FRAL project F ree R oute A irspace L ISBOA FIR

1. FRAL project Free Route Airspace LISBOA FIR Vanda Cruz MAR 2011

2. FRAL Project • FRAL Project Objectives • Interface with procedural Control • Civil-Military Coordination • General Procedures • Contingency Planning • Airspace Management • AIS Mechanisms • Interface with Eurocontrol for FPL • Impact on ATC • Systems • Traffic flow statistics & Benchmarking • Benefit results • Next Steps • Conclusions

3. FRAL Project Objectives • WHY FRAL PROJECT • The significant traffic growth experienced throughout the last decade, jointly with the severe increase in the en-route delay, forced ANSP's to increase airspace capacity by means of airspace restructuring. • Keeping in mind that the increase in demand is expected to continue, the international community urges fuel savings and reductions in CO2 emissions. • Today, an ATS fixed route network appears inefficient to manage potential airspace capacity and to satisfy aircraft operator's expectations in terms of greater operational flexibility, punctuality and financial benefits.

4. FRAL Project Objectives • WHY FRAL PROJECT • As aircraft operators persistently insist for enhancements and new possibilities providing more flexibility throughout the European airspace. • Being completely aware of future challenges faced by the aeronautical industry, NAV Portugal decided to implement on the 7th of May 2009 a full Free Route Airspace project within Lisbon FIR (FRAL) above FL245. • The FRAL aims to remove the constraints imposed by the fixed route structure and through the optimized use of the entire airspace obtaining benefits of capacity, flexibility, flight efficiency and cost savings, while maintaining safety standards.

5. FRAL Project Objectives FRAL Before FRAL

6. FRAL Project Objectives • LISBOA FIR • 1200 movements per day • Main traffic flows • - Northbound/Southbound flow • - Westbound/Eastbound Oceanic flow • to/from Santa Maria Oceanic FIR. Anchoring points

7. Interface With Procedural Control • Interface with procedural Control: • NAV Portugal also provides non-radar services in Santa Maria Oceanic FIR. • This figure illustrates the western boundary limit between Santa Maria Oceanic and Lisbon FIR. • Random routing • The main traffic flows along this boundary between both Portuguese FIR’s is oceanic traffic to/from the Iberian Peninsula, being Madrid airport the main hub destination.

8. Interface With Procedural Control Previous route structure • Main ATS routes via landfall BUSEN • Free Route Airspace • Wider range of possibilities

9. Interface With Procedural Control Traffic may now proceed directly from the entry point in Lisbon FIR to the exit point in Lisbon FIR. Example: Flight planning from Madrid to Boston before and after the Free Route concept implementation: • For those airlines operating in the oceanic region through Lisbon FIR airspace, the Free Route Airspace project has permitted enormous flexibility and cost-efficiency

10. Civil – Military Coordination Civil – Military Coordination: • Segregated airspace within Lisbon FIR is composed by restricted (R) military areas, danger (D) military areas, temporary segregated areas (TRA) and one prohibited (P) area with no impact in this project. • Above FL245 there are two types of military areas: - AMC, manageable areas; - NON AMC. • LPR60B was the only NON AMC segregated area inside FIR Lisboa above FL245. • As the main segregated area it has some implications on traffic demand. • Coordination was made with the military to become manageable above FL245. It is necessary to recognize the excellent cooperation and close relationship between NAV Portugal and Portuguese Air Force.

11. Civil – Military Coordination • Today, aircraft operators plan their trajectory inside FRAL disregarding all segregated airspace. In case there is no availability to cross active segregated areas, it is expected that the average flight extension to be considered by aircraft operators is approximately 5NM and in exceptional occasions 15NM. • Several fast time simulation exercises were performed in order to evaluate the impact of this military area in the attempt to identify the rerouting options and the trajectory extension most penalising to traffic.

12. General Procedures Procedures available above FL245 Users free for using Waypoints No limitations on the use direct trajectories Predefined trajectories above FL245 will be applied in case of contingency

13. General Procedures Delegated airspace is excluded BABOV/RAKOD and CCS, outside FRAL area, are transfer coordination points with Madrid ACC. Madrid ACC Lisbon ACC Seville ACC

14. General Procedures Flight Planning: Within the FRAL area there will be no limitations on the use of “DCT “. Traffic will be subject to general rules and procedures (AIP Portugal ENR1.1), RAD orientation scheme and internal Letters of Agreements (LoA’s) between neighboring ACC’s. Flight planning within the FRAL area will accomplish with adjacent ATS route network orientation. YES NO

15. General Procedures Flight Planning: Arriving traffic should plan directly from Lisboa FIR entry point to the STAR initial waypoint. Departing traffic should plan directly from the SID final waypoint to the Lisboa FIR exit point. Overflight traffic should plan directly from Lisboa FIR entry point to Lisboa FIR exit point.

