IFATCA The Controller - September 2007

THE

CONTROLLER September 2007

Journal of Air Traffic Control

4 SINGLE EUROPEAN SKY Will it work?

Also in this issue:

INTER-

TION OF AIR TRAFF ERA IC C FED

LLERS’ ASSNS. TRO ON

4 Ueberlingen Trial

NATIO NAL

4 Update on Brazil and Argentina ATC situation

Welcome to Arusha Tanzania at the 47th IFATCA Annual Conference in March 2008

Welcome to the 47th IFATCA Annual Conference in Tanzania, the land of Kilimanjaro and Zanzibar.

On 10 to 14 March 2008, IFATCA will hold its 47th Annual Conference in Arusha Tanzania hosted by the Tanzania Air Traffic Controllers’ Association.

Arusha is the safari capital of the Tanzania, located at the center of the Great North Road running from Cape Town in South Africa to Cairo in Egypt. It is also known as “The Geneva of Africa.”

It is located in the northern highlands of Tanzania between the twin peaks of Mount Meru and Mount Kilimanjaro.

Built by Germans as a centre of colonial administration in the 20th Century, Arusha was a sleepy town with a few shops and garrisons stationed at the old Boma.

Recently the face of Arusha has changed and is rapidly continuing to change. Being one of the country’s most prosperous towns, it is the seat of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Rwanda genocide and the Headquarters of the East African Community which is comprised of Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi.

Arusha is the gate way to Tanzania’s world famous National parks. Imagine 24% of the territory is dedicated to game reserves and national parks!!

To the west we have Lake Manyara, Tarangire, Ngorongoro Conservation area and Oldvai Gorge which reveals its prehistoric secrets. We have also Serengeti with its endless plain and vast numbers of Wildebeest, Zebra, Gazelles, Lions, Elephants, and attendant carnivore.

Towering over Arusha town is Mount Meru dusted with snow from November to January. To the East is the Africa’s highest Mountain the Kilimanjaro with the height of 19,340 ft at a snow capped summit.

Arusha city is the ideal place for the conference where we will do business at a holiday destination.

The venue; the Arusha International Conference Center (AICC) is surrounded with hotels such as Impala, Naura, Kibo Palace, New Safari and The Arusha hotel just to mention a few, so be assured of enough accommodation to suit your budget.

About 70% of visitors from abroad arrive in Arusha via Kilimanjaro International airport which has been privatized leading to a marked improvement in Airport facilities.

Simon Kimiti Executive Chairman IFATCA 2008 Organising Committee

Contents

THE

September 2007 3rd quarter 2007 volume 49 ISSN 0010-8073

CONTROLLER THE

CONTROLLER September 2007

Journal of Air Traffic Control

4 SINGLE EUROPEAN SKY Will it work?

Photo: Also in this issue:

4 Update on Brazil and Argentina ATC situation INTER-

NATIO NAL

TION OF AIR TRAFF ERA IC C FED

LLERS’ ASSNS. TRO ON

4 Ueberlingen Trial

MD80 taking off towards New European single Sky. Photo credit: Enav

PUBLISHER IFATCA, International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations.

EXECUTIVE BOARD OF IFATCA Marc Baumgartner President and Chief Executive Officer Alexis Brathwaite Deputy President Cedric Murrell Executive Vice-President Americas Henry Nkondokaya Executive Vice-President Africa/ Middle East John Wagstaff Executive Vice-President Asia/Pacific Patrik Peters Executive Vice-President Europe Dale Wright Executive Vice-President Finance Doug Churchill Executive Vice-President Professional Vacant Executive Vice-President Technical Jack van Delft Secretary/Conference Executive EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Philippe Domogala Editorial address:Westerwaldstrasse 9 D 56337 ARZBACH, Germany Tel: +492603 8682 email: ed@ifatca.org Residence: 24 Rue Hector Berlioz F 17100 LES GONDS, France CORPORATE AFFAIRS Kevin Salter (Germany/UK) WEB SITE AND EDITOR ASSISTANT Philip Marien (EGATS)

In this issue:

Foreword by Patrik Peters ……………………………………………… 4 Editorial by Philippe Domogala ………………………………………… 5 SES – SESAR 1 Single European Sky …………………………………….. 6 SES – SESAR 2 Interview with Luc Tytgat, Head of Unit Single Sky European Commission by Philippe Domogala ……………. 7 SES – SESAR 3 High Level Group Report Review by Paul Neering and Marc Baumgartner ….…………………………………………… 8 SES – SESAR 4 SES: Competition or Cooperation? by Paul Neering and Marc Baumgartner ……….….…………………………………… 10 SES – SESAR 5 What is SESAR? by the SESAR Project Directorate …...…… 12 SES – SESAR 6 The Nordic ATS Academy Entry Point North by Helena Sjostrom . 14 SES – SESAR 7 “Maastricht Radar” by Patrik Peters ..…………………...……... 16 SES – SESAR 8 The MOSAIC Initiative by Frederic Deleau …………….…… 18 SES – SESAR 9 Letter to Commissioner Barrot …...….…………………………… 20 European News 1 Reporting Incidents Saves Lives by Philippe Domogala ...… 21 European News 2 Paris le Bourget – 2007 by Philippe Domogala .……..…… 22 Spotlight by Kevin Salter ……………………………….……………...…….……… 24 Asia Pacific China intends to go RVSM … in Meters by Phil Parker …………… 26 Africa News Introducing the new IFATCA Executive Vice President Africa and Middle East by MD Matale ……….…………...……………. 27 Americas News Argentina Latest News by Cedric Murell and El Kadur Acosta . 28 Brazil Update 1 The Brazil Mid-Air Collision: A Legal Update

by Christoph Gilgen ……….…………..……………………… 29 Brazil Update 2 Update on the Brazilian ATC situation

by Christoph Gilgen .……………………….……………... 30 Brazil Situation Brazil Second Major Air Disaster within One Year

by Christoph Gilgen …………….…..………………… 32 Legal News Ueberlingen Collision: The Trial

by Christoph Gilgen ...……………..……..………….. 34 Philip Marien Feature Aviation Records

by Philip Marien …………………. 36 Americas ICAO News by Alexis Braithwaite .… 38 Charlie‘s Column ……………………… 39

REGIONAL EDITORS Moetapele D. Matale (Botswana) Al-Kadur Acosta (Dominican Republic) Phil Parker (Hong Kong) Patrik Peters (Europe) COPY EDITORS Paul Robinson, Helena Sjöström, Stephen Broadbent and Brent Cash PRINTING-LAYOUT LITHO ART GmbH & Co. Druckvorlagen KG Friesenheimer Straße 6a D 68169 MANNHEIM, Germany Tel: +49 3 22 59 10 email: info@lithoart-ma.de

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this magazine are those of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA) only when so indicated. Other views will be those of individual members or contributors concerned and will not necessarily be those of IFATCA, except where indicated. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in this publication is correct, IFATCA makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the nature or accuracy of the information. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or used in any form or by any means, without the specific prior written permission of IFATCA.

VISIT THE IFATCA WEB SITES:

www.ifatca.org and www.the-controller.net

Foreword

Ph

o : to PP

Foreword from the Executive Board Patrik Peters, ^ by EVP Europe IFATCA

There is only one sky…

The Single European Sky initiative of the European Commission, launched under Commissioner Loyola de Palacio, is not any longer solely a European issue. Studies carried out by the EUROCONTROL agency, the European Commission and other related bodies have a worldwide impact on the redesign of modern air traffic management. The aim to use more efficient ATM based on actual flight patterns, rather than using the present system which is largely based on national boundaries, can be applied in many congested regions around the globe. We’ve heard promoters saying that harmonization, both technically and operationally, would reduce current delays, serve better airspace utilization, lower the fuel-burn per flight and improve the general ATM system’s efficiency. All these goals make sense and are worthwhile investigating.

How do we improve airspace fragmentation in Europe (and elsewhere) and which are the instruments to use?

The SESAR program The program looking at solving these issues in Europe is SESAR, the Single European Sky ATM Research Program. SESAR uses a performance driven approach, aiming at improving the balance between system solutions, like new concepts and processes, and stakeholders’ needs.

This is different compared to the past, when technology was the main driver for change. New tools were added and one would adapt to the impact and requirements as they became available. Today,

decisions shall be taken based on the identified needs of all stakeholders concerned, - the general public, airspace users, industry and staff. These requirements can be translated into performance and be used to evaluate costs versus possible gain. The advantage of this process is the tailor-made action plan, which can be split into different key performance areas. We differentiate between societal outcome (safety, security, environment), operational performance (cost-effectiveness, capacity, efficiency, flexibility, predictability) and performance enablers (access and equity, participation, interoperability), the latter of which is not of direct interest to airspace users and customers. Looking at operational performance, where we as air traffic controllers have the biggest impact, cost-effectiveness, capacity and efficiency are key words we hear every day in the control room. Operational staff is expected to contribute in reaching target levels set by Eurocontrol’s Performance Review Commission (PRC).

Capacity IFATCA members repeatedly report traffic increases of ca. 5% in Europe, which makes it increasingly difficult to cope with workload and stress. A lot is being done to improve capacity and the past has shown that modern flow regulation and motivated ATC staff could provide extra capacity. Recently though, traffic is building up again and we have to ask how far we can stretch. Reducing a

controller’s workload with the aid of new technology will only be used to have him or her handle even more traffic in the future. Capacity is not infinite and we are rapidly closing in to total saturation.

Our environment There is another subject, where we are in a similar position - our environment. Our planet cannot cope anymore with the daily increase in pollution. Airlines are being criticized and have realized the need to launch environmental campaigns to justify the use of air travel and to present their efforts in becoming more environmentally friendly. Some service providers are investing in research about economizing fuel-burn around their airports. “Green approaches” as being used in Stockholm/ Sweden (an initiative of the Swedish ANSP LFV in cooperation with SAS/Scandinavian airlines) are just one idea to reduce the “workload” for our planet.

Taking a look at the current hype in the automobile sector, where tax reductions for bio-fuel or gas driven vehicles are already in force, we may in the future see slots given out according to the environmental status of a particular airline or aircraft.

… because there is only one sky! ^

evpeur@ifatca.org

Traffic is building up again and we have to ask how far we can stretch?

THE

4

CONTROLLER

Editorial

Editorial North East meets South West Philippe Domogala, ^ by Editor To paraphrase the old “ East meets West” phrase, this issue of The Controller compares involuntarily how two areas of the world deal with ATC. While Europe prepares itself for the 21st century with the Single European Sky initiative (SES), South America returns to the 19th century where the military regimes use brute force to hang on to their privileges. Those controllers daring to speak up are either dismissed or simply thrown in jail, just like the latter stages of the 19th century.

In the article about the SES, you will learn what the European politicians and manufacturers plan for us in the long term, and make no mistake it will in time affect all of us, whether you are in Europe or not. The latest news from Argentina and Brazil will remind us that despite gains in some areas, recognition of the profession is still far away in a number of countries.

Christoph Gilgen has been very productive. The latest crash in Brazil (the TAM A320 in Sao Paulo) and the legal consequences of the previous GOL B737 collision are also addressed in this issue.

Ueberlingen Trial: The trial relating to the July 2002 collision over Ueberlingen has concluded. I followed most of the proceedings everyday on the internet, and I ended up feeling sad and angry. Not about the judges or the prosecutor, who after all carried out a rather competent investigation and asked the right questions. What made me sad and angry was the pitiful defense of the eight accused - most of them denied any responsibility and placed the blame on Peter Nielsen, the controller on duty that night who was subsequently murdered.

I find it strange, to use a mild word, that all those managers who are frequently so keen at showing their power and boasting of their “responsibilities” while at work were acting like first-grade schoolboys when their system failed with terrible consequences. I am fully aware that the strategy adopted by the defense lawyers was probably not their individual choice, but that does not excuse them in my eyes.

bly be known, but in my view the verdict is not the most important issue.

Sending controllers and/or managers to jail will not solve anything – it never has and never will in ATC. In this case systemic errors were identified. Accepting responsibility for those errors, and ensuring that money and resources are committed to try and ensure that similar errors will not happen again is what I would expect from a responsible manager. In this trial they chose to defend themselves differently. It will be difficult for me and many others to take them seriously from now when they will speak about “being responsible“ most of their credibility is gone.

You see, everybody, and I mean everybody, ends up losing something when an accident occurs.

ed@ifatca.org By the time you read these lines, the verdict (due in early September) will proba-

READER’S LETTERS to the Editor “Human Error” Definition Philippe, I am reacting to your last editorial and the statements that „human errors are mostly at the root cause of accidents,“ and that “the percentage of human errors in accidents is still steady around 75-80% in aviation, since the 1960s“.

While these two statements might be acceptable according to a big part of our community, for me 75-80% is really wrong. If you want to quantify the human contribution to aviation accidents, it must be around 100%. Who invented the industry - I think it was the humans. So I guess what you are saying is that in the modern judgment of what caused an accident (which is a very subjective view), we humans judge it to be 75-80%.

My point here is to say that it is not important to quantify who or what causes accidents. We should instead focus on countermeasures, because putting a number on human contributions to accidents might make us look in the wrong direction for solutions.

It is normal that if you have a cause that says ”human error“, you will start fixing the ”human error“ problem.

But what is a ”human error“? Human error can only be seen after the accident and not before. If we, IFATCA and our controllers around the world, want to contribute to a safer and more efficient industry, we have to move away from the myth about human error causing the problems that we have. This path leads us nowhere. The enemy to safety is not human error, but rather it is complexity. The solution is not to fight human error. The solution lies elsewhere, and there are good answers to where to look, which I think we should promote.

Tom Laursen /Zurich ACC

Now, what does this mean? Who causes the rest? Technology?

God? Animals? Water? Humans cause accidents as humans created the industry.

Editor’s Note: Tom has been invited to write an article on this very hot subject for the next issue of The Controller, so watch this space for more.

THE

CONTROLLER

5

4 SES – SESAR

Single European Sky The Single European Sky (or SES) was launched by the European Commission in December 1999 and was drafted with the following objectives:

Photo: European community 2007

1. Restructure European airspace as a function of air traffic flows, rather than according to national borders.

2. Create additional capacity.

3. Increase the overall efficiency of the air traffic management system.

Almost 8 years later where are we?

THE

6

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR

Interview ^

interview by Philippe Domogala, Editor

Philippe: The last time the European Union (EU) got involved in ATC, it was not that successful. Everyone remembers ATLAS and what became of it. What is the difference between ATLAS and SESAR? Luc Tytgat: ATLAS was a paper study, it was a research aimed at overturning old concepts.

SESAR is a program representing the technical element of the Single Sky, it is financed through the trans-European network budget and has an implementation phase.

Ph.: Do you think you will succeed this time?

LT: Yes because we cannot continue like today. We have to start having a continental approach to legislation traffic, not solving problems sector by sector. We need to have a macroscopic vision and to anticipate problems, the Single European Sky (SES) has for vocation a high level of harmonization. SES allows for dialogue. We want to separate operations from regulation, but you should give us time. SES has only really started since 3 years, you cannot show in 3 years the same results as a 30 year old system.

Ph.: You have an operational military background and experience in the space sector: Will that be an asset to drive the SESAR program?

