Conflict Management & Automation
Document information
PCP Expert Group
5
Deliverable Name
Deployment Analysis
Edition
00.00.00
Task contributors
List all the Expert Group contributors involved in the task
Please complete the advanced properties of the document
Abstract
Abstract is written for the purpose of succinctly summarizing the main points of the document as objectively as
possible. It must be short - only about a paragraph- and has to describe the purpose, the scope, and methods
used
Use this style/font for writing the abstract.
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Authoring & Approval
Reviewed By - Reviewers internal to the Expert Groop.
Name & Company
Position & Title
Date
<Name / Company>
<Position / Title>
<DD/MM/YYYY>
Approved for submission to the SJU By - Representatives of the company involved in the project.
Name & Company
Position & Title
Date
<Name / Company>
<Position / Title>
<DD/MM/YYYY>
Rejected By - Representatives of the company involved in the project.
Name & Company
Position & Title
Date
<Name / Company>
<Position / Title>
<DD/MM/YYYY>
Rational for rejection
None.
Document History
Edition
Date
00.00.01
DD/MM/YYYY
Status
Author
Justification
New Document
2 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 6
1
HIGH LEVEL DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 7
1.1
1.2
1.3
HIGH-LEVEL OPERATIONAL IMPACT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 7
HIGH-LEVEL SYSTEM IMPACT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................ 7
HIGH-LEVEL DESCRIPTION OF THE ESSENTIAL DEPLOYMENT BASELINE RELATED ELEMENTS .............. 7
2 MEDIUM TERM CONFLICT DETECTION WITH CONFLICT RESOLUTION ADVISORIES AND
CONFORMANCE MONITORING (OI STEP CM-0204) ................................................................................ 9
2.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ..................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
2.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION.................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
2.2.1
System: None ................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.2.2
Procedural ......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.2.3
Institutional: None .........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ......................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
2.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ...................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ....................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved .........Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.4
Actors involved ..............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.5
Flows of information between actors ..........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.3.7
Impact on ground systems ...........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ........... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
2.4.1
Standards .......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .......................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks .........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS....................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
2.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ......Error! Bookmark not defined.
3 PROVISION OF CLEARANCES USING DATALINK: TRAJECTORY BASED
IMPLEMENTATION (OI STEP AUO-0302-B)............................................................................................... 12
3.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 12
3.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 13
3.2.1
System ......................................................................................................................................... 13
3.2.2
Procedural ................................................................................................................................... 16
3.2.3
Institutional .................................................................................................................................. 17
3.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ............................................................................................................... 17
3.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ................................................................................................ 17
3.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ................................................................................................. 17
3.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved ...................................................... 17
3.3.4
Actors involved ........................................................................................................................... 17
3.3.5
Flows of information between actors ....................................................................................... 18
3.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ..................................................................................................... 18
3.3.7
Impact on ground systems ........................................................................................................ 18
3.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ................................................................. 18
3.4.1
Standards .................................................................................................................................... 18
3.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .................................................................... 18
3.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks ...................................................................................... 18
3.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 18
3.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 18
3.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 18
3.5.3
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 19
3.5.4
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 19
3 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
4 ENHANCED TACTICAL CONFLICT DETECTION/RESOLUTION AND CONFORMANCE &
INTENT MONITORING (OI STEP CM-0404) ................................................................................................ 20
4.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ..................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
4.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION.................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
4.2.1
System ............................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.2.2
Procedural ......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.2.3
Institutional: None .........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ......................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
4.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ...................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ....................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved .........Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.4
Actors involved ..............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.5
Flows of information between actors ..........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.7
Impact on ground systems ...........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ........... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
4.4.1
Standards .......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .......................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks .........................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS....................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
4.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ......Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.5.3
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.5.4
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ......Error! Bookmark not defined.
5 USE OF ONBOARD 4D TRAJECTORY DATA TO ENHANCE ATM GROUND SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE: TRAJECTORY BASED IMPLEMENTATION (OI STEP IS-0303-B) ....................... 26
5.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 26
5.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 28
5.2.1
System ......................................................................................................................................... 29
5.2.2
Procedural: None ....................................................................................................................... 32
5.2.3
Institutional: None ...................................................................................................................... 32
5.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ............................................................................................................... 32
5.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ................................................................................................ 32
5.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ................................................................................................. 32
5.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved ...................................................... 33
5.3.4
Actors involved ........................................................................................................................... 33
5.3.5
Flows of information between actors ....................................................................................... 33
5.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ..................................................................................................... 33
5.3.7
Impact on ground systems ........................................................................................................ 33
5.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ................................................................. 33
5.4.1
Standards .................................................................................................................................... 33
5.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .................................................................... 33
5.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks ...................................................................................... 34
5.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 34
5.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 34
5.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 34
5.5.3
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 34
5.5.4
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 34
6 PRECISION TRAJECTORY CLEARANCES (PTC)-2D BASED ON PRE-DEFINED 2D ROUTES
(OI STEP CM-0601) .......................................................................................................................................... 35
6.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 35
6.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 36
6.2.1
System (for AOM-0206) ............................................................................................................ 36
6.2.2
Procedural ................................................................................................................................... 40
6.2.3
Institutional: None ...................................................................................................................... 43
6.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ............................................................................................................... 43
4 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ................................................................................................ 44
6.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ................................................................................................. 44
6.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved ...................................................... 45
6.3.4
Actors involved ........................................................................................................................... 45
6.3.5
Flows of information between actors ....................................................................................... 46
6.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ..................................................................................................... 46
6.3.7
Impact on ground systems ........................................................................................................ 46
6.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ................................................................. 47
6.4.1
Standards .................................................................................................................................... 47
6.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .................................................................... 48
6.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks ...................................................................................... 48
6.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 48
6.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 48
6.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 48
6.5.3
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 48
6.5.4
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 48
7
CONFLICT DILUTION BY UPSTREAM ACTION ON SPEED (OI STEP CM-0403) ..................... 49
7.1 OI STEP DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 49
7.2 RELATED ENABLERS DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................ 50
7.2.1
System ......................................................................................................................................... 50
7.2.2
Procedural ................................................................................................................................... 54
7.2.3
Institutional .................................................................................................................................. 55
7.3 BACKGROUND & ASSUMPTION ............................................................................................................... 56
7.3.1
Related SESAR Specifications ................................................................................................ 57
7.3.2
Aeronautical services involved ................................................................................................. 58
7.3.3
Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved ...................................................... 58
7.3.4
Actors involved ........................................................................................................................... 58
7.3.5
Flows of information between actors ....................................................................................... 58
7.3.6
Impact on airborne systems ..................................................................................................... 59
7.3.7
Impact on ground systems ........................................................................................................ 59
7.4 RELATED STANDARDIZATION AND REGULATORY ACTIVITIES ................................................................. 59
7.4.1
Standards .................................................................................................................................... 59
7.4.2
Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks .................................................................... 59
7.4.3
Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks ...................................................................................... 59
7.5 MATURITY AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 59
7.5.1
Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy ............................................. 59
7.5.2
Any other deployment considerations not covered above ................................................... 59
APPENDIX A ....................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
A.0
STAKEHOLDER CATEGORIES ...................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
A.1
LIST OF AERONAUTICAL SERVICES ................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
A.2 .............................................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
A.2.1
LIST OF PHASES OF FLIGHT (as defined by CAST/ICAO) .Error! Bookmark not defined.
A.2.2
LIST OF PHASES OF FLOW MANAGEMENT ........................Error! Bookmark not defined.
A.3
LIST OF ACTORS (EXCERPT FROM OATA APPROACH).......... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
A.4
LIST OF EATMN SYSTEMS (AS IDENTIFIED IN ANNEX I OF (EC) 552/2004)ERROR! BOOKMARK
NOT DEFINED.
5 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Executive summary
Executive summary is informative and is an expanded version of the abstract (front page). The Executive
summary should be maximum 2 pages. The Executive summary must not contain reference to subsequent
sections in the document. All statements in the Executive summary should be supported by facts.
In your Executive Summary focus on summarizing your conclusions on:

The technological and/or operational changes resulting from the R&D activities that are within
the scope of your Expert Group.

Links with existing and/or planned implementing rules and/or standards.

Potential risks that your Expert Group has pre-identified that would hinder the implementation of
the pilot common project (R&D maturity and/or implementation related).