16. General Procedures CROSS BORDER: Cross-Border -DCT- NOT Allowed. Following IFPS procedures, DCT segment which ends in the FIR but starts in another FIR which is not part of the same NAS is NOT permitted. Airspace users will have to plan their trajectory inside FRAL through the use of intermediate waypoints. Suggestions: Intermediate waypoint ABRAT suggested for traffic entering MOSEN or NINOS with destination LPFR or exiting via AMSEL/OSLAD. Intermediate waypoint NARTA suggested for traffic passing through Casablanca FIR/UIR. ABRAT

17. Contingency Planning in Lisboa ACC CONTINGENCY PLANNING: In case of contingency, a reduced ATS route structure above FL 245 will apply as defined in our AIP 2.2.3- CONTINGENCY PLANNING IN LISBON ACC (CONFLICT FREE FL ALLOCATION SCHEME) . Arrivals to Madeira

18. Airspace Management Airspace Management: Lisboa FIR: Traffic is still subject to the adjacent FIR’s ATS route network orientation. For this reason, apart from minor modifications, no significant changes were encountered to these traffic flows. Santa Maria FIR: A significant change to the oceanic flow was observed. With no landfalls to accommodate the flows, airlines now have a variety of exit points in the FIR boundary between Lisbon and Santa Maria to optimize their flights when flying within Lisbon FIR.

19. Airspace Management Conflict Detections: • Large number of different direct connections to meet operational requirements of the AO´s • Three Fast Time Simulations • 3 day Sample traffic (August) • 1000 Ft, 10NM

20. Airspace Management Traffic exclusion list: • No sector limit changes. • Defined traffic exclusions The traffic exclusion analysis was essential to guarantee a better demand/capacity balance along Lisbon FIR traffic volumes improving our performance and avoiding any unnecessary ATFM regulation.

21. Airspace Management TMA: • Improved the arrival/departure (STAR's/SID's) routes in the three main Portuguese terminal areas. • In terms of airspace structure, the only changes made inside the TMA’s were some adjustments to the SID’s and STAR’s procedures.

22. Airspace Management Airspace Utilization Lisboa FIR Route Structure before Free Route Free Route trajectories Offering numerous possibilities

23. AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication AIP updated: 1.- AIC publication. (5 months prior) 2.- ENR 1.10: Flight planning. Item 15. (update) 3.- ENR 1.3: “Free route airspace general procedures”. (new chapter) 4.- ENR 3: ATS routes. (update) 5.- ENR 6: En-route charts. (update) 6.- ENR 2.2.3: “Contingency planning in Lisboa FIR”. (new) 7.- AD2 Aerodromes: (update) LPPT, Lisboa LPFR, Faro LPPR, Porto

24. AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication

25. NEW Airspace Type: RAS (Reserved Airspace) Coded Identification: LPPCFRA Name: Lisboa Free Route Airspace Significant_Point_In_Airspace: each entry/exit point ATS Route Segment: Vertical Limit changed to: FL245 FL460, within delegated airspace Withdrawn (segments above FL245) AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication EAD & SDO SYSTEM

26. AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication EAD & SDO SYSTEM SDO (Static Data Operation). Airspace definition. An specific Free Route Airspace was created to define all necessary components.

27. AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication EAD & SDO SYSTEM SDO (Static Data Operation). Route segments version withdrawn. All ATS routes above FL245 were eliminated from the system.

28. AIS Mechanisms • Aeronautical Information Publication EAD & SDO SYSTEM SDO (Static Data Operation). Route segments usage condition. All Upper limits of ATS routes were corrected to FL245.

