IFATCA The Controller - April 1963 by IFATCA

~~&_路路 ~-

TELEFUNKEN radar for safe guidance from take-off to landing "

Visit Telefunken af the Hanover Fair 1963. You will find us in Hall 13 at Stand 106

TELEFUNKEN

MARCONl'S

7,000Mc/s rodor doto link system

Radar data links allow radar aerials to be sited remotely from control centres to take full advantage of ideal site conditions.

designed to moke lnternotionol lnteuroted

Air Ironic Control oreolilY NOW

The U.K. airways system uses Marconi 7000 Mc/s radar data links.

MARCONI ~

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS ~,___~ M ARCONl 'S

SURV EYED 路 PLANNED . INSTALLED . MAINTAI NED

W IRELESS

TELEGRAPH

COMPAN Y

LIMITEO

CHELMSFORD.

ESS EX,

ENGL A ND

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL

T elevisio n c an present tabulated fli ght prog ress information in stan t aneou sly w herever it is required in an air traffic co ntrol centre.

TAKE A GOOD VIEW

DATA TRANSMISSION FOR AIR TR A FFIC CONTROL PA S SEN G ER H A NDLIN G INFORMATION AR RIVA L / DEPARTURE INFORMATION FLI G HT S CHEDULE INFO R MATION FLIGHT M OV EM ENT INFORMATION W IND TUNNEL OB S ERVATION M E T . B R IEFIN G D O C UMENT TR A N S MI S SION TR A ININ G FLI G HT TE S TIN G R UN WAY OB SE RV A TION APRO N S U R VEILL A N CE

APRON SURVEILLA NCE

Television presents an allround view of the c ompl ete parki ng area, el im inatin g th e bli nd spots and enabli ng the marshalli n g supervisor to see the number and d ispo si tio n of aircraft anywhere on t he apron.

MARCONI TELEVI SION FOR AVIATION Closed C ircuit Television D ivision

MARCONI'$ W IRELESS TELEGRAP H COMPA NY LI MITED BASI LDON, ESSEX, EN GLA ND

RESEARCH

Observat ion o f after bu rning in a gas tu rbine engine at a gove rnment resear ch st ation. T his is t yp ica l of th e many research appli cat ions fo r which te levisio n is being us ed to-day.

IFATCA JOURNAL OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL

THE CONTROLLER Volume 2 • No. 2

Frankfurt am Main, April 1963

Publisher: International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations, Cologne-Wahn Airport, Germany.

Elective Officers of IFATCA: L. N. Tekstra, President; Maurice Cerf, First Vice President; Roger Sadet, Second Vice President; Hans W. Thau, Secretary; Henning Throne, Treasurer; Walter Endlich, Editor.

Editor: Walter H. Endlich, 6471 Rommelhausen, Wilhelmstrasse 10, Phone Frankfurt 20821.

Production and Advertising Sales Office: W.Kramer&Co., 6 Frankfurt am Main NO 14, Barnheimer landwehr57a, Phone 44325, Postscheckkonto Frankfurt am Main 11727. Rate Card Nr. 1.

Printed by: W.Kramer & Co., 6 Frankfurt am Main NO 14, Bornheimer Landwehr 57a.

Subscription Rate: OM 8,- per annum (in Germany).

Contributors are expressing their personal points of view and opinions, which must not necessarily coinci~e with those of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations (IFATCA).

CONTENTS

IFATCA does not assume responsibility for statements made and opinions expressed, it does only accept responsibility for publishing these contributions.

London Report

Contributions are welcome as are comments and criticism. No payment can be made for manuscripts submit· ted for publication in •The Controller•. The E~itor re· serves the right to make any editorial changes 1~ ma~u scripts, which he believes will improve the material without altering the intended meaning.

Written permission by the Editor is necessary for re· printing any part of this Journal.

Advertisers in this Issue: The Decca Navigator Company, Ltd. (Inside Back Cover). N. V. Hollandse Signoalapparaten (Back Cover). Marconi"s Wireless Telegraph Company, Ltd. (1, 2). Telefunken GmbH (Inside Fronl Cove~).

Tirey K. Vickers Messages of Welcome to the 2nd Annual IFATCA Conference

Official Conference Report of the 2nd Annual IFATCA Confe~~

Appendices to the Conference Report

Attendance List

Letters to the Editor

Controller's Puzzle

Corporation Members

of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations Cossor Radar and Electronics Limited, Harlow, England The Decca Navigator Company Limited, London ELLIOT Bros. Ltd., London Hazeltine Corporation, Little Neck, N. Y., USA IBM World Trade Europe Corporation, Paris, France KLM Royal Dutch Airlines The Hague, Netherlands Marcon i's Wireless Telegraph Company, Ltd. Radar Division Chelmsford, Essex, England N.V. Hollandse Signaalapparaten Hengelo, Netherlands Telefunken GmbH, Ulm/Donau, Germany Texas Instruments Inc., Dallas 22, Texas, USA

The International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations would like to invite all corporations, organizations, and institutions interested in and concerned with the maintenance and promotion of safety in air traffic to join their organization as Corporation Members. Corporation Members support the aims of the Federation by means of an annual subscription and by supplying the Federation with technical information. The Federation's international journal "The Controller" is offered as a platform for the discussion of technical and procedural developments in the field of air traffic control. For further information on Corporation Membership please contact Mr. H. W. Thau, Secretary, IFATCA, Cologne-Wahn Airport, Germany.

by Tirey K. Vickers London Report Hazeltine Corp. Highlights of the Second Annual IFATCA Conference The following is on extract of an article which was originally published in the US Journal of Air Traffic Control. It is reprinted with kind permission of the Editor, Mr. Donald J. Byers. Tirey Vickers (Vic), who had come to London with ATCA's Executive Director Ed Cockerham, is already well known to our readers, and his impressions of the Second IFATCA Conference will, un· doubtedly, meet great interest. Ed.

England didn't have a Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers, during the Middle Ages. But they have one now, and it still observes many of the colorful old guild hall traditions and ceremonies. From April 29 to May 2, the UK Guild was the host association for the Second Annual Convention of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers Associations, at the Bennington Hotel in London. There were processionals, recessionals, Grand Wardens, Past Masters, ribbons and medallions galore. And when the Toastmaster in his long crimson coat boomed out "Pray Silence!" at the start of the meeting, even Mr. Halaby would have been impressed. Ed Cockerham and I sat there wondering how all this would go over at Newark, or the North Texas Chapter. Administrative Sessions While Ed was sitting in on Subcommittee A, I was watching the goings-on in Subcommittee B. This group had the job of preparing resolutions and guidance material for the IFATCA delegates to the 1963 RAC/OPS Meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in Montreal. In getting things ready to take to ~ontreal, Subc~m mitte B worked over many different sub1ects. The resulting recommendations included the following: (1) simplification of essential traffic information, (2) support for an ICAO study for the possible revisi~n of horizontal separ~ tion standards, (3) allocation of flight levels by the semicircular rule instead of the U.S. quadrantal rule, (4) stratification of airspace to separate various types and speeds of aircraft, (5) extended use of flight record~rs to collect data necessary to studies of airspace r.equ1rem~nts, (6) clarification of ATC responsibility for taking terrain clearance into account in altitude assignments, (7) simplification of designators for airways and reporting points, (8) commencement of a study to resolve civil/military coordination problems. Technical Sessions The technical tours arranged for IFATCA delegates were excellent this year, as they were last year in Paris. Following are the highlights which appeared most interesting from the ATC standpoint. Bright Tube: At the Marconi Research Laboratories at Great Beddow we saw some of the latest British developments in bright tubes and LP displays. One new device was the 11-inch direct view storage tube (DVST) produced by a Marconi affiliate, the English Electric Valve Company. This tube produces an extremely bright radar picture that is visible in direct sunlight. Thus it is particularly useful for control tower installations. Last fall, a 5-inch DVST was installed in the tower of London's new Gatwick Airpoint, to give the departure controller a decentered PPI display covering the last ten miles of the

approach path. It was so useful in helping to keep the outbounds properly separated from the inbounds, that a similar DVST has now been ordered for the control tower at London's Heathrow Airport. A noteworthy feature of the English Electric 11-inch DVST is that it has only one neck, like a normal radar tube; the flood gun is circular and is located around the tube neck. This DVST has a controllable memory feature, which lets you adjust the length of radar target trails. It also has an instant erase feature which is nice to have around when you are changing video maps, range scales, or decentering adjustments. The resolution of the 11-inch DVST is not quite as good as that of a conventional radar indicator. However, further development is being conducted, to improve this characteristic. LP Display: Although hi-fl fans might assume that this term refers to a radar rotation rate of 33 1hrpm, the term LP, as used by Marconi, is the abbreviation for Labelled Plan. The LP Display is a PPI presentation with alphanumeric labels or tags on the various aircraft targets. Marconi has worked almost exclusively with the development and refinement of primary, rather than secondary, r~dar. As may be expected, their LP tags are tied to the aircraft targets through the use of primary radar tracking gates, instead of active-readout beacon decoders. The tracking gates are operated by a digital computer, This computer also produces the waveforms which wiggle the writing beam between radar sweeps, to paint the target labels on the radar picture. One of the most unusual features of the Marconi LP display is that the radar tube uses two separate deflection yokes. One provides the necessary deflection for the radar sweep, and also for slewing the beam to the center of the next alphanumeric character location. The other yoke provides the little wiggles necessary to trace out the shape of the character or symbol. When the symbol has been completed, the first yoke slews the writing beam to the center of the next character location, or back to the main bang to start another radar sweep. By redesiging their deflection circuit with transistors instead of vacuum tubes, Marconi has reduced retrace time by 50% and thus has provided more time for the beam to write characters between sweeps. Using the same beam-wiggling techniques described above, the LP computer can also generate supplementary tabular flight progress displays for the controller. Th~ characters are exceptionally crisp and legible. Marconi expects that such display will someday take the place of flight progress strips. They plan to use video recording to provide a backup for the controller, in case of display failure. Marconi has designed a transistorized monitor unit, known as the S-3101, as a modular display for presenting supplementary tabular information.

,--

On the LP radar display, the target label consists of one letter, one tracking symbol, and one digit. This label is selectable by the controller, who uses a ball-tracker instead of a joystick, to move the tracking symbol over the blip, for lockon. The same label (for example, J-4) appears also on the associated tabular display, to form the connecting link or index between the aircraft flight data on the tabular display, and the aircraft target on the radar scope. The brevity of the Marconi radar target label is based on the worth~ objective of keeping the symbology as simple as possible, in order to minimize clutter and data overlap on the radar scope. However, I still remember the trouble we encountered at Indianapolis several years ago, in testing a similar labeling system. In heavy traffic conditions, the job of translating the target label back into the aircraft identification (and vice-versa) used up a surprising amount of controller time and mental effort.

HARCO: The Decca Navigator Company made one of their test aircraft available to IFATCA delegates to demonstr~te their new .HARCO (Hyperbolic ARea COverage} navigation system. L1~e Decca, HARCO is a low frequency (50-150 KC). hype~bolic pha.se comparison system; it provides the pilot with a continuous plot of his position on a roller map display known as a Flight Log. ' One ~f th~ ~icest t~in~s about a pictorial navigation display like this 1s that 1t gives the pilot plenty of advance warning when a course change is coming up; so he can anticipate precisely when to . start his turn to avoid a n overshoot. He a Iso gets an immediate indication of wind drift, so that he c.an co~pens~te for it right away and get back on the desired line. With these capabilities, there is no need for monstrous ~SO holding areas. The first time around a H_ARCO holding pattern, we were staying well within 1/4 mile of the racetrack marked on the map even on the turns. The straightaways were much closer. ' The latest HARCO system includes a little 16-pound transistorized computer known as Omnitrac II. This device converts the hyperbolic coordinates into X-Y form fa the display. It also provides another very useful functionr known as the "Ghost Beacon" feature; the computer will instantly calculate the b~aring and distance to any selected point within 256 miles of the aircraft. It will continuously update this information in flight, thus providing a synthetic VORTAC-type readout (on supplementary indicators on the instrument panel) to the point selected by the pilot. The bearing element of this output will not only provide left-right indications for the pilot, but it can also be fed into the auto-pilot coupler, to guide the aircraft automatically along the desired track.

Data Link: Another new feature of the HARCO System is an air-to-ground data link which can automatically transmit the aircraft position coordinates to the ground equipment. At the present time the ground equipment is hooked experimentally to an X-Y plotter in the Decca laboratory. Here it plots a continuous track of the HARCO test aircraft, on a map similar to the map used in the airborne Flight Log. At the conclusion of my demonstration flight I took the Flight log plot from the aircraft and held it up to a window. On top of this plot, I superimposed the flight plot produced by the data link ground equipment. The two plots coincided exactly, like carbon copies, to demon-

strate conclusively the extremely high accuracy of the data link system.

Push-Button Airliner: At the DeHavilland Aircraft Co., at Hatfield, IFATCA delegates got the opportunity to look over the new DeHavilland Trident, which is the first jet transport designed from the ground up for automatic flight, approach, and landing. With lines similar to the Boeing 727, the Trident is a medium-range transport powered by 3 tail-mounted Rolls-Royce "Spey" turbo-fan engines. It carries about 85 passengers, and its most economical speed/altitude combination is 503 knots at 32,000 feet. The pilot's cockpit is equipped with PVD's (Para-Visual Directors) - small barber-pole devices driven by the flight director. These cylindrical display rotate to provide vertical and directional guidance. They are designed so the pilot can read them with his peripheral vision, even though he may be looking somewhere else. The Trident has what is probably the most advanced auto-pilot system in the world. The system can hold the aircraft at any predetermined flight attitude, altitude, air speed, heading, or Mach number. It can descend the aircraft at any preselected rate and latch on to any preselected altitude level. It can intercept and track the localizer and the glide path, with automatic Doppler drift correction. It can flare the approach path automatically to land the aircraft gently on the runway. Each control surface of the Trident is driven by three separate hydraulic systems, any one of which can complete the flight if the other two fail. The Tridents going into service this year have duplex auto-pilot channels. If one channel goes out, the auto-pilot will disconnect automatically, and simultaneously warn the pilot. Reductions in weather minima will be limited only by the pilot's ability to monitor and take over control manually if the auto-pilot disconnects. Ultimately a third auto-pilot channel will be added, to give full triplex operation. Eventually, this should permit weather minima to be reduced to zero-zero, for if one auto-pilot channel goes out, the two remaining channels will "out vote" the malfunction, and retain full automatic control to complete the landing. In this case, the pilot does not prepare to take over; indeed, in truly zero-zero conditions he could not do so. The triplex system will be designed for a reliability requirement of not mor7 than l failure in 10 million landings. Perhaps the most important limiting factor in the introduction of completely automatic landing will be the psychological acceptance of this concept by the pilots. With all the money being spent these days to land 0 man on the moon, it is rather reassuri~g to _know that some people are still working to make. 1t possible someday to land a planeload of passengers in lon~~n o~ Paris or New York under conditions when the ceiling rs less than 200 feet and the visibility is less than 1'2 mile.

* With the addition of Greece and Central Africa, who joined this year, IFATCA now has member associations in seventeen different countries. But when the boys get together, they are fellow controllers first and foreign nationals second. In these days of world tensions, IFATCA has a wonderful spirit of camaraderie that is a joy to behold. And that is just one reason why this organization has such a good opportunity to become an effective force for advancing the interests of the air traffic control profession, all over the world.

IF ATCA President L. N . Tekst r o openi ng the Pu blic Mee ting of the Second Annuol IFATCA Conference.

M r B Johnsson , !CAO Technical Officer, discusses ATC problems wit h Henning Throne Co pto1 n C C Jockso n ond Hanâ&#x20AC;˘ W Tho u II to

Messages of Welcome Message of Welcome from the Rt. Hon. Julian Amery, M.P., Minister of Aviation, United Kingdom

It gives me great pleasure to welcome the overseas delegates and guests attending this

GATCO Goodwill Message from the Moster of the UK Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers

I would like to welcome Mr. Tekstra his Officers and all Delegates to this Second Annual Conference of IFATCA. The Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers is privileged to be hosts on this occasion and we hope that the arrangements which we h~ve made will set .the stage _for a successful and profitable Conference. In this, I would like to thank Mr. Field and his Sub-Committees for their hard work in making all necessary arrangements. Aviation is essentially an international transport medium, and it is natural that the airc_raft control organisations which provide aircraft with the necess?ry saf~t~ and exp~di足 t1on of flight should merge together in their common task. IFA"~CA _is a pos1t1ve expression of the essential international quality of air traffic control as 1t brings together men who share a common interest and pride in their profession. . .. We_ have quite a full programme, but may I draw your attent1~n to the v1s1ts and demonstrations which certain industrial concerns have kindly provided for you on 2nd May. I hope these will prove interesting and be a fitting end to what I consider to be a memorable occasion. KEITH B. CROSBY, A.R.Ae.S., Wing Commander, Royal Air Force.

The President"s Message

The 1963 l on d on Conference of IFATCA is its second annua I mee t'mg, b ut th e f"1rst one to r.eview a complete year of federation activity. ~~ring this year the first annual conference was organised in Paris. Three associations 10.med th.e Federation at that occasion, which brought the membership up to 15 national Air Traffic Control Associations. Individual membership of these associations totals about

Conference, and to wish you all every success in these important deliberations. New problems are looming up which we must solve together. France and Britain for instance have embarked on a project to build a supersonic air transport - the Concord. In the United States similar plans are under discussion. Other nations will also take up the challenge of supersonic travel. It is therefore certain that the last quarter of the century will see transport aeroplanes flying at speeds and frequencies of service that will exceed the capacities of our present air traffic control system. Civil airliners will tend to move more and more into the upper air space, once the prerogative of military aircraft. This will present new difficulties for air traffic controllers everywhere. In the United Kingdom we have taken steps to co-ordinate civil and military traffic. Through EUROCONTROL we are also harmonising our procedures with those of the nations whose air space lies so close to our own. I note that this subject has a prominent place on your agenda. The amount of work that you have set yourselves will leave little spare time. I hope nevertheless that you will find an opportunity to see something of our country and its people.

