-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
1/14
Directorate Network ManagementMonthly Network Operations Report
Analysis - February 2012
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
2/14
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. TOTAL TRAFFIC.................................................................................. 1
2. ATFM DELAY AND ATTRIBUTIONS................................................... 4
3. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAYS ................................................................ 5
3.1. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER LOCATION....................................... 53.2. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER DELAY GROUPS............................. 6
3.3. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER FLIGHT............................................. 7
3.4. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY YEAR-TO-DATE....................................... 84. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAYS........................................................... 9
4.1. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER LOCATION................................. 9
4.2. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER DELAY GROUPS....................... 9
4.3. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER FLIGHT..................................... 10
4.4. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY YEAR-TO-DATE............................... 10
5. DAILY EVOLUTION........................................................................... 10
6. ALL AIR TRANSPORT DELAYS (Source: CODA)............................ 117. ATFM SLOT ADHERENCE ............................................................... 12
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
3/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 1
1. TOTAL TRAFFIC
Last 13 months average daily traffic
24403
25684
26914
28786
30041
30401
29974
30589
28004
24756
22759
22695
23260
16000
18000
20000
22000
24000
26000
28000
30000
32000
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
Average daily traffic 2011 - 2012
forecast date : 2012-02
20000
22000
24000
26000
28000
30000
32000
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
STATFOR Forecast 2011 2012
Traffic decreased by 4.7% compared to February 2011. The traffic growth remains below the forecast which wasupdated in February.
Average daily traffic in February for last 5 Years
forecast date : 2012-02
25994 23779 23634 24403 23260
23622
20000
21000
22000
23000
24000
25000
26000
27000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
12 months rolling traffic trend
2.5%
1.9%
3.8%
1.7%1.7%
3.1%2.9%
3.2%3.5%3.5%
3.7%3.8%4.0%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
February 2012 traffic was below the 4 previous years and alsowell below the forecast.
This graph shows the variation in total traffic for the last 12-month period relative to that for the 12-month period before.Accordingly, the total traffic from Feb11 to Feb12 increasedby 1.9% relative to that from Feb10 to Feb11.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
4/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 2
Several main airports continued to experience a decrease in traffic during February 2012 (e.g. London Heathrow, Paris CDG,Frankfurt, Madrid, Munich, Rome Fumicino and Barcelona). The largest decreases were experienced in Palma de Mallorca,Madrid, Athens, Las Palmas and Prague. Ferihegy Budapest recorded a 29.9% decrease due to Malv Hungarian Airlinesceased operations. The largest increases in traffic were recorded at Bergen Flesland, Istanbul Ataturk and London City.
For air operators, the most significant decreases were recorded by Czech Airlines (-30.5%), Iberia (-26.2%), Royal Air Maroc (-24.1%), Cimber Air A/S (-19.2%) and Air Europa (-16.8%). The largest growth was recorded by United Airlines (140.7%) andNaysa (40.3%). All of these changes were due to airline consolidation and restructuring rather than traffic growth.
Some major carriers (S.A.S, Turkish Airlines and KLM) recorded a growth in traffic in February 2012 which is in line withAmsterdam and Istanbul airport growth.
Unidentified operators (mainly General Aviation) recorded a decrease of 7.1% in February 2012.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
5/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 3
Stavanger, Tallinn and Warsaw ACCs experienced a significant increase in traffic. Spain (Madrid, Seville, Barcelonaand Palma ACCs), Rome and Skopje ACCs recorded significant decreases in traffic. The decrease in Malta is bothdue to slow recovery from the Libyan airspace closure and the general decline in traffic level.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
6/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 4
2. ATFM DELAY AND ATTRIBUTIONS
Average daily ATFM delays
345
09 4
9024
77275
84301
69435
79211
58861
341
14
19761
15103
22810
24377
29333
0
10000
20000
30000
4000050000
60000
70000
80000
90000
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
EN-ROUTE
AIRPORT/TMAAverage daily ATFM delays
11428
8305
17906
14506
39.0% 36.4%61.0% 63.6%0
2000
4000
6000
8000
1000012000
14000
16000
18000
20000
201102 201202
EN-ROUTE
AIRPORT/ TM A
The average daily ATFM delays decreased from 29333minutes in February 2011 to 22810 minutes in February 2012.
