L
Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) UNITED KINGDOM
Year 2016 - Level 1
Document Title LSSIP Year 2016 for United Kingdom
Infocentre Reference 17/01/30/142 Date of Edition 15/05/2017 LSSIP Focal Point Craig Jiggins - [email protected] LSSIP Contact Person Oscar Alfaro - [email protected] Status Released Intended for Agency Stakeholders Available in http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip
Reference Documents
LSSIP Documents http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip LSSIP Guidance Material http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip Master Plan Level 3 – Plan Edition 2016 http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/european-atm- master-plan-level-3-implementation-plan Master Plan Level 3 – Report Year 2015 http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/european-atm- master-plan-level-3-implementation-report European ATM Portal (password https://www.eatmportal.eu controlled) European ATM Portal for ATM http://www.atmmasterplan.eu/ Masterplan STATFOR Forecasts http://www.eurocontrol.int/statfor Acronyms and abbreviations http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/glossaries United Kingdom AIP http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/UK AIP National Performance Plan http://www.caa.co.uk/Airspace/Future Airspace Strategy/National Performance Plan-Air Navigation Services
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom Released Issue
APPROVAL SHEET
The following authority has approved the present issue of the LSSIP document and their signature confirms the correctness of the reported information and reflects their commitment to implement the actions laid down in the European ATM Master Plan Level 3 Implementation Plan (also known as the ESSIP Plan).
A representative of the national regulatory authority has signed on behalf of all the involved contributory stakeholders. This arrangement between the signatory authority and the national stakeholders was decided at State level. Each of the involved stakeholders has provided written confirmation (via e-mail) to the signatory authority of the correctness of the information provided.
Stakeholder / Name Position Signature Date Organisation
Head of Airspace, Air Traffic UK Management and Aerodromes Jon Round Civil Aviation (AAA) (Safety 10 May 2017 Authority and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG))
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom Released Issue
CONTENTS
Chapter 1 National ATM Environment ...... 7 1.1. Geographical Scope ...... 7 1.1.1. International Membership ...... 7 1.1.2. Geographical description of the FIR(s) ...... 7 1.1.3. Airspace Classification and Organisation ...... 8 1.2. National Stakeholders ...... 9 1.2.1. Civil Regulator(s) ...... 10 1.2.2. Air Navigation Service Provider ...... 15 1.2.3. Airports ...... 17 1.2.4. Military Authorities ...... 19 Chapter 2 Traffic and Capacity ...... 22 2.1 Evolution of traffic in the United Kingdom ...... 22 2.2 London En-route ACC ...... 23 2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021 ...... 23 2.2.2 Performance summer 2016 ...... 23 2.2.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer ...... 24 2.3 London Terminal Control (TC) ...... 26 2.3.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021 ...... 26 2.3.2 Performance summer 2016 ...... 26 2.3.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer ...... 27 2.4 Prestwick ACC ...... 29 2.4.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021 ...... 29 2.4.2 Performance summer 2016 ...... 29 2.4.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer ...... 30 3 Master Plan Level 3 Implementation Report recommendations ...... 32 4 National Projects ...... 34 4.1 NATS ...... 34 4.2 Military Authority ...... 38 4.3 Gatwick Airport ...... 39 4.4 Heathrow Airport ...... 44 4.5 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) ...... 48 4.6 iTEC – interoperability Through European Collaboration - European Flight Data Processing ...... 49 4.7 NERL Roadmap ...... 50 4.8 Prestwick Lower Airspace Systemisation (PLAS) ...... 50 4.9 Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) ...... 51 4.10 Space Planes ...... 51 4.11 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)/Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) ...... 51 5 Regional Co-ordination ...... 52 5.1 FAB Context ...... 52 5.2 FAB Projects ...... 54 5.2.1 Dynamic Sectorisation Operational Trial (DSOT) ...... 54 5.2.2 Queue Management – Cross Border Arrival Management (XMAN) ...... 55 5.2.3 Common Regulatory Functions ...... 56 5.2.4 Exchange of regulatory Personnel in Safety Auditing Action ...... 56 5.2.5 Cooperative Preparation for EASA Safety Audit ...... 56 5.2.6 Safety Partnership Arrangements between UK and Ireland ...... 56 5.2.7 Future Airspace Strategy – Low Density/Low Complexity Area (LDLCA) ...... 57 5.2.8 Interoperability and Resilience ...... 57
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom Released Issue 5.2.9 Harmonised 18,000ft Transition Altitude ...... 58 5.3 Regional cooperation ...... 59 5.3.1 Direct Route Airspace (DRA) ...... 59 5.3.2 Regional Cooperation Initiatives ...... 59 5.3.3 Borealis Alliance ...... 60 5.4 Regional Projects ...... 61 6 Implementation Objectives Progress ...... 71 6.1 State View ...... 71 6.1.1 Overall Objective Implementation ...... 71 6.1.2 Objective Progress per SESAR Key Feature ...... 71 6.1.3 ICAO ASBU Implementation ...... 76 6.2 Detailed Objectives Implementation progress ...... 77 6.2.1 State Implementation Objectives ...... 78 6.2.2 Airport-related ESSIP Objectives ...... 94
Annexes Annex A – Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process Annex B – National Stakeholders Organisation Charts Annex C – Glossary of Abbreviations
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom Released Issue Executive Summary
National ATM Context The United Kingdom remains fully engaged with the European Commission, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and Eurocontrol in the development and implementation of a Single European Sky (SES) and EASA implementing regulations. The work required from the UK Department for Transport and the UK Civil Aviation Authority is substantial and includes significant resource in support of key SES programmes and implementation such as the Performance Scheme, FABs, Standardised European Rules of the Air, Common Requirements and SESAR - including the Pilot Common Project - in support of the Air Traffic Management (ATM) Master Plan.
Traffic and Capacity During summer 2016 (May-October), the UK experienced a large traffic increase of 5.9% compared to the same period in 2015. The average summer en-route delays, per flight were as listed below: London Area Control was 0.11% per flight a slight increase from 2015. Note: 47% of the LAC delays were for Weather and 42% for ATC Capacity. London Terminal Control was 0.22% per flight, which was a 0.13% increase against 2015 figures. Note: 41% of the LTC delays were for Weather, 29% for ATC Staffing and 28% for ATC Capacity. Scottish Area Control was 0.51% per flight, an increase from 0.02% in 2015. Note: 43% of the SAC delays were for Special Events, 22% for ATC Capacity, 20% to ATC Staffing and 13% for Weather. Capacity increases in London Area Control over the future period (2017-2021) are based upon a number of ongoing improvements and activities including improved ATFCM including STAM, and a more flexible use of staff. The Swanwick RP2 airspace programme will deliver various modules during this period. For 2017 this will focus on improvements in the Hurn and East Anglia areas, including increased systemisation, new Conditional Routes and new RNAV1 STARs and ATS Routes. Capacity increases in London Terminal Control over the future period (2017-2021) are based upon a number of ongoing improvements and activities including improved ATFCM including STAM, and a more flexible use of staff. Increased capacity delays in 2016 were due to the introduction of London Airspace Management Programme Phase One Alpha. The ExCDs project will deliver Electronic Flight Strips to London Terminal Control staff during 2017-2018. Capacity increases in Scottish Area Control over the future period are based upon further benefits from the RLAT Phase-2 activities; improved ATFCM including STAM and there may be additional capacity benefits from PC Lower Airspace but that has yet to be determined.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 1 Released Issue Implementation Objectives Overview
Progress distribution for applicable Implementation Objectives
Completed 8; 9% Ongoing Planned 15; 16% 42; 46% Late 2; 2% No Plan 25; 27% Not Applicable Missing Data Undefined
1) Any problem in completing objectives due for 2014-2016 (or prior to) AOP04.1. Birmingham is still intending to install A-SMGCS Level 1 during 2017, but delayed slightly later to October. Manchester have announced a further delay in the development an initial project plan for the installation of A-SMGCS, Level 1 during 2018 with deployment by July 2019. London Heathrow is still aiming to complete Level 1 by the end of 2018. London Stansted had previously reported as Complete, but whereas they had previously filed Not Applicable concerning the equipage of vehicle transponders after removing them during 2014; new transponders have now been purchased and will be installed, tested and validated by December 2017. AOP04.2. Birmingham is still intending to install A-SMGCS Level 2 during 2017. Manchester Level 2 has been identified as a separate project to Level 1 and installation is aimed at February 2019, with full deployment by February 2020. London Heathrow is still aiming to complete Level 2 by December 2018. London Stansted had previously reported as Complete, but some alterations have been made to the system and with testing of the new transponders completion is now anticipated December 2017. AOP05. Birmingham has delayed the introduction of A-CDM until December 2018, due to the delayed implementation of EFPS until spring 2017. Manchester has further delayed the implementation of CDM until the end of 2018. London Luton continues to report ‘Late’, with an anticipated completion November 2019 due to funding not being as available as a result of another regulatory project taking priority. Edinburgh still has no defined or approved implementation plan or budget but has stated that they are supportive of the principles were there not a cost barrier to implementation. Edinburgh remains as No Plan. London Stansted continues to evaluate A-CDM and subject to cost benefits analysis will implement elements; and is now planning for full implementation by the end of 2020. ENV02. London Gatwick has been unable to pursue this primarily due to business focus on the Airports Commission during 2015, but intends to review this position during 2017. FCM01 and FCM03. Both of these Objectives have been reported as ‘Late’, and are planned as part of the part of the wider NATS systems upgrade strategy with full implementation expected circa 2020. ITY-FMTP. NATS has been ‘Complete’ for some time, but whilst the capability provisions for the military are supplied by NATS, there are certain military elements that remain either as ‘Late’ or ‘No Plan’.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 2 Released Issue 2) Plans for completing objectives due for 2017 and 2018 AOM19.1 is a new Objective this cycle. Utilisation and expansion of LARA has enabled the booking of airspace for the military to be more accurate and will be in wider use at military establishments. It is anticipated to be ‘Complete’ ahead of schedule December 2017. ATC02.8. Ground based safety nets, which is basically three previous Objectives rolled into one has been declared as Complete by NATS. The ITEC FDP System has the capabilities to meet the requirements of this Objective. COM10. NATS has a basic AMHS Service with a number of other ANSPs, but remain outstanding on one SLoA which is anticipated to Complete in March 2017. INF07. The UK is working towards meeting the requirements of Electronic Terrain and Obstacle data (TOD) via an overarching AIM Project Plan and overall is on target to meet the agreed deadline, although some SLoAs are now running late. ITY-ADQ. The CAA has developed and published policy and guidance to facilitate compliance to the ADQ regulation and anticipates that completion will be achieved January 2022. ITY-AGDL. Previously NATS had been deemed to be compliant, however it has since found that performance of the overall data link service did not fully meet the requirements of all its Stakeholders, and is now planned to Complete by early 2018. ITY-AGVCS2. At least 95% conversions had been achieved at December 2016, with non-cooperating operators being pursued. NATS is on schedule to complete on time (December 2018) and for State aircraft the military is also expected to complete within the timescales with FOC December 2020. NAV10 is now reported as ‘Complete’. SAF11. Both REG and NATS have reported as ‘Complete’. However, the military and the airports are anticipating being ‘Complete’ by December 2017. The military are currently formulating a plan. The airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester and Stansted) are currently capturing many of the recommendations by routine oversight or specific work packages.
3) Notable changes since the previous cycle AOM19.2 and 19.3 are new Objectives this cycle. They are both predicated upon the interoperability of LARA and the new ATM system. AOM19.2 anticipated completion is currently ahead of schedule December 2020 and AOM19.3 anticipated completion is on schedule for December 2021. AOM21.2. NATS and the military are working together on this Objective. The first phase of the new FDP system, which is essential in order to implement FRA, came into service at Prestwick Centre in summer 2016 and Part 1 of the Borealis FRA was implemented late 2016. Completion of this Objective is on schedule for December 2021. AOP11. Gatwick has reported Complete. Heathrow is working closely with other stakeholders to define and develop information that supports AOP and now aim to complete by April 2017. Glasgow has elements of this work underway and is to be established in line with the target date. AOP12. Gatwick has reported Complete. AOP13 is a new Objective this cycle aimed at the ANSPs of Manchester (NATS), Gatwick (Air Navigation Solutions), London Heathrow (NATS) and London Stansted (NATS); with only Heathrow (NATS) reporting as ‘Ongoing’ and on target with the FOC December 2023; all others are ‘No Plan’. ATC15.2 is a new objective this cycle, with NATS declaring as Complete. ATC16 with the military now completing the last outstanding SLoA; this Objective has now been declared as Complete. ATC17. NATS is still intending to deploy to all NATS Units by 2019, but overall will be unable to declare Complete until December 2021. ENV02. Edinburgh has completed the last outstanding SLoA so are now ‘Complete’.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 3 Released Issue FCM04.2 is a new objective this cycle, with NATS declaring as Ongoing with anticipated completion currently ahead of schedule by December 2020. FCM05. Two new SLoAs (ASP) this cycle, with ‘No Plan’ being recorded as the Interactive NOP and DNP have not yet been introduced by the NM. FCM08 is a new Objective this cycle with the activity at a very early stage, so this cycle ‘No Plan’ has been recorded. NAV03. Significant progress has been made with the London Airspace Management Programme, (phase 1a) implemented in February 2016. Full completion anticipated ahead of schedule January 2023.
Any Objectives not covered by the descriptions above are deemed to have NOT changed significantly from what has been previously reported.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 4 Released Issue Progress per SESAR Phase The figure below shows the progress made so far in the implementation of the SESAR baseline. The percentage is calculated as an average of the relevant objectives as shown in Chapter 6.1.2. The objectives declared ‘Achieved’ in previous editions (up to, and including, ESSIP Edition 2011- 2015) are also taken into account for as long as they were linked to the Level 2 of the ATM Master Plan and implemented by the State.
SESAR Baseline 2010 2019 Implementation 72%
Progress per SESAR Key Feature and Phase The figure below shows the progress made so far, per SESAR Key Feature, in the implementation of the SESAR baseline. The percentages are calculated as an average, per Key Feature, of the same objectives as in the previous paragraph.
Advanced Air Traffic Enabling Aviation Optimised ATM Services High Performing Airport Infrastructure
Network Services Operations
85% 84% 59% 58%
SESAR SESAR SESAR SESAR Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline
ICAO ASBUs Progress Implementation The figure below shows the progress made so far in the implementation of the ICAO ASBUs both for Block 0 and Block 1. The percentage is calculated as an average of the relevant Objectives contributing to each of the relevant ASBUs; this is explained in Chapter 6.1.3.
2010 2018 Block 0 74%
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 5 Released Issue
Introduction
The Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) documents, as an integral part of the Master Plan (MP) Level 3 (L3) / LSSIP mechanism, constitute a short/medium term implementation plan containing ECAC States’ actions to achieve the Implementation Objectives as set out by the MP Level 3 and to improve the performance of their national ATM System. This LSSIP document describes the situation in the State at the end of December 2016, together with plans for the next years.
Chapter 1 provides an overview of the ATM institutional arrangements within the State, the membership of the State in various international organisations, the organisational structure of the main ATM players - civil and military - and their responsibilities under the national legislation. In addition, an overview of the Airspace Organisation and Classification, the ATC Units, the ATM systems operated by the main ANSP are also provided.
Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive picture of the situation of Air Traffic, Capacity and ATFM Delay per each ACC in the State. It shows the evolution of Air Traffic and Delay in the last five years and the forecast for the next five years. It gives also the achieved performance in terms of delay during the summer season period and the planned projects assumed to offer the required capacity which will match the foreseen traffic increase and keep the delay at the agreed performance level.
Chapter 3 provides a set of recommendations extracted from the MP L3 Implementation Report 2015 which are relevant to the state/stakeholders concerned. The State reports how they have handled those recommendations and the actions taken during the year to address the concerns expressed by those recommendations.
Chapter 4 provides the main ATM national projects which contribute directly to the implementation of the MP Operational Improvements and/or Enablers and Implementation Objectives. The description, timescale, progress made and expected contribution to the ATM Key Performance Areas are provided by the State per each project included in this chapter.
Chapter 5 deals with the ATM Regional Coordination. It provides an overview of the FAB cooperation and Projects and also all other regional initiatives and Projects which are out of the FAB scope. The content of this chapter generally is developed and agreed in close cooperation between the States concerned.
Chapter 6 contains aggregated information at State level covering the overall level of implementation, implementation per SESAR Key Feature and implementation of ICAO ASBUs. In addition the high- level information on progress and plans of each Implementation Objective is presented. The information for each Implementation Objective is presented in boxes giving a summary of the progress and plans of implementation for each Stakeholder. The conventions used are presented at the beginning of the section.
Chapter 6.2 is completed with a separate document called LSSIP Level 2. This document consists of a set of tables organised in line with the list of Implementation Objectives. Each table contains all the actions planned by the four national stakeholders to achieve their respective Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) as established in the European ATM Master Plan L3 Implementation Plan Edition 2016.
The information contained in Chapter 6 is deemed sufficient to satisfy State reporting requirements towards ICAO in relation to ASBU (Aviation System Block Upgrades) monitoring.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 6 Released Issue
Chapter 1 National ATM Environment
1.1. Geographical Scope
1.1.1. International Membership
The UK is a Member of the following international organisations in the field of ATM:
Organisation Since ECAC Nov/1955 Eurocontrol Dec/1960 European Union Jan/1973 EASA Sep/2003 ICAO Apr/1947 JAA 1989 NATO Apr/1949
1.1.2. Geographical description of the FIR(s)
The geographical scope of this document addresses the London and Scottish FIRs/UIRs and associated areas of airspace where provision of ATS has been delegated to NATS. NATS also provides air traffic services within the Shanwick Oceanic Control Area (OCA); provision for such services being delegated by ICAO to the United Kingdom as a NAT Provider State. The development of such services is beyond the scope of this document.
The Swanwick and Prestwick Centres provide Air Traffic Services (ATS) in en-route airspace to GAT at and above FL245 within the London and Scottish Upper Information Regions (UIR).
The Swanwick and Prestwick Centres also provides ATS to GAT in both en-route and TMA airspace, below FL245, within the London and Scottish Flight Information Regions (FIR); the airspace being allocated according to operational requirements.
The London and Scottish FIR/UIRs are surrounded by the FIR/UIRs of 7 States, namely France (France UIR Paris FIR and Brest FIR), Ireland (Shannon FIR/UIR), Iceland (Reykjavik FIR), Norway (Norway FIR/UIR), Denmark (Copenhagen FIR), The Netherlands (Amsterdam FIR) and Belgium (Brussels FIR/UIR). Through airspace delegated from The Netherlands and Belgium to Eurocontrol, the London UIR also interfaces with the Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC).
The Prestwick Centre also interfaces with the NAT (North Atlantic) ATS providers of Shanwick OCA and Reykjavik OCA.
The provision of military area radar services and ATS to OAT in the London and Scottish FIR/UIR is the responsibility of RAF (Unit) Swanwick as is the provision of ATS, by arrangement and agreement, to off-route GAT within appropriate surveillance coverage and Operational Areas of Responsibility (AoR) being designated as appropriate. If the RAF (Unit) Swanwick is for any reason unable to provide a service, NATS retains responsibility for the provision of an ATS. Other ATS providers may also provide an appropriate ATS within their own AoR.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 7 Released Issue 1.1.3. Airspace Classification and Organisation
The following classification of airspace is applied in the UK.
Flight Level UK Upper Limit 660 195 – 660 C SFC – 195 G
Type of Airspace Structures and Classifications Major TMA A C D
Minor TMA E CTA A C D
AWY A C D E CTR D
There are currently six TMAs in the UK: Three TMAs Solely Class A; One TMA Part Class A and Part Class C; One TMA Part Class C, Class D and Class E; One TMA Solely Class D.
There are currently thirty eight CTAs in the UK: Five CTAs Solely Class A; Two CTAs Part Class A and part Class C; Three CTAs Solely Class C; Twenty eight CTAs Solely Class D.
All Control Areas (Airways) below FL 195 as notified within the UK FIR (with some exceptions which are notified as Class C, D or E) are notified as Class A; above FL 195 they are all notified as Class C.
There are currently twenty nine CTRs in the UK, all notified as Class D. Note: The above was correct as of 8 Dec 2016 (AIRAC 13/2016).
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 8 Released Issue 1.2. National Stakeholders
The main National Stakeholders involved in ATM in the UK, which contribute to the compilation of this document, are the following: UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) - National Supervisory Authority and Competent Authority National Air Traffic Services (NATS) Military Authorities Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited, Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), and Manchester Airports Group (MAG) Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the UK Department for Transport (DfT).
Their activities are detailed in the following subchapters and their relationships are shown in the diagram below.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 9 Released Issue 1.2.1. Civil Regulator(s)
General Information
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is a public corporation providing independent advice to the DfT and regulation of all aspects of the aviation industry. The Department for Transport is the UK government department responsible of air traffic management matters including the UK's membership of EUROCONTROL. DfT represents the UK in the Provisional Council and Permanent Commission.
An overview of the regulatory bodies in the UK can be seen in the table below:
Activity in ATM: Organisation Legal Basis responsible Rule-making DfT acting on The CAA is designated as the NSA by the UK recommendations from Government under the Single European Sky the Civil Aviation (National Supervisory Authority) Regulations 2013 Authority (CAA), and (Statutory Instrument 2013 No. 2620). subject to rule-making http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2620/co processes at European ntents/made Union level.
Safety and Airspace Rule-making powers arise under the Civil Aviation Act Regulation Group 1982, the Air Navigation Order 2016, the Rules of the (SARG), CAA. Air Regulations 2015, and the Air Navigation General Regulations 2006.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 10 Released Issue Safety Oversight UK CAA/SARG (NSA The CAA is designated as the NSA by the UK as per SES Government under the Single European Sky Regulations, Competent (National Supervisory Authority) Regulations 2013 Authority under EASA (Statutory Instrument 2013 No. 2620). Regulations). Under Article 270 of the UK Air Navigation Order 2016 the CAA is: 1. The NAA (National Aviation Authority) of the UK for the purposes of the Basic EASA Regulation. 2. The competent authority of the UK for the purposes of the EASA Aircraft Certification Regulation. 3. The competent authority of the UK for the purposes of the EASA Aircrew Regulation. 4. The competent authority for the UK for the purposes of the EASA Continuing Airworthiness Regulation. 5. The competent authority for the UK for the purposes of the EASA Air Operations Regulation, except that the Secretary of State is the competent authority of the UK for the purposes of Subpart RAMP of Part-ARO. 6. The competent authority for the UK for the purposes of the EASA Aerodromes Regulation. 7. The competent authority for the UK for the purposes of the Standardised European Rules of the Air Regulation. 8. The competent authority of the UK for the purposes of EU-OPS. 9. The NSA and the competent authority of the UK for the purposes of Articles 4 and 27 of the EASA Air Traffic Controllers’ Licensing Regulation; and 10. The competent authority of the UK for the purposes of the Occurrence Reporting Regulation.
Under Article 271 of the UK Air Navigation Order, the functions conferred on the UK by Article 14(4) of the Basic EASA Regulation are to be exercised by the CAA: subject to obtaining the consent of the Secretary of State prior to granting any exemption in accordance with Article 14(4) which is repetitive or is for more than two months. Under Article 272 of the UK Air Navigation Order, the function conferred on the UK by Article 4(8) of the EASA Aircrew Regulation is to be exercised by the CAA. Under Article 273 of the UK Air Navigation Order, the functions conferred on the UK by Articles 3(2), 4(3), 5(2), 5(6), 5(7), 6(3), 7(3), 8(2), 9, 13(6), 13(7), 13(8), 13(10), 13(11), 13(12), 15(1), 15(2), and 16(3) of the Occurrence Reporting Regulation are to be exercised by the CAA.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 11 Released Issue Enforcement actions in case of CAA Air Navigation Order 2016 for Licensing, Approvals non-compliance with safety and Certificates. regulatory requirements SES and EASA legislation for Certifications and Designations (under the SES Service Provision, EASA BR, Common Requirements and Safety Oversight Regulations (under EASA Regulations 1034/2011 and 1035/2011); ATFM under the SES ATFM Regulation; and Interoperability under the high-level SES Interoperability Regulation and Implementing Rules made under it.
Criminal sanctions for breaches of: (1) SES requirements under the Air Navigation (Single European Sky) (Penalties) Order 2013 (Statutory Instrument 2013 No.2874); and (2) EASA requirements under the Air Navigation Order 2016 Article 265(5) to (7) and Schedule 13 Parts A, B, C and D. Airspace DfT acting on Both UK and European level regulations. recommendations from the CAA. CAA SARG Economic DfT in the light of advice Both UK and European level regulations. from the CAA /UK CAA the Consumer and Markets Group (CMG) Environment DfT/UK CAA. Both UK and European level regulations. Security UK CAA AAA deals with Both UK and European level regulations. security aspects of the EASA Common Requirements Regulations for ANSPs. CAA (Avsec) deals with the compliance monitoring and oversight of aviation security more generally. Policy aspects of security are handled by DfT Transec. Accident investigation Air Accidents The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is an Investigation Branch independent part of the DfT and is not part of the (AAIB) CAA. Its purpose is to improve aviation safety by determining the causes of accidents and serious incidents and making Safety Recommendations to prevent accidents in the future.
Civil investigations into combined military and civil accidents are conducted in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 on the investigation and prevention of accidents and incidents in civil aviation, the Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996 No. 2798) and the (Armed Forces (Service Inquiry) Regulations 2008 (SI 2008 No 1651). The investigations will be carried out in parallel by respective accident investigation organisations of the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) and Military Air Accidents Branch (MAAIB). Each organisation will provide a Liaison Officer to assist in the process and ensure factual data is shared.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 12 Released Issue (*) Commission Regulation (EC) 1034/2011. - In line with ICAO Annex 11, Section 2.27, Regulation EC 1034/2011 requires the monitoring and assessment of the levels of safety achieved against the tolerable levels of safety determined for specific airspace blocks. However, those tolerable levels of safety still need to be fully established at Community level and will be addressed in the finalisation of a Commission Regulation laying down technical requirements and administrative procedures related to service providers and the oversight thereof. This was recently enacted (in error) as Commission Implementing Regulation 2016/1377 but has now been withdrawn. It will be replaced by a new regulation to apply from 1 January 2020.
The UK Secretary of State for Transport has given the CAA Directions – The Civil Aviation Authority (Chicago Convention) Directions 2007 - to ensure that the UK discharges its obligations under the Convention and after consultation with the CAA. The CAA must (inter alia) ensure that when exercising its statutory functions, it acts consistently with the obligations placed on the UK under the Convention; it must, in relation to Convention Annexes and PANS, consider whether it is necessary to amend UK legislation to ensure appropriate implementation of an ICAO provision; and where implementation of an ICAO provision is an EC responsibility, the CAA must assist in the development of the EC measure, where appropriate implement in the UK any part of an ICAO provision excluded from the EC measures, and assist the EC in determining whether any Difference should be notified to ICAO.
National ATM Safety Minima are not defined in the UK but may be addressed in the Commission Regulation referred to above or AMC/GM developed under it. More generally ICAO provisions call for States to establish a safety programme in order to achieve an acceptable level of safety performance; and that the acceptable level of safety to be achieved is established by the State concerned. The UK ALoSP is comprised of three safety performance targets:
1. Fatal accident rate 5 year rolling average is in the best 5% of States; 2. SPIs track the frequency of operational events regarded as potential precursors to fatal accidents, and indicate continuous improvement in reducing these risks; and 3. Compliance with ICAO SARPs of at least 90% with sound and considered rationale where differences have been filed.
The EU Occurrence Reporting Regulation has replaced articles in the UK ANO on occurrence reporting. The CAP 382 ‘Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme’ publication is now a series of web pages which offers guidance on adhering to EU 376/2014 on the reporting, analysis and follow up of occurrences in civil aviation and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1018 laying down a list classifying occurrences in civil aviation to be mandatorily reported, the European rules and its Guidance Material. The latest version is at CAP 382.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 13 Released Issue The CAA receives reports on air traffic control services, navigation and communications equipment, airfield facilities and ground occurrences. These reports include, for example, loss of standard separation, wake vortex encounters, runway incursions and ground collisions. Each event is recorded on a database and coded in order to aid further analysis of trends. The database is used to produce high-level safety performance indicators for ATM-related safety occurrences. Safety data is collated and reported to Eurocontrol on a six-monthly basis (March and September) for the Annual Safety Report, in accordance with Regulations No. 996/2010, (No. 1035/2011 and “national authority” data provision requirements under Annex IV of the SES Performance Regulation (No.390/2013). For the RP2 period from 1 January 2015, the UK and Irish FAB Performance Plan contains not just a FAB just culture target around training, but also a FAB NSA policy approach to the just culture issues.
Civil Aviation Authority / DGCA
Following the Public-Private Partnership arrangements for NATS introduced in 2001, the UK CAA has a wholly regulatory relationship with NATS. Indeed there is full separation in the UK between service provision and oversight. As the NSA, the CAA's stated aim is to be the 'the most competent and respected aviation regulator through an open and fair regulatory regime, and to champion the sustainable interests of air travellers and airspace users.' The CAA's current roles that are relevant to this document encompass economic regulation, safety regulation and airspace policy. However, the CAA also has an environmental strategic objective which is relevant to many elements of sustainable and efficient ATM. The function of oversight of aviation security transferred from DfT (Transec) to the CAA in 2014.
The Consumer and Markets Group (CMG) aims to secure the best sustainable outcome for users of air transport services by providing economic regulation and policy advice. Under powers granted in the Civil Aviation Act 2012 CMG’s responsibilities include the economic licensing of airport operators meeting a competition test of dominance. This replaces the system under which the former Regulatory Policy Group (RPG) regulated three “designated” airports (Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted). CMG also provides policy advice to the DfT on airports and competition policy. In relation to the NATS En Route plc (NERL) ATS Licence, CMG has a key role to play in co-ordinating the licence management function across the CAA as well as applying the economic regulatory aspects of the Licence (issued under the Transport Act 2000). Within the licence management function, and within the enabling statute (the Transport Act 2000), the CAA has an overriding safety duty.
The Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG) mission is ‘to ensure that risks to civil aviation safety are properly controlled’ and to support the CAA’s role ‘to provide best practice regulation and expert advice that are independent and enable civil aviation to best meet the needs of its users and society in a safe and sustainable manner’. For the purposes of this document, SARG regulates all civil ATS providers and UK-registered aircraft operators. SARG also provides specialist advice to the DfT. SARG plays a significant role in the work of the Eurocontrol Safety Regulatory Commission (SRC) and is instrumental in many aspects of the development of European ATM/ANS safety regulation. SARG has been fully engaged in the development of SES Phase 2+, the development of EASA ATM Regulations, and supporting the DfT in negotiations in Council for the amendment of the Basic EASA Regulation.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 14 Released Issue SARG is responsible for planning and managing the efficient use of the airspace over the UK to meet the needs of all airspace users, taking into account national security and environmental issues. Consultation is conducted through the National Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee (NATMAC) and its subgroups. SARG staff contribute significantly to a number of Eurocontrol work streams and domains related to airspace and air navigation issues, such as the Network Operations (NETOps) and the Agency Advisory Body (AAB). SARG staff also represent the UK in the Civil- Military Interface Committee (CMIC). Policy and technical advice is provided to the DfT. SARG and representatives from the CAA’s Policy and Programmes Team (PPT) also represent the UK on the Single Sky Committee and its ad-hoc working groups and in rule-making and other working groups within EASA. They also represent the CAA in engagement with the SESAR Joint Undertaking and in the NSA Coordination Platform (NCP) and its working groups. They also provide significant UK representation on ICAO Panels and other technical fora.
Annual Report published: Y CAP1309 – Civil Aviation Authority Annual Report & Accounts 2015/16
CAA Annual Report & Accounts 2015/2016
http://www.caa.co.uk/
1.2.2. Air Navigation Service Provider
Service provided
Name of the ANSP: NATS Governance: Public Private Partnership Ownership: - 49% State-owned (Govt retains a as of 2001 Golden Share). - 51% private-owned (42% by the Airline Group (*), 4% by LHR Airports Limited and 5% by NATS employees). Services provided Y/N Comment ATC En-route Y NATS (En Route) plc (NERL). ATC Approach Y Provided for those UK Airports detailed in the License as London Approach and at specific UK Airports under contractual arrangements with the Airport Operator. ATC Aerodrome Y Provided at specific UK Airports under contractual arrangements with the Airport Operator through NATS Services Ltd (NSL). AIS Y CNS Y MET Y ATCO training Y Others Additional information: Provision of services in Y Provides ATC Approach/Aerodrome services at Gibraltar. other State(s): Provides ATC Approach/Aerodrome services at Wattisham, Netheravon and Middle Wallop through AQUILA partnership. Provides Aerodrome services at 10 airports in Spain through a partnership with Ferrovial Servicios. (*)The Airline Group comprises: British Airways PLC, Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd, Deutsche Lufthansa AG, EasyJet Airline Company Ltd, Thomas Cook Airlines Ltd, Thomson Airways Ltd, Monarch Airlines Retirement Benefit Plan Ltd and USS Sherwood Ltd.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 15 Released Issue
Annual Report published: Y http://www.nats.aero/news/annual-report-accounts-2016/ This is the annual report covering yearly activities of the ANSP. www.nats.co.uk
ATC systems in use According to European Regulation 552/2004 on the Interoperability of the European Air Traffic Management Network, Chapter 3 defines the ATS Systems (systems and procedures for air traffic services, in particular flight data processing systems, surveillance data processing systems and human-machine interface systems). NATS operates different ATS systems for each of its centres and at the airports at which it has contractual arrangements; the ATS systems in use at the airports include some common components and some differences. All of our ATS Systems and their complex sub-systems are in a process of improvement; most systems are developed in close cooperation with a variety of different manufacturing companies whilst for others NATS is the manufacturer itself. Regardless of the source, NATS Engineering and the respective Operations and Services teams are always closely involved in the improvement processes of the NATS ATS systems. NATS continues to progress its major strategic programme aimed at Deploying SESAR through a new technology platform by 2018 and the deployment of new SESAR aligned methods of working across the operation by 2020.
Whilst NATS recognises that plans remain subject to change as operational and business conditions alter, an overview of the current plans is as follows:
Major upgrade1 Year EATMN System Manufacturer (Recent and Planned)* 1. Systems and procedures for airspace NATS with additional Vendor No recent Major upgrade. management. Planned upgrade on-going 2014 to 2017. Major update planned 2018 to 2020. 2. Systems and procedures for air traffic Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2014. flow management. Upgrade on-going 2015 to 2018. 3. Systems and procedures for air traffic Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2013 with further services, in particular flight data changes planned for the period processing, surveillance data processing 2016 to 2019. and human-machine interface systems. 4. Communications systems and Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2013. procedures for ground-to-ground, air-to- ground and air-to-air communications. Upgrade on-going 2014 to 2018. 5. Navigation systems and procedures. Multiple External Vendors No recent Major upgrade. Upgrade on-going 2014 to 2018. 6. Surveillance systems and procedures. Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2013.
1 Upgrade is defined as any modification that changes the operational characteristics of the system (SES Framework Regulation 549/2004, Article 2 (40))
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 16 Released Issue Major upgrade1 Year EATMN System Manufacturer (Recent and Planned)* Planned upgrade 2022 to 2023. 7. Systems and procedures for Multiple External Vendors No recent Major upgrade. aeronautical information services. Upgrade continuing over the period 2014 to 2019. 8. Systems and procedures for the use of Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2015. meteorological information. No upgrades planned in the immediate future. * Note that all dates are provisional and remain subject to alteration depending upon business and operational requirements.
ATC Units The following Table lists the ACCs, and associated FIRs/UIRs, in the UK airspace, which are of concern to this LSSIP. This information matches the LSSIP Traffic & Capacity section.
ATC Unit Number of sectors Associated FIR(s) Remarks En-route TMA NATS Swanwick 23 44 London FIR/UIR This is the maximum potential configuration. The TMA total includes some sectors which also provide a limited en-route service and some which provide approach services for London airports. NATS Prestwick 27 Scottish and London This is the maximum potential FIR/UIR configuration. Prestwick Centre sectors operate across both en-route and TMA environments.
1.2.3. Airports
General information Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited owns and runs London Heathrow airport, Heathrow being the largest and busiest airport in the UK. Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited is in turn owned by FGP Topco Limited, a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A. Gatwick Airport has the world’s busiest single-use runway and is the UK’s second busiest airport. The airport is owned by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), an Infrastructure owning company that has its operational headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut. GIP is also the owner of Edinburgh (sixth busiest airport in the UK) and London City Airport (thirteenth busiest airport in the UK). Manchester Airports Group (MAG) is now the country’s largest UK owned airport operator. Manchester Airport, which is the UK's third busiest airport is wholly owned by the ten local authorities of Greater Manchester and is operated by The Manchester Airports Group MAG also operates Stansted airport which is the fourth busiest airport in the UK and East Midlands Airport which is the eleventh busiest Airport in the UK. London Luton Airport is owned by Luton Borough Council. It is listed as the fifth busiest airport in the UK. Birmingham Airport is owned by seven Metropolitan Boroughs of West Midlands (49%) and the Airport Group Investments Ltd (approx 48%) and the Employees through a share scheme (for the remainder). It is currently the seventh busiest airport in the UK.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 17 Released Issue Glasgow Airport is now owned and operated by AGS Airports Limited. AGS Airports is a partnership between Ferrovial and Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) established in 2014 to invest in Aberdeen, Glasgow and Southampton airports. It is currently the eighth busiest airport in the UK. Bristol Airport is owned by the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. It is currently the ninth busiest airport in the UK. Newcastle Airport is owned by seven local authorities (51%) and AMP Capital (49%), an Australian based investment Management Company. It is listed as the tenth busiest airport in the UK. Other airports within the UK are operated by private companies or consortia of companies, while only a very limited number of airports remain in local government ownership.
Note: The airports above are ranked based on Terminal passenger movements.
Airport(s) covered by the LSSIP
ICAO State Airport AOP04.1 AOP04.2 AOP05 AOP10 AOP11 AOP12 AOP13 ATC07.1 ENV01 ENV02 code UK Manchester EGCC London UK EGKK Gatwick London UK EGLL Heathrow London UK EGSS Stansted ‐
UK Birmingham EGBB ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ London UK EGGW Luton ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ UK Bristol EGGD ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ UK London City EGLC ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ UK Newcastle EGNT ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Nottingham UK East EGNX ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Midlands UK Glasgow EGPF ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ UK Edinburgh EGPH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Legend: In the applicability area & Completed. In the applicability area but Not yet Completed. Not in the applicability area.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 18 Released Issue 1.2.4. Military Authorities The Defence Airspace and Air Traffic Management Organisation (DAATM), Ministry of Defence (MoD) is the policyholder for all airspace and airspace management related issues. The Military Aviation Authority (MAA) has full oversight of all Defence aviation activity and undertakes the role of the single military regulatory authority responsible for regulating all aspects of air safety across Defence, including ATM. The MAA develops, promulgates and enforces a regulatory framework to promote an active safety culture and assure appropriate standards are being met in the delivery of military air safety through an independent end-to-end assurance process. The aim is to enhance the delivery of operational capability through continual improvement in military air safety, culture and practice. The MAA, thereby, provides assurance to the Secretary of State through the Permanent Under Secretary that high standards of air safety are maintained in the conduct of military aviation. Headquarters Air Command (HQ AIR) is the HQ responsible for the provision of Air Traffic Services and ATM at both Royal Air Force (RAF) Terminal Units (including Army bases where ATS is either provided by RAF staff or contractors) and the Military ATCCs. HQ Navy Command is the equivalent organisation for the Royal Navy (RN) ATC, units both onshore and embarked. The DAATM, HQ AIR and HQ Navy liaise directly with the relevant operational departments at NATS ACCs and Airports, and other airports as required. Direct liaison with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG), the UK Airspace Regulator, is maintained to progress service provision issues. The CAA SARG is also staffed in part by a number of RAF and RN military officers on secondment to the CAA. These personnel are employed in a number of Airspace Regulatory and Airspace Utilisation roles and provide essential support to the CAA, thus maintaining a joint ethos. A close working relationship has been established over the years between civil and military controllers and civil and military ATM staff, which is essentially a result of the UK’s Joint & Integrated (J&I) approach to the provision of ATS. Airspace is shared in the UK; however, NATS mainly provides ATS to aircraft within en-route CAS. The Military ATCC is collocated within the Swanwick Civil ACC and provides ATS to aircraft in the UK FIRs and UIRs, including radar-crossing services through CAS for military and civilian aircraft. Military controllers at the ACC also provide Area Radar services to aircraft from ground level to unlimited altitude within radar cover. Terminal ATM is provided by military personnel at RAF and RN airfields, and by civilian personnel at airfields where ATS are contracted to civilian companies. Aircraft operators are governed by regulations issued by the MAA. Military Terminal ATC units normally provide ATS to aircraft arriving at, and departing from their units. Additionally, at specified ATS units, a Lower Airspace Radar Service can also be provided up to FL 95, normally within 40nms from the unit. Military controllers do not normally provide ATS to aircraft in Terminal Control Airspace, with the exception of RAF Northolt ATC, nor normally in airspace within which ATS is delegated to adjacent States. ATS provided by Air Defence Units are specifically for Air Defence Training and operational defence of the Homeland. Air Defence units are also regulated by HQ AIR and HQ Navy, adhering to MoD policy. A J&I ATS are provided by civil and military Air Navigation Service Providers, under policy overseen by the Joint Air Navigation Services Council (JANSC). The JANSC is chaired by the SARG Director, CAA and includes senior executives from the en-route ANSPs and the MoD. The regulatory, service provision and user roles in ATM are detailed overleaf.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 19 Released Issue Regulatory role
Regulatory framework and rule-making
OAT GAT OAT and provision of service for OAT governed Y Provision of service for GAT by the Military Y by national legal provisions? governed by national legal provisions? Level of such legal provision: Level of such legal provision: Ministerial Decree through the Defence Council. State Law authorised through the CAA. Authority signing such legal provision: Authority signing such legal provision: Permanent Under Secretary of State for Defence. Secretary of State for Transport and Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. These provisions cover: These provisions cover: Rules of the Air for OAT Organisation of military ATS for OAT Organisation of military ATS for GAT OAT/GAT Coordination OAT/GAT Coordination ATCO Training ATCO Training ATCO Licensing ATCO Licensing ANSP Certification ANSP Certification ANSP Supervision ANSP Supervision Aircrew Training ESARR applicability Aircrew Licensing Additional Information: This is published through Joint Additional Information: Nil. Service Publications, ATM Orders and other orders contained in the Military Regulatory Publications Means used to inform airspace users (other than Means used to inform airspace users (other than military) about these provisions: military) about these provisions: National AIP National AIP National Military AIP National Military AIP Eurocontrol eAIP Eurocontrol eAIP Other: Flight Information Publications, Websites, Other: such as the CAA and Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 2
Oversight
OAT GAT Military Aviation Authority National Supervisory Authority (as per SES reg. 550/2004) for GAT services provided by the military: The Civil Aviation Authority. Additional information: Nil. Additional information: Nil.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 20 Released Issue Service Provision role
OAT GAT Services Provided: Services Provided: Military do not participate, civil provide: En-Route Provided by Mil and Civil En-Route Approach/TMA Provided by Mil and Civil Approach/TMA Airfield/TWR/GND Provided by Mil and Civil Airfield/TWR/GND AIS Provided by Mil and Civil AIS MET Provided by Civil MET SAR Provided by Mil and Civil SAR TSA/TRA monitoring FIS Other: VHF and UHF alerting and Other: Distress and Diversion Cell fixing Mil only capability Additional Information: Nil. Additional Information: Nil.
Military ANSP providing GAT n/a If YES, since: Duration of the services SES certified? Certificate: Certificate issued by: If NO, is this fact reported to the EC in n/a accordance with SES regulations? Additional Information: The UK Military ANSP, operates to an equivalent standard.
User role
IFR inside controlled airspace, Military aircraft OAT only GAT only Both OAT and GAT can fly?
If Military fly OAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify the available options: Free Routing Within specific corridors only Within the regular (GAT) national route network Under radar control Within a special OAT route system Under radar advisory service
If Military fly GAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify existing special arrangements: No special arrangements Exemption from Route Charges Exemption from flow and capacity (ATFCM) measures Provision of ATC in UHF CNS exemptions: RVSM 8.33 Mode S ACAS Others: There are military CNS exemptions that allow certain non-equipped military aircraft to access controlled airspace. UHF can be provided with notification and agreement.
Flexible Use of Airspace (FUA)
Military apply FUA requirements as specified in the Regulation No 2150/2005: Y FUA Level 1 implemented: Y FUA Level 2 implemented: Y FUA Level 3 implemented: Y
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 21 Released Issue Chapter 2 Traffic and Capacity
2.1 Evolution of traffic in the United Kingdom
UK - Annual IFR Movements
3.500.000
3.000.000
2.500.000
2.000.000
1.500.000 flights IFR IFR movements - Actuals
1.000.000 IFR movements - Baseline forecast IFR movements - High forecast 500.000 IFR movements - Low forecast A = Actual F = Forecast 0 2012 A 2013 A 2014 A 2015 A 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F 2020 F 2021 F 2022 F
EUROCONTROL Seven-Year Forecast (September 2016) IFR flights yearly growth 2013 A 2014 A 2015 A 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F 2020 F 2021 F 2022 F H 5.7%3.9%2.9%2.1%3.2%2.3%2.3% UK B 0.6%2.0%2.4%5.5%2.4%1.4%1.4%1.8%1.2%1.2% L 5.2% 0.9% -0.1% 0.3% 0.7% 0.2% 0.4% ECAC B -1.1% 1.7% 1.6% 2.7% 1.4% 2.1% 2.1% 2.4% 1.9% 2.1% Note: NATS Forecast for the UK in 2017 is 3.2%.
2016 Traffic in the UK increased by 5.9% during summer 2016 (May to October inclusive), when compared to the same period during 2015.
2017-2021 The EUROCONTROL Seven-Year Forecast predicts an average annual traffic growth between 0.4% and 2.9% during the planning cycle, with an average baseline growth of 1.6%.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 22 Released Issue 2.2 London En-route ACC
2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021
EGTTACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays
8000 1.0
0.9 7000 0.8 6000 0.7 5000 0.6
4000 0.5
0.4 3000 IFR flights (Daily Average) (Daily flightsIFR 0.3 Enroute Delay (minutes per flight) (minutes Delay Enroute 2000 0.2 1000 0.1
0 0.0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Peak Day Traffic 6028 6040 6206 6300 6617 Summer Traffic 5426 5534 5655 5784 6076 Yearly Traffic 4894 4927 5033 5172 5552 Summer Traffic Forecast 6217 6321 6425 6533 6613 High Traffic Forecast - Summer 6317 6511 6647 6875 7046 Low Traffic Forecast - Summer 6107 6110 6138 6190 6195 Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.09 0.12 0.07 0.09 0.11 Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * 0.07 0.14 0.05 0.06 0.09
*From 01/01/2016 to 31/10/2016
2.2.2 Performance summer 2016
En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity Traffic Evolution 2016 Capacity Baseline Ref value Actual gap +5.1% 433 (+2%) 0.26 0.11 No Average enroute delay per flight slightly increased from 0.09 minutes per flight in summer 2015 to 0.11 minutes per flight in Summer 2016 (May to October inclusive). 47% of the delays were for the reason Weather, 42% for ATC capacity, 8% for other, 1% for the reason airspace management and 1% for ATC Staffing. Capacity Plan: +2% Achieved Comments TMA transition sectors enhancement – RNP development No Planned for 2017 Improved ATFCM, including STAM Yes UK / Ireland FAB initiatives Yes Implementation of LAMP 1A Yes R-LAT (Nov 2015) Yes CPDLC Yes Developing Queue Management programme Yes Maintain progress to 18000ft TA No Flexible use of existing staff (including cross-sector training) more closely related to sector demand Yes On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Yes Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Yes Traffic Management Improvements Yes Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Yes Maximum configuration: 23 sectors Yes Summer 2016 performance assessment The capacity of 433 was calculated with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak hour demand was 438, the peak 3 hour demand was 392.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 23 Released Issue 2.2.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer The planning focuses on the Summer season to reflect the most demanding period of the year from a capacity perspective. This approach ensures consistency with the previous planning cycles.
Capacity Profiles 2016 Profiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year) ACC baseline 2017 2018 2019 H 440 2% 448 2% 454 1% Ref. 437 1% 441 1% 445 1% EGTT 433 L 434 0% 435 0% 436 0% Open 437 1% 441 1% 445 1% C/R 437 1% 441 1% 445 1%
Capacity Plan 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Free Route Airspace Airspace Management
Advanced FUA Airport & TMA Network Integration Cooperative Traffic Management Improved ATFCM, including STAM UK / Ireland FAB initiatives RP2 Airspace Development Programme Airspace R-LAT Phase 2
CPDLC Procedures Developing Queue Management programme Flexible use of existing staff (including cross-sector training) more
Staffing closely related to sector demand On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Transition to new controller
working positions iTEC Technical introduction
(Winter 2017/18) New VCS
(VOIP) Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Capacity Traffic Management Improvements Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Athletic World
Championship Training for Significant Events new controller
working positions Max sectors 23 23 23 23 23 Planned Annual Capacity 1% 1.5% 1.5% 2% 1% Increase Reference profile Annual % 1% 1% 1% N/A N/A Increase Difference Capacity Plan v. 0% 0.7% 1.3% N/A N/A Reference Profile Annual Reference Value (min) 0.18 0.18 0.18 N/A N/A Summer reference value (min) 0.26 0.25 0.25 N/A N/A Swanwick RP2 airspace programme will deliver various modules throughout the period, capacity increase values will be confirmed in project definition. For 2017 this will focus on improvements in the Hurn and East Anglia areas, including Additional information increased systemisation, new Conditional Routes and new RNAV1 STARs and ATS Routes.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 24 Released Issue
The graphs above show an outline of available sector configurations for a typical weekday and a weekend day for summer 2017.
2017-2021 Planning Period Outlook
No capacity issues are expected over the planning period at London ACC.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 25 Released Issue 2.3 London Terminal Control (TC)
2.3.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021
EGTTTC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays
5000 1.0
4500 0.9
4000 0.8
3500 0.7
3000 0.6
2500 0.5
2000 0.4 IFR flights (Daily Average) (Daily flights IFR 1500 0.3 Enroute Delay (minutes per flight) per (minutes Delay Enroute
1000 0.2
500 0.1
0 0.0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Peak Day Traffic 4059 4071 4198 4319 4563 Summer Traffic 3663 3714 3819 3935 4109 Yearly Traffic 3386 3408 3511 3626 3844 Summer Traffic Forecast 4181 4246 4306 4370 4413 High Traffic Forecast - Summer 4243 4356 4439 4594 4703 Low Traffic Forecast - Summer 4124 4121 4132 4160 4164 Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.22 Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.22
*From 01/01/2016 to 31/10/2016
2.3.2 Performance summer 2016
En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity Traffic Evolution 2016 Capacity Baseline Ref value Actual gap +4.4 % 286 (+0%) 0.11 0.22 yes Average enroute delay per flight increased from 0.09 minutes per flight in summer 2015 to 0.22 minutes per flight in summer 2016. 41% of the delays were for the reason Weather, 29% of the delays were for the reason ATC Staffing, 28% for ATC Capacity and 2% for Equipment. Capacity Plan: +2% Achieved Comments Improved ATFCM, including STAM Yes Implementation of LAMP 1A Yes Developing Queue Management programme Yes Maintain progress to 18000 ft TA No Flexible use of existing staff Yes On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Yes Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Yes Traffic Management Improvements Yes Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Yes Maximum configuration: 44 (27 ENR + 17 APP) Yes This is the maximum potential configuration. The TMA total includes some sectors which also provide a limited en-route service and some which provide approach services for London airports. Summer 2016 performance assessment The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 286. During the period June/July, the peak hour demand was 297, the peak 3 hour demand was 267. NB: Increased Capacity delays in 2016 were due to the introduction of LAMP 1A Airspace Development.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 26 Released Issue
2.3.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer The planning focuses on the summer season to reflect the most demanding period of the year from a capacity perspective. This approach ensures consistency with the previous planning cycles.
Capacity Profiles 2016 Profiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year) ACC baseline 2017 2018 2019 H 291 2% 295 1% 298 1% Ref. 288 1% 291 1% 294 1% EGTTT 286 L 286 0% 286 0% 286 0% Open 288 1% 291 1% 294 1% C/R 288 1% 291 1% 294 1%
Capacity Plan 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Free Route Airspace Airspace Management
Advanced FUA Airport & TMA Network Integration Cooperative Traffic Management Improved ATFCM, including STAM Airspace RP2 Airspace Development Programme Procedures Developing Queue Management programme Flexible use of existing staff Staffing On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Transition to EXCDS new controller Implementatio working n Technical positions iTEC introduction (Winter 18/19) Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Capacity Traffic Management Improvements Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs TC Training for new Athletic World controller Championship Significant Events working position TC training for EXCDS 44 44 44 44 44 Max sectors 27 ENR +17 27 ENR +17 27 ENR +17 27 ENR +17 27 ENR +17 APP APP APP APP APP Planned Annual Capacity 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% Increase Reference profile Annual % 1% 1% 1% N/A N/A Increase Difference Capacity Plan v. 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% N/A N/A Reference Profile Annual Reference Value (min) 0.11 0.10 0.10 N/A N/A Summer reference value (min) 0.11 0.10 0.10 N/A N/A Swanwick RP2 airspace programme will deliver various modules throughout the period, capacity increase values will be confirmed in project definition. Major Project Transition to Electronic Platform in TC 2017/2018 Up to 23 ENR sectors are planned to be open in summer 2017 with a maximum of 27 Additional information possible if required. The ExCDs project will deliver Electronic Flight Strips to London Terminal Control staff during 2017/2018.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 27 Released Issue
The graphs above show an outline of available sector configurations for a typical weekday and a weekend day for summer 2017.
2017-2021 Planning Period Outlook No capacity issues are expected over the planning period in London TC.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 28 Released Issue 2.4 Prestwick ACC
2.4.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2012-2021
EGPXALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays
4000 1.0
0.9 3500 0.8 3000 0.7 2500 0.6
2000 0.5
0.4 1500 IFR flights (Daily Average) (Daily flights IFR 0.3 Enroute Delay (minutes per flight) per (minutes Delay Enroute 1000 0.2 500 0.1
0 0.0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Peak Day Traffic 3080 3205 3079 3169 3353 Summer Traffic 2621 2682 2657 2700 2893 Yearly Traffic 2381 2398 2400 2441 2651 Summer Traffic Forecast 2942 2980 3018 3062 3086 High Traffic Forecast - Summer 2988 3066 3122 3204 3267 Low Traffic Forecast - Summer 2881 2875 2883 2903 2892 Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.51 Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.36
*From 01/01/2016 to 31/10/2016
2.4.2 Performance summer 2016
En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity Traffic Evolution 2016 Capacity Baseline Ref value Actual gap +7.2 % 203 (-10%) 0.18 0.51 Yes The delay per flight increased from 0.02 minutes per flight in summer 2015 to 0.51 minutes per flight during the same period in 2016. 43% of the delays were due to Special Events, 22% to ATC capacity, 20% to ATC staffing, 13% due to weather, 2% due to other and 1% due to airspace management. The increased delay in 2016 was directly associated with the introduction of iTEC FDP system. The system is now fully operational and normal operations resumed. Capacity Plan: +1% Achieved Comments Improved ATFCM, including STAM Yes R-LAT (Nov 2015) Yes UK / Ireland FAB initiatives Yes CPDLC Yes Developing Queue Management programme Yes Maintain progress to 18000ft TA No Flexible use of existing staff Yes On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Yes iTEC / Common work station Yes Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Yes Traffic Management Improvements Yes Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Yes Maximum configuration: 27 sectors Yes 27 is the maximum potential configuration. Prestwick Centre sectors operate across both en-route and TMA environments. Summer 2016 performance assessment The capacity baseline of 203 was measured with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak 1 hour demand was 220, the peak 3 hour demand was 197.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 29 Released Issue 2.4.3 Planning Period 2017-2021 - Summer The planning focuses on the summer season to reflect the most demanding period of the year from a capacity perspective. This approach ensures consistency with the previous planning cycles.
Capacity Profiles 2016 Profiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year) ACC baseline 2017 2018 2019 H 230 13% 234 2% 238 2% Ref. 225 11% 227 1% 230 1% EGPX 203 L 222 9% 223 0% 225 1% Open 225 11% 227 1% 230 1% C/R 225 11% 227 1% 230 1%
Capacity Plan 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 FRA for Upper Free Route Airspace Airspace Airspace Management
Advanced FUA Airport & TMA Network Integration Cooperative Traffic Management Improved ATFCM, including STAM R-LAT Phase2
PC Lower PC Lower PC Lower Airspace Airspace Phase Airspace Airspace 1 and 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 UK / Ireland FAB initiatives CPDLC Procedures Developing Queue Management programme Flexible use of existing staff Staffing On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels Technical SENATE Adaptation of sector configurations to demand Capacity Traffic Management Improvements Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs Significant Events Max sectors 27 27 27 27 27 Planned Annual Capacity 11% 2% 2% 1% 1% Increase Reference profile Annual % 11% 1% 1% N/A N/A Increase Difference Capacity Plan v. 0.0% 1.3% 2.2% N/A N/A Reference Profile Annual Reference Value (min) 0.13 0.14 0.14 N/A N/A Summer reference value (min) 0.18 0.20 0.20 N/A N/A Estimated Capacity Benefits for PC Lower Airspace are included in the period. SENATE (Surveillance Enabled North Atlantic Traffic Evolution) Potential to reduce separation minima on the North Atlantic. No capacity benefits have been determined. Additional information Up to 24 sectors are planned to be open in Summer 2017 with a maximum of 27 possible if required.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 30 Released Issue
The graphs above show an outline of available sector configurations for a typical weekday and a weekend day for summer 2017.
2017-2021 Planning Period Outlook
No capacity issues are expected over the planning period at Prestwick ACC.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 31 Released Issue 3 Master Plan Level 3 Implementation Report recommendations
Recommendations issued from the European ATM Master Plan Level 3 Implementation Report 2015 applicable to United Kingdom for all items that require corrective actions and improvements.
Reference Recommendation 2015 Ownership number Operational stakeholders should ensure that the pace of implementation of pre-SESAR elements is increased, or at least All operational REC-2015/1 kept at the same level to ensure timely delivery of SESAR stakeholders baseline.
Corrective actions taken: YES
Description: See comment below re: REC-2015-2.
Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of AOM19.1, AOP04.1, COM10, ITY-ADQ and NAV10 to take Local REC-2015/2 corrective measures to reduce the implementation delays, or at Stakeholders least ensure that these delays are not increased.
Corrective actions taken: YES
Description: AOM19.1 has had the deadline lengthened this cycle and therefore the UK is currently planned to complete ahead of the revised schedule.
AOP04.1. Birmingham is still intending to install A-SMGCS Level 1 during 2017, but delayed slightly later to October.
AOP04.1. Manchester has announced a further delay in the development an initial project plan for the installation of A-SMGCS, Level 1 during 2018 with deployment by July 2019.
AOP04.1. London Heathrow is still aiming to complete A-SMGCS Level 1 by the end of 2018.
AOP04.1. London Stansted had previously reported as Complete, and at the time Stansted had previously filed Not Applicable concerning the equipage of vehicle transponders after removing them during 2014. New transponders have now been purchased and will be installed, tested and validated by December 2017.
COM10 has had the deadline lengthened cycle and therefore the UK is currently planned to complete ahead of the revised schedule.
ITY-ADQ. The UK are unfortunately still running late and will almost certainly be Late for final delivery of ADQ, but significant progress has been made and anticipate further progress during 2017/2018.
NAV10 is now reported as ‘Complete’.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 32 Released Issue Reference Recommendation 2015 Ownership number ANSPs should use the momentum created by PCP funding ANSPs benefiting opportunities to secure and achieve full interoperability in line REC-2015/7 from EU funding with Master Plan Level 1 vision. Corrective actions taken: YES
Description: NATS NATS has secured INEA funding to implement SESAR-related improvements. Some are in service of the PCP; others are in service of other elements of the Master Plan. This includes improving interoperability through the implementation of solutions such as SWIM.
Gatwick Air Navigation Systems PCP funding opportunities are being identified and are being pursued in line with development projects. All Gatwick projects are conducted in partnership with the airport company. All of the projects underway meet interoperability requirements and PCP funding to assist will be a bonus.
CAA Funding, although welcome does not resolve the local noise issues with regard to PBN deployment. Significant local campaigns can delay or stop PBN deployment
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 33 Released Issue 4 National Projects
4.1 NATS
3Di-Three Dimensional Inefficiency Score Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: Implemented. Status: Implemented. Description: The flight efficiency metric, known as 3Di (three dimensional efficiency score), was introduced on 1st January 2012 following several years of developmental work by NATS in consultation with airline customers and the UKs specialist aviation regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
3Di compares the actual trajectory that aircraft take with an airline preferred flight trajectory that minimises fuel burn and CO2 emissions. Every commercial flight in UK domestic airspace, every day of the year, has a 3Di score calculated. Scores are averaged annually and compared to targets set by the CAA in consultation with airline customers.
Scores run from 0, representing zero inefficiency (best), to over 100. In 2014 the average score from all flights was 29.7. By extending existing horizontal flight efficiency tracking to include vertical elements, 3Di quantifies the benefits delivered by air traffic controllers through continuous climb departures, cruise levels as requested by airspace users and continuous descents, as well as most direct point-to-point routeings.
The 3Di score is calculated: In the horizontal plane it compares the actual radar ground track against the most direct great circle track within the airspace network above the UK. The difference between these two distances, which describes the 'additional miles flown', defines the inefficiency in the horizontal plane. A new dimension to 3Di was incorporated in 2014 in the horizontal plane. This looks at the excess track extension added to the whole flight - encouraging NATS to consider how its airspace boundary entry and exit points may affect airline fuel burn across multiple airspace regions. The overall aim is to provide aircraft with the most direct route across their whole flight profile. In the vertical plane the metric compares the actual vertical profile against the airlines preferred trajectory. Vertical inefficiency that results from Air Traffic Control interactions has been simplified to periods of level flight that occur below the airlines requested cruise level. The vertical inefficiency is defined by the amount of flight time spent in level flight and the deviation from its requested cruise level. Level portions of flight at low altitude are more fuel penalising than at higher levels. In addition, the more time spent in level flight below the requested cruise level the more penalising for 3Di. Lastly, because aircraft performance and in particular fuel flow rates vary across the different phases of flight the metric applies different weightings for level flight occurring in climb, cruise, and descent phases of flight.
All of these factors are then combined to give a single 3Di score for each flight in NATS airspace above the UK. The metric is subject to a regulatory performance scheme that includes bonuses and penalties for NATS with a maximum of 1% turnover available on up and downsides (circa. £6m).
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 34 Released Issue Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in - Name/Code in DP2016: - DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: - Environment: The flight efficiency metric, known as 3Di, forms the cornerstone of an incentive regime which is designed to deliver 277,000 tonnes of fuel savings, worth up to £180m (based at the time on £650 per metric tonne). Capacity: - Cost-efficiency: - Operational efficiency: -
Implementation of Initial SWIM Capability (AF5) across NATS Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 30/11/2019. Status: The deployment of the EIS is in progress, software has been procured. According to current milestones an operational implementation for limited internal NATS use is currently scheduled for Jan 2018 after which there will be a series of updates leading to an initial operational implementation supporting the SESAR SWIM Yellow Profile by April 2019 with a full implementation by November 2019.
It is should be noted that EIS deployment has a number of dependencies both internal and external, for example the SWIM Technical Infrastructure (TI) Standardisation is not expected to be approved until the end of 2017. Description: Objectives: The objective is to enable iSWIM as an enabler for other PCP elements that deliver benefits in safety, capacity, cost-effectiveness and environment. Initial System Wide Information Management (iSWIM) supports information exchanges that are built on standards and delivered through an internet protocol (IP)-based network by SWIM enabled systems and will be delivered in the following blocks: Common Infrastructure Components (Sub AF 5.1); SWIM Technical Infrastructure and Profiles (Sub AF 5.2); Aeronautical information exchange (Sub AF 5.3); Meteorological information exchange (Sub AF 5.4); Cooperative network information exchange (Sub AF 5.5) and Flight information exchange (Sub AF 5.6).
NATS plan is to deliver a core Enterprise Information Service (EIS) capability to interconnect ATM services within centres, with Airports and other users and to underpin and enable later stages of information exchange by Flight Object. Provision of full Flight Object exchange and IOP will be delivered in a future project. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: INF08.1 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Projects 117AF5; Family 5.2.2 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 35 Released Issue Introduction of Electronic Flight Strips (2015_286_AF2) Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 19/06/17 - 31/12/2018 - Operational Conversation Training (OCT) & Implementation. Status: About to enter a period of limited operational service between March and June 2017 to evaluate its performance prior to entry into service late in 2017. Description: Introducing electronic flight data for the London TC Approach and TMA function.
Permitting controllers to conduct electronic coordination and releases within the Terminal Control Unit. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_286_AF2; Family 2.1.2 DP2016:
London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) (Phase 1a) (120AF1) Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 30/04/2016. Status: Implemented. Description: Project Leader: NATS; Contributors: British Airways, Heathrow Airport Limited.
Objectives: Produce systemised airspace design for the London TMA by using PBN-based procedures and STARs facilitating RNP-1 SIDs where required at London Airports; Introduce greater efficiencies in the design of airspace to accommodate forecast demand and also facilitate Continuous Climb and Descent Operations minimising delay and realising fuel savings.
This project concerns the first implementation of the LAMP programme (Phase 1a), implementing that part of the London TMA affecting London City Airport and higher level re-sectorisation and airspace modification within the TMA.
The LAMP project will be delivered in a phased approach; the first deployment (Phase 1a) being delivered prior to the implementation of the key enabling project of raising the Transition Altitude (TA) to 18,000 feet from the current 6,000 feet. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: NAV03 L2: AO-0601, AO-0602 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 120AF1; Family 1.2.3 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: Reduction in approach risk of up to 42%.
Environment: CO2 savings of c. £10m p.a. Capacity: - Cost-efficiency: - Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 36 Released Issue Manchester TMA Re-Development (119AF1) Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 30/04/2019. Status: - Description: Objectives: Introduction of RNAV1 SIDs (Standard Instrument Departure) and STARs (Standard Arrival Route) within the existing Manchester Terminal Manoeuvring Area (MTMA) in order to systemise the airspace infrastructure.
The systemised airspace will: Exploit existing and future aircraft capabilities to fly precise trajectories (through use of Performance Based Navigation - PBN), enabling greater flexibility in airspace design through closely spaced arrival and departure routes independent of ground- based navigation aids; Offer greater resilience against human error (pilot or controller), with fewer interactions between routes and a reduction in tactical interaction by controllers; Reduced tactical intervention will offer a corresponding increase in capacity; Locate routes where they best meet the needs of airports and flight profiles, making far better use of finite terminal airspace; Save fuel and reducing noise by enabling continuous descent approaches (CDAs) and continuous climb departures (CCDs) to be flown from/to significantly higher altitudes than available today.
The revised RNAV route infrastructure will align with LAMP (London Airspace Management Programme) requirements and maximise the benefits within the majority of the UK TMA.
The Project is split into two phases: Phase 1: Project Definition (PD) completed November 2016. En-route design for MTMA and surrounding impacted areas sufficient to undertake consultation. Work continues with Manchester Airport to complete lower level designs; Phase 2: Implementation from December 2016 - March 2019. Implement the revised NTCA designs into Operations subject to approval of CAA Consultation. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: NAV03 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 119AF1; Family 1.1.2 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: - Environment: 60 K tonnes Co2. Capacity: 5 Flight Per Busy Hour improvements. Cost-efficiency: 5 - 15 FTE Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 37 Released Issue 4.2 Military Authority
A400M Strategic Transport aircraft compliance with RNP (2015_258_AF1) Organisation(s): MIL (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/03/2016 - 31/12/2018. Status: On-going in accordance with the implementation date. Description: Providing UK with nine A400M aircraft with RNP capabilities capable of accessing and operating in high density TMAs across Europe. Training 27 crews (81 personnel) in RNP procedures. The UKs A400M fleet must be capable of deconflicting with all civilian traffic arriving and departing into London. PBN capabilities will offer a greater set of routing possibilities that could reduce potential congestion on trunk routes and at busy crossing points. PBN capability helps to reduce route spacing and aircraft separation. RNP upgrade will allow A400M to fly optimized routes. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: NAV03 L2: AO-0601, AO-0602 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project in DP2016: Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_258_AF1; Family 1.2.4
Deliver C17 Training for RNP and CPDLC/VDL2 (2015_270_AF1) Organisation(s): MIL (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/03/2016 - 31/12/2016. Status: Completed. Description: RNP 0.3 Approach (Family 1.2.1) and RNP 1 for TMA access (Family 1.2.4) Aircrew Operator Training for 54 personnel. CPDLC/VDL2 (Family 6.1.2) Aircrew Operator Training for 54 personnel. All 8 UK C17 Globemaster aircraft have been modified during BLOCK Upgrade with the necessary interfaces and systems to support RNP 0.3 Approach (Family 1.2.1), RNP 1 for TMA access (Family 1.2.4) and multi-frequency CPDLC/VDL2 (Family 6.1.2). The UKs C17 fleet must be capable of de-conflicting with all civilian traffic arriving and departing into London. PBN capabilities will offer a greater set of routing possibilities that could reduce potential congestion on trunk routes and at busy crossing points. PBN capability helps to reduce route spacing and aircraft separation. C17 RNP and CPDLC Upgrade will permit safe operation in Free Route Airspace and in high density TMAs without detriment to the Performance and Capacity of ANSPs and Airports.
Link and references ATM MP links: L3: ITY-AGDL, NAV03 L2: AO-0601, AO-0602 Other links: AUO-0301 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_270_AF1; Family 1.2.1, 1.2.4 & DP2016: 6.1.2
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 38 Released Issue
Mil MTCD Advanced Controller Tools (FOURSIGHT) (2015_269_AF3) Organisation(s): MIL (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/03/2016 - 31/12/2019. Status: On-going in accordance with implementation date. Funding has been secured now awaiting implementation. Description: Providing Flight Path Monitoring (FPM), Trajectory Prediction (TP) and Medium Term Conflict Detection (MTCD) Tools within all UK Sovereign Airspace to the same geographic boundaries as UK Civil ATM En-Route Operations. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: ATC12.1 Other links: CM-0202, CM-0203, CM-0205, CM-0207-A Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_269_AF3; Family 3.2.1 DP2016:
4.3 Gatwick Airport
A-SMGCS upgrade to provide airport safety nets and routing & planning functions (2015_298_AF2) Organisation(s): GATWICK Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/07/2016 - 31/12/2019. Status: - Description: Increasing safety on the manouvring area - reducing the risk of runway incursions and conflicts / incidents on the manouvring area whilst maintaining declared ground movement rates.
Reducing controllers' workload by providing system support for monitoring of traffic and its conformance to clearances on the manouvring area, and by providing automated routing and planning functions.
Reducing potential conflicting routing for arrivals, departures and other ground movements and thus increase efficiency of ground operations.
Optimising controller working position by more advanced integration of systems and improving Human Machine Interface (HMI).
Implementing airport safety nets associated with ASMGCS (Level 2) (Family 2.5.1) in line with Commission Regulation (EU) No 716/2014 and SESAR Deployment Programme.
Implementing A-SMGCS routing and planning functions (Family 2.4.1) in line with Commission Regulation (EU) No 716/2014 and SESAR Deployment Programme. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP12, AOP13 Other links: OI-Steps: AO-0104-A which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_298_AF2; Family 2.5.1 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 39 Released Issue Enhanced Departure Management integrating airfield surface assets Organisation(s): GATWICK Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/03/2015 - 31/12/2017. Status: Initial roll out of project commenced with 1 Ground handling agent vehicles being equipped with tracking technology. All aircraft pushback tugs have been fitted with Geo tagging systems. Description: The high-level objectives of the project are as follows: Achieve 100% equipage of ground service vehicles with tracking technology; Increase airside safety by providing visibility of appropriate vehicles and equipment to Air Traffic Control Tower; Enable further implementation of Airport Safety Nets (ATM Sub-Functionality 2.5); Improve taxi conflict prediction to reduce number of stop-and- go taxiing; Improve efficiency of airside operations by providing real-time information about location of ground service equipment and vehicles to Ground Handling Agents (GHAs) and Airport Flow Centre. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP12 Other links: OI-Steps: AO-0104-A which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 092AF2; Family 2.5.1 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 40 Released Issue
Enhanced Terminal Airspace (TMA) using RNP-Based Operations Organisation(s): GATWICK Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 31/03/2022. Status: Delivered replicated RNAV1 SIDs for each SID route from 08L and 26R.
Work in progress to improve RNAV1 SID replication (Routes 2, 4 and 5) following post implementation review recommendations.
Additional RNAV1 SID (ADNID trial halted) and ADNID SID permanently withdrawn.
Feasibility and options study of RNAV 1 arrival transitions to be conducted (to be used at night) leveraging the lessons learned from the proposed Noise Respite Trials which form part of Noise Management Board 2017/18 work programme. Description: Objectives: The objectives of the project for Gatwick Airport are as follows: Efficient BOGNA Standard Instrument Departure (SID) Route; Dual Precision Area Navigation (P-RNAV) routes with easterly and westerly arrival and departure routes to runway (RWY) 26 and 08, providing rolling respite; Re-design SIDs and STARs to meet RNP specifications.
As a result of these changes, the project would deliver the following benefits: Improvements in arrivals and departures stability; Significant improvement in operational resilience; Reduced fuel burn for airlines; Reduced CO2 emissions (reduced track mileage); in line with Gatwick Airport and NATS carbon reduction targets; Reduced noise impact for people on the ground through provision of rotating respite; Delivery against requirements of S106 Legal Agreement; Support the delivery of NATS 10% carbon emissions reduction target.
The project is divided into two Phases: Phase 1: Enhanced terminal airspace using P-RNAV for all Standard Instrument Routes; Phase 2: Enhanced terminal airspace to meet RNP specifications. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: NAV03 L2: AO-0601, AO-0602 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 091AF1; Family 1.2.3 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 41 Released Issue Performance contribution Safety: Reduced controller tactical intervention and increased systemisation improves safety. Environment: Reduced fuel burn for airlines.
Reduced CO2 emissions (reduced track mileage) - in line with Gatwick Airport and NATS carbon reduction targets.
Reduced noise impact for people on the ground.
Delivery against requirements of S106 Legal Agreement.
Support the delivery of NATS 10% carbon emissions reduction target. Capacity: Improvements in arrivals and departures stability. Significant improvement in operational resilience. Cost-efficiency: - Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 42 Released Issue Integrated Ground Management (GMAN) (2015_299_AF2) Organisation(s): GATWICK Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/04/2016 - 31/10/2019. Status: - Description: Optimising airside ground management performance by integrating and dynamically allocating stands.
Delivering improvements in stand utilization, On-Time Arrival (OTA) and On-Time Departure (OTD) performance.
Providing a critical architectural component to subsequently deliver optimized flow management enabled by integrated A-SMGCS Routing and Planning function.
Providing relevant operational data in easy to consume formats that include mobile device offerings for information access at users; fingertips.
Delivering a solution that enables the integration of data feeds from movement tracking devices used on airside assets.
Optimising airside ground management performance by integrating and dynamically allocating critical resources (stands, coaching, towing, PRM, arrival baggage carousels). Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP13 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project in DP2016: Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_299_AF2; Family 2.1.4
Time-Based Separation for Final Approach Organisation(s): GATWICK Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 30/01/2017 - 31/12/2018. Status: In progress: Engaged with NATS and ANS; Options for implementation were developed with feasibility assessed; Deployment plans developed as part of airfield systems roadmap; Work continues under the 2017/18 (Noise Management Board) NMB work plan with periodic updates provided at NMB; Delivery of TBS integrated with AMAN/DMAN anticipated 2020+. Description: The high-level objectives of the project are as follows: Implement initial spacing monitor to support air traffic controller to deliver optimum separation between arriving aircraft; Improve utilization of existing RWY capacity; Increase landing rates, especially during strong headwind conditions and reduce arrival and knock-on delays. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP10 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0303 which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project in DP2016: Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 094AF2; Family 2.3.1
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 43 Released Issue 4.4 Heathrow Airport
ASMGCS Level 1 & 2 (2015_016_AF2) Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/03/2016 - 07/04/2018. Status: Although implementation of A-SMGCS Level 2 is complete as not all the vehicles that have a legitimate reason to enter the runway have transponders installed the project is deemed incomplete. The intention is to install all vehicles during the current regulatory period. Description: ASMGCS Level 1 & 2 baseline Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP04.1, AOP04.2 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0102, AO-0201 which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project in DP2016: Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_016_AF2; Family 2.2.1 Performance contribution Safety: Improved awareness. Environment: - Capacity: - Cost-efficiency: - Operational efficiency: -
Airport Operating Plan (AOP) (2015_060_AF2) Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 03/02/2016 - 12/12/2017. Status: To be implemented throughout the second half of 2017. Description: Heathrow has worked closely with NATS, the Met Office, the airport co-ordinator (ACL) and airlines to define and develop the information that supports the AOP. Heathrow is developing and implementing the necessary IT infrastructure, systems (Demand Capacity Balancing (DCB)) and processes to develop an initial AOP. This will ensure data is efficiently exchanged / processed for better predictability and to produce improved plans on a rolling basis for the airport and the NOP. The plan will be shared with airport stakeholders including airlines, ground handlers and the APOC. This is a pre-requisite for AOP-NOP integration. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP11 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0801 which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project in DP2016: Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_060_AF2; Family 2.1.4 Performance contribution Safety: - Environment: Fewer pre-departure delays; more flights arriving on time; fewer flights operating in the night period. Capacity: Better use of existing capacity. Cost-efficiency: Better use of resources as more flights arriving on time. Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 44 Released Issue
Airport Safety Nets associated with A-SMGCS Level 2 - Preparation for SMAN Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2015 - 31/12/2020. Status: Project started, feasibility and options study launched. Description: Objectives: Concept of Operation has been developed to clarify the AGL and field infrastructure component design and architecture requirements for an integrated ASMGCS level 4/5 Surface manager (SMAN); A holistic Options analysis and selection process is being undertaken to assess the functional and safety integrity requirement of the Ground Movement Control System as a system design that is fully congruent and potentially pre- integrated with the ASMGSC4/5 Surface Manager; Primary Cable specification, distribution and operational architecture is being surveyed to scope design and installation of an airfield-wide GMCS primary cabling matrix to allow floating separation and necessary system integrity for automatic/.semi-automatic operation; - Existing AGL system architecture is undergoing resilience and communication architecture modification to allow for validation testing of floating separation and seamless operational transition to the new GMCS/SMAN function.
Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP12 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0104-A which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 100AF2; Family 2.5.1 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 45 Released Issue
Preparation for AOP (099AF2) Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/09/2014 - 01/12/2015. Status: Completed. Description: The AOP is a rolling airfield plan that becomes more accurate over time and provides an up-to-date plan for the day of operation. It incorporates pre-tactical details from the DCB and reflects external factors and user preferences. The solution builds on the pre-requisite A-CDM concept and tooling and expands in line with the future SESAR APOC/AOP concept.
The production of a common and optimized rolling airfield plan covers three main steps: to create a plan (based initially on the schedule which is then updated with the latest information) that can be shared among all stakeholders; to evaluate and update the airfield plan using different scenarios (from DCB) to optimise it; to take into account user preferences in all operational circumstances (not only during times of disruption) known as User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP).
In summary an AOP empowers the workforce to make a real difference with the right information at the right time by providing: an integrated operating environment to improve efficiency, effectiveness and resilience against disruption; A common shared truth to facilitate timely and focused collaborative decision making.
The AOP: aids decision making in complex landscape of airport operations; optimises the allocation of limited airport resources; - supports an enhanced passenger experience. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP11 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0801 which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 099AF2; Family 2.1.4 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: Benefits realised when AOP is generated and in use. Environment: Benefits realised when AOP is generated and in use. Capacity: Benefits realised when AOP is generated and in use. Cost-efficiency: Benefits realised when AOP is generated and in use. Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 46 Released Issue
Time Based Separation Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: National Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 01/12/2015. Status: Implemented. Description: Time Based Separations (TBS) is a pioneering new system plus operational methodology aimed at organizing the separation of arriving aircraft by time instead of distance.
The deployment of TBS at Heathrow Airport was to address the biggest single cause of delay to its arrivals - strong headwinds on final approach. TBS has been in operation constantly at Heathrow since mid-2015 in all wind conditions. Its delivery comes after several years of exhaustive analysis from co-members of the Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) development programme.
The introduction of a TBS method at Heathrow has helped maintain the landing rate under strong headwind conditions and deliver an average improvement of 2.6 flights per hour compared to pre-TBS. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOP10 Other links: OI Steps: AO-0303 which is disabled because it is linked to one of the selected objectives. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 097AF2; Family 2.3.1 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: More stable landing rates; no increase in go round rates. Environment: Reduction in air holding delay; reduction in ATFM delays due to headwinds. Capacity: An increase of up to 2.6 additional movements per hour in strong wind conditions. Cost-efficiency: Fewer flight cancellations due to headwinds. Operational efficiency: -
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 47 Released Issue 4.5 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) The UK’s Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) was developed by the CAA, in cooperation with the Department for Transport, Ministry of Defence, NATS and key aviation stakeholders, to address the development of UK airspace to 2030. The strategy is now regarded as a flexible framework or tool kit of options that will assist us in determining how the operation, management and regulation of our airspace should evolve depending on the circumstances.
The FAS structure has been particularly successful in driving change through cross industry involvement in improvement activities. The aviation industry in the UK has adopted the FAS framework for deployment and will determine the key characteristics of a proposed future airspace system and identify the changes required to deliver it. The policy and regulatory considerations that may need to be made in support of these changes are identified as the deployment programmes progress and are addressed through the governance structure.
An industry stakeholder group has been assembled to develop the FAS implementation plan. The FAS Industry Implementation Group (FASIIG) meets quarterly with sub groups to address individual areas as required. An equivalent VFR implementation group has been formed to coordinate the input from General Aviation community, ensuring a fully cross industry approach to deployment. This approach provides the opportunity for all those with a stake in the way we use our airspace to contribute to its strategic direction and understand how any proposed changes may affect them
Due to the size, breadth and complexity of the subject matter, development and deployment of FAS represents a significant undertaking. The strategy provides a unique opportunity to set the direction for the UK’s airspace arrangements against a backdrop of expected growth in demand for aviation, SESAR technological advancements and international collaboration in the sector.
In 2016 the FAS has concentrated on development and use of a facilitation fund to support deployment of key FAS activities including:
Extensive research into route separation criteria using PBN; data and evidence has been collated through extensive airborne trials and a programme of international airline supported simulator trials;
Continued deployment of PBN arrival and departure procedures;
The evolution of Flexible Use of Airspace tools and techniques;
Expansion of airport connectivity into the European Network Manager functions through the provision of DPI;
Research into the deployment of a range of ADS-B capabilities in different airspace environments;
Simplifying the integration of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) into a controlled airspace environment.
The re-development of terminal airspace in Manchester and Scottish airspace is continuing.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 48 Released Issue 4.6 iTEC – interoperability Through European Collaboration - European Flight Data Processing
NATS is replacing its current Flight Data Processing System and the military Flight Data Processing System with iTEC, steering the civil and military operations towards commonality and convergence. The iTEC FDP is a trajectory based system which will deliver enhanced ATC tools to the operational users at all NATS En Route units. The key elements to the project are as shown below: Joint acquisition and development with DFS, AENA, LVNL and AVINOR of the iTEC product from Indra; Minor amendments to the iTEC product to suit the specific needs of UK ATM; Changes to the existing NATS systems to interface with the iTEC Product; The development and delivery of a strategic HMI and procedures designed to work with iTEC and support the tasks in all NATS En Route units. Through a combination of product developments in the ATM marketplace and regular assessments of NATS long-term investment plan (LTIP) and associated strategies, NATS have decided that the delivery of a new workstation with its associated controller capabilities and tools is now a realistic opportunity. This offers a much more optimal delivery plan yielding greater overall benefits realisation. As such, the iTEC programme has been extended in duration to create the space for the deployment and delivery of iTEC and new strategic workstations at each of the units. In the meantime significant progress has been made on the iTEC programme and early development of a Controller Working Position based on the current DFS operation. NATS have had a number of builds of software delivered from Indra and the product is undergoing numerous verification and validation activities. NATS is also working closely with AENA, DFS and LVNL on Methods of Operation within Upper and Lower Airspace. The target dates for the delivery of iTEC and the new workstation at each of the NATS units are as follows: Prestwick Upper Airspace sectors (PC) – Full Operational Service. Completed June 2016; London Area Control (including Military) (AC) – March 2020; London Terminal Control (TC) – March 2022. It is intended that V1 of iTEC and the workstation for NATS will be delivered within the upper airspace of PC, whilst V2 of iTEC will be delivered within the AC and TC deployments as well as the remainder of PC. Once iTEC is fully deployed at all units the current FDP systems and a number of other existing NATS systems will be decommissioned to reduce on-going operating costs. NATS is also accelerating its process of ‘Legacy escape’ and embarking on a strategy to Deploy SESAR concepts across its operations by 2020.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 49 Released Issue 4.7 NERL Roadmap
The NATS strategy is to consolidate and rationalise its asset base to reduce operating costs whilst investing in new common technologies to safely meet the growth in traffic and to ensure regulatory compliance. We are changing the way we offer services by moving to a One Operation at Two Centres on a Common Platform approach, thus enabling NATS to exercise an ‘any controller, any airspace, any centre, any customer’ way of working and realise real efficiency and flexibility in the way we provide our operational services. Additionally, NATS will migrate to a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA); this will enable NATS to rationalise its current business, bringing together systems and people to deliver ATM services. By 2025, NATS anticipate having replaced the ageing and expensive legacy systems with new SESAR-compliant technology and reduced the overall number of assets NATS own; the new equipment will provide a single operational platform across all units, with specific tools supporting the upper and lower airspace. The operational platform will be easily reconfigurable, allowing any workstation to operate any sector of airspace in the London or Scottish FIR. The platform will improve contribution to customer benefits in terms of: Safety Improvements: introduction of controller support tools; Capacity and fuel efficiency: earlier support for Free Route upper airspace and systemised terminal airspace; Reduced operating costs: common systems based on industry standard component. Increased resilience: resilient architecture with increased operational flexibility both for normal operations and contingency.
4.8 Prestwick Lower Airspace Systemisation (PLAS)
Prestwick Lower Airspace Systemisation (PLAS) formerly Northern Terminal Control Area (NTCA) Providing 3nm separation capability below FL285 within required regions. (Implemented 02/03/2017); IOM/Antrim sectors redesign to improve capacity and reduce complexity. (ACP submission target 31/03/2017, Implementation 09/11/2017); MTMA re-design – including procedurally deconflicted arrivals and departures for all airfields (including point merge at Manchester); Re-design of all SIDs and STARs in MTMA to RNAV1; Route improvements in STMA to provide safety, capacity and environmental benefits.
The timetable for MTMA changes and also changes in the STMA are under negotiation with the relevant airports.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 50 Released Issue 4.9 Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) The United Kingdom has implemented all aspects of SERA Parts A and B and is in the process of implementing SERA Part C Phase 1. Activity to implement Part C Phase 2 will commence in April/May 2017. The UK would seek to be actively engaged in anticipated EASA rulemaking activity associated with routine SERA maintenance (RMT.0476).
4.10 Space Planes The deadline for creating enabling legislation for a 2020 Spaceflight launch from the UK remains. The CAA Space Planes team has supported the creation of draft Primary Legislation during the latter half of 2016-17. The provision of enabling regulation for spaceflights will bring together the efforts of three organisations, namely the UK Space Agency (UKSA), The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Meanwhile, preparations are being made to create Secondary Legislation and this will have a focus upon Licensing, Compliance, Enforcement and Liabilities. Planning by the parliamentary sponsor (BEIS) and route to enact legislation (Lords) and securing parliamentary time are still in development. The CAA Activity Mandate and Funding Envelope for 2017-18 are in preparation and will be clarified by April 2017.
4.11 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)/Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) As one of the SESAR JU’s nine RPAS ‘demonstration activities’, a tripartite industrial consortium involving NATS, Thales UK and NLR were involved in running Project CLAIRE in conjunction with the CAA. Project CLAIRE is an ambitious project aimed at operating an RPAS within a non-segregated mixed traffic environment, identifying the issues and demonstrating the associated ATM processes required to achieve this. The project is based on an incremental and complimentary series of experiments, real time simulations and live flight trials within UK controlled airspace and also across FIR boundaries. A number of ATC radar and aerodrome based simulations were completed during 2014, however the live flight’ portions, initially planned to be conducted during October 2014, were delayed, but a single live flight, believed to be a European ‘first’, took place during October 2015. This flight, using a military UAS, involved a flight along a short portion of Class A airspace over water and was able to validate a number of the synthetic environment programme’s findings. A second flight, planned to include a longer (overland) portion of Class A airspace was cancelled due to a technical fault on the UAS. The final report was presented to the SESAR JU in December 2015. As at 31 December 2016, there were no further updates to be made. The majority of the CAA works now involves the smaller end of the drone spectrum and is mainly regulatory in nature.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 51 Released Issue 5 Regional Co-ordination
5.1 FAB Context The UK-Ireland FAB has been operational since 2008. A substantial amount of work has been undertaken by the ANSPs, the Customer Airlines and Military participants under the management of the joint NATS and IAA ANSP ‘FAB Management Board’, with oversight provided by the joint NSA’s ‘FAB Supervisory Committee’ on behalf of the Member States. The following video provides a summary of to explain the background, objectives and successes of the FAB. UK Ireland FAB Video (https://www.ukirelandfab.eu/)
• AIXM 5.1 B2B data exchange with NM is partly completed in the UK (2021) and planned in IE (Winter 2017/2018). • COTR implementation is completed in both States. • The implementation of automatic exchange of the AFP messages is ongoing in IE (2017) and late in the UK (2020). • OLDI implementation is planned in the UK (2018) and N/A in IE. MONA function complete in IE and partly completed in the UK (2021).
• FRA is implemented in IE and planned in the UK (2019). • Basic AMAN planned in Manchester and Stansted, implemented at Heathrow, Gatwick and Dublin. Extended AMAN implemented in the UK and planned in IE (2017). • PRNAV implemented in IE and planned in the UK (2020). • APV procedures partly completed in both States.
• A-SMGCS Level 1 and 2 implemented in Gatwick, Edinburgh and Dublin. Late in Manchester (planned for Level 2), Birmingham, Heathrow and Stansted. • A-CDM completed in Gatwick and Heathrow, planned in Dublin, late in Manchester, Stansted, Luton and Birmingham. No Plan for Edinburgh. • Dublin, Manchester, Gatwick, Heathrow and Stansted in list for mandatory implementation of PCP AF2 functionalities.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 52 Released Issue
• Migration to AMHS completed in IE, ongoing in the UK (2017). • AGDL implemented in IE, planned in the UK (2018). • Implementation of FMTP provisions completed in both States. • Implementation of AIXM 5.1 B2B data exchange with NM is partly completed in the UK (2021) and planned in IE (Winter 2017/2018).
A UK/Ireland FAB Joint Safety Management Arrangements document has been developed by the IAA and NATS and accepted by the NSAs of Ireland and UK. This provides for a harmonised approach to safety management and safety assurance across the ANSPs and has been used on all FAB projects since their development.
The IAA and NATS have operated a FAB Joint Network Management solution since 2013. Based at NATS’ Swanwick Centre, the Flow Management Position provides network management services for the FAB airspace. This joint solution continues to optimise the capacity of airspace in the vicinity of the FIR boundary and has permitted a more effective streaming of traffic flows between the FAB ANSP partners.
The UK/Ireland FAB partners will, during RP2 (2015-2019), reduce the average cost per flight of ATM service provision by close to 20%. Additionally, total cumulative customer savings enabled by the FAB are expected to exceed €336 Million by 2020 (including the value of enabled cuts to fuel burn & CO2 emissions).
Both UK/Ireland FAB partner ANSPs operate to global industry best practices and in full compliance with all European and National security legislation.
The ANSP partners in the UK/Ireland FAB operate to the highest levels of operational efficiency and will continue to do so in order to enhance safety, lower costs, reduce delays and cut emissions in compliance with the challenging targets of the FAB RP2 performance plan.
Changes in airspace design and operational procedures by the UK/Ireland FAB partners will facilitate the savings of 330,000 tonnes of fuel and a reduction of 1.06 Million tonnes of CO2 emissions by 2020.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 53 Released Issue 5.2 FAB Projects
5.2.1 Dynamic Sectorisation Operational Trial (DSOT) SESAR Context Dynamic Sectorisation or Dynamic Capacity Management is a SESAR concept “which allows for the adaptation of capacity to traffic load by grouping and de-grouping sectors and managing the staff resources accordingly (www.sesarju.eu SESAR Solutions – Optimised ATM Networks). Although Dynamic Sectorisation, and its application across borders, is a key SESAR concept; ground and airborne systems are not yet developed to the stage to support full deployments of cross border Dynamic Sectorisation. Project Purpose To allow the FAB partners to trial new ways of delivering Air Traffic Management (ATM) services to our Airline Customers and to gather information on efficiencies that could be gained through the SESAR concept of cross border ‘dynamic sectorisation’ and inform its future implementation. Dynamic sectorisation between Air Traffic Control Centres allows areas of responsibility to be flexibly adjusted in response to traffic demand, allowing resource to be deployed to meet changing traffic patterns. The DSOT project was initially planned for 3 phases to meet 16 specific objectives. However, most of the objectives were achieved in Phase 1 which allowed Phase 2 to be re-scoped to achieve the remaining objectives thereby rendering Phase 3 unnecessary, shortening the overall duration of the trial making it more cost efficient and avoiding disruption to the Customer (Airlines). Phase 1 (9th January – 18 September 2014) - Complete In Phase 1, a portion of airspace within the Scottish FIR, usually under the control of the Prestwick ACC was controlled by Shannon ACC for the duration of the trial period. This phase successfully achieved 75% of the overall DSOT objectives, was positively received by our Airline Customers, enhanced flight efficiency within the delegated area and reduced CO2 emissions with no negative impact on safety, all key criteria for the trial. Phase 2 (18th-20th January – 20 November 2015) - Complete In Phase 2 a portion of airspace within the Shannon FIR under control of Shannon ACC was shadowed by Air Traffic Controllers from the Prestwick ACC for the trial period. This phase focused on successfully meeting the remaining objectives including further exploration of civil-military interactions. The UK NATS Controllers shadowed services using the iTEC flight management system linked to IAA’s COOPANS system, this not only allowed delivery against the remaining trial objectives, but also provided a test environment to allow future tools to be investigated and the supervisory procedures to be tested. Outcomes The DSOT project successfully achieved all 16 objectives that were set at the project outset via the delivery of two phases of the trial. Additionally, the trial provided a valuable opportunity to demonstrate the connectivity of two flight data processing systems used by the ANSPs – iTEC & COOPANS is a significant step forward in demonstrating the interoperability that will support the implementation of future SESAR concepts across the FAB. The formal report includes 35 recommendations that will inform development of cross border dynamic sectorisation concepts and consolidate into future operations. Following the trial, the existing route structure in the Scottish FIR was replaced with a Direct Route Airspace structure for the Rathlin & Central sectors, helping the airlines save in excess of 3,400 tonnes of fuel and cut over 10,000 tonnes of CO2 each year. This demonstrates that we are already using information from the trial to deliver benefits to airspace users
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 54 Released Issue 5.2.2 Queue Management – Cross Border Arrival Management (XMAN) SESAR Context The SESAR concept of Extended Arrival Management, is a development of Arrival Management and extends the managed distance out from the airport concerned – “Extending the horizon provides more time for queue management to act on the traffic and provides greater benefits in terms of flight efficiency, environmental impact and punctuality. To keep a high runway throughput, relieve congestion and minimize arrival queuing time a smooth and optimal arrival flow is computed. The Solution relies upon a delay sharing strategy such that the ATC system integrates information from arrival management systems operating out to an extended distance to provide an enhanced and more consistent arrival sequence. Handling of the traffic is performed in En-Route phase which allows a more efficient management of delays and reduces waiting times in TMA holding patterns (fuel reduction). (www.sesarju.eu SESAR Solutions – Advanced Air Traffic Services). Heathrow Arrival Management Trial (April 2014 – October 2015) – Complete This trial cut the average time spent in the holds at London Heathrow by making tactical interventions to the speed of inbound aircraft when holding was predicted at Heathrow. The process works by Air Traffic Controllers slowing aircraft in the cruise phase of flight some 350 nm from Heathrow. This enables a reduction in time spent at low level, fuel inefficient holding. An average in cruise time absorption of c.50 seconds providing CO2 and fuel saving. The Trial was extended to include French and Dutch ATC in collaboration with the FABEC XMAN project. Beyond the trial period a further extension has been agreed between NATS and the IAA to allow continued delivery of XMAN benefits until the autumn; while an integrated system solution is developed for delivery in March 2017. Once in place, it will allow the procedure to be introduced on a permanent basis. Outcomes Successful demonstration of arrival management concept on a cross border basis and £3million annual fuel saving benefit; Reduction in the average holding time at Heathrow Airport; Demonstrated Inter FAB co-operation (UK/Ireland FAB & FABEC) with implementation of cross border procedures; Agreement reached to continue procedural solution and benefit delivery beyond the end of the trial, whilst a systemised solution for permanent benefit delivery is developed (due in March 2017).
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 55 Released Issue 5.2.3 Common Regulatory Functions Project Purpose To implement coordinated, collaborative and cooperative regulatory arrangements. Common Procedures for the oversight of Change to the ATM Systems Safety Management Arrangements (SMA) which currently stands at document version D and is in use for operational validation under the DSOT. The common (UK /Ireland) regulatory oversight requirement are addressed in this document, which is wholly compatible with SES and ICAO Article 19 (SMS) regulations. Upon full validation and proven success from deployment of the SMA in DSOT, the FAB Supervisory Committee will deem the SMA to be endorsed formally. The NSA oversight process is compatible with and complementary to the SMA and the validation of the SMA from DSOT will further inform the work and the reference documentation to further harmonise the procedures of the FAB NSA oversight process. The NSAs jointly contribute, benefit and pre- prepare their future harmonised procedures from the shared deployment of a CAA (SARG) staff member to EASA, on the design and drafting task force on Safety Assessment of Changes to the Functional Systems. The outcome of this task force is intended (by EASA) to form a key component of the EASA ATM/ANS IR proposals.
5.2.4 Exchange of regulatory Personnel in Safety Auditing Action Now absorbed into business as usual. Regulatory staff exchanges have occurred in the form of witnessing on-site audits of ACCs, but due to re-organisational and staff changes in both NSAs this has slowed of late. There is regular contact by video conference and telephone to deliver operational oversight and the allocation of regulatory oversight resources, responsibilities and action on DSOT and other day to day matters. The FAB NSAs share their staff and other resources through deploying a single representative of both the UK and Ireland NSA bodies to key European (e.g. NCP working group) and other international fora and meetings (e.g. ICAO).
5.2.5 Cooperative Preparation for EASA Safety Audit The planning and audit preparations were discharged by the UK CAA/IAA NSA team to effect a successful outcome and positive utility for of the EASA Standardisation Audit and its findings. Preparation for the EASA Audit of the IAA provided opportunity for IAA to consider and modify positions ahead of the IAA Audit and to further harmonise and meet the requirements of the EASA Audit. Lessons learned from the outcome of the UK CAA Audit were shared in full and without any points being withheld.
5.2.6 Safety Partnership Arrangements between UK and Ireland The partnership is established and safety data sharing with access to each States’ occurrence reports and database is in place and active.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 56 Released Issue 5.2.7 Future Airspace Strategy – Low Density/Low Complexity Area (LDLCA) Project Purpose To produce a strategy for LDLCA within the UK/Ireland FAB. Status Update The Low Density Low Complexity project affords the opportunity to provide cost effective solutions in the LDLCA airspace. A workshop approach has generated a draft Strategy which will continue to be developed. An initial step looks to utilise a trial to better understand the use of ADS-B data as an aid to air traffic service provision and what this would entail to collect and display this information on the ground.
5.2.8 Interoperability and Resilience This activity replaces “Technical Convergence Strategic Plan” and reflects the fact that NATS and the IAA have, for a long period of time, which pre-dates the formation of the FAB, have been following different technological paths, particularly in the area of FDP platforms. The ANSPs have already invested significant funds into the development of these and other new systems and will explore how best to leverage their interoperability capabilities, rather than write off these investments for no return. SESAR Context Since the outset, the SESAR Programme has been committed to and focused on “global interoperability and harmonisation, recognising these as vital prerequisites for a smooth and seamless transition towards a modernised global air traffic management (ATM) system. Interoperability does NOT mean the implementation of the same solution everywhere but rather that ‘systems’ at many different levels should be able to work together”. Project Purpose The iTEC and COOPANS systems (the Flight Data processing systems used by NATS & IAA respectively) are being developed in collaboration with other ANSPs and the systems manufacturers, and are key platforms for SESAR Deployment across Europe, delivering against the SESAR interoperability concept. This project will investigate the feasibility and options for improving the resilience of the delivery of Air Traffic Services to ensure levels of service are maintained across the FAB in the event of unforeseen events. Status Update The project is exploring Feasibility and Options and this phase is expected to be completed by Winter 2017/2018. Planned Outcomes Building on the success of the additional benefits delivered through DSOT Phase 2, which successfully demonstrated the interoperability capabilities of iTEC and COOPANS, this project will deliver a report to the FMB that covers: The types of service events that could be mitigated; The options that could potentially mitigate the service delivery impact; The stakeholder engagement required to design, plan and tactically implement; An initial cost estimate for each identified option, including lifecycle and tactical implementing.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 57 Released Issue 5.2.9 Harmonised 18,000ft Transition Altitude On the 31st January 2012, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) commenced consultation on a policy of a higher, and harmonisation of the Transition Altitude (TA).
Progressing a higher, harmonised TA of 18,000ft involved considerable liaison within the United Kingdom (UK) and overseas. The UK, Republic of Ireland and Norway formed a Transition Altitude Oversight Group (UINTAOG) to ensure a consistency of approach, identification of potentially common issues and development of compatible procedures, as they sought to implement an 18,000ft TA. There was also significant combined UK and Ireland participation in the EASA Harmonised European Transition Altitude (HETA) Rulemaking Group, as well as consultation with agencies further afield.
The UK works on the principle that an 18,000ft TA’s primary benefit lies in enabling any new systemised airspace design to fully realise its potential by removing the loss of levels around the current 6,000ft TA (5,000ft around Manchester) within the Terminal Manoeuvring Areas (TMA).
An 18,000ft TA better facilitates systemised airspace designs through interlocking, systemised Standard Instrument Departures, Standard Arrival Routes, Holds, Arrival Transitions and Instrument Approach Procedures, including those with vertical guidance, without the need to include within the design vertical buffers to allow for airline SOP differences in the manual re-setting of altimeters between QNH (Local Pressure) and QNE (Standard Pressure).
An 18,000ft TA will also better facilitate more consistent Continuous Climb Operations (CCO) and Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) in the airspace below 18,000ft.
It is recognised by the CAA that there are considerable financial implications associated with the implementation of a higher, harmonised TA and that these are particularly significant for certain sectors of the industry. The CAA will however be looking at this from the overall state perspective when balancing the financial costs against the benefits delivered to the UK’s aviation industry as a whole. From a financial perspective the CAA wants to ensure that the project delivers overall benefits to users, particularly commercial aviation in terms of fuel burn and available capacity, which would then make the investment, particularly by ANSPs at Regional Airports, more worthwhile.
The stated purpose of introducing a higher harmonised TA has always been to enable a more efficient use of airspace in order to realise potential savings for aircraft operators in terms of lower fuel bills and lower emissions. This applies across the boundary between the UK and Ireland where a coordinated approach meant that TA procedures were addressed on a joint basis.
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has stated that it anticipates considerable costs whilst receiving no operational benefit as a result of a raised TA; but acknowledged that these issues did not prevent them from implementing a TA of 18,000ft. The MoD recognises the benefits of a raised TA within the lower airspace and airfield environment.
The GA community is largely in favour of an 18,000ft TA as the simplified procedures give them better awareness of their proximity to terrain. The procedures also help them avoid infringing CAS or other airspace reservations, which would help ANSPs managing CAS. Additionally, a raised TA would impose very few costs on the GA community’s operations.
The NATS’ London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) was intended to be the first large scale systemised airspace design requiring an 18,000ft TA, however, multiple factors affecting NATS meant that it was unable to progress the redesign of the southeast’s airspace, for which a raised TA of 18,000ft was a key enabler, until Regulatory Period 3 (RP3).
The CAA confirms its commitment to a higher, harmonised TA across the UK, both inside and outside CAS and it remains the CAA’s intention to see an 18,000ft TA implemented at the earliest opportunity. In view of the fact that NATS have delayed the systemised airspace structure which relies on an 18,000ft TA until RP3, the CAA concludes that implementation of an 18,000ft TA will move to RP3.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 58 Released Issue 5.3 Regional cooperation
5.3.1 Direct Route Airspace (DRA) 5.3.1.1 In March 2015 NATS completed a project to deliver Direct Route Airspace (DRA) into 3 sectors in Prestwick airspace. This allows airlines to flight plan direct point to point through these sectors to achieve reduced fuel burn. Following on from the experience gained during the first phase of the DSOT trial this extends the ATM capability that was provided in a part of one sector during DSOT into three full sectors. To facilitate the most direct routings from the Oceanic entry and exit points through these sectors the IAA supported this activity with the deployment of 3 additional Co- ordination Points (CoPs) on the boundary between NATS and IAA airspace. 5.3.1.2 Outside of the DRA Airspace, the UK continues to implement NTFSR (Night Time Fuel Saving Routes) which introduce shorter, defined, direct routes providing more optimal flight profiles. 5.3.1.3 The UK CAA will continue to develop its position regarding the regularisation and rationalisation of airspace classifications within the UK FIRs.
5.3.2 Regional Cooperation Initiatives A6 Alliance The “A6 Alliance” was set up informally in 2007 between the ANSPs interested in accession to SJU membership, i.e: ENAIRE, the Spanish ANSP; DFS, the German ANSP; DSNA, the French ANSP; ENAV, the Italian ANSP; NATS, the British ANSP; NORACON, (the NORth European and Austrian CONsortium), which consists of nine members: Swedavia (Swedish airports) and eight European ANS providers: Austro Control (Austria) and the North European ANS Providers (NEAP) including AVINOR (Norway), EANS (Estonia), Finavia (Finland), IAA (Ireland), ISAVIA (Iceland), LFV (Sweden) and Naviair (Denmark). After the successful cooperation for accession to SJU membership, it was decided to formalise the A6 Alliance through a Memorandum of Cooperation which was concluded in June 2011. The aim of the cooperation and coordination between the 6 parties was to provide customer value through improving the ATM performance at a European Network Level and increasing the pace of delivering the Single European Sky. The main areas of cooperation relate to general fields of mutual interest (e.g. best practice, harmonised strategy etc.), the SESAR R&D phase and SESAR deployment phase. The governance of the A6 Alliance is ensured by a Steering Board composed of CEOs which meets on a quarterly basis and is supported by a Strategy Board composed of senior managers. An R&D Working Group and a Deployment Working Group organise co-operation at expert level. The A6 Alliance quickly became an important player and a key stakeholder of the Single European Sky and has made significant and remarkable contributions to the SESAR JU, for example on the occasion of the ATM Master Plan Updates (editions 2012 and 2015). The A6 Alliance leads European-wide technical activities validated and co-funded by the EC for their consistency with the SES framework: ANSPs coordination for IDP (CFP Ten-T 2012, 233.9 M€, co- funded 20%), Advanced FDP (CFP Ten-T 2012, 13.3 M€, co-funded 50 %) and New European Common Services Provision for PENS2 and DLS (CFP Ten-T 2013, 2.4 M€, co-funded 50%).
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 59 Released Issue PANSA is now a full member of the A6 Alliance, which has also developed a close partnership with the COOPANS2 ANSPs, and a strong relationship with the A4 (Airlines) and the SDAG (airports) which has resulted in the setup of an industry led consortium (SESAR Deployment Alliance (SDA)). On December, 5th 2014, the European Commission tasked the SDA with the setup of the SESAR Deployment Manager, thus strengthening its legitimacy in actively contributing to SESAR deployment. This partnership between ANSPs led to the formal integration of COOPANS into the A6 Alliance for SESAR Deployment Manager activities and today, the A6 Alliance members provide significant support either in logistics or in staff to the SESAR Deployment Manager. Finally, in the context of SESAR2020, the B43 Consortium joined the A6 Alliance in 2015 and an agreement has been recently established between the A6 Alliance and Skyguide in order to authorise exchanges between their experts in the domain of R&D.
5.3.3 Borealis Alliance The Borealis Alliance is a leading Alliance of nine ANSPs from the UK, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Norway and Sweden that enables its Members to drive better performance for stakeholders through business collaboration. The Borealis Alliance members provide air traffic services for over 4m flights a year across 12.5 million km2 of North European airspace, accounting for almost 39% of European airspace (based on the 2016 traffic figures). Since 2015, the Borealis Alliance is working on a major programme to deliver Free Route Airspace (FRA) across the whole of Northern Europe by 2021. The programme will create free route airspace extending from the eastern boundary of the North Atlantic to the western boundary of Russian airspace in the North of Europe, delivering significant customer benefits in terms of fuel efficiency, environmental performance and cost savings. The programme was recognised by the European Commission in its inaugural Single European Sky awards in 2016. To date, the programme has been awarded considerable financial support to continue its work to deliver Free Route Airspace across Northern Europe by 2021 under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) INEA 2014 and 2015 funding. The Borealis FRA programme is fully supported by the 9 State NSA group established in 2015. This group represents a benchmark for regulatory cooperation across Europe. Borealis Alliance Home Page
2 ACG, Croatia Control, IAA, LFV and Naviair together form the COOPANS Alliance. 3 PANSA, ANS CR, LPS SR and Oro Navigacija together form the B4 Consortium.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 60 Released Issue 5.4 Regional Projects
Direct Route Airspace (DRA) Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: March 2015. Status: - Description: NATS are currently undertaking a project to delivery Direct Route Airspace (DRA) into 3 sectors in Prestwick airspace. This will allow airlines to flight plan direct point to point through these sectors to achieve reduced fuel burn. Following on from the experience gained during the first phase of the DSOT trial NATS is extending the ATM capability that was provided in a part of one sector during DSOT into three full sectors. To facilitate the most direct routings from the Oceanic entry and exit points through these sectors the IAA are supporting this activity with the deployment of 3 additional Co-ordination Points (COPs) on the boundary between NATS and the IAA. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in - Name/Code in DP2016: - DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: - Environment: - Capacity: - Cost-efficiency: This will allow airlines to flight plan direct point to point through these sectors to achieve reduced fuel burn. Operational efficiency: -
AOP-NOP Integration (2015_113_AF4) Organisation(s): HEATHROW Airport (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 01/03/2016 - 31/12/2019. Status: - Description: Project Leader: EUROCONTROL / Network Manager Contributors: Heathrow Airport Ltd, Aéroports de Paris, Fraport AG
Objectives: setting up B2B AOP-NOP interfacing for data exchange with selected airports; ensuring that exchanged data is being processed for better predictability and improved rolling plans for NM and airports; providing guidance material for other airports for later implementation of AOP-NOP link and on Collaborative Decision Making in order to provide quality input data.
This project is still in the definition stage. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: FCM05 Other links: - Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_113_AF4; Family 4.2.4 DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 61 Released Issue
Borealis FRA Implementation (Part 2) (2015_227_AF3_A; 2015_227_AF3_B) Organisation(s): EANS (EE), FINAVIA (FI), IAA-ATS Provider (IE), Type of project: Regional LFV (SE), LGS (LV), NATS (UK), Naviair (DK) Schedule: 15/02/2016 - 31/12/2020. Status: Ongoing. Description: Contributors: Avinor Flysikring AS, Finavia, Irish Aviation Authority, LFV, NATS, Naviair, Ryanair, LGS, EANS, Isavia The project implementation scope depend on the coordinated work of all 10 partners (Avinor Flysikring AS, Finavia, IAA, LFV,LGS, NATS, Naviair, EANS, Isavia, Ryanair) and was split into a cohesion and non-cohesion parts.
Project Objective: Implementing FRA, which is a key element of ATM Functionality (AF3) - Flexible Airspace Management and Free Route, across three functional airspace blocks (FABs), namely, NEFAB, DK-SE FAB and UK-IRE FAB, and Iceland; The implementation will support the achievement of the flight efficiency targets for RP2 of the performance scheme. The Performance Review Body (PRB) and the Network Manager (NM) has highlighted the need to pay particular attention to interfaces between the Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs) and the deployment of FRA initiatives to achieve these targets; Reducing fuel consumption by allowing users to flight-plan their preferred (hopefully shortest) trajectories; Introducing seamless integration among ACCs; Reducing the effort on ATCOs by allowing a more cost-effective approach, while keeping the highest level of safety; The implementation also includes EANS (Estonia) who are funded for their contribution towards Borealis FRA implementation through the Cohesion fund.
Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOM21.2 Other links: AOM-0401, AOM-0402, AOM-0501, AOM-0502, CM-0102-A Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_227_AF3_A and DP2016: 2015_227_AF3_B; Family 3.2.4
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 62 Released Issue Borealis Free Route Airspace (Part 1) Organisation(s): AVINOR AS (NO), EANS (EE), FINAVIA (FI), IAA- Type of project: Regional ATS Provider (IE), LFV (SE), LGS (LV), NATS (UK), Naviair (DK) Schedule: 01/01/2014 - 31/05/2017. Status: Awaiting the final implementation will take place on 25 May 2017. Description: The Borealis Alliance will implement Free Route Airspace (FRA) within the NEFRA region that consists of the two functional airspace blocks (FAB) of Denmark-Sweden and North European Functional Airspace Block (Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Norway). Free Route Airspace is a key element of the Pilot Common Project and NEFRA is a FRA programme that results in a seamless cross border inter-FAB FRA implementation in Europe. This project is broken down into airspace design, fast and real-time simulations and finally implementation. A second part is planned at a later stage to cover planning for the FRA implementation of NEFRA as well as the airspaces of UK, Ireland and Iceland. This project will be finalised on 25 May 2017 and it will be marked by the final meeting between NEFRA, Borealis, SDM and INEA. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: AOM21.2 Other links: AOM-0401, AOM-0402, AOM-0501, AOM-0502, CM-0102-A Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 020AF3; Family 3.2.4 DP2016:
European Harmonised Forecasts of Adverse Weather (Icing, Turbulence, Convection and Winter weather) (2015_068_AF5) Organisation(s): Met Office (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 01/10/2016 - 31/01/2020. Status: Overall progress: 2.09% (as at 31 December 2016). Initial phases of this project are related to more detailed scoping and development of more detailed plans for deployment. Those processes have commenced, with a meeting of primary partners at the DWD headquarters, Offenbach, Germany 2nd March 2017. Description: Project Leader: EUMETNET EIG Contributors: Met Office (UK), Météo France, Finnish Meteorological Institute, EUROCONTROL and DWD
Objectives: Providing resilient, single source (with robust backup capability) and harmonized adverse weather forecast products (including convection, icing, turbulence and winter conditions) within the European domain. In particular the MET information will cover high density TMA and Airports, as well as pan European network applications. Enabling all stakeholders (ATC, Airlines, Airports, AU, supporting actors) to base decisions on a common representation of adverse weather situations, thereby increasing safety in complex scenarios and facilitating collaborative reactions to hazardous weather events. Distributing forecast information of adverse weather via the MET-GATE (069-AF5) service, using protocols and governance compatible with SWIM architecture and principles. Enabling comprehensive assessments of the impact of adverse weather on all aspects of industry operations, providing a high degree of confidence and accuracy. A clearer understanding of uncertainty will assist in operational decision making. - Raising awareness of new MET capabilities among stakeholder groups.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 63 Released Issue Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: INF08.1 DP: Family 5.4.1; Project 2015_068_AF5 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in - Name/Code in DP2016: - DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: Easy access to the same consistent adverse MET information by all interested parties that project 2015_068_AF5 will help to enable a common situational awareness across all operational stakeholders and will allow common safety-related decision making. Environment: The use of MET Hazards in enabling common MET situational awareness for all ATM and AU stakeholders will allow better flight efficiency (in time and in fuel) aiding the environmental impact of aircraft and airports. Capacity: By enabling common MET situational awareness of all ATM and AU stakeholders, project 2015_068_AF5 is expected to allow improved capacity management and collaborative decision making. Cost-efficiency: Use of standardized structured message exchange model allows more cost efficient handling of MET messages. Operational efficiency: As discussed for Cost Effectiveness, project 2015_068_AF5 will enable use of standardized structured MET information that allows more efficiency. By enabling common MET situational awareness of all ATM and AU stakeholders, project 2015_068_AF5 is expected to allow better flight efficiency (in time and in fuel) and collaborative decision making. Cooperation Activities: Use of gridded data in GRIB2 and especially polygons/MET objects describing warning areas in XML standards rather than text messages improves resilience of MET communications and enables better data presentation to ATCOs. Easy and performant access to MET data in interoperable formats will allow a more efficient integration in ATM/AU/airports systems. Liaison will also take place between 3D Radar Composite (2015_067_AF5), the MET-GATE (2015_069_AP5) and SWIM Governance Deployment (CEF2016) to ensure interoperability within SESAR data transfer.
European MET Information Exchange (MET-GATE) (2015_069_AF5) Organisation(s): Met Office (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 01/10/2016 - 31/12/2020. Status: Overall progress: 1.21% (as at 31 December 2016).
Initial phases of project are related to more detailed scoping and development of more detailed plans for deployment. Those processes have commenced via email and WebEx. A meeting of primary partners at the Météo-France headquarters, Toulouse, France is scheduled for 18-19th April 2017. Description: Project Leader: EUMETNET EIG Contributors: Météo-France, Met Office (UK), DWD, EUROCONTROL, DFS
Objective: Single source to request and receive customized MET information tailored for user’s needs by applying smart functionalities.
Point of contact for requesting MET information services, using protocols and governance compatible with SWIM architecture and principles.
Enabling all stakeholders (ATC, Airlines, Airports, supporting actors) to base decisions on a common representation of meteorological situations.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 64 Released Issue Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: INF08.1 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_069_AF5; Family 5.4.1 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: Easy access to the same consistent MET information by all interested parties that project 2015_069_AF5 will help to enable a common situational awareness across all operational stakeholders and will allow common safety-related decision making. Environment: The use of MET-GATE does not directly impact environmental indicators, however if the MET information used from it are applied well then improvements in fuel efficiency and timeliness can be expected. Capacity: By enabling common MET situational awareness of all ATM and AU stakeholders, project 2015_069_AF5 is expected to allow improved capacity management and collaborative decision making. Cost-efficiency: Use of standardized structured message exchange model allows more cost efficient handling of MET messages. Operational efficiency: As discussed for Cost efficiency, project 2015_067_AF5 will enable use of standardized structured message exchange model that allows more efficient handling of MET messages. By enabling common MET situational awareness of all ATM and AU stakeholders, project 2015_069_AF5 is expected to allow better flight efficiency (in time and in fuel) and collaborative decision making. Cooperation Activities: The NMS involved in this work are involved in activities such as OGC 65tilizes6565n65ion, EUROCAE SWIM Services development, and activities with non European NMS (e.g. US National Weather Service) to ensure that the standards and technologies that are being driven forward are consistent and fit for purpose. Use of XML standards rather than text messages improves resilience of MET communications and enables better data presentation to ATCOs. Easy and performant access to MET data in interoperable and SWIM-compliant formats will allow a more efficient integration in ATM/AU/airports systems. Liaison will also take place between 3D Radar Composite (2015_067_AF5) and the Weather Hazard project (2015_068_AP5) and SWIM Governance Deployment (CEF2016) to ensure interoperability within SESAR data transfer.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 65 Released Issue
European Meteorological Aircraft Derived Data Center (EMADDC) (2015_137_AF5) Organisation(s): Met Office (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 01/03/2016 – 31/12/2020. Status: Overall progress: 4.01% (as at 31 December 2016).
Initial phases of project are related to more detailed scoping and development of more detailed plans for deployment. Following a short delay which is not expected to have significant impact on the project, those processes have commenced. Draft ‘requirements’ documents for elements of the project have been developed and are under review. A meeting between KNMI and the Met Office took place at the Met Office headquarters, Exeter, UK on 2nd March 2017. Description: Project Leader: Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI) Contributors: Met Office (UK)
Project Objective: Setting up a governance model, in line with EU Open Data regulations, for collection of surveillance data/aircraft derived data and dissemination of obtained or derived meteorological information. Deploying operational European meteorological aircraft derived data centre. Realising a collection of aircraft derived data from surveillance service providers or via deployment of local ADS-B/Mode-S receivers including the necessary infrastructure to maintain and operate these local receivers operationally. Providing service and disseminating derived meteorological information via services and PENS/(New)PENS. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: INF08.1 Project included in RP2 NA Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_137_AF5; Family 5.4.1 DP2016: Performance contribution Safety: Increased situational awareness and improved consistent and collaborative decision making. Environment: A positive environmental impact is that better use and integration of MET information can lead to more efficient ATM operations, and as such can result in e.g. reduced fuel burn for airspace users and reduction of gaseous emissions.
The CBA for the Global Project (PCP), as published by the European Commission in document ‘Targeted stakeholder consultation on the establishment of the ‘Pilot Common Project’ supporting the implementation of the European Air Traffic Management Master Plan’, dated 12 December 2013, contains the overall positive impacts of PCP implementation on CO2 Credit Savings and CO2 emissions reduction. Capacity: Rapidly refreshed observations of upper air wind and temperature provided by the EMADDC are identified as essential to support various operational decisions support systems. The SESAR projects WP 6.8.1 Time Based Separation, WP 4.7.2, WP 5.7.2 Wind for TP calculation and WP5.6.4 AMAN, and as such the implementation of AF1 and AF2 services, defined the use of this type of data. Cost-efficiency: Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMA’s result in ANS productivity gains as described in the PCP CBA. The EMADDC is an enabler for these concepts.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 66 Released Issue Operational efficiency: Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMA (AF 1), as well as DMAN and Time Based Separation (AF2), require rapidly refreshed observations of upper air wind and temperature as will be provided by the EMADDC to maintain optimal capacity.
Optimized use of airspace capacity. Cooperation Activities: Coordination and cooperation with Eurocontrol, EUMETNET, Met Office, airline stakeholders. Output of this project is an input to the EUMETNET IP (Lead UKMO) European Harmonised Forecasts of Adverse Weather (Icing, Turbulence, Convection and Winter Weather) and SESAR 2020 PJ10 DFS.
European Weather Radar Composite of Convection Information Service (2015_067_AF5) Organisation(s): Met Office (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 17/10/2016 – 31/12/2019. Status: Overall progress: 3.66% (as at 31 December 2016).
Initial phases of this project are related to more detailed scoping and development of more detailed plans for deployment. Those processes have commenced, with a meeting of primary partners at the Met Office headquarters, Exeter 2nd/3rd February 2017. Description: Project Leader: EUMETNET EIG Contributors: Met Office (UK), Météo France, EUROCONTROL, DWD
Objectives: Originate resilient, single source real-time 3-dimensional (3D) weather radar information of convective weather events for high density TMA and Airport with: 1) Departure Management Synchronised with Pre-departure sequencing, 2) Departure Management integrating Surface Management Constraints, or 3) Time-Based Separation for Final Approach. Originate resilient, single source real-time weather radar information of convective weather events for the European geographical footprint. Distribute weather radar information of convective weather events in a SWIM complaint format through the MET-GATE (069-AF5) service by applying SWIM compliant protocols, standards and governance principles. Enable all aviation stakeholders (including ATC, NM, Airlines and Airports) to base decisions on a common reference and representation of convective weather events for the European geographical footprint. - Raising awareness of new MET capabilities among stakeholder groups. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: INF08.1 DP: Family 5.4.1; Project 2015_067_AF5. Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in - Name/Code in DP2016: - DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 67 Released Issue Performance contribution Safety: For most weather situations, the effect of the 2015_067_AF5 radar tools will enhance efficiency. However, in certain situations, there is the potential for in-flight safety to be enhanced by more pro-active weather avoidance and less tactical (or last-minute) changes to flight routes. For example, further detailed forecast information of thunderstorm development and extent may inform pre-flight and in-flight decision-making, 68tilizes6868 the scale of in- flight tactical/reactive weather avoidance. The earlier notification of the scale of thunderstorm development may also allow routing to take account of horizontal extent of individual (or joined) thunderstorm cells. The effect on Safety will be small in many weather situations, but potentially large in specific weather phenomena. Environment: There is an expectation that the work from 2015_067_AF5 will enable better 68tilizes6868n of MET information providing more efficient flight-routing in both good and poor weather situations. For example, higher resolution (spatial and temporal) radar observations of convection will allow more precise flight routes to avoid convection thereby reducing fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Capacity: By enabling increased situational awareness with MET data, both at the pre- tactical and tactical phases of ATM operation, project 2015_067_AF5 is expected assist understanding where capacity may be constrained due to convection. Furthermore, the accurate and early identification of potential MET-related causes for reduced capacity will enhance the deployment of mitigating actions. Cost-efficiency: The 3D Radar Weather composites will allow greater efficiency in the routing of aircraft. This most-efficient routing should therefore allow 68tilizes68 cost- effectiveness in terms of (fuel) operating costs. Another possible benefit will be that hazardous airport/TMA weather will be consistently forecast, permitting earlier capacity and constraint planning, again permitting increased cost effectiveness and reduced tactical re-routing. Operational efficiency: Project 2015_067_AF5 will aim to enable development which will deliver efficiency into the ATM world. This will be both in operations involving the predictability of arrival and in the mitigation of the impacts of adverse weather. Tangible benefits are expected to be include predictable (and often reduced) flight times, reduced fuel consumption and reduced tactical/reactive weather avoidance. Cooperation Activities: As part of the requirements gathering process, documentation from parallel projects (e.g. NEXTGEN) will be assessed and liaison will take place (through EUROCONTROL) to ensure consistency of approach and interoperability. Regulatory requirements (e.g. ICAO) will also be assessed to determine gaps between the emerging requirements and current service expectations. Liaison will also take place between the Weather Hazard project (2015_068_AF5), the MET- GATE (2015_069_AP5) and SWIM Governance Deployment (CEF2016) to ensure interoperability within SESAR data transfer. In addition, this project 68tilizes skill and knowledge from the EUMETNET Programme OPERA on who the radar project science is based.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 68 Released Issue
ITEC-FDP/CWP Organisation(s): DFS (DE), ENAIRE (ES), LVNL – Type of project: Regional Luchtverkeersleiding Nederland (NL), NATS (UK) Schedule: 2010 – 2022. Status: Project Definition. Description: Investments that will deliver advanced systems and tools to provide the platform for SESAR-based operations, notably ITEC-FDP, ITEC-CWP and allied controller safety and productivity tools. This investment is being progressed in collaboration with the Spanish ANSP (AENA), the Dutch ANSP (LVNL) and the German ANSP (DFS) to deliver a system with a common core to share costs and risk and provide a common platform across several key European ANSPs. Bespoke/additional functionality is only being developed where needed to support specific operational concepts. Work is on-going to ensure that ITEC-FDP platform is fully interoperable with the other main FDP system being developed in Europe (CoFlight).
Prestwick Centre Upper Airspace presently operates high level traffic on iTEC.
iTEC build for Swanwick is presently implementing iTEC in the former Swanwick ENR ops room; a temporary combined ops room is in use until the works are complete. Link and references ATM MP links: L3: ATC17 Other links: CM0201 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in - Name/Code in DP2016: - DP2016:
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 69 Released Issue NewPENS Stakeholders contribution for the procurement and deployment of NewPENS (Part A: General Call; Part B: Cohesion Call) (2015_174_AF5_A; 2015_174_AF5_B) Organisation(s): NATS (UK) Type of project: Regional Schedule: 15/02/2016 – 31/12/2020. Status: A Common Procurement Agreement (CPA) has been developed between EUROCONTROL and the key ANSPs involved and Call for Tenders were published in late 2016. The Tender Evaluation phase will commence once the bids are received in April 2017. Description: Contributors: Austro Control, Avinor Flysikring AS, DSNA, ENAIRE, Finavia, Irish Aviation Authority, LFV, LVNL, MNAV, NATS, Naviair, SMATSA, NAV Portugal, Aéroports de Paris, Belgocontrol, Slovenia Control, BULATSA, ROMATSA.
Project Objective: Deploying an Internet Protocol (version6 and version4) Network Service necessary to support the SWIM Exchanges; Deploying within the ICAO EUR/NAT Region a unique Pan European Network Service to support the information exchange needs of all ATM stakeholders, ANSPs (almost users of PENS1) but also Airports, Airspace Users, MET Providers and Military; Replacing PENS1 terminating in June 2018.
The project implementation scope depend on the coordinated work of all 19 partners (EUROCONTROL, AUSTROCONTROL (Austria), Avinor Flysikring AS (Norway), DSNA (France), ENAIRE (Spain), FINAVIA (Finland), IAA (Ireland), LFV (Sweeden), LVNL (The Netherlands), MNAV (Macedonia), NATS (UK), NAVAIR(Denmark), SMATSA (Serbia & Montenegro), NAV Portugal (Portugal), Aéroports de Paris (France), Belgocontrol (Belgium), SLOVENIA CONTROL (Slovenia), BULATSA (Bulgaria), ROMATSA (Romania)) and is split into a cohesion and non-cohesion part.
The current Pan European Network Service (PENS) contract includes the main European ANSPs supporting ATM operations, both for these ANSPs and the Network Manager. This contract is due to expire in June 2018. Throughout its use, this service has demonstrated to be a cost effective solution for providing a common IP based managed network service across the European region for Ground-Ground data and voice communications for the provision of ATM/ANS services.
The PENS’ success, although showing the way ahead, did not yet allow reaping the full benefits of the evolution and remains an alternative in addition to existing legacy infrastructure. The vision of the NewPENS initiative aims at pushing further the transformation of ground ATM communications in Europe by providing a unique, secure, cost-effective connectivity service using IP technologies for all ATM stakeholders. The NewPENS aims at taking PENS from being a means of communication for cross-border data and voice exchange in Europe to becoming the means of communication supporting pan-European ATM operations. Link and references ATM MP links: - Other links: COM12 Project included in RP2 - Name/Code in RP2 - Performance Plan: Performance Plan: Project included in Y Name/Code in DP2016: Project 2015_174_AF5_A and DP2016: 2015_174_AF5_B; Family 5.1.2.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 70 Released Issue 6 Implementation Objectives Progress
6.1 State View
6.1.1 Overall Objective Implementation
Progress distribution for applicable Implementation Objectives
Completed Ongoing 8; 9% Planned
15; 16% 42; 46% Late 2; 2% No Plan
25; 27% Not Applicable Missing Data Undefined
6.1.2 Objective Progress per SESAR Key Feature
Legend:
## % = Expected completion / % Progress = Implementation Objective timeline (different colour per KF)
100% = Objective completed = Completion beyond Implementation Objective timeline
Optimised ATM Network Services
Average implementation progress: 59%
<15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
Harmonise Operational Air Traffic 82% AOM13.1 (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling 72% AOM19.1 ASM support tools to support A‐FUA
ASM Management of real‐time 40% AOM19.2 airspace data ASM Management of real‐time 50% AOM19.3 airspace data Enhanced tactical flow management 68% FCM01 services 43% FCM03 Collaborative flight planning
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 71 Released Issue <15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
100% FCM04.1 STAM Phase 1
10% FCM04.2 STAM Phase 2
28% FCM05 Interactive rolling NOP
100% FCM06 Traffic Complexity Assessment
Advanced Air Traffic Services
Average implementation progress: 82%
<15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
100% AOM21.1 Direct Routing
10% AOM21.2 Free Route Airspace
100% ATC02.2 STCA Level 2
100% ATC02.8 Ground‐based Safety Nets
ATC07.1 AMAN tools and procedures
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 10%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 100%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 0%
Automated support for conflict detection, resolution 67% ATC12.1 support information and conformance monitoring Implement, in en‐route operations, information 100% ATC15.1 exchange tools & procedures in support of basic AMAN Arrival Management extended to en‐route 100% ATC15.2 airspace 100% ATC16 ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1
Electronic dialogue as automated assistance to 26% ATC17 controller during coordination and transfer
ENV01 Continuous Descent Operations
EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport 100%
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 100%
EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport 100%
EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport 100%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLC ‐ London City Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 100%
EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport 100%
EGNX ‐ Nottingham East Midlands Airport 100%
EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport 100%
EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport 100%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 100%
Ground‐ground automated co‐ordination 100% ITY‐COTR processes 86% NAV03 RNAV 1
100% NAV10 APV procedures
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 72 Released Issue
High Performing Airport Operations
Average implementation progress: 52%
<15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
AOP04.1 A‐SMGCS Level 1 EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport 46% (Outside Applicability Area) EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 33%
EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLC ‐ London City Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 79%
EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport 100%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 80%
AOP04.2 A‐SMGCS Level 2 EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport 25% (Outside Applicability Area) EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 0%
EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLC ‐ London City Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 94%
EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport 100%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 85%
AOP05 Airport CDM
EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport 17%
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 38%
EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport 6%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLC ‐ London City Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 100%
EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport n/a (Outside Applicability Area) EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐ 0%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 33%
AOP10 Time‐Based Separation
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 73 Released Issue <15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 0%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 0%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 100%
AOP11 Initial Airport Operations Plan
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 0%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 50%
EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport 11%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 25%
Improve runway and airfield safety with ATC
AOP12 clearances monitoring EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 40%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 100%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 10%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 5%
Automated assistance to Controller for Surface
AOP13 Movement Planning and Routing EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 0%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 0%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 8%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 0%
ENV02 Collaborative Environmental Management
EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport 100%
EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport 100%
EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport 100%
EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport 100%
EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport 92%
EGLC ‐ London City Airport 100%
EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport 100%
EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport 100%
EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport 100%
EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport 100%
EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport 100%
Improve runway safety by preventing runway 73% SAF11 excursions
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 74 Released Issue
Enabling Aviation Infrastructure
Average implementation progress: 42%
<15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
77% COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS
20% COM11 Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)
0% FCM08 Extended Flight Plan ‐
100% INF04 Integrated briefing
6% INF07 Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (eTOD)
10% ITY‐ACID Aircraft identification
Ensure quality of aeronautical data and 12% ITY‐ADQ aeronautical information 68% ITY‐AGDL Initial ATC air‐ground data link services
8,33 kHz air‐ground voice channel spacing below 43% ITY‐AGVCS2 FL195 41% ITY‐FMTP Common Flight Message Transfer Protocol
83% ITY‐SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 75 Released Issue 6.1.3 ICAO ASBU Implementation
The following table shows, for each of the ASBU Block 0 modules, the overall status, the final date foreseen for completion and the percentage of progress achieved in the current cycle. These results were determined using the LSSIP Year 2016 declared statuses and progress of the relevant Implementation objectives in accordance with the mapping approved by ICAO EUR EANPG/58 (European Air Navigation Planning Group).
Legend:
= Completed (during 2016 or before) = Missing planning date
= Progress achieved in 2016 = Not applicable
<16 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ≥25
100% B0‐APTA Optimization of Approach Procedures
including vertical guidance
100% B0‐SURF Safety and Efficiency of Surface Operations 70% (A‐SMGCS Level 1‐2)
100% B0‐FICE Increased Interoperability, Efficiency and 56% Capacity through Ground‐Ground Integration
100% B0‐DATM Service Improvement through Digital 56% Aeronautical Information Management 100% B0‐ACAS ACAS Improvements
100% B0‐SNET Increased Effectiveness of Ground‐Based
Safety Nets 100% B0‐ACDM Improved Airport Operations through 42%
100% B0‐RSEQ Improved Traffic flow through Runway 76% sequencing (AMAN/DMAN)
100% B0‐FRTO Improved Operations through Enhanced En‐ 86% Route Trajectories
100% B0‐NOPS Improved Flow Performance through 56% Planning based on a Network‐Wide view 100% B0‐ASUR Initial capability for ground surveillance 83%
100% B0‐CDO Improved Flexibility and Efficiency in Descent 93% Profiles (CDO)
100% B0‐TBO Improved Safety and Efficiency through the 68% initial application of Data Link En‐Route
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 76 Released Issue 6.2 Detailed Objectives Implementation progress
Two colour codes are used for each Implementation Objective ‘box’: o a colour code is used to show the Objective Scope in the Objective ID cell, and o another colour code is used to show the Objective Progress in the State and for each national stakeholder.
(*) Objective Scope Code: (**) Objective/Stakeholder Progress Code: ECAC Completed No Plan EU+ Ongoing Not Applicable Multi-N Planned Missing Data APT Late
In Paragraph 6.2.2, in particular for London Gatwick Airport, since the following Objectives (AOP04.1, AOP04.2, AOP05, ATC07.1, ENV01 and ENV02) were filed as completed the ANSP has changed. So, whilst it was correct at the time of Completion the references to NATS is no longer valid, and should now reflect Air Navigation Solutions Ltd. These entries will be updated for the 2017 cycle.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 77 Released Issue 6.2.1 State Implementation Objectives
Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling AOM13.1 Timescales: 82% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2018 REG (By:12/2018) The UK has adopted the EUROAT provisions with effect from 1 Completed October 2011 (the required EUROAT timescale) as the national CAA policy for OAT‐IFR, subject to the national variations listed in ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 Annex 4 Country Chapter for the United Kingdom submitted to EUROCONTOL on 3 August 2011. The MoD is content that UK Military Regulations meet current Completed UK/EC/NATO requirements. Some changes may be necessary with the implementation of EUROAT but this cannot be MIL ‐ 100% confirmed until the final version is published, at which point 31/12/2011 the Military Aviation Authority will amend any affected regulation. ASP (By:12/2018) Completed MIL Activity in this area is continually monitored by the MoD. ‐ 100% 31/01/2007 NATS participates fully in harmonised OAT/GAT handling Completed through shared equipment, facilities and mutually agreed NATS procedures. Harmonisation at FAB level is ensured by co‐ ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 ordination through a FAB Management Board. Activity in this area is continually monitored by NATS. MIL (By:12/2018) Arrangements are in place to harmonise OAT and GAT Ongoing MIL ‐ 63% handling to the maximum extent possible within the UK. 31/12/2018
ASM support tools to support A‐FUA Timescales: AOM19.1 72% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2017 ASP (By:12/2018) NATS utilises LARA V3 in order to secure the appropriate Ongoing NATS connectivity with the NM system; NATS await a formal LoA ‐ 72% 30/09/2017 with the NM in relation to this connectivity. Ongoing MIL ‐ ‐ 72% 31/12/2017
ASM Management of Real‐Time Airspace Data Timescales: AOM19.2 40% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2017 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2021) Future development of functionality is predicated upon the Ongoing NATS ‐ 40% interoperability of LARA and the new ATM system. 31/12/2020 The MoD will be using NATS equipment, therefore the MoD Ongoing will fall in line with the NATS timeline. MIL ‐ 40% Future development of functionality is predicated upon the 31/12/2020 interoperability of LARA and the new ATM system.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 78 Released Issue
Full rolling ASM/ATFCM process and ASM information sharing Timescales: AOM19.3 50% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2014 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2021 ASP (By:12/2021) Ongoing NATS NATS uses the LARA system for compliance. ‐ 50% 31/12/2021 The MoD will be using NATS equipment (NATS uses the LARA Ongoing MIL system for compliance), therefore the MoD will fall in line with ‐ 50% 31/12/2021 the NATS timeline.
Direct Routing Timescales: AOM21.1 100% Completed Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2017 ‐ ‐ 31/03/2015 ASP (By:12/2017) NATS introduced Direct Route Airspace (DRA) in the Rathlin & Completed Central sectors of Prestwick Centre airspace in March 2015. This has enabled airspace users to flight plan direct routes NATS across the identified portion of airspace. NATS does not have ‐ 100% 31/03/2015 any current plans to expand upon this implementation of DRA. Instead NATS is concentrating its efforts on implementation of Free Route Airspace (FRA).
Free Route Airspace Timescales: AOM21.2 10% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2021 ASP (By:12/2021) Borealis FRA Ongoing NATS is in the process of developing a new Flight Data Implementati Processing (FDP) system which is essential in order to on (Part 2) / implement FRA. The first implementation of this FDP entered NATS Borealis Free 10% service at Prestwick Centre (PC) in Summer 2016. Further FDP 31/12/2021 Route changes are required to enable FRA capability and are planned Airspace (Part be delivered in 2020. 1) The MoD is working with NATS on a phased approach to the Ongoing implementation of Free Route Airspace. It is vital that tools, procedures and/or agreements are reached in order to ensure MIL ‐ 10% that the military can continue to safely carry out OAT activity 31/12/2021 with certainty and without the need for excessive coordination.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 79 Released Issue
Ground‐based Safety Nets Timescales: ATC02.8 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2009 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2016 ASP (By:12/2016) En‐route (APW): NATS has no business requirement to Completed introduce this capability in a safety net. However, the iTEC FDP system that NATS is rolling out will have the capability of detecting when flight trajectories are planned to penetrate defined restricted areas.
En‐route (MSAW): Due to a lack of operational requirement for this functionality there are no plans to implement MSAW in UK en‐route airspace. NATS ‐ 100% En‐route (APM): There are no NATS business requirements to 31/12/2016 deploy APM Level 2. However, the COTS Safety Net Server that NATS is procuring is capable of hosting such a safety net.
Airports: Ground based safety net functionality has been implemented at a number of airports across the UK whilst others continue to evaluate the benefits this may bring to their operations. The decision to implement any ground based safety net rests with the airport operator as part of their ongoing investment plans. APW: The Military Authority, military processes and Completed procedures facilitate the safe control of aircraft in close proximity to the ground therefore there is no plan to introduce APW.
MSAW: For the Military Authority, there is also no plan to implement; however, they do use radar vector charts, both MIL ‐ 100% hardcopy and displayed on the radar display, showing safe 31/01/2009 minimum altitudes within 40 miles of an aerodrome. Similarly, they have Area Safe Altitude charts for use outside of 40 miles.
APM: For the Military Authority, All IFR approaches are already monitored on the Precision Approach Radar (where installed). No plans to change current procedures.
Automated support for conflict detection, resolution support information and conformance monitoring ATC12.1 Timescales: 67% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2021 ASP (By:12/2021) NATS has already implemented the iFACTS system in the Ongoing Swanwick Area Centre; fully automated conflict detection, NATS Resolution support information and conformance monitoring ‐ 67% 31/12/2021 will be provided across all NERL centres through the iTEC Programme by 2020.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 80 Released Issue Implement, in en‐route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of basic AMAN ATC15.1 Timescales: 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 ‐ ‐‐ 31/07/2013 ASP (By:12/2017) Cross border use of AMAN with neighbouring ANSPs, including Completed our FAB partners the IAA, was introduced in April 2014 as part NATS of our XMAN development. NATS has a detailed Queue ‐ 100% 31/07/2013 Management Programme which will enhance existing AMAN and XMAN throughout RP2.
Arrival Management extended to en‐route Airspace Timescales: ATC15.2 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 ‐ ‐ 30/04/2015 ASP (By:12/2023) Extended AMAN has been implemented in UK airspace Completed NATS ‐ 100% managed by NATS following a 12 month trial period. 30/04/2015
Electronic Dialogue as automated assistance to controller during coordination and transfer ATC17 Timescales: 26% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2021 ASP (By:12/2018) ATC Coordination is currently in place with Prestwick Upper Late ITEC‐ NATS and is planned to be extended across the Lower airspace and 26% FDP/CWP 31/12/2021 our Swanwick Area Control Centre before 2022.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 81 Released Issue
Migrate from AFTN to AMHS Timescales: COM10 77% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/12/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018 ‐ ‐‐ 31/03/2017 ASP (By:12/2018) NATS has deployed an AMHS capability and gateway facilities Ongoing to AFTN. Implementation with some partners is complete; NATS has an active project which is working with AFTN & NATS ‐ 85% CIDIN international partners to transition to AMHS, subject to 31/03/2017 their readiness to implement. Aspects of this objective will be carried out with our FAB Partner. No separate plans for the MoD to have their own systems. Ongoing The MoD will utilise NATS systems. Therefore the timescales and dates will fall in line with NATS timings. MoD Capability in Area Radar is provided through NATS. NATS has deployed an AMHS capability and gateway facilities to AFTN. There are no MoD systems planned which make use of extended AMHS functions. MIL ‐ 68% EUR‐NAM ‐ A Regional boundary gateway with the USA and 31/03/2017 Singapore is operational. NATS has the capability to gateway to other NAM regions, as and when they are in a position to do so. EUR ‐ NATS have implemented an AMHS connection to the NM via PENS and further connections are being planned. Portugal and Austria being the next States to be connected.
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Timescales: COM11 20% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2020) NATS plans to have VoIP in use between our centres for Ongoing ground‐ground voice services. NATS will implement VoIP NATS ‐ 40% between all our centres and their radio stations for air‐ground 31/12/2020 services. For the military, when NATS replaces the AC VCS & upgrades Planned the TC & PC systems with VoIP compatible systems it is MIL ‐ 0% envisaged that these will also provide the Military with VoIP 31/12/2020 capability.
Collaborative flight planning Timescales: FCM03 43% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2000 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2017) Planned as part of the NATS Strategy, implementation Late depends upon the iTEC and DP en‐route programme; the timescales for implementation of FCM03 will align with this NATS project ‐ 43% 31/12/2020 For the Military Authority, IFPLID is utilised in all messages to ETFMS.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 82 Released Issue Short Term ATFCM Measures (STAM) ‐ phase 1 (Outside Applicability Area) FCM04.1 100% Completed Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ ‐ ‐ 31/01/2012 ASP (By:10/2017) NATS has a comprehensive set of short term ATFCM Measures Completed in place which exceed the requirements of this LSSIP objective. NATS They are extensively used in our operations which are strictly ‐ 100% 31/01/2012 monitored and do not exceed 45 minutes duration unless in exceptional circumstances to minimise delay.
Short Term ATFCM Measures (STAM) ‐ phase 2 Timescales: FCM04.2 10% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/11/2017 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2021) UK FMP has been utilising STAM measures for a number of Ongoing years. NATS is currently moving toward the completion of the Programme Definition phase of the project to provide a new NATS Traffic Management Tool (TLPD replacement). The new tool ‐ 10% 31/12/2020 will interface directly with the NM system (B2B connection) and will facilitate the transfer of data to reflect proposals and agreements with regard to STAM implementation.
Interactive rolling NOP Timescales: FCM05 28% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2021 ASP (By:12/2021) Interactive NOP (now Initial Network plan (INP)) and Dynamic No Plan Network Plan (DNP) have not yet been introduced by the NM, NATS ‐ 0% with the latest timescale being Q2 2017 for INP. Until this is in ‐ place DNP cannot be further developed. APO (By:12/2021) Airport Coordination Ltd (ACL) sends slot information for the Ongoing UK Level 3 UKs Level 3 Coordinated Airports to the EUACAs common Coordinated database. This information is then sent daily to DDR. ‐ 55% 31/12/2021 Airports The integration of the AOP with the NOP is in progress and anticipated meeting the target date.
Traffic complexity assessment Timescales: FCM06 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ 30/06/2000 ASP (By:12/2021) NATS utilises its Traffic Load prediction Device (TLPD) tool to Completed monitor sector demand and evaluate traffic complexity. NATS NATS ‐ 100% are upgrading its current tools in order to future proof its 30/06/2000 operation; phased implementation will take place from 2017.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 83 Released Issue Extended Flight Plan Timescales: FCM08 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2016 Full operational capability: 31/12/2021 ‐ ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2021) The introduction and project for this initiative within the No Plan European Region is being managed by EUROCONTROL, the activity is at a very early stage and all aspects of Flight Plan and NATS ‐ 0% Flight Data Evolution is captured ‐ under the recently established NM FPFDE Strategic Project which NATS and UK CAA are fully engaged in.
Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (eTOD) Timescales: INF07 6% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/11/2014 Full operational capability: 31/05/2018 ‐ The UK is working towards meeting the requirements for TOD via an overarching AIM Project Plan. 31/05/2018 REG (By:05/2018) Plans are in place to ensure data is compliant apart from Ongoing specific aerodrome related information, where the completion date is expected to be beyond that indicated above, but is CAA within the timeframe of Aerodromes resurvey required to ‐ 10% 31/05/2018 support Instrument Flight Procedure design review periods, as required by ICAO Doc 8126. A statement of compliance will be provided to the NSA at the appropriate time. Ongoing MIL See CAA's comment. ‐ 13% 31/05/2018 ASP (By:05/2018) NATS is awaiting the development of a National TOD policy Planned NATS and Implementation Programme before creating its related ‐ 0% 31/05/2018 plans and roadmaps. A plan will be developed once the national TOD policy and Planned implementation programme has been initiated. It is not MIL ‐ 0% therefore expected that the compliance against this objective 31/05/2018 will be achieved until 31 May 2018. APO (By:05/2018) Plans are in place to ensure data is compliant apart from Planned specific aerodrome related information, where the completion date is expected to be beyond that indicated above, but is All UK within the timeframe of Aerodromes resurvey required to ‐ 0% Airports 31/05/2018 support Instrument Flight Procedure design review periods, as required by ICAO Doc 8126. A statement of compliance will be provided to the NSA at the appropriate time.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 84 Released Issue
Aircraft identification Timescales: ITY‐ACID 10% Ongoing Entry into force of the Regulation: 13/12/2011 System capability: 02/01/2020 ‐ ‐ 01/12/2019 ASP (By:01/2020) Ongoing MIL See NATS' comments. ‐ 10% 01/12/2019 The NERL Surveillance Data Processing systems are all capable Ongoing of processing downlink aircraft identification but Mode S NATS ‐ 10% correlation capability is not anticipated until the introduction 01/12/2019 of the new iTEC FDP.
Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information Timescales: Entry into force of the regulation: 16/02/2010 Article 5(4)(a), Article 5(4)(b) and Article 6 to 13 to be implemented by: ITY‐ADQ 12% Late 30/06/2013 Article 4, Article5(1) and Article 5(2), Article 5(3) and Article 5(4)(c) to be implemented by: 30/06/2014 All data requirements implemented by: 30/06/2017 ‐ ‐ 01/01/2022 REG (By:06/2017) The CAA published policy and guidance on 8th July 2015 to Late facilitate compliance to the ADQ regulation. CAA has also published CAA Information Notices 052/2015 & 064 which outline expected compliance milestones. These milestones are dependent on the Aeronautical Information Services ADQ IR CAA compliant systems being fully operational by January 2019. UK ‐ 10% 31/01/2019 also intends to respect ICAO requirements for 5 year review of Instrument Flight Procedures (IFP) and has no intention of requiring aerodromes to review their IFP data ahead of the ICAO five year schedule. This could result in IFP data not being ADQ compliant until 2020. The NSA introduced a policy in 2014 that stipulated Late requirements for new data to be ADQ IR compliant 18 months after publication. This policy was introduced and the 18 month period ends Jan 2017. This deadline includes formal MIL arrangements to be established. ‐ 10% 31/01/2019 MoD will be in a position to initiate compliance with ITY‐ADQ‐ REG01/02/03/04 and ITY‐ADQ‐APO01/02/03/04/05 SLoAs. MoD is currently working alongside the State to establish a route to compliance; hence formal arrangements are in place. ASP (By:06/2017) Late MIL See REG‐MIL comment. ‐ 14% 30/06/2019 NATS NATS is making every effort to comply with the legal ‐ 15% Late
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 85 Released Issue requirement as defined in Implementing Rule (EU) No 73/2010 but more specifically the requirements of our National Regulator as specified in their relevant Information Notice (which requires compliance by 1st January 2019).
Note that our implementation has suffered from a number of issues but two are particularly significant: 1) The lack of published Acceptable Means of Compliances (AMCs) which delayed the UK Regulator from issuing Policy on this matter (now resolved through publication of the new UK Civil Aviation Publication CAP 1054). 2) The lack of a mature and complete solution in the marketplace meant that whilst we have worked with our Supply Chain to procure the new system it has subsequently 01/01/2022 involved far more development with the Supplier than was ever envisaged and this has seriously affected our implementation dates. It is anticipated that most other AISPs will be in the same position.
Please note: 1) These compliance dates allow for the NATS implementation to run the old and new AIM systems alongside each other for a number of AIRACs. 2) The NATS AIM system already operates a safe high quality service and the compliance dates listed below are specific to the current legislative requirements of (EC) No 73/2010. APO (By:06/2017) Plans are in place to ensure data is compliant apart from Late specific aerodrome related information, where the completion date is expected to be beyond that indicated above, but is All UK within the timeframe of Aerodromes resurvey required to ‐ 10% Airports 31/01/2019 support Instrument Flight Procedure design review periods, as required by ICAO Doc 8126. A statement of compliance will be provided to the NSA at the appropriate time.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 86 Released Issue
Initial ATC air‐ground data link services Timescales: ITY‐AGDL Entry into force: 06/02/2009 68% Ongoing ATS unit operational capability: 05/02/2018 Aircraft capability: 05/02/2020 ‐ ‐‐ 05/02/2018 REG (By:02/2018) Project has delivered core DL Capability. Further FANS Completed development still ongoing. Whilst the UK AIP section is up to date, a revision may be CAA ‐ 100% required in 2017 to reflect the adjusted deployment plan 31/10/2013 pertaining to any re‐mediation fixes (both ground and avionics) that will affect the availability of the CPDLC service. ASP (By:02/2018) NATS implemented the full data link capability in line with Ongoing Implementing Rule (EC) No 29/2011 in October 2013 and was deemed to be compliant, however it was subsequently found that performance of the overall data link service did not fully meet requirements for all stakeholders. The SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU) initiated a Work Package to investigate this, NATS led the consortium that carried out the investigation and NATS the Final Report together with the Recovery Plan issued by the ‐ 47% 05/02/2018 SESAR Deployment Manager are being used by stakeholders to inform the actions to be taken to resolve the current difficulties and achieve the required performance by the 2018 deadline. From initial analysis it does not appear that any significant change needs to be made to the Data Link systems already implemented in NATS but changes may be required of the Communications Service Providers we use. MIL (By:01/2019) Deliver C17 Completed Training for MIL Military is compliant with data link services IR. 100% RNP and 31/12/2009 CPDLC/VDL2
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 87 Released Issue
8,33 kHz air‐ground voice channel spacing below FL195 Timescales: Entry into force: 07/12/2012 New and upgraded radio equipment: 17/11/2013 New or upgraded radios on State aircraft: 01/01/2014 ITY‐AGVCS2 43% Ongoing Interim target for freq. conversions: 31/12/2014 All radio equipment: 31/12/2017 All frequencies converted: 31/12/2018 State aircraft equipped, except those notified to EC: 31/12/2018 State aircraft equipped, except those exempted [Art 9(11)]: 31/12/2020 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2020 REG (By:12/2018) Ongoing MIL See CAA's comment. ‐ 41% 31/12/2018 Work is progressing with the required phased implementation Ongoing of 8.33kHz‐capable radio equipage and frequency channelisation in accordance with the Regulation requirements. ITY‐AGVCS2 REG02, section 2, the 25% CAA ‐ 57% conversion target was achieved by end of August 2015. 31/12/2018 >95% conversion of the eligible OPC frequency assignments achieved as of Q4 2016. Non cooperating, largely international operators currently being pursued. ASP (By:12/2018) Ongoing NATS NATS have plans in place to achieve this objective. ‐ 63% 31/12/2018 Ongoing MIL See MIL‐MIL comment ‐ 50% 31/12/2018 MIL (By:12/2020) The MoD has plans in place to achieve this objective and will Ongoing MIL advise both the NSA and EC of any instances where it will not ‐ 5% 31/12/2020 be able to comply with the dates laid down within the IR. APO (By:12/2018) Ongoing MIL See MIL‐MIL comment. ‐ 30% 31/12/2018 All APO SLoAs are partly completed but subject to continued Ongoing oversight by CAA personnel. CAA have begun negotiations All UK with operators of major airports in order to determine plans ‐ 23% Airports 31/12/2018 for the conversion of their operational frequencies to 8.33kHz spacing.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 88 Released Issue
Common Flight Message Transfer Protocol (FMTP) Timescales: Entry into force of regulation: 28/06/2007 All EATMN systems put into service after 01/01/09: 01/01/2009 ITY‐FMTP 41% Late All EATMN systems in operation by 20/04/11: 20/04/2011 Transitional arrangements: 31/12/2012 Transitional arrangements when bilaterally agreed between ANSPs: 31/12/2014 ‐ ‐‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2014) NATS had the capability to operate TCP/IP Message Protocols Completed using IPv6 in early 2011 so meeting this requirement. However, introduction to service with our various ANSP partners was largely dependent upon the availability of PENS, NATS and so connectivity/operational service was progressively ‐ 100% 30/04/2011 established from January 2013 onwards with the deadline extension provided for by the Transition Amendment Regulation (EU) No 283/2011 being used by some, each of which were captured in specific bi‐lateral agreements. See MIL‐MIL comment. Late Capability provisions for Military are provided by NATS, but MIL ‐ 10% there are certain elements for the Military that remain either 31/12/2020 as outstanding (Late) or that they currently have No Plan for. MIL (By:12/2014) Whilst the MoD is totally reliant on NATS to provide iTEC to No Plan replace the EDDUS system currently used for FMTP, there is currently No Plan to introduce FMTP exchange between military Units. Also, under the award of the Project MARSHALL MoD contract to Aquila ATM (NATS and Thales), that this will also be the case MIL for all military airfield ATSUs. Whilst there are currently No ‐ 0% ‐ Plans, there remains a possibility that RAF Northolt, embedded within the London Control Zone could be scoped for FMTP provision in the future by NATS as the radar operation is co‐ located in the London Terminal Control Operations room at Swanwick as aircraft there are directly connected to the Network.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 89 Released Issue
Surveillance performance and interoperability Timescales: Entry into force of regulation: 13/12/2011 ATS unit operational capability: 12/12/2013 ITY‐SPI New aircraft capability: 08/06/2016 83% Ongoing ELS in transport‐type State aircraft : 07/12/2017 EHS and ADS‐B Out in transport‐type State aircraft : 07/06/2020 Ensure training of MIL personnel: 07/06/2020 Retrofit aircraft capability: 07/06/2020 ‐ ‐ 31/01/2019 REG (By:02/2015) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an ANSP chooses to implement it.
CAA Note: NATS (NSL/NERL) is currently using some form of ‐ 100% Surveillance data at sixteen airports. 31/03/2014 In addition to the sixteen airports mentioned above, there are another twenty seven UK airports/aerodromes that are using some form of Surveillance data. ASP (By:02/2015) NATS were already using All‐purpose Data stream Replicators Completed NATS (ADR) operationally so many of these aspects had already ‐ 100% 30/04/2014 been catered for. All data supplies are fully compliant. Completed Our Safety Assessment covers the service we utilise and is MIL ‐ 100% covered under our Safety Management System and 30/04/2014 submissions to our Regulator. MIL (By:06/2020) The Military is fully committed to both the UK national and Ongoing European Mode S equipage programmes. The MoD reports 6 MIL ‐ 55% monthly to NATS and annually to the CAA with regards to the 31/01/2019 Mode S upgrade programme that it has implemented.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 90 Released Issue
RNAV 1 Timescales: NAV03 86% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2001 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 ‐ The London airspace change (LAMP Phase 1a) including the UKs first Point Merge structure for London City was introduced in February 2016 and is expected to result in a 14% improvement in Safety and approximately 30kT p.a. fuel savings based against peak UK traffic in 2008. Plans for major London airspace redesign including airport procedures as envisaged in LAMP Phase 2, have been postponed until 2022‐23 with a raised Transition Altitude to 18,000ft now planned for 2021‐22. Plans are in place for a major airspace change affecting the Prestwick Lower Airspace System (PLAS) 31/01/2023 incorporating the major Northern and Scottish airports. This will include the application of RNAV 1 in en‐ route sectors across the Irish Sea, SIDs at Edinburgh, Glasgow and Prestwick and Point Merge at Manchester. Remedial action on existing RNAV 1 SIDs is ongoing at Gatwick, Luton and Birmingham, following unforeseen shortcomings within the designs. ASP (By:12/2023) London Ongoing NATS has active projects that will introduce P‐RNAV Airspace procedures co‐incident with major airspace, or navigation Management infrastructure changes, as permitted by levels of aircraft Programme equipage. NATS (LAMP) 86% Controllers are already familiar with RNAV and will be trained 31/01/2023 (Phase 1a) / at unit level prior to P‐RNAV procedures being introduced. Manchester There are no current plans to implement RNAV at military TMA Re‐ aerodromes. Development
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 91 Released Issue
APV procedures Timescales: NAV10 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/06/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 ‐ The UK continues to move forward with the introduction of APV procedures in accordance with the ICAO Assembly Resolution A37‐11. By the end of 2016 the status of RNAV (GNSS) approach procedures in the UK was as follows: A total of 20 aerodromes now support 59 LNAV; 30 LNAV/VNAV; and 22 LPV instrument approach procedures. The UK MoD have also introduced 2 RNP AR APCH procedures at one of the British Overseas Territories aerodromes.
A significant number of procedures covered by the EC ACCEPTA funding, including those to introduce SBAS at remote Scottish Islands, have been completed and the planned implementation for 2017 is 72 LNAV; 34 LNAV/VNAV; and 89 LPV instrument approach procedures. Please see the EUROCONTROL PBN Approach Map Tool for further details. With continued GSA funding anticipated plus the establishment of a UK Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) Facilitation Fund initiative to support up to 50% of design costs, further implementation is anticipated through 2017.
With the declaration of operational capability of EGNOS to support LPV200 operations, the first application has been submitted with further expected. However, the CAA is not anticipating a move to modify all existing LPV designs and believe that LPV200 will be limited to those airports where CAT I or better infrastructure is already present. 31/12/2016
The first procedures based on CAP 1122, 'Application for Instrument Approach Procedures to Aerodromes without an Instrument Runway and/or Approach Control', have now been implemented, with a number of aerodromes in‐design. There have been some policy lessons learned on both sides (aerodrome and CAA) and an update to the CAP is envisaged.
Challenges still remain in extending APV to all runway ends in the UK. The large percentage of runway ends with ILS procedures already providing stabilised 3D approach guidance makes any new approach type difficult to justify. The learning curve with SBAS procedures has proven more difficult for some Approved Procedure Design organisations and costs of validation data base still proves to be a deterrent. As the UK seeks alternative methods for offsetting costs and brings additional resource to the IFP regulatory role in order to deal with the back‐log, the implementation of APV is expected to gather pace, assisted by funding initiatives from the EC.
Although non‐compliant with the ICAO Resolution, the UK will continue to promote APV approaches as a means of improving safety where no 3D guidance exists or as resilience for existing ILS procedures. REG (By:04/2016) The CAA applies the applicable regulatory instruments Completed CAA provided by EASA for both the airworthiness and operational ‐ 100% 31/12/2010 approval. ASP (By:12/2016) NATS encourages and supports the development and Completed implementation of APV procedures. NATS provides procedure NATS design, safety assurance and Airspace Change Proposal ‐ 100% 31/12/2016 services to several aerodromes and will assist others as and when requested.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 92 Released Issue
Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions Timescales: SAF11 73% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/01/2018 ‐ NATS works pro‐actively with both the airport operators and the airlines at the airports at which it provides the ATC service to ensure that the appropriate parts of the European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Excursions are implemented. Any incidents of runway excursions are analysed and 31/12/2017 any lessons learned are promulgated across the NATS units for consideration at a local level where appropriate, thus this will remain living activity in terms of its development. REG (By:01/2018) Most of the Action plan, Part 3.6 recommendations have been Completed CAA implemented. Further work is required for 3.6.5, 3.6.6, 3.6.7 ‐ 100% 31/12/2016 and 3.6.9 ASP (By:12/2014) MoD are still formulating a plan to be implemented by 31 Dec Late MIL 2017 and will be reported through the appropriate channels ‐ 10% 31/12/2017 when complete. NATS have implemented the applicable measures of the Completed NATS Action Plan (Parts 3.1 to 3.3) and report through the ‐ 100% 30/06/2013 appropriate mechanism. APO (By:12/2014) MoD is still formulating a plan which was due to be Late MIL implemented by 31 Dec 2017 and will be reported through the ‐ 10% 31/12/2017 appropriate channels when complete. Individual organisations have not been assessed for Late implementation of specific recommendations and at the time of publication of this Report were yet to be confirmed. Many All UK recommendations are captured either by routine oversight or ‐ 10% Airports 31/12/2017 by specific work packages. Currently, this Objective only applies to Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Manchester Airports.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 93 Released Issue 6.2.2 Airport-related ESSIP Objectives
Birmingham Airport (EGBB)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 46% Late Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ 31/10/2017 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to CAA implement it. ‐ 100% 31/01/2013 Birmingham Airport is working towards installation of an A‐ SMGCS system in 2017. ASP (By:12/2011) BIRMINGHA Late Birmingham Airport is working towards installation of an A‐ M ANSP ‐ 17% SMGCS system in 2017. System procured from Avibit. 31/10/2017 (BAATL) APO (By:12/2010) BIRMINGHA Birmingham Airport is working towards installation of an A‐ Late ‐ 20% M Airport SMGCS system in 2017. System procured from Avibit. 31/10/2017
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 25% Late Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ 31/10/2017 ASP (By:12/2017) BIRMINGHA Late Birmingham Airport is working towards installation of an A‐ M ANSP ‐ 20% SMGCS system by Q4, 2017. 31/10/2017 (BAATL) APO (By:12/2017) BIRMINGHA Birmingham Airport is working towards installation of an A‐ Late ‐ 40% M Airport SMGCS system by Q4, 2017. 31/10/2017
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 17% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport ‐ 31/10/2018 ASP (By:12/2016) BIRMINGHA The introduction of A‐CDM will follow, the now delayed Late M ANSP implementation of Electronic Flight Progress Strips (EFPS) ‐ 17% 31/10/2018 (BAATL) which is planned for Spring 2017. APO (By:12/2016) The introduction of A‐CDM will follow the now delayed Late BIRMINGHA introduction of Electronic Flight Progress Strips (EFPS) which is ‐ 17% M Airport 31/10/2018 planned for Spring 2017.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 94 Released Issue
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport ‐ 31/12/2011 ASP (By:12/2013) CDA achievement rates at Birmingham have increased Completed BIRMINGHA significantly following an airspace change and the installation M ANSP ‐ 100% of ILS. Communities and other local stakeholders have 31/12/2011 (BAATL) responded positively to the improved CDA performance. APO (By:12/2013) CDA is implemented H24 at Birmingham Airport with the Completed BIRMINGHA exception of military flights and aircraft making use of non‐ ‐ 100% M Airport 31/01/2011 precision approaches.
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGBB ‐ Birmingham Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2013 ASP (By:12/2016) BIRMINGHA Birmingham Airport, airlines and BAATL (formerly NATS) work Completed M ANSP closely sharing data and agreeing targets for performance ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 (BAATL) improvement. APO (By:12/2016) Birmingham Airport has had a strong focus on environmental Completed performance for many years and has mature environmental mitigation measures in place and a high degree of inter agency BIRMINGHA co‐operation to minimise environmental impact both on the ‐ 100% M Airport ground and within Birmingham controlled airspace. The 31/12/2013 airport is always mindful of new environmental initiatives. Its open reporting of environmental impact with both partner and community organisations continues.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 95 Released Issue Manchester Airport (EGCC)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 Timescales: 33% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 31/12/2019 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. Manchester does not presently have A‐SMGCS. They have CAA ‐ 100% SMR (supported by RIMCAS) with primary returns that can be 31/01/2013 labelled but the labelling is not totally reliable. Manchester is aware that they need to have A‐SMGCS fully operational and effective by 2021. ASP (By:12/2011) Manchester currently operates a Surface Movement Radar Late with Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System NATS (RIMCAS) for runway safety protection and guidance in Low ‐ 0% 31/12/2019 Visibility Operations. A project for A‐SMGCS Level 1 will commence in 2017. APO (By:12/2010) Manchester currently operates Surface Movement Radar with Late Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System MANCHESTER (RIMCAS) for runway safety protection and guidance in Low ‐ 0% Airport 31/07/2019 Visibility Operations. A project for A‐SMGCS Level 1 will commencein 2017.
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 Timescales: 0% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 28/02/2020 ASP (By:12/2017) Manchester currently operates a Surface Movement Radar Late with Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System (RIMCAS) for runway safety protection and guidance in Low Visibility Operations. NATS ‐ 0% Development of ASMGCS Level 2 has been identified as a 28/02/2020 separate project from Level 1. Implementation is aimed to commence in February 2019 and deploy by the end of February 2020. APO (By:12/2017) Manchester currently operates a Surface Movement Radar Late with Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System (RIMCAS) for runway safety protection and guidance in Low MANCHESTER Visibility Operations. ‐ 0% Airport 28/02/2020 Development of ASMGCS Level 2 has been identified as a separate project from Level 1. Implementation is aimed to commence in Feb 2019.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 96 Released Issue Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 38% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2018 ASP (By:12/2016) Local implementation of CDM is in project to be delivered by Late March 2017. This will facilitate the use of most CDM milestones with exception of Target Start Approval Time (TSAT). Additional development work with the AODB supplier NATS ‐ 38% and ANSP will commence early 2018 to develop and deploy a 31/12/2018 Pre‐departure Sequencing Tool along with DPI messages, however through the UK 'Advance Tower' project A‐DPI and C‐ DPI messages are already being produced from the EFPS. APO (By:12/2016) Local implementation of CDM is in project to be delivered by Late March 2017. This will facilitate the use of most CDM milestones with exception of TSAT. Additional development MANCHESTER work with the AODB supplier and ANSP will commence in 2018 ‐ 38% Airport to develop and deploy a Pre‐departure Sequencing Tool along 31/12/2018 with DPI messages, however through the UK 'Advance Tower' project A‐DPI and C‐DPI messages are already being produced from the EFPS.
Time Based Separation Timescales: AOP10 0% Planned Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 31/12/2023 REG (By:12/2023) Manchester have not notified commencement of TBS No Plan planning. However, it is known that SESAR TBS is not finalised. CAA ‐ 0% UK airports have until 2023 to implement TBS aligned with the ‐ PCP regulation. ASP (By:12/2023) AMAN system, together with compatibility of Controller Planned Working Position (CWP) for TBS will be developed by April 2019. NATS ‐ 0% All other aspects of TBS including implementation of TBS 31/12/2023 procedures and training will be achieved by the projected implementation date of 31 Dec 2023.
Initial Airport Operations Plan Timescales: AOP11 0% No Plan Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2021 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2021) Awaiting final specification. Deadline will be established in line No Plan with the target date. In the meantime the AOP information NATS ‐ 0% under its responsibility is provided and maintained, ensuring ‐ the appropriate quality. APO (By:12/2021) MANCHESTER Awaiting final specification. Deadline will be established in line No Plan ‐ 0% Airport with the target date. ‐
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 97 Released Issue Improve runway and airfield safety with ATC clearances monitoring Timescales: AOP12 40% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2020) Basic Airport Safety Nets are in place through the use of Ongoing RIMCAS. A further enhancement to the safety nets is being trialled during 2017 whereby breaches of specific illuminated NATS Runway Guard Bars by aircraft or vehicles will be alerted to ‐ 50% 31/12/2020 ATC. Further deployment of Airport Safety Nets will not be possible until after implementation of A‐SGMCS Level 2 by the end of Feb 2020. APO (By:12/2020) MANCHESTER Comprehensive training will be provided for operational staff Ongoing ‐ 10% Airport as the programme develops. 31/12/2020
Automated assistance to Controller for Surface Movement Planning and Routing AOP13 Timescales: 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2016 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2023) No Plan CAA Activity has not started. ‐ 0% ‐ ASP (By:12/2023) Planned NATS Currently planned to be part of the ASMGCS roll‐out. ‐ 0% 31/12/2020
AMAN tools and procedures Timescales: ATC07.1 0% Planned Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2019 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport AMAN tool for London Stansted Airport is planned for implementation by December 2019. Arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme and other airports will be added in line 31/12/2019 with the PCP timetable. ASP (By:12/2019) AMAN tool for London Stansted Airport is planned for Planned NATS implementation by December 2019. Arrival management is ‐ 0% 31/12/2019 part of the NATS Queue Management programme.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 98 Released Issue
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2011 ASP (By:12/2013) CDO is in practice consistently during night operations at Completed NATS Manchester Airport and when feasible during day time ‐ 100% 28/02/2009 operations. APO (By:12/2013) Manchester Airport maximises the use of CDA during night Completed operations. Further study into extending CDA to daytime MANCHESTER operations had indicated that local airspace constraints only ‐ 100% Airport permit CDA during periods of lower traffic density. A major 31/12/2011 redesign of the TMA airspace is required in order to permit greater use of 24hr CDA.
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGCC ‐ Manchester Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2014 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS is committed to reducing ATM environmental impact Completed and has in place a large programme of activity to deliver its ambitious environmental targets. In addition to our internal programme of airspace and operational environmental NATS efficiency, NATS plays an active role in Manchester Airports ‐ 100% 31/01/2008 Collaborative Environmental Management Group. NATS is working collaboratively with the airport to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) Environmental aspects of flight operations have been a focus Completed of existing collaborative forums for several years, largely focussed on noise, track and CDA. This approach was MANCHESTER enhanced with the commencement of formal CEM at the ‐ 100% Airport beginning of 2010. The CEM group continues to provide the 31/12/2014 focus for a variety of environmental and operational initiatives including forthcoming airspace changes and the roll‐out of the Sustainable Aviation Departures code of practice.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 99 Released Issue Bristol Airport (EGGD)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Not Applicable CAA such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to ‐ % ‐ implement it. ASP (By:12/2011) Bristol has no plans to implement A‐SMGCS due to current Not Applicable level of ATM and vehicular movements and satisfactory procedures for managing those movements being in place. NATS ‐ % The UK regulatory system makes provision for the approval of ‐ such equipment and systems as and when an airport operator considers they are required. APO (By:12/2010) Bristol has no plans to implement A‐SMGCS due to current Not Applicable level of ATM and vehicular movements and satisfactory BRISTOL procedures for managing those movements being in place. ‐ % Airport The UK regulatory system makes provision for the approval of ‐ such equipment and systems as and when an airport operator considers they are required.
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2017) Bristol has no immediate plans to implement this system. The Not Applicable UK regulatory system makes provision for the approval of such equipment and systems when an Aerodrome operator NATS ‐ % considers they are required. NATS will make tentative ‐ provision for this within its equipment replacement program in order to be prepared should this situation change. APO (By:12/2017) Although currently planned within the ANSP equipment Not Applicable replacement program, Bristol has no immediate plans to BRISTOL implement this system. The UK regulatory system makes ‐ % Airport ‐ provision for the approval of such equipment and systems when an Aerodrome operator considers they are required.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 100 Released Issue
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) AOP05 Timescales: % Not Applicable ‐ not applicable ‐ EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) Although information gathering and sharing is common Not Applicable practice at Bristol, these are not formally aligned to A‐CDM guidance. No formal agreements are in place to share certain information. NATS reviewed the full requirements of CDM NATS during 2012, in concert with the airport operator who has ‐ % ‐ invited and received CDM presentations from Eurocontrol. It was anticipated that A‐CDM would be implemented early 2013; however, Bristol Airport can see no capacity, performance or cost benefit to fully applying CDM. APO (By:12/2016) Although information gathering and sharing is common Not Applicable practice at Bristol the information gathered and the sharing techniques are not formally aligned to A‐CDM guidance. No formal agreements are in place to share certain information. BRISTOL It was anticipated that A‐CDM would be implemented early ‐ % Airport ‐ 2013. Having reviewed the full requirements of CDM during 2012, with our ANSP and invited and received CDM presentations from Eurocontrol, Bristol Airport can see no capacity, performance or cost benefit to fully applying CDM.
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport ‐ 31/12/2013 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS has previously delivered CDA in a limited way due to Completed airspace constraints but very successfully at some locations NATS particularly in the London TMA. Airspace changes are enabling ‐ 100% 31/12/2012 CDA from higher levels and NATS has led the UK CDO improvement campaign on behalf of Sustainable Aviation. APO (By:12/2013) Bristol ANSP supports the implementation CDA procedures at Completed BRISTOL the aerodrome, and monitors this using Flight Profile Monitor. ‐ 100% Airport Bristol Airport also monitors CDA performance using the noise 31/12/2013 and track keeping system.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 101 Released Issue
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGGD ‐ Bristol Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS works closely with the airport operator and airlines at Completed Bristol to identify and deliver opportunities for CEM. NATS is NATS working collaboratively with the airport to review and improve ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) BRISTOL Bristol Airport has a number of initiatives in place which go Completed ‐ 100% Airport some way to satisfying the requirements of this objective. 31/12/2015
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 102 Released Issue London Luton Airport (EGGW)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Not Applicable CAA such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to ‐ % ‐ implement it. ASP (By:12/2011) No plans to install A‐SMGCS at Luton. The A‐SMGCS will not Not Applicable NATS be implemented due to negative outcome of a cost benefit ‐ % ‐ analysis ratio against the current and recently installed SMR. APO (By:12/2010) There are currently no plans to install A‐SMGCS at Luton. At Not Applicable LONDON‐ this stage A‐SMGCS will not be implemented due to negative LUTON outcome of a cost benefit analysis ratio against the current ‐ % ‐ Airport and recently installed SMR though this situation remains under constant review.
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2017) A‐SMGCS is being reviewed as part of A‐CDM implementation. Not Applicable NATS However, there is an SMR system in place, which includes ‐ % ‐ RIMCAS functionality planned to be deployed during 2016. APO (By:12/2017) LONDON‐ A‐SMGCS is being reviewed as part of A‐CDM implementation. Not Applicable LUTON However, there is a SMR system in place, which includes ‐ % ‐ Airport RIMCAS functionality planned to be deployed during 2016.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 6% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport ‐ 30/11/2019 ASP (By:12/2016) A‐CDM is not currently in place but is planned. London Luton Late NATS Airport is currently sending DPI messages to the Network ‐ 2% 30/11/2019 Manager Operations Centre (NMOC) via our ATM system. APO (By:12/2016) LONDON‐ A‐CDM is not currently in place, but planned. London Luton Late LUTON Airport is currently sending DPI messages to the NMOC via our ‐ 10% 30/11/2019 Airport ATM system. A‐CDM implementation is now planned for 2019.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 103 Released Issue Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport ‐ 31/12/2011 ASP (By:12/2013) CDAs are delivered for the majority of approaches although, Completed NATS depending upon which runway is in use, certain approaches ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 can preclude CDA due to airspace constraints. APO (By:12/2013) LONDON‐ Completed London Luton Airport measures and monitors CDO LUTON ‐ 100% performance and feedback is an ongoing practice. 31/12/2011 Airport
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGGW ‐ London Luton Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS works closely with the airport operator to devise the Completed appropriate plans required to support CEM. NATS is working NATS collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) LONDON‐ Various groups with various stakeholders are used to progress Completed LUTON and mitigate impacts of noise as part of the environmental ‐ 100% 31/12/2015 Airport impact of air traffic procedures.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 104 Released Issue London Gatwick Airport (EGKK)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 Timescales: 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 31/01/2013 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. A‐SMGCS is not mandated by any European Regulation. CAA Community Specifications exist for Levels 1 and 2 but these ‐ 100% 31/01/2013 ETSI standards do not link into any Implementing Rule, they act just as means to demonstrate compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 contains specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. ASP (By:12/2011) NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Gatwick within the Completed NATS ‐ 100% limitations as they currently exist. 31/07/2007 APO (By:12/2010) GATWICK Completed Gatwick Airport has a fully implemented A‐SMGCS. ‐ 100% Airport 31/07/2008
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 Timescales: 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 31/07/2008 ASP (By:12/2017) Completed NATS NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 2 at Gatwick. ‐ 100% 31/07/2007 APO (By:12/2017) GATWICK Completed Installed at Gatwick. ‐ 100% Airport 31/07/2008
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 105 Released Issue
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐‐ 07/11/2014 ASP (By:12/2016) Following a trial of A‐CDM in 2010 a revised programme and Completed NATS roll out has been agreed. Full implementation was delivered ‐ 100% 07/11/2014 on 7th November 2014. APO (By:12/2016) Gatwick had started A‐CDM in 2010, and had originally been Completed due for implementation completion in December 2011. The program has changed for two reasons; Gatwick separation from BAA IT and the introduction of the Airfield Performance Team in January 2011.
The Gatwick A‐CDM 55 programme was completed in November 2014; includes the use of TSAT calculator and DPI data validation.
Since forming the Airfield Performance team Gatwick have decided to broaden their A‐CDM 55 program to meet both the Eurocontrol A‐CDM network requirements but also better GATWICK support the Gatwick Airfield Performance targets. The ‐ 100% Airport program now includes in addition to Eurocontrol requirement 07/11/2014 for certification: a) Integration of arrival, departure TSATs, stand allocation; b) Time based separation management tools; c) Sequencing optimiser for departures; d) Turnround performance monitoring and control tools; e) Replacement AODB and messaging system.
The enhanced A‐CDM 55 project was launched 1st November 2011
A‐CDM network integration and DPI exchanging had been delayed from Q4 2013 to Q1 2014 and was completed 7 November 2014.
Time Based Separation Timescales: AOP10 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2023) Gatwick have not notified commencement of TBS planning. No Plan However, it is known that SESAR TBS is not finalised. UK CAA ‐ 0% airports have until 2023 to implement TBS aligned with the ‐ PCP regulation. ASP (By:12/2023) Work is yet to commence on a TBS support tool appropriate No Plan Gatwick Air for Gatwick. Air Navigation Solutions (ANS) acknowledge the Navigation initiative and it is held within a joint project deck between GAL ‐ 0% Solutions Ltd ‐ and ANS. Work on integration of AMAN and airport CDM ANSP systems has commenced.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 106 Released Issue Initial Airport Operations Plan Timescales: AOP11 100% Completed Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2021 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 31/12/2016 ASP (By:12/2021) Since ANS took over as ANSP, cooperation with GAL has Completed enabled ANS to support the Airports extant plan. As ANS was not provided with any assistance by the outgoing ANSP the Gatwick Air detail of the airport plan has been largely accepted in line with Navigation the agreed business plan and provided the necessary ‐ 100% Solutions Ltd assurance is in place. 31/12/2016 ANSP This process will allow the development of a mature ANSP specific plan in years 1‐3 of the term as ANSP. The contract agreed with GAL requires a defined development path and includes all of the plan elements. APO (By:12/2021) GATWICK Completed An AOP was Completed by Gatwick Airport during 2016. ‐ 100% Airport 31/05/2016
Improve runway and airfield safety with ATC clearances monitoring Timescales: AOP12 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ 31/12/2016 ASP (By:12/2020) Gatwick Air EFPS and A‐SMGCS have been installed and in use at Gatwick Completed Navigation for a number of years. ‐ 100% Solutions Ltd RIMCAS against transponder equipped vehicle with a new 31/12/2016 ANSP Safety Case being completed and with GAL for ongoing review. APO (By:12/2020) A‐SMGCS Completed upgrade to All Airside Operations staff undertake airside operations provide induction training on joining the dept; Includes Module on ATC airport safety and Navigational Systems (A‐SMGCS/RIMCAS) nets and Also, in place is an: routing & (a) airside driving package for training and regular refreshing GATWICK planning of drivers on the manoeuvring area; 100% Airport functions / 31/12/2015 (b) annual training for all staff employed to drive specialist Enhanced snow/ice vehicles on the manoeuvring area; Departure (c) annual competency checks; Management (d) on‐going runway safety awareness training delivered by integrating ANSP to personnel operating on or near the runway. airfield surface assets
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 107 Released Issue
Automated assistance to Controller for Surface Movement Planning and Routing AOP13 Timescales: 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2016 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2023) No Plan CAA Activity has not started. ‐ 0% ‐ ASP (By:12/2023) Gatwick Air No Plan Work has just commenced on the ATS systems upgrade that is Navigation required to support this. ANS acknowledge the initiative and it ‐ 0% Solutions Ltd ‐ is held within a joint project deck between GAL and ANS. ANSP
AMAN tools and procedures Timescales: ATC07.1 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2019 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport AMAN tool implemented in the London TMA providing automated sequence numbering, stack delay and expected approach time information, initially for Heathrow and Gatwick, arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme and other airports will be added in line with the PCP 31/01/2009 timetable. Significant development of AMAN has been undertaken since its introduction in 2009 allowing advanced benefits to be realised. ASP (By:12/2019) AMAN tool implemented in the London TMA providing Completed automated sequence numbering, stack delay and expected NATS approach time information, initially for Heathrow and Gatwick. ‐ 100% 31/01/2009 Arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme.
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2006 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS has implemented CDA at Gatwick, and delivers a module Completed NATS on the techniques associated with its use as part of initial Air ‐ 100% 31/01/2006 Traffic Controller training. APO (By:12/2013) Gatwick Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance Completed and feedback to the ANSP, implemented pre‐2007. Annual Flight Performance Report contains CD0 data and is available to the local community via the London Gatwick GATWICK Airport website. ‐ 100% Airport 31/12/2006 The London Airspace Management Programme which contained proposals to further increase the scope of CDA remains on hold awaiting further guidance and direction from the CAA.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 108 Released Issue
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 92% Late Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGKK ‐ London Gatwick Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2017 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS is committed to reducing ATM environmental impact Completed and has in place a large programme of activity to deliver its ambitious environmental targets. In addition to our internal programme of airspace and operational environmental NATS ‐ 100% efficiency, NATS plays an active role in Gatwick Airports 31/01/2008 adoption of A‐CDM. NATS is working collaboratively with the airport to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) In light of the business focus on the Airports Commission Late GATWICK during 2015, Gatwick Airport Limited (GAL) have been unable ‐ 88% Airport to pursue this matter further; but do however intend to review 31/12/2017 this position in 2017.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 109 Released Issue London City Airport (EGLC)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGLC ‐ London City Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Not Applicable CAA such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to ‐ % ‐ implement it. ASP (By:12/2011) Not currently installed. There are no firm plans, but will be Not Applicable NATS ‐ % considered as part of future airfield development. ‐ APO (By:12/2010) London City does not use Advanced Surface Movement Not Applicable LONDON‐CITY Guidance and Control systems Level 1. This is due to the ‐ % Airport ‐ visibility minima enforced.
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGLC ‐ London City Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2017) Not currently installed. There are no firm plans, but will be Not Applicable NATS ‐ % considered as part of future airfield development. ‐ APO (By:12/2017) London City does not implement an A‐SMGCS Level 2 due to Not Applicable LONDON‐CITY the unusually high operating minima. Visual contact is ‐ % Airport required by ATC for all aircraft and vehicles using the ‐ manoeuvring area at all times.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) AOP05 Timescales: % Not Applicable ‐ not applicable ‐ EGLC ‐ London City Airport (Outside Applicability Area) Until further clarification is provided on the future plans, this objective is consolidated as Not Applicable. ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) London City Airport has formed a Continuous Improvement Not Applicable Committee who have identified areas within the turnaround process where improvements could be made. Information is a NATS key element to this work, NATS continues to discuss airport ‐ % ‐ requirements and understands that the airport operator is considering elements of CDM which are suitable for the airport operation. APO (By:12/2016) As the Airside operation at London City is not complex due to Not Applicable its topographical structure a complex CDM process is not LONDON‐CITY required. A full CDM system will therefore not be ‐ % Airport ‐ implemented, although London City will be introducing elements of CDM to improve operational effectiveness.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 110 Released Issue Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) ENV01 Timescales: % Not Applicable ‐ not applicable ‐ EGLC ‐ London City Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2013) CDA operations at London City are severely limited by airspace Not Applicable NATS constraints and interactions with other airfield and air traffic ‐ % ‐ flows. APO (By:12/2013) London City is unable to operate a continuous descent Not Applicable LONDON‐CITY approach technique due to its interaction with Heathrow ‐ % Airport ‐ traffic.
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGLC ‐ London City Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS plays an active role in promoting environmental best Completed practice across the aviation industry including at London City. NATS NATS is working collaboratively with the airport to review and ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) London City Airports Environmental Management Programme Completed forms part of the Section 106 Planning Agreement with the London Borough of Newham. As part of the Agreement, the systems and processes in place to mitigate environmental impacts are reported back annually to the Local Authority and made available publicly.
As part of the Section106 Agreement, London City is required to implement the following measures: a) Air Quality Strategy; b) Noise & Track Keeping management scheme; LONDON‐CITY c) Airline Penalty and credits system; ‐ 100% Airport d) Wake Turbulence studies and monitoring; 31/12/2015 e) Noise Complaints Scheme; f) APU Control; g) Restricted operating hours (daily closure 2230‐0630 and 24 weekend closure period).
In order to ensure that London City continually progresses its environmental programme, it has committed through an updated (2009) legal planning agreement with Newham Council, to a range of monitoring and mitigation strategies and action plans. These actions are being reviewed and updated in order to be published in 2016.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 111 Released Issue London Heathrow Airport (EGLL)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 Timescales: 79% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2018 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. A‐SMGCS is not mandated by any European Regulation. CAA Community Specifications exist for Levels 1 and 2 but these ‐ 100% 31/01/2013 ETSI standards do not link into any Implementing Rule, they act just as means to demonstrate compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 contains specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. ASP (By:12/2011) NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Heathrow within the Completed NATS ‐ 100% limitations as they currently exist. 31/12/2002 APO (By:12/2010) The intention is to install transponders to all vehicles that have Late HEATHROW ASMGCS a legitimate reason to enter the runway during the current 5 37% Airport Level 1 & 2 31/12/2018 year regulatory period.
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 Timescales: 94% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2018 ASP (By:12/2017) Completed NATS NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 2 at Heathrow. ‐ 100% 31/12/2002 APO (By:12/2017) Implementation of A‐SMGCS Level 2 is complete at Heathrow Late HEATHROW Airport. However as AOP04.1 (the equipment of vehicles) is ASMGCS 75% Airport not fully implemented and this is a pre‐requisite for AOP04.2 Level 1 & 2 31/12/2018 this SLoA is deemed Late.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐‐ 30/11/2015 ASP (By:12/2016) CDM is in place at Heathrow and is fully operational in all Completed NATS weather conditions. NATS is working closely with airport ‐ 100% 30/06/2015 owner and selected airline operators to progress this further. APO (By:12/2016) A‐CDM was implemented at Heathrow during 2012. Local Completed implementation was closely followed by full implementation HEATHROW at the end of May 2012. In July 2012 a full reversion took ‐ 100% Airport 30/11/2015 place and Heathrow remained disconnected from the network until July 2013 when the airport was again fully implemented.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 112 Released Issue
Time Based Separation Timescales: AOP10 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2015 REG (By:12/2023) TBS at Heathrow was implemented in 2015. The Heathrow AIP Completed entry was updated to notify implementation. CAA has oversight of the implementation process i.a.w Regulation 1034/2011. CAA ‐ 100% There will be some enhancements made to the existing TBS 31/12/2015 system at Heathrow and a new project is due to begin in February for their introduction. A similar regulatory process will be followed as was applied for the initial approval and live operation is expected early in 2018. ASP (By:12/2023) TBS procedures are now in operation at London Heathrow Completed Airport. Approach and tower systems have been adapted and NATS integrated with the new TBS tools; these adaptions have ‐ 100% 31/12/2015 successfully completed testing and operational trials and are now in full operation.
Initial Airport Operations Plan Timescales: AOP11 50% Ongoing Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2021 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 30/04/2017 ASP (By:12/2021) Heathrow Airport has worked closely with NATS, the Met Ongoing Office, the airport co‐ordinator (ACL) and airlines to define and develop the information that supports the AOP. This includes AMAN information that will be integrated into the AOP. NATS Heathrow Airport is implementing a project to develop and ‐ 50% 30/04/2017 implement the necessary IT infrastructure, systems, processes and procedures for an initial Airport Operations Plan. Information elements have been specified, sources agreed and the system build is nearing completion. APO (By:12/2021) Heathrow Airport has worked closely with NATS, the Met Ongoing Office, the airport co‐ordinator (ACL) and airlines to define and develop the information that supports the AOP. This includes Airport AMAN information that will be integrated into the AOP. Operating HEATHROW Heathrow Airport is implementing a project to develop and Plan (AOP) / 50% Airport implement the necessary IT infrastructure, systems, processes 30/04/2017 Preparation and procedures for an initial Airport Operations Plan. for AOP Information elements have been specified, sources agreed and the system build is nearing completion. Airport Operating Plan AOP / Preparation for AOP.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 113 Released Issue
Improve runway and airfield safety with ATC clearances monitoring Timescales: AOP12 10% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2020) Heathrow Airport and NATS are partnering to develop an Ongoing advanced surface management solution which will transform the tower operation. It will include the 'Airport Safety Nets' NATS objectives. This solution will be deployed in phases between ‐ 10% 31/12/2020 2017 and 2020 and will include a training programme which will be devised and implemented to train all relevant staff on the necessary functionality. APO (By:12/2020) Airport Safety Ongoing Heathrow Airport and NATS are partnering to develop an Nets advanced surface management solution which will transform associated the tower operation. It will include the 'Airport Safety Nets' HEATHROW with A‐ objectives. This solution will be deployed in phases between 10% Airport SMGCS Level 31/12/2020 2017 and 2020 and will include a training programme which 2 ‐ will be devised and implemented to train all relevant staff on Preparation the necessary functionality. for SMAN
Automated assistance to Controller for Surface Movement Planning and Routing AOP13 Timescales: 8% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2016 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2023 REG (By:12/2023) No Plan CAA Activity has not started. ‐ 0% ‐ ASP (By:12/2023) Heathrow Airport and NATS are partnering to develop an Ongoing NATS advanced surface management solution which will transform ‐ 10% 31/12/2023 the tower operation.
AMAN tools and procedures Timescales: ATC07.1 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2019 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport AMAN tool implemented in the London TMA providing automated sequence numbering, stack delay and expected approach time information, initially for Heathrow and Gatwick, arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme and other airports will be added in line with the PCP 31/01/2009 timetable. Significant development of AMAN has been undertaken since its introduction in 2009 allowing advanced benefits to be realised. ASP (By:12/2019) AMAN tool implemented in the London TMA providing Completed automated sequence numbering, stack delay and expected NATS approach time information, initially for Heathrow and Gatwick. ‐ 100% 31/01/2009 Arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 114 Released Issue Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐ 31/12/2006 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS has implemented CDA at Heathrow, and delivers a Completed NATS module on the techniques associated with its use as part of ‐ 100% 31/01/2006 initial Air Traffic Controller training. APO (By:12/2013) HEATHROW Heathrow Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance Completed ‐ 100% Airport and feedback to the ANSP, implemented pre‐2007. 31/12/2006
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGLL ‐ London Heathrow Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2014 ASP (By:12/2016) Heathrow Airport have installed a formal CEM database and Completed NATS is a principal partner in the successful delivery of this project. NATS is committed to reducing ATM environmental impact and has in place a large programme of activity to deliver its ambitious environmental targets. In addition to our internal programme of airspace and operational NATS ‐ 100% environmental efficiency, NATS plays an active role in 31/01/2008 Heathrow Airport's adoption of A‐CDM and other collaborative groups on operational and environmental efficiency. NATS is working collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) CEM is established at Heathrow. There are a number of Completed HEATHROW initiatives that have been implemented and are now business ‐ 100% Airport as usual as well as developments that are being developed 31/12/2014 over time.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 115 Released Issue Newcastle Airport (EGNT)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Not Applicable CAA such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to ‐ % ‐ implement it. ASP (By:12/2011) NEWCASTLE ATC utilise a non‐cooperative TERMA Scasta SMR system. An Not Applicable ‐ % Airport ERA Multilateration system was installed during 2013. ‐ APO (By:12/2010) NEWCASTLE Current non‐cooperative SMR has been in operational service Not Applicable ‐ % Airport since 2000. ‐
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2017) Multilateration system was installed during 2013. This Not Applicable NEWCASTLE provides active information on all aircraft movements and the ‐ % Airport ‐ identity of vehicles on the manoeuvring area. APO (By:12/2017) Non‐cooperative SMR, including RIMCAS, in service since Not Applicable NEWCASTLE 2000. A multilateration system was installed in 2013, with ‐ % Airport ‐ some vehicles being equipped with Squibs in due course.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) AOP05 Timescales: % Not Applicable ‐ not applicable ‐ EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) NEWCASTLE Not Applicable There are no plans to implement A‐CDM at Newcastle Airport. ‐ % Airport ‐ APO (By:12/2016) NEWCASTLE Some elements are already in place, but not as a result of Not Applicable ‐ % Airport working towards A‐CDM. ‐
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 116 Released Issue
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport ‐ 31/01/2008 ASP (By:12/2013) NEWCASTLE CDAs for both runways are in place and the procedures are Completed ‐ 100% Airport used regularly. 31/01/2008 APO (By:12/2013) NEWCASTLE CDAs for both runways are in place and the procedures are Completed ‐ 100% Airport used regularly. 31/01/2008
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGNT ‐ Newcastle Airport ‐‐ 31/01/2009 ASP (By:12/2016) The Airline Technical Committee ‐ comprising ATC staff and Completed NEWCASTLE Newcastle based airline captains ‐ meets on a quarterly basis ‐ 100% Airport 31/01/2009 with additional meetings as required. APO (By:12/2016) The Airline Technical Committee ‐ comprising ATC staff and Completed NEWCASTLE Newcastle based airline captains ‐ meets on a quarterly basis ‐ 100% Airport 31/01/2009 with additional meetings as required.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 117 Released Issue Nottingham East Midlands Airport (EGNX)
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGNX ‐ Nottingham East Midlands Airport ‐‐ 31/05/2005 ASP (By:12/2013) East Midlands was one of the first ATC units in the country to Completed develop CDAs and have been in operation since May 2005, operating 24/7 and compliance statistics are very high. NATS ‐ 100% 31/05/2005 As this set of SLoAs for East Midlands has been completed for some time an update has not been requested. APO (By:12/2013) East Midlands has a very strong commitment to environmental Completed issues and multilateration track monitoring equipment is used to great effect to establish compliance records for individual operators. Statistics are fed to operators on a monthly basis, EAST and the Airport recognises/awards airlines with the best MIDLANDS ‐ 100% compliance levels, and those achieving airport percentage 31/05/2005 Airport targets.
As this set of SLoAs for East Midlands has been completed for some time an update has not been requested.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 118 Released Issue Glasgow Airport (EGPF)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Not Applicable CAA such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to ‐ % ‐ implement it. ASP (By:12/2011) There are no plans to implement A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Glasgow Not Applicable NATS ‐ % Airport. ‐ APO (By:12/2010) GLASGOW There are no plans to implement A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Glasgow Not Applicable ‐ % Airport Airport. ‐
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 % Not Applicable Timescales: ‐ not applicable ‐ EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport (Outside Applicability Area) ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2017) Further progress is subject to a business case by Glasgow Not Applicable NATS ‐ % Airport Limited (GLA). ‐ APO (By:12/2017) GLASGOW Not Applicable No plans to install A‐SMGCS at Glasgow Airport. ‐ % Airport ‐
Initial Airport Operations Plan Timescales: AOP11 11% Ongoing Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2021 EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2021) Development of an AOP is yet to commence, elements of this Ongoing work are underway but are yet to be brought together in a NATS ‐ 10% single format. Deadline to be established in line with target 31/12/2019 date and operational requirements. APO (By:12/2021) Development of an AOP has commenced, elements of this Ongoing GLASGOW work are underway but are yet to be brought together in a ‐ 12% Airport single format. Deadline established and are in line with target 31/12/2020 date and operational requirements.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 119 Released Issue
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport ‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS currently delivers CDA operations at Glasgow Airport Completed though some limitations exist due to terrain. A programme of airspace and navigation improvements combined with a CDA NATS focus group with airlines has led to considerable success; CDO ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 has increased from 62.3 in 2013 to 68.4 in 2015. Glasgow continues to strive to further improve CDO achievement as part of the UK‐wide Sustainable Aviation CDO campaign. APO (By:12/2013) In 2015 an improvement was noted in particular for CDAs. We Completed work closely with our ANSP NATS to understand how the airport can improve. Glasgow has some unique terrain on the approach to Runway 23 which makes it more difficult for aircraft to complete a CDA therefore NATS work with the GLASGOW airlines to understand the best CDA profile achievable. A ‐ 100% Airport programme of airspace and navigation improvements 31/12/2015 combined with a CDA focus group with airlines has led to considerable success; CDO has increased from 62.3 in 2013 to 68.4 in 2015. Glasgow continues to strive to further improve CDO achievement as part of the UK‐wide Sustainable Aviation CDO campaign.
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGPF ‐ Glasgow Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS, the airport operator and airlines work closely to deliver Completed improvements in operational efficiency. NATS is working NATS collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) Glasgow is committed to reducing environmental impacts Completed through their Airport Sustainability Strategy. NATS, the airport GLASGOW operator and airlines work closely to deliver improvements in ‐ 100% Airport operational efficiency. The Airport is working collaboratively 31/12/2015 with NATS and airlines to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 120 Released Issue Edinburgh Airport (EGPH)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 Timescales: 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐ 31/12/2015 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. A‐SMGCS is not mandated by any European Regulation. CAA Community Specifications exist for Levels 1 and 2 but these ‐ 100% 31/01/2013 ETSI standards do not link into any Implementing Rule, they act just as means to demonstrate compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 contains specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. ASP (By:12/2011) Some aspects of A‐SMGCS have been installed at Edinburgh Completed Airport including a new SMR which was commissioned into operational service at Edinburgh Airport during 2014. The airport operator has examined the business benefit of NATS ‐ 100% investing in other aspects of A‐SMGCS, including vehicle 31/12/2015 transponders but has concluded that the cost/benefit is insufficiently positive; therefore no further aspects of A‐ SMGCS are anticipated to be installed. APO (By:12/2010) A‐SMGCS Installed at Edinburgh Airport. Completed A new SMR was installed and commissioned into operational service at Edinburgh Airport during 2014. EDINBURGH Edinburgh Airport Limited (EAL) evaluated the business ‐ 100% Airport 31/12/2015 benefits of installing vehicle transponders and as an outcome of this evaluation will not be installing transponders on airfield vehicles.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 121 Released Issue
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 Timescales: 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2015 ASP (By:12/2017) Implementation of A‐SMGCS Level 2 is complete at Edinburgh Completed Airport. Edinburgh Airport Limited (EAL) has evaluated the business NATS ‐ 100% benefits of provision of in‐vehicle transponders in relevant 31/12/2011 airside vehicles but has concluded that the cost/benefit of doing so was not strong enough to justify its introduction. APO (By:12/2017) Air Nova 9000 was installed in 2005; augmented by RIMCAS Completed safety alerting system. A project to install a new SMR (to also include the provision of vehicle transponder interrogation facility and updated SMR Displays in the ATC Control Tower) was completed during Q4 EDINBURGH 2014. ‐ 100% Airport 31/12/2015 As part of the new SMR project, there are updated SMR Displays in the ATC Control Tower and provision for vehicle transponder interrogation. Following evaluation EAL have decided not to install vehicle transponders.
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2016) Edinburgh Airport has not yet a defined or approved No Plan implementation plan or budget for implementation of A‐CDM. Edinburgh Airport is supportive of the principles and will be implementing actions were there not a cost barrier to NATS ‐ 0% implementation. ‐ Continuous improvement strategy adopts principals of A‐CDM with some significant progress made during 2016, as described throughout. APO (By:12/2016) Edinburgh Airport has not yet a defined or approved No Plan implementation plan or budget for implementation of A‐CDM. Edinburgh Airport is supportive of the principles and will be implementing actions were there not a cost barrier to implementation. EDINBURGH Continuous improvement strategy adopts principals of A‐CDM ‐ 0% Airport ‐ with some significant progress made during 2016, as described throughout. Introduction of two new roles in airfield team to focus on operational performance improvement; Performance Manager and Quarterback.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 122 Released Issue
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐ 31/12/2013 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS has previously delivered CDA in a limited way due to Completed airspace constraints but very successfully at some locations. Airspace changes are enabling CDA from higher levels. NATS NATS completed a CDO study at Edinburgh and continues to work ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 closely to enable further improvement. NATS has led the UK CDO improvement campaign on behalf of Sustainable Aviation and is monitoring CDO achievement UK wide. APO (By:12/2013) CDA (+CCD) techniques are fully in place. Completed ANSP (NATS) staff are trained in requirements/operation and operating airlines are aware of, and are fully committed to, CDA and CCD measures. EDINBURGH Reports regarding CDA and CCD performance are provided ‐ 100% Airport monthly by NATS and this information is reported to, and 31/12/2013 discussed with operator's at quarterly Flight Operations and Safety Committee meetings. Such information / reports are also shared with local community groups via our regular airport newsletter.
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGPH ‐ Edinburgh Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2016 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS, the airport operator and airlines work closely to deliver Completed improvements in operational efficiency. NATS is working NATS collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and ‐ 100% 31/12/2011 improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) Edinburgh is actively working with the ANSP and airlines to Completed EDINBURGH control environmental impact, although no formal agreements ‐ 100% Airport 31/12/2016 are currently in place.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 123 Released Issue London Stansted Airport (EGSS)
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level1 AOP04.1 Timescales: 80% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 31/12/2017 REG (By:12/2010) The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of Completed such systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. A‐SMGCS is not mandated by any European Regulation. CAA Community Specifications exist for Levels 1 and 2 but these ‐ 100% 31/01/2013 ETSI standards do not link into any Implementing Rule, they act just as means to demonstrate compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 contains specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. ASP (By:12/2011) NATS introduced A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Stansted in December Completed NATS ‐ 100% 2010. 31/12/2010 APO (By:12/2010) STANSTED Stansted are purchasing new transponders during 2017 and Late ‐ 40% Airport expect the project to be complete by the end of 2017. 31/12/2017
Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (A‐ SMGCS) Level 2 AOP04.2 Timescales: 85% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 31/12/2017 ASP (By:12/2017) Completed NATS A‐SMGCS has been installed at Stansted. ‐ 100% 31/12/2010 APO (By:12/2017) A‐SMGCS has been installed at Stansted; however, there has Ongoing STANSTED been some alterations made to the system and testing to the ‐ 40% Airport new vehicle transponders will commence mid 2017, with 31/12/2017 completion anticipated end of 2017.
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 124 Released Issue
Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) Timescales: AOP05 33% Late Initial operational capability: 01/01/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2016) Stansted Airport continues to evaluate A‐CDM and subject to Late cost analysis benefit will implement elements. The plan to deliver local airport procedures was developed NATS and a cost benefit analysis is being undertaken to consider ‐ 55% 31/12/2020 implementation ahead of a 2021 time‐scale [PCP]. NATS and MAG have formed a ten year partnership on these items as part of their on‐going contractual arrangements. APO (By:12/2016) Stansted Airport continues to evaluate A‐CDM and subject to Late cost analysis benefit will implement elements. The plan to deliver local airport procedures was developed and a cost benefit analysis is being developed to consider implementation ahead of a 2021 timescale [PCP]. STANSTED NATS and MAG have formed a ten year partnership on these ‐ 10% Airport 31/12/2020 items as part of their on‐going contractual arrangements. STN have applied for INEA funding, as part of the 2016 call, to progress the installation of A‐CDM at the airport from 2017 onwards. Our aim is for PCP timescale compliance by the end of 2020.
Initial Airport Operations Plan Timescales: AOP11 25% No Plan Initial Operational Capability: 01/01/2015 Full Operational Capability: 31/12/2021 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ ‐ ASP (By:12/2021) The AOP information under the responsibility of Stansted Completed NATS ANSP (NATS) is provided and maintained, ensuring the ‐ 100% 01/01/2015 appropriate quality. APO (By:12/2021) Some elements are currently available through the AIP and the No Plan STANSTED capacity declaration through ACL. Currently exploring ‐ 0% Airport ‐ feasibility of setting up an Airports Operations Centre (APOC).
Improve runway and airfield safety with ATC clearances monitoring Timescales: AOP12 5% Ongoing Initial operational capability: 01/01/2015 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ 31/12/2020 ASP (By:12/2020) Vehicle transponders yet to be deployed and implemented. Ongoing Controller training is awaiting system implementation and procedure development. NATS is currently developing an NATS integrated EFS working position design for consideration at ‐ 7% 31/12/2020 operational units such as Stansted. Manchester Airports Group (MAG) is seeking opportunities for integrated A‐CDM early 2017. APO (By:12/2020) STANSTED Planned To be implemented in accordance with PCP time‐scales. ‐ 0% Airport 31/12/2020
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 125 Released Issue
Automated assistance to Controller for Surface Movement Planning and Routing AOP13 Timescales: 0% No Plan Initial operational capability: 01/01/2016 Full operational capability: 31/12/2023 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐ ‐ REG (By:12/2023) No Plan CAA Activity has not started. ‐ 0% ‐ ASP (By:12/2023) Stansted airport are not progressing with this objective at the No Plan NATS ‐ 0% moment. ‐
AMAN tools and procedures Timescales: ATC07.1 0% Planned Initial operational capability: 01/01/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2019 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport AMAN tool for London Stansted Airport is planned for implementation by December 2019. Arrival management is part of the NATS Queue Management programme and other airports will be added in line 31/12/2019 with the PCP timetable. ASP (By:12/2019) AMAN tool for London Stansted Airport is planned for Planned NATS implementation by December 2019. Arrival management is ‐ 0% 31/12/2019 part of the NATS Queue Management programme.
Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) Timescales: ENV01 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/07/2007 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2006 ASP (By:12/2013) NATS has implemented CDA at a number of UK airports, Completed including Stansted, and delivers a module on the techniques NATS ‐ 100% associated with its use as part of initial Air Traffic Controller 31/01/2006 training. APO (By:12/2013) STANSTED Stansted Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance Completed ‐ 100% Airport and feedback to the ANSP, implemented pre‐2007. 31/12/2006
Airport Collaborative Environmental Management Timescales: ENV02 100% Completed Initial operational capability: 01/09/2004 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 EGSS ‐ London Stansted Airport ‐‐ 31/12/2013 ASP (By:12/2016) NATS, the airport operator and airlines work closely to deliver Completed improvements in operational efficiency. NATS is working NATS collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and ‐ 100% 31/01/2008 improve airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. APO (By:12/2016) STANSTED Completed See level 2 comments. ‐ 100% Airport 31/12/2013
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 126 Released Issue ANNEXES
Annex A - Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process
LSSIP Co-ordination
LSSIP Focal Points Organisation Name
LSSIP Focal Point for United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority Craig JIGGINS
EUROCONTROL LSSIP Support
Function Directorate Name
LSSIP Contact Person for United DPS/PEPR Oscar Alfaro Kingdom
Implementation Objectives
EUROCONTROL Implementation EUROCONTROL National Stakeholder PEPR Objective Objective Objective Owners Specialist Coordinator
AOM13.1 O. MROWICKI A. DYBOWSKA CAA/SARG – NATS - MoD AOM19.1 G. ACAMPORA O. ALFARO NATS - MoD AOM19.2 G. ACAMPORA O. ALFARO NATS - MoD AOM19.3 G. ACAMPORA O. ALFARO NATS - MoD AOM21.1 C. BRAIN A. DYBOWSKA NATS AOM21.2 C. BRAIN A. DYBOWSKA NATS - MoD CAA/SARG – NATS – BAATL/Birmingham – Edinburgh AOP04.1 M. BIRENHEIDE P. VRANJKOVIC – ANS/Gatwick – Heathrow– Manchester – Stansted NATS – BAATL/Birmingham – Edinburgh – ANS/Gatwick – AOP04.2 M. BIRENHEIDE P. VRANJKOVIC Heathrow – Manchester – Stansted NATS – BAATL/Birmingham – Edinburgh – ANS/Gatwick – AOP05 M. BIRENHEIDE F. ROOSELEER Heathrow – Luton – Manchester – Stansted CAA/SARG – NATS - AOP10 M. BIRENHEIDE F. ROOSELEER ANS/Gatwick –Heathrow – Manchester
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 127 Released Issue NATS – ANS/Gatwick – AOP11 M. BIRENHEIDE L. DELL’ORTO Glasgow – Heathrow – Manchester – Stansted NATS – ANS/Gatwick – AOP12 M. BIRENHEIDE P. VRANJKOVIC Heathrow – Manchester – Stansted CAA/SARG – NATS – AOP13 M. BIRENHEIDE P. VRANJKOVIC ANS/Gatwick – Heathrow – Manchester – Stansted ATC02.8 B. BAKKER F. ROOSELEER NATS - MoD NATS – ANS/Gatwick – ATC07.1 P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO Heathrow –Manchester – Stansted ATC12.1 P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO NATS ATC15.1 P. CONROY L. DELL’ORTO NATS ATC15.2 P. HOP L. DELL’ORTO NATS ATC17 S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO NATS COM10 Y. EYUBOGLU J. PINTO NATS - MoD COM11 L. POPESCU J. PINTO NATS - MoD NATS – BAATL/Birmingham Birmingham – Bristol - East Midlands – Edinburgh – ENV01 M. BIRENHEIDE B. HILL ANS/Gatwick – Glasgow – Heathrow – Luton – Manchester - Newcastle – Stansted NATS - BAATL/Birmingham Bristol - Edinburgh – ANS/Gatwick – Glasgow – ENV02 S. MAHONY B. HILL Heathrow – London City – Luton – Manchester - Newcastle – Stansted FCM03 C. BOUMAN O. CIOARA NATS - MoD FCM04.1 P. HOP O. CIOARA NATS FCM04.2 P. HOP O. CIOARA NATS CAA/SARG (APO) – NATS – FCM05 I. MENDES VIDEIRA O. CIOARA MoD FCM06 P. HOP F. ROOSELEER NATS FCM08 K. BREIVIK O. CIOARA NATS CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – INF07 A. PETROVSKY A-P. FRANGOLHO NATS – MoD ITY-ACID A. DESMOND-KENNEDY O. CIOARA NATS - MoD CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – ITY-ADQ M. UNTERREINER A-P. FRANGOLHO NATS - MoD ITY-AGDL S. DISSING B. HILL CAA/SARG – NATS – MoD CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – ITY-AGVCS2 J. POUZET O. ALFARO NATS – MoD ITY-FMTP L. POPESCU B. HILL NATS – MoD ITY-SPI M. BORELY O. CIOARA CAA/SARG – NATS – MoD NAV03 F. PAVLICEVIC P. VRANJKOVIC NATS NAV10 R. FARNWORTH P. VRANJKOVIC CAA/SARG – NATS CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – SAF11 S. LAWRENCE F. ROOSELEER NATS – MoD
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 128 Released Issue
Annex B - National Stakeholders Organisation charts
An overview of the UK Organisation to Manage Related EATM Matters is shown below.
Civil Aviation Authority/ Provider of Civil Air Responsible Ministry Military Authority Administration Traffic Services Department for Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) NATS Defence Airspace and Air Transport (DfT) Traffic Management (DAATM)
Great Minster House K6 CAA House 4000 Parkway K6 CAA House 76, Marsham Street 45-59 Kingsway Whiteley, Fareham 45-59 Kingsway London London Hampshire London SW1P 4DR WC2B 6TE PO15 7FL WC2B 6TE
Provisional Council: Provisional Council: Dan Micklethwaite Mark Swan Director General Civil Group Director Safety and Aviation Airspace Regulation (SARG)
Agency Advisory Body Agency Advisory Body (AAB): (AAB): Harry Daly Alison MacMaster International CNS/ATM Head of International Implementation Lead Affairs (Airspace, ATM and Aerodromes) (SARG)
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 129 Released Issue Annex C - Glossary of Abbreviations
This Annex mostly shows only the Abbreviations that are specific to the LSSIP United Kingdom. Other general abbreviations are in the Acronyms and Abbreviations document in http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/glossaries
Term Description AAA Airspace, ATM and Aerodromes (Level One only) AAIB Air Accident Investigation Branch (Level One only) ACL Airport Co-ordination Limited (AOP11-EGLL/EGSS/FCM05) ACP Airspace Change Proposal (ENV01-EGGD/ENV02-EGSS) ADR All-purpose Data-stream Replicators (ITY-SPI) AFDAS Approach Funnel Deviation Alert System (AOP04.2- EGSS/ATC02.8) AIM Aeronautical Information Management (ITY-ADQ) AMR Annual Monitoring Report (ENV02-EGGW) ANO Air Navigation Order (ATC16) ANS Air Navigation Services (Various-EGKK) AOC Airline Operators Committee (AOP05-EGCCEGKK/EGLL) AODB Airport Operational Database (AOP05-EGCC/EGKK/EGSS) APOC Airports Operations Centre (AOP11-EGSS) ASBU Aviation System Block Upgrade (Level One only) ATC Airline Technical Committee (ENV02-EGNT) ATSD Air Traffic Standards Department (ITY-AGVCS2) AUC Airport Users Committee (AOP05-EGLL) BAATL Birmingham Airport Air Traffic Ltd (Various-EGBB) CACD Central Airspace and Capacity Data (AOM19.1) CCC Cooperating COM Centres (COM10) CCD Continuous Climb Departures (ENV01-EGPH/ENV02-EGPH) CMG Consumer and Markets Group (Level One only) DAATM Defence Airspace and Air Traffic Management (AOM19.1) DfT Department for Transport (ENV02-EGLL & Level One) DGCA Director General, Civil Aviation (Level One only) EAL Edinburgh Airport Limited (Various-EGPH) EAMS Extended Air Messaging System (Mil-EAMS) (COM10/INF04) EDDUS Electronic Data Display Update Systems (ITY-COTR/ITY- FMTP) FAS Future Airspace Strategy (ENV01-EGGW/FCM01/NAV10) FASIIG FAS Industry Implementation Group (AOP05-EGSS, ENV01- EGPF and Level One) FASDSG FAS Deployment Facilitation Fund (ENV01-EGPF) FLOPC Flight Operations Committee (Various)
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 130 Released Issue FLOPSC Flight Operations Performance and Safety Committee (Various) FMARS Future Military Area Radar Services (COM11) FOST Flag Office Sea Training (AOM19.1) FSTA Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft (ITY-AGDL) GAL Gatwick Airport Limited (Various-EGKK) GiP Global Infrastructure Partners (Level One Only) GLA Glasgow Airport Limited (Various-EGPF) Ifacts interim Future Area Control Tools Support (ATC12.1) iTEC interoperability Through European Collaboration (Various) JANSC Joint Air Navigation Services Council (Level One only) LAMP London Airspace Management Programme (ENV01- EGGW/ENV0-EGSS/NAV03) LARA Local and Regional Airspace (AOM19.1/AOM19.2/AOM19.3) LLACC London Luton Airport Consultative Committee (ENV01/ENV02- EGGW) LTIP Long Term Investment Plan (Level One only) MAG Manchester Airports Group (AOP05/AOP11-EGSS) MDS Multistatic Dependency Surveillance (AOP04.1- EGKK/EGLL/EGSS) MOCOR Maturity of Cross Organisational Relationship (ENV02-EGLL) MoD Ministry of Defence (Various) NATMAC National Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee (Level One only) NATS National Air Traffic Services (various) NERL NATS En-Route Limited (various) NIAL Newcastle International Airport Limited (Various-EGNT) NPR Noise Preferential Routes (ENV02-EGPH) NSL NATS Services Limited (ITY-SPI/NAV03) NTKWG Noise Track Keeping working Group (ENV02-EGSS) OCA Oceanic Control Area (Level One only) OTP On Time Performance (AOP05-EGKK) PC Prestwick Centre (AOM21.2) PDG Procedure Design Group (NAV10) PLAS Prestwick Lower Airspace Systemisation (Level 1 Projects) RIMCAS Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System (Various Airports) RPAS Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (Level One only) RPG Regulatory Policy Group (Level One only) SARG Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (ATC15) SDDG Scottish Development and Delivery Group (AOP05-EGPH) SRG Safety Regulation Group (ATC15) TLPD Traffic Load Prediction Device (FCM04.1/FCM04.2/FCM06) TOBT Target Off Block Time (AOP05-EGKK/EGLL) TOC Total Organic Carbon (ENV02-EGNT)
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 131 Released Issue TOMS Tactical Operational Management Systems (FCM01/FCM03) TOPG Terminal Operations Performance Group (AOP05-EGGD) TSAT Target Start Approval Time (AOP05-EGCC/EGKK/EGLL) VTT Variable Taxi Time (AOP05-EGLL)
LSSIP Year 2016 United Kingdom 132 Released Issue