Coherence with ICAO’s Global Air Navigation Plan and Aviation System Blocks Upgrades.
6 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
1 High Level Description
1.1 High-Level Operational impact description
Summary of the impact at Operational level, brought forward by the implementation of this topic. The following
items have been already identified at the end of Phase 1:
•
Provision of an automated Medium Term Conflict Detection tool with resolution
advisory information improving ATC automation and efficiency
•
Enhanced Monitoring Aids are required to support optimized use of RNP capabilities
of modern aircraft and the development of Precision Trajectory Clearance.
1.2 High-Level System impact description
Summary of the impact at System level, brought forward by the implementation of this topic. Make clear
dissociation between ground and airborne system impacts as appropriate.
1.3 High-Level description of the Essential Deployment
Baseline related elements
Provide high-level description of the Essential Deployment Baseline related elements referring in particular to
section 8.1 – Annex A of the European ATM Master Plan, edition 2 – October 2012
https://working.atmmasterplan.eu/downloads
•
7 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
8 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
2 Medium Term Conflict Detection with Conflict
Resolution Advisories and Conformance Monitoring (OI
STEP CM-0204)
2.1 OI Step description
CM- Medium Term Conflict Detection with Conflict Resolution Advisories and Conformance
0204 Monitoring
IOC:
31-12-2015
DESCRIPTION: The system provides real-time assistance to the tactical controller for monitoring
trajectory conformance and provides resolution advisory information based upon predicted conflict
detection
RATIONALE: Trajectory prediction & deconfliction for: the Tactical controller The objective is to
provide the tactical controller (at sector level and in real time) with an automated Medium Term
Conflict Detection tool with resolution advisory information. This will utilise a Trajectory Prediction
model enhanced by real-time a/c and met data to enhance accuracy. Info: NATS intends to deploy
operationally a tactical conflict detection and resolution tool in 2010/11; although the resolution part is
only at CORA 1 level (context information to support controller resolution - resolution advisories will
not be provided).
COMMENTS: Expert Team comment:
2.2 Related Enablers description
2.2.1 System: None
<Enabler reference>
IOC:
<date>
IOC
Sync
<title>
<date>
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
<…>
<…>
Stakeholder
<…>
DESCRIPTION: <text from Data Set 9>
COMMENTS: <text from Data Set 9>
Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
9 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
2.2.2 Procedural
ATC Procedures for Using System Support to Near Term
Conflict Detection and Resolution
PRO-046c
IOC:
31-122015
IOC
Sync
-
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
PROCEDURAL
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures - Near Term Conflict Detection and Resolution
COMMENTS: This enabler needs to be deleted
Expert Team comment:
2.2.3 Institutional: None
2.3 Background & assumption
This form is focused on the WHAT of OI steps-related operations (which SESAR Specifictions, which services,
which actors, which flow of information, which specifications and standards, which supporting systems, which
OSEDs etc.).
2.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
2.3.2 Aeronautical services involved
Identify all aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step. Aeronautical service is used in a wide
sense, services as defined by ICAO, SES regulations or other non-regulatory multi-lateral arrangements between
organisations, based on a service provision scheme, see Annex A1.
2.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved
Identify all phases of flow management and/or phases of flight involved in the operations of the OI step
…Systems automating operations during these phases might be impacted to support operations related to this OI
Step or Not Applicable…see Annex A2.
2.3.4 Actors involved
Identify all actors involved in operations of the OI step. A list of actors is given hereafter in Annex A. Other actors
can be introduced provided that a basic definition is given to understand role and responsibility of these new
actors.
2.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active.
2.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.
10 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
2.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4.
2.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
2.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
2.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
2.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.
2.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
2.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
2.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
11 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
3 Provision of clearances using Datalink: trajectory based
implementation (OI STEP AUO-0302-B)
3.1 OI Step description
AUO-0302-B
Provision of clearances using Datalink: trajectory based implementation
IOC:
31-12-2020
DESCRIPTION: Mutiple CTOs assignment, 2D PTC based on preferred trajectory, 3D PTC based on
predefined route (new CPDLC/ACL messages including the required performance), supported on the
airborne side by CPDLC/CTOs, CPDLC/minor speed adjustment, CPDLC/PTC using 2D/3D
predefined/preferred trajectory including navigational performance.
RATIONALE: Objective is to avoid misunderstanding and facilitate auto loading of the clearance and
flight crew acceptance, reducing cockpit workload.
COMMENTS: Expert Team comment:
This OIs describes new clearances and interchange of information with the aircraft that have to be
considered by the trajectory prediction associated to the Conflict Management to detect posible
conflicts.
The use of Datalink for clearances implies that the uncertainity of the tactical trajectory is reduced
upon reception of the WILCO from the pilot.
The AUO-0302-A OI should be also included in the Deloyment Analysis document
12 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
3.2 Related Enablers description
3.2.1 System
A/C-31b
IOC:
---
Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 2
IOC
Sync
---
Category:
System
o AU Civil Scheduled
Aviation
o AU Civil Business
Aviation
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
R
Stakeholder
o AU Civil General
Aviation
o AU Military Transport
o AU Military Fighter
DESCRIPTION: Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 2 e.g. CTOs and 2D/3D PTC
COMMENTS: Uplink ot target times should be part of D-TAXI services according to WG78/SC214
Expert Team comment: The uplinking of clearances could improve the trajectory prediction used by
Conflict Management. If the trajectory prediction is out the scope of the Conflict Management, this
enabler should be deleted.
AERODROME-ATC-12
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
Provision of the optimised ground route minimising conflicts
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: Tool (route planning function) to provide the Controller with conflict-free route for
individual controlled aircraft and the air-ground data link communication service to issue taxi and
other ground clearances.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
This enabler is related with TWR ground control and is out of scope of the Conflict Management
Group.
13 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
High integrity air-ground datalink communications service
supporting different kinds of applications
AGSWIM-54
IOC:
31-122018
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: High integrity datalink services complementing voice communications (which will be
used only for emergency situations) and comprising the message sets supporting a wide variety of
applications to support dialogues and exchanges between aircraft and ATC ground systems : - high
integrity services about trajectory and other flight information during in-flight phase - high integrity
services about trajectory and other flight information during ground phase - Datalink service for
communicating Common Flight Object information between air and ground.
COMMENTS: Not step 1 enabler, need for enabler is questionned ( end of the target concept?) GA:
see a/c enabler; to be moved to step 2 in light of Thales comment. Essential enabler.
Expert Team comment: The Conflict Management function does not require but can be improved by
this enabler providing more accurate trajectory data. This enabler is related with FDP instead of the
Conflict Detection and resolution.
CTE-C1
IOC:
31-122019
High performance Air-Ground Datalink
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: A new integrated mobile communications infrastructure is deployed with the
following components providing capacity to satisfy all the requirements for air/ground datalink
services: - a VDL mode 2 infrastructure providing the existing datalink services, - a new terrestrial AG datalink component to complement VDL2 for more demanding services, - a new satellite A-G
datalink to provide service redundancy to the new terrestrial datalink to satisfy the high availability
requirements.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
The Conflict Management function does not require but can be improved by this enabler providing
more accurate trajectory data. This enabler is related with FDP instead of the Conflict Detection and
resolution.
14 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
CTE-C2b
IOC:
01-012018
Enchanced Air-Ground datalink (ATN/OSI)
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: ATN/OSI over VDL2 is the standard A-G datalink to support continental ATS
services (SES IR) - ATN/OSI B1 in 2015 and ATN/OSI B2 in 2018. Technology exists.
COMMENTS: BA: ADS-B IN discussed but is costly to implement, maybe only new aircrafts. CBA
difficult for BA considering that BA flights into hubs is not the majority of operations. TBC with BA
manufacturer for OI Step function IOC. Essential enabler
Expert Team comment:
The Conflict Management function does not require but can be improved by this enabler providing
more accurate surveillance and trajectory data. This enabler is related with FDP instead of the
Conflict Detection and resolution.
FDP modified to allow management of those aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100a2
IOC:
31-122018
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: --COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
The Conflict Management function does not require but can be improved by this enabler providing
more accurate trajectory data. This enabler is related with FDP instead of the Conflict Detection and
resolution.
Enhance En-route ATC Controller human machine
interaction management function 4D trajectory aspects
implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100b2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: Controller workstation, modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, Pilot
request, TMR, CTA, etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
15 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
This enabler is related with FDP and trajectory management.
An enabler about the changes in the CWP to support Conflict Management is missed
ER APP ATC 129
ER APP ATC 130
Enhance En-route ATC monitoring aids function to use 4D
trajectory aspects implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100c2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: flight path monitor and tools modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, CTA,
etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
This enabler is related with FDP and trajectory management.
3.2.2
Procedural
Joint ATC/Cockpit Procedures for distinguishing between
clearances, instructions, and proposed trajectory
modifications (open to negotiation).
PRO-106b
IOC:
01-012017
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: Joint ATC/Cockpit Procedures- modifications
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
16 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
3.2.3 Institutional
New EUROCAE Standard for A-SMGCS (Level 3&4)
including SMAN
ASMGCS-0201
IOC:
31-122015
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Institutional
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: --COMMENTS: Potential standardisation enabler currently under review by C.03 - Enabler description
not clear
Expert Team comment:
This Enabler is out of the scope of the Conflict Management and Automation for en-route and TMA.
3.3 Background & assumption
3.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
3.3.2 Aeronautical services involved

air traffic control service (area control service, approach control service or aerodrome
control service)

communication, navigation, surveillance services
3.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved

tactical
3.3.4 Actors involved






pilot
tower runway controller
tower ground controller
executive controller
planning controller
multi-sector planner
17 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
3.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active.
3.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.
3.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4.
1. Systems and procedures for air traffic services, in particular flight data processing
systems, surveillance data processing systems and human-machine interface systems.
2. Communication systems and procedures for ground-to-ground, air-to-ground and air-toair communications.
3.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
3.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
3.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
3.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.
3.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
3.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
3.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
18 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
3.5.3 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
3.5.4 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
19 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
4 Enhanced Tactical Conflict Detection/Resolution and
Conformance & Intent Monitoring (OI STEP CM-0404)
4.1 OI Step description
CMEnhanced Tactical Conflict Detection/Resolution and Conformance & Intent Monitoring
0404
IOC:
31-12-2018
DESCRIPTION: Advanced automation support for controllers including conflict detection and
resolution, conformance monitoring (CM), intent monitoring (INT) and complexity monitoring. In
combination these tools detect almost all aircraft/aircraft conflicts, aircraft penetrations of segregated
airspace, aircraft stop bars and restricted areas trespassing during taxi in/out, runway incursions and
potential task overloads with sufficient time to allow an orderly resolution. The tools also effectively
monitor the ATM system for human error. G.2.1/2 G3 OCE 6
RATIONALE: --COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment: OI CM-0404 does not only apply to the Tactical Conflict Detection and Intent
Monitoring in the ER & APP domain. Aircraft stop-bars, taxi in/out, runway incursions should be driven
by the Aerodrome domain and therefore to other EG.
It could be considered the following OIs as the most representatives OIs for the Tactical Conflict
Detection & Monitoring:
CM-0204: considered in chapter 2
CM-0406: Automated Assistance to ATC for Detecting Conflicts in Terminal Areas Operations
Ground system situation monitoring, conflict detection and resolution support is deployed to ensure
safety and assist with task management in Terminal Area Operations.
Even if conflict-free route allocation is deployed, there will still be circumstances when flights have to
deviate from their clearance or in busy airspace where route and profile interaction is inevitable (e.g.
multi airport TMAs). This tool will assist the controller in detecting and assessing the impact of such
interactions or deviations.
NOTE - close link with CM-0204
IS-0302: Use of Aircraft Derived Data (ADD) to enhance ATM ground system performance.
Continued improvement in the performance of ground-based systems such as Trajectory Predictors
through use of Aircraft Derived Data (e.g. aircraft position and state , mass, wind, then intent data next 'n' waypoints) subject to quick variations and/or frequent updates.
The objective is to improve the performance of ATC decision support tools (e.g. by reduced
uncertainty of climb and descent profiles) and ground based safety nets. Current Trajectory Prediction
systems use an aircraft performance model such as BADA. This makes assumptions of a/c
performance which leads, particularly in the vertical plane, to wide zones of uncertainty. Knowing
more exact details of the a/c state and met data will increase the accuracy of trajectory prediction and
reduce the zones of uncertainty. Initial implementation is expected to be in the En-route environment
where such tools are more mature. The tools will also enable the first phases of User Preferred
Trajectories by supporting the controller in conflict detection, and subsequent resolution.
20 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
4.2 Related Enablers description
4.2.1 System
A/C-37a
IOC:
31-122016
Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
R
System
Stakeholder
o
AU Civil Scheduled
Aviation IOC: 31-122016
o
AU Civil Business
Aviation IOC: 31-122018
o
AU Civil General
Aviation IOC: —
o
AU Military Transport
IOC: 31-12-2016
o
AU Military Fighter
IOC: 31-12-2016
DESCRIPTION: Downlink of trajectory data (e.g. way points, altitude, speed, time contraints and
prediction in the 4 dimensions, wind, weight etc) according to contract terms (e.g. change of the route
and/or constraints, deviation of the trajectory prediction continuously computed onboard versus the
previously shared trajectory prediction more than thresholds (TMR), on request or on periodic basis).
COMMENTS: This enabler includes ADS-C Aircraft Derived Data e.g. ETA min/max and Extended
Projected Profile (up to 128 points with e.g. estimates or associated constraints), contract established
with up to 5 ANSP during the whole flight from the gate No link with APV, Cruise Climb, CDA, CCD.
Missink link with I4d + CTA. V4 start depending on 2012 decision. Mainline: IOC 2016 or 2018
Boeing: Current capability BA: Few BA aircrafts are equipped with FANS (mainly large BA aircrafts).
Few BA aircrafts are equipped with ADS-C. ADS-C capability not planned. TBC with manufacturer for
ADS-C IOC. Beneficial enabler. GA: Critical component of ground-air shared picture of projected
trajectory. Needs a GA version apart from ADS-C-EPP. Beneficial enabler. As for the uplink enabler
(A/C-31a), there is no reason why GA could not downlink traj data over a suitable datalink. This won’t
be VDL2. Note for GA, this may have an impact on IOC/FOC dates. Is this really going to be used in
low complexity TMAs in Step 1? Mil: "Applies to military transport a/c the same way as civil aircraft.
For other types of a/c, depends on military data link accomodation, covered by 9.20 & 15.2.8 (step
1); we should not provide an IOC earlier than for civil a/c!"; V3 of 9.20/15.2.8 is 2013 => IOC 2018
Expert Team comment:
21 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
FDP modified to allow management of those aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100a2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: --COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Enhance En-route ATC Controller human machine
interaction management function 4D trajectory aspects
implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100b2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: Controller workstation, modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, Pilot
request, TMR, CTA, etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Enhance En-route ATC monitoring aids function to use 4D
trajectory aspects implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100c2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: flight path monitor and tools modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, CTA,
etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
22 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Conflict detection update and Efficient Conflict resolution
function that make use of RBT and trajectory information
ER APP ATC 100d2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: Conflict detection update and efficient Conflict resolution function that make use of
RBT and trajectory information and where appropriate that make use of a conflict dilution logic.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Enhance conflict detection to use to use 4D trajectory,
clearances, and requests
ER APP ATC 120
IOC:
31-122016
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: MTCD will determine interactions among trajectories, based on the most updated
data in the SBT/RBTs, active clearences, estimated and target times, AU preferences (if specified)
and aircraft parameters, taking into account defined separation criteria and uncertainty in the data.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
ER APP ATC 147
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
Develop conflict resolution functionalities
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: A conflict resolution functionality is developed in support of the controller. This
functionality will in particular be able to propose speed adjustment as part of the resolution strategy
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
23 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
4.2.2 Procedural
ATC Procedures for Using Advanced System Assistance to
Tactical Conflict Detection and Resolution
PRO-114c
IOC:
01-012017
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures - Tactical Conflict Detection and Resolution
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
4.2.3 Institutional: None
4.3 Background & assumption
This form is focused on the WHAT of OI steps-related operations (which SESAR Specifictions, which services,
which actors, which flow of information, which specifications and standards, which supporting systems, which
OSEDs etc.).
4.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
4.3.2 Aeronautical services involved
Identify all aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step. Aeronautical service is used in a wide
sense, services as defined by ICAO, SES regulations or other non-regulatory multi-lateral arrangements between
organisations, based on a service provision scheme, see Annex A1.
4.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved
Identify all phases of flow management and/or phases of flight involved in the operations of the OI step
…Systems automating operations during these phases might be impacted to support operations related to this OI
Step or Not Applicable…see Annex A2.
4.3.4 Actors involved
Identify all actors involved in operations of the OI step. A list of actors is given hereafter in Annex A. Other actors
can be introduced provided that a basic definition is given to understand role and responsibility of these new
actors.
4.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active.
4.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.
24 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
4.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4.
4.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
4.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
4.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
4.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.
4.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
4.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
4.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
4.5.3 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
4.5.4 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
25 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
5 Use of onboard 4D trajectory data to enhance ATM
ground system performance: trajectory based
implementation (OI STEP IS-0303-B)
5.1 OI Step description
ISUse of onboard 4D trajectory data to enhance ATM ground system performance:
0303trajectory based implementation
B
IOC:
31-12-2018
DESCRIPTION: Update of the ground system by the predicted trajectory computed on board
after take off (ATOT), after any change in route and/or altitude/time constraints (RBT
revision) in case of deviation of the estimates vs previous shared ones more than predefined
thresholds (automatic RBT update), on request or periodically (full 4D includes the downlink
of the trajectory from take off to landing). This will be supported on the airborne side by e.g.
ADS-C EPP provided after take off and in the context of full 4D operations.
RATIONALE: The objective is to improve ground trajectory prediction by use of airborne
data. Thales: Whenever available the ground system will use the aircraft trajectory as the
source of its trajectory computations. The aircraft being the most reliable source of trajectory
data. Airbus: Standardisation of the trajectory to be down linked is currently in progress
(ADS-C EPP); capability is expected to be available onboard from 2015 to complement ETA
min/max & CTA using data link in line with 9.1 project; ADS-C EPP & ETA min/max are part
of B4.2 scenario; AUO-0203/SBT and AUO-0204/RBT are OI for step 1. Note: this OI has to
be distinguished from IS-0302 ADD as it corresponds to the "whole" trajectory and not to
some "discrete" aircraft derived data.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
This OI step should probably be preceded, in accordance with the Master plan, by:

IS-0302 - Use of Aircraft Derived Data (ADD) to enhance ATM ground system performance

IS-0303-A - Use of onboard 4D trajectory data to enhance ATM ground system performance –
Initial and Time-based operations
In the context of this PCP, IS-0303-B actually appears too far out as it addresses step 2 improvements relying on
the existence of an agreed RBT and associated revision mechanisms to improve and synchronise the ground
predicted trajectory and to improve the performance of controller tools.
A combination of the following OI steps would appear to be preferable and more compatible with the timescale
considered:

IS-0302 for use of static A/C such as obtained from the Mode S transponder (via Mode S datalink) and
from ADS-B out, possibly complemented with near-term “intent” data (the next trajectory change points)
if available.

IS-0303-A for use of predicted trajectory computed on board, downlinked via ADS-C EPP, in the context
of i4D operations.
26 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
As it stands, IS-0303-A is described as follows: “Update of the ground system by the predicted trajectory
computed on board, following a download on request (i4D includes the downlink of the arrival portion of the
trajectory in Step 1). This will be supported on the airborne side by e.g. ADS-C EPP provided at AMAN horizon in
the context of i4D operations”. This OI step appears to be consistent with step 1 activities undertaken in i4D/CTA
projects and compatible with a deployment in the timeframe of the first PCP. Initial feedback from i4D/CTA
validations on the EPP downlink and route clearance aspects that are applicable to the present OI step is
promising and tends to confirm the benefits that can be obtained from trajectory exchanges between the a/c and
ground systems.
As it stands, IS-0302 is a bit more ambiguous. The description of the OI step refers to “use of Aircraft Derived
Data (e.g. aircraft position and state, mass, wind, then intent data - next 'n' waypoints) subject to quick variations
and/or frequent updates”. It is assumed that this refers to the use of aircraft derived data that can be obtained
from the Mode S transponder (via Mode S datalink) and from ADS-B out. The type of 4D trajectory information
that can be obtained via these datalinks is limited to the so-called “intent” data corresponding to the next nearterm trajectory change points.
However, IS-0302 is also currently linked to enablers ER APP ATC 14a/b/c/d/e/f. This is extremely misleading as
these enablers refer to enhancing Controller tools to use Aircraft derived 4D trajectory data, and are specifically
tied to enabler “A/C-37 - Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms” which refers to ADS-C EPP.
To remove any ambiguity, we would recommend to link ER APP ATC 14a/b/c/d/e/f to IS-0303-A instead of IS0302.
With this proviso, the following OI steps could be included in the present Deployment Analysis for Conflict
Management & Automation:

IS-0302 - Use of Aircraft Derived Data (ADD) to enhance ATM ground system performance

IS-0303-A - Use of onboard 4D trajectory data to enhance ATM ground system performance –
Initial and Time-based operations
And the current OI step