LT: Yes, especially on how to best coordinate the different resources and the needs of all players, in our case here that will include the pilots and the controllers. Because to succeed we will need to have a consensus on the mission to accomplish. This is similar to a military or a space mission, where all actors have to agree to work in a smooth way towards a common goal.

Ph.: How are you going to convince all the 27 EU states to renounce their sovereignty?

LT: The principle of SES is that its implementation will be done by each State. We are not in the USA where one organization is able to impose rigid principles. In Europe each State retains its sovereignty. To ensure that the States will comply there is a need to exchange experiences, co-operate, and accept such things as peer reviews. But new EU States will have to accept what has already been agreed upon, and without having been involved in the process. This is a challenge

Photo: EU

Luc Tytgat. Head of Unit Single Sky European commission to make sure there are no different cultural perceptions or interpretations of the same texts, but we are hopeful.

Ph.: What do you think about the current urge by neighboring States for forum association, and even create their own Functional Airspace Blocks (FAB) ahead of the game?

LT: The FABs will become the main pillars of the process, but we should be careful that we do not create another level of fragmentation. The fact to signing agreements among neighboring states should not create another regional level fragmentation, as these could create new rigidity. To work with your neighbors is one thing, but to have an agreement between 2 States only, will only solve the problems between those 2 States. It is a local arrangement. We need to have true convergence inside a larger area and it is the whole of Europe which has to evolve.

Ph.: Is ATC privatization a need for SES? LT: Privatization is not an essential element. It is a possible one. What is important is the ability to put forward incentives in order to get a more efficient system. We need to look at the costs against the level of service. We should also avoid the automatic rise of costs in response to traffic increases. But to get more efficient does not necessarily mean you have to privatize. The public sector is important for instance in solving the equation safety levels versus traffic increase. But the public sector should remain responsible to oversee and regulate in some areas, such as the way service providers bill airlines for instance. There is a need to keep costs lower in order to keep air transport attractive in Europe.

Ph.: What about the MOSAIC Project proposed by the controllers unions and associations?

LT: This is an attractive project. It is a simple solution to a complex problem, but at this stage, I do not have enough information to judge.

Ph.: What do you expect from the High Level Group (HLG)?

LT: The HLG was put in place by Vice-Presi-

4 Luc Tytgat dent Barrot and the questions he asked are of institutional nature. Because when SESAR will deliver it’s first proposed solutions, their success will depend largely if we see a change in some regulatory issues.

Ph.: How to you see the future of Eurocontrol under SES? Will the European Safety Agency (EASA) replace Eurocontrol one day?

LT: No, EASA does not have the vocation to replace Eurocontrol.

Only the regulatory functions need to be considered, but that currently affects 30 persons at most within Eurocontrol. The rest, especially the operational validation and the standardization, will remain. We expect a lot from Eurocontrol on the validation of the solutions that industry will propose through SESAR. But on the long term, whether Eurocontrol can keep the CFMU (Central Flow Management Unit) and Maastricht UAC (Upper Area Control centre) will be answered hopefully by the HLG.

To get more efficient does not necessarily means you have to privatize.

THE

CONTROLLER

7

4 SES – SESAR Ph.: What are the strong points of SESAR? LT: It is a pan European program that unites different actors, from public sector to industry. It was a political ambition to enable the EU to offer answers to the present challenges in air traffic: accommodate its growth of course, but including environmental and security issues as well. It is also the first time that the “Air” and the “Ground” are involved in such a depth with equipment suppliers in a single exercise.

Ph.: And what are the weak points?

LT: Its length. It will be a long

exercise. Benefits will be felt by 2016 at best.

It will be a progressive development, and we have to be careful not to create a SESAR-like environment instead of the real thing.

Ph.: Do you see more challenges ahead?

LT: Many, such as convincing people of the need to change and plan for traffic growth.

There are cyclic variations in air traffic (fuel crisis, Gulf war, 9/11, SARS epidemic, etc.) and these variations can generate bad habits, we need to plan for constant growth.

Another one is with the manufacturers: we should be careful not to depend in the end on a single manufacturer and a unique solution.

Ph.: Do you have a message for European controllers, because, frankly after all this reducing costs business, we are a little worried?

LT: SES aims at becoming more efficient and cheaper, but contrary to popular belief controllers are not the most expensive part of ATM. We should not shoot at the wrong target. The costs of fragmentation are the real issue, duplication of efforts costs a lot.

SESAR work must be done together with controllers Ph.: Finally, how do you see ATC in Europe in 2030?

LT: We will see a new generation of controllers, that will be more managing different technologies and will inter act in a much different way than today with pilots. Pilots will be more involved in ATC, but for this to succeed, all actors must be involved in this system evolution. We expect the controllers to help us making the best system possible. ^

High Level Group Report Review Paul Neering, Liaison Officer to the European Union for IFATCA ^ by and Marc Baumgartner, President IFATCA

Is Europe ready for SES II? European Aviation – a Framework for Driving Performance Improvements Under this title the HLG*) (High Level Group for the Future of European Aviation Regulatory Framework) delivered its report(1 to

Commissioner Barrot in July 2007. The high level group has been created following two regulation conferences in 2006. VicePresident of the European Commission Mr. J.Barrot requested from the HLG to produce a report on the possibility of enhanced regulation for European Aviation.

The Group was composed of representatives of all the stakeholders except staff representatives. On the 20th of March though all the staff representative organisations have been invited to a so-called hearing and were able to present to the HLG their views. Through the participation in the ICB IFATCA was able to give some input to the drafting of the HLG report. The report is fairly conservative in the sense that nothing really new has been written. The positive points of the report are the roadmap and the recommendation.

The following article outlines the recommendations of the HLG report and gives the reader the opportunity to compare the contents with the letter sent by IFALPA/ECA, IFATCA and IFATSEA to Commissioner Barrot.

1)

4 Supposed to replace old ideas?

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air_portal/hlg/ doc/2007_07_03_hlg_final_report_en.pdf

Amongst others, this report contains 10 recommendations for the future development of European Air Traffic Management: Photos: European Community 2007

8

EU as Driving Force at Regional Level Strengthen the role of the European Commission and the Community method as the sole vehicle to set the regulation agenda for European aviation by eliminating overlaps between EU and other regulatory processes, ensuring independent management structures for regulation and service provision, and systematically separating safety regulatory activities from all other regulation. Appoint a senior figure as an ‘Aviation System Champion’ to drive forward the necessary actions.

Greater Responsibilities for Industry Give more responsibility to industry continuing the ‘normalisation’ of the aviation industry started with the liberalisation of the internal market. Enable the competition for activities that are best executed by industry.

Better and less Regulation Apply the principles of Better Regulation, avoiding over- or prescriptive regulation, and undertaking full impact assessments and consultation. Apply consistent definitions.

Drive improved Performance Agree and follow-up on performance tar-

THE

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR gets, maximising the use of performance incentives within the aviation system. Provide economic regulation to drive performance improvement in monopoly situations.

4 Delivering the report.

Deliver the Single European Sky Deliver the Single European Sky: Accelerate the delivery of the Single European Sky (SES) and SESAR through proactive management. Translate the SES ambitions into an implementation strategy.

ing the airport capacity issue while demanding that airports themselves take greater responsibility for securing the local ‘licence to grow. Integrate airports more systematically into the total system approach(2.

2)

Where ACI (Airports Council Int.) constantly indicates that growth capacity at the major airports is maximised at 60% IFATCA has a legitimate question which airports have to facilitate the remaining 140% growth for 2020. The ATM consequences for regional, new and ex-military airports have to be taken into account in time.

Deliver Safety

Introduce new economic regulation for ATM services to ensure that ANSPs are governed to achieve converging objectives in Europe and to regulate the monopoly characteristics of ANSP service provision.

Address the hurdles to implementing FABs and task the Aviation System Champion to facilitate their progress. Increase the political support for SES, including the military stakeholders in European ATM.

Empower EUROCONTROL Empower Eurocontrol to play a key role in delivering the Single European Sky and SESAR objectives within the strategic and regulatory framework set by the EU. Focus its activities on excellent pan European functions and ATM network design. Transfer the safety regulatory activities to EASA. Facilitate the unbundling of activities through the creation of undertakings where appropriate to allow the Eurocontrol organisation to evolve in line with industry developments while ensuring that the interests of employees are considered.

Require states to monitor and report safety performance consistently and, in particular, facilitate the uniform application of ‘just culture’ principles. Empower EASA as the single EU instrument for aviation safety regulation including airports and ATM, and ensure that EASA is funded and resourced accordingly. Prepare timely certification processes. Ensure that states’ safety oversight is harmonised and that cooperation between national authorities is stimulated to achieve overall higher levels of performance.

Deliver Environmental Benefits Ask the European Commission to develop an integrated environment strategy to 2020, incorporating ambitions from the transport and environment perspectives, enabling Europe to play a leading role in balancing economic, environmental and social impacts ensuring appropriate cross regional linkages.

Commit Member States to Deliver Require more systematic execution from EU member states to implement existing commitments, in particular the defragmentation targeted by the Single European Sky initiative.

States should address inconsistent guidelines for ANSPs, performance shortfalls in oversight, bottlenecks in airport capacity and safety management, and the new challenges of mitigating and adapting to climate change.

Address Airport Capacity

Roadmap of Actions

Address the forthcoming airport capacity crunch by asking the European Commission to raise the profile of this emerging bottleneck in the European aviation system and point the way forward in terms of reconciling growth and environment goals. Request member states to provide plans for address-

There are a number of explicit actions arising from the High Level Group’s recommendations. These actions are summarised in a recommended Roadmap. The actions are classified into groups of strategic direction, operational improvements and structural changes.

In conclusion the work of the HLG has provid-

ed in a pragmatic way an overview over all the current ideas which are showing there is a need to move ahead with aviation in Europe and in particular with ATM. This momentum will now have to be translated into a clear set of actions to fulfil the aviation community aim to create an efficient European aviation system. ^ loeu@ifatca.org and pcx@iftaca.org *) The High Level Group was composed of representatives from the aviation community who produced a report to VP Barrot outlining proposals for future of ATM regulation.

• Ms Jacqueline Tammenoms Bakker (Director General Civil Aviation and Freight Transport, NL) • Mr Thilo Schmidt (Chairman of Management Board European Aviation Safety Agency – EASA and Director General Civil Aviation, D) • Mr David McMillan (Director General Civil Aviation, UK) • Mr Raymond Cron (Director General Federal Office of Civil Aviation CH) • Mr Michel Wachenheim (President of European Civil Aviation Conference – ECAC) • Mr Victor Aguado (Director General Eurocontrol) • Mr Fritz Feitl (Chairman Industry Consultation Body) • Mr Alexander Ter Kuile (Secretary General Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation – CANSO) • Mr Jeff Poole (Director International Air Transport Association – IATA) • Mr Olivier Jankovec (Director General Airports Council International Europe – ACI - Europe) DG TREN Air Transport Directorate provided the secretariat under the leadership of Mr Luc Tytgat.

The report is fairly conservative in the sense that nothing really new has been written.

THE

CONTROLLER

9

4 SES – SESAR

SES: Competition or Cooperation?

Paul Neering, Liaison Officer to the European Union ^ by for IFATCA and Marc Baumgartner, President IFATCA Photo: DP

Blaming ATC for everything According to the recent airline campaign of IATA, air traffic control is responsible for the environment pollution their aircraft cause: ‘Air Traffic Control says it all… In Europe, there are 34 different air traffic control authorities.

In the USA – a similar land area - there is just one. If we had a ‘single European sky’, travel would be more efficient and you would spend less time in the air. This alone would cut CO2 emissions in Europe by 12 million tonnes.(1 1)

4

Marc Baumgartner wondering about SES.

The objective of SES shifted from reducing the delays to becoming more a vehicle for the better and cheaper mobility of European citizens.

4

Milan Linate airport waiting for SES.

Photo: enav

http://iata.org/whatwedo/environment/ campaign/traffic.htm

Some of you might recall that in the late 90s the airlines blamed ATC for the inefficiencies.

Then it was about delays, now it is about the environment. So in spite of the European Commission’s Single European Sky, nothing appears to have changed, or has it?

Single European Sky (SES) There has been a flurry of Single European Sky (SES) activity of late.

Eurocontrol‘s Performance Review Commission (PRC) report highlighted that it is not possible to do an impact assessment on the SES as implementation is not yet mature.

Commissioner Barrot created a High Level Group (HLG) of regulators and industry to advise him on a future aviation regulatory framework. The report has been completed and will form the basis of a Commission Communication on the subject in September. The professional staff although regrettably not part of the group, were nonetheless invited to a hearing by the Chairwoman and IFATCA’s opinion was noted. Furthermore IFATCA was represented in the Industry Consultation Body (ICB) and

contributed to the comments on the progress within the HLG given by the Institutional subgroup of the ICB.

What has IFATCA done?

IFATCA has published ‘SESAR Mission Possible?’ and we have contributed to the D3 work of the SESAR definition phase. The SESAR Operational Concept is now ready to be delivered to the purchasers (European Commission and Eurocontrol) and the SESAR Joint Undertaking Administrative Board had it‘s first official meetings. The first official meetings between the CEO‘s of the Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSP) involved in the FAB Europe Central (FABEC) and staff representatives has also taken place.

Is the ATM community becoming single minded and concentrated on the aim the airlines would like to see – a European FAA? The IATA information campaign on pollution is certainly delivering this message.

Some figures to establish the current situation in Europe. From 2003-2008 the average unit rate of the route charges has dropped by 11.1% and will decrease an additional 3.1% by 2012. CFMU reduces delays trifold, RVSM saves 310,000t of fuel, with extra savings by the application of FUA etc. In 1999, there was a shortfall of 1600 ATCOs – in 2007 this figure has risen to approximately 1800.

Better and cheaper Travel The European Commission will now start to develop a new regulatory framework (SES II) to give a new impetus to the SES. This regulatory framework will hopefully clarify the objective of the SES, which shifted from reducing the delays to becoming more a vehicle for the better and cheaper mobility of European

THE

10

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR citizens (according to the Lisbon Agenda).

The High Level Group has given clear recommendations on the directions of the SES. Together with the justified push by the airlines for seamless ATM (meeting the same agreed and shared performance targets), will the pressure on the States be sufficient to make it happen? As David Learmount mentioned in 2005 ‘While it will be ATM professionals who will advise on how best to structure Europe’s airspace, it will be state governments, with their legal advisers, who will have to approve it. This will require pragmatism, compromise and wisdom. If those are lacking, the SES will operate below its potential efficiency levels as its structural design will be based on considerations other than safety and optimal ATM’(2.

This statement is even more valid today.

2)

4

Which direction to go?

Photo: airservices Australia

david learmount, Flight international 4.7.2005

States Reaction The European States need to position themselves clearly on the way ahead. e.g. the German government and the members of the High Level Group think that privatisation and liberalisation (or unbundling) of the safety chain and the provision of ATM (including the infrastructure) is the way forward – whereas the ANSPs tend to try to establish a cooperative approach through the FAB initiatives. These problems will not be solved without a greater participation in the ANSP decision-making process (e.g. by attending Eurocontrol meetings). Neither can the push by a new profile of ATM management (airlines) bring about a new service, independent of governments, as it still has to deal with bankruptcies, short term benefits issues, shareholder values etc.

