Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) EUROCONTROL ... · Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by...

Year 2015 - Level 1

EUROCONTROL

Local Single Sky ImPlementation(LSSIP) EUROCONTROL Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC)

LSSIP Year 2015 EUROCONTROL Maastricht

Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC) Released Issue

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET

LSSIP for Maastricht

Infocentre Reference: 16/01/29-65

Document Identifier Edition: Year 2015

LSSIP Year 2015 Maastricht Edition Date: 10 March 2016

LSSIP Focal Point - Frank GREVEN E-mail: [email protected]

Maastricht UAC

LSSIP Contact Person - Adriatik KOKONA E-mail: [email protected]

Unit DPS/PEPR

Status Intended for

Working Draft General Public

Draft Agency Stakeholders

Proposed Issue Restricted Audience

Released Issue

Accessible via: Internet (www.eurocontrol.int)

Path: X:\03 LSSIP\1. LSSIP States\MUAC (EU) - TK\Year 2015

LINKS TO REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

1 LSSIP Guidance Material http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip 2 ESSIP Plan Edition 2015 http://www.eurocontrol.int/pepr

3 European ATM Portal Working - https://www.eatmportal.eu/working

Public - https://www.atmmasterplan.eu/ 4 ESSIP Report 2014 http://www.eurocontrol.int/pepr

5 STATFOR Forecasts http://www.eurocontrol.int/statfor

6 Acronyms and abbreviations

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/glossaries

7 LSSIP Documents http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip

8 FAB Performance Plan http://www.fabec.eu/fabec_homepage/en/Performance/Performance%20Plan/



APPROVAL SHEET

The following authorities have approved all parts of LSSIP Year 2015 document and their signature confirms the correctness of the reported information and reflects their commitment to implement the actions laid down in the ESSIP Plan.



TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4

National ATM Environment ................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1 -1.1 Geographical Scope ................................................................................................................ 5

1.1.1 International Membership ......................................................................................................... 5 1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s) ..................................................................................... 5 1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation ................................................................................. 6

1.2 National Stakeholders .............................................................................................................. 6 1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s) ...................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.2 Supervision of service provision at Maastricht UAC ................................................................. 7 1.2.3 Airports ...................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2.4 Military Authorities ..................................................................................................................... 9

Traffic and Capacity ............................................................................................................ 10 Chapter 2 -2.1 Evolution of traffic in the Maastricht UAC .............................................................................. 10 2.2 UAC Maastricht ...................................................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2011-2020 ........................................................................ 11 2.2.2 Summer 2015 Performance .................................................................................................... 11 2.2.3 Planning Period 2016-2020 .................................................................................................... 12

ESSIP Report recommendations ........................................................................................ 14 Chapter 3 -

National Projects ................................................................................................................. 15 Chapter 4 -

Regional Co-ordination ....................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 5 -5.1 FAB Co-ordination ................................................................................................................. 17 5.2 FAB Projects .......................................................................................................................... 17 5.3 Regional cooperation ............................................................................................................. 27

5.3.1 Regional Cooperation Initiatives ............................................................................................. 27 5.3.2 Regional Projects .................................................................................................................... 28

ESSIP Objective Implementation ....................................................................................... 30 Chapter 6 -6.1 Conventions ........................................................................................................................... 30 6.2 ESSIP Objectives Implementation progress .......................................................................... 31 6.3 Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress ........................................... 43

ANNEXES


Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC) 1 Released Issue

Executive Summary

National ATM Context

The provision of ATS and operation of facilities by EUROCONTROL at Maastricht UAC is based on the “Agreement relating to the Provision and Operation of Air Traffic Services and Facilities by EUROCONTROL at the Maastricht Area Control Centre” (the “Maastricht Agreement”), signed on 25 November 1986 by Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and EUROCONTROL.

The EUROCONTROL Organisation provides ATS to GAT at Maastricht UAC in accordance with the national regulations in force on the territories and in the airspaces concerned. The regulators of the four national contracting parties in respect of ATS are represented by the respective Ministries of Transport. Each of the four States retains its competences and obligations in respect of aeronautical regulations, rulemaking, airspace organisation and relations with international organisations, e.g. ICAO, with the airspace users and other third parties, with regard to the airspace over its territory and within designated portions of airspace over the high seas, on the basis of the Air Navigation Plan – European Region of ICAO.

The EUROCONTROL Agency has been authorised to conclude an agreement with Germany concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Hannover UIR. The Member States also authorised the Agency to open negotiations for the conclusion of a special agreement with the Netherlands concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Amsterdam FIR, in line with the principles set out in the National Airspace Vision of the Netherlands. A project to deal with these additional tasks has been established with the goal to see results by the end of 2016/spring 2017.

In the Netherlands, by amendment to the Aviation Act in Oct 2007, EUROCONTROL Maastricht UAC was designated as an ATS provider in accordance with Article 8 of the Service provision regulation. The other three States, Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, consider the Maastricht Agreement as a valid means for their respective designations of EUROCONTROL as an ATS provider at Maastricht UAC.

At its 74th meeting, the Maastricht Coordination Group agreed on the development of an adequate legal basis for the provision of cross-border ATS, on the basis of Article 10 of (EC) Regulation No. 550/2004.

The Agreement between the FABEC ANSPs concerning the provision of ANS within the FABEC airspace, which was signed early 2013, will serve as a legal “umbrella” for the existing operational Letters of Agreement concluded between MUAC and the neighbouring ANSPs.

Maastricht UAC does not encompass Military Authorities of its own or Airports within its area of responsibility. The LSSIP chapters and sections dealing with military authorities or with airports are not applicable to Maastricht UAC (see the LSSIP documents of the four States).

The Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility is surrounded by London UIR, Copenhagen FIR, Rhein UIR and France UIR. The only ATC unit of concern to this LSSIP is Maastricht UAC, currently configured for operating a maximum of 20 en-route sectors (Brussels: 6, DECO: 6, Hannover: 8).

Traffic and Capacity

Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by 1.1% during Summer 2015 (May to October inclusive), when compared to Summer 2014.

MUAC could still be challenged by changes in the traffic patterns resulting in higher traffic growth at Sector Group level. Moreover the capacity gains linked to some FABEC airspace projects are not likely to be delivered in the planning period.



ESSIP Objective Implementation

At its meeting in Brussels on 8 and 9 December 2015, the Provisional Council has decided to entrust EUROCONTROL with an extended mandate to operate military air traffic control services, in addition to the current civilian air traffic control services. As such, AOM13.1 will become applicable as from 2016.

AOM21.1 was completed in 2015, following the implementation of the required system changes. The related objective AOM21.2 is planned for 2021.

In the ATC context, both ATC02.5 and ATC12.1 have been completed in 2015. ATC17 remains planned for completion in 2017.

COM11 will be completed with the operational implementation of the New Voice Communication System and has been re-planned from 2015 to 2016.

Implementation of FCM03 shifted from 2015 to 2016 and the new objective FCM06 on Traffic Complexity Assessment is partly completed, with full completion planned for 2020.

LSSIP 2015 - Maastricht UAC

* FOC Date

█ Planned implementation date (see legend at the bottom of the table)

State-related ESSIP Objectives

<=

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

AOM13.1 Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling

*

AOM19 Implement Advanced Airspace Management

*

AOM21.1 Implementation of Direct Routing [PCP]

[E] *

AOM21.2 Implement Free Route Airspace [PCP]

[E] *

AOP03 Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions

*

ATC02.5 Implement ground based safety nets - Area Proximity Warning - level 2

*

ATC02.6 Implement ground based safety nets - Minimum Safe Altitude Warning - level 2

*

ATC02.7 Implement ground based safety nets - Approach Path Monitor - level 2

*

ATC12.1 Implement automated support for conflict detection, resolution support information and conformance monitoring

*

ATC15 Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations

*

ATC16 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1

*

ATC17 Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and Transfer

*

COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS

*

COM11 Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM

*

FCM01 Implement enhanced tactical flow management services

*

FCM03 Implement collaborative flight planning

*



LSSIP 2015 - Maastricht UAC

* FOC Date

█ Planned implementation date (see legend at the bottom of the table)

State-related ESSIP Objectives

<=

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

FCM04 Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures - phase 1

FCM05 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP [PCP]

[E] *

FCM06 Traffic Complexity Assessment [PCP]

[E] *

INF04 Implement integrated briefing

*

INF07 Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD)

*

ITY-ACID Aircraft identification

ITY-ADQ Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information

*

ITY-AGDL Initial ATC air-ground data link services above FL-285

*

ITY-AGVCS2 Implement air-ground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195

ITY-COTR Implementation of ground-ground automated co-ordination processes

*

ITY-FMTP Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP)

*

ITY-SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability

*

NAV03 Implementation of P-RNAV

*

NAV10 Implement APV procedures

*

SAF10 Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements

*

SAF11 Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions

*

Understanding the Table

Objective Completed No Plan

Objective Partly Completed Missing Data

Objective Planned Not Applicable (MUAC does not participate in this obj.)

Late

E= Essential – Master Plan Reference PCP = Pilot Common Project

NOTE: The year where the coloured box is placed indicates the ‘Implementation Completion Date’ as stated in the ESSIP for each objective. The colour-code indicates the Local progress with respect to this date.



Introduction

The Local Single Sky ImPlementation documents (LSSIPs), as an integral part of the ESSIP/LSSIP mechanism, constitute a short/medium term implementation plan containing ECAC States’ actions to achieve the Implementation Objectives as set out by the ESSIP and to improve the performance of their national ATM System. The LSSIP document – Year 2015 describes the situation in the State at the end of December 2015.

The LSSIP documents are structured into 6 chapters to better differentiate the Stakeholder(s) accountable for the information contained in each of them:

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the ATM institutional arrangements within the State, the membership of the State in various international organizations, the organizational structure of the main ATM players - civil and military - and their responsibilities under the national legislation. In addition, an overview of the Airspace Organization and Classification, the ATC Units, the ATM systems operated by the main ANSP are also provided in this chapter.

Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive picture of the situation of Air Traffic, Capacity and ATFM Delay per each ACC in the State. It shows the evolution of Air Traffic and Delay in the last five years and the forecast for the next five years. It gives also the achieved performance in terms of delay during the summer season period and the planned projects assumed to offer the required capacity which will match the foreseen traffic increase and keep the delay at the agreed performance level;

Chapter 3 provides a set of recommendations extracted from the ESSIP Report which are relevant to the state/stakeholders concerned. The state reports how they have handled those recommendations and the actions taken during the year to address the concerns expressed by those recommendations;

Chapter 4 provides a set of the main ATM national projects which contribute directly to the implementation of the ATM MP OIs and/or Enablers and ESSIP related Objectives. The description, timescale, progress made and expected contribution to the ATM Key Performance Areas are provided by the states per each project included in this chapter;

Chapter 5 deals with the ATM Regional Coordination. It provides an overview of the FAB cooperation and Projects and also all other regional initiatives and Projects which are out of the FAB scope. The content of this chapter generally is developed and agreed in close cooperation between the states concerned;

Chapter 6 contains high-level information on progress and plans of each ESSIP Objective. The information for each ESSIP Objective is presented in boxes giving a summary of the progress and plans of implementation for each Stakeholder. The conventions used are presented at the beginning of the section.