IS-0303-B - Use of onboard 4D trajectory data to enhance ATM ground system performance –
Trajectory-based operations
Removed.
Related enablers:
This function does not require but can be improved by any enabler providing more accurate
surveillance and trajectory data
For IS-0302:
-
ER APP ATC 70b Manage ADD received from aircraft for FDP and Tool use.
-
ER APP ATC 70d Manage ADD received from aircraft for FDP and Tool use.
-
ER APP ATC 94a Adapt ATC tools in support of RNP1 aircraft for Approach
-
A/C-48a Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast 1090 Extended Squitter transmission
capability (ADS-B OUT) based on EUROCAE ED 102A/ RTCA DO 260B
-
HUM-IS-0302 Initial training, competence and/or adaptation of new/active operational staff for
the application and use of the enhancements and improvements included of the OI Step Use
of Aircraft Derived Data (ADD) to enhance ATM ground system performance.
For IS-0303-A
27 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
-
AGDLS-ATC-AC-9 Implementing Rule Datalink Extension (DLS II)
-
ER APP ATC 14a Enhance FDP function to use aircraft provided data (ADD) in en-route ATC
systems
-
ER APP ATC 14b Enhance monitoring aids function to use aircraft provided data (ADD) in
en-route ATC systems
-
ER APP ATC 14c Enhance conflict management function to use aircraft provided data (ADD)
in en-route ATC systems
-
ER APP ATC 14d Enhance FDP function to use aircraft provided data (ADD) in approach
ATC systems
-
ER APP ATC 14e Enhance monitoring aids function to use aircraft provided data (ADD) in
approach ATC systems
-
ER APP ATC 14f Enhance conflict management function to use aircraft provided data (ADD)
in approach ATC systems
-
A/C-37 Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
-
ER APP ATC 100a FDP modified to allow management of those aspects of 4D trajectories
implemented in step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, Pilot request,
CTA, etc.).
-
ER APP ATC 100c Enhance En-route ATC monitoring aids function to use RBT and PT
provided implemented in Step1 from aircraft systems
-
HUM-IS-0303-A Initial training, competence and/or adaptation of new/active operational staff
for the application and use of the enhancements and improvements included of the OI Step
Initial 4D includes the downlink of the predicted trajectory upon request
5.2 Related Enablers description
28 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
5.2.1 System
A/C-37a
IOC:
31-122016
Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
R
System
Stakeholder
o
AU Civil Scheduled
Aviation IOC: 31-122016
o
AU Civil Business
Aviation IOC: 31-122018
o
AU Civil General
Aviation IOC: —
o
AU Military Transport
IOC: 31-12-2016
o
AU Military Fighter
IOC: 31-12-2016
DESCRIPTION: Downlink of trajectory data (e.g. way points, altitude, speed, time contraints and
prediction in the 4 dimensions, wind, weight etc) according to contract terms (e.g. change of the route
and/or constraints, deviation of the trajectory prediction continuously computed onboard versus the
previously shared trajectory prediction more than thresholds (TMR), on request or on periodic basis).
COMMENTS: This enabler includes ADS-C Aircraft Derived Data e.g. ETA min/max and Extended
Projected Profile (up to 128 points with e.g. estimates or associated constraints), contract established
with up to 5 ANSP during the whole flight from the gate No link with APV, Cruise Climb, CDA, CCD.
Missink link with I4d + CTA. V4 start depending on 2012 decision. Mainline: IOC 2016 or 2018
Boeing: Current capability BA: Few BA aircrafts are equipped with FANS (mainly large BA aircrafts).
Few BA aircrafts are equipped with ADS-C. ADS-C capability not planned. TBC with manufacturer for
ADS-C IOC. Beneficial enabler. GA: Critical component of ground-air shared picture of projected
trajectory. Needs a GA version apart from ADS-C-EPP. Beneficial enabler. As for the uplink enabler
(A/C-31a), there is no reason why GA could not downlink traj data over a suitable datalink. This won’t
be VDL2. Note for GA, this may have an impact on IOC/FOC dates. Is this really going to be used in
low complexity TMAs in Step 1? Mil: "Applies to military transport a/c the same way as civil aircraft.
For other types of a/c, depends on military data link accomodation, covered by 9.20 & 15.2.8 (step
1); we should not provide an IOC earlier than for civil a/c!"; V3 of 9.20/15.2.8 is 2013 => IOC 2018
Expert Team comment: IOC dates for BA and MIL seem too optimistic. To be checked with BA and MIL
airspace users.
29 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
High integrity air-ground datalink communications service
supporting different kinds of applications
AGSWIM-54
IOC:
31-122018
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: High integrity datalink services complementing voice communications (which will be
used only for emergency situations) and comprising the message sets supporting a wide variety of
applications to support dialogues and exchanges between aircraft and ATC ground systems : - high
integrity services about trajectory and other flight information during in-flight phase - high integrity
services about trajectory and other flight information during ground phase - Datalink service for
communicating Common Flight Object information between air and ground.
COMMENTS: Not step 1 enabler, need for enabler is questionned ( end of the target concept?) GA:
see a/c enabler; to be moved to step 2 in light of Thales comment. Essential enabler.
Expert Team comment: This enabler is for step 2 or beyond; it is not applicable to this first PCP.
CTE-C2b
IOC:
01-012018
Enchanced Air-Ground datalink (ATN/OSI)
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: ATN/OSI over VDL2 is the standard A-G datalink to support continental ATS
services (SES IR) - ATN/OSI B1 in 2015 and ATN/OSI B2 in 2018. Technology exists.
COMMENTS: BA: ADS-B IN discussed but is costly to implement, maybe only new aircrafts. CBA
difficult for BA considering that BA flights into hubs is not the majority of operations. TBC with BA
manufacturer for OI Step function IOC. Essential enabler
Expert Team comment: Agree. This enabler is applicable. ATN/OSI B2 is required for i4D.
FDP modified to allow management of those aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100a2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: --COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
30 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Should make reference to ER
Edition 00.00.00
APP ATC 100a instead
The main impact here is to improve FDP trajectory predictions to better align them with the a/c trajectory
received via the EPP downlink. Better trajectory predictions will in turn improve the performance of controller
tools that rely on this information.
Enhance En-route ATC monitoring aids function to use 4D
trajectory aspects implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100c2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: flight path monitor and tools modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints, CTA,
etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Should make reference to ER
APP ATC 100c instead
Conflict detection update and Efficient Conflict resolution
function that make use of RBT and trajectory information
ER APP ATC 100d2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
Air Navigation Service
Provider Civil
DESCRIPTION: Conflict detection update and efficient Conflict resolution function that make use of
RBT and trajectory information and where appropriate that make use of a conflict dilution logic.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Not applicable, or only partially applicable.
In the context of this analysis and selected OI steps, conflict detection tools may be improved by making use of
EPP trajectory information, but not through RBT; some forms of conflict resolution aids may be achievable, but
automated conflict dilution logic will not be achievable in this timescale.
31 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
5.2.2 Procedural: None
<Enabler reference>
IOC:
<date>
IOC
Sync
<title>
<date>
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
<…>
<…>
Stakeholder
<…>
DESCRIPTION: <text from Data Set 9>
COMMENTS: <text from Data Set 9>
Expert Team comment:
Several Procedural enablers would seem to be applicable, such as:
PRO-055a ATC Procedures for conflict & conformance monitoring with the introduction of controller
support tools in En-route phase
PRO-055b ATC Procedures for conflict & conformance monitoring with the introduction of controller
support tools in En-route phase in Terminal area
PRO-108 ATC Procedures covering the use of Trajectory Planning and Conflict Management Tools
PRO-114c ATC Procedures for Using Advanced System Assistance to Tactical Conflict Detection
and Resolution
5.2.3 Institutional: None
5.3 Background & assumption
This form is focused on the WHAT of OI steps-related operations (which SESAR Specifictions, which services,
which actors, which flow of information, which specifications and standards, which supporting systems, which
OSEDs etc.).
5.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
5.3.2 Aeronautical services involved
Identify all aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step. Aeronautical service is used in a wide
sense, services as defined by ICAO, SES regulations or other non-regulatory multi-lateral arrangements between
organisations, based on a service provision scheme, see Annex A1.

air traffic control service (area control service, approach control service or aerodrome
control service)

communication, navigation, surveillance services
32 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
5.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved
Identify all phases of flow management and/or phases of flight involved in the operations of the OI step
…Systems automating operations during these phases might be impacted to support operations related to this OI
Step or Not Applicable…see Annex A2.


En-route and Approach
Medium term and tactical
5.3.4 Actors involved
Identify all actors involved in operations of the OI step. A list of actors is given hereafter in Annex A. Other actors
can be introduced provided that a basic definition is given to understand role and responsibility of these new
actors.



