follows the identification of ATCO (air traffic control officer) employment costs as an issue for further investigation in last years’ Report. In future reports we hope to continue to integrate the work of the other CANSO workgroups to give greater insight into ANS performance and the context within which

the key performance indicators (KPI) presented in the ANSP View/Industry View Reports should be considered.

This document and the data-sharing activity available to participating ANSPs enable Members to study their own efficiency against that of other ANSPs and to identify opportunities for performance improvement. This activity supports Members in general benchmarking, identifying best practice and dialogue with stakeholders.

Next steps

The robustness of this analysis will increase as the process matures and our understanding of the impact of external factors such as the regulatory and operating environment develops. This year, the GBWG has carried out a trial of a number of contextual data metrics which could capture some of these external factors. We hope that in future years we will be able to present the most promising of these new data metrics so as to support greater understanding of performance drivers.

Performance in ANS provision

What does performance mean in the context of air navigation services (ANS)?

This report focuses on cost efficiency, a key part of the performance equation, and an important measure for an industry striving to become more ‘business-driven’.

Measuring inputs and outputs

Performance comparison is usually based on a number of KPIs. To compare cost indicators between different providers, data need to be normalised by output levels (e.g. costs/IFR1 flight hours). For cost indicators a decrease denotes a more efficient service. The efficiency of providers can also be compared using output/input indicators (e.g. IFR flight hours per ATCO2 hours). An increase in the indicator suggests more efficient service provision.

The traffic output measure used in the calculation of cost efficiency indicators is IFR flight hours. Whilst this is accepted as the main measure

of ANS activity it does not provide a complete picture of the services provided, especially for ANSPs which have a significant proportion of terminal activity. CANSO continues to work towards a more comprehensive measure to either replace or supplement IFR hours.

ATCO hours are used as the input measure when comparing ATCO employment costs. A comprehensive benchmarking of this indicator would need to account for the institutional factors that may impact this variable, e.g. regulations regarding shift lengths.

There should be an increase both in the number of KPIs and – more importantly – the quality of the KPIs, as indicators of progress of the industry and as tools for performance comparison, as we develop a better understanding of how to best mitigate external factors.

Figure 1 - ANS performance analysis

1 See Acronyms and abbreviations2 ATCO refers to ATCO in Operations (OPS)

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

6

7

Performance comparison: an efficiency perspective

It is difficult to compare performance between service providers convincingly. Each ANSP is subject to a variety of local, regional and global factors which means that drawing conclusions from performance data for a particular year must be done with caution.

There are, however, techniques that can be used to help reduce the local, regional and global factors affecting ANSPs. One such technique is to present trend analysis, showing the comparison of percentage changes year-on-year. This presentation of the data reduces the emphasis on individual ANSP performance and focuses instead on the higher-level industry performance factors to see if, as a whole, the performance of the industry is moving in the right direction. The anonymous presentation of data in these reports is also important in mitigating problems of comparability between ANSPs, including methodological differences in cost allocation or accounting practices.

ATCO Costs

ANS is not only highly labour intensive but also requires a highly-skilled labour force and thus a significant proportion of the cost base is related to ATCOs. Not only is there an outlay in terms of salary, but also training is expensive and time-consuming. This can have an impact on the flexibility of ANS costs in response to operational changes, notably traffic. This issue is important as global air traffic continues to rise, significantly so in certain regions, and is discussed in the section on Human Resources. The HR perspective is key to understanding and driving ANSP performance and so the insight from the HRWG (Human Resources Workgroup), which is included in this Executive Summary report, should provide invaluable information to participating ANSPs.

Figure 2 - ATCO Costs

2014 Participation

This edition of the report has achieved a greater global contribution than in any previous year. Data submissions were received from

The 2014 data submission covers:

