SES ll and SESAR -Presentation to BBGA Annual Conference

SES ll and SESAR -Presentation to BBGA Annual Conference

Brian Humphries CBEPresident EBAA

12 Mar 2013

SINGLE EUROPEAN SKY SES II

An SES Mess• SES is a pan-European project to achieve a harmonised and efficient European airspace, benefitting

European mobility, competitiveness and the environment. • Initiative includes organising airspace into functional blocks, according to traffic flows rather than to national

borders.• It has been +10 years since the Commission first adopted proposals for SES• All initiatives have, so far, failed to deliver

November 2000 Establishment of SES regulation

June 2008 SES-II regulation adopted. It is more performance-oriented:• Performance Scheme • Functional Airspace Blocks • The Network Manager • The Charging Regulation

February 2013 SES II+European Commission developing a new legal framework concerning the performance and charging scheme for air navigation services for 2015-2019.

“SES is too important to be allowed to fail. We have fallen seriously behind in our original ambitions. After more than 10 years, the core problems remain the same: too little capacity generating the potential for a negative impact on safety at too high a price. There are some signs of change, but overall progress is too slow and too limited. We need to think of other solutions and apply them quickly. There is too much national fragmentation. Promised improvements have not materialized.” – Vice-President Siim Kallas, European Commissioner for transport, 11 October 2012

Where We Stand Today

• EU is taking a majority of states to EU court for failing to deliver on FABs• Airspace users have filed lawsuit against Eurocontrol Member States for excessive route

charge payments• EU Commission to have final vote on 2nd draft Regulations on performance scheme and

charging…and it’s not looking good

SESAR GOALS & OBJECTIVES

SESAR Objectives & SchedulesOBJECTIVES To triple the traffic To reduce route charges by 50% To improve safety by a factor 10 To reduce emissions by 10%

SCHEDULE

Deployment in three steps

IP1 2010 NowGen (2010)

IP2 2018 Mid-term in NextGen (2012-2018)

IP3 2020 Far-term in NextGen (2019-2025)

THE BEST WAY TO PREDICT THE FUTURE IS TO CREATE IT (Peter Drucker)

Business Aviation Vision

SAFETY FIRST Elimination of non-precision approaches Non-controlled airspace to become controllable

MINIMISE IMPACT ON AIRLINE TRAFFIC Operate above airliners (above 41000 ft) Develop “wake vortex free“ approaches to increase runway throughput

OPERATE IN HARMONY WITH LIGHT AVIATION By promoting an ADS-B adapted to GA (UAT)

MITIGATE NOISE NUISANCE TO AIRPORT RESIDENTS Special procedures (steep & curved approaches)

Benefits for Business AviationSAFETY With ADS-B TMA of local airports are becoming "controllable" ASAS self separation, virtual tower, dynamic airspace allocation In low density airspace (above FL410, desert areas) Developments of "cooperative self separation" Elimination of non-precision approaches (LPV SBAS on any runway)

ENVIRONMENT Cruise climb and Continuous Descent Approach “CDA" (in SBAS mode) Development of special procedures to mitigate noise nuisance

OPERATIONS Complete flight plan optimisation (business trajectory) "Free flight" in "cruise climb" all over Europe "3D pseudo ILS" down to 200 ft on any runway Possibility to operate to CAT2/3 for EVS aircraft equipped

4D BUSINESS TRAJECTORY VERSUS INITIAL 4D

4D Business Trajectory – BusAv VisionPURPOSE & OBJECTIVE User selects and negotiates flight profile (trajectory, flight levels, speed) ATC facilitates Reference Business Trajectory (RBT) User owns Reference Business Trajectory 4D RBT allows user to follow flight profile

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT ATC based on “A/C real time positions” “4D RBT” & “last Wind/Temp forecast” predicts potential “conflicts” up to one hour in advance ATC offers “strategic separation” by flight level or trajectory changes ATC offers “tactical separation” by lateral deviations Today under ATC control (minimum separation 5 nm) Tomorrow by delegation of the separation to the pilot (ADS-B & ASAS) down to 3 nm (*)

* a 3nm lateral deviation, initiated 5 minutes before the conflict, induces a delay of only 2 seconds

Initial 4D & Required Time of Arrival (RTA) Likely Impact

RTA FUNCTIONALITY Need to transmit aircraft trajectory data to all enroute ANSPs – CPDLC and ADS-C? Prediction based on aircraft speed, flight plan, and predicted wind/temperature conditions RTA accuracies will depend on accuracy of wind data Certification conditions not yet defined (no AMC currently available) RTA will probably be only certified as “advisory”

BENEFITS & DRAWBACKS Should improve prediction of arrivals and aircraft sequencing Has to be provided only to aircraft which are on dedicated track (not affecting the others) Will not be certified as “primary means of separation” Will require specific pilot training Expensive (especially if we have to change the FMS) A prerequisite to RTA is to put in place a weather data broadcast facility (wind/temp) Weather data used by aircraft and ATC must be accurate and the same

4D RBT vs Initial 4D

WHAT USERS NEED FOR 4D RBT Tools to use 4D RBT (network, sectors) Tools to predict aircraft conflicts and arrivals Aircraft position (ADS-B), flight plan based on RBTs, unique real-time wind/temp model

To keep ATC stability, aircraft will have to follow RBTs

RISKS FOR USERS OF i4D i4D used in cruise conditions likely to generate instability in conflict management i4D will require additional pilot / ATC dialogue, Increasing rather than reducing ATC workload i4D will not permit redefinition of ATC sectors around the traffic axes i4D likely to prevent operators flying their requested 4D RBT i4D will have a real cost impact on users (avionics and services e.g. need for VERY accurate weather data) i4D onboard navigation needs three prerequisites : PBN, ADS-B, weather broadcast

COST?

Risks of the proposed solution

Too much focus on time constraints which could destabilise the network & ATM predictions EBAA seeking single constraint ONLY for

arrival sequencing - NOT for separation I4D would be linked with extended arrival

managers at major hubs potentially affecting all aircraft in the airspace even those not flying to hubs EBAA opposing the prioritisation of

‘regulated’ flights over aircraft not flying to hubs

Technologies needed are expensive

OUTLOOK – DISAPPOINTING!!THANK YOU