Compared to February 2011, ATFM delays were down by22.2% mainly due to the lower than expected traffic. Therepartition between en-route and airport delays stayed almostthe same.
Monthly ATFM delays trend
56.6%
-33.8%
-21.3%
-28.5%-34.9%
10.6%
-25.3%
-50.4%
-27.0%
-20.3%
-74.3%
-46.0%
-22.2%
-46.9%
-27.2%
-80%
-60%
-40%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%80%
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
Roll ing 12 month t rend Same month las t year
Proportion of ATFM delay in February 2012
AIRPORTWEATHER, 36 .4%
AIRPORT ATC
CAPACITY, 7.0%
EN-ROUTE ATC
CAPA CITY, 17.2%
EN-ROUTE ATC
DISRUPTIONS,
8.7%
EN-ROUTE
EVENTS, 1.4%
AIRPORT
INFRASTRUCTU
RE, 20.3%
EN-ROUTE
WEATHER &
EXTERNAL
DISRUPTIONS,
3.3%
EN-ROUTE ATC
STAFFING, 5.9%
Compared to February 2011, ATFM delays decreased by
22.2%. The ATFM delay trend continued to decreasethroughout 2011/2012.
In February, 63.6% of all ATFM delays occurred at the
Airports/TMA. The main issue was weather which contributedfor half of Airport delays. En-route delays accounted for36.4%.
Top 20 delay locations for year-to-date ATFM delays
2021
15461445
1288
1023 1010 991808
667 620440 365 334 295 278 265 256 253 243 226
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
ISTANBUL-ATATURK
FRANKFURTMAIN
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
LONDON/HEATHROW
PARISALLACC
NICOSIAACC
LANGENACC
MUENCHEN2
ZURICH
PARISCHDEGAULLE
ANKARAACC
GENEVECOINTRIN
WARSZAWAACC
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
REIMSU/ACC
MUNCHENACC
MALMOACC
TENERIFESUR
MANCHESTER
HELSINKI-VANTAA
ProportionoftotalATFMdelay
AIRPORT ATC CAPACITY
AIRPORT WEATHER
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
EN ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNA L DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE EVENTS
EN ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
These are the top 20 delay generating locations for the beginning of 2012. Figures are the average daily delays in minutes. Thetop 20 location represents 76.3% of the entire Network ATFM delays, the top 5 locations represents 38.9% of the NetworkATFM delays. Istanbul, Amsterdam, London Heathrow, Munich and Zurich airports registered the most significant delays mainly due to weather
conditions: snow, strong wind and low visibility.
Frankfurt delays were caused by the Apron and marshalling personnel strike during 9 days between the 16th
and 29th
February.
Nicosia, Langen and Warsaw ACCs recorded delays mainly due to ATC capacity and staffing. Marseille and Reims ACCsrecorded delays mainly due to industrial action.
Paris ACC registered delays due to ATC capacity and industrial action.
Malmo recorded en-route delays due to the implementation of the new ATC system COOPANS.
Delays in Ankara ACC were due to reduced ATC Capacity in ORBB (Baghdad) FIR (NOTAM A0004/12).
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
7/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 5
3. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAYS
3.1. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER LOCATION
Top 20 delay locations for en-route delays in February 20121536
1165 1146
529464 447 390
318 273
235 186 185 176 154 126 115 84 82 59 51
0%
2%4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
PARISALLACC
LANGENACC
NICOSIAACC
ANKARAACC
MARSEILLEACC
MUNCHENACC
REIMSU/ACC
BORDEAUXALLACC
GENEVAACC
CANARIASACC/FIC
BRESTU/ACC
OSLOATCC
BREMENACC
MADRIDALLACC
WARSZAWAACC
MALMOACC
LONDONACC
KARLSRUHEUAC
ZURICHACC
LONDONTMATCP
roportio
n
oftotalEn-routedelays
EN-ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNA L DISRUPTIONS
EN-ROUTE EVENTS
EN-ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN-ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN-ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
The top 20 en-route delay locations generated 33.9% of the monthly total (network) ATFM delay.The top 5 en-route delay locations generated 21.2% of the monthly total (network) ATFM delay.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
8/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 6
3.2. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER DELAY GROUPS
Reasons for en-route delays in February 2012
5.9%
3 . 3 %
1.4%
8.7%
17.2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
EN-ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
EN-ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN-ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN-ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNAL
DISRUPTIONS
EN-ROUTE EVENTS
Overall en-route delays accounted for 36.4% of all ATFM
delays. 17.2% were attributed to en-route ATC capacity and8.7% to en-route ATC disruptions.