2,300. Friendly relations have been established with many associations outside of Europe, e. g., the ATCAs in the U.S.A., Japan and New Zealand. These contacts hold promise for future affiliation with IFATCA.

Corpor~te ~embe~ship has shown a steady increase since the first two firms joi~ed the Federa! 10 n m April, 1962. It goes without saying that this support from Industry 1s much appreciated. The IFATCA Journal of Air Traffic Control - "The Controller" - which appears quarterly, has proved to be a goodwill ambassador for the ATC profession in general, and for IFATCA in particular. Reactions received from all over the world are very favourable. This second annual conference will give a great deal of attention to technical professional matters, apart from the necessary administrational subjects. To speed up the work the conference will handle its agenda in two Sub-Committees. This we hope will expedite the proceedings in the plenary sessions. Results of the conference will be announced at the final public meeting. On behalf of the Officers and Directors I wish to express my gratitude to the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers of Great Britain for its excellent preparation of this conference. May the results of our deliberations be a contribution to the fundamental object of our Federation - the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation by promoting the Air Traffic Control profession.

L. N. TEKSTRA 8

Conference Report of the 2nd Annual IFATCA Conference Compiled by Conference Secretary L. S. Vass and edited by IFATCA's Publications Committee

Agenda 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Opening Ceremony. Roll Call of Directors. List of unrepresented affiliated Associations, if any. Applications for membership. Presentation of report of previous Conference. Short annual report of the President. Appointment of Sub-Committees: A. Administration and Nomination. B. Professional Matters. 8. Appointment of a chairman and secretary for each Sub-Committee. 9. Meetings of Sub-Committees.

Sub-Committee A. a) Report of Secretary. b) Reports of Treasurer and Auditors. c) Reports of Standing Committees. S.C. Ill "Publications and Public Relations". S.C. IV "Relations and Co-operation with International Organizations". S.C. VI "Co-operation with EUROCONTROL". S.C. VIII "Finance". I) Appointment of Executive Secretary. (added) d) Budget. e) Internal Organization and Internal Policy. f) IFATCA Manual "Administration and Policy". g) Nomination. h) Report and proposals to the Conference.

Sub-Committee B.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

a) Reports of 1st and 2nd Vice-President. b) Reports of Standing Committees. S.C. I "Professional Environmental Problems in ATC". S.C. II "Technical Problems in ATC". S.C. V "Co-operation with Pilot~"路 .. S.C. VII "Co-ordination and Relation between Civil and Military Air Traffic Control". c) Papers to be submitted to the ICAO RAC/OPS Meeting. d) Realization of Federation Policy. e) Report and proposals to the Con~erence. Reports and proposals of Sub-C?mmittees to the plenary meeting. Composition of Standing Committees. Nomination and Election of Officers. Decision on place and dote of next ~onfer~nce. Public Meeting addressed by the United Kingdom Secretary of State for Air the Rt. Hon. Hugh Fraser, M.B.E., M.P. ' Official Address by the President of IFAT CA. Adjournment.

Opening Ceremony The Ceremony began by the Conference Secretary and Assistant Conference Secretary, Immediate Post Moster of GATCO, Wardens of GATCO and Masters of GATCO Lodges in U.K. escorting the Elective Officers of IFATCA to their appointed places. The President IFATCA and Master GATCO had met the Controller, NATCS, in the foyer of the hotel and, at the appointed hour, the Master of the U.K. Guild entered the hall followed by the IFATCA President escorting the Guest of Honour, Air Vice-Marshal Sir Laurence Sinclair, Controller NATCS. An official Toastmaster was present throughout for all announcements. Although some guests were prevented from attending at the last moment, some 120 delegates and guests were present at the Opening.

AGENDA ITEM 1

The first Address was given by the Master of the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers, Wing Commander K. B. Crosby ARAES RAF in which a welcome was extented to both the President of IFATCA and the Controller NATCS. He welcomed also all the overseas delegates on behalf of the U.K. Guild and pointed out that he saw in IFATCA a positive expression of the essential international aspect of Air Traffic Control. The U.K. Guild were honoured to be the hosts on this occasion and he hoped the Conference would be a fruitful one for all concerned. Wing Commander Crosby concluded by introducing the President of IFATCA, Mr. L. N. Tekstra whose Opening Address then followed.

Opening Address by the President, Mr. L. N. Tekstra Sir Laurence, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to thank Wing Commander Crosby for his kind words of welcome extended to us on behalf of the United Kingdom Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers. The fact that an active military member has been elected to be the Master of the Guild reflects the good relationship between the civil and military ATC in your country which has recently resulted in the establishment of a national ATC service of which Sir Laurence Sinclair is the highest authority. The skies, like the high seas, have formed the scene of heavy battles during the last w~rld war and every one of us is aware of the present situation in the world which requires the skies to be used as the highways of international goodwill and prosperity. At the same time, however, it must also be the realm of wings protecting the peace of the world. The problem of military-civil coordination is one of the most difficult problems confronting our profession but is one which cannot be left unsolved much longer. This fact has been realised both by the United States of America and the United Kingdom. Some other countries in Europe have effected a joint military-civil ATC. Within IFATCA, ~e hop.e that the cooperation of civil and military Controllers in the member associations will help to find a solution to the pressing problems at hand.

T~e. truly inte~national character of this Meeting is quite noteworthy. The member associations are situated in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, West Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Luxemburg Netherlands Norway Sweden, Switzerland and the United-Kingdom. ' ' ' Observers have come from national associations in the United States, Italy, Spain, Greec.e .and Central Africa (Rhodesia). ). The last two mentioned have newly-formed Assoc1at1ons which have applied for Membership of IFATCA. The associations in Japan, Ne.w Ze.al~nd and South America have been unable to be represented due to transpor!atio~ difficulties. Being able to muster a meeting of controllers of twenty or more nations is quite an occasion, and it is a great pleasure for me to bid you all a warm welcome. On behalf of the Directors and Officers of the Federation, I would like to say how very ple~sed we are with the attendance of a great number of Observers from such international bodies as ICAO, IFALPA, EUROCONTROL and IANC; the National Air Traffic Contr~l .service, UK, the Federal Aviation Agency from the USA, various British aviation associa!ions and many representatives from Industry. The interest in our work from all these ~ifferent bodies forms a strong incentive to the furtherance of IFATCA activity. We bid everyone of you a really warm welcome to this Conference. At this moment, as we are about to start our Second Annual Conference, it appears appropriate to review the short history of our Federation and its objectives. The ~ir Traffic Controller's profession derives its importance from the objects of the air tra~ic c~ntrol service which are, in short, to safeguard and expedite air traffic. The prof~ssion .1s 0 .ne of considerable importance in the interests of both safety and efficiency in ~ir navi~atio~. :his service can only be executed effectively by individuals having a keen interest in av1at1on, one which forms the basis of their dedication to the profession. The foundation of IFAT CA was a natural result of the common objects of the profession being appli~d by members of this profession from many countries. The Inaugural Meeting was held in. Amsterdam only l 1/2 years ago where the principle of co-operation in technical professional matters affecting air traffic control was established, the fundamental object being the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation through the promotion of the air traffic control profession. The First Annual Conference was held in April 1962 in Paris, the French association being hosts. As in all new ventures of this nature, lack of sufficient funds and the obvious limita-

tions of voluntary labour in the spare time of those charged with the administration and organisation of conferences etc. were then and are still difficulties which we hope, in the fullness of time, to overcome. Enthusiasm is, however, attendant upon our deliberations in this and other respects and whatever the limitations of 41/2 years of improvisation have been since a Federation was first thought of, this basic enthusiasm has slowly spread among controllers and those in industry closely connected with ATC through many countries of the world. The many contacts established hold promise of great expansion in the coming years. It should be stressed here once again that affiliation with our Federation does not automatically give rights and benefits to the member-associations. Membership is based on voluntary cooperation with an idealistic aim. It has much more to demand than to offer. Those associations that have much to offer in the way of professional experience are called upon to make this experience available to their fellow controllers so that, ultimately, such cooperation might lead the profession into a better place in the international aviation sphere. Such a status has not yet been realised which is patently obvious to those familiar with ICAO procedures for ATC services. In these the air traffic controller is never mentioned. It is the units providing such services which are responsible but, be that as it may, it is the controller who is called to account personally for irregularities which occur. The blame for such irregularities will not be given to the unit, but to the man. This personal responsibility with the far-reaching consequences any error may bring to the highly specialized individual, the air traffic controller has developed into in these past ten years or so, must surely form the basis for a recognised status for the air traffic control profession throughout the world. One-and-a-half years do not represent much of a history. Nevertheless, the papers submitted to this Second Annual Conference will reflect the growth to maturity of the Federation. Administratively, the urgent need for an Executive Secretary is one of the items under consideration; the budget severely curtails the possibilities but a start will somehow have to be made. Technically, some important subjects will be discussed; the establishment of our Technical Sub-Committee highlights the importance we attach to these matters. The administrative machinery, which so !a.r has taken much of our attention, is only a means to an end_ the technical product1v1ty of the Federation which we hope will result in improvements in ATC knowhow throughout the world, not for controllers alone, but also for those in industry so closely affiliated to our work and, indeed, all who are interested in safety in the air. Much hard work awaits the Conference; the sooner we start the better and therefore it is my privilege to introduce to you the Controller of the National Air Traffic Control Services in the United Kingdom, Air Vice-Marshal Sir Laurence Sinclair.

Address by the Guest of Honour, Air Vice-Marshal Sir Laurence Sinclair, GC., KCB., CBE., DSO., RAF (Retd.) Sir Laurence Sinclair spoke withou~ notes and began by thanking the President for asking him to open the Conference. He said he looked upon the decision to have this Conference in London as a good omen. Both IFATCA and the NATCS of which he was Head have similar problems of growth and Sir Laurence postulated that such problem can only be solved through a mutual underst~nding and agreement_ between the ATC organisations and the men in the air. This, he said, must be the foundation of success in ATC problems. Sir Laurence went on to observe that if one is able at any time to get together two air traffic controllers and two pilots, for exompl_e, all four immediately are "on the same wavelength" and tuned in to a common sub1ect of mutual interest. This interest in the technical aspect of air traffic control. and aviation generally was rather like a boxing tournament with all the sorting out being done under one roof and consolidated around a glass of beer. In this way, he said, everything will work out in the end. Sir Laurence concluded by assuring the President of his continued interest in the work and progress of the Federation and considered that IFATCA will prove in the future to be of the greatest benefit to the aviation world. At this stage of the proceedings, Sir Laurence Sinclair took leave of the Meeting and the President closed the Opening Ceremony, gave the detail of the remaining part of this and other sessions and invited the Guests to return the following day to hear the results of the deliberations of the forthcoming private Conference sessions. 11

Roll Call of Directors AGENDA ITEM 2

The Secretary, Mr. H. W. Thau was then invited to make the Roll Call of Directors and the following acknowledged attendance: Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Iceland Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Switzerland United Kingdom Sweden

Mr. 0. Schubert Mr. A. Maziers Mr. A. Mortensen Mr. K. Virva Mr. J. Flament Mr. J. Duken Mr. V. Olafsson Mr. J. Murphy Mr. A. Feltes Mr. J. van Ginkel Mr. 0. Saeboe Mr. B. Ruthy Mr. A. Field. Mr. G. Atterholm

Total 14

List of Unrepresented Affiliated Associations AGENDA ITEM 3

Th: Israel Association was unable to be represented at the Conference due to transportation difficulties. No proxy had been designated.

Applications for Membership AGENDA ITEM 4

Two applications had been received:

1) The Air Traffic Controllers Association of Greece. (President -Mr. N. Gonos, Athens) 2) The Association of Air Traffic Control Officers, Central Africa. (Chairman Mr. J. D. Thomas, Salisbury, S. Rhodesia). Both associations had been formed within the last six months and the Secretary explai~ed that their constitutions had been checked and found to be in line with the general ob1ectives of the Federation. Both representatives mentioned above were present of the Conference. Mr. Schubert (Austria) asked for membership numbers of the respective groups and these were given as Greece 84 and 36-plus for the ATC Association of Central Africa. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) proposed the acceptance of the Greek Association to IFATCA Membership. Seconded by Mr. Maziers (Belgium), this was carried unanimously. Mr. Field (U.K.) then made a similar proposal in respect of the ATC Association of Central Africa. This was seconded by Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) and also carried unanimously. Both Mr. Gonos (Greece) and Mr. Thomas (C. A.) spoke to express their pleasure at being elected into IFATCA and promised to do everything to further the objects of the Federation. The President extended a hearty welcome to the two new member associations and ex.pressed his confidence in their willingness to co-operate within the Federation. He took this opportunity to thank Mr. J. D. Thomas for the excellent way in which he had represented the Federation at the IFALPA Annual Conference in Salisbury (S. Rhodesia) in March this year.

Report of the Paris Conference 1962 AGENDA ITEM 5

The Report, compiled by Mr. Hank Meijers of the Netherlands Guild, had been circulated well in advance of the Conference. Mr. Field (U.K.) proposed the acceptance of the Report as a true record of business of the First Conference. Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) seconded this and the proposal was carried unanimously. The President, in accepting the Report, thanked Mr. Meijers for the hard work he put in during the Paris Conference and also in compiling the Report in such detail afterwards.

Annual Report of the President The President then delivered his annual report, which is attached as Appendix P 2.

AGENDA ITEM 6

Appointment of Sub-Committees The meeting of Elective Officers, Conference Secretary and Chairmen of Standing Committees, which had met on Monday 29th April, had discussed the machinery of Sub-Committees. To shorten the procedure in plenary session, two Sub-Committees were to be formed, each taking the agenda-items designated to it. The Sub-Committees were to report to the plenary session next day, making recommendations on actions to be taken in plenary.

AGENDA ITEM 7

This procedure proved acceptable to the Conference, and two Sub-Committees were formed as follows: A:

Administration and Nomination

Professional Matters

Delegates were requested to ensure, that as far as practicable every member association would be represented in both Sub-Committees.

Appointment of Chairman and Secretary for each Sub-Committee Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands} proposed that the chairman of each Sub-Committee should be an Elective Officer, excepting the President and the Secretary. Also that the secretary of each Sub-Committee should be somebody who mastered the English language as his mothertongue. He proposed Mr. Throne to take the chair for Sub-Committee A and Mr. Cerf for Sub-Committee B. Both Mr. Throne and Mr. Cerf had acceptable reasons to be excused from taking the chair. Mr. Field (U.K.) then suggested Mr. Endlich as chairman for Sub-Committee A, the latter statin.g his willingness to acc~pt. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) seconded Mr. Field's proposal and in turn proposed Mr. Field to be chairman of SubCommittee B. Mr. Atterholm (Sweden) seconded and voting was called for both motions together. These carried unanimously. Appointed as chairman Sub-Committee A: Mr. Endlich, chairman Sub-Committee B: Mr. Field.

AGENDA ITEM

It was further agreed that Mr. Vass (U.K. dep.) be appointed secretary to Sub-Committee A his having agreed to combine this with the Conference Secretaries' duties. Mr. D. F. Hen~ son (member U.K. Guild} was appointed as Secretary to Sub-Committee B. At 10.30 hrs the plenary session was adjourned until the next morning.

Meetings of Sub-Committees Sub-Committee A

AGENDA ITEM 9

Directors and/or deputies attending were:

Chairman:

Austria ................ Mr. K. Payr Belgium .............. Mr. A. Maziers Denmark .............. Mr. H. Christensen Finland ................ Mr. K. Virva France ................ Mr. J. Flament Germany ......... · · · · ·Mr. J. Duken & Mr. H. W. Thau (Sec./IFATCA) Iceland ................ Mr. K. Sigurdsson Ireland ................ Mr. D. Eglinton Luxembourg .......... Mr. A. Klein Netherlands ..... ·····Mr. H. Meijers & Mr. Tekstra (Pres.) Norway .............. Mr. A. Gravdal Sweden .............. Mr. G. Atterholm Switzerland ............ Mr. B. Ruthy United Kingdom ...... ·.Mr. L. S. Vass (Sec. of S/C "A"} Mr. W. Endlich (Germany}

In attendance also were serveral observers and members of the UK Guild. 13

Sub-Committee B Directors and/or deputies attending were: Austria ................ Mr. 0. Schubert Belgium .............. Mr. R. Tamigniaux Denmark .............. Mr. A. Mortensen Finland ................ Mr. M. Eraepuro France ................ Mr. R. Chateaux Germany .............. Mr. J. Foeh Iceland ................ Mr. V. Olafsson Ireland ................ Mr. J. Murphy .......... Mr. A. Feltes Luxembourg Netherlands .......... Mr. J. van Ginkel & Mr. Tekstra (Pres.) Norway .............. Mr. 0. Saeboe Sweden .............. Mr. C. Ahlborn Switzerland ............ Mr. A. Jaton United Kingdom ........ Mr. D. F. G. Henson (Sec. of SIC "B") Chairman:

Mr. A. Field (United Kingdom)

Many observers were also present at this session, and many Directors and Deputies changed places to Sub-Committee A and vice versa. Agenda Sub-Committee B: as per Conference Agenda. All items were discussed. Recommendations to the plenary session were drafted to be submitted under Agenda Item 10. The Sub-Committee work having been disposed of during the afternoon and evening of April 30th, and secretarial work necessary to prepare for the next day's session having been completed not before 0100 hrs overnight, the Conference reconvened at 0930 in plenary session, and the President took the Chair once again.

