Introduction to the Mission trajectory V1.0 hr

EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION

EUROPEAN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Introduction to the Mission Trajectory

Document Identifier: 10/06/03-62 Edition: 1.0 Edition Date: 25/05/10 Status: Released Issue Intended for: General Public


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: i Mission Trajectory

DOCUMENT APPROVAL

The following table identifies all management authorities who have successively approved the present issue of this document.

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD

The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the present document.

Edition Number Edition Date Reason for change Pages

affected

1.0 25/05/10 Creation All


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: ii Mission Trajectory

DOCUMENT CHARACTERISTICS

TITLE

Mission Trajectory

EATM Infocentre Reference:

Document Identifier: 10/06/03-62 Edition: 1.0

Contractual Ref:

Contractual ID:

Version Date: 25/05/10

Abstract

The purpose of the present document is to progress the main defined concept of a Mission Trajectory related to military activities to a level comprehensive and exploitable for further detailed research and development.

Keywords Mission trajectory Research and

Development Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace

Airspace Management

Technical Support

Contact Person(s) Tel Unit Prepared by: Hugues ROCHER +32 2 729 46 59 DCMAC/ATM

Issued by: Patrick DELMOUZÉE +32 2 729 51 82 DCMAC/ATM

STATUS, AUDIENCE AND ACCESSIBILITY Status Intended for Accessible via

In progress � General Public � Intranet �

Internal Draft � EATM Stakeholders � Extranet �

Working Draft � Restricted Audience � Configuration Manager �

Proposed Issue �

Released Issue �

ELECTRONIC SOURCE Path: I:\CND\DCMAC\ATM\SESAR ATM & SES\Mission Trajectory\Mission Trajectory V1.0

File Name: Introduction to the Mission Trajectory V1.0

Host System: Software Application: Size:

Windows XP: Microsoft Word 10.0 2402 kB


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: iii Mission Trajectory

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Purpose of the Document............................................................................................................ 3

2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 The Concept .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 ATM Capabilities................................................................................................................... 4

3 Mission Trajectory Description ................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Definitions .............................................................................................................................. 6 3.2 Military Activities ................................................................................................................... 7

3.2.1 Airspace Constraints .................................................................................................... 7 3.2.2 Mission trajectory/Business Trajectory...................................................................... 7

3.3 Development Phases ........................................................................................................... 8 3.3.1 Mission Development Trajectory ................................................................................ 8 3.3.2 Shared Mission Trajectory......................................................................................... 10 3.3.3 Reference Mission Trajectory ................................................................................... 11

3.4 Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR) .............................................................. 14 3.5 Data Sharing of a Mission Trajectory .............................................................................. 15 3.6 Airspace Management ....................................................................................................... 15

3.6.1 General......................................................................................................................... 15 3.6.2 Unmanaged Airspace................................................................................................. 16 3.6.3 Managed Airspace...................................................................................................... 17 3.6.4 High Complexity Operations ..................................................................................... 17 3.6.5 Medium/Low Complexity Operations....................................................................... 19 3.6.6 Integration of Specific Airspace Structure Requirements..................................... 19

3.7 Prioritisation Process (User-Driven Prioritisation Process) .......................................... 23 3.8 ASM Supporting Tools ....................................................................................................... 24 3.9 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 24

4 Other SESAR Elements and Technical Support.................................................................... 25

4.1 Sharing of Information for all Partners (FPL).................................................................. 25 4.2 System Wide Information Management .......................................................................... 25 4.3 Network Management ........................................................................................................ 27 4.4 Airport Operations............................................................................................................... 28 4.5 Airspace Capacity............................................................................................................... 29 4.6 Flight Object ........................................................................................................................ 29 4.7 Civil-Military System Interoperability Considerations Impacting 4D Performance.... 30

ANNEXES

Annex A: Principles and Military ATM Requirements to be Accomodated in SESAR

Annex B: Military Air Operations


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: IV Mission Trajectory

Glossary

A

AAR Air-to-Air Refuelling

ACCS Air Command and Control System (NATO)

ADS-B Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast

AEW Airborne Early Warning

AFUA Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace

A/G Air-Ground

AMC Airspace Management Cell

ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider

AOC Airline Operations Centre

APP Approach

ARES Airspace Reservation

ASAS Airborne Separation Assistance System

ASM Airspace Management

ATC Air Traffic Control

ATFCM Air Traffic Flow and Capacity Management

ATM Air Traffic Management

AWACS Airborne Warning and Control System

B

BDT Business Development Trajectory

BT Business Trajectory

C

CAOC Combined Air Operations Centre

CBA Cross-Border Area

CDM Cooperative Decision Making

COMAO Composite Air Operation

CONOPS Concept of Operations

CPDLC Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications

CSAR Combat Search and Rescue

CT Controlled Time

CTA Control Time of Arrival

CTO Calculated Time Over

D

DAP Downlinked Aircraft Parameter

DMA Dynamic Mobile Area

E

EU European Union


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: V Mission Trajectory

F

FIR Flight Information Region

FL Flight Level

FMS Flight Management System

FPL Flight Plan

G

GALILEO European Satellite Positioning Constellation

GAT General Air Traffic

GNSS/PPS Global Navigation Satellite System / Precision Positioning Service

GPS Global Positioning System

H

HA High Altitude

I

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

IFR Instrument Flight Rules

INS Inertial Navigation System

IOP Interoperability

L

LA Low Altitude

M

MA Medium Altitude

MDT Mission Development Trajectory

MEDEVAC Medical Evacuation

MMS Military Mission System

MT Mission Trajectory

MVPA Military Variable Profile Area

N

NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NAV Navigation

NOP Network Operations Plan

O

OAT Operational Air Traffic

P

PBN Performance Based Navigation

PPS Precise Positioning Service

PT Predicted Trajectory

Q

QoS Quality of Service


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: VI Mission Trajectory

R

R&D Research and Development

RBT Reference Business Trajectory

RMT Reference Mission Trajectory

RNP Required Navigation Performance

RTA Required Time of Arrival

S

SBT Shared Business Trajectory

SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research (Programme)

SMT Shared Mission Trajectory

SWIM System Wide Information Management

T

TACAN Tactical Air Navigation

TMA Terminal Control Area

TMR Trajectory Management Requirement

TP Trajectory Prediction

TRA Temporary Reserved Area (Military Reserved Airspace)

TSA Temporary Segregated Area

U

UAS Unmanned Aerial System

UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

UDPP User-Driven Prioritisation Process

UIR Upper Flight Information Region

V

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VGA Variable Geometry Area

W

WOC Wing Operation Centre

WP Way Point


Ref 10/06/03-62, Edition: 1.0 Page: 1 Mission Trajectory

Preamble

The SESAR Programme is the technological component of the Single European Sky (SES) initiative driving the evolution of Air Traffic Management (ATM) in Europe. Split in several projects dealing with operational concepts and associated technological developments, military aspects of the future trajectory management of all type of missions executed in Europe might be addressed in order to fulfil their national Defence and Security requirements, keeping the same principle of freedom and access to airspace than today.

All projects will perform integrated and pre-operational validation and concept validation and/or verification. The definition of Operational concepts will be consolidated and validated using platforms and through fast-time and real-time simulations.

Based on the sharing capabilities of data related to Air Traffic Management along different planning cycles and execution phase, the European States shall retain the right to suspend procedures related to Mission trajectory management and information exchange as part of specific conditions established by the States to fulfil National Defence and Security tasks.

Mission trajectory management will take into consideration ICAO provisions especially for State aircraft operations over high seas. Indeed, as reminder, operations of State aircraft are lawful for all States over high seas and, more generally, when States issue regulations for their aircraft, they must have due regard for the safety of civil aviation.

This document has been elaborated through the expertise of Eurocontrol/DCMAC personnel and in consultation with Military Stakeholders assigned to national organisations or international organisations (NATO). It should support the harmonisation of Mission trajectory management in Europe to its maximum extent. Nevertheless, this document is not intended to be agreed by the States or any international organisation. It is a basic document defining how the military missions could be integrated in the future Single European Sky ATM network, to be used for the SESAR Programme Research and Development activities.



Reference Documents

• Concept of Operations – Task 2.2.2 – Milestone 3 – DLT-0612-222-02-00

• The ATM Target Concept – D3

• The SESAR Master Plan – D5

• EA-WPB-EP2-03 Understanding Trajectory Management V2.01_SJU_D3 (06/07/2009)

• EUROCONTROL Guidelines on Generic Military Requirements To Be Considered When Establishing A Functional Airspace Block (07/05/2008)

• Determining future military airspace requirements in Europe, endorsed by 18th Provisional Council Session reviewed in September 2005



1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT

The conceptual documents of SESAR identify the Business and Mission Trajectory. Although the need to differentiate between the two types of trajectories for specific needs was clearly explained, the description of the term ‘mission trajectory’ remained rather vague.

This was unavoidable insofar as the description of Business Trajectory relies on one flight profile commonly used by all commercial airspace users, whereas Mission Trajectory encompasses several types of Flight Profiles through much more complex scenarios and different planning cycles.

The purpose of the present document is to progress the main defined concept of a Mission Trajectory related to military activities to a comprehensive and exploitable level for further detailed research and development.

The need to have a reference document was mainly expressed by the military experts in order to group the main conceptual description of a Mission Trajectory, and to offer a more detailed explanation and a list of possible issues which have to be taken into account while participating in the SESAR R&D Work Packages. Evidently, this document will also serve as a basis for the entire SESAR Programme to explain the mission trajectory concept.

It will serve as a baseline for further work to provide the processes and services for the SESAR Enterprise architecture framework.



2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 The Concept

The SESAR target concept of operations is a trajectory-based concept. All partners in the ATM network will, wherever possible, share trajectory information in real time from the earliest trajectory development phase through operations and post-operation activities.

ATM Planning, Cooperative Decision-Making (CDM) and tactical operations will be based on the latest trajectory data.

A Business Trajectory (BT) for civil aviation or a Mission Trajectory (MT) for military operation is elaborated and agreed for each flight, resulting in a the trajectory that a user agrees to fly and the ANSP and airport agree to facilitate.

In principle, users must fly their trajectory close to their intent in the most efficient way, minimising changes without a need to adhere to a fixed route structure in a low/medium density area.

The trajectory-based approach confirms 3 important characteristics of trajectories:

• Expressing the needs: trajectories represent the mission intentions of military airspace users. By safeguarding the integrity of the trajectories the concept ensures the best outcome for all users. The trajectory is always associated with all data required to describe the flight.

• Trajectory ownership: under normal circumstances users have primary responsibility over their operation. If ATM constraints have to be applied, the resolution is left to the individual user in order to achieve the best mission outcome.

• 4D trajectories: mission trajectories will be described and executed with the required precision in all 4 dimensions. They will be shared and updated from the sources (aircraft systems, flight operational control systems, ANSP trajectory predictor, FPL data for flights unable to comply with SESAR trajectory management requirements).

The SESAR concept supposes the existence of a standardised trajectory sharing capability mediated by cooperative processes. For civil and military airframe architecture it does not imply compulsory common equipment to ensure the capability of sharing a standardised trajectory. However, although avionics systems should be specific to each airframe e.g. Mission Management System (MMS) for military aircraft or Flight Management System (FMS) for civil aircraft, the ability to exchange the required MT/BT compatible data has to be guaranteed for equipped military aircraft.

In parallel, the SESAR concept envisages mixed-mode operations and accommodation of aircraft with lower or divergent capability levels. This will be enabled by the acceptance of different capability/service levels and by the provision of supplementary ground system support from ANSPs. One example is the Trajectory Prediction (TP) function which can be performed at the airborne side or on the ground. Accommodation of military aircraft experiencing a mismatch of capabilities can also be ensured on the basis of demonstrated equivalent performances.

2.2 ATM Capabilities

The Trajectory management concept implies systematic sharing of aircraft trajectories between various participants in the ATM system in order to obtain a common view of flights and have access to the most up-to-date data available. Airborne systems should be able to store, process and share several trajectories. As a result, both airborne systems and ground systems must build and maintain an identical view of the trajectory and its details using the shared net-centric distributed information environment.



Capability levels are defined to describe the progressive deployment of advanced ATM systems for aircraft, ground systems and airports as well as airborne equipment. For the latter, because of the cost of continued certification of airborne equipment and large range of military aircraft, it is inevitable that there will be a wide variation of capability existing throughout the SESAR timeframe.

The progression of ATM capabilities can be summarised as follows:

ATM Capability Level

ATM-0-1: Existing systems and those that are delivered up to 2012-2013

ATM-2-3: Systems delivered and in service from 2013 onwards, with new capabilities but not fully compliant with 2020 requirements

ATM-4-5: Very advanced capabilities achieving the SESAR goals, in particular the very high-end capacity target from 2020 onwards

Today, the trajectory processed in the aircraft flight management and the trajectory calculated by the ground system are different because the trajectories are calculated for different purposes and using different methodologies.

In SESAR, both aircraft and ground systems will use shared flight data to get a common understanding of trajectory evolution. However, the ground system will still have specific local trajectories derived from a shared trajectory to support the various ATM tasks required to control aircraft that, for any reason (capability or failure), cannot share their trajectory and ensure the required separation.

Similarly, the aircraft system may maintain several trajectories, not all of them needing to be shared. Pre-determined rules will specify which data and which changes to data should be shared to ensure a common understanding of trajectory evolution.

Progressive improvement of the accuracy of ground-based trajectory prediction will improve performance of controller support tools and reduce controller workload per flight (fewer clearances with longer effective duration and increased dependence between/on the tools themselves to monitor compliance with the clearance and to detect potential conflicts). These improvements create most of the increased airspace capacity and safety up to 2020 and beyond. The emphasis will be put on the design and validation of future ATC systems’ capabilities to be used in ATC Centres, Airline Operations Centres (AOC) and Wing Operation Centres (WOC).

The progression of capabilities can be summarised as follows:

• Step 1: General deployment of ground-based trajectory prediction tools supporting conflict detection, conformance monitoring and queue management, using Flight Plan Data, aircraft performance tables, meteorological forecasts and additional trajectory and performance data from the AOC/WOC. These data with limited down-linked intent aircraft parameters (DAP) from Mode S surveillance (later on ADS-B) will allow the introduction of basic intent monitoring functions. This capability is equivalent to ATM-1 capability and will support operation by ATM-0 aircraft until they are withdrawn from service.

• Step 2: Addition of data from aircraft (down-linked aircraft parameters: DAP) using ADS-B and real-time weather measurements. Further lateral and longitudinal uncertainty reduction thanks to clearances based on 2D-RNP (Required Navigation Performance) and/or single time constraints (as RTA: Required Time of Arrival). This represents ground system capability aligned with ATM-2 capability aircraft.