executive controller
planning controller
(multi-sector planner)
5.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active.
Essentially system interactions between avionics and ground automation.
5.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.
I4D avionics and datalink capabilities required for this OI step
5.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4.
Systems and procedures for air traffic services, in particular flight data processing systems,
air-ground datalink, surveillance data processing systems and human-machine interface
systems.
5.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
5.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
RTCA SC214 / EUROCAE WG78 for i4D/CTA datalink
5.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
33 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
5.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.
5.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
5.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
5.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
Deployment of airborne enablers is required for this OI step.
5.5.3 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
5.5.4 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
34 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6 Precision Trajectory Clearances (PTC)-2D Based On
Pre-defined 2D Routes (OI STEP CM-0601)
6.1 OI Step description
CMPrecision Trajectory Clearances (PTC)-2D Based On Pre-defined 2D Routes
0601
IOC:
31-12-2020
DESCRIPTION: After allocation of 2D routes, vertical constraint and longitudinal separation is
provided by ATC to complement the 2D route. This may be achieved through surveillance based
separation and/or the dynamic application of constraints. New support tools (incl. MTCD) and
procedures and working methods have to be put in place.
RATIONALE: The allocation of 2D routes is a deconfliction method with vertical and longitudinal
separation (if required) provided by conventional techniques to complement the 2D route. This may
be achieved through surveillance based separation and/or the dynamic application of constraints
(depending on available ATM capabilities). 2D PTC based on pre defined 2D route will lead to a RBT
revision (new 2D route constraint allocated via data link). Airbus: Need to clarify what is new in 2D
PTC based on pre defined route versus today, i.e. ground tools have to consider the RBT and allocate
a 2D PTC based on predefined route (i.e. on published waypoints) using data link to the flight deck;
the flight crew has to load and check the fly ability of the new route before accepting it, and then to
activate it leading to a revision of the RBT followed by a RBT update. To be noted that this OI consists
of a building block towards 2D/3D PTC based on preferred routes, i.e. which may include non
published waypoints, i.e. computed by Ground tools and defined in lat / long or bearing / range.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
A general note: there is no clear link between this OI and the initial scope of the Conflict Management
and automation PCP .Also the proposed IOC for this OI is outside the considered deployment time.
On a broader definition the use of 2D route clearances as a method of conflict management (non
coincident route based separation) is a method applied since the 60s, even in procedural environment
(i.e. without surveillance).A way of understanding of this OI is the use of precision trajectory (involving
an improved navigation performance allowing the reduction of the lateral bounds of an ATS route) in
trying to achieve a de-confliction by clearing aircraft to fly on different routes. Another way of
understanding this procedure would be the use of reduced route separation by requiring ATC to
monitor closely the evolution of the aircraft involved. If these assumptions are correct the proposed
IOC is not necessary consistent with the operational applicability but it can be considered that it is
mostly related to different technologies (enablers) of providing the clearance to the flight crews and as
well as to the capability of the aircraft to adhere to the clearance using a better navigation
performance (e.g. allowing the reduction of the lateral bound of the routes used). The issue of
communication means (the clearance can easily be transmitted via voice too), however, is related to a
service performance level and integrity of information, these determining if a data-link communication
(and if yes which technology) is required.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Relationship of this OI step with the topic ‘Conflict Management &
Automation’ was presented with a question mark in the assessment carried out in Phase 1 of
the PCP project.
35 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.2 Related Enablers description
6.2.1 System (for AOM-0206)
Flight management and guidance to improve lateral
navigation in approach (2D RNP)
A/C-04
IOC:
31-122007
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Flight management and guidance to improve lateral navigation e.g. 2D RNP value
down to 0.3NM. Enabler for IP1 already available in most Airbus ACFT.
COMMENTS: IOC dates correspond to V3 end dates + 2 or 3 years, i.e. initial operational capabilities
if standardisation is available, there is no major certification issue and there is a window of
opportunity for the implementation within the aircraft. MSW: Connected to the 2nd step on PBN
regulation. Comment from C.03: With regard to the "2nd step of PBN regulation", the ICB
recommended a stepwise approach to the PBN IR. In all current scenarios, final implementation of
PBN IR would cover all NAV requirements for Initial 4D. Note however that final implementation of
PBN IR is currently foreseen only in 2025 Mainline: Enabler for IP1 timeframe already available in
most A/C. Boeing: "Current fleet capability. Still incompatibility with European legislation (AMC20-26,
20-27)" BA: Most BA aircrafts are certified for 2D RNP0.3 ; Essential Enabler for BA GA: Essential
enabler. The IOC/FOC dates may need to be moved for GA. For the low density TMA rows in
particular, we have some concerns. A-RNP will not be mandatory by 2021 in these TMAs. The dates
should be shifted to 2025 and beyond. Check for over-design e.g. Point merge in complex TMAs is
allocated to low density TMAs in the same timescale; no need. Rationale for the GA comment: The
RNP lateral accuracy (and possibly integrity/continuity) requirements shouldn?t be an issue for GA.
Vertical constraints or turn-based requirements (e.g. FRT, RF) will present an issue for most GA IFR
aircraft in the dates suggested (2018 onwards). Also, are we suggesting that every TMA will move to
A-RNP by 2021 (i.e. at the same time)? This is unlikely in practice. MIL: Applicability to military
aircraft and associated timetable handled by 15.03.01; Military authorities to be consulted.When
MMS impact, to be handled by 9.3. Processes for certification by equivalent performance should be
provided by 9.49. CMAC (Jpe) 25/11/11: Indirectly solved by the PBN IR. In accordance with 15.3.1
by 2017 it will be available in the majority of transport and some fighters (through equivalent
performance). Implemented in A400M (2017); Fighter 2019, ref 15.3.1.
Expert Team comment: If the deployment of the considered OI implies the reduction of the ATS route
lateral bounds this enabler is essential in designing the route structure in en-route as well as in the
approach (TMA) environments.
36 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
A/C-31a
IOC:
31-122016
Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1 i.e. DCL/ATN, CPDLC in Approach,
clearance for ATSA-ITP, CTA allocation, clearance for ASPA and clearances for push-back/start-up
and taxi route (D-TAXI).
COMMENTS: 9.33 for DCL/ATN, CPDLC in APP, CPDLC for ATSA-ITP, IOC 2015, may be
clearance for BTV which has no project today. 9.1 for CTA allocation, linked to A/C-11 9.5 for ASPA
clearance, linked to A/C-15 9.13 for D-TAXI services, linked to AC-42a Missing OFA: Surface
planning and routing. A/C31a IOC 2016 or 2018 (depending on V4 launch decision next year)
Mainline: IOC 2016 or 2018; IOC 2019 MIL (implementing rule). IR exemption cell considers 75%
equip in 2016 but later IOC due to new set of msg standadisation. Boeing: "Boeing indicated this
would be a FANS3 capability. Boeing is working with industry committees on FANS 3 capabilities.
Boeing expects FANS3 in 2022." BA: CPDLC capability is planned. Few BA aircrafts are equipped
with FANS. TBC with BA manufacturers for the OI Step function's IOC. Beneficial enabler GA: Will
probably be done via VDL2 initially outside of GA, but we will cost out a separate solution (e.g. 4G
LTE). For now, we'll call it a "GA datalink". Beneficial enabler but not for all related OI Steps: AUO0703: GA won?t use brake to vacate - AUO-0704: Possibly not used, GA unlikely to carry out tailored
arrivals in Step 1. (and is it really needed in low complexity TMAs?) - AUO-0302-A & AUO-0303-A &
CM-0601 & TS-0103: Can be done by GA, but a separate cost figure will need to be used as GA will
not use VDL2 (too costly). Note for GA, this may have an impact on IOC/FOC dates.Is this really
going to be used in low complexity TMAs in Step 1? - TS-0105: GA won?t do ASPA-S&M in Step 1AO-0205: GA may use D-TAXI - AUO-0602: not GA for small/remote airports Uplink of D-TAXI
clearances at small airports onto a moving map is unlikely. MIL: "Applies to military transport a/c the
same way as civil aircraft. For other types of a/c, depends on military data link accomodation,
covered by 9.20 & 15.2.8 (step 1). OC Tpt: 2019 (ref SPI reg) . IOC for civil is now 2018. Should align
IOC on SPI reg, i.e. 2019". V3 of 9.20/15.2.8 is 2013 => IOC 2017. Note: [Enabler being split by
WPB4.3 into 7 enablers according to type of clearance].
Expert Team comment: This enabler is not entirely linked to the considered OI (i.e not all the
elements can be considered as essential enablers for the OI considered). While the OI refers to the
capability of transmitting a 2d route clearance via datalink to an aircraft, with the objective of deconfliction, most of the services considered in this enabler are specific to other types of applications:
-
DCL/ATN – departure clearance transmitted via ATN network,(departure clearance is not a
tactical clearance with the objective of flights de-confliction)
-
Clearance for ATSA ITP – consists of a specific set of messages (preformatted) supporting
the ATC-Flight Crew communications in an In Trail; Procedure (ITP) in an oceanic/noncontinental environment. The ITP application does not include any changes in the 2D route
of the aircraft involved
-
CTA allocation – This is beyond the initial 2D scope of the clearance
-
Clearance for ASPA – currently the Airborne Spacing Application (ASPA) does not infer the
need for a route 2D clearance in the message exchange (while the EUROCAE/RTCA ED195
Safety Performance and interoperability Interval Management standardization document
imply the possibility of transmitting a route description in the manoeuvre clearance, the
ASPA Sequencing and Merging application considered in SESAR WP 5.6.6 is limited to
simple situations without the need for a route descriptor in the clearance)
-
Clearance for push back and taxi – this set of messages is specific to the ground
37 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
environment and therefore not applicable to the considered OI
A/C-37a
IOC:
31-122016
Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Downlink of trajectory data (e.g. way points, altitude, speed, time contraints and
prediction in the 4 dimensions, wind, weight etc) according to contract terms (e.g. change of the route
and/or constraints, deviation of the trajectory prediction continuously computed onboard versus the
previously shared trajectory prediction more than thresholds (TMR), on request or on periodic basis).
COMMENTS: This enabler includes ADS-C Aircraft Derived Data e.g. ETA min/max and Extended
Projected Profile (up to 128 points with e.g. estimates or associated constraints), contract established
with up to 5 ANSP during the whole flight from the gate No link with APV, Cruise Climb, CDA, CCD.
Missink link with I4d + CTA. V4 start depending on 2012 decision. Mainline: IOC 2016 or 2018
Boeing: Current capability BA: Few BA aircrafts are equipped with FANS (mainly large BA aircrafts).
Few BA aircrafts are equipped with ADS-C. ADS-C capability not planned. TBC with manufacturer for
ADS-C IOC. Beneficial enabler. GA: Critical component of ground-air shared picture of projected
trajectory. Needs a GA version apart from ADS-C-EPP. Beneficial enabler. As for the uplink enabler
(A/C-31a), there is no reason why GA could not downlink traj data over a suitable datalink. This
won?t be VDL2. Note for GA, this may have an impact on IOC/FOC dates. Is this really going to be
used in low complexity TMAs in Step 1? Mil: "Applies to military transport a/c the same way as civil
aircraft. For other types of a/c, depends on military data link accomodation, covered by 9.20 & 15.2.8
(step 1); we should not provide an IOC earlier than for civil a/c!"; V3 of 9.20/15.2.8 is 2013 => IOC
2018.
Expert Team comment:
This functionality can be considered as not being an essential enabler for the considered OI. While
the new 2D clearance is provided by the ATC the ground system can be updated automatically with
the new planned trajectory of the aircraft. However, in order to enable ATC support tools enhanced
functionality on the ground an updated trajectory from the concerned aircraft is required. If the OI
considers that automatic conflict detection tools are required on the ground (enhanced) then this
enabler is a requirement mainly for these tools.
If there is a requirement for ATC to monitor the aircraft trajectory more closely (see interpretation of
the OI) then an updated trajectory downlink is required.
38 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
CTE-C2a
IOC:
31-122003
Air-Ground existing datalink (VDL2 and AOA)
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
R
System
Stakeholder
o
o
DESCRIPTION: A-G datalink using VDL2 adn AOA (ACARS over AVLC) to support basic
controller/pilot CPDLC exchange. Technology exists.
COMMENTS: IOC date for the ground to be checked, make a link to IR datalink. IOC date for A320
in the past. MSW: IOC 2013 - D-TAXI usability in the context of Airport for this 'Business and Mission
Trajectory' OFA is questionned. Mainline: IOC date for the ground to be checked, make a link to IR
datalink. IOC date in the past for some aircraft Boeing: Current fleet capability BA: CPDLC capability
planned. TBC with BA manufacturers for IOC. Some concerns on interoperability with US. Some
concerns with VHF spectrum management. Beneficial enabler. GA: GA won't equip with VDL2
normally - let's cost it to show the expense though! Beneficial enabler.
Expert Team comment: There is a need to understand if this technology is applicable to the level of
performance and integrity required by the OI. Also while this enabler refers to basic controller pilot
communications, the 2D clearance message may be (even in the first phase) too complicate dto be
supported by this enabler
Management and delivery of En-Route ATC clearances to
the aircraft using datalink
ER APP ATC 121a
IOC:
31-122015
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: Changes required to FDP, HMI, ATC tools and air-ground data management to
support the provision of 2D precisions clearances to the aircraft.
COMMENTS: to cover aa gap in the Ois with repect to the ground infrastructure associated to
CPDLC and ADS-C in Step 1. CPDLC/CTA (ATN) is linked to AUO-0302(a) and ADS-C/EPP (ATN)
is linked to IS-0303(a) with V3 dates by 2013 and IOC dates by 2015 according to 9.1 I4D project.
Expert Team comment:
If the delivery of the 2D clearance via data-link is required this is an essential enabler.
39 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Management and delivery of Approach ATC clearances to
the aircraft using datalink
ER APP ATC 121b
IOC:
31-122015
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: Changes required to FDP, HMI, ATC tools and air-ground data management to
support the provision of 2D precisions clearances to the aircraft.
COMMENTS: to cover aa gap in the Ois with repect to the ground infrastructure associated to
CPDLC and ADS-C in Step 1. CPDLC/CTA (ATN) is linked to AUO-0302(a) and ADS-C/EPP (ATN)
is linked to IS-0303(a) with V3 dates by 2013 and IOC dates by 2015 according to 9.1 I4D project.
Expert Team comment:
If the delivery of the 2D clearance via data-link is required this is an essential enabler
6.2.2 Procedural
ATC Procedures for greater use of vertical performance, that
work in conjunction with 2D pre-allocated routes and
longitudinal separation constraints in En-route phase
PRO-054a
IOC:
31-122012
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures for greater use of vertical performance/constraints to greater
facilitation of separation management in the execution phase.
COMMENTS: Enabler not clear
Expert Team comment: The definition of this enabler is not clear. It is difficult to understand (through
the definition of the considered OI) what kind of new procedures (compared to today’s environment)
would be needed for clearing a 2D trajectory for de-confliction. Moreover, current ATC procedures
and working methods allow the implementation of vertical constraints for separation purposes (which
would mean that this enabler is already deployed)
ATC Procedures for greater use of vertical performance, that
work in conjunction with 2D pre-allocated routes and
longitudinal separation constraints in Terminal area
PRO-054b
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures for greater use of vertical performance/constraints in separation
management to greater facilitate more continuous climb and descent (incorporates constraints in
separation management, such as weather & wake vortex).
COMMENTS: Enabler not clear
Expert Team comment: The definition of this enabler is not clear. It is difficult to understand (through
the definition of the considered OI) what kind of new procedures (compared to today’s environment)
40 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
would be needed for clearing a 2D trajectory for de-confliction. Moreover, current ATC procedures
and working methods allow the implementation of vertical constraints for separation purposes (which
would mean that this enabler is already deployed)
ATC Procedures for conflict & conformance monitoring with
the introduction of controller support tools in En-route phase
PRO-055a
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
31-122018
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures for automated tactical conflict alerting and resolution tool, based on
surveillance separation and dynamic constraint management in the En-route Airspace.
COMMENTS: Enabler not clear.
Expert Team comment: This enabler is essential for the introduction of advanced conflict detection
and resolution tools in the en-route environment. New procedures and working methods would be
required for ATC to define the responsibilities and actions to be undertaken (by controller sector
teams) in detecting and solving conflicts) However the link between the definition of this enabler and
the considered OI is not really obvious.
With respect to the definition of the considered OI (see comments under the OI definition) procedures
would need to be introduced for monitoring the conflict resolution implementation and these may be
independent of the ATC support tools available (depending on the tools definition)
ATC Procedures for conflict & conformance monitoring with
the introduction of controller support tools in En-route phase
in Terminal area
PRO-055b
IOC:
31-122012
IOC
Sync
31-122018
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures for automated tactical conflict alerting and resolution tool, based on
surveillance separation and dynamic constraint management in the TMA airspace.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
Note – the title of this enabler appears not to be consistent with the definition (the title refers to both
en-route and TMA while the explanation only focuses at the TMA environment)
This enabler is essential for the introduction of advanced conflict detection and resolution tools in the
TMA environment. New procedures and working methods would be required for ATC to define the
responsibilities and actions to be undertaken (by controller sector teams) in detecting and solving
conflicts) However the link between the definition of this enabler and the considered OI is not really
obvious.
With respect to the definition of the considered OI (see comments under the OI definition) procedures
would need to be introduced for monitoring the conflict resolution implementation and these may be
independent of the ATC support tools available (depending on the tools definition)
41 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
ATC Procedures to prepare, issue and monitor Precision
Trajectory Clearances (PTC) 2D
PRO-128b
IOC:
31-122012
IOC
Sync
31-122018
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures - PTC-2D operations
COMMENTS: Enabler not clear
Expert Team comment:
It is not clear if new procedures would be needed to prepare a 2D clearance, however if new
functionality(e.g. data-link) will be available for delivering the clearance to the concerned flight then
associated procedures will be required. Also the implementation of the clearance by the concerned
aircraft may require specific new procedures.
ATC Procedures to prepare, issue and monitor Precision
Trajectory Clearances (PTC) 2D in Terminal airspace
PRO-128e
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
31-122018
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures - PTC-2D operations
COMMENTS: Enabler not clear
Expert Team comment:
It is not clear if new procedures would be needed to prepare a 2D clearance, however if new
functionality(e.g. data-link) will be available for delivering the clearance to the concerned flight then
associated procedures will be required. Also the implementation of the clearance by the concerned
aircraft may require specific new procedures.
Cockpit Procedure to comply to up linked constraints or
clearances
PRO-AC-31a
IOC:
31-122018
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Automatic loading onboard of up linked constraints or clearances
COMMENTS: Datalink Implementing rule will not be enforced untill 2013, which covers ascending
and descending transmission of data.
Expert Team comment:
This enabler is linked to AC31a.However depending on the performance and safety requirements
derived for the OI this functionality may be required
42 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.2.3 Institutional: None
<Enabler reference>
IOC:
<date>
IOC
Sync
<title>
<date>
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
<…>
<…>
Stakeholder
<…>
DESCRIPTION: <text from Data Set 9>
COMMENTS: <text from Data Set 9>
Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
6.2.4 Missing enabler?
There is a related enabler that appear to be missing in the list: HUM-AUO 0302-A: Initial training,
competence and/or adaptation of new/active operational staff for the application and use of the
enhancements and improvements included of the OI Step Clearances for start up/push back and for
taxi ,CTA assign, and 2DPTC on predefined route
The planning for the training set-up, and the training itself includes training needs identification for
affected actors with regard to new procedures and enhanced systems; Training refers to the
development of the skills, knowledge, understanding & attitude behaviour patterns required by an
individual in order to adequately perform their role & tasks ; potential negative effects of training
during the transition are identified; potential interference between existing and new knowledge & skills
are identified; potential negative effects of the training on operational task performance are identified;
performance and competence levels in order to perform a defined task safely and effciciently are
identified; provisions are made for emergency trainings ; the training covers normal operational
conditions/ abnormal operational conditions and conditions in degraded mode
6.3 Background & assumption
This form is focused on the WHAT of OI steps-related operations (which SESAR Specifictions, which services,
which actors, which flow of information, which specifications and standards, which supporting systems, which
OSEDs etc.).
Operating environments consist of:

