The Pilot Common Project (PCP) constitutes the first batch of technical and/or operational changes to be implemented in

the 2014-2024 timeframe for the first time under the deployment governance. The importance of PCP is not only because

it is the first one, but also because it activates a new process and a new way stakeholders and the Commission work to-

gether to deploy modernized European ATM infrastructure. One of the most important questions during the PCP consul-

tation process was the maturity of the AFs and progress of the pre-requisites’.

This analysis provides an assessment of the progress of the PCP pre-requisites. It relies on earlier analysis work done by

the Interim Deployment Steering Group .

The IDSG work resulted in the mentioned report identifying a limited number of ESSIP objectives as pre-requisites, es-

sential pre-requisites or facilitators for the deployment of the PCPs. Those objectives are linked to the ATM Functionali-

ties (AFs) in the PCP proposal as follows:

• AF1: ATC15, ATC07.1, NAV10

• AF2: AOP05, AOP04.1, AOP04.2

• AF3: AOM19, AOM21, ATC12, FCM05

• AF4: FCM04, FCM05

• AF5: COM09, ITY-FMTP, FCM05, ITY-ADQ

• AF6: ITY-AGDL

Introduction

July 2014

PCP pre-requisites implementation

Inside this issue:

AF1 1

AF6 3

AF5 3

AF2 1

AF4 3

AF3 2

Progress of PCP at European level

1

PEPR flash

Data source

The main information sources

for the production of this anal-

ysis are the LSSIP State re-

ports. In order to ensure the

quality and consistency of

LSSIP information two data

assessments took place in

2013:

- LSSIP in-cycle review: ob-

jective coordinators perform

an assessment to make sure

that the content is clear, infor-

mation complete and guidance

for implementation progress

applied correctly

- ESSIP objective experts re-

view: before LSSIP reporting

is closed, the information was

sent to designated experts in

EUROCONTROL for assess-

ment. For each ESSIP objec-

tive there is a dedicated expert

in EUROCONTROL working

in the field covered by a spe-

cific objective. The purpose of

this check is to ensure the

consistency of reported infor-

mation with other data sources

in EUROCONTROL and to

challenge the States to report

consistently.

Page 2

PCP pre-requisites implementation

Progress of the PCP pre-requisites at European Level

AF1: Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMAs

The implementation status for operations in European En-Route environments taking advantage of Basic AMAN operations

shows good progress. Where customer demands and operational needs exist and a business opportunity is demonstrated,

AMAN capabilities have generally been implemented. That situation should provide a robust foundation for AF1.

When it comes to the implementation of PBN/APV, most of the stakeholders report completion within the scheduled dead-

line.

AF2: Airport Integration and Throughput

The above reported implementation status for the ESSIP objectives related to CDM and A-SMGCS indicates that the timely

implementation of the AF2 functionalities may be exposed to a higher risk than identified in the PCP proposal; arising out

of the indication that stakeholders may not be able to provide the enabling system evolution on time. It should be noted that

delays in implementation A-SMGCS Level 1 could impact implementation of Level 2 functionality. The main problem is

the equipage of ground vehicles with transponders (see ESSIP report 2013 for detailed A-SMGCS progress assessment).

2012 2013 2014 2016 2020 2025RP1

C

RP2 RP3

ATC15

ATC07.1

NAV10

AOP04.1

AOP04.2

AOP05

AOM19

AOM21

ATC12

FCM04

FCM05

COM09

AGDL

FCM05

FMTP

FCM05

ADQ

F: Facilitator

P: Pre-requisite

EP: Essential pre-requisite

AF1.1

AF1.2

AF2.3

AF2.4

AF3.2

AF4.1

AF4.2

AF4.3

AF4.4

AF5

AF6

AF2.1

AF2.2

AF2.5

AF3.1

2015 2017 2018 2019 2021 2022 2023 2024 2026 2027

P

F

P

EP

EP

P

P

P

P

P

P

EP

P

P

P*

EP

F

* Intermediary actions not fulfilled

Progress according

to plan

Progress slower

then plan

Progress inconsistent

with plan

Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures per phase 1 concepts in the applicable area is

well underway. Likewise the LSSIP reporting indicates that the proliferation of concepts and

methods related to the interactive rolling NOP in the ECAC area is quite satisfactory.