• Step 3: addition of down-linked trajectory data and application of Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR). Further vertical, lateral and longitudinal uncertainty reduction thanks to clearances based on 3D profiles/3D aircraft navigation and flight control capability and multiple time constraints. This represents a ground system capability aligned with ATM-3 capability aircraft.

• As the data sources increase in number and accuracy, the ground system will assign each trajectory with a performance level in each of the 4 dimensions (4D), based on the quality of the source data.

Greater capacity improvements can be obtained by measures aiming at reducing future-position uncertainty and/or by reducing separation minima below the generally available radar separation minima (today 5NM en-route, 3NM in TMA and generally 1000 feet vertical separation in IFR considering RVSM compliant aircraft).

These capabilities have a much longer research and development cycle and a limited initial deployment. The timeframe for initial fleet equipage is 2025 and beyond, and airports that have these capabilities are referred to as ATM Capability Level 4 (ATM-4).

For non-mainline aircraft operators it is crucial that the performance values are adequately quantified to enable the use of different aircraft enablers that are demonstrated as capable of reaching equivalent performance levels.

3 MISSION TRAJECTORY DESCRIPTION

3.1 Definitions

Trajectory : In general, a trajectory is the path that a moving object follows through space. It will be the description of the movement of an aircraft, both in the air and on the ground, including position, time and at least via calculation, speed and acceleration.

In the SESAR context it could be defined as an aircraft flight path from departure till destination which the user agrees to fly and the ANSP and airport agree to facilitate.

Business-Oriented Users : Users which business it is to make profit by reducing their trajectory costs

Business Trajectory : A trajectory which aims to give its owner the most cost-efficient routing

Non Business-Oriented Users : Users which strive to make the trajectory costs as minimum as possible

Mission Trajectory : A trajectory which aims to give its owner the most mission effective routing and usage of the airspace. It represents an airspace user’s intention with respect to a given mission objective.

Airspace Constraint : Reservations of airspace for activities not involving fully shareable trajectories.

Additional definitions (NATO):

Mission: One or more aircraft ordered to accomplish one particular task

Sortie: In air operations, an operational flight by one aircraft Formation: An ordered arrangement of two or more aircraft proceeding together under a commander

Flight Path : The line connecting the successive positions occupied, or to be occupied, by an aircraft, missile or space vehicle as it moves through air or space



3.2 Military Activities

There is a great diversity of military activities which can be catalogued (as activities or air operations) according to different elements (see Annex B). Here, in the context of the SESAR concept, the activities are initially catalogued based on the inclusion of a trajectory, similarity with BT and the level of data sharing.

3.2.1 Airspace Constraints

Military activities not including a trajectory will also have a need for airspace. Examples include ground-to-air or ground-to-ground gunnery sessions. For obvious reasons of safety these are executed within segregated or restricted areas. Segregated Airspaces initiated by this type of activity are defined as Airspace Constraints.

Segregated Airspace (e.g. Prohibited Area) for flight profiles not relevant to other airspace users are also considered as Airspace Constraints.

The activity within the Airspace Constraints is unshared but the size and times of activation and de-activation of these areas can be shared during the planning cycles and in real-time.

3.2.2 Mission trajectory/Business Trajectory

Other military activities include one or more trajectories. Some military activities include flights with the same profile (climb, transit and descent phases from departure till arrival airports) as the BT. All information is normally shareable during the planning cycle and during flight. It has to be emphasised that some could require special handling or processing or bear a priority stamp (Figure 1).

The choice here is to either identify them as BT or as MT. Assuming the particularities and requirements linked to some of these missions, as in case of certain special non-military flights (e.g. MEDEVAC, VIP flights, calibration flights, etc.) which will be accommodated in the definition and Research and Development (R&D) of the BT, the preferred option is to catalogue them under the BT denomination.

The remainder of those trajectories with a specific military flight profile, for example a trajectory including an airspace reservation, are defined as MT. They can be further catalogued depending on their flight profile, planning cycle, shareable data, specific service requirements, etc.

According to the type of MT the data will be fully or partially shared during the development and execution of the MT.



Figure 1

3.3 Development Phases

As described in the SESAR concept, the different phases of the trajectory management for civil aviation (BDT: Business Development Trajectory; SBT: Shared Business Trajectory; RBT: Reference Business Trajectory) should be partially or entirely transposable for military operations, taking into account the total military activity such as annual exercises, daily training, special events, different types of missions and unpredictable operational needs.

3.3.1 Mission Development Trajectory

This phase would represent the origin of planned missions known only by certain military actors (e.g. Combined/Joint Forces Staff Headquarters, NATO Commands, EU, Air operations centres, etc.). It was introduced in the D3 document as Military Long Term Planning cycle (Strategic Level). At this stage, most information is not shared outside the airspace user organisation. Nevertheless, long-term planning of major exercises or events can be shared and de-conflicted.

The recurrent daily training of combat and reconnaissance squadrons and pilot training schools, military air transport (including air-to-air refuelling, AEW1, parachuting), Special Operations, test flights, UAS operations, and special events have to be considered.

1 Airborne Early Warning

MILITARY ACTIVITIES

Trajectory-based operation?

Airspace Constraint

Same flight profile as

BT?

N Y

Business Trajectory

Are relevant data

shareable?

Y N

Mission Trajectory

including ARES

Y N



While no other detail than the departure and destination aerodromes need to be planned for civil aviation, it is much more complex for military operations. However, for both civil and military aviation, this phase may originate several months or only hours before the intended departure time.

For military users, this phase may be short or non-existent (for example for air defence/policing flights). However, it is apparent that complex military operations (large exercises involving a large number of aircraft) or a specific firing campaign may start a cycle of planning several months or years before the day of operation because a high level of flight synchronisation and/or major airspace re-organisation required by such operations will need a high level of priority for each the flight/the fires of the operation. At this point, information would only contain dates, duration, concerned FIRs/UIRs, portions of airspace (high, medium, low), existing airspaces structure to be used, ad-hoc airspace structures to be created if needed, etc.

The Mission Development Trajectory (MDT) will go through several iterations and will be constantly refined taking into account the military resources (at national and international level if necessary), known calendar constraints, scenario changes, conflicting events etc.

Even if the MDT is not shared outside the military organisation, a global presentation could be provided to partners when a certain level of maturity is reached, within the framework of CDM.

For daily air combat training, air transport and basic/advanced pilot training, such MDT could be non-existent or only constituted by statistical data (planned Flying Hours Programme, firing programmes, hours of flight distribution as MT or BT, VFR or IFR).

This MDT, if existing, could be constituted only by known data. The data should be preferably labelled by the degree of maturity:

- Planned exercises (dates, number of expected sorties per day, impacted FIR/UIR, concerned airspace portions/volumes (high, medium, low altitude), planned general time slots (summer or winter time tables) etc.;

- The volume of flights expected for each military platform, relying upon previous year statistics and on the annual plans: number of flights and distribution between VFR and IFR, number of hours of flight in High Altitude/Medium Altitude/Low Altitude;

- Special events for which military aerial units are committed (e.g. protection of International Conference Summits, protection of World Championship, Olympic Games, Air shows).

Conclusion: At this stage of planning, most of the time, military Organizations will be able to provide only a generic description of the intent to use a portion of the airspace instead of a complete and detailed trajectory description. However, it is considered that even dissemination of this information would be useful for all ATM partners (as to deconflict major exercises, events, airspace reservations and traffic streams…etc). Consequently, all the above information should be published for consideration in the Network Operations Plan (NOP and would then become “Shared Information”.



3.3.2 Shared Mission Trajectory

In the SESAR concept, once the plans are sufficiently mature, the Aircraft Operator publishes the Shared Mission Trajectory (SMT) to the wider aviation community. This phase was introduced in the D3 document as the Military Daily Planning cycle (Pre-tactical level). For the military community, aircraft operators can be represented at WOC or Combined Air Operations Centres level (CAOC) level depending on the size of operations and on the specific national organisation.

The WOC is a generic designation of a military entity in charge of dispatching and prioritising the flights, developing and planning Mission Trajectories, and managing Flight Data and manage environmental issues.

The different military forces in Europe have their own organisation and the term “Wing” can be unused, either because it is differently named or because this level of responsibility is placed at another level (e.g. Squadron Operations Centre, Air Base Operations Centre, Air Command Operations Centre etc.) If, for any reason, military users are not capable of generating SMT, it may be determined and managed by another system (e.g. ANSP systems).

In principle, every flight should initiate one SMT. A SMT is formally published as a flight plan or part of a flight object and is available for ATM planning purposes. It reflects the user’s preferred trajectory and considers potential constraints the user has already taken into account (e.g. available slot times of airspace allocated by airspace management if such structure is needed). Through the NOP, the ATM System evaluates each proposed SMT and SBT as it is received, identifying possible capacity imbalances, and consistency of the proposed flight with planned airspace reservations (if needed).

The originally filed SMT, which can be available some time (days, weeks or months) before the flight, may only contain the information known at that moment. The day of operation, when the Aircraft Operator’s plans and details regarding airspace management become more precise and less subject to modifications, information is added to the SMT. However, the “sharing” of flight description and associated flight data does not imply that change requests could be integrated by the WOC. This would depend on the priority process and level of synchronisation (if necessary) required between all MTs.

At least 2 hours prior to departure, corresponding to the average mission preparation timeframe (it can be longer for very complex missions), the WOC and the Service Providers and/or possibly Air defence unit as part of a military internal process, agree on the mission trajectory details and the SMT is published as the Reference Mission Trajectory (RMT). At this stage, RMT is not changeable, as the mission preparation phase relies on stable elements.

In the short and medium term (IP 1 and IP2)2, it is essential that the airspace management process is consistent with the trajectory management process in order to ensure allocation of specific training areas at the appropriate time. In the long term (IP 3), it will be essential that Airspace Reservation (ARES) is an integral part of the SMT description.

2 IP: Implementation Package defining Initial Operational Capability timeframes

IP 1: short-term up to 2012 – IP 2: medium-term period 2013-2019 – IP 3: long-term period from 2020 onwards



Daily training is generally composed of single missions and small exercises including possible air-to-air refuelling phases and AWACS operations. However, for a complete joint exercise comprising multiple flights departing from multiple aerodromes, and including air-to-air refuelling phases, formation of COMAO, transiting phases, high-low-high profiles flights, air combat phases, AWACS operations, parachuting phases including paragliding, UAS operations, Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) operations, Combat helicopters operations etc., the shared information on all MTs would be much more complex. Such MTs will create a more complex environment for the system(s) and for the other users.

Such exercises are relatively infrequent but a high level of flights synchronisation is required. As a result, every SMT must obtain a high level of priority, determined during anticipated Cooperative Decision Making (CDM) processes, in order not to be constrained by the validation process within the ATM system and to keep the planned flight synchronisation intact. In other words, when SMTs are published in the NOP, the system may identify potential constraints and propose adjustments as a remedy to non-participant airspace users only (both civil and military).

3.3.3 Reference Mission Trajectory

The flight plan becomes active through a clearance request which can be a start-up clearance or another clearance if unshared parts of the flight are foreseen. Once the flight plan or flight object is active, only the Flight Crew can initiate a change to the Reference Mission Trajectory (RMT).

The RMT may be revised if:

• the aircraft or one of the aircraft in the formation is unable to start up or is late because of some minor failure (may use a spare aircraft which will join later);

• it is required to change the mission due to urgent operational reasons (diversion, failed/cancellation of air-to-air refuelling, air defence priority, unforeseen circumstances, etc.);

• it is due to a new operational constraint (runway capacity because of incidents, airspace management issues, weather conditions, etc.);

• it is needed to provide separation (e.g. formation take-off in bad weather);

• it is needed to organise a queue for a constraint resource (air-to-air refuelling, air combat area, runway, shooting range etc.).

The trajectory revision will be a cooperative process except under time critical conditions demanding immediate action from the Flight Crew.

Beyond 2020 in the SESAR concept, trajectories are supposed to be expressed in all 4 dimensions (4D = longitudinal, lateral, vertical and time) and flown with the highest possible precision which is beneficial in separation planning when aircraft systems are able to share the aircraft intention data with both the ATM system and other aircraft.

Conclusion: During this phase all available data about MT will be shared. However, due to the particularities of a MT, some specific items linked to a MT have to be considered by Cooperative Decision Making process – priority decisions and non-trajectory deviation aspects, equipage limitations and interoperability constraints etc.



For non-4D capable aircraft, the ATM system will have to generate an RMT to enable the controller tools to handle all aircraft in a similar manner. This mixed-mode environment is covered in the SESAR CONOPS and will be particularly important to enable mitigation means to accommodate airspace users with capability mismatch.

The RMT may include target times which are estimates. Target times will facilitate planning and some of them may become constraints (CT: controlled time) to assist in queue management when appropriate (e.g. CT for arrival (CTA) or CT over points (CTO) for MT management).

For those aircraft with on-board FMS or MMS, the aircraft will be guided along the trajectory, as authorised by successive clearances, from take-off to landing, except for unshared phases of MT (e.g. air combat training, very low altitude phases, all phases inside segregated areas or outside managed airspace (see Annex A)). MMS (FMS-alike) should be tailored to support the specific MT tasks and, at the same time, to interact with the ATM environment as necessary.

For those aircraft without on-board flight management systems, the aircrew will navigate its trajectory (according the Flight plan) as authorised by successive clearances through conventional means, ANSPs being responsible to create and maintain a pseudo-RMT through their own systems.

The RMT is frequently updated and shared with the ground systems according to the Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR-see§3.4). The RMT has to be computed by the aircraft (or ANSP, WOC or other Centre) and shared with all partners. To ensure optimum re-use of available military avionics it might happen that airborne trajectory functions are supported with different military avionics which deliver equivalent output (e.g. Mission Computers or MMS instead of FMS). For non-capable aircraft, the RMT will have to be computed and shared by the WOC (or equivalent) and/or the ANSP systems.

RMTs are updated and revised following 2 distinct processes:

• automatic update triggered when the predicted trajectory differs from RMT by more than the predefined thresholds indicated in the TMR;

• revision triggered at ground or air initiative when constraints are modified by the ANSP or cannot be achieved by the aircraft.

For a revision initiated by the ANSP:

• a proposed revision is transmitted to the aircraft using a System to System Data Link;

• the Flight Crew determines that it is acceptable and transmits acceptance to the ANSP;

• the Fight Crew updates the aircraft MMS/FMS with the revised trajectory;

• When the MMS/FMS update process is completed, the MMS/FMS broadcasts a complete copy of the revised RMT through Data Link to the NOP. The System tools are updated with the new RMT.

