IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY DUBLIN POINT MERGE Presented by James O Sullivan PANS-OPS & AIRSPACE INSPECTOR Irish Aviation Authority
2012 Holding Holding Before Point Merge No Pilot anticipation of distance to go Controller workload high Less capacity and growth Potential (II Rwy) Not fuel-efficient Less continuous descent Not using full FMS capability Radar Vectoring at low altitudes With Point Merge Full Pilot anticipation of distance to go Mostly Continuous descent (120 Kms) Early Direct-to routeings Total FMS operations Optimum profiles Further capacity potential 2013+ Merge Point
INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS DUBLIN AIRSPACE ENVIRONMENTAL SCORE (0-100) AVERAGE FUEL BURN (kg) AVERAGE TRACK DISTANCE (NM) Pre-Point Merge 34.6 668.5 67.0 Post-Point Merge 28.5 540.9 55.7 PERCENTAGE IMPROVEMENT 17.6% 19.1% 20.3%
CUSTOMER BENEFITS Savings to Airline Customers as a result of Point Merge 127kg of fuel per flight. 19.1% saving in their fuel requirement per flight. Fuel savings Distance savings CO 2 93.10 ( 78.10) cost saving per flight (based on average jet fuel prices in 2013). 5.5m ( 4.6m) total fuel cost savings during 2013 and during 2014 (based on current estimates of 60,000 flights per annum that can benefit at Dublin). 11.3 Nautical Miles average track distance per flight saved in Dublin CTA 20.3% saving in distance. 396kg of CO 2 emissions (0.4 metric tonnes per flight). 19.1% of their CO 2 emissions. 23,500 tonnes of total CO 2 savings during 2013 and during 2014.
Benefits ANSP BENEFITS to IAA More Capacity with Existing Controller Resources (including Single Sector configuration) CAPAN Study Report shows average capacity gains of 30% per sector Improved ATCO Situational Awareness Systemised procedures mean that aircraft are flying on predictable trajectories making transfer between sectors and sequence building very intuitive Reduced RTF Instructions Available Cognitive Time increased, leading to safety enhancements ATM Ground System does not need Upgrade The main difference is addition of mapping
THE FUELLING ISSUE It has been proved by independent study that fuel usage has significantly reduced since the introduction of Point Merge. Only one airline is not showing a positive impact on their fuel figures and, for them this is a fuel planning rather than a fuel usage issue. The airline routinely carries up to 400kg per flight because they include the whole of the sequence leg in their Trip Fuel.
ICAO Doc Flight Planning and Fuel Management Manual Doc 9976 The fuel for the Point Merge system will not have to be calculated and included in the contingency fuel what the provision means is that the contingency fuel does not have to include a fuel provision for the whole Point merge system (i.e. including the total sequence leg) and that the trip fuel only includes the portion of the leg expected to be flown for any particular city pair and/or time of flight most airlines interpret this as either the shortest distance from the start of the sequence leg to the merge point or (in the case of Dublin) the length of the shorter STAR (e.g. the X STAR for RWY28)
THE FUTURE Point Merge has been extended to Runway 10 implementation 02 April 2015 Two disassociated legs allow optimum positioning of sequencing legs adjacent to base turn for final approach Complemented by new RNAV IAP s
Thank you for your attention Any questions?? James O Sullivan james.osullivan@iaa.ie Pans-Ops & Airspace Inspector Safety Regulation Division Irish Aviation Authority
PANS-OPS STATE REGULATION V STATE OVERSIGHT
ICAO Annex 6 4.4.8 Instrument flight procedures 4.4.8.1 One or more instrument approach procedures designed in accordance with the classification of instrument approach and landing operations shall be approved and promulgated by the State in which the aerodrome is located to serve each instrument runway or aerodrome utilized for instrument flight operations. 4.4.8.2 All aeroplanes operated in accordance with instrument flight rules shall comply with the instrument flight procedures approved by the State in which the aerodrome is located.
ICAO Doc 8168 4.1.2 The State is responsible to ensure that all published instrument flight procedures in their airspace can be flown safely by the relevant aircraft.
ICAO Doc 9906 Vol 1
ICAO 9734 Part A - Oversight PANS OPS/AIS/Cartographic Inspectorate Are all the functions and responsibilities of the PANS OPS inspectorate clearly defined? Have job descriptions for PANS OPS inspectorate staff been clearly defined? Has the State established minimum qualifications and experience requirements for PANS OPS inspectorate staff? Does the State employ a sufficient number of qualified PANS OPS inspectorate staff to carry out its safety oversight tasks and regulatory functions over the service providers? Has the State developed a formal training programme detailing what type of training should be provided to its PANS OPS inspectorate staff? Does the State develop a periodic training plan detailing and prioritizing what type of training will be provided during the established period? Is the training programme appropriately implemented for PANS OPS inspectorate staff? Are PANS OPS inspectorate staff required to satisfactorily complete OJT prior to being assigned tasks and responsibilities? Does the PANS-OPS inspectorate have a system for the maintenance of training records for its technical staff? Does the State effectively conduct oversight over its procedures specialists or service providers?
ICAO 9734 Part A - Oversight PANS OPS/AIS/Cartographic Inspectorate Has the State established a flight procedures design office or entity to oversee the process of development and maintenance of visual and instrument flight procedures? If not, has the State delegated the responsibility for oversight of the process of development and maintenance of visual and instrument flight procedures to an agency, another Contracting State or group of States? If the State delegates its duties to other CAA divisions, State bodies, Contracting States, regional organizations, private agencies or individuals, have the delegated tasks been clearly defined?
ICAO 9734 Part A - Oversight PANS OPS/AIS/Cartographic Service Providers Does the State ensure that PANS OPS service provider has developed job description for its PANS OPS technical staff? Does the State ensure that PANS OPS service providers develop a training programme for PANS OPS technical staff? Does the State ensure that PANS OPS service providers maintain training records for PANS OPS technical staff?
EU Regulations - Oversight EC Regulation 549/2004 definitions EC Regulation 550/2004 The National Supervisory authorities referred to in Article 4 of the framework regulation shall ensure the appropriate supervision of the application of this regulation in particular with regard to the safe and efficient operation of air navigation service providers which provide services relating to the airspace falling under the responsibility of the member state which nominated or established the relevant authority.
EU Regulations 1034 Oversight COMPETENT AUTHORITY Page 1 paragraph (5): National Supervisory Authorities should consider using the safety oversight approach as appropriate in order to develop efficient and coherent supervision Page 1 Paragraph (7) All air navigation services, as well as air traffic flow management and air space management use functional systems that enable the management of air traffic. Therefore any changes to functional systems should be subject to a safety oversight. It states in Article 6 Safety Regulatory Audits Paragraph 3 (b) Cover all the organisations and services operating under the supervision of the National Supervisory Authority Paragraph 5 National supervisory authorities shall decide which arrangements, elements, services, products, physical locations and activities are to be audited within a specified time frame