AGENDA ITEM 10

Reports and Proposals of Sub-Committees to the Plenary Meeting Sub-Committee A

Sub-Committee proceedings are printed in small letters

SIC "A" ITEM a) APPENDIX Al PAGE 31

SIC" A" ITEM b) APPENDICES A 2 and A 3

Mr. Endlich, chairman of this committee, reported on its work. Copies of the various posals to the Conference had been distributed following overnight preparation. President thanked Mr. Endlich for his report and took the individual items one by (Appendices for this Sub-Committee are numbered in the order of discussion and fixed "A".j

proThe one. pre-

Report of Secretary Accepted by Sub-Committee A and recommended for adoption, excepting the proposal on Standing Committees which was dealt with under Agenda Item 11. Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) moved the adoption of the Report. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

Reports of Treasurer and Auditor These reports were considered by Sub-Committee A and recommended for adoption, subject to a minor amendment in the Treasurer's report. Poro 9 should now read: "On the Income side I am pleased to report that all subscribtions for the year 1962 from the 15 Member路Associotions and Guilds (representing 2109 individuals} and our 4 Corporation Members have been collected." In considering the Auditors report, note was taken by Sub-Committee A of the comments regarding the production of vouchers in support of Conference expenditure and the Committee recommended that, in view of the many difficulties which would arise for the national association charged with organising a conference if all vouchers ore required to be submitted to the Federation, a Statement of Account certified by the organising association is all that shall be required by he Federation.

Mr. Vass (U.K.) moved the adoption of the reports. Mr. Duken (Germany) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted 14

In both cases, the President echoed the words of the proposers highlighting the hard and sustained work put in by both Mr. Thau, Secretary, and Mr. Throne, Treasurer, since the inception of the Federation.

Reports of Standing Committees

SIC •A• ITEM c)

S. C. Ill "Publications and Public Relations"

APPENDIX A 3

Chairman: Walter Endlich, Germany. The Danish Association presented a paper to Sub-Committee A proposing that a Standing Committee be set up to collect, record and publish information of Air Traffic Control interest. Discussion reminded the SubCommittee of the need for reduction of the number of Standing Committees. In view of Mr. Endlich's report it was agreed that S.C. Ill would deal with this matter. The Danish Association was satisfied with this action and withdrew its paper.

Sub-Committee A accepted the report, which was recommended for adoption. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) moved the adoption of the report. Mr. Flament (France) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

S. C. IV "Relations and Co-operations with International Organisations"

APPENDIX A 4

Chairman: Mr. Ruthy, Switzerland. Mr. Duken (Germany) proposed adoption. Mr. Vass (U.K.) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

S. C. VI "Co-operation with Eurocontrol"

APPENDIX A 5

This report was discussed at length in Sub-Committee A. The Eurocontrol Representative Mr. Soward commented, that as the Eurocontrol Convention had been ratified only two months ago, very little additional information could be provided at this stage. Closer co-operation was requested from the floor. Mr. Soward pointed out that the papers recently forwarded to IFATCA should be considered as on answer to this request.

The report was accepted by Sub-Committee A ?nd recommended for adoption. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) proposed adoption. Mr. Maziers (Belgium) seconded. Voting 13 For, one abst. Carried and adopted

S. C. VIII "Financial Affairs" Chairman: Mr. Throne, Denmark.

The Paris Conference 1962 charged this S. C. _f 0 c~nsider a basis. for a sliding scale of annual subscriptions for large associations. The S. C. was also to investigo_te the ~ueshon how for the assistance of the Federation should be extended to applicants with undue. hardships, which_ may prev~nt them from becoming a member of the Federation. Proposals were made to this conferen~e,. wh1_ch were discussed and amended by Sub-Committee A. In the case of membership of a very large ass~c1ot1on it "'."os considered incorrect that the major part of the income from member-associations would be provided by a single association. As a result of the deliberations on the proposals of S. C. VIII, the following motions were recommended by Sub-Committee A to be considered in plenary.

APPENDIX A 6 a

1. •That as a matter of principle all in~ividuol members of the F~d~ration. should pay the same per capita

subscribtion to the Federation, excepting that the annual subscription paid by any single member-association shall not exceed 490/o of twice the total annual subscription income received from all the other member-associations. 2. HThe following be accepted as odministrati_ve ~olicy "'."ith regard to Art. 111 Sect. Jo of the Constitution: ·in certain coses, in which financial hardship either ~ill prevent a member-association from continuing as a member of the Federation, or prevent a prospe~tive member-association from becoming affiliated, the Directors may by a majority vote approve 0 reduction of, or a dispensation from, paying the annual subscription." N

Mr. Flament {France) proposed adoption. Mr. Feltes {Luxembourg) seconded. During discussion in plenary several delegates queried the underlined statement in proposal no. 1 "49% of twice". Mr. Mortensen considered it should read: "not more than 49% of the total annual income". The President pointed out that the principle was clear. The problem was phrasing the resolution unambiguously, stating the principle together with the necessary arithmetic. Mr. Vickers (USA) suggested to replace "49% of twice" by 98%. Mr. Duken {Germany) pointed out that "99%" would meet both requirements and moved an amendment to this effect. The motion was seconded by Mr. Murphy (Ireland). The amendment was put to vote and carried unamimously. 15

The substantive motion was now reading: "That as a matter of principle all individual members of the Federation should pay the same per capita subscription to the Federation, excepting that the annual subscription paid by any single Member Association shall not exceed 99% of the total annual subscription-income received from all the other member-associations." The substantive motion was then put to the vote. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted The second motion was then put to the vote. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

APPENDIX A 6 b

Allowance Scheme During the year the need had become apparent for an approved allowance scheme for official journeys of Officers and representatives of the Federation. The Standing Committee for Financial Affairs had made a proposal which was discussed in Sub-Committee A. The allowance scheme was recommended for adoption with the following amendments: In para 5, page 1, renumber 8 and 9 to read 7 and 8. In para 2 alter 8 to read 7, and under 2(b) insert after "or in line 3 - "or less than 24 hours". Delete paras 4 & 5 and substitute new para 4 as follows: "Before departure from his duty as controller a representative should assure himself that his employer will treat the period of representation on the same basis as ordinary leave from the point of view of payment 0 .f sickness benefit and medical and similar expenses. If, however, this is not the case, and if a period of ~i~n~ss wo_uld result in loss of pay and/or incur medical expenses for the representative, then an appropriate indiv'.dual insurance shall be taken out by the representative to cover the period of representation and the premium shall be charged to the Federation. If the sum received under the insurance cover should prove insufficient to meet the expenses incurred then the Federation shall make good the balance. Renumber paras 6 to 9 as 5 to 8 .

Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) proposed adoption of the scheme as amended. Mr. Flament (France) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

APPENDIX A 7

Appointment of an Executive Secretary The _Secretary had prepared a working paper on this subject, containing proposals worked o~t. durin~ a meeting of the President and the Secretary of IFATCA with the Clerk and Treasurer of the British Guild. Ther~ was general agreement in Sub-Committee A on the contents of the paper, except the figure of 15% mentioned in para 5 (g) which was considered to be on the high side and should rather be in the region of ~OO/o. A~ _amendment on the draft resolution was agreed upon to substitute "a common permanent HQ" by a prov1s1onal common HQ".

The amended resolution was recommended for adoption by Standing Committee A: "It is resolved that the Elective Officers of the Federation are authorised to prepare a Letter of Agrement with The United Kingdom Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers in order to establish a provisional common Headquarters for both organisations in the London area and engage a combined full time Executive Secretary. The guiding principles for this Letter of Agreement, as specified in the paper presented by the Secretary to the 196~ .Annual .Conference should be duly observed. It is further resolved that the. fl~al dec1s1on relative to the above mentioned Letter of Agrement should be taken by a ma1ority vote of the Elective Officers of the Federation. The Letter of Agreement shall be signed by the President and the (Honorary) Secretary of the Federation." Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed adoption. Mr. Sigurdsson (Iceland) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

APPENDIX A 8

Budget Sub-Committeee A discussed the draft budget prepared by the Treasurer. An additional item was added to the expenditure side, regarding the expenses for an Executive Secretary during part of this Federation year, estimated at ÂŁ 150. As a result of this, the estimated "excess of income over expenditure" was reduced to ÂŁ 30.

The amended budget was accepted by Sub-Committee A and recommended for adoption. Mr. Atterholm (Sweden) proposed the adoption of the budget 1963. Mr. Saeboe (Norway) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted 16

Internal Organization and Internal Policy

SIC HA. ITEM e) SIC AH ITEM f) H

IFATCA Manual "Policy and Administration" Sub-Committee A deolt with these subjects together. The recommendation regarding a reduction of the number of Standing Committees was handled under Agenda Item 11. The Sub-Committee considered the contents of the draft Manual on Policy and Administration which hod been presented by the Secretary. As pointed out already by Mr. Thou in his paper and during the Sub-Committee discussions, the draft Manual is incomplete at this stage because the resolutions, recommendations, guidance material etc. adopted at this conference and several lists of adresses still have to be incorporated. According to Article VI, Section 3. of the Constitution the Secretary has to maintain a permanent record of the Federation's policy and activity and each member-association shall be provided with sufficient copies thereof. This record shall also be available at oil conferences of the Federation and has to be kept up to dote as necessary. In addition, certain rules and regulations are required for the composition and activities of Standing Committees, for the procedures at Federation conferences and for the realization of IFATCA policy on a national and international level. These requirements are dealt with in par. 4.3. - 4.4. and 4.5. of the draft Manual.

In view of these considerations, Sub-Committee A recommended the following for adoption by the conference: a) That the present draft Manual on Policy and Administration be accepted as reference material for internal use only. b) That the Secretary prepare a complete draft Manual in sufficient copies for distribution to all Member Associations to obtain final comments and the subsequent approval of the Directors for the Reproduction of the Manual. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed adoption. Mr. Flament (France) seconded. Voting 13 For, one abst. Carried and adopted

Nomination

SIC HA- ITEM g)

The recommendation of Sub-Committee A was handled under Agenda Item 12.

Awards (added) Sub-Committee A accepted the oral report of the Icelandic representative Mr. Sigurdsson on their investigations on this subject. It was agreed that no action would be taken at this stage other than collect information which might be used in future. This finished the deliberations on items handled by Sub-Committee A.

Sub-Committee B The President then invited Mr. Field (U.K.), Chairman of Sub-Committee B to introduce the report of the deliberations of his Committee. This was done briefly, as sufficient copies of the report had been circulated together with the working papers considered by this Committee. The President thanked Mr. Field for his report and brought each subject to the consideration of the plenary session in turn.

Reports of 1st and 2nd Vice-President

SIC "a路路 ITEM a) APPENDICES B 1 and B 2

Report lst Vice-President: Accepted by Sub-Committee B and recommended for adoption. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) proposed adoption. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted Report 2nd Vice President: Sub-Committee B accepted the report and recommended the adoption subject to the proposal on the number of Standing Committees, which was referred to Sub-Committee A and subsequently handled under Agenda Item 11. Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) moved the adoption of the report, excepting the proposal on Standing Committees. Mr. Feltes (Luxembourg) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted 17

路e路 ITEM b) APPENDIX B 3

SIC

Reports of Standing Committees S. C. I Professional Environmental Problems in ATC Chairman: Otto Schubert, Austria. Sub-Committee B accepted the report and proposed its adoption. Mr. Feltes (Luxembourg) moved the adoption. Mr. Murphy (Ireland) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

APPENDIX B 4

S. C. II Technical Problems in ATC S. C. VII Co-operation and Relation between Civil and Military ATC Chairman: Arnold Field, United Kingdom. Sub-Committee B accepted the report and recommended its adoption. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) moved the adoption. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) seconded. Voting 13 For, one abst. Carried and adopted

S. C. V Co-operation with Pilots No specific report of this S. C. had been received, the particulars being contained in the 2nd Vice-President's report. SIC "B" ITEM c)

Papers to be submitted to the ICAO RAC/OPS Meeting Standing Committee I and VII, (jointly handled by the British Guild} had prepared working papers on a number of Agenda Items for the RAC/OPS Meeting. These had been circulated well in advance of th~ conference, and comment was received from Member-Associations. This comment had been incorporated '" the working papers submitted to the conference. The Netherlands Guild had prepared a working paper on lt~m 10 RAC/OPS. Sub-Committee B considered all working papers, making recommendations to the plenary session as follows:

APPENDIX B 5 PAGE 34

1) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 3. "Control of flights in VMC" After discussion Sub-Committee B decided to delete the words "en route" in the draft resolution.

!he fo~lwing ~esolution was recommended for adoption: . That m the interest of safety all flights in controlled airspace should be regulated in accordanc~ with Instrument Flight Rules, and that all countries should implement procedures to this effect as soon as possible, if necessary in phases." Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed adoption. Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted APPENDIX B 6 PAGE 35

2) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 4. "Essential Traffic Information" After ~iscussion in Sub-Committee B including comments by the IFALPA observer (Capt. Jackson). the following resolution was recommended for adoption: (amended slightly in plenary)

"It is resolved that the definition of Essential Traffic in PANS/RAC Part 3, 18.l should be amended to require the passing only of information on !FR-traffic which, in relation to a particular aircraft, is not separated by the required minimum, and it is further resolved that para. 18.2. be amended to cover the passing of essential traffic information only when deemed to be necessary and practicable by the ATCO, in which case the information passed should include ( i) direction of flight of the conflicting aircraft (ii) type of aircraft (iii) cruising level (iv) estimated time of arrival at the reporting point nearest to where the conflict will occur." Mr. Mortensen {Denmark) moved the adoption subject to a slight amendment (incorporated above). Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted 18

3) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 7. "Development of criteria for the determination of lateral and longitudinal separation minima"

APPENDIX B 7

Sub-Committee B recomended acceptance of this working paper as Guidance Material. Mr. Virva (Finland) proposed acceptance as GUIDANCE MATERIAL. Mr. Atterholm seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted as Guidance Material

4) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 8. "Cruising Level Systems"

APPENDIX B 8

Discussion of Sub-Committee B included the following points: 1. Is Fl 290 the best dividing line between 1000 ft ond 2000 ft vertical separation? 2. Should the rules apply to uncontrolled airspace? 3. Is it desirable to have the semi-circular rule applying to controlled airspace, ond the quadrantal rule to non-controlled airspace? An amended version of the originally proposed resolution was accepted in Sub-Committee B and recommended for adoption in plenary.

PAGE 36

"That, in the interests of safety, 1000 feet is the minimum vertical separation which can be accepted below FL 290 or any other level which is decided upon in the light of recent operational experience, and the increase of this minimum to 2000 feet above this level is also supported. It is considered that at least in controlled airspace this minimum vertical separation should be applied, and that the allocation of flight levels should normally be in accordance with the semicircular rule." Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) proposed acceptance. Mr. Muphy (Ireland) seconded. During the ensuing discussion, Capt. Jackson (IFALPA) queried the specific use of FL 290 as the yardstick. Mr. Field (U.K.) explained that FL 290 was not intended to be tied level. With regard to the semi-circular rule there was not a common application and this was merely an attempt to introduce a common system. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

5) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 9. "Airspace Organisation" Discussion in Sub-Committe B took place on the possible increase of the width of an airway from 10 to 15 miles where necessary. Should the aim not be to improve navigation aids rather than to increase the amount of controlled airspace?

APPENDIX B 9 PAGE 36

The following resolutions were recommended for adoption in plenary: 1. Consideration be given to the stratification of layers of airspace of such dimensions as will accommodate the various types and speeds of aircraft required for Air Traffic Control purposes to use each layer.

2. Control areas in the form of airways should be retained where presently established and that the lateral extent of these airways should be conditioned by the navigational accuracy available, bearing in mind the need to incorporate one or more tracks within each airway. 3. That in Annex 11 there should be more comprehensive guidance material, for the formulation of Terminal Control Area requirements, based on traffic volume, aircraft operating criteria, and navigational systems. 4. That the use of Flight Recorders should be extended to include the collection of data required for the establishment of criteria for the formulation of controlled airspace requirements.

Mr. Sigurdsson (Iceland) proposed acceptance. Mr. Mortensen {Denmark) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted

6) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 10. "ATS Personnel Resonsibilities"

APPENDIX B lO

Sub-Committee B discussed this paper and recommended the following resolution for adoption in plenary: "That the Federation recognises the necessity for Air Traffic Controllers to take into account the factor "safe terrain clearance" when allocating levels to aircraft under control. This responsibility on the part of ATC should be laid down clearly in the ICAO Standards and Procedures."

