IFATCA The Controller - 1st quarter 1999 by IFATCA

,.,cw.,,.,

THECONTROLLER~ !Â¥!~

-..,,,,

JOURNAL

AlR

Level Busts I Breitling Obiter 3 - Success

TRAFF

1/-

l C C O NT RO L

lFATCA'99

I Human Factors in ATC

1/99 1st quarter 1999 volume 38 ISSN 0010- 807 3

PUBLISHER IFATCA, Internat ional Federat ion of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations. See bottom of page 4 for contact address.

,._~.!.-_.~

THE

fflD©

JOURNAL

EXECUTIVE BOARD OF IFATCA

NTROLLER'

AIR

TRAFFIC

CONTROL

Samuel Lampkin Preside nt and Chief Executive Officer

Paul Robinson Deputy President

ln This lssue

Jean Robert Dumfries Executive Vice President Americas

Foreword Industrial Revolution - Martyn Cooper, Executi ve Vice President Profession al

Level Busts An article by Graeme Stagg, from the United Kingdom Safety Regulations Group

Maastricht ATC '99 Philippe Domagala reports from the Exhibition and EGATS Forum

The Future of Separation Executive Vice President Technical, Martin Cole, addresses the EGATS Forum

The EGATS Future of Separation More from Maastricht

State of the Federation The annual summary of IFATCA business as presented by the President and Chief Executive Officer, Samuel Lampkin

Breitling Success Patrick Schelling reports from the control room

IFATCA News

Ten Years of Human Factors in Air Traffic Control Bert Ruitenberg pre sents to the ICAO Glob al Flight Safety and Hum an Factors Sy mposium

Famous Aircraft The Emperor Bokassa Caravelle

Regional Meeting

Charlie's Column

Albert Taylor Execut ive Vice-President Africa/ Middle East

Philip Parker Execut ive Vice-P resident Asia/Pacific

Marc Baumgartner Exec utive Vice-Preside nt Europ e

John Redmond Execu tive Vice- President Finance

Martyn Cooper Execut ive Vice-P resident Professional

Andrew Beadle Exec utive V ice-President Technical

Terry Crowhurst Executive Board Secretary/ Ed itor

EDITOR Terry Crowhurst 29 Heritage Lawn, Langshott,

Forum

Hor ley, Surrey, RH6 9XH, Uni ted Kingdom. Tel. +44 (0) 1293 784040 Fax. +44 (0) 1293 77 1944 email: terry _crow hurst@compuserve .corn (home) Internet: te rry.crowhurst@srg.caa.co .uk (work)

CMG CHAIRMAN AND ACCOUNTS Edge Green O . B. E 4 The Rookery Peasemore, RG20 7JY, United Kingdom. Tel. +44 (0) 1635 247890 Fax . +44 (0) 1635 247891

Uni ted Kin gdom Ma rch 1999

Reports

em ail: EdgeGreen @compuserve .com

Volum e 38 No 1

ADVERTISING SALES OFFICE

Advertisers in this issue Airsys ATM, Crimp, Schmidt, City University, Rayt heon

Copy Editors Lucy Leveson, Harry Cole

BH21 1EA, United Kingdom

Photographs T. Crowhurst, P. Domagala, P. Schel ling, Age nce

Cover Breitling Orbite r 3 Take-off. See story on page 22

Tel & Fax +44 (0) 1202 881554

de Presse ARC SA

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Cartoon Ken Tully

Philip At lay 25 King Street W imborn e Min ster Dors et

Patrick Schelling Ch . Sur le Moulin , 1261 Le Vaud , Swit zerland . Tel +41 (0) 22366 2684 Fax +4 1 (0 ) 2236 6 4305

Philipp e Dom oga la Me relstraat 5, NL 6176 EZ Spaub eek, The Net herland s Tel +31 (0)46 44335 64 Fax +3 1( 0 )43366 1541

The Contr oller, Journ al Of Air Traff ic Co ntrol , is pu blished quart erly by the Internation al Federation of A ir Traffic Co nt roll ers' Ass ociations (IFATC A). Issues app ear end of M arch , June, Sept emb er and D ecem be r. Sub scrip tio n rate s are C HF 30 per annum (4 issues ) plu s post & pac king . Postage Rate s: UK - CHF 6 .00 . Euro pe: (d eliv ery w it hin 14 days ) CHF 7 .50 . A irm ail, Wor ldw id e - CHF 12 .00 . Chequ es or m oney order s (n ot cash ) in Swiss Francs sho uld be mad e pay able to Th e Contro ller. Special sub scr ipt ion rates fo r ATCOs .

DESIGN & PRINTING M ercury Press Uni t 1, Baird Close, Craw ley, W est Sussex, RHl O 2SY, United Kingdom .

fl II CONTROLLER

Enquiries to our Subscription Manage r: The Cont roller , Steph Sim monds Fiv e Rob ins Little V igo Yateley Hampshire GU4 6 6ES Un ited Kingd om (see sub scr ipt ion fo rm on page 33) Tel: +44 (0) 1252 86 073 6 Fax: +44(0 ) 1252 860 737 e.m ail: step h_simmon ds@msn.co m

Issues Appear End of March. June. September, December Contributors Are ExpressingTheir Personal Pmntsof View and Opinions. Which May Not Necessarily Coincide With Those of The International Federation of Arr TrafficControllers· Assoc1at1ons. IFATCA IFATCADoes Not AssumeRespons1b1l1 ty For StatementsMade and Opinions Expressed. It Accepts Respons1b1 lity For PublishingTheseContributions ContributionsAre Welcomeas Are Commentsand Crrt1c1smNo PaymentCan be Made For Manuscripts Submitted For Publication ,n The Controller The Editor Reserves The Right to Make Any Editorial Changes in Manuscripts. Which he BeitevesWili ImproveThe Matenal VV,thout Altering The IntendedMeanmg Wntten Permissionby The Editor15 NecessaryFor ReprrntingAny Part01 ThisJournal

Corporate Members of lFATC ADACEL PTY LTD

JEPPESEN& Co . GmbH

Canberra, Aust ralia

Frankfurt am Main, German y

The Intern atio nal Fede rat ion of Air Traffic Contro llers' Associations wou ld like to invite all corporations, interested in and concerned

AIR TRAFFIC AND

M ILLER FREEMAN EXHIBITIONS

NAVIGATIONAL SERVICESCo. Ltd.

Londo n, UK

Johannesburg , Republic of South Afri ca

Oslo , Norway

AIRSYS ATM LTD .

NICE SYSTEMS Ltd

Chessington, UK

Tel Av iv, Israel

NAVIA AV IATIO N AS

Rome, It aly AM BIDJI GROUP PTY LTD M elbourne, A ustralia ARINC INCORPORATED Ann apolis, M A, USA BREITLING SA Grenchen, Swit zerland BRITISH AIRWAYS London Heat hrow Air port, UK CELSIUSTECH SYSTEM S

NO RTHROP GRUMMAN

and promotion

safety in air t raffic to join their orga ni sat ion as Corporate

Members .

Corporate Members

by supplying

support the aims of t h e Fe deration

the Federation w ith tech nic al inform at ion and b y mean s of an annual sub scr ipti on . Th e Federations' offered

ALEN/A

organisat io n s, and institutions

with the maintenance

int ernatio nal journ al 'The Controller'

as a pla tform for the di scu ss ion of technical and proced\Jral

developments

in the field of air tr aff ic control.

For further informa t ion concerning ge ner al IFATCA matters,

Corporate

please contact

Membership,

the:

Baltimore, MD, USA

IFATCA OMNILIFE Overseas Insurance Co.

1255

University

Ltd .

Manager:

Suite

408,

Montreal,

Quebec

H3B 3B6 CANADA

London, UK RAYTHEON Co .

Tel: +1 514

866

7040

Fax: +1 514

866

7612

E: ifatca@sympatico.ca

Marlborough, MA, USA RAYTHEON SYSTEMS Ltd.

Office

Street,

TO PLACE AN ADVERTISMENT

PHONE

OR FAX:

Burgess Hill, UK

+44 1202

REFLECTONE UK LTD

881 SS4

Bristol, UK

Jarfalla, Sw eden SCHMID TELECOMMUNIC ATION CESEL SA

Zurich, Sw itzerland

lFATCA- 40th anniversary story

Madrid, Spain SERCO-IAL CORIS

We ybridge, UK

It has been decided to present an historical perspective of IFATCA in book form for the Federation 's 40th Anniversary in 2001. Information is now being collected for this task . Contributions of a historical nature, photographs, interesting / humourous anecdotes, . recollections/ reflections, supplementary papers etc. are invited . If you can contribute in any way, please contact or send relevant material (not photographs in the initial instance) and information to:

SW EDAV IAAB

Bernhard Ruethy

Neil Vidler

Burenstrasse 23

c/o A TM.D

CH-33 12 FRA UBRUNNEN

ATC Centre, A ir Traffic Control

Bath , UK

Le Plessis Robinson, France SOCIETE D'ETUDE S ET CRIM P A/ S Allerod, Denmark

D'ENTREPRISES ELECTRIQUES Ma lakoff, France

DAIM LER- BENZ AEROSPACE AG Ulm/ Donau, Germany

SONY COMPUTER

DENRO Gaithersburg, MD, USA

Nor rkoping , Sweden DICTA PHONE CORPORATIO N Stratford , CT, USA

TELUB AB Solna, Swe den

Switzerland

DIVERSIFIED INT'L SCIENCES CORP.

TERMA ELEKTRONIK AS

Phone: +41 31 767 8235

Lanham, MD , USA

Birkerod , Denmark

Tower Road Chep Lap Kok Int ernation al Airport, Lantau, Hong Kong

Fax:+41 31 767 8235

Phone +852 2792 2757

email:

Fax:+852 279 1 4747 ernai I:n rvid ler@ne tv igator .corn

FLIGHT REFUELLING Ltd W imborne, UK

VITROCISET S.pA Rome, Italy

100245 .1460@compus erve .corn

FREQUENTIS

WAV ION IX SOFTWARE LTD

Any contr ibution,

Vie nna, Austr ia

Geneva, Sw itzerland

no matter how large or small, will be appreciated.

· ·1

CONTROL LER

Obituary Klaus Werner Loidl A sad report from Hiromichi (Hiro) Tade, Tokyo Area Control Centre, JFATC(JapanFederation of Air Traffic Contr ollers) id you see the 'IFATCA' car in Toulouse during IFATCA 987 - it was the last chance unfortunately. It was the car of Klaus Werner LOIDL of Innsbruck (LOWI), Austria. You can see it in the photo below . Klaus came to meet me and my wife in Zurich and took us Âˇ to Innsbruck. I found that his red Volvo car had the car plate of IFATCA, "I FATCA 1 ". He explained to me that he would have liked to put his or his daughter's name on it but was unable to do so. He made up his mind to chose the letters "FATCA" which with the first letter "I" for Innsbruck, which by luck he lived in, allowed him to have "IFATCA" on his car. We travelled from Innsbruck to the conference in Toulouse, with a one night stay in Monaco. On the expressway near Toulouse, we overtook a car with a Zagreb number ahead and they blinked their

lights and waved their hands in acknowledgement of our car plate. "RADAR CONTACT" or "RA on TCAS". No problem for ATC colleagues on the road, is there? Unfortunately, I regret to say that Klaus passed away from heart failure on 28 September, 1998. In August his daughter told me that he had suffered from cardiac

problems and he had been hospitalised since 6 July. His wife sent me the sorrowful letter in October, just before the Asia/Pacific Regional Meeting in Macau. Also during the Regional meeting I discovered the sad news about the death of Carlos Olmos Mendoza in the Executive Board Report. I was shocked to receive both

of these bad pieces of new s. Klaus had attended almost every Annual Conference. We have lost two of the w ell known IFATCA faces. IFATCA joins in sendi ng its condolences to the famil y of Klaus. Some of you may remember that we feat ured his car number plate in The Controller several y ears ago.

IFATCA CAR Hiro TADE and Mr. Klaus LOIDL

THE CONTROLLER

I I If CONTROLLER

Foreword Industrial Revolution Martyn Cooper, Executive Vice President Professional

During the period 1760 to 1830, Great Britain experienced something that has become known as the "Industrial Revolution". t w as a period of dramat ic change from almost t otal manual labour t o t he introduct ion of machines. Although the early machines w ere very basic, and oft en broke dow n, they enabled a vision of increased outp ut and more efficient use of wo rkers. It w as not surprising, t hen, that th ere was concern for employm ent and fear that th e machines w ould put people out of w ork. A group of disenchanted w orkers, know n as "Luddites" , took it upon the mselves to reject the pro cess and actively set out to destr oy t he machines - t o no avail. A mechanised lifestyle, thr ough indu st ry and t ransport systems, soon developed and became an importa nt factor In maintaining growt h in increasingly more competiti ve

w orld markets. Effe ctiv ely, t he Indu st rial

Revolution did not have powerful nations in the Wo rld . Today, the 'buzz' words in disastrous effects on indu stry are "Technolog y " and employment that the Luddit es first feared. Between the years "Automation" . We are led to 1783 until 1901, the annual believe that future growth and growt h of the British economy competitive advantages are was hardly exceptional, often solely reliant on technology less t han 2% per year. Nor w as based indu stri es. We are t his "Revolution" confin ed encouraged to believe that purely to Industry . Wh at was automation will be the panacea clear, t hough, was the impact for all our problems . In air t hat machines had on the w ay tr affic terms, t echnolog y and products were produced. automation have already made Clearly, labour intensive significant impacts, whether it indu stri es became more be radar, SSR, TCAS or data effi cient and employment costs processing. In t he previous we re reduced . Businesses "Controller" magazine, we w ere able to expand and meet focused on the development of the demands on the 20th the "Free Flight Concept" and the significant changes th at it century as empires expanded and t echnical advances wer e w ill bring to the way controll ers undertake their made. Thee xperiencesof tasks; particularly , the th ese early days paved th e w ay delegation of responsibilit y for for neigh bourin g countri es in separation assurance and the Europe and also t he USA to freedom of aircraft to fly on industrialise t o great effect and random tracks w ith little or no created some of t he most

THECONTROLLER REGlO NAL SUB-EDlTORS AFRICA MIDDLE EAST Mr A lbert A idoo Tay lor PO Box 9181 Kotake International Ai rport Accra GHANA Tel: +233 21 773283 Fax:+233 21 773293

AMERIC A S

ASIA PACIFIC

Rosanna Baru (ATCA U) P.O. Box 6554 M ontevide o URUGU AY Tel : +598 2770299 Fax +598 2770299

Mr John Wagstaff ATMD , CAD Hong Kong International Airport Chep Lap Kok, Lant au HONG KONG Tel: +852 25510081 Fax: +852 23628101

ATC intervention . To enable aircrew and controllers to meet the challenges of the "Free Flight Concept", essential ground and airborne-based systems must be developed . All of this will need to be technolog y based to ensure safet y is maintained and th e " controller remains "in the loop to participate fully in the proces s. .h Automation has been wit us, in various forms, for over SOyears . The first real computer was developed in the 1940s and, today , the technolog y that once filled a room can now undertake the same data proc essing in the palm of your hand . The ave rage home PC has mor e computer power than Apollo 11 needed to land Neil Arm strong on the moon (21 st July 1969) With the incr ease in computing pow er come s the determination to use th at technolog y, regardle ss of the impa ct it will hav e on th e lifest y les or job sati sfaction . In many w ays, t echnolog y, automation and computer s can

EUROPE M r Philippe Domag ala Merelstraat 5 NL - 6176 EZ Spaubeek THE NETHERLANDS Tel: +31 46 4433564 Fax : +31433661541 Mr Daniel Casanov a . 7, Avenue Edouard Belin BP4005 31055 Toulou se Cede x 4 FRANCE Tel: +33 5 621 7 46 28 Fax: +33 5 62 17 46 62

CO NT RO LLER

all enhance the way we live, work and play. All of us experience many positive benefits as a result of 'new technology'. Although the benefits of some TV and radio programmes might be questioned, the whole concept of communication by electronic media is undoubtedly the most important factor of this century, or even this millennium. However, the direction and control over the way automation is used, is equally important. The move towards privatisation and commercialisation of air traffic services has already shown that the emphasis is on controlling the costs of this particular industry and utilising whatever technology is available to enable greater efficiencies and productivity. Of course, with productivity comes profit, and IFATCA is keenly aware that profit motivation is being seen as a key factor in privatised ATC services. Profit is necessary to attract the initial and subsequent investment to meet the growing needs of air traffic demand. IFATCA has no problem with this, as long as independent regulation ensures that safety is the prime objective. Moves to reduce or streamline staffing with the introduction of technology has attractions to employers, especially where costs are concerned, but the resultant impact of automation into ATC has been the subject of much debate within IFATCA over the years. Controllers are naturally cautious and, to some extent, resistant to change. This is a natural process that develops during training and is refined as operational experience proves that you can not always expect the expected to happen. The security of a known and controlled environment provides a safety

i Âˇ 11 CONTROLLER

net for the controller to work in. That is why the proposed environment of the "Free Flight Concept" causes controllers to question their ability to handle traffic in a 'passive' way. Human factor studies into automation and ATC have identified several areas to be wary of. David Hopkins has long been an advocate for caution and has addressed this matter directly for many yearst_ Of particular concern, is the fact that humans do not make good monitors of a system, but computers do. The removal of certain repetitive, non-essential, tasks releases the controller to focus on more important issues. And although prolonged exposure to stress contributes to fatigue, some stress actually enhances performance. Boredom, on the other hand, can be equally important; in as much as it reduces alertness and response time to events. When considering the application of automation to the ATC process, consideration must be given to the way controllers will interact with the machine. The man-machine interface (MMI) has been a subject for much research since computers were first introduced into the working environment. Because electronics engineers, rather than the operators originally developed computer systems, there was a tendency to create a system that was not completely in harmony with the existing tasks they were supposed to support. Therefore, instead of the computers supporting the existing task, the actual tasks often had to be modified in order that they could fit in with what the system demanded. Another feature of automation, is the removal of key elements of the task that provide the job satisfaction. In ATC, some of these elements might be conflict alert and resolution, speed control or

vectoring techniques. If a human is to remain in control of a system, then there must be something left within the operational tasks that enhances the performance of the human and maintains job satisfaction. The "Free Flight Concept" is still being developed and already there are differences of opinion as to how controllers will interact with this new system. If controllers are merely to be passive observers as aircrew undertake their own conflict alert and resolution, then the ability of the controller to maintain essential skill levels may be severely reduced. If controllers are to become active participants in the management of air traffic, including guidance and control, then technology will be needed to provide the controllers with all the essential data that will enable them to provide the control function. Any resistance to change is not necessarily a reaction to new technology - far from it. I would suggest that controllers, like pilots, are willing to embrace anything that will make their jobs easier and reduce their workload. However, they are intelligent and skilled enough also to recognise the dangers of inadequate consideration for the way that technology will impact on their role as a controller, on the maintenance of their situational awareness and, ultimately, their job satisfaction. Regardless of how the method of ATC is changed by the introduction of new technology, it must also be recognised that when reliance is placed on automated systems it is not a simple task to revert to 'old', manual methods of controlling. The Year 2000 bug is only one example of the need to be careful when introducing new technology into the workplace and the resultant reliance that is then placed upon those systems.

