ICAO NAT Region

updates

ICAO EUR/NAT

70˚N

80 N 80N 70N

60˚N 60˚N

REYKJAVIK

50˚N 50˚N

SHANWICK

GANDER

40˚N 40˚N

NEW YORK EAST SANTA

MARIA

30˚N 30˚N

20˚N 20˚N

60ºW

50ºW 40ºW 30ºW

Outline • ICAO EUR/NAT

• NAT traffic figures

• NAT service development

roadmap (MNPS to

HLA/PBN,Reduced separations,

data link etc)

• ICAO amendments on PBN/PBCS

Global & Regional

Global Plans

SARPs & PANS

Training & Guidance

Implementation Planning/Supp.

Measurement & Reporting

if needed

Compliance & Verification

Needs Analysis / Validation

3 July 2014 3

Austria

Belgium

Bulgaria

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Ireland

Italy

Latvia

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Malta

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

Estonia

Norway

Switzerland

Albania

Armenia *

Bosnia and Herzegovina

The former Yugoslav Republic

of Macedonia

Republic of Moldova *

Monaco

Montenegro

Serbia

Turkey

Ukraine *

Azerbaijan *

Georgia

San Marino

Andorra

Belarus *

Israel

Kazakhstan *

Kyrgyzstan *

Russian Fed. *

Tajikistan *

Turkmenistan *

Uzbekistan *

EU

EUROCONTROL (41 States)

ECAC (44 States)

ICAO EUR Region (55 States)

Iceland

Algeria

Morocco

Tunisia

ICAO EUR/NAT Office accreditation (56 States)

* : IAC Member

4

Croatia

( + Iceland )

5

EUR/NAT Regional Groups

North Atlantic Systems Planning

Group

(NAT SPG)

1965

European Air Navigation Planning

Group

(EANPG)

1972

Regional Aviation

Safety Group EUR

(RASG-EUR)

2011

ICAO EUR/NAT Aviation Security Group

(ENAVSEC) 2012

Our role in the EUR/NAT

• Liaise with States on the issues related to compliance with ICAO SARPs in a very unique and complex environment (ECAC, EU, EUROCONTROL, EASA, IAC,…)

• Assist States in implementation of corrective actions

• Coordinate intra and inter- regional aspects of GANP/ASBU, GASP, AVSEC and FAL implementation with the ICAO mandate per Chicago Convention

• Provide a forum for States and industry to work together, share knowledge and best practice, address common issues under the ICAO umbrella

• Ensure the inter-regional coordination with other ICAO Regional Offices

• Regional coordination and support of the ICAO USOAP and USAP activities

6

NAT Region Statistics

• Annual Operations1

– Number of flights: 547,907

• 536,309 passenger flights

• 11,598 cargo flights

• Passengers and Cargo2

– Passengers: More than 100 million carried

– Cargo: Approximately 27 billion freight RTMs transported

1 FAA, TFMS Data 2 FAA estimates using TFMS and US DOT/BTS Operational Data

7

2010 20132011 2012 2014 2017 2018 20192015 20202016 20222021

RLongSM Trial Prep(IMP Plan Ref.)

RLongSM Trial

(IMP Plan Ref.)

RLongSM Roll-out (IMP Plan Ref.)

RLatSM Trial Prep (IMP Plan Ref.)

RLatSM Trial (IMP Plan Ref.)

FANS Mandate Preparation(IMP Plan Ref.)

FANS Mandate P1 (IMP Plan Ref.)

FANS Mandate Phase 2(IMP Plan Ref.)

PBN Trial Prep(IMP Plan Ref.)

PBN Trial (IMP Plan Ref.)

PBN Roll-out (IMP Plan Ref.)

NY OCA RNP4/10 (IMP Plan Ref.)

NAT Service Development RoadmapIssue: 2013_Draft A : Date: January 2013

RCP/RSP Preparation(IMP Plan Ref.)

RCP/RSP Roll-out

(IMP Plan Ref.)

AIDC Rollout (IMP Plan Ref.)

Flight Plan 2012 Rollout (IMP Plan Ref.)

Key:Development activity

Dependency

Progress indicator

OTS Phaseout (IMP Plan Ref.)

Further separation reduction Phase 1 (IMP Plan Ref.)

Further separation reduction Phase 3 (IMP Plan Ref.)

Further separation reduction Phase 2 (IMP Plan Ref.)

LEO ADS-B Surveillance

(IMP Plan Ref.)

DCPC Voice (IMP Plan Ref.)

Reduced deconfliction horizon

(IMP Plan Ref.)

SWIM Roll-out (IMP Plan Ref.)

SESAR/NextGen 4-D Trajectory development (IMP Plan Ref.)

SESAR/NextGen NOP development (IMP Plan Ref.)