PAGE 41

Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed acceptance. Mr. Virva (Finland) seconded. 19

In the original version recommended by Sub-Committee B the word STANDARDS was missing. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) pointed out that acceptance of this resolution by ICAO would be an addition to the objects of the ATC service, which would require an amendment to the Standards in Annex 11. Mr. Johnsson (ICAO) suggested the use of the term "Standard". Mr. Field explained that this was in fact the intended meaning of the resolution. The conference accepted line 4 to read: "ICAO Standards and Procedures". Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted APPENDIX B 11

7) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 13. "Designators for Air Routes and Reporting Points" Considerable discussion took place on this subject in Sub-Committee B including valuable contributions from observers. The Sub-Committee accepted the following amendments to the paper: Para 2: After 3rd sub. para after "necessary" insert "White may be used to designate national airways". Para 4: Substitute X for V. In the second sub- para. delete "three", insert "Two or three" and delete after "group" all from "the" to "above". Sub-Committee B recommended adoption as Guidance Material. Mr. Feltes (Luxembourg) proposed adoption as Guidance Material. Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted as Guidance Material

APPENDIX B 12 PAGE 42

8) RAC/OPS Agenda Item 16. "Civil/Military Coordination" Sub-Committee B discussed the working paper on this item, which was, by no .means i~ten颅 ded to resolve the very complicated problem, but to highlight the areas which constitute the problem. T,he following statement was presented to the plenary session for consideration: That th~ first step in resolving the Civil/Military Coordination problems should be cl.early to establish and agree the basic items which constitute the problem. If this can be achieved then it is considered that a basis will exist upon which it should be possible to commence work upon the solution of the problem." Mr. Mortensen (Denmark proposed acceptance as "Recommendation". Mr. Sigurdsson (Iceland) seconded. Voting 13 For, one abst. Carried and recommendation adopted

APPENDIX B 13 PAGE 43

Pilot/Controller Relationship In S~b-Co'.1'mitte~ A the President (Mr. Tekstra) introduced his paper on this subject, which was the. outc~me of d1~cuss1~ns with IFALPA. The purpose of the paper is to serve as guidance material for future d1scuss1ons on this su~1ect between the Federation and Pilot Associations, which was not to be restricted to IFALPA only. Sub-Committee B recommend d d 路路 M 路 I e a option of the paper as Guidance ateria .

The co~clusion of the paper reads as follow: 1 ~ the interes.t of flight safety it is necessary to promote a common concept of the prin~iples govern!ng the division of responsibility and authority between pilots and cont~olle~s ~n the execution of air traffic control services. Although the status of both professions is involved, st~tus c~nsiderations should not be of importance. The IFATCA con~ept is. based on the cons1derat1on that the air traffic control service is indispensable to air traffic, and that it can. only fulflll its objects when its authority is incontestable. Within this concept there remains room for di~cussion with the intent to clarify the present intentions of ICAO d~cuments, or to draft recommendations to improve existing procedures and phraseologies. Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed acceptance as Guidance Material. Mr. Flament (France) seconded. Capt. J.ackson (IFALPA) stated during the discussion that although there seemed to be a theoretical problem, in actual practice there was none. He stated that IFATCA could count on the fullest support of IFALPA. Voting 14-nil Carried and adopted as Guidance Material SIC "B" ITEM d)

Realisation of Federation Policy This item had been dealt with in the IFATCA Manual item of Sub-Committee A (f}. This finished the deliberations on items handled by Sub-Committee B.

Secretarial Note For ease of reference, all amendments proposed to Resolution and Recommendation items and other Conference items have already been incorporated in the Appendices to which this Report may refer.

Composition of Standing Committees

AGENDA ITEM 11

Mr. Endlich, Chairman of Sub-Committee A explained the consideration of his Sub-Committee relative to an overall reduction of Standing-Committees eventually arriving to a desire for three Standing-Committees to undertake the work of the year within the Federation. These would be: Standing Committee I ..... . Standing Committee II ..... . Standing Committee Ill. .... .

Technical and Professional Matters Publications & Public Relations Finance

Each of these Standing Committees to have the freedom to sub-divide as necessary in relation to the amount of work involved, under the supervision of the 2nd Vice President. Mr. Flament (France) proposed acceptance. Mr. Maziers (Belgium) seconded. Mr. Schubert (Austria) then read a prepared Statement on behalf of the Austrian Association which he wished to be recorded as follows: On behalf of the Austrian delegation I have to give the following statement: To protect and safeguard the individual and collective interests of the ATCO's profession was one of the main reasons which have led to the foundation of IFATCA. This becomes quite obvious when one studies all the respective working-papers which have been issued prior to the foundation of the Federation. The idea was, that all technical and professional problems of a world-wide profession and a world-wide service should be represented by one common world-wide Federation of ATCO's, IFATCAI Right now, IFATCA is only interested in the ATC services. No consideration at all is given to the problems of the man who is providing this service. We do not want IFATCA to be a Trade-Union, but we regret to say, that due to the fact that IFATCA's present policy is disregarding completely the human factors of our profession we are not satisfied with IFATCA-policy at the present stage. We are still of the opinion that IFATCA should first of all deal with the human problems in ATC, because it is the man who determines the quality of his service and not vice versa. Last but not least I have to ask to include this statement in the final report of the Conference. Thank you I Mr. Atterholm (Sweden) then proposed an Amendment that the original 4 Standing-Committees should be accepted in accordance with that originally suggested in the Secretary's Report. Mr. Virva (Finland) seconded. Voting on the Amendment (4 Standing--Committees) 3 For 9 Against 2 Abstentions Amendment therefore Rejected Voting on the Proposition (3 Standing-Committees) 10 For 2 Against 2 Abstentions The proposition therefore Carried

S.C. I: Technical and Professional Matters Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) proposed the U.K. Guild provide this Sub-Committee under the Chairmanship of Mr. A. Field. Mr. Saeboe (Norway) seconded. Voting 12 For - 2 Abst. Carried

S.C. II: Publications and Public Relations Mr. Mortensen (Denmark) proposed the German Association provide the Sub-Committee with Mr. Endlich (Editor) as Chairman. Mr. Schubert (Austria) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried 21

S.C. Ill: Finance Mr. Saeboe (Norway) proposed the Danish Association provide the Sub-Committee under the Chairmanship of the Treasurer, Mr. Throne. Mr. Virva (Finland) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried As a matter of correct procedure the President then proposed that the order of the Agenda of the next two items be shifted. This was agreed by the Conference.

Place and Date of next Conference (Original Item 13) AGENDA ITEM 12

In the Sub-Committee meeting proposals were initially Copenhagen and Vienna. After consideration, both respective Member Associations had good reason to opt out of offering their capitols as a venue. The Irish and Belgian Associations then offered Shannon and Brussels respectively. Due to direct-flight travel difficulty from the Continent to Ireland primarily, the Sub-Committee eventually voted in favour of Brussels for the 1964 venue. The Irish Association have offered their country as a 1965 venue.

Mr. Maziers (Belgium) proposed that the 1964 Conference be considered for Brussels and offered the Belgian Guild as hosts. Mr. Feltes (Luxembourg) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried Mr. Ruthy (Switzerland), seconded by Mr. Duken (Germany) proposed that the date of the Conference should be left to the Belgian Guild and this was agreed.

Nomination of Officers (Original Item 12) AGENDA ITEM 13

In view of the administrative difficulty which would attend any requirement to make nominations at this stage of the Conference, the British Guild proposed to investigate the correct constitutional procedure as the problems were clearly outside the time available ot this Conference, the details to be circulated to Member Associations as soon as possible in order that nominations shall be received in the correct manner in time for the next Conference. ~ub-Co~mittee A therefore recommended that the present Elective Officers be re-elected for the next Session m the interests of continuity.

M~. Endlich, Chairman of Sub-Committee A reported on the discussion in his Sub-Committee. Mr. N. Alcock (U.K.) would draft a procedure for nomination, to be circulated by the Secretary for comment and handled as a "draft release" in accordance with Art. Vl-1 of the Constitution. Mr. van Ginkel (Netherlands) moved the acceptance of this proposal. Mr. Saeboe (Norway) seconded. Voting 14-nil Carried and accepted

~r. Duken (Germany) then proposed that the present Officers remain in office in the

interest of continuity. Mr. Murphy (Ireland) seconded.

Voting 13 For, one abst. Carried and accepted VOTE OF THANKS

Mr. Field (U.K.) then proposed a vote of thanks to the ladies (Mrs. Vass, Mrs. Girling and Mrs. Johnston) whose typing and duplicating work in the background had enabled the Deleg_ates to be well-documented. This was accepted and the President also thanked th~m. Mr. Field (U.K.) then moved an adjournement until the Public Session at 1500 hrs; which was unanimously accepted.

Report of the Public Meeting AGENDA ITEM 14

The start of this Meeting again was made by the Elective Officers taking their places in company with the Officers and Wardens of the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers, UK. The Toastmaster then announced the arrival and entry of the Guest of Honour, the Rt. Hon. Hugh Fraser, MBE., MP, Secretary of State for Air, United Kingdom, Air ViceMarshal Sir Laurence Sinclair, Controller NATCS, and the President of IFATCA. All three were led and escorted by the Master of the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers, UK. The President of IFATCA made a short introductory welcome to Mr. Fraser explaining that his stay at the Meeting would be short in view of some last-minute pressing engagement in Government affairs and hence the Address would be given by Mr. Fraser straightway.

Adress of the Rt, Hon. Hugh Fraser, MBE, MP, Secretary of State for Air, United Kingdom Mr. President and Gentlemen: I am very honoured by your invitation to adress what is, I believe, the Second Annual Conference of your Federation this afternoon, and happy also that you should have decided to hold it in London. In the past half century the conquest of the air has introduced entirely new standards of speed and distance into the concept of transport which had remained comparitively unchanged since the invention of the wheel. I see no sign of any slackening: we stand today on the threshold of supersonic civil flight with all the technical problems this involves in the air and on the ground. The very success of man's conquest of the air has brought about the need for the control of aircraft in flight and hence of your own profession. The development of air transport has, as it were, reduced the size of the world and brought the nations closer together; it is all the more important therefore that the technical problems of air transport and air traffic control should be considered together internationally. I therefore very much welcome the work of bodies such as your own Federation designed to facilitate the exchange of ideas and professional knowledge between one country and another. But if there is a need to foster, as you are doing, a greater understanding of the problems and developments in the field of air traffic control between different nations, there is also a need to encourage between the various different users of airspace an understanding of each other's problems and requirements. For there is, of course, a great difference between the needs of those who fly upon their lawful occasions. Civil air traffic itself comprises widely varying elements from the international operators on the main trunk routes to the short-haul operator at the periphery. Each element presents its own demands on air traffic control. Then there are the needs of private flying to be considered, wether this be purely recreational or for fusiness purposes. Finally, there is military traffic in which, as the Minister responsible for the Royal Air Force, I must declare a special interest. Inevitably the needs of the military operator differ from those of his civil counterpart. The sky is, I believe, big enough to accomodate all these varying activities, but this can only be so if we use airspace correctly and take maximum advantage of the aids which modern technology has made available to us. It calls, moreover, for a willing appreciation in all concerned - whether military or civil, whether in the air or on the ground - of the other man's point of view. We must not adopt too narrow or pedagogic an attitude. We must remember that air traffic control exists to improve the safety and effectiveness of air travel; we must not allow it to become purely restrictive. In short, we must not permit the means to obscure the end. I am happy to say that in this country there is a tradition of close co-operation between military and civil aviation authorities. Indeed, in so small a country as this co-operation is essential between the two sides, if both are to survive, let alone flourish. We have found that each has much to offer the other and by joint use of equipment, by close consultation in the planning of airfield and control facilities, both sides have benefited. So much so that we aim to set up a common system of control for both civil and military traffic and to this end have formed a National Air Traffic Control Headquarters staffed by both civil and military personal. I am glad to see that this close co-operation between the civil and the military also reflected in international bodies such as the Eurocontrol organisation set up to handle traffic in the upper airspace. There are three thoughts which I should like to leave with you today. First, in all our planning we must be imagnative and be prepared to "think big". We must look boldly forward if we are to keep pace with the rapid progress of technical developments which is so characteristic of aviation. Second, we must plan to serve the best interest of all users of airspace and not attempt to force their necessarily varied activities into some one predetermined form. Finally, if we are to achieve the two aims which I have just described, we must seek every means to improve understanding between operators of aircraft, whether military or civil, and those who exercise control on the ground. These are ideals, which, I am sure, inform the thinking of your Federation and of the individual member associations. If we keep these aims before us we can, I am sure, develop the science of air traffic control to meet and, if possible, anticipate the needs of aviation tomorrow, heavy though they will be. Our aim must be to promote the safe and sure enjoyment of the freedom of the air. 23

The Rt. Hon. Hugh Froser, MBE, MP, Secretory of Stole for Air, United Kingdom, IFATCA President L. N. Tekstro, Air Vice Morshal Sir Laurence Sinclair, The Controller, NATC. (I. tor.). ....

·I

The Rt. Hon . Hugh Froser delivering his oddress to the IFATCA Conference (I. tor. ): Henning Throne, Maurice Cerf, The Rt. Hon. Hugh Fraser, l. N. Tekstro, Air Vice Marshal Sir Lourence Sinclair, Hons W. Thau, Walter Endlich. •

Mr. Tekstra thanked Mr. Fraser who, after a period of press photography, took his leave of the Meeting, escorted from the Hall by the Master of the U.K. Guild, Wing Cdr. Crobsy. The next part of the Meeting was primarily for the benefit of the Guests, Observers other than those who attended the full Conference, and the Press. The President, Mr. Tekstra, delivered his Conference Address which gave an account of the deliberations of the Conference overall, details of which are, of course, included in this Conference Report. The Chairmen of both Sub-Committees, Mr. Endlich and Mr. Field then gave an account of the work and results of their respective Committee meetings. The President then called upon Wing Commander K. B. Crosby, Master GATCO to make his Closing Adress:

Closing Address by the Master, Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers Mr. President, Air Vice-Marshal Sir Laurence Sinclair, Delegates and Guests, as I said in the Opening Ceremony, the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers is honoured to have had the opportunity to be host to this, the Second Annual Conference of IFATCA. As we are not a Founder Member of the Federation, it has, in a sense, proved that we have caught up and are in step with the other member associations. I am also happy that the Conference has ratified the setting-up of an IFATCA Headquarters here in London and that we, the Guild, will share with IFATCA the operation of a joint Secretariat in the person of a paid Executive Secretary. After attending many of the sessions conducted in Sub-Committees A and B, I have been impressed with the essentially professional manner in which the business has been carried out. This must be one of the first occasions in which controllers, representative of many nations, have met together here in London. The atmosphere of a common understanding which has been generated augurs well for the future. It only remains for us to take our respective Administrations with us. There are three points I would like to emphasize. The first is that all airspace is essentially a Unity. Although the demands made upon an air traffic control organisation by both civil and military operators differ, it is uneconomic and inefficient to establish two organisations. Our task must be to plan and implement one air traffic control organisation both nationally and internationally if the one does not include the other, which is capable of co-ordinating and satisfying both civil and military requirements. Secondly - and I think this follows from what I have just said - the member associations of IFATCA should do all they can to attract military controllers into their midst. The more military and civil ATC understands each other, the more we shall eliminate problems of joint operation caused by ignorance and suspicion, thereby leaving our energies free to find answers to problems which are real and jointly understood. Thirdly at this Conference we have witnessed the joining together of three interests - aircrew and operators; air traffic control officers and the authorities they represent, and industry which supplies the tools which air traffic control requires to serve those who fly. This union of Air, Ground and Technical services is a real and essential association, vital to the maintenance of an efficient air traffic control system and to the planning of its evolution. May I thank the various industrial concerns which have offered hospitality to the delegates at the Conference and also for those who will be demonstrating their wares tomorrow, May 2nd. This kindly cooperation has made the Guild's task of preparation much more effective. Finally, I would like on your behalf to congratulate and thank our Presid~nt, Mr. Tekstro, and his Officers for their hard and succesful work as a result of which this Conference has taken a step forward in "the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation by promoting the Air Traffic Control profession".

Before closing the business of Conference, the President, Mr. Tekstra paid tribute. to th~ "backstage" work of those members of the British Guild who assisted with secretari.al ~n documentation work over the Conference period and during the period of organisat~n prior to it. Apart from Mr. Field, this group comprised the Conference Secret~l,' Mr. L. Vass; Assistant Conference Secretary, Mr. D. Henson; the Assistant Cler~ GA;he Pres~~ Bradshaw; Mr. N. Alcock, Mr. N. Vernon, Mr. A. J. Rushton and Mr. D. Price. V Ms dent also conveyed the thanks of the Officers and himself to the ladies, Mrs. JC. afss, r ~ 路路 . on erenc 0 f the H. Girling and Mrs. W. Jo h nston an d , 路in so doing, brought the business to a close at 1615 hrs.

While April 30th and May lst were reserved for IFATCA business sessions and the Public Meeting, visits were undertaken on 2nd May by delegates who had expressed a preference for one of a choice of four visits which had been arranged by the Conference Secretary. Coaches took delegates to the Marconi Research Laboratories at Great Beddow, Essex to inspect the latest developments in the radar display field. Transistorised PPI and tabular displays and directview storage tubes for ATC use and other equipment was on show. Another group proceeded by coach to London Airport where a Valetta of the Decca Navigator Co. Ltd. was put at the disposal of IFATCA parties who, under the direction of Mr. J. Groves, flew in the aircraft on two flights during which new equipment relative the HARCO proposals was demonstrated. Groups not flying were taken on conducted visits of Southern Air Traffic Control Centre and to London TWR and Approach by the courtesy of the Ministry of Aviation. Yet another group under the direction of Mr. V. H. King were taken to Biggin Hill, Kent where, during the course of the opening day of the International Air Travel Fair, they flew in a Percival Prince belonging to the Company and had demonstrated the airborne data link equipment relative again to HARCO. The fourth group travelled from the hotel to Hatfield, where they enjoyed a day's visit of great variety inspecting the D.H. "Trident", listening to a lecture on the autopilot and autoland systems for the aircraft touring the production lines and witnessing a test firing of the Blue Streak missile rocket motors. Mr. John Cunningham, the Chief Test Pilot, and his fellow test pilots were there to talk ATC and flying to the visitors during the visit and each visitor was presented with a compendium of literature and a souvenir tie depicting a trident motif a very acceptable memento. Mr. Cunningham was not able to offer a flight in the only Trident flying at the time as it was full of test gear and the other three aircraft were being modified on the ground, but the varied interest of the visit was much appreciated by all. IFATCA is greatly indebted to Messrs. Elliott Bros. {London) Ltd., the Decca Navigator Co., Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Co. Ltd., and the de Havilland Aircraft Co. for their generosity and assistance offered during the Conference period in making a varied and interesting programme of both entertainment and instructional interest. In addition, thanks are due to the Directors and Staff of Ferranti, Ltd. and the Air Traffic Management Division of General Precision Systems Ltd. who kindly invited the IFATCA Officers and Guests to a jointly-sponsored lunchtime reception on May 1st.