Top 10 delay locations for en-route ATC Capacity
in February 2012816 800
667
243 235156 147
95 77 72
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
PARISALLACC
NICOSIAACC
LANGENACC
REIMSU/ACC
CANARIASACC/FIC
GENEVAACC
MADRIDALLACC
WARSZAWAACC
LONDONACC
MUNCHENACC
Proportionoftot
alEn-routeATC
Capacity
delays
Top 10 delay locations for e n-route ATC Staffing
in February 2012456
346
136 11882
42 31 25 6 60%
10%
20%
30%
40%
LANGENACC
NICOSIAACC
BREMENACC
GENEVAACC
KARLSRUHE_
UAC
MUNCHENACC
WARSZAWAACC
TAMPEREACC
OSLOATCC
BRESTU/ACCP
roportion
of
totalEn-route
ATCS
taff
ing
delays
With the exception of Madrid and Warsaw ACCs, ATC delaysincreased in February compared to January 2012 in the ACCsabove.
Staffing problems in Langen ACC increased significantlycompared to January 2012.Nicosia ACC recorded staffing delays mainly on Thursdaysand during the weekends of February.
Top delay locations for en-route ATC Disruptions
in February 2012
645
459
318
178 147 14096
10%
10%
20%
30%
40%
PAR
ISALLACC
MARSEILLEACC
BORDEAU
XALLACC
O
SLOATCC
RE
IMSU/ACC
BR
ESTU/ACC
MUN
CHENACC
WIENACC
ProportionoftotalEn-routeATC
Disruptions
delays
Average en-route daily flights > 15 min delay
225302 347 290
132
630
945
215
755
13701391
1727
1429
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
FE
B
MA
R
AP
R
MA
Y
JU
N
JU
L
AU
G
SE
P
OC
T
NO
V
DE
C
JA
N
FE
B
The 5 French ACCs generated delays mainly due ATCindustrial action that took place on the 28th and 29th February.
In February 2012, an average of 225 flights per dayexperienced en-route delay of more than 15 minutes.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
9/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 7
3.3. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY PER FLIGHT
Top 20 delay locations for en-route delays per flight in February 20121.89
0.510.39 0.34 0.30
0.22 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.02
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
NICOSIAACC
PARISALLACC
LANGENACC
ANKARAACC
CANARIASACC/FIC
OSLOATCC
MARSEILLEACC
REIMSU/ACC
GENEVAACC
BORDEAUXALLACC
MUNCHENACC
BREMENACC
BRESTU/ACC
MALMOACC
WARSZAWAACC
MADRIDALLACC
TAMPEREACC
ZURICHACC
KARLSRUHEUAC
LONDONACC
EN ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNAL DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE EVENTS
EN ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
Nicosia ACC generated the most significant average en-route delay per flight in February.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
10/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 8
3.4. EN-ROUTE ATFM DELAY YEAR-TO-DATE
Top 20 delay locations for year-to-date en-route ATFM delay
1023 1010 991
440
334278 265 256 224 221 186 154 144
90 89 87 74 48 45 43
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
PARISALLACC
NICOSIAACC
LANGENACC
ANKARAACC
WARSZAWAACC
REIMSU/ACC
MUNCHENACC
MALMOACC
MARSEILLEACC
MADRIDALLACC
GENEVAACC
BORDEAUXALLACC
CANARIASACC/FIC
BRESTU/ACC
OSLOATCC
BREMENACC
LONDONACC
KARLSRUHEUAC
ZURICHACC
LONDONTMATC
Proportion
oftotalATFMdela EN ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNA L DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE EVENTS
EN ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
These are the top 20 en-route delay locations since the beginning of 2012.The top 20 en-route delay locations generated 33.9% of the total ATFM (network) delay since the beginning of the year.The top 5 en-route delay locations generated 21.6% of the total ATFM (network) delay since the beginning of the year.
Year-to-date daily en-route flights > 15 min delay
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
J
AN
F
EB
M
AR
A
PR
M
AY
J
UN
J
UL
A
UG
S
EP
O
CT
N
OV
D
EC
2011
2012Monthly en-route delay monitoring
0.70
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
En-routedelaysperflight
0
5000
1000 0
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
AverageEn-routeDelays
M ONTHLY TGT DLY AVG ER DLYS TGT DLY/FLT YTD 2012
Since the beginning of the year, an average of 179 flights perday was subject to an en-route delay of more than 15 minuteswhich is below the 2011 result.
In February the monthly optimum* en-route delays (8030 min)was exceeded (8305 min) despite the lower than expectedtraffic. Performance in January has assisted the year-to-dateen-route delay per flight result (0.29 min/flt) staying lower thanthe optimum* year-to-date target (0.34 min/flt).
*NMs calculation that provides the optimum en-route delay (min) requirements to achieve the end-of-years target (0.70 min/flight).
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
11/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 9
4. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAYS
4.1. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER LOCATION
Top 20 delay locations for Airport/TMA delays in February 2012
2872
1922
1237 1130917
774597 517 503
333 280 267 256 250 198 193 173 139 135 122
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
24%
FRANKFURTMAIN
ISTANBUL-ATATURK
MUENCHEN2
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
LONDON/HEATHROW
PARISCHDEGAULLE
ZURICH
GENEVECOINTRIN
MANCHESTER
DUESSELDORF
LONDON/GATWICK
BRUSSELSNATIONAL
HELSINKI-VANTAA
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
TEGEL-BERLIN
ROMEFIUMICINO
WIENSCHWECHAT
PARISORLY
STOCKHOLM-ARLANDA
TENERIFESUR
Proportion
oftotalAirport/TMAdelay
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
AIRPORT WEATHER
AIRPORT ATC CAPACITY
The top 20 Airport/TMA delay locations generated 56.2% of the monthly total ATFM (network) delay.
The top 5 Airport/TMA delay locations generated 35.4% of the monthly total ATFM (network) delay.
4.2. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER DELAY GROUPS
Reasons for Airport/TMA delays in February 2012
36.4%
20.3%
7.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
AIRPORT
WEATHER
AIRPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE
AIRPORT ATC
CAPACITY
Top 10 delay locations for Airport Infrastructure
in February 20122857
835
289 148 100 46 39 31 21 190%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
FRANKFURTMAIN
ISTANBUL-A
TATURK
PARISCHDE
GAULLE
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
TEGEL
-BERLIN
LOND
ON/CITY
WIENSCHWECHAT
HA
MBURG
ZURICH
DUESS
ELDORFP
roportion
ofallAirport
Infrastructuredelays
Airport/TMA delays accounted for 63.6% of all ATFM delays.Weather was the main cause of airport delay.
Frankfurt delay was mainly due to the Apron and marshallingpersonnel strike between the 16
thand the 29
thof February.
Istanbul Ataturk airport continues to generate delay due toairport infrastructure.Paris CDG delay was due to Grenelle (noise reduction)procedure.
Top 10 delay locations for Airport Weather
in February 2012
1229
995 921 890
503381 314 305 280 260
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
MUENCHEN2
ISTANBUL-ATATURK
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
LONDON/HEATHROW
MANCHESTER
PARISCHDEGAULLE
DUESSELDORF
GENEVECOINTRIN
LONDON/GATWICK
ZURICH
ProportionofallAirportW
eather
delays
Top 10 delay locations for Airport ATC Capacity
in February 2012
317
212
122 104 92 89 74 73 62 61
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
ZURICH
GENEVECOINTRIN
TENERIFESUR
PARISCHDEGAULLE
ISTANBUL-ATATURK
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
HURGHADA
ANNECY
MADRIDBARAJAS
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
Proportion
ofallAirpo
rtATC
Capacitydelays
Munich, Istanbul, Amsterdam, London Heathrow, Manchesterand Paris CDG airports recorded significant delays due tosnow, strong wind and low visibility.