TMA Very High Capacity Needs

TMA High Capacity Needs

TMA Medium Capacity Needs

TMA Low Capacity Needs

En-Route Very High Capacity Needs

En-Route High Capacity Needs

En-Route Medium Capacity Needs

En-Route Low Capacity Needs
43 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
SESAR WP related to the OI:

04.02 Consolidation of operational concept definition and validation including
operating mode and air-ground task sharing.

04.03 Integrated and pre-operational validation & cross validation

04.07.03 Use of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) for En Route Separation
Purposes

05.02 Consolidation of Operational Concept Definition and Validation

05.07.02 Development of 4D Trajectory-Based Operations for separation
management using RNAV/PRNAV

05.09 Usability Requirements and Human Factors Aspects for the Controller Working
Position
SESAR WP related to the enablers:

A/C-31a Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1
o
09.01 Airborne Initial 4D Trafectory Management
o 09.33 ATS Datalink Operational Improvements



A/C-37a Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
o
09.01 Airborne Initial 4D Trafectory Management
o
09.03 Interoperability of Business Trajectory and Mission Trajectory
CTE-C2a Air-Ground existing datalink (VDL2 and AOA)
o
10.07.01 Enhanced Datalink Features for all phase of flight
o
10.10.03 iCWP Prototyping
ER APP ATC121a/b Management and delivery of En-Route/Approach ATC
clearances to the aircraft using datalink
o
10.03.08 ATC System support to Precision Trajectory Clearances
o
10.04.02 Precision Conformance Monitoring
o
10.10.03 iCWP Prototyping

6.3.2 Aeronautical services involved
Identify all aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step. Aeronautical service is used in a wide
sense, services as defined by ICAO, SES regulations or other non-regulatory multi-lateral arrangements between
organisations, based on a service provision scheme, see Annex A1.
44 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis

Edition 00.00.00
air traffic control service
o
area control service
o
approach control service

communication, navigation, surveillance services

central flow management
o may require the knowledge of the change in the subject aircraft routes

local flow management (?)
o may require the knowledge of the change in the subject aircraft routes
6.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved
Identify all phases of flow management and/or phases of flight involved in the operations of the OI step
…Systems automating operations during these phases might be impacted to support operations related to this OI
Step or Not Applicable…see Annex A2.
Phases of flow management affected:

Tactical
Phases of flight affected:

initial climb

en route

approach

landing
6.3.4 Actors involved
Identify all actors involved in operations of the OI step. A list of actors is given hereafter in Annex A. Other actors
can be introduced provided that a basic definition is given to understand role and responsibility of these new
actors.






Pilot, responsible for
o Receiving the new 2D clearance
o Acknowledging the execution of the clearance
o Implementing the clearance
executive controller, responsible for
o assessing the information (e.g. potential conflict and proposed resolution)
o transmitting the clearance
o monitoring the implementation of the clearance
planning controller, responsible for
o supporting the tactical controller
multi-sector planner, responsible for
o supporting the tactical and planner controller
flow manager, responsible for
o updating the flow management system with the new clearance
traffic complexity manager, responsible for
45 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
o
o
Edition 00.00.00
assessing the traffic situation
deciding on actions to be taken if needed
6.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active





Tactical controller
o Communicates with pilot
o Communicates with planning controller/MSP/flow controller
o Receives information regarding the conflict and proposed resolution
pilot:
o Receives ATC clearance
o Provides trajectory update
traffic complexity manager
o Communicates to/from ATC, ACC supervisor, flow manager
o Receives information
.
6.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.