Note: Chapter 6 is completed with a separate document called LSSIP Level 2. This document consists of a set of tables organised in line with the list of ESSIP Objectives. Each table contains all the actions planned by the four national stakeholders to achieve their respective Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) as established in the ESSIP.

Note: The information contained in Chapter 6 is deemed sufficient to satisfy State reporting requirements towards ICAO in relation to ASBU (Aviation System Block Upgrades) monitoring.



National ATM Environment Chapter 1 -

1.1 Geographical Scope

1.1.1 International Membership

This paragraph is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. This information as regards the four States concerned is made available in each of their respective LSSIP documents.

1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s)

The geographical scope of this document addresses the Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility comprising the following Control Areas;

Airspace Designation Vertical Limits ICAO Airspace Classification

Airspace sector group of Maastricht UAC

Belgium & Luxembourg - Brussels UIR FL245 to FL660 C Brussels

The Netherlands - Amsterdam FIR FL245 to FL660 C DECO

North West Germany - Hannover UIR FL245 to FL660 C Hannover

The Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility is surrounded by London UIR, Copenhagen FIR, Rhein UIR and France UIR.

The map below shows the situation of Maastricht upper airspace in winter 2015 and its sectorisation.



1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation

All the airspace serviced by Maastricht UAC is ICAO Class C (above FL 245); See chart under 1.1.2.

1.2 National Stakeholders

1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s)

1.2.1.1 General information

The provision of ATS and operation of facilities at Maastricht UAC is based on the “Agreement relating to the Provision and Operation of Air Traffic Services and Facilities by EUROCONTROL at the Maastricht Area Control Centre” (the “Maastricht Agreement”), signed on 25 November 1986 by Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and EUROCONTROL. The EUROCONTROL Organisation provides ATS to GAT at Maastricht UAC within the airspace entrusted to it by the four States, subject to the conditions defined in the Agreement.

According to Article 15 of the Amended Convention, service provision is undertaken in accordance with the national regulations in force on the respective territories and airspaces concerned.

The four States regulators in respect of ATS provided at Maastricht UAC are represented by the respective Ministries of Transport or equivalent ministries. The Maastricht Coordination Group (MCG) joins together senior officials of the four States. The high-level relationship between the entities dealing with Maastricht UAC is presented in the diagram below. More information on the relevant national stakeholders in each of the four concerned States is presented in the respective LSSIP Level 1 documents.

1.2.1.2 Regulatory Activity

ATS provision at Maastricht UAC is subject to four different national regulatory regimes, each specifically defining applicable rules and regulations. Regulation and oversight of service provision performed at Maastricht UAC is exercised in a coordinated manner among the four concerned States ATS provision at Maastricht UAC is subject to the Single European Sky (SES) legislation; SES certification as an Air Traffic Service Provider was obtained in November 2006.

The four States regulators and their respective NSAs, which are institutionally separated from the EUROCONTROL Organisation of which MUAC is an integral part, have set-up appropriate arrangements to establish common rules for ATS provision at Maastricht UAC and to ensure adequate regulatory oversight.

Meetings with MoT representatives take place on an ad-hoc basis.

Maastricht CoordinationGroup

Senior officials from the Four States

Maastricht Upper AreaControl Centre

Director MUAC

EUROCONTROL AgencyDirector General

Provisional CouncilDirectors General of Civil Aviation and their

military counterparts

EUROCONTROLPermanent Commission

Ministers of Transport and Defence

Audit boardMaastricht Coordination

GroupSenior officials from the Four States

Maastricht Upper AreaControl Centre

Director MUAC

EUROCONTROL AgencyDirector General

Provisional CouncilDirectors General of Civil Aviation and their

military counterparts

EUROCONTROLPermanent Commission

Ministers of Transport and Defence

Audit board



The table below summarises the main regulatory and supervisory responsibilities/ activities in respect of service provision performed at Maastricht UAC.

Activity in ATM: Organisation responsible

Legal Basis

Rule-making The 4 States’ regulators (Ministries of Transport or equivalent)

The 4 States’ national laws, the EUROCONTROL Convention and the Maastricht Agreement

Safety Oversight ILT (CAA-NL), in coordination with the other 3 States’ NSAs within the 4 States’ NSA Committee

The NL Aviation Act and other relevant NL national regulations empowering ILT (CAA-NL) as regards safety oversight. See details in LSSIP NL.

Enforcement actions in case of non-compliance with safety regulatory requirements

ILT (CAA-NL), in cooperation with the other 3 States’ NSAs, within the 4 States’ NSA Committee

The NL Aviation Act and other relevant national regulations empowering ILT (CAA-NL) as regards safety oversight of the NL-based ANS/ATM providers.

Airspace The 4 States’ relevant regulatory authorities, each per its own territory and concerned airspace

The 4 States’ relevant national laws, the EUROCONTROL Convention and the Maastricht Agreement

Economic Same as above Same as above

Environment Same as above Same as above

Security Same as above Same as above

Accident investigation Same as above Same as above

Annual Report published: Y For 2014 the ILT (CAA-NL) published the Annual Report. https://www.ilent.nl/over_ilt/publicaties/jaarverslag/

1.2.2 Supervision of service provision at Maastricht UAC

Subsequent to the enactment of the SES framework regulation (Regulation (EC) No. 549/2004), the four States have each established an NSA:

for Belgium, the Belgian Supervising Authority for ANS (BSA-ANS);

for Germany, Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung (BAF);

for Luxembourg, the Civil Aviation Authority CAA Luxembourg; and

for the Netherlands, this is the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport, ILT (CAA-NL) of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (MoI&M, “Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu”).

The SES-certifying National Supervisory Authority, as per the service provision Regulation, is the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment of the Netherlands. EUROCONTROL for its service provision at Maastricht UAC located on Netherlands territory was certified as an ATS provider by the Netherlands NSA in accordance with (EC) Regulation 550/2004 and in cooperation with the other three States’ NSAs. Information on the organisation and relevant activities of ILT (CAA-NL) and of the other three States’ NSAs is available in the respective LSSIP documents.



The 4 States NSAs have established two supporting bodies for ongoing oversight of service provision at Maastricht UAC:

o The NSA Committee (NSA-C), representing all four NSAs and having a co-ordination and advisory role for the relevant decision making authorities on oversight issues; and

o The Common Supervisory Team (CST), which is composed of staff of the co-operating NSAs and has an executive role in performing document studies, audits, inspections, etc.

A manual for the oversight activities at Maastricht UAC has been developed and agreed upon, by the four NSAs, last updated in 2015.

The Belgian Civil Aviation Authority (Belgian CAA), acting on behalf of the four States NSAs, is responsible for issuing licenses for Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) at Maastricht UAC. The following agreement was reached between the 4 States:

o The Belgian CAA acts as the licensing authority for ATCOs and students ATCOs;

o The Belgian CAA is the authority for certification of ATS training organisation at Maastricht UAC;

o The licences are issued in accordance with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 805/2011 laying down detailed rules for air traffic controllers’ licenses.

Maastricht UAC was certified as a Training Organisation by the Belgian CAA in 2009, with a recent renewal in December 2015 for a 1-year period, awaiting the certification under the new regulation EC2015/340.

1.2.2.1 Designation as an ANSP

Provision and operation of ATS at Maastricht UAC is governed by the Maastricht Agreement.

Subsequent to the SES certification of service provision at Maastricht UAC and in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No. 550/2004 (the service provision Regulation), each of the 4 signatory States to the Maastricht Agreement must designate a SES-certified ATS-provider for the airspace block(s) serviced by MUAC.

In the Netherlands, by amendment to the Aviation Act in Oct 2007, EUROCONTROL for its service provision at Maastricht UAC has been designated as an ATS provider in accordance with Article 8 of the service provision Regulation.

The other three States, Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, consider the Maastricht Agreement as a valid means for their respective designations of EUROCONTROL as an ATS provider at Maastricht UAC.

At its 74th meeting, the Maastricht Coordination Group agreed on the development of an adequate legal basis for the provision of cross-border ATS, on the basis of Article 10 of (EC) Regulation No. 550/2004.

The Agreement between the FABEC ANSPs concerning the provision of ANS within the FABEC airspace, which was signed early 2013, will serve as a legal “umbrella” for the existing operational Letters of Agreement concluded between MUAC and the neighbouring ANSPs.

Name of the ANSP: Maastricht UAC

Governance: Four-States agreement Ownership: EUROCONTROL Member States

Services provided Y/N Comment

ATC en-route Y 4 States (BE, DE, LU, NL) Upper Airspace

ATC approach N/A N/A

ATC Aerodrome(s) N/A N/A

AIS N -

CNS Y -

MET N -

ATCO training Y Since 2015 initial training is provided by ENAC, based in Toulouse. Ab Initio course 69 started in May 2015.

Others - -

Additional information:

Provision of services in other State(s):

Y Delegation is identified in section 1.2.2.3.



Annual Report published: Y http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/maastricht-upper-area-control-centre-muac-publications

The public website of MUAC is: http://www.eurocontrol.int/maastricht-uac.

The MUAC organisation chart is available in Annex B.

1.2.2.2 ATC systems in use

Specify the manufacturer of the ATC system currently in use: The major suppliers of the ATC systems are: For air traffic flow management: EUROCONTROL/NM For air traffic services: INDRA (FDPS), Thales ATM (HMI) and EUROCONTROL (ARTAS) For communication systems: Frequentis (VCS)

Upgrade1 of the ATC system is performed or planned? A replacement of the current VCS is due for 2016

Replacement of the ATC system by the new one is planned? Not yet planned

1.2.2.3 ATC units

The only ATC unit of concern to this LSSIP is Maastricht UAC, currently configured for operating a maximum of 20 en-route sectors (Brussels: 6, DECO: 6, Hannover: 8).

ATC Unit Number of sectors Associated FIR(s) Remarks

En-route TMA

MUAC 20 0 Brussels FIR/UIR Amsterdam FIR Hannover UIR Delegation in: France UIR Rhein UIR

1.2.3 Airports

Not applicable, as Maastricht UAC area of responsibility (upper airspace) does not contain any airports.

1.2.4 Military Authorities

Maastricht UAC does not include any military authorities in its own management structure. However, details of civil-military coordination and FUA application within the airspace of Maastricht UAC are made available in Chapter 1 of LSSIP the Netherlands (as NL NSA is the certifying authority for Maastricht UAC, an NL-based ATS provider). More info may also be found in Chapter 1 of the LSSIP documents of the other three States concerned (DE, BE and LU), as regards specific civil-military coordination or FUA conditions which may apply only in the respective States.