We have also seen how technology has impacted with the cockpit of modern airliners and the situations that many aircrew have experienced when they lost situational awareness. When highly automated aircraft systems began behaving in ways that were 'alien' to the aircrew's experience, there was a great deal of concern in the cockpit and confusion as to the extent that the automated system could be overridden. Of course, lessons have now been learnt and aircrew are better placed to become directly involved with the development of such systems, working closely with the electronics engineers. IFATCA also advocates a similar process for controllers. Any introduction of new technology has an impact on the work place. It is, perhaps, one of the most important factors to be considered in industrial relations. Particularly, with regard to overall responsibilities, system integrity and legal liability. As more and more ATC providers look to new technology to reduce their costs, either through reduced staffing levels or greater efficiencies, they should also remember that humans are still involved in the process. Therefore, the introduction of new systems must be carefully planned and seek to compliment the human aspirations of job satisfaction and compatibility. The introduction of new technology into ATC systems must be undertaken in a way that embraces a recognition of the overall task and enhances the performance of the control staff. It must be a harmonious and complimentary transition, and one that does not alienate its users. As we approach the new millennium, we need a Technology "Resolution " - not a "Revolution".

+Human Factors and A,r Traffic Control (1995)

Level Busts Why All the Fuss About 1

I __..,.. ...

- .f\.SO

------ ---------------------

_ . t,..\titude

7000 tt -

Level Busts·?

Graeme Stagg, United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority , Safety Regulation Group

If you have been reading any UK CAA/Industry Flight Safety publications rec~ntly you m.ay ha_venoted that a lot of attention is being paid to the subject of level busts by aircraft. A lthough this article has been written to address a UK concern, the p roblem is belived to be of world-wide proportions and accordingly may be of interest to our readers.

A 'level bust' awareness campaign, spearheaded by the UK CAA, 1s gathering momentum.

ncreasing publicity is being given to the topic together with encouragement for aircrew and ATC t o report these incidents. Despite th is, there may be sceptics, especia lly on the flight deck , who consider they have never been involved in a 'leve l bust', or t hat if the y have and no conflict result ed , there was no danger.

Consequent ly, they are probably wonder ing, 'why all this fuss?'

because it was recognised that this a growing safety problem. Was

The aim of this short article is to convince any sceptics why 'level busts' are a serious flight safety issue and are of concern to all pilots and

A third CAA "Data Plus" leaf! . h d. . et was pu bi 1s e in 1998 h1ghlightin , 1 b ust s, reco rd ed .In UK airspa g eve/ . ce sinc e 1994 . The most noticeable h . c ange over this three years is th e i . ncrease i 1997 in the combined numb n er of A IRPROX and loss of ATC se ar . incid ents caused by 'level b p ation , usts' Clearly the level bust' proble .· going away. m is not

controllers .

It became noticeab le in 1993 that reported incidents of aircraft in UK airspace deviating more than 300 feet from the ir vert ical clearances was increasing. This increase had become a Pilots and air traffic controllers acutely aware that lif e in are all significant safety issue h recent year because it was causing a rise as become busier as civil air tra s in the recorded rates of loss movements grow and the d nsport emands on of ATC standard contro lled airspace becom . es greater separation . Early studies Whilst ATC systems have stead ily . into the prob lem with in improved and many fac iliti es no w . UK airspace led to the incorporate safety nets in the form of publication of two CAA conflict alert systems, the de sign and "Data Plus" safety performance of modern aircraft have leaflets on the 'level been enhanced qu ite dramaticall y. bust' issue, one in Advances , part icularly in aircraft 1994 and a second nav igation and the adve nt of t he in 1996 . computerised 'g lass cockpit' flight Additionally, th e management systems, now mean that National A ir Traff ic the aircraft are fl y ing with great Services Ltd accuracy. This com bin ed with the (NATS) held a latest auto flight abilitie s and impressive series of climb and descent qua lities, means that workshops and w hen positional errors occur , any presentations conflicts with ot her traffic in the same with airlines airspace will result in aircraft being in

• CONTROLLER

much closer proximity. This can significantly increase the threat of a mid-air collision. As an example, within the London Terminal Control Area (LTMA), the ATC task is to integrate safely the flight paths of aircraft arriving at and departing from the major London Airports with those of over-flying aircraft and those wishing to join the airways system in the London area . The complex nature of the operation is eased by the use of Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) which specify predetermined tracks and levels to be flown by arriving and departing traffic. Normal ATC coordination procedures are augmented by the use of 'Standing Agreements' (SAs). These SAs allow aircraft to enter the airspace of an adjacent control sector without individual co-ordination of their transfer arrangements as lon g as certain conditions regarding leve ls and routings are met. Th erefore, SIDs, STARS, and SAs are now fundamental to the operation of busy ATC units since they facilit ate the safe and efficient flow of traffic during the departure and arr ival phases of flight . However, these procedures are heavily reliant upon accurate and reli able level keeping by the pilots flying their aircraft. To put this in perspecti ve, in 1997 the London Area and Terminal Control Centre (LATCC) provided an ATC service to over 1.7 million flights. Of these, nearly one million operated in the London TMA. Considering each of these flights wou ld have made perhaps 10 level changes inside this very congested airspace, the need for accurate vertical navigation by pilots, and clear, unambiguous communication of leve l change instructions between the flight deck and air traffic control becomes self evident . ATC radar conflict alert systems and the increasing number of aircraft fitted with TCAS have helped to reduce the threat of a 'level bust' resulting in a mid -air co llision . The advent of the mandator y carriag e of TCAS II for comme rcial air tran sport aircraft w ith 30 seat s or mo re,

I It CONTROLLER

from 1 January 2000, along with improvements in airborne collision avoidance and the ground based ATC conflict alert systems shou ld help to reduce further the collision risk in UK airspace. However effective, such safety nets cannot be relied upon in isolation . 'Level busts' are an everpresent safety hazard in today's increasingly crowded and complex airspace. Pilots and controllers must: • be fastidious in checking and monitoring all vertica l clearances • be constantly aware of the risks associated with deviating from assign ed levels • do their utmost to prevent 'leve l busts' .

Note. Graeme Stagg is t he ATC Flight Safety Ana lyst

Whilst the reported 'level bust' rate in the London TM A in 1997 is only 11.8 per 100,000 air transport movements, 'level busts' are a growing problem and pilots and contro llers must work together to halt their increase before they become a serious safety threat which is really what all the fuss is about.

in t he CAA 's Safety Data Departmen t , t he JAAP Execut ive and report book editor. He was also a member of the CAA / Industr y 'Level Bust' Wo rking Group (LBW G). This articl e has st emmed from his work in all three areas and has been w ritten primari ly for t he LBW G's current aw areness campaign .

Since writing this article, the accident report into the tragic mid-air collision near New Delhi between the Kazakh IL76 and the Saudi B747, in November 1996, has been published . Referring to the direct causes of the collis ion, the report said the air traffic controller had issued clear and correct instructions to the pilots. "The root and approximate cause of the collision was the unauthorised descending by the Kazakh aircraft to FL 140 and failure to maintain the assigned FL150 ."

Maastricht ATC'99 1999 EGATS Forum - Maastricht Exhibition ATC 99 A report of the Forumby PhilippeDomagala,ContributingEditor

The theme of thisyear'sEGATSforum was THE FUTUREOF SEPARATION. round 200 participants attended t he one-da y Forum . The attendance was exceptionally good considering the terrible weather that paralysed traffic all around the South of Holland and the Maastr ich area in particular . About 25cm (12 inches) of snow fell during the previous night and disrupted all the traffi c. It took more tha n two hours to cross the city, where normally only 15 minutes maximum is needed . Fortunate ly most speakers had arrived the night before and following a delayed start the Forum commenced. T he quality of t he presentations th is year was above average and everyone present praised the organ isers for a very entertaining and interest ing day. The fi rst speaker w as Mr Arnold Vanderbroucke, Director of the Maastricht Control Centre , w ho in his opening speech reminded us that due to the complexity and the high density of airspace w e we re now w orking in and the slow accepta nce of change, it w ill take more time than initially env isaged to get new future ATC systems in place. Mr Cazaux , of the French research centre (CENA) expla ined ASAS (A irborne Separation Assurance Systems). As a co-developer of the system, he exp lained both t he possibilities but also the limitat ions of the system. He pointed out that primarily, air traffic contro l was more than just aircraft separation and that ASAS could never fill all ATC requirements. According ly he did not expect the so-called 'co-operat ive separation app licat ions' (i.e. aircraft separating t hemselves auto nomousl y), to be available in the near future. Mart in Cole, Executiv e Vice President Technical of IFATCA, said that IFATCA was not against shared responsib ilities for separation per se. He questioned however , if the systems proposed (ASAS and CDT!

[ Cockpit Display of Traffic Information]) were technically feasible, whether it was quite a different story if one considered the human aspects. With this he meant the individual's liability following a reversion of responsibility back to the controller, if a pilot is unable to continue with his manoeuvres etc. He also questioned how a controller could efficiently recover from a non-routine situation. All this would certainly increase his/ her workload and therefore not allow the promised increases in capacity. (A copy of Martin Cole's presentation follows this article.) Christian Denke, of the German Pilots Association, explained the various IFALPA policies on ATM (Air Traffic Management). He said, pilots w ould support the use of CDTI and ASAS providing some conditions are met, such as, special procedures and ACAS (TCAS) to provide the ultimate protection. However, he said pilots were not so eager to take over air traffic control tasks. He saw a possible use of the equipment in en-route airspace, again providing some proper tools are in place, but certainly not in the arrival/sequencing areas. Dirk Van Eck, a Dutch Legal expert explained the legal implications and various protections available for controllers w hen separation standards are involved. Using various scenarios, he demonstrated that today we still lacked a proper international convention on the liability of air traffic controllers. He said the work started in 1977 but was never finished and he urged IFATCA to look into the matter. Peter Malanik, representing the Association of European A irlines (AEA), made a remarkable and courageous presentation by arguing in this forum that t he controller was in fact the limiting factor for t he lack of capacity in Europe .

The Head Table at the EGATS Forum (from right to left) Patrick Peters, EGATSSecretary, Philip Marien , EGATS President, Ernst Vrede, Moderator and Chairman Forum and Philippe Domogala , Theme Setter. He said, AEA saw the Free Flight concept as the solution to their problems, as it will reduce the responsibility of the controller and air traffic control in general. Among other remarkable things, Mr Malanik said that AEA was no longer against State ownership of ATC as they realised that there is much greater danger in a privatised monopoly of ATC. For AEA the performance of a control centre is limited by costs. The cheaper the better! According to AEA, the airspace is not crowded, Just badly managed. He also said that the current AEA press releases blaming air traffic control are not to be seen by controllers as a measurement of their jobs, (he said that controllers individually were doing a good Job considering the tools they were given), but as a statement that ATC as a whole was deficient. He concluded his presentation by stating that airlines were planning in taking the separation of aircraft in the future away from ATC. .. "We will do it ourselvesl" he said. Finally, Alex Hendriks , Head of the Airspace Division in EUROCONTROL (and a former IFATCA EVP Technical) gave a very good presentation in explaining firstly the current situation , and secondly what was planned in the future, in order to impro ve capacity. He mentioned the Flexib le use

of Airspace Concept, the Basic RNAV Project that were both being implemented in order to expedite and re-route traffic around bottle neck areas. He explained that purely for political reasons some very basic improvements were not implemented. He continued by saying that the main problem in European air traffic control today was the use of the word SOVREIGNTY. He gave a fe w interesting examples on how this was used to impede some projects today. Concerning Free Flight. he saw the transfer of responsibility for separation from the ground to the cockpit as the sticking block that is preventing Free Flight . Therefore, Europe will initially implement Free Route Airspace; initially in airspace above eight States and from 2003 or 2004. Thereafter this will be extended to the whole European area. In his view, air traffic control must firmly remain on the ground, as pilots and controllers have very different tasks. The FORUM participant s then all went to a reception area , as th is year the debates that traditionally follow the presentations were not held in th e auditorium but in a nearby bar area, with a glass in hand . A much more rela xed atmos phere allowed the participants to have di rect access to the speakers and ask their questions in a much less formal manner .

CONTROLL ER

The Future of Separation The Controller 's Viewpoint Martin Cole, Executive Vice PresidentTechnical Presentationto the EGATS Forum

A United States president earlierthis century got elected largely by promisingto the American people that he would put "a chicken in every (cooking) pot." t appears to me that this phrase is being resurrected today and that the aviation community is being promised "a controller in every cockpit." Let's examine this promise and see what, if any, validity it holds . The concept of air traffic controllers sharing separation responsibilities with the aircrew is supported mostly by groups who see it as a tool to increase airspace capacity or to allow aircraft to fly autonomous (uncontrolled) routes that is th e envisioned niNana of Free Flight. I have yet to see the idea of shared separation responsibilit y touted as a system safety enhancement. This concept of sharing separation is most definitely not being pushed by t he controller community, and is receiv ing only a cautious initi al acceptance within the pilot commun ity. Howe ver , just because an idea has as its main goal an incr ease in airspace capacity, this is NOT a reason to oppose it, although many of my controller col leagues might disagree with me . Is the concept of controllers sharing separation responsibi lity w ith the aircrew w ithin the realm of possibility? I am going to again startl e some of my contro ller colleagues by saying that, in my opinion this concept is both te chnically and procedura lly possible . But before my IFATCA colleagues begin impeachm ent proceedings and , even more important, befor e the proponents of shared separation rush out and announce that IFATCA supports their idea, let me say that I think the chances of this concept ever reaching any w idespread implementation are extremely small.

W hy is thi s? I have seen th e technica l requirement documents and the demonst rations that show the techno logy for Cock pit Display of Traffic Info rmat ion (CDTI) is already feasible . I have also seen t he ope rational concept document s

if II CONTROLLER

that show how this technology wo uld be integrated into the airspace procedure s to allow just the capacity increase that is so yearned for. What I have NOT seen, and what may prove the major roadblock to this idea, is the will to address and answer the very difficult HUMAN questions that should have been tackled before the concepts and requiremen ts or th e MOPS and MAS PS were even looked at. What I hope to do here today is to put on the table some of these questions and examine their implic ations. Then I want to challeng e the airspace managers and concept vision aries to go home and determine whet her the commitment and resources exist to answe r these diff icult question s. If this concept of sharing separation is ever going to gain acceptance with in the controller community, t hese qu estio ns must be answered. The questions th at I w ill put forth toda y are: â&#x20AC;˘ First, w hat part does the separation of aircraft play in the ove rall mission of the air traffic controller , and can the aircrew be expected to perform separatio n respo nsibilitie s in a way that accompl ishes this overal l mission? â&#x20AC;˘ Second, when cockpit prioriti es or unusual situations requir e th e pilot abrupt ly to "hand back" the separation responsibi lity that was delegated by th e controll er, w ill that control ler be able quickly to revert to full separation respon sibility on the ground? â&#x20AC;˘ And third, but poten tially th e most difficult, whe n separation respons ibility is being shared or delegated and an operational lossof -separation or accident occurs, w ho wi ll be held ultim ately liable? A nd let me make it clear fr om the beginning that it is still a ve1y open question whet her the answe r w ill eve nt ually be the control ler, the pilot. or the State or airspace manager who impl eme nt ed the concept of shared separation

responsibility. These questions have vastly different levels of comp lexity and difficulty, with the first being probably the most complex and the third, that of liability, being fairly straightforward but also having some of the most serious impli cations. Ultimate liability for separation W hile it may prove to be the most contentious problem of the three, I propose to start off w ith the question of liability. There are a couple of reasons to start here. First, despite its adm ittedly conten tious nature , it wi ll be the quickest to examine because of its relative ly simple nature . Its simplicit y stems from the fact that the qu esti on of who is liable wil l have a simp le answer (the pilot , the contro ller or the airspace manager). Another reason t o start w ith this qu estion is that unless it is adequately answered, control lers wil l be unwi lling to vent ure very far down the road of shared separation respons ibi lity. I w ill begin by acknow ledging t hat I am a controller in a country t hat has, unfortunatel y, one of the most lit igiou s cultures on earth. I also wo rk for a Civil Aviat ion Authority (CAA) wh ich zealously investig ates each operational error and incide nt, and then pursues enforcement actions against contro llers or pilots who may be responsib le. Some of my coll eagues fro m other countr ies have cautioned me not to let the situation for United States contro llers put too much emphasis on this qu estion of liability. But any State that is a signatory to the Chicago Convention, and thus a Member country of ICAO , endo rses the concept of separation minima . And where there are separation standards , there is the concurre nt concept of operational losses-of-separation, regardless of the differe nt levels of emphasis that part icular States may place on the enforceme nt actions resulting from those losses-of-separat ion. So this

question of liability resulting from shared separation responsibility is import ant to contro llers everywher e, and should be important to t he pilot communit y as we ll. Today , with in controlled airspace and especially under Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC), contro llers have the full responsibi lity for the separation of aircraft. W ith that full responsibility goes full accountabili ty for situations resulting in less than the required separation minima. The on ly major exception to this full accountability would be an instance in which a pilot fails to compl y with a correct ly acknowledged clearance or inst ruction. Controllers accept this accountability as an inherent consequence of having full responsibili ty for, and control of, the situation s within their areas of airspace. So w hat are the ramifications of shared or de legated separation responsibi lity? The situation of limited delegation of separation responsibi lity that involves only two specific aircraft wou ld seem to be the logica l place to begin , because it is much simpler than the concept whe rein the aircrew wou ld accept f ull responsibility for separation from all surrounding aircraft. Let's look first at the limited de legation of separation respons ibility. Once t he control ler ascertains that the pilot has ident ified a specific aircraft on the airborne CDTI equipment, the contro !!er could issue a clearance that would put the responsibi lity on the pilot for separation from that specific aircraft tr affic . An example wou ld be to "maintain at least 5 NM separation from traffic aircraft " and then execute a particular maneuv er such as "climb or descend to a level" or "proc eed direct to a fix ." Another example could be that the pilot receives a clearance on a specific route or procedure along with instruct ions to maintain at least the requ ired long itudina l separatio n from the airuaft ahead . In these