For non-capable aircraft, after acceptance is received from the Flight Crew, the ANSP will be responsible for updating the pseudo RMT used by the NOP.

The ANSP may make or propose changes to the trajectory in several cases:

• ATC tactical actions related to separation and queue management;

• Reactions due to changing constraints or resource availability;

• Unforeseen circumstances (e.g. weather conditions).

No trajectory management process interferes with controller prerogatives to make tactical changes by issuing instructions or clearances.



The means to implement non-tactical changes will be amendment, removal or imposition of constraints whenever time permits.

The user will propose a change to the RMT meeting the constraint and ANSPs will accept the amendments if no additional problems are induced by the change.

For departure, the RMT is published by the WOC (or equivalent) or ANSP and accessed by the aircraft which becomes the primary source of a trajectory. If the aircraft is ATM-0 capable, the trajectory will be originated by WOC (or equivalent) or ANSP and calculated from shared data.

If the departure phase is an unshared part to a shared segment entry point, the RMT will have been published before take-off, maintained and updated during flight and the first shared segment of the RMT will be cleared prior to the entry point.

For aircraft which cannot share the trajectory prior to the entry point, the RMT will be published by the ANSP using notified data.

During flight, several requirements to change the RMT may come from ground or air for many reasons: separation provision, sequencing, new user needs, weather, incident or failures forcing a return to base or a diversion, inability to comply with the conditions of a constraint on the RMT (e.g. fuel management issues), missed air-to-air refuelling manoeuvre, in-flight mission change, etc.

Any closed-loop clearance3 to the aircraft will automatically result in a revised RMT.

The RMT will be progressively updated and shared (computed by aircraft or by WOC or equivalent and/or ANSP for non-capable aircraft). For military aircraft the additional option of manual entry of data by the crew should be envisaged. Nevertheless the additional workload imposed to a single seat fighter (meaning without Weapon System Officer (WSO)) should make this option unrealistic as a routine task.

Aircraft System Predicted Trajectory (PT): The trajectory calculated by the aircraft system from the current aircraft position compared with the RMT.

If the aircraft MMS/FMS detect unauthorised non-conformance to the RMT, the aircraft will resume conformance as early as possible and the PT may have some interest for other partner.

However, when the termination of the constraint and rejoining the RMT is not yet known (e.g. opened loop clearances), the PT becomes relevant to other partners only when the opened loop clearance is cancelled (e.g. resume own navigation/speed).

3.3.3.1 RMT Description in Terms of ATM Capability

• ATM-1

- 2D route

- requested/cleared FL (Flight level) and any en-route planned FL changes

- altitude minimum/maximum windows

- applicable time constraints

- estimates, profile level, speed at Way Points (WP) and trajectory change points

3 Closed loop clearance: clearance containing full trajectory revision (from beginning to resuming normal navigation)



• ATM-2/3, as above plus

- 3D route when applicable

- estimates, profile level, speed at WP and ATM significant points

- relevant containment parameters

The RMT will be flown with the required accuracy (altitude constraints and CT and required containment (for lateral or vertical as appropriate for the operation) as well as NAV alerting/integrity monitoring).

Without containment of altitude (as on a 3D route) and time (4D contract) along the trajectory, altitude and time will slightly deviate due to actual wind from the reference trajectory computed with forecasted winds.

3.4 Trajectory Management Requirements (TMR)

Within the framework of the clearance process, all ATM-3 or higher capable aircraft will have a TMR associated to their MT.

The purpose of TMR is to reduce the uncertainty of trajectory predictions by ground and airborne applications.

TMRs specify the ‘delta’ that the flight detects from previous predictions or on a recurrent basis.

The TMR will specify:

• the lateral, vertical or time parameters that will trigger the update process;

• the required data content;

• the allowed tolerance of selected time, speed and altitude.

The specific parameters will be tailored according to the type of operation and will be revised within the framework of the progressive RMT clearances.

Possible examples of types of contract parameters:

• Very Wide Parameters (example: 3’/500 ft/RNP5): require a very low update rate and can be used where prediction accuracy is not required (e.g. over high seas or areas where traffic is very diluted)

• Wide Parameters (example: 1’/500 ft/RNP4): require a low update rate and can be used where high prediction accuracy is not required (e.g. in airspace with low traffic complexity)

• Tight Parameters (example: 10’’/250 ft/RNP0.5): require a high update rate and can be used in areas of high traffic complexity where great prediction accuracy is required to maximise capacity

Parameters may also be associated to airspace, routes (where existing), flight object, procedures as well as being tailored for specific operations (e.g. en-route air-to-air refuelling; heavy formation from 4 aircraft onwards). Circumstances in which clearances are passed by voice rather than data link will nevertheless remain.

In all cases, both ground and airborne sides will be aware of the parameters in use and there will be an automatic confirmation process.

Non-capable aircraft will use default parameters associated to their operations which will be published. The aircraft will confirm compliance capability before flight.



3.5 Data Sharing of a Mission Trajectory

The data to be shared are the planning data and the real-time exchange of flight data. MTs can contain parts during which the profile of the flight is similar to a BT and parts during which the flight is randomly executed within a specific airspace structure (e.g. TSA/TRA), or executed within unmanaged airspace (e.g. Low Altitude), or over high seas. The latter parts of the flight can be unshareable4. However, the activation/de-activation times of the specific airspace structures and their descriptions are always shareable.

Similarly, the times and positions of entry and exit from unmanaged airspace can be shared. The MT will contain the climb, the transit to and from an area and the descent phases. In addition, the ASM planning data, real-time activation and de-activation data, entry and exit data will be shared as well as part of the MT.

It is obvious that the shared data will not include military confidential information (e.g. weapons configuration). A special requirement for the MT will also be the possibility to stop sharing certain data for security reasons at certain times.

SESAR is aiming at the possibility of sharing data with other airspace users and ground stations. This possibility could also be exploited outside the scope of SESAR. The sharing of flight data in unmanaged airspace should be an option for consideration at least to obtain information on all MTs flying in.

3.6 Airspace Management

3.6.1 General

Airspace management and design in SESAR will serve the requirements of the trajectory managed environment. The CONOPS states that MTs usually comprise an entry into a volume of special airspace with a timely limited operation and an exit.

Whenever needed for mission trajectory, airspace reservation will be an integrated part of the mission trajectory. The sharing of SMT, RMT and ARES through SWIM shall not be dissociated. MT and Airspace Management should have merged lifecycles.

4 Shared or unshared parts could be interpreted as “accessible” and “inaccessible parts” of flight data if we consider that all data are shared into the system (SWIM, NOP), and the accessibility is managed



The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

IANS – GEN / CIV-MIL Course (17 – 20 MAY 2010)

LIFECYCLE OF

THE MISSION

TRAJECTORY

Mission Development

Trajectory

Shared Mission

Trajectory

Planned Airspace Demand

Airspace Demand

Reference Mission

Trajectory

Airspace Allocation

MDT SMT SMT SMT RMT QRA

Quick Response

Alert

Figure 2

Airspace is either Managed or Unmanaged and established and organised in a service-oriented approach

3.6.2 Unmanaged Airspace

Unmanaged airspace is defined from surface/mean sea level to a specified upper level regionally harmonised in the SESAR area. No internal subdivision visible from an ATM perspective, will be applied.

Unmanaged airspace will accommodate various businesses, private and military operations. Air Traffic Information and Alert Services as well as support and assistance will be provided to military air operations.

Flight Information and Alerting Services including military surveillance based traffic information services may be available and be provided on request. This will include information on activation and de-activation of areas for military or other specific purposes (e.g. sensitive facilities protection, environment protection etc.).

No Separation Service will be provided. However, aircraft operating in unmanaged airspace will have access to all relevant information available in SWIM.

There is no obligation to share flight data of any kind with the ground ATM network unless available air traffic service is needed. In this case, the predetermined minimum set of flight data including trajectories must be shared, as a minimum, before departure or during flight using any of the available methods.



3.6.3 Managed Airspace

Managed airspace is defined from a specified lower level regionally harmonised in the SESAR area to an upper level. It may extend down the surface/mean sea level where service provision is required (e.g. around aerodromes).

Temporary segregated airspace structures to ensure safety between certain types of operation and other traffic will continue to exist and will be dynamically managed in cooperation between the partners, through the Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace concept.

The predetermined separator is the separation service provider. It may be delegated according pre-defined rules.

Flight Information and Alerting services will be available everywhere in Managed Airspace. Separation services might not be provided in designated parts; here Self-separation by permanent delegation would be applied.

Aircraft operating in managed airspace will have access to all relevant information available in SWIM.

All aircraft operating in managed airspace are obliged to share their flight data including trajectories, in accordance with the applicable rules. The rules will also include cut-off times for initial sharing of information before the execution phase commences. This may be between 1 day and a few minutes for unforeseen flights.

A high number of trajectories spread randomly across the area of responsibility increases the perceived complexity because the monitoring task cannot be dependent only on controller experience. But, even with advanced automated support for conflict detection, conformance and intention monitoring, the controller will be required to validate solutions and execute them at the appropriate time.

The controller will have to retain sufficient situational awareness, possibly limited and focused on the given problem, to be able to make those decisions.

Furthermore, traffic density is not synonymous with complexity and creation of airways can increase the density whilst reducing the complexity because aircraft fly in the same direction.

The goal of the SESAR concept is to assist controllers in managing complex situations and to reduce complexity through strategic de-confliction measures in order to increase capacity.

3.6.4 High Complexity Operations

In Europe, high complexity operations generally occur in terminal areas but they may occur in other airspace e.g. in en-route sectors with a lot of cross-over of descending and climbing traffic, when a lot of airports are concentrated in a small sector of airspace or when complex military operations are in progress through High Altitude (HA)-Medium Altitude (MA) and Low Altitude (LA) flight profile and need creation of temporary restricted areas or activation of TSAs leading to airspace segregation and availability restriction with consequent traffic congestion.

These geographically and temporarily dimensioned volumes will be visible via the NOP and “User preferred routing” may be suspended when analysis of the pending trajectories determines potential high complexity. Obviously, a lot of reasons not only linked to military activities can also cause high complexity situations and trigger fixed routes structure activation.



Military specific route structures (OAT routes) do not exist in all European countries. Even when existing, as main principle, free routing or “user preferred routing” is considered as the best option insofar as, there are no really specific routes to join TSAs from military airports, and the best direct route in the transit phase is a factor of performance (fuel saving, best ratio between transit and training timeframes, aircraft potential saving etc.). Furthermore, studies are in progress in order to elaborate a flexible OAT-IFR Transit Service (OATTS) across ECAC airspace, connecting different national provisions of adequate routing options according to military Mission requirements.

In the context of Trajectory-based operations, when route structures may be retained to support transition for reducing complexity, military specific route structures, if existing, could also be kept for military flights if it is relevant for the planned missions in the absence of a military route network, or if it is not relevant for the planned missions, the best option will be taken through the CDM process in order to minimize or avoid additional factors of complexity. A preferential option, the user-preferred-routing principle could be retained for military flights which will require re-assessment of the level of complexity.

In absence of military specific route structures:

- Option 1: military flights should be continuously managed according “user preferred routing” principle because:

• it is considered that the volume of traffic they represent is not a factor in complexity,

• Military flights or part of them are unable to maintain the common routes network because it is not appropriate to their mission requirements. In this case the level of complexity has to be re-assessed, considering both the flow of traffic confined on route network and military traffic in free-routing.

If the level of complexity results high, Option 2 should be applied.

- Option 2: all military flights should use the common existing routes network available for all airspace users, if it is acceptable for the planned mission. If it is not, military flights or part of them should be required to follow their “user preferred routing” and should become constraints for other airspace users.

In the presence of military specific route network:

- Option 3: military flights should use the military specific routes network which is activated at the same time as ATS routes network, if it is appropriate to the planned mission. If it is not appropriate to the mission or if, according specific agreement the military specific routes structure network is not envisaged to be activated Option 1 then possibly Option 2 must be applied.

During periods of high complexity, en-route operations will be based primarily on the issuance of 2D clearances on user SBT/SMT data from the aircraft, ground-based trajectory prediction and uncertainty calculation.

Conflict management support tools will be able to predict conflict with sufficient accuracy to allow the controller to exploit the benefits of non-fixed route operations as long as complexity level permits.

Conventional route structure based clearances will be used for non-capable aircraft but such aircraft may be subject to restrictions. Nevertheless, restrictions for military aircraft dedicated to initial training, either because they are non-capable aircraft, or because navigation using conventional route structure is a mandatory training phase, might be mitigated through a prioritisation process.



Segregated airspace allocation will be used for military needs if dictated by Mission and Safety requirements.

Controllers will use surveillance, constraint management or ASAS (Airborne Separation Assistance System) separation to complement the route allocation.

To achieve the additional capacity to reach the high end SESAR, the appropriate separation mode may include contract clearances and ASAS. Aircraft operating according to 4D contracts will have priority and controllers will separate other flights from them providing an advantage to equipped aircraft.

3.6.5 Medium/Low Complexity Operations

For these operations the goal is to provide sufficient capacity to meet demand without relying on a fixed route network. However, if free-routing is the norm for much of the en-route airspace, it will be an exception in most terminal airspaces or below certain flight levels where airways are generally organised to feed TMAs. During periods of medium or low complexity, en-route operations will not need high capacity modes. Flights will operate as close as possible to their optimum trajectory except for separation, airspace hazards or arrival management needs.

At the same time it will be necessary to conduct certain military operations within airspace where free-routing is permitted. Some military activity will not pose a problem but mixing certain military and commercial activities in the same airspace could cause constraints on both, especially if segregation between both types of air traffic is needed. Consequently, the selection of airspace where free routing and military operation will be permitted should be validated through a simulation process.

A flexible geographical position of segregated airspace (in a reasonable way in order to minimize the timeframe of transit against the timeframe of training, less than ten minutes transit time being the optimum value) can be a valuable option for both activities whereas the required size for the mission might be non-negotiable volume, without degrading or even impeding the execution of the mission. Geographical position could be fixed through CDM process when RMT is published (see §3.6.6).

Aircraft will be subject to conventional ATC separation or will use ASAS capabilities. They will be separated from segregated airspace as required. Vertical constraints will be used as required and precise longitudinal navigation may be applied either through CTO (enabled by flight guidance systems) or through relative spacing between flights and/or segregated airspace being achieved by controller actions or ASAS when needed.