It is the governments who have to decide on the way forward. The European Commission, within its competences, has to provide a strong regulatory framework – for the travelling public, the airlines and the workforce throughout the safety chain. The Commission is there to prevent a lowering of the services and performance levels.

IFATCA Involvment The representatives of the professional staff in Europe (ie. controllers, technicians and pilots) have been associated with the work – with some success. This will need to continue in an unseen way. One of the prime tasks of ATM staff organisations is to guarantee that they not only are consulted or listened to – but that they are included. This could be through the social dialogue although this has proven to be too rigid and undemocratic with regard to the representation. Other fora are perhaps more influential. As representative organisations all the staff organisations need to become trusted partners in the change process. IFATCA is certainly ready to be part of the solution and not a hinderer. Having said this, this re-

quires as well a maturity in dialogue by the other actors and stakeholders. Change will only be successful if lived according to the vision of ICAO‘s ATM Concept. That means all stakeholders agree on a common and shared vision, which will be translated in commonly agreed and shared performance plans.

Future The future looks interesting and hopefully will deliver the expectations of the users and the European citizens by 2015. The European Commission still needs to convince the member states that it can be trusted with some sovereign aviation tasks. This means that the Member States would have to fund, regulate and abide by certain compromises (e.g. sufficient funding and resourcing of EASA). Otherwise we will end up in a empty discussion on what should and could be done, while on the ground the ATCOs will still continue to control 5th generation automation aircraft with a 1st generation automated ATM system. Hopefully the investment into the SESAR Joint undertaking will help us shape our future to reach the potential capacity and do away with cumbersome working techniques and tools.

Both the States and the European Commission should decide whether the future approach should be competition or cooperation. The stakeholders need a common understanding of what has to be achieved, otherwise the current confusion (i.e. bottom-up cooperation vs topdown competition, or top-down cooperation vs bottom-up competition) will continue and the expected performance will not be achieved.

Cooperation Naturally, IFATCA favours a cooperative solution which, for the last twenty years, (contrary to what some stakeholders believe), has provided a very well functioning system. It has provided some 29‘000 air traffic control-

led flights a day in Europe (of the global daily total of 77‘000) with delays not higher than 18% of all flights during the peak summer months (3. This performance has been carried out by the air traffic controllers which have not really changed in numbers since the late 90s. The future direction of the SES is not yet clear but whatever the outcome, we should not forget that the shortage of staff for the transition period (from now to the full deployment of SESAR by 2016) has not yet been addressed.

Staff shortage issues are even dismissed and denied by some stakeholders. IFATCA is worried that both the shortage of qualified ATCOs and the airport capacity problems will be the main stumbling blocks for a smooth and required performance improvement of the overall European system, be it single or with 34 ANSPs. ^ 3)

CFMU monthly statistics

loeu@ifatca.org and pcx@iftaca.org

The European Commission still needs to convince the member states that it can be trusted with some sovereign aviation tasks.

THE

CONTROLLER

11

4 SES – SESAR

What is SESAR? ^

by the SESAR Project Directorate

SESAR is the modernisation programme of the European Air Traffic Management (ATM) system. From the very beginning, SESAR has been set up as an enabler for change: designed to be the operational part to the legislative packages of the Single European Sky, it combines all aspects (operational, technological, economic and regulatory) that are needed to allow a revamped European ATM structure to provide its full support to the future challenges that will be faced by air transport. The realisation of the first phase - the SESAR Definition Phase – has been entrusted to the SESAR Consortium, gathering a significant number of major players from the air transport industry.

What will SESAR deliver?

Achievements

Multiple hopes and expectations are projected by air transport stakeholders on this study. What will it really deliver? This project is a feasibility study aiming at the creation of one commonly agreed “ATM Master Plan for 2020”. As such, the primary objective is not to provide detailed and frozen figures nor specifications but rather to propose 2020 performance targets that experts commonly consider as achievable and which should be consolidated throughout the whole study and even beyond. Moreover, this study is providing a robust basis for the launch of the subsequent SESAR Development Phase under the Joint Undertaking (JU) established by the European Commission and EUROCONTROL.

The Definition Phase is based on a 6-step approach. The first two Milestones were necessary to establish a common baseline of today’s situation and to agree upon the performance targets for 2020: • Milestone Deliverable D1: analysis of the way air transport is conducted today, identification of major blocking points and expectations for the future. D1 establishes a common baseline allowing participants to jointly agree on the best way to solve the identified issues.

• Milestone Deliverable D2: focusing on the required performances of the future system by 2020. The defined Performance Framework -eleven Key Performance Areas, covering performance areas for the whole air transport value chain- was designed to meet the 2020 objectives: - to cope with the projected almost double capacity increase by 2020, while including the provisions in the design for a 3-fold capacity increase - Improve the safety performance by a factor of 3 for 2020 and also establishing processes and procedures allowing for further improvements by a factor 10 - Provide ATM services to the airspace users at a cost which is at least 50% less - and reduce the effects flights have on the environment

Buy-In: A Key Target This underlines the second major objective of the SESAR Definition Phase Study: reaching consensus between all air transport stakeholders on the best way to concretely meet these targets. This is no doubt an ambitious approach, although achievable as demonstrated with the successful release of the first two Milestone Deliverable Reports.

Photo: SESAR

The 2020 Conops

Multiple hopes and expectations are projected by air transport stakeholders on this study.

The SESAR Consortium concentrated the expectations of the major European players within ANSPs, airspace users, airports, supply industry and from associated partners(1, such as IFATCA(2, which requirements are crucial for a sustainable and realistic ATM Master Plan for 2020. In addition, the SESAR Consortium is determined to ensure that the Master Plan is not just a plan agreed by the SESAR Consortium, but will be used as the European contribution to govern the future ATM developments in Europe within a global framework of interoperability.

With the third Milestone (public release expected for autumn 2007), the Definition Phase reaches a critical step towards the final results: this Milestone’s outcome will be the ATM Target Concept, including the Concept of Operations (ConOps) which is important for IFATCA and more largely for the controllers’ community.

Christian Dumas, Project Director has the challenging responsibility of the overall Management Process. “When we started working on the Concept of Operations, we had 2 clear objectives: 1. to agree between all of us on the way to best meet the performance targets that we had set, and 2. to have a reality check on a credible implementation by 2020” he said.

It is really a challenge to establish the right balance between these two objectives, actually balance between ambition and realism: on the one hand lack of ambition would not allow to properly support the sustainable growth of a safe air transport, on the other

1)

12

safety regulators (CAA UK), military organizations (EURAMID), research centres, staff associations including pilots (ECA), controllers (IFATCA, ATCEUC, ETF) and engineers (IFATSEA) 2) IFATCA: International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers

THE

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR hand unrealistic ambition would result in the Master Plan ending in some long-term research agenda with no concrete implementation plan. But the result is there: the SESAR Consortium’s proposal for the ConOps relies on a detailed assessment by the main European ATM experts of the on-going and past innovative research activities. The most promising elements have been assembled in a coherent ConOps to adequately address the performance targets. Whether it fully or partially matches all of them remains to be assessed in a more quantified way, but “we are definitely on the right track, and we know what we have to work on” stated Mr Dumas.

The JU will undertake extensive simulation and validation activities and determine the actual performance of the ConOps against the various targets.

Optimisation through Trade-Off The results of this validation activity will be used for trade-off analysis: it will define which elements of the ConOps may need adjustments and identify significant shortfalls while maintaining an optimised balance between all performance requirements (for example between efficiency and flexibility). After that, the ConOps will go through the ultimate refinements towards development and implementation, -“but never final: we’re not a static air transport world!” adds Christian Dumas.

Controllers Involvement in the Conops is Key The professional organizations of controllers, in particular IFATCA, have brought their contribution to the SESAR activities: while the ConOps was clearly a topic on which all stakeholders wanted to add their knowledge and opinion (turning into a hardly manageable process…), the professional organizations of controllers commented on the Tasks which defined the ConOps. More importantly, their direct inputs were discussed and in most cases directly integrated in the D3 Milestone Deliverable. Another major contribution from the professional associations of controllers focused on the definition of the role of the human in the future ATM Target Concept elaborated in D3 and which will be further defined in D4. This topic will naturally also need further attention beyond the SESAR Definition Phase.

The Conops in brief…

The ATM Target Concept is built on a serviceoriented performance partnership between all stakeholders including e.g. Airspace Us-

ers (Airlines, …), Air Navigation Service Providers and Airport Operators.

A main principle of the ConOps is the business (mission) trajectory management representing an Airspace Users’ intention with respect to a given flight which should be executed as close as possible to the intention of this Airspace User.

ATM services necessary to execute this trajectory will ensure that it is carried out safely and cost efficiently within the infrastructural and environmental constraints.

These objectives are achieved through wide information sharing: the partners openly provide and share all information relevant to ATM. Trajectories are the common principal language.

Information sharing enables Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) processes to be applied to strategic, tactical and just-in-time planning & execution of all Airspace Users’ trajectories. Overall balance of the different needs is ensured by a central network management function.

From these over-arching principles, the following key features define the Concept of Operations: • Trajectory based operations imply a new approach to airspace design and management to avoid, whenever possible, airspace becoming a constraint on the trajectories. New separation modes, supported by controller and airborne tools, will use trajectory control and airborne separation systems to minimize potential conflicts and controllers’ interventions.

• Collaborative planning is continuously reflected in the Network Operations Plan • Integrated Airport operations are contributing to capacity gains • System Wide Information Management – integrating all ATM business related data • Humans will be central in the future European ATM system as managers and decisionmakers. An advanced level of automation support for the humans will be required to accommodate the expected traffic increase.

Photo: SESAR

(www.sesar-consortium.aero). As for the previous Milestone Deliverables, the aeronautical community is encouraged to provide its comments and feedback to the SESAR Consortium.

The next Deliverable-D4 will be based on the agreed ATM Target Concept for 2020 and it will define the respective implementation packages for 2008-2020 (timing and transition from today’s ATM system). The SESAR Joint Undertaking, in partnership with ATM industry will coordinate the necessary R&D activities between 2008 and 2013 to implement the ATM Master Plan. ^ For more information, please visit www.sesar-consortium.aero or contact us under: info@sesar-consortium.aero Photo: eurocontrol

SESAR – Next Steps The ATM Target Concept will be published and presented to the community in autumn 2007

The professional organizations of controllers […] direct inputs were discussed and in most cases directly integrated.

THE

CONTROLLER

13

4 SES – SESAR

TWR simulator

Phot o: EP N

4

The Nordic ATS Academy Entry Point North The first trans-national ATM academy

^

by Helena Sjostrom

Training at Entry Point North The three Scandinavian countries; Sweden, Norway and Denmark are since March of 2005 joined together in the co-owned training centre Entry Point North, EPN. The academy is owned to equal thirds

by LFV Sweden, Avinor Norway and Naviair Denmark.

After extensive planning and preparations, Entry Point North officially opened in March 2006 and is located at Sturup Airport in southern Sweden at the facility formerly known as SATSA, Swedish ATS Academy. Only ca 45 kilometres across the Öresund, the water between southern Sweden and Denmark, is Copenhagen Airport where part of the simulator training takes place.

The academy so far only accepts students from the three owner countries but the plan is to offer ATM training to other countries and providers as well. Due to the shortage of controllers in Sweden and Norway, EPN will over the next years train ca 120 ab initio students annually instead of the originally planned 30. The incentive for Sweden, Norway and Denmark to join in this co-operation is to become a larger player on the ATC training market. By themselves, the three countries would be too small to play any significant international role but together they hope to become a strong competitor. In the future EPN might be an even larger venture.

Iceland, Finland and the Baltic states are very interesting potential partners for EPN.

Mixed Nationalities – Mixed Languages Around 40 persons from the three countries work at EPN. Ca 28 of these have contracts running up to a few years and the rest are EPN employees. The management is also of mixed Scandinavian nationalities: Anne Kathrine Jensen, Managing Director; Per Ekelöf, Director Training; Juhani Sismo, Director Administration and Johan Steinkjer, Deputy Director Training.

Before Entry Point North opened, there was of course some concern about the anticipat-

ed difficulties with mixing the languages and to a certain extent, the cultural differences of the three countries. One might think, “Scandinavia is Scandinavia. How much difference can there be?” The answer is: A lot, actually!

- The mix of nationalities of students, instructors and the rest of the staff has been almost without any exception very positive, says Pia Vigert, Training Coordinator Sweden at Entry Point North.

- From the beginning, we planned to have the training in a mixed “Scandinavian” language.

However, this did not work out very well. The students felt stressed and had difficulties to understand, especially between Danish and Swedish. So the “Basic” part of the training is now in English. The “Rating” part is still in “Scandinavian”, largely because not very much of it takes place in a classroom environment but in simulators. Eventually though, we may have all training in English. We also feel that this is a good way for the students to get used to working more in English, not only on the frequency, which seems to be the way we are all headed in the future.

Pia, originally a tower-controller at SAAB/ Linköping Airport, for many years worked at SATSA, The Swedish ATS Academy, before Entry Point North was founded. What is the dif-

THE

14

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR ference between training exclusively Swedish students in a solely Swedish atmosphere and working at EPN? - Well, Pia says, strange as it may seem, not very much! And where there are differences, I can see only improvements. For example: In the days of SATSA, it could sometimes be a bit difficult to unite the experience and knowledge of the short-term instructors who came to the academy. The instructors might say: “at my centre we do it this way” or “in my tower we do it that way”. Now when we have a larger melting pot of experience, it seems that the instructors are not so locked in their own way of working but can see the broader picture so to speak.

Traditionally, Sweden has had a very high success rate in ATC training, often between 80 and 90 percent. Since only one ab initio course so far has completed its training at EPN from start to finish, it is a bit difficult to compare. In that one course, there were 18 students and 1 had to stop training. The remaining students have now moved on to development training and OJTI in their respective countries.

- Of course I keep an extra close eye on the Swedish students of that first group and will continue to do so throughout their training at the various ATC facilities in Sweden, says Pia Vigert.

The First Students One of the students in the first all-EPN course is Christopher Montecinos. Christopher applied to the Swedish ATS academy a couple of years ago and was then “put on hold” when the Swedish ANSP decided to stop all ab initio training after declining traffic figures in the aftermath of 9.11 2001. This pause in training is one of the reasons for the present

shortage of controllers. When LFV then decided to resume training again, Christopher was contacted by LFV and asked if he was still interested in becoming a controller. Not knowing at the time that he would be one of the first students at EPN, he accepted.

- Although I didn’t know until shortly before I started, that I would be training at the new school Entry Point North, I wasn’t very worried about that, says Christopher.

- It was more the training itself I was thinking about. Having classmates from other countries was only positive and the initial language trouble soon turned into something fun. Also, all the written material is in English.

On the question of what was the most positive experience during the training, Christopher replies: - Actually everything was really good. The instructors, the training plan and compared to studying at a “normal university” the teachers are very good and most of all there are more teachers and instructors in relation to the number of students.

- The only thing I was not so happy about was that during the time at EPN we only had 7 days of on the job practise.

