WHY THE JSPA AS AN ANSWER?
SARAJEVO APRIL 2013
WHY JSPA?
CHANGES in
PROGRESS
Transport policy objectives
 Transport policy objectives are set out in the White
Paper on Transport «European Transport Policy for
2010: Time to decide»
 The 2006 mid-term review brought new objectives:
• disconnecting mobility from its adverse effects, which means
promoting technical
innovation
• a shift towards the least polluting and most energy efficient
modes of transport
• above all, co-modality, i.e., optimally combining various modes of
transport within the same transport chain
Challenges – Main, global
Challenges
 More than ever costs and new techologies will dictate
civil aviation environment




Satelites will influence every activity in civil aviation
Galileo is in the heart of SES concept
-----------------------------------------------------Augmentation Systems
 Aircraft-Based Augmentation System (ABAS)
 Space-Based Augmentation System (SBAS)


Uses geostationary satellites
India, Japan, Europe, US
 Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS)
 Ground-Based Regional System (GRAS)
Challenges
 Our main companions in comming years
- Future Air Navigation System(FANS)
 CPDLC (Controller Pilot Data Link Communication)
 ADS – C (Automatic Dependent Surveillance Contract)
- PM-CPDLC (Protected Mode CPDLC) – Link 2000+
- 4D Trajectories of flights
- ADS-B(USA/Australia/Canada/China/Sweden/UAE)
Challenges
The European Geostationary Navigation
Overlay Service (EGNOS)
 Europe’s Satellite based Augmentation System
(SBAS)
 EGNOS can be used for precision approaches to
airports by enabling
APV procedures
PINS procedures
 These procedures do not require any conventional
ground-based navigation aids, such as VOR, DME
or NDB
NO COST
Performance Based Navigation
(PBN)
 Historically, aircraft navigation
specifications have been specified
directly in terms of sensors
(navigation beacons and/or
waypoints).
 PBN = Navigation technique which
allows an aircraft to fly precisely
along a predefined route using
state-of-the-art onboard navigation
systems (Global Positioning
System - GPS).
 This concept is used en route, and
can reduce aircraft separation,
including the terminal area, and
used to optimize arrival and
departure procedures.
ATM environment
 The ATM Concept of Operations for 2020 represents
a paradigm shift from an airspace-based
environment to a trajectory-based environment. The
concept is based on:
 Trajectory management
 Collaborative planning
 Integrated airport operations
 New separation modes
 System-wide information management
 Humans central as managers and decision-makers in
the future European ATM system
ATM and Safety
 SESAR (and NextGen in the USA) will face safety
related challenges in system design, development,
certification and regulation
 As systems become more and more complex,
equipment needs to be more and more reliable and
safe
 One of the biggest problem
Standards do not exist
ATM and Safety
 The safety of travelling is an absolute prerequisite for
air transport,
 In the current ATM system (as in SESAR), the role of
human beings is central,
 Maintaining safety levels implies a number of
challenges for ATM:
• Society will increasingly become less tolerant of risks
• The ATM profession will have to accept that human
error, instead of being the possible cause of incidents,
is a direct consequence of constantly operating the
ATM system
• The economic climate affects safety
Technological solutions
 Airlines want to decrease pollution, and in particular
by renewing the fleet of higher-consumption aircraft
 Manufacturers are producing cleaner aircraft to help
reduce emissions, better navigation systems, better
use of on-board energy, and optimization systems for
taxiing and descending
Technological solutions
 In the years to come, an additional challenge will be
the integration of new aircraft into the system,
especially when it comes to VLJ (very light jets)
 VLJ are used because of flexibility or connectivity
•
•
Flexibility relates to air taxi
Connectivity relates to linking big cities with smaller ones
 In the USA 25% of all IFR flights are made by VLJ
 In Europe, only 10%, but growth of VLJ traffic is
twice of that of conventional aircrafts
Technological solutions
 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) may come to
take a potentially high market share, with a wide
range of applications such as delivery, search and
rescue, and so on…
 UAS size and performance introduce safety issues:
how to ensure separation with other traffic
 This will call for new safety rules to be developed
Technological solutions
 For the foreseeable future, kerosene will continue to
be used - even into the next generation of aircraft
 There is also significant research into the use of
alternative fuels
Nuclear
energy
Emission-free
Nuclear
waste
Pollution
 Nuclear-based operational concept is probably about
100 years
Fuel
 One of the main challenges for European air
transport is the global economy
 FUEL PRICE
 Over the long-term, the biggest concern. Without
political intervention, a higher fuel price will only
reduce air traffic growth for the air transport industry
is the cost of fuel
Environment
 Operational solutions for reducing emissions per flight
include:
• Reducing the speed, and in turn reducing emissions by up
to 30%
• Choosing better flight levels
• Decreasing emissions from ground traffic by reducing
waiting time for departure slot or for gate
• Planning for more efficient flights, which would consume
less energy
 The ATM community
can reduce the environmental
impact of aviation by cooperating with airlines to reduce
flight inefficiencies
