International Civil Aviation Organization 25/07/13 North American, Central American and Caribbean Office (NACC) First NAM/CAR Air Navigation Implementation Working Group Meeting (ANI/WG/1) Mexico City, Mexico, 29 July to 1 August 2013 Agenda Item 4 Air Navigation Matters 4.2 Follow-up on the NAM/CAR Regional Performance Based Air Navigation Implementation Plan (NAM/CAR RPBANIP): National Plans Reports on ASBUs (AIM, ATM and CNS) POST-IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING OF THE NEW ICAO MODEL FLIGHT PLAN FORMAT (Presented by Cuba) SUMMARY This paper describes the Cuban concerns on the follow-up to the New ICAO Model Flight Plan Format after its implementation, and a brief description of the identified problems. References: AN 13/2.1-08/50, approval of Amendment 1 to the PANS-ATM Procedures for air navigation services, Air Traffic Management (PANS-ATM Doc.4444) NACC/DCA74 Final Report Conclusion NACC/WG 3/3 actions to avoid errors, missing and duplication of flight plans Strategic Objective 1. Introduction NACC/DCA/13 Final Report This working paper is related to Strategic Objective: A. Safety Enhance global civil aviation safety 1.1 Subsequent to State Letter AN 13/2.1-08/50 dated June 2008 amending the 15th edition of the PANS-ATM, Doc 4444, the Region adopted the appropriate measures to ensure the implementation of the changes for the new ICAO model flight plan format, complying with what was established in its timetable and achieving the proposed objective, on the agreed time and date. 1.2 With a view to this implementation and in order to avoid errors, loss and duplication of flight plans, ICAO assisted States with the development of the following actions:
2 2. Discussion. 1) training programme by the involved bodies and units, mainly by the air traffic controllers, personnel from the ARO offices and airline operators; 2) development, dissemination and follow-up of the implementation through the AICs related to the actions to apply Amendment 1; 3) activities and coordination meetings with the air navigation services provider, and this provider with others ANSPs, to monitor the system performance and evaluate the flight plans and associated messages management; and 4) improvement in the pre and post implementation of the system by the ANSP entities, among others. 2.1 In spite of the adopted measures and the accomplished actions, duplicate messages and messages with errors still continue to be received by Cuba s automated system, which motivates rejection to the field flight plan. 2.2 The statistical data of the monitoring made by Cuba corresponding to an average day of flight plans and their rejection messages management, four months after the implementation of the new format are shown below: Subtotal rejection of all flight plans % in relation to the total flight plan Subtotals flight plans ICAO region % regarding flight plans issued by each emitting region Total flight plan messages received related to flights of 35 operators: 3711 Total rejection messages: 929 (25% the total flight plan messages) North America Europe NAM EUR Central America and Caribbean CCAR South America SAM 288 53 214 374 (7,8%) (1,4%) (5,7%) (10%) 1692 290 831 898 17% 18,3% 25,5% 41,4%
3 ANI/WG/1 WP/28 REGION ICAO STATION NAM EUR CCAR SAM REJECTION MORE THAN ONE REASON - 4 8 27 TOTAL REASONS FOR REJECTION 288 57 222 401 TOTALES 39 968 DUPLICATE 162 (56%) 17 (30%) 43 137 359 (37%) TOTAL REASONS FOR REJECTION SIMILAR SIMILAR Y DUPLICATES 59 221 (21%) (77%) 26 43 (46%) (75%) 87 130 119 256 291 (30%) 650 (67%) ERRORS 67 (23%) 14 (25%) 92 145 318 (33%) 2.3 It was found that the duplicate messages, and similar errors are not always emitted from the premises of traders, many of them leave the premises of the STA, in the destinations, departures and overflights some cases, it is verifiable from data captured in the tables in Annex 1, which shows that: - In the region CCAR from dependencies from the FIRs of Cuba, Jamaica will generate messages that make up 35 and 10 percent respectively of rejected messages that area. It is appropriate to note that since the seasons of States belonging to COCESNA such as Guatemala, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, the percentage is between five and ten percentage points. They are only five percent below the corresponding dependencies to Bahamas and Belize and Mexico FIR. - In the specific case of the Havana FIR, the largest number of messages that are cause for rejection are generated by the station operators and the ANSP. - From stations NAM FIRs messages sent are rejected by more than 15% of their flight plans as the case of Canada, 13, 9 from KD, KM 21.9 and 26 KT. - In the case of SAM, from its FIR, receive messages generated rejection Havana dependencies States for Panama with 37% Colombia with more than 20% and between 5 and 20 percent, from there they were sent, are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Peru, just below five is Bolivia and Venezuela. 2.4 Statistics show that: - Most FPL received in Cuba automated system come from the NAM / CAR / SAM. - More than 80 percent of the messages from these regions are rejected, with 17% of NAM, CAR 25.5% and 41% of SAM, - 33% of all messages that are rejected by the system are due to errors and 67% among similar and duplicate.
