Europe's MASTER PLAN Aviation Infrastructure
EUROPEAN ATM MASTER PLAN Implementation view Plan 2021 Digitalising Europe’s Aviation Infrastructure
The implementation view of the L3 Master Plan L3 Plan Geographical scope is 41 ECAC States Israel and Morocco Solutions & Objectives Source of this dashboard is Dataset 21
PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Implementation Plan constitutes the “Implementation view” or Level 3 of the European ATM Master Plan (MP). The Implementation Plan brings together and provides the framework for the commonly agreed actions to be taken by EU stakeholders, and by extension, by all other ECAC stakeholders, Israel and Morocco via an agreement by EUROCONTROL Member States, in the context of the implementation of SESAR. These actions are consolidated in the form of ‘Implementation Objectives’, addressing those elements in SESAR which have reached the necessary operational and technical maturity and for which stakeholders have expressed a common interest in their operational introduction. Implementation Objectives address validated SESAR Solutions and account for the existing (EU) regulations in ATM. The Level 3 of the Master Plan addresses the deployment towards operational implementation, therefore focusing on the plans for 5 to 7 years ahead. Currently it contains elements of Phases A and B, as pictured below. Figure 1 Focus of the Level 3 Implementation Plan 2020 The strategic dimension of the Implementation Plan The long-term vision of the SESAR project is supported through the implementation of a number of operational changes. The Implementation Plan addresses planned and expected evolutions in the mid-term horizon by structuring its strategic view by Essential Operational Changes, in line with the ATM Master Plan 2020 document. The Level 3 Implementation Plan (this document) presents a high-level description of the Implementation Objectives. A technical annex complements this document, providing the detailed descriptions, as well as the full set of agreed Stakeholder Lines of Action and the references to required or recommended supporting material for their finalisation. i
The evolution of the Implementation Plan for 2021 A SESAR SOLUTION-CENTRIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Level 3 Implementation Plan edition 2021 focuses on the results of the SESAR 1 and SESAR 2020 Wave 1 Programmes It naturally incorporates those SESAR Solutions that are subject to regulated implementation through the EU legal framework. Other Solutions find their way into the Level 3 Plan through the development of Deployment Scenarios that, in turn, need to fulfil a number of conditions so the Solution is subject to a coordinated / harmonised deployment. The SESAR Solutions in deployment are currently 94. Out of the total, 51 Solutions are described in the form of Implementation Objectives (i.e. subject to planning, deployment and operational introduction), and another 43 are monitored for implementation across the ECAC area (ref. The MPL3 Report 2021) but are not yet described in an Implementation Objective. The distribution of the 94 SESAR Solutions across the nine EOCs is reported in Figure 2. On top of that, the chart show the 20 Objectives that, per EOC, are not linked to any Solution. Figure 2 Overall number of SOLs and Implementation Objectives by EOCs CHANGES IN THE LEVEL 3 PLAN 2021 For Edition 2021, the following changes were implemented: 41 new Implementation Objectives (32 active and 9 initial); 10 substantially changed Implementation Objectives; 12 Implementation Objectives removed; 2 Implementation Objectives closed as ‘Achieved’. Most of these changes are due to the adaptations needed to incorporate the requirements of Common Project 1 Regulation, published in February 2021 (see the relevant sub-section below). COMMON PROJECT 1 (EU REGULATION 2021/116) By far the most significant change in this edition of the L3 Plan is linked to the issuing of the CP1 Regulation (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/116, amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 409/2013 (on the SESAR deployment framework) and repealing Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 716/2014 (PCP Regulation)). The update of the MPL3 Plan ensures that the content of the SESAR Deployment Programme (SDP) ii
