FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE IMPLEMENTATION IN ARMENIA (ARMFRA)
FRA DEFINITION A specified airspace within which users may freely plan a route between a defined entry point and a defined exit point, with the possibility to route via intermediate (published or unpublished) way points, without reference to the ATS route network, subject to airspace availability. Within this airspace, flights remain subject to air traffic control.
European Route Network Improvement Plan (ERNIP) Framework Document PART 1 - The European Airspace Design Methodology Guidelines - General Principles and Technical Specification for Airspace Design PART 2 - ATS Route Network Version - Catalogue of Airspace Projects PART 3 - ASM Guidance Material - ASM Handbook PART 4 - Route Availability Document (RAD) User Manual The 4 th meeting of the Network Management Board (NMB) on 7 th June 2012 approved the full ERNIP (5 documents) and the actions required to enhance airspace utilisation.
FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE (FRA) APPLICATION IN NMOC GUIDELINES V1.1 The Document contains provisions supplementary to those described in the ERNIP, Part 1, Chapter 6,Section 6.5 FRA Concept and relevant for the entire process of NMOC FRA Operational Validation and NMOC FRA system processing. This document outlines the necessary steps needed to be taken in order to ensure the required level of compatibility of NMOC systems with envisaged flight planning procedures in the scope of free route operations.
FRA - SUMMER 2017
FRA - SUMMER 2018
FRA - END 2019
FRA - END 2020
FRA - END 2021
DOC 4444 Flights along designated ATS routes [ ] OR, If the departure aerodrome is not on or not connected to the ATS route, the letters DCT followed by the point joining the first ATS route, followed by the designator of the ATS route. [ ] OR, By DCT, if the flight to the next point will be outside the designated route, unless both points are defined by geographical coordinates. Flights outside designated ATS routes INSERT points normally not more than 30 minutes flying time or 370 km (200 NM) apart, including each point at which a change of speed or level, or change of track, or a change of flight rules is planned. [ ] INSERT DCT between successive points unless both points are defined by geographical coordinates or by bearing and distance.
FLIGHT PLAN (FPL-AF102-IS -MD83/M-SDFRWY/S -OIIE0945 -N0440F300 DCT PAXID B121 MAGRI DCT DEKIT DCT TISOT N82 LAPTO -URMM0215 URKK -PBN/B4 REG/EPLCO EET/UDDD0050 UGGG0110 ORGN/OIIEZPZX PER/C)
The FRA relevance of the significant points shall be indicated by the following letters and published within brackets: (E), for FRA Horizontal Entry Point (X), for FRA Horizontal Exit Point KKKKK (EX ) KKKKK (EX ) KKKKK (EXAD ) HHHHH (DI) JJJJJ (EXADI) JJJJJ (I) ZZZZZ (I) SSSSS (EX) SSSSS (EX) SSSSS (EX) FLzzz (I), for Intermediate Point (A), for FRA Arrival Connecting Point (D), for FRA Departure Connecting Point KKKKK (EX ) HHHHH (I) HHHHH (I) JJJJJ (I) JJJJJ (EX): FLaaa - FLyyy (ADI): FLyyy - FLzzz SSSSS (EX) Combinations of letters can be published in accordance with this matrix: KKKKK (EXAD ) HHHHH (DI) JJJJJ (ADI) ATS route network ZZZZZ (I) (EXI) N1 FLyyy M1 Airport JJJJJ (EX) L1 FLaaa
ARMFRA ARMFRA Project will be implemented into two phases: Phase 1: Night FRA within the period 20:00-02:00 UTC above FL285 with implementation date 07 DEC 2017; Phase 2: H24 FRA with implementation Winter 2018/2019. The details in regard to ATS route network availability, lower vertical limit and ARR / DEP procedures are under consideration and discussion.
ARMFRA The ARMFRA Phase 2 and FRAG Phase 2 to be merged into a common H24 cross-border South Caucasus FRA area FLXXX - FL660. This South Caucasus FRA area will cover initially Yerevan FIR and Tbilisi FIR. Project name FRASC might be considered for discussion. Proposed implementation - Winter 2018/2019.