4 3. Conclusions - It is significant that in some cases the percentage of rejected messages to the offices of the FIR of a State for lack of requirements set forth in our regulations and AIP, can exceed more than a quarter of which are sent to the region. - Is evident in the statistics shown in Appendix 1, that even after six months, though few, are included in the flight plan issues that do not correspond to the current format. 3.1 There are problems in our regions of non-observance of the provisions of the Procedures for Air Navigation Services, Air Traffic Management (PANS-ATM Doc.4444), Chapter 11, 11.4 and Appendices 2 (Flight Plan) and 3 (Messages of Air Traffic Services), which shows that they have not been totally effective the results of implementing the actions agreed at the NACC / WG, Conclusion 3/3, relating to actions to prevent errors, loss and duplication flight plan, which is attached to the Appendix to this working paper. 3.2 Cuba is concerned about maintaining duplicate messages and errors still being committed in the filling and handling of flight plans, all of which further prevents proper operation of automated systems and the exchange of the CPL among those FIRs I have implemented, motivating irregularities in the management of air traffic flow and increased actions that overload the controller work in the fields, so it is necessary to insist on the adoption of measures leading to improved topic in the region. 4. Suggested action 4.1 The Meeting is invited to: a) note the contents of this note, and b) that the new group ANI / WG along with Secretary of ICAO and users follow up on the mitigation / solution proposed in the conclusion NACC / WG 3/3 and others deemed appropriate to monitor and follow strict compliance the new form of the ICAO flight plan.
APPENDIX AMOUNTS AND CAUSES OF REJECTION OF THE FLIGHT PLAN MESSAGES OF 35 UNITS OPERATORS BY REGIONS WHERE THE RISE ICAO. REASONS FOR REJECTION NAM CCAR EUR SAM TOTAL DUPLICATED FPL STORED 162 43 17 137 359 ICAO FORMAT MIXED IN MESSAGE 0 8 1 15 24 INCONSISTENT ITEM 10 AND 18 0 8 4 27 39 INCONSISTENT ITEM 10 AND 18 R WITH NO PBN/ 0 8 4 27 39 INCONSISTENT PBN VALUE WITH ITEM 10 0 5 0 26 31 INVALID AIRCRAFT MODEL 0 4 0 8 12 INVALID DATE OF FLIGHT 0 3 0 3 6 INVALID FPL EET DATA 67 28 2 21 118 INVALID OTHER INFORMATION ELEMENT 0 9 0 0 9 INVALID SRV EQUIP DESIGNATOR 0 7 0 0 7 MISSING OR EXCEEDING FIELD 0 6 3 2 11 MISSING PARENTHESIS 0 1 0 2 3 MUST ENTER NEW ICAO FORMAT 0 4 0 2 6 NO RVSM STATUS 0 1 0 0 1 PBN/ VALUE EXCEEDED OR INVALID 0 0 0 10 10 SIMILAR FPL STORED 59 87 26 119 291 SYNTAX ERROR IN FIELD 10 0 0 0 2 2 TOTAL ERROR 288 222 57 401 968 % OF THE TOTAL 17 27 20 45 26 TOTAL MESSAGES REJ 288 214 53 374 929 MESSAGES MORE THAN ONE REASON 0 8 4 27 39 TOTAL FLIGHT PLANS BY REGION 1692 831 290 898 3711