he Future of Separation examples, the pilot wo uld be require d to execute the specific maneuver or route and at the same tim e maintain the requ ired separation minima or greater . Both of these examples have been proposed to me as situations in which the controller could utilize this concept of delegated separatio n responsibility in order to then REMOVE his or her situational aware ness from that particu lar pair of aircraft, thus allow ing the controll er to concentrate attention on other tasks. These same proponents contend that the more a contro ller delegated separation to the cockpit (fo r example , by setting up a long string of aircraft all with instruction s to maintain separation from the prece ding aircraft) then the more aircraft a controller could allow into the airspace. This is because the controller would not have to maintain situational awareness on those pairs of aircraft to w hich separation responsibilit y had been delegated. But what happe ns w hen, as they always do, things go wro ng? The re w ill eventually be a situation where a pilot has been instructed to maintain a specific separation from another aircraft and the required separation is subseq uently lost. In every instance w here I have heard t his concept proposed , the answer is t hat the controller still retains ultimate responsibility, and thus ult imate liability , in these situations . Please be clear on this point, if the co ntrolle r retains ultimate res pons ibi lity for the maintenance of requi red separat ion then the control ler wi ll not remove his operatio nal awareness from that situation any more than he would in today's environme nt. This means that even if contr ollers were to de legate t his supposed responsibility then all of thi s hoped-for "surp lus" situat ional awareness (and concurrent increase in airspace capacity ) W ILL NOT materialize. And w ithout th is envisioned increase in airspace capacity, wou ld there continue to be sufficient reason to implement this concept? Remember that th is is the simple st of the delegated separation scenarios. The idea of Free Flight airspace, in which the aircrew w ould accept responsibility for separation from all aircraft w ith in that airspace, is much more comp lex. Th e idea that contro llers w ill retain final responsib ility fo r separation w ithin this Free Flight airspace Is even more "visionary," and I do not mean that in a comp limentary sense. But I w ill

leave the discussion of responsibility and liability in a full Free Flight scenario until another, later forum. I w ill only say th at a successful resolution of these issues in the situation of limited delegation of separation wil l be necessary before progre ss can be made towards that fully realized concept of Free Flight . Return of Delegated Separation Responsibility Let us move on to the second questio n I posed, that of when , and how, t his delegated separation responsibility might be returned to the controller. There are obvious, order ly conclusions to this delegation of responsibility. In the examples already stated, these order ly conclusions could be when the pilot finished the maneuver (such as the climb or descent) or w hen the aircraft lands (as in the case of aircraft in trail on final approach). An orderly conclusion could also entail the controller issuing a new clearance, probably accompanied by an explicit statement that the controller is resuming responsibility for separation. These wo uld be the normal, routine conclusions to the delegation of separation responsibility and could be accommodated by the control ler as part of t he normal planning of tasks. What remains to be addressed are the non-routine and t he emergency situations that might require an abrupt unplanned return of separation responsibility to the control ler. As I stated earlier, this concept of shared or delegated separation responsibility has been proposed on ly as a means to increase the capacity or flexibility of airspace beyond w hat is possible today. A irlines and CAA 's have not lined up behind this techno logy merely in order to reduce the work load and stress on air traffic contro llers. Neithe r have human factors experts nor safety certification officials proposed that blurring today's clearly defined separation responsibilities wo uld enhance the level of aviation system safety. In this area of safety we hear only th e often used but difficult to validate statement that this new concept "must not degrade overall safety levels." So the goal of this concept is to increase system capacity or flexibility (and th us complexity) beyond the contro ller's limits in today's environment. It follows logically that an unplanned return of th is delegated responsibility

wou ld put the contro ller into a situation of being immediately overloaded. Whi le the contro ller wo uld, in most instances, be able to handle one or two aircraft abruptl y "handing back" this delegated responsibility, I seriously doubt if the proponent s of thi s concept envision the capacity increases being limited to one or two aircraft, even on a per sector basis. Th at means we must consider th e consequences of a w ide-scale reversion of this responsibility to the controller w ho may be wo rking significantly increased numbers of aircraft. This return of separation responsibility could happen for a number of reasons, some technical and some human based. Examp les that come quickly to mind are: 1. an outage of the GNSS signal resulting in the loss or degradation of the A DS-Broadcast techno logy upon wh ich a CDTI might be based, 2. a line of rapidly building weather that could limit the maneuvering opt ions for a number of aircraft w ithin a short period of time, or 3. unexpected clear air turbulence that could cause the lead aircraft of a long in-trail line to slow dow n, w hich would lead to compression of the string and an inability for the aircrew to maintain the required separation. So if an unacceptab le controll er wo rkload should result whe n a number of aircrew abrupt ly return the separation responsibility to the controller, w hat wil l be the limitations on the retu rn of th at separation responsibility? Few of the restrictions I can envision wo uld be popu lar with my pilot colleagues. Because the pilots hold the ultimate responsibility fo r the safe operation of the flight , w hen the aircrew decides that their wo rkload or fl ight condition s require returnin g the task of separation to the controll er, they w ill not wi llingly accept any limitations on their ability to do so. But because a control ler cannot conceivably be expected to salvage a situation that is return ed to him seconds before separation is lost , there wo uld almost certainly have to be (at a minimum ) a requirement that the task is return ed wit h adequate time to accept. analyze and manage the situation safely. Since the complexity and speed of operational situation s varies great ly, this timeframe wou ld either have to take into account a "worst case" scenario (and thu s unacceptab ly long prohibitions) or there wou ld have to be some provision for the

controller to refuse to accept back a separation situation wh ich he could not safely manage. Anot her possibilit y is that the ab rupt return of separation responsib ility may have to be an exe rcise of t he pilot's emergency authority. This would then allow the contro ller to salvage the situation in a way tha t might not mainta in the requir ed separatio n minima. As I said, I doubt whether my pilot col leagues would be too happy with any of these possible soluti ons. So here we have another difficult set of questions, but they are ones that must be answered before contr ollers can afford to begin shari ng of separation responsibility w ith the aircrew. The Overall ATC Mission Going back to the first of my original questions, many people in this room already know quite well that merel y keeping aircraft separated by the required distances is only one facet of the con tr oller's job . But I have encount ered proponents of the delegation of sepa ration respo nsibilit y who seem to think that so long as all aircraft remai n the required distances apart then the job of the air traffic control ler is accomp lished. So let us exami ne the part that the separation of aircraft plays in th e overal l air traffic contro l mission . The contro ller's mission can be broken down into thre e bro ad categories. They are : 1 _Th e separat ion of aircraft, 2. Airspace constraints, and 3. Provid ing assistance to aircraft. We' ll look at each in detai l to see how they fit together into th e mission of the air traffic controller. Keeping aircraft separated can be described in the simpl est te rms as knowing the separat ion minima wh ich app ly in each situatio n and airspace and then using the three basic too ls of th e control ler (leve l changes, traJectory cha ng es, and spee d changes) to ensure that aircraft remain apart by greater than those min ima. Despite thi s simp le definition , separatio n is probably the mo st comp licated and certain ly th e mo st safety-re lated of the contro ller 's ro les. Thi s compl ex ity stems from the fact that it is seld om on ly two aircraft between w hich th e co ntroller is required to app ly th ese separation minima . Although other factors can sometim es make the task of separat ing even two aircraft diff icu lt. the real comp lex ity comes from the interweav ing of m ultiple aircraft into that intr icate aerial II>Âˇ14

' CONTROLL ER

/ COMMUNICATION

STRAIGHTFORWARD Schmid

Telecommunication

connects

air-traffic

controllers with pilots and other ATC centers with a revolutionary

standard of quality. Rapidly , simp ly

and as reliably as a Swiss watch. A wealth of know-how as a leader in the commun ications field coupled with state-of- the -art digital technology makes all this possible . The user interface, r., n•·t T•ll\ol T-ollt.1 1~1 n,,.,

e,,a

for example , is based

a touchsc reen , which not only makes life a lot easier for users but also cuts expense mum

work

and

a mini-

when

systems

are adapted to future developments . Make your skies safe. And call us for more info rmation.

Binzstrasse35 , CH-8045 Zu rich Phone + 4 1 - 1 - 4 5 6 1 1 1 1 Fax + 4 1 - 1 - 4 61 4 8 8 8

The Future of Separation ballet that can be either beauty or heart-po unding stress to wat ch or to choreograph . Despite this, most contro llers w ould tell yo u that if the onl y thi ng they had to keep in mind was separation minima, then their jo b would be much easier. So let's look at the other two aspects of the controller's jo b. The first of these two additional aspects is airspace constraints . These airspace constraints come in several forms: • static Letters of Agreement (LOA), • dyna mic coord ination ag reements between controllers, • Traffic Flow Management (TFM ) initiatives, • and military and Special Use Airspa ce (SUA) Some of t hese can be affected by the controller on a dynam ic basis and some (like military airspace) need almo st a government dec ree to change. A lso, the consequences of violating these constraints can vary tremen dousl y, from the gentle reminder by you r neighbo r contro ller "stay in yo ur ow n airspace" to the gruesome thought of a 747 trespassing into an air-toground missile firing range . Airspace constraint s in the form of LOA's are those restri ctions w ith which a controll er is required to comply, such as all aircraft to a particular destination crossing a point at or below a specific level, or all overfl ight aircraft exit ing a sector only at even or odd levels. The second additional cont roller task is assistance to aircraft . Assistance to aircraft is much mor e than the control ler rend ering all possib le help to an aircraft in an emergency situation, although t his is certainly an important aspect of contro ller assistance. Assistance to aircraft might be more correct ly described as ensu ring the eff icient management of the airspace. Thi s effic ient management of airspace is the real key to the cont roller 's role and importance in the overa ll ATC mission . A lthough an attempt to exp lain t his mission element (efficie ncy) wo uld take more time t han we have today, a few examp les might highlight what I mean here . Examp le 1: In resolving a separation con fli ct situat ion , a contro ller almost alway s has several solution opt ions. Normally, if there is a choice between turning one aircraft or turn ing three, log ic wou ld dictate t hat the single aircraft 1s turned . But t his is not always the most efficient If the single aircraft wou ld have to be turned away from its desired route of flight and the

three aircraft could be turned towards their destination and then sent direct to a fix that shortened their route of flight , the logic of turning three aircraft sudden ly becomes clear. Exa mple 2: In a converging conflict situation between two aircraft, if one of those aircraft must be climbed, a quick look at the situation might indicate that the controller should climb the aircraft that is landing the furthest distance away. Normally one wants the aircraft that must descend for landing underneath the aircraft that is continuing on. But there are numerous other variables to consider in choosing the most efficient solution. First, the aircraft landing closest may also be a type of aircraft that operates much more efficiently at higher altitudes and which frequently requests climbs even relatively close to its destination. This aircraft might also be a type that climbs much faster and could execute the level change in half the time the other aircraft w ould require . Also in this scenario, there may be airspace constraints unknown to the pilots, such as aircraft to a particular destination may be required to enter the next sector only at specific levels. Example 3 : In resolving an intrail overtak ing conflict , the control ler may choose to use the too l that pilots seem to hate the most speed control, and reduce the speed of the overtaking aircraft. Th e controller may do this even w hen the lead aircraft could almost certainly speed up to allow the second aircraft to maintain its speed . Yes, even in this situation the controller may slow up the second aircraft. I have done it myself and before the pilots in the roo m storm the stage, let me explain. One of t hose airspace constraints I ment ioned earlier was Traffic Flow Management init iatives. Many of these initiatives have specified beginning and ending times . In the situation I have described here, the controlle r may know that allowing both aircraft to fly at the faster speed would also put them across a sector boundary w ithin a timeframe w hich would make them both subject to a Flow Contro l restriction . This restriction might require both of the aircraft to be slowed anyway and wou ld also require that they be descended much earlier than would be required if they we re not w ithin the restrictio n t imeframe . I know th ere are some of you

thinking that I must be fabricating such a scenario to justify my contro ller's sadistic love of slowing aircraft. Let me give yo u an example of a common Flow Control restriction in one of the sectors I work : "Between 2000-2200Z, all aircraft on J-6 landing Saint Louis (KSTL) must be at or below FL260 and 20 NM in t rail." Unfortunately, controllers do not always have sufficient t ime to explain the reasons behind some of the clearances that the pilots find the most disagreeable. So how does this idea of managing airspace efficient ly affect the question of delegation of separation responsibility to the cockpit? The answer is that, just as it is the real key to the controller's overall task, it is also crucial to a successful implementation of shared or delegated separation responsibility. As we have seen previously, situation solutions which ONLY address meeting required separation minima may not support the overall ATC mission and in fact may hinder or degrade the efficient management of the airspace. A ny contro ller will testify to the fact that a single "inefficie nt" solution can complicate his or her job for many stress-filled minutes. What this implies is that pilots to whom the job of separation is given must make those necessary separation decisions in ways that not ONLY contribute to the efficiency of their own flight but also to the effic iency of the overall ATC mission, including observ ing airspace constraints and the needs of surrounding aircraft. In order for pilots to be able to make the correct separation decisions (meaning in this case the most efficient), the technology must be able to show them much more than JUStthe location and short term intent of aircraft around them. There must be a means to give the pilots A LL the information that contro llers have available, including : • the routes of flight and types and destinations of the surrounding aircraft, • all the airspace constra ints that are in effect, • wide area weather returns, • and even the work load and capacities of ATC sectors in their vicin ity.

the effi cienc y of t he system overa ll. I wo n't ask the pilots in the room if this scenario is something they are interested in accepting . I already know the answer to that question But I wi ll say to the proponents of shared separation responsibility ; you must be clear that this is exactly what yo u w ill be asking pi lots to accept as part of this concept. And be clear also that it is you, not contro llers, who w ill have to sell this concept -to the pilot community. As a controller, I do NOT feel pilots shou ld be asked to do my job in add ition to their own . Even if I did, I am not enough of a salesman to eve n attempt it.

Summary In summary, let me reca ll that at the beginning of my presentation I said I believe that the co ncept of shared or delegated separation responsibility is technically and procedurally feasib le, alb eit extremely difficult from a human perspective . Let me amp lify this by saying that I am not opposed philo sophica lly to the concept of de legating some, or eve n most, of my respo nsibili ty to the aircrew for speci fied periods of time . But the implementers of this concept have a difficult task ahead, becau se as a controller I WILL d emand that the concept's implementation mu st be in a manner: 1 . that does not leave me without contro l of a situation to which I may be held ultimately liable, 2. that makes provision to ensure the workload that I have delegated can not be abrupt ly handed back to me in order to salvage an unsa lvageable situation, and 3. that does not vast ly increase my workload, undoing decis ions that pi lots made because they were not given the tool s, information , or capabi lity allowing them to make the decisions which support overal l system efficiency So if the vis ionaries in thi s audience can do all this, and do it in a way that does not degrade the safety of the aviation system and in a way which shows the positive Cost Benefit Analy sis airlines demand ; if you can do all t hat, then you may be surpri sed to find that controlle rs are not nearl y as resistant to cha ng e as we are accused of being . Note:

Then the pilot must take all the se factors into consideration and be wi lling to make decisions that may not be the most efficient for their particular Flight but which supp ort

This document reflects an IFATCA position . with in the Unit ed States, _ it has NOT been coordinated with NATCA. As such . ,t should not be taken to represent a NATCA pos,t,on to the FAA

•I

CONTROLL ER

EGATSF rum The EGATS Future of Separation Forum Will a Reduction of Separation Increase Capacity? An extract from the presentation Philippe Domagala gave at the EGATS Forum, during the Maastricht ATC 99 Exhibition, on 23 February 1999. INTRODUCTION Is reducing separation an aim in itself or only a means in order to obtain more capacity? Or is the aim to obtain an increase in ATC seNice, or is it both together, i.e. more capacity and more seNice? Today, air traffic control still works on the old ICAO principle to EXPEDITE an ORDERLY flow of traffic. To achieve this controllers are using a mix of procedures and ground based equipment to keep aircraft separated. In addit ion , contro llers also use three other principles: Th e First Come First SeNed Principle: Someone neutral decides who gets what and when he gets it. Th e Expedit ion and Safety Principle : The controller tries to expedite th e traff ic for the good of the who le and normall y never compromises on safety principles. And last but not least the contro ller is trained to give a SeNice to A LL Users. If we delegate the separation functions to the cockp it, I believe those three principles wi ll not be applied . Norm ally, pilot s, and this is not a criticism, are only concerned with their own aircraft . This is how the y have been trained . Th e need to expedite another (possibly sometimes at his own expense) will not normall y be th e pilots fir st priority - especially if the other aircraft is from a competing airlin e, or General Aviation . Now t he capacity versu s seN ice problem : For th e sake of the argument let's take RVSM (Reduction of Vertical Separat ion Minima) in Continent al Europe . Here w e are looking for capacity gains (mor e Flight Levels) and better seN ice (mor e preferred cruising altitude s) tog ethe r. But are we really going t o achieve thi s7 Let me briefly review the conc ept of RVSM One t housand feet separation above FL290, six extr a levels at

II CONTROLLER

once , doub ling the cruising capacity, says the glossy brochure! Well let's put the fact s together and be realistic. FL 380 and 400 won't be very popular and not much used. FL360 wi ll possibly be used a bit more but this is not where the demand wi ll be . Now FL300, 320 and 340, that w ill be where the requests w ill be for use. So in fact three extra levels will be used but, on paper, this is still a 50% extra capacity. To achieve this gain of capacity, many other factors need to be in place. For example , the percentage of aircraft technically equ ipp ed to operate in the RVSM airspace , exceptions (by th is I mean State aircraft, or military) wi ll need to be kept to a minimum, stable weather cond ition s (no CBs, no turbulence) and adequate sector s and manpower on the ground to work the extra capacity. So until those factors are resolved, we should talk about possibilities of increased capacity, instead of an actual increase . Today the capacity shortfall s in Europe are located in sector s around large airports (APP, TMA , en-route feeders sectors) and on the en-route sectors corresponding to the major crossing of flow s of traffic, between those large airports . Those sectors are producin g the most delays as w ell. The APP and TMA sector s wi ll not be directly affected by RVSM . However, incre ased capacity en-route could lead to a new factor of conge stion for those sector s i.e. th e possibilit y of mor e aircraft arriving at th e same time in thos e secto rs. On the oth er hand RV SM w ill give more possibiliti es to resolve conflict s and to "move aircraft " safely separat ed to the next Sector or Centre . But thi s w ill increase th e number of aircraft per given area. Further mo re, w ithin the t ime fr ame of t he introdu ction of RVSM , t here w ill be no new major tech nological breakthroug h

that w ill fundamentall y change the way we control air traffic in the core area of Europe. Therefore, if the number of aircraft per given area is incre ased, in order to move it more safely, we will need more sectors. More sectors mean more hardware and more staff and w e are back into our notion of seNice versus capacity. If this is not put in place in time (within the next thre e years), then we w ill have RVSM introduced with the same numb er of sectors as toda y. This w ill mean the number of aircraft per area wi ll be limited to what w e have today - which equals no real gain in capacity. Implementation is expected in less than three years from now and accordingl y we need t o put in place sufficien t hardwa re and recruit (or retain ) suffici ent staff to successfully op erate the programme. Oth erw ise t he airlines are going to ask some questions I RVSM is just an example however; my reasoning is valid for any form of reduct ion of separation standard aimed at raising capacity. To get any benefit from any project w it hin the air traffic cont rol framework of t he next five years, it w ill only lead to capacity gains if suff icient sectors can be open ed to accept this ext ra capacity safely. Finally, a last short remark about seN ice versus capacity : Pilots are t rained to requ est the opt imum fl ight profil e at all t imes (most direct rout e at optimu m alt itude s) Controlle rs are trained to give t he best seN ice possible to pilots and t he air traffic control system of to day gener ally works on this principl e. Howev erÂˇ, we read now that in t he futu re, both in t he USA and in Europe, some form of Free Flight or Free Route Airspace wi ll be t he goal. In other words a more opt imal seN ice! There is not hing wrong with t his. However , unt il now we have

all been w orking on the goal to increase capacity . (Remember the 1992 pledge of th e ECA C Ministers. and t he EATCHIP programme .) One has to realise, that in tod ay's ATC structu re, wh ich is very unli kely to chang e in the next ten years, any large increase of capacity w ill cu rtail th e freedom of ope rations (level capping , mand atory rout ings, speed restrict ions, etc .) Likew ise any for m of increase of freedom of operations is likely to have a negative effect on capacity . (You defini tive ly process more aircraft if you restr ict t hem one behind each ot her at the same speed on fi xed seg regated one w ay rout es, rather than to let the m fly at random towards major airports.) Both goals taken individually will involve a comple x resectorisat ion, re-training , recruit ing new staff etc.