Zurich, Geneva, Tenerife and Paris CDG airports experienceddelays due to ATC capacity.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
12/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 10
4.3. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY PER FLIGHT
Monthly average Airport delay (min) per flight
Last 12 months = 0.6 minutes
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.7
0.7
1.0
0.7
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
Top 10 Airport de lay per flight in February 2012
YTD Situation2.42 2.31
1.18 1.06 1.01 0.890.72 0.65 0.62 0.61
0
1
2
3
FRANKFURTMAIN
ISTANBUL-ATATURK
MUENCHEN2
SCHIPHOL_
AMSTERDAM
GENEVECOINTRIN
ZURICH
LONDON/HEATHROW
ROMACIAMPINO
DUESSELDORF
PARISCHDEGAULLE
Average Airport/TMA delay per flight decreased from 0.7minutes in February 2011 to 0.6 minutes in 2012.
Frankfurt airport experienced high delays per flight even abovetheir Year To Date situation; this was due to the apron andmarshalling personnel industrial action.
4.4. AIRPORT/TMA ATFM DELAY YEAR-TO-DATETop 20 delay locations for year-to-date Airport/TMA delays
2021
1546 14451288
808667 620
365 295 253 243 226 179 158 153 151 112 105 103 102
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
ISTANBUL
-ATATURK
FRANKF
URTMAIN
SCHIPHOL_
AM
STERDAM
LONDON/H
EATHROW
MU
ENCHEN2
ZURICH
PARISCHD
EGAULLE
GENEVE
COINTRIN
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
TENERIFESUR
MAN
CHESTER
HELSINKI-VANTAA
DUESSELDORF
BRUSSELS
NATIONAL
WIENSC
HWECHAT
LONDON
/GATWICK
ISTANBUL-SABIHA
MADRID
BARAJAS
TEG
EL-BERLIN
H
URGHADA
Proportion
oftotalATFMdelay AIRPORT ATC CAPACITY
AIRPORT WEA THER
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
The top 20 Airport/TMA delay locations generated 47.5% of the total ATFM (network) delay since the beginning of the year.The top 5 Airport/TMA delay locations generated 31.2% of the total ATFM (network) delay since the beginning of the year.
5. DAILY EVOLUTION
Average de lay (min) per flight in February 2012
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
AIRPORT ATC CAPACITY
AIRPORT WEATHER
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
EN-ROUTE WEATHER & EXTERNAL
DISRUPTIONSEN-ROUTE EVENTS
EN-ROUTE ATC DISRUPTIONS
EN-ROUTE ATC STAFFING
EN-ROUTE ATC CAPACITY
In February 2012, only 1 day recorded anaverage delay per flight at or above 2 minutes.Most significant delays were recorded:
On Wednesday 29th February: The Industrialaction that took place in France was the maincause for delays representing almost 60% of thedelays for this day. Weather was also responsiblefor delays in Amsterdam, Dusseldorf, Manchesterand Marseille airports due to low visibility and fog.The Apron and marshalling personnel strikegenerated significant delays in Frankfurt.En-route ATC capacity and staffing affected mainlyLangen and Nicosia.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
13/14
DNM Network Operations Report Analysis - February 2012 11
6. ALL AIR TRANSPORT DELAYS (Source: CODA)
The analysis below is based on the data provided to CODA by the airlines (AO). As the data collection for February12 is not yetcomplete at the time of writing, this analysis covers the latest available 13-month period (Jan2011-Jan2012) and containsdetails on 68% of commercial flights in the ECAC region.
ATFM delays reported by airlines are often lower than the ATFM delays calculated by the network manager (NM). ATFMdelays of NM are the (flight) planned delays whereas the airlines report the actual experienced ATFM delay on departure.
