ICAO NAT Region updates 70 N 80 N 80N 70N 60 N 60 N REYKJAVIK 50 N 50 N ICAO EUR/NAT SHANWICK GANDER 40 N 40 N
ICAO EUR/NAT NAT traffic figures Outline NAT service development roadmap (MNPS to HLA/PBN,Reduced separations, data link etc) ICAO amendments on PBN/PBCS
Needs Analysis / Validation Compliance & Verification Global Plans if needed Measurement & Reporting Global & Regional SARPs & PANS Implementation Planning/Supp. Training & Guidance 3 July 2014 3
EU ICAO EUR/NAT Office accreditation (56 States) ICAO EUR Region (55 States) ECAC (44 States) ( + Iceland ) EUROCONTROL (41 States) Austria Latvia Norway Albania Azerbaijan * Andorra Iceland Belgium Lithuania Switzerland Armenia * San Marino Belarus * Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Bosnia and Herzegovina Georgia Monaco Montenegro Republic of Moldova * Israel Kazakhstan * Kyrgyzstan * Russian Fed. * Tajikistan * Turkmenistan * France Slovakia Serbia Uzbekistan * Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Slovenia Spain Sweden United Kingdom Croatia The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Turkey Ukraine * Algeria Morocco Tunisia * : IAC Member 4
EUR/NAT Regional Groups North Atlantic Systems Planning Group (NAT SPG) 1965 European Air Navigation Planning Group (EANPG) 1972 Regional Aviation Safety Group EUR (RASG-EUR) 2011 ICAO EUR/NAT Aviation Security Group (ENAVSEC) 2012 5
Our role in the EUR/NAT Liaise with States on the issues related to compliance with ICAO SARPs in a very unique and complex environment (ECAC, EU, EUROCONTROL, EASA, IAC, ) Assist States in implementation of corrective actions Coordinate intra and inter- regional aspects of GANP/ASBU, GASP, AVSEC and FAL implementation with the ICAO mandate per Chicago Convention Provide a forum for States and industry to work together, share knowledge and best practice, address common issues under the ICAO umbrella Ensure the inter-regional coordination with other ICAO Regional Offices Regional coordination and support of the ICAO USOAP and USAP activities 6
NAT Region Statistics Annual Operations 1 Number of flights: 547,907 536,309 passenger flights 11,598 cargo flights Passengers and Cargo 2 Passengers: More than 100 million carried Cargo: Approximately 27 billion freight RTMs transported 1 FAA, TFMS Data 2 FAA estimates using TFMS and US DOT/BTS Operational Data 7
NAT SDR 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 RLongSM Trial Prep RLongSM Trial RLongSM Roll-out NAT Service Development Roadmap Issue: 2013_Draft A : Date: January 2013 Key: Development activity NY OCA RNP4/10 Progress indicator Flight Plan 2012 Rollout Dependency AIDC Rollout FANS Mandate Preparation RCP/RSP Preparation RCP/RSP Roll-out FANS Mandate P1 FANS Mandate Phase 2 RLatSM Trial Prep PBN Trial Prep RLatSM Trial OTS Phaseout PBN Trial Further separation reduction Phase 1 Reduced deconfliction horizon LEO ADS-B Surveillance Further separation reduction Phase 2 DCPC Voice Further separation reduction Phase 3 PBN Roll-out SWIM Roll-out SESAR/NextGen 4-D Trajectory development SESAR/NextGen NOP development
NAT initiative Impl date Aerospace and/or tracks Flight levels Aircraft capabilities Related provisions RLongSM initial phase Applied btw eligible pair after oceanic entry Applied btw eligible pairs since 2010 Gander &Shanwick MNPS fls FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C Applied pnly after CPDLC/ADS-C connection established in oceabnic airspace RLongSM next phase-traffic loaded onto tracks using RLongSM TBD Gander, Reykjavik, Shanwick. Potentially others DLM Phase I 7 Feb 2013 2 core NAT tracks MNPS fls FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C 360-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C same DLM Phase 2A 5 Feb 2015 All NAT OTS tracks 350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C DLM Phase 2B 7 Dec 2017 ALL NAT region 350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C Not applied in the areas with ATS surv, NY and above 80 same DLM Phase 2C 30 Jan 2020 All NAT, incl NY 290 and above FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C Not applied in the areas with ATS surv and above 80
NAT initiative Impl date Aerospace and/or tracks Flight levels Aircraft capabilities Related provisions RLatSM Phase I 12 Nov 2015 3 core tracks 350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS- C+RNP4 approved Not applied in NY RLatSM Phase II TBD All tracks 350-390 same same RLatSM Phase III TBD Btw eligible pairs throughout NAT TBD same MNPS to HLA/PBN Jan 2015 All existing MNPSA MNPS to HLA/PBN 4 Feb 2016 All existing MNPSA 285-420 RNP10 or RNP4 for all new MNPSA authorisations MNPS nav spec discontinued 285-420 RNP4/RNP10 MNPS airspace renamed to NAT HLA MNPS to HLA/PBN 30 Jan 2020 ALL HLA 285-420 All appropriate PBN MNPS nav spec is not accepted for HLA authorisations MNPS to HLA/PBN TBD All HLA 265-420 All appropriate PBN No HLA authorisation required PBCS 12 Nov 2016 RLatSM RLatSM RCP240/RSP180 PBCS approvals required
