RAD Evolution Workshop Network Approach to the RAD - DP/4

1. RAD Evolution WorkshopNetwork Approach to the RAD - DP/4 Way Forward Tihomir Todorov / Boris Radovanovic Head of Section Airspace Design / NM/NSD/PCI 13 DEC 2018 RAD WS 12 - 13 DEC 2018, Brussels, Belgium

2. NM responsibilities with respect to the RAD The RAD: • subject to continuous review by the Network Manager and the Operational Stakeholders to ensure that the requirements are still valid and take account of any ATC structural or organisational changes that may occur. • may be suspended, or temporarily relaxed, in cases where it has an abnormally adverse impact upon the traffic flows. The Network Manager • in conjunction with the FMPs monitor the actual situation duringthe day of operation to ensure the RAD is achieving the balance of traffic required. If, due to a major unexpected event, there is a significant disturbance to traffic patterns • the Network Manager may suspend part of the RAD and provide alternative routeings, after co-ordination with the relevant parties (FMPs and AO’s). • may refuse and/or remove any RAD restriction, if not properly co-ordinated until the coordination process is completed. CURRENT

3. RAD Way Forward General Vision • In order to achieve harmonized implementation of the network-oriented RAD restrictions, an adequate process needs to be established. With this process, it is a necessary to insure that RAD restrictions definition made in a way that will serve the clear operational goal, with limited impact on other traffic.

4. RAD Way Forward “Last minute” change - Requirement for Eligibility Criteria • “Last minute” change shall be consider any amendment on existing, already submitted to the NM RAD Team RAD requirement. • The following non-exhaustