Episode 3 EX-COM D2.5-01 Final Report and Recommendations Operational and Processes Feasibility

1. Episode 3 EX-COM D2.5-01 Final Report and RecommendationsOperational and Processes Feasibility Pablo Sánchez-Escalonilla CNS/ATM Simulation Division.- AENA 15th December 2009

2. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityApproach • Collaborative Planning Phase • Roles & Responsibilities • Key findings on the CDM Planning Processes • Supporting Tools Small-scale prototyping and gaming exercises supported by Expert Group-Based techniques have allowed operational experts to participate in the assessment of the SESAR CONOPS • Execution Phase • Roles & Responsibilities • Key findings on Processes and Operational Feasibility • Supporting Tools

3. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityPlanning Phase.- Exercises & Concepts Collaborative Planning Phases Dynamic DCB when arrival congested situations AMAN DCB when military changes its airspace reservation at short notice Total Airport Management Processes and the definition of the high-level AOP content

4. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityPlanning Phase (1/3) • The principle of the business management ownership and its interpretation in the context of DCB processes remains an open issue • Airspace Users claimed for trajectories changes decisions from the beginning of the DCB processes • Network managers expose considered that business trajectories should first be determined by ATM taking into account network constraints • A New function/role could convey the civil users interests integrated within the decision-making entities: The airline Coordinator • He should always be aware of this negotiation process, but only intervenes if the problem cannot be solved through direct negotiation • This function will ensure the equity of the prioritised users

5. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityPlanning Phase (2/3) • A clear breakdown of the ATM planning processes according to the temporal scope, look-ahead time horizon and actors involved is essential • The extension of geographical ranges and temporal scopes will fundamentally shift the nature of the planning processes, and it raises many issues related to the share of responsibilities between regional, sub-regional and local actors • E.g. two ATM processes with different look-ahead time were viewed by the experts as constituent elements of the queue management concept mentioned in the CONOPS • A continuous AMAN process works mainly on airborne flights by managing accurate arrival sequences. This process is under the responsibility of the APOC/TMA manager • An upstream dynamic DCB process pre-sequences flights when a significant imbalance is detected. This process is under the responsibility of the sub-region that has the congested airport

6. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityPlanning Phase (3/3) • Automation is the answer to guarantee the equitable treatment of airspace users, and the consideration of their interests whilst maintaining the performance levels targets • The Civil Users should invest in tools to manage their business trajectory planning in reaction to ATM constraints (time and space constraints) • The Sub-Regional Manager, as the final responsible to get a DCB Solution at the FAB Level, will need what-if tools to support the processes • The APOC, considered as an “agent-based” environment should provide different services such as Performance Planning Service, Monitoring and alerting Service, Decision Support Service and Analysis Service

7. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes Feasibility Execution Phase.- Exercises & Concepts En-Route Environment TMA Environment Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) and the Controlled Time of Arrival (CTA) 4D/time constraints (CTA) and ASAS sequencing and merging with a P-RNAV route structure and Continuous Descent Arrival procedures New separation modes and complexity management in the en-route phase.

8. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityExecution Phase (1/3) • While pilots are responsible for the 4D trajectory achievement, ATCos are tasked to facilitate the aircraft 4D trajectory (RBT and CTA when applied) • The management and adherence to an agreed trajectory is a change for today’s practices

9. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityExecution Phase (2/3) • In the En-route Phase, ATCos raised the issue of lack of predictability which caused high workload. This is due to: • The agreed trajectories can change from day to day • The unknown and changing conflict points • The difficulty to manage aircraft behavior • On the other side, ATCos efficiently facilitated the aircraft 4D trajectory • Most of the aircraft followed their 2D planned trajectory and controllers’ intervention had a very limited impact of the time achievement. • On the contrary, the efficient management of the lateral and time dimensions was sometimes detrimental to the vertical dimension

10. D2.5-01.- Operational & Processes FeasibilityExecution Phase (3/3) • In the TMA environment, ATCos raised that the CTAs will allow the optimal delivery at the metering point. This will improve punctuality, predictability and stack usage • On the contrary, the concept might reduce flexibility and ATCos’ situation awareness • ATCos, having delegated spacing tasks to the cockpit, are able to better monitor the traffic evolution on the arrival streams • The ASPA S&M infringement tool enables to have a timely warning in case of infringement