-A2- NORTH AMERICA % OF THE TOTAL % OF THE TOTAL OF REJECTION FIR DEPENDENCE REJECT TOTAL FOR FIR OF REJECTION BY FIR CYHZCJAX 5 1,7 CYYCXXSK 8 2,8 CY CYYZACAW 12 4,2 44 15,3 CYYZXNST 12 4,2 CYYZXNSX 7 2,4 KA KATLASQD 3 1,0 KATLDALQ 18 6,3 21 7,3 KC KCHIUALE 2 0,7 2 0,7 KDCMYYXX 1 0,3 KD KDENXLDS 8 2,8 40 13,9 KDTWNKSD 31 10,8 KF KFCFCOAU 15 5,2 15 5,2 KI KILNABXD 5 1,7 5 1,7 KJ KJFKGTIW 2 0,7 KJFKJBUD 12 4,2 14 4,9 KM KMCOTRSD 60 20,8 KMIAYFYX 3 1,0 63 21,9 KS KSDFUPSM 8 2,8 8 2,8 KT KTULAALD 75 26,0 75 26,0 KZ KZJXZRZX 1 0,3 1 0,3 TOTAL 288 100 288 100 TOTAL FPL 1692 %FPL NAM 17,0 TOTAL FPL ALL 3711 %FPL TOTAL 7,8
A3 ANI/WG/1 WP/28 CENTRAL AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN FIR % OF THE TOTAL % OF THE TOTAL OF REJECTION DEPENDENCE REJECT TOTAL FOR FIR OF REJECTION BY FIR MG MGGTZPZX 13 6,1 13 6 MHCCZQZX 2 0,9 MH MHLMZPZX 8 3,8 14 7 MHTGYOYX 4 1,9 MK MKJKZQZX 4 1,9 MKJPYOYX 17 8,0 21 10 MMCZXMXO 2 0,9 MMIDZRZX 4 1,9 MM MMMXAMXO 1 0,5 8 4 MMQTXMXO 1 0,5 MN MNMGZPZX 22 10,4 22 10 MR MRLBZPZX 4 1,9 MROCZPZX 21 9,9 25 12 MS MSLPZPZX 17 8,0 17 8 MUCCZPZX 1 0,5 MUCLZPZX 1 0,5 MUCUZPZX 1 0,5 MUHAAFLX 1 0,5 MUHACRNW 10 4,7 MU MUHACUBW 14 6,6 75 35 MUHAZPZX 22 10,4 MUHGZPZX 2 0,9 MUPBGTVD 19 9,0 MUSCZPZX 2 0,9 MUVRCUBK 2 0,9 MY MYNNYFYX 5 2,4 5 2 MZ MZBZZPZX 2 0,9 2 1 TN TNCAZPZX 9 4,2 TNCCZPZX 1 0,5 10 5 TOTAL 212 100 212 100 TOTAL FPL CCAR 831 % FPL CCAR 25,5 TOTAL FPL ALL 3711 %FPL TOTAL 5,7
A4 EUROPE FIR DIRECCION REJECT % OF THE TOTAL OF REJECTION ED EDDFTAIX 45 84,9 EU EUCBZMFP 1 1,9 LK LKPRTVSX 3 5,7 UU UUEUYRYA 4 7,5 TOTAL 53 100 TOTAL FPL 290 %FPL EUR 18,3 TOTAL FPL ALL 3711 %FPL TOTAL 1.4
A5 ANI/WG/1 WP/28 SOUTH AMERICA FIR % OF THE TOTAL % OF THE TOTAL OF REJECTION DEPENDENCE REJECT TOTAL FOR FIR OF REJECTION BY FIR MP MPTOCMPO 24 6,5 MPTOYFYX 114 30,6 138 37 SA SAEZZPZX 23 6,2 23 6,2 SBGLYOYX 2 0,5 SB SBGRYOYX 12 3,2 27 7,3 SBSPTAMO 13 3,5 SC SCELLANW 9 2,4 SCELZPZX 15 4,0 24 6,5 SEGUZPZX 7 1,9 SE SELTZPZX 3 0,8 29 7,8 SEQMZPZX 19 5,1 SKARZPZX 2 0,5 SKBOAVAX 3 0,8 SKBOFDPA 7 1,9 SKBOZDZX 16 4,3 SKBOZFZX 1 0,3 SK SKBOZPZX 19 5,1 80 21,5 SKBOZRZX 3 0,8 SKBQZPZX 1 0,3 SKCGZPZX 3 0,8 SKCLZPZX 2 0,5 SKRGZPZX 23 6,2 SL SLVRZPZX 1 0,3 1 0,3 SPIMYOYX 35 9,4 SP SPIMYSYB 1 0,3 37 9,9 SPIMZPZX 1 0,3 SU SUMUZPZX 3 0,8 3 0,8 SV SVMCZPZX 3 0,8 SVMIZPZX 7 1,9 10 2,7 TOTAL 372 100 372 100 TOTAL FPL 898 %FPL SAM 41,4 TOTAL FPL ALL 3711 %FPL TOTAL 10,0 END