29. Interface with Eurocontrol for FPL • Having no route structure inside a Flight Information Region was a completely new concept in regards to the flight planning system. • Considering some system issues that came across with the CFMU, effort was made in close collaboration with Eurocontrol to avoid any Flight Plan rejections during the first weeks of implementation. • Manual adjustments were adapted to the circumstances where it was not possible to avoid the automatic rejection. • From the beginning, collaboration and monitoring of flight plans in the Lisbon control room proved critical to identify and solve problems. • Many fast time simulations were performed to anticipate those situations and to prepare cost-effective alternative options to inform airline operators and CFMU personnel to act when those cases occurred.

30. Impact on ATC • Kept it simple avoiding changes that could have a negative impact on ATC. • No changes were made to sectors, • No new waypoints created on our FIR border, • Intermediate waypoints were maintained to allow the best planning possible by the AO’s • Providing “directs” by the ATC was already a parte of the day to day operational reality in Lisbon ACC which made the transition process of direct routing very familiar to the ATC, The day-to-day experience gained in the OPS room has permitted to believe in the potential of Lisbon FIR to eliminate the upper ATS route network. • Use of LAT/LONG • Having in mind the air traffic controllers, the use of waypoint and nav-aids is preferable as they are familiarized with their position whereas the use of LAT/LONG bring upon infinite possibilities. • Training: • Real time simulations in Free Route scenarios contemplating procedures for radar failure

31. Systems • From the technical point of view the existing systems and management tools are valid to support operations in the airspace "free route"In any case, five technical tools identified that could have a significant contribution to facilitate the concept of "free route" in Lisbon FIR: • STCA Short Term Conflict Alert • Flight Leg • MTCD - Medium Term Conflict Detection • APW - Area Proximity Warning • Flight Plan Track

32. Traffic Flow Statistics & Benchmarking • Traffic flow statistics & Benchmarking Traffic flows monitoring and post analysis has identified an increase of 20% additional entry/exit combinations compared with the previous ATS route network scenario regarding the overflight traffic demand. Flight planning freedom in both airspaces has permitted to identify some variations in the fixed boundary waypoints chosen by the airlines. Comparing traffic samples from August 2008 with an existing ATS route structure, and traffic in August 2010 within a Free Route environment, the following graphs show concrete conclusions regarding the variations encountered in oceanic traffic flows. North/Westbound oceanic traffic flows 2008 vs 2010. North/Eastbound oceanic traffic flows 2008 vs 2010

33. Traffic Flow Statistics & Benchmarking • Traffic flow statistics & Benchmarking South/Westbound traffic Oceanic Traffic Flows 2008 vs 2010. South/Eastbound flow Oceanic Traffic Flows 2008 vs 2010.

34. Benefit results From na economic perspective, the FRAL project enableded in it’s first year of operations: • Reduction of 1.300.000NM • Fuel Savings 8.783 Tones • Savings over 12.milion Euros Environmental perservation • 27.000 Tones CO2 • Interface with Santa Maria Oceanic Considering a monthly traffic sample (August 2010), the total saving of the oceanic Westbound and Eastbound flows were: • Westbound traffic: 7200 NM • Eastbound traffic: 5300 NM As a total, 12500NM/month was saved with the implementation of the Free Route airspace in Lisbon FIR for this particular overflight traffic.

35. Benefit results Main Traffic Flows • ENTRY POINT: AKUDA AKUDA – BABOV 819 Flights Savings per flight 3.8NM TOTAL 3112 NM AKUDA – TURON 208 Flights Savings per flight 17.91 NM TOTAL 3725 NM TURON BABOV AKUDA

36. Benefit results Main Traffic Flows • ENTRY POINT: RALUS RALUS – BEXAL 246 Flights Savings per flight 2.79NM TOTAL 686NM RALUS – OSLAD 326 Flights Savings per flight 7.58NM TOTAL 2471 NM RALUS BEXAL OSLAD

37. Benefit results Main Traffic Flows • ENTRY POINT: CCS – ELVAR CCS – LUTAK 204 Flights Savings per flight 6.48NM TOTAL 1321 NM CCS – KOMUT 238 Flights Savings per flight 8.29NM TOTAL 1973 NM CCS – GUNTI 146Flights Savings per flight 15.53NM TOTAL 2267NM GUNTI KOMUT CCS LUTAK

38. Benefit results • Traffic via NELSO RALUS – NELSO Savings per flight 14.49 NM MOSEN – NELSO Savings per flight 14.86NM RALUS MOSEN NELSO

39. Benefit results • One of the main gains of FRAL concerns the Air Berlin flight from EDDL to LPPD Saving:70NM DEMOS LUTAK

40. FRAL Future Steps

41. FRAL Future Steps Vertical Airspace Management above FL150 FRAL Above FL195 • In order to harmonise the Lower/Upper airspace organisation, a feasibility study will be performed to extend FRAL airspace to FL195.