IFR flight hours: 43.8 M Airport movements: 13.4 M

ANS Costs: USD 18.24 BN Number of ATCOs in OPS: 30,123

Member Country

AfricaATNS South Africa

CAA Uganda Uganda

Americas

COCESNA Central America

FAA-ATO USA

IDAC Dominican Republic

NAV CANADA Canada

SENEAM Mexico

Asia Pacific

AEROTHAI Thailand

Airports Authority of India India

Airservices Australia Australia

Airways New Zealand New Zealand

CAAS Singapore

JANS Japan

Europe

ALBCONTROL Albania

ANS Czech Republic Czech Republic

DHMI Turkey

DSNA France

EANS Estonia

Finavia Corporation Finland

HungaroControl Pte. Ltd. Co. Hungary

Isavia Ltd. Iceland

LFV Sweden

LGS Latvia

LPS SR Slovak Republic

NAV Portugal Portugal

ROMATSA Romania

SAKAERONAVIGATSIA Georgia

SE ORO NAVIGACIJA Lithuania

Slovenia Control Slovenia

SMATSA Serbia & Montenegro

UkSATSE Ukraine

Middle EastDANS Dubai

GACA Saudi Arabia

343 ANSPs in total, which included two new participants.

Figure 3 – Participating ANSPs

3 One ANSP is anonymous in the report.4 Nominal costs converted at 2014 exchange rates.

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

8

9

Global Context

Aviation is a key sector in the world economy. It both drives and supports global economic growth.

On a global level, in 2014, the aviation market was boosted by strong growth in emerging markets. Approximately 3.3 billion scheduled passengers and 51.5 million tonnes of cargo were transported, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA)5. Airports Council International (ACI) figures6 show 5.7% growth in passengers in 2014, above the 4.3% average growth rate of passenger traffic between 2004 and 2014, and showing the resilience of traffic to geopolitical events.

For ANS the key measures of activity are Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flights, IFR flight hours and IFR airport movements7.

While there is an evident link between the growth in passengers and ANS activity, the impact of passenger growth on ANS demand may be muted by either an increase in the average size of aircraft or load factor, as airlines strive for further improvements in operational efficiency. According to IATA figures the 2014 passenger load factor was 80%, maintaining the record high levels in 20138.

5 www.iata.org/pressroom/facts_figures/fact_sheets/Documents/fact-sheet-industry-facts.pdf6 www.aci.aero/News/Releases/Most-Recent/2015/08/31/ACI-releases-2014-World-Airport-Traffic-Report-Airports-in-

advanced-economies-rebound-in-2014--global-passenger-traffic-up-by-over-5-air-cargo-volumes-rise-after-three-

years-of-stagnation-7 See Annex 1 of the ANSP View report for definitions.8 www.iata.org/about/Documents/iata-annual-review-2015.pdf

Figure 4 – Global Airport Passenger Traffic

The increase in aircraft size is also indicated by a 6.3% growth in airline capacity as measured by airline seat kilometres (ASK). This means that while air traffic, measured by number of passengers, grew above the historic yearly average of 5%, the demand for ANS services grew markedly slower.

Data from ACI, which records information from 2,215 commercial airports in 160 countries, saw worldwide aircraft movements at airports increase 1.3% in 2014 to 84.6 million. Overall growth was higher than the 0.6% observed in 2013, supported by sustained high growth in Asia Pacific and Middle East Regions and a return to growth in Europe.

North America and Europe remained the largest traffic areas by movements, with Europe experiencing a return to growth after a fall in traffic in 2013, while airport movements continued to fall in North America.

The Middle East continued to grow strongly (4.8%) where the use of hub airports as focal points between East and West is further developing, following the rise of “South-South” trade links between Africa, the Middle East and Asia. In 2014 economic growth in the US also boosted Middle East – North America traffic.

Asia Pacific again showed the highest rate of growth of movements at 5.0% as it benefited from a large increase (6.3%) in air cargo traffic coupled with the increase in passenger movements. Although this increase is positive, it is still a drop off from the growth seen in 2013.

As the demand for air travel increases, the industry faces a number of performance challenges including maintaining safety standards and minimising the associated environmental impacts of air transport while catering for increasing global air traffic.

Figure 5 - Airport movements

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

10

10_11

There has been an improvement in cost efficiency by the majority of ANSPs. Cost per IFR flight hour (unit cost) decreased for 56% of ANSPs during 2014. This is an improvement on the trend since 2011 which saw 47% of ANSPs decrease unit costs.

This improvement in cost efficiency performance was made in the context of rising traffic. In 2014, 79% of ANSPs experienced an increase in traffic, a higher proportion compared to previous years (between 2011 and 2014, traffic increased for 70% of ANSPs).

In In the context of steady growth in traffic, as was the case for the majority of ANSPs, costs often grow at a slower rate than flight hours, leading to improved cost efficiency performance: 47% of ANSPs had an increase in traffic and a decrease in unit costs. However, 32% of ANSPs increased unit costs despite an increase in traffic.