ARMFRA SAFETY ASSESSMENT REPORT FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATIONS IN YEREVAN FIR Phase I SAFETY ASSESSMENT REPORT Edition Number: 1.0 Edition Date: 05/05/2017 Status: Final version
FRA PROJECT WORKING PLAN
FRA CONOPS
Possible ARMFRA FREE ROUTE AIRSPACE DESIGN ALL POSSIBLE CONNECTIONS DISPLAYED ARMFRA (I) ADANO ARMFRA (I) ADILA ARMFRA (I) ASMIK ARMFRA (I) DEKIT ARMFRA (EX) ELSIV ARMFRA (I) GOGOL ARMFRA (I) GOSIS ARMFRA ARMFRA ARMFRA ARMFRA ARMFRA ARMFRA (EX) (EX) (EX) (EX) (EX) (EX) INDUR IRLAN MAGRI MATAL NEGAN OGEVI ARMFRA (EX) PEMAN ARMFRA (I) REBGI ARMFRA (EX) REBLO ARMFRA (I) SEVAN ARMFRA (I) TABAS ARMFRA (EX) TAVRO ARMFRA (I) TIBLO ARMFRA (X) TISOT ARMFRA (I) TUTAK ARMFRA (EX) VETEN ARMFRA (I) GRM ARMFRA (I) ZVR
Assigned on the shortest route FL285 and above ARMFRA ALL SHORTEST CONNECTIONS DISPLAYED
HORIZONTAL TRANSITION - OVERFLIGHTS PEMAN(EX) OGEVI (EX) REBGI (I)
HORIZONTAL TRANSITION - ARRIVALS (DEPENDS ON FRA LOWER LIMIT. STEP 2) UDSG ASMIK (A) UDYZ ADANO (I) GOSIS (A) MAGRI (EX)
HORIZONTAL TRANSITION - DEPARTURE (DEPENDS ON FRA LOWER LIMIT. STEP 2) SEVAN (D) UDSG ASMIK (D) UDYZ ADANO (I) HORIZONTAL TRANSITION - DEPARTURES (DEPENDS ON FRA LOWER LIMIT. STEP 2) MAGRI (EX)
TISOT (X) HORIZONTAL TRANSITION CROSS BORDER ADANO (I) MAGRI (EX)
REBLO (EX) SEVAN (I) Special Area GND - UNL DEKIT (I) ADANO (I) HORIZONTAL TRANSITION - SPECIAL AREA MAGRI (EX)
BENEFITS The implementation of FRA offers a number of efficiency benefits for the operators. The most notable benefits are: Reduced flight time, since most flights will be using the shortest routes possible; Reduced CO2 emissions, as a consequence of the reduced flight time; Reduced fuel waste, also a consequence of the reduced flight time and more optimal flight profiles; Low implementation costs for ANSPs in most cases implementation of FRA is supported by the existing ACC equipment; Fewer conflicts since the same number of aircraft are spread over more routes; Weight optimization in general FRA reduces the difference in distance between the planned route and the actual route. This in turn reduces the amount of extra fuel that needs to be carried potentially allowing for a heavier payload.
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES As any new technology and procedure in aviation, FRA poses a number of challenges to the users. These do not outweigh the benefits but need to be addressed properly in order to gain the best of FRA. Such issues and challenges are: Conflicts may become harder to detect due to the spread and increased number of possible conflicting points. Changes to the separation provision methods used by ATC (e.g. direct routes are less an option for solving conflicts since most aircraft are using the most direct route available anyway). Conflicts occurring shortly after entering the area of responsibility of an ATC sector require controllers to be even more vigilant during transfer/acceptance of control. Need for coordinated approach to FRA implementation the efficiency benefits will only be achieved if FRA is deployed over large areas. Need for enhanced (system supported) coordination between ANSPs in case FRA extends beyond the state borders. Sectorisation may need to be optimized to better accommodate the new traffic flows. This is a particularly challenging task in case of time limited FRA implementation.
QUESTIONS?