1 Upgrade is defined as any modification that changes the operational characteristics of the system (SES Framework Regulation 549/2004, Article 2 (40))



Traffic and Capacity Chapter 2 -

2.1 Evolution of traffic in the Maastricht UAC

2015

Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by 1.1% during Summer 2015 (May to October inclusive), when compared to Summer 2014.

2016-2020

Based upon STATFOR 7-Year Forecast September 2015.

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2010 A 2011 A 2012 A 2013 A 2014 A 2015 A 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F 2020 F

IFR

flig

hts

Maastricht - Annual IFR Movements

IFR movements - Actuals

IFR movements - Baseline forecast

IFR movements - High forecast

IFR movements - Low forecast

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020High 2.8% 3.5% 3.6% 2.5% 3.6%Base 1.3% 2.5% 2.4% 1.9% 2.4%Low -0.3% 0.4% 1.2% 0.8% 1.0%



2.2 UAC Maastricht

2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2011-2020

2.2.2 Summer 2015 Performance

Traffic Evolution 2015 Capacity Baseline En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity

gap Ref value Actual

+1.1 % 322 (-2%) 0.28 0.53 Yes

The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.25 minutes per flight in Summer 2014 to 0.53 minutes per flight in 2015.

53% of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 32% for Weather, 11% for Airspace Management, 2% for ATC Staffing and 2% for Other. The majority of the delay was caused in the Brussels Sector Group which was challenged by changes in the traffic patterns resulting in traffic growth higher than expected. Capacity Plan +1% Achieved Comments

Improved ATFCM including STAM Yes

FABEC AD South-East Phase 1: EUC25 No Project frozen

Advanced tactical ATFCM measures Yes

Cross training of ATCOs Yes

iFMP (integrated Flow Management Position) Yes Fielded with basic capabilities

Stepped implementation of XMAN (possible negative impact on capacity)

Yes 2 out of 13 expected implementations done

Maximum configuration: 20 sectors (Possible if required according to traffic levels) Yes 17 sectors were opened

Summer 2015 performance assessment

The capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS/Reverse CASA at 322. During the same period, the peak 3 hour demand was 316 and the peak 1 hour was 337.

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Peak Day Traffic 5348 5244 5349 5526 5552

Summer Traffic 4788 4793 4941 5043 5096

Yearly Traffic 4407 4389 4474 4579 4646

Summer Traffic Forecast 5163 5291 5419 5522 5657

High Traffic Forecast - Summer 5239 5422 5615 5753 5961

Low Traffic Forecast - Summer 5082 5100 5162 5205 5257

Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.06 0.04 0.07 0.25 0.53

Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.17 0.39

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

En

rou

te D

ela

y (m

inu

tes

pe

r fli

gh

t)

IFR

flig

hts

(Dai

ly A

vera

ge)

EDYYUAC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays

*From 01/01/2015 to 31/10/2015



2.2.3 Planning Period 2016-2020

Capacity Plan

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Free Route Airspace FABEC FRA Step 1: WE

DCTs

FABEC FRA Step 2: H24 DCTs with

military activity

FABEC FRA Step 3: Final

goal FRA Volume

Airspace Management Advanced FUA

Initial FUA Implementation above FL365

Airport & TMA Network Integration

Cooperative Traffic Management

Improved ATFCM including STAM ATC2ATM Program

Airspace Brussels UIR DFL Change

Brussels UIR 3rd Layer

FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures

Procedures Advanced tactical ATFCM measures Staffing Cross training of ATCOs

Technical

iFMP (integrated Flow Management Position)

NVCS SRAT (Super

Role Allocation Tool)

RDFS

Capacity Stepped implementation of XMAN (possible negative impact on capacity)

Significant Events

Max sectors 20 20 20 20 20

Capacity increase p.a. 2% 3% 3% 3% 2%

Reference profile 4% 2% 3% 2% N/A

Additional information The potential benefit of an implementation of a Brussels Sector Group 3rd layer is being evaluated. If found feasible the actual implementation will take place in 2017.

2016 2017 2018 20190.17 0.17 0.17 0.170.27 0.27 0.27 0.27

Annual

En-route ATFM delay breakdown - Reference ValuesEDYYUTA

Summer

H 342 6% 353 3% 365 3% 375 3%

Ref. 336 4% 344 2% 353 3% 360 2%

L 331 3% 332 0% 335 1% 338 1%

Open 336 4% 344 2% 353 3% 360 2%

C/R 327 2% 334 2% 342 2% 349 2%

EDYY 322

ACC2015

baseline 2016 2017 2018 2019

Capacity ProfilesProfiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year)



2016-2020 Planning Period Outlook

MUAC could still be challenged by changes in the traffic patterns resulting in higher traffic growth at Sector Group level. Moreover the capacity gains linked to some FABEC airspace projects are not likely to be delivered in the planning period.

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

2016‐2019 Reference Capacity Profile 336 344 353 360

Capacity Profile ‐ Shortest Routes (Open) 336 344 353 360

Capacity Profile ‐ Current Routes 327 334 342 349

Capacity Profile ‐ High 342 353 365 375

Capacity Profile ‐ Low 331 332 335 338

Capacity Baseline 329 322

2016 ‐ 2020 Plan 328 338 348 358 365

220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

400Cap

acity profile (movements per hour)

EDYYUAC - Reference capacity profile and alternative scenarios



ESSIP Report recommendations Chapter 3 -

Recommendations issued from the ESSIP Report for 2014 applicable to Maastricht for all items that require corrective actions and improvements.

Reference

number Recommendation 2014 Ownership

REC-2014-06

(equal to REC-2013-15)

The ANSPs within a FAB should coordinate their system renewal and capability evolution more closely in order to deliver larger scale performance improvements to customers.

FAB ANSPs

Corrective actions taken:

YES

Description:

The “FABEC ANSP Strategic Agenda”, contains, amongst others, all agreed planned and ongoing FABEC activities. Based on this Strategic Agenda the FABEC 5-Year-Work-Plan (5YWP) detailing all the activities, the time schedule and the required budget is developed. Both the Strategic Agenda and the 5YWP are revised twice a year.

Besides, the OPS and TECH domains have jointly developed the FABEC roadmap containing the FABEC projects/activities and the ANSP local studies/projects that have a direct/indirect impact on the FABEC project implementation timeframe. This roadmap is also revised twice a year.

In this way, it is made sure that an agreed ANSP work plan and roadmap is available, including the main system renewals.

Within FABEC, dedicated Standing Committees address all operational, technical and SESAR matters and make sure that proper coordination is done among FABEC ANSPs to ensure proper interoperability between stakeholders.

Even if common procurement is investigated, ANSPs should not be constrained on the “how” to implement functionalities and reach the performance objectives.



National Projects Chapter 4 -

Name / Code Description - Scope Schedule Status Link with ATM Master Plan / Other references

Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas

MUAC ANSP (MAS)

ATC2ATM ATC2ATM intends to introduce an evolution in the concept of operations, including new roles, procedures and tools bridging the gap between the ATFCM and ATC functions and making the most efficient use of staff and airspace. The programme will improve post-ops processes, data analysis and traffic prediction to optimise the effectiveness of ATM decision making and to improve the planning and the execution of daily operations. As a result, flows will be optimally routed through the MUAC airspace so that workload is balanced across the sectors and traffic is streamlined before it reaches the ATCO to operate safely and efficiently.

2015-2025 The programme has been established in 2015 and in its first tranche focuses on short-term goals i.e. implementing iFMP as the primary decision making tool, establishment of a new Advanced ATFCM Planning Function in the operations room, revision of the existing flow management processes, improvements to the post-ops analysis processes and tooling.

ESSIP:AOM19

OI-Steps: AOM-0201, AOM-0202, AOM-0205, AOM-0401, DCB-0203 Other: -

Capacity: The ATC2ATM programme will deliver improvement in efficiency and capacity by better planning of available resources (human and airspace) starting from the strategic ATFCM phase (months in advance) up to the day-of-operations. The new roles (AAPF) and supporting tools (iFMP based) will ensure that traffic flows are optimally routed through MUAC airspace and that its complexity is reduced before it reaches the controller.

Safety: New Advanced ATFCM Planning Function and supporting tools (iFMP based) will fill the gap between today’s ATFCM and ATC processes reducing the likelihood of controller overloads.

Environment: It will also deliver tools to support the achievement of MUAC environmental KPIs. Cost-Efficiency: The additional ATM tasks ensuring capacity growth will be distributed among existing roles and actors making best use of available resources.

Beek Transmitter Station (BKTX)

The BKTX project will provide two transmitter stations, namely BK1 Tx and BK2 Tx, for use by MUAC OPS, DFS CCUM and LVNL Staff and the decommissioning of the current BK Transmitter stations with its antenna installations on the roofs of the MUAC buildings.

2014-2017 The new BK-TX towers have been erected. The Radio & Antennas installation will be done in Q2 2016. The connection to N-VCS is planned for Q4 2016.

ESSIP:-

OI-Steps: -

Other: -

Capacity: -

Safety: Increased redundancy

Environment: -

Cost-Efficiency: -

FDPS 2.0 Migration of the FDPS to Intel hardware, 64 bit Linux operating system. In addition, converge towards re-usable software components as well as hardware consolidation through (KVM) virtualization.

2013-2015 The project has been closed and implementation occurred on 23 November 2015.

ESSIP:-

OI-Steps: -

Other: -

Capacity: -

Safety: Safety level maintained.

Environment: Lower hardware footprint (number of FDP related servers reduced by 60%) and use of low power consumption processors wherever



Name / Code Description - Scope Schedule Status Link with ATM Master Plan / Other references

Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas

possible.

Cost-Efficiency: Lower maintenance costs via the use of common hardware building blocks (less hardware variants and less training) as well as via less physical elements to maintain (number of servers reduced by 60% thanks to hardware consolidation). License costs reduced.

RDFS (Radio Direction Finder System)

The scope of the RDF project is the acquisition of a set of Radio Direction Finder sensors, to configure, install and connect them to a Virtual Private Network, to develop the processing platform that will calculate the location of the A/C during their transmission and to visualize them on the radar screen in an easily accessible and user-friendly way.

2014-2016 The project has started in January 2014 and is expected to be completed by the end of 2016.

ESSIP:-

OI-Steps: -

Other: -

Capacity: -

Safety: The project will contribute in reducing the number of operational incidents generated by call sign confusion, read-backs from wrong aircraft or crossed transmissions.

Environment: -

Cost-Efficiency: -

VCS Replacement of the Voice Communications System

2009-2016 The new system will be ready for operational deployment by end 2016.