Preparing for SES Entry Point North is not the only area for Scandinavian ATC cooperation. Since several years, LFV Air Navigation Services and Naviair are investigating and preparing for the possibility of a close formal cooperation in provision of ATC in accordance with the Single European Sky legislation. The project, which started in 2001, originally included also Norway and Finland. After numerous delays and changes to the initial project, the Definition Phase Final Report of the NUAC Programme

The NUAC programme is considered the frontrunner of all the different FAB- and merger projects in Europe was presented in February 2007.

In this report, the NUAC team presents different possible scenarios as a platform for decision-making. In June 2007, the NUAC team released a new, supplementary report. This extends the original analytical foundation by providing an additional scenario and refining the analysis. The NUAC steering committee is expected to decide on the future development of the NUAC programme during 2007.

The three scenarios of the supplementary report are: • A re-investigated Merger Scenario • An Alliance Scenario • An Operational Alliance Scenario The NUAC programme is considered the frontrunner of all the different FAB and merger projects in Europe. All three scenarios are assumed to have the same time frame; implementation in 2008 to 2011 and full operation from 2011 and onwards. ^ helena.sjostrom@lfv.se

The incentive for Sweden, Norway and Denmark to join in this co-operation is to become a larger player on the ATC training market.

4 THE

CONTROLLER

Ops room Simulator (SMART) Photo: Erik Cedeberg

15

4 SES – SESAR

“Maastricht Radar” European integration versus national interests Chances and challenges

^ by Patrik Peters, European Editor The 29th February 1972 marked a new era in European air traffic control. The EUROCONTROL Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre, MUAC, controlled its first flight, LTU121, an S210 Caravelle, flying from Lanzarote/ Canary Islands back to Düsseldorf/Germany. For the first time, traffic overflying one country was controlled from an ATC facility in another country.

The idea of the 1960 founded EUROCONTROL Agency was to install central ATC facilities to accommodate the rapidly growing aviation industry and to serve the flying public. Shannon/Ireland, Karlsruhe/Germany and Maastricht/The Netherlands were the strategic locations chosen to build those air traffic control centers at the end of the 1960’s. Following political battles and confronted with national interests and military sovereignty aspects, only the Maastricht UAC survived as ATC facility of the Agency, the others were “re-nationalized”.

Area of Responsibility Today MUAC is responsible for the provision of air traffic control service in the upper airspace (division FL245) of Belgium, The

260 air traffic controllers from more than 28 different nations work here.

Netherlands, Luxembourg and north-west Germany.

For improved civil - military cooperation, a Deutsche Flugsicherung (DFS) unit, controlling military traffic over north-west Germany, is co-located at MUAC.

Multi-National Teams About 260 air traffic controllers from more than 28 different nations work here. The geographical limits of the 3 main sector groups coincide with the Upper Information Regions of the countries Belgium/Luxembourg (Brussels sectors), The Netherlands (DECO sectors, DELTA & COASTAL) and Germany (Hannover sectors). There are six teams in each sector group.

Every team consists of a duty-supervisor, deputy supervisor, principal ATC officer (PATCO), training officer and ca. ten controllers. Additionally one or two trainees are performing their on-the-job training in every team. Their training officer closely liaises between them, the training section and the team, schedules training sessions and documents the training progress, whereas the PATCO assists the two supervisors in carrying out their duties. Deputy and duty supervisor are coordinating the daily work, like sector configuration, traffic load or break planning with the team, flow managers and management. The duty supervisor is in addition responsible for the overall functioning of the OPS-room. He/She is amongst others the point of contact for any technical malfunction or other occurrence. Control staff work in a 4/2 roster, i.e. 4 days of shift work are followed by 2 days off. Shifts vary in start and end times and last approximately 8 hours. The current shift system is presently being reviewed to accommodate increasing traffic figures and to alleviate controller fatigue.

Photo: Eurocontrol

handled from the sectors division flight level to their cruising level and vice versa, representing the larger amount of the traffic handled. The relatively small size of sectors, mainly in the Brussels and Hannover sector groups, lead to a short transition time, which is rather typical for a busy central European ATC facility. The proximity of military training airspace, usually active during daytime and the amount of traffic as such, add up on the complexity of the traffic handling. Over the past few years MUAC is accounting for a traffic increase of ca. 5% per annum, which brings it close to the 1.5 million movements mark in 2007.

MUAC and SES When the legislative package of the Single European Sky initiative was adopted in 2004, it became obvious that MUAC, due to its strategic position, efficiency and productivity, would play a major role in the creation of a Functional Airspace Block (FAB). The Maastricht states Belgium, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Germany decided to cooperate Photo: PP

Complexity With a large number of major European airports in the area of responsibility or close to it, the work at MUAC differs from other area control centers and can best be compared with a large approach unit due to the high number of vertical movements. Departing and arriving traffic from numerous airports in the region are

THE

16

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR with France and Switzerland. In July 2006, the FAB Europe Central (FABEC) feasibility study was commissioned, recognizing the need for compliance with SES objectives.

As the feasibility study is ongoing – final results are expected for the summer of 2008 – all involved states’ civil aviation and military authorities in cooperation with the respective service providers are defining areas of change and adaptation as well as looking for common ground. Work is divided into seven working groups ranging from operational, technical, financial and human resources groups via regulatory and civil-military to the safety group (UK joined in 2007 for the operational, technical and civ.-mil. groups).

Challenges The vision of the FABEC partners is to have one continuum of airspace irrespective of national borders with an airspace structure according to traffic flows. One operational concept with ideally only two different ATM systems, which would have to be fully compatible to each other as well as one charging scheme with a single unit rate, one regulatory body and one safety management system shall guarantee that FABEC appears as one face to the customer.

Easier said than done – history showed that EUROCONTROL, for political reasons, failed three decades ago with a similar concept. One has to acknowledge though that times have changed since then and pressure on states and service providers has increased. SESAR and the airline industry published expectations in performance, requiring 100% more capacity, 50% reduction of cost per flight and (only!)

10% reduction of environmental impact by aircraft operation until 2020, just to name a few.

An initial inventory of the technical systems currently in use by the different ATC facilities shows the difficulty of this undertaking.

Photo: PP

A three-phase plan commencing with “optimization” of existing systems, followed by “rationalization”, i.e. joint planning and development of future systems, could possibly lead to “consolidation” to reduce the number of operational units or maintenance organizations in the FABEC area. One example for the challenges to be tackled is the last phase called “consolidation”, which raises the question of redundancy. Offering sufficient ATS capacity in case of a major outage of one main FABEC ACC can become more expensive than the possible gains of consolidated systems; – and this does not only apply to the technical aspect.

What about Maastricht?

MUAC has demonstrated over several decades that a big cross border centre can offer a high level of capacity in an efficient and cost-effective way. The advantages of a single modern ATM system, operated by controllers having followed the same training scheme with harmonized standards are documented in the reports of the EUROCONTROL Performance Review Commission.

The challenge to transit from a conservatively planned sectorization to a more dynamic layout that takes into account daily as well as seasonally fluctuating traffic demands has been accepted. The Maastricht ATC Tools and Systems (MANTAS) program was launched to lay the groundwork for a new operational concept. Other hurdles are differing legislations, rules and regulations for each of the served countries. Currently MUAC is for example working with six different AIPs, where one would be sufficient.

MUAC controllers are motivated to go through this process of change and are prepared to actively influence their future. The past has shown that despite hesitation to change, they

always remained faithful, which is probably thanks to this unique melting pot of different nations.

Professional Involvement The EUROCONTROL Guild (EGATS) and the Trade Union EUROCONTROL Maastricht (TUEM) are active partners of the MOSAIC initiative, which unites trade unions and professional associations in central Europe aiming for one service provider as an alternative to competition and privatization.

They promote safety and security, recognizing the need to rationalize the current structure and improve cost- effectiveness.

The IFATCA papers “Future ATM” and “SESAR – mission possible?” offer a helping hand in finding solutions respecting the requirements of the industry, states and service providers not forgetting those of the employees, the air traffic controllers, who every day make sure that the sky is safe!

In the end though, it’s all politics. ^ evpeur@ifatca.org

Hurdles are differing legislations, rules and regulations for each of the served countries.

THE

CONTROLLER

17

4 SES – SESAR

The MOSAIC Initiative ^

by Frederic Deleau, MOSAIC Focal Point During the last year, a new name became part of many side discussions related to Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs) in the core area of continental Europe: MOSAIC. Here is the story and the latest developments of a project that refused to be an acronym because of real human centred ambition.

Starting Point:

Develop and promote a credible alternative to the privatisation of the Air Traffic Services.

This project, in the beginning regarded by some as a utopia in the context of the Single European Sky and the privatisation of the German Air Navigation Provider, took everyone by surprise.

When all the aspects behind the initial idea were explained it became apparent that the energy needed to defragment the network in some of the most complex airspace, had materialised. It was a clear spark initiated by some social partners already in 2005.

Photos: MOSAIC

The project basics were then promoted extensively across Europe by the core member’s team lead by Nicolas Hinchliffe and Frederic Deleau, both air traffic controllers.

Their belief and motivation to act in the interest of all involved, including the users, in order to develop a safe, sustainable, social, efficient and stable system has brought together 17 major Unions and Professional Associations of ATCOs and ATSEPs. The MOSAIC group representing the major Unions and Professional Associations from seven countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Switzerland, The Netherlands) and the EUROCONTROL Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre was joined at the end of June by the Austrian Air Traffic Controllers Association. AATCA has officially joined them as privileged observer in order to fully participate in the future developments of the project.

MOSAIC has grown to its intended critical mass to deliver the best possible international platform ever envisaged in ATM. For the first time ever, these organisations defend together common principles as the best option for their members, the States, the users and the travelling public.

Last but not least, the project is also highly supported by the Air Traffic Controllers European Union Coordination (ATCEUC) and IFATCA has given its moral support.

THE

18

CONTROLLER

4 SES – SESAR

MOSAIC Vision: In an industry confronted on a daily basis with many challenges and expecting major changes in the short to medium term, the MOSAIC group has demonstrated that ATCOs, Engineers and all players involved in the safety chain could develop and promote a credible alternative to the privatisation of the Air Traffic Services and all related negative consequences (e.g. blind consolidation or further fragmentation of the network due to private interests). These organisations could propose pro-active and viable solutions in the context of a future trans-national model approach. Cross-border developments raise several issues that clearly call for new ways of dealing with social aspects, operational optimisation, technical integration, liability and sovereignty problems for instance. The key words are ambition and international vision.

More Ambitions for functional Evolutions: Over the last years, despite a considerable and overall improvement of the European Air Traffic Management system and tangible progresses in the areas of safety, capacity, efficiency and the environment, undue financial considerations have become central. This lack of understanding of structural problems may lead to real capacity shortage in the coming years. One can not afford “Financial Airspace Blocks” if we want to give a chance to achieve as a matter of priority a performing continuum for ATM. Solid basic institutional rules need to be established between States, acting as involved and responsible stakeholders. Therefore the logical evolution proposed by MOSAIC is a step-by-step approach starting with enhanced collaboration and leading to the integration into one international public entity sharing common standards and conditions of employment based on an existing and suc-

cessful model. With clear financial constraints continuously in mind, overall performance is achievable faster, including staff requirements, for the benefits of all.

The Way ahead: Perceived at the start as a dubious role for Unions and Professional Associations to make such proposals, it has recently been recognised as a truly interesting initiative.

Following high level discussions between MOSAIC representatives and the European Commission, the project basics were accepted and will be considered in an official study on FAB developments. This first important step constitutes the recognition of the value of the alternative in today’s complex environment and will surely gain more support at the highest European levels in the context of the Single European Sky. While the explanation campaign continues and intensifies in order to gain further professional and political support, the MOSAIC group has set specific working groups dealing with the key areas of a FAB development. First results and publication of common positions are expected during the last quarter of 2007.

What to do next?

MOSAIC is clearly a regional initiative. However some of its principles will surely be shared on a global basis by professionals defending a network approach keeping human needs at the centre of priorities Passengers and citizens have a right not only to the service but mainly the security of an efficient, continuous and independent public ATM system. States have a duty to organise these services taking into consideration the security, safety, efficiency, sustainability and the continuity of said system based on global functional aspects rather than private financial short gains.

MOSAIC step approach is encompassing most of the requirements set in the FAB Europe Central feasibility study. However, in order to achieve the full benefits of enhanced collaboration, to meet the challenges of tomorrow, to sustain and deliver the needed capacity, to apply solutions based on safety and operational requirements, to defend the access to airspace to all users, to avoid social unrest, etc, collocation of different models defending opposite goals is ill-fated. The FAB initiative has to go further. The international public model as already implemented for 30 years in certain areas has clearly demonstrated the positive results on capacity and flight efficiency. An integrated international public service system will ensure the long term stability and efficiency needed by the airline industry to develop their business while meeting the ATS staff requirements for the support, security and highest standards they need to perform their ever more demanding duties.

A serious and ambitious evolution but no revolution! ^ focalpoint@project-mosaic.eu

The FAB initiative has to go further.

THE

CONTROLLER

19

4 SES – SESAR

Letter to Commissioner Barrot: Dear Commissioner Barrot, The European and global pilots (ECA/ IFALPA), air traffic controllers (IFATCA) and air traffic safety electronics personnel (IFATSEA) welcome the report on the future of aviation regulation produced by the High Level Group established on your initiative.

Through its ten recommendations and the road map, the Group seeks a pragmatic way ahead. The proposed actions are both detailed and flexible which at times provide much scope for interpretation.

For example, we are very concerned that critical elements of change such as the unbundling of services would be considered before there is a clear priority to implement robust and ‘watertight’ regulatory structures (including those for safety oversight). These structures must first be in place and mature.

We would ask the Commission to address this shortcoming as a priority.

The Commission’s aim to increase safety levels by ten (while providing more air traffic capacity, increased efficiency at reduced cost and environmental impact) is not achievable simply by “future technology”, which you hope will be provided by SESAR. Such a step change can only be achieved by carefully integrating the experience of all people involved in the system. A more thorough understanding of the human factor implications of change management is necessary.

4

Commissioner Barrot

There is great potential in the proposed function of an Aviation System Coordinator. It is important that this role complements the Commission’s regulatory and executive role to provide strategic leadership both in the change and in the future system development.

As front end users, we have a number of proposals that we believe would be of value to your team in future policy inception: • There should be more emphasis on closing the gaps and embracing maximum consistency with the ICAO Standards and recommended practices in Europe. The commitment to build on these basic provisions is a necessity. It is equally essential that best practices in some States are elevated to European standards. By the same token, a strong commitment to align with ICAO provisions will facilitate global interoperability, a point which, in our joint global perspective, has not been dealt with in sufficient detail.

• For a document entitled ‘a framework for driving performance improvement’, there appears to be no clear performance objective or vision. The ICAO ATM Operational Concept (Doc. 9854 AN/458) requires a commonly agreed and shared concept and performance plan. The linking of performance to incentives, in spite of the disclaimer that this should not affect safety, nonetheless has the potential to negatively affect safety. Any future regulation of ATM performance should, as a minimum, respect internationally agreed standards (including safety, certification and quality and safety management systems).