2021 and its supporting material and the CP1-related Implementation Objectives mirror one another, avoiding any double or inconsistent reporting by stakeholders. The Level 3 Plan 2021 includes 41 CP1 Implementation Objectives fully aligned to the Families and Deployment Milestones of the SDP 2021. Of them, 10 are derived from already existing Implementation Objectives, while the remaining 31 are new in the Plan. In the context of adapting to the CP1 Regulation, this implied the suppression of 6 existing Implementation Objectives because either redundant to the new ones, or unfit against the new Regulation. AIRSPACE ARCHITECTURE STUDY TRANSITION PLAN (AAS-TP) The AAS-TP, developed by the SJU with support from the Network Manager, aims at addressing the capacity challenge through, for the first time, a coupling of airspace, operations and technical evolution, accompanied by proposed evolution of service provision supported as needed by the relevant regulatory measures. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is the global trade association for the airline industry, representing 290 member airlines worldwide. Based on IATA’s analysis of the impact of the outbreak on airlines around the world, it is very clear that the COVID-19 pandemic is challenging the viability of the global air transport system as never before in history. The current industry crisis is much worse and more widespread than any crisis before it. Notwithstanding the current COVID-19 crisis and at short-term some relaxation in the request for more capacity in the system, the AAS objective to propose a future European airspace architecture with an associated transition strategy, addressing the limitations of the system, remains applicable. The Level 3 Implementation Plan 2021 fully addresses Phase 1 of the AAS-TP, covering the period up to 2025. It does so through Implementation Objectives addressing 24 SESAR Solutions (they were 15 in the edition 2020). SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO IMPLEMENTATION OBJECTIVES (NON CP1) In the Implementation Plan, a ‘substantial change’ is a change that may affect the stakeholder commitment to implement an objective (e.g. implementation deadline, applicability area, etc.) and therefore requiring the highest level of consultation. Further to the adaptations related to CP1, other changes are associated to the creation of ‘Initial’ Implementation Objectives addressing SESAR Solutions in the ‘Airport and TMA performance’ Essential Operational Change, addressing a) efficient separation during Take-Off and final approach; and b) traffic optimisation on runways. Two Objectives, one addressing Short Term Conflict Alert for TMAs and one addressing the EU Regulation on Surveillance Performance and Interoperability, were closed as ‘Achieved’ following the reported progress in the LSSIP 2020 exercise. Two Implementation Objectives, one covering the implementation of OLDI messages, and the other addressing the being repealed EU Regulation on Aeronautical Data Quality, were removed from the plan. CONTRIBUTING TO THE EXTENSION OF SESAR TO THE ECAC AREA The ambition of the Master Plan remains to reach all the States within the ECAC area. For this, EUROCONTROL provides the working arrangements that serve as vehicle to extend the agreed implementation actions to the whole of ECAC and those States having signed a Comprehensive Agreement with the EUROCONTROL Organisation. Implementation Objectives that are associated to elements of the ICAO Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) are always associated to the widest possible geographical scope within the Plan. THE PERFORMANCE DIMENSION This edition of the MPL3 Plan endeavours to give a better visibility to the contribution of each SESAR Solution and Implementation Objective to performance, and in particular the Key Performance Areas identified in the ATM Master Plan 2020: Capacity, Operational Efficiency, Cost efficiency, Safety, Environment, and Security. iii