Attendance-List APPENDIX P 1

The following opperidices hove been selected for publication in "The Controller" because it is assumed that they will be of interest to a larger group of readers, on account of their technical character. The other oppen~ices r~ferred to in the Conference Report, mostly dealing with internal IFATCA administration, will be published in a separate IFATCA Circular which may be obtained from the IFATCA Secretary.

The following Officers, Delegates and Observers attended the Conference: President: L. N. Tekstra, Netherlands First Vice President: Maurice Cerf, France Second Vice President: Roger Sadet, Belgium {Temporarily absent) Secretary: Hans W. Thau, Germany Treasurer: Henning Throne, Denmark Editor: Walter H. Endlich, Germany AUSTRIA 0. Schubert K. Payr A. Federl K. Told H. Brandstetter

Director Deputy Observer Observer Observer

Representing: Verband Osterreichischer Flugverkehrskontrollore

BELGIUM A. Maziers R. Tamigniaux

Director Deputy

Representing: Guilde Beige des Controleurs du Trafic Aerien

DENMARK A. Mortensen H. Christensen

Director Deputy

Representing: Dansk Flyveleder Forening

Director Deputy

Representing: Suomen Lennonjohtajin Yhdistys r.y.

Director Deputy

Representing: Association Professionelle de la Circulation Aerienne

FINLAND K. Virva M. Eraepuro FRANCE J. Flament R. Choteaux

GERMANY J. Duken J. Foeh

Director Deputy

Representing: Verband Deutscher Flugleiter e. V.

Director Deputy Observer

Representing: Felag lslenzkra Flugunferdastj6ra

Director Deputy

Representing: Irish Air Traffic Control Officers Association

Director Deputy

Representing: Guilde Luxembourgoise des Controleurs de la Circulation Aerienne

ICELAND V. Olafsson K. Sigurdsson G. Olafsson IRELAND J.E. Murphy D. Eglinton LUXEMBOURG

A. Feltes A. Klein NETHERLANDS J. van Ginkel H. Meijers J.L. Evenhuis C. Kuypers

Director Deputy Observer Observer

Representing: Het Nederlandse luchtverkeersleidersgilde

Director Deputy

Representing: Lufttraflkkledelsens Forening

Director Deputy

Representing: Swedish Air Traffic Controllers Association

Director Deputy

Representing: Verband des Personals der Radio Schweiz AG

NORWAY 0. Saeboe

A. Gravdal SWEDEN G. Atterholm C. Ahlborn SWITZERLAND B. Ruthy

A. Jaton

UNITED KINGDOM Representing: The Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers

A. Field

Director

L. S. Vass

Deputy and Conference Secretary

Wing Commander K. B. Crosby RAF Observer and Master GATCO N. Alcock

Observer and Warden GATCO

D. F. G. Henson

Observer and Assistant Conference Secretary

D. N. Price

Observer and Press liaison

A. J. Rushton

Observer

N. Vernon

Observer and Warden GATCO

E. Bradshaw

Observer and Assistant Clerk, GATCO

G. C. Burch

Observer and GATCO Treasurer

J. Macdonald

Observer 27

APPENDIX p 1

Observers delegated by non-affiliated Associations or Countries where an Association has not been established Edward H. Cockerham

Executive Director: Air Traffic Control Association USA

Tirey K. Vickers

Counselor: Air Traffic Control Association USA

J.C. Sanchez

Spanish ATC Association

S. G. Carballeira

Spanish ATC Association

E. Garcia

Spanish ATC Association

N. Gonos

President: ATCA of Greece

P. Mathioudakis

Gen. Sec.: ATCA of Greece

C. Tuzzi

K. B. Garn

Sec.: Associazione Nazionale Assistenti Civili Navigazione Aerea Italia Deputy Sec.: Associazione Nazionale Assistenti Civili Navigazione Aerea Italia Central Africa Air Traffic Control Association (Rhodesia) (ATCACA) Malaya

C. R. Olivera

Malaya

A. Paxyeo

Portugal

L. Belluci

J. D. Thomas

Observers delegated by International Organisations B. Johnsson ICAO Technical Officer, Rules of the Air, ATS/SAR Section, European and African Office, Paris representing: . . International Civil Aviation Organisation Captain C. C. Jackson Executive Secretary of IFALPA representing: . . . The International Federation of Airline Pilots Assoc. V. R. Pitcher

R. M. Soward

Chairman, IANC representing: . . The International Airline Navigators Council Ops Division Officer representing: Eurocontrol Association

Note: The IATA Representative, Mr. J. Gilmore, could not attend due to the IFATCA Conference clashing with the IATA Meeting in Lucerne Observers from the Corporate Members of IFATCA

W. E. J. Groves V. H. King

H. A. Mason E. A. Naef J. A. Rollason

representing: Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Co Ltd., UK

A. Carnell P.R. Max A. Allen R. Shipley

representing: Cossor Radar & Electronics, UK

D. H. T. Dowding

representing: Hollandse Signaalapparaten N. V. I Netherlands

M. Maller

representing: Texas Instruments International Ltd.

Charles F. Feltham Tirey K. Vickers D. B. Mclaughlin D. Stuart W. H. Thomas

representing: The Decca Navigator Co Ltd., UK

representing: Hazeltine Corporation representing IBM Ltd.

Airline Observers including those from national organisations C. T. Farndell F.W.Zehnder Captain R. I. Hill, BEA

W. J. lnglefleld Captain D. J. Turner, BEA Captain Lincoln Lee, BOAC E. A. Smirnov Industry Observers -

APPENDIX P l

representing: British Overseas Airways Corporation representing: Deutsche Lufthansa Chairman: Airways Committee. BALPA representing: British Airline Pilots Association representing: British European Airways Corporation representing: The Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators (also G.A.P.A.N.) representing: Aeroflot

General

R. N. Harrison J. Wachholz Wing Cdr. N. A. Smith P. Sothcott Paul Holden J. W. Swift T. F. Peppitt J. Stewart J. D. Meredith G. P. O'Flynn G. R. Scott-Farnie

Solartron Electronic Group Ltd. Telefunken Standard Telephones and Cables Ltd. Standard Telephones and Cables Ltd. General Precision Systems Ltd. Redifon Ltd. General Precision Systems Ltd. Atlas Lighting Ltd. (Airfield Lighting Divn.) Ecko Electronics Ltd. Ecko Electronics Ltd. International Aeradio Ltd.

Observers from U.K. Organisations other than those already listed Dr. A. M. Ballantyne PhD BSc FRAeS R. A. M. Ames R. F. Hansford

Secretary, Royal Aeronautical Society Aviation Secretary: Royal Aero Club Institute of Navigation

Observers and Guests from U.K. and Government Departments abroad Rt. Hon. Mr. Hugh Fraser MBE MP Air Vice-Marsh. Sir Laurence Sinclair GC KCB CBE RAF(Retd) Capt. V. A. M. Hunt CBE FRAeS Air Commodore H.J. Hickey CBE RAF D. F. Peel W. C. Woodruff Heinz Engel Lyle H. Ditzler W. Wayne Spense E.T. Dickie C. M. A. Kyrke-Sm ith W. H. Hargreaves C. M. Colbeck G. Monk L. H. Tesell

Secretary of State for Air, United Kingdom Controller, National Air Traffic Control Services (NATCS) Director of Control (Plans) NATCS Director of Control (Ops) NATCS Director Civil A. T. Ops NATCS Dep Director A. T. Ops NATCS Director of Plans and Coordination / Fed. Republic of Germany FAA Mission to Ministry of Aviation, UK ATC Advisor Europe, FAA OBE DDCO, NATCS OBE Chief ATCO, NATCS Northern Divisional Controller, MoA Southern Divisional Controller, MoA OBE DFC Div. ATCO, Southern Div. DD Control (Plans) NATCS

Press/Radio Chris Wren Group Capt. T. D. Warne Reginald Turnill

Aeroplane & Commercial Aviation News World Aviation Electronics BBC 29

President's Report APPENDIX P 2

The Constitution of the Federation requires the President to deliver to the Annual Conference a Report of the activities of the Federation in the past year. The Secretary, however, has produced an excellent factual report on our activities. I would therefore like to restrict myself to some more general aspects, regarding our internal and external contacts. During the course of this year the member associations have been kept informed on pertinent activities by two printed IFATCA circulars from the Secretary. Working papers have been distributed by the S. C. for Technical Affairs and the Financial S. C. has studied some questions put at the Paris Conference. Personally I have sent some circular letters to the member associations, in particular with relation to the coming ICAO RAC/OPS Divisional Meeting and the ILO study on working conditions in ATC. An extensive exchange of ideas took place between the officers by means of correspondence and at one officers meeting. This first year of federation has proved to be one of learning the hard way. We have been prepared to learn by trial and error and I can assure you that this is a very effective way of learning, even if it is not always the most efficient one. The teamspirit within the board of officers was strengthened by the trust put in us by the Paris Conference. We were well aware of the fact that the Paris Conference had to be prepared at short notice by the French Association who did extremely well in the short time available to them. We have taken the opportunity of a longer period of preparation this year to prepare for what we hope will be a good Conference. During the preparation of the Conference one thing has shown up quite prominently: there has been very little communication from the member associations to the Secretariat and the S. C.'s. If the reason for this has been a certain measure of compassion with the Secretary and the members of S. C.'s, I would like to thank you on their behalf. However, I feel that this compassion is out of place in a body like our Federation. Contrary to common belief, neither an association nor a federation can thrive on activity of the board only, the member associations constitute the Federation, and their activity within the Federation is the only way to make it really productive. It is all well and good to have an active S. C. for Technical Affairs, it is wrong, however, for the member associations to sit back and wait what it produces and accept its statements with little or no comment. More and more individual members should get engaged in technical studies; you may be assured that all working papers submitted to this conference have initially been drafted by an individual who had the courage to put his ideas on paper. This first stage is the ~ost difficult in any study, further discussion and criticism usually raises sufficient enthusiasm for the subject to guarantee that the final draft is an acceptable one. I am sure that our activity can only be substantially improved if all member associations encourage their individual members to take an active part in this process. The excuse of lacking experience is hardly one to be used for ever. We sincerely hope that during the next year more associations will produce papers on technical problems. An excellent start has been made by our S. C. for Technical Affairs. May their work prove to be an example and an incentive for the member associations to sort out one of the many problems that confront the profession. Well prepared draft papers should not be kept in stock until the next conference. During the Federation year they should be circulated for comment. The final paper to be presented to the Conference will in that case reflect the common idea of the membership, which will help to cut down the discussions considerably. In this way our next Conference may be even better prepared and more productive than the [)resent one is expected to be. At this point I would like to stress the importance of good relations of the member associations with their national authorities. Technical activity and good co-operation at national level provide the basis for the realization of IFATCA policy nationally and internationally. A secondary but very welcome result is the growing willingness of national authorities to assist the associations and the Federation. Some member associations have already experienced this co-operation, special leave has been granted to officers and some directors for our conferences and other meetings and in some countries assistance has been received for transportation. With regard to our external contacts real progress has been made, as reported by the Secretary. Since his report was produced we have received an invitation from the Secretary General of ICAO to be represented at the forthcoming RAC/OPS Divisional meeting in Montreal in the status of observer. I have appointed our 1st Vice-President Mr. Maurice Cerf to be observer for the duration of the complete conference, and Mr. Thau, our Secretary, will join him on the Sth of June to cover the last part of the meeting. We ore indeed

grateful to the Secretary General of ICAO for the invitation and to the national authorities of France and Germany for their co-operation offered to our observers. Without this cooperation we could not at present afford the expenses of our representation.

APPENDIX P 2

Our contacts with IFALPA have made real progress during the year. At both IFALPA conferences our observer received a warm welcome and at both occasions our profession got a good deal of attention. The working paper on pilot/controller relationship which I have submitted to this conference highlights one of the main differences of opinion between the two Federations. The difficulties pilots experience in some parts of the world where the ATC service shows deficiencies should in my opinion become a point of consideration in our Federation's work programme. IFALPA should be in a position to produce evidence on shortcomings in the ATC service; together we may be able to find ways and means to improve the situation. Although there are differences of opinion I feel sure that the good relationship between our two Federations will clear the way for constructive and useful cooperation in the interest of both professions and indeed in the interest of greater safety, efficiency and regularity in air navigation, which after all is our common goal. An unexpected opportunity for the Federation to pursue its objects arose when the International Labour Office requested our assistance in a world-wide study on working conditions in the profession. Avoiding controversial subjects within the scope of our constitution, we have been able to provide useful information for this study. We hope that the report of the study will help to improve working conditions in ATC, as this will no doubt increase the safety of air navigation. The report will be made available to the Federation when it has been completed. Although other international contacts have been established, these three have been the most effective and therefore most gratifying. Each of them has given a certain amount of work, and it is to be expected that closer contacts with a growing number of international bodies will form a great part of our activities in future. Looking back then at our first year of federation I feel justified in stating that it has certainly come up to expectations and in some fields has even exceeded our expectations. Membership is growing; interest is shown from many national associations all over the world which will undoubt7d_ly result in _a steady growth and expansion of our activity around the globe. Our original conception of a European Federation was abolished at the founder meeting, and history already proves this decision to be right. We have a long way to go to a really world-wide International Federation; our trust in the goodwill of our fellow controllers gives us reason to believe that this goal will be reached within a reasonable period of time. Our initial success, however, should in no way make us overconfident. We have only just started and the welcome we have received has shown that there was need for our organization, but at the same time much is expected from it. The principle of federation is that of cooperation, in other words "working together" and I would like to stress two words separatly and combined, - WORKING TOGETHER. This must be our leading principle and this pressupposes the willingness of all member-associations to WORK, produce studies etc., discuss them TOGETHER and in this way produce sound material which helps to further safe and efficient air-navigation. The Amsterdam meeting has given the "cleared to start engines", the Paris meeting can be considered the "engine-check". The London conference will put us on our way by giving the "take-off-clearance". May our common efforts make our journey a succesful one. Before I finish this Report I ':ould like to take this opportunity of bidding a hearty welcome to the Conference particularly to the representatives of our new Corporation Members - the Hazeltine Corporation, the Decca Navigator Company, Cossor Electronics Ltd. and IBM."

Report of the Secretary Past Activities When we had adjourned the 1962 Paris Conference and travelled back to our respective countries, the Directors had agreed on a definite course of action for the ensuing business year.

APPENDIX A 1

1. Improve communication between the Secretariat and the Member Associations, 2. Improve the cooperation with other international organizations, 3. Increase the contacts with non-member ATC Associations and the major electronics industries, air lines, etc. with the ultimate object to maintain a constant exchange of ideas and experiences and to attract further Member Associations and Corporation Members, 4. Intensify the activities of the Standing Committees, 5. Ensure adequate preparation of the 1963 Annual Conference in London, 6. Prepare an IFATCA Manual on "Administration and Policy" which should contain all necessary information about the past, present and future activities of the Federation, its objects and internal procedures. Within his limited capabilities and restricted spore time the Secretary has tried to do his part in realizing these intentions. Considering the pressure of time during the course of this Conference and the number of items to be discussed in the agenda, this paper intends to cover the above mentioned six points briefly but adequately. 1. In addition to the distribution of our Federation Journal "The Controller" which has been effected by the Editor, our Member Associations were supplied with 2 Circulars from the Secretary, both of which contained a review of the past activities of the Elective Officers and the Secretariat and gave also sufficient information about the intended actions during the next few months. This can be considered as a rather modest start in the proper direction which will be carried on much more effectively when we have a full-time Secretary. 2. During the past year our contacts and cooperations were particularly improved with regard to ICAO, EUROCONTROL, and IFALPA. We have again the honour to welcome ICAO delegates among our Conference observers and IFATCA has reason to expect an invitation to participate in the work of the forthcoming ICAO RAC/OPS Meeting in Montreal through the presence of an official observer delegated by our Federation. Our own proposals to be submitted for consideration at this important ICAO meeting have been prepared by the Technical Standing Committee, and the comments of the Member Associations have been included. Some time ago the EUROCONTROL Association informed the Federation of the provisional operational requirements for secondary surveillance Radar for EUROCONTR?L purposes. This marks, as we hope, the beginning of an exchange of ideas and studies on professional subjects between IFATCA and the EUROCONTROL Association. The respective paper will be carefully studied in our appropriate Standing Committee. We have the pleasure to welcome Mr. R. M. Soward, Section Chief in the EUROCONTROL Operations Department, as an observer to this Conference. The cooperation with IFALPA was particularly close and effective during the past year. We delegated observers to the IFALPA Conferences in Stockholm and Salisbury and our President, Mr. L. N. Tekstra, attended the IFALPA Symposium on All Weather Landing in Amsterdam. These contacts have even resulted in the presentation of a paper to Sub-Committee B which has been drafted by the Netherland's Guild. IFALPA is also duly represented a; the present Conference. Unfortunately, our coordination with IATA was somehow restricted due to the coincidence that our last two conferences took place exactly at the same time as important technical meetings of IATA, which prevented this Organization from delegating observers to our annual meetings. However, the Technical Director of IATA has asked me expressly to convey to you IATA's sincere regret for not being able to join our discussions due to their Lucerne Conference. I should like to mention here that the Federation started also a close communication with the International Labour Office (ILO) in Geneva. The ILO has received an official request from ICAO to investigate and study the importance and the consequences of environmental factors in the air traffic control service. On request the Federation and some of the affiliated associations provided ILO with relevant reference material for these studies. This included a statement of the President and a report of the Secretariat supplemented by 23 papers and scientific lectures dealing with the investigation subjects. The FAA Aeromedical Research Institute in Oklahoma City kindly provided the Secretary with numerous papers containing the results of important research work relative to human factors and environmental problems in air traffic control. Copies of these papers were distributed to the Member Associations and to Standing Committee No. I for further action.