• The Commission’s major challenge for ‘SES II’ is to create a solid, well thought through and commonly agreed regulatory framework which provides an international level playing field between the competing interests. We would ask the Commission to clarify whether the future system should entail a cooperative or competitive approach, as this point is not sufficiently clear in the High Level Group report.

We appreciate your ambitious initiative and welcome the opportunity to be included in the process. We therefore would like to ask you for the opportunity to meet with you to discuss in more detail possible solutions to the issues above. ^

^

20

Photo: European community 2007.

Signed by: Martin Chalk, President ECA, Marc Baumgartner, President IFATCA and Yvan Ouelette, President IFATSEA.

THE

CONTROLLER

4 European News

Reporting Incidents Saves Lives A Just Culture European Conference Photo: DP

^ by Philippe Domogala, Editor Bucharest CANSO and ETF organized this Conference in Bucharest last June. Both organisations used this event to advertise their “leadership” in promoting the so-called “social dialogue “ currently in demand in the European Union (EU) circles in order to make staff swallow those difficult-to-digest bits of the Single European Sky concept. The Conference was attended by 140 persons from various ATM groups, airlines, and ANSPs, but unfortunately there was nobody from the justice sector. No judges, no prosecutors, and no lawyers to hear the benefits of Just Culture.

Educating the Media Educating the media and the judiciary on the benefits of learning from incidents is the key issue recognized by all. Bill Voss, President and CEO of the Flight safety Foundation (FSF) made some very good points in this respect. He said we should argue for fair treatment of aviation professionals who report incidents (their errors) and in doing so increase the chances that lives can be saved. We should focus and argue with the media about “ lives saved” instead of preaching for “immunity” for staff.

“Reporting incidents saves lives, and here are the figures to prove it“ should be preferred to the current “incident reporting is part of the excellent safety management system” which we currently have in place.

Some advocated the creation of a special body for this education. Job Bruggen of ATC Netherlands said “There is a need for a ‘Just Culture Foundation’ in order to educate the press, inform the public, to stimulate research, and allow networking.”

Depenalising Incidents IFATCA, through it’s President Marc Baumgartner, said it was time to act and stop talking because today controllers are sent to jail or dismissed after an accident or an incident [even for an airprox] often before it is fully investigated. Resolving that issue was urgent, and implementing a just culture is a way of achieving this.

A key question in prosecuting controllers is the question of “who” gets to draw the line between what is an acceptable behavior -

what is an honest mistake, and what is not (and should be prosecuted). The judiciary and professionals have very diverging views on this. What are “normal operations“ is also debatable, as some acts we do “normally” as controllers will not be considered “normal” by outsiders and/or judges looking from outside the industry.

R. Van dam, from Eurocontrol legal services explained the mechanism of the famous ICAO Annex 13 Appendix E (Legal Guidance) which, contrary to popular belief, is not offering any protection from prosecution.

He said we cannot avoid criminalisation of controllers in cases of accidents. He said the current Just Culture vicious circle of “Less reporting = more accidents = more legal proceedings = less reporting“ is seen by many as blackmail. He said we should stop talking about legal impediments and instead try to harmonise the legal framework among EU member States.

European Union (EU) R.Salvarani, head of Safety in DG Tran said the EU wanted results on Aviation Safety. At the moment they are concentrating on airlines (the famous EU Black List) but “ ATM is next“ he said. “We have just recruited 20 staff to analyse ATM incidents, and are waiting for the data to come in“. He also used an interesting phrase - “In a competitive environment, there is commercial pressure to “deliver” and not to appear “unsafe” to the outside. So they minimise their incidents, and this works against the purpose of a good safety culture.“ Marc Baumgartner confirmed that “Generally ATC commercialisation and privatisation are done for financial reasons, and this does not go very well with safety.“

They include the importance of trust between controllers, management, industry and regulators in order to implement a workable Just Culture. We need to raise the public awareness of the safety benefits of Just Culture.

Finally the European social partners should seek the support of the European Commission, The European Parliament, and the Council of Ministers to achieve a robust framework of Just Culture everywhere in the EU. ^ ed@ifatca.org

“More legal proceedings equals less reporting is seen by many as blackmail”.

(R.Van Dam, Eurocontrol)

4

Old Bucharest airport Control Tower Photo: DP

Conference Conclusions: The conclusions of this Conference will be made widely known.

THE

CONTROLLER

21

4 European News

Paris le Bourget – 2007 4

Boeing and Airbus side by side Photo: DP

^ by Philippe Domogala, Editor The Paris Air Show this year was different from previous years – there were less aircraft on display and fewer visitors. But the quality of the visitors compensated for the diminished numbers. France is Airbus territory, and we got the full show. There were two A380s on display - one in the ground that one could visit by invitation, and a second doing air displays. That was for the eyes!

Photo: DP

4

The Airlab from Thales.

Photo: Thales

For the wallet, Airbus announced during the show 728 new aircraft orders and commitments (425 firm orders and 303 options) worth nearly a $US100 billion. This was a completely unheard of situation, and the champagne was flowing accompanied by smiles on all faces there.

On the Boeing side the orders announced during the show were also significant (130 aircraft) and they had their latest B777 ER on display, but their profile was lower. Everybody awaits the B787, and promises were made that the aircraft (due to make its first test flight around the time you read this article) will be present in 2009 for next year’s Le Bourget air show.

Another large European aircraft should also be present next time - the A400 M, the military transport replacement for the Hercules and Transall.

Interesting to note was the growing number of Unmanned Aircraft (UAVs). Many believe these are the future, and some even predict that this will be the end of our jobs as we know it because fully automatic trajectories cannot be controlled by humans as we do today. One manufacturer predicted that the first test with civilian cargo (jokingly mentioned as Ebay airlines!) could take place within 3 years. We’ll see.

The first helicopter flew in 1907, so this year showed the 100th anniversary of that revolutionary flying machine. To mark this, a flying demonstration by the “Tigre” a European

THE

22

CONTROLLER

4 European News 4

military helicopter revealed a maneuver never shown before - a full spin, tail down, only recovered by sheer power. It was very impressive.

Talking about spins, a Mig 29 engaged in a flying display showed us what a flat spin looked like. It went down 4 or 5 turns losing a few thousand feet, and then recovered the same way as the preceding helicopter - by applying sheer power. It is worthy to note that almost all current flying objects, including recent sophisticated commercial aircraft, crash after entering a flat spin.

Among the ATC displays, there were many innovations this year especially on the surveillance side. Various ADS solutions were shown, the most promising being the socalled Continuous Descent Approaches (CDAs) being promoted by ACSS in the US and currently being tested by UPS in their B757s. It is based on a Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI), using a “merging and spacing” feature that allows UPS aircraft to sequence themselves and line up in advance of arrival at their major hubs.

Another interesting new ATC feature is the so-called AirLab built by Thales. It is a large simulator (based on military “battlefield labs”) made to test and validate air-ground ATC procedures and scenarios. Pilots, controllers and airline operations managers are working

What the future could look like: UAVs (here the very large global hawk) and the A380 in the background

side by side on a single platform. Current work is on a 4D trajectory exchange, but the possibilities are endless.

More on this in a forthcoming issue of The Controller.

During the show, Fedex donated a Boeing 727 to the French Aviation Museum located in Le Bourget. It arrived during the show and was saluted by the Rescue Fire water canons as usual.

It is a strange feeling for me to see that the B727 is now considered to be a museum piece, having started my ATC career at the same time as this aircraft took to the skies.

On the people side, John Travolta came from the US in his private B707 in the old Qantas livery to visit the A380, and we subsequently learned that he even flew it during a display.

Later it was announced that a private “secret” customer had ordered his own A380, but Travolta denied that it was him. The aircraft cost only $US300 million, and is probably going to someone in the Middle East or Russia who is fed up with his current private B747. I wonder how the interior will look? ^

4

Fedex donated a B727 to the Paris Aviation Museum. Photo: DP

ed @ifatca.org

4 Photo: Dassault Aviation/S. Rande

The Dassault NEURON UAV: a fighter without pilot.

THE

CONTROLLER

23

SPOTLIGHT

Spotlight on Corporate Members ^ Ke

vin

by Kevin Salter Contributing Editor, Corporate Business

r Salte

Welcome to the second of our two part Spotlight on Micro Nav the specialists in ATM simulation for training, design and evaluation. In this article we cover their powerful new Fast Airport Builder, image generator and aircraft editor as well as catch up with their latest projects.

^ Accurate models of airport buildings

The Fast Airport Builder has already been ordered for training applications and is being tested in the field on airport design projects by a team of international consultants with good results.

^ Airport layout and surroundings

Fast Airport Builder

^ Aerial map with airport located

New Best Visual Simulation Tools Micro Nav launched their new 3D Fast Airport Builder, Image Generator and Aircraft Model Editor at the international ATC show in Maastricht in February 2007.

The suite of software was a major attraction that will revolutionise the ease and cost of creating visual models for airport simulation and training. Users can, for the first time, create and update 3D models of their airports themselves. These unique visual simulation capabilities have been developed in partnership with Imagine – a company specialising in advanced PC-based graphics.

24

The Fast Airport Builder allows users to create and change their own 3D visual models quickly and cheaply. It is equally attractive to designers and trainers. New airports can be visualised and tested with realistic traffic in a matter of minutes. For the first time designers can see and evaluate the full airport from layout through to ATC operation. Trainers can create new airports and make changes to existing airports with large savings in time and costs.

The many options facing airport operators can be tried and tested and controllers can be trained using the same simulators to save time and money. The BEST data preparation tool that creates the ATM environment now allows the 3D visual scene to be created as well. The ATC data and the visual data are automatically correlated so that aircraft and vehicles move correctly throughout the scene and displays.

A new airport can be built from scratch and have aircraft flying within minutes rather than months.

^ Airport layout with key buildings

Image Generators The new image generators take advantage of the latest 3D PC graphics technology to give impressive scene features with high dynamic capacities. Micro Nav have shown 180 detailed aircraft models flying realistically and passing close overhead in the same window. The image generator is fully integrated with BEST which drives all of the selections and dynamic effects through the 3D Visual Gateway. The Imagine image generator is placed in the mainstream development path of the latest 3D graphics cards for PCs. Users can take advantage of the large investments being made in graphics for the games and entertainment markets as well as the simulation sectors.

They are thereby future proofed and technology upgrades can be accomplished easily and economically. The architecture is modular with one PC driving one, or more, visual channels and displays. More channels can be added as required. Full 360-degree displays are synchronized using as many channels with different format views as are needed to meet the requirements and budgets. The image generator runs many more 3D models with greater levels of detail and more special features than the previous generations. Many airfield models and ATM databases can be stored. They can be selected and loaded quickly as required.

THE

CONTROLLER

SPOTLIGHT ^ Tower simulator cab view

Oman Aircraft Control College

^ Tower simulator cab view with binoculars

Aircraft Editor The Aircraft Model Editor allows users to customise the appearance and behaviour of their high-fidelity 3D models easily themselves. The results can be seen immediately. The editor is easy and quick to use. It does not need any modelling expertise or expensive tools. The editor allows the user to change many aspects of the models including: the position of fires and smoke; the size, colour and behaviour of lights; the scaling factors and level-ofdetail switch distances; the animation of the undercarriage, props and rotors.

The Ministry of Defence of the Sultanate of Oman recently placed an order for a range of BEST ATM simulators for the Oman Aircraft Control College (OACC), which is jointly owned by BAE Systems. The major order includes BEST radar and both 2D and 3D tower simulators with special military features as well as an advanced fighter controller system. The project integrates 18 Controller, 21 Pseudo-Pilot and a suite of Data Preparation and Support positions.

The BEST simulators are being used for a wide range of military and civil controller training courses run at the College.

The simulators have been installed, accepted and incorporated into the College courses under a very fast schedule to minimise disruption to the training programme. A mini area radar simulator was installed and used for training within days of the order being placed. The full commissioning, testing and user training schedule was completed in July 2007. This order extends Micro Nav’s presence in the region with users in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Sharjah and Bahrain.

Inverness Airport, UK Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd has introduced a BEST simulator at Inverness Airport to provide a range of training for their

ATC staff. The simulator is based on the special package designed for airports and includes one radar controller workstation, two pseudo-pilot workstations, full audio communications, flight strip printing, data preparation, user training and extended warranty. It was ordered in October 2006, delivered in November and entered service in February 2007. Leon Gilmour, radar and simulator instructor at Inverness, said: “We are impressed with the ease of use and the scope of BEST. It is absolutely crucial for the success of our radar training programme.

We have used it for design and evaluation work as well as training. It will more than pay its way particularly when we start the next phase of the Inverness radar project.”

Bournemouth International Airport, UK BEST has recently been ordered by Bournemouth Airport to support their on-the-job training programme. They selected the radar simulator package designed for airport users. It was delivered and commissioned in July 2007. This completes our look at Micro Nav and I would like to, once again, thank Tom Howard-Jones for his company’s contribution to Spotlight.

As usual if any reader would like more information, or would like to comment on Spotlight, please contact me using the following address: Kevin Salter IFATCA Contributing Editor Corporate Affairs Flugsicherungsakademie Am DFS-Campus 4 D-63225 Langen Tel: + 49 (0)6103 707 5202 Fax: + 49 (0)6103 707 5177 E-Mail: kevin-john.salter@dfs.de

^ Aircraft Editor

25

4 Asia Pacific

China intends to go RVSM … in Meters ^ by Phil Parker, Regional Editor Asia-Pacific Photos: Phil Parker

John Wagstaff (from Hong Kong) is settling into the job of IFTACA Executive Vice President Asia Pacific and has just returned from an ICAO meeting in Bangkok. Of note from that meeting was a review on progress by China on the implementation of RVSM in their airspace.

Metric RVSM in China At this, and previous meetings on the subject, various parties, including IFALPA and IFATCA, raised the prospect of reduced safety with the implementation of Metric RVSM. To quote the Chinese representatives, “we understand clearly the requirement to use feet worldwide. To use metric flight level in China is our national policy.” “All the national aviation industry is based on meters. China will not follow the feet system and continued argument on this issue will only result in delaying the implementation on RVSM.“

At the moment, vertical separation in China is 300 Meters up to 8,400 Meters (S0840), and 600 Meters (2,000ft) above that. Russia, Mongolia and North Korea, also use a metric system of flight

levels, but in the case of Russia, it is a different system. This Meter RVSM implementation is due to take place in November of this year. The unseemly haste is due of course to the Olympic Games. The technical aspects of the implementation are being looked after by ICAO, however the Human Factors issues for both pilots and controllers don’t appear to have been sufficiently addressed. This was raised by IFALPA. IFATCA supported the view of IFALPA and advised the meeting that we had the same policy for ensuring commonality to reduce human errors.

Several major issues remain unresolved regarding the implementation of Metric RVSM in China by November 2007. The transition procedures and Letters-of-Agreement with the 26 adjacent Air Traffic Control units have not been agreed and the training program for controllers has not been finalized. There are still outstanding issues relating to safety assessment of the RVSM procedures, particularly with regard to the transitions to Metric RVSM.