ESSIP:COM11

OI-Steps: -

Other: -

Capacity: The new VCS will continue to provide reliable Ground-to-Ground and Air-to-Ground communications, providing capability for expandability, flexible reconfiguration and different switching technologies, necessary to support emerging operational concepts and technical standards (e.g. Voice over IP).

Safety: -

Environment: -

Cost-Efficiency: -

iFMP The aim of the iFMP project is to address shortcomings of the currently used tools (CHMI, NOP) and information used by the Flow Management Position (FMP) and Tactical Capacity Management (TCM) process by integrating traffic and complexity prediction tools, sector configuration management, manpower planning tools, airspace management tools (ASM) and other (analysis) tools into one coherent system with a single, customized and user friendly HMI.

2009-2015 The iFMP tool has been deployed for a trial use in Dec-14, Initial Operational Capability (IOC) has been declared in Feb-15. The further evolution of the iFMP tool and related infrastructure is planned to align with the ATC2ATM programme trying to establish and strengthen the ATM layer at MUAC.

ESSIP:FCM04, FCM06

OI-Steps: CM-0101, CM-0103-A, DCB-0205, IS-0102

Other: -

Capacity: The iFMP project will deliver improvements in efficiency and capacity by better usage of available resources (human and airspace) in the tactical ATFCM phase (day of operations). It will as well support the implementation of advanced STAM (Short Term ATFCM Measures) and improve the interoperability with NM systems via B2B services.

Safety: The iFMP will reduce the likelihood of controller overloads by providing a complexity prediction tools

Environment: - / Cost-Efficiency: --



Regional Co-ordination Chapter 5 -

5.1 FAB Co-ordination

FAB Europe Central (FABEC) consists of the following states: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and Switzerland.

The FABEC Feasibility Phase (2006-2008) led to the conclusion that FABEC is feasible. The Implementation Phase (2008-2013) demonstrated that the FABEC structure was compliant with SES regulations.

After the ratification of the FABEC Treaty by all FABEC States, FABEC formally entered into force on the 1st of June 2013. This means that FABEC is now operational.

FABEC intends to deliver on the goals set by SES II and as laid down in the FABEC Performance Plan. FABEC intends to provide capacity, avoid bottlenecks, reduce costs and emissions, make flying more efficient and ensure military mission effectiveness, while maintaining the high safety standards that exist over Europe. To achieve this, FABEC is developing a set of projects which are described in the next section.

5.2 FAB Projects

On the following pages, tables detail for each ongoing main FABEC project:

which ANSPs and military partners are participating

a description, the scope and objectives

the schedule and implementation planning

the status end 2015

the link to the ESSIP, if any

the expected performance contribution to the SES KPAs capacity, safety, environment and cost-efficiency



Project Name: Airspace Design South-East Project Code: AD SE

Organisation(s) ANA LUX

Belgocontrol

DFS

DSNA

MUAC

Skyguide

Military partners of: B, CH, D, F and NL

Description/Scope/Objectives The scope of the South East airspace project consists of 2 main airspace changes:

1. EUC22 Establish a new Cross Border Area (CBA) EUC22 for use by the French, German and United States Air Forces. This EUC 22 will increase the amount of airspace available for civilian use in the LUX area. This additional airspace will allow for optimisation of the civil route network (SWAP) and will assist the various Airspace Projects around the LUX area to achieve their performance targets. A stepwise approach was chosen for the implementation of the EUC22.

2. SWAP In the current situation, the flows of traffic on UN852 and UN853 cross twice, once in Brussels UIR at the DIK waypoint, and again to the north of Geneva. The SWAP concept intends to remove this dual crossing to improve safety and increase the capacity of the network by:

De-conflicting upper air routes UN852 and UN853 by swapping the direction of the traffic flows

Creating duplicate parallel routes to allow for segregation of over flights from climbing and descending flights

The boundaries of the EUC 25 (French-Swiss Cross Border Area) were redefined in March 2015 to ensure sufficient civil airspace for the new Geneva SIDs & STARs that will be implemented to join the SWAP network.

Schedule/Implementation planning To facilitate the implementation, the project has been divided into three phases:

Phase 1 EUC25

Phase 2 SWAP and new EUC22 step 1

Phase 3 FULL EUC22

As the project is now “suspended” the implementation planning is TBD.

Status

Phase 1 was successfully implemented in March 2015.

Phase 2: Significant operational and technical concerns were raised during training sessions using large scalesimulations; these concerns were considered as too important for an implementation in March 2016. As a result, in December 2015 the project has been “suspended”.

Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references

ESSIP: - AOM20: Implement ATS Route Network (ARN) – Version 7. (Objective set to “Achieved” and removed from ESSIP ed.2014)

Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s))

Capacity Project under re-evaluation.

Safety Project under re-evaluation.

Environment (including flight efficiency)

Project under re-evaluation.

Cost efficiency Project under re-evaluation.



Project Name: Airspace Design

CBA Land/Central West Project Code: AD CBALCW

Organisation(s) DFS

LVNL

MUAC

Military partners of: D and NL

Description/Scope/Objectives The objective of the CBA Land/Central West project is to design and implement an optimised ATS structure of the FABEC Central West area and of the North area which also includes a CBA Land.

Based on known constraints in current airspace design, the objectives of the project are to:

Release military airspace in the south of the Netherlands, to create increased civil capacity and more direct civil routes for the hub airports London, Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.

To compensate the military airspace users, to implement a larger consolidated Cross-border exercise area to accommodate legacy as well as fifth generation fighter training operations.

Schedule/Implementation planning

In the original work planning two implementation steps were foreseen:

Step 1

This step implements the new and changed sectorisation and ATS route structures related to the Northern area and the core area of CBA Land military cross-border area over Northern Netherlands and Germany. The implementation also requires improved ASM arrangements and initial GAT route network improvements in the southern part and it will also implement the required cross-border ATM legislation, rules and procedures.

Step 2

This step completes the full implementation of CBA Land/Central West project. It will implement the restructuring of the airspace structure in the southern part and allow full release of a MIL training area (TRA12) in the South-East of the Netherlands and the implementation of the 4th IAF for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, resulting in direct routings in the lower and upper airspace. At the same time the end state of the CBA will be implemented. As the project is now “suspended” the implementation planning is TBD.

Status

The airspace and route design has been developed and successfully validated. In October 2015 the project has been “suspended”.


ESSIP: - AOM20: Implement ATS Route Network (ARN) – Version 7. (Objective set to “Achieved” and removed from ESSIP ed.2014)


Capacity To be re-evaluated if project is restarted.

Safety To be re-evaluated if project is restarted.


To be re-evaluated if project is restarted.

Cost efficiency To be re-evaluated if project is restarted.



Project Name: AIM Task Force Project Code: AIM


Belgocontrol

DFS

DSNA

LVNL

MUAC

Skyguide

Military partners of BE and NL

Description/Scope/Objectives

The AIM Task Force has three areas of activities:

Harmonisation of aeronautical information inside the FABEC area

Creation of a consistent FABEC ATM Data Set

Provisions for an efficient management of the FABEC ATM Data Set


The AIM Task Force received revised priorities. The work plan 2015/2016 was changed accordingly.

Status

The team started its new activities in June 2015. Two deliverables (AIM P-2 and AIM P-3) are completed and handed over to the FABEC AIM Steering Group. AIM TF plans to finalize the present deliverables by end 2016.


ESSIP: - ITY-ADQ: Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information. PCP: - AF5: Initial System Wide Information Management. Deployment Programme DP 2015: - FT 5.3.3: Interface to Network Management System (NMS) > Aeronautical Information Exchange Centralised Services: - CS5: European ATM Information Management Service (EAIMS)


Capacity N/A

Safety Harmonised aeronautical information, avoiding duplications or ambiguities, significantly contributes to ATM safety.


FABEC wide harmonised data sets available from a single source will allow for improved flightplanning.

Cost efficiency Expected: A significant positive impact on the cost efficiency of e.g. Airspace Design Projects as cross-border data becomes readily and seamlessly available.



Project Name: FABEC ATFCM/ASM Project Project Code: FAAP

Organisation(s) Belgocontrol

DFS

DSNA

LVNL

MUAC

Skyguide

Military partners of: BE, CH, DE, FR and NL


The aim of this project is to develop ASM solutions, addressing both civil and military airspace user’s needs. All AMC responsibilities are remaining as they currently are but AMCs should use interoperable tools to enhance data exchange/sharing and coordination between stakeholders. A stepped approach will give sufficient time to take advantage of future achievements of on-going FUA related activities (e.g. FUA harmonization, Booking Principles and Priority Rules (D7.1)) and to acquire the necessary confidence in and the appropriate knowledge of working methods between stakeholders.

Furthermore, DFS and DSNA joined in a bilateral initiative to support FAAP developments.


Step 1: Provide a FABEC airspace status overview (FASO) and enhance the cooperation between AMCs.

FAAP started to further develop the FASO tool. This is done by taking into account requirements from airspacedesign projects and related initiatives. The task includes further the development of general requirements and thetechnical implementation of FASO.

Status

In November 2014, Step 1 has been implemented successfully. Subsequent steps are currently under discussion at the level of the Standing Committee Operations. Until agreement on the future of the FABEC ATFCM/ASM Project (FAAP) has been reached, the Standing Committee Operations decided to limit the scope of FAAP to further develop the FABEC Airspace Status Overview (FASO) by taking into account requirements from airspace design projects. In the framework of the bilateral initiative DFS – DSNA a trial is executed from 12/11/2015 until 04/02/2016 to validate AMC coordination to optimize the availability of cross-border CDR routeing (City Pair Paris – Munich).


ESSIP: - AOM19 : Implement Advanced Airspace Management PCP: - AF3.1.1 & 3.2: Airspace Management and Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace Deployment Programme DP 2015: - Family 3.1.1: (Initial) ASM Tool to support AFUA Centralised Services: - CS4: Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace


Step 1

The main objectives of Step 1 focussed on the preparation of further Steps: analysis and description of local working methods, defining additional working methods, and set-up of an information sharing process. As such Step 1 did not deliver any performance benefits as far as it concerns the 5 KPAs contained in the FABEC Performance Plan.

Further Steps

TBD



Project Name: Free Route Airspace Project Code: FRA


DFS

DSNA

LVNL

MUAC

Skyguide

Military partners of: BE, DE, FR and NL

Description/Scope/Objectives The FRA programme aims at developing and implementing a Free Route Airspace FABEC wide. The objective of the FRA implementation is to give users opportunities to improve the horizontal flight efficiency through both plannable direct routes and at a later stage defined volume/s of Free Route Airspace within FABEC airspace. The FRA programme defines a stepped and gradual implementation approach where FABEC ACCs will develop and implement various iterations of Free Route Airspace.