The PCP proposal stipulates that operational stakeholders and the Network Manager shall oper-

ate Network Collaborative Management by 1 January 2022. The above implementation status

indicates that the prerequisites identified above should not hinder the realization of the deploy-

ment of AF4 according to the stipulated time schedule.

Page 3

PCP pre-requisites implementation

Close implementation

monitoring of the pre

-requisites with risk

of delay should be

ensured.

The ESSIP reporting indicates that the implementing States will implement the AOM19 capa-

bilities by the Full Operational Capability date. Concerning the new ESSIP objective AOM21

the implementation status and outlook is also positive so that the planned deployment status

will be achieved, to the full benefit of Airspace Users. Likewise, ANSPs indicate that re-

quired support tools per ATC12 will become available by end 2016. Summarised, the above

implementation status indicates that the mandatory implementation of the first element of

AF3 (direct routing provided in the ECAC area by 1 January 2018 as set forth in the PCP

proposal) should not be at risk due to these three prerequisites.

ESSIP objective COM09 covers the data connectivity requirements between ANSPs, the Net-

work Manager and the EAD. The implementation progress for the COM09 technical enabler for

SWIM is satisfactory. The support of IPv6 by 2014 would seem established, even if IPv6 based

services are not necessarily fully in operation due to time differences in the implementation of

ATM system adaptations to fully support and utilize the backbone infrastructure.

The PCP proposal stipulates that operational stakeholders and the Network Manager shall pro-

vide and operate the iSWIM as of 1 January 2025. In this context it is furthermore assumed that

European centres exhibiting “very high” and “high” capacity needs shall be connected to the

Pan-European Network Services (PENS) by that time. At this stage the infrastructure prerequi-

site measured through the implementation of COM09 is not a limiting factor for the realisation

of the iSWIM capabilities. Implementation issues related to FMTP and ADQ could potentially

appear as a limiting factor if not addressed timely.

The analysis work done by the Interim Deployment Steering Group identified the data link capa-

bility (Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 on data link services refers) as an essential pre-

requisite for this ATM functionality and the PCP proposal supports that view.

The implementation speed of the ITY-AGDL objective has been slower than assumed in the ES-

SIP Plan and recommendations were raised in the ESSIP Report 2012 to pinpoint the risks asso-

ciated with delayed and inconsistent implementation of this objective. In the context of timely

implementation of the PCP AF6 by 1 January 2025, that risk would appear manageable, as the

initial ATC air-ground data link capability is only one item in the larger collections of system

level elements that need to be in place in order to realise the trajectory information sharing.

There are risks of

delays in

implementation of

AF2 and AF6.

AF3: Flexible Airspace Management and Free Route

AF4: Network Collaborative Management

AF5: iSWIM

AF6: Initial Trajectory Information Sharing

EUROCONTROLEUROCONTROLEUROCONTROLEUROCONTROL

Pan Pan Pan Pan ---- European Planning European Planning European Planning European Planning

Monitoring and ReportingMonitoring and ReportingMonitoring and ReportingMonitoring and Reporting

This flash summary is prepared to highlight the most important findings of

the ESSIP Report for 2013 produced under T007 of the SESAR C.02. The

main goal is to emphasize all implementation issues that could hamper the

SESAR Deployment.

The intended readership of this document includes decision makers and

executives that need summarized facts and most important findings pre-

sented in a simple manner without going into detailed analysis.

For more information on the elements presented in this document, please

refer to the ESSIP Report for 2013.

PCP pre-requisites implementation

plementation progress reports. These are later con-

solidated on a European level so that the aviation

community can identify the gap between what is

needed at the European level and what can actually

be done at local and regional level to close that gap.

We make plans and write reports for the European

air traffic management community, so helping them

to plan and then to take corrective action.

The Single European Sky needs concrete implemen-

tation plans for Europe as a whole and these have to

be based on the European ATM Master Plan. Our

Yearly Deliverables are clearly linked with the Euro-

pean ATM Master Plan.

Once a European plan has been agreed to, local and

regional plans have to be drawn up. They will be

used by air navigation service providers, regulatory

authorities, the military, airports, airspace users, etc.

Individual stakeholders then compile their own im-

Pan-European Planning, Monitoring and Reporting

http://www.eurocontrol.int/pepr