EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION

EUROCONTROL

EUROCONTROL EXPERIMENTAL CENTRE

LONDON Heathrow CDM WP1

EEC Note No. 03/05

Project London Heathrow CDM

Issued: February 2005

The information contained in this document is the property of the EUROCONTROL Agency and no part should be reproduced in any form without the Agency’s permission. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the Agency.

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Reference: Security Classification: EEC Note No. 03/05 Unclassified Originator: Originator (Corporate Author) Name/Location: EEC - APT EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre Centre de Bois des Bordes (Airport Throughput Business Area) B.P.15 F – 91222 Brétigny-sur-Orge Cedex FRANCE Telephone: +33 (0)1 69 88 75 00

Sponsor: Sponsor (Contract Authority) Name/Location: EUROCONTROL EUROCONTROL Agency 96, Rue de la Fusée B-1130 Brussels BELGIUM Telephone: +32 2 729 90 11

TITLE: LONDON Heathrow CDM WP1

Authors Date Pages Figures Tables Annexes References R. Lane 02/2005 xvi + 115 39 11 3 - D. Hogg Project Task No. Sponsor Period CDM London - 2004 Distribution Statement: (a) Controlled by: Peter ERIKSEN - EUROCONTROL BUSINESS AREA MANAGER Roger LANE - EUROCONTROL CDM PROJECT MANAGER (b) Special Limitations: None (c) Copy to NTIS: YES / NO

Descriptors (keywords): Collaborative Decision Making – Target Off Block Time – Common Situational Awareness – Flight Update Message – Departure Planning Information – Start-up Approval Time – Variable Taxi Time

Abstract:

This project is a collaboration between the EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre (EEC), EUROCONTROL Airport Operations Unit (APR) and London Heathrow Airport represented by the BAA, UK National Air Traffic Services (NATS), British Airways (BA), bmi and other partners.

Representatives from EUROCONTROL performed a study on the current airside operations and information flows at Heathrow by visiting the various partners to give presentations and conduct interviews. The results of these meetings are detailed in the first part of this document and identify the missing information gaps, weaknesses in procedures and/or equipment and areas that would benefit from the introduction of CDM measures. The latter part of the document details the steps identified by the Working group (WG) necessary to resolve the issues.

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION EUROCONTROL was invited by BAA and its London Heathrow Airport (LHR) partners - the Aircraft Operators (AOs), Ground Handlers (GH) and National Air Traffic Services (NATS) to investigate the potential value of implementing Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) practices at Heathrow in order to further optimise the operations of the LHR aeronautical platform. The project began on the 22 September 2003 and after interviews and meetings with the airport partners, EUROCONTROL developed this document and it was reviewed and agreed by the partners in September 2004. The document details the current state of operations at LHR and identifies the requirements that LHR needs to fulfil in order to become a CDM Airport (CDM-A).

KEY FINDINGS IMPROVING ARRIVAL INFORMATION - Improving the information concerning arrivals (estimates and actual times) will be the first essential step to establishing a CDM-A platform at LHR. It is seen by the partners as a potential quick win and will act as a catalyst towards providing accurate departure times. The CDM project has identified several methods of improving arrival estimates, from the Flight Update Message (FUM) sent by the CFMU three hours before landing, to the A- SMGCS providing instant and accurate landing and in-block times. It is important that these changes are implemented as soon as possible in order to show the partners that CDM can make a difference, maintaining commitment and support from the partners and encouraging them to provide accurate departure information in return. It would also be useful for LTCC to have access to airport information concerning arrivals, such as terminal, stand availability and delay. IMPROVING DEPARTURE INFORMATION - Departure estimates are generally more difficult to predict than arrival estimates, as they are subject to many factors, such as late passengers, CTOT, ground handling resources, late arrival of the aircraft etc. Analysis of Estimated Time of Departure (ETD) in June 2004 showed that only 50% of flights departed within +-5 minutes of their ETD. Departure can also refer to take off time as well as off block time and here ATC and the CFMU are interested to get an accurate prediction of the Target Take Off Time. Obtaining a more accurate Off Block Time can be achieved by tracking key events (milestones) that occur during a turn-round and providing that information to the concerned partners. An accurate Estimated In Block Time is essential to be able to estimate a turn-round time and this can then generate a Target Off Block Time which is confirmed by firstly the AO/GH and then adjusted by ATC (TSAT) subject to the operational situation at the time. When an accurate TSAT has been agreed it can be linked to a variable taxi time to provide an accurate Target Take Off Time, which will be used by the CFMU to enhance the European Air Traffic Flow Management. With a transparent view of partners intentions, departure management will become more efficient – better punctuality, reduced queuing, enhanced resource management, fewer wasted slots and less stress for many of the partners involved in the turn-round. In order to reach this situation, the current system will need to be modified and partners will need to adapt the way they operate today, which could result in changes to procedures and Letters of Agreement / Service Level Agreements.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 v

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

With the ever increasing environmental pressures on the aviation industry, any mitigation strategies deriving from CDM implementation should be capitalised on. Reduced aircraft taxi times and queuing reduces fuel resource use, ground noise and emissions to the atmosphere such as NOx, unburnt hydrocarbons and greenhouse gases. In addition to reducing the social and economic burden arising from these impacts, such reductions can also alleviate the risk or severity of local constraints and may also help to avoid breaches of national or EU regulations. This may be of strategic importance to major airports close to residential areas. IMPROVING THE IT PLATFORM - The foundation for CDM is for the partners to provide and have access to accurate and timely information. There are many systems currently used by the different partners and many feed into the main BAA interface IDAHO. A general Staff Information System (SIS) is available to most of the partners providing arrival and departure information; however, it is generally considered that the information on SIS is unreliable, hard to read and inadequate for making operational decisions. The situation can be improved by linking/upgrading the current systems so that the partners have access to a platform that displays the best data available at the right time. Several new tools such as A-SMGCS are also available to provide partners an improved awareness of the operational situation and these can also be incorporated into the platform. System modifications need not be expensive as much of the data exists at present and it could be distributed via an intranet/extranet HMI. With many Airline Operation Centres (AOCs) not situated locally, the benefits of any web based system would allow remote access to the AOCs worldwide. With a clearer picture of the local situation at LHR operational decisions could be made a lot earlier than they are now. EXCHANGE OF CFMU MESSAGES (FUM/DPI) - The CFMU is currently modifying their software to be able to send and receive new messages (FUM/DPI) to/from an airport. The aim of these messages is to enhance the overall flow of European Air Traffic by firstly providing a CDM airport (CDM-A) with an accurate estimated landing time up to 3 hours before, and then to use an accurate take off estimate from the airport to update the flight plan for ATFM purposes. The airport will have to ensure that the departure data sent to the CFMU conforms to certain requirements, therefore, it will be essential that the airport introduces CDM applications such as the TOBT procedure and variable taxi times in order to reach a high data quality. The messages will be managed by the airport’s CDM platform and exchanged automatically with the CFMU from one address at the airport. By providing precise information on departure times, one of the main benefits Aircraft Operators can expect to receive will be more flexibility from the CFMU regarding slot shifting.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS In April 2004 BAA took steps to commence improvements to the arrival information based on the initial findings of this CDM study. These steps involve mainly improving the source of information that is already provided and therefore should not necessitate major system changes. As previously stressed, improved arrival estimates should be the first step towards CDM and will help to motivate partners in subsequent CDM implementation. Implementing changes for departures, CFMU messages and the IT platform will require more time and complex management, as partners will need to accept changes to their current way of working and this could mean modifying SLA/LoAs, an element of training and briefing partners on the changes.

vi Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

It is recommended that BAA dedicates a full time Project Manager (PM) to be responsible for implementing CDM at LHR. The PM will require technical and operational advisors as well as the continued support of LHR CDM Working / Steering Groups and EUROCONTROL. Due to the large amount of on going projects at LHR (T5, preparation for the A380 and a new ATC TWR etc.) it is appreciated that implementing CDM in one big step will be difficult, therefore, a plan should be created that will establish a phased implementation e.g. arrivals including inbound taxi times, TOBTs, outbound taxi times, pre-departure sequencing and CFMU messages. A prototype HMI should be designed to help to develop the CDM requirements and maintain the commitment by the partners. The findings above concentrate on normal operations and equate to the EUROCONTROL Airport CDM Levels 1 and 2. In the future, CDM could expand to include Level 3 – CDM in adverse conditions, such as Low Visibility Procedures, de-icing or blocked runways. Establishing new procedures to deal with situations like these will largely depend upon a stable CDM platform being in place and providing accurate information.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 vii

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Page intentionally left blank

viii Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ANNEXES...... XI

LIST OF FIGURES ...... XI

LIST OF TABLES...... XII

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS...... XIII

DEFINITIONS ...... XV

1. INTRODUCTION...... 17

2. TERMS OF REFERENCE...... 18 2.1. OBJECTIVES ...... 18 2.2. SCOPE...... 18 2.3. ASSUMPTIONS ...... 18 2.4. TIMESCALES...... 18 2.5. RESOURCES...... 18 2.5.1. EUROCONTROL Resources ...... 18 2.5.2. Heathrow Partner Resources ...... 18 2.5.3. Heathrow CDM Implementation ...... 19 2.6. DELIVERABLES ...... 19

3. STUDY METHODOLOGY...... 20

4. LONDON HEATHROW AIRPORT...... 21

5. PROFILE OF STUDY PARTNERS ...... 23 5.1. AIRPORT AUTHORITY...... 23 5.2. AIRCRAFT OPERATORS...... 24 5.2.1. British Airways ...... 24 5.2.2. Bmi ...... 24 5.2.3. Virgin Atlantic Airways ...... 25 5.2.4. General Aviation...... 25 5.2.5. Air Traffic Control...... 26 5.3. GROUND HANDLING...... 27 5.3.1. Aviance UK...... 27 5.3.2. Air France Services Limited...... 27

6. CURRENT OPERATIONS MODEL ...... 28 6.1. CURRENT AIRCRAFT TURN-ROUND PROCESS...... 28 6.1.1. File Flight Plan & CFMU Slot Allocation ...... 28 6.1.2. Confirmation of Push Back & Airborne Times ...... 28 6.1.3. Manage Air Traffic Flow...... 29 6.1.4. Landing Clearance at Heathrow ...... 29 6.1.5. Stand allocation for Arriving Aircraft ...... 29 6.1.6. Notification of allocated stand to Aircraft ...... 30 6.1.7. Turn-round Activities...... 30

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 ix

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

6.1.8. Start-up & Push Back Approval ...... 31 6.1.9. Recording of Push Back Clearance Time...... 31 6.1.10. Pushback of Aircraft ...... 31 6.1.11. Clearance for Take-off from Heathrow ...... 31 6.1.12. Confirmation Push Back & Airborne Times ...... 32

7. OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT SYSTEMS ...... 33 7.1. BAA ...... 33 7.1.1. NATS Radar ...... 33 7.1.2. SITA Messaging ...... 34 7.1.3. Aviation Message Server...... 34 7.1.4. Gate Pushbutton...... 34 7.1.5. Accounts...... 34 7.1.6. SIS (Staff Information System) ...... 34 7.1.7. ARIS (Stand Planning) ...... 35 7.1.8. Aircraft Push-Back Clearance ...... 37 7.1.9. Public Displays (FIDS)...... 37 7.2. BRITISH AIRWAYS...... 38 7.2.1. FICO...... 39 7.2.2. FIGARO...... 39 7.2.3. AXIS ...... 39 7.2.4. SIRIUS...... 39 7.2.5. STARPLAN & STARMAN...... 40 7.2.6. BA WEBSITE...... 40 7.3. BMI ...... 41 7.3.1. AIROPS (Strategic Flight Planning)...... 41 7.3.2. TANGO (Tactical Flight Management) ...... 42 7.4. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES ...... 43 7.4.1. National Air Space System (Host) ...... 43 7.4.2. Aerodrome Traffic Monitor (ATM)...... 43 7.4.3. Advanced - Surface Movement Guidance Control System (A-SMGCS) ...... 44 7.4.4. ATIS Weather System ...... 45 7.4.5. Stack Monitors...... 45 7.4.6. Airport Playback Tool (APT) ...... 45 7.4.7. Expected Approach Time (EAT) Tool...... 46 7.4.8. Stand Confirmation...... 46 7.5. AVIANCE UK...... 47 7.5.1. Ground Handling Operations System...... 47 7.5.2. Aircraft flight Progress Information ...... 47 7.6. AIR FRANCES SERVICES LIMITED...... 47 7.6.1. Departure Control System (DCS) ...... 47 7.6.2. MILORD...... 47 7.6.3. Aircraft flight Progress Information ...... 47

8. CHANGES ALREADY PLANNED AT HEATHROW ...... 48 8.1. BAA ...... 48 8.2. BRITISH AIRWAYS...... 48 8.3. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES ...... 48 8.4. BMI ...... 49

x Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9. PHASED IMPLEMENTATION & PARTNERS CDM TARGETS AND BENEFITS...... 50 9.1. IMPROVE LOCAL ARRIVAL INFORMATION...... 51 9.1.1. Current Situation...... 51 9.1.2. Proposed Improvements ...... 51 9.1.3. Trial Methodology...... 52 9.1.4. Benefits to Partners ...... 52 9.1.5. Summary (Arrivals)...... 55 9.2. IMPROVING DEPARTURE INFORMATION...... 56 9.2.1. Current Situation...... 56 9.2.2. Proposed Improvements ...... 58 9.2.3. Benefits to Partners ...... 60 9.2.4. Summary (Departures) ...... 74 9.3. IMPROVEMENTS TO THE IT PLATFORM ...... 75 9.3.1. Current Situation and proposed improvements ...... 75 9.3.2. Summary (IT Platform) ...... 78 9.4. ENHANCED ARRIVAL & DEPARTURE IMPROVEMENTS WITH CFMU MESSAGE EXCHANGE ...... 78 9.4.1. Current Situation...... 78 9.4.2. Proposed Improvements ...... 78 9.4.3. Trial Methodology...... 80 9.4.4. Benefits to Partners ...... 81 9.4.5. Summary (CFMU Messages) ...... 82

10. COST-BENEFITS ANALYSIS ...... 83 10.1. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS ...... 83 10.1.1. Costs ...... 83 10.1.2. Benefits...... 84 10.1.3. Departure punctuality and predictability ...... 86 10.1.4. Landing time estimates...... 87 10.1.5. Qualitative benefits...... 88

LIST OF ANNEXES

ANNEX A: Completed Questionnaires from Study Participants ...... 93 ANNEX B: Consolidated Problems & Requirements List...... 111 ANNEX C: Arrivals information trial spreadsheet (with one line of sample data) ...... 115

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Airport and En-route Flight Delays...... 17 Figure 2: Western View of LHR, with new terminal construction site in background ...... 21 Figure 3: Airfield Map of LHR...... 22 Figure 4: The S&G Management Operations Room...... 23 Figure 5: BA Aircraft parked at T4 ...... 24 Figure 6: Bmi Ground Handling Operations Room at LHR ...... 25 Figure 7: Virgin aircraft parked off-pier upon long layover ...... 25 Figure 8: LTCC Operations Room ...... 26 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 xi

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Figure 9: LHR ATC Tower ...... 26 Figure 10: Diagrammatic Overview of Current Turn-round Process...... 28 Figure 11: Overview of BAA IDAHO System & Interfaces ...... 33 Figure 12: BAA SIS Page as used by Airfield Operations ...... 35 Figure 13: SIS T3 Stand Status Screen...... 36 Figure 14: BAA Airfield Operations Accommodation ...... 37 Figure 15: BAA Website with Arrivals Information ...... 38 Figure 16: Overview of BA FICO System & Interfaces ...... 38 Figure 17: BA Website with Arrivals Information...... 40 Figure 18: BA Website with Departures Information...... 41 Figure 19: Bmi AIROPS Screen...... 41 Figure 20: Bmi TANGO Screen ...... 42 Figure 21: Bmi Arrivals Information...... 42 Figure 22: Bmi Departures Information...... 43 Figure 23: Final Approach on 09L...... 43 Figure 24: A-SMGCS screen ...... 44 Figure 25: Airport Playback Tool Display...... 45 Figure 26: EAT (Expected Approach Time) tool ...... 46 Figure 27: Screen Shot of Eclipse tool...... 49 Figure 28: Phased Implementation & Partners CDM Targets and Benefits...... 50 Figure 29: EIBT - 30 Minutes before Arrival...... 53 Figure 30: EIBT - 10 Minutes before Arrival...... 53 Figure 31: EIBT - 4 Minutes before Arrival...... 54 Figure 32: AIBT Comparison using A-SMGCS Data ...... 54 Figure 33: ALDT Accuracy using A-SMGCS Data...... 55 Figure 34: Analysis of AOBT vs EOBT ...... 57 Figure 35: Analysis of AOBT vs SOBT ...... 73 Figure 36: Example CDM Intranet Display...... 77 Figure 37: Comparison of schedule and estimated off block time ...... 86 Figure 38: Taxi-time averages per terminal vs time of day ...... 87 Figure 39: Comparison of schedule, actual and estimated in block times ...... 87

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Turn-rounds times ...... 59 Table 2: Stand numbers ...... 62 Table 3: Arrivals Taxi Averages - Medium / Small / Light aircraft...... 63 Table 4: Arrivals Taxi Averages - Heavy aircraft ...... 64 Table 5: Departure taxi average – Medium / Small / Light aircraft ...... 66 Table 6: Departure taxi average – Heavy aircraft...... 67 Table 7: Average taxi time - Medium / Small / Light Aircraft...... 69 Table 8: Average taxi time – Heavy aircraft...... 70 Table 9: Estimated CDM costs for Heathrow airport ...... 83 Table 10: Estimated emissions reductions through CDM for Heathrow airport...... 84 Table 11: Estimated CDM benefits for Heathrow airport...... 85

xii Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Abbreviation De-Code ACARS Aircraft Communications and Reporting System A-DPI Airport - Departure Planning Information AFSL Air France Services Limited AIBT Actual In-Block Time ALDT Actual Landing Time AO Aircraft Operator AOBT Actual Off-Block Time A-SMGCS Advanced Surface Movement Guidance System APT Airport Playback Tool ATC Air Traffic Control ATFM Air Traffic Flow Management ATM Air Traffic Management ATOT Actual Take Off Time ATS Air Traffic Services BA British Airways BAA British Airport Authority Bmi British Midland International CBA Cost Benefit Analysis CCTV Close Circuit Television CDM Collaborative Decision Making CDM-A CDM Airport C-DPI Cancel – Departure Planning Information CFMU Central Flow Management Unit CTOT Calculated Take Off Time DCS Departure Control System DEP Departures (Position in the TWR) DLA Delay Message DPI Departure Planning Information EAT Expected Approach Time EFPS Electronic Flight Progress Strips E-DPI Early – Departure Planning Information EIBT Estimated In-Block Time ELDT Estimated Landing Time EOBT Estimated Off-Block Time ETA Estimated Time of Arrival ETD Estimated Time of Departure ETFMS Enhanced Tactical Flow Management System ETOT Estimated Take Off Time EU European Union

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 xiii

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Abbreviation De-Code FICO Flight Information And Control of Operations (BA System) FIDS Flight Information Display System FMP Flow Management Position FPL Filed Flight Plan FUM Flight Update Message GA General Aviation GH Ground Handler/ing GMC Ground Movement Control (TWR) GMP Ground Movement Planning (TWR) ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization LHR London Heathrow Airport LTCC London Terminal Control Centre MTT Minimum Turn-round Time MVT Movement Message NATS National Air Traffic Services RVR Runway Visual Range S&G Stand and Gate SID Standard Instrument Departure SIS Staff Information System SLA Service Level Agreement SOBT Scheduled Off-Block Time SRM Slot Revision Message SSR Secondary Surveillance Radar STD Scheduled Time of Departure T-DPI Target - Departure Planning Information TOBT Target Off-Block Time TSAT Target Start Up Approval Time TTOT Target Take Off Time TWR Aerodrome Control Tower UK United Kingdom VTT Variable Taxi Time WP Work Package

xiv Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

DEFINITIONS

CDM Airport. An Airport that has successfully proven that it can ARRIVALS CDM-A exchange FUM/DPI messages with the CFMU and provides data to the required accuracy. A FUM message is sent from the CFMU to a CDM-A providing an ELDT, FUM ETO and Flight Level at the last point of route. The estimated time that an aircraft will touchdown on the runway. ELDT (Equivalent to ATC ETA –Estimated Time of Arrival = landing). The time that an aircraft lands on a runway. (Equivalent to ATC ATA – ALDT Actual Time of Arrival = landing, ACARS=ON). Estimated Taxi In Time - The estimated time between landing and in- EXIT block TURN-ROUND SIBT The time that an aircraft is scheduled to arrive at its parking position. The estimated time that an aircraft will arrive in blocks. (Equivalent to EIBT Airline/Handler ETA –Estimated Time of Arrival). The time that an aircraft arrives in blocks. (Equivalent to Airline/Handler AIBT ATA –Actual Time of Arrival, ACARS = IN). SOBT The time that an aircraft is scheduled to depart from its parking position. The estimated time at which the aircraft will commence movement EOBT associated with departure (ICAO). The time that an aircraft operator / handling agent estimates that an aircraft will be ready, all doors closed, boarding bridge removed, push TOBT back vehicle present, ready to taxi immediately upon reception of clearance from the TWR. Time the aircraft pushes back/vacates the parking position AOBT (ACARS=OUT). Target Start Approval Time - The time provided by ATC taking into TSAT account a CTOT and/or the current traffic situation that an aircraft can expect to receive Start up approval. Actual Start up Approval Time. This is the time that an aircraft receives ASAT its Start up approval. Calculated Take Off Time. The time provided by the CFMU, taking into account the ECAC ATC flow situation, that an aircraft has been DEPARTURES CTOT calculated to take off. The CTOT also known as slot has a tolerance of – 5 to +10 minutes. Slot Issue Time. The time when the CFMU issues the SAM (Slot SIT1 Allocation Message). This is normally two hours before EOBT. Early Departure Planning Information. This DPI is sent from the CDM-A E-DPI to the CFMU (ETFMS) notifying the ETOT between three and two hours before the EOBT. Estimated Taxi Out Time - The estimated time between off-block and EXOT take off. Estimated Take Off Time. The estimated take off time taking into ETOT account the EOBT/TOBT plus EXOT. (Equivalent to ATC ETD– Estimated Time of Departure).

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 xv

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Target Departure Planning Information. This DPI is sent from the CDM-A T-DPI to the CFMU (ETFMS) notifying the ETOT between two hours before EOBT and twenty minutes before TOBT. Target Take Off Time. The Target Take Off Time taking into account the TTOT TSAT plus the EXOT. ATC Departure Planning Information. This DPI is sent from the CDM-A A-DPI to the CFMU (ETFMS) notifying the TTOT between TOBT/TSAT minus 20 minutes and AOBT. Actual Take Off Time - The Time that an aircraft takes off from the ATOT runway. (Equivalent to ATC ATD–Actual Time of Departure, ACARS = OFF). Cancel Departure Planning Information. This message resets the flight C-DPI plan status to ‘not activated’ (for example if a flight suffers a technical fault).

xvi Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

1. INTRODUCTION

With the future forecast growth in the aviation industry and the recent enhancements to the ATC en-route network such as Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM), delays at airports will continue to be the restricting bottleneck to the overall ATM system.

Figure 1: Airport and En-route Flight Delays

To help reduce airport delays, EUROCONTROL has launched an initiative called Airport CDM. This works by attempting to minimise slot wastage at European airports. CDM Implementation Projects have already commenced at many major European airports. These early trials of CDM are already realising degrees of operational benefits. BAA and selected business partners have agreed for EUROCONTROL to commence a CDM Implementation study at London Heathrow Airport.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 17

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

2. TERMS OF REFERENCE

2.1. OBJECTIVES

Phase 1 – Perform a study on the state of operations and processes at London Heathrow and define the operational gaps and future CDM targets. This phase assesses the current operational processes between the Working Group partners at Heathrow. It assesses the major decision drivers involved in the process of decision making. It analyses the information systems and the main information flows between the partners. The partners will then identify the gaps in the current state of operations and select and design the required CDM processes, information systems and information flows to reach common and agreed targets. An initial CBA (Cost Benefit Analysis) will also be conducted based upon the present operation situation. Phase 2 - Implement and run. This phase will design and implement the CDM elements, processes, information systems and flows required to fill the identified gaps in the current operations/procedures. It will also establish a set of parameters, including a method to check and to verify that the required improvements are met. Phase 3 - Measure and follow-up. This phase will measure the results obtained and will evaluate the changes made according to the initial CBA model.

2.2. SCOPE

The project will study the current information data exchange, procedures, systems and factors affecting the turn-round process at Heathrow Airport, specifically, arrival – on ground phase (airside) - departure. Any issues identified that lead to changes to the current procedures / operations could also be considered for implementation at other BAA Airports such as Gatwick and Stansted.

2.3. ASSUMPTIONS

It is assumed that Heathrow Partners will be able to provide timely access to key operational staff during the interviewing & fact-finding stage of this project.

2.4. TIMESCALES

The project will commence in September 2003 and initial interviews and meetings will take place up until Spring 2004. Any implementation that occurs as a result of the Working Group meetings should occur between 2004 and 2005.

2.5. RESOURCES

2.5.1. EUROCONTROL Resources

EUROCONTROL staff assigned to the Heathrow CDM project will be financed by EUROCONTROL during their involvement in the project.

2.5.2. Heathrow Partner Resources

Partners involved in the Heathrow CDM project will provide resources as required and all costs concerning time and effort will be the partners’ responsibility.

18 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

2.5.3. Heathrow CDM Implementation

EUROCONTROL is not responsible for supplying budget or funds for any CDM implementation that is identified as a result of the WP1 phase. The Heathrow CDM Steering Group will be responsible for identifying and co-ordinating budget management for any issues regarding CDM implementation. The extent of budget is unknown at the beginning of the project and commitment / acceptance of budget issues will be subject to partners’ acceptance at the various stages of the project.

2.6. DELIVERABLES

This phase of the project will deliver the Work Package 1 (WP1) Report, containing the information stated in section 2.1, above.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 19

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

3. STUDY METHODOLOGY The approach taken was to identify and document the:

• Current approach to aircraft turn-round by Heathrow Airport partners. • IT systems used by partners and their interfaces to each other. • Problems caused by current way of working. • Note any relevant operational changes & initiatives already planned by partners. • Recommend changes to achieve a more efficient way of working.

20 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

4. LONDON HEATHROW AIRPORT Heathrow is the world's busiest international airport, serving 63 million passengers a year, and the second busiest cargo port, moving 1.3 m tonnes of cargo. It has over 80 airlines that serve 180 worldwide destinations. Opened in 1946 and situated west of central London, it has two main runways and four terminal buildings. A new control tower and terminal building are currently under construction, with completion dates of 2006 and 2008, respectively.

Figure 2: Western View of LHR, with new terminal construction site in background

The main runways (09/27 Left and Right) are used for take-off and landings. The third runway (05/23) is seldom used for landings/take offs but instead is utilised as a busy taxiway and the 05 end is used to park aircraft using the terminal 4 area. Stands and taxiways have recently been renumbered to fit in with the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) protocol. Some runways and taxiways can already accept the next generation of large aircraft (NGLA) e.g. Airbus A380, whilst others are being upgraded. Runway alternation takes place at 1500hrs when in the Westerly configuration. Upon an Easterly wind direction, Runway 09L is normally used for landings, but has been used for departures too due to frequent Canadian Geese activity on the approach to 09L. Runway 09R is normally only used for departures but arrivals to Terminal 4 (T4) are often accommodated between departures to reduce taxi times and ground congestion around the central area. With the high density of long haul traffic at Heathrow airport, many aircraft remain on the ground on long layovers. Managing this in turn puts high pressure on the airfield infrastructure.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 21

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Figure 3: Airfield Map of LHR

22 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

5. PROFILE OF STUDY PARTNERS A cross-section of Heathrow organisations were invited to assist with this study. The ‘first wave’ of participants comprises of the following Airport partners:

5.1. AIRPORT AUTHORITY

BAA, one of the world's leading airport companies, owns seven UK airports - Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Southampton, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Edinburgh. Heathrow Airport is currently undergoing significant expansion with the building of the new Terminal 5, which will include a ground transport interchange (rail link, motorway spur off the M25 motorway and coach park) for easier and faster access into and out of LHR. Once built, Terminal 5 will have the capacity to accommodate around 30 million passengers per annum. For the purposes of this study, attention will be focussed on BAA Airfield Operations, who are responsible for stand and gate planning for Terminals 2 and 3. The responsibility for Terminals 1 and 4 has been delegated to British Airways, the main user of these terminals.

Figure 4: The S&G Management Operations Room

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 23

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

5.2. AIRCRAFT OPERATORS

5.2.1. British Airways British Airways is the world’s largest international carrier flying to 233 destinations in 96 countries and the United Kingdom's largest international scheduled airline. British Airways is one of the founding partners of the One world alliance In 2002, British Airways carried 38 million passengers with its fleet of 237 aircraft. Heathrow is both the main base and hub for this British flag carrier.

Figure 5: BA Aircraft parked at T4

5.2.2. Bmi

Bmi is the United Kingdom’s second largest scheduled service operator serving domestic, European and US routes, operating more than 2000 weekly flights to 29 destinations in 10 countries. Bmi’s main operational base is LHR where it holds 14% of all take off and landing slots. The airline operates with a fleet of 41 jet aircraft that have an average age of five years. Through its membership of Star Alliance, a grouping of 16 airlines offering seamless travel worldwide, it is also able to offer an international network reaching all areas of the globe.

24 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Figure 6: Bmi Ground Handling Operations Room at LHR

5.2.3. Virgin Atlantic Airways

Virgin Atlantic is the second largest long haul airline in the UK and the third largest European carrier over the North Atlantic. Their route network has grown rapidly to include destinations in the United States, Caribbean, Far East, India and Africa, and they have won virtually every award the travel industry has to offer. Founded in 1984, Virgin Atlantic now has more than 26 Boeing 747s and Airbuses and is the launch customer for the A340-600 due for delivery in 2002, and the A380 due for delivery in 2006. In 2000, Virgin carried a total of 4.3 million passengers.

Figure 7: Virgin aircraft parked off-pier upon long layover

5.2.4. General Aviation

The number of General Aviation (GA) flights account for a fraction of total aircraft movements at Heathrow. Much of GA traffic has moved in recent years to smaller neighbouring airfields such as Farnborough. There are two main handing agents for GA aircraft at LHR: Executive Aircraft Service and Metro Business Aviation.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 25

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

5.2.5. Air Traffic Control

National Air Traffic Services (NATS) is responsible for the control of aircraft flying in the UK controlled airspace. The London Terminal Control Centre (LTCC) at West Drayton, Middlesex handles aircraft operating in the London Terminal Control Area. The Terminal Control operations room situated at LTCC provides an area control service to aircraft flying at 17500 feet and below within the London Terminal Control Area. It provides an approach control service to aircraft at LHR, Gatwick, London City, Luton and Stansted Airports.

Figure 8: LTCC Operations Room

The NATS Heathrow Tower (TWR) works very closely with LTCC and is responsible for controlling aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land or depart and full aircraft movements on the ground. A new TWR is being constructed and will be positioned in the Terminal 3 (T3) area and is due to be completed 2006.

Figure 9: LHR ATC Tower

26 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

5.3. GROUND HANDLING

The division of liability for Ground Handling (GH) functions at Heathrow Airport varies considerably. The responsibilities will include full handling (airside and landside), ramp only, passenger (landside) only, under-wing and cargo handling. The main independent handling companies are Aviance, Air France Services Ltd (AFSL) and Plane handling. Aircraft operators like British Airways, bmi, Lufthansa, United and Alitalia will both handle all or partly their own aircraft and offer additional handling services to third parties carriers. The extreme complexity of LHR and the GH operation requires skilled and dexterous management to ensure that resources (staff and equipment) are used at a reasonable level of efficiency. However, regardless of the handling agreements in place at the airport the objective of all ground handlers is to successfully execute the aircraft turn-round agreements established with the aircraft operators, normally set up in the form of service level agreements. Some aircraft operators will not have their own staff at the airport and require additional functions to be carried out on their behalf by the ground handling company concerned. Close coordination is always required between ground handlers and Aircraft Operations Centres to ensure smooth ground operations at LHR. From the onset of this project GH companies are seen as a very important partner to the Airport CDM project, being at the sharp-end of the ground operation and often in the position to disseminate enhanced operational situational awareness amongst other airport partners. However, it is recommended that Aircraft Operators (AO) should be the first points of contact when communicating with the ground handlers as they are seen as a service provider to the Aircraft Operators only.

5.3.1. Aviance UK

Aviance UK is part of the Aviance international alliance. Other members of the alliance include ADP Handling (France), Euro Handling and Jet Aviation handling Ltd. The Aviance Alliance now serves 77 airports in 11 countries, including 17 airports across the UK and Eire. Since 1987, Aviance UK has been involved in Plane Handling, a joint cargo-handling venture with Virgin Atlantic and has gained a respected name in the air cargo-handling sector.

5.3.2. Air France Services Limited

The company was formed in 1997 under its former name of Air France Servisair Ltd. Originally a joint venture between Air France (51%) and Servisair (49%) AFSL broke the mould of the traditional ground handler at Heathrow. The largest customer of AFSL has always been Air France who saw the opportunity in forming AFSL to concentrate on its own core activity. In February 2003 the company was restructured. Servisair withdrew from the shareholding and AFSL having sold its Terminal 3 business to GlobeGround concentrates its activities on its terminal 2 base. The revised business is focussed on delivering a high quality service. The current business profile for full handling includes Air France, Aeroflot, Czech Airlines, Libyan, Tunis, Syrian Arab, Yemenia and from 1st April 2004 China Eastern. AFSL also has a cargo trucking division, which provides that service to customers of GlobeGround such as South African Airways, Iran Air, PIA, Qatar, Air Algerie, Royal Air Maroc, Tarom and Croatia Airlines. Future activities will concentrate on the opportunities created by the SkyTeam Alliance and the terminal moves created by the opening of Terminal 5 in 2008.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 27

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

6. CURRENT OPERATIONS MODEL

6.1. CURRENT AIRCRAFT TURN-ROUND PROCESS

AIRCRAFT Cleared for AIRCRAFT EUROCONTROL Hold Approach & CFMU BAA Delays Runway in Use Airport System For Arrivals (IDAHO) Airborne Time Landing Clearance; (from onboard Arrival Confirmation of Flight Plan & Into FIR Slot Request Reply ACARS system) Runway to Use; Local Weather Conditions. Allocated Stand 1 Aircraft Op. 2Outstation GH 3Term. Control 4TWR Arrivals 5BAA Ops. Departure File Flight Plan Confirm Push Back Manage Air Cleared for Landing Assign Stand for & Details And Traffic Flow At Heathrow Obtain CFMU Slot Airborne Times Arriving Aircraft

Stack Flight Strip Push Back & Airborne n CCTV – o ls ti Times (via SITA a ca iv o 6TWR GMC Stand No. Movement Message) rr L A t And Airfield af LHR Arrivals cr Advise Aircraft ir Taxi Route A o. of Allocated N nd Stand Sta Flight Arrivals – Aircraft Information AIRCRAFT Location (Z, F, L, A) Update LHR Departures BAA BAA Airport System Staff Information System Arri (IDAHO) A vals Heathrow Departures – Airborne ircra – 7 LHR GH (SIS) ft Lo NATS SSR Time cation RADAR Perform Turnaround In-Blocks Time Activities De (from onboard E pa Pushback & Airborne st rt im ur ACARS system) a es Times (via SITA ted – Ti D me ep Movement Message) s . 8TWR GMP/C In Blocks 12 LHR GH 11 TWR Dep. 10 LHR GH Time & Est. Grant Start-up Dep. Times Confirm Push Back Cleared for Take Push Back And Push Back (via SITA And Off From Heathrow Aircraft Clearance Movement Airborne Times Push Back Message) Clearance Time Cleared for Request Airborne Time Take Off Push Back (from onboard 9BAA Ops. p ACARS system) rt-u Time Push Back Approved ta BAA st S ue ck Record Push-back Airport System OUT eq Ba AIRCRAFT R sh (IDAHO) Pu Clearance Time By TWR GMC STATIONS &

Figure 10: Diagrammatic Overview of Current Turn-round Process

6.1.1. File Flight Plan & CFMU Slot Allocation

The Aircraft operator will submit a flight plan to CFMU. The CFMU will allocate a slot (if required) in advance of the flight departure time.

6.1.2. Confirmation of Push Back & Airborne Times

The out station ground handler will send the airborne and pushback times, via SITA messaging, to BAA’s central airport operations system (IDAHO), which will in turn publish the planned landing time of the flight at Heathrow on BAA’s Staff Information System (SIS). The latter is an intranet system that is available to the majority of BAA partners at Heathrow and provides custom-designed “pages” of information to given partners as well as general airport-wide information. The planned landing time is also displayed by BAA through the following information channels: corporate and public flight information displays (FIDS) around the airport campus; Teletext; and on BAA’s own Internet website (www.baa.com).

28 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

6.1.3. Manage Air Traffic Flow

Heathrow Approach Controllers (at the London Terminal Control Centre) control and sequence aircraft prior to handing over control to the Tower, normally at 10 miles final to land. The TC controllers are responsible for any stack hold delays that may be experienced.

6.1.4. Landing Clearance at Heathrow

The TWR Arrivals controller will be pre-notified of arrival traffic with a printed paper strip 20 minutes before landing time. The controllers can identify inbound aircraft leaving the stack and entering the Zone using the Aerodrome Traffic Monitor. The aircraft will contact the Controller by radio transmission and the controller will monitor the progress of the aircraft on final approach and give landing clearance at the appropriate time. The controller will confirm the runway in use for landings, as well as surface conditions, together with any other relevant details. Where visibility is an issue due to adverse weather conditions, the controller will use the Advanced Surface Movement Guidance System (A-SMGCS) (the “ground radar”) to monitor the position of the aircraft as it comes into land and exits the runway at the prescribed turn off. Upon exiting the runway, the controller will instruct the aircraft to contact Ground Movement Controller (GMC) on the given radio frequency for taxi instructions to the allocated stand. The controller will update the manual flight strip with the landing time and stand number before passing the strip to the Air Traffic Services Assistant (ATSA) to retain for later management information reporting analysis.

6.1.5. Stand allocation for Arriving Aircraft

BAA Airfield Operations have two Terminal Controllers (one each for T2 and T3), who manage the day-to-day stand allocation. They monitor the progress of inbound aircraft using the BAA SIS Arrivals screen. When an aircraft is on final approach or has landed (status code “F” or “L” on SIS), the stand will be allocated to the aircraft using BAA’s ARIS (Stand & Gate Planning) system. This information is then automatically, and instantaneously, displayed on the SIS flight Arrivals screen against that flight. The final decision as to which stand to allocate is based upon the stand plan, the position of the inbound flight, the current availability of the stand (i.e. is it already occupied and, if so, for how much longer), the general stability of the stand plan so far that day, the serviceability of the stand and general airport & stand congestion (using BAA’s CCTV system). The BAA Terminal Controller will use ARIS to confirm the final stand allocation for the aircraft. This action will automatically update the BAA IDAHO and SIS systems with this information. Prior to this action, the SIS system will not show a stand number against a flight. This “just in time” approach to stand allocation (i.e. when the aircraft is literally a few minutes away from landing) helps to reduce the potential for stand changes for whatever reason.. Late stand changes can cause major difficulties for other partners, such as ground handlers, who then need to re-deploy their staff and equipment to a different place on the airport campus British Airways prepare the stand plan for T1 and T4 using the FICO system, which has an electronic link to ARIS.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 29

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Using the same “at the last minute possible” approach, British Airways submit the proposed stand for the inbound aircraft to ARIS. The BAA Terminal Controller will consider the proposal and then confirm via ARIS whether it is accepted or not. If accepted, IDAHO and SIS will be updated as above and a confirmation message will be sent to FICO, which will then show the stand number on the FICO screen against that flight.

6.1.6. Notification of allocated stand to Aircraft

The TWR GMC controller will instruct the aircraft to taxi across the airport along a specific route and to park at the allocated stand. The stand number will be made available to GMC on the paper flight strip (the ATSA will hand write the stand on the strip, having got the information via the BAA SIS Arrivals screen). Exceptionally, where no stand information has been published on SIS at this stage, then the TWR ATSA will telephone BAA Airport Operations and ask for the stand number. Should the allocated stand be occupied by another aircraft, then the TWR will make enquiries upon BAA to determine whether the aircraft should hold on the taxiway (for short delays), more remotely (for longer delays) or if a substitute stand would be more appropriate for that particular aircraft.

6.1.7. Turn-round Activities

The GH will normally have arrived (subject to receiving the stand information in good time) and be in position to ‘set up’ the stand for receiving the aircraft as it arrives. The timely attendance by ground handling is achieved by virtue of the aircraft confirming its arrival time when it is approximately 30 minutes away from landing and by the Ground Handler checking the BAA SIS Arrivals page to see if the aircraft is on final approach. The in-block time is captured manually by the GH or automatically from ACARS equipped aircraft where a movement message is generated when the pilot applies the aircraft parking brake. The dispatcher will oversee the turn-round activities, such as baggage, cargo, catering, cabin cleaning, refuelling, and passengers processing. Where an aircraft is running behind schedule and is not expected to leave at the scheduled time on its out-bound leg, the Ground Handler will send a SITA delay message to BAA with an estimated departure time (i.e. when the aircraft is expected to push-back from the stand). BAA’s IDAHO and SIS systems are updated with the estimated departure time Where there is likely to be a delay in the aircraft’s published departure time, the Ground Handler will contact BAA Airport field Operations Stand & Gate Team to advise that the stand will not be vacant as previously planned. BAA will then contact the TWR Ground Movement Planner (GMP) with this information. Subject to service level agreements between the aircraft operator and ground handling company the handler may be required to contact CFMU to request a revised CTOT that caters for the delayed departure. The dispatcher will advise the pilot when turn-round activities have been completed and the aircraft is ready for push back.

30 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

6.1.8. Start-up & Push Back Approval

When the Aircraft is ready to depart, the pilot will contact the TWR GMP (also known as “Delivery”) and request approval for start-up, confirming the callsign and stand location. Subject to the aircraft’s CTOT (if any) and current airport congestion, the aircraft will be granted permission to start-up engines. GMP will also provide the pilot with the aircraft’s SSR Code and the latest weather report version to check on the ATIS system. Where an aircraft has missed its CTOT, the ATSA will request a new CTOT using the CFMU TACT system. Where start-up is approved, GMP will instruct the pilot to contact GMC for permission to push back and taxi. If the aircraft contacts GMC too early or too late, relative to the CTOT, or the holding areas are too congested, then permission will be denied. If permission is granted, then the aircraft will be advised of the taxi route to use and to report back once it has reached a given point or block on the airport, on it’s way to the take off runway.

6.1.9. Recording of Push Back Clearance Time

BAA Airport Operations staff constantly monitor radio communications between GMC and departing aircraft. The exact time when GMC grant approval to an aircraft to push back off a stand is noted by BAA staff and manually entered into BAA’s IDAHO system. IDAHO automatically updates BAA’s Staff Information System (SIS) with the aircraft’s departure time and ARIS (the Stand & Gate Planning Tool) with the corresponding stand’s availability to receive another aircraft. It should be noted that the time recorded in IDAHO is when permission to push back is granted by GMC and may not be the same as when the aircraft physically left the stand.

(Insert photo of BAA Airfield Ops staff with RT headsets, monitoring GMC communications with aircraft. Also show screen shot of how push back times are input into IDAHO).

6.1.10. Pushback of Aircraft

The aircraft crew via headset will instruct the ground crew to push back the aircraft and confirm if any non standard pushback procedures have been applied. After pushback and subject to the type of tug used the ground crew will uncouple from aircraft, supervise any additional engine start and remove the nose wheel steering pin prior to giving the flight crew the all clear for them to request taxi clearance from GMC. The dispatcher will manually record the push back time on the flight turn-round progress report and often confirm via radio to his or her operational base the times. These times are used for post flight analysis.

6.1.11. Clearance for Take-off from Heathrow

GMC will transfer the aircraft to the TWR Departures (DEP) controller as it taxis to the holding point of the take-off runway. The DEP controller may instruct the aircraft to give way to any other aircraft behind it, where necessary. In doing so, the aircraft may need to wait to one side within the holding area to allow the preceding aircraft to pass safely. Alternatively, the controller may instruct the aircraft to line-up on the take-off runway immediately after the aircraft in front of it has taken-off. The controller will manually update the Departure Flight Strip with the take-off time. Once the aircraft is airborne and has left the vicinity of the airfield, the controller will instruct the aircraft to contact LTCC on a pre-set frequency for further instructions.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 31

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Once the aircraft has acknowledged the latter instructions, the flight strip is returned to the ATSA. The paper strip is retained for later management information reporting analysis.

6.1.12. Confirmation Push Back & Airborne Times

The time that the aircraft is physically pushed-back from the stand by the tug is recorded manually on the dispatch sheet by the ground handling dispatcher. The Heathrow NATS SSR Radar system will detect the aircraft once it has become airborne. The airborne time will be automatically input into the BAA IDAHO system, which in turn will publish it on BAA SIS. The dispatcher, having access to BAA SIS, will transcribe the airborne time from SIS onto the dispatch sheet too. A movement message will be sent by the ground handler to the airline in question, as well as any other parties that it is contracted to inform, for example, all out stations pertaining to that airline and aircraft. The ground handler will update its own internal systems with the dispatch details (for example, billing), as well as enter relevant details into any of its customers’ own systems as per any contractual agreements.

32 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

7. OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT SYSTEMS This section identifies the main information flows between partners and the IT systems used by them to support the aircraft turn-round process at Heathrow.

7.1. BAA

BAA’s central IT system is IDAHO (also known as ADAM) and is linked to a variety of other BAA systems, as shown in the following diagram.

IDAHO System Inputs & Outputs BRITISH User AIRWAYS workstations BUCHair ETA/ETD AIRPORT SITA / ARINC (Reference data) GATE CO-ORDINATION Registration PUSHBUTTONS Stands Seasonal schedules FTP Gate open Payload (Monthly) Boarding (Daily) Cancel/divert NATS Last Call zone/finals Gate closed landed/overshoot INFO DESKS airborne PA STUDIOS Stand All ti U it TRAFFIC MANAGERS IDAHO (Baggage Halls) FTP STAR (Daily) TCS (Accounts) Invoices

DISPLAY AIRPORT MANAGERS DATABASE/ AOMIS Baggage Corporate Data Warehouse FIDS Real-time data e.g. Baggage systems Data streams VIP Speakeasy e.g. BA CIP Lounges LGW/STN/SOU Baggage LED signs dtFTP (every 5 mins) Off-Airport services Automated PA Contingency e.g. Teletext/Web/SMS PUBLIC ARIS SIS FTP (every 2 mins) SIRIUS FTP Schedule data DISPLAYS (Stand (Intranet Staff e.g. IDAHO/AOMIS Planning) Information) (Daily) RMS CUBES

Figure 11: Overview of BAA IDAHO System & Interfaces

The key BAA systems and interfaces from partner systems, that support the aircraft turn-round process, may be summarised as follows:

7.1.1. NATS Radar

The NATS SSR radar system sends an update message to IDAHO as inbound aircraft reach each of the following milestones: Zone, Finals, Landed and In-Block. This information is processed by IDAHO and passed to two other BAA systems: SIS and FIDS (both are mentioned below in more detail). It should be noted that the landing time is displayed on SIS some four minutes after the event due to the way in which the radar system determines a landing and the in-block time displayed is based upon default taxi-times and may not be the same as the actual in-block time. If for any reason the aircraft aborts a landing and overshoots, then an update message is also sent to IDAHO and will be displayed on SIS. For outbound aircraft, the radar system will send an update message to IDAHO once an aircraft is airborne, which is then displayed on SIS.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 33

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

7.1.2. SITA Messaging

The IDAHO system receives movement messages (as well as other types of messages) from partners at certain points in an aircraft flight progress. When an inbound aircraft becomes airborne at an outstation, a movement message is sent to IDAHO. The message, which contains various data items, including airborne time, is automatically processed and an expected time of arrival is displayed on SIS and FIDS.

7.1.3. Aviation Message Server

The Aviation Message Server is the main connection between BA and BAA operational systems.

7.1.4. Gate Pushbutton

Four key stages (gate open, boarding, last call and gate closed) in the boarding process of an outbound flight are captured by gate staff using these buttons. The information, as each button is pressed, is sent to IDAHO which updates public FIDS.

7.1.5. Accounts

Not strictly an operations system, but nevertheless worth highlighting here is the issue of introducing more accurate landing, in-block times and off-block times in relation to BAA’s current stand and parking charges policy. The current charging policy states that charging for inbound aircraft commences from touchdown (less a discretional default taxi-time) to pushback. The latter time is considered to be the time when TWR GMC gives the pilot permission to pushback, which may of course differ from when the aircraft physically moves off the stand. With the introduction of more accurate, radar-based, pushback data capture, it may be that aircraft operators may end up having to pay more parking fees, as the actual move off the stand will be recorded and used as the unit of measure when working out parking charges. To balance out the equation BAA may wish to consider charging from the aircraft being in-block (which will also be more accurately measured using ASMGCS ground radar instead of landing time plus default taxi-times).

7.1.6. SIS (Staff Information System)

This is BAA’s main information system for staff and also Heathrow partners. It is a read-only system and receives (almost) real-time data updates from IDAHO. Many pages are available and the system is widely available across the airport community. Some partners, e.g. aircraft operators, can access their own “pages” on SIS that will show only their arrivals and departures details.

34 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Figure 12: BAA SIS Page as used by Airfield Operations

The SIS system is a key information source for the majority of airport partners regarding the status of flights and in planning their on-the-day resources in relation to those flights. Although SIS is said to be an intranet system (i.e. for use within a single company or organisation), it is in fact an extranet system, whereby access to it has been extended to BAA’s customers and suppliers. In view of SIS’s existing coverage across the airport community, and with individual pages being created for specific partners, it may well be feasible to amend SIS to allow direct data entry of key information into SIS by partners to support proposed CDM procedures. For example, ground handling companies to input target off-block times and for the TWR to see those times and either accept or counter-propose new times. Whichever technical option is selected by Heathrow, the IT platform needs to support the collaborative decision making process where partners can propose, review, revise, agree and disseminate data and then base their actions upon it.

7.1.7. ARIS (Stand Planning)

The ARIS system is used by BAA Airfield Operations to plan stands for Terminals 2 and 3, and to manage the on-the-day use of those stands. ARIS uses data held on AOMIS, which is a separate database from IDAHO. The stand plan is prepared a day in advance by the Operations Team. Note that stand planning for Terminals 1 and 4 is undertaking by British Airways (this is discussed in more detail below). Although the stand plan is prepared a day in advance, the information is not shared with partners until the day of the operation, when the aircraft has left the stack and is in Zone i.e. approximately 10-15 minutes before landing. Operations look on SIS to see the location of the aircraft and as its status changes from P (Planned) to Z (Zone), the Terminal Controller will check the Stand allocated to the flight and subject to the stand being available will confirm the stand on ARIS. This action will update SIS, via AOMIS, and the stand number will appear on SIS almost immediately. Operations can also look at Stand Availability pages on SIS to see the status of each stand, as seen by airport partners.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 35

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Figure 13: SIS T3 Stand Status Screen

For Terminal 1 and 4 stands, British Airways use their own in-house system called STARMAN. Having pre-planned the stands for the day, British Airways’ Stand & Gate Management Team propose the stand number for a given flight to BAA. This is achieved by a dedicated link between Figaro and ARIS, which causes a pop-up message to appear on ARIS. One of the two Terminal Controllers in BAA Airfield Operations will consider the proposed stand and, if appropriate, accept it. Accepting the proposed stand for a given aircraft on ARIS will cause an update of SIS via AOMIS. Not strictly an IT system, but worth mentioning is Airfield Operations use of the Stack Flight Strips CCTV feed from NATS TC. Two VDU monitors are used to show the four stacks (two stacks per VDU) being operated by NATS Terminal Control at West Drayton. The CCTV monitors show the manual flight stack strips on the controllers work desk and any updates to them in real-time. This information provides BAA with additional information as to the order and timing of inbound aircraft such that daily stand allocation and usage can be optimised. As NATS do not have access to ARIS, then if for any reason the stand number for an arriving aircraft is not shown on SIS when the aircraft has landed, NATS TWR GMP will contact the Terminal Operations Controller in BAA Airfield Operations by telephone and ask for the stand number. The Controller, having confirmed the stand, will update ARIS and the information will be sent to IDAHO, which will in turn update SIS with the stand number. If there is any late stand or gate changes by BAA Airfield Operations (i.e. after the stand number has been published on SIS) then the Controller will telephone the NATS TWR Watch Supervisor and confirm the change verbally before updating ARIS and SIS. This is because the manual flight strip for the flight has already been printed by the TWR and there is no automatic means of updating the information in the TWR at that late stage. It should be noted that the introduction of Electronic Flight Progress Strips in the TWR in 2006 should enable an automatic update of such late stand changes and so render the need for a telephone update redundant. A final point to note on stand planning is that BAA Airfield Operation’s current accommodation does not provide full visual coverage of the stands at each of the terminals. The Operations Team is located in an almost windowless building, to the west of the central airport area, between the two main runways. To compensate for this lack of visual amenity, they use CCTV to see the status of stands and apron areas; including the status of aircraft e.g. is the aircraft ready for push back.

36 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Figure 14: BAA Airfield Operations Accommodation

It is anticipated that they will be able to relocate their offices to the current TWR building, which provides a substantially better vantage point, once NATS have moved to the new tower that is beginning built.

7.1.8. Aircraft Push-Back Clearance

This is a manual interface between NATS TWR GMC and BAA Airfield Operations personnel. Up to two Airfield Operations personnel (one covering each GMC zone being operated by NATS TWR) monitor the radio frequency between GMC and the pilot and manually record the time that push- back was granted. This time is then transcribed manually into IDAHO by Airfield Operations This causes IDAHO to automatically update ARIS and SIS (where the aircraft status on the departures screen for that flight will change to “D” to signify that it has departed i.e. it has pushed back from stand). This manual interface is very labour intensive, from a BAA perspective, and the accuracy of the data captured is, by its very nature, subject to human error. Note that the use of A-SMGCS to automatically capture push-back times will render this manual interface redundant. A-SMGCS will capture actual push-back times rather than the time that the pilot was granted push-back clearance.

7.1.9. Public Displays (FIDS)

IDAHO provides two different types of flight information details (FIDS): corporate (back office) and public. Public FIDS is available on conventional monitors and plasma screens around the airport site, as well as on Teletext and BAA’s internet website.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 37

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Figure 15: BAA Website with Arrivals Information

7.2. BRITISH AIRWAYS

FICO System Inputs & Outputs

BRITISH AIRWAYS

BAA SIRIUS

Z, F, L BA AXIS INTERNET (ACARS) Arrivals & RTO Data

Aviation BAA IDAHO Message Server BABS & FICO PULSAR DCS Aircraft Allocation

CFMU CIRRUS Slot Allocation (LIDO) FIGARO Flight Plan STARPALN Z, F, L Terminal Fli h Operations & (D Day & D+1) STARMAN

BAA IDAHO Gatwick

Figure 16: Overview of BA FICO System & Interfaces

38 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

The key BA systems and interfaces from partner systems, that support the aircraft turn-round process, may be summarised as follows:

7.2.1. FICO

The Flight Information & Control of Operations (FICO) system is BA’s main IT system and is the hub into which most of BA’s other operations systems link into. It contains operational data for D-5 to D+42. It holds information on BA’s world-wide operations, including aircraft registrations, crew hours, engineering defects, etc. FICO interfaces with a variety of other BA systems, as shown in the above diagram, as well as providing a feed to BAA’s IDAHO system at Heathrow, via the RTO Data Warehouse and the Aviation Message Server.

7.2.2. FIGARO

This is the main terminal operations system, supporting BA’s Heathrow operations. It holds data for D day and D+1. It receives a feed from FICO and contains information such as: flight numbers, departure times, destination, passenger numbers, stand numbers etc. Figaro is the most widely used system with BA and has some 2000 pages of Information that are tailored for individual departments needs. Figaro users have the facility to input data into this system, which will then update FICO, though the majority of users have read-only access to it. It is the main arrivals and departures information system within BA. It is also used by BA’s Airport Centre to input target departure times that are received from BA’s own ground handling teams. Any changes to departure or arrival times are automatically passed to BAA IDAHO via FICO. FIGARO also receives a data feed from BAA’s Gatwick IDAHO system.

7.2.3. AXIS

The AXIS system receives and processes ACARS messages from BA aircraft and feeds the data into FICO. An aircraft will send a message when it pushes back and also when it becomes airborne at an outstation. It then sends a position report message every 30 minutes. Upon arrival at Heathrow a message will be sent when the pilot has applied the parking brake when the aircraft is on stand. This information is used to update FIGARO, but not BAA’s IDAHO system.

7.2.4. SIRIUS

The BAA SIRIUS system provides a data feed from the NATS SSR radar, with flight progress information. Data is received when the aircraft enters the Zone, is on final approach and when it has ‘landed’ i.e. when it disappears below the SSR radar and does not reappear for a pre-set period of time.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 39

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

7.2.5. STARPLAN & STARMAN

The STARPLAN system is used to plan stand and gate allocation for Terminals 1 and 4. STARMAN is used for the tactical management of the plan. Once the plan is in STARMAN, it is available for all BA staff to see via Figaro. However, the stand number for a given flight will only be sent to BAA IDAHO once the aircraft is in Zone and the stand allocation controller for the corresponding terminal has confirmed that stand for the in-bound flight. Note: In order for BAA SIS to show accurate EIBT times for flights under CDM, it will be necessary for BA to feed IDAHO with the stand number at least 30 minutes before the estimated landing time.

7.2.6. BA WEBSITE

The BA web site receives data from the RTO Data Warehouse in order to display arrivals and departures information. The information is updated once every 60 seconds.

Figure 17: BA Website with Arrivals Information

40 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Page intentionally left blank

Figure 18: BA Website with Departures Information

7.3. Bmi

Operations are managed from bmi’s Castle Donnington Offices, near East Midlands Airport. The main operations planning system is AIROPS from Sabre, with links to an airport operations tool called Tango.

7.3.1. AIROPS (Strategic Flight Planning)

Bmi use AIROPS (from SABRE) to create and publish the network plan. The system is located at the flight-planning centre at Castle Donnington.

Figure 19: Bmi AIROPS Screen

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 41

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

7.3.2. TANGO (Tactical Flight Management)

Bmi use an airport planning system called TANGO to manage the on-the-day operations. It has the facility to generate IATA standard movement messages according to a given set of business rules to various addresses upon changes being made to a flight e.g. Flight delayed. TANGO movement messages are sent to BAA via IDAHO in order to update SIS information. AIROPS is updated of actual flight progress against planned via IATA messaging from TANGO. Note that bmi would prefer to use TANGO to capture flight status details and for that information to be fed into other partner systems for collaborative decision making rather than for bmi to input the data into TANGO and then again into another system introduced under this CDM.

Figure 20: Bmi TANGO Screen

Bmi also use SIS within their Heathrow ground handling operations room for flight arrivals and departures information and have their own bmi “pages” on SIS:

Figure 21: Bmi Arrivals Information

42 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Figure 22: Bmi Departures Information

7.4. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

7.4.1. National Air Space System (Host)

This system receives and holds flight plans from CFMU pertaining to LHR. The Host system will automatically generate flight strips for outbound aircraft 39 minutes before the scheduled departure and 20 minutes for arrivals. The paper strips are printed in the TWR by the ATSA and passed to GMP or Arrivals as appropriate. With the introduction of Electronic Flight Progress Strips (EFPS), the strips will appear automatically on the relevant controllers display screen at the appropriate time.

7.4.2. Aerodrome Traffic Monitor (ATM)

More of a radar system, than a conventional IT system, ATM is a key tool for controllers. The radar screen can be set to show details of inbound and outbound aircraft within a few miles radius of the airfield, as well as those either just entering the local area (final approach) or leaving it.

Figure 23: Final Approach on 09L

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 43

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

7.4.3. Advanced - Surface Movement Guidance Control System (A-SMGCS)

This is a ground radar system that has great potential for improving common situational awareness and collaborative decision-making. All aircraft (or even ground vehicles) with Mode S transponders can be conclusively identified with this system. The NATS TWR currently uses it to manage the ground movements in conditions of low visibility. A-SMGCS will provide the controller with accurate, automatic identity of all aircraft and vehicles on the manoeuvring area and all relevant aircraft on the apron. This will be useful not only in poor visibility, but also in good visibility, particularly when multiple aircraft with similar colour schemes are manoeuvring in close proximity to one another (e.g. in a holding bay). The advanced A-SMGCS can also assist the controller with a warning system, detecting potentially dangerous conflicts on the runway and restricted areas. The A-SMGCS could also be used to provide IDAHO/SIS with an accurate and timely Landing time, in-block time, off-block time and take off time.

Figure 24: A-SMGCS screen

It is possible to use A-SMGCS to capture actual aircraft landing times, as the weight of the aircraft on its wheels triggers a message from the transponder to A-SMGCS. The actual in-block time could also be captured automatically, as well as push-back times with minimal effort. This information could then be fed back from NATS into IDAHO for airport partners to use via SIS.

44 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

7.4.4. ATIS Weather System

This system is used by pilots and the TWR to check prevailing weather conditions at the airfield. Runway rotations are recorded too and are maintained by BAA Airfield Operations.

7.4.5. Stack Monitors

Not an IT system. The CCTV monitors show the manual flight stack strips on the controllers work desk and any updates to them in real-time. The information feed is shared with BAA Airfield Operations and British Airways Technical Flight Dispatch.

7.4.6. Airport Playback Tool (APT)

Not an on-the-day operational tool, but one that provides value by processing historical data (the current database can archive data for up to 12 months) from A-SMGCS and identifying trends and resolving issues. It will be possible to use this tool to calculate average taxi-times from given blocks on a runway to given stands. These average taxi-times can then be used to introduce variable taxi-times at Heathrow in order to derive more accurate in-block estimates, Target Take Off Times and CTOT adherence.

Figure 25: Airport Playback Tool Display

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 45

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Currently aircraft towing vehicles are not Mode S equipped and therefore do not appear with a label on the screen (unless the aircraft electrics are activated and the transponder selected on in which case the aircraft registration is displayed). The aircraft have different colour states depending on whether they are occupying the runway, queuing, taxiing in or out, or on stand. Data is downloaded in Microsoft Excel spreadsheet format and includes all times on different parts of the airport (runway or taxiways), speeds, and ground holding times.

7.4.7. Expected Approach Time (EAT) Tool

This system is located at LTCC in West Drayton and works on the long-range radar information. It can automatically calculate the ETA of an aircraft at one of the four holding stacks (BNN, LAM, OCK or BIG) and the EAT when it will leave the stack. The difference between the two values equals the holding delay. This delay is not currently included in any calculation of the arrival time estimates shown on SIS.

Figure 26: EAT (Expected Approach Time) tool

It is normally about 10 minutes from the stack to touchdown on Westerlies and on Easterlies 10 minutes from OCK and BNN and 14 minutes from LAM or BIG. Adding the EAT plus the default flying time from the stack could be used to give the first accurate ELDT.

7.4.8. Stand Confirmation

NATS TWR use a SIS Arrivals page to check the stand allocated to a given inbound aircraft and will advise the pilot of that stand together with taxi route instructions to it.

46 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

7.5. AVIANCE UK

7.5.1. Ground Handling Operations System

The main system used within Aviance’s ground handling operations office at Heathrow is Dameral. It is used to record in-blocks and push back times. It is also used for the billing of customers for ground handling services. The key stages of the turn-round process are recorded and retained on manual turn-round sheets. Aviance also input data into 11 different customer systems. The customers simply provide Aviance with the appropriate access and Aviance input the required data into those systems as required by the terms of their individual ground-handling contract.

7.5.2. Aircraft flight Progress Information

SIS pages specific to Aviance supported flights are used to track the progress of inbound flights in order to manage on-the-day resources. When aircraft are shown to be on final approach (status on SIS is shown as “F”) and the stand number is shown against the flight, the ground handling team responsible for that flight is sent to the stand in order meet the flight as it arrives. The amount of notice given to the team will depend on how quickly BAA confirms the stand number (i.e. when the aircraft is on finals, has landed or is holding on the apron for a stand to become available) and the taxi-time from the landing runway and the stand. Last minute stand changes are not unknown and can cause the aircraft to arrive at the new stand before the ground handling team have time to reposition.

7.6. AIR FRANCES SERVICES LIMITED

7.6.1. Departure Control System (DCS)

The ground handling supervisor uses this system to enter the estimated departure time of an aircraft that has just arrived on stand and the turn-round activities are just about to start. The estimate is based upon the minimum amount of time required to turn an aircraft of that particular type round, together with any other local knowledge or information the supervisor may have. The information, once entered into DCS, will update the BAA IDAHO system via a movement message in order to update SIS.

7.6.2. MILORD

This is AFSL’s main operations system. It has an interface to DCS and contains information that includes aircraft, crews and schedule details.

7.6.3. Aircraft flight Progress Information

SIS pages specific to AFSL supported flights are used to track the progress of inbound flights in order to manage on-the-day resources.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 47

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

8. CHANGES ALREADY PLANNED AT HEATHROW

8.1. BAA

The BAA is currently involved in the massive Terminal 5 construction project, with the main terminal building expected to be in operation by 2008. A new NATS tower is also under construction. This building work will create much needed additional stands around the Terminal 5 campus. With British Airways being the prime candidate for occupying the new terminal building, BAA will need to manage the transfer of BA from Terminals 1 and 4 into 5. It is anticipated that Terminals 1 and 4 will be re-allocated to one or more of the other airline alliances. The new taxiway layout has been implemented and now conforms to ICAO standards. The implementation has occurred without any major disruptions. BAA are in the process of introducing variable taxi-times into their arrival time calculations. The information is available from NATS and IDAHO is understood to already be capable of accepting such data.

8.2. BRITISH AIRWAYS

BA is expected to become the main tenant of the new Terminal 5 building once it opens in 2008. This will require a major transfer of operations from Terminals 1 and 4 (also some in Terminal 3) to a single building. BA are working towards minimising the disruption this may cause it’s operations by designing IT systems, business process and operating procedures that can be moved to Terminal 5 without any significant change. In other words, nothing will be implemented in Terminal 5 that has not already been tried and tested within existing terminal buildings. A new Airport Centre has been set up within the Compass Centre. This replaces the earlier individual Terminal Control offices. The Airport Centre comprises of a single-floor open plan office that houses representatives from all BA departments that have any involvement with Heathrow operations e.g. Stand & Gate Planning, Engineering, Baggage Flow Systems, Security, Radio Transmissions (with airborne crew), ground handling (BA’s own internal team), Passenger Transfer Unit, and third parties such as catering and cleaning. This bringing together of key departments ensures improved communication and a more effective trouble-shooting environment. BA have also recently moved flights between Terminals 1 and 4, in order to even out the passenger peaks previously experienced within each terminal. Terminal 4 contained predominately long-haul flights, with peak passenger throughput within that terminal during the early mornings and late afternoons. Terminal 1 contained more of the short-haul flights with peak traffic during the late morning and early afternoons.

8.3. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

It is anticipated that NATS will be taking occupation of the new LHR TWR in 2006. The existing TWR may be used for stand-by purposes, as well as possibly being used by BAA’s Stand & Gate Management Team.

48 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

The key change to NATS TWR operations upon the move to the new TWR will be the use of Electronic Flight Progress Strips (EFPS) instead of the current manual strips. The new EFPS system is being introduced at Stansted and Gatwick before Heathrow and any operational issues are expected to have been addressed prior to implementation at Heathrow.

8.4. Bmi

Bmi are currently evaluating a new computer-based aircraft turn-round system called Eclipse from Speedwing (a subsidiary company of British Airways). It is not yet known if the purchase is going ahead or the results of the evaluation.

Figure 27: Screen Shot of Eclipse tool

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 49

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9. PHASED IMPLEMENTATION & PARTNERS CDM TARGETS AND BENEFITS It was identified from an early stage, considering the complexity of LHR that a phased approach would be recommended to safeguard full Airport CDM implementation in the short term. It was agreed by the Stakeholders that a number of key areas needed to be tackled, some being quick- wins, others being more complex and many acting as prerequisites to other areas. The following changes are recommended to further optimise the operations of the Heathrow IT platform. The flow chart below gives an overview of the main CDM improvements required for achieving CDM-A status.

Airport Partners CFMU LHR = CDM-A

ARRIVALS IT PLATFORM DEPARTURES Turn-round FUM ARR Delay Column STATUS TPLD - EAT DEP Delay Column TOBT SSR information Alarm/Warning

A-SMGCS (ALDT & A-SMGCS (AOBT & AIBT) ATOT) CTOT column VTT (taxi in) VTT (taxi out)

Take Off order PREDEPARTURE Hold for stand SEQUENCE Airport Slot check TTOT DPI

Figure 28: Phased Implementation & Partners CDM Targets and Benefits

50 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9.1. IMPROVE LOCAL ARRIVAL INFORMATION

9.1.1. Current Situation

Following interviews with partners it was identified that the SIS does not provide accurate and timely arrivals information. The estimated time of arrival does not take into account any stack holding delays or variable taxi times (VTT). The estimated arrivals times displayed on SIS can therefore be inaccurate by the amount of the hold delay plus taxi time differences, until the aircraft leaves the stack and enters the Zone when the arrival time is re-calculated and re-displayed on SIS. This recalculation takes into account the aircraft position in the Zone and assumes a default flying time to touchdown. Estimates can still be inaccurate due to the varying approach profiles given by ATC, especially when landing on easterlies. The estimated in-block times are calculated using default taxi times (7 or 9 minutes depending on the terminal) from the landing runway to the terminal building. With taxi times varying significantly between a given runway and stand, the use of variable taxi times would afford better estimates of when an aircraft is estimated to be in-blocks. The actual landing time (ALDT) appears on SIS approximately four minutes after the event. This issue is of particular relevance to ground handling partners, who dispatch crews to meet in-bound aircraft using SIS arrivals information. The publication on SIS of an accurate landing time without the current 4 minute time-lag would enable GH companies to allocate resources at the arrival stand more efficiently and thereby maximise the prospects of completing turn-round activities on-time. The actual in-block times (AIBT) are calculated by adding a default taxi time to the actual landing time and are not usually updated with an accurate in-block time. Although some aircraft are fitted with ACARS and the in-block times can be determined from when the pilot applies the parking- brake upon arriving at the stand, other aircraft do not have such devices fitted. The LHR stands infrastructure does not currently provide an automated means of capturing in-block times. An automated or low cost means of capturing such times would be of great interest to Heathrow partners.

9.1.2. Proposed Improvements

In order to address the identified problems, the following improvements are proposed: • Calculate the estimated landing time (ELDT) using Expected Approach Times (EATs) derived from radar information plus initially default flying times from the stack to the runway. When aircraft have left the hold altitude triggers could be used to update the ELDT/EIBT instead of the Zone position filters. • Use the estimated landing time and variable taxi times to calculate the estimated in- block time. • Capture the actual landing time using a data feed from A-SMGCS, the advanced ground radar system. • Capture actual in-block times using a data feed from A-SMGCS. • LTCC in West Drayton to have access to SIS Flight Arrivals pages, showing terminal numbers for in-bound flights. This will allow TC to allocate the most favourable runway (in terms of shortest taxi-time) to an aircraft during the early morning rush (usually between 0600-0700hrs), when both runways can be used for landing. If in the future the runways are used more regularly in mixed mode configuration the benefits would be even greater.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 51

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.1.3. Trial Methodology

In order to substantiate the above proposals a trial was conducted over a period of two hours on a single day and required the involvement of three EUROCONTROL personnel. One person was required at TC in West Drayton, one at BAA Stand and Gate Management and one in the TWR. The objective was to capture flight progress details and times from three different sources NATS, SIS and visually from the Heathrow TWR and then to compare the existing data available in SIS to that from NATS (EATs) and Variable Taxi Times, with the visual data being a confirmation of the actual event times at Heathrow. The steps taken to obtain this data were as follows:

• The Expected Approach Time (EAT) information (i.e. the estimated time that an aircraft will leave the stack) was printed off from EAT PC in LTCC at West Drayton every 30 minutes and saved.

• The average flying time for an aircraft from leaving flight levels 6900' and 2900' to touchdown was calculated. This was done by looking at the radar screen in the TWR and recording the times between the aircraft leaving these flight levels and landing on the runway. On average the 6900' time to touchdown time was found to be 10 minutes and the 2400 time 3 minutes. As such, these values can be used as a default in later calculations.

• Record the estimated arrival times on SIS when the SIS flight status code is Z, L and A. Also record the time when the status code changes from P to Z.

• Visually check and record the touchdown times and in block times of the in-bound aircraft.

• Take the ETA time off the paper strips in the TWR to see a comparison of the different ETA information everyone has.

• Use the variable taxi times (VTTs – section 9.3.2) to calculate an estimated in block time.

• Create a spreadsheet to show results of the trial (see 0for the spreadsheet used in the trial).

• The CDM value is initially calculated using the EAT + time to touchdown from the stacks (14 mins from LAM and 13 from BIG on easterlies) + VTT (according to stand from 09L). The next value is the time when it commences descent from 6900 +10 minutes + VTT (according to stand from 09L) and then passing 2400' + 3mins + VTT (according to stand from 09L).

9.1.4. Benefits to Partners

Using the current EAT information (the accuracy of which is being enhanced) would improve ELDTs and EIBTs. The greatest improvement in the accuracy of the EIBT estimate was when the aircraft were still some 30 minutes away from landing and the EAT was included in the EIBT calculation. As can be seen from the following graph, the EIBT could be estimated using CDM to within +-5 minutes of the AIBT in 59% of cases and the figure rose to an impressive 90% where a tolerance of +-10 minutes was chosen. This compares to figures of 21% and 50% using the current SIS calculations.

52 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

25

20

15

10

5

0 0 -5 +6 to 10 +11 to +16 to +21-49 mins min 15 min 20 min mins diff

Variation (P time on SIS vs AIBT) Variation (EAT + flying time and variable taxi time vs AIBT)

Figure 29: EIBT - 30 Minutes before Arrival

Similar improvements were recorded when the aircraft were in the Zone (10 minutes away from landing) and height triggers were used instead of the 12nm default flying time .Here the target was to get an accuracy of +- 3 minutes for the EIBT and the CDM proposals improved the estimation from 59% to 81% of flights.

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 -1 2 - 3 min 4 - 5 min 6 - 7 8 -24 mins diff mins mins

Variation (Z time on SIS vs AIBT) Variation (6900' time +10mins +variable taxi time vs AIBT)

Figure 30: EIBT - 10 Minutes before Arrival

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 53

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

For aircraft on final approach (4 minutes from landing), the difference between the two different estimates was less pronounced, though the CDM values were still closer to the AIBT than those shown on SIS mainly due to the variable taxi time calculation.

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 mins 1 min 2 min 3 mins 4-21 diff mins

Variation (F time on SIS vs AIBT) Variation (2900' time +4mins +variable taxi time vs AIBT)

Figure 31: EIBT - 4 Minutes before Arrival

The accuracy of the A-SMGCS tool in determining AIBT was also shown to be higher than SIS.

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0 0 mins diff +1 min +2 min +3 min +4 mins +5 mins +6 mins

Variation (Visual vs SIS) Variation (Visual vs ASMGCS)

Figure 32: AIBT Comparison using A-SMGCS Data

The final graph here confirms the accuracy of A-SMGCS in determining the actual landing times and how this information feed could provide a reliable and timelier replacement of the current means of determining landing times and displaying them on SIS.

54 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

35 30 25 20 15 Variation (Visual 10 vs ASMGCS) 5 0 0 +1 +2 +3 mins min min min diff

Figure 33: ALDT Accuracy using A-SMGCS Data Variable Taxi Time Study A small study was carried out where Variable Taxi Times were added to the ALDT in order to predict a more accurate EIBT; these estimates were compared to the current times displayed on SIS. In all three runway configurations there was an increase in the accuracy of EIBT within a tolerance of +-3 minutes which indicates that VTT would increase the EIBT predictability. Results

09L (42 flts) SIS CDM +/- 1 12 21 +/- 2 22 28 +/- 3 29 29

27R (99 flts) SIS CDM +/- 1 34 42 +/- 2 52 54 +/- 3 65 68

9.1.5. Summary (Arrivals)

Improving the information concerning arrivals (estimates and actual times) would be the first essential step to establishing a CDM-A platform at LHR. The partners see it as a potential quick win and will act as a catalyst towards providing accurate departure times. The CDM project has identified several methods of improving arrival estimates, from the Flight Update Message (FUM) sent by the CFMU three hours before landing, to the A-SMGCS providing instant and accurate landing and in-block times. It is important that these changes are implemented as soon as possible in order to show the partners that CDM can make a difference, maintaining commitment and support from the partners and encouraging them to provide accurate departure information in return. It would also be useful for LTCC to have access to airport information concerning arrivals, such as terminal, stand availability and delay.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 55

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.2. IMPROVING DEPARTURE INFORMATION

9.2.1. Current Situation

An EOBT is currently taken from the Flight Plan (FPL) and provides the Estimated Time of Departure (ETD) in IDAHO/SIS. This time is updated by some operators through their own interfaces according to the delay and if a DLA message is sent to the CFMU the ETD is normally also updated. For many flights that are within 15 minutes of their EOBT and where no manual update is made by the GH company the ETD remains the same as the original EOBT, and when the aircraft eventually calls for start it may then be subject to an ATC delay. This lack of accurate off block information causes difficulties for S&G Management, GH resource management and may result in non-compliance with both Airport and CFMU slots. The graph below (Figure 28 : below shows analysis of 10,000 flights in June 2004, where the ETD, the updated STD has been compared with the ATD (ATD=AOBT). The ETD is in fact the current version of the Target Off Block Time (TOBT) used by the AO/GH, however, from the graph it can be clearly seen that it is poorly adhered to (only 50% of flights departed with +-5 minutes of ETD) and for this reason many partners find it difficult to plan using information that is inaccurate. The graph shows that,

General

• 24% (16% were up to 4 minutes early) of the flights departed prior to their ETD (shown in green on the graph). • 6% of the flights departed at their ETD (shown in blue on the graph). • 70% (22% were up to 4 minutes late) of the flights departed after their ETD (shown in red on the graph). • About 50% of flights departed within +-5 minutes of their ETD.

Specifically

• 11% of flights departed between 1 and 2 minutes after ETD. • 21% of flights departed between 1 and 4 minutes after ETD. • 30% of flights departed between 1 and 6 minutes after ETD. • 54% of flights departed between 1 and 14 minutes after ETD. • About 48% of flights departed more than 4 minutes after ETD. At present there is no time in the SIS that displays when ATC predict that the aircraft can depart (equivalent to the CDM TSAT) so some of the delay will be attributable to the movement of aircraft on the ground at the time (i.e. flights that are blocked in a cul-de-sac due to arriving flights or other departures. However, the aim of CDM is to improve all of the above statistics, especially the 48% of flights that departed more than 4 minutes after ETD (4 minutes allows for timing differences and other traffic movements).

56 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Distribution of AOBT - EOBT (June 2004)

>60

60

55

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

14

12

10

8

6

AOBT-EOBT (minutes) 4

2

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

-15

>-20

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Number of flights (Total =10,000)

Figure 34: Analysis of AOBT vs EOBT

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 57

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.2.2. Proposed Improvements

9.2.2.1. Turn-round times

Turn-round times are an integral part of the ground phase of any given flight and the link between the inbound flight segment and outbound flight segment. The taxiing segment for both arriving and departing aircraft is not considered within the turn-round time but must be considered in the complete milestone process. The duration of a turn-round is considered as the time an aircraft arrives on-blocks on a parking stand (AIBT) to the commencement of push-back for the departing flight (AOBT). Most Aircraft Operators have two different sets of ground time references:

• MTT - Minimum transit / turn-round times, based on technical possibilities with standard equipment and normally productive manpower. • Scheduled transit / turn-round times, usually higher than minimum turn-round times (averaging MTT + 10-15 minutes) as they take into account any possible arrival delay and still allow on-time performance. These are normally calculated by internal airline data studies, covering minimum times more objectively than scheduled times which have a variety of other factors to take into account. These factors are airport site specific and will include such elements as airport slot coordination, airport infrastructure, time of operation etc. With the high number of Aircraft Operators and the varied aircraft types operating through London Heathrow Airport many parameters have to be considered in the calculation of minimum turn- around times. The list (not exhaustive) below gives a general overview of such parameters that needs to be considered:

• Short haul / long haul flights • Home Based / Away based Aircraft Operators • European / International / Domestic / Transit Flights • Contact Stands / Remote Parking • Cleaning / Catering • Containerised / Bulk loading • Passenger / Cargo • Airport infrastructure e.g. hydrant fuel • Landside links e.g. passenger flows, security requirements • Immigration / Customs • Engine start procedures Some of the aircraft operators and ground handlers have provided minimum turn-round times for their aircraft types below. This table would need to be expanded on to take into account individual parameters for all airlines and ground handlers. These agreed values would then need to be included within the CDM platform but with provision / facility for tactical manual override by the AO/GH based on the operational situation at the time.

58 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Table 1: Turn-rounds times

MTT in minutes A/C TYPE Domestic / European / outside Europe

DH8 25 / 25 / na ER4 35 / 35 / na 733 40 / 40 / na 734 35 / 45 / na 735 30 / 35 / na 738 45 / 45 / na 757 45 / 60 / 70 767 55 / 60 / 75 777 na / na / 90 747 na / na / 100 319 35 / 45 / na 320 40 / 45 / na 321 45 / 50 / na 310 na / 55 / na M83 na / 45 / na 100 35 / 40 / na 146 / 35 / 35 / na RJ100

9.2.2.2. Target Off-Block Time (TOBT)

Definition Of A Milestone - A critical event during the progress of a flight. A successfully completed milestone will trigger decision making processes for downstream events and influence both the further progress of the flight and the accuracy with which the progress can be predicted. Definition of TOBT - It is the time, taking into account the current operational situation, that an AO/GH agent estimates that an aircraft will be ready, all doors closed, boarding bridge removed, push back vehicle present, ready to push back / taxi immediately upon reception of TWR instructions. A TOBT is one of the key milestones identified in the turn-round process and the accuracy is essential for planning of departures and as a subsequence the European Air Traffic Flow Management. Procedure – The airport information platform will correlate the incoming and outgoing flight of the same airframe using the aircraft registration (e.g. generally an aircraft arriving late, will normally depart late). Given an accurate in block time (Add EDLT + taxi in time) and a minimum turn-round time the first TOBT can be generated and then a VTT can be added to provide a Target Take off Time (TTOT). The AO/GH can evaluate the TOBT against the operational situation and amend it as required up until about 20 minutes before where it will need to be stable in order for ATC to finalise the pre-departure sequence. If ATC calculate that the aircraft will need to depart after the TOBT (due to cul-de-sac congestion or to conform to the CTOT etc.) they will provide a Target Start Up Time (TSAT). The platform will provide warnings / alarms when certain events are looking doubtful e.g. if boarding hasn’t started X minutes before TOBT. It will be the responsibility of the partners concerned to cancel the warning by updating the information concerned.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 59

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Benefits - Accurate TOBTs will enhance operations on the ground because all partners will have a clear picture of the intentions of the aircraft. It will be beneficial to S&G management and ATC to know the expected hold if a stand is occupied and subsequently ATC will be able to provide the AO/GH with a time when they will clear the aircraft for push back, which will allow the ground resources to be in the correct place at the right time.

9.2.2.3. Pre-Departure Sequencing

Definition – A pre-departure sequence is the order that aircraft are planned to depart from their stands (push off blocks) taking into account partners preferences. It should not be confused with the pre-take off order where ATC organise aircraft at the holding point of a runway. Method - Accurate estimates of Off-block times are necessary for the effectiveness of this application. Presently and as a general rule, ATC applies the “first come first served” principle in departure sequencing, only taking into account the optimisation of runway throughput. It is widely accepted that this principle is well out of date. When pre-notification of the aircraft being ready for pushback is available, optimised pre-sequencing of aircraft departing their stands according to known constraints should be possible. The pre-departure sequence will link with the A-DPI message to the CFMU.

Trial Methodology ATC currently do not have the time, equipment or resources to plan a pre-departure sequence. The GMP position has a constant high workload connected with passing ATC clearances, managing requests from pilots (slot extensions, start up delays etc.) and regulating the flow of starting traffic to GMC. The introduction of clearances provided by datalink and Electronic Flight Progress Strips in the new TWR is expected to relieve some of the GMP workload, however, the method of pre-departure sequencing and integration into the ATC procedures is still under discussion. Note: The pre-departure sequence raises an issue of ATC keeping a flight on stand after it is ready which implies a delay on the AO, even though they have requested to depart the stand. This issue needs to be resolved at an airport level as it also involves problems such as stand occupancy, charging and punctuality statistics.

9.2.3. Benefits to Partners

CDM Partners will have greater transparency on the operational situation regarding the position of departing flights. GH will be able to position their resources more efficiently as they will know exactly which order and when the flights will depart. S&G management will be able to plan stands with more precision and AOs will be able to prioritise their flights and have a better overview of their aircraft movements. ATC, who will plan the final order, will be able to regulate the queue at the holding point (reducing emissions), plan push backs in order to reduce congestion on aprons and taxiways and regulate the take off order taking into account CTOT.

60 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9.2.3.1. Variable Taxi Times (VTT)

Definition - In the context of Airport CDM, taxi time is considered to be:

• For arriving flights: the taxi-in time is the period between the Actual Landing Time (ALDT) and the actual In Block Time (AIBT).

• For departing flights: the taxi-out time is the period between the Actual Off Block Time (AOBT) and the Actual Take Off Time (ATOT). For departures the taxi time includes the time spent queuing at the holding point and the time spent on the runway before the take-off roll is initiated. Introduction - The ability to maximise the use of the available runway and taxiway capacity depends to a large extent on optimizing the pushback, taxi and take-off sequence and hence reducing queuing and taxiway congestion. The significance of calculating accurate taxi times is the fact that they form an essential input into other processes, including prediction of take off times for the CFMU. The taxi times calculated for individual flights are used primarily for the following purposes:

• Ground handlers: taxi-in times are used to refine EIBT.

• Aircraft operators: taxi-in times are used to refine EIBT, taxi-out times to ensure CTOT compliance.

• Air traffic control: taxi times are used to organize and manage, in the short and medium term, surface movements on the airport, optimizing the use of available capacity and avoiding taxiway congestion; taxi-out times are also used to ensure CTOT compliance.

• Central Flow Management Unit: taxi-out times meeting the required accuracy result in improved ETOTs, which in turn enable better overall traffic prediction. This is essential for optimising the use of en-route capacity.

Current situation Arrivals

• Northerly Runway (27R/09L) - SIS will add either a default taxi time of 7 minutes (for Central area) or 9 minutes (for area south of Southerly runway) to an ELDT or ALDT to calculate the EIBT (ETA).

• Southerly Runway (27L/09R) - SIS will add a default taxi times of 7 minutes for all areas to an ELDT or ALDT to calculate the EIBT (ETA). Departures The CFMU uses a default value of 16 minutes for all runways except 27R where 20 minutes is used. Variable Taxi Time Calculation - A study was performed where data was obtained from the Heathrow APT, which records information from the surface movement radar (A-SMGCS). The APT records the aircraft callsign, type, registration and details of taxi times as the aircraft moves around the aerodrome.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 61

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

The data was gathered over a period of 9 months from 5th September 2003 until 31st May 2004. The raw taxi data from the APT for both arrivals and departures has been sorted in four stages. • Any aircraft that does not have a taxi time or has been classed as remote holding is deleted from the results sheet. • The times take into account a period of delay incurred due to waiting for other traffic to enter/exit cul-de-sacs. • The data was sorted by which runway it used. 09L, 09R, 27L or 27R. • The data is sorted by aircraft type/size. Heavy aircraft include B747, B777, B767, A340, A330, DC10, MD11, IL96 and L101s. All other aircraft are included in the Medium/Small category. • The data is sorted by the stand each aircraft was parked on. The stand numbers are grouped into areas designated by the taxiway that is used to access them.

Table 2: Stand numbers

APRON TWY STANDS A-West North 500 - 509 A-West South 510 – 519 B-West North 525 – 529 B-West South 520 – 524 C-West North 530 – 539 C-West South 540 – 556 D-West North Still to be numbered D-West South 566 - 576 A – East 170/171 B - East 146-150/ 152-156/158 B - North 101/103/105/107/109/174/176/178/180/182/184/186/188/190/192L/192R B - Northwest 334/336/338/340/342 B - South 212/212L/212R/214/301/303/305/307/309 F 314/316/317/319/321/363/365 G 318/320/322/323/325/327/329/331/335/364 H 324/326/328/330/332/350-354 J 102/104/106/108/110/112/117/119/121/123/125/125L/125R/127/127L/127R/129 K 114/116/118/120/122/122/124/126/128/130/132/134/139/141/143-145 P 203/205/207/209/209L/209R/236/238/240/242 Q 202/204/206/208/210/211/213/215 R 302/304/306L/306R/308/310/313/315 S - East 429-432. S - West 601-609 T - South 401-403 / 461/463 T - North 404-412/440/441 V 414-417/419-425 W 451-456/RS/RS1/RS2 Z 611-616

62 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Results Arrivals Taxi Averages This table below details the average taxi time taken for arriving aircraft to vacate the runway and reach their stand. The times are considered to be the unimpeded time, in other words the direct taxi time with no holding.

Table 3: Arrivals Taxi Averages - Medium / Small / Light aircraft

27L Arrivals Taxi In time 27R Arrivals Taxi In time A-West North average = 8 A-West North average = 6 A-West South average = 6 A-West South average = 8 B-West North average = 8 B-West North average = 6 B-West South average = 6 B-West South average = 8 C-West North average = 7 C-West North average = 5 C-West South average = 5 C-West South average = 7 D-West North average = 6 D-West North average = 4 D-West South average = 4 D-West South average = 6 B-east average = 6 B-east average = 6 B-north average = 7 B-north average = 3 B-northwest average = 6 B-northwest average = 4 B-south average = 4 B-south average = 8 F Average = 4 F Average = 6 G average = 5 G average = 5 H average = 7 H average = 3 J average = 8 J average = 4 K average = 7 K average = 5 P average = 6 P average = 8 Q average = 5 Q average = 8 R average = 3 R average = 6 S-east average = 7 S-east average = 12 S-west average = 3 S-west average = 11 T-North average = 4 T-north average = 11 T-south average = 6 T-south average = 13 V Average = 5 V Average = 12 W Average = 4 W Average = 10 Z average = 3 Z average = 10

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 63

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

09L Arrivals Taxi In time 09R Arrivals Taxi In time A-West North average = 8 A-West North average = 10 A-West South average = 10 A-West South average = 8 B-West North average = 8 B-West North average = 10 B-West South average = 10 B-West South average = 8 C-West North average = 7 C-West North average = 5 C-West South average = 9 C-West South average = 7 D-West North average = 6 D-West North average = 4 D-West South average = 8 D-West South average = 6 B-east average = 6 B-east average = 5 B-north average = 3 B-north average = 7 B-northwest average = 5 B-northwest average = 8 B-south average = 8 B-south average = 3 F Average = 7 F Average = 6 G average = 6 G average = 7 H average = 4 H average = 7 J average = 4 J average = 7 K average = 5 K average = 6 P average = 7 P average = 4 Q average = 7 Q average = 4 R average = 7 R average = 3 S-east average = 12 S-east average = 6 S-west average = 11 S-west average = 3 T–north average = 12 T-north average = 3 T–south average = 14 T-south average = 5 V Average = 11 V Average = 4 W Average = 11 W Average = 3 Z average = 11 Z average = 4

Table 4: Arrivals Taxi Averages - Heavy aircraft

27L Arrivals Taxi In time 27R Arrivals Taxi In time A-West North average = 7 A-West North average = 5 A-West South average = 5 A-West South average = 7 B-West North average = 7 B-West North average = 5 B-West South average = 5 B-West South average = 7 C-West North average = 6 C-West North average = 4 C-West South average = 4 C-West South average = 6 D-West North average = 5 D-West North average = 3 D-West South average = 3 D-West South average = 5 B-east average = 8 B-east average = 8 B-north average = 8 B-north average = 5 B-northwest average = 6 B-northwest average = 4 B-south average = 5 B-south average = 7 F Average = 4 F Average = 5

64 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

27L Arrivals Taxi In time 27R Arrivals Taxi In time G average = 5 G average = 4 H average = 7 H average = 3 J average = 10 J average = 6 K average = 9 K average = 6 P average = 6 P average = 8 Q average = 6 Q average = 9 R average = 4 R average = 7 S-east average = 8 S-east average = 14 S-west average = 3 S-west average = 11 T-north average = 6 T-north average = 11 T-south average = 8 T-south average = 13 V Average = 7 V Average = 13 W Average = 5 W Average = 11 Z average = 8 Z average = 10

09L Arrivals Taxi In time 09R Arrivals Taxi In time A-West North average = 9 A-West North average = 11 A-West South average = 11 A-West South average = 9 B-West North average = 9 B-West North average = 11 B-West South average = 11 B-West South average = 9 C-West North average = 8 C-West North average = 10 C-West South average = 10 C-West South average = 8 D-West North average = 7 D-West North average = 9 D-West South average = 9 D-West South average = 7 B-east average = 5 B-east average = 5 B-north average = 5 B-north average = 8 B-northwest average = 5 B-northwest average = 9 B-south average = 9 B-south average = 4 F Average = 8 F Average = 5 G average = 7 G average = 7 H average = 4 H average = 8 J average = 3 J average = 8 K average = 4 K average = 7 P average = 6 P average = 3 Q average = 8 Q average = 3 R average = 9 R average = 4 S-east average = 11 S-east average = 5 S-west average = 11 S-west average = 6 T-north average = 11 T-north average = 3 T-south average = 13 T-south average = 5 V Average = 11 V Average = 3 W Average = 11 W Average = 3 Z average = 12 Z average = 7

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 65

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

DEPARTURE TAXI AVERAGES This result sheet details the average unimpeded taxi time from push back until airborne and doesn’t take into account any queuing at the holding point.

Table 5: Departure taxi average – Medium / Small / Light aircraft

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 17 A-West North average = 15 A-West South average = 15 A-West South average = 17 B-West North average = 17 B-West North average = 15 B-West South average = 15 B-West South average = 17 C-West North average = 16 C-West North average = 14 C-West South average = 14 C-West South average = 16 D-West North average = 15 D-West North average = 13 D-West South average = 13 D-West South average = 15 B-east average = 9 B-east average = 9 B-north average = 12 B-north average = 10 B-northwest average = 13 B-northwest average = 12 B-south average = 9 B-south average = 11 F Average = 11 F Average = 15 G average = 14 G average = 14 H average = 13 H average = 12 J average = 11 J average = 10 K average = 10 K average = 9 P average = 9 P average = 10 Q average = 9 Q average = 11 R average = 11 R average = 12 S-east average = 6 S-east average = 16 S-west average = 12 S-west average = 17 T-north average = 10 T-north average = 14 T-south average = 12 T-south average = 16 V Average = 9 V Average = 13 W Average = 11 W Average = 16 Z average = 13 Z average = 18

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 6 A-West North average = 8 A-West South average = 8 A-West South average = 6 B-West North average = 6 B-West North average = 8 B-West South average = 8 B-West South average = 6 C-West North average = 7 C-West North average = 9 C-West South average = 9 C-West South average = 7 D-West North average = 8 D-West North average = 10

66 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time D-West South average = 10 D-West South average = 8 B-east average = 14 B-east average = 14 B-north average = 12 B-north average = 14 B-northwest average = 9 B-northwest average = 12 B-south average = 14 B-south average = 11 F Average = 11 F Average = 10 G average = 13 G average = 12 H average = 11 H average = 14 J average = 14 J average = 16 K average = 14 K average = 16 P average = 16 P average = 14 Q average = 15 Q average = 13 R average = 14 R average = 11 S-east average = 18 S-east average = 14 S-west average = 16 S-west average = 11 T-north average = 18 T-north average = 13 T-south average = 20 T-south average = 15 V Average = 19 V Average = 14 W Average = 18 W Average = 13 Z average = 15 Z average = 10

Table 6: Departure taxi average – Heavy aircraft

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 20 A-West North average = 18 A-West South average = 18 A-West South average = 20 B-West North average = 20 B-West North average = 18 B-West South average = 18 B-West South average = 20 C-West North average = 19 C-West North average = 17 C-West South average = 17 C-West South average = 19 D-West North average = 18 D-West North average = 16 D-West South average = 16 D-West South average = 18 B-east average = 12 B-east average = 12 B-north average = 15 B-north average = 13 B-northwest average = 16 B-northwest average = 15 B-south average = 12 B-south average = 14 F Average = 14 F Average = 18 G average = 17 G average = 17 H average = 16 H average = 15 J average = 14 J average = 13 K average = 13 K average = 12 P average = 12 P average = 13 Q average = 12 Q average = 14 R average = 14 R average = 15

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 67

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time S-east average = 9 S-east average = 19 S-west average = 15 S-west average = 20 T-north average = 13 T-north average = 17 T-south average = 15 T-south average = 19 V Average = 12 V Average = 16 W Average = 14 W Average = 19 Z average = 16 Z average = 21

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 9 A-West North average = 11 A-West South average = 11 A-West South average = 9 B-West North average = 9 B-West North average = 11 B-West South average = 11 B-West South average = 9 C-West North average = 10 C-West North average = 12 C-West South average = 12 C-West South average = 10 D-West North average = 11 D-West North average = 13 D-West South average = 13 D-West South average = 11 B-east average = 17 B-east average = 17 B-north average = 15 B-north average = 17 B-northwest average = 12 B-northwest average = 15 B-south average = 17 B-south average = 14 F Average = 14 F Average = 13 G average = 16 G average = 15 H average = 14 H average = 17 J average = 17 J average = 19 K average = 17 K average = 19 P average = 19 P average = 17 Q average = 18 Q average = 16 R average = 17 R average = 14 S-east average = 21 S-east average = 17 S-west average = 19 S-west average = 14 T-north average = 21 T-north average = 16 T-south average = 23 T-south average = 18 V Average = 22 V Average = 17 W Average = 21 W Average = 16 Z average = 18 Z average = 13

68 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

These result sheet detail the average taxi time from push back until airborne and takes into account an average amount queuing at the holding point (7-10 aircraft).

Table 7: Average taxi time - Medium / Small / Light Aircraft

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 27 A-West North average = 25 A-West South average = 25 A-West South average = 27 B-West North average = 27 B-West North average = 25 B-West South average = 25 B-West South average = 27 C-West North average = 26 C-West North average = 24 C-West South average = 24 C-West South average = 26 D-West North average = 25 D-West North average = 23 D-West South average = 23 D-West South average = 25 B-east average = 19 B-east average = 19 B-north average = 22 B-north average = 20 B-northwest average = 23 B-northwest average = 22 B-south average = 19 B-south average = 21 F Average = 21 F Average = 25 G average = 24 G average = 24 H average = 23 H average = 22 J average = 21 J average = 20 K average = 20 K average = 19 P average = 19 P average = 20 Q average = 19 Q average = 21 R average = 21 R average = 22 S-east average = 16 S-east average = 26 S-west average = 22 S-west average = 27 T-north average = 20 T-north average = 24 T-south average = 22 T-south average = 26 V Average = 19 V Average = 23 W Average = 21 W Average = 26 Z average = 23 Z average = 28

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 16 A-West North average = 18 A-West South average = 18 A-West South average = 16 B-West North average = 16 B-West North average = 18 B-West South average = 18 B-West South average = 16 C-West North average = 17 C-West North average = 19 C-West South average = 19 C-West South average = 17 D-West North average = 18 D-West North average = 20 D-West South average = 20 D-West South average = 18 B-east average = 24 B-east average = 24

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 69

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time B-north average = 22 B-north average = 24 B-northwest average = 19 B-northwest average = 22 B-south average = 24 B-south average = 21 F Average = 21 F Average = 20 G average = 23 G average = 22 H average = 21 H average = 24 J average = 24 J average = 26 K average = 24 K average = 26 P average = 26 P average = 24 Q average = 25 Q average = 23 R average = 24 R average = 21 S-east average = 28 S-east average = 24 S-west average = 26 S-west average = 21 T-north average = 28 T-north average = 23 T-south average = 30 T-south average = 25 V Average = 29 V Average = 24 W Average = 28 W Average = 23 Z average = 25 Z average = 20

Table 8: Average taxi time – Heavy aircraft

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 30 A-West North average = 28 A-West South average = 28 A-West South average = 30 B-West North average = 30 B-West North average = 28 B-West South average = 28 B-West South average = 30 C-West North average = 29 C-West North average = 27 C-West South average = 27 C-West South average = 29 D-West North average = 28 D-West North average = 26 D-West South average = 26 D-West South average = 28 B-east average = 22 B-east average = 22 B-north average = 25 B-north average = 23 B-northwest average = 26 B-northwest average = 25 B-south average = 22 B-south average = 24 F Average = 24 F Average = 28 G average = 27 G average = 27 H average = 26 H average = 25 J average = 24 J average = 23 K average = 23 K average = 22 P average = 22 P average = 23 Q average = 22 Q average = 24 R average = 24 R average = 25 S-east average = 19 S-east average = 29 S-west average = 25 S-west average = 30

70 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

27L Departures Taxi out time 27R Departures Taxi out time T-north average = 23 T-north average = 27 T-south average = 25 T-south average = 29 V Average = 22 V Average = 26 W Average = 24 W Average = 29 Z average = 26 Z average = 31

09L Departures Taxi out time 09R Departures Taxi out time A-West North average = 19 A-West North average = 21 A-West South average = 21 A-West South average = 19 B-West North average = 19 B-West North average = 21 B-West South average = 21 B-West South average = 19 C-West North average = 20 C-West North average = 22 C-West South average = 22 C-West South average = 20 D-West North average = 21 D-West North average = 23 D-West South average = 23 D-West South average = 21 B-east average = 27 B-east average = 27 B-north average = 25 B-north average = 27 B-northwest average = 22 B-northwest average = 25 B-south average = 27 B-south average = 24 F Average = 24 F Average = 23 G average = 26 G average = 25 H average = 24 H average = 27 J average = 27 J average = 29 K average = 27 K average = 29 P average = 29 P average = 27 Q average = 28 Q average = 26 R average = 27 R average = 24 S-east average = 31 S-east average = 27 S-west average = 29 S-west average = 24 T-north average = 31 T-north average = 26 T-south average = 33 T-south average = 28 V Average = 32 V Average = 27 W Average = 31 W Average = 26 Z average = 28 Z average = 23

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 71

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.2.3.2. Target Take Off Time (TTOT)

Current Situation Although the TTOT is not currently available in the airport system it could be estimated today by adding the ETD to a default taxi out time.

CDM Improvement The TTOT will be used by the CFMU to update ETFMS and thus improve the ATFM within Europe. Initially the ETOT is calculated using the initial TOBT and VTT. When ATC agree a TSAT this will be added to the VTT to become a TTOT. This estimate should be very accurate as it based on the pre-departure sequence, however, it could be further improved by linking the CDM platform to the departure controllers EFPS system where a more accurate TTOT could be generated based upon actual departure frequency. For example, departures at LHR are normally separated by either 1 or 2 minutes according to aircraft vortex wake category. In a queue where a flight is following 3 heavies (2 minute separation x 3) and 4 non-heavies (1 minute separation x 4) a TTOT of H+10 minutes could be predicted.

9.2.3.3. CTOT Slot Compliance

Current Situation The CTOT tolerance for LHR, as for all European airfields, is -5 to +10 minutes. This tolerance is for the benefit of ATC in order to fit traffic into a take off order to suit the operational situation. AOs/Pilots are expected to plan their departures so that aircraft are at the Holding Point prior to the CTOT and not consider the tolerance window as a back up to compensate for their own delay. At a large Airport like LHR which has many factors affecting departure from stand and is currently using one value for taxi time calculation it is very difficult to manage aircraft to meet all their CTOTs especially if they push back late.

Between January 2003 and March 2004 the average for aircraft departing outside of the Slot Tolerance window was 29%.

CDM Improvement ATC have limited flexibility with FMP/CFMU to extend slots, however, the aim is to improve the conformity through enhanced planning using TOBTs and pre-departure sequencing, VTTs and the use of DPI messages (leading to CTOT shifting). ATC will be able to achieve a better CTOT compliance, reducing the number of required extensions to the slot window. Overall network benefits will be gained by reducing aircraft bunching in en-route sectors caused by local CTOT slot extensions being applied.

72 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9.2.3.4. Airport Slot Compliance

Current Situation LHR is a co-ordinated airport (Airport Slots Mandatory) where the slots are planned for summer and winter, the change over coincides with the hour change. Slots are planned on EOBT and will only need to be re-negotiated if the delay goes into the next day. Airport Coordination Limited (ACL) manage the slot allocation planning and they send to BAA the daily slots (sent the evening before activation) and the BAA/BA will then plan the stands accordingly. Heathrow currently has an Air Traffic Movement limit of 480K a year and has been around 466K at the highest peak. GA slots are available (max 3 on airport at one time). The Operations Duty Manager will often coordinate these slots and others outside of office hours. Royal flights/Heads of State have an automatic slot when it is approved as an official visit from the foreign office. The graph below (Figure 35 below) shows analysis of 10,000 flights in June 2004, where the STD has been compared with the ATD (ATD=AOBT). From the graph it is evident that the schedule is poorly adhered to, only 33% of flights departed with +-5 minutes of ETD, which makes planning of slots and subsequently S&G management very challenging and also can damage an airports reputation. The graph shows that:

• 12% of the flights departed prior to their STD (shown in green on the graph). • 4% of the flights departed at their STD (shown in blue on the graph). • 84% of the flights departed after their STD (shown in red on the graph). • About 33% of flights departed within +-5 minutes of their STD.

Distribution of AOBT - SOBT (June 2004)

>55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20

15 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 AOBT-SOBT (minutes) AOBT-SOBT -2 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14 -15 >-20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Number of flights (Total =10,000)

Figure 35: Analysis of AOBT vs SOBT

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 73

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

CDM Improvement CDM will improve operations on the ground and will enable AOs to operate closer to their slots/schedule. The enhanced arrival and departure information will provide ACL with accurate data, which can be used for statistics and tracking of slot conformance and assist in the planning of future slots.

9.2.4. Summary (Departures)

Departure estimates are generally more difficult to predict than arrival estimates, as they are subject to many factors, such as late passengers, CTOT, ground handling resources, late arrival of the aircraft etc. Analysis of Estimated Time of Departure (ETD) in June 2004 showed that only 50% of flights departed within +-5 minutes of their ETD. Departure can also refer to take off time as well as off block time and here ATC and the CFMU are interested to get an accurate prediction of the Target Take Off Time. Obtaining a more accurate Off Block Time can be achieved by tracking the events (milestones) that occur during a turn-round and providing that information to the concerned partners. An accurate Estimated In Block Time is essential to be able to estimate a turn-round time and this can then generate a Target Off Block Time which is confirmed by firstly the AO/GH and then adjusted by ATC (TSAT) subject to the operational situation at the time. When an accurate TSAT has been agreed it can be linked to a variable taxi time to provide an accurate Target Take Off Time, which will be used by the CFMU to enhance the European Air Traffic Flow Management. With a clear view of partners intentions, departure management will become more efficient – better punctuality, reduced queuing, enhanced resource management, fewer wasted slots and less stress for many of the partners involved in the turn-round. In order to reach this situation, the current system will need to be modified and partners will need to adapt the way they operate today, which could result in changes to procedures and Letters of Agreement / Service Level Agreements. With the ever increasing environmental pressures on the aviation industry, any mitigation strategies deriving from CDM implementation should be capitalised on. Reduced aircraft taxi times and queuing reduces fuel resource use, ground noise and emissions to atmosphere such as NOx, unburnt hydrocarbons and greenhouse gases. In addition to reducing the social and economic burden arising from these impacts, such reductions can also alleviate the risk or severity of local constraints and may also help to avoid breaches of national or EU regulations. This may be of strategic importance to major airports close to residential areas.

74 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9.3. IMPROVEMENTS TO THE IT PLATFORM

9.3.1. Current Situation and proposed improvements

Arrivals

Field Current SIS Info CDM Improvement Benefit Description DELAY Not shown at present A column indicating the delay in terms of Partners would instantly positive or negative value based on a be able to see the state comparison of the SIBT with EIBT. of a flight concerning its delay and be able to plan accordingly. STATUS Indication made using Expand to three letters (e.g. PTO, ZON, Several partners seem one letter (e.g. P,Z,F) FIN) and show STS to all partners (ATC confused as to the currently do not see STS on deps. meaning of the letters so using three letters could help increase awareness and understanding. Landing Currently there is only a A single column could be displayed Better information to Time column for ATL. The showing times in different colours plan runway changes, ATL is displayed 4 according to status Scheduled / and planning of ground minutes after the event. estimated / Actual. The accuracy could movements. be improved as described in Para 9.1.2. Landing The landing RW is A mechanism that will allow ATC to A variable taxi time will Runway displayed but is only input the Landing RW for individual be added to the ELDT to detected when the flight flights needs to be put in place so that calculate the EIBT. It is is on final approach an accurate EIBT can be generated up essential that the landing to 30 minutes before in block time. RW is used otherwise the EIBT could be inaccurate. The benefit will be more accurate IBT for AO/GH/S&G. In Block Currently there is an A single column could be displayed Better information to STA and an ETA. The showing times in different colours plan turn-round activities ETA column shows according to status Scheduled / (S&G management and estimated and later on estimated / Actual. The accuracy could Ground handling an actual in block time. be improved as described in Para 9.1.2. especially). This would The times displayed are indirectly help ATC by inaccurate with no reduction in congestion distinction between on taxiways. estimate and actual. Stand The stand is currently With more confidence in EIBT the S&G Better planning for ATC only commonly should be able to plan stands without on ground movements, displayed when a flight last minute changes. Ideally up to 30 and a reduction in is on final approach. minutes before IBT the stand should be blocked taxiways. This is does not give published. AO/GH would be able to AO/GH/ATC sufficient In addition to the known Hold (H), a time plan positioning of time to plan operations next to the H could indicate the hold resources more related to the turn-round. based on the difference between the efficiently. Also if a known Hold is EIBT of inbound flight and the TOBT of expected an H is the outbound flight. displayed. Remark Not currently displayed? A remarks column could be used to An easy way to display addition information on a flight. communicate between E.g. callsign of flight blocking stand. partners.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 75

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Departure

Field Description Current SIS Info CDM Improvement Benefit DELAY Not shown at present A column indicating the delay in terms Partners would instantly of positive or negative value based on be able to see the state a comparison of the SOBT with EOBT. of a flight concerning its delay and plan accordingly. STATUS Indication made using Expand to three letters (e.g. GTO, Several partners one letter (e.g. O,B,K) BOR, GTC) and show STS to all seemed confused as to partners (ATC currently do not see the meaning of the STS on deps. letters so using three letters could help increase awareness and understanding. Alarm / Warning Not shown at present An alarm or warning could be It would force the displayed if boarding (BOR) or Gate AO/GH to act to verify closed (GTC) has not occurred at a the state of the flight. time prior to ETD Off Block Currently there is an A single column could be displayed The different colours STD and an ETD. The showing times in different colours would clearly show the ETD column shows according to status Scheduled / state of the flight and the estimated and later on Estimated /Target (AO/GH), Target intended off block time. an actual off block time. ATC and Actual. This will be used to The times displayed are improve S&G inaccurate and can be management, the confusing. management of GH resources and provide a basis to calculate a more accurate take off time. CTOT Not shown at present A column should be created showing Provide better the CTOT that has issued by the awareness to all CFMU partners of the CFMU regulation for each flight. Take off time Currently the Actual take The Estimated/ Target and Actual Better awareness of off time is shown, but no could all be shown using different planned and actual take estimates are shown colours. Estimates/ Targets would be off times for all partners, prior to the event updated based on Off block estimates especially the CFMU in and VTTs and ultimately linked to the order to up date the EFPS on the DEP position in the flights profile in ETFMS. Tower. Departure The departure RW is not A mechanism that will allow ATC to A variable taxi time will Runway currently displayed input the departure RW for individual be added to the TOBT to flights needs to be put in place so that calculate the ETOT. It is an accurate TTOT can be generated essential that the up to 30 minutes before off block time. departure RW is used otherwise the ETOT could be inaccurate. The benefit will be more accurate take off times for the CFMU and provide ATC with better information for planning. ATC Take Off Not shown at present A column could indicate the potential Better planning for ATC. Sequence take off order based upon TTOT Common view for (TOBT +VTT). This order could be partners of what is linked to the EFPS planned for the happening at the holding DEP controller. point.

76 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

The above recommendations could be incorporated into a secure intra/extranet CDM screen that would be adaptable according to individual partner’s preferences. An example is shown below which includes:

• An A-SMGCS screen in the top right hand corner that could be enlarged when required and could be linked to the flight lists, so that a selected flight can be highlighted in the table (shown in orange) and would also be highlighted on the A-SMGCS screen for tracking purposes.

• Essential aerodrome data such as Runways in use, Runway Visual Range (RVR) values, Capacity for the current hour and the following hour, ATIS information and temperature and any local airport news. An intranet/extranet system would offer the advantages that many people already have access to the internet so hardware costs would be reduced. This applies to external partners as well such as the London Terminal Control Centre who would benefit from knowing information concerning stand availability for arrivals and for Operators that are based away from LHR, external access could provide essential information concerning the progress of flights during the turn-round process.

Figure 36: Example CDM Intranet Display

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 77

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.3.2. Summary (IT Platform)

The foundation for CDM is for the partners to provide and have access to accurate and timely information. There are many systems currently used by the different partners and many feed into the main BAA interface IDAHO. A general Staff Information System (SIS) is available to most of the partners providing arrival and departure information; however, it is generally considered that the information on SIS is unreliable, hard to read and inadequate for making operational decisions. The situation can be improved by linking/upgrading the current systems so that the partners have access to a platform that displays the best data available at the right time. Several new tools such as A-SMGCS are also available to provide partners an improved awareness of the operational situation and these can also be incorporated into the platform. System modifications need not be expensive as much of the data exists at present and it could be distributed via an intranet/extranet HMI. With many Airline Operation Centres (AOCs) not situated locally, the benefits of any web based system would allow remote access to the AOCs worldwide. With a clearer picture of the local situation at LHR operational decisions could be made a lot earlier than they are now.

9.4. ENHANCED ARRIVAL & DEPARTURE IMPROVEMENTS WITH CFMU MESSAGE EXCHANGE

9.4.1. Current Situation

Arrival and departure information at most airports is inaccurate due to a series of factors. For arrivals, airports normally receive (in some cases not at all) only a movement message (MVT) via the SITA network or ACARS. These arrival estimates are normally calculated using still flight times with no allowance for wind conditions. Unless aircraft are ACARS equipped no further positioning reports and arrival updates are received at the destination airport until it is within local radar range. As we are all aware many on-route contributing factors will have an impact on arrival times including ATC route changes, wind components and aircraft characteristics. Departure information is based on an EOBT which will only get updated if there is a known delay of greater than 15 minutes and an agreed default taxi time for each airport. The taxi times at major airports can differ considerably and this variation added to the uncertainty of when an aircraft will actually be off-blocks results in a very poor predicted take off time. The CFMU uses the departure information to calculate slots (CTOTs) and it is therefore necessary to have the best estimates available in order to calculate traffic throughput in the European area.

9.4.2. Proposed Improvements

CFMU requirements for CDM-A CDM-A platforms have to conform to the following CFMU requirements:

• The FUM & DPI messages must be implemented together at an airport. • DPI messages will be accepted from only known and validated originators. The preferred network is AFTN. • The transmission of DPI & FUM messages between a CDM-A and the CFMU will be automated.

78 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

• On reception of a FUM, the CDM-A platform shall process and distribute information to partners according to local Service Level Agreements (SLAs). • DPI & FUM messages shall be sent for all (IFR/GAT) regulated and non regulated flights. • A high quality of data sent to the CFMU must be proven by the CDM-A.

9.4.2.1. Arrivals

The CFMU will provide accurate arrival update information through a message called the Flight Update Message (FUM). This message contains an accurate estimate for the last point on the FPL route and based on this time plus a default flying time to the runway in use, a landing estimate can be calculated. The first FUM will be triggered 3 hours before the estimated landing time (ELDT) based on either when the Target Take off Time is generated from the outstation or the position of the flight using radar information available at the CFMU (ETFMS). It will be updated where a deviation of more than 5 minutes occurs.

An example Flight Update Message Sent to: EGLLZTZA @AFTN. Message description: -TITLE FUM -BEGIN ADDR -FAC EGLLZTZA -END ADDR -IFPLID AA45043485 -ARCID BMA693 -ADEP EGPE -ADES EGLL -EOBD 040624 -EOBT 1240 -ELDT 040624141235 -ARCTYP A319 -ESTDATA -PTID HON -ETO 040624135705-FL F200 -STAR BNN2A -FLTSTATE AA

9.4.2.2. Departures

In exchange, CDM airports will provide Departure Planning Information (DPI) which will supply the CFMU with updated departure information for the flights at a CDM-A between EOBT–3 hrs and the actual take off time. The DPI messages coming from the CDM-A will improve the predictability of the traffic situation over the ECAC area. Information such as estimate of off-block, taxi-out time and SID will help to improve the traffic flow management system (ETFMS) and will allow a more efficient and more flexible slot allocation.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 79

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Four types of DPI messages have been defined. They shall be sent from the CDM-A to ETFMS between [EOBT – 3 hrs] and ATOT: The Early DPI (E-DPI) can be sent from the [EOBT – 3 hrs] to the CFMU slot issue time (SIT1) at [EOBT – 2 hrs]. It aims at confirming / updating FPL data and Estimated Take Off Time (ETOT) for slot allocation, optionally issuing SID, taxi time and aircraft type information. The Target DPI (T-DPI) can be sent from SIT1 at [EOBT – 2 hrs] to the flight pre-sequence time (time parameter to be defined locally). It aims at updating ETFMS with more reliable departure estimates, ATC (taxi-out time and SID) and flight information and confirming the target take off for a potential slot improvement. The ATC DPI (A-DPI) can be sent from the flight pre-sequence time (time parameter to be defined locally) to the actual take off at ATOT. It aims at updating the CFMU with the Target Take Off Time (TTOT) based on the ATC pre-departure sequence using very accurate estimates of off-block and taxi times. The Cancel DPI (C-DPI) can be sent at any time after the transmission of an E-DPI, T-DPI or A- DPI. It aims at cancelling a previously sent take off time. An example T-DPI Message -TITLE DPI -IFPLID AA12295633 -ARCID BMA451 -ARCTYP A320 -REG GMIDU -ADEP EGLL -EOBT 0845 -EOBD 170304 -ATTOT 0852 -DPISTATUS P -ADES LIMC -SID BIG1F -TAXITIME 0017

9.4.3. Trial Methodology

The CFMU software (version10) that will pass and process the FUM/DPI messages will be tested during Q3 of 2004. This software will be able to update the CFMU profile with taxi times and SID information and will be used for evaluation and analysis of the data. The following software release (version 11) will be able to update CASA with DPI information. The CFMU are setting up a series of tests with CDM trial airports during 2005 in order to evaluate the accuracy of data and the procedures associated with the FUM and DPI messages and they are keen that LHR participates in this validation period.

80 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

9.4.4. Benefits to Partners

If an FUM is based on a DPI message from the airport of departure, then the FUM will represent the link between a CDM departure airport and a CDM arrival airport. For a long time airports have been looking for early updates of the landing time of flights based on ETFMS data to enhance the use of airport infrastructure and resources. These new messages will have many benefits to the partners and most importantly visible to all. The lists below are not exhaustive but generally highlight the specific gains to the individual partners with some being general to all:

9.4.4.1. ATC and Airport

• FUM messages improve significantly early arrival estimates using ETFMS data and also DPI data before flights are airborne. This will enable ATC to anticipate the arrival sequence and predict at an early stage any holding that might be required. A more accurate ELDT/EIBT will in turn allow improved Stand and Gate management and ground resource management.

• The DPI message received by the CFMU can trigger a FUM message for the airport of destination and close the loop between a CDM departure airport and a CDM arrival airport. The benefit for the arrival airport is improved estimates of arrivals in terms of completeness, precision and timeliness.

• FUM and DPI messages represent the link between all CDM airports. They create the CDM network effect, which in turn encourages airports to join the Airport CDM project (i.e. to supply information and to benefit from supplied information).

• Flow Management Positions will not only get a more clear and anticipated picture of the traffic load, but also the objective of the Aircraft Operators. It will be possible to anticipate the impact of the cancellation of a regulation (all flights going back to their ETOT). Management of exceptional conditions and recovery phases after disruptions will be facilitated.

9.4.4.2. Aircraft Operators & Ground Handlers

• The new FUM/DPI messages will help the Aircraft Operators to achieve their principle objective which is to depart as close as possible to schedule. With the CFMU slots being timely adapted to the real-time traffic evolution the Aircraft Operators can expect to receive more realistic ATFM slots (where needed), thus less ATFM delay is to be expected. The CFMU will then be able to offer improved flexibility through slot shift (and swap) for ALL flights.

• Messages sent before Take off at the airport of departure thereby increasing the available time horizon by one or more hours which corresponds to 50% earlier for most European flights.

• Continued arrival updates where the estimate differs by more than 5 minutes.

• Enhanced use of ATM Capacity.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 81

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

9.4.4.3. CFMU

• The DPI will be used by the CFMU to update the flight plan for ATFM purposes. An early accurate update of the flight plan will improve the ATFM slot allocation process by reducing overloads, reducing bunching and additionally it may reduce the ATFM delay for other non departed flights It will improve the predictability of the traffic load for regulated and non-regulated flights thereby minimising unnecessary regulations.

9.4.5. Summary (CFMU Messages)

The CFMU is currently modifying their software to be able to send and receive new messages (FUM/DPI) to/from an airport. The aim of these messages is to enhance the overall flow of European Air Traffic by firstly providing a CDM airport (CDM-A) with an accurate estimated landing time up to 3 hours before, and then to use an accurate take off estimate from the airport to update the flight plan for ATFM purposes. The airport will have to ensure that the departure data sent to the CFMU conforms to certain requirements, therefore, it will be essential that the airport introduces CDM applications such as the TOBT procedure and variable taxi times in order to reach a high data quality. The messages will be managed by the airport’s CDM platform and exchanged automatically with the CFMU from one address at the airport. By providing precise information on departure times, one of the main benefits Aircraft Operators can expect to receive will be more flexibility from the CFMU regarding slot shifting.

82 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

10. COST-BENEFITS ANALYSIS Many benefits of CDM are difficult to quantify as they have an impact on other partners and some decisions are hard to measure. An example might be that ATC know that an aircraft has to hold for a stand for 20 minutes and decide to hold the aircraft remotely, hence keeping the taxiway clear. If the aircraft had blocked the taxiway it could have affected several flights arriving or departing, resulting in a different impact on partners. The subsequent reduction in controller workload is also difficult to evaluate as the amount of radio transmissions would be minimal.

Shorter aircraft taxi time and queuing reduces fuel resource use, ground noise and emissions to the atmosphere such as NOx, unburnt hydrocarbons and greenhouse gases. In addition to reducing the social and economic burden arising from these impacts, such reductions can also alleviate the risk or severity of local constraints and may also help to avoid breaches of national or EU regulations. This may be of strategic importance to major airports close to residential areas.

Note: One EU estimate is that 1 tonne of unburnt hydrocarbons has an equivalent health impact cost of 100s K Euro depending on the size of the city affected.

10.1. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS AND BENEFITS

10.1.1. Costs

The potential costs of implementing CDM need further assessment, particularly concerning the system integration costs between airport and ATC systems. We have estimated about 1 man year of effort for this work. Overall the estimated effort is as follows:

Table 9: Estimated CDM costs for Heathrow airport

Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 onwards Project definition/management 246 246 20 Procedures development 0 29 0 Total training 117 67 10 Internal software development 210 210 0 Total effort (days) 573 552 30 Total cost (£k) 154 138 8

The effort has been converted into costs in the above table using estimates of opportunity costs for the different airport partners.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 83

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

10.1.2. Benefits

The benefits of CDM derive from an improved accuracy and availability of information, as well as new information. The benefits are summarised in the Table 11. The environmental benefits may be summarised in terms of a reduction in emissions:

Table 10: Estimated emissions reductions through CDM for Heathrow airport

Reduction in emissions (Tonnes) Year 1 Year 2 Average on-going

CO2 5728 5756 5955

H2O 2237 2248 2326

SO2 2 2 2 HC 16 16 17 NOx 7 7 8 CO 60 60 62

There is a particular interest in reducing aircraft emissions at LHR. Heathrow Airport Ltd currently monitors air quality at two sites in order to compare the air pollution with the UK Air Quality Strategy objectives1. Current trends mean that LHR will not meet the national air quality objectives for nitrogen dioxide by 2005 or 2010. As a consequence, no further developments at LHR will be sanctioned until the required air quality limits are met.

1 These objectives are derived by independent experts and relate to EC Directives on limiting values of pollutants (1999/30/EC and 2000/69/EC). Further details may be found in: AEA Technology report for Heathrow Airport Ltd, ‘Air Pollution at Heathrow Airport: Annual Report for 2003’. See also: http://www.baa.co.uk/main/corporate/sustainable_development/air_quality_page.html

84 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Table 11: Estimated CDM benefits for Heathrow airport

Year 1 Year 2 Average annual Beneficiary CDM level 1 benefits (£k) (£k) (year 3-15) (£k) Economic benefits ATC Fewer lost slots and over-deliveries 420 1641 Passengers Departure punctuality for passengers 3084 6198 5038 Airport / local Reduced ground emissions (out-bound community taxi) 137 137 142 Handlers Improved customer service - ground handlers arrive on time 611 614 635 Local Reduced ground emissions (in-bound community taxi) 55 55 57 Financial benefits Airlines Reduced out-bound taxi-time 3434 3451 3574 Airlines Reduction in delay due to late inbound - allocation of closer stand 2 2 2 Airport / Improved cost efficiency for ground handlers handlers - handlers do not arrive too early at the stand 3985 3985 3985 Airport / Increase capital productivity handlers 996 996 996 Airlines Reduced in-bound taxi-time 1373 1381 1430 Total benefits 13677 17239 17501

The remainder of this section summarises the rationale for the above benefit estimates.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 85

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

10.1.3. Departure punctuality and predictability

The following figure compares scheduled and estimated with actual off-block times (see also Para 9.2.1 and 9.2.3.4). There is clearly scope to improve the departure punctuality, and perhaps adjust schedules to better reflect operations. The estimates are a better predictor of punctuality than the scheduled times, however they are only provided by around half of the airlines.