Schedule/Implementation planning The FABEC FRA project was launched in 2011 with the objective of setting up a FABEC Free Route Airspace with A-FUA at FL 365 (and lower when and where possible) in a stepped approach by the end of RP2. In 2015, the project has been aligned with the requirements of Pilot Common Project requirements. This induced an implementation of FABEC Free Route Airspace FL310+ by 2022. Since the feasibility to achieve the implementation of Free Route at FL 310 in the whole FABEC airspace (and at all time), especially in high density airspace, is not yet proven, a stepwise approach will be chosen. The stepwise implementation may start at higher Flight Levels and/or in parts of FABEC airspace with lower traffic density and may be time and/or area restricted. The different situation at FABEC ANSP's such as system functionalities, system implementation plans as also the MME shall be taken into account.” All Free Route initiatives conducted locally, bilaterally or within a FABEC framework are under the FABEC FRA umbrella. Free Route activities which are not directly conducted within FABEC working groups are managed at ACC or national level using local management processes and are monitored at FABEC level.

The Project focuses on the launch of FRA implementation whilst continuing the Direct Routing implementation, moving from three steps to three parallel work streams. Each work stream develops a specific concept:

Stream 1: National and cross border DCTs Stream 2: Long Range Direct Routing Mil OFF/Mil ON Stream 3: Initial Free Routing

Status For all ANSP’s, stream 1 and 2 implementations have begun and are on-going. For DFS and MUAC, initial implementations of Free Routing are planned by 2017.


ESSIP: - AOM21.1: Implementation of Direct Routing - AOM 21.2: Implementation of Free Route Airspace PCP: - AF3.1.2, 3.2 & 3.3: Free Route Deployment Programme DP 2015: - Family 3.2.1: Upgrade of ATM systems (NM, ANSPs, AUs) to support Direct Routings (DCTs) and Free Routing Airspace (FRA) - Family 3.2.3: Implement Published Direct Routings (DCTs) - Family 3.2.4: Implement Free Route Airspace


Capacity Capacity benefits could be foreseen since reduced average transit times may result in an increase in capacity. Capacity benefits may also be possible if there is proven to be a reduced number of conflicts, fewer redirects, and the resulting impact on controller tools. However it is also possible that in some cases conflicts may become more complex and other or new choke points may emerge. Hence the overall impact of FRA on sector capacity cannot be determined without simulations.

Safety No impact.


FRA allows airspace users to fly direct routes, thus reducing flight distance flown, with consequent savings in fuel and direct and strategic operating costs. There are environmental benefits from savings in CO2-emissions.

Cost efficiency Investments at ANSP-level will deliver benefits in financial terms to users, but not to ANSPs.



Project Name: Extended Arrival Management Project Code: XMAN


DFS

DSNA

LVNL

MUAC

Skyguide

NATS


The XMAN/AMAN project will develop and implement a harmonised approach to arrival management in the corearea of Europe because it has to rely on cross-centre and cross-border processes and procedures. The implementation of XMAN will improve and optimise arrival management operations for the major 5 airports/TMAsas well as for other selected intermediate airports as defined by the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No716/2014.

One of the main characteristics of the XMAN project is the extension of the planning horizon of arrival managementsystems (AMAN) from the local TMA into the airspace of upstream control centres.

The final extension of arrival management operations is expected to reach as far as 200 NM or even beyond, depending on the operational environment and the needs of the stakeholders. These extended planning horizons will cover almost the entire FABEC airspace and, as a consequence, most of the FABEC control centres will be affected by extended AMAN operations and some of them will need to feed several arrival streams for different airports/TMAs.


The XMAN project envisages 3 development and implementation steps: Basic - from 2012 to 2017

The Basic Step uses the currently available systems and technologies in order to establish cross-centre arrival management in the airspace controlled by DFS, LVNL, MUAC, DSNA and NATS. Advanced - from 2013 to 2023

The Advanced Step will take into account validated SESAR results concerning Time Based Flow Management(TBFM) in order to improve the en-route part of cross-centre arrival management in the overall FABEC airspace.This step also requires enhanced data exchange between ACC/UAC in order to support a delay sharing strategy. Additional planning information related to departures and airborne flights will be used to be provided by Airport-CDM and/or Network Management. This step has potentially an impact on all FABEC ACCs. Optimised - from 2017 to 2023 The Optimised Step will take into account further validated SESAR results and will optimize the cooperation between arrival management and Airport-CDM, Aircraft Operators and Network Management in order to widely share Arrival Management (AM) information between all partners and to process and to apply Arrival Management information where needed.

Status

The FABEC XMAN Basic Step definition has been finalized in September 2015.

The concept development of the Advanced Step has been finalized in November 2014.


ESSIP: - ATC07.1: Implement arrival management tools. - ATC15: Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations. PCP: - AF1: Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMA Deployment Programme DP 2015: - Family 1.1.1: Basic AMAN - Family 1.1.2: AMAN upgrade to include Extended Horizon function


Capacity Improved average punctuality: small positive effect.

Better forecast for sector loads: small positive effect.

Reduced controller workload: no significant effect.

Safety Improved situational awareness: small positive effect.

Reduced tactical interventions: small positive effect.




Reduction of:

Track miles and holdings: small positive effect; Fuel burn: large positive effect; CO2/NOX emissions: large positive effect.

Cost efficiency From ANSP point of view: large negative effect (investment cost without financial return for ANSP).



Project Name: Flow Optimisation Concept Scenario Project Code: FOCS


DFS

DSNA

MUAC

NATS


The overall objective of the FOCS Project is to develop, to validate (when applicable) and to implement the different tabled implementation packages defined during the FOCS Study, while taking the most recent changes of the FABEC airspace into account. For RP3, an updated problem statement will be developed in Q4 2016 which will be the basis for further work for this reference period.

Schedule/Implementation planning The Local Implementation Packages will be fully executed and managed locally (ASM and VFE improvements, CBA100, French corner). For these elements the FOCS Project only ensures FABEC monitoring. As such, their planning is done at local level and not in scope.

For the Implementation Packages (IPs) West (W) and East-South (ES), work is planned in two parallel streams (W and ES). Each stream has its own set of PLC milestones.

The phase up to MS2 will focus on achieving an agreement on the overall design (for West) or on a shortlist of acceptable overall designs (for ES).

The phase up to MS3 will use real-time simulations to select and validate the final design for ES. The W and ES designs will be further elaborated to a level of detail allowing actual implementation.

The safety and performance work up to MS2 will be limited to monitoring of progress. Furthermore, the technical domain is not involved at this stage. The bulk of the work up to MS2 will therefore be done by the PMT, which has a mixed attendance of civil and military operational experts. The PMT will handle both streams of work (W, ES).

Expected availability of PMT members drives the rate of progress in the current planning.

Status

The FOCS project is in the launch phase and its scope may be revisited in 2016.


ESSIP: n/a


Capacity Still to be determined.

Safety Shall not deteriorate.


Still to be determined.

Cost efficiency Still to be determined.

FOCS area



Project Name: Implementation of Common Cost Management level II

Project Code: CCM level II


Belgocontrol

DFS

DSNA

LVNL

MUAC

Skyguide


The common planning of financial aspects (investments, cost savings, etc.) between ANSPs is considered the next step towards an aligned financial framework. The project will analyse which cost items can commonly be planned, which synergies can be derived and which consequences can be derived from the obtained information.


2015-2016

Status

Ongoing; started in 2015.


ESSIP: n/a


Capacity N/A

Safety N/A


N/A

Cost efficiency The project should be the baseline for future financial cooperation and hence an enabler for future benefits in Cost Efficiency without actually delivering own elements of cost saving.



5.3 Regional cooperation

5.3.1 Regional Cooperation Initiatives

Maastricht UAC area of responsibility is a complex and dense airspace in the close vicinity of major airports such as London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf and Copenhagen. Maastricht UAC interfaces with many civil and military ACCs and UACs.

Regular co-ordination meetings are set up with adjacent/ subjacent partners – within and outside the FABEC context - in order to improve airspace organisation and procedures such as to optimise the handling of traffic at the common interfaces.

Following the initial and successful introduction, in 2011, of Free Route Airspace operations in the area controlled by Maastricht UAC and the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung Karlsruhe Upper Area Control Centre, more than 850 direct routes have been implemented.

At the same occasion, over 100 of these direct routes starting in MUAC airspace were linked with direct routes in the Karlsruhe area, creating a large-scale free routing airspace over Belgium, most of Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Next to these routes, 18 cross-border direct routes were implemented. Cross-border direct routes distinguish themselves from normal direct routes by the fact that they do not have a coordination point at the boundary between the two involved service providers.

To maximise benefits, Maastricht UAC is closely coordinating the implementation with adjacent partners. Alignment with the Danish and Swedish free route projects is realized in the framework of the North Sea Regional Focus Group (NSFRG), an ad-hoc coordination group under RNDSG.

In 2012, work started in the context of FABEC with the objective to offer free route operations to aircraft operators across the FABEC area. This work is still ongoing. Nearly every month packages of carefully tuned DCTs are published, both locally or cross-border in close cooperation with DFS Karlsruhe. These implementation packages offer the Airline Operators numerous flightplan options dependent on the time of day. Further development is done with military partners in order to start implementing cross-border DCT’s available through military training areas when not used during the day of operations. It is expected that this next step will offer Airline Operators major benefits with regard to route extensions. First DCTs have been implemented and more are expected in the course of 2016.

From 2017 onwards the focus will be on the Pilot Common Project (PCP) requirement to implement Free Route by 2021. The implementation of FRA, which is the final step in the FRAM program, is planned in three phases (Night/Weekend/H24). In close cooperation with the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung Karlsruhe Upper Area Control Centre, MUAC will implement FRA during Night in Q4 2017.

Crossborder operations will as soon as possible be extended in the FRA environment, both with KUAC and Copenhagen.

The changes to the route network with the introduction of free routes during times of military activity required adaptation of OAT-GAT operating principles between MUAC and our military partners. Working practices that have evolved during many years of close cooperation were simplified, improving communication and optimising procedures for the benefit of both Civil and Military airspace users. An improved Concept of Operations is planned for 2016 with the integration of OAT services at MUAC.

On 27 June 2012 MUAC started to use the LARA (Local And sub-Regional ASM) system operationally. LARA is a support tool that encompasses all phases of airspace management - from long-term event planning to airspace management at level 2 and 3 - including real-time coordination of airspace activation. This is the first large-scale common civil and military deployment of LARA in Europe. MUAC has been integrated as the civil user in the first LARA cluster which is operational for the management of Belgian airspace. This cluster is composed of a number of workstations in MUAC, Brussels ACC, Belgian military airbases, CRC Glons, ATCC Semmerzake and the Belgian Airspace Management Cell. The LARA workstations are all connected over a network to the central LARA server, which is also installed at MUAC.