NAT SDR

NAT initiative Impl date Aerospace and/or tracks

Flight levels Aircraft capabilities

Related provisions

RLongSM initial phase Applied btw eligible pair after oceanic entry

Applied btw eligible pairs since 2010

Gander &Shanwick

MNPS fls FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

Applied pnly after CPDLC/ADS-C connection established in oceabnic airspace

RLongSM next phase-traffic loaded onto tracks using RLongSM

TBD Gander, Reykjavik, Shanwick. Potentially others

MNPS fls FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

same

DLM Phase I 7 Feb 2013 2 core NAT tracks

360-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

DLM Phase 2A 5 Feb 2015 All NAT OTS tracks

350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

Not applied in the areas with ATS surv, NY and above 80

DLM Phase 2B 7 Dec 2017 ALL NAT region 350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

same

DLM Phase 2C 30 Jan 2020 All NAT, incl NY 290 and above FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C

Not applied in the areas with ATS surv and above 80

NAT initiative Impl date Aerospace and/or tracks

Flight levels Aircraft capabilities

Related provisions

RLatSM Phase I 12 Nov 2015 3 core tracks 350-390 FANS 1/A CPDLC&ADS-C+RNP4 approved

Not applied in NY

RLatSM Phase II TBD All tracks 350-390 same same

RLatSM Phase III TBD Btw eligible pairs throughout NAT

TBD same

MNPS to HLA/PBN Jan 2015 All existing MNPSA

285-420 RNP10 or RNP4 for all new MNPSA authorisations

MNPS nav spec discontinued

MNPS to HLA/PBN

4 Feb 2016 All existing MNPSA

285-420 RNP4/RNP10 MNPS airspace renamed to NAT HLA

MNPS to HLA/PBN

30 Jan 2020 ALL HLA 285-420 All appropriate PBN MNPS nav spec is not accepted for HLA authorisations

MNPS to HLA/PBN

TBD All HLA 265-420 All appropriate PBN No HLA authorisation required

PBCS 12 Nov 2016 RLatSM RLatSM RCP240/RSP180 PBCS approvals required

PBN

Proposal for the amendment of Annex 6, Parts I, II and III,

• simplification of the PBN approval process;

• achieved by including standard operating procedures and training

programmes in the operator’s operations manual which is approved by

the State of the Operator (or State of Registry);

• a framework in the form of a template to standardize specific approvals

(letters of authorization) for general aviation;

• the concept of “complex” PBN operations for “out of the ordinary”

operations (e.g., similar to Cat II and III instrument approach

operations) which would be subject to a specific approval.

7.2.2 For operations where a navigation specification for performance-based navigation (PBN)

has been prescribed, an aeroplane shall, in addition to the requirements specified in 7.2.1:

a) be provided with navigation equipment which will enable it to operate in accordance with the

prescribed navigation specification(s); and

b) have information relevant to the aeroplane navigation specification capabilities listed in the

flight manual or other aeroplane documentation approved by the State of the Design or State

of Registry; and

c) have information relevant to the aeroplane navigation specification capabilities included in

the MEL.

7.2.3 The State of the Operator shall, for operations where a navigation specification for PBN

has been prescribed, ensure that the operator has established and documented:

a) normal and abnormal procedures including contingency procedures;

b) flight crew qualification and proficiency requirements in accordance with the appropriate

navigation specifications;

c) a training programme for relevant personnel consistent with the intended operations; and

d) appropriate maintenance procedures to ensure continued airworthiness in accordance with

the appropriate navigation specifications.

7.2.4 The State of the Operator shall issue a specific approval for complex navigation

specifications.

Proposal for the amendment of Annex 6, Parts I, II and III,

• prescription of RCP and RSP for air traffic services that are predicated

on communication and surveillance performance;

• approval of air operators for a communication and/or surveillance

capability including aircraft equipage for operations where RCP and/or

RSP specifications have been prescribed;

• indication of an aircraft’s communication and surveillance capability in

the form of RCP/RSP specifications in the flight plan;and

• monitoring programmes to assess actual communication and

surveillance performance against RCP and RSP specifications and to

determine corrective action, as applicable, for the appropriate entity

PBCS

7.1.3 For operations where communication equipment is required to meet an RCP specification for

performance-based communication (PBC), an aeroplane shall, in addition to the requirements specified in

7.1.1:

a) be provided with communication equipment which will enable it to operate in accordance with the prescribed

RCP specification(s) type(s);

b) have information relevant to the aeroplane RCP specification capabilities listed in the flight manual or other

aeroplane documentation approved by the State of Design or State of Registry; and

c) have information relevant to the aeroplane RCP specification capabilities included in the MEL.

7.1.4 The State of the Operator shall, for operations where an RCP specification for PBC has been prescribed,

ensure that the operator has established and documented:

a) normal and abnormal procedures, including contingency procedures;

b) flight crew qualification and proficiency requirements, in accordance with appropriate RCP specifications;

c) a training programme for relevant personnel consistent with the intended operations; and

d) appropriate maintenance procedures to ensure continued airworthiness, in accordance with appropriate

RCP specifications.

7.1.5 The State of the Operator shall ensure that, in respect of those aeroplanes mentioned in 7.1.3, adequate

provisions exist for:

a) receiving the reports of observed communication performance issued by the monitoring programmes

established in accordance with Annex 11, Chapter 3, 3.3.5.2; and

b) taking immediate corrective action for individual aircraft, aircraft types or operators, identified in such reports

as not complying with the RCP specification.

ICAO NAT documents

http://www.icao.int/EURNAT/P

ages/welcome.aspx