3.6.6 Integration of Specific Airspace Structure Re quirements

The SESAR concept is based on a highly flexible approach to airspace usage which ensures that possible constraints imposed by any airspace activity on other operations are kept to the absolute minimum in time and space. Hence the target is to minimise segregation and the way to accommodate users with divergent capabilities.

3.6.6.1 Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace Concept

In the future, airspace will be planned and allocated in a more dynamic manner through close cooperation between civil and military authorities. On-line real-time coordination at any time, shared planning information, civilian traffic forecasts, common situational awareness and supported cooperative decision-making will be the enablers to meet the expectations of airspace users.

New and optimised tools (e.g. simulation, planning and situational awareness tools) will be implemented to facilitate this process.

ARES are coordinated and activated to match the military training and operational profile as required.



Airspace Management in conjunction with an Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace Concept (AFUA) is considered to play a vital role as enabler to improve civil-military co-operation and for an increase of capacity for the benefit of all airspace users.

The principles to be applied are:

- Full application of the AFUA concept in all participating States in 2020;

- Equal consideration of military subject to national requirements and civil airspace users needs;

- Protection of classified and sensitive data;

- Application of agreed rules for priority procedures of military air operations (national requirements/international commitments);

- State sovereignty and legitimate responsibility for airspace remain including the need to identify flights entering national territory.

3.6.6.2 General Definition of ARES

The ARES is a volume of airspace temporarily reserved for exclusive or specific use by categories of users.

ARES will be determined by the need for designated areas to facilitate military requirements through a mission tailored-volume of airspace subject to cooperative planning processes and coordination.

An ARES can respond to a need for strict segregation from other traffic according to the nature of operations conducted. It may be static like an ad-hoc TSA (generally published in AIP), with fixed dimensions but dynamically located, or moving along with the flight path to facilitate aerial operations such as en-route air-to-air refuelling, UAS flights or Composite Air Operations.

The location of other patterns will be subject to local ATM requirements or to Mission Support Requirements (such as air-to-air refuelling, AEW orbits, etc.). Indeed, certain pattern locations are directly linked to the mission trajectory support needs. These ARES will be identified by other users to facilitate their planning trajectory. They will be activated and de-activated according to agreed principles.

Tools will calculate required airspace dimensions for specific military missions or for civil needs, depending on the number and type of aircraft involved and the mission to be carried out, or other identified criteria (e.g. environmental limitations). It will result into a proposal of airspace which may be:

• a fixed TSA/TRA (fixed dimensions and location),

• a Military Variable Profile Area (MVPA),

• a Variable Geometry Area (VGA),

• a Dynamic Mobile Area (DMA).

An MVPA (Figure 3) model constitutes a flexible composition of several sub-parts of defined airspace modules to fulfil military needs (and minimise the restriction for other airspace users). Depending on individual military mission profiles, the airspace dimension required will be flexibly composed by combining one or more allocated sub-parts (published for identification). The optimum airspace can be simulated through respective tools. This airspace is coordinated through the Airspace Management Cells (AMC), delivered into SWIM, followed by military pilots and best considered by civil ATM partners.

Sophisticated ASM tools will ensure effective civil-military coordination and a common situational awareness.



A VGA (Figure 3) principle is to have an area (TSA/CBA/TRA) which is the core of the airspace considered, and to have pre-planned possible extensions able to accommodate more important military operations. This core part of TSA/CBA/TRA could be new in the future SESAR context or be the currently existing areas. The slots and scenarios of activities would be agreed according to CDM and AFUA principles.

1

MISSION TRAJECTORY

AFUA AIRSPACE STRUCTURES

TSA XTSA X1 TSA X2 TSA X3

TSA X4 TSA X5 TSA X6

Military Variable Profile Area (MVPA)

TSA XCore Area

TSA X1 TSA X2

TSA X3

Variable Geometry Area (VGA)Fixed areas (TSA – CBA – TRA )

Main characteristics :

-Areas and sub-areas with defined lateral and vertic al dimensions,

-At fixed geographical location published in Aeronau tical Information Publication,

-AMC manageable in their lateral (MVPA, VGA), vertic al and temporal dimensions

Figure 3

DMAs are temporary trajectory exclusion volumes. All will be kept to the absolute minimum required. It is a constraint placed on a trajectory. The high precision of 4D navigation allows equipped aircraft to avoid DMA with minimum business trajectory disruption.

As a result, it is not needed to avoid large blocks of airspace:

- The dynamic geographical position ensures that at all times volumes of segregation are at the best place of constraints sharing; (Figure 4)

- The dynamic profile changes ensure that at all times exclusion volumes are as small as possible and that only unavoidable BTs/MTs are affected in a given period of time; (Figure 5)

- In some cases, an exclusion may be mobile, to follow the special activity in progress on its MT and to ensure minimum disturbance. (Figure 6)

Information sharing involving flight crews enables the dynamic adjustment of the other MTs/BTs to ensure avoidance, even when exclusions appear for a short time. The DMA will be integrated in the SMT description because it will not depend from fixed geographical positions of ARES. In establishing airspace reservations for military purposes, the appropriate authorities should specify the appropriate buffers to effectively and safely separate the military activities within the ARES and the rest of flights outside them. It is recommended that a standard buffer would be established throughout ECAC.



2

MISSION TRAJECTORY


TSA X

Dynamic Mobile Area (DMA)

Main characteristics :-Areas with defined lateral and vertical dimensions + timeframe allocation needs ,

-At variable geographical location decided through CDM process when SMT is published i n order to meet the best possible scenario for Demand Capac ity Balancing

TSA X

Military airfield

TSA X

~10 min transit time

Figure 4

3

MISSION TRAJECTORY



Main characteristics :-Areas with defined lateral and vertical dimensions + timeframe allocation needs ,

-At variable geographical location along the Trajectory, activated / de-activated duri ng specific timeframes

MT

MT

T0T0+ tT1

MT

T1+ t’

Figure 5



4

MISSION TRAJECTORY


Main characteristics :-Areas with defined lateral and vertical dimensions around moving activity to be protected, and within which several aircraft, UAS must be segregat ed during all flight duration

-All elements shared for a Mission Trajectory are de scribed + moving airspace dimensions

- Usable whenever regulatory separation between fligh t formation and other users is not applicable.

-Area should be “attached” to the leading aircraft position which should be in charge to share the real-time flight data.


X + Y + ZMT

VdmaVdma

Figure 6

3.6.6.3 Management by Segregation without ATC

Portions of airspace can be also segregated in managed and unmanaged airspace, according to the same arrangements as those described above, but without ATC services provision.

The status of the airspace is defined and published, describing the restricted conditions of penetration. It can be managed for activation and de-activation and announced by a body that does not necessarily provide air traffic services.

3.7 Prioritisation Process (User-Driven Prioritisat ion Process)

In the absence of any capacity shortfall, reference trajectories are supposed to be handled on a first-come-first-served basis with the necessary established exceptions.

However, abrupt loss of capacity can happen for any reason (e.g. runway closure) and it will be the responsibility of the user to respond in a cooperative manner to the network management function with a demand that matches best the newly available capacity.

Some flights will continue to have the highest priority, such as military, medical and government operations, and the User Driven Prioritisation Process (UDPP) will respect this priority. Consequently, some airspace users will be exempted from this process due to the nature of the flight or mission. This category does not only include military operations but also special civil flights (e.g. medical, government or other).



The UDPP is initiated when a certain inconsistency between demand and capacity is reached. An initial set of measures will be agreed during the planning phase and will be visible via the NOP.

It is the starting point of the process, and airspace users can trade slots if they agree to do so, based on agreements and rules transparent to the other actors and accepted by all parties.

The result of the process is the user’s contribution for balancing demand and capacity in an order of priority that best reflects individual business strategies.

The UDPP will also be re-run if any changes in capacity occur.

3.8 ASM Supporting Tools

In general, tools should be available to extract the airspace demand from the trajectory planning and also to incorporate the airspace demand in the trajectory. Interfaces for sharing the demands should be foreseen. De-confliction of demand and prioritisation possibilities should be included.

Such support should take care of the planning cycle and the continuous link with the trajectory planning cycle. One option is to integrate such tools in the trajectory planning and management.

Existing tools or systems in development to support airspace management are either local or network tools. They are designed to support the planning process and even in some cases to support the common situational awareness by sharing the real-time activation and de-activation of areas. Negotiation focuses on airspace, and routings and flight profiles are adapted depending on the result.

The requirements of tools or systems to support trajectory management should include support for airspace management. For the user, only one consistent user-friendly system is acceptable. Such support system should ensure a continuous link between the trajectory development and the airspace needed. Negotiation functionalities should be included to negotiate the trajectory and its airspace demand and reservation.

3.9 Conclusion

Specific mission trajectory needs:

The trajectory-based approach recognises that sufficient airspace volumes to meet military operational and training requirements will have to be provided and that military coordination and information sharing requirements will need to be accommodated. The priority process is to be addressed for specific needs, regardless of the profiles of flights, including those similar to BT. Consequently, MT Management and Airspace Management have to be fully indivisible for military operations in order to make the transit phase of flights and the airspace allocation process consistent.



4 OTHER SESAR ELEMENTS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT

4.1 Sharing of Information for all Partners (FPL)

The traditional ICAO FPL (OAT–GAT) is replaced by the action of sharing the information required about the flight (in the SESAR area). The volume of information to be shared will be larger than that contained in today’s FPL message. Military User applications in charge of submitting the flight information automatically ensure that all required information is provided and properly shared.

The flight description requirement is that for each predetermined point of the trajectory lifecycle, the prescribed minimum quantity of information is shared. The latter is a condition to allow the RMT/RBT to pass into the execution phase. The various elements describing a flight may be shared at different times and with different levels of detail.

For some military missions, elements linked to specific airspace structure needs will be shared, such as the identification of airspace and the estimated times of activation and de-activation, entry and exit points and times. For future DMAs, the volume of airspace described around the fixed or mobile activity (e.g. UAS, AAR, heavy formations, etc.), comprising buffers will also be described in the different sharing phases.

When the flight information is shared, it is not addressed to any user in particular. Airspace users do not need to know the addressing rules because service providers can organise their subscription to the information sharing environment according their agreed needs and/or access rights.

Flight plans submitted outside the SESAR area and including a European segment will also be accepted and processed, creating an initial shared trajectory which can be updated by the aircraft operator when new shared data become available.

For flights leaving the SESAR area, an ICAO FPL will be generated by the aircraft operator and sent by appropriate applications.

4.2 System-Wide Information Management

System Wide Information Management (SWIM) is supported by a set of elements (so-called SWIM architecture) allowing the exchange of data and ATM services across the whole European ATM system. SWIM is based on the interconnection of various automation systems. SWIM integrates air-ground data, ground-ground data and ATM service exchange. Air-air data exchange is considered outside the scope of SWIM itself.

Linked to the SWIM network, technical systems and sub-systems are the elementary components of the ATM technical architecture within the following ATM stakeholder domains (adapted to the military community):

4.2.1 Local and Sub-Regional Systems

- Aircraft (through Air-Ground Data Link Ground Management)

- En-Route/Approach ATC

- Aerodrome ATC - Autonomous ATC (e.g. for aircraft carrier)

- WOC/Base Operations Centre (as Airport Airside Operations)

- WOC ATM (as Aircraft Operations)

- WOC for Navy Aviation Group



4.2.2 Regional Systems

• SWIM Supervision

• Aeronautical Information Management (including Military Aeronautical Information)

• Advanced Airspace Management (civil-military process)

• Network Information Management

• External System: for the military community, an external system such as C2 systems (Command and Control systems), NATO/ACCS or national military systems should be linked to SWIM through a data exchange interface, in order to share ATM information provided by military aircraft, wing operations centres/base operations centres.

SWIM services will be organised around 6 data domains (Flight Information, Aeronautical Information, Meteorological Information, ATFCM Scenario, Surveillance Data, Capacity and Demand Data).

For each data domain, systems and sub-systems will interact, all using SWIM. Sub-systems will be:

• Users: Sub-systems using provided service information for which they have subscribed (e.g. Aircraft Flight guidance sub-system, Aerodrome ATC demand and capacity sub-system, Safety Nets sub-systems of En-route/APP ATC, etc.)

• Publishers: Sub-systems responsible for the service of information provision for a certain domain (e.g. Aircraft Flight Management sub-system/Military Mission sub-system), Trajectory Management sub-system for AOC/WOC, Flight Data Processing or Arrival Management sub-system for En-Route/APP ATC, Departure Management sub-system for Aerodrome ATC, etc.)

• Contributors: Sub-systems that feed a main/focal point Publisher (e.g. Network Demand and Capacity Balancing sub-system feeding Flight Planning Management sub-system, De-icing sub-system feeding the Turn-Around Management sub-system, etc.

Air-Ground Information Management Principles: the technical architecture provides the means to manage the participation of the aircraft in SWIM. This is done through an A/G Data Link Ground Management System which offers the aircraft a single point of access to the ground part of SWIM, filtering the shared information needed by the aircraft and providing a gate to update onboard databases.

Military aircraft should be capable either of being directly linked to SWIM or through C2 systems or national military systems themselves linked to SWIM. Military transport aircraft for which the majority of the missions are transit flights should be equipped with the Air-Ground IOP SWIM management system.

Ground-Ground Information Management Principles: the technical systems of stakeholders participating in SWIM (e.g. WOC) will have to fulfil the interoperability (IOP) requirements through a Ground-Ground IOP/SWIM Management system. This capability will be provided thanks to a set of common standard IOP services. External systems (ACCS, meteorology) not in the scope of the SESAR programme will also have the possibility of interacting with the European ATM network under the IOP rules and requirements for civil and military users.

Amongst the military classified information being held by ACCS, only that related to ATM should be shared to maintain a certain level of confidentiality.



Military Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) can be fully automatic systems or systems connected to a ground pilot-in-command. Whatever the geographical position of ground-pilot-in-command, even out of Europe, the UAS monitoring system would have to be linked to SWIM.

Figure 7 * Aircraft + full automatic UAS

4.3 Network Management

The Network Management is a new function which assures stability and efficiency of the ATM network, paying particular attention to airports and TMA elements. It is structurally independent of users and ANSPs but will work transparently and cooperatively with both and with the airports. It is composed of two levels, a regional and a sub-regional level.

A key tool for network management is the Network Operations Plan (NOP) which aims at facilitating those processes needed to reach an agreement on demand and capacity. The NOP continuously reflects cooperative planning.

The role of the Regional Network Management is to facilitate a dialogue between users, ANSPs and airport operators so that balancing issues between air traffic demand and capacity can be resolved efficiently. The prime task is to assure stability of the entire network and to cope with traffic demand, weather phenomena and loss of significant assets such as airports or runways for whatever reason.