4500 Actual-Scheduled (sample: 4000 Actual-Estimated (sample: 3500 3000

2500

Count 2000

1500

1000 500 0 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

Off blocks 'punctuality' (minutes) - 5 minute 'bins'

Figure 37: Comparison of schedule and estimated off block time

Improving departure predictability has a number of consequential benefits. In our benefit estimates we have assumed that ATC take advantage of the target off block times to work out a departure sequence on a rolling 20-30 minute time horizon. Recent discussions have shown a number of practical issues to be addressed if the benefits are to be realised. For instance, there is no guarantee that the departure sequence following push back will be maintained by the time the aircraft are at the ground holds. Our calculation of benefits assumes that the sequence can be maintained to some extent and that fewer aircraft are on the aerodrome at any one time. This should lead to reduced congestion and thereby lower average taxi times. The benefit calculation assumes that 1 minute on average taxi-out times may be saved. Take-off predictability may be improved through variable taxi times. The following graph shows the possible impact of congestion on taxi-times, which compares average outbound taxi-times for different hours of the day. The low periods of the day have been used to estimate ‘unimpeded’ taxi times, where there is little congestion or queuing. The peak hour times are unlikely to reach the unimpeded times through CDM as there are a number of practical issues, such as the need to maintain a queue of departures to keep the departure throughput high.

86 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Terminal 1 Average taxi-time (min) Terminal 2 Terminal 3 30 Terminal 4 25

20

15

10

5

0 1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour in day (24 hour)

Figure 38: Taxi-time averages per terminal vs time of day

Improvements in departure punctuality should result in benefits to passengers and to the ATC system. Passengers benefit assuming that some departure delay translates into arrival delay. Our benefit estimates assume the average departure punctuality could be improved by 10 minutes for delayed departures, in line with Brussels estimates from CDM trials data. The benefits to the ATC system derive from reducing the number of lost slots. From around 230,000 departures per year we have estimated that 10,000 slots that are currently missed could be achieved (about 30 per day).

10.1.4. Landing time estimates

The next figure compares scheduled, estimated and actual in-block times. Here we see a large variance in the times, with little difference between the accuracy of scheduled or estimated times when compared to actual times. There is clearly scope for improvement with CDM.

Count Actual-Scheduled (sample: 16518) 6000 Actual-Estimated (sample: 16394) 5000

4000

3000

2000

1000 0 -60 - 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 11 12 0 0 0 In blocks 'punctuality' - 5 minute 'bins'

Figure 39: Comparison of schedule, actual and estimated in block times

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 87

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

The main benefit of improving landing time estimates lies in avoiding wasted time by ground handlers. The benefit calculations assume that an average of 2min per aircraft can be saved in ground handlers’ time; i.e. time not wasted by ground handlers waiting for an aircraft to arrive due to inaccurate prediction of in-block time.

10.1.5. Qualitative benefits

In addition to the above benefits, a number of other benefits are foreseen at Heathrow, as follows:

• Enhanced planning of airport resources with respect to flight schedules. Improved alignment between scheduled and actual use of airport resources. AOBT – SOBT may highlight any problems between ATFM and airport slots and is an indicator of arrival delay at the destination airport. This is a qualitative benefit only, although some quantitative aspects are covered in other CDM applications.

• Better fleet utilisation. At the European network level, an improved adherence to schedules should enable operators to utilise their aircraft more. This benefit is likely to be gained over time as aircraft operators make use of greater predictability via CDM to adjust their schedules and improve fleet utilisation. This may require system wide implementation of CDM to be effective, as it involves the number of rotations for an aircraft. We have treated this benefit as qualitative only, as it requires further study.

• Improved Arrival information. - More accurate arrival estimates would result in less exhaust emissions from ground handling vehicle engine idling while awaiting aircraft.

• Turn-round time closer to SLA. The target off-block time should ensure greater adherence to estimated or scheduled off-block time. This improved adherence should help constrain turn-rounds towards the agreed service levels. It assumes that turn-rounds would not start earlier as a consequence of CDM. This benefit has not been quantified.

• Improved departure planning (ATC). The target off-block time should enable tower controllers to plan departure sequences up to 20-30 minutes in advance. The reduced aerodrome congestion should give some other qualitative benefits in addition to the quantitative benefits associated with reduced operating times:

• Reduced ground noise. As a consequence of shorter taxi-times, this assumes that a major source of noise is the aircraft, and not the associated ground handling vehicles. The noise and emissions benefits both assume that the saved operating time is also a saved time that the engines / APU are operated - e.g. fixed electrical ground power (FEGP) is used to power the aircraft on stand.

• Lower accident repair costs. With fewer aircraft on the apron and taxi-ways at the same time, there is some potential to reduce accidents. This is difficult to find evidence for and isolate from other safety measures, hence it has been treated qualitatively.

88 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

• Reduction in RTF workload. The improved predictability in apron control may require less RTF between aircrew and ATC. There is an associated safety argument in that fewer RTF communications reduce the risk of confusion and require less workload for both pilots and controllers. This benefit requires further investigation and has been treated qualitatively2.

• Improved customer service. A more accurate estimate of arrival time should benefit passengers, where they are being met at the airport. Over time, this may cause wider benefits in terms of airport surface access congestion. This is a qualitative benefit.

• Improved customer service. Ground handlers may use a more accurate estimate of landing time to ensure they do not arrive too late at the stand. Passengers are therefore disembarked without undue delay.

• Reduced ground-handling related delays in recovering from minor disruptions. Advanced warning of minor disruptions enables ground handlers to plan recovery. Assumes that minor disruptions are planned by ATC (runway closure for sweeping, snow clearing etc) hence no additional impact such as reduced aerodrome congestion as ATC should already be accounting for this.

• Improved planning for stand allocation. Stand and gate management should gain a more stable planning horizon with which to tactically plan stand allocations. This is a qualitative benefit.

2 The benefit depends on the information given through CDM information sharing, which the pilot does therefore not need to contact ATC to confirm (or provide an update). The benefit may not necessarily reduce controller workload, as some form of interaction will continue to be required. However, it may have similar benefits to Datalink in as much as non-critical communications can be delayed to balance the controller's workload.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 89

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Page intentionally left blank

90 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ANNEXES

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 91

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Page intentionally left blank

92 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ANNEX A: COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRES FROM STUDY PARTICIPANTS

BAA

ID BAA OPS inc S& G Answers

IDAHO holds schedule 10 day in advance of operation How and when do you download scheduled daily planned APT1 Pre ACCORD downloads to SIRIUS at approx 19:00hrs nightly. movements? Schedule downloaded to ARIS nightly prior to days operation Do you receive in advance daily flight programs from Aircraft APT2 Pre YES operators? When do you complete a pre stand and gate plan? General rules APT3 Pre Night before day of operation used including Aircraft Operators prefered allocation? Are you generally open to requests from Aircraft Operators and APT4 Pre Yes, where Operation permits Ground Handlers S&G requests?

APT5 ARR Do you receive ARR/DEP FPLs from AO? NO APT6 ARR Do you receive accurate MVT/DEL messages from outstation? YES APT7 ARR Are these messages automatically read & checked or manually? Automatically Are these messages compared with Ground Handlers APT8 ARR A small percentage are information? Do you receive passenger & baggage transit/transfer information? Facility in ADAM/IDAHO for some airlines but not used by SAU for APT9 ARR If yes, what is the procedure? allocation calculations

APT10 ARR Do you receive ACARS messages (out/off and positioning reports) YES

Do you have VHF air to ground communication with A/C APT11 ARR What info do you receive (eta, wchr,unmin etc) and pass (CTOT)? NO Who do you pass this information to and how?

APT12 ARR How do you receive priorities? Question unclear at to the priorities it refers

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 93

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID BAA OPS inc S& G Answers

APT13 ARR How do you communicate priorities? ditto Direct line telephone to ATC and SIS for airline/operators (also courtesy APT14 ARR How do you pass stand & gate changes? call to airlines whenever poss)

APT15 ARR How do you receive the arrival sequence and who from? Collected automatically as they leave the stacks and enter airfield ‘zone’

How do you disseminate aircraft finals between the airport APT16 ARR SIS partners (10min out)? APT17 ARR How do you receive landing times? Aprons Co-ordinator APT18 ARR How do you coordinate the ground 'follow me' vehicles? Marshallers monitors ATC frequencies and communicate direct with ATC where required Who inputs Actual in-block times? i.e automatically, received from SITA message publishes Zones & Finals messages. Landed times are APT19 ARR GHs or manually? calculated by finals +7 minutes if no overshoot message is received. what is done with this information?

What methods of communication are used i.e radio, handheld Airport wide - radios, handheld computers, telephones, electronic APT20 ARR computers? messaging (internal & external), fax

APT21 Turn round How is the airport FIS updated and Who is responsible for? Automatically - IDAHO

How is minimum turn-round calculated? i.e do you coordinate with APT22 Turn round Collect relevant delay info from GH the GHs?

Any known delay, prior to arrival who is responsible for updating? Automatically and manually. from Airlines/Handlers to SAU as soon as APT23 Turn round How, who and when? practicably possible, then published by SAU to airport systems

If delay < 15’: who updates the delay in the AO Dispatch Control APT24 Turn round ditto Service? (Ramp agent? Ops control centre?)

APT25 Turn round If delay > 15’: will an update be done in the AO DCS? - Who? Ditto

94 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ID BAA OPS inc S& G Answers

APT26 Turn round How do you receive CTOT? How, who and when? CFMU / DSM

Do you require GHs to board aircraft regardless of CTOT? APT27 Turn round Co-ordinated by Airline Anticipating changes and towing off aircraft to remote areas?

How do GHs communicate with you regarding delays in the APT28 Turn round Telephone turnaround?

APT29 Turn round How are coaching gates allocated? SAU T2 & T3

What is the Check in & boarding procedure for both pier and Gate open, Boarding, APT30 Turn round remote operations? i.e called to gate, last call Last Call, Gate Closed

APT31 Removed from quest.

APT32 Removed from quest.

If layover longer than 4 ½ hrs A/C expected to tow remote (if operation How are aircraft on long layovers managed i.e towing stand from requires). When required tow is expected to take place within 90 APT33 Turn round stand, mx areas etc minutes of arrival. Departing A/C are required to be given Pier served towback stand no less than 90 minutes before departure

APT34 Departure Removed from quest. How are off blocks, mvt messages generated? Automatically, APT35 Departure Manually input into system manually etc? How, who and when

Can we have an overview of all IT systems used, local, network APT36 Systems No and links between partners?

Can you describe the current information flows and links between APT37 Systems Yes different partners both internally and externally?

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 95

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID BAA OPS inc S& G Answers

How to you communicate the aircraft status to your operational APT38 Systems Automatically system?

Crisis Management Team, What is your companies role in crisis situation? Any APT39 Systems Business Recovery Team, documentation would be useful Emergency contingency plans

APT40 Systems Is it possible to get an example of departure schedule and delay? Yes

What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating APT41 CDM in CDM?

Would improved arrival precision make your operation more APT42 ARR efficient?

Would improved communication links with the other partners APT43 CDM enhance the efficiency of the operation?

What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating APT44 CDM in CDM?

Through continuous coordination during the turn around (kind of APT45 CDM milestones), can you define the key milestones?

What would the impact on your work if the pre-departure sequence APT46 CDM is known? i.e resource management

Do you have any other needs to enhance the efficiency of your APT47 CDM operation?

96 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

BRITISH MIDLAND AIRWAYS

ID Seq Aircraft Operators Common Questions bmi Answers

Do you compare your daily flight program with the Airport No. They receive a copy of our flight program but no formal check of AOCO1 Pre Operator? Checking consistency and Airport slots? consistencies is done once they load their system. The night before the day of operation a Mayfly is produced (usually AOCO2 Pre When and how do you pass your flight program to other partners? between 1800-2100). This is faxed to all service providers We have 6 dedicated domestic stands and 1 dedicated international stand and therefore can plan the use of these stands ourselves. We advise BA Terminal Control of our plan for these stands and at the AOCO3 Pre When do you receive the pre stand and gate plan? same time make our requests for stands for other flights. Our notification of the stand for these flights is not published until the a/c is in the zone. The use of our dedicated stands is also subject to change throughout the day. Are the Airport Operators generally open to S & G requests from AOCO4 Pre yes you and Ground Handlers? AOCO5 ARR Do you disseminate any ARR/DEP FPLs to the Airport Operator? no AOCO6 ARR Do you receive accurate MVT/DEL messages from outstation? Yes although occasionally the odd MVT is missed or sent incorrectly AOCO7 ARR Are these messages automatically read & checked or manually? both Do you receive passenger & baggage transit/transfer information? AOCO8 ARR Not on all flights If yes, what is the procedure? AOCO9 ARR Confirm SITA & AFTM Addresses LHRKLBD AOCO10 ARR Do you receive ACARS messages (out/off and positioning reports) no Do you have VHF ground to air communication with A/C If yes, Yes. A normal call from an inbound a/c would include estimated landing time, any special needs pax and any other relevant information. A AOCO11 ARR What info do you receive (eta, wchr,unmin, fuel requirements etc) separate call is usually made to engineering regarding any a/c defects. and CTOT? Any information that needs to be passed on will be done by telephone. Who do you pass this information to and how? How do you disseminate priorities with, Ground Handlers and AOCO12 ARR By phone other service providers?

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 97

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID Seq Aircraft Operators Common Questions bmi Answers

Either by telephone from BA Terminal Control or via the BAA SIS AOCO13 ARR How do you receive stand & gate changes? system AOCO14 ARR How do you receive the arrival sequence and who from? SIS AOCO15 ARR How do you receive landing times? SIS

Who inputs Actual in-block times? i.e automatically, received from The Dispatcher meeting the a/c will call in the on blocks time to our traffic office. Our TCA’s then input the information into our TANGO AOCO16 ARR Airport Operators, GHs or manually? system which then formats and generates the standard arrival MVT what is done with this information? signal which is sent to pre-designated recipients. AOCO17 ARR If so, what is done with this information? Unknown What methods of communication are used i.e radio, handheld AOCO18 ARR Radio computers? AOCO19 ARR Do you have any trouble with communication airport blind spots? Occasionally SITA telex from Brussels. In the main approx. 2hrs prior to departure or AOCO20 Turn round How do you receive CTOT? How, who and when? as and when regulations are applied. The slot is entered into the flight information screen. Ant service AOCO21 Turn round How do you receive, distribute CTOTs between partners? providers who do not have access to this information are not advised of the CTOT Any slot delay upto 60mins the Company policy is to board for a Do you require GHs to board aircraft regardless of CTOT? AOCO22 Turn round scheduled departure and taxy to the remote holding area. Any delay in Anticipating changes and towing off aircraft to remote areas? excess of 60mins boarding is at the Captain’s discretion. AOCO23 Turn round How do you disseminate aircraft changes between partners? SITA telex and fax We have standard t/a times for our various a/c types. The intention however is always to dispatch as close to schedule as possible How is minimum turn-around calculated? i.e do you coordinate AOCO25 Turn round meaning we attempt to undercut the standard t/a times. There is not with the GHs? normally any formal dialogue with the GH’s although the dispatcher may set deadlines for loading, cleaning etc. AOCO26 Turn round How do you disseminate turn-around times? They are published in our Ops. manual. How do GHs communicate with you regarding delays in the Turn AOCO27 Turn round Through the aircraft dispatcher round? If delay < 15’: who updates the delay in the AO Dispatch Control AOCO29 Turn round Traffic Office Service? (Ramp agent? Ops control centre?)

98 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ID Seq Aircraft Operators Common Questions bmi Answers

AOCO30 Turn round If delay > 15’: will an update be done in the AO DCS? - Who? Yes again done by the traffic office AOCO31 Turn round How are coaching gates allocated? Gate request made to BA Terminal Control What is the Check in & boarding procedure for both pier and AOCO32 Turn round Gate open – minus 50, boarding – minus 30, last call – minus 20 remote operations? i.e called to gate, last call Dispatcher calls traffic office. Traffic office call EMA slot desk. Slot desk AOCO34 Turn round If CTOT extension required what is the process? request extension from Brussels. Do you input any Ready Status (all doors closed and tug in AOCO35 Turn round Ready messages sent by EMA slot desk position)? How and who? We have very few aircraft which have long layovers however any which How are aircraft on long layovers managed i.e towing stand from AOCO36 Turn round do will be towed around as required to free up stands etc. but the end stand, mx areas etc goal will always be to have the a/c on pier for departure. Dispatcher declares the off blocks time. TCA’s input data into TANGO How are off blocks, mvt messages generated? Automatically, AOCO37 Departure which formats standard departure MVT signal which is sent to pre- manually etc? How, who and when designated recipients. Can you describe the current information flows and links between AOCO38 Systems TANGO different partners both internally and externally? How to you communicate the aircraft status to your operational AOCO39 Systems TANGO system? I can e-mail a blank draft departure schedule if reqd. Please advise if AOCO41 Systems Is it possible to get an example of departure schedule and delay? this will be sufficient.

Can we have an overview of all IT systems used, local, network AOCO42 Systems and links between partners? Communic AOC043 Do you communicate with APT? ation Communic AOC044 Do you communicate with HDLG ation Communic AOC045 Do you communicate with TWR ation Communic AOC046 Do you communicate with FMP (IFPS?) ation

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 99

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID Seq Aircraft Operators Common Questions bmi Answers

More accurate arrival information for meeters and greeters. More accurate delays on departures published to advise customers and being published earlier than at present. Improved punctuality by better What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating AOCO47 CDM utilisation of slots. More effective use of available resources. Improved in CDM? handling of transit passengers and baggage to reduce baggage losses. On days of mass disruption better intelligence on which to base decisions on cancellations at an earlier stage. Do you have any other needs to enhance the efficiency of your The only ones which spring to mind currently fall outside of the remit of AOCO48 CDM operation? CDM e.g.. Crew report times and crew transport issues. Would improved communication links with the other partners AOCO49 CDM Yes enhance the efficiency of the operation? What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating AOCO50 CDM As AOCO43 in CDM? On blocks - last pax off - cleaners on - cleaners off - commence Through continuous coordination during the turn around (kind of AOCO51 CDM boarding - loading progress - headcount confirmed - holds closed - milestones), can you define the key milestones? pushback. Much improved use of resources. Avoidance of knock-on delays What would the impact on your work if the pre-departure resulting from allocation of resource to flights out of sequence. Better AOCO52 CDM sequence is known? i.e resource management information supplied to outstations and a resultant reduction in incoming telephone calls into our Ops office regarding progress of flights.

100 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

ID Seq ATC / TWR Common Questions - NATS Answers

TWRO1 Pre Do you compare your movement program with the Airport Operator? No, talk with Owen Davis (NATS) comparing arr SCHD and ACT. No, take stand off SIS and add to strip- CDM would improve. Gate information only published on SIS approx 5 minutes before ATA. This then TWRO2 Pre When and how do you receive the pre stand and gate plan? links to another SIS page to publish the corresponding outbound gate approx 45 minutes prior to departure. i.e. Once the inbound aircraft is within 5 minutes from touchdown. EAT. Estimates 20 min in advance based on time at hold +X This can be improved with a funnel estimate. ETA printed on strip, which is produced TWRO3 ARR How do you receive FIR eta boundary times approx 40 minutes prior to arrival. This does not take delays in the inner stacks into account and can therefore vary greatly from the ATA. TWRO5 ARR Confirm ATFM Address Not always, slow updates on SIS. X - Recently vacated, H - still occupied CDM would improve. Gate changes for inbounds (when neither the new or old stand are occupied) are often not picked up at all as once they are TWRO7 ARR How do you receive stand & gate changes? written on the strip no-one goes back to re-check them. This requires a phone call from HAL or BA, normally the crew pass the information to us over the RT before we get the call. TWRO8 ARR How disseminate the arrival sequence? Based on TC. Don’t understand the question. Written on strip, BAA log. NATS merge 2 sets of Data to give BAA. ASMGCS could supply accurate data-CDM. This will only be possible when TWRO9 ARR How do you log landing times? the A-SMGCS displays “weight on wheels”. APT may be able to do this now though. TWRO10 ARR Do you receive arrival priorities from Aircraft Operators? No, TC occasionally helps BA only. EAT swapping between BA aircraft No, Proposed with EFPS. PDCS is future project, timescale uncertain at TWRO11 Turnaround Do you use data link with aircraft for clearances? this time. TWRO12 Turnaround How do you introduce Taxi-times? 27L / 09L / / 09R 16 min / 27R 20 min John Greenwood worth talking to. Assistant takes times from CFMU system (DSM). Now also have TACT TWRO13 Turnaround How do you receive CTOT? terminal in VCR.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 101

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID Seq ATC / TWR Common Questions - NATS Answers

TWRO14 Turnaround How are any delays during the turn-around disseminated to you? They are not. Occasionally crews call. No CDM would improve CTOT - 30mins GMP can request new slot from CFMU via the DSM. 20 a day / max 4ph + 15 min (however CFMU don’t recognize) Sometime TWRO15 Turnaround If CTOT extension required what is the process? London FMP will allow aircraft to be released before or after CTOT, again not recognised by CFMU. No, ASMGS could assist. Aircraft engine runs and Remote Holding is co- How is secondary ground movements coordinated with you? E.g. TWRO16 Turnaround ordianted between the operators, HAL and the VCR Supervisor. There is towing stand from stand, aircraft engine runs etc. no pre-coordination of towing traffic. Do you receive any Ready Status (all doors closed and tug in position)? TWRO17 DEP Pilot only. TOBT will enhance - CDM How and who? Occasional request for remote holds only, but nothing else. BA Terminal 4 often try to impose a departure order but never take into account prevailing TWRO18 DEP Do you receive departure priorities from Aircraft Operators? traffic and often ask for the impossible. Never seem to ask for KLM to be given priority though for some reason. Can we have an overview of all IT systems used, local, network and TWRO19 Systems Graham Henderson (NATS)? EFPS (Paul Johnson) Layouts available links between partners? Can you describe the current information flows and links between TWRO20 Systems Sorry no ideas different partners both internally and externally? Are TWR inputs stored in a data base, if so NAV data base or common TWRO21 Systems Sorry no ideas data base? Improve all terminal operations (reduced holding on TWYs. CDM information Flows Flexible taxi times What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating in TWRO24 CDM CDM? A/c pushing back realistically for CTOT Greater adherence to CTOTs More accurate estimated outbound demand will improve preplanning of flow restrictions (both imposing and lifting) Not directly, potential gains for others clearly apparent. Accurate weight on TWRO25 CDM Would improved arrival precision make your operation more efficient? wheels for land / Dep to partners to encourage buy-in (followed by improved ELDTs based on update on radar position / altitude) Through continuous coordination during the turn around (kind of Not discussed but assumed 16 milestones identified by EUROCONTROL TWRO26 CDM milestones), can you define the key milestones? would apply