English Proficiency With regard to English proficiency requirements, a survey carried out has shown in the Asia/Pacific area that non-English speaking States, have made very little preparation and are only now organising language training for controllers. Some States are still hoping that ICAO will delay the implementation date. In this regard, the IFATCA Regional Meeting in Kuala Lumpur from 30 October to 2 November will have as its theme, the ICAO Language Proficiency requirements.

Staff Shortages As in the rest of the world, the majority of controllers associations are reporting staff shortages with some in a critical situation. Paid and un-paid overtime is frequently required from staff, resulting in long duty hours and a reduction of rest days per month. All of this with an unprecedented increase in traffic levels in the Asian area and a complete lack of understanding by the States that investment in aviation resources and infrastructure are a major key to prosperity in the Region. ^ philatcinhk@netvigator.com

“China will not follow the feet system”

THE

26

CONTROLLER

4 Africa News

Introducing the new IFATCA Executive Vice President Africa and Middle East MD Matale (Africa and ^ by Middle East Regional Editor) The highly attended 46th Annual Conference of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers Association held in Istanbul-Turkey, culminated among other things in the election of Mr. Henry Peter Nkondokaya of Tanzania as Executive Vice President Africa and Middle East (EVP AFM) by representatives of the Region’s Member Associations.

Mr. Nkondokaya who won the elections against his Egyptian contestant Ayman Mahmoud, had presented a relatively rich profile a few minutes before the secret ballot election.

His familiarity with operations of IFATCA together with his lifetime history of significant contribution to the work of the federation (serving as member of the Regional Support Group) is indisputable.

Apparently the 52 years old EVP, who happens to be a reputable family man, has been in the ATC profession from as way back as 1976.

Heavy tasks lie ahead

Above the ordinary ATC ratings and validations the EVP has extensive knowledge of RVSM, CNS ATM, GNSS ATC Procedures, Disaster Management, International Instructor Training, Aircraft Accident Investigation, Search and Rescue, Safety Management, etc.

Photo: DP

During the IFATCA Annual Conference 2003 held in Buenos Aires, he proudly received the Executive Board Award in recognition of “significant support of, and commitment to the objectives of IFATCA and its Member Associations, thus making a major contribution to the Federation”.

The new EVP is faced with multiple safety centered issues of paramount importance including the upcoming implementation of the ICAO English Language Proficiency which is bound to significantly affect the non English speaking nations in the region.

These also include among others the continuation of efforts to ensure improved level of recognition of the ATC profession by African Governments and their Civil Aviation Departments or Authorities and thus the appropriate recognition of the conditions of operation and service for the ATC profession and the continuation of efforts to ensure successful implementation of Reduced Vertical Separation Minima (RVSM) in the region.

The unsupportive political and socio-economic situations in the Africa and Middle East Region are the main suppressing factors to the success of the air traffic control profession in the region. The outgoing EVP has persevered through tough times in his efforts to improve the region’s professional practices to achieve the requisite provision of international standard air traffic control service.

ment of Civil Aviation Authorities and will hopefully be performing his duties in an improved and a more accommodating environment in most parts of the region.

As experts say, “success of every leader depends on the level of support given by his subordinates; their dedication, determination and discipline; their cooperation and collaboration at all times”. The Regional Support Group and the Member Associations in the region are bound to recognize the fact that they are “His” pillars of success and therefore should provide their utmost level of support to the IFATCA Executive Vice President Africa and Middle East Mr. Henry Peter Nkondokaya. ^ mdmatale@yahoo.co.uk

The unsupportive political and socioeconomic situations in the Africa and Middle East Region are the main suppressing factors to the success of the air traffic control profession in the region

Optimistically the new EVP AFM Mr. Nkodokaya commences his term of service at a time when the region is moving into the new era of commercialization by way of establish-

THE

CONTROLLER

4 Henry Peter Nkondokaya 27

4 Americas News

Argentina Latest News Sense of Responsibility. Is it a matter of apportioning guilt or solving the problems?

Cedric Murell, IFATCA EVP Americas and ^ by El Kadur Acosta, Regional Editor Americas It has already been three months since Argentina has been working without their RADAR System after a major storm damaged the equipment. Today there is a national crisis during a very traumatic time of change being experienced within the Argentinean Civil Aviation system.

According to reports, the radar system was found not to be in the appropriate condition to provide ATC services and neither was the backup. This, because of the “lack of investment in new technology, together with the increased number of flights because of the growth in tourism, meant that we were overwhelmed with work and without the tools to guarantee safety”, as the report brought by the Asociación de Controladores de Tránsito Aéreo de Argentina states.

There are accusations of military mismanagement of the air traffic system, and these statements do not arise only from the Air Traffic Controller’s union; declarations from pilots, as well as other aviation professional unions strengthen the allegations presented

by Enrique Piñeiro in 2006 in his documentary called “Fuerza Aérea Argentina, S.A.” (Argentinean Air Force, Inc.), which led to a lawsuit. “Whisky, Romeo, Zulu”, is another film developed about similar circumstances.

The Situation

As the Air Traffic Controllers warned the general public about these happenings, alerting about the risks of safety loss, some controllers were separated from their duties and relocated away from active air traffic control. On the other hand, since reverting to manual control methods, unions and associations of air traffic technicians and professional controllers have reported at least six “near collision“ situations involving aeroplanes on the ground or in the air.

Today, Argentineans face a dilemma due to their radar system failure. As the market increases its demands, air traffic controllers must dose and delay traffic flow to ensure safety. This particular situation, along other ongoing issues, has turned the ATM environment into a nightmare.

Piñeiro turned to film-making in 1999, when he resigned from LAPA airlines over concerns about lack of safety within the company. Soon after he left, a LAPA plane slewed off the runway as it was taking off, and 67 people were killed. Now Piñeiro has brought legal action against the air force’s top brass, accusing them of lack of concern about safety, and he warned in March about the risk of collisions between “a large numbers of planes carrying thousands of passengers.“

While the government is trying to address the general concern, by stating that safety levels meet ICAO standards, industry users complain and submit reports about the safety breaches that become visible recurrently. At the same time, the Tourism Minister has admitted that a falloff in travel ticket sales is attributable to the air traffic services deficiencies.

Not only has the national press focused on the matter, but the media worldwide has started to write, comment and talk about it. This is a double edged sword, since while it pressures the government to expedite the arrangements to solve the problem it can also have a negative effect on tourism.

“Some of our colleagues in Argentina were removed from the job” Photo: Rafael Reca

4

Buenos Aires Control tower

By the time The Controller Magazine deadline for this issue closed, some of our colleagues in Argentina were removed from the job they love, only because they were alerting the general public of a national security matter, as a consequence of the non-proactive stance of their leadership.

Surrounding Issues The President of Argentina, Néstor Kirchner, has ordered the gradual transition from the military to a completely National Civil Aviation Authority. This transition has been delayed however. There are concerns from some individuals within the government and the military wants the unions to be blamed as the main reason of the current crisis. A new radar system is expected to be acquired, but the purchase is believed to be delayed as well, as part of the plan to discredit the controllers.

Cesar Salas, president of the air traffic controller’s union, affirms “The air force was not proactive in terms of investment, and the large airlines that operate in our airspace do not have adequate ground support“.

28

Who or What?

Authorities should understand that the best way to find a solution to a problem is to address efforts to mitigate the causes, rather than the persons involved. It is not smart to increase the stress factors over the already overstressed air traffic controllers. If management intimidates the employees, they will be afraid to address any significant general system malfunction, therefore hiding vital information that can lead to a major system disaster. Mistakes in our profession are paid with lives, but our countries pay in the end with their reputations. ^

evpama@ifatca.org and elkaduracosta@i-atc.net

THE

CONTROLLER

4 Brazil Update

The Brazil Mid-Air Collision: A Legal Update 4

A GOL Boeing 737.

Photo: Flavio Guerra

Christoph Gilgen, ^ by Swiss ATCA 4 Controllers and 2 Pilots Indicted Early in May the Brazilian judge Renato Sayao, officially denounced 4 controllers and the 2 Legacy-jet American pilots to the Brazilian Federal Justice as being responsible for the September 29 2006 mid-air collision between the GOL B-737 and the Legacy N600XL. According to the 3000 pages dossier filed, the Legacy crew failed to follow their flight plan (FPL) when they flew at the wrong altitude. Furthermore, the submission alleges that the crew had also deactivated (more than likely without intent) the transponder of their aircraft and so had disabled the last-ditch safety net, the Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS).

IFALPA Strongly Complains Shortly after This, IFALPA issued a press statement calling the prosecution of the Legacy crew “fundamentally flawed and premature“. Undeterred by this, the Federal judge, Muilo Mendes, from the tiny city of Sinop in Mato Grosso, not only accepted the six denunciations from the Federal Police but, on June 1 2007 approved the indictment of the six accused. What is very worrying is the fact that the indictment is unaltered and exactly as logged and requested by Federal Police.

One of the accused Brasilia controllers, was controlling the Legacy jet when it passed over Brasilia VOR at FL 370. According to the injunction, the controller did not notice that the ATC system had changed automatically the “system level“ of N600XL. He has been charged with “voluntary manslaughter“. This has caused a lot of indignation and even open anger within the Brazilian controller community.

According to the approved indictment papers, a controller had failed to clear the Legacy to the correct altitude. He would have been required to adapt the cleared level to the automatically changed level shown by his ATC-system. By failing to do this, according to the Federal Po-

lice, he let the aircraft fly for a prolonged period of time in the opposite direction to the normal traffic flow and the published airway direction.

He is also accused of having noted the disappearance of the aircraft transponder (Mode A and C) on his radar, but not having undertaken the required actions according to ICAO, Brazilian air law and local procedures. Finally, he is also accused of having made an erroneous handover to his colleague, who took over from him about 35 minutes before the collision.

The other five defendants, including the two US-pilots, are accused of “involuntary manslaughter“ The ATC staff is alleged to have given incomplete flight instructions and/or for having failed to try different frequencies when the two way radio communication with the Legacy had failed. Another point that the justice is criticizing is the fact that the Brasilia controllers had missed to inform Manaus ACC about the transponder failure and the communication problems experienced by the Legacy. According to the Brazilian Penal code, using article 261, “placing a vessel or aircraft in jeopardy“, this crime can be sanctioned with between 2 to 5 years of imprisonment.

The Controllers Worked Alone (SMOP) A Brasilia controller assistant is accused of issuing an incomplete ATC-clearance to the tower in São José dos Campos, the airfield where the Legacy jet had departed. According to the Federal Police indictment papers, the Brasilia ACC assistant (working at the São Paulo sector) had failed to mention, as required, during the phone call issuing the ATC clearance, to either specify all flight levels contained in the Legacy FPL, nor issue a clearance limit until where FL 370 was applicable. This is required by the Brazilian ATM Manual (ICA-100-12). It must be noted that the Brazilian procedures for issuing ATCclearances are much more stringent than ICAO PANS-ATM (4444) requirements.

The controller who took over from the principal accused controller, and the sector 7

assistant who came about 20 minutes later to position, are both accused of involuntary manslaughter. They are accused of not having undertaken the required international and national procedures foreseen for communication failure and those for handling aircraft suffering a transponder failure. It should be noted that both controllers had worked alone as part of a “Single Man Operation Procedure (SMOP), which is permitted by an internal rule and procedure signed by a former ACC Brasilia chief. Only during the last 30 minutes before the collision was the controller joined by a sector assistant himself accused of the same facts and omissions.

The Official Technical Accident Investigation It is a known fact that the official technical accident investigation, based on ICAO Annex 13, is yet to be completed. The Brazilian Air Accident Investigation Bureau, named CENIPA, assisted by the US NTSB, has

[a controller] has been charged with „voluntary manslaughter

THE

CONTROLLER

29

4 Brazil Update now indicated that the final accident report can be expected after one year after the accident, in October 2007, but at latest at the end of the year.

The Brazilian justice system, however, is working on its‘ own terms and is completely independent from the official accident inquiry. This despite the

fact that it is not yet fully determined if military controllers (working in uniform and abiding to military regulations) can be prosecuted by a civilian court. Despite high public pressure and the press frenzy surrounding the case, it is more than likely that the Brazilian legal system will find a smart way out of this situation.

But this outcome cannot be guaranteed and remains pure speculations for moment. Considering the serious nature of the allegations

filed against the controllers and pilots involved, it is important to note that more serious “voluntary manslaughter” crime can incur a prison sentence of up to 36 years in Brazil.

It is, therefore, essential that all controllers around the world, including their associations, prepare themselves to support with all their means their Brazilian colleagues who are indicted and involved in this tragic event. ^ chrisgi@bluewin.ch

Update on the Brazilian ATC situation Christoph Gilgen, ^ by Swiss ATCA

ATC) was cancelled by the President a few days later. Everything indicates that the President came under overwhelming pressure from the Brazilian military and was forced to turn around and cancel the deal. On April 5, 2007 a military inquiry against the leaders of the controller movement for alleged mutiny during the hunger strike was opened. This official military inquiry is still running and rumour has it that around 60 Brazilian military controllers are subject to investigation and might face heavy charges going as far as long imprisonment terms and dismissal from service.

Photo: FB

4

Radar image from Manaus showing blurred targets

During the last 3 months the times for Brazilian ATC have been very busy and full of spectacular twists and changes.

After the “hunger strike“ of March 30, 2007 the country went through several air traffic black-outs (“apagão“ in Portuguese, literally “to switch off“) due to equipment failures, lack of back-up equipment or insufficient capacity unable to meet the traffic demand.

The tentative agreement concluded between the Brazilian controllers and the government, to end the hunger strike (which included a plan to civilize

More System Outages and Equipment Problems All system outages and technical failures of ATC equipment in Brazil are blamed systematically on “controller sabotage“ by the authorities. An official hinted to the press that “there were more system outages in the last year than we had in the last 30 years“. But the truth is that the system is now under high exposure. The reporting culture has dramatically improved as a consequence of the fact that the Brazilian press is more willing to report about ATC-problems since the fatal mid-air.

By the end of June 2007 a mini-black out occurred again in Brasilia ACC. This time in the very busy sector of São Paulo where the controllers present complained that their radar screens showed completely diffuse pictures and that the aircraft labels were no longer readable. They therefore, logically, asked for repair, or a substitution of the faulty equipment. The Air Force decided to send in technicians to assess the situation. These system

engineers, after a short inquiry “guaranteed“ that the screens were maybe not all perfect, but nevertheless “useable“ and no need to change them or make repairs. This, despite the fact that ICAO document 4444 (PANSATM), but also the Brazilian ICA 100-12 (its‘ Brazilian equivalent) clearly give the controllers the right, and even the duty, to assess system performance and take protective measures, if needed. The situation then ended again in controversy and delays, as many flights were left late or were simply cancelled.

Plan B It is said that this last episode triggered at stiff reaction by President Lula da Silva who invited the Air Force chief, Juniti Saito to his office and asked for a “swift and decisive plan to resolve forever this air traffic chaos“. On June 22, 2007 the decisions taken by the Air Force became clear. By taking advantage of the presidential powers conferred to them, they implemented PLAN B. The plan consisted of singling out all the “negative elements“ in the controller staff and to move them away from their normal working positions. This went as far as prohibiting the use of cell phones in the ATC premises. In addition the use of computers and internet was completely prohibited and the grouping of more than two persons in the control room was not tolerated anymore.