ACCS/ National Military System/ Ground

Pilot UAS/ Meteo

Systems

*



Likely co-located with civil-military sub-regional AMCs, Sub-Regional Network Management is in the best position to determine optimum sub-regional resources to meet users’ actual or predicted demands. A collegiate entity composed of civil and military authorities, its role via AMC is to determine optimum airspace configurations, route structures (if required) and any essential constraints or strategies to assure the most efficient traffic flow and the best combination of trajectories. That implies CDM processes involving all stakeholders, designed to resolve situations where sufficient capacity cannot be provided, and to develop scenarios to cope with diverse events.

The NOP provides the latest available information being shared in the system, as demand and capacity situation, achieved agreements, detailed BTs and MTs information, including the requirement for agreed ARES, as well as access to simulation tools for scenarios modelling. In SESAR, the NOP is a dynamic rolling plan for continuous operations.

Stakeholders will use the NOP as the single portal for access to ATM information. The NOP is continually accessible and evolves through iterative and cooperative processes.

Military stakeholders should envisage unlimited access to the NOP for their airspace users and service providers.

During this evolution, users will declare their SBT/SMT possibly including their requirement for ARES. Agreements and change proposals for trajectories will be entered via appropriate NOP applications accessible to all concerned. If after all possible measures taken for balancing demand and capacity, an excess of demand still remains, it will be decided in close collaboration with users, airports and ANSPs if the potential delay is acceptable or if and how the capacity shortfall will be managed (UDPP).

During the execution phase, the NOP should reflect the most updated information including data from aircraft, constraints, active airspace volumes, priority trajectories, etc.

4.4 Airport Operations

Military airports are normally established to accommodate specific flying tasks e.g. training, transport, air defence, etc. However, such military operations are seldom subject to capacity related constraints. Consequently, the SESAR concept of airport management, especially Ground Trajectory Management is not crucial to military airports that are not opened to commercial air transport.

However, even though stands, gates and turnaround management processes (if existing) should not be an integral part of the ATM Network like foreseen for civil airports, military airports will have to share all information associated to MTs or BTs (departure and arrival planning for all IFR flights supposed to transit in Managed Airspace, and very likely for VFR flights planned to operate in Unmanaged Airspace (it will remain under States’ decision).

Common TMAs for adjacent civil and military airports is also a possibility and will require special attention.

Clusters of airports of which one is military within the close vicinity of a large congested airport will require new harmonised ATM techniques and procedures serving the area concerned to assure maximum runway utilisation, flight efficiency and minimal flight path confliction.

Activity of military aircraft based on joint airports and civil use of military airports will have to be addressed through a specific study. For such airports, airport information on landing time, constraints, turnaround time, airport capacity and taxiing time should be provided by the SWIM and supporting CDM processes.



4.5 Airspace Capacity

New Controller Tools and New Separation Modes

Controller task load and separation modes are two aspects of ATM capacity improvement.

The ATM concept will increase capacity by reducing the controller workload per flight, decreasing routine tasks and the requirement for tactical intervention.

In managed airspace the pre-determined separator is the ANSP. However, the role of the separator may be delegated to the pilot following specific rules (approved equipped aircraft and pilot qualification). In unmanaged airspace, the pre-determined separator is the Airspace User.

3 lines of action and 3 broad categories of separation modes are included in the ATM Concept:

• Automation for routine controller task load supported by better methods of data input and improved data management;

• Automation support to conflict/interaction detection, situation monitoring and conflict resolution;

• Significant reduction for controller tactical inter vention by reducing the number of potential conflicts and by redistributing tactical intervention to the pilots when appropriate through cooperative separation or self-separation.

Separation modes:

• Conventional modes as used today but with better data and better tools to improve trajectory and network efficiency;

• 2D/3D/4D Precision Trajectory Clearance concepts relied on the de-confliction of flights, using the navigational performance of the aircraft, constraint management and controlled times for queue management purposes;

• New airborne separation modes using Airborne Separation Assistance System (ASAS): cooperative separation (temporary delegation of separation to the pilot) and self-separation (aircrew designated as separator for a defined flight segment).

4.6 Flight Object

The ‘Flight Object’ (FO) is a concept to support the sharing of consistent flight data between all stakeholders. Its purpose is to ensure that all systems have a consistent view of the flight, and that the data is widely and easily available, subject to appropriate access controls.

The fundamental idea is that a single logical entity, the FO is kept up to date by all parties wishing to share information about a flight. All parties use the FO as a reference and all keep it updated with the latest information, thereby ensuring that all systems have the most up to date and consistent view of the flight data. This is true for all stages of a flight, from planning through flight execution to post-flight analysis.

So conceptually the FO is intended to hold all flight data that needs to be shared between any interested stakeholders: Civil ATC, Military ATC, Flow Management Systems, Airport Operators, Aircraft Operators and Aircraft Systems5.

5 [Extracts from SESAR WP8 Early Project 4 – Flight Data Interoperability – Related Activities Ed 1.0 dd. 29 Jun 2009]



4.7 Civil-Military System Interoperability Consider ations Impacting 4D Performance

1. The accommodation of military airspace users in the SESAR environment on the basis of the military MT concept is dictated by the specific flight profiles associated to military operations. It should not be forgotten that the available enabler infrastructure, system support and equipage considerations may lead to the adoption of deviating solutions. Civil-military interoperability is crucial to support implementation of the MT concept.

2. Military combat aircraft are essentially weapons platforms whose equipage priorities are normally decided in accordance with its specific military missions. This has led to a clear mismatch between the capabilities of military systems normally designed to support military functions and ATM requirements.

3. Many military aircraft are being equipped with some basic ATM/CNS capabilities. However, due to the size of military fleets and procurement and technical constraints, many lower capability airframes will have to be accommodated in the SESAR trajectory environment on the basis of supplementary support provided from ground systems.

4. In the medium and longer term it is expected that transport-type military aircraft will become equipped like any mainline or regional aircraft. 4D capability for combat aircraft will be more difficult to attain due to complex airborne integration difficulties and lack of space for avionics retrofits. A performance-based approach is required to ensure that fighters can be handled by re-utilising available avionics capabilities determined as 4D-equivalent.

5. The fundamental military aircraft functions relevant for 4D management (subject of SESAR R&D) will be:

• The re-use of military data links for the exchange of CPDLC (Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications), ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast ) and trajectory management data through ground interfaces. Transmission delays/latency and specific applications supported should be compared with 4D requirements (air-ground SWIM). If SESAR R&D efforts prove successful, the ability to exchange information between military aircraft and SWIM should not be a limiting factor to the implementation of MT. [Required Communications Performance should be validated].

• 2D navigation for military aircraft will rely on the use of restricted GNSS (GPS/PPS and GALILEO/PPS) signals and different sensors and NAV configurations (TACAN, INS). Overall performance will have to be studied and considered in comparison with required 4D Quality of Service ( QoS) levels. 3D vertical performance for fighters will be subject of specific study and demonstration of performance. [Performance Based Navigation (PBN) should be a target reference].

• Military aircraft might have specific flight control/flight guidance means which should be verified in terms of timing precision. The trajectory management function for military aircraft might have to be supported by FMS-alike Military Mission Systems or emulated by ground systems.

• Separation modes/4D contracts applied to military aircraft should be supported by airborne surveillance capabilities including implementation of the ADS-B in/out capability. [Required Surveillance Performance should be validated].

• These divergent systems will generate deviating data elements, parameters and performance values that should be compared against required mission trajectory values and be adequately mitigated. This mitigation should be included in the specification of trajectory management systems to be used by ANSPs or WOCs.



ANNEX A: PRINCIPLES AND MILITARY ATM REQUIREMENTS T O BE ACCOMMODATED IN SESAR

1 PRINCIPLES

The formulation of military ATM requirements has taken into account following basic principles:

1.1 National Sovereignty

Every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory6.

1.2 National Competence and Obligations

With regard to the airspace over its territory and within designated portions of the airspace over the high seas, each State shall retain its competence and obligations defined in existing regulations.

1.3 Safeguarding National Security and National Def ence Policy Interests

National defence policy shall be respected and all necessary measures to safeguard the national security of the States7 shall be considered The continuity of the defence operations of all States should be guaranteed at all times.

1.4 Precedence of International Treaties or Convent ions

States’ obligations under international treaties or conventions and regional agreements shall be respected. States’ international commitments shall be accommodated.8

1.5 Safety

Safety shall not be compromised and the existing levels of safety shall be at least ensured. Whenever possible, these should be enhanced.

1.6 Civil-Military Cooperation

States shall enhance civil-military cooperation9 in all possible domains which enable the optimum use of airspace, in particular Civil and military air activities shall be conducted in compliance with the Flexible Use of Airspace (FUA) concept.

1.7 Flexibility

The European ATM Network should provide flexibility to cope with varying operational demands of the participating national armed forces.

6 ICAO Doc. 7300/9; Convention on International Civil Aviation; Article 1 7 REG (EC) N° 549/2004 of 10 March 2004 (the Framewo rk Regulation); Article 13 Safeguards 8 EUROCONTROL Air Traffic Management Strategy for the Years 2000+ 9 REG (EC) N° 549/2004 of 10 March 2004 (the Framewo rk Regulation); Statement by the Member States on military issues related to the SES and REG (EC) N° 2150/2005 (common rules for the FUA)



2. GENERAL MILITARY REQUIREMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED F OR SESAR

SESAR R&D should take into account the defined military requirements to ensure that all operational and technical improvements will not hamper the State’s political, defence and security objectives.

The main requirements of the entire SESAR ATM Concept for the military stakeholders are:

• Institutional and regulatory commitments where harmonisation is essential at European level (European OAT rules, Air Navigation Services provided to OAT flights, Security, Safety)

• Significant changes to the roles, responsibilities and supporting technologies affecting military pilots, air traffic controllers, engineering and maintenance staff, Air operations centres staff (or/and Wing operations centres staff, Squadron operations centre staff, Air Base operation centre staff …) and other military service providers (meteorology, air defence, …)

• A powerful information handling network for sharing data with the ATM network. There should be interfaces with national (e.g. AIS systems) and multinational systems (e.g. C2 Systems like the NATO ACCS) and data exchange with military ATM and non-ATM actors.

• New air-to-air, ground-to-ground, and air-to-ground data communications systems.

• Increased reliance on airborne and ground based aut omated tools.

2.1 Requirements Based on Institutional and Regulat ory Commitments

In the SES and in particular in FABs, participating States allow their national airspace to be internationally organised for the purpose of improving overall network performance while considering all airspace users needs.

Each State is in particular responsible for

• Security and Defence; • Safety; • Certification of service providers; • State exemptions and derogations; • Search and Rescue; • Investigation of Incidents and Accidents;

A number of international, bilateral and multilateral agreements partially or entirely cover ATM issues and operations of State aircraft. The scope and subject of the agreements are heterogeneous, including for instance access to national airspace by a third party, diplomatic clearance, exemption from route charging schemes, delegation of service provision and delegation of execution of air policing missions.

In accordance with national and international law and international agreements, some military operations require a national decision (Diplomatic Clearance, Exercise accommodation….). Some operations may only take place over the sovereign territory of States where special legal provisions, rules and procedures are in place, unless otherwise agreed upon between the concerned States. Differences in requirements, based on the State’s sovereign national security and defence policy, have to be accommodated.

SESAR, in its phased approach, may result in the need of several new implementation rules, for example changes related to mandatory aircraft equipage. Variation between



national laws in some areas may complicate specific issues, but not to the point that it becomes a blocking point for the implementation of the ATM Concept. State involvement will also be necessary for any proposed changes, which could place new requirements/restrictions on the military.

Certain SESAR operation concept elements will require regulation changes. For example: self-separation will require major changes in European and national legislation to ensure the necessary technical and operational harmonisation.

Future developments should include clarification of the new roles and responsibilities in order to assess legal implications as well as the ATM safety responsibilities and new interfaces between stakeholders.

Significant changes to technology, both on the ground and airborne, will need to be developed within an unambiguous safety regulatory framework. A close civil-military interaction between the safety regulatory authorities will be an essential requirement.

2.2 General Requirements

MIL REQ 001: Developments of SESAR shall support and respect the various national security and defence policies (e.g. short term activation of security protection areas positive identification of flights, airspace surveillance, real time air space security incident management, air defence missions, etc.)

The European ATM network shall consider enabling national actions in the event of crisis, war or serious international tension constituting a threat of war e.g. enabling the activation of a national protection plan

MIL REQ 002: Special national policy requirements shall be included (e.g. embargo measures, escorting flights during official visits, etc.)

MIL REQ 003: Appropriate civil/military coordination procedures and contingency plans are required when a State suspends the provision of services rendered to civil aviation and/or applies specific procedures affecting the airspace under its responsibility

MIL REQ 004: The applicability of diplomatic clearance procedure shall be considered in the dynamic trajectory management environment (requirements which could influence UDPP, CDM, Time On Target (TOT) etc.)

MIL REQ 005: Designation and supervision of the service provision for Mission trajectories shall be a State responsibility (Non applicability of SES to MIL)

MIL REQ 006: Rules and procedures for State aircraft operations, mission trajectory and its required service should be harmonised throughout the SESAR participant States

MIL REQ 007: SESAR shall take account of the National obligations to Military international agreements (e.g. NATO)

MIL REQ 008: Trajectory management shall take into account national regulations concerning safety of military operations (e.g. restrictions of areas for supersonic flights, restrictions of UAV operations over populated areas, etc.)

MIL REQ 009: Some military activities that could be incompatible with trajectory-based operations shall be adequately segregated with clear harmonised separation standards and procedures

MIL REQ 010: SESAR shall support and mirror national and international security measures such as RENEGADE10

MIL REQ 011: The European ATM system shall take the necessary protective measures to prevent or minimise the impact of hostile acts against ATM facilities, systems and data, including support to measures agreed at national and/or international level

10 RENEGADE: civil platform that has been assessed as operating in such a manner as to raise suspicion that it might be used as a weapon to perpetrate a terrorist attack (NATO RENEGADE concept)



MIL REQ 012: The State’s prerogative to be able to order all aircraft to clear its national airspace shall be respected

MIL REQ 013: Within the European ATM network, by agreement between the Military organizations and the ANSPs involved, supporting surveillance of the airspace under State responsibility including the capability to detect, track, identify and evaluate all aircraft using this airspace e.g. providing flight plan information, Air Defence Centres, making CNS facilities available, etc., shall be ensured

MIL REQ 014: High priority and unrestricted airspace access shall be foreseen for national security or national policy-related air operations (e.g. escort flights, political embargo…)

MIL REQ 015: Technical support and service provision for Mission Trajectories shall guarantee that military operations are not hampered, restricted or interrupted except under special agreed circumstances (redundancy provisions)

MIL REQ 016: SESAR shall consider the financial impact for States to maintain their national security and national Defence policy interests

The SESAR concept will likely be affordable and economically viable to all stakeholders if the cost-efficiency target is met, if capacity and quality of service targets are met and if global interoperability is achieved allowing significantly reduced costs

But for military, fully dependent on public funding, the concept should be seen as strategic in nature in order to justify public expenses. For non commercial orientated users it is an absolute priority to minimise the financial impact

2.3 Service Provision Requirements

2.3.1 Airspace Requirements

Military airspace needs will mainly be determined by a new generation of aircraft, new weapon systems, multinational and combined air operations and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operations. These future airspace requirements will be often accommodated in larger areas. The goal is to achieve mission effectiveness by ensuring the optimum use of airspace.