102 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ID Seq ATC / TWR Common Questions - NATS Answers

Would a 'Target of block time' generate by the GH make your operation TWRO27 CDM Yes, but reservations on buy in by Aircraft operators more efficient? Difficult to quantify at present. Pre departure sequence will not be effective from the GMP position unless there are signifiacnt airfield delays. GMC What would the impact on your work load be if the pre-departure TWRO28 CDM workload increased as controllers try to Juggle aircraft to match what PDS sequence is known? says is best order. PDS will not be able to take into account visual separations and will therefore not be as flexible as the Deps controller. Would improved communication links with the other partners enhance Yes, many parallel projects running. Close coordination required.\ Use of TWRO29 CDM the efficiency of the operation? existing equipment maximized. No additional HMI would be accepted. Do you have any other needs to enhance the efficiency of your TWRO30 CDM Issues include 20-25% EGLL slot busting according to CFMU operation? TWRO31 CDM Do you agree implementing flexible taxi time Yes airlines may not be happy though.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 103

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Aviance UK

ID Seq Ground Handlers Common Questions Aviance UK Answers

Do you receive in advance daily flight programs from Aircraft GH1 Pre Y operators? Do you receive all seasonal and day to day planned flight GH2 Pre Y movements from the Airport Operator? GH3 ARR Do you receive ARR/DEP FPLs from AO? Y GH4 ARR Do you receive accurate MVT/DEL messages from outstation? Y ( with some exceptions) GH5 ARR Are these messages automatically read & checked or manually? Both Do you receive passenger & baggage transit/transfer information? Y – sent to tfr bag unit to enable them to meet flight with correct manpower, also GH6 ARR If yes, what is the procedure? sent to pax svcs/codeco etc GH7 ARR Do you receive ACARS messages (out/off and positioning reports) Y For some carriers GH8 ARR Do you receive VHF air to ground communication with A/C Y If yes, what info do you receive (eta, wchr, unmin, fuel GH9 ARR Y – ETA/Special handling (wchr etc) we give stand if known requirements etc) and pass (stand number, CTOT)? GH11 ARR If yes, who do you pass this information to and how? To airline and wchr suppliers by phone GH12 ARR How do you receive priorities? ? GH13 ARR How do you communicate priorities? ? GH14 ARR How do you receive the arrival sequence and who from? BAA, SIS GH15 ARR How do you receive finals (10min out)? SIS Do you consider 'run time' (base-stand) for resources (staff and GH16 ARR ? equipment) GH17 ARR How do you receive stand allocation? SIS or by calling stand allocation unit GH18 ARR Can you influence the stand allocation? Some carriers have prefered stands which we request How are late stand changes passed to you? What’s the percentage GH19 ARR SIS or stand allocation unit / 20% of late changes? GH20 ARR How do you receive landing times? SIS Who inputs Actual in-block times? Operations dept GH21 ARR Where is the information going? Goes in own system and we also send sita to airline and HAL

104 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ID Seq Ground Handlers Common Questions Aviance UK Answers

What methods of communication are used i.e radio, handheld GH22 ARR Ground to air, hand held radio, telephone, SIS, fixed vehicle radios computers? GH23 Turnaround How is minimum turn-around calculated? Agreed time with most airlines from on blocks Any known delay, prior to arrival who is responsible for updating? GH24 Turnaround Either Aviance ops or airlines ops by sita message How, who and when? If delay < 15’: who updates the delay in the AO Dispatch Control GH25 Turnaround Ops centre Service? (Ramp agent? Ops control centre?) GH26 Turnaround If delay > 15’: will an update be done in the AO DCS? - Who? ? GH27 Turnaround How do you receive CTOT? How, who and when? Sita message or from CFMU or airline ops, - 2 hours ? GH28 Turnaround Do you board aircraft regardless of CTOT? Anticipating changes? For most carriers – some will not for very delayed slot How does the dispatcher receive Departure Control System GH29 Turnaround Via cute at all gates information? GH30 Turnaround How are coaching gates allocated By stand allocation unit What is the Check in & boarding procedure for both pier and GH31 Turnaround Subject to airline- W/B -60 N/B -45/-60 is general guide line. remote operations? i.e called to gate,last call GH32 Turnaround How are Last Minute Change s dealt with? By dispatcher/airline rep How do you communicate with fuel company? i.e uplift Operations or dispatcher. Some long haul put initial fuel on board on remote stand GH33 Turnaround requirements & additional top-ups if required during long stop GH34 Turnaround How are any delays during the turn-around disseminated? Dispatcher to Operations then HAL GH35 Turnaround If CTOT extension required what is the process? Dispatcher contacts operations or airline or request capt to call ATC How are aircraft on long layovers managed i.e towing stand from 60 min min tow off for a/c on less than 3 hour turnround. Tow off stand allocated GH36 Turnaround stand, mx areas etc (secondary movements) by SAU and tow back stand allocated -90 Do you input any Ready Status (all doors closed and tug in GH37 Departure N position)? How and who? How are off blocks, mvt messages generated? Automatically, GH38 Departure Manually by operations after dept manually etc? How, who and when Can we have an overview of all IT systems used, local, network GH39 Systems Refer to Martyn Robinson and links between partners? Can you describe the current information flows and links between SIS is main form of information as it is in most dept and companies, additional info GH40 Systems different partners both internally and externally? by radio.telephone

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 105

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

ID Seq Ground Handlers Common Questions Aviance UK Answers

How to you communicate the aircraft status to your operational GH41 Systems ? system? GH42 Systems Is it possible to get an example of departure schedule and delay? Contact Aviance ops 0208 7570765

What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating in GH43 CDM Improved information re arriving a/c and better info on o/b delays CDM? Would improved arrival precision make your operation more GH44 CDM Manpower planning/meeting SLA,s efficient? Through continuous coordination during the turn around (kind of Arrival of crew / arrival of service providers (fuel / catering / loading /cargo) GH45 CDM milestones), can you define the key milestones? boarding commencing on time/ pushback tug Would a 'Target of block time' generate by the GH make your GH46 CDM Y operation more efficient? What would the impact on your work if the pre-departure sequence GH47 CDM Y is known? Would improved communication links with the other partners GH48 CDM Y enhance the efficiency of the operation? Do you have any other needs to enhance the efficiency of your GH49 CDM Airport infrastructure is main concern/ stand availability/ dedicated stands operation? GH50 CDM Do you agree implementing flexible taxi time ?

106 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

AIR FRANCE SERVICES LIMITED

Ground Handlers Common Questions ID Seq Answers AIR FRANCE SERVICES LIMITED Do you receive in advance daily flight programs from Aircraft Yes. Received prior to the start of the season. In the case of Flybe we also GH1 Pre operators? receive a daily Mayfly. Do you receive all seasonal and day to day planned flight GH2 Pre No movements from the Airport Operator? GH3 ARR Do you receive ARR/DEP FPLs from AO? No GH4 ARR Do you receive accurate MVT/DEL messages from outstation? Usually GH5 ARR Are these messages automatically read & checked or manually? MVT is dealt with automatically, but the DEL may require manual intervention. Do you receive passenger & baggage transit/transfer information? GH6 ARR LHRPV receive a PTM via Sita If yes, what is the procedure? GH7 ARR Do you receive ACARS messages (out/off and positioning reports) AF flights only GH8 ARR Do you receive VHF air to ground communication with A/C Yes If yes, what info do you receive (eta, wchr, unmin, fuel Eta. Wch, UM, CTOT are all dealt with automatically. VHF is used for non routine GH9 ARR requirements etc) and pass (stand number, CTOT)? information e.g. diversion, lost mobiles etc. GH11 ARR If yes, who do you pass this information to and how? All interested parties GH12 ARR How do you receive priorities? ? GH13 ARR How do you communicate priorities? ? GH14 ARR How do you receive the arrival sequence and who from? SIS GH15 ARR How do you receive finals (10min out)? SIS Do you consider 'run time' (base-stand) for resources (staff and GH16 ARR ? equipment) GH17 ARR How do you receive stand allocation? SIS GH18 ARR Can you influence the stand allocation? Yes How are late stand changes passed to you? What’s the percentage GH19 ARR SIS, but often backed up by a phone call from Stand Alloction Unit of late changes? GH20 ARR How do you receive landing times? SIS, but in the case of AF via acars Who inputs Actual in-block times? GH21 ARR Acars in the case of AF. LHRKLAF for the other airlines. SIS receives the info. Where is the information going?

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 107

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Ground Handlers Common Questions ID Seq Answers AIR FRANCE SERVICES LIMITED What methods of communication are used i.e radio, handheld GH22 ARR Air-ground VHF, ground-ground radios, telephones and mobiles computers? GH23 Turnaround How is minimum turn-around calculated? There is an agreed maximum time allowed per acft type Any known delay, prior to arrival who is responsible for updating? GH24 Turnaround Ops supervisor via SIS which in turn updates terminal info boards and teletext etc. How, who and when? If delay < 15’: who updates the delay in the AO Dispatch Control GH25 Turnaround Ops supervisor Service? (Ramp agent? Ops control centre?) GH26 Turnaround If delay > 15’: will an update be done in the AO DCS? - Who? Yes – Ops supervisor GH27 Turnaround How do you receive CTOT? How, who and when? Acars in the case of AF. Via Sita fron BRU for others If the delay is less than 2 hours we board for an on-time dep. For delays over 2 GH28 Turnaround Do you board aircraft regardless of CTOT? Anticipating changes? hours we delay boarding by the delay minus 2 hours. How does the dispatcher receive Departure Control System GH29 Turnaround The dispatcher has access to the DCS at the gate or in the office information? GH30 Turnaround How are coaching gates allocated By SAU What is the Check in & boarding procedure for both pier and GH31 Turnaround Check in is identical. The flight is called earlier in the case of remote ops remote operations? i.e called to gate,last call GH32 Turnaround How are Last Minute Change s dealt with? Manually in the case of minor changes. A new LDS is issued for larger changes How do you communicate with fuel company? i.e uplift GH33 Turnaround Verbally at aircraft and by phone from office requirements & additional top-ups if required The delay code is on the MVT message and in the AFSL ground handling GH34 Turnaround How are any delays during the turn-around disseminated? computer. The implicated dept. reports on the reasons for the delay GH35 Turnaround If CTOT extension required what is the process? Send a new ETD which in turn delays the FPL How are aircraft on long layovers managed i.e towing stand from GH36 Turnaround In liaison with SAU. stand, mx areas etc (secondary movements) Do you input any Ready Status (all doors closed and tug in GH37 Departure No. This is now the responsibility of the pilots. position)? How and who? How are off blocks, mvt messages generated? Automatically, Automatically via the DCS. The dispatcher or ops supervisor inputs the GH38 Departure manually etc? How, who and when information as soon as known – either via acars or via SIS AF DCS which communicates with SIS via Sita. It also has a network link with the Can we have an overview of all IT systems used, local, network GH39 Systems AF movements computer. The AFSL ground handling computer which is purely and links between partners? an in-house system for storing records and producing stats.

108 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

Ground Handlers Common Questions ID Seq Answers AIR FRANCE SERVICES LIMITED Internally via information pages on the DCS. Externally by keeping SIS updated Can you describe the current information flows and links between GH40 Systems which we do either via BAA ops by telephone or by sending MVTs and ETDs via different partners both internally and externally? the DCS. How to you communicate the aircraft status to your operational GH41 Systems Either by direct input to the AF movements computer or via the DCS. system? GH42 Systems Is it possible to get an example of departure schedule and delay? Yes

What are the objectives or potential gain you expect participating in GH43 CDM ? CDM? Would improved arrival precision make your operation more GH44 CDM Yes efficient? Through continuous coordination during the turn around (kind of Arrival on block. Cleaners off. Fuelling complete. Unloading/loading complete. GH45 CDM milestones), can you define the key milestones? Pax count correct. Would a 'Target of block time' generate by the GH make your No. We prefer to calculate our own and to disseminate the information via SIS GH46 CDM operation more efficient? and our own systems. What would the impact on your work if the pre-departure sequence GH47 CDM ? is known? Would improved communication links with the other partners GH48 CDM ? enhance the efficiency of the operation? Do you have any other needs to enhance the efficiency of your GH49 CDM ? operation? GH50 CDM Do you agree implementing flexible taxi time ?

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 109

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Page intentionally left blank

110 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ANNEX B: CONSOLIDATED PROBLEMS & REQUIREMENTS LIST

No. Partner Priority Category Sub-Cat. Description

Long delays incurred holding for occupied stands especially in the T4 area: aircraft blocking taxiways for long periods causing GMC to give complex routeing instructions to vehicles and 1 NATS Process Stands other aircraft to avoid the holding traffic. 2 NATS Process Stands Demand and availability of Stands and Gates (S&G). 3 NATS Environment Work Space No available working space for additional computer screens. 4 NATS Process Stands High workload with stand conflicts and ground holding delays. 5 NATS Environment Work Space Many computer screens are difficult to read in the VCR. 6 NATS Process Stands Late notification of S&G allocation. 7 NATS Process Holding Times ETA on the strip does not take into account any holding. Coordination of T4 departure order (British Airways and Air Traffic Control have different 8 NATS Process Dep Mngmnt problems). 9 NATS Process Dep Mngmnt Poor CTOT compliance and unknown status of departures. 10 NATS People Taxi Times Airline Operators might not like using variable taxi times. In the morning the TWR have no stand info so they often put arrivals on the least favoured 11 NATS Process Info Sharing runway regarding the taxi in and stand. 12 NATS Technology Flight Strips Accurate automation of ALDT & CTOT on strips (EFPS in the future). 13 NATS Process Taxi Times Variable Taxi time Calculation. Off-Block 14 NATS Process Times More accurate off-block times (OBT) provided by Aircraft Operators / Ground handlers. 15 NATS Process Dep Mngmnt Aircraft respecting their estimated OBT. Pre Departure Sequencing – mainly during significant airfield delays. How could a tool perform 16 NATS Technology Dep Mngmnt versus a GMC? 17 NATS Process Dep Mngmnt Improve CTOT compliance. 18 NATS Process Stands Earlier indication needed of stand allocation, conflicts and late changes. Earlier indication needed for secondary ground movements i.e. towing to and from MX / HGR 19 NATS Process Towing areas, stand to stand and requirement to cross active runway ? 20 NATS Process General Improved T4 operations.

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 111

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

21 NATS Process General Any CDM improvements coupled with the introduction of EFPS. Remote 22 NATS Process Holding Enhanced use of remote holding for both departures and arrivals to reduce taxiway congestion. 23 BAA Environment Work Space Limited visual view of the airfield. 24 BAA Process Landing Times Inaccurate ELDT and ALDT. 25 BAA Process Dep Mngmnt Poor estimates of departures. 26 BAA Process Stands Stand and Gate availability. 27 BAA Process Stands Staff monitor a congested frequency to log off blocks status. 28 BAA Process Dep Mngmnt No early warning of pushback delays to departing aircraft. 29 BAA Process Punctuality Enhanced departure and arrival punctuality and airport slot adherence. 30 BAA Process General Enhanced situational awareness required with the limited view. An enhanced information data flow is needed between various partners (Ground handlers) 31 BAA Process Info Sharing especially concerning the status of aircraft. 32 BAA Process Dep Mngmnt Pre-departure sequencing (improving estimates of pushback clearance). 33 BAA Process Taxi Times Flexible Taxi-times. Earlier indication of secondary ground movements i.e. towing to and from MX / HGR areas, stand 34 BAA Process Towing to stand and requirement to cross active runway. Enhanced Stand & Gate management using a more accurate OBT (will provide earlier indication 35 BAA Process Stands of stand conflicts). 36 BAA Process Towing Less delay incurred whilst towing aircraft. Off-Block Automation to enhance accuracy of AOBT and manpower required to monitor GMC frequency 37 BAA Technology Times (possible ASMGCS capture in the future). 38 BAA Process Dep Mngmnt Pre-departure sequencing (improving estimates of pushback clearance). Remote 39 BAA Process Holding Enhanced use of remote holding. Holding in Inaccurate estimated landing times (ELDT) and actual landing times (ALDT) after aircraft enter 40 bmi Process Stack arrival holding patterns. No means of showing already known flight delays on SIS prior to flight becoming airborne at 41 bmi Process Info Sharing outstation. 42 bmi Process Landing Times Poor resource planning with inaccurate ELDT and ALDT. 43 bmi Process Stands Late Stand and Gate Changes. 44 bmi Process Landing Times Poor passenger information displayed due inaccurate ELDT.

112 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

45 bmi Process General Poor management of transit passengers and baggage. 46 bmi Process Info Sharing Poor information flows in times of disruption. 47 bmi Process Towing Delays incurred when towing aircraft. 48 bmi Process Stands Stand and Gate availability. 49 bmi Process Dep Mngmnt No notification of delays incurred on stand when aircraft fully ready for push. 50 bmi Process Punctuality Enhanced departure and arrival punctuality. 51 bmi Process Landing Times Improved Accuracy of arrival times (both ELDT and ALDT). 52 bmi Process Dep Mngmnt Pre-departure sequencing (improving estimates of pushback clearance). 53 bmi Process Taxi Times Flexible Taxi-times. 54 bmi Process General Enhanced resource planning. 55 bmi Process Stands Reduced number of Stand & Gate changes. 56 bmi Process Towing Less delay incurred whilst towing aircraft. 57 bmi Process Stands Enhancing preferred stand allocation agreement. Holding in 58 Aviance Process Stack Inaccurate ELDT and ALDT after aircraft enter arrival holding patterns. 59 Aviance Process Landing Times Poor resource planning with inaccurate ELDT and ALDT. 60 Aviance Process Stands Late Stand and Gate Changes (up to 20%). 61 Aviance Process Towing Delays incurred when towing aircraft. 62 Aviance Process Stands Stand and Gate availability. 63 Aviance Process Dep Mngmnt No notification of delays incurred on stand when aircraft fully ready for push 64 Aviance Process Landing Times Improve Accuracy of arrival times (both ELDT and ALDT). 65 Aviance Process Dep Mngmnt Pre-departure sequencing (improving estimates of pushback clearance). 66 Aviance Process Taxi Times Flexible Taxi-times. 67 Aviance Process General Enhanced resource planning would improve SLA with Aircraft Operators. 68 Aviance Process Stands Reduced number of Stand & Gate changes. 69 Aviance Process Towing Less delay incurred whilst towing aircraft. 70 Aviance Process Stands Preferred stand allocation. There is a requirement to show landing runway in the system (SIS) 20-30 minutes in advance of 71 EUROC Process Runway landing, but who should be responsible for keeping the information correct ? There is a need to provide TC with information on Stands and maybe this could be also be tied in with showing the current delay to a flight (EIBT-SIBT) (perhaps several pages of the SIS could be 72 EUROC Process Stands piped over).

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 113

EUROCONTROL London Heathrow CDM WP1

Page intentionally left blank

114 Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05

London Heathrow CDM WP1 EUROCONTROL

ANNEX C: ARRIVALS INFORMATION TRIAL SPREADSHEET (WITH ONE LINE OF SAMPLE DATA)

Callsign Rw Stand ETA (at EAT P-ETA P-ETA CDM - CDM - ETA Time CDM New New CDM in Hold) as shown (ELDT) = (EIBT) ELDT EIBT (ELDT?) sts Time SIS SIS Time use shown on Colume displa (EAT+ (ELDT+ as chan aircraft ETA ETA pas- on EAT EAT H min 7 yed DFT) VTT) +- shown ges departe given given sing Tool tool min on SIS +-5min 5mins on strip d hold from with Z with 69 in TWR P to Z (ELDT) Z (In block)

BMA816 A321 09L 0:00 10:20 10:24 10:50 10:57 10:38 10:43 10:39 10:27 10:25 10:39 10:46 10:28

CDM - CDM - Time New SIS New SIS Time CDM CDM - CDM - ALDT +- APT - New SIS CDM - Time AIBT - APT AIBT - ELDT EIBT Sts ETA ETA Sts Time ELDT EIBT 1 min ALDT ETA EIBT Sts DH AIBT BAA (T69+9 (ELDT+V change given given change passing (T+4min (ELDT+ (Visual) after (ALDT+ change (visual) mins) +- VT) +- s from Z with F with F s from F 29 s) VTT) +- ALDT VTT) s from L 2mins 2mins to F (ELDT) (in to L +-1min 1min (EIBT) +-1 to A block)

10:38 10:43 10:33 10:39 10:46 10:41 10:33 10:37 10:42 10:37 10:37 10:44 10:42 10:46 10:46 10:45 0:00

Project London Heathrow CDM - EEC Note No. 03/05 115