CONCLUS ION If we wa nt to address both aspects at the same t ime, then the playing f ield needs to be redefi ned . More infrastructures , such as runways, new airports , new sector suites or even new ATC Centres, have to be built. Hundreds of control lers have to be recruited now , to be in place before imp lementation takes place. Thi s is go ing to cost effort and money Contro llers are ready for t he challenge but how about the rest of t he playing fie ld?

lFATCA'99 State of the Federa tion 38th Annual Conference - Santiago de Chile, 15 - 19 March 1999 Address to the Opening Plenary Presented by the President & Chief Executive Officer, Samuel Lampkin n my maiden speech at Final Plenary, last conference I echoed to an ext ent some thought s of members of the Ex ecu t ive Board and me as your new President. I feel heartened to repo rt that your Executi ve Boar d, although reduced by the sad and untimely passing away of our Executi ve V ice President Am ericas, has over the past year conscient iously kept on track as far as the affa irs of the Federation's activities are concerned. That aside, the year under review did have its moments of grief whe n there were some major air disasters, wh ich took several hundred lives. I am pleased to see that com ing out of th e Wo rld W ide CNS / ATM Systems Implementat ion Confere nce, !CAO and its Contra ct ing States have adopted a Declaration which wou ld ensure that SAFETY remains the pillar of internati onal air navigat ion and that eff iciency and cost effectiveness be an adjunct to safety. I am also pleased to note the untir ing efforts made by the many Regional Plannin g and Imple menta t ion Groups (PIRGs) in work ing t owards red ucing the nu mber of shortc omings and def icien cies t hat exist w ithin the vari ous ICAO Regions. I am quite satisfied that the ICAO , its Regional Offices and its member States have recog nised that IFAT CA has a legit imate right to part icip ate in all matters co ncernin g internat ional air navigation . Though our relationsh ip w it h IATA has been a "ro ller-coaster " one , I am pleased to see t hat during the

past yea r it has somewhat deepened . Additiona lly, I am encouraged by the growth in the joi nt partnersh ip that exists between IFA LPA and us globally. I am also pleased to report that one of our MAs was successful in w inning their case against their administ ration on unfair and vindict ive labour practices, thereby havi ng the ir members returned to t heir ATC jobs. I am, howe ver, saddened by the fact t hat there are some MAs that are yet to have their matters determined before the courts . I am very concerned over the lack of sensitivity of many nation al administrations in failing to right professional issues that eve ntuall y escalate into industr ial issues whe n left unattended. States and their ATC adm inistrations oug ht to t ake cognisance of the concerns expressed by the ir operationa l personnel : outdated, unreliable equipment ; poor ly designed procedures; defic iency in per sonnel, tra ining , certification and qu ality assurance; poor and indec ent w ork ing condit ions have no place in the industr y tod ay. Equipage, adequate infrastructure , proper social benef its and a highly trained moti vated human resource equal ensured SAFETY Air traffic control lers must be afforded t hese conditions so t hat they can perform optima lly. Failur e to follow these grou nd rules imp inges on safety standards, increasing t he probabili t ies for accidents and incident s accidents and incidents t hat we as contro llers consider unaccept able . It , t herefore, behoves thi s

Federation, likewise every person and organisat ion involved in the business of air navigation to work towards increased safety marg ins. No national aviation admi nistrat ion can consider itself safety conscious if it continua lly and perpetua lly refuses to provide optim um work ing cond iti ons in all respects for its personnel. As contro llers, we all know of the task demands necessary to accommodate the projected and ever increasing air traffic, at the same time maintaining an even increasing safety margin and efficiency. We know that much more can be done if all the players comm it themselves to fulfil the task. It is therefore important t hat we as a Federation conti nue our thrust towards achiev ing increased safety margins with greater vigilance.

ADMINISTRATION This year the admini strative task has primarily focussed upon supporting the new Off ice to fulfi l! its first fu ll year of operation smoothly since the Executive Secretary stepped down. I am pleased to report that our staff and the Dep uty President have met this challenge comfortab ly Our Office Manager, Maura Estrada, and her assistant, Patricia Estrada, have coped wel l with t heir new environment (the wor ld of professiona l air tr affic contro llers) w it h aplomb. The Office is our first point of contact for Member Associations , Corporate Members, other industry organisations and t he publ ic As such, our staff

receive many and var ied requests for information and assistance, and they genera lly have to dete rmin e for themselves how best to meet the nature of the co nt act. A ltho ugh the Executive Board is avai lab le to advise and assist whe n necessary, the aim of the Office is to fac ilitate the overall operatio ns of the Federation by relieving the Board of most of the day-to-day administration, which is a fundamenta l part of an international organisation. The Office Manag er comb in ed w ith the Deputy President and the Editor reviewed and upd ated the Confere nce Guid elin es and the Executive Board Guidelines. The IFAT CA Brochure was also updated. Thi s year's Conference Report was produced in a slig htl y "cleaner" format, and the Manual amendment, the new Information Handbook, the IFAT CA Circu lars, and Spec ial Newsletters were all distributed in a smooth and timel y m anner. The Executi ve Board has decided on the content and form of our web site, and appointed a Web Maste1Âˇ. We hope th is faci lity wil l be substantia lly completed by Annua l Conference in Santiago. The Board has also set up a small Task Force to review the requirement s of our Annua l Conferences in the future . Th e Deputy President w ill bring to Conference two papers to amend the adm inist rative po licies of the Federat ion because of the change in our structure from the Exec utive Secretary to the permanent offic e Stand ing Comm ittee

CONTROLL ER

(SC) 6 has again had an extensive work programme, and we thank the Committee for their advice and assistance with constitutional and administrative issues.

;..

FINANCES Although the Federation remains financially sound, we realized a small loss for the fiscal year 1997/98. Expenditures exceeded income by 1.1%, or CHF 4,400.00. Years of increasing budgets and continuing surpluses have given way to a tight fiscal outlook, as predicted in last year's State of the Federation. As 1997/98 was the first year of operation for the Office, and a duality of administration between the Office and the Secretariat existed for much of the year, I am pleased to note, that the combined operation of the Office and Secretariat came in at 9.3% under budget; CHF 7,360.00 ahead of estimates. Unfortunately, the Executive Board realized the greatest overexpenditure of all budget areas, primarily the result of the costs associated with the symposium in Harare, and Conference in Toulouse. The Executive Board continues to examine ways to reduce its own expenditures, and is operating below budget for the current fiscal year. Projections for the balance of this year show a stable outlook on the income side, with expenses running slightly below budget. SC3 met once, in Miami. The primary focus of this year's agenda was a restructuring of the accounting processes used by the Federation, and the ongoing review of our financial status. THE CONTROLLER MAGAZINE This year has been a difficult one for the CMG (Controller Management Group). Although the magazine has been produced in a timely manner and has continued to provide informative and original material, administratively it has been

i, ii CONTROllER

disastrous. In the middle of the year, the Editor discovered that there was a serious cash flow problem. Perhaps due to some personal problems, the recovery of revenue for advertising, owed to the CMG, had not been effected by the then incumbent Chairmanand Treasurerof the CMG. Similarly, it was discovered that some invoices for 1997 subscriptions had not been raised and many for 1998 had not been issued. There was no fraud involved in the events but following the discoveryand after further investigation, the UK GATCO replaced the Chairman of the CMG and appointed a new Subscription Manager. To resolve the cash flow problem, IFATCA loaned some funds to the CMG to enable order to be restored. Thankfully,the action is proving to be effective and due to significant efforts by the Subscription Manager and the Chairman of the CMG, already all invoicinghas been brought up to date, including the dispatch of all 1999 invoices. Outstandingmonies have also started to be recovered. The new CMG is confident that the money borrowed from IFATCA will be returned in the agreed timescale and that normal trading practices have been restored. The retiring Advertising Manager, Ron Mahendran is to be commended for his efforts in the selling of advertising space for the journal. The last few issues have been most successful and the income being recovered should more than pay for both the production and distribution costs. This should greatly assist the magazine's financial recovery process. During the year, the Editor assumed the duties of the Executive Board Secretary in addition to those associated with the magazine.

PROFESSIONAL One of the major items of "Professional" interest during the year has been the significant

number of industrial problems that are facing many of our MAs. A number of disputes have led to legal action being taken against groups of controllers. This is a most worrying factor as it underpins a real concern controllers have for their profession, their role and their working environment. In some cases, industrial action has been taken because of serious concerns for the safety of the Air Traffic System. A lack of serviceable and appropriate equipment, a lack of suitably trained staff, and continuing increases in traffic levels, are contributing factors to controllers' concerns. These problems are not necessarily confined to known difficult areas, such as Africa or South America, but are occurring in every IFATCA Region. IFATCA has been required to intervene to support our members in Greece, Russia, Zimbabwe and Uganda. In most cases, we have been successful in assisting our membership to identify their concerns and have their professional status acknowledged. However, there are many areas where controllers continue to face hardships and difficulties caused by a lack of appreciation for the important tasks they undertake. Poor salaries and working conditions naturally lead to discontentment, yet our members still attempt to overcome the problems they face with reason and patience. Regrettably, it is the act of cooperation and understanding from controllers that is often abused by employers. The demand for IFATCA involvement and participation with ICAO and European working groups continues unabated. Representation is often difficult to manage, not least to find available members, but also to cover the associated costs. There obviously has to be a limit to how much IFATCA can participate, but can we really afford to turn down the invitations we receive? Can we really trust employer

organisations to act upon our behalf and accurately represent the controllers' viewpoint? This is especially important with Professional matters. Satisfactory working conditions, licensing, work and rest schemes, training, even stress management, are key issues that face every controller, regardless of where they work or who they are employed by. Privatisation of ATC Services often promoted as a positive way forward - has in itself created new problems. There are clear indications that an emphasis on cost saving is affecting staffing levels and is directly affecting the allocation and agreement for rest and holiday periods. Controllers worldwide are having to work harder, often with outdated equipment, as traffic levels continue to rise. SC4 has been tasked with creating a Working Paper to review the effects of Privatisation and IFATCA will also participate at an ILO (International Labour Organisation) Conference later this year. Both SC4 and SC7 have faced some difficult work programme items requiring much deliberation to create suitable working papers for Conference. The participation in these SCs becomes ever more important as the work items increase and the subject areas become more complex. IFATCA needs determined and able members on these SCs, with full support and encouragement from the MAs they represent. This year has seen a number of work items that have required a joint approach to reflect the Professional, Human Factors and Legal aspects. Executive Vice President Professional (EVPP) has a desire to see the creation of a single "Professional" SC. but awaits the outcome of the SC1 trial. There are many new work items that will benefit from a combined Technical and Professional approach, in order that comprehensive IFATCA policy can be developed from ll> 20 the outset. To this end, there

l FAT

IMPRESSIONS OF

Philippe Domagala, his year, Conference was hosted by the Chilean Air Traffic Controllers Associations (familiarly known as" el Colegio") and was one of the best conferences ever. Nearly 600 participants, superb accommodation in the Conference Hotel, the Carrera, which is one of the oldest and most luxurious hotels in Santiago and a very relaxed atmosphere all helped towards its success. A small but well distributed technical exhibition was heavily visited, as all the coffee breaks were held in the middle of the exhibition stands. Official opening of conference by the Minister of Defence

The first evening reception was held in the hotel itself and delegates and guests had their first taste of the Chilean wines. For many, the wines were an interesting surprise as they are really excellent. After a further week of wine tasting, during various meals, one can only come to the conclusion that some countries and France in particular, have to be very careful indeed if they want to maintain supremacy! The Opening Ceremony was held in the Congress Centre, where the Chilean Minister of Defence, together with the Chief of the Air Force, opened the event. Flags and the singing of the national anthem gave a very solemn tone to the Plenary. Press and television were present and covered the event. although sometimes overdid it a bit! Working sessions were in the hotel and all lunches consisted of superb 4 course meals with, you've guessed right, two ty pes of wines I The Wednesday evening brought us to the National Theatre, a few blocks from the hotel, to view a national folklore presentation, some of which w as stunning in qualit y This was follo w ed by a reception (wine again) and further chances to met our Chilean colleague s.

Cornmilter A - Headtabl r

The accompan ying persons also got t heir Wine Tour, and at 10 00 am on odd

' â&#x20AC;˘I

CONTROLL ER

FERENCE co

'99

FERENCE 1 99

Contributing Editor days people had a chance to view the spectacular changing of the guard at the Palace Moneda, just opposite the Hotel. This palace is special to many Chileans, as it was the centre of the battles between Allende and the Pinochet partisans in the 1970's. If you looked carefu Ily on the walls, it is possible to still see the numerous bullets holes in the houses around the building. But that is past history. Today Chile is a very peaceful and democratic country, with very little crime and very friendly people. On the Friday evening, we were all invited to a castle overlooking the city (the access to it was via a special elevator from the street) where we were treated like royalty. An aperitif was served on the terraces overlooking a large park with Santiago City below us. The aperitif was the national evening cocktail called PISCO SOUR (1 part Pisco alcohol and 3 parts lemon juice,+ a little ice, well shaken). Following this, a perfect dinner was served with again more wine and dancing until the small hours of the morning. This year an Egyptian did not win the IFATCA Breitling watch draw. Instead, a colleague from Croatia was the proud winner. Our friend from Egypt declared later that it was a bad yearl (For those not aware the same per son has won the watch at the previous two conferences .... )

Delegates at work - Committee C

Delegates at Work Committee B

Next year we will meet again in another Continent at Marrakech in Morocco. However, nobody present in Santiago w ill forget the experience here . A very well organised Conference indeed "Mucha s gracias para tod o los Amigos del colegio de controladores de transi to Aereo aereos de Chile, y hasta la proxima vista en Ma ruecosl" EditorialNote.Âˇ Information about the new Executive Board members , Comm ittee Report s and details of the Acco mpan ying Persons programme w ill be inci ude d

the

Chilean Folklore Spectacle al the Nal io11alTheatre

next edition of The Contro ller

CONTROLLER

State of the Federation has been impro ved comm unicat ion between SCl, 4 and 7, wh ich included a joint meet ing in M ontreal. T he long aw ait ed Professional Man ual is now available and a means fo r maintaining th is document have been establi shed . It is alw ays diff icult t o identify one or tw o key people w ho w ork for IFATCA 's beh alf. All repres entat ion is undert aken on a volunt eer basis and oft en in t he ind ividual's ow n t ime. The enthus iasm our rep resentat ives have for carryin g out t he t asks on behalf of th e Federat ion is t o be applaud ed. How ever, I w ou ld like to make special ment ion of th e work undertak en wi t hi n t he ICA O Huma n Fact ors Task Group . The recent publ icat ion of th e ICAO HF Document basically copied IFAT CA 's sub missions w ord for w ord. T EC H NI CAL It has been an extremel y busy year for our techn ical representat ives, especially our representa t ives t o the RGCSP (Revi ew of t he General Con cept of Separat ion Panel), the ISPA CG (the Informa l Sout h Pacif ic ATC Coord inating Group ), and for our new rep resentat ive to the A DSP (A ut omat ic Depe nde nt Syste m Panel), M r. Cedric Robin of France. The se importa nt ICA O gro ups have been gr applin g w ith t he issues of red uced separat ion standards and the use of dat alink in t hose red uct ions. Since last confere nce, we w ere successfu l in securing an invit atio n t o provide a Federation t echn ical rep resentative to another im port ant ICAO region al group . Mr. Yoshiki lmawaka of Japan has accept ed the posit ion of IFATCA representati ve t o th e IPACG (t he Info rmal Pacific ATC Coord ination Group ). This group deals w it h int ernat ional issues and coordinat ion fo r the North and Cent ral Pacifi c region , includin g dat alink and t he Pacific imp lementat ion of RVSM . M r. lmawaka rÂˇecently conclud ed a three -year detail to the ICAO

Bangkok office and brings valuable experience and technical expertise to his role as the IFATCA Representative . The first year of the two-year SCl trial appears to have been quite successful. The trial couples MA membership on SCl w ith participation of our technical representatives, whose roles are to support the MA committee members in prog ressing specific work items. This new committee format contributed to tw o extremely producti ve SCl meetings . Recognizing that there are issues and concerns that cross the boundaries of technical and professional issues, SCs 1, 4 and 7 met during the same week in Montreal. This allowed a follo w on meeting betw een the Executi ve V ice President Professional, the Executive Vice President Technical and the chairmen of SCl and SC4, to discuss w ays t o impro ve coordination betw een the technical and profes sional repre sent atives and the relevant SCs. This impro ved coordina t ion w ill be necessary, to deal successfully w ith a number of emerging issues. We cont inue to w ork with our pi lot colle agues in IFALPA on important t echnical and prof essional issues. Some of t hese issues, such as ASAS (A irborne Separation A ssurance Syst ems) and t he delegation of separation respon sibilit y to the aircrew are of vital inte rest to bot h IFATCA and IFA LPA.