In order to fulfil military training and operational requirements and/or to ensure safe separation from activities potentially hazardous to other traffic, the establishment of appropriate segregated airspace11 is the sovereign right of the State but should be limited to justifiable needs as much as possible and adequately coordinated.

Accuracy of information on trajectories, airspace status and on specific air traffic situations, and timely distribution of this information to all concerned will directly impact safety and efficiency of operations12.

11 Regulation (EC) No 2150/2005 of 23 December 2005 (common rules for the flexible use of airspace); Preamble (7) 12 Regulation (EC) No 2150/2005 of 23 December 2005 (common rules for the flexible use of airspace); Preamble (16)



2.3.1.1 Airspace Design

MIL REQ 017: Airspace design and management procedures shall ensure effective military operations within the entire national airspace and possibly in FAB airspace

MIL REQ 018: The design of sectors and sector families shall not increase the complexity of civil-military coordination

MIL REQ 019: In order to satisfy operational military needs, lateral consistency of airspace design between lower and upper airspace volumes shall be ensured

2.3.1.2 Procedures and Systems

MIL REQ 020: Civil-military coordination procedures and communication facilities shall allow real-time activation, deactivation or reallocation of airspace and the linked trajectories

MIL REQ 021: Harmonised procedures and priorities for the assignment of airspace to military users shall be applied

MIL REQ 022: The airspace reservation/allocation process shall be an integral part of the trajectory management

MIL REQ 023: Airspace management shall take into account and support the dynamic operational decision-making process of military operations

MIL REQ 024: Mission Trajectory Management and in particular Cooperative Decision Making (CDM) processes shall allow ad-hoc structure delineation at short notice)

MIL REQ 025: The European ATM network shall differentiate between movable and non-movable areas (e.g. a shooting range area is a non-movable area)

MIL REQ 026: ATM systems shall include functionalities to comply with specific national security requirements

MIL REQ 027: Tools shall be designed to assess the performance of airspace management processes with regard to the military users’ needs

MIL REQ 028: Adequate supporting systems shall be put in place to enable to manage mission trajectories, airspace included, and to share all relevant data to all affected users13

2.3.2 ATS Requirements

Civil and/or military service providers shall be designated to deliver the service provision for Mission Trajectories. In all cases, military requirements are to be met.

MIL REQ 029: Special handling of State aircraft shall be provided in line with State designation requirements

MIL REQ 030: The service to Mission Trajectories shall be inconspicuous if provided by civil or military service providers

MIL REQ 031: Specific agreements shall anticipate circumstances in which military authorities need to have a direct link to the controllers giving service to Mission Trajectories, when such situations occur (for instance, directives on the conduct of operations should be forwarded directly to such positions, thus avoiding cumbersome procedures through the hierarchy of the service provider)

MIL REQ 032: Tailored services shall be provided for air policing and Air Defence missions

13 Based on Regulation (EC) No 551/2004 of 10 March 2004 (the Airspace Regulation); Article 7 Flexible use of airspace; Section 1



MIL REQ 033: States shall identify the various types of military operations which can be accommodated by applying the same rules, procedures and service as applied to the Business Trajectory and those which require other rules, procedures and services (Mission Trajectories)

MIL REQ 034: Special priority handling procedures shall be put in place for security flights and time-critical missions

2.3.3 SAR Requirements

MIL REQ 035: Future ATC systems shall include automated functionalities to support SAR operations

2.3.4 Information Requirements/Data

One of the objectives is to determine effective mechanisms and procedures to enhance the response of ATM to security threats and events affecting flights (aircraft and passengers). ATM has to support national security for the identification of flights entering a State’s airspace or identification zone. The Air Defence organisation and Military ATM units have to be provided with all information relevant to their tasks.

MIL REQ 036: States shall remain responsible for the provision of aeronautical data within their area of responsibility

MIL REQ 037: Static and dynamic aeronautical information shall be accessible and available as prescribed by international agreements and provisions

MIL REQ 038: Civil and military ATC and FOC/WOC systems and their constituents shall support the timely sharing of correct and consistent information covering all phases of flight14.

MIL REQ 039: It is required that any data deemed ‘sensitive’ by the military e.g. flight data from specific Mission trajectories, are adequately protected within the systems

MIL REQ 040: The European ATM Network shall accommodate the filtering of secure and/or sensitive information and data as requested by States

MIL REQ 041: The use of common data formats between ATM Systems, Meteorological Systems and Air Defence Systems shall be ensured

MIL REQ 042: Military ATC and Air Defence systems should be capable of exchanging ATM information with SWIM safeguarding security requirements

MIL REQ 043: Information and Services Models supporting SWIM shall take into account and accommodate military requirements for exchanging ATM information for the benefits of all civil and military actors

MIL REQ 044: The data shall be freely shared between authorised users

MIL REQ 045: Service providers shall, on a timely and continuous basis, provide national/international Air Defence units with the data necessary for the execution of Air Defence and security tasks

14 Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of 10 March 2004 (the Interoperability Regulation); Annex II: Essential requirements; Part A; 4 CIV-MIL coordination



MIL REQ 046: For the purpose of public security, times of crisis and war, uninterrupted data provision necessary for the execution of Air Defence tasks shall be secured by the development of appropriate contingency plans

MIL REQ 047: All the service providers15 shall ensure that information and coordination procedures are transparent for national Air Defence units, independent of the dynamic reshaping of the airspace and the sectors of the control agencies

MIL REQ 048: The military ATM data should be harmonised and apply the same modells as the civil ATM data to facilitate data exchange and interoperability

2.3.5 Network Requirements

Possible priority procedures for Mission Trajectories are defined by national legislation. Head of State flights, emergency traffic and Search & Rescue flights constitute some of the traffic which needs special measures.

MIL REQ 049: Priority of certain Mission Trajectories (e.g. synchronised MTs) shall be ensured across the Pan-European Network

MIL REQ 050: SESAR shall enable a pan-European transit service for Mission Trajectories

MIL REQ 051: Direct coordination and procedures have to be established between appropriate service providers and Military ATM units /Air Defence units to ensure flight safety and uninterrupted provision of services

MIL REQ 052 The SESAR Enterprise Architecture will facilitate military-military cooperation among States

2.4 Human Centred Approach

Humans will constitute the core of the future European ATM System’s operations.

During the ATM concept implementation, there will be significant changes to the roles, responsibilities and supporting technologies affecting several hundred thousands commercial and military pilots, civil and military air traffic controllers, engineering and maintenance staff, operation centres staff and other service providers.

An advanced level of automation will be required to improve overall system and human performance.

Actors: actors are defined as entities that interact with the ATM Network. It might be a human user, an organisation or a computer system. Actors are consumers and/or providers of services:

Military Airspace users: Flying crew, Staff members of Wing Operation Centre (or equivalent)

Military Airport operators:

- Wing Operations Centre should be the focal point for all military airport activities. Any implementation of new responsibilities or roles should need further consideration by the military authorities: set up departure queue, airport resources management, environmental issues management, Flight Data management.

- If it is relevant for some military airports, Ground Handling Agents will manage turnaround of aircraft.

15 Service providers: include providers of all types of services (air navigation, meteorology, network management etc.)



Military Air Navigation Services Providers:

Military Providers of Air Navigation Service include En-Route, APP, TWR Air Traffic Control Units, AIS Units, MET Units,

Air Defence Controlling Units:

They are involved in:

- Flights Identification and Classification within National Airspace.

- Missions control within training areas (segregated, restricted, danger) maintaining the flights inside.

- Activation/de-activation of specific areas in real-time,

- QRA Flights control (Air Defence Measures) through coordination procedures.

MIL REQ 053: Military staff should be capable of Mission Trajectory Management within their Wing Ops Centre or equivalent. They should be the organisational unit being responsible for MT management on the day of operation. An urgency management process shall be determined for Quick Response Alert Mission Trajectory (QRA-MT)

MIL REQ 054: Mission trajectories shall be reliably executed by the flight crew, or UAS Pilot-in-command according navigational performance. This requires operators to:

• Conduct flight according to RMT and applicable rules,

• Modify RMT if needed or required,

• Assure separation if this responsibility must be assumed by flight crew in accordance with pre-defined rules

• Achieve Required Time of Arrival /Over (RTA/RTO) if appropriate

• Achieve Controlled Time of Arrival/Over (CTA/CTO) if appropriate.

MIL REQ 055: The European ATM network shall imply enhanced responsibilities in creating, negotiating, adapting, synchronising with other MT, maintaining and distributing on time the different MT data during planning and execution phases (SMT, RMT)

MIL REQ 056: WOC and ANSP staff shall provide the necessary service support for non capable aircraft for supporting full Reference Mission Trajectory (RMT) management



2.5 Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CN S)

To support the SESAR ATM concept and architecture for 2020 and beyond, the expected evolutions of CNS encompass:

• Communications technologies enabling voice and improved data exchanges between all service actors within the system,

• Navigation technologies enabling precision positioning, timing and trajectory management of the aircraft to support efficient 4D trajectory operations in all phases of flight,

• Surveillance technologies enabling precise identification and monitoring of all traffic including new modes of operation with enhanced traffic situational awareness and airborne separation assistance systems (ASAS).

2.5.1 Communications

2.5.1.1 Air-Ground Communications

Air-Ground Voice: while the ATM concept is oriented towards data exchanges between aircraft and ATM ground systems, air/ground voice will remain an essential means of communication at least until the 2020 timeframe. Beyond 2020, voice should be no longer the primary means of communication but will remain to be used only in certain circumstances (e.g. support of critical situations/emergencies) and it will essentially be a safety back-up means of communication. The primary means supporting air-ground communications exchanges will be Data link. To alleviate VHF congestion it will be necessary to proceed with the expansion of VHF 8.33 KHz below FL 195 maintaining during a certain transition UHF and VHF 25 KHz channels to accommodate non-equipped GA and State Aircraft in some parts of airspace as described in the EC Regulation on Air-Ground Voice Channel Spacing.

Air-Ground Data: automated data exchange will be progressively introduced for routine communication. It is important to highlight that higher performance in term of security, latency, availability, integrity, throughput, will be required to support advanced services relying on techniques like ADS-B, such as the ASAS separartion, self-separation and 4D contract, trajectory exchanges, as well as the increasing air traffic volumes and density. Data Links will enable aircraft to be a node of SWIM.

SESAR future communications infrastructure will comprise multiple data link alternatives relying on terrestrial and satellite data link technologies.

Beyond 2020, data link will become the primary means of communications.

2.5.1.2 Ground-Ground communications

They are the means to enable distributed information flows between all stakeholders/actors like ATC centres and national, sub-regional or regional civil/military organisations, airport, operators, airspace users etc. The higher levels of co-ordination in the future operational environment where ATC, AOC (WOC), Airports are integrated will increase data volumes and the level of automation justifying the net-centric approach.

SESAR envisages sharing resources for both operational and administrative data communications purposes. By 2020, ground installations will be connected using a distributed pan-European ground-ground Internet Protocol (IP) based network supporting both data and voice



An underlying SWIM structure including air-ground SWIM will be deployed, providing efficiency improvements by sharing of voice and data on the same network on the basis of a service-oriented architecture.

In terms of aeronautical messaging, the ANSPs are already replacing the Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunication Network (AFTN) by the Aeronautical Message Handling Service (AHMS) which will later migrate over the IP-based Pan-European Network Services (PENS).

2.5.2 Navigation

The evolution of the navigation technologies will be dominated by the transition from a predominantly ground-based to a multi constellation and multi frequency satellite-based infrastructure based on the navigation performance requirements.

Primary aircraft positioning means will be satellite based for all flight phases. Positioning is expected to rely on a minimum of 2 dual frequency satellite constellations and augmentations as required:

• Aircraft Based augmentation systems (ABAS) such as INS, multiple GNSS processing receivers, RAIM

• Satellite Based Augmentation Systems (SBAS) such as EGNOS and WAAS

• Ground Based Augmentation Systems (GBAS) for Cat II/III approach and landing with backup provided by ILS/MLS, and specific GBAS features may be necessary to meet high performance guidance requirements for airport surface navigation

• Enhanced on-board trajectory management systems and ATS Flight processing systems to support the trajectory concept (FMS/MMS).

Terrestrial Navigation infrastructure based on DME/DME and/or TACAN is maintained to provide a backup for En Route and TMA.

Military will use GNSS with multi-constellation solutions comprising GPS/PPS and GALILEO/PRS + augmentations, TACAN will be considered as a NAV means of compliance where applicable.

2.5.3 Surveillance

The objective of the surveillance service is to provide a complete picture of the actual traffic situation, identify flights to ensure a safe separation and efficient traffic flow. Four basic surveillance principles can be distinguished:

• Non Cooperative Independent Surveillance: it uses the primary surveillance radar (PSR), not relied on airborne avionics and continuously deployed, as necessary, for safety and security in order to detect transponder failure or unidentified aircraft. They should be replaced by cheaper forms of non cooperative independent surveillance. At civil side it exists in TMA with en-route surveillance relying today on double SSR coverage.

• Cooperative Independent Surveillance: it uses monopulse SSR, SSR Mode S or WAM (Wide Area Multi-lateration, which needs ground antennas rather than rotating equipment). It is relied on airborne active transmissions. It provides the principal means of surveillance until 2020 except for global Air Defence Surveillance which still will need Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR) Information as principal means for the detection and tracking of non-cooperative aircraft, even though all other information transmitted by cooperative aircraft (using SSR, mode S, ADS-B) are fundamental to the production of the recognised air picture



• Cooperative Dependant Surveillance: aircraft position, altitude, identity and other parameters by means of ADS-B Out initially supported by Mode S 1090 MHz Extended Squitter data link are fully dependant on the aircraft systems. This type of surveillance is initially a solution for low-density non-radar airspace or as a complement to independent surveillance in medium to high-density airspace.