As a further development, MUAC is testing the connection between the LARA Server and its ATC system (FDPS). This will allow a direct feed of military airspace planning data into the FDPS and an automatic display of active training areas on the radar screen. This feature was initially tested in a live environment between ATCC Semmerzake and MUAC in December 2012 and is due for operational implementation in 2016. Next to the Belgian connection, MUAC is also testing the same feature for the Dutch airspace. Trials are ongoing and an operational implementation is also planned in 2016.



5.3.2 Regional Projects

5.3.2.1 MUAC OAT Provision

On 30 September 2013, the MUAC air traffic control system has been extended to be used remotely at the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) Air Operations Control Centre at Nieuw Milligen and seven air bases: this was the first instantiation of the Shared ATS System (SAS).

In the continuation of this project and in line with the Airspace Strategy for the Netherlands, a feasibility study was initiated in January 2014 to look at the possibility to either co-locate the military personnel of the Royal Netherlands Air force at the Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre or to transfer the provision of military ATS in the Amsterdam FIR above FL 245 to Maastricht. Due to a general shortage of RNLAF staff, the study concluded in January 2015 that MUAC Staff will provide the military ATS above FL 245, while RNLAF staff will keep providing military ATS below FL 245. The Member States authorised the Agency to open negotiations for the conclusion of a special agreement with the Netherlands concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Amsterdam FIR, in line with the principles set out in the National Airspace Vision of the Netherlands.

The EUROCONTROL Agency has also been authorised to conclude an agreement with Germany concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Hannover UIR.

The implementation of these provisions of military ATS is managed through the MOAT project, MUAC OAT Provision, which will deliver its first results by end 2016/early 2017.

5.3.2.2 SESAR Validation

Maastricht UAC actively participates to the SESAR Programme and makes its Industrial Based Platform (IBP) available to conduct pre-operational validations in areas assessed as important performance enablers for the future. The MUAC IBP evolves continuously, taking the lesson learnt and maturing concepts and technology into account.

Current SESAR activities as described in this chapter are all candidates to evolve further under the SESAR2020 programme (2016-2021), for which projects are expected to start in Q4 2016, in preparation of the mandated PCP deployments.

A non-exhaustive list of validation activities, focusing on the major enablers is presented below.

Interoperability-Air (IOP-A) / i4D

The main objective is to perform a gradual validation of trajectory exchange with the aircraft (2D/3D moving towards 4D) and to validate the concept of a shared trajectory to ensure consistency of information between ground and airborne systems.

This information will be used to improve ATM ground System Performance and flow/queue management, support enhanced early conflict detection and resolution and use of CTA/CTO (time based operations) as final objectives including the management of traffic towards TMAs.

This Project will support in validating the required enhancements of Data Link capabilities and required navigation performance of the aircraft.

In the period 2011 till March 2014 Maastricht participated in two live flight trials and real time validations in three steps. The Maastricht IBP evolved via these three steps to a maturity and is currently still used for live testing with Airbus productions flights (known as the PEGASE demonstrations) as well as tests together with Airbus and Inmarsat using satellite communication instead of the VDL2 radio channels. This baseline is planned to be the baseline for further evolutions under SESAR2020 to get close to what can be a basis for the operational introductions under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #6 (initial Trajectory Information Sharing).

i4D is part of the overall Trajectory Management Framework (TMF) concept and covers the air-ground interoperability of TMF.



Interoperability-Ground (IOP-G)

The objective of this project is to perform operational validation of trajectory exchanges, using the Flight Object, in an “IOP triangle” (MUAC/Reims/Karlsruhe) initially and extended with NATS, LVNL, ENAV and the Network Manager (NM). The validations started in January 2013 but will continue for the rest of the SESAR 1 period up till the end of 2016.

In a number of “annual” steps the project tried to will evolve from validating the non-regression compared to current operational practices towards adding new functionality will be added on top of the non-regression baseline.

The MUAC prototype is based on adaptations of the MUAC N-FDPS to include an IOP application (a.k.a. Flight Object Server - FOS) and integration with a SWIM Node prototype. The Maastricht IBP is planned to evolve during SESAR1 towards a maturity which is planned to be the baseline for further evolutions under SESAR2020 to get close to what can be a basis for the operational introductions under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #5 (iSWIM), of which the Flight Object covers the SWIM Blue Profile.

Most of the IOP-G activities focus on the ATC-ATC aspects, but MUAC is the first ANSP partner for NM to ensure that also NM will become user of the Flight Object.

IOP-G is part of the overall Trajectory Management Framework (TMF) concept and covers the ground-ground interoperability of TMF.

Flow and Complexity Management

The MUAC iFMP tool is integrated into the MUAC IBP and used in a SESAR development phase in En- Route validation scenario (MUAC AoR) to continuously monitor and evaluate traffic complexity; a method of assessing traffic complexity based on an algorithmic approach using information from the live FDPS is used. This information will be used by Centre supervisors to assess the impact on upcoming congestions and decide on the optimum airspace configuration scheme (sectorisation) to be applied, including the use of dynamic sector configurations (e.g. vDFL) and military activities from ASM systems like LARA.

The tool will also offer support (through an advanced HMI) for decision making by providing what-if capabilities on flights, traffic flows and airspace configurations at centre level supporting future functions of Multi and Meta Sector Planners, initially implemented in support of the Advanced ATFCM Planning Function within the context of the ATC2ATM programme.

The Maastricht IBP is planned to evolve during SESAR2020 PJ24 Network Collaborative Management towards a maturity which is planned to be the baseline for the operational deployment under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #3 (Flexible Airspace Management and Free Route) and ATM Functionality #5 (Network Collaborative Management).



ESSIP Objective Implementation Chapter 6 -

6.1 Conventions

Two colour codes are used for each ESSIP Objective ‘box’:

o a colour code is used to show the Objective Scope in the Objective ID cell, and

o another colour code is used to show the Objective Progress in the State and for each national stakeholder.

Obj. ID (*) Obj. Title (By mm/yyyy of overall objective, inc non-State SloAs) Obj. Progress (**)

State’s high level progress statement State Impl. Date

REG (By:mm-yyyy) REG high level progress statement

APO. Progress (**)

APO Impl. Date ASP (By:mm-yyyy) ASP high level progress statement

ASP. Progress (**)

ASP Impl. Date MIL (By:mm-yyyy) MIL high level progress statement

MIL. Progress (**)

MIL Impl. Date APO (By:mm-yyyy) APO high level progress statement

APO. Progress (**)

APO Impl. Date

(*) Objective Scope Code: (**) Objective/Stakeholder Progress Code:

ECAC Completed No Plan

EU+ Partly Completed Not Applicable

Multi-N Planned Missing Data

APT Late



6.2 ESSIP Objectives Implementation progress

AOM13.1

Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018

Not Applicable

AAMS‐10a(EN), AIMS‐19b(EN), AOM‐0301(OI)

Not applicable, since Maastricht UAC currently only provides ATS to GAT. However, at its meeting in Brussels on 8 and 9 December 2015, the Provisional Council has decided to entrust EUROCONTROL with an extended mandate to operate military air traffic control services, in addition to the current civilian air traffic control services. The EUROCONTROL Agency has been authorised to conclude an agreement with Germany concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Hannover UIR. The Member States also authorised the Agency to open negotiations for the conclusion of a special agreement with the Netherlands concerning the provision by the Organisation of air traffic services for operational air traffic in the Amsterdam FIR, in line with the principles set out in the National Airspace Vision of the Netherlands. A project to deal with these additional tasks has been established with the goal to see results by the end of 2016/spring 2017.

‐

REG (By:12/2018)

4 States' NSAs See main comment. ‐ Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12/2018) EUROCONTROL See main comment. ‐

Not Applicable

‐

MIL (By:12/2018)

MIL Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress in this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents.

‐

Not Applicable

‐

AOM19

Implement Advanced Airspace Management Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016

Completed

AAMS‐11(EN), AOM‐0201(OI), AOM‐0202(OI), AOM‐0205(OI), AOM‐0401(OI), DCB‐0203(OI)

Maastricht UAC was involved in the FABEC ASM/ATFCM Field trial (2010) and the Live Trial (2010). The final goal is to make ASM Tools in FABEC interoperable (e.g. connection LARA ‐ STANLY ACOS). In April 2012, LARA was implemented operationally by the Belgian Air Force and in June 2012 in MUAC. The operational implementation of the LARA to FDPS connection (Belgian cluster) is not planned yet. Operational implementation of LARA by RNLAF is planned for 2016. The connection of the Dutch cluster to the MUAC FDPS will be implemented thereafter.

31/12/2014

ASP (By:12/2016)

EUROCONTROL See main comment.

ATC2ATM /

FABEC

ATFCM/ASM

Project

Completed

31/12/2014

AOM21.1

Implementation of Direct Routing Timescales: Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2017

[PCP] [Essential] Completed

AOM‐0401(OI), AOM‐0402(OI), AOM‐0500(OI) [E]

All system changes have been implemented; the MUAC system is fully capable of supporting direct routing. 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2017) EUROCONTROL ‐ ‐

Completed

31/12/2015



AOM21.2

Implement Free Route Airspace Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021

[PCP] [Essential] Planned

AOM‐0401(OI), AOM‐0402(OI), AOM‐0501(OI) [E], AOM‐0502(OI) [E], CM‐0102‐A(OI) [E]

In 2011, FRAM was introduced operationally at MUAC via the implementation of direct routes between entry and exit points. Via a stepped approach, MUAC started in December 2012 with phase 4. Phase 5, cross border direct routes without a COP at the boundary, started in May 2013. Phase 6, consisting of free route airspace where Airline Operators can freely plan above a certain flight level, is planned for 2021.

31/12/2021

ASP (By:12/2021)

EUROCONTROL ‐

Free Route

Airspace

Planned

31/12/2021

AOP03

Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/04/2003 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013

Not Applicable

AO‐0101(OI)

Maastricht UAC does not have any airports within its area of responsibility. ‐ REG (By:12/2013)

4 States' NSAs N/A for Maastricht UAC. Progress in this objective by the REG authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents.

‐ Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:12/2013) EUROCONTROL N/A ‐

Not Applicable

‐

ATC02.5

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Area Proximity Warning ‐ level 2 Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2009 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016

Completed

CM‐0801(OI)

The N‐FDPS (put into service in Dec 2008) incorporates conformance monitoring and provides alerts for deviations of track, as well as TSA crossing warnings in case of crossing of an active TSA. Controllers were properly trained prior to operational use. The N‐FDPS provides the APW function to the extend this is needed in an en‐route environment through the TSA Crossing Warnings, and the forcing on the CWP of (imminently) active TSA Contours in the (Warning) Alert Colour. In the course of 2013, the TSA Crossing Warning function was further enhanced by the implementation of "allowed" crossing tubes through active TSA‐s to reflect the concept of available CDRs through TSA‐s. In addition, the display of active TSA Contours will be further automated by linking the FDPS to the Air Space Management Tool (LARA).