REGIONS AFRICA / MIDDLE EAST Th e Afri ca/ Middl e East Region has made significant strides in t ry ing to solve most of the prob lems t hat are prevalent in t he region. W hat remains elusive is t he wi ll powe r of t he autho rities in playing t heir ow n part , hence the unstable labour climate . Very few countri es in t he previous year made any signifi cant prog ress in impro ving cont rollers w orking conditi ons. In 1998 , IFATCA vigorou sly campaigned against t he unjust decision of firing cont rollers by

the Zimbabwean Government and the subsequent hiring of Zambian controllers to help them cushion the effect of the job action. The Federation put pressure on all the parties that unnecessarily got involved in the dispute. The Zambian controllers finally left in December onlyÂˇ after the Zimbabw ean Government had become under pressure through the judiciary and the public. The matter of the dismissed Controllers was finally put to rest w hen it was ruled in the High Court that the dismissals were illegal and thus invalid. The Zimbabwe association received assistance from the legal fund to pay part of their legal expenses. Our relationship with ICAO and IFALPA remains cordial with both organizations sending representatives to the regional meeting. Both organisations acknowledged the need to involve controllers in all technical and professional areas that directl y affect them . ICAO also pointed out that for the anticipated ATC Oversight Programme (now commonly referred to as the Audit) to succeed, require s the involvement of operational controllers. THE AMERICAS Improved staffing, training , equipment, appropriate social conditions in ATC. and respectful and producti ve relationship between management and staff, are the major issues affecting many MAs of the Region . Extreme difficulties exist in th e areas mentioned above in some of ou r MAs in the Caribbe an, South and Central America. While there has been an increased level of toler ance amongst cont rollers concerning the delivery of impro vement s. some national aviation admini strati ons have not handled their responsibiliti es equally we ll tow ards the ATM (A ir Traffic Management) system and t heir personnel by falling short of projection s. Though IFATCA has been

particip atin g at several ICAO technical for a in the region, many Americas MAs are yet to be cogniz ant that the quality of our repre sentation depends largel y on our ability to obtain the required information from their inputs. Whereas, our contribution is welcome and respected at those fora, we need to improve and become more effective in order to respond from an all-emb racing and informed position. Individual controllers and MAs must become more sensitive to the needs and realities for proper representation. While we continue our participation at the several Working Groups (E/CAR, C/CAR, CAN/MEX/USA CNS/ATM). GREPECAS (the Caribbean and South American Regional Planning and Implementation Group) and its contributory bodies there needs to be greater effort by all in the Americas to assist and support our repre sentative s in fulfilling the demand as well as maintaining continuity . Operationally, an increase in air traffic has been registered throughout the region . Increased CNS/ ATM activitie s have been observed . There has been an expansion of GPS trials and demonstrations in the Caribbean, North and Central America . Datalink trials are ongoing while RNAV (Area Nav igation) route trials with tenminute longitu dinal separation are expected to begin soon betw een City-pairs in North and South America . Of importance, MA s of th e ICAO CAR/SAM (Caribbean/South American) Regions of The America s should note tha t , in October thi s year, a Regional Air Navigation meet ing w ould be con vened in Argen t ina to chart the Region's future in internation al air navigation acti vit ies for the next deca de. Both ICAO and IFALPA att ended for the fi rst t ime th e 1998 Am ericas Region al Me eting w hich was held in Miam i A lthough th ere was no Execu t ive Vice Preside nt

" CONTROLLER

Americas Region, business was ably conducted by Executive Vice President Finance and Executive Vice President Professional.

ASIA/PACIFIC It has been again a very busy year for IFATCA in the Asia/Pacific Region. IFATCA has taken part in most of the ICAO meetings in the region. To name a few important ones: - The Bay of Bengal Meeting - The South China Sea ATS Coordination Meeting - The APANPIRG ATS/ AIS/SAR Sub-group Meeting - The APANPIRG Main Group Meeting - The RVSM Task Force Meeting The focus of this year's activities is on RVSM and Y2K issues. Following on the recommendation of APANPIRG (Asia/Pacific Air Navigation Planning and Implementation Regional Group), an ICAO RVSM (Reduced Vertical Separation Minima) Implementation Task Force was formed to examine the feasibility of developing an RVSM programme in the whole Asia/Pacific Region. The first meeting was held in Tokyo in November 98 and IFATCA was represented. The plan is to introduce RVSM in North and Central Pacific in February 2000. During the APANPIRG, the meeting also recognized the urgent requirement for formulation of contingency measures in the event that international air traffic would be affected by the Changeover to the year 2000. A year 2000 (Y2K) Contingency Planning Task Force was subsequently formed and again IFATCA is a member of the Task Force. For the coming year, a series of four Task Force Meetings will be held and IFATCA will provide inputs at these meetings. On the professional front, it is unfortunate to learn that a number of member associations are facing problems in the

', :r CONTROLLER

negotiation of terms and conditions of employment with their authorities. The ATC authorities, which have become corporatised are now more concerned with cutting costs than with operational issues.

Corporate Members' Coordinator, Charles Stuart, has resulted in the development of a Corporate Members' Charter, which would be presented, to each existing CM and new ones upon their acceptance.

EUROPE The ever-growing demand for expertise and input of the Federation in all domains of the European ATM has kept IFATCA very busy during the year under consideration. The highlights were the participation at the Strategy ATM 2000+ which should show ways and means to cope with the forecasted traffic increase. The participation as observer to the Eurocontrol's Provisional Council, as well as the active participation in the ATM domain of the European Union, ensured that the voice of the IFATCA was heard. Although it consumes a lot of time and manpower, IFATCA is more and more often requested to provide input in the various EATCHIP (European ATC Harmonisation and Improvement Project) programmes and projects. Our technical expertise is widely regarded and respected. Following the laborious introduction of BRNAV (Basic RNAV) in Europe (1300 airframes not equipped at the introduction date), IFATCA is voicing serious concerns with regard to the introduction of 8.33kHz Channel Separation and the RVSM in the core of Europe. IFATCA held a productive factfinding mission to Greece and close liaison was kept with the IFALPA Inspection Team that was visiting at the same time.

RELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS Our relations with other international organisations grew and deepened over the past year. While we do not always hold similar views on certain subjects, we have maintained and in some cases increased our liaisons. This is particularly so of the past year's relationship with IFALPA. We are narrowing our differences in many areas where hitherto we held dissimilar viewpoints, as the notion of being the two front end users of the ATM system takes root. Apart from our involvement in each other's technical committees, representatives from both our Federations attended each other's Regional meetings in 1998. Our Executive Board continues to hold periodic meetings with the IFALPA Principal Officers. Relations with ICAO and IATA continue on a growth path. Both ICAO Montreal and its regional offices continually seek IFATCA's technical inputs. To a point, our success is beginning to haunt us in the regions. In particular, capable and willing representatives are often difficult to come by in Africa/Middle East and the CAR/SAM area. On the regional front, IATA sought our participation on their task forces. Being a major player in the business, seeking ties with IFATCA must be considered significant and we should see this as an opportunity to work with them to impress upon national Civil Aviation Authorities that there is a need for them to meet their obligations in the ATM system. Later this year ILO will be holding a Transportation Conference to which IFATCA

CORPORATE MEMBERS The past year has witnessed a reduction in the number of our Corporate Members because of world market force economics and the many acquisitions and mergers that are taking place in the aviation industry. Those that remain continue to support the Federation's activities. Close liaison with the new

has been invited to participate.

CONCLUSION It has been a relatively good year for the Federation. The Office has provided administrative support to the Executive Board, the Standing Committees and our representatives. It has assisted our MAs and Corporate Members and, in just over one year of operation, it has become the first point of contact for the Federation. This support will certainly help increase the professional image and credibility of the Federation and allow the Executive Board and its Officers to focus on being the internationally recognised voice of the air traffic controller. An internal review, through the SC1 trial project, commenced last year and reports are encouraging. The review will continue by looking at how we approach future annual Conferences. Additionally, we should receive greater publicity and be able to further promulgate our policy position through the launch of our web site. The increases in air traffic will exert increased pressure on the components of the ANS. States and national ATC administrations will be continually forced to find ways to improve their systems. Whether it is equipment or the human, controllers cannot allow safety to be compromised. The ANS comprises several components of which the human is the most important and which must be considered as the major safety element. IFATCA is committed to continue its policy of promoting safety, efficiency and regularity in international air navigation. Finally, in the coming years, in order to do the things that we have pledged in our Objectives and have striven to achieve, we would need to seriously review our income generation capabilities and consider methods of deriving additional sources of sustainable income flows.

Breitling Success Around the world in 19 Days, 21 Hours and SS minutes Patri ck Schelling, Contributing Editor and part of the successful control cent re t eam hree ditchings, the most recent ones in Hawaii and Japan, seemed to promulgate the message that going around the world might remain an unattainable dream . But history will retain t hat the last to take-off th is season (98/99) was finally going to be the firstl Pilots Bertrand Piccard and Brian Jones were about to store th eir Breitling Orbiter 3 until the next jetstr eam season (starting in November 1999), when a metwindow opened for a departure on March 1 st. Three days earlier, the two (now famous meteorologists) , Pierre Eckert and Luc Trullemans , d etected a pattern of forecasted wind s favourabl e for a new attempt to circumnavi gate the Globe . Although almost at the end of the winter season in the Northern Hem ispher e, jetstreams were still present but showing less inte nsity. A little after 9 o'clock on that very Monday morning, Breitling Orbiter 3 graciously lifted form the alpine resort of Chateau d'Oex, located within the Swiss Alps, and quickly disappeared beh ind the mountain peeks in a south-westerly direction I The metguys said that they wo uld catch the good winds in two days after passing the Baleares - over Northern Afri ca. Fine, we thought - given a chance . Sure enough , three days into the flight. the balloon slowly turned left over Mauritania and Mali onto an easterly heading - this time pointing in the right direction and gu ided by an invisible hand as Bertrand later exp lained . The balloon kept go ing unt il it appeared again over the coast of Maur itania w hile crossing and later follow ing its own (orig inal) fl ight path after passing the finishing line. The flight then landed safely in the western desert of Egypt - some 45 OOOkm after departing from Switzer land I A remarkable achievement that broke several wor ld records which are currently being certified by the FAI (Federation Aerona utique lnternationale ). Team work As for previous attempts , the Orb iter 3 Control Centre was again

located at Geneva Airport. The facilities consisted of a small room that contained a handf ul of comp uters, telephones and fax. The core team was composed of the Course Directo r, Allan Nob le and six co-o rdinators, the two above mentioned meteorologists and three air traffi c contro llers, Nik Gerber. Greg Moegli and Patrick Schelling (all from swisscontrol). The co-ordinators assured 24 hours physical presence while the weather men and the controllers mainly took day shifts and covered the rest of the time sleeping with their mobile phonesl The controllers involved in the Orbi ter 3 vent ure were often classified by the press as the pathfinders . This label did in fact well describe the activit ies of the ATC personnel involved . Their main task was to update the ICAO Flight Plan, to co-ordinate the over-flight clearances (d iplomatic ,

restricted/shoot ing areas), to coordinate operational and discuss safety issues (separation, blocking flight levels, etc) with ATCOs along the flight path. An ICAO Flight Plan was fi led for the initial countr ies to be over-flo w n. The latter was then updated according to the progress of the flight and transmitted around the clock by the staff of the Aeronautica l Data Management Centre of swisscontro l via the AFTN network . In addition to the voice reports (VHF and HF) of the two pilots. the position of the balloon was forwa rded on average every hour to the ACC in charge of the concerned FIR/UIR The reports from the balloon were obtained through an automatic polling system The reports contained time. GPS position, track, speed and altitude (FL) This information was crucial to meteorologists who could monitor

progres s according to forecasts and make corrections to flight path w hen necessary. These adju stments we re made by analysing the w inds at differen t leve ls and order ing the balloon to climb or descent in order to change di rection. The con trollers used th is information to update the flight plan and start co-ord ination w it h t he country to be over-flown. A lthough the orga niser had previo usly req uested , and most of t he t ime obta ined. a Diplomat ic Clearance in advance, th e latter was not always readi ly available w hen the balloon approached a part icu lar cou ntry. As an exam ple, this was th e case for Yemen w hich the Orb iter 3 was not scheduled to penetrate, since initial w ind models did not show such a southerly route. Therefore , a clearance had to be obtained before enter ing the UI R, specially since the balloon was head ing for a shoot ing area. A fax to the Civi l Aviation Aut hority remained unanswered (it was a Saturday!) but the contro llers at Saana were very helpf ul and the flight proceeded safely towards Oman . Chi nese airspace was probably the most crucia l to cross as there was a restrictio n to transit the country below 26 degrees north . Helped by favou rable winds, but also by manoe uvr ing up and down, the balloon crossed China almost in a straight line, enteri ng the Kunm ing area to the east and leaving the mainland sout h of Fouzhou . The coord ination wit h our Chinese colleagues of Kunming and Guangzhou ACC was very profess ional and fr iend ly. There is not enough space here to ment ion all the ATC units with w hom the three Geneva contro llers coordinated and obtained special clearances to assure an optima l flight profi le of th e balloon. An additiona l effort had to be made to guide civil traff ic around the Orb iter 3 which understandably was not always a trivial exercise, especially in a nonradar env ironment. Howe ver. even w ith different cultures, the air traffic contro llers have once again prov en that they speak only one language the one of safety and eff iciency Thanks again. you can be proud to have contributed to the histor ic aviation event of this mil lennium. Seefront cover picture taken shortly after take-off from Chateaud'Oex. Already

Note

an air traffic conflict exists ! !ns1de rear

cover picture shows the balloon shortly after touchdown 1nEgyptand the two pilots - BertrandPiccard and BrianJones.

' ., CONTROLLER

lFATCANews IsraeliAnnual Function Avi Hacohen, ATCAl's Chairman, congratulated the President on his special contribution to the advancement of the ATC profession, and for the great interest he showed and continues to show in its developments worldwide .

The pictures show: Mr. Weizman addressing the gathering . Mr. Weizman accompanied by Mr. Avi Hacohen , Chairman ATCAI (right of photograph) and Mr. Avi Kostelitz, Director General of the Israel Airport Authority (left of photograph) . n December 22nd 1998, the Air Traffic Controllers Association of lsrae_l (ATCAI) celebrated its annual function, in which commendation letters to three air traffic controllers, who prevented midair collisions, were presented.

More than 300 participated, including the President of Israel, Mr. Ezer Weizman. Mr Weizman is also the Honorar y President of ATCAI. The President addressed the participants and expressed the great appreciation he has for air traffic controllers in general and the Israeli controllers in particular, for their special and responsible duty.

New EuropeanCentre t the European Provisional Council Workshop ATM 2000+ meeting, held in Brussels on 22nd of January 1999, a preliminary stateme nt was made by the Czech representative concerning the recent progress made in the CEATS (Central European ATS) project Th e pre vious day, 21 st of January, the Directo r - Generals of the Civil Aviat ion Authorities concerned (Austria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Slovak Republic, Slovenia) signed an agreement in the CEATS co-ordination commission on how to continue their joint work. The following info rmation was released :

- The UAC wi ll be located in Vienna - Donau - The Research and Development fac ility w ill be located in Budapest

111 CONTROLLER

- The training centre wi ll be located in Forli - Th e Strategy and Develop ment Unit w ill be initia lly located in Prague and move later on (as soon as the UAC is operational) to V ienna Th e whole proj ect should become operationa l by 2005 and EUROCONTROL is an active contr ibutor to t he work. The DGCA' s have approved t his solution and wi ll be submitting it to their respective Min isters of Transport The y are confident that t hey wil l be able to present the fi rst progress report to t he 4th Prov isional Counc il meeting in April. However, t his news has been received w ith caution and the Chairman of t he Provisional Council (Mr A.J. Go ldman , U I<) invited t he aud ience to reserve its applause for the day that t he deal is signed.

Human Factors Ten Years of Human Factors in Air Traffic Control Text of the presentation to be given to the ICAO Fourth Global Flight Safety and Human Factors Symposium, held in Santiago, Chile, from 12 to 15 April 1999 by Bert Ruitenberg , the IFATCA Human Factors Specialist.