• Air to Air surveillance: specific applications of ADS-B In technique initially supported by Mode S 1090 MHz Extended Squitter data link in order to provide the aircraft the necessary capability to support ASAS applications (Airborne Separation Assistance System) including ATSAW (Air Traffic Situational Awareness) identified in the concept. However it will be necessary to improve the air-air data capacity, integrity, security and availability to support additional functions such as trajectory intent data.

2.5.4 CNS Requirements

MIL REQ 057: Transmission of trajectory data and surveillance data to appropriate military units is a basic requirement

MIL REQ 058: The establishment of secure lines of communication should also be considered16 (e.g. coordination in the event of terrorist actions)

MIL REQ 059: Military aircraft should have ADS-B In/Out capability

MIL REQ 060: Military aircraft should support key 4D performance requirements including FMS-alike functions and advanced navigation

MIL REQ 061: A maximum achievable level of civil-military CNS interoperability is required

MIL REQ 062: Interoperability arrangements shall take into account national security requirements17

MIL REQ 063: Interoperability or interface modules/gateways between military and civil systems shall comply with common specifications/standards. Equivalent verification of compliance mechanisms will be used

MIL REQ 064: Data link interoperability should be implemented for military aircraft

MIL REQ 065: Technical standards should be identified as required to support the industrialisation of R&D solutions and mechanisms to support equivalent certification for military systems should be defined

16 NATO document C-M (2002)59 “NATO Guidance for the establishment of civil-military air traffic control procedures in light of the new security environment” 17 Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of 10 March 2004 (the Interoperability Regulation); Annex II: Essential requirements; Part A; 4 CIV-MIL coordination



ANNEX B: MILITARY AIR OPERATIONS

Annex B is essentially related to Military Training Air Operations which will continue to share, on daily basis, the airspace use with all others airspace users in the future European ATM Network. Operations concern flights and other activities (operational paragliding, firing etc.).

Nevertheless some of them can be conducted as real Military Air Operation (e.g. maritime patrols, reconnaissance flights, Air defence flights, transit flights from European airfields or others to destination to real Theatre of Operations…).

Some of them can be part of industrial activities (e.g. test flights, firing…) in the scope of research, development and validation of new material.

The list of missions has been extracted from “Determining Future Military Airspace Requirement in Europe” document, elaborated by Military Harmonisation Group (MILHAG). The document was adopted by the Civil/Military Interface Standing Committee (CMIC) of Eurocontrol and subsequently endorsed by the Provisional Council, at its 18th Session, as guidance by EUROCONTROL Member States and the Agency during the development of ATM and CNS related Projects and Programmes. The document was updated and approved by CMIC at its September 2005 meeting and presented to EANPG Programme Coordinating Group (COG)/33 in October 2005.

Some descriptions have been updated by Eurocontrol/DCMAC experts, through minor changes.

1 GENERAL

1.1 In comparison with commercial aviation activities, military operations are complex and generate several different flight profiles which will have to be partially or fully integrated into the future ATM system, in order to share all useful information with the whole ATM community.

1.2 Military combat aircraft generally operate today in OAT, flying IFR or VFR. Part of traffic is operated within segregated airspace in order to make all other type of traffic compatible and not to compromise the safety.

1.3 For the majority of military operations, Mission Trajectories will require complex routings with multiple aircraft/formations, using mission tailored types and dimensions of airspace reservations and possible additional ATM support.

1.4 The Military GAT IFR flights operate on partially similar characteristics to other users even if a “Mission” is still followed. As already seen, these missions should be catalogued as Business Trajectories in terms of technical trajectory management.

1.5 All other Mission Trajectories are generally composed of an entry and an exit from airspace with a time-limited operation and encompass all low-medium altitude Missions flown in VFR (within managed and/or unmanaged airspace).

1.6 Missions flown in VFR could concern both managed and unmanaged airspace. Alternately flying within both type of airspace during the same mission, will be a factor of complexity for all planning cycles and execution in terms of sharing flight data. Short transits in managed airspace should be avoided or specific arrangements should be found in order to minimize pilot workload (e.g. clearance request, essentially for single seat aircraft).

1.7 Some Military activities use airspace volumes, possibly without any aircraft trajectories. Nevertheless, all relevant information about volumes description, penetration restrictions, activation and de-activation needed by all airspace users must be shared. These activities should be catalogued as Airspace Constraints.

1.8 In 2020 and beyond the majority of military aircraft should depend on ground-based 4D trajectories and should be handled accordingly.



1.9 Mission Trajectories may originate from any of the sources accepted for other airspace users (aircraft system, Wing Operations Centre or equivalent, ground-based ATM system, Radar surveillance airborne System (AEW), Navy Aviation Group Ops Centre or aircraft Carrier ATM system etc.).

1.10 For en-route phases, the military aircraft may be subject to the new SESAR Airborne Separation modes, if aircraft are properly equipped, the rules are agreed and the pilots can comply.

1.11 Transits of Business Trajectories within training areas will rather be an exception than a rule. Within large-scale areas, transit may be possible but subject to tactical co-ordination process with the controlling agency.

1.12 All other military operation in training areas will not be able to self-separate from other traffic and will be monitored by integrated, co-located or separated Military En-Route Control Centres or by Air Defence Control Units, depending on the type of mission and specific national organisation or FAB arrangements.

1.13 It is recognised that the use of common ATM systems facilitate civil-military co-operation and co-ordination as it is already shown in co-located or integrated area control centres.

1.14 Common system definition and development, common display facilities, direct co-ordination and common responsibilities for both civil and military aspects will facilitate for ATM purposes the handling of air traffic whilst respecting military sensitive data and provide high level of safety.

1.15 However the national responsibility for Air defence Organisations might also lead for maintaining in separated facilities En route control units and specific Air Defence systems, which are adapted to dynamic manoeuvres and provision of required information in order to display an air situation picture of all trajectory data needed for supporting their defence tasks.

1.16 The flight data of mission trajectory would contain shared and unshared parts18 for the ATM network during planning and execution phases.

The unshared flight data could be:

• Within airspace reservation, because sharing the flight data in real-time is not appropriate (e.g. for random profiles of flight as air combat), or because military flights are fully segregated from other users regardless the type of mission inside airspace (air-to-air refuelling, UAS, air combat, testing flights, great height paragliding flights etc.),

• for specific firing operations requiring ad-hoc airspace structures (airspace constraints for ballistic missiles (G/G), cruising missiles and strafing mission (A/G), air combat missiles used on flying targets (A/A), anti-aircraft missiles used on flying target (G/A)),

• any other mission profiles impossible to share due to unavailability of flight data, or requesting full segregation for obvious safety concerns.

• for missions requiring certain level of confidentiality.

The sharing flight data process could concern:

• the transition flights between aerodromes and airspace reservations,

• the departure and arrival phases within managed airspace (e.g. CTR, TMA, Restricted Areas not segregated)

• all phases of military air transport flights (similar to commercial flights)

• en-route air-to-air refuelling,

• low-medium altitude VFR flights,

18 Shared or unshared parts can be considered as “accessible” and “inaccessible parts” of flight data if we consider that all data are shared into the system (SWIM, NOP), and accessibility is managed



• AWACS orbits outside segregated areas,

• UAS operations outside/inside segregated areas,

• Supersonic flights,

• …

1.17 The great diversity of air operations does not make it possible to associate a type of Mission Trajectory Management to every type of Mission. However it is possible to define 3 generic types of Mission Trajectory Management and 1 exceptional type according different elements as: 1 The ability to share all information about the flight during all planning cycles and

during flight (real-time exchange of flight data). Such Mission Trajectory supposes to be similar to Business Trajectory flight profile through climb, transit and descent phases from departure and arrival airports.

2 The ability to share all information about the flight during all planning cycles but only

parts of the flight in real time (partial real-time exchange of flight data). Such Mission Trajectory contains parts during which the profile of flight is similar to Business Trajectory through climb, transit and descent phases, and parts during which the flight is randomly executed either within a specific airspace structure (e.g. TSA/TRA or Restricted). Activation/de-activation times of specific airspace structures and times of entry/exit from unmanaged airspace are shared during all planning cycles and in real-time.

3 The needs to conduct other military operations which are fully operating within restricted areas and not subject to Flight Planning. Even though some flights can be executed by aircraft, others generally are executed by projectiles.

They include ground-to-ground, ground-to-air and air-to-air gunnery and missiles operations, flying-targets flights and high altitude air drop operations. They are executed within areas to be compulsorily avoided by all non-participant airspace users for evident reason of safety. They are catalogued as Airspace Constraints in term of Trajectory Management because not any real-time flight data can be shared, even though the size and times of activation/de-activation of those areas can be shared during all planning cycles and in real-time. They are considered as “black boxes” for which activities are not detailed because they don’t provide any benefits for ATM purposes.

4 The inability to share information about the flight during all planning cycles (except some agreed real-time flight data decided at National level). Such Mission Trajectory involves Quick Response Alert (QRA) Missions for national security matters (exceptional case) and some missions requiring high level of confidentiality.



2 Different Military Mission Trajectory Types

Either for daily training or for complex operation, different generic Mission Trajectory types are described. A simple mission will contain one of the generic Mission Trajectories whereas a complex operation will contain several generic Mission Trajectories linked together to form the general air operation.

Aircraft in close formation throughout the whole mission will be considered as a single aircraft, but if separation is needed for some parts of mission, every single aircraft will fly its own Mission Trajectory. If split and join-up manoeuvres are operated within segregated airspace, these parts of the Mission Trajectory should be unshared for the ATM network. In the other cases, these manoeuvres have to be described and shared through appropriate flight data. If it is not feasible, splitting manoeuvres should be considered as revised RMTs and only shared during execution phase (real-time flight data exchange)

Nine major categories have been identified at European wide scale. They are:

• Instruction Flights,

• Operational training flights,

• Air defence flights,

• Patrol Flights,

• Special Flights,

• Transit Flights,

• Search and Rescue (SAR),

• Firing operations,

• Ground based activities.

2.1 Instruction Flights

Instruction flights are performed for the initial and repeat training of pilots and for their conversion to different aircraft types.

2.1.1 Initial Flight Instruction

Initial flight instruction serves to teach the student pilots basic and advanced flying skills on military aircraft. This is the phase where the student pilots must reach the required level of proficiency in IFR procedures, basic combat manoeuvres and navigation at high, medium and low altitudes.

MT/BT/AC TSA/Restricted AC IFR/VFR Day/Night FL Sharing

MT/BT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P

MT/BT/AC: indicates if missions are catalogued as Mission trajectory, Business Trajectory or Airspace Constraints

TSA/Restricted: indicates if Mission Trajectory needs TSA/Restricted types of airspace structure (Yes = mandatory, No = never, Possible = optional)

AC: indicates if the activity can be executed within Airspace Constraint without any trajectory data sharing (Yes = mandatory, No = never, Possible = optional)



IFR/VFR: indicates if Mission Trajectory is flown in IFR or/and VFR

DAY/NIGHT: indicates if Mission Trajectory in flown during Day or Night or Both

FL: indicates possible vertical usage of Mission Trajectory

SHARING: indicates the type of trajectory sharing with the ATM community

F (fully shared): Mission Trajectory fully shared (accessible), real-time flight data included

P (partially shared): Mission Trajectory for which some parts of flight profiles are not shared in real-time due to random profile within segregated airspace structure. Airspace activation/de-activation will be shared.

U (unshared): Mission trajectory and others “no-trajectory-linked” activities for which no information is shared with the ATM community in terms of flight data. However airspace activation/de-activation can be shared.

2.1.2 Aircraft Type Conversion Training Programme

Aircraft type conversion training programmes are performed both inside and outside TSAs/TRAs. They serve to teach a number of skills, among them the ability - from take-off to reaching the TSA - to perform a continuous climb to high altitudes using the afterburner. The purpose of this is to be able to exploit the fighter aircraft's full potential in air operations.


MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P

2.1.3 Operational Training Flights

After having finished the type conversion, initial operational training starts for the crews. Subsequent continuous operational training ensures permanent qualification across multiple disciplines. Some of these disciplines are: tactical navigation, weapon delivery, reconnaissance, support for ground operations, air combat and air defence operations, helicopter support operations etc. The complexity of these flight operations ranges from single aircraft operations to large formations, including air-to-air refuelling (AAR), or, joint operations with land and sea forces.

2.1.3.1 Air-to-Air Missions

Most of the advanced air-to-air training takes place in segregated airspace (TSAs/TRAs) at all altitudes. During flights to and from TSAs, in-flight updated instructions are often conducted between the aircraft controlling unit (ACU) and the crews. This is partly to update the information on the objectives, execution and expected results of the training and partly to save time before the configuration of the formation in the training area. Details of last minute changes can be exchanged between the ACU and the crews. Often, the formation can be split up by the ACU so that it is ready to start the mission as soon as it arrives at the training area. The return flight from the TSA can be performed along the "home mode" profile, i.e. the pilot, en route for his home base, will climb to the optimum fuel-saving altitude and descend in the most economical mode. This allows the optimum use of the flying time in the TSA.


MT Yes No Both Both SFC/FL550 P



2.1.3.2 Air-to-Ground Missions

Although air-to-ground operations can be performed at all altitudes, they are normally carried out below FL 240. The operations comprise various types, among them medium level close air support (ML CAS). ML CAS comprises air-to-ground missions at medium altitudes, typically in communication with a forward air controller (FAC) on the ground. What is required is the freedom to choose one’s own heading and altitude, and a clear two-way radio communication with the FAC. To allow a high degree of variation and challenges for the crews and FACs, the targets are placed at various locations and not necessarily in training areas. The targets are described in air task orders (ATOs) or air task messages (ATMs). For air-to-ground exercises or live-ordnance deliveries, ”bombing-ranges” or exercise areas are used. “Bombing-ranges”, which may also be used for forward-firing weapons such as missiles, rockets and guns, can be located over either land or sea.

For safety reasons, air traffic not involved in training missions must be kept out of the exercise areas. To ensure the safe performance of flights to and from danger or restricted areas by night and under IMC, special routes and corridors or other support by air traffic services may be required.

It should also be taken into consideration that modern weapons are increasingly delivered for targets beyond the crew’s visual range and therefore from outside the boundaries of the actual “bombing-range”. In addition, UASs will probably be used more frequently for air-to-ground tasks in the future, potentially resulting in greater airspace restrictions for safety reasons.


