1 FAB CE Feasibility Study Operations FAB CE Stakeholders Workshop March 5 th 2008, Prague.

1

FAB CE Feasibility Study

Operations

FAB CE Stakeholders Workshop

March 5th 2008, Prague

Click to edit Master title style

• Click to edit Master text styles

• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 2

2

FAB CE

Introduction Key results

Airspace Concept Civil/Military Contingency

Content

Conclusions



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 3

3

FAB CE FAB Development Process

Assumptions:

1. Airspace (7States)

2. Route Network (RNDSG 2010+)

3. Common understanding

OPERATIONAL CONCEPT

DOCUMENTVolume I

Initial Airspace Design

WG2

OPS WG AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY

WG3

WG4

WG5

WG6

OPERATIONAL CONCEPT

DOCUMENTVolume II

Sector Families

SectorGroups

TIME

FIN WG

Master Plan

TEC WG

HR WG

ILR WG

SAF WG

FAB Scenarios

CBA

SAF CASE

constraints

Master Plan

OPSScenarios



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 4

4

FAB CE OPS Concept evolution

CONCEPT ALIGNMENT

2009 2015 2020+

Based on•FAB Static and Dynamic ScenariosMain driver:

•Business and TechnologyAlignment with:

•SESAR LT Concept•Expectations FABCE partners•Industry standards

Based on•FAB Static and Dynamic ScenariosMain driver:•Strategic ATM business objectives •Operational performance included SAFETYAlignment with:•ECIP/LCIP•DMEAN•SESAR MT Concept•Expectations of the FAB partners

Based on• FAB scenario for initial operationsMain driver:• Satisfy SES Req.Alignment with:

• ECIP/LCIP• DMEAN. •Legal [e.g SES]• Expectations of the FAB partners

FAB CE 2015 Concept

Concept for the future [2020+]

Concept for 2009 -> Evolution from

current situation



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 5

5

FAB CE

Proposal 2Load – 01/09/2006, Critical Areas

Current AoRs

Initial Operations

• Small scale cross border operations solving 25 critical areas in upper and lower airspace

• Joint Civil-Military Airspace Co-ordination Body [JCMACB] coordinating airspace use and route network and enabling functional integration of ASM & ATFCM

• Systematic Application of Direct Routes

• Contingency Plan for safety critical situations



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 6

6

FAB CEAirspace

SECTOR Configuration

(SC) EST

SECTOR GROUP (SG)

FAB CE OPS Concept Elements

2015

Elementary SECTOR

(ES) EST

Traffic 2012

Optimized AAS 07

SECTOR FAMILY (SF)

FAMILY GROUP (FG)

Airspace design OPS Scenarios OPS Concept

Sector Family (SF) - areas containing specific air traffic flows and conflict areas which will consist of strongly interdependent elementary sectors.Family Group (FG) - group of Sector Families made along the major traffic flows (minimum FAB)Sector Configuration (SC) – combination of elementary sectors to satisfy operational requirementsSector Group (SG) – includes one Sector Family or more Sector Families to satisfy single sector configuration management (minimum AoR)



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 7

7

FAB CE

Sector Groups (FL285 – FL660)

and Family Groups

Note: FGs borders simplified for purpose of presentations



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 8

8

FAB CESector Groups (GND – FL285)



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 9

9

FAB CEConcept Planning Cycle

State/ANSP/MIL

State/ANSP/MIL

FAB CE

Other Network Stakeholders

State/ANSP/MIL

NO

P

SGs/AoR

sectors

SCP

STATIC AoR:

1 ATSU in 1 SG

Dynamic AoR:

1+n ATSU in 1 SG

Network

FAB CE coordinated

implementation, training,

validation



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 10

10

FAB CEStatic AoR Operations

• Extensive cross border sectorisation with ATM provision for GAT (possibly OAT)

• Sector Configuration Plan (SCP) relating to Sectors Groups which are under the exclusive control of single ATSU

• SCP part of FAB/European NOP valid/updated minimum for a season

• ASM/ATFCM integrated processes involve the different actors (ANSPs, CFMU, Airlines, Authorised Agency and civil/military coordinating bodies)

• FAB AMC(s) (in each FG), ideally combined with FMPs, play a key role in collaborative decision making and in review of the NOP

• Collaborative decision making process from the strategic phase to the executing phase



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 11

11

FAB CEDynamic AoR Operations

• Sector Group involves several ATSUs

• Sector Configuration Plan for several ATSUs relating to Sectors Group as part of FAB/European NOP, valid/updated minimum for a season

• Sector Configuration Management done within a Sector Group



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 12

12

FAB CEDynamic Area of Responsibility Operations

sector 2

ATSUA

ATSUB

ATSUB provides ATS in Sector 3 and 4 as part of SG B (sec 2 + sec 3 + sec 4)

sector 3

ATSUA and ATSUB provide ATS in sector 2 in periods defined by Sector Configuration Plan ATSUB is responsible for Sector Configuration Management in whole SG B including the sec 2

sector 1ATSUA provides ATS in sector 1 as part of the SG A (sec 1)

sector 4



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 13

13

FAB CECivil/Military

Strategic ASM/ATFCM Process

FAB CE Airspace Plan

EUROPEANNATIONAL REGIONAL

Military Airspace

RequirementsFAB CE Member States

Civil Airspace Requirements

FAB CE ANSPs

EUROPEAN BODIES

JCMACBNATIONAL BODIES

Supporting Bureau



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 14

14

FAB CE

FABAMC

Traffic Demand

TRAFFIC DATA

Civil/Military Pre-tactical ASM/ATFCM Process

AUP UUP

ACCs

Sectors capacities/conf.

CFMU

Coordination major traffic flows

•Establish pre-defined modus operandi•Establish process and procedures to apply•Establish defined priority criteria to use for decision

Strategic level

decisionsAirspace allocation

requests *

On line definition of airspace requests based on:•Fixed areas•Predefined areas•Requested shapes

* National decision to identify the

Approved Agencies

CRAM UCRAM

ADR

CFMU

IFPS

AOs:•Shortest routes•Cheapest routes•No-delay routes



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 15

15

FAB CEContingency Concept

COST EFFECTIVENESS: Targeted in Dynamic AoR for the whole Contingency cycle

SAFETY: FAB mutual assistance achieved in Initial Operations

BUSINESS: FAB – ATS delegation achieved in Static AoR Operations



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 16

16

FAB CEConclusions

• Concept of FAB driven by OPS needs, using existing and planned ATS facilities

• Incremental, performance driven development and implementation

• Alignment with SES and European Network

• Adaptation responding to the evolution of traffic



• Second level

• Third level

• Fourth level

• Fifth level

04/11/23 17

17

FAB CEFAB CE Feasibility StudyOPS WG

THANK YOU !

1 FAB CE Feasibility Study Operations FAB CE Stakeholders Workshop March 5 th 2008, Prague.

Documents

fab partners fab ce

master text styles

master title style

fab static

sector group slide

concept concept

bodies fab amcs

validation slide