Wh en I was invited to present a paper on 10 years of Human Factors in Air Traffic Control I initially was determined to specifically include the years 1951, 1961, 1976, 1977, 1991 and 1994 in my presentation, which left me with the task to only find four other years worth mentioning. fter some reflect ion though I realised that the intent of the Symposium organisers w as for me to focus on the decade preceding toda y's date. Of course I'm more than happy to restrict my presentation to that period, but in a sense the restriction imposed by th e title of this paper suggests that there only have been Human Factors efforts in ATC for the last ten yea rs. I would argue that that is not exactly true, and the selected years I mentioned earlier may help to prove this point. 1951 is t he year in which a group chaired by Mr. P.M. Fitts in the USA produced a report on "Human Engineering for an Effective Air Navigation and Traffic Control system". 1961 is the year in wh ich The International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations (IFATCA) was fou nded, by Air Traffic Controllers' Associations from 12 European countries . 1976 is the year in which a mid-air co llision occurred over Zagreb , Yugoslavia, and in 1977 there was a co llision between two Boeing 747s on t he runwa y ofTener ife, Canary Island s. The invest igations of those two accidents addressed many aspects of Human Factors in ATC. In 1991 IFATCA became invo lved in the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme . Last but not least. in 1994 ICAO included in Annex 1 (Personnel Licensing) the requ irement for A ir Traffic Co ntro llers to "have demonstrated an approp riate level of knowledge in the subject of human performance and limit ations relevant to A ir Traffic Co ntro l" . So despite t he fact that t he subject of Human Factors in ATC has been on t he agenda for almost

fifty years now , in this presentation I wil l confine myself to the developments that have occurred over the last te n years. Of course I wi ll in particular address the role of IFATCA in those developments, but I hope to also give you an idea of what is happening in the field in a genera l sense. Here is an overview of this presentation: • IFATCA's role in the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme • IFATCA's role in other Human Factors forums • IFATCA's Human Factors activities in general • Human Factors in Air Traffic Control: achievements • Human Factors in Air Traffic Contro l: areas w ith room for improvement • Conclusion

IFATCA's role in the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme The 1990 Leningrad Seminar marks the start of the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme. At that time IFATCA was not yet invo lved in the ICAO programme, but to their credit the seminar organisers had included in the programme several presentations on Human Factors in ATC. None of those presentations involved active Air Traffic Controllers though. There were however a number of active Air Traffic Control lers in the audience at Leningrad , and their reports of the seminar did reach IFATCA. When ICAO embarked on its first series of Regional Seminars, with Doualla (Cameroon) as the first venue , IFATCA again was not directly involved . But at the second

stop of this first series, in Bangkok (Thailand) in November 1991, the then Executive Vice- President Professional of IFATCA , Mr. Wim Rooseman, presented a paper on Human Factors in ATC. From that point onward IFATCA has been an accepted membe r of the small faculty of lecturers at the ICAO Regional Seminars. We presented papers at every subsequent seminar of the first series, w ith the exception of th e Panama-seminarin November 1997. When ICAO began its second series of Regional Seminars, in Hong Kong (1995), ATC had been left out of the programme by intent so IFATCA was not participating there. But in response to feedback from the audience this omission was rectified and at the next seminar, held in Abid jan (1996) , IFATCA again was included as a facultymember. This membership was continued at the seminar in Beirut, last December, and is expected to also be valid for the seminar that wil l be held in West-A fri ca later this year. IFATCA furthermore presented papers at the ICAO Global Symposia in Washington (1993), Auck land (1996) and now in Santiago de Chile. In parallel with those activities, IFATCA has been a member of the ICAO Flight Safety and Hum an Factors Study Group since 1991 . Highlights of our involvement are . the submission of a detailed review of the draft -version of Hum an Factors Digest no. 11 (Human Factors in CNS/ ATM systems), editing the ATC-chapters of the recently pub lished Human Factors Training Manual, and participat ing in the group's review of existing ICAO An nexes and Document s

wi th the aim to incorpo rat e Human Factors requirements. IFATCA's role in other Human Factors forums As what I consider to be a direct result of IFATCA's involvement in the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme, we are · regularly inv ited to present papers at other Hum an Factors eve nt s around the g lob e as we ll. Examp les are Aviation Psychology Symposia in Columbus, Ohio (USA), and in Manly (Australia). We presented a paper at the IATA 22nd Techni cal Conference (Mo ntreal, 1993) , at th e 21st Conference of the Europ ean Associa ti on for Aviat ion Psychology (Dubl in, 1994), and at workshops hosted by Euroco ntr o l. IFATCA was also invo lved in a pane l as part of the convers iont raining programme for Australia n Air Traff ic Controllers in preparation for the implementation of their new automated ATC system. Common factor in all those presentations has been to demonstrate that most of the Human Factors know ledge deri ved from studying the flight deck or aircraft design and operations can be transposed to the ATC domain . It is important to realise though that identification of similar problems in both domains does not necessarily imply that the solut ions from one domain can be successful ly app lied to the other domain too. In most presentat ions made, IFATCA tries to propose solutions for ATC Hum an Factors issues. Such solutions are usually based on availab le IFATCA Policies. IFATCA's Human Factors activities in general In the list of significant years for Human Factors in ATC at the beginning of this presentation I included the year in w hich IFATCA was founded (1961 ). This event may seem to be a little out of place when compared to the other events from the list, yet it isn't. Th e words used by the ICAO Air Navigation Comm ission in 1986 to formu late the objective for the

, ii CONTROLL ER

Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme are: "To improve safety in aviation(. .. ) through the provision of practical Human Factors material and measures developed on the basis of experience in States, and by developing and recommending appropriate amendments to existing materials in Annexes and other documents with regard to the role of Human Factors in the present and future operational environments". Now if we substitute "Human Factors" by "Air Traffic Control" in this statement, we get a rather accurate description of the aims of IFATCA as formulated 25 years earlier! Since its foundation in 1961 IFATCA has developed Policies on a wide range of technical and professional topics. Our representatives in international meetings use these Policies to prepare their input to the meetings. Such meetings comprise ICAO panel-meetings as well as those of Regional bodies, like for example the European ATC Harmonisation and Integration Programme (EATCHIP) and the African Civil Aviation Conference (AFCAC). By providing input based on the IFATCA Policies, our representatives participate in "developing and recommending appropriate amendments to existing materials in Annexes and other documents with regard to the role of Air Traffic Control in the present and future operational environments", which is in keeping with the spirit of the words from the Air Navigation Commission. The difference is that the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme is attempting to apply theoretical knowledge in practice, whereas IFATCA's efforts are to convert practical expertise into written procedures, rules and regulations. In other words, the ICAO programme follows a topdown approach and IFATCA uses a bottom-up approach. But the important thing is that our aims are largely the same. The IFATCA Policies are developed by Air Traffic Controllers for Air Traffic Controllers, and without exception address areas that can be described as the interfaces of the well-known SHEL-model. A good example to illustrate that the aims of the two organisations are similar is IFATCA's Policy on Automation. At the 1991 IFATCA Annual Conference a number of separate Policies were adopted that can be summarised as follows:

1 I ii

CONTROllER

"Automated systems are there to help the Air Traffic Controller, not the other way around". Without intending any disrespect, I submit that this statement also epitomises the principles of Human Centred Automation as described by Dr. Charles Billings that same year. ICAO later adopted those principles to guide the development of the CNS/ ATMsystem. Continuing with the topdown/bottom-up metaphor for just another moment, I think the approaches by IFATCA and ICAO came together in 1991 when we became involved in the Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme. Allow me to take this event as the starting-point for an overview of what has been achieved since then.

Human Factors in Air Traffic Control: achievements From a high-level perspective the achievements are twofold: Air Traffic Control was put more prominently on the Human Factors agenda, and Human Factors has received more attention within the Air Traffic Control community. So now let's lower our perspective and take a closer look at some examples to illustrate these points.

ATC as an item for the Human Factors community In previous decades topics on Human Factors in ATC were predominantly covered by scientists and researchers who specialised in this field. Although they would make extensive use of field-studies and analyses of selected simulator-exercises involving qualified Air Traffic Controllers, their work was mainly academic in nature. Favourite subjects for research were taskanalysis and job-description of Air Traffic Controllers, with

development of selection-methods also very much in the foreground. Notice that these subjects have little direct practical value for already qualified Air Traffic Controllers. But during the last decade we see a development in the scientific community to conduct research in ATC that is aimed at a more practical application of the results. The realisation has grown, and continues to grow, that the aviation-system does not consist of isolated units but is a complex socio-technical system with interactions at many levels. The improvements and benefits brought by scientific research to the airborne part of the system are considerable. But there is a

potential for even more improvements and benefits to the system as a whole by applying similar efforts to the ground-based parts of the system. It is this potential that now motivates researchers to look into the interaction between the flight deck and the ground, i.e. maintenance, airline dispatch and ATC. Examples of these efforts are the USA's Panel on Human Factors in ATC Automation, chaired by Dr. Christopher Wickens, and the work on whether or not Automation can enable a cooperative future ATM system, by a group of researchers from universities in Ohio and Illinois comprising Drs. Phil Smith, Charles Billings, David Woods, Elaine McCoy, Nadine Sarter, Rebecca Denning and Sydney Dekker. The work from those and other groups will in the near future undoubtedly have a bearing on the workingpractices of already qualified Air Traffic Controllers.

Human Factors as an item for the ATC community Modelled after the set-up of the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors Programme, IFATCA held an internal campaign to increase the awareness among its membership of the importance of Human Factors in aviation in general and in ATC in particular. Articles were published in the Federation's quarterly magazine "The Controller", and a dedicated Panel was introduced as a standard-item at the Annual Conferences from 1993 onward. In this Panel speakers were invited to address the Conference on selected Human Factors issues related to ATC. Furthermore, IFATCA organised a number of Regional Seminars for its Member Associations in which technical issues as well as related Human Factors issues were addressed. In Europe the EATCHIP Human Resources Team does a lot of valuable work for the practical application in ATC of Human Factors knowledge. I specifically would like to mention the production of several little booklets, called Human Factors Modules, and the work done on the development and implementation of CRM-courses for Air Traffic Controllers, called Team Resource Management (TRM) courses. The implementation of TRM will potentially have a direct effect on the working-practices of already qualified Air Traffic Controllers in the 32 European States that are co-

operating in EATCHIP. Dr. Manfred Barbarino of Eurocontrol, the agency responsible for managing EATCHIP, will tell you more about TRM in his presentation later this afternoon. But also on the regulatory side there are significant achievements to report. As already mentioned, in 1994 ICAO included a requirement in Annex 1 that applicants for an Air Traffic Controller's licence must have demonstrated an appropriate level of knowledge in the subject of human performance and limitations relevant to Air Traffic Control. Most States or organisations that train their Air Traffic Controllers in accordance with the requirements from Annex 1 have by now incorporated this subject in their curriculum. Âˇ A second and related achievement by ICAO is the production of the Human Factors Training Manual, published in 1998. This Manual is an edited compilation of the earlier Human Factors Digests, and as already mentioned in this presentation IFATCA was responsible for editing the chapters on Human Factors in ATC. What should be realised however is that these regulatory efforts will mainly affect students who are entering basic ATCtraining. For the already qualified ATC-workforce a different approach will be required. The regulatory framework as provided by ICAO admittedly will allow such a different approach, but the true enablers will have to come from the regulatory bodies in States.

Human Factors in Air Traffic Control: areas with room for improvement One of such enabling factors could be the institution of periodical Recurrent Trainingschemes for Air Traffic Controllers, possibly as element of an ATC Proficiency Checking system. Although there are a few countries where these schemes and systems exist, the vast majority of Air Traffic Controllers in the world are never subjected to any formal training or checking after they have obtained their licence, except maybe when new technology is introduced at their facilities. The result of this lack of periodic trainingprogrammes is that there are no convenient opportunities embedded in the ATCorganisations to teach Air Traffic Controllers any new knowledge or skills during their career. Any training-programme for already qualified staff that 1scontemplated

Human Factors w ill hav e t o be planned as an extra t o all other ongoing activities, and is therefore often regarded by many Ai r Traff ic Services-providers as a luxury t he organ isation can't aff ord. This line of t hinking could quietly pe rsist in th e industry for many years because th e provis ion of A ir Traffic Services (including ATC) and th e Regu lat ory role w ere both in th e hands of t he State. But in thi s last d ecade the re is a marked devel opme nt in the industry to sep arate tho se ro les. The State retain s its role as Regulator but the provi sion of Air Traffic Services is delega t ed t o some fo rm of privati sed or co rporatised agenc y with a large degree of ind epe ndence. This leads to a situation wh ere th e Regulator can t reat the ATS pro v ider t he same w ay as the y tr eat th e Airlines in th at State. That is, assuming the Regulator posse sses the required amount of in-house ATS-e x pert ise for t hat role , whi ch is someth ing t hat in some cases appears to hav e bee n ov erloo ked . To sum marise t his point , it is IFATC A 's vi ew t hat if more States w ere t o introd uce Recu rrent Training prog ramme s fo r Ai r Traffic Contro l staff , th ese coul d be usef ul platfo rms for t he gradual and syst emic introd uction of Human Factors know led ge to alread y qualified A ir Traff ic Con tr ol lers . A second subject whe re impro v eme nts are po ssible in t he indus t ry at large is ATC Inciden t Inv estigat ion. Simi lar to w hat was said before about t he lack of recurre nt t raining and profic ienc y checking pro gram me s in ATC. t he re are few States that str uct urall y inv est igate ATC incidents . And in several of those w ho do, it could be argued that t he inv estigat ions are cond ucted main ly w it h a v iew to ap porti on blame . IFATCA th inks that if ATC incid ent s were st ruct ur ally inv est igat ed in a no n-punit ive environme nt w ith t he aim to fi nd and correct syste mic w eaknesses, t he safety of the air nav igat ion syste m could be signifi cant ly enhan ced . A fu rther and perhaps more de licate area w ith room for impro ve ment s are w hat we call the safety-re lated w ork ing co ndi tion s of A ir Traff ic Co ntro llers . Hou rs of w ork , consecut ive w or king-day s and mandato ry overt ime all have a d irect bear ing on safety if the y are such t hat the y may lead to fatigu e. Even remunerat ion cou ld be incl ud ed 1n t his catego ry, fo r if a Contro ller 's wa ge s are insuffi cient

to bu y food and pay the rent thi s Controller is forced to take a second or even third job in order to survive. It requires littl e imagination to see that fatigue could easily occur in those cases. There are many places in Asia, Africa and South America w here Con t rollers are in continual danger of becoming fatigued for t ho se v ery reasons. But this problem is not confined to these continents. Wi t h t he ongoing corporatisation of ATS-providers there are signals from the ATC-communitie s in Europe , North America and the South Pacific that the goals of the new organisations are subject to a subtle shift whe n compared to the old ones. Traditionally, the goal of ATC has been to provide a safe and orderly flo w of traff ic. But now that ATS is being corporatised we see t he concept of an "economical servicepro v ision" emerge. In other words, the costs as well are becoming an important factor for the organisat ion . Th is inevitab ly seems to lead to a sit uation where everything and everyone in the organisation is pushed to the legal limits . A nd although the Regulator int ended those limits as a minimal requirement , the y by default become the st andard in the o rganisation from w hich no deviat ion in eit her direction is po ssible , thus remo v ing whate ver inte rnal fle xibility the organisation had . If th is results in an increasing occurrence of "burn-out" sympt om s in the w orkforce , w ith an incre ase in the attrition-rate of t he staff t o match, t he organisation w ill come out w eaker than befor e w hic h in t urn could have a negat ive effe ct on air safety. IFATCA t herefo re urges all ATSpr ov iders t o invest in their human resou rces rat her t han to consider th em as an opposing force. Earlier in thi s presentat ion I mentioned t he concept of Human Cent red Automa t ion of wh ich IFATCA th inks it is the w ay for the futu re . For ATS-pro vider s a similar yet still undeve loped concept of a Human Centred Organis ation may w ell prove to be t he key to longe v ity. A n organisat ion t hat makes a lot of money in a short time but loses its enti re staff on the way wi ll cease to exist. An organisation w it h dedicated and mot ivated staff on the ot her hand w ill pote nt ially continue to produ ce revenue for years on end . Proper w ork ing-cond it ions and adequate recu rrent tr aining progra mmes are pre requisi tes for becoming such an

organisation. They furthermore are prerequisites for an organisational culture that fosters attention for Human Factors. The final area with room for improvement that I wa nt to mention in relation to Human Factors in Air Traffic Control is the Free Flight concept. Much has been said about this topic, also by IFATCA-representatives at dedicated meetings or conferences, and I prefer to not repeat all that here. Our point is that Free Flight is a highly technology and economy dri ve n concept, w ith little regard for Human Factors. Despite t he fact that almost none of the assumedly required technology is implemented or even available yet, the industry seems convinced that Free Flight is the desired end-state of all future developments in air navigation. This conviction appears to be especially strong among the non-operational people in the industry, i.e. the policy-makers and budget-planners, and particularly in airlines. IFATCA does not share that conviction . On the other hand, we don't dismiss the idea of transferring responsibility for aircraft-separation from the gro und to the flight deck either. But where we differ from the planners in the industry is that we think this form of autonomous flight should be integrated in the existing air navigation system rather than replace it. The air navigat ion system is wide ly recognised as being the safest mode of mechanised transportation available to man . It could be argued that the main reason for that are th e many wel ldeveloped opportunities for error detection and error-recovery in the system. Several of those opportunities are possible by allowi ng for generous margins on the operat ional side. IFATCA will be among the first to admit that in some cases these margin s may be a bit too generous, yet if the capacity of the system is under pressure of an ever increasing demand IFATCA wil l also be among the first to caution that decreasing the margins and completely replacing the system may not be the best solut ion to th e prob lem The Free Flight concept undoubted ly contains elements t hat merit further study and development. Yet the indus try should exercise caution not to be tempted by t he attracti veness of so-called short-term benefit s t hat

some play ers keep ad vertising. Many of such short-term benefits are based on the extens ive application of new tec hnolo gy in wh ich Hum an Factors considerations appea r not to have been given a high priority . IFATCA hopes th at the industry wi ll be w ise enough to apply the lessons learned fr om t he past. A statement from the ICAO Air Navigation Commission from January 1999, made in a wider context, would seem to support this hope : "Indu stry and States need to be reminded that SARPs cannot be developed as an instant response to new idea s or technologies but only after research, technic al developm ent, verification and va lidat ion have been co mplet ed." Conclusion A lthough Hum an Facto rs in Air Traffic Control is not a novel item, the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Facto rs Programme has given a new impetus to the work in this area during the last decade. One of the more significant result s is th at elements of Human Factors in Ai r Traffic Control have m igrated from the academi c world to the ope ration al domain, with possibilities for dir ect and practical appl ication by Air Traffic Services provid ers . Yet many cha llenge s rema in to be faced. Th ese challenges exist in the field of providing alre ady qualified Air Traffic Controllers w ith Human Factor s knowledge and skills, as well as in th e field of t he ongoing development of the Air Navigation System . IFATC A is comm itted to an evolutionary improvement process tha t builds on the strengths of the existing and proven aviatio n-system whi le attempting to mitigate the effects of its weak nesses. Th e application of Human Factors knowledge therefore must be an int egral part of this process . References V David Hopkin (1995) Human Factors in Air Traffic Control. Taylor & Francis, London . UK . ISBN O 7484 0357 4. A nne Isaac, Bert Ruitenberg (1999). A ir Traffic Control: Human Performance Factors. A shgate. Alder shot , Hampshir e. UK. ISBN 0 291 39854 5. ICAO Anne x 1, Personn el Licensing. Eight Edition (1988) ICAO, Mont real, Canada. ICAO Human Factors Training Ma nual Doc 9683-AN / 950 . First Edition (1998 ) ICAO , M ont real. Canada

CONTROLLER

................... ·············································

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION FOR THE AIR TRANSPORT INDUSTRY For an industry that is now central to the economy of the world, air transport has not been provided with much specialised senior management education. Partly as a result, some airlines and groundbased organisations have recruited into management positions those with management and financial qualifications from outside the industry rather than promote those with an aviation background. The usual educational background of controllers, aircrew, cabin staff and others seldom includes significant financial management or planning content and indeed many aviation professionals are relatively weak at presentations, written or verbal, and at analysis of human and business management situations. Much of this is due to lack of confidence as much as knowledge. The educational background of most controllers up to the end of school is similar to that of those who move on to become undergraduates studying, for example, business studies or similar courses at U.K. universities. About two years ago, City University in London recognised the issue of the latent potential of air transport professionals (aircrew, controllers, engineers) and the contribution that they would make to the air transport industry and launched an MSc in Air Transport Management. This is a part time course based on a series of short (3 day, in London) modules and an individual project. Each module a central academic

MSc

core and a number of speakers from industry. Recent such talks have been by the Managing Director of Flying Colours Airlines, the head of the Economic Regulation Group CM, the Director of Strategy for Virgin Atlantic Airways, the Operations Manager of London City Airport and the head of Leasing of Rolls Royce. The course is currently being taken by about 60 students, each at their own pace so individual modules are attended by about 20. These come from most of the main EU countries as well as further afield such as Malta, Ghana, Canada, Singapore, Zimbabwe and the Lebanon. At present there are two students from ATC, Maastricht, Damian Glennon and Paul Fleming. They say. "From a student's perspective, the City University course has much to offer. The scope and ease of transportation links with London means that access to the University is a relatively simple affair. While the prospect of travelling to London for three days for each module may not be immediately appealing, it is well worth the effort. One gains as much from meeting, mixing with and exchanging ideas with the wide spectrum of students undertaking the course as from the lectures themselves. The flexibility of being able to take modules as they suit the student is of great benefit. as is the fact that the course can be started at any time during the academic year. The University also offers assistance with booking accommodation, either at halls of residence

in Air Transport

or at a number of hotels, all of which are within ten minutes walk of City University." The modular nature of the course enables each individual to tailor the pace of work and examinations to fit their own time constraints. Since the vast majority of students are drawn from the aviation operations environment, this is a very welcome development. Finally, although the course was originally designed with the pilot community in mind, the course content is such that there is broad applicability to the field of Air Traffic Services. Given the ongoing trend toward privatisation of ATS providers, subjects such as human resource management, quality systems management and marketing are highly relevant. The evolution of future air navigation systems (ADS/Mode S, A/G datalink, etc.) make the modules on Operations & Safety Management and Developments in Avionics & /Tvery relevant indeed. Finally, Damian Glennon writes "All in all, the Air Transport Management course has been, for me at least, a means of taking a fresh look at the industry within which I've worked for the past fifteen years, in some instances considering areas and subjects for the very first time. Call it a new lease on life, if you will."