Due to the effects, that the COVID-19 crisis is having on the world economy and on the aviation industry as a whole, for the short term this imposes to reconsider the path towards achieving the SESAR vision, that remains valid (Ref. main outcomes of SJU MPC/11 of 29/04/2020). Short-term focus should be on cost efficiency, fuel efficiency and efficiency of implementing changes. An effort has been made to ensure that the reader can identify in an easy manner those Solutions/Objectives that contribute, or not, to a specific KPA. Performance benefits of SESAR Solutions originate from the Solution data packs and other associated information on the SJU website. Performance benefits of Implementation Objectives not related to the SESAR Solutions, originate from internal EUROCONTROL business cases and analyses. Figure 4 below shows the distribution of benefits across the Implementation Plan 2021, per Key Performance Area. It is essential to specify that, in order to avoid double counting, whenever a Solution is linked to an Objective, the Objective becomes the main reference in the calculation of the performance benefits. Figure 3 Contribution to the Key Performance Areas As shown in the chart, Safety remains the top priority, closely followed by Capacity, Operational and Cost Efficiency. Along the lines of last year, U-Space Services do not yet have any contribution in the L3 Plan 2021, even though several Solutions have reached now V4. A dedicated U-space monitoring exercise will start toward the end of the year. Finally, the Operational View allows the identification of the individual contribution of each SESAR Solution to the KPAs, while the individual Deployment Views provide a short description of the expected benefits. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. I TABLE OF CONTENTS . 5 TABLE OF FIGURES . 6 1 INTRODUCTION . 7 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 OPERATIONAL VIEW . 17 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 CNS INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES . 21 ATM INTERCONNECTED NETWORK. 23 DIGITAL AIM AND MET SERVICES . 26 AIRPORT AND TMA PERFORMANCE . 28 FULLY DYNAMIC AND OPTIMIZED AIRSPACE ORGANISATION . 31 TRAJECTORY BASED OPERATIONS . 33 MULTIMODAL MOBILITY AND INTEGRATION OF ALL AIRSPACE USERS. 35 U-SPACE SERVICES . 36 VIRTUALISATION OF SERVICE PROVISION . 37 DEPLOYMENT VIEW . 39 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF L3 PLAN 2021 . 7 HOW TO READ L3 PLAN 2021 . 9 WHAT IS NEW IN THIS EDITION . 11 CNS INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES . 40 ATM INTERCONNECTED NETWORK. 62 DIGITAL AIM AND MET SERVICES . 131 AIRPORT AND TMA PERFORMANCE . 134 FULLY DYNAMIC AND OPTIMIZED AIRSPACE ORGANISATION . 181 TRAJECTORY BASED OPERATIONS . 200 MULTIMODAL MOBILITY AND INTEGRATION OF ALL AIRSPACE USERS. 213 VIRTUALISATION OF SERVICE PROVISION . 216 AIRSPACE ARCHITECTURE STUDY TRANSITION PLAN IN MPL3 . 221 4.1 4.2 SCOPE OF TRANSITION STRATEGY FOR AAS . 221 AAS PERSPECTIVE IN THE PLAN . 222 ANNEXES . 225 ANNEX 1 – RELEVANT MAPPINGS OF L3 PLAN 2021 . 225 ANNEX 2 – APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORTS . 231 ANNEX 3 – MPL3 IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP . 237 ANNEX 4 – ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS . 248 5
TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1 Focus of the Level 3 Implementation Plan 2020 . i Figure 2 Overall number of SOLs and Implementation Objectives by EOCs. ii Figure 3 Contribution to the Key Performance Areas. iv Figure 1-1 Focus of the Level 3 Implementation Plan 2021 . 7 Figure 1-2 Mechanism supporting L3 Plan and implementation of Solutions. 8 Figure 1-3 Scope of planning and monitoring mechanism supporting L3 Plan . 8 Figure 2-1 Overall number of Solutions and Objectives in L3 Plan . 18 Figure 2-2 Regulated and Non-Regulated Objectives and SOLs per EOC . 18 Figure 2-3 Categorisation of Objectives and Solutions, based on Phase . 19 Figure 2-4 Stakeholders' involvement in the Implementation Phase. 19 Figure 2-5 Objectives and Solutions contributing to KPAs in V5 . 20 Figure 2-6 Contribution to KPAs per EOC in phase V5 . 20 Figure 2-7 CNS contribution to KPAs . 22 Figure 2-8 iN contribution to KPAs. 25 Figure 2-9 dS contribution to KPAs . 27 Figure 2-10 ATp contribution to KPAs. 30 Figure 2-11 dA contribution to KPAs. 32 Figure 2-12 TBO contribution to KPAs . 34 Figure 2-13 M3 contribution to KPAs. 35 Figure 2-14 vS contribution to KPAs . 38 6