For instance, a flight with an ATFM delay may also have a handling delay absorbed within the ATFM delay. For the airline, apart of this delay is the ATFM delay and the rest is the handling delay
Breakdown average delay per flight January 2012
4.6
0,22 0,17
8,8
0
3
6
9
ATFM en-route
(NM)
ATFM en-route
(AO)
P rimary (A O) P assenger
experience
delayinminutes
Reactionary delay
Primary Delay (excl En-Route)Airline Reported En-Route ATFM DelayNM reported En-Route ATFM delay
Airline reported en-route ATFM delay in January 2012 (0.17minute per flight) is below the NM reported average en-route ATFM delay of 0.22 minute per flight. As airlines mayassign multiple delay reasons for a delayed flight, some ofthe en-route ATFM delay may be attributed to other reasonsif the other reason prevented the flight from obtaining a slotimprovement. A common example is a NM reported en-route ATFM delay reported by airlines as a split between
reactionary and en-route ATFM delay. According to airlinereports, in January 2012 Primary delays accounted for 55%(4.8 min/flt) of which 2% (0.17 min/flt) is attributed to en-route ATFM delays. The rest are the Reactionary delayscounted for 3.9min/flt.
Average departure delay per flight
min
5 min
10 min
15 min
201101
201102
201103
201104
201105
201106
201107
201108
201109
201110
201111
201112
201201
Reactionary (AO)
Other Primary delay (A O)
ATFM en-route (AO)ATFM en-route (NM)
Based on airline data, the reported share of reactionarydelays in January 2012 remained stable at 45% of delay all-causes.
Both NM and airlines report that en-route ATFM delaysreached the lowest point when observing the last 13months.
Percentage of de layed flights: ATFM & All Causes
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
201101
201102
201103
201104
201105
201106
201107
201108
201109
201110
201111
201112
201201
Percentageofflightsdelayed
ondeparture
-ATFM
DNM
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
Percentageofflightsdelayed
ondeparture:AllCauses
> 15min by ATF M Restrictio ns (NM )
> 30min by ATFM Restrictions (NM )
> 15min:All Causes (CODA )
> 30min:All Causes (CODA)
The percentage of flights delayed by long ATFM restrictions(exceeding 15' and 30') in January 2012 was the lowestduring the previous 13 months.
The percentage of long departure delays all-causes inJanuary 2012 was lower compared to January 2011 andwas the third lowest during the previous 13 months. Thepercentage of flights delayed by long ATFM restrictions(exceeding 15' and 30') reached its peak during June andJuly 2011, with a similar pattern observed for delays AllCauses. The correlation between long ATFM delays andlong delays All Causes becomes less obvious during
winter months with increased weather related delays.
-
7/31/2019 Network Operations Report February 2012 Analysis
14/14
7. ATFM SLOT ADHERENCE
Average daily evolution of early and late flights
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
201102
201103
201104
201105
201106
201107
201108
201109
201110
201111
201112
201201
201202
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
N OF EARLY DEPARTURES N OF LATE DEPARTURES
% EA RLY DEPA RTURES % LA TE DEP ARTURES
In February 2012, the percentage of early departures hasincreased well above the yearly average.
Although the overall percentage of traffic departing withintheir slot tolerance window is above the target (at least 80%)there are some airports for which compliance can beimproved.
NM continues to validate the data used and identify issuescontributing to non-compliance.
The chart below shows the top 40 airports (more than 300 regulated flights) with their average daily number and proportion ofregulated flights that departed outside of the Slot Tolerance Window
Proportion of regulated flights outside the Slot Tolerance Window in February 2012
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
ISTANBUL-ATATUR
K
TELAVIV/BENGURION
MANCHESTER
DUBLIN
BALE-MULHOUSE
ZURICH
PRAHARUZYNE
SCHIPHOLAMSTERDAM
PARISCHDEGAULLE
GENEVECOINTRIN
LONDON/HEATHROW
PARISORLY
MARSEILLEPROVENCE
LYONSATOLAS
WARSZAWA/OKECIE
LASPALMAS
LONDON/GATWICK
STUTTGAR
T
HAMBURG
MILANOLINATE
COPENHAGENKASTRUP
FRANKFURTMAIN
VENEZIATESSERA
WIENSCHWECHAT
NUERNBERG
KOELN-BONN
DUESSELDORF
ROMEFIUMICINO
NICE
ATHINAI/ELEFTHERIOS
MUENCHEN2
HANNOVER
STOCKHOLM-ARLANDA
GOTEBORG/LANDVETTER
BRUSSELSNATIONAL
TOULOUSEBLAGNAC
MILANOMALPENSA
LISBOA
TEGEL-BERLIN
MADRIDBARAJAS