Pleasesee the accompanying advertisement to this article which provides information as to where further information may be obtained.

Management

A quality, part-time course that is specifically designed to meet the interests of professionals working in airline and air defence services. It aims to enhance technical and academic knowledge of air transport and related industries, and to develop relevant management skills to improve career and promotion prospects. The course is: • Run in 3-day modules with minimum interruption

to work

° Focused on the airline industry and aircraft operations

• Suitable for mature candidates

• Global in appeal

• Open

• Strong in business content

air traffic controllers, aircrew and licenced engineers

For funher information please contact Linda Brookes, School of Engineering, City University, Nonhampton Square. London EC 1V 0HB. Tel: +44 (0) 171 477 8112. Fax: +44 (0) 171 477 8101. Email: L.M.Brookes@ciry.ac.uk. Web sire: http://city.ac.uk/engineering

We are having an "Open Day" at the Heathrow Ariel Hotd, Bath Road, Monday 12th April 09.00 to 17.00. Do call in and meet us for an informal chat. THE UNIVERSITYFORBUSINESSAND THE PROFESSIONS

II CONTROLLER

Famous Aircraft No 3 The Emperor Bokassa Caravelle Philippe Dom agala, Contributing Editor

Back

;n the early 1970s, French President de Gaulle offered an Aerospatiale Caravelle (S210 ) as a present to his "son", the President of Central Afr ican Republic, Mr Bedel Bokassa (Bokassa always called de Gaulle "my father"). President Bokassa used it as presidential aircraft . The aircraft was fitted w ith 20 seats and a large bedroom and bathroom with gold plated app liances. The aircraft carried the registrat ion TL (for Republique Centraficaine) AB B (B B) for Bedel Bokassa. Bede! is not a Frenc h first nam e , but one of the abbreviations of Saints in the Postal Calend ar. In the colonial times, the reg istratio n of childre n in France was only possible with a name appearing in the official French calendar as a Saint. No other name was

permitted, Each day of the year had its Saint . Addit ionally, some particular days were also mentioned on the calendar such as "Noel " for Chr istmas on 25 December and on 14 July for Fete Nationale (National Holiday) often abbreviated as Fet. Nat.as the space available on the calendar was restricted. An especia lly long name of a Saint would likewise be abbreviated and for instance St Bernard de Lassale was w ritten Be.de L. It was not uncommon for semi-illiterate families at the beginning of the century to call their children Noel, Fetnat or Bedel . Many of you w ill know how Bokassa decided to follow Napoleon and declared himself Emperor w ith all the gold and ceremonial t hat we nt with it. All this w it h the bened iction of the French Govern ment

PHOTO: Air To ulouse Caravellr await ing it s fin al tr ip to lh e museum.

that made a lot of profit in the country by the operation of the rich diamonds and uranium mines. In 1979 Emperor Bokassa decided to sell the uranium in its mines to Libya and Iraq. This was unacceptable for France and its Secret Services helped the then opposition in a coup and made Emperor Bokassa destitute . As Bokassa had French Nationality (he was a Captain in the French Army) and did not realise it was the French Government of the time who had ordered his demise, he saw fit to flee his country and go back to France in the Caravelle. He entered French airspace on his way to Paris where he was intercepted by two Mirages from the French Air Force The aircraft was diverted to Evre ux, a militar y airbase south of Paris.

The French Government did not know what to do with him and they forced the aircraft to taxi to a stand and prevented him from leaving his aircraft He remained inside the Carave l le for three days and was not allowed any contact w ith the outside world . An attempt was made by some journalists to contact him on VHF R/ T by using a small single engine aircraft that was hired to circle around the mi litary base. The attempt failed when the light aircraft was int ercepted by Mirages who threatened to shoot it down . Finally, after more than 80 hours stuck in the aircraft, Bokassa was allowed out, to be "expelled" to Ab idjan in the Ivory Coast where he was placed under house arrest in a villa guarded by the French Mi litary . The aircraft was "confiscated" and later sold to Europe Aero Services (EAS) a small Airline based in Perpignan, in the south of France. It was repainted and registered F-GCJT and refurbished with all econom y seats . Before the refurbishment the aircraft had been thorough ly searched for compromising documen ts and small diamonds th at were rumour ed to be hidden in the aircraft. It was well known that Bokassa gave diamo nd s as presents to alm ost every official he met and that he also kept

CONTROLLER

compromising documents on some political figures in France at the time . This included the French President of the time, Mr Giscard D'Estaing, who later in 1981 lost his seat, mainly due to a scandal involving a gift of diamonds received from Bokassa. EAS made no secret of the fact that this Caravelle was ex-Bokassa and frequently the captains of the flights, in their public address to the passengers made reference to this and joked about it . Some captains asked passengers to look carefully under their seats for any left overs! EAS was operating only one passenger scheduled line between Paris and the small town Valence (south of Lyons) and they used the Caravel le for this route. At the same time, Air Inter had the monopoly of the domestic flights between major cities in France and the flights to nearby Lyon and Marseille were often overbooked. EAS took care of those passengers, by setting up connecting buses between Valence and both big cities and found itself a niche. It was also common, not everyday but almost, to find US tourists arriving in Valence believing they were in Valencia, Spain Attracted by the cheap fares they never asked questions and the airline never discouraged them as they were sure to sell them back a ticket to

f If CONTROLLER

Paris - as there was no way, except by boat from Marseilles once a week, to reach Valencia from Valence. During 1989 and 1990 the Caravelle was leased to Air City in Switzerland and was used there for charter flights between Geneva and Palma. In 1991 the aircraft returned to France and was leased this time to Air Toulouse, another small French charter company. In 1995 Air Toulouse went bankrupt and the Caravelle was left parked in Toulouse Blagnac airport. Fortunately, in 1996 the local air museum bought the aircraft for a symbolic Franc (0.15 Euro) but still waits for a place to display it. It is now resting, without its engines, still in Air Toulouse colours on a remote taxiway at Blagnac airport. (See photo), waiting its final retirement as a tourist attraction.

Updating ATIS- VOLMET? IC CRIMP has the solution to remo ve th e heavy work load: Fully Automa ted AT IS•VOLMET Elim inates all reco rding tasks

•

Consistent speed and qua lity sec ure clear broadcasts to pilots

•

Long exper ience and many operational systems worldwide ens ure the functional ity requi red by the users CORRECTION / ADDENDUM In the last Famous Aircraft item (CL44 in THE CONTROLLER 4/98) the last paragraph mentioned that the registration of the TAR first Boeing 707 wa s GBOAC It has been pointed out to me th at in fact it was G-BCAL and it was the fir st 707 of British Caledonian, not of BOAC .. M y apologi es.

•

Com mercial Off The Shelf product CRIMP A/S So lvang 30 OK-3450 Aller0d Denmark tel.: +45 48 100 500 fax: +45 48 100 550

Selected for airports worldwide including Oslo -Gardermoen, Kuala Lumpur International , Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok ----

------

Regional Meeting Reports Asia/Pacific Regional Meeting Report of the 15th Asia/Pacific Regional Meeting held in Macau between 19-21 October 1998 Geo rge Chao, Executive Vice President Asia/Pacific

he 15t h Asia/ Pacifi c Regio nal Meet ing was he ld in Macau 19-21 October 1998 and Macau Air Traffic Control Associati on hosted it. The meeting was held in t he Macau Tour ism Activities Ce ntre. Over 70 part icipants from t he following organ isations att ende d the meeting: IFATCA Deputy President and EVP Asia/Pacific Member Associations: A ust ralia, France, Hong Kong (China), Japan, Maca u, Ma laysia, Mo ngo lia, New Caledonia (French Overseas Territory). New Zealand, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tahiti (French Overseas Territory), Taiwan. Observers: Civil Av iation Authority of Macau, IATA (Un ited Airl ines) George Chao, IFATCA EV P AS P, chaired the meet ing and Paul Robinson , Deputy President who acted as the Chairman on the second day, assisted him. After the we lcomi ng speech by Mr . E. Mas sa, the Preside nt of MATCA, he intro du ced t he fo llow ing key speakers w ho made open ing addr esses: M r. Alves De Panla - Und er-secretary for Public Works and Transportation, Mr. George Chao - Executive V ice Preside nt Asia/ Pacifi c IFATCA and Mr . Paul Robi nson- Deputy Preside nt IFATCA. After the roll call, the Chairman

began the w orking session. The meeting cove red a number of operational, technical and professional issues. The memb ers w ere also briefed on the curr ent w or k and tasks und ertaken by IFATCA. The meet ing also received reports on the Info rmal Sout h Pacific ATS Co-ordinati ng Group (ISPACG), A ut omatic Dependant Surveillance (A DS) Panel, Inform at ional Pacific ATC Coord inatin g Group (IPACG) ATS/ A IS/ SA R Sub-group and Asia/ Pacific A ir Navigation Planning and Implementation Regional Group (A PA NPIRG) On th e adm inistrative issues, th e meet ing w as briefed on the IFATCA M anual, the work of the IFATCA off ice in Montreal and t he preparation w ork fo r the 1999 IFATCA conf erence in Sant iago, Chile. The Chairman regrette d that due to th e cont inuin g pressure of w ork, he wo uld not be standing for reelect ion to the post of EVP at the next confere nce. He urged Mr . Yoshiki lmawaka w ho had given t remendous support and assistance to the Chairman to consider putt ing himself forward as a candidate for t he post. (Editorial Note - Mr. lmawaka was unable to put himself forward as a candidate for the position but fortu nately a regional candidate was forthco ming

before conference and Mr. Phil Parker was duly elected as the Executive Vice President for the region.). During the meeting, guest speakers were invited to make presentations on the following topics: 1. Mr. Phil Parker,Air Traffic Control Officer Hong Kong, (HKATCA) . 'Training Controllers for the New Hong Kong International Airport ' . 2. Ms Christine Ledue-Ledoux, Air Traffic Control Tahiti, (T-APCA). 'CPDLC- ADS Operations'. 3. Mr. Jose Queiroz , Chairman, (Civil Aviation Authority of Macau) . 'Macau International Airport: Economic and Technological Issues'. In the closing session, Sri Lanka announced that they would like to host the 16th Asia/Pacific Regional Meeting in 1999 in Colombo. On the social side, it was again an astounding success. Generous sponsorship was provided by the CAA Macau, the Airport Authorit y Macau, the ATS Provider, Macau (ADA) and the office of Communication / Tourism / Culture. A one-day trip to Zhuhai w as organised on the third day by Macau ATC and it was well attended. The Hong Kong ATCA offered a tour of Hong Kong ATC facilities in the new Hong Kong International Airport after the Regional M eeting and the visit was att ended by more than 30 members. Overall it w as a rewarding and producti ve meeting . The dedication and enthu siasm displayed by the organising and supporting staff contribut ed to th e success of the meeting .

Agenda 1999 APRIL 14 - 16 Inter Airport 99 Asia Singapore Expo Centre Contact - Nadine Graville Phone +44 1707 275641 Fax +44 1707 275554 MAY 28 -31 CATCA 21 st Convention Edmonton, Alberta Contact - JoAnne St~Gelais Phone + 1 613 225 3553 Fax + 1 613 225 8448 Email Catca@catca.ca JUNE 11 - 13 IFATCA Executive Board Meeting, Geneva Contact - IFATCA Office Manager, Maura Estrada Phone + 1 514 866 7040 Fax + 1 514 866 7612 Email: ifatca@sympatico .ca OCTOBER 1 - 3 IFATCA Executive Board Meeting, Hong Kong Contact - IFATCA Office Manager, Maura Estrada Phone + 1 514 866 7040 Fax +151 4 8667612 Email: ifatca@sympatico .ca

2000 FEBRUARY 23 - 26 Airways World Aviation Rugby 10's, Christchurch, New Zealand Contact - Patrick Coyle, Secretary, Phone +64 3 3581500 or 3856789 Fax +64 3 3582790 Email: Wartenz@airways.co .nz

CONTROLLER

Report of 9th Americas Regional Meeting Miami, Florida, Sth - 6th November 1998 Martyn Cooper,ExecutiveVice PresidentProfessional Introduction Fifteen MAs from the Americas Region gathered in downtown Miami as the remains of Hurricane "Mitch" hit Florida. Once again, the size of this annual meeting was reduced by some 50%, underlining the problems many MAs have in this Region for travel and participation in IFATCA meetings. These problems became even more apparent as the agenda unfolded, but more of that later. Undoubtedly, the most important item on everyone's mind at the start of the meeting was the absence of the EVP AMA, Carlos Olmos Mendoza. His tragic and most unexpected death in August had left the Region without the essential coordinator that this large and diverse region required. Mexico were later to make special mention of Carlos's qualities and enthusiasm for air traffic control in this Region, but it was Mike McNally, President NATCA, who formally opened the meeting and expressed NATCA's own tribute to the late EV PAMA In the absence of the EVP AMA, the Executive Board had asked John Redmond, Executive Vice President Finance to chair the meeting and he invited all delegates to stand and observe a minute's silence in memory of Carlos. The Chairman then thanked Adell Humphreys (NATCA) and Maura Estrada (IFATCA OM) for their help in organising the meeting in such difficult circumstances. Assisting EVPF,was Martyn Cooper, Executive Vice President Professional, who was also tasked to act as Secretary to the meeting, as no other volunteers came forward. The following MAs participated in the meeting: Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, Canada, Chile, Dominican Republic, France, Guyana, Jamaica, Mexico, Netherlands Antilles, Trinidad and Tobago, United States and Uruguay. Capt. Brandford Chase, IFALPA and Snr. Jorge Fernandez, ICAO Office, Lima also attended the meeting as Observers. The report of the previous year's meeting was accepted and Samuel Lampkin, President and Chief Executive of IFATCA, on behalf of the Region provided a written status report of the Americas Region. Comment was obviously made on the loss of the EVPAMA, but also recognised the efforts made by several members of the Regional Support Group, and from Uruguay, to attend meetings on behalf of IFATCA

'I II CONTROllER

and carry out the work of the Region. Singled out for mention were Rosanna Baru (Uruguay), Malcom de Peiza (Trinidad and Tobago), Fernando Reyes (Uruguay) and Cedric Murrell (Barbados). Despite his role as PCX, Sam had also made time to support the Region that he so loves and works in, but was only able to do this with the assistance that Maura Estrada, IFATCA's Office Manager, provided in the way of administration and secretarial functions. In his report, the PCX mentioned that many MAs in the Region have yet to honour their financial responsibilities to the Federation. Some were already suspended and faced termination from IFATCA during the 1999 Conference. He urged these MAs to take the necessary actions to maintain their membership. The importance of maintaining contact with IFATCA was also stressed. Regardless of the lack of EVPAMA, at the moment, it was essential that MAs keep in touch so that their problems and successes could be recorded and acted upon. A written report on the activities of IFATCA, from the Executive Board, was provided and EVPP highlighted some specific items of interest to the Region. The problems recently faced by Panama were also being reflected in some parts of Europe and Africa. The need for up to date information from MAs affected by industrial disputes and legal action was stressed and neighbouring MAs were asked to assist IFATCA, especially when communications in the Region were often difficult. The Regional Support Group had also been affected by the loss of the EVPAMA and no meeting had been held during the current year. A meeting was planned for 7th November, immediately following the RM,and members of the RSG gave a verbal update. It had been a difficult year for the Region, especially as Carlos had indicated his enthusiasm for getting things moving amongst the Region's MAs. It was hoped that the meeting on the 7th November would develop a way forward. Uruguay reported briefly on a meeting of a new group of Latin American MAs on October 19/20th 1998. This group, named "MERCOSUR", was founded to draw together the South American countries who had much in common language, industrial problems and communication difficulties. A written report was provided on this meeting

and was discussed later.