PBN Proposal for the amendment of Annex 6, Parts I, II and III, simplification of the PBN approval process; achieved by including standard operating procedures and training programmes in the operator s operations manual which is approved by the State of the Operator (or State of Registry); a framework in the form of a template to standardize specific approvals (letters of authorization) for general aviation; the concept of complex PBN operations for out of the ordinary operations (e.g., similar to Cat II and III instrument approach operations) which would be subject to a specific approval.
7.2.2 For operations where a navigation specification for performance-based navigation (PBN) has been prescribed, an aeroplane shall, in addition to the requirements specified in 7.2.1: a) be provided with navigation equipment which will enable it to operate in accordance with the prescribed navigation specification(s); and b) have information relevant to the aeroplane navigation specification capabilities listed in the flight manual or other aeroplane documentation approved by the State of the Design or State of Registry; and c) have information relevant to the aeroplane navigation specification capabilities included in the MEL. 7.2.3 The State of the Operator shall, for operations where a navigation specification for PBN has been prescribed, ensure that the operator has established and documented: a) normal and abnormal procedures including contingency procedures; b) flight crew qualification and proficiency requirements in accordance with the appropriate navigation specifications; c) a training programme for relevant personnel consistent with the intended operations; and d) appropriate maintenance procedures to ensure continued airworthiness in accordance with the appropriate navigation specifications. 7.2.4 The State of the Operator shall issue a specific approval for complex navigation specifications.
PBCS Proposal for the amendment of Annex 6, Parts I, II and III, prescription of RCP and RSP for air traffic services that are predicated on communication and surveillance performance; approval of air operators for a communication and/or surveillance capability including aircraft equipage for operations where RCP and/or RSP specifications have been prescribed; indication of an aircraft s communication and surveillance capability in the form of RCP/RSP specifications in the flight plan;and monitoring programmes to assess actual communication and surveillance performance against RCP and RSP specifications and to determine corrective action, as applicable, for the appropriate entity
7.1.3 For operations where communication equipment is required to meet an RCP specification for performance-based communication (PBC), an aeroplane shall, in addition to the requirements specified in 7.1.1: a) be provided with communication equipment which will enable it to operate in accordance with the prescribed RCP specification(s) type(s); b) have information relevant to the aeroplane RCP specification capabilities listed in the flight manual or other aeroplane documentation approved by the State of Design or State of Registry; and c) have information relevant to the aeroplane RCP specification capabilities included in the MEL. 7.1.4 The State of the Operator shall, for operations where an RCP specification for PBC has been prescribed, ensure that the operator has established and documented: a) normal and abnormal procedures, including contingency procedures; b) flight crew qualification and proficiency requirements, in accordance with appropriate RCP specifications; c) a training programme for relevant personnel consistent with the intended operations; and d) appropriate maintenance procedures to ensure continued airworthiness, in accordance with appropriate RCP specifications. 7.1.5 The State of the Operator shall ensure that, in respect of those aeroplanes mentioned in 7.1.3, adequate provisions exist for: a) receiving the reports of observed communication performance issued by the monitoring programmes established in accordance with Annex 11, Chapter 3, 3.3.5.2; and b) taking immediate corrective action for individual aircraft, aircraft types or operators, identified in such reports as not complying with the RCP specification.
http://www.icao.int/eurnat/p ages/welcome.aspx ICAO NAT documents