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF L3 PLAN 2021 The ATM Master Plan Level 3, Implementation Plan, constitutes the “Implementation view” or Level 3 of the European ATM Master Plan (MP). It is based on the ATM MP L1 and L2, the SESAR Deployment Programme (SDP), the Network Strategy Plan, as well as SES Interoperability regulations. The Implementation Plan brings together and provides the framework for the commonly agreed actions to be taken by ECAC stakeholders in the context of the implementation of SESAR. It addresses V3 validated SESAR Solutions, CP1 ATM Functionalities (AFs), SESAR Baseline solutions, SES and ICAO requirements. The Implementation Plan is updated every year and covers short to medium term horizon (around 5 years ahead). This plan focuses primarily on the deployment phase V5, hence the solutions that have reached the necessary operational and technical maturity and for which stakeholders have expressed a common agreement/interest in their operational implementation. However, it also shows an outlook to the SESAR Solutions in the Industrialisation and Standardisation Phase V4. Figure 1-1 Focus of the Level 3 Implementation Plan 2021 The ambition of the Master Plan remains to reach all the States within the ECAC area. For this, the joint governance of SJU Admin Board (through the Master Planning Committee) and EUROCONTROL Provisional Council is very beneficial. EUROCONTROL provides the working arrangements that serve as vehicle to extend the agreed implementation actions to the whole of ECAC and the EUROCONTROL Comprehensive Agreement States (see Figure 1-1 and the scope of ECAC ), as well as the method for implementation planning, monitoring and reporting consisting of the implementation objectives and LSSIP mechanism. The Implementation Objectives represent consolidated implementation actions, addressing operationally and technically mature SESAR solutions for which stakeholders have expressed a common agreement/interest in their operational implementation. 7
Figure 1-2 Mechanism supporting L3 Plan and implementation of Solutions An applicability area lists the States/Airports having committed to implement the objective and/or being mandated to do so by a Regulation. States/Stakeholders have the opportunity, through the annual LSSIP process, to modify their commitment to a given Implementation Objective, for example by voluntarily joining the deployment of a given Objective/Solution. An implementation objective may also have a “Local” scope, i.e. without a predefined Applicability Area and Full Operational Capability (FOC) date. They are subject to local business decisions by any stakeholder concerned. Figure 1-3 Scope of planning and monitoring mechanism supporting L3 Plan 8
1.2 HOW TO READ L3 PLAN 2021 The main parts of MPL3 Plan 2021 are: Executive summary – that highlights the most important elements of this Plan Introduction – setting the scene for a reader by stating scope and objectives of L3 Plan. It highlights the main news in this edition. Operational view – It provides a consolidated view across the Essential Operational Changes (EOCs) of the SESAR Solutions within the EOC, in terms of impacted stakeholders, planned implementation date, performance benefits and an outlook for SESAR solutions in Industrialisation and Standardisation phase. Deployment view – It provides a summary of the main elements (what, who, when, where and all references). It describes the SESAR Solutions and related Implementation Objectives within the EOC, identifying deployment scenarios (DS), describing main actions for the stakeholders and performance benefits, implementation timeframes and reported implementation progress from MPL3 Report. Airspace Architecture Study – Transition Plan (AAS-TP) – It provides a mapping of the elements supporting the milestones of the AAS-TP, with SESAR Solutions and Implementation Objectives in the Plan. Annexes – They provide support documents for easier reading and understanding of the L3 Plan, mostly mappings between Master Plan elements. Engineering view – It is not integral part of this document. It is a separate soft copy called ‘’Technical Annex‘’ accompanying MPL3 Plan. It is available online, on the European ATM Master Plan Portal https://www.eatmportal.eu/working/signin ) and EUROCONTROL website tm-master-plan-implementation-plan-level-3; re-and-monitoring#key-documents . It provides a complete description for each Implementation Objective, including detailed descriptions of stakeholder lines of action (SLoAs) and relevant supporting material. 