Liberalisation
 The Liberalization in Europe that started in1987
opened the national markets allowing carriers free
entrance and market competition in a way of offering
greater number of flights and lowering cost of air
transport.
 The Air Navigation Service Providers (i.e. Air Traffic
Control) left outside of this process as only link in the
value chain organized and operated at the national
level.
Cost of fragmentation
Passengers, airlines and the wider European
economy are losing €5 billion every year from
inefficient air traffic management. That’s the cost
of the fragmentation of European airspace
NETWORK
 Reorganization of Europe’s air traffic network will not
guarantee that ANSP improve their efficiency or reduce
their costs, or guarantee inter-FAB coordination and
cooperation;
 Impending failure of most FABs to meet their formation
deadlines is symptomatic of how the SES programme is
failing to deliver the benefits that it should because of
pretty birocratic approach.
De-fragmenting ANSP and FAB
Today, the European sky is controlled by 63 Control
centres. The trend is going towards mergers through
FAB. ATM cost reduction will be achieved through
technical elements like systems harmonization,
maintenance, and supervision with economies of scale
rather than through service unit and personnel cost
reduction.
In 2030 there will be the same
number of ATCO and service units,
even if based on a different
organization. ATM will need five to
ten years to achieve its defragmentation objective. A third SES
package, SESII+ is on the way as
support.
Goals of SES packages
 Goal is the implementation of a European high-
performance, integrated, network-centric,
collaborative and seamless air ground ATM system
 European airspace will operate as an efficient
continuum with two airspace categories
 Human roles and responsibilities will be more
“management task” oriented
SES II
 The Performance Scheme (Commission Regulation
(EU) N° 691/2010) and the adoption by the
European Commission of the EU-wide performance
targets for the reference period 2012-2014
(Commission Decision of 22-02-2011) in areas of
cost-efficiency, capacity and environment², requires
that the National Supervisory Authorities elaborate
national (or FAB-level) performance plans which
contribute to the EU-wide performance targets
SES II - FAB
 The Functional Airspace Blocks are bottom-up
initiatives led by the States to be established by the
end of 2012 ; they aim at an enhanced cooperation
between the air navigation service providers
(ANSPs) and the national supervisory authorities
(NSAs) to de-fragment the airspace and obtain the
operational efficiency gains through such strategies
as common procurement, training and optimisation
of air traffic controllers (ATCs) resources.
SES II - Network
 The Network Manager is a centralized function at
EU level to carry out the management of the ATM
network functions(airspace design, flow
management) and management of scarce
resources(transponder code allocations, radio
frequencies) as defined in Commission Regulation
(EU) N° 677/2011 of 07-07-2011. This function has
been entrusted to Eurocontrol up to 2019.
SES II - Charging
 The Charging Regulation (Commission Regulation
N° 1191/2010) on the en-route charging system lays
down a legal framework of transparent reporting of
en-route charges and costs' components of the
Member States. It also defines a legal basis for
financing, through the charging system, of the
"Common Projects" in the context of the deployment
of SESAR.
SES II - EASA in ATM
 In conjunction with the approval of the SES
regulatory framework, the competences of EASA
have been extended to ATM and aerodromes³.
EASA is now in charge to develop ATM rules dealing
with safety and has started to carry out safety
inspections in the field of ATM in 2012.
SES II+ - WHY we need JSPA?
The European Commission is hoping that the
SES II+ package of legislation will prove that third
time is lucky.
 We should strive for global harmonization and
simplification of:
 rules
 certification
 operations
Outline of the possible guiding objectives
of the SESII+ proposal:
 Improving the performance of air navigation services
in terms of efficiency and quality by :
 Revitalizing the FABs
 Updating the charging system
 More efficient performance targets system
Outline of the possible guiding objectives
of the SESII+ proposal:
 Improving the current institutional set-up by:
 Strengthening and supporting the national authorities
to guarantee efficient oversight and implementation of
rules
 Clarifying the SES and EASA Frameworks, developing
EASA and Eurocontrol
 Concentrating economic regulation in the Commission,
technical regulation and oversight in EASA, with
Eurocontrol as a supporting body for these entities.
 Updating the Network Manager governance
One regulator for Europe
 The Commission sees itself as having control over
air transport matters while leaving developmental
and operational responsibilities to the industry
 Means for the EC to be the regulator for non-EU
states include:
 ECAA agreements
 EUROCONTROL moving into the Community
 Extending the acquis to non-EU member states.
JSPA as the Answer
 Our New approach


 (The content and the “speed” to be decided by you)



 STRATEGY for our Region at least 10 years ahead
WHY?
 OUR motivs should be:
- Awareness of very difficult coming period which
-
requires better provisions,
Belifes:
about our greater possibilities,
we could do better than we did,
we can make decisions that will bring benefits in the
coming decades,
we could be serious partner for respect, partner who
can build, not just follow
WHY?
 TO WAIT OR NOT?