FABEC Operations. From a project-driven approach to continuous operational improvements

Transcription

1 FABEC Operations From a project-driven approach to continuous operational improvements Andreas Pötzsch Chairman FABEC Operations and DFS Director En-route and Approach. Madrid, 07 March

2 FABEC at a glance 6 states 7 ANSP s 5 Military partners 14 ACC s Traffic: ~ 5.7 Mio Flights/ Year more than 50 % of European air traffic Airspace: 1,7 Mio km² Service at 240 Airports 1

3 ACC s and UAC s 14 Centres with different organisational structures UACs ACCs 2

4 FABEC Focus until 2014 / 2015 Establish FABEC governance and structure on ANSP and States side Establish complex processes to steer common work Concentrate on large scale airspace design projects, involving numerous stakeholders from both civil and military ANSP s 3

5 FABEC Airspace Design Projects 4

6 FABEC Focus until 2014 / 2015 Establish FABEC governance and structure on ANSP and States side Establish complex processes to steer common work Concentrate on large scale airspace design projects, involving numerous stakeholders from both civil and military ANSP s Distinguish between local / national projects and FABEC projects 5

7 FABEC projects until 2014 / 2015 AMRUFRA cross border airspace redesign R Night Network / City Pairs FAAP: ASM / FUA improved civil military coordination FRA: FABEC Free route project ongoing XMAN: Extended Arrival Management ongoing R R R R CBA Land / CW: cross border airspace redesign on hold IP SE: cross border airspace redesign on hold FOCS: cross border airspace redesign under discussion tbd 6

8 Changing the focus Realism and Performance Combining realistic initiatives to an overarching planning based on performance needs and customer requirements. 7

9 FABEC Lessons Learned Common processes and firm operational steering is needed Alignment of Local/National and FAB strategies is required when building the FAB project portfolio Large scale airspace redesign is not the answer anymore to fast changing traffic patterns and regulatory framework (e.g. PCP IR) Stepwise approaches instead of big bang implementations Ensure active involvement of all stakeholders Ensure firm commitment of all partners Address daily OPS requirements and stay in close contact with ACC s 8

10 FABEC New OPS orientations (1) Pursue performance driven approach (safety, capacity, environment, cost efficiency) 9

11 Holistic approach to FABEC performance 10

12 FABEC New OPS orientations (1) Pursue performance driven approach (safety, capacity, environment, cost efficiency) Subsidiarity principle (ACC-level, national level, FABEC-level) 11

13 ACC s and UAC s 14 Centres with different organisational structures UACs ACCs 12

14 FABEC New OPS orientations (1) Pursue performance driven approach (safety, capacity, environment, cost efficiency) Subsidiarity principle (ACC-level, national level, FABEC-level) Adjustment of the FABEC OPS governance 13

15 FABEC SC OPS Working Organisation 14

16 FABEC New OPS orientations (1) Pursue performance driven approach (safety, capacity, environment, cost efficiency) Subsidiarity principle (ACC-level, national level, FABEC-level) Adjustment of the FABEC OPS governance Widening FABEC Ops scope (include local and bilateral initiatives) Close to daily operations ( 2 nd pillar initiatives, establishment of a Head of ACC group at FABEC level) 15

17 FABEC: Weather induced delay MET Alliance conducts FABEC study about the impact of adverse weather conditions on ATM 16 January ; At the request of the FABEC air navigation service providers, MET Alliance, a consortium of leading European meteorological service providers, is investigating the possible effects of changes in weather behaviour on air traffic management and more generally the impact of adverse weather conditions on ATM. 16

18 FABEC New OPS orientations (1) Pursue performance driven approach (safety, capacity, environment, cost efficiency) Subsidiarity principle (ACC-level, national level, FABEC-level) Adjustment of the FABEC OPS governance Widening FABEC Ops scope (include local and bilateral initiatives) Close to daily operations ( 2 nd pillar initiatives, establishment of a Head of ACC group at FABEC level) Actively address OPS challenges (traffic volatility, capacity gaps etc., establishment of a FABEC OPS Development Group) Set goals in dedicated OPS plans 17

19 FABEC Operational Planning

20 FABEC New OPS orientations (2) Extended Arrival management (XMAN) and Free Route (FRA) remain backbone of OPS strategy 19

21 FABEC XMAN Project Plan 2017 London ACC Brest: mid 2017 Munich UAC Karlsruhe: end 2017 (extension to 220NM) Munich ACC Vienna: end 2017 (extension to 220NM) Munich ACC Zurich: end 2017 (extension to 220 NM) Munich ACC Langen: end 2017 Frankfurt MUAC: mid 2017 Frankfurt UAC Karlsruhe: mid 2017 Frankfurt ACC Munich: mid 2017 Frankfurt ACC Bremen: end 2017 Zurich UAC Reims: early 2017 Zurich ACC Munich: early 2017 Zurich ACC Langen: early

22 FABEC Free Route Airspace Project Stepwise approach One common Concept of Operations Incorporation of AU Set-up States/ANSP FUA task force Rolling UUP InterFAB initiatives 21

23 FABEC New OPS orientations (2) XMAN and FRA remain backbone of OPS strategy Include Inter FAB OPS initiatives 22

24 FABEC InterFAB Initiatives - SESAR Optimized Descend Profiles - Long-Range DCT s on SE axis - New DCT s with Baltic FAB - XMAN adjacent to FABEC - ATM system groups, e.g. itec - Free Route extension SW FAB 23

25 FABEC New OPS orientations (2) XMAN and FRA remain backbone of OPS strategy Include Inter FAB OPS initiatives Development of a FABEC OPS Performance Roadmap Close cooperation with NM, close to network evolutions Close cooperation with airspace users (Joint OPS/AOG, FABEC Customer Satisfaction Survey, etc.) Involvement of social partners Development of FABEC positions towards external stakeholders 24

26 From FAB s to European Network Joint efforts or blaming culture in European aviation? Who is to be blamed for what? European ATM operational performance: not as efficient as US EC: Regulatory framework not adapted to the network requirements FAB s: not delivering expected performance ANSP s: capacity gaps and high unit rates Airlines: not using the shortest routes CFSP s: technically not up-to-date to support efficient flight planning NM: not delivering network performance Military airspace users: blocking large parts of European airspace Airports: not prepared for special situations (e.g. winter operation) Unions (ANSP and Airline): frequent strikes causing major disruptions???: Heavy thunderstorm season

27 The European Network Joint Way Forward Instead of blaming each other. FAB s, AO s, Airports, NM, CFSP s, EC focusing on today s biggest challenges: Traffic volatility Improving daily operational processes Improved data exchange to enhance traffic predictability and improve flight efficiency Improved regulatory framework Availability of resources 26

28 Thank you for your attention!

29 Questions and Answers