31/12/2015

ASP (By:12/2016) EUROCONTROL As in the overall comment. ‐

Completed

30/03/2015



ATC02.6

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Minimum Safe Altitude Warning ‐ level 2 Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2009 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016

Not Applicable

CM‐0801(OI)

This objective is N/A for Maastricht UAC as MUAC provides ATC only above FL245. ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) EUROCONTROL N/A ‐

Not Applicable

‐

ATC02.7

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Approach Path Monitor ‐ level 2 Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2009 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016

Not Applicable

CM‐0801(OI)

This objective is considered N/A for Maastricht UAC as MUAC provides ATC service only above FL245. ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) EUROCONTROL N/A ‐

Not Applicable

‐

ATC12.1

Implement automated support for conflict detection, resolution support information and conformance monitoring Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021

Completed

CM‐0202(OI), CM‐0203(OI), CM‐0205(OI), CM‐0207‐A(OI)

The MTCD function has been linked to the Near Term Conflict functionality which is a tool operating between a classical MTCD look‐ahead time and TCT Tools; NCW operates with a 8 minutes look‐ahead time. NCW with MTCD is operationally used since early 2015.

31/12/2015

ASP (By:12/2021) EUROCONTROL ‐ ‐

Completed

31/12/2015

ATC15

Implement, in En‐Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017

Completed

TS‐0305(OI)

The interface with Amsterdam ACC was implemented in 2011. Implementation with additional partners (e.g. Frankfurt) is expected to take place depending on their readiness and operational needs. Due to its unique position, MUAC is piloting the integration with multiple AMAN implementations as input into the FABEC XMAN initiative.

31/12/2011

ASP (By:12/2017)

EUROCONTROL

The interface with Amsterdam ACC was implemented in 2011. Implementation with additional partners (e.g. Frankfurt) is expected to take place depending on their readiness and operational needs. Due to its unique position, MUAC is piloting the integration with multiple AMAN implementations as input into the FABEC XMAN initiative.

Extended Arrival

Management

Completed

31/12/2011



ATC16

Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/03/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2015

Completed

PRO‐AC‐21(EN)

ATCOs are aware of the TCAS version upgrade and of the effect that the new "Level off, level off" RA will have on ATC operations through the Electronic Briefing. The awareness is further raised during the yearly Refresher Training Program.

31/12/2012

REG (By:12/2015)

REG NL

The CAAs of the 4 States have evidence on the status of compliance with regulatory provisions for ACAS II (TCAS 7.1) for aircraft and aircraft operators in the State of Registry under the ILT(CAA‐NL) oversight. Airworthiness certification can be provided upon application.

‐

Completed

30/06/2012

ASP (By:03/2012)

EUROCONTROL

ATCOs are aware of the TCAS version upgrade and of the effect that the new "Level off, level off" RA will have on ATC operations through the Electronic Briefing. The awareness is further raised during the yearly Refresher Training Program.

‐

Completed

31/12/2012

ATC17

Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and Transfer Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018

Planned

CM‐0201(OI)

All messages are implemented in the MUAC system, but operational use is currently limited. Prior to operational introduction, technical tuning will be required. Operational use with Karslruhe UAC is planned for 2017. For the other messages, no operational use with other partners is currently planned. Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAA‐NL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP.

31/12/2017


Planned

31/12/2017

COM10

Migrate from AFTN to AMHS Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/12/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2014

Completed

CTE‐C06c(EN)

Maastricht UAC has replaced the DCFEP with a new ECG‐based switch, which was a prerequisite for the introduction of AMHS. Implementation with LVNL was successfully concluded in March 2014, with DFS in May and with Belgocontrol in July 2014.

31/12/2014


Completed

31/03/2014



COM11

Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020

Planned

CTE‐C05a(EN)

MUAC will use VoIP for the first time with its New VCS system, which is due for implementation in 2016. Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAA‐NL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP. This change is notified 2012 and subject to formal acceptance and review based on the 4‐States manual.

30/11/2016

ASP (By:12/2020) EUROCONTROL See main comment. VCS

Planned

30/11/2016

FCM01

Implement enhanced tactical flow management services Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/08/2001 Full operational capability: 31/12/2006

Completed

IS‐0102(OI)

1) ASTERIX Cat 62&65 support is available for external partners with the operational deployment of the ART‐DACO radar gateway as from Q2/2006. Supply of Cat 062/065 to ETFMS was implemented in September 2009. 2) EFD data is available to the local Traffic Management System (TMS‐ASP) as from 2010. 3) FSA was operationally implemented in 2010.

31/12/2014


Completed

31/12/2014

FCM03

Implement collaborative flight planning Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2000 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017

Planned

IS‐0102(OI)

With the introduction of the N‐FDPS in 12/2008, APL and ACH messages are treated automatically. Automatic AFP has been tentatively implemented early 2011, but was not yet used in the NM operational system due to some technical incompatibilities. The target date is provisionally set to end 2016. Until FOC, data is only sent to the NMD test system by MUAC.

31/12/2016


Planned

31/12/2016

FCM04

Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures ‐ phase 1 (Outside Applicability Area) Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐

Completed

DCB‐0205(OI)

MUAC uses CHMI for hot spot detection through TMV monitoring by TCM and provides the sectorization plans and associated TMVs/OTMVs daily to NM through CHMI.

30/09/2013

ASP (By:12/2015) EUROCONTROL See main comment. iFMP

Completed

30/09/2013



FCM05

Implementation of interactive rolling NOP Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021

[PCP] [Essential] Not Applicable

AOM‐0202(OI), AOM‐0205(OI), DCB‐0102(OI), DCB‐0103‐A(OI) [E], IS‐0901‐A(OI) [E]

The responsibility for the Dutch ASM support system lies with the RNLAF, for the German system (based on STANLY) with the DFS. The Belgian LARA cluster is hosted and maintained by Maastricht UAC, but the responsibility lies with the Belgian Airspace Management Cell (AMC). Therefore, this requirement is Not Applicable to Maastricht UAC.

‐

ASP (By:12/2017) EUROCONTROL Same as in the above comment. ‐

Not Applicable

‐

FCM06

Traffic Complexity Assessment Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021

[PCP] [Essential]

Partly Completed

CM‐0101(OI), CM‐0103‐A(OI) [E], IS‐0102(OI)

iFMP (integrated Flow Management Position) was implemented in 2015 and is due for operational use in 2016. Prototyping of local traffic complexity tools has been done and operational validations are planned.

31/12/2020

ASP (By:12/2021)

EUROCONTROL

iFMP (integrated Flow Management Position) was implemented in 2015 and is due for operational use in 2016. Prototyping of local traffic complexity tools has been done and operational validations are planned.

‐

Partly Completed

31/12/2020

INF04

Implement integrated briefing Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/07/2002 Full operational capability: 31/12/2012

Not Applicable

IS‐0201(OI)

This objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC as it has no airports within its area of responsibility. Also, Maastricht UAC is not an AIS provider.

‐

ASP (By:12/2012) EUROCONTROL N/A ‐

Not Applicable

‐

INF07

Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD) Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/11/2014 Full operational capability: 31/05/2018

Not Applicable

AIMS‐16(EN)

This objective is not applicable, as MUAC provides ATC only above FL245. ‐ ASP (By:05/2018) EUROCONTROL ‐ ‐

Not Applicable

‐



ITY‐ACID

Aircraft identification Timescales: Entry into force of the Regulation: 13/12/2011 System capability: 02/01/2020 Possible deferred compliance, only for services provided by military units or under military supervision, subject to conditions:: 02/01/2025

Completed

GSURV‐0101(EN)

MUAC is compliant with the ACID regulation since 2010. 31/12/2014 ASP (By:01/2020) EUROCONTROL See State comment. ‐

Completed

31/12/2014

ITY‐ADQ

Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information Timescales: Entry into force of the regulation: 16/02/2010 Article 5(4)(a), Article 5(4)(b) and Article 6 to 13 to be implemented by: 30/06/2013 Article 4, Article5(1) and Article 5(2), Article 5(3) and Article 5(4)(c) to be implemented by: 30/06/2014 All data requirements implemented by: 30/06/2017

Not Applicable

IS‐0202(OI), IS‐0204(OI)

Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information, subject of this regulation. As such, this objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. In particular cases when MUAC provides information to be published in the 4 States national AIPs (e.g: in the context of the Free Routes project) the provision of this type of information will be covered by SLAs currently being drafted with the corresponding Data Providers (DFS, Belgocontrol, LVNL already drafted, ANA).

‐

REG (By:06/2017)

4 States' NSAs Because Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information this regulation is not applicable to Maastricht UAC.

‐

Not Applicable

‐

ASP (By:06/2017)

EUROCONTROL

Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information, subject of this regulation. As such, this objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC.

AIM Expert Task

Force

Not Applicable

‐



ITY‐AGDL

Initial ATC air‐ground data link services above FL‐285 Timescales: ATS unit operational capability: 05/02/2018 Aircraft capability: 05/02/2020

Completed

AUO‐0301(OI), CTE‐C02b(EN)

Maastricht UAC already complies with the requirements of this objective since several years. There is no particular issue to note or to report.

31/12/2013

REG (By:02/2018)

4 States' NSAs

Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAA‐NL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP.

‐

Completed

28/02/2013

ASP (By:02/2018)

EUROCONTROL

Maastricht UAC implemented air‐ground datalink communications in 12/2002, supporting CM, CPDLC, DLIC ACM, ACL and AMC services in the complete area of responsibility. Service level agreements have been established with the communication providers and monitoring of the service (external and internal segments) is in place. LOF and NAN have been available with the introduction of N‐FDPS in 12/2008 and has been implemented operationally with DFS Karlsruhe in September 2012. Both ATN/VDL‐2 and FANS communications are supported.

‐

Completed

31/12/2008

MIL (By:01/2019)

MIL Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents.

‐

Not Applicable

‐

ITY‐AGVCS2

Implement 8,33 kHz air‐ground voice channel spacing below FL195 (Outside Applicability Area) Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐

Not Applicable

CTE‐C01a(EN)



ITY‐COTR

Implementation of ground‐ground automated co‐ordination processes Timescales: Entry into force of Regulation: 27/07/2006 For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of notification and initial coordination processes: 27/07/2006 For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of Revision of Coordination, Abrogation of Coordination, Basic Flight Data and Change to Basic Flight Data: 01/01/2009 To all EATMN systems in operation by 12/2012: 31/12/2012 Systems serving ACCs providing services above FL285 in the airspace defined in Regulation (EU) 2015/310: 05/02/2018

Completed

CM‐0201(OI)

The requirements of this objective are fulfilled by Maastricht UAC since the introduction into service of N‐FDPS. MADAP, and in particular the N‐FDPS, ensure the following functions: ‐ display, processing and compilation ‐ receive, store, process, extract, and deliver ‐ issue a warning when failures are detected ‐ provide warnings related to the working positions ‐ modify flight information ‐ status of relevant system information exchanges Implementation of ground‐ground automated co‐ordination processes is technically completed since the operational introduction of the MUAC N‐FDPS system in December 2008. ABI and ACT messages are exchanged with all partners and REV messages with Paris, Reims and Karlsruhe. LOF/NAN messages are already exchanged with DFS Karlsruhe. MAC messages are exchanged with Paris and Reims.

