SES Performance Scheme

Transcription

1 SES Performance Scheme 12 th Florence Rail Forum 2 May 2016 Rolf TUCHHARDT European Commission, DG MOVE

2 The Single European Sky policy initiative to improve the overall performance of air traffic management (ATM) and air navigation services (ANS) SES I approved in 2004 Focus on capacity and safety Supervisory authorities, certification, Functional Airspace Blocks SES II approved in 2009 Focus on performance and modernisation Binding performance targets, Network Manager,..

3 How it all started Analysis in 1997: Lack of information on performance of the European ATM system, or fragmented and inconsistent data. Data inadequate, structured collation and dissemination lacking. More systematic approach to performance review needed, including quality of service and cost measures. Objective: 'to introduce strong, transparent and independent performance review, also for better basis for investment analyses and economic regulation'

4 Performance Scheme today Implemented in 28 EU Member States plus Norway and Switzerland Fixed reference periods (RP , RP ) Four key performance areas (safety, environment, capacity, cost-efficiency) Union-wide performance targets and binding national/fab targets consistent with Union-wide targets Commission assessment, assisted by independent Performance Review Body (PRB) Ongoing monitoring and reporting of performance

5 Setting of performance targets Commission adopts before the start of the reference period Union-wide performance targets Member States draw up performance plans including binding national or FAB targets Commission assesses consistency of national/fab targets with Union-wide performance targets If targets are inconsistent, Member States have to revise targets in light of Commission recommendation Commission assesses consistency of revised targets and may impose corrective measures N months + 5 months + 4 months + 5 months Retroactive application as of start of RP

6 Four key performance areas Safety Cost-efficiency Environment Capacity

7 Setting of performance targets at different levels European Union-wide level Local level: Level of Functional Airspace Blocks Charging zone level Airport level Plus System of Key Performance Indicators (Target setting) and Performance Indicators (Monitoring)

8 Key performance area Effectiveness of safety management Safety Application of severity classification Application of automated safety data recording systems Reporting on level of 'just culture' Level of occurrence reporting Number of SMI, RI, AI, ATM-occurrenc. * *separation minima infringements, runway incursions, ATM-specific occurrences

9 Key performance area Average Union-wide determined unit costs for en route services Cost-efficiency Additional Cost of capital (level/composition asset base; return on equity) Inflation assumptions Traffic forecast assumptions Description/assumptions pension costs; loans financing provision of ANS... Determined unit costs for terminal services Cost of Eurocontrol, with breakdown various service provision activities

10 Key performance area Horizontal en route flight efficiency of actual and planned trajectory Remarks Distance flown outside 40NM of airport For extra-eu flights only part inside EU airspace measured Additional time in taxi-out Additional time in terminal airspace (ASMA) Environment Effectiveness of booking flexible use of airspace (FUA) Rate of planning conditional routes (CDR) Effective use of conditional routes (CDR)

11 Key performance area Average en route ATFM delay per flight Remarks Difference between estimated take-off time requested by aircraft operator in last submitted flight plan and calculated take off time allocated by central unit of ATFM All IFR flights within EU airspace and all delay causes, excluding exceptional events Average arrival ATFM delay caused by landing restrictions (local target) Capacity Adherence to ATFM slots Average minutes of ATC pre-departure delay

12 Some selected monitoring results Cost-efficiency Environment Capacity

13 Cost-efficiency evolution of en route unit costs

14 Cost-efficiency en route unit costs and charges Det. unit costs 2015 % vs unit rate in EUR2009 EU average in EUR Germany % Switzerland % Italy % Austria % United Kingdom % France % Spain Cont % Belgium % Luxembourg % Slovenia % Netherlands % Spain Canarias % EU average Denmark % Sweden % Finland % Slovak Republic % Croatia % Norway % Lithuania % Czech Republic % Hungary % Cyprus % Portugal % Greece % Romania % Poland % Bulgaria % Ireland % Malta % Latvia % Estonia % 31.10

15 Traffic in 2015

16 Environment

17 JAN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV JAN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV JAN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV JAN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV JAN MAR MAY JUL SEP NOV Environment % Horizontal en-route flight efficiency (SES RP 2) 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 4.78% 4.84% 4.61% 4.44% 4.27% 4.10% KEP (plan) - monthly KEA (actual) - monthly KEP (plan) - annual KEA (actual) - annual 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.83% 2.96% 2.87% 2.78% 2.69% 2.60% Target (KEP) Target (KEA) Indicative reference (KEA) Indicative reference (KEP) 2.0% 1.5%

18 En-route ATFM delay per flight Capacity situation SES - RP1 AREA SES - RP2 AREA Other [all other codes] Weather [codes W,D] ATC other [codes IRTV] Capacity/staffing [codes CSG] Target Traffic index (2008)

19 Opportunities for further improvements Airborne ANS Flight-efficiency En-route: 1.0 B TMA, taxi: 1.2 B ATFM Delays ER: 0.5, Apt: B 0.8 B Total User cost (ground) 10.5 B User Charges 7.5 B ATCO Support costs Other staff Other operating CAPEX Depreciation Cost of capital Other costs ECTL, MET, NSA 2.0 B 3.5 B 1.2 B 0.8 B Estimated TEC 2012 (SES)