Member Associations' Reports A common theme running through the MA reports was the need to improve staffing, training and equipment. Whereas the central and northern parts of the Region seemed to have reasonable relationships with their employers. it was quite clear that the southern part were facing extreme difficulties. In many Latin American countries the responsibilities and skills of the controller were rarely recognised. Salaries were low and equipment was in need of updating. Morale was low in many areas and there was a desperate need to raise the profile and status of an air traffic controller. Whilst acknowledging that the economies of many countries in Latin America were poor, nevertheless, whether it was tourism or business needs, the economies of these countries depended on good air communications. Controllers are an integral part of the process to ensure safety in the air and their role and requirements need to be met. A new radar system had been installed in Aruba, but it was not yet operational because of an industrial dispute over salary. Agreement had now been reached, but may need renegotiating. Training of staff was under way, in Miami, and it was hoped the radar system would be fully operational in early 1999. Airport expansion was under way to meet traffic demands and increase availability for more flights. Barbados had just celebrated its 21 st Anniversary and an update on training schemes and rostering solutions was provided. New radar consoles were being used with the old radar system, but hoped to have a new radar system operational soon. New communication equipment was also in use. Ann Logie had provided a very useful presentation on CISM to relevant ATS and Emergency service personnel. BATCA indicated they had asked their Government to fund such a scheme but nothing had been agreed as yet. Barbados also gave information about a legal investigation into an air accident that occurred in 1996. Three ATCOs were crossexamined during the investigation and BATCA was concerned at the iack of legal representation and assistance given to the controllers. BATCA had asked their Government to consider providing legal representation assistance in any future cases.

Bermuda indicated the importance of belonging to IFATCA, an internationally recognised body. They had a high ratio of female controllers and ATS authorities had recently tried to prevent one of their female members working because she was pregnant. IFATCA policy had assisted greatly in resolving this matter. Canada reported on industrial matters with regard to new contracts. Agreement on new working practices was still being discussed. CATCA had been asked to provide training courses for supervisory staff in Costa Rica. It was hoped that something could be done informally, as any assistance would have to be voluntary. CATCA would be willing to act as a go-between for Costa Rica and any Canadian controllers who were able to assist them. It was good to report that Nav. Canada were trying to improve relationships with operational controllers by involving them in development working groups to identify solutions to ATS problem areas. It was an encouragement to see that their employer was willing to work with the controllers to improve working procedures. A brief update on the follow-up to the recent Swissair accident was given. Controllers involved had received CISM and were now back at work. Canada provided a brief review of the way they undertook CISM and encouraged all MAs to press for the implementation of CISM with their employers and Government authorities. Chile reported on the organisation of the 1999 IFATCA Conference. Their Government had indicated their total support for the Conference in Santiago and they were confident that they would meet all the needs _ that IFATCA required. They were still working with Lan Chile, the national airline, to provide attractive rates for the transport of delegates and Lan Chile had been nominated as the 'official carrier' for IFATCA '99. As far as other ATC matters were concerned, Chile had been involved with a modernisation programme of their DGAC - and their viewpoint had been listened to. There had been an increase in radar sites from 4 to 8 to give better coverage. They still have problems with staffing levels in recognition of increases in traffic Traffic had increased over the last 5 years by some 250%, but there had been only a 65% increase in staff Recruitment and training of additional staff was obviously needed to meet

the air traffic demands of the future. The Netherlands Antilles reported that restrictions have been placed on the training and employment of additional controllers. The Dutch government is helping to integrate airfield and area ATS authorities into one department. It was hoped that this would assist with administration costs and enable department to be self-funding. They were looking to satellite communications to improve radio reception and communication in this area. Jamaica commented on the poor radio and telephone communications with neighbouring ACCs. such as Curacao. ATCANA said financial problems had caused delays in implementing introduction of new communication equipment. It was the first Regional Meeting for the Dominican Republic and. after many years, also for Jamaica. Both MAs promised a full report next year and the Chairman welcomed them into the Federation. France reported on developments at Martinique, including improvements to controller training. They had also been promoting the career of controllers with school visits to their ATC Tower. They were also in discussion with ATS authorities for the promotion of the legal aspects of a controller's job for an improved working practices agreement. Areas of concern for legal responsibility were mentioned and it was recommended that all MAs should consider the importance of addressing these issues. Of particular importance was the situation where supervisory staff had legal responsibility for the actions that their staff took. At the moment, this process was confined to an ACC in mainland France, but it had implications on a national level. Guyana indicated that a proposal has been given to their Government for improved working conditions. but a response is still waited. Difficulties were reported with training new controllers, with existing controllers unwilling to work with trainees unless a premium payment was made. They sought recognition that there were risks of errors from OJTI with inexperienced staff. The situation was not helping staffing needs and did not reflect well on the ATC Department. There was an additional cause for concern over the quality of trainees being presented to the operational Unit. Following a question from the floor, Guyana admitted that time off was a key issue. Due to staffing needs, up to 83 hours of overtime were required per month and quality rest time was limited. Many MAs present raised concerns over the health and safety issues related to this overtime working and EVPP highlighted existing IFATCA Policy on Work and Rest Schemes. This policy was

clearly supported by independent scientific evidence and it was essential that MAs draw this to the attention of their employers to improve their working conditions, if only on safety grounds. EVPP considered it very important that controllers were not exposed to any litigation following an incident caused by their tiredness. Mexico reported that they were developing relationships with their employer on Technical issues. They reported on a range of activities such as CFiT, CNS/ ATM, HF, etc. that their MA had been involved with. They were very active in Technical/Professional issues. A new Professional agreement - working with the employer to establish new working conditions - was under discussion. Their annual Conference gave their MA an opportunity to acknowledge controllers who have been working in the profession. Recognition was made for every 5 years of service up to 20 years and beyond. ATCAM considered this to be a nice gesture to acknowledge individual controllers amongst their membership. The next annual ACTAM Conference was planned for October 20/21/221999. ATCAM invited any MA, and any individual controller, to attend any of their seminars or conferences. Providing they contacted the Liaison Officer of ACTAM, full details would be forwarded. Spanish was the language used. Finally, the MA now had its own Website which is being developed, although the language used is mainly Spanish (actam@www.bsmx.com). Trinidad and Tobago indicated that recent problems with the provision of refresher radar training had been resolved. Having had their radar system out of use for some time, it had been necessary to re-train staff to use it again. However. a local management dispute had caused this training to be cancelled. Fortunately, common sense had prevailed and the requirement for the re-introduction of the radar, on safety and efficiency grounds, had been acknowledged. OJT for other training requirements had been cancelled, as the remuneration of OJT mentors had not been agreed. This is an on-going problem that is delaying the progression of trainees. A Government decision on resolving this matter is awaited. Visual procedures for night-time departures from Tobago had been resolved following work within TIATCA's Technical group. A controller exchange visit from France (Martinique) had been set up and was considered very useful, but Trinidadian controllers had not yet been able to participate on a return visit because of financial constraints. There was better news from the

UnitedStates. They had had a busy year negotiatingwith the FAA and had comeout with a good deal. A lot of effort was made to come up with a fair agreement that avoided the industrial disputes of the past. A lot more freedom to negotiate was given to them. Controller levels would be maintained and 2% increase per year had been built into the agreement to meet future traffic demands. Controller-in-charge pay (no supervisoravailable)had been agreed for those controllers who were left in charge, or asked to take on supervisory tasks. Althoughthe number of supervisors might be reduced, compensation would be paid to those who adopted the 'supervisory' tasks. Pioneering work within FederalGovernment employment with regard to leave and sick leave compensatory arrangements was continuing. NATCA had had the opportunityto becomeinvolvedwith AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations) which had been a big politicaladvantageto NATCA. Followingthe failureof earlierATM development plans, NATCA had been invited to participate in recovery schemes to meet future needs and assist in the development of future ATM concepts. They were doing a lot more in Technical and Human Factor aspects than they had ever done, including evaluation of controller tasks and health and welfare studies. NATCA's area of influence was expanding and they identified areas where their influence was helping to change attitudes and acceptedpracticesto increase efficiency, and to take on new management techniques that benefited everyone. Uruguay was able to provide an overview of the problems that the Latin American MAs faced. The problems of Association acceptance within many MAs were identified, including the action by several countries to put controllers out of work if they joined a trade union. The MERCOSUR meeting had confirmed the importance of a teamwork approach of regional MAs to tackle problems within Latin America and also that IFATCA was the most appropriate organisation to promote the professional and technical views of their group. It was also agreed to establish a data bank of information on deficiencies within the area to identify common areas requiring attention. This would help to coordinate problems and draw them to a wider audience as a whole, rather than separate individual countries. France remarked on anonymous reporting - that it was very difficult to keep things anonymous. Uruguay indicated that in many countries in Latin America, scapegoats were sought when things that had gone

wrong were reported.

Input From Invited Organisations/ Associations IFALPA Captain Brandford Chase RVP CAR-East of IFALPA was invited to address the meeting. He described his responsibilities, including the setting up of a Regional ALPA in the Eastern Caribbean area. He commented on the observed difficulties that faced many controllers in the area through lack of funding and offered his own support for controllers and their important tasks. The Chairman indicated that the EB were pursuing closer links with IFALPA and that a meeting of senior Officers would be held in Montreal in January. Reference was made to a visit by IFATCA to Greece this year to review problems identified by IFALPA. It was pleasing to note that subsequent to both organisations' visits, there was an indication that Greece ATS authorities had been encouraged to make changes.

Development of and Maintaining of Contacts amongst Regional MAs and International/Regional Organisations for the benefit of the Region and MAs Uruguay commented on the need for suitable IFATCA Representation from within the Region to assist and participate with the demands placed upon IFATCA to attend seminars and conferences. It was important that IFATCA participates and it is most useful if someone from the Region where the meeting is held can attend. This benefits IFATCA, the Region and the individual MA. Canada suggested that this was an important item for the RSG to consider. Uruguay commented on the need for continuity, especially with the more important meetings of groups, such as GREPECAS. Language was also important for those meetings that were undertaken in Spanish.

Other Reports Regrettably. due to the circumstances that had faced this region during the year, participation at many working groups had not been possible. The following reports were provided.

E-CAR/WG This group was formed about 20 years ago to discuss common items of interest for ATS authorities in the ECAR area and to formulate proposals with the assistance of ICAO. Meetings are held annually. Main subjects under discussion at the moment include SSR code allocation, radar data sharing, ATS communications failure procedures and ICAO assistance to promote controller training in the area.

CAN/MEX/USA CNS/ ATM/WP Mexico indicated that a lack of information about the meeting of this group had prevented their

. Âˇ -1

CONTROILILER

attendance on behalf of IFATCA. GREPECAS COM/SG Uruguay highlighted the difficulties they had had attending the meeting, because information was not forwarded to them in good time. However, the subject matter was very interesting and very important for MAs in this Region, especially with regard to the use of communications and Human Factors aspects. Perhaps the most important subject discussed was the matter of deficiencies and shortcomings in the Region. Unfortunately, those States who could do something about these problems refused to speak on the subject or discuss the matter. It was important that the IFATCA representative to this group had information on deficiencies and shortcomings available to them before they went to the meeting. The Chairman requested that all MAs provide this information to Uruguay. ICAO agreed with Uruguay and said that MAs could forward information directly into GREPECAS. It had to be recognised that not all States shared this information with them. Uruguay stated that it was important that the correct and 'true' information was provided. Other

MAs agreed and indicated that there was a general lack of assistance from engineers and technicians that deal with communications equipment. It was important to recognise that controllers were users of this equipment and it was essential that our concerns were duly noted and acted upon. Emergency Continuation Training EVPP introduced an additional item to determine how many MAs in the Region undertook emergency continuation training. EVPP discussed the importance and relevance of such training and invited comment from the floor. Mexico indicated that refresher training was most important and described the range of activities that were undertaken in their MA. Barbados reported on a recent aircraft accident and the need for controllers to receive such training. One of the controllers involved had had no training with aircraft emergencies since his basic training. Bermuda commented on the number of aircraft emergencies they experienced. Since being privatised, employers were reluctant to provide emergency exercises and wanted to save money. No CISM was provided to employees who were involved

HEARD IN THE TOWER

with aircraft emergencies. France reported on the full training they received, including dealing with equipment failure. The legal implications of being involved with aircraft emergencies were also mentioned. Canada reported that although they had a yearly procedures check, they did not have specific emergency traffic handling training. The Life and Times of Carlos Olmos Mendoza, EVPAMA. Javier Camerena, Liaison Officer to IFATCA for ATCAM paid tribute to Carlos Mendoza. He read the contents of a letter sent to EB and MAs regarding the sudden death of Carlos identifying the roles that Carlos had taken up within Mexico and the American Region to support IFATCA and controllers. The desire that Carlos had to unify the Region and to deal with the serious problems many MAs had was recognised. It was only too apparent that IFATCA had lost a dedicated and sincere IFATCA member, and a good friend. Future Americas Regional Meeting In closing the meeting it was decided that France will attempt to arrange the 1999 (10th) Regional Meeting in Martinique and Barbados

indicated their interest to host the 2000RM. Despite reflections on what might have been had Carlos been with us, there was an air of genuine enthusiasm to make things work in the region, especially in Latin America. There was a commitment to make the Regional Support Group active and influential; to improve communication with MAs in the region and to build on the common themes that affect so many controllers in this part of the world. Uruguay is to be commended for their lead in bringing the South American MAs together in "MERCOSUR" and for showing the true spirit of an air traffic controller: the will to overcome, whatever the problem. It is to be hoped that their commitment and enthusiasm will be matched by the influence of other international bodies, such as ICAO and IATA, to improve the working conditions of air traffic controllers in this region and to have their professional status and responsibilities correctly acknowledged. The partnership of such diverse air traffic controller groups in IFATCA always impresses me and it was a privilege to share in this meeting.

No.1 Vale of York, U.K. circa 1968

120 Jet Provost Trainers Airborne, (pre-SSR), an aircraft transmits ...

' ~IMtfl ' â&#x20AC;˘

IM No--r 11ikf Fâ&#x20AC;˘.... I) -Off

THf CONTROLLER

W\11-' THE-Al~ Fot1.C6-{.....

' '

Charlie's Column WAR BETWEEN COMPUTER MANUFA CTURERS. Bill Gates is launching a war to remain the major player in the computer field . Someone recentl y explained to me the main difference between the various computer operating systems by making an analogy w ith airl ines . Suppose the ope rating syste m was an airline: With a DOS Airline everybo dy pushes the plane unt il it glides, runs behind it and jumps on board, it becomes too heavy and lands again . The y then push it again , jump on and so on .... A DOS airline with latest upgrade Âˇ basically the same th ing but with more room to push. A MA C (Ap ple) airline - all stewardesses, captains, baggage hand lers and t icket agents look the same , act the same and ta lk the same way. If you ask quest ions you are t old yo u do not need to know. A Windows 98 airline - the airport terminal is nice and colourfu l, with friend ly stewar desse s to help yo u around, easy access to the plane and a completely uneventful take-off, the n once in the air the planes blows up witho ut a warn ing whatsoever. An NT Airline - everyone marches out on t he runway , state the password in uni son and form the out line of an aero plane. Then t hey all sit down and make a wh ist ling sound like they are flying .. A UNI X airlin e - everyone brings one piece of the plane w it h them when the y come to the airport. T hey all go out on t he runwa y and put the plan e toget her. After it has landed they spend the same amount of t ime d ismantling the plan e. THE ENGINEER, MANAGER AND CO MP UTER PROGRA MMER JOKE: Talking abo ut comp uter program s, here is a nice joke you can te ll your favourite ATC system programmer next time you see him :

In my ATC faci lity, the Managing Director, the Chief Mainten ance Engineer and the Head of the Syst em Programming have to go on a mission tog ether. They take a staff car and off they go . At the top of a big hill, the driver realises the brakes of the car have just failed. With a lot of effort and scraping the side of the car along the wa lls on the side of the road , he manages to stop the car at the bottom of the hill. A ll the passengers get out and are very scared. The Driver the n asks: "We are in the middle of nowhere , what are we going to do7" The Managing Director says first: "Do not panic! Let's get together, form a comm itt ee and decide w hat to do next." The Maintenance Engineer then says: "No need for a committee. Let's dismantle the brakes and put them back toget her. That wi ll probabl y work." Th en the Programmer said: "I have a better idea. Let' s push the car back up the hill and see if it does it again I "

HOW TO SOLVE LANGUAGE PROBLEMS British Aeros pace has hundreds of staff work ing near Toulouse in France, employed in the A IRBUS aircraft building busin ess. As they seem to have some difficulties in communicating w ith other nationalities , I read here (AW&S T 3/99) that British aerospace w ill invest Five Million Euros (6 Mi llion$) in building a new English language school near Toulouse, aimed at improving the level of English of the other nationals... Now that is a nove l idea! When in France, do not learn French but build a schoo l to educate the others in speaking English I ALONE IN BOURNEMOUTH TOWER ... Last march in Bournemouth Airport in the UK, a lonely Towe r Contro ller dec ided , befor e the "rush ho ur" to go down and make himself a cup of coffee . He

unfortun ately slipped do w n the stairs, fell badly and broke his leg in the process. Unable to climb back up the stairs on his own, the "r ush hour" arrived witho ut anyone in the Tower to answer the aircraft. Consequently, two aircraft, one a B737, started to circ le overhea d . It took a wh ile before the alarmed fire brigade could find our poor controller, and call anoth er one at home that cou ld direct the planes to land safely. (Charlie's) The moral of the story: A lways put two controllers in a Towe r, so th at when you need a cup of coffee you can always send the other one to fetch it for you.

YOUR CAPTAIN SPEAKING After a rather bump y flight and a roug h landing: "Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for Flying Delta Business Express. We hope yo u enjoyed giving us the business as much as we enjoyed taking you for a

ride ." ( From the Du tch controller magazin e - De Guildebrief .)

OVERHEARD ON THE FREQUENCY " North west 123 , speed 160 Knots, you're following a heavy 747. Thre e ... Ehhhh, let' s make tha t five miles ahea d .... " (From Transmit 1 /99 ) A bit of British milit ary hum our (also from the last Transmit) Pilot: "Contro l thi s is Mil 234 w it h you, requesting radar pick up for a GCA. Control : "Roger Sir. Squawk ident and report position" Pilot : "You've got radar, you can find us" A litt le whi le later : Control: "M il 234, on final. We are now closing this frequency, good bye" Pilot: " Ehhh . Approach contro l. . Which channe l shou ld we sw itch to for GCA?" Controll er: "Mil 23 4, yo u've got 720 chan nels Sir. You find us!"

SUBSCRIPTION FORM Pleasereturn to the Subscription Manager, Five Robins, Little Vigo, Yateley, Hampshire, GU46 6ES, United Kingdom (BLOCKLETIERSPLEASE)

Family Name

FirstName(s)

Address

Post Code

Country

Payment:

ChequeEnclosed

Against Invoice

Ratefor 1 year (4 issues)CHF 36 plus postage and packing. Seepostagerateson page 3.

Araouane

A Timbu

a, )