Navigation systems – new RNP requireemnts
Communication systems – data-link communications for route clearance
Flight Management System
6.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4
3. Systems and procedures for air traffic services, in particular flight data processing
systems, surveillance data processing systems and human-machine interface systems.
a. To allow processing, delivery and conformance monitoring of the 2D clearance
4. Communication systems and procedures for ground-to-ground, air-to-ground and air-toair communications.
a. To facilitate the delivery of the clearance and the trajectory update
5. Navigation systems and procedures
a. To allow the implementation and design of precision trajectory in the route
structure.
6. Surveillance systems and procedures.
a. Potential new surveillance performance requirements to allow the monitoring of
the implementation of the PTC
.
46 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
6.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
AGDLS-ATC-AC-1: Published ICAO PANS-ATM for initial ADS-C based services;


automatic downlink of 4D Trajectory data according to contract terms via ADS-C
EPP/ADD is supported
enables A/C-37a Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
AGDLS-ATC-AC-10: Update ICAO Doc 9880 for aligning PM-ADS-C and PM-FIS with PM-CPDLC


On-going work of WG78/SC214 in coordination with ICAO ACP WG-M The current 9880
includes PM-CPDLC only
enables A/C-37a Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
AGDLS-ATC AC-11a New SPR for PM ADS-C services i4D –


On-going work of WG78/SC214
enables A/C-37a Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
AGDLS-ATCAC-11c - New IOP for PM ADS-C services i4D


On-going work of WG78/SC214
enables A/C-37a Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
AGDLS-ATC AC-12a - Update ICAO PANS-ATM Doc 4444 for optimised CPDLC message set
including oceanic and new continental needs –


Planned work of WG78/SC214 in coordination with ICAO ACP WG-M
enables A/C-31a Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1
AGDLS-ATC AC-14b - New SPR for data link exchange of Instructions and clearances (ACL) over
ATN B2


On-going work of WG78/SC214
enables A/C-31a Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1
AGDLS-ATC AC-15b - New IOP for datalink exchange of Instructions and clearances (ACL) over
ATN B2


On-going work of WP78/SC214
enables A/C-31a Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 1
Note: the above standardization documentation is considered as institutional enabler in the ATM
Master Plan


Avionics standards
o EUROCAE SPR documents are required for data-link communication
o Navigation standards
Ground system standards
o EUROCAE SPR documents are required for data-link communication
o
47 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
6.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
IR for RNP
6.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.