3. During the past year the Federation has established contacts with the ATC organizations or administrations in Italy, Portugal, Japan, New Zealand, Central Africa, Uruguay, and Argentine. The already existing contacts with the U.S. Association, Canada, Greece, Spain, and some other countries were maintained. This communication may result in several applications for affiliation after the time this report has been originally issued. An application for membership from the ATCA of Greece has been received in the meantime and will be considered and welcomed by the Conference. The Federation welcomed also 5 new Corporation Members bringing the total number up to 7. Some further applications may be expected because the Secretariat is at present in contact with about 8 prospective corporation members. 4. The activity of the Standing Committees was restricted considerably because of some mistakes we made in the allocation of functions. Undoubtedly, we have too many Standing Committees and it is one of the main tasks of this Conference to initiate a reorganization of the committees. Practical proposals will be made at the end of this paper. However, we have to express our sincere respect to the UK Guild of ATCO's for the excellent manner in which they handled the work and the functions of the Standing Committee for technical problems. 5. Because of the close and early cooperation between the Conference Secretary, Mr. L. S. Vass of the UK Guild, and the Elective Officers of the Federation, we were in a position to considerably improve the preparation of the conference arrangements. Although some of the procedural requirements were not quite covered, e. g. presentation in time of agenda and conference papers, it can be said that the Conference was excellently prepared by the UK Guild and the Federation, and, in particular, by Mr. Vass. Therefore, we are sincerely obliged to our British fellow controllers for the very impressive and efficient arrangement of the whole meeting. The details of the conference programme, agenda, invitations, etc. were determined in close coordination between Mr. Vass and the Elective Officers. The printing was effected in Germany and the Secretary distributed about 400 printed and typed invitations all over the world and the highly satisfactory response will be noticed at the Conference. 6. Unfortunately, the Secretariat has not been able to present to the London Conference a final draft of the IFATCA Manual on "Administration and Policy". It has been impossible to complete the preparatory work due to other more urgent activities. However, most items of the Manual have been covered already so that at least a raw draft of the contents of the Manual is available for discussion in Sub-committee A. The final drafting and the incorporation of further subjects will have to be done after the present Conference.

APPENDIX A 1

Present Situation The conclusion of the first business year in the Federation's existence provides an opportunity to review the past activities and to evaluate the effectiveness of our administration. Although some parts of this report appear to reflect rather favourable results of our past action, this should not, by any means, give the mis-leading impression that the over all management of the Federation's affairs is satisfactory. On the contrary, much more could probably have be~n done if .the activi!ies of the Elective Officers had not been restricted by the limited capacity of their spare trme and better results would certainly be achieved through a better organization of the work of our standing committees. Obviously, the constitutional objectives and the policy of IFATCA can only be realized through an effective coordination with appropriate national and international organizations, by a more efficient management of our internal affairs, and _ last not least through close contacts of the Federation with the affiliated Associations. These results can be achieved only when the following principles are observed: a) Federation policy and professional recommendations shall be prepared by active Standing Committees, shall be properly discussed among the Member Associations and finally approved by the Directors. b) The resulting guidance material and resolutions should be presented to the competent authorities and every endeavour be made to ensure that our proposals find adequate consideration.

Future Requirements In consequence of the above statements the Conference should try to make the necessary arrangements for: 1. Properly working Standing Committees, 2. A smoothly running administration to maintain the required internal and external communications, and 3. Adequate funds to avoid inactivity caused by financial considerations. 33

APPENDIX A 1

l. When we consider the present number and functions of the standing committees it is obvious that we have a considerable overlapping between certain committees and also between other committees and the functions of the Secretariat. The Directors should endeavour to find a satisfactory solution of these problems. First of all it seems recommendable to cut down the number of Standing Committees. With due regard to past experiences it can be stated that the Federation does not need more than 4 Standing Committees: I II Ill IV

"Professional Status and Environmental Factors" "Technical Problems" "Public Relations and Publications" "Financial Matters"

All other functions should be dealt with by the Officers of the Federation. Such a limitation of the number of committees would prevent any inactivity due to doubts of competency and should help to concentrate the given work capacity on really important issues. 2. The next and very important requirement is the establishment of an efficient Secretariat. In addition to the routine or special correspondence of the Secretary with other international organizations, with the relevant industry, and non-member ATC organizations, one of the main tasks of the Secretariat is to provide for close and constant communication between the Officers and the Member Associations which is of decisive importance for widespread activities and a common interest in the advancement of Air Traffic Control. The required effectiveness of the Secretariat in these respects can only be achieved, however, after the engagement of a full-time Secretary. The particular problems to be considered when dealing with this issue have been specified in a separate paper submitted to the Conference. 3. The last remaining item concerns our rather limited funds. The Treasurer will give you detailed information on this subject. It should be mentioned, however, that we have sufficient prove to expect the affiliation of further Member Associations and also the acceptance of further Corporation Members either already before or shortly after the present Conference. Therefore, it can be assumed with reasonable certainty that our financial situation will gradually improve and that in the not too distant future the Federation will have the financial means necessary to realize its objectives without being hampered too much by financial drawbacks.

Control of Flights in VMC En-route Flights in Controlled Airspace APPENDIX BS

The avoidance of collision can be achieved in three ways - regulation of flights by ATC, reliance on pilots' visual observations ("see and be seen") or the provision of equipment in the aircraft which will provide information on the position of any hazard and which will enable the pilot to avoid it. Research and development into the last method has so far shown little promise of producing either equipment or rules to avoid even a simple confliction, and the probability of the production of such equipment and the formulation of rules to avoid confliction in complex traffic patterns appears at present so remote that it can be discounted. The variables affecting the success or failure of "see and be seen" are cockpit visibility, meteorological visibility, relative speed, manoeuvrability and pilot judgment. It is not appropriate to this item to discuss these factors but it is necessary to state the conclusion from a study of them. This conclusion is that "see and be seen" can be effective (but not necessarily completely safe) only between slow aircraft flying in good visibility. It is not an acceptable principle, even in good visibility, between fast aircraft or between fast and slow aircraft. The weather over much of the world and in particular over Europe is such that reliance on "see and be seen" by slow aircraft cannot provide safe and regular flights. Even if all aircraft in the en-route phase of flight in controlled airspace could be classified as "slow", "see and be seen" would be acceptable only on a proportion of occasions and in many countries that proportion would be low figure. As it is, the great majority of aircraft using controlled airspace for en-route flights cannot be accepted into the class for which "see and be seen" is effective in good visibility. Thus a second conclusion is reached - that for en-route flights in controlled airspace, "see and be seen" is not an acceptable principle for the aviodance of confliction.

Of the three ways of avoiding collision mentioned in the first paragraph only one remains - the regulation of flighls by ATC. The question now arises as to whether this regulation should be applied in the same way both to IFR and VFR flights. There is clearly no reason to impose any greater regulation or restriction to flights in VMC than those imposed on flights in IMC, and therefore if there is to be any difference it can only take the form of a lesser regulation of flights in VMC. Less regulation can only mean a reduction of separation standards. There can be three reasons for the reduction of separation standards in this case. The first reason would be that this traffic can rely on "see and be seen" but this has already been rejected by the second conclusion above. The second reason would be that this traffic does not warrant the same degree of safety as other traffic but there is no reason to suggest that this is the case. The third reason would be that VFR traffic can navigate more accurately than IFR traffic but there is no justification for such an assumption. Therefore the third conclusion is that VFR and IFR en-route traffic in controlled airspace should be regulated in the same way. That is to say, in effect, that all en-route traffic in controlled airspace should be required to fly in accordance with IFR. Nevertheless it is recognised that, because of the current limitations of ATC facilities and airborne COM/NAV equipment, combined with air defence requirements, it is not yet possible to implement this last conclusion in many countries. Therefore a transition period will generally be required during which intermediate rules should be implemented to meet the growing demand for regulation of VFR flights in controlled airspace in order to keep them separated from I FR traffic.

APPENDIX BS

Essential Traffic Information In certain circumstances the Air Traffic Control Service may be unable to provide the minimum standard IFR separation between aircraft. These circumstances may arise when, for example, an aircraft cannot be cleared for climb or descent at the desired time due to the presence of other aircraft with less than the standard longitudinal separation at intermediate levels. When this situation occurs it is sometimes permissible for ATC to offer to a pilot clearance to carry out his climb or descent maintaining visual meteorological conditions. In this case, the responsibility for avoiding collision rests with the pilot. To assist him in this respect ATC may advise the pilot of the position and flight levels of those aircraft which he will encounter while he is changing levels, and from which he has less than the minimum prescribed standard separation. This is a practice which dates back over very many years to the time when aircraft cruising speeds were of the order of 140 knots and it was possible to maintain a fairly reasonable lookout from the cockpit. The aircraft's descent was not likely to involve passing through more than a comparatively few flight levels. At a speed of 140 knots an aircraft would traverse only 47 miles during the 20 minutes required to provide the standard minimum longitudinal separation for opposite direction traffic. At present day speeds of the order of 500 knots, an aircraft would traverse 167 miles during the 20 minute period. At the same time, of course, the aircraft of today would pass through many more flight levels during its descent than would the older type of aircraft.

APPENDIX B6

We must, therefore, consider three aspects of this problem as follows: (i) to assess the value os passing information to a pilot regarding aircraft which may be up to 167 miles away from him; (ii) to cons'.der problems :VVhich woul~ confront a Controller in deciding which of many mrcraft are traffic to a particular pilot; (iii) to consider the possibility that traffic information may now have a much reduced value to a pilot in view of the restricted external vision from the cockpit of a modern .air~raf! and, equally important, a pilot's preoccupation with cockpit work which 1s vital to the safe conduct of this flight. In connection with (i), the distance of 167 miles would, in Europe, frequently take a pilot across an international b~:>Undary with consequent difficulties in obtaining essential traffic information. It must also be remembered that very few Airways sectors have uninterrupted lengths of 167 miles or more. Consequently, much information would be passed to a pilot on aircraft which, although constituting essential traffic at a given moment, will diverge to another Airway or route before coming within sighting distance. Regarding (ii), the necessity to consider many aircraft within an Airway sector which would have to be passed as "essential traffic" to a particular traffic, such aircraft having less than the standard minimum separation during a climb or descent, would at times present the Controller with a prodigious task which could possibly be performed only at the

APPENDIX B6

expense of safety, having regard to the time such a task would require and the additional loading of the radio frequency which would result. Regarding (iii), the restricted visibility from the cockpit of a modern aircraft and the cockpit work load are factors which are sufficiently well known to require no further elaboration in this paper. Although the PANS/RAC definition of essential traffic requires the passing of information on VFR traffic in addition to IFR traffic, the information on VFR traffic available to ATC is likely to be less accurate than its information on IFR traffic. Its value to the pilot is consequently even more doubtful.

Cruising Level Systems APPENDIX BS

The "quadrantal rule" requires aircraft to fly at the odd or even flight levels when flying on_ a north-east or south-west heading, and at the odd or even ~evels plus 500 feet w~en flying on south-east or north-west headings. This system provides 500 ~eet sepa~ah~n between aircraft flying in adjacent quadrants and 1000 feet between aircraft flying in opposite quadrants.

~nsofar as this rule was applied to controlled airspace, it originall.y .caused lit!le difficulty in those countries which, at that time, accepted 500 feet as the minimum ve~t1cal separation, since this allowed aircraft in the holding areas to be separated ve~tically by !he sam~ minimum (500 feet) as that provided by the quadrantal system which was being applied on the "en route" sections of the Airways systems. Id In the light of experience, it was decided that for various reason, 500 feet cou .n?t be regarded as providing safety between aircraft so separated. Accordingly, the minimu':° verti ea I separa t•ion b etween aircraft · . .m controlle d airspace · ·is now 1000 feet. This flying standard requires aircraft flying on headings in the semi-circle from n.0 r!h through east to south to fly at odd levels, and aircraft flying on a heading in the semi-circle from,,sout_h through west to north to fly at even levels. This rule is, therefore, known as the semicircular rule".

~h~n aircraft are waiting in a holding area they are required to be separated by a minimum of 1000 feet vertically. It is, therefore, necessary to adjust the cruising leve.ls allocated on the "en-route" sectors so that they correspond with the available levels in the holding areas. This is achieved by eliminating the "plus 500 feet" levels of the qua~rantal system and applying the "odd and even thousands" levels of the semi-circular rule instead. One must not consider the effect of the application of the semi-circular rule within controlled airspace in those countries (such as the United Kingdom) in which the quadrantal system continues to be applied in uncontrolled airspace. Insofar as the aircraft flying and remaining within uncontrolled airspace are concerned, it would seem logical to apply the same standard of safety as is applied to controlled airspace by increasing the minimum vertical separation from 500 feet to 1000 feet. This would have the additional merit of ensuring that, in th~ case of aircraft joining or leaving controlled airspace, such aircraft w~u~d be flying in uncontrolled airspace at levels corresponding with those allocated within the Airways system. Unless this is done, an aircraft joining the Airways system must fly in uncontrolled airspace at a level based on the semi-circular rule since the pilot will have been allocated an odd or even flight level for entry into the Airway. He must, there!ore, be at this level before he actually enters the Airway. In these circumstances, the distance which the pilot will cover while flying in uncontrolled airspace at a flight level which is not in accordance with the quadrantal rule will vary with the accuracy of the navigational aids available. A further problem rises when different rules are applied when an aircraft passes a particular flight level on a climb or descent. In certain countries a different set of rules apply as an aircraft climbs through FL 200 or FL 250. An aircraft flying below the designated level will be allocated a cruising level in accordance with the semi-circular rule but, above this level, the quadrantal rule applies. Taken in conjunction with the increase to 2000 feet in the minimum vertical separation, for opposite direction traffic above FL 290, these variations in the rules governing the allocation of cruising levels present a difficult problem both to the Air Traffic Control Service and to pilots.

Airspace Organisation APPENDIX B9

The fundamental difference between the design of en route airspace and that of a Terminal Control Area is characterised by the TMA requirement to provide a pre-determined flow of traffic, the nature and volume of which is known.

2. The number of tracks or patterns to be contained within the TMA will be influenced or determined by the following: a) volume of traffic in a given period, b) number of Terminal Airports to be served and their route structure demand outside the TMA, c) runway directions most frequently used, d) traffic priorities if any, e) requirements of minor aerodromes, f) requirements of military aerodromes. 3. The above factors are in most cases determined by the physical properties of the metropolitan area to be served, and it is therefore unlikely that any two Terminal Control Areas will be alike. It may however be possible to provide guidelines for the planning of future Terminal Control Areas, and extensions to existing areas. 4. The nature of tracks or patterns will be influenced or determined by the following: a) the operating characteristics of user aircraft and differences in characteristics, b) ATC/navigational system and equipment in use, c) degree of freedom accorded military aerodromes, e. g. integration with or segregation from civil traffic, d) segregation or integration of low level traffic, special VFR, CVR and helicopters, e) segregation or integration of other VTOL types. s. The nature of the tracks or patterns will depend primarily on the operating characteristics of user aircraft and the ATC and navigational system to be used. It may therefore not be possible to standardise the navigational and ATC system required in all Terminal Control Areas, indeed what would be excessively uneconomical for one would be inadequate for another. Nevertheless it may be possible to achieve limited standardisation for TMA's whose traffic is roughly similar to characteristics, and above a certain volume level. 6. In the establishment of controlled airspace for Terminal Area Control operations, the object should be to commence a homogeneous flow for arriving aircraft as far as practicable from the initial approach fixes in the TMA, probably eigthy miles from fixes. By contrast, the limitations of a traffic flow system should for departing aircraft be terminated as early as possible after take off, and en-route control should be implemented as near as possible to the point of departure. For this reason departing aircraft should be segregated from arriving aircraft the airspace demands of which are likely to increase at least over the next decade. Where tracks have to cross this should be done as near to the points of origin as possible for departing aircraft, or should be delayed until the point where en-route control ceases to become influenced by arrival flow requirements of the TMA. It follows that for a given traffic volume, unless track cross-over can take place in the TMA, the number of available tracks outside the TMA and inside it will need to be increased and a twin track system will be required for at least eighty miles en route.

APPENDIX B9

Effect of Traffic Volume 7. In order to establish criteria for the design of airspace for TMA operations each Terminal Airport must be considered in vacuo for both arriving and departing traffic, and the requirements of each overlaid in order to recognise route requirements applicable to all airports and to indicate where separate routes will be required. 8. It will be necessary to commence with an assessment of the theoretical achievable capacity of each main runway and combination of runways at each Terminal airport, expressed in terms of ratios arrival to departure operations. From each runway the departure route should provide for sufficient capacity to match the achievable outflow to that route from the runway(s). A departure route will require to be duplicated when at any point on it the traffic flow in a given period (generally sixty minutes) is less than the potential outflow of the runways. An arrival route will require to be duplicated when approximately twenty five per cent of the traffic is unable to commence an approach from the initial approach fix within a given period (usually sixty minutes).