MT/AC Possible Possible Both Both SFC/FL300 P/U



2.1.3.3 Live Flying Exercises

Live flying exercises, in particular large-scale exercise scenarios, require large airspaces and, if carried out within controlled airspace, considerable ATC capacity en route. Special areas, routes and corridors may be necessary; these are designed in close co-operation with the civil and military aviation authorities prior to the exercise. To meet the requirements, the whole spectrum of airspace may be needed. The objectives can only be achieved by making use of all the available airspace management resources. A growing number of operational flights will be conducted at night with visual aids, for which adequate airspace must be provided.

Live flying exercises can be performed either on a large or small scale. In large-scale exercises, composite air operations (COMAO) are often practised. COMAOs are composite, complex flight operations involving large numbers of aircraft in various roles. The COMAO package of aircraft is composed of different types of aircraft with different tasks that come from different airfields and possibly different states. It is spread over a fairly large area and may have various targets. The package must be in radio communication with the ACU in order to receive threat warnings, updates on its own situation and conditions, and lastly information on other air traffic. The ACU also assists the aircraft with guidance instructions so that the COMAO formation can be configured as intended. To support for COMAO the control unit must be thoroughly familiar with the ATO (Air Task Order) when it is produced and operational order for the exercise. Sufficient en-route capacity to fly to the target area and return from it as well as adequate segregated airspace for the specific mission must be available. It may also be necessary to provide airspace for operations under IMC and by night as well as proper ATC arrangements.


MT/AC Yes Possible Both Both SFC/FL550 P/U

2.1.3.4 Reconnaissance Training

Reconnaissance training usually takes place outside segregated airspace in order to achieve the highest degree of target complexity. The missions may be executed at all altitudes, for example a low-level approach followed by a pop-up manoeuvre at the target. Under some circumstances, reconnaissance missions are also flown for disaster relief or police operations. In these cases, airspace that is usually quite congested may be needed at short notice. Priority will be given to these types of mission.


MT No No Both Both SFC/FL300 F/P



2.1.3.5 Profile Fighter

Profile fighters intercept military aircraft whose intentions are not known in advance by the fighter pilot. Profile fighters are controlled by the ACU, which specifies the mission type (exercise identification or simulated engagement) and guides the crew to an advantageous position. While the fighter is en route, the ACU provides information on the altitude, heading and speed of the target so as to choose the most appropriate tactics. For profile fighters, VMC are needed and the skills which are built up/maintained are of vital importance to the Service in terms of the crew's operational readiness and ability to survive in an unknown hostile environment.


MT No No IFR/VFR Both SFC/FL550 F

2.1.3.6 Helicopter Operation

For the most part, helicopter operations take place at lower altitudes. They comprise transport operations, tactical reconnaissance, special operations and insertions as well as combat operations. Since helicopter operations may include several aircraft, corridors and restricted airspace may be needed.


MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL150 P

2.1.4 Air Defence Flights

2.1.4.1 Hot Scramble

In case of hot-scramble flights, rules must be applied that ensure the priority of these flights over all other air traffic, except that undergoing emergency procedures.


MT No No Both Both SFC/FL550 P

2.1.4.2 Air Defence Exercices (T-scramble)

In order to train the air defence system, live and simulated exercise intruders are used. These intruders act as unidentified aircraft and behave in a suspicious manner. The air defence system will then act appropriately and scramble a QRA flight for training purposes (T-Scramble).





2.1.5 Patrol Flights

2.1.5.1 Airborne Early Warning (AEW)

Airborne early warning radar aircraft must orbit along a fixed track or random pattern at high and medium levels to fulfil their surveillance and control tasks. Typically, AEW aircraft fly at approx 30.000 ft and co-ordinate their airspace requirements either directly with air traffic control or via an ACU.

2.1.5.2 Joint Surveillance and Targeting Radar System (JSTARS) Flights

JSTARS aircraft detect and track static or moving ground targets. Their airspace requirements are similar to those of AEW aircraft. However, JSTARS aircraft may operate somewhat closer to the target area.

2.1.5.3 Stand Off Jammer (SOJ) Flights

Electronic warfare may be incorporated in air exercises. In modern warfare, the electromagnetic spectrum is exploited by both friendly and enemy forces. Procedures for electronic warfare are therefore an important exercise objective. SOJ will need orbit areas and close co-ordination procedures with the “victim unit”. Procedures with civil agencies managing neighbouring areas must be developed.

2.1.5.4 Electronic Support Measures (ESM) Flights

ESM aircraft are employed as a part of electronic warfare or peacetime intelligence gathering operations. All of the above patrol flights need orbit areas and radio contact with military agencies. Random tracks can be co-ordinated with civil agencies, but military security constraints may play a role.


MT Possible No IFR Both SFC/FL350 F/P

2.1.5.5 Maritime Patrol Flights

Typically, MPAs conduct sea surveillance, anti-surface force warfare and anti submarine warfare at low and medium altitudes. Normally, they fly above littoral areas or the open sea.

2.1.5.6 Maritime Environmental Protection Flights

Maritime environmental protection can either be provided by means of routine patrol flights or specific missions. Patrol flights are normally performed at low levels although the transits to the target area may be carried out at higher altitudes in OAT or in GAT. Designated patrol aircraft are used, but even fighter aircraft and helicopters may be tasked with identifying suspect ships at short notice.


MT No No Both Both SFC/FL300 F/P



2.1.6 Special Flights

2.1.6.1 Air-to-Air Refuelling

The main objective of AAR is to increase the range or flying time of the aircraft being refuelled. AAR may take place in orbit areas or en-route. Even buddy-to-buddy AAR, where two aircraft of the same type are hooked together and exchange fuel, may be carried out in orbit areas or en-route. In this case, temporary level reservations must be ensured.


MT Possible No IFR Both SFC/FL280 P

2.1.6.2 Supersonic Flights

The flights that may be performed at supersonic speed are instruction flights, operational flights, functional check flights or air defence flights (the latter have priority over other flights). They serve to train the crews and to make them familiar with supersonic flying at high altitudes, for example by using the afterburner, breaking the sound barrier, decreasing the speed to subsonic flying and descending (in many cases with small quantities of fuel left).

2.1.6.3 Functional Check Flights

Functional check flights are conducted to verify an aircraft’s performance after a major overhaul. Functional check flights follow special profiles at various altitudes and can include flying at supersonic speeds for capable aircraft. They are characterised by a restricted amount of fuel on board and a high fuel consumption rate, thereby limiting the flight time.

MT/BT/AT TSA/Restricted AC IFR/VFR Day/Night FL Sharing

MT/AC Possible Possible Both Day SFC/FL550 P/U

2.1.6.4 Test Flights

The flights are performed by pre-production models of new combat aircraft, transport aircraft, helicopters or UAS. Flights may be performed by existing aircraft types as testing platforms for new weapon systems or new avionics or any new kind of equipage, even for dropping tests. In some European countries, civil aircraft pre-production models flights are under the responsibility of MoD. These flights can be segregated from others airspace users by specific airspace reservation /airspace constraint or be handled as IFR or VFR flights, according to programme testing phases.


MT/BT/AC Possible Possible Both Day/Night SFC/FL550 F/P/U



2.1.6.5 Air Shows and Demonstrations Flights

At during air shows and demonstrations military aircraft demonstrate their capabilities by showing extraordinary manoeuvres, e.g. steep turns as well as rapid climbs and descends.


AC No Possible VFR Day SFC/FL150 U

2.1.6.6 Calibration Flights

Calibration flights are performed to check the accuracy of ground-based and airborne radar stations. In addition, navigation and precision landing aids for civil and military use may also be inspected. Some calibration types can be performed through en-route transit flights


MT/BT No No Both Day SFC/FL550 F

2.1.6.7 Ground Based Air Defence Test Flights

New anti-aircraft defence or surface-to-air missile systems may be tested by carrying out attack flights against them. Obviously, these flights involve evasive manoeuvres including rapid climbs and descents. The profiles are described in advance in an operational order, which all participants must be thoroughly familiar with. The ACU or target radar unit controls the test flights. This is necessary in order to be able to make instantaneous changes to the test programme.



2.1.6.8 Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Flights

UASs are likely to become a regular part of military operations mostly for reconnaissance purposes and air-to-ground attacks at all altitudes. For their flights outside segregated airspace, adequate air traffic control procedures must be developed. A particular attention will be paid to low speed and poor dynamic performance UAS at medium and high altitude. UAS operations take place by both night and day and under all weather conditions. During exercises, UASs may be restricted to defined airspaces. During real operations, however, UASs operate in all theatres. Long-haul transit flights can be performed by UAS flying in IM (IFR Military).


MT Possible No IFR Both SFC/FL550 F/P



2.1.6.9 Air Drop Flights

Transport aircraft and helicopters can be used for dropping personnel and equipment into a target area from a variety of altitudes. Paragliding in all weather conditions can be performed as part as Special Forces training. The latter requires specific protection airspace structure.

MT/BT/AC TSA/ Restricted AC IFR/VFR Day/Night FL Sharing

MT/AC Possible Possible Both Both SFC/FL250 P/U

2.1.7 Transit Flights

Military transport aircraft may operate as Operational Air Traffic (OAT) or as General Air Traffic (GAT). In some cases, they are equipped like civil transport aircraft and can be handled by ATC like any other GAT flight. Combat aircraft normally perform their transit as OAT in a manner that is comparable to GAT en route. However, it may also be necessary to train and perform transit flights at different altitudes under tactical conditions, e.g. when simulating threats from the air or ground, both in managed and unmanaged airspace.


MT/BT No No Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P

2.1.8 Search and Rescue Flights

In many countries, military authorities are responsible for SAR operations. SAR flights have to be given the highest priority and handled as expeditiously as possible. Although they are normally performed at lower altitudes, aircraft are sometimes used at medium altitudes as airborne radio relay units or on scene SAR co-ordinator/ commander. The airspace requirements depend on the actual circumstances.


MT No No VFR Both SFC/FL350 P



2.1.9 Firing Activities

Gunnery and Missile Firing operations (Ground-to Gr ound, Ground-to-Air, Air-to-Ground, Air-to-Air)

Ground and sea forces regularly train in the use of guns, rockets and missiles against ground-, sea- and airborne targets. Depending on the weapon type used, the airspace above these ranges and in case of air-to-air firing also below must be restricted in the interests of public safety and to ensure the safety of all airspace users.

Surface-to-surface as well as surface-to-air firing also requires airspace that’s horizontal and vertical dimensions depend on the various types of weapons employed. Air-drops may be performed from low up to very high altitudes. The dimension of airspace needed depends mainly on the tasks and weather conditions.


AC No Yes VFR Both SFC/FL550 U

2.1.10 Over High Seas Operations

Because States have no sovereignty over high seas (generally beyond 12 NM from the coasts), all flights operated in OAT over high seas by State Aircraft are lawful for all States. However, they have to operate having due regard for the safety of civil aviation (Chicago Convention).

Today, a notification is generally sent by foreign Users to the State concerned by such operation within its FIR over high seas, but it is not mandatory.

NOTAM or other supports are not necessarily required by aircraft operators.

Several States in charge to provide air navigation services over high seas, have decided to implement OAT regulations for their own State aircraft, paying a particular attention to the compatibility between OAT and GAT flights. However these regulations are not applicable by other States aircraft over high seas.

As a consequence, it must be admitted that in SESAR environment over high seas, some Military operations shall not be shared in particular by non-European States and likely by European States aircraft (to be determined).

Insofar as the European FIRs over high seas is far to be negligible, the question of Military operations performed by European State Aircraft within European FIRs/UIRs over high seas in SESAR environment should be addressed.



Type of Mission MT/BT/AC TSA/ Restricted AC IFR/

VFR Day/ Night FL Sharing

Plannable

L - M - S

Calibration Flights BT/MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL550 F Y – Y – N

Transit Flights BT/MT No No Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P Y – Y – Y

Maritime Patrol Flights MT No No Both Both SFC/FL300 F/P Y – Y – Y

Profile Fighter MT No No Both Both SFC/FL550 F N – Y – Y

Reconnaissance Training MT No No Both Both SFC/FL300 F/P N – Y – Y

Air Defence Flights – Training MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL550 P N – Y – Y

Air Defence Flight – Hot MT No No Both Both SFC/FL550 P N

Patrol Flights MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL350 F/P Y – Y – Y

Search and Rescue Flights MT No No VFR Both SFC/FL350 F/P N

Air-to-Air Refuelling MT Possible No IFR Both SFC/FL280 F/P Y – Y – Y

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Flights MT Possible No -- Both SFC/FL550 F/P Y – Y – Y

Air-to-Air Missions MT Yes No Both Both SFC/FL550 P N – Y – Y

Helicopter Operation MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL150 P Y – Y – Y

GBAD Test Flights MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL350 P Y – Y – Y

Air-to-Ground Missions MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL300 P N – Y – Y

Aircraft Type Conversion Training Programme MT Possible No Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P N – Y – Y

Test Flights BT/MT/AC Possible Possible Both Both SFC/FL550 F/P/U N – Y – Y

Live Flying Exercises MT/AC Possible Possible Both Both SFC/FL550 P/U Y – Y – N

Functional Check Flights MT/AC Possible Possible Both Day SFC/FL550 P/U N – Y – Y

Air Drop Flights MT/AC Possible Possible Both Both SFC/FL250 P/U Y – Y – Y

Air Shows and Demonstrations Flights AC No Possible VFR Day SFC/FL150 U Y – N – N

Firing Activities AC No Yes VFR Both SFC/UNL U Y – Y – Y MT/BT/AC: indicates if missions are catalogued as Mission trajectory, Business Trajectory or Airspace Constraints TSA/Restricted: indicates if Mission Trajectory needs TSA or Restricted type airspace structure (Yes = mandatory, No = never, Possible = optional) IFR/VFR: indicates if Mission Trajectory is flown in IFR or/and VFR DAY/NIGHT: indicates if Mission Trajectory in flown during Day or Night or Both FL: indicates possible vertical usage of Mission Trajectory SHARING: indicates if Mission Trajectory is shared with ATM network

F (fully shared): Business/Mission Trajectory fully shared, real-time flight data included P (partially shared): Mission Trajectory for which some parts of flight are not shared in real-time (e.g. within segregated airspace structure or in unmanaged airspace) . Airspace activation/de-activation can be shared. U (unshared): Military activity for which no information is shared with the ATM community in terms of flight data. However airspace activation/de-activation data can be shared

PLANNABLE: L– LONG TERM: beyond 6 months – M – MEDIUM TERM: between 1 month and 6 months – S – SHORT TERM: less than 1 month