30/04/2013

ASP (By:02/2018)

EUROCONTROL

Maastricht UAC has implemented the OLDI 2.3 standard (and additional messages). Additional Information exchanged between CIV‐MIL, are defined in INTNET (Belgium Mil) and CIMACT/ADMAR (German remote Mil) interfaces. DFS‐CCUM is co‐located with MUAC and uses the same system. AOCS NM also uses the same system (SAS).

‐

Completed

30/04/2013

MIL (By:12/2012)


‐

Not Applicable

‐



ITY‐FMTP

Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) Timescales: Entry into force of regulation: 28/06/2007 All EATMN systems put into service after 01/01/09: 01/01/2009 All EATMN systems in operation by 20/04/11: 20/04/2011 Transitional arrangements: 31/12/2012 Transitional arrangements when bilaterally agreed between ANSPs: 31/12/2014

Completed

CTE‐C06(EN)

Maastricht UAC has migrated the majority of connections to FMTP in close co‐ordination with its adjacent partners. Details of the various implementation plans are provided below. From a regulatory perspective, the relevant (EC) SES regulations apply directly and mandatory in each of the 4 States. Details of progress and of the actions undertaken by each of the 4 States regulators to ensure that FMTP is used between the ATS units and controlling military units and also to supervise compliance with the respective regulations are in each of the respective LSSIP documents. The 4 States NSA Committee will further consider establishing supervisory action in this respect. The transition to IPv6 is gradually progressing.

31/01/2011

ASP (By:12/2014) EUROCONTROL Same as in the overall comment. ‐

Completed

30/04/2011

MIL (By:12/2014)


‐

Not Applicable

‐

ITY‐SPI

Surveillance performance and interoperability Timescales: Entry intro force of regulation: 13/12/2011 ATS unit operational capability: 12/12/2013 New aircraft capability: 08/06/2016 ELS in transport‐type State aircraft : 07/12/2017 EHS and ADS‐B Out in transport‐type State aircraft : 07/06/2020 Ensure training of MIL personnel: 07/06/2020 Retrofit aircraft capability: 07/06/2020

Completed

GSURV‐0101(EN)

The changes to the local MUAC systems are conducted in accordance with agreed MUAC safety processes. In addition, the performance verification requirements of the surveillance data processing systems has been fulfilled in accordance with EC Regulation 1207/2011 and the ESASSP.

31/12/2013

REG (By:02/2015)

4 States' NSAs For this implementation, procedures according the 4‐States Manual have been followed. In line with these procedures, there was no need for a formal acceptance.

‐

Completed

31/12/2013

ASP (By:02/2015) EUROCONTROL See State comment. ‐

Completed

31/12/2013

MIL (By:06/2020)


‐

Not Applicable

‐



NAV03

Implementation of P‐RNAV Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/01/2001 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023

Not Applicable

AOM‐0601(OI), AOM‐0602(OI), CTE‐N08(EN)

Most SLoAs are the responsibility of each of the four States. Progress of these SLoAs is rendered in the respective LSSIP documents. However, Maastricht UAC is concerned with 4 SLoAs. Maastricht UAC will train ATCOs in P‐RNAV procedures (ASP03) and implement P‐RNAV routes (ASP05) in accordance with the 4 States' plans of introducing P‐RNAV. This is also the case as regards the adaptation of corresponding ATS automated systems (ASP07) and the development of a local P‐RNAV safety case (ASP11).

‐

ASP (By:12/2023) EUROCONTROL Same as overall comment. ‐

Not Applicable

‐

NAV10

Implement APV procedures Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/06/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016

Not Applicable

AOM‐0602(OI), AOM‐0604(OI), CTE‐N06a(EN), CTE‐N06b(EN)

There are no airports within the area of responsibility of Maastricht UAC. ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) EUROCONTROL ‐ ‐

Not Applicable

‐



SAF10

Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/06/2008 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011

Completed

CM‐0801(OI)

The European Action Plan for Airspace Infringement Risk Reduction (June 2009) has been reviewed and is mainly concerned with infringements in the context of lower airspace, focused on General Aviation. As regards the Upper Airspace, considering the particular type of airspace concerned (Class C), the plan has no effective application. There is no General Aviation VFR flying at such levels and it is prohibited in this class of airspace. Infringements regarding military reserved airspace have limited application ‐ infringements by civil aircraft into military reserved airspace are extremely rare and, if any, coordination procedures prevail. The only relevant action concerning Maastricht UAC is the planned introduction of the Local and Sub‐Regional ASM Support System (LARA) Tool. LARA was implemented in June 2012 with the Belgian Airforce. Implementation with the RNLAF is due for 2015. However when in the event of an infringement either by GAT or OAT (Leaving a reserved airspace and causing an infringement with GAT), risk reduction measures and corrective action will be taken within the context of the mandatory reporting system. The Maastricht UAC is therefore compliant with SAF10 although through constant vigilance and review, improvements will where necessary be applied.

31/12/2012

REG (By:12/2011)

4 States' NSAs

IVW (CAA‐NL) reported having assessed the European action plan and consulting with the relevant stakeholders. Airspace infringements are being monitored by ILT (CAA‐NL) and most items of the European Action Plan were found to be implemented, while regulatory action is being taken for the remaining items. Risk reduction measures will be monitored and assessed onwards. Enforcement based on national regulations is already on‐going.

‐

Completed

31/12/2012

4 States' REG ‐ ‐ Completed

31/12/2012

ASP (By:12/2011)

EUROCONTROL

The EAP‐AIRR toolkit has been reviewed and a local action plan generated and implemented.

‐ Completed

31/12/2011

MIL (By:12/2011)


‐

Not Applicable

‐

SAF11

Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions Timescales: Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/01/2018

Not Applicable

PRO‐006a(EN)



6.3 Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress



Annexes

Annex A – Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process

LSSIP Co-ordination

LSSIP Focal Points Organisation Name

LSSIP Focal Point for Maastricht UAC Frank GREVEN ATM/CNS Strategy, ASD (MUAC)

LSSIP Focal Point for ILT (CAA-NL), the SES-certifying authority

Marcel HARTMAN Advisor, ILT (CAA-NL)

LSSIP Focal Point for the 4 States’ NSA Committee

Marcel HARTMAN Advisor, ILT (CAA-NL)

EUROCONTROL LSSIP Support

Function Directorate Name

LSSIP Contact Person for Maastricht UAC DPS/PEPR Adriatik KOKONA

ESSIP Objective Implementation

ESSIP Objective

EUROCONTROL Objective Owners EUROCONTROL PEPR Objective Coordinator

National Stakeholder Specialist(s)

AOM13.1 R. BUCUROIU, O. MROWICKI, C. LUCCIOLI, E. REUBER

A. DYBOWSKA N/A

AOM19 G. ACAMPORA, O. MROWICKI

A. DYBOWSKA Dirk DE HERDT

Robert PARYS

AOM21.1 R. BUCUROIU A. DYBOWSKA Herbert KOPPE

AOM21.2 R. BUCUROIU A. DYBOWSKA Herbert KOPPE

AOP03 T. LICU P. VRANJKOVIC N/A

AOP04.1 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A

AOP04.2 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A

AOP05 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A

AOP10 M. BIRENHEIDE B. HILL N/A

AOP11 M. BIRENHEIDE B. HILL N/A

AOP12 M. BIRENHEIDE P. VRANJKOVIC N/A

ATC02.5 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT Peter HENDRICKX

ATC02.6 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT N/A

ATC02.7 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT N/A

ATC07.1 P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO N/A

ATC12.1 P. TERZIOSKI

L. DELL’ORTO Kris VERMEIREN

Peter HENDRICKX

ATC15 P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI

L. DELL’ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS

Peter HENDRICKX

ATC16 S. DROZDOWSKI L. DELL’ORTO Luc STAUDT

ATC17 S. MORTON

L. DELL’ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS

Peter HENDRICKX

COM10 Y. EYUBOGLU A. KOKONA Gustaaf JANSSENS



ESSIP Objective

EUROCONTROL Objective Owners EUROCONTROL PEPR Objective Coordinator

National Stakeholder Specialist(s)

COM11 L. POPESCU A. KOKONA Gustaaf JANSSENS

ENV01 C. FABER B. HILL N/A

ENV02 S. MAHONY, A. WATT B. HILL N/A

FCM01 H. KOOLEN

O. CIOARA Roel HUURDEMAN

Peter HENDRICKX

FCM03 TBD


Peter HENDRICKX

FCM04 P.HOP


Peter HENDRICKX

FCM05 I. MENDES O. CIOARA N/A

FCM06 P. HOP

O. ALFARO Roel HUURDEMAN

Peter HENDRICKX

INF04 P. MATERN A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A

INF07 A. PETROVSKY A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A

ITY-ACID A. DESMOND-KENNEDY O. CIOARA Torsten DÖRNBACH

ITY-ADQ M. UNTERREINER A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A

ITY-AGDL S. DISSING A. KOKONA Volker STUHLSATZ

ITY-AGVCS2 J POUZET O. ALFARO N/A

ITY-COTR S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS

ITY-FMTP L. POPESCU O. ALFARO Gustaaf JANSSENS

ITY-SPI M. BORELY, R. STEWART O. CIOARA Torsten DÖRNBACH

NAV03 F. PAVLICEVIC A. KOKONA N/A

NAV10 R. FARNWORTH A. KOKONA N/A

SAF10 T. LICU I. FEIJT Keith CARTMALE

SAF11 S. LAWRENCE I. FEIJT N/A



Annex B – National Stakeholders Organisation Charts



Annex C – Glossary of Abbreviations

Specific abbreviations for Maastricht UAC.

ACE ATM Cost Effectiveness

AF ATM Functionality

AOR Area of Responsibility

BE Belgium

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

DE Germany

FABEC FAB Europe Central

FDPS Flight Data Processing System

FHA Functional Hazard Analysis

FMP Flow Management Position

GAF German Air Force

ILT Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport (Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate, Civil Aviation Authority of The Netherlands)

LU Grand Duché Luxembourg

LVNL ATC the Netherlands (“Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland”)

MCG Maastricht Co-ordination Group

MoI&M Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment of the Netherlands

MUAC Maastricht UAC

NMC Network Management Cell

N-FDPS New FDPS

NL The Netherlands

ODS Operator input and Display System

PCP Pilot Common Project

DP Deployment Programme

S-AF Sub ATM Functionality

TLS Target Level of Safety

Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) EUROCONTROL ... · Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by...

Documents

Transcript of Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) EUROCONTROL ... · Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by...