Out of those that experienced a fall in traffic, three ANSPs (9% of the sample) managed to reduce unit costs.

Key messages -

Financial Cost Efficiency

Figure 6: IFR Flight Hours

Figure 7: Traffic Elasticity

Rising traffic and improving efficiency

Traffic Elasticity

11

In 2014, 53% of ANSPs reported an increase in ATCO productivity. This is positive, compared to the 3-year view during which 47% of ANSPs have seen increased ATCO productivity.

At the same time, ATCO employment costs (per hour) increased for 53% of ANSPs. This is actually an improvement on the 3-year view which has seen increasing ATCO costs for 64% of ANSPs.

Unit ATCO employment costs rose in real terms for 53% of ANSPs.

While 53% of ANSPs increased

ATCO hour productivity, there were also increases in controller working hours for half of ANSPs; and the number of IFR hours per ATCO increased for 62% of ANSPs.

Figure 8: ATCO Productivity

ATCO Productivity

Figure 9: Staff Costs

Staff Costs

12

13

Overall, 2014 was marked by rising traffic for an increasing proportion of ANSPs, in addition, the majority of providers showed improved cost efficiency performance as unit costs fell for 56% of ANSPs. However, we note that, despite the fact that the majority of ANSPs reduced their unit costs, average costs for the industry are increasing.

As in 2013 rising ATCO employment costs remain a concern for many of the participating providers. In 2014, 53% experienced an increase in employment costs above inflation. However, it is positive to note that 47% of ANSPs experienced a decrease in unit employment costs, which may be due to the falling average age of the workforce, as shown in the recent HRWG survey.

The observed increase in ATCO working hours could be due to ANSPs using adjustments in shifts, rosters, hours and leave to mitigate cost rises in the context of rising traffic. The ability of an ANSP to adjust costs to changes in traffic is an important part of performance and is detailed in the following Human Resources section.

Human Resources

Human resources is an important part of ANSP diversity

This year’s report clearly shows the diversity of Member providers across the world. They face many of the same issues but the context in which they operate – for example in terms of airspace composition - and the scale on which they operate – for example in terms of human resources - vary significantly.

This year’s report introduces new contextual data metrics to provide greater comparability between ANSPs. For example, by accounting for the different workload that is required to control en-route traffic compared to approach and tower traffic. It is clear that not only does service provision come in many different forms, but also every ANSP has a slightly different approach to account for its unique circumstances. The way that en-route, approach and tower services are provided ranges from integrated ACC/APP/TWR centres to a decentralised model where each segment of the flight is controlled from a separate location. Differences such as these highlight the need for greater understanding of how members can learn from industry best practice in such a diverse operating environment.

The new section below, provided by the CANSO Human Resources Workgroup, shows that there is diversity from an organisational perspective as well as from an operational standpoint. For example, employer contributions to pensions vary between 3 and 100%. However, it also highlights the fact that ANSPs across the industry face common challenges such as the long timescale required for training and the 30% average failure rate.

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

14

Executive Summary of the CANSO ATCO Remuneration and HR Metrics Report 2015

The CANSO ATCO Remuneration and HR Metrics Report 2015 incorporates the results of the sixth CANSO ATCO Remuneration Survey and the third HR Metrics Survey. The full version of the Report is provided to CANSO Members that provided data for the report. CANSO Members that did not provide data can obtain the de-identified summary version of the report.

The key results from the survey are as follows: — 21 ANSPs responded to the survey

— There is an increase in the number of ATCOs under the age of 30 and a decrease in the number of ATCOs over age 50

— The ratio of male to female ATCOs is 5:1

— The number of ATCOs employed in ANSPs ranged from 48 to 14,059 with an average ATCO headcount of 1,244

— 90% of respondents pay students while in training and the duration of training ranges from 10 to 44 months. The average failure rate is 30%.

— Average ATCO salary is around 3.6 times higher than the average industrial wage

— There has been a reduction in the number of defined benefit pension schemes. In addition, employers’ pension contributions range from 3% to 100%

— There has been a reduction in the average pay of controllers, which may be driven in part by a change in profile of respondents to this study

— Average turnover of controllers in this study is 3.24% per annum

— Over half of respondents plan to increase pay in 2015

— Majority of respondents have a mandatory retirement age of 60

— Average annual leave for ATCOs is 32 days

— Average working week for ATCOs is 37.4 hours

— 38% of respondents have an income protection plan in place for ATCOs

— Between 3.5% and 15% of a controller’s time is spent on non-operational duties

15

reducing management costs; and trying to reduce costs that are not directly related to ATCOs, which may have more flexibility. Similarly, for an increase in traffic, extra overtime costs and reduced additional training are options that allow for the ANSP to meet demand within the fixed ATCO resources and without increasing long term costs by hiring more staff.