1.2.1 The main definitions of the terminology used in L3 Plan 2021 The following stakeholder group designators are used: REG – State Authorities ASP – Air Navigation Service Providers (Civil & Military providing services to GAT) APO – Airport Operators USE – Airspace Users INT – International Organisations and Regional Bodies MET – Meteorological Service Providers AIS – Aeronautical Information Service Providers IND – Aeronautics Industry AGY ‐ EUROCONTROL Agency (non‐Network Manager) NM – EUROCONTROL Network Manager The Key Performance Areas used in this document are in line with those defined in Chapter 3 (“Performance View”) of the Level 1 of the European ATM Master Plan Edition 2020. The graphical designator indicates the EOC and is fully consistent with the corresponding designator from the Level 1 of the European ATM Master Plan Edition 2020. The implementation objective designators consists of acronym identifying one of the designated ATM areas of work and a serial number for the objective within the area of work it covers. AOM Airspace Organisation and Management AOP Airport Operations ATC Air Traffic Control COM Communications ENV Environment FCM Flow and Capacity Management HUM Human Factors INF Information Management ITY Interoperability NAV Navigation SAF Safety Management 9
The Implementation Objectives (IOs) set out the operational, technical and institutional improvements that contribute to meet the performance requirements for the key performance areas (KPAs) cost-efficiency, operational efficiency, capacity, environment, safety and security, as defined in the ATM Master Plan Level 1. They also reflect the outcomes from the Planning and Architecture level (Level 2) in considering the integration of operational changes, which have reached the necessary operational and technical maturity, and are supported by common agreement for their inclusion in the plan and, where applicable, their deployment. This includes Objectives derived from existing (EU) Regulations in ATM, including the Common Project 1 (CP1) Regulation. Implementation Objectives describe Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) of ANS Providers, National Regulators, Airport Operators, Military Authorities, Airspace Users that address the deployment and operational introduction aspects of the functionalities described in the IO. The industrialisation phase (i.e. the V4 phase in the E-OCVM) is currently not addressed. Outline Descriptions (ODs) are developed as a working tool to achieve expert-level consensus on the technical and operational content of the targeted implementations, their timescales and the main set of Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) which would guide the implementers through the deployment phase. ODs can be considered as embryonic Implementation Objectives and allow the experts to investigate different implementing options, while respecting the overall technical requirements expressed in the SESAR Solution. 1.2.2 Deployment criteria of Implementation Objectives An Implementation Objective present in L3 Plan may have one of the following statuses: Active – Objective in the L3 Plan fully ready for implementation and monitored in LSSIP; Initial – Objective introduced in L3 Plan but some elements still require validation/commitment and therefore it is not monitored in LSSIP yet. The Implementation Objectives are also classified as ‘’Regulated’’, ‘’Committed’’ or ‘’Local’’. These terms have the following meaning in the context of the implementation plan decision making: Regulated: There is a law act (usually EU IR) obliging the stakeholders concerned to implement specified functionality by predefined date within the predefined applicability area; Committed: The stakeholders committed through EUROCONTROL Provisional Council to implement a functionality by agreed date within agreed applicability area in a coordinated manner, while there is no law act regulating these two elements. Local: There is no commonly agreed pan-European implementation plan. An individual stakeholder decides if and when to implement a functionality. The classification on regulated, committed or local is without prejudice to the existing SES regulatory framework in ATM (e.g. common requirements, safety, conformity assessment, etc.). Any implementation including purely local ones has to be performed taking fully into account the entire regulatory framework. An Implementation Objective may have one of the following applicability area(s) defined as follows: ECAC: Referring to the States members of the European Civil Aviation Conference Maastricht UAC. ECAC : Referring to all ECAC states plus the states signed Comprehensive Agreement with EUROCONTROL, i.e. Israel and Morocco. EU : Referring to the States members of the European Union (including Maastricht UAC) the states signatory to the European Common Aviation Area Agreement (ECAA), Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Georgia, Montenegro, Serbia and Moldova, NO and CH. EU SES: Referring to the States members of the European Union (including Maastricht UAC) Norway and Switzerland who have signed agreements with the EU contractual commitment to implement the SES legislation. EU: Referring to the States members of the European Union. 10