Effect of Aircraft Operating Procedures 9. When the number and nature of routes within the TMA has been established it will be necessary to determine the amount of airspace required laterally to protect the routes from each other and from random traffic operating outside these routes e. g. in the FIR. This will best be done by first considering the limitations of aircraft performance, and then applying to these limitations the limitation of the navigational system to be used.

APPENDIX 89

10. Until recently it has not been possible to obtain data on aircraft operating performance sufficient to provide adequate guidance for the formulation of airspace requirements. Hitherto information has been extracted from airworthiness requirements and operating manuals, indeed with new types of aircraft this must be the first step. However this method, together with that of asking pilot opinion is likely to prodl ce a wide divergence of data for the same type of aircraft. The most reliable method of obtaining data for establishing the required criteria, is by observed performance. The difficulties of utilising this method need no explanation. However it is now possible to provide Flight Recorders for use in aircraft. These ore fitted by some States to selected aircraft for reasons other than to obtain airspace utilisation data, and it should be possible to extend the programme of recording to include any information required in this context. Much of the information already required for other purposes will assist in the present problem and it should not prove difficult both to extend the Flight Recorder programme and to modify it. There may be some pilot resistance to any significant extension to Flight Recorder programmes, and every effort should be made to explain to pilots organisations, the objects of the programme, in order to obtain their co-operation. 1

Effect of Navigational System in Use

11. The navigational system in use is, when foregoing conclusions have been taken into account, the final arbiter on the horizontal dimensions of the TMA. It is better to approach the problem by enquiring how close aircraft can be allowed to the norm, to be, rather than to ask how far apart must aircraft be. The question of what is a norm will hardly be supported by mathematical analysis, the reliability of all known aids is likely to produce a mean error over a long period that is considerably greater than the flyablility of such aids when they are serviceable. It will therefore be necess_ary to provide radar for navigational monitoring purpose, rather than for the avoiaance of collision between aircraft flying correctly on their assigned tracks. Indeed it radar is not provided, separation between tracks, and between controlled and FIR ~ircraft will be such that the TMA will be considerably larger than otherwise required, and route mileage will be increased appreciably. Appendix A provides guidelines for separation for use with point source and area coverage aids.

Airspace Organisation 1. Within the next decade it will become necessary to formulate procedures for the control of aircraft of the speed of Mach One or above. It is aso anticipated that over 50% of these aircraft will operate in the higher levels, i. e. 30,000 ft. and above, and that their requirement for manoeuvring space will be considerably greater than that appertaining at present. It seems therefore that unless we are to permit the almost unrestricted extension laterally of controlled airspace, in the form of wider Airways, the principle of 'Area Control' will have to be accepted. The acceptance of this principle however, should be conditional upon the provision of much more satisfactory navigational systems and would almost inevitably eliminate the use of 'point source' aids. 2. Although the 'speed disparity' between current types of aircraft, e. g. Dakotas 150 K against jet aircraft 500 plus K, will still be existent, the ranges will have moved in the speed scale; thus the disparity will exist between prop. jet and pure jets, and between sub-sonic and super-sonic aircraft. This would suggest that some thought should be given to the desirability of 'stratification' or height segregation according to speed, the super-sonic aircraft appearing in the top levels, sub-sonic in the middle levels, etc. Provision will still have to be made for the slow piston aircraft, but these will presumably operate only on short-haul flights and can be accommodated in the lower airspace levels, i. e. up to 10,000 feet. For take-off it will be necessary to separate the fast pure jet aircraft from the turbo-prop. and piston engined aircraft, not only to achieve expedition of departures but to legislate for any noise-avoidance procedures that may be necessary. 3. It has been stated in paragraph 1 above, that the unrestricted lateral extension of Airways in the Upper Levels is to be avoided if possible, this should not however militate against the acceptance of this in the lower levels. Even at the present time a modern high-speed aircraft is difficult to confine within the 10 nautical miles of lateral airspace of an Airway, when turns, track adjustments, and corrections to navigational errors are necessary, it is therefore for consideration whether the lateral extent of Airways should be increased from 10 to 15 nautical miles for all levels up to and including Flight Level 250.

4. The consideration of airspace organisation in Terminal Control Areas necessitates the exploration of the different requirements for the control of aircraft usually achieved under the jurisdiction of Approach Control. The type of aircraft, its holding and manoeuvring characteristics and performance ore more significant here than almost anywhere else particularly when regard is given to the critical phases of flight introduced by landing and take-off requirements.

APPENDIX 89

The Role of the Navigation System 1. When considering airspace organisation, it is pertinent to examine the required characteristics of the navigation system to be employed, since this will define the route structure, the airspace required and the separation standards to be used. Such an examination can best be made by considering specific phases of flight. 2. The characteristics of the nqvigation system will be governed by TMA and en-route requirements which may be summarised as the ability to a) define any desired route structure without regard to siting limitations, coupled with the facility to modify the structure to meet changing traffic requirements. b) define reporting points without regard to siting limitations and to change these as required. c) establish and orientate holding fixes in the optimum position for the runway to be served, d) provide for close lateral separation along discrete flight paths for departing, arriving, pure jet, conventional and VSTOL traffic, e) permit aircraft to calculate and maintain accurate ETAs for approach and holding fixes and to leave the latter with high precision both in position and time. 3. The above requirements, covering departure, arrival, holding and en-route, define the characteristics of the navigation system viz: a) blanket coverage from ground level upwards b) high accuracy c) pictorial presentation to the pilot for i. precise track keeping ii. simple interpretation of ATC instructions iii. accurate position reporting and time keeping In addition it will be necessary to provide complete flexibility in the positioning of route intersections, particularly where departure tracks cross inbound routes as defined in the main paper. The navigation system must also permit the pilot to fly accurate slant tracks. Requirements for Departure Traffic

1. Definition of discrete tracks for jet, conventional and helicopters. 2. Provision of route intersections where required to segregate departure from arrival traffic as soon as possible after take-off. 3. Track keeping accuracy of at least -

1 n.m. standard deviation.

Requirements for Arrival Traffic

1. Accurate definition of optimum point to commence descent. 2. Precise ETA reporting at initial approach fixes. 3. The ability to segregate arriving traffic either according to descent characteristics or according to traffic sequence by allocation of predetermined tracks in the intermediate approach phase. 4. Track keeping accuracy of at least -

1 n.m. standard deviation.

Requirements for Holding

1. Accurate definition of holding fix coupled with accurate ETAs. 2. The ability to remain within the prescribed holding area.

APPENDIX B9

3. The ability to adjust the flight path so as to leave the holding datum within Âą15 sees. of the 1ime prescribed by ATC. 4. The ability to leave on a heading to make good a descent path for the intermediate approach phase as prescribed by ATC. Horizontal Separation Standards

The airspace requirements for Airways and TMA's will be influenced by the horizontal (particularly lateral) separation standards employed. In turn these separation standards will be conditioned by the accuracy of the navigation aid in use. A detailed consideration of separation standards will be dealt with fully under Agenda Item 7 of the RAC/OPS Meeting. It is therefore inappropriate to discuss precise standards as applied to various navigation aids within this Appendix. Nevertheless it is essential to indicate the order of separation standards required for efficient airspace utilisation, and this inevitably leads to an indicaton of the navigational accuracy required. These separation standards may be considered under the following headings: a) Lateral Track Separation

A requirement exists for the application of closely spaced parallel or multiple tracks. On the assumption that radar monitoring is employed, the tracks would need to be separated by at least 5 n.m. However the airspace requirement must encompass a navigational capability to fly tracks independent of radar use since it is axiomatic that, whilst radar monitoring and sequencing will be employed, radar "navigation" is unacceptable. A lateral separation of the order of 7-8 n.m. between tracks, incorporating a 2 to 3 n.m. buffer on either side of each track, should be employed. b) Longitudinal Separation

The same considerations concerning the use of radar as in a) above will apply. Requirements for longitudinal separation will vary from one minute between take offs, two to five minutes on approach paths, up to five minutes at transfer points. The separation will depend upon the relative speeds of the aircraft involved and the direction of their respective tracks. The application of longitudinal separation will have a relatively small effect upon airspace requirements as compared with lateral separation. Nevertheless, in its application there is a need for the pilot to have accurate and direct presentation of instantaneous position from his navigational equipment. c) Holding Areas Many factors will influence the amount of airspace required to encompass holding areas; altitude, IAS and temperature, bank angle, wind velocity effect and navigational accuracy and presentation. The airspeed, altitude and bank angle factors have a standard effect on airspace requirements for any given set of values. However, the size of the holding areas will vary according to basic navigational accuracy and also to pilot response to presentation. This in turn will effect the allowance to be made for errors due to uncorrected wind effect. Thus holding areas based on point source aids must make allowance for cone effects and for angular inaccuracies of course indication. Delay in reaction to overhead indications and an inability to appreciate precise track made good on inbound and outbound legs also increase the airspace requirements. Since airspace will inevitably be at a premium in the design of the TMA, every effort must be made to reduce the size of holding areas by minimising the effects of these factors capable of improvement, i. e. navigation accuracy and presentation.

Summary

In considering all aspects of airspace utilisation, it must be obvious that navigational accuracy and presentation influences airspace requirements. In the planning stages flexibility and all altitude coverage is essential. The definition of departure and arrival tracks requires a high accuracy capability of the order of at least Âą1 n.m. standard deviation. Holding area dimensions must be kept to a minimum by high navigational accuracy. Simple and direct presentation of navigational information should be provided for the pilot in the form of pictorial display, for holding pattern flying, accurate time keeping and precise track flying. On the basis of the separation standards, considered under Agenda Item 7, the airspace requirements to meet all phases of flight must demand a high navigational capability.

ATS Personnel Responsibilities APPENDIX 810

Background Notes In the course of his duties, the Air Traffic Controller has no time, or little time, to check the elements of navigation submitted by the pilot. The latter responsibility in this respect is confirmed in the PANS/RAC Part II, 1 - Note 2. However, certain provisions in the PANS/RAC, e. g. Port Ill, 4 and 6, which it is believed was primarily intended to be "good practice" in the internal operation of Air Traffic Control Services, may give the impression that the onus is on lhe controller. The intent of such points should be clarified.

References

ICAO PANS/RAC (DOC. 4444)

Part II

(General provisions) 1 - Note 2: The objectives of Air Traffic Control as prescribed in Annex 11 do not include the prevention of collision with terrain, so the procedures prescribed therein do not relieve the pilot from his responsibilities for ensuring that clearances issued by ATC units are safe in this respect. Part Ill (Area Control Service) 4- Minimum cruising level. 4.1 Cruising levels below minimum safe levels shall not be assigned. Minimum safe levels are: ......... . etc., etc. Part Ill, 6 - Assignment of cruising levels - 6.2. When an aircraft hos been cleared into a centre's control area at a cruising level which is below the established minimum cruising level for a subsequent portion of the route, action should be initiated by that Area Control Centre to issue a revised clearance to the aircraft even though the pilot hos not requested the necessary cruising level change.

NOTES: The intention of this agenda-item is to clarify the intent of certain ICAO technical provisions. (PANS/RAC Ill, 4 and Ill, 6.2.) These provisions are believed to be intended as "good practice" in the internal operation of ATC Services, but may give the impression that the onus is on the controller. The intention of the provisions of ATC Services is clearly laid down in the definition of ATC, which specifically excludes from its objects the avoidance of collision with terrain. Attention to this fact is drawn in the PANS/RAC, Part II, 1 - Note 2.

Considerations As an important statement of fact for pilots, this note might also be incorporated in Annex 2, e. g. under 5.1.1., minimum cruising levels, to indicate that the responsibility for terrain clearance is his only. However, the question arises whether it is realistic to vest this responsibility in the pilot only, since the Air. Traffic Controller in. the normal ~ourse .of his duty assigns cruising levels clears for climb and descent and imposes certain restrictions on these manoeuvres. Altho~gh the PANS/RAC state that "clearances are based solely on expediting and separating air traffic ... " (Part II, 9. 1. ~.).the fact remains that controllers are not supposed to assign cruising levels below minimum safe levels, (Port Ill, 4 and 6) and in actual practice controllers certainly t ?ke in~o acco~nt the factor "terrain-clearance". The background-notes state: the Air Traffic Controller has no time, or little time, to check the elements of navigation submitted by the pilot". (This statement is losing weight with the increasing introduction of radar in ATC, which is used not only for monitoring, but also for vectoring aircraft, especially in Terminal Areas). It appears equally true that a pilot hos little or no ti~e to :nsure that an assigned level is safe with respect to terrain clearance, especially during climb and descent, and restrictions imposed thereon. The local ATC authorities and the controller are in a much better position than a pilot to establish the minimum safe level in controlled airspace, by their knowledge of local terrain, local pressure at different points in the area, serviceability and availability of navigational aids etc. (see PANS/RAC 4.2) It would therefore appear realistic to allocate the responsibility for establishing minimum safe levels (lowest usable flight levels) in controlled airspace to the ATC Services. In this conception the pilot would remain responsible for the elements of navigation he submits (position reports), whilst the Air Traffic Controller would be fully responsible for the allocation of SAFE levels, based on these position reports, and including a safe terrain clearance. Consistent with the "good practice" of cross-checking, ATC would endeavour to check the navigation of the pilot (radar, D/F), whilst the pilot would check, as far as 1

APPENDIX 810

possible, the safety of allocated levels with respect to terrain clearance, and their practicability with regard to other operational requirements such as aircraft performance. In view of the development of the ATC Services, the introduction of radar in ATC, the use of Standard Altimeter Setting Procedure, the thorough knowledge of local circumstances in ATC-units and the workload on pilots, especially in the climb - and descent - phase of a flight, it appears realistic not only to continue the "good practice" laid down in PANS/RAC Ill 4 and 6.2 but to strive towards implementation of procedures which recognise responsibility on the part of ATC for safe terrain clearance in all allocated levels. Full recognition of this responsibility would introduce a new clement in the objects of ATC as laid down in Annexe 11, namely: "Preventing collisions between aircraft and terrain". (This change would be subject to the full procedure of Article 90 of the Convention of Civil Aviation, Adoption by Council, Art. 37).

Civil-Military Co-ordination APPENDIX 812

In dealing with this subject it is considered that the first requirement should be to try to state in broad terms what the fundamental problems are in regard to co-ordination. If it is possible to accept the fact that they do exist and that they can be categorised, then at least it should be possible to examine each problem separately rather than to take this unwieldy in its entirety and try to provide a 'blanket' solution. The intention therefore of this paper is to state the problem, to gain acceptance with amendments as necessary that this has been fairly done and then to postulate solutions at a later date if this approach to the problem meets with approval. In accordance with the foregoing the following are the problems as seen by IFATCA. Abbreviated notes only are given at this stage and will be amplified later if the approach meets with success. (i) Terminology Considerable doubt exists regarding what is meant by for example: Security flights Co-ordination Clearances Predetermined routes Operational traffic etc. Radar terms. It is of fundamental importance that these items of which the above are but a selection are clearly defined in the most concise terms.

(ii) Division of responsibilities ATC is indivisible, one block of airspace, one controller. How is this simple principle to be applied? (iii) Co-ordination Can co-ordination best be achieved by integration at the Planning and Policy levels? Vvhat does co-ordination mean? (iv) Air Defence It is accepted that Air Defence cannot in many circumstances come under the 'umbrella' of ATC but they must co-exist in a safe traffic environment. This can only be achieved with a free and complete co-ordination although it is recognised this may have to be somewhat different from the co-ordination envisaged in para. (iii) above. (v) Classification of Military Missions As with terminology, it is essential that the military authorities reach agreement amongst themselves as to the types of different missions performed by them and which of these can be subjected to ATC. (vi) ATC System It is fair to state that, with exceptions, the civil ATC system is generally regarded by some military authorities as a too cautious approach, and as such unacceptable to military operations.

The growing realisation in some of the military minds that the system is based upon the experience of experts concerned as much with expedition as safety

APPENDIX 812

requires acceleration. (vii) Compatability of operating procedures The ability of civil and military operations to comply with the requirements of an ATC system without striving for the elusive goal of standardised air/ground equipment.

(viii) The Flight Plan Probably the most contentious single item misused and misunderstood. The need to clarify what a flight plan is and does and the difference between the flight plan and air traffic control data derived from it or any other source. (ix) Requirement for co-ordination in automation The requirement for equipment compatability between civil and military operations in these new techniques to avoid the obvious consequences differing systems.

(x) The role of radar A key factor to the success of co-ordination which must be fully and frankly discussed. The civil concept of an organised system supplemented by radar and the military system of a random situation organised by radar. Are they compatible? Can they exist as two separate systems?

(xi) Military Exercises, Danger Areas, etc. In regard to military exercises it is fair to state that within Europe a great deal of co-ordination has already been achieved although there is still room for improvement at the Planning stage. The establishment of danger areas although largely the concern of individual national authorities is a matter upon which there has been little co-ordination and one which requires keen re-appraisal.

Pilot/Controller Relationship Introduction

APPENDIX 813

From its early start IFATCA has received liberal support from the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations. It is .reco~niz~d within both professions that co-operation is in the interest of the safety. of air-navig?tion and the first annual IFATCA conference has underlined this by accepting a resolution to the effect that all member-associations should "endeavour to establish the necessary official relationship with the Air Line Pilots Associations in their respective countries". Notwithstanding the close co-~peration .and friendly relationship with IFALPA, there appears to be a fund.amental differ~nce rn the opinions of IFALPA and IFATCA on the status of the Air T raff1c Control Service. IFALPA policy on this subject is stated as follows: (RAC Section of the "T" Manual, Para 1.3): "During flight time the safety of the aircraft and of those on board is vested in the pilot. It follows therefore, that Air Traffic Control is in the nature of advice to the pilot rather than instructions to him. For this reason "instructions" should never be requested by the pilot or used by the controller; the word clearance should be used instead." It is clear that this statement does not reflect the opinion of controllers on the nature of ATC. IFATCA should lay down its policy on this fundamental issue. The intent of this paper is to form a basis for discussion at the IFATCA Annual Conference.