A more radical approach, in the case of both increasing and decreasing traffic, is for an ANSP which is experiencing a growth in traffic to arrange to hire, as fixed term contractors, ATCOs from an ANSP which is suffering a decrease in traffic. There are several factors that complicate such an arrangement – such as ensuring similarity in the working environments. However, experience shows that as a short term measure it was mutually beneficial for both ANSPs.

The Role of Technology

As well as staff management measures, technology provides an additional way to increase cost flexibility. Investment in new technology is another, longer term, way to handle an increase in traffic and this investment may actually reduce ANSP vulnerability to a decrease in traffic. The example of remote towers is often cited as an investment in technology which would lead to a reduced ATCO head count without compromising capacity.

As new technology requires investment, it would be helpful to be able to produce statistics and graphics that demonstrate levels of investment made by participating ANSPs. This will be considered for future reports.

Insights into ANSP performance from the human resources perspective

The surveys conducted by the HRWG also provide some important insights and evidence for the analysis of ANSP performance: the average ATCO salary is comparatively high which, when coupled with the paid training lasting up to 44 months and a failure rate of 30%, leads to large ATCO related costs. However, the increase in ATCOs under the age of 30 (and the decrease of over 50s) could help mitigate upwards cost pressures.

The ability to manage and adjust ATCO resources is also key in the context of traffic variability. In general, increasing traffic is conducive to improved cost efficiency and an unexpected decrease in traffic will tend to worsen efficiency indicators, especially in the short term where costs are less flexible. The ability of an ANSP to increase or decrease costs in line with demand is especially important in cases where the ANSP bears some degree of traffic-related revenue risk as a drop in traffic without a fall in costs can lead to a financial loss.

In the short term managing costs is difficult for ANSPs as many items are fixed, or very inflexible. This includes ATCO salary and pensions costs, which are (more or less) fixed in the short term. This is because making any significant changes in the number of ATCOs could only be done if an ANSP was confident that this change in traffic was part of a long term trend.

ANS Cost Flexibility

To manage a decrease in traffic, measures might include: slowed training of new ATCOs;

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

16

Summary

This report is aimed at exploring trends, and identifying areas where improvements could be made within the air traffic management industry. This Executive Summary report is supported by the Industry and ANSP Views, which cover the collected data in greater detail. In addition, the data collection and distribution will enable participating Members to compare themselves against similar ANSPs which should encourage greater levels of dialogue on both a regional and global level.

The findings show an industry building on 2013’s recovery. 79% of participating ANSPs experienced an increase in traffic, while at the same time 56% of ANSPs experienced a drop in cost per IFR flight hour. Particularly encouraging was the finding that only 12% of ANSPs suffered both a decrease in traffic and an increase in cost per IFR flight hour. These findings seem to show that the key trends in 2013, increasing traffic levels and improved efficiency have continued during 2014.

The experience of participating Members aligns with the global data showing rising passenger numbers (+5.7%) and airport movements. While all regions experienced growth in the number of passengers, there was a marked difference between the continued strong growth in the Middle East, Asia Pacific and Latin America and Caribbean regions and the slower growth in other regions.

However, the 2014 data also indicates that while the majority of ANSPs reduced unit costs, ATCO employment costs rose again in 2014 (though, positively, it was a smaller percentage increase than the 3-year view). The input from the HRWG provides a valuable view on this

area, as well as providing insight into some of the data trends, including the potential role of younger ATCO recruits in reducing average ATCO employment costs. Investment in new technologies also plays an important role in enabling more cost efficient and flexible ANS provision and is an area that will be developed in future reports.

17

Evolution of the report

This report builds on the new perspective and analysis of the data developed in the CANSO Global Air Navigation Services Performance Report 2014. This activity currently focuses on cost efficiency, which is a key part of the performance equation. Efficiency is an important measure for an industry that is striving to become more business-driven. However, efficiency is a narrow criterion on which to base performance judgements. To conduct a comprehensive comparison (benchmarking) of performance, comparable data covering capacity, safety and flight efficiency as well as the operational and institutional environment would need to be collated and included in the analysis. The integration of input from the HRWG this year is of significant value, contributing to the view on joint challenges and the diversity of the industry.

