Traffic Identification Some tendencies from the NUP EVA Simulation

1. ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary Traffic Identification Some tendencies from the NUP EVA Simulation

2. DLH 234 DLH 123 ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary ESVA application (draft Package 1 OSED) Visual Following Procedure without CDTI ESVA Procedure using CDTI Controller:Lufthansa 123, Traffic to follow is a Company Airbus 320 in your 12 o‘clock position, range 4 nautical miles. Would you like to maintain own visual separation? Pilot after visual identification:Aircraft in sight, Lufthansa 123. Controller:Lufthansa 123, Confirm visual identification of Delta Lima Hotel 234. Pilot after checking CDTI and visual identification:Confirm visual Identification of Delta Lima Hotel 234. Range 4 nautical miles, 12 o’clock, Lufthansa 123. Controller: ”Lufthansa 123, maintain own visual separation to traffic twelve o’clock. 3 miles. Company A320.” Pilot:”Traffic in sight, maintaining own visual separation, Lufthansa 123.” Controller: ”Lufthansa 123, maintain own visual separation to Delta Lima Hotel 234.” Pilot:”Delta Lima Hotel 234 in sight, maintaining own visual separation, Lufthansa 123”

3.   tested phraseology Lufthansa 123, Maintain own visual separation 234 Delta Lima Hotel Lufthansa 123, Maintain own visual separation 234 Lufthansa • Instruction ending with flight number might confuse the pilots Proposal: Reversed airline designator/flight number for the identification of the third party to avoid confusion of the third party pilot. Potential problem with acceptance: Controllers questioned the necessity of the reversed airline designator/flight number.  new proposal  • Spelling of familiar callsigns (DLH in Frankfurt, SAS in Stockholm) is difficult for controller as well as for pilots.  Proposal: “Lufthansa” or “Scandinavian” could be used instead of, if both pilot and controller are familiar with.  • Potential confusion with the numeral ‘2’.  Proposal: delete ‘to’ in the phraseology. DLH 234 DLH 123 ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary Proposed Phraseology Lufthansa 123, Maintain own visual separation toDelta Lima Hotel 234

4. No major problems caused by the procedure mix could be realized during the simulation runs. • It is an assumption of the simulation team that most of the “misinterpretations” happened because of few training of the controllers ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary Procedure Mix: EVA  Classic Visual Following • Facts: • Only 1% “misinterpretations” happened during the simulation sessions (4 out of 275 landings) • 3 cases: Controller instructed the classical Visual Following procedure although the aircraft was able to perform the EVA procedure • 1 case: Controller instructed the aircraft to perform the EVA procedure although the aircraft was not equipped • controller “misinterpretations” happened independent from the equipage rate (0%, 30%, 70%)

5. ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary EVA Simulation Exercise Number of Simulation Exercises: 4(involving controllers from Frankfurt Approach) Simulation Exercise: 1 familiarization run (30% EVA equipage)(for one controller) 1 simulation run (0% EVA equipage) 1 simulation run (30% EVA equipage) 1 simulation run (70% EVA equipage)altered sequence between subjects Simulation Run: Frankfurt Approach environment incl. 4D-planner CWP enhancement: presentation of ADS-B equipage on flight strips and radar label TIS-B available in the Frankfurt environment controller involved: 1 feeder, 2 pick-up ~1 hour simulation time 45 arrivals/hour typical Frankfurt aircraft mix: 40% Heavy 60% Medium

6. ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary EVA Simulation Exercise Pick-up North Feeder Pick-up South

7. DLH 234 DLH 123 ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary „Package 1 ESVA“ versus „NUP EVA“ ESVA Procedure (draft Package 1 OSED) EVA Procedure(NEAN Update Project) Controller:Lufthansa 123, Confirm visual identification of Delta Lima Hotel 234. Pilot after CDTI and visual identification:Confirm visual Identification of Delta Lima Hotel 234. Range 4 nautical miles, 12 o’clock, Lufthansa 123. Controller:Lufthansa 123, Confirm visual identification of 234 Lufthansa. Pilot after checking CDTI and visual identification:234 Lufthansa in sight, Lufthansa 123. Controller: ”Lufthansa 123, maintain visual separation to Delta Lima Hotel 234.” Pilot:”Maintaining visual separation to Delta Lima Hotel 234, Lufthansa 123.” Controller: ”Lufthansa 123, maintain own visual separation 234 Lufthansa.” Pilot:”234 Lufthansa in sight, maintaining own visual separation, Lufthansa 123.”

8. ESVA Application • EVA Phraseology • EVA Procedure Mix • EVA Simulation • ESVA vs. EVA • Summary Summary NUP EVA simulation runs highlighted some specific issues of the proposed phraseology to be put into the Global Discussion on „Third Party Identification“. 1. Modified Phraseology Proposal: Lufthansa 123, Maintain own visual separation toDelta Lima Hotel 234 tested phraseology Lufthansa 123, Maintain own visual separation 234 Lufthansa new proposal 2. Procedure Mix between EVA (with CDTI) and Visual Following Procedure (without CDTI) seems to be possible.