This all was stiffly enforced by armed military police marshalling the premises and the control rooms 24 hours per day.

Another aspect of “Plan B“ of the Air Force was to bring in Air Defence controllers and let them handle civilian traffic that operates according to ICAO rules (GAT). These controllers were

THE

30

CONTROLLER

4 Brazil Update completely unprepared and not trained for this kind of work. In order to get around the licensing and legal questions, the Brazilian regulator, also under the umbrella of the military, simply changed the same day (22nd of June 2007) the licensing regulations for controllers.

Special Corridors Although IFATCA denounced this unacceptable situation the Brazilian authorities started to implement the so-called “Tubulões“ (special air traffic corridors). These are one way traffic corridors, especially over the Atlantic (Northbound) and some other strategically internal routes, controlled by CINDACTA – 1 in Brasilia. Another is a corridor between São Paulo and Brasilia airports completely avoiding the Brasilia ACC. The licensing of the controllers have been quickly adapted to this new reality. Technical adaptations, such as radio frequencies or direct telephone lines, or even back-up equipment, are still waiting to be installed. “But it is safe and works perfectly well“ according the press releases from the Government and the Air Force.

TAM Crash Only one day after the landing accident of the TAM-Airbus, on July 18, 2007, (see details

on page … in this issue) an official statement

by IFATCA was issued stating among other points that: “Following the mid-air collision in September 2006, this is yet another disastrous civil aviation accident in Brazil in a short period. In both cases numerous warning signs, multiple risks and safety relevant reports were ignored [….]. Warnings on the conditions at the airport in Congonhas have repeatedly been ignored by the authorities…”.

The full IFATCA statement can be found on the website of IFATCA: www.ifatca.org.

Not surprisingly, this IFATCA communication received a lot of attention in Brazil, as well as elsewhere around the globe. (more on the TAM crash article on page …)

More Controller Repression Between the start of the military actions and this TAM crash, several Brazilian association leaders were jailed. Their Military commanders, as justification for the punishment, alleged that those association leaders (being under military rules), are not allowed to talk freely to the public and the press without their explicit permission and full consent.

This despite the fact that all those imprisoned were elected and recognized association leaders, members of the Executive Board of their association which is fully acPhoto: FB cepted as such by the Brazilian government and the Air Force.

One military controller, based in São Paulo, was imprisoned for more than 15 days and was held under very stringent rules: he was only allowed sunlight for

one hour per day and his contact to the family was restricted to one short visit per week. Two more military controllers, both stationed in Brasilia, were also imprisoned but this was under much lighter conditions and for shorter periods of time.

ILO Intervention This led IFATCA and ITF (International Transport Federation) to make, on July 6, 2007, a direct intervention at the level of the Director General of the ILO (International Labour Organization) in Geneva asking for the immediate release of the imprisoned at the highest level of the Brazilian Government. The actions of the ILO were very swift and decisive. It is hard, however, to assess how much this has actually speeded up the process. The recent memorandum of understanding signed between ITF and IFATCA works very well and the cooperation between the two organizations was excellent in this particular matter. At the moment of finalizing this article, all Brazilian controllers are free, but continue to work under heavy pressure and strict rules. What is for sure: we have not yet seen the end of the Brazilian ATC- and air crisis. There is certainly more to come, and we will report it in The CONTROLLER. ^ chrisgi@bluewin.ch

4

Another radar image from Manaus.

60 Brazilian military controllers might face imprisonment terms and dismissal from service.

Photo: Enav

THE

CONTROLLER

31

4 Brazil Situation

Brazil Second Major Air Disaster within One Year

Christoph ^ by Gilgen, Swiss ATCA While writing an update on the situation in Brazil (see elsewhere in the magazine), news broke about a terrible air crash at São Paulo Congonhas airport. What started with an accident during landing quickly developed into a major crash with potentially over 200 deaths. While adding to the text of the other article was an option, the case quickly warranted a separate article.

Facts about the TAM Airbus Accident Shortly before 18.45 local time, on July 17 2007, TAM flight 3054, an A-320 of TAM Brazilian Airlines, made its approach to runway 35L at SBSP. With

… political and economic pressure resulted in a stark disregard of even basic safety considerations

1945m (6365 ft) it is the main runway at the airport, besides a shorter parallel runway.

On an internal flight from Porto Alegre in the south, the aircraft was full with 187 occupants on board and an approximate landing weight of 62 tons. The weather report stated a 6 km visibility with intermittent heavy rain, a broken cloud base at around 900 ft agl. Runway conditions were reported as very slippery with a very poor breaking action. Congonhas-airport has a well-known history of a slippery main runway (see special box about the Congonhas runway incidents).

After touchdown, the aircraft exited the runway and collided with a concrete building.

The collision and subsequent fire killed all occupants and 12 people in the building.

Earlier in the year, after several serious landing incidents at SBSP, a Brazilian judge had prohibited operation of several aircraft types during rain or with standing water on the runway. Heavily contested by airlines, INFRAERO (the Brazilian state-owned airport administrator) and in particular ANAC, the Brazilian regulator, the landing restrictions were quickly lifted, on the understanding that the main runway would be resurfaced without delay.

After 45 days of construction, the resurfaced runway was reopened on June 29, 2007.

4

TAM aircraft.

Photo: Flavio Guerra

Right Thrust Reverser Disabled Airbuses land in similar weather conditions every day and weather conditions alone could not account for the fact that the aircraft crashed at over 180kph into a building at the end of a 2000 metre long runway. It seemed the Airbus failed to decelerate and stop as it was expected, after a fairly routine touchdown.

Two days after the accident, TAM-airlines announced that the aircraft had its’ right thrust reverser disabled following oil leaks discovered during routine inspections. According to regulations, commercial operation of A-320s is possible for up to 10 days before repair becomes compulsory.

The CVR tape, very controversially and contrary to international (ICAO) agreements leaked to the press some 2 weeks after the accident, indicate that spoilers were not deployed on landing. This further hints, as usual, at a more complex sequence of events than initially voiced by the press. If the aircrafts computers did not correctly register the aircraft as being on the ground (something that

THE

32

CONTROLLER

4 Brazil Situation can happen with water on the runway), this would have prevented the spoilers deploying, autobrakes engages, etc.

The exact sequence of events is not yet fully clear and it would be very unwise and premature to enter those kinds of speculations right now. It is hoped that the official inquiry will bring forward all the operational and technical aspects of this terrible air accident that has cost 199 human lives so far (current count of the victims).

New Runway Never Certified With focus on technical and operational factors, another episode of Brazilian air transport reality unfolded: the actual refurbishment

seems to have played a more important role than they’d like to admit. It appears that political and economic pressure (the beginning of July is the start of the holiday season in Brazil) resulted in a stark disregard of even basic safety considerations. Unfortunately, the same can be said of Brazilian Air Traffic Control industry, where safety is often blatantly disregarded by the authorities.

Brazilian President Fires Leading Aviation Figures and Ministers Continued pressure by the revelations, President Lula da Silva fired the already much criticized Air Defence Minister and chief of the Brazilian CAA Waldir Pires on July 25. He was replaced by Nelson Jobim, who has encouragingly indicated that it is time to stop nominating politicians and friends for leading

4

method chosen by INFRAERO consisted of first putting a smooth surface over the existing runway. As a second step, grooves would be cut into the smooth concrete of the runway. This would help to eliminate the hydroplaning on wet runways, draining the water quicker. Only before step 2, planned for the end of July 2007, the authorities decided to reopen the resurfaced smooth runway without imposing any operational restrictions on it.

Furthermore, it was found that the Brazilian aviation and airport authorities had actually omitted or “forgot” to correctly certify the resurfaced main runway and declare it safe for use! The press extensively reported that the INFRAERO “expert” who opened the runway on June 29, 2007, only drove up and down the runway for just 10 minutes in a normal car before giving his OK for the newly surfaced runway. The paperwork, as required by national and international rules, was simply not submitted, nor were the required NOTAMs published. The directors of the civil aviation regulator of Brazil (ANAC) and the Brazilian airport authority, INFRAERO, accused each other as responsible for this “omission”.

Trying to downplay their role - they like to point out that the TAM-aircraft was clearly “defective” - the decision to permit use of the runway without proper consideration

aviation jobs. He also believes that only technicians and fully competent candidates should be considered for such key jobs in government.

Also replaced was the very controversial and outspoken INFRAERO president, Brigadier José Carlos Pereira. This is probably not the end of the reshuffles and indications are that all leading INFRAERO and ANAC executives will be replaced.

To be continued, to say the least! ^ chrisgi@bluewin.ch

TAM Airbus A320.

Photo: Flavio Guerra

Other Incidents and Accidents at São Paolo-Congonhas (SBSP) March 2006 A Boeing of BRA with 115 persons onboard slipped off the main runway and stopped only very shortly before the Avenue Washington Luiz.

October 2006 A Boeing 737-300 of Gol, flight GOL 1941 from Cuiabá, slipped off the wet runway.

Nobody was hurt.

17. January 2007 A B737 of VARIG, flight RG 2438, coming from Rio de Janeiro-Santos Dumont, was forced to perform an emergency stopping due to a strong water accumulation on the runway.

25. June 2007 An Airbus of TAM, towed by an engine, clipped its wing with a Boeing 737 of Gol that was taxing near the holding bay and ready for take-off.

16. July 2007 (one day before the fatal TAM accident) An ATR 42 of PANTANAL, coming from Araçutuba, lost control during the landing run.

It came to a stop between the main runway and the auxiliary runway.

Nobody was hurt but the aircraft was a complete write-off.

October 1996 A Fokker 100 of TAM crashed into the suburb of Jabaquara, in São Paulo, shortly after having departed from Congonhas airport. Flight 402, as it became known, was headed for Rio de Janeiro. From the 99 persons killed, 90 were passengers. Six cabin crew and three persons on ground were killed as well. The reverser, deployment was the reason for this accident.

THE

CONTROLLER

33

4 Legal News

Ueberlingen Collision: The Trial Christoph Gilgen, ^ by Swiss ATCA Almost 5 years after the fatal mid-air collision that occurred on July 1, 2002 near Ueberlingen (Germany) staff involved faced their judges during 2 weeks in May 2007.

The trial was held in Switzerland after an agreement with Germany. For reasons of logistics, it was done in the City hall of Bülach, near Zurich Airport. The trial was open to the public.

The nine staff involved held the following positions at Skyguide Zurich et the time of the accident: Head of ANS, Head of ACC, Head of Operations ACC, Supervisor ACC (Late shift) Air Traffic Controller ACC (Night shift Duty Controller, deceased), Air Traffic Controller ACC (Night shift), System Manager ACC, Interdisciplinary Project Manager and a System Expert. The accusations against Peter Nielsen, the controller who last guided both aircraft, were dropped following his murder in February 2004.

Shifting Blame For their defence, Skyguide provided a lawyer for each of the accused. However, it seemed that the defence strategy was a common one – to plead not guilty. Some of the defendants decided to shift the blame onto the deceased controller – the late Peter Nielsen.

The Accusation by the Public Prosecutor

The accusation centred around three main themes: Overload of the air traffic controller, Tolerating understaffing and Incomplete information towards the night shift team.

According to the Prosecutor, during the night of the accident, the controller on duty was alone since his colleague had left for a break.

This way of doing was unwritten, but known and tolerated by the Zurich-management.

Furthermore, due to maintenance and modifications, the availability of some technical equipment was limited. These implied the optical warning of the STCA – Short Term Conflict Alert as well as the non-availability of the main telephone system. The controller on duty was managing the entire traffic of the Zurich ACC. During the critical phase, he was working on two radar displays switching from one to another. On one display, he was controlling Upper airspace (where the collision occurred) and on the other, a late arrival to Friedrichshafen Airport. To underline his case, the public prosecutor played the tapes of the last minutes before the collision, to show how the controller was in a situation of overload and no longer totally in control.

However, according to the accusation, the accident could not be solely attributed to failure of the controller on duty. As important as that, was the lack of care and lack of risk awareness at that time at Skyguide Zurich. At all levels of the hierarchy, from Management down to Operations, not enough attention was given to the high requirements for safety. Internal orders contained contradictions and were even consciously ignored.

4

The Tu154 tail.

Photo: Juergen Meier

The Prosecution was clear about who was responsible.

Communication between operations and system management was lacking, which played an important role in leading to the eventual breakdown of the provision of air navigation services during the night of the accident.

No common interdisciplinary coordination took place in view of the modification works, which had to be undertaken during the night of 1st to the 2nd of July at Zurich ACC. Each group concentrated on their own duties and assumed that the other entities would take care of the rest. The disastrous concatenation of breach of duty of care of this kind, finally led to the collision within the South German airspace.

Tolerating Under-Staffing A major contributing factor was the understaffing during the night shift, which was tolerated by the responsible managers as a common practice despite existing orders.

The result was that the second controller on duty, who left shortly after 11pm for a break to last several hours, was not readily available at short notice to support his colleague in emergency situations.

This tolerated practice was apparently to save cost and had already been criticised by the Swiss Aircraft Accident Bureau (AAIB) before the accident, as well as, during the investigation of the Ueberlingen collision, by the German AAIB. By virtue of these facts and other acts contrary to duty, the Public Prosecutor accused the Manager of the Air Navigations Services Provider Skyguide Zurich, the Head of ACC as well as its Head of Operations.

The requested sentence by the Public Prosecution for these 3 managers was 15 months of prison, on probation for 2 years.

Other breaches of duty of care concerned the lack of information to Operations regarding the upcoming works on the air navigation equipment. The purpose-written internal communication by the Skyguide experts, detailing the status and availability, did not contain the main point-to-point telephone

THE

34

CONTROLLER

4 Legal News system with adjacent centres, as one being unavailable. The manager who ordered this internal communication subsequently discovered this omission but did not correct it since he gathered that ‘nobody would realise the difference’. His temporary deputy, the System Expert, who was responsible for the modifications during the night of the accident, did not discover the error. In addition, contrary to internal procedures, the adjacent centres were not informed of the non-availability of the main telephone system. As a consequence, the collision warnings of the German ANSP could not reach the Zurich ACC. This completed the negative picture of absence of care during the planning, as the functioning of the emergency telephone was not tested. The latter failed due to a software programming error, which was discovered only after the accident. The absence of telephones impeded the controller to establish contact with Friedrichshafen. Not knowing that the phones were not working, he tried several times and subsequently dialled the number manually – without success. During this process, he lost a lot of time and consequently, the overview, which made it impossible to fight off the collision. The Public prosecutor rated these omissions as gross negligence and requested for both the Interdisciplinary Project Manager and his temporary deputy (the System Expert) 12 months of prison, on probation for 2 years.

The Nightshift Team Further sentences were requested by the Public Prosecutor against the Supervisor of the late shift at the ACC Zurich as well as the System Manager ACC, for having incompletely informed the Duty controller (who also functioned as the Night shift Supervisor) of the technical interventions and its implications on the functions of the Radar and the telephone system. This, in turn, influenced the decision-making process of the Duty Controller as to releasing, or not, his Night shift colleague for the extended break. Also omitted was the message to the Duty controller, that on the technical side, a System Expert was available to quickly solve technical issues. The Public Prosecutor rated these omissions as not of slight importance and requested for both the Supervisor of the late shift and the System Manager ACC 6 months of prison, on probation for 2 years.