30 CP1 Airports: Referring to the airports identified in the CP1 Regulation: Vienna, Brussels, Prague, Berlin Brandenburg, Düsseldorf, Frankfurt Main, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart, Copenhagen, Barcelona, Madrid Barajas, Málaga Costa del Sol, Palma de Mallorca, Helsinki, Lyon, Nice, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Paris Orly, Athens, Dublin, Milan Linate, Milan Malpensa, Rome Fiumicino, Amsterdam Schiphol, Warsaw, Lisbon, Stockholm Arlanda, Geneva, Zurich Kloten. 1.2.3 Master Plan Level 3 layout overview The Implementation Plan 2021, as it was already the case for the Plan 2020, includes a set of information that is summarised in the bullet points here below: Alignment with the 2020 edition of ATM Master Plan Level 1 (i.e. use of Essential Operational Changes) A SESAR Solutions centric approach– new information structure and display in the document; A clear top-down content approach – starting from EOC DS SOL to
This edition of the MPL3 Plan endeavours to give a better visibility to the contribution of each SESAR Solution and Implementation Objective to performance, and in particular the Key Performance Areas identified in the ATM Master Plan 2020: Capacity, Operational Efficiency, Cost efficiency, Safety, Environment, and Security.
SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuel) a.k.a. aviation biofuel, biojet, alternative aviation fuel. Aviation Fuel: Maintains the certification basis of today’s aircraft and jet (gas turbine) engines by delivering the properties of ASTM D1655 – Aviation Turbine Fuel – enables drop-in approach – no changes to infrastructure or equipment,
Below are some Aviation Fun Facts to celebrate National Aviation History Month: National Aviation Day, August 19, is a United States national observation that celebrates the history and development of aviation. It was established in 1939 by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who issued a presidential proclamation which designated the anniversary of .
AVIATION SAFETY Challenges and ways forward for a safe future 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 CURRENT AVIATION-SAFETY CHALLENGES 7 The ‘big five’ aviation-safety challenges 9 . Safe. Research & Innovation Projects for Policy AVIATION SAFETY AT. AVIATION SAFETY 20.
Florida Transportation Plan, Florida Aviation System Plan, the airport's master plan and airport layout plan along with any long range transportation plan, and applicable Federal Aviation Administration guidelines. *As of April 5, 2017, FDOT Program & Resource Plan 15 Key Areas of Responsibility 1. Florida Aviation System Plan
European Aviation Crisis Management Cell - Aviation Crisis Management in Europe 1. EUROCONTROL 2. Eyjafjallajökull 2010 crisis 3. European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell (EACCC) . Microsoft PowerPoint - 3 July_PPT06_ECTRL.ppt [Compatibility Mode] Author: vkourenkov Created Date: 7/4/2012 8:39:46 AM .
maintenance operations, air traffic control agencies, aviation financial companies, aviation-related manufacturers and suppliers (aircraft, engines, fuels, and components), and local, state and federal aviation agencies. 1.2. Mission The mission of the graduate program in Aviation and Aerospace Management is
A. Toyota Motor Europe - Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 5 B. Toyota Motor Europe - Anti-bribery and conflict of interest guidelines 14 C. Toyota Motor Europe - Quality 22 D. Toyota Motor Europe - Delivery 23 E. Toyota Motor Europe - Production Preparation 24 F. Toyota Motor Europe - Environment 25 Glossary39 Note to Reader
Independent Personal Pronouns Personal Pronouns in Hebrew Person, Gender, Number Singular Person, Gender, Number Plural 3ms (he, it) א ִוה 3mp (they) Sֵה ,הַָּ֫ ֵה 3fs (she, it) א O ה 3fp (they) Uֵה , הַָּ֫ ֵה 2ms (you) הָּ תַא2mp (you all) Sֶּ תַא 2fs (you) ְ תַא 2fp (you