APPENDIX 013

References ICAO-Definitions Air traffic control service: A service provided for the purpose of: 1. Preventing collisions: a) between aircraft, and b) on the manoeuvring area between aircraft and obstructions; and

2. Expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of air traffic.

Air traffic control clearance: Authorization for an aircraft to proceed under conditions specified by an air traffic control unit. The definition of an "ATC-Instruction" has been discarded by ICAO after the 2nd Air Navigation Conference in 1955. The report of this meeting (Doc. 7625, AN-Conf/2) states the following reasons:

Part 111-30, 7.6: ''The conference already agreed that it is undesirable to distinguish between ATC clearances and instructions and that only the term "air traffic control clearance" should be retained." Para 20.1.: "It is undesirable to distinguish between an ATC clearance and an ATC instruction since a clearance constitutes in itself an instruction in that a pilot shall now comply with the terms of a request he made, as prescribed in 3.5.1.1. of Annex 2, or with such modification of his request as may be suggested by air traffic control. Generally the clearance also contains specific directions as to the way in which the original request shall be carried out. Only the term "ATC clearance" should be retained with a new definition, which is presented in part IV." Para 20.2.: "Wherever the word "instruction" will appear in the text of the Standards, it will now be used in its general dictionary meaning." (The Webster dictionary defines "instruction" (single) as: the act of instructing; education; knowledge acquired by education; precept; rule; "instruction" (plural): orders as to duty or procedure; commands; directions; an order, etc.)

Considerations 1. The explanation given by the 2nd Air Navigation Conference for its proposal to ~liminate the term ATC-instruction, and to retain only the term "ATC-clearance" with its new definition, indicates that this conference regarded a clearance as mandatory.

Annex 2, Cha pt 3, Para 5 states: 3.5.1. Air Traffic Control Clearances. 3.5.1.1. An aircraft shall be operated in compliance with air traffic control clearances received. The PANS/RAC (DOC 4444) states: Part Ill If an air traffic control clearance is not suitable to a pilot in command, he 9.1.4. may request and, if practicable, obtain an amended clearance. This latter procedure indicates that obtaining an amended clearance is subject to the criterion "if practicable"; this practicability is clearly meant to be determined by ATC. 2. The authority of the pilot in command is laid down in Annex 2, 2.4.: "The pilot in command shall have final authority as to disposition of the aircraft while he is in command." The responsibility of the pilot in command for compliance with the Rules of the Air is laid down in Annex 2, 2.3.1.: "The pilot in command of an aircraft shall, whether manipulating the controls or not, be responsible for the operation of the aircraft in accordance with the Rules of the Air, except that he may depart from these rules in circumstances that render such departure absolutely necessary in the interest of safety." The conclusion is justified, that the final authority of the pilot in command is only meant to be exercised for departure from the Rules of the Air, in circumstances that render such departure absolutely necessary in the interests of safety, precluding such departure on other grounds, e. g. economy. 3. The objects of the Air Traffic Control Service are two-fold: 1. preventing collisions (safety), and 2. expediting and mainlaining an orderly flow of air traffic.

It should be quite clear that this task cannot be accomplished without the necessary authority on the part of ATC. It is recognized that the safety of a particular aircraft and it occupants during flight time is primarily vested in its pilot. When this pilot chooses to make use of the ATC-service, i. e. conducts his flight under IFR in controlled airspace, he is subject to the regulations laid down for the execution of this service. ATC is responsible for the separation of a number of aircraft in relation to each other. This responsibility clearly overrides the authority of the pilots in command of these single aircraft; were this not so, the value of the service would be highly questionable, as the degree of safety afforded would be dependent on voluntary co-operation from a number of pilots, and non-compliance of one of them would endanger the others. The conclusion in the foregoing IFALPA resolution "that ATC is in the nature of advice to the pilot rather than instructions to him", is therefore unacceptable to the ATCprofession, since it does not recognize the fundamental principle of the service. This conclusion is in effect degrading the ATC-service to an Advisory Service, of which the PANSiRAC (DOC 4444) states: Part VII, 1.2.1.3.: " ... such service ... does not afford the degree of safety and cannot assume the same responsibilities as the ATC service in respect to the avoidance of collisions ... "

APPENDIX 813

4. The question whether ATC should execute its function by giving ATC-clearances or instructions has been answered by the 2nd Air Navigation Conference: "It is undesirable to distinguish between ATC clearances and instructions and that only the term "air traffic control clearance" be retained." The present situation should therefore be clear, but apparently there is still confusion as to the use of certain phraseologies. It cannot be denied that ATC in effect makes use of 3 types of messages: instructions (mandatory), clearances (permissive, when accepted: mandatory) and information. The confusion is apparently caused by the question whether an ATC-clearance should always comprise the word "cleared" or "clearance". Pilots appear to make a distinct difference between the messages: "Cleared to descend to ... " (which is understood to be permissive), and "Descend to ... " (which is understood to be an instruction). Controllers are bound to exe_cute. the ATC-service in compliance with ICAO procedures, with the exception of certain differences filed by their respective governments. The PANS/RAC (DO~ 4444)~ Part I~ contains typical p~raseologies to be used in the provision of air traffic services. It 1s noteworthy that in the phraseologies for Area- and Approach Control Service the word "clears" or "cleared" is only used when an ATCclearance contains a clearance limit. All other messages are clearly instructive: "Maintain ... ", "Climb ... ", "Cross ... ", "Cruise ... ", "Report ... ", "Hold ... ". The definitions of these phraseologies under the heading "Subject" read as follows: e. g. 2.7.: "Instructions authorizing an aircraft to descend or climb ... ", 2.8.: "lnstructions requiring that an aircraft cruise at or cross a reporting-point at a specified level ... ", 2.10.: "Instructions requiring that an aircraft climb or descend ... ". Combining the definition of an ATC-clearance and the phraseologies given in the PANS/RAC, the conclusion is justified that the present procedures do not require the word "clears" or "cleared" to be contained in a message as a condition to give it the status of an "ATC-clearance". S. The questi~n rem~i~s, whether the definition of an ATC-clearance and the present phraseologies suff1c1ently cover the needs of controllers in the execution of their service, and the needs of pilots making use of this service. A common study by controller- and pilot-groups might be able to solve this question. Condition for such a common study must be that the authority of the air traffic control service is n~ long~r conteste~ by t~e pilot-group, and that the controller-group is aware 1hat its services are basically intended to help pilots in command to the utmost extent. Good controlmanshi~ requires optimum exploitation of the existing co-operation and mutual understa~ding between pilots and controllers; authority should only be exercised when the ob1ects of the service definitely require so. In the daily routine of ATC it appears useful to distinguish between messages containing 0 permission and messages containing instructions. A possible solution would be to restrict the definition of an ATC-clearance to a permissive sense and to re-introduce a definition of an ATC-instruction. A clearance in this conception should be based on a request made by the pilot (or anticipated request by same); the relevant message should comprise an authorization based on a request, and should contain the word "clearance", "cleared" or "clears". An ATC-instruction should contain an order and should be phrased in such a manner as to require a pilot to comply with it. In many instances the two would be combined.

APPENDIX 813

A) KLM 408 is cleared to Paris via A6 to maintain FL 140 (as requested); (instructions:) cross RM at FL 60 or above, cross WO at FL 120 or above. B) KLM 408 is cleared for an ILS approach on RW 19; cross AS {holding beacon) at 2500 ft, report over AS. C) 1. an oircraft ha s to cross a runway while taxiing; at p ilots request {or anticipating this request) the controller can give: "K LM 408 is c leared to cross RW 23" (clearance). 2. an aircraft has to cross a runway to give way to anothe r aircraft: " KLM 408 cross RW 23 and hold on the other side" (in struction). D) 1. there is no o b jection again st an aircraft starting its descent (at own dis cretio n) : "K LM 408 ... is cl e ared to descend to ... ". 2. an aircraft is required to descend now in order to secure separation or to e xp ed ite traffic: " KLM 408 . .. descend to ... ".

:;-

â&#x20AC;˘

De Hovil lond Ch ief Test Pilot John Cunningham (Second from left) discusses p orticu lorities of the new "Trident" with IFATCA Delegates.

The De Hovi ll ond "Tr identâ&#x20AC;˘ .

The De Havi llond "125".

Letters to the Editor Readers are encouraged to state their opinion with regard to the articles published in "The Controller". Letters to the Editor should be addressed to: Walter H. Endlich, Editor "The Controller", 6471 Rommelhausen, Wilhelmstrasse 10, Germany

Problems of Air Space for General Aviation First of all, I would like thank Mr. Masefleld for the kind words on behalf of the Controllers, with which he started his article on "Problems of Air Space for General Aviation" in the January issue of "The Controller". These words were adressed to the British Guild, but I presume that they were meant for Controllers in more than one country. However, when reading the article, I was, more than once, very amazed. A couple of statements and ideas are in my opinion, not helping safety in the air very mu~h. And because of safety we have Air Traffic Control. I agree with Mr. Masefield that safety is a matter of degree but we should always, and here I think quite different!~ from Mr. Masefield, try !o achieve l 00% safety. I know that this is hard to realise, because we can see in the past that we have never reached l 00% safety. If we are going to aim at something less than 100%, e. g. 95% we will end up at 900/o. We should always try to achi~ve 1000/o safety. By doing that one probably will end up at, the usual, 95%. ~r. Maseflel~ stated, e. g., that ne collision over the U.K. m 10 years 1s acceptable, but ~he Controller, who is standing trial, for causing that one ollision will not be exonerated, just because one will ~ay: he' caused the collision which we accept every 10 years. So it is obvious that we have to try to achieve 1000/o safety. The five principles stated on page 7 ore ollright, as I g as we do not forget that any one aircraft is not more · onportant than another one. Air Traffic Control-wise a im h . h Piper-Tripacer, e. g., has t. e same rig ts a.s a D. C.-8 with 100 passengers, if both aircraft comply with the rules. As we continue to read, we notice the statement that the air is considered flat and that we ore losing the benefit of the three-dimensional flexibility. I do not know where this is practised but certainly not in the Netherlands. We do not separate aircraft laterally as long as they have sufficient hei~ht se~arotion. Of course one cannot start doing something with radar, when the aircraft are separated by 5 n.m. from each other. Something has to be done about it at an earlier stage. And that is not going to change, whether you h.ave .go~ h~ight-finding radar or not. Maybe SSR with he1ght-md1cat1on is going to be a help. Another matter is the preoccupation with the possibility of a mid-air collision. Here the statistics are coming on the scene. That is dangerous. In the statistics we only find mid-air collisions and reported (!) near-misses. They do not show many incidents, which are not reported for some reason or other; but these happen all the same and should not be forgotten. I agree with Mr. Masefield that avoiding collisions should not lead to serious economical restrictions, because if that were the case, one might better leave the aircraft on the ground and wait for a while. I think it is right that the airline pilots want full positive

control; that is what the Controllers want. All pilots should want positive control for their own safety. Again I disagree with Mr. Masefield when he says that the principle of "see and be seen" will continue to be used in the future. I think it is an obsolete principle, which will vanish in the future.

I agree that General Aviation is becoming more and more important, but we should not create a special kind of control for General Aviation. Maybe we can change the present control-system slightly, to make it more up to date, but General Aviation, just as all the others, have to comply with the regulations. Furthermore there is stated that the air is not congested. Mr. Mosefield tries to prove his point by counting aircraft {civil only); he even divided the surfaces of a couple of countries by the number of civil aircraft. What is the use of doing that? You don't prove anything by that. And if you want a correct conclusion, well, you s~ould count the military planes as well. Quite a lot .0 f aircraft, I would say. And how about the airliners which are flying outside their country of registration, in other parts of the world? In general I would say that there is room for m~r~, safely controlled aircraft but there are times when this is not possible. The truth ~s always, is somewhere in between the two stateme~ts: "The Air is Empty" and "The Crowded Sky". Mr. Masefield himself mentions the following safetyrequirements: "ATC should know position, head in~, spe~d and height and should be in direct communication with the aircraft. If we know these items we can up to a certain limit (trying to achieve 1000/o and reaching 95 0/o) safely control everything from helicopter to V-bomber and from hoovercraft to supersonic airliners. Mr. Masefield takes his immediately followin~ rema;.k right from the hearts of all Controllers: "Even '" con itions of clear skies and unlimited visibility, aircraft shou~d not enter Controlled Airspace without establishing ra?• 0 . . .mdent1'fi1cation · w'th the ,,Controlling contact and positive ' Authority and receiving clearance to proceed · ~learan ces however are subject to conditions ~nd there is some doubt, whether all General Aviation Aircraft are able to comply with these conditions! Then I read something strange: "Controlled Airspace should be kept to a minimum". Well, I always ~~ought that there should be Control "all over the place · Wh'! does General Aviation want to fly uncontrolled? Wouldn t it be much better that outside from what is now called . Controlled Airspace every b o d Y h as to fly in accordance with certain rules (CVF) above a certain level? My personal idea is: Absolutely uncontrolled and fr7e airspace below 3000' outside Control Zones and TMA s. Everybody can fly there the way he. wishes that is to say, under VFR. Between 3000' and, for instance, FL 100, con47

trolled airspace for !FR-flights and certain VFR-flights (CVF?) in radio contact with the appropriate unit for that region. Above FL 100 absolute positive control, i.e. IFRflights only. Then I come to the 100-hours flying experience. Once I was a pilot myself and I dare say that a pilot with 100 hours flyingtime has little, not to say, no experience at all. He is able to keep the aircraft in the air, that is all. Now Mr. Masefleld states that: I. an aircraft flown by a pilot with 100 hours in his logbook, should be allowed to cross Controlled Airspace under less than VMC; II. the same aircraft, with the same pilot (100 hours flying experience) should not be separated in VMC, from other aircraft, piloted by pilots with the same "experience" and in the same conditions; 111. in weather-conditions less than VMC, two such aircraft, with two such pilots, should be separated with 2 min. If we are going to separate two aircraft with inexperienced pilots with 2 min. in less than VMC, how shall we separate two aircraft with experienced pilots on IFRplans in blue sky and with accurate navigation equipment etc., etc. Finally a word about the equipment. Mr. Masefleld says that CVF should be perfectly satisfactory without a VCR-receiver. which would be, as he says, the cheapest and most satisfactory additional aid for a light aircraft. We don't know exactly what CVF means, as yet, but it will be a way of flying in VMC and also in weather conditions worse than VMC. I am absolutely sure that, when flying in less than VMC one must have some kind of navigation aid e. g. V?R, at least a ~adio-compass, to be in a position to receive adequate A;;- Traffic Control. Visual

naviaation in less than VMC, let us say a visibility of one n.m. is very difficult, that is 1o say, to do it accuratE-ly, I know that from experience. After intensive low-levelbad-visibility training, one might gain a satisfactory experience, but we cannot expect that from an averoge General Aviation pilot. Radio-sets are expensive. Here I would like to refer to the saying, that everything is a matter of degree. How much does an adequate radio-set cost? More money than I can spend, that is for sure, but in comparison with the price of an average light aircraft, not so much, I believe. Mr. Masefleld states that a 7-channel set would be quite sufficient. Let us consider one example. Somebody wants to cross an airway, on what we shall call a CVF-plan, but he has not got the proper frequency on which the specific Airways-Control is operating. Certainly, he will probably be able to contact somebody, who is going to obtain that crossing-clearance for him, but Airways-Control has no positive radar-check in that case and is not sure of the exact position, etc. I think a 7-channel set in an aircraft, which is flying some kind of CVF, is not sufficient. I wrote these comments not to be hard on Mr. Masefield or for the fun of making comments, but I did it for the same reason that Mr. Masefield wrote his article; to try to achieve that all users of airspace, as well as the Controllers will understand each others points of view. While "closing down", I would like to thank a couple of my fellow-controllers for their useful help, without which I wouldn't have been able to write this.

At which points of the earth's surface the sun is standing twice in the zenith during one year, at which points once, and where never? A jet airliner is proc~eding ~t. an airspe~d of Vp = 500 kts. Considering no wind cond1t1ons, at which latitudes will the aircraft be able to track the subpoint of the sun, i. e. at which latitudes could the aircraft perhaps overfly the centerline of consecutive time zones always at the same time? A travelling salesman intends to fly to Taveuni airport on Fiji Island, wanting to celebrate New Year's Eve at the date line. How many times will he be able to celebrate New Year's Eve there? (In this, as well as in the following questions, the well known system of time zones has to be considered.)

Another travelling salesman intends to fly to Taveuni Airport on Fiji Islands in order to celebrate his 21 st birthday at the date line. For how many hours can he celebrate his birthday there?

Will G. v. Blokland Airways-Controller Amsterdam

A scientist is forced to celebrate New Year's Eve at the Earth's South Pole. How many times can he celebrate New Year's Eve there? A scientist is forced to celebrate his 21 st birthday at the Earth's South Pole. How many hours can he celebrate his 21 st birthday there? These questions have been kindly provided by Dr. G. Raenike of Technische Universitot Berlin. Solutions will be published in the next issue of "The Controller".

the data link navigation system

KEEPS THE SITUATION UNDER CONTROL " Air Traffic Controllers are work ing at a leve l of s u s tained pressure and t e nsion unequalled in aviation or any other profession ... " Evidence submitted to the U.S. Senate Aviation Sub-committee on A TC

N.V. HOLLANDSE SIGNAALAPPARATEN HENGELO - NETHERLANDS