This OI is part of the:
o Operational Focus Area 03.03.03 Enhanced Decision Support tools and
Performance Based Navigation which is part of
o B1-10 Improved Operations through free routing
6.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
6.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
6.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
6.5.3 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
6.5.4 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
48 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
7 Conflict Dilution by Upstream Action on Speed (OI STEP
CM-0403)
This description form is a vehicle to summarise what is expected to be achieved operationally from the OI step
and who are the actors involved, with the aim to identify all involved stakeholder groups and expected actions to
implement the OI step.
This description form must be completed before starting the development of an Implementation Objective.
However, it is not self-sufficient as it does not address any geographical applicability, or a time horizon for its
putting into operation. These elements will have to be part of the analysis foreseen to be conducted in Q1 2013,
based on the positive results of this one.
In case you identify any critical issues with regards to the scope and present level of description of preidentified OI steps or enablers please contact the Support & Validation Office with a qualification for your
change request.
7.1 OI Step description
CM0403
Conflict Dilution by Upstream Action on Speed
IOC:
31-12-2018
DESCRIPTION: The system - through use of better navigation accuracy, FMS performance
and air/ground communication facilities - is able to 'dissolve' conflicts by minor adjustments
of flight parameters (vertical/horizontal speed, rate of climb/descent) not directly perceivable
by the controller and not conflicting with their own action and responsibility. E.2.6.2.3.2 TCSA (Trajectory Control Through Ground Based Speed Adjustments).
RATIONALE: The objective is to reduce the number of residual conflicts, thus increasing
sector safety and productivity while maintaining controllers in the decision-making loop. This
air-ground cooperative and human-centred ATC automation allows transition towards further
automation while respecting the operator cognitive processes and taking account of the fact
that only some aircraft will be equipped.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
In answer to the IMPORTANT NOTE reported below, the relationship of this OI step with the topic “Conflict
Management & Automation” should be confirmed. As matter of fact current validation exercises are evidencing
that controllers recognize TC-SA as a viable solution in resolving conflicts by dilution techniques in En Route
context. In particular TC-SA has been identified as a strategic de-conflicting service aiming at adjusting the 4D
planning trajectory in order to optimize separation management for medium and /or long term conflicts (e.g. 20’25’ look-ahead time). It is based on the assumption that early resolution of conflicts provides the potential for
controllers’ workload reduction. Furthermore, TC-SA aims at de-conflicting automatically the situation although
the ATCOs remain full responsible for the entire traffic.
TC-SA solves conflicts by sending CTOs to all the aircraft involved in the conflicts, which means that TC-SA
eligible conflicts are those involving i4D equipped aircraft or (in the TC-SA “mixed version”) at least one i4D
equipped aircraft. Consequently conflict dilution techniques will be applicable if a full set of advanced controlled
tools (using SBT/RB) updated with better performance conflict detection using shared 4D trajectories (reduced
uncertainty on trajectory prediction) will be implemented and available for operations.
Currently It is foreseen that in 2017 the percentage of i4D equipped aircraft will hardly reach the 30%; this could
represent a problem in consideration that the initial operational capability associate to the OI is established by the
end 2018.
The effectiveness of conflict dilution by upstream action on speed is supposed to be explored through TC-SA
49 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
either working standalone or, in conjunction with the CD aid for planning and tactical controllers.
Hence the assessment of the impact of this OI on reduction of residual conflicts (which means controllers’
workload) will include the possibility to combine two services in carrying out conflict management
IMPORTANT NOTE: Relationship of this OI step with the topic ‘Conflict Management &
Automation’ was presented with a question mark in the assessment carried out in Phase 1 of
the PCP project.
7.2 Related Enablers description
The information presented is extracted from SESAR Data Set 9. To note that Enablers with Initial Operational
Capability (IOC) before 12/2013 belong to the Deployment Baseline. The full list of Stakeholder categories
presented in the Enabler tables is available in Annex 0 of this document and is consistent with the information
provided in the European ATM Master Plan Portal.
7.2.1 System
A/C-31b
IOC:
---
Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 2
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Uplink of clearances or instructions in step 2 e.g. CTOs and 2D/3D PTC
COMMENTS: Uplink ot target times should be part of D-TAXI services according to
WG78/SC214
Expert Team comment:
IOC related to this enabler is not available.
It should be verified that the IOC related to this enabler is consistent with the IOC of the CM-0403
50 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Onboard management of minor speed adjustment
generated by ground system
A/C-35
IOC:
31-122018
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Onboard management of minor speed adjustment automatically generated
by ground system for conflict dilution
COMMENTS: 9.2, speed change even if minor requires the pilot in the loop, speed
instruction already exists via CPDLC / ACL (L2K+), speed could be replaced by CTO
instruction, so, linked to A/C-11 & A/C-31a, IOC 2018 to be confirmed IOC dates
correspond to V3 end dates + 2 or 3 years, i.e. initial operational capabilities if
standardisation is available, there is no major certification issue and there is a window of
opportunity for the implementation within the aircraft. GA: Not likely to be used on GA
aircraft. Unlikely to be needed.
Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
A/C-37a
IOC:
31-122016
Downlink of trajectory data according to contract terms
IOC
Sync
31-122016
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Downlink of trajectory data (e.g. way points, altitude, speed, time contraints
and prediction in the 4 dimensions, wind, weight etc) according to contract terms (e.g.
change of the route and/or constraints, deviation of the trajectory prediction continuously
computed onboard versus the previously shared trajectory prediction more than thresholds
(TMR), on request or on periodic basis).
COMMENTS: This enabler includes ADS-C Aircraft Derived Data e.g. ETA min/max and
Extended Projected Profile (up to 128 points with e.g. estimates or associated constraints),
contract established with up to 5 ANSP during the whole flight from the gate No link with
APV, Cruise Climb, CDA, CCD. Missink link with I4d + CTA. V4 start depending on 2012
decision. Mainline: IOC 2016 or 2018 Boeing: Current capability BA: Few BA aircrafts are
equipped with FANS (mainly large BA aircrafts). Few BA aircrafts are equipped with ADS-C.
ADS-C capability not planned. TBC with manufacturer for ADS-C IOC. Beneficial enabler.
GA: Critical component of ground-air shared picture of projected trajectory. Needs a GA
version apart from ADS-C-EPP. Beneficial enabler. As for the uplink enabler (A/C-31a),
there is no reason why GA could not downlink traj data over a suitable datalink. This won’t
be VDL2. Note for GA, this may have an impact on IOC/FOC dates. Is this really going to be
used in low complexity TMAs in Step 1? Mil: "Applies to military transport a/c the same way
as civil aircraft. For other types of a/c, depends on military data link accomodation, covered
by 9.20 & 15.2.8 (step 1); we should not provide an IOC earlier than for civil a/c!"; V3 of
9.20/15.2.8 is 2013 => IOC 2018.
Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
51 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
FDP modified to allow management of those aspects of
4D trajectories implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100a2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: --COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
DESCRIPTION: Enhanced FDP, modified to allow management of all the aspects of 4D trajectories
implemented in Step2 (including RBT, TMR, etc.)
IOC related to this enabler is not available.
It should be verified that the IOC related to this enabler is consistent with the IOC of the CM-0403
Enhance En-route ATC Controller human machine
interaction management function 4D trajectory aspects
implemented in step2 (TMR, etc...).
ER APP ATC 100b2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: Controller workstation, modified to allow management of all aspects of 4D
trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal, constraints,
Pilot request, TMR, CTA, etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
IOC related to this enabler is not available. Does IOC date correspond to V3 end date + 2 or 3
years? V3 en date is 31/12/2014, the corresponding IOC date should be 31/12/2016-17?
52 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Enhance En-route ATC monitoring aids function to use
4D trajectory aspects implemented in step2 (TMR,
etc...).
ER APP ATC 100c2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: flight path monitor and tools modified to allow management of all aspects
of 4D trajectories implemented in Step1 (including clearances, RBT update proposal,
constraints, CTA, etc.).
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
IOC related to this enabler is not available. Does IOC date correspond to V3 end date + 2 or 3
years? V3 en date is 01/07/2015, the corresponding IOC date should be 01/07/2017-18?
Conflict detection update and Efficient Conflict
resolution function that make use of RBT and trajectory
information
ER APP ATC 100d2
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: Conflict detection update and efficient Conflict resolution function that
make use of RBT and trajectory information and where appropriate that make use of a
conflict dilution logic
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
IOC related to this enabler is not available. Does IOC date correspond to V3 end date + 2 or 3
years? V3 en date is 31/12/2013, the corresponding IOC date should be 31/12/2015-16?
ER APP ATC 147
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
Develop conflict resolution functionalities
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: A conflict resolution functionality is developed in support of the controller.
This functionality will in particular be able to propose speed adjustment as part of the
resolution strategy
COMMENTS: ---
53 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Expert Team comment:
IOC related to this enabler is not available. Does IOC date correspond to V3 end date + 2 or 3
years? V3 en date is 31/01/2016, the corresponding IOC date should be 31/01/2018-19?
New CPDLC messages in support of step2 trajectory
management requirements (e.g. TC-SA).
ER APP ATC 150
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
System
R
Stakeholder
ANSP Civil
DESCRIPTION: Ground implementation of the CPDLC exchanges for TC-SA and any other
need in support of trajectory management.
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
IOC related to this enabler is not available.
It should be verified that the IOC related to this enabler is consistent with the IOC of the CM-0403
7.2.2 Procedural
ATC Procedures for Trajectory Control by Ground
Based Speed Adjustment (TC-SA)
PRO-114b
IOC:
01-012017
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
Unassigned
DESCRIPTION: ATC Procedures - TC-SA
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
Cockpit Procedure to manage onboard the up linked
minor speed adjustment
PRO-AC-35
IOC:
01-012017
IOC
Sync
31-122018
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Procedural
R
Stakeholder
DESCRIPTION: Automatic minor speed adjustment
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
54 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
7.2.3 Institutional
Detailed supplementary specs under ICAO PBN
framework to support the specific performance based
elements required for military NAV systems (TACAN,
GPS/PPS, GALILEO/PRS, INS, MMS) to be accepted
as means of compliance for advanced NAV and
trajectory mgmt.
MIL-0301
IOC:
---
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Institutional
R
Stakeholder
o
DESCRIPTION: Trajectory management and improved navigation
COMMENTS: Potential standardisation enabler currently under review by C.03 - CMAC
(Jpe) : New specification for advanced RNP and RNP on approach for mil a/c.. FR: To be
allocated to CC aircraft and to stakeholder Airspace User. Ois to be reviewed (step 1 Ois
OK?). All PBN dates not before 2020 => MIL IOC>2020
Expert Team comment: specify here any complementary comments you may have with regards to the
description of the Enabler
The IOC related to this enabler has not been provided.
Since all PBN dates are not before 2020 and consequently MIL IOC >2020, this enabler is probably not
consistent with the OI CM-0403 (out of time window 2016-2020)
55 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
7.2.4 Human
Initial training, competence and/or adaptation of
new/active operational staff for the application and
use of the enhancements and improvements
included in the OI Step Conflict Dilution by
Upstream Action on Speed
HUM-CM-0403
IOC:
31/12/2017
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Human
R
Stakeholder
DESCRIPTION: Competence requirements are identified; potential interference between
existing and new knowledge & skills are identified; impact on operator licensing has been
identified; The identified competence needs are verified by reviewing the predicted impacts
of the Onboard revision of RBT/RMT on staff and comparing it to competence requirements;
staff competence is validated against competence requirements; Planning for the training
set-up, and the training itself includes training needs identification for affected actors with
regard to new procedures and system; potential negative effects of training during the
transition are identified; potential negative effects of the training on operational task
performance are identified; provisions are made for emergency trainings ; the training
covers normal operational conditions/ abnormal operational conditions and conditions in
degraded mode; the system is designed according to HF design principles guranteeing that
the training requirements are reduced as much as possible
COMMENTS: --Expert Team comment:
This enabler is included in SESAR Data Set 9 but it has not been included in the template.
In the change request to send to Support and Validation Office, this enabler should be included
Social, people management, change and transition
management factors for the OI Step Conflict
Dilution by Upstream Action on Speed
HUM-CM-0403-01
IOC:
31/12/2017
IOC
Sync
---
Required/EnHancement/Alternate
Category:
Human
R
Stakeholder
DESCRIPTION: This includes the establishment of Social Dialogue as main enabler;
Potential social and cultural problems linked to automation are identified ; their
consequences are anticipated and methods managing social factors are in place to mitigate
negative consequences; also includes the establishment of participative Processes and
Procedures as main enablers; Methods to manage significant changes and their demand for
human transition are in place, to facilitate positive response of people to unlearn `old? and
learn `new? skills, to adapt to new structures and working methods.
COMMENTS: ---
56 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
Expert Team comment:
This enabler is included in SESAR Data Set 9 but it has not been included in the template.
In the change request to send to Support and Validation Office, this enabler should be included
7.3 Background & assumption
This form is focused on the WHAT of OI steps-related operations (which SESAR Specifictions, which services,
which actors, which flow of information, which specifications and standards, which supporting systems, which
OSEDs etc.).
TC-SA is based on the assumption that early resolution of conflicts could provide the potential for
controllers’ workload reduction. It is expected to reduce the controller’s workload associated with
routine monitoring and conflict detection as well as reduce the interventions of ATC in changing flight
profiles to resolve potential conflicts.
TC-SA is a de-conflicting service aiming at adjusting the 4D planning trajectory in order to optimise
separation management for medium and/or long term conflicts (e.g. next 20/30minutes conflicts). The
trajectory adjustment relies, among others, on FMS generated trajectory that will facilitate more
reliable information and potentially better decision aid performance.
The computed speed adjustments are translated into a Controlled Time Over (CTO) which are
operated via Datalink between ground system and airborne system, with no controller intervention,
although information are displayed on flights that are under TC-SA “control”.
It is worth mentioning that CTO are also to be used for arrival and departure management
(AMAN/DMAN) as studied in SESAR WP 5.6. (for this use it is called RTA or CTA). Therefore, ground
coordination will be needed in order to send the aircraft the most appropriate time constraint.
Furthermore, in order to guarantee the efficiency of this service it is required that a sufficient
proportion of aircraft are equipped with i4D-capable FMS.
7.3.1 Related SESAR Specifications
Identify here related SESAR Specifications (OSED, SPR, INTEROP) and any other reference documents
(VALPs, any other relevant project/analysis results specifying the source).
The related SESAR specifications which are related to the OI step CM-0403 Conflict Dilution by Upsteam action
on Speed are associated mainly to the operative project P04.07.02 and technical project P10.04.01.
The results currently provided by these projects and dealing with conflict dilution by TC-SA – Trajectory Control
Through Ground Based Speed Adjustments are
P04.07.02 V2 Development and validation plan_1 (VALP)
P04.07.02 Preliminary V2 OSED 1 (OSED)
P04.07.02 V2 OSED 1 (OSED)
P04.07.02 V2 Validation Report_1 (VALR)
P10.04.01 Conflict Detection and Resolution Tools System Requirements – Step1 (TS).
Some of these contributions have already been hand over, the other will be soon finalized
57 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
7.3.2 Aeronautical services involved
Identify all aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step. Aeronautical service is used in a wide
sense, services as defined by ICAO, SES regulations or other non-regulatory multi-lateral arrangements between
organisations, based on a service provision scheme, see Annex A1.
Aeronautical services involved in the operations of the OI step CM-0403 are:
• air traffic control service (area control service, approach control service or aerodrome control service)
• communication, navigation, surveillance services
• flight information service
• air traffic advisory service
• aeronautical information services
• airspace management
7.3.3 Phases of flow management / Phases of flight involved
Identify all phases of flow management and/or phases of flight involved in the operations of the OI step
…Systems automating operations during these phases might be impacted to support operations related to this OI
Step or Not Applicable…see Annex A2.
Phase of flight involved in the operations of the OI step CM-0403 is:
• en route
• approach
7.3.4 Actors involved
Identify all actors involved in operations of the OI step. A list of actors is given hereafter in Annex A. Other actors
can be introduced provided that a basic definition is given to understand role and responsibility of these new
actors.
The actor involved in operations of the OI step CM-0403 is
• pilot
Air crew considers the ground system as a unique actor, therefore it requires synchronization between ground
services. If ground system can be considered as an actor, it should be included besides the pilot in the list of
actors involved.
When TC-SA is working in conjunction with the CD aid for planning and tactical controllers also other two actors
should be involved in the operations of OI step CM-0403:
• executive controller
• planning controller
• multi-sector planner
• pilot
7.3.5 Flows of information between actors
Provide a high level description of flows of information circulated amongst actors and clarify in which phases of
flow management and flight phases, those flows of information are active.
The high level description of flows of information circulated amongst the pilot and the ground system during the
flight phase en route is the following one.
58 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
If/when a CTO update is required to achieve a TC-SA solution, the aircrew will receive a new CTO requests
from the ATC system. The aircrew will need to assess the request, answer the CPDLC messages related to the
suggested CTO (accept, reject, standby), and update the FMS with the new CTO.
7.3.6 Impact on airborne systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on A/C systems, in terms of capability upgrade (performance, functionality) and
any operational approval, authorisation granted by authorities, required to use this new capability…or Not
Applicable.
The OI step CM-0403 assumes that the aircraft is is i4D-capable.
It means that:
- the 4DTRAD process can be applied
- the FMS is i4D-capable so that the flight can apply an uplinked CTO with the required accuracy (10s
or 30s)
7.3.7 Impact on ground systems
Outline the impact of the OI step on EATMN systems, in terms of new capability (performance,
functionality)…or… Not Applicable. See Annex 4.
The OI step CM-0403 assumes that the ground systems is able to send time constraints to the aircraft.
7.4 Related standardization and regulatory activities
7.4.1 Standards
Identify applicable standards considered as the baseline to automate the aforementioned flows of information and
apply relevant operational procedures.
7.4.2 Impact on SES / EASA Regulatory frameworks
Outline the impact of the OI step on the SES and EASA regulatory frameworks. For example, availability of
Community Specifications, Certification Specifications necessary to support implementation …or… Not
Applicable.
7.4.3 Link to ICAO Global Concept Blocks
Outline the link to ICAO Blocks to anticipate any issue that might hamper harmonisation and interoperability of
deployed solution. If needed, detail the status of ICAO documents on peculiar topics of relevance to implement
the OI step. …or… Not Applicable.
7.5 Maturity and implementation considerations
7.5.1 Maturity Issues including link with the SJU Release Strategy
Identify here any pre-identified maturity issues. Note that it was agreed that not all changes should be considered
“fully mature”(V3 mature) at the time of preparing the PCP. However there shall be sufficient confidence that V3
maturity will be achieved up to an including Release 4.
7.5.2 Any other deployment considerations not covered above
Identify here any additional deployment considerations that you would like to highlight that cannot be directly
derived from the information provided in the sections above.
59 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING
PCP Expert Group 5
Deployment Analysis
Edition 00.00.00
-END OF DOCUMENT-
60 of 61
©SESAR JOINT UNDERTAKING