42. FRAL Future Steps Taking into account aircraft operators preferred trajectories, the airspace sectorisation will be adjusted accordingly. Alternative sectorisation Current sectorisation

43. FRAL Future Steps • Improve Airspace Utilization • Although both FIR’s are managed by NAV Portugal, there is still a boundary limit between them with a fixed waypoint based structure to serve as compulsory fly-over reference. • Unavoidably this confines the access to a more flexible arrangement whereas flying over these waypoints would not be necessary. Taking advantage of the Free Route Airspace concept in both Portuguese FIR’s (Lisboa + Santa Maria) it will be studied the possibility to permit CROSS_BORDER_DCT between both airspaces with the improvement of airspace utilisation. Taking full advantage of the Free Route Concept, maximizing the benefits in both FIR’s.

44. Conclusions Some AO’s opinions reflect key benefits of the free route concept: • IBERIA operations: “…free route permitted an optimal flexibility with a total alleviation of military areas. Information published was clear and did not cause any disturb in the flight planning department…”. • IBERWORLD operations: “…free route concept has permitted to achieve a dream for airlines operations without the necessity to invest in new technology…”. • TAP Portugal operations: “…thanks to the flexibility of the free route concept we have optimised TAP routes with significant gains in fuel saved…”. • VUELING operations: “…after some contacts with NAV Portugal airspace department we achieved to optimise trajectories inside Lisbon FIR. Free route adaptation was easy, fast an successful..”. • IACA operations: “…To our knowledge there have been no reported ATFM issues resulting from military requirements which have been managed tactically by the Portuguese authorities. We were delighted that any foreseen problems proved unfounded. We recognize that significant savings have been made over the last twelve months in respect of fuel burn and carbon emissions….”

45. Conclusions • Conclusions • On the 7th of May 2010, the Free Route Airspace concept in Lisbon FIR, FRAL project, celebrated its first anniversary with the satisfactory recognition from the airspace user’s community in favor of the success of the project. • After this first year it can be concluded: • It was founded in a simply and basic number of general procedures; • No new technical equipment required, just basic RNAV capability; • Simplicity has facilitated the success in the execution of the flight planning; • It was designed considering all partners (CFMU, Military, Aircraft operators and Database operators); • Maximum freedom has been offered to verify aircraft operators expectations; • CFMU systems aware of new concept to be updated; • Efficiency and flexibility most appreciated by airline operators; • Huge benefits can be obtained for AO’s (>1 million NM, >8.000 Tons fuel, >27.000 Tons CO2).

46. Conclusions Eurocontrol Guidance Material: Concept of Operations for Harmonised Free Route Implementation • Airspace Classification • Flight Level Orientation • Limited Applicability of Free Route Airspace Operations • Airspace Organisation • - Vertical Limits of Free Route Operations Airspace and their publication • - Horizontal Limits of Free Route Operations Airspace and their publication • - Vertical connection between Free Route Operations Airspace and the underlying fixed ATS route Network • Maximising efficiency of Free Route Operations Airspace • - Access to/from Terminal Airspace • - Publication of a contingency ATS Route Network and publication of contingency procedures • - Maintenance of a fixed route network within Free Route Airspace • - Special Use Airspace structures • - Route Availability • - Sectorisation • - Sector and traffic volume capacities /monitoring values • - ATS Delegation • Airspace Management • Letters of Agreement and Coordination Procedures • Flight Planning • - Use of intermediate Lat/Long points for flight planning • - Flight Planning through Special Use Airspace • - Flight Planning Facilitation through the use of DCTs • Air Traffic Flow and Capacity Management • - Sector Configuration Management • - Sector and Traffic Volume capacities /monitoring values • - Re-routing proposals • - ATFCM procedures • - ATFCM/IFPS tools support • Network Systems Support

47. Conclusions The iFlex program reinforces the importance of providing much more flexibility in planning for aircraft operators in line with the FRAL project objectives. Thank You For Your Attention vanda.cruz@nav.pt