Finally, according to the findings during the investigation, the two Air Traffic Controllers, Peter Nielsen and his colleague, assigned to the night shift were also partially responsible for the accident. Contrary to internal procedures, they omitted to familiarise themselves at the beginning of their duty with the particular working situation. If they had conducted a briefing, they would have realised that one controller would not be enough to guarantee the provision of a safe air traffic control service. The Public pros-

Stop Press: The verdict of the trial On September 4, 2007 the Swiss court of Bülach/Zurich announced its verdict.

Three managers on trial, namely the Head of ANS Zurich, the Head of Zurich ACC and Chief of Operations for the centre, were found guilty of multiple accounts of manslaughter. They were sentenced to a 12 months imprisonment, be it suspended.

The Interdisciplinary Project Manager, who planned and supervised the technical maintenance on night of the accident, was fined with 13500 SFR (approx 10.000 USD) also on suspended terms. These four managers were also sentenced to pay damages to the families of the victims.

The four operational people on trial, including the controller who was on break and the supervisor who went home early, were acquitted.

ecutor requested a prison sentence of 6 months on probation of 2 years for the controller that left for the extended break.

The TU 154 Crew The Public Prosecutor confirmed that the fact that the TU154 crew followed the clearance to descend instead of following the climb of their TCAS could not be held against them.

The air navigation services provider first committed errors leading to the accident. The actions in the cockpit of the TU154 had no effect on the latter.

Final Responsibility The Prosecution was clear about who was responsible.

It is evident that the collision near Ueberlingen was primarily caused by carelessness and systemic deficiencies at the Air Navigation Services in Zurich.

At the end of the trial, the Public Prosecutor deplored that the accused, despite unambiguous investigation results, could not understand this fact.

Indeed, all along the 2-week trial, the accused showed empathy towards the families of the victims, but all of them pleaded not guilty and the defence requested acquittal. The verdict is scheduled to be announced on 4th of September 2007. ^ chrisgi@bluewin.ch

The defence strategy was a common one – to plead not guilty. Some defendants decided to shift the blame onto the deceased controller.

Photo: Patrik Peters

THE

CONTROLLER

35

4 Philip Marien Feature

Aviation Records ^ by Philip Marien People love records - highest, fastest, longest, most, longest,... The fact that the Guinness Book of World Records is one of the most popular book series of all times is not a surprise. And the world of aviation is not an exception.

One of the doors was replaced by an accordion type sliding door, which allowed them to easily hoist a bucket on a rope to bring food and water on board. Delivering the supplies was a T-Bird chase car, which matched speeds on a straight stretch of road in the desert. The airplane was equipped with an extra belly tank, which was filled in-flight by a truck pumping fuel, driving underneath again at matching speeds. A tube allowed them to add oil to the engine from the cockpit.

Endurance Non-Commercial Some of these are surprisingly old. Like that of Robert Timm and John Cook for the longest. On December 4, 1958 they took off from McCarran Airfield, Las Vegas to raise money for charity. Their Cessna 172 was heavily modified to accommodate their record breaking attempt. Most of the interior was stripped, which allowed space for a mattress on which one of them would sleep for 4 hours before swapping over.

Photo: Eurocopter

4

Highest Helicopter Mount Everest landing

Longest Commercial Another “old” one... While modern aircraft like the A 340 can certainly fly longer distances, a Lockheed Constellation Starliner (L-1649) still holds the record for the longest-duration non-stop passenger flight. During TWA‘s inaugural London to San Francisco flight on 1-2 October, 1957, the “Connie“, as they were affectionately known, stayed aloft for a backbreaking 23 hours and 19 minutes. Exposed to the constant drone of propellers for almost 24 hours, I‘ll bet the decision to build passenger jets was taken during that flight...

Shortest Commercial

Photo: UNK

4

Endurance non-commercial: The refueling by car.

When the electric generator failed, a small propeller driven one was hoisted aboard, taped to one of the wing supports and plugged into the cigarette lighter(!) socket, providing electricity for the rest of the flight. Towards the end of the flight, after nearly 1500 hours of continuous operation and long overdue for an overhaul, the engine only barely provided enough power to climb again after refueling. They landed after a staggering 64 days, 22 hours, 19 minutes and 5 seconds in the air ...

It doesn‘t always have to be the longest: the shortest scheduled flight in world will take you from Westray to Papa Westray, two of about 70 islands known as the Orkney Islands, an archipelago in northern Scotland. Operated

by Loganair, the 2.7 Km flight is scheduled to take 2 minutes. It‘s been done in 58 seconds though, leaving us to wonder whether the stewardess boast that they‘ve arrived ahead of schedule? Costing £14 for the one way trip, it‘s probably the most expensive flight per mile flown and you probably don‘t even get a drink! Loganair also have a scheduled turnaround time of 7 minutes.

Endurance Glider In April 1952, Charles Atger of France flew an Arsenal Air 100 glider broke the endurance records for glider aircraft. Staying aloft (awake?!?) for for 56h 15m Romaninles-Alpilles near Saint-Rémy-de-

Photo: Patrick PENNA

THE

36

CONTROLLER

4 Philip Marien Features 4

Highest tower: Vancouver harbour on top of a building.

tower in the world. The tallest free-standing tower is at Suvarnabhumi International Airport (VTBS) in Thailand. At 132.2 meter, it‘s 2 meter higher than the one in Kuala Lumpur. But in Vancouver, Canada, on the 29th floor of the Granville Square skyscraper is the control tower for Vancouver Harbour airport.

It‘s the busiest water airport in Canada and it has one of the highest seaplanes movements in the world. It‘s also 142 meters above the ground.

Photo: Wikipedia

ATC records are seemingly non-existent.

Provence in the french Alps. While his record was recognised by the FAI (see below), further attempts at single pilot endurance records were discontinued as pointless and because of the obvious danger of the pilot falling asleep.

wing/tilt engine aircraft and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Through their website (http://www. fai.org), you can find the current record holders as well as the previous record holders.

Infrastructure

Highest Following experimental flights up to 8,992 meters in April 2004 and up to 10,211 meters in April 2005, a serial Ecureuil/AStar AS 350 B3 piloted by the EUROCOPTER X-test pilot Didier Delsalle, landed at 8,850 meters (29,035ft) on the top of the Mount Everest on May 14th 2005. Taking off from base camp Lukla at 2,866 meters (9,403ft), the aircraft remained landed on ground more than 2 minutes, required to validate the record on the top of the world before flying back to Lukla. It‘s the highest landing and take-off ever and unless some oil-sheik builds a tower higher than Everest, it‘s a record that will stand forever!

There‘s also a number of infrastructure records, like the highest airport. Several websites list Bangda airport (ICAO designator: ZUBD), in eastern Tibet, as the winner: it was opened in October 1994 and lies at 14219 ft. The high altitude also implies they have the longest commercial runway: 5500m or just over 18000 ft.

But looking beyond just commercial airports: Peru has an 2670m (8760ft) long dirtstrip in San Rafael (ICAO designator: SPRT), at 4395m (14422ft) elevation. Both will be eclipsed however by a new airport also in Tibet. Scheduled to open in October 2010, Ali in the northwest portion of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau has an average altitude of 4,500 meter (14760 feet).

Other than that, ATC records are seemingly non-existent. Going for the most aircraft in one sector would obviously be irresponsible as would be the record for the longest time behind the radar without a break.

But the longest clearance ever issued (with correct read back), the most vectors given to one aircraft in a sector, the briefing sheet with the most abbreviations or the longest time without anyone on the frequency should be out there! You can submit your non-risk-bearing attempts with proof to webmaster@thecontroller.net ^

Keeping Track The Fédération Aéronautique Internationale or FAI keeps track of many of these records.

Categories in which records can be claimed include free balloons, airships, aeroplanes, gliders & motorgliders, rotorcraft, model aircraft, parachuting, vertical take-off and landing aeroplanes, manpowered aircraft, spacecraft, tilt-

The lowest airport in the world seems to be I Bar Yehuda (ICAO designator: LLMZ) on the shore of the Dead Sea. At 385m (1266ft) below Mean Sea Level, you‘re strongly advised to visit it before the worlds‘ icecaps melt.

ATC Air Traffic Control records are curiously absent from the books: just about the only ATC record that I could find was the highest control

Photo: Richard Ferriere

4

4

Tallest tower: Bangkok Photo: aerothai

Endurance Glider

THE

CONTROLLER

37

4 Americas

ICAO News Alexis Brathwaite, ^ by Deputy President IFATCA This September, IFATCA will invite the ICAO Assembly to agree that in the interest of achieving a seamless air traffic

4

management system, States must demonstrate the necessary political will and resolutely commit to cooperating with all stakeholders and strictly adhere to accepted standards and recommended practices.

Deputy President, Alexis Brathwaite (18-21); EVP-Finance, Dale Wright (21-28); and EVPProfessional, Doug Churchill (24-28) will be our observers in Montreal for ICAO’s 36th Session of the Assembly, 18-28 September.

Montreal ICAO Building Photo: Kerwin

We will present our first paper at the plenary session under agenda Item 2: Statements by delegations of Contracting States and of Observers. These are statements presented during the first two days of the Assembly that focus on high-level policy issues. We remind states of their obligations to implement safety programmes and to adopt ICAO’s Global Aviation Safety Plan.

In the Technical Commission we present papers addressing Just Culture and Language proficiency. We request that States immedi-

ately review existing legislation to remove all deterrents to the collection and analysis of valuable safety-related information; and to the protect persons involved in the reporting, collection and/or analysis of safety-related information in aviation. We further ask that States ensure English language proficiency training and testing for air traffic controllers complies with ICAO requirements; and ask that ICAO establish and enforced accountability where States are not compliant with those requirements by 05 March 2008. We will also present the IFATCA global statement on ATM to the Assembly.

View IFATCA papers at www.ifatca.org or www.icao.int/assembly36/ The ICAO Council has convened a one-day, high-level meeting to coincide with the 36th Assembly. This meeting, on September 17, will address safety issues in the AFI Region and draft a resolution for adoption by the Assembly. Alexis Brathwaite will represent IFATCA. See www.icao.int/highlevel for further details. dp@ifatca.org

Subscription Form The CONTROLLER is 4 issues a year, usually published on 1st March, June, September and December. Subscriptions will be automatically renewed for one year on 31st May of each year. Cancellation or amendements to numbers of issues must reach the Subscriptions Manager (office@ifatca.org) by 1st April. A reduced rate is available on request for large orders.

Magazines are despatched using priority airmail worldwide. Costs for a year (4 issues) inclusive of mailing are as follows:

^ IFATCA members …………………….. 1 year subscription = 32 USD ^ Others ……………………………........ 1 year subscription = 42 USD Payment for large numbers can be made by cheque card in US dollars.

Further information available from the • e-mail: subscribe@ifatca.org Please Return to: The CONTROLLER MagaStreet, Suite 408, Montreal, Quebec, H3B

or bank transfer in US Dollars, or for individual subscriptions by visa/master-

Subscription Manager: • web sites: www.ifatca.org

• www.the-controller.net

zine Subscription via email: subscribe@ifatca.org or mail to: IFATCA, 1255 University 3B6, Canada or fax: +1514 866 7612

BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE Family Name ________________________________________________

First Name(s) ____________________________________________________

Address ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________

Country ____________________________________________

Number of copies required: ________ Method of Payment: (please indicate)

Cheque enclosed

visa

mastercard

request invoice

Cheques to be made payable to The CONTROLLER in US Dollars If paying by visa/mastercard: Card Number: __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

expiry date __ __ __ __

Signature of cardholder _______________________________________________________________ Credit Card Security code (on reverse) __ __ __ Name of cardholder __________________________________________________________________ Address of cardholder ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (if different from above) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Tel of cardholder _______________________________________

Email of cardholder _____________________________________________________

Charlie‘s Column

Photo: INT

Charlie‘s Column Boeing 737 Stuck in Middle of City In Mumbai (India) a truck moving an old Air Sahara B737 from the airport to a dump site near Delhi got lost in the suburbs, and subsequently became stuck taking a roundabout in the middle of the city. The driver abandoned his truck and load, and has not been seen since. No-one will accept responsibility for the B737.

After a few days the aircraft became a tourist attraction, but the local inhabitants are not amused as it blocks the traffic and it is not a nice view they say.

Bee Strike Not only do we have bird strikes, we now have bees strikes. Last may a B737 taking off from Bournemouth (UK) bound to Faro with 196 passengers hit a swarm of bees, and one hour later one engine suffered a surge and had to be shut down. The aircraft returned, and the turbine was found to be full of dead bees. This is the first recorded event of bees forcing an engine shut-down.

Some jokes were made about this in ATC circles.

To explain why the engine didn‘t surge until an hour after the bee strike, it is probable that the bees managed to fly in front of the aircraft for an hour until they became tired.

4 Not a nice view?

For many of us, a B737 is a delight!

You‘ve just got to admire any killer bee that takes on a 737.... ... and wins.

Overheard on the Frequency:

Why did the pilot did not see the bees?

The bees did not have the right transponder setting tuned in... probably because bees don‘t squawk, they buzz.

American pilot: “London, the ride is smoother at FL370, thanks a lot.“ British controller: “Oh, that‘s okay sir, that‘s my job!“

Cosmic Toilets

Some foreign pilots often speak English as a translation of their own language. A young Mexican pilot on his first flight to the US (Texas) called US ATC at the border saying “Control, this is AX123, good night!“ (for “Buenas noches“ a normal late evening greeting in Spanish).

After a stunned silence, the experienced US controller replied “AX 123,…Okay sleep well!“

You remember my story last time about the A380 toilets with 100 km/h flushing devices. Now I have another one on the ISS and the space shuttle.

In zero gravity going to the toilet is not that easy. For the small things, some anatomic devices do the job but for big things it is rather complicated. I spare you the details other than to tell you that the complete unit cost $US19 million! For that money you are supposed to get away clean, but you have to remember that no water can be used!

The NASA have just had to order a new one as they plan to double the astronauts in the space station from 3 to 6. Now the 1 million dollar question: what happens to the waste? Well the urine is distilled back and is re-used as normal water!!

The 737 was probably refueled by BeePee.

The “heavy” parts are transferred into disused supply containers and when full are released and they finally re-enter the atmosphere and burn on their way down, like a falling star.

I‘ve had wildflower honey, barley honey, lavender honey, pine honey, but never JET-A honey...

Well, I am sure the next time you see a falling star in the summer evening you will remember this story… ^

This one from Germany: A female trainee controller is fighting hard during a departure rush, she is constantly transmitting.

Controller: “Alitalia 123,… ah disregard.“ 4 transmissions later: Controller: “Alitalia 123,..e ee e…ah disregard.“ Another 6 transmissions later, again: Controller: “Alitalia 123,...eee . ah, disregard.“ AZA123 (male, with heavy Italian accent): “Ah, madam-e, do you want-e my telephone number?”

THE

CONTROLLER

39

The Controller is read everywhere.

Your advertisement could be here!

Contact Tatiana at: office@iftaca.org ¡ Visit us at: www.the-controller.net