The division of the report into three distinct sections is designed to increase the usefulness of the report by displaying the key messages in a shorter, more digestible document – Executive Summary – while the other two reports cover the detailed data.

There are five areas of development for future reports to create a more complete view on global ANS performance.

Consistency: there needs to be continued development of a consistent data set based on well understood and globally applicable data definitions. This year’s analysis again highlights the importance of working towards consistent reporting of cost categories and a clearer understanding of the revenue data.

Context: there needs to be understanding and, where possible, accounting for the impact

of external factors in performance analysis. A distinction should be made between controllable and uncontrollable factors.

Scope: there should be consideration of other areas of performance, such as safety and flight efficiency. A complete picture of performance should also include factors that impact customers such as ANS charges and delay costs as well as predictability9.

Focus on key issues: this year’s key messages highlight the importance of understanding the drivers of ATCO employment costs. The report will, in future, include more information on technology which will play an increasingly active role in determining these costs and their flexibility in the context of change in traffic.

Participation: a larger sample size allows for a more robust evaluation of industry trends and discussion of regional performance trends and context. An increased sample size is also beneficial for the internal data-sharing activity between participants.

9 The importance of the ‘total economic’ view of ANS including all the impacts of costs and quality of service on users

is increasing acknowledged within the industry.

Global ANS Performance Report 2015Executive Summary

18

Sources

i)IATA data sources on traffic:www.iata.org/about/Documents/iata-annual-review-2015.pdf www.iata.org/publications/economics/Pages/Air-Passenger-Monthly-Analysis.aspxwww.iata.org/pressroom/facts_figures/fact_sheets/Documents/fact-sheet-industry-facts.pdf

ii)ACI Traffic data:www.aci.aero/Data-Centre/Annual-Traffic-Data

iii)ACI Data:www.aci.aero/News/Releases/Most-Recent/2015/08/31/ACI-releases-2014-World-Airport-Traffic-Report-Airports-in-advanced-economies-rebound-in-2014--global-passenger-traffic-up-by-over-5-air-cargo-vo-lumes-rise-after-three-years-of-stagnation-

19

Acronyms and abbreviations

ACC Area control centre

ACI Airports Council International

ANS Air navigation services

ANSP Air navigation service provider

APP Approach control

ASK Available seat kilometres

ATCO Air traffic control officer

ATM Air traffic management

BN Billion

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

CANSO Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation

GBWG Global Benchmarking Workgroup

HR Human resources

HRWG Human Resources Workgroup

IATA International Air Transport Association

IFR Instrument flight rules

KPI Key performance indicator

OPS Operations

TWR Tower control

VFR Visual flight rules

Full Members - 88 — Aeronautical Radio of Thailand (AEROTHAI) — Aeroportos de Moçambique — Air Navigation and Weather Services,

CAA (ANWS) — Air Navigation Services of the Czech Republic

(ANS Czech Republic) — AirNav Indonesia — Air Traffic & Navigation Services (ATNS) — Airports and Aviation Services Limited (AASL) — Airports Authority of India (AAI) — Airports Fiji Limited — Airservices Australia — Airways New Zealand — Albcontrol — Austro Control — Avinor AS — AZANS Azerbaijan — Belgocontrol — Bulgarian Air Traffic Services Authority

(BULATSA) — CAA Uganda — Cambodia Air Traffic Services Co., Ltd. (CATS) — Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh (CAAB) — Civil Aviation Authority of Botswana — Civil Aviation Authority of Mongolia — Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) — Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) — Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines — Civil Aviation Regulatory Commission (CARC) — COCESNA — Croatia Control Ltd — DCA Myanmar — Department of Airspace Control (DECEA) — Department of Civil Aviation, Republic of Cyprus — DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS) — Dirección General de Control de Tránsito Aéreo

(DGCTA) — DSNA France — Dubai Air Navigation Services (DANS) — Dutch Caribbean Air Navigation Service Provider

(DC-ANSP) — ENANA-EP ANGOLA — ENAV S.p.A: Società Nazionale per l’Assistenza

al Volo — ENAIRE — Estonian Air Navigation Services (EANS) — Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) — Finavia Corporation — General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) — Ghana Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) — HungaroControl Pte. Ltd. Co. — Instituto Dominicano de Aviacion Civil (IDAC) — Israel Airports Authority (IAA) — Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) — ISAVIA Ltd — Japan Air Navigation Service (JANS) — Kazaeronavigatsia — Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) — Latvijas Gaisa Satiksme (LGS)

CANSO Members

Membership list correct as of 11 December 2015. For the most up-to-date list and organisation profiles go to www.canso.org/canso-members

— Letové prevádzkové Služby Slovenskej Republiky, Štátny Podnik

— Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland (LVNL) — Luxembourg ANA — Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) — Malta Air Traffic Services (MATS) — National Airports Corporation Ltd. — National Air Navigation Services Company

(NANSC) — NATS UK — NAV CANADA — NAV Portugal — Naviair — Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) — Office National de LÁviation Civile (OFNAC) — Office National Des Aéroports (ONDA) — ORO NAVIGACIJA, Lithuania — PIA “Adem Jashari” - Air Control J.S.C. — PNG Air Services Limited (PNGASL) — Polish Air Navigation Services Agency (PANSA) — Public Authority for Civil Aviation - Oman (PACA) — ROMATSA — Sakaeronavigatsia Ltd — SENEAM — Serbia and Montenegro Air Traffic Services

Agency (SMATSA) — Serco — skyguide — Slovenia Control — State Airports Authority & ANSP (DHMI) — Sudan Air Navigation Services Department — Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority — Tanzania Civil Aviation Authority — Trinidad and Tobago CAA — The LFV Group — Ukrainian Air Traffic Service Enterprise (UkSATSE) — U.S. DoD Policy Board on Federal Aviation — Viet Nam Air Traffic Management Corporation

(VATM)

Gold Associate Members - 11 — Airbus ProSky — Anhui Sun Create Electronics Co., Ltd. — Boeing — Exelis, inc. — FREQUENTIS AG — GroupEAD Europe S.L. — Inmarsat Plc — Lockheed Martin — Raytheon — Selex ES — Thales

Silver Associate Members - 70 — 42 Solutions B.V. — Adacel Inc. — Aeronav Inc. — Aireon — Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA)

— ALES a.s. — Association Group of Industrial Companies

“TIRA” Corporation — ATAC — ATCA – Japan — ATECH Negócios em Tecnologia S/A — Aveillant — Aviation Advocacy Sarl — Aviation Data Communication Corp (ADCC) — Avibit Data Processing GmbH — Avitech GmbH — Bayanat Engineering Group — Brüel & Kjaer EMS — CGH Technologies, Inc. — Comsoft GmbH — CSSI, Inc. — Airbus Defence and Space — EIZO Technologies GmbH — European Satellite Services Provider (ESSP SAS) — Emirates — ENAC — Entry Point North — Era Corporation — Esterline — Etihad Airways — Exelis Orthogon — Guntermann & Drunck GmbH — Harris Corporation — Helios — Honeywell International Inc. / Aerospace — IDS – Ingegneria Dei Sistemi S.p.A. — Indra Navia AS — Indra Sistemas — INECO — Integra A/S — Intelcan Technosystems Inc. — International Aero Navigation Systems Concern,

JSC — Jeppesen — JMA Solutions — Jotron AS — LAIC Aktiengesellschaft — LEMZ R&P Corporation — MDA Systems Ltd. — Metron Aviation — Micro Nav Ltd — The MITRE Corporation – CAASD — MLS International College — MovingDot — NEC Corporation — NLR — Northrop Grumman — NTT Data Corporation — PASSUR Aerospace — Quintiq — Rockwell Collins, Inc. — Rohde & Schwarz GmbH & Co. KG — RTCA, Inc. — Saab AB — Saab Sensis Corporation — Saudi Arabian Airlines — SENASA — SITA — Snowflake Software Ltd — STR-SpeechTech Ltd. — Tetra Tech AMT — Think Research Limited

CANSO – the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation – is the global voice of air traffic management (ATM) worldwide. CANSO Members support over 85% of world air traffic. Members share information and develop new policies, with the ultimate aim of improving air navigation services (ANS) on the ground and in the air.

CANSO represents its Members’ views to a wide range of aviation stakeholders, including the International Civil Aviation Organization, where it has official Observer status. CANSO has an extensive network of Associate Members drawn from across the aviation industry. For more information on joining CANSO, visit www.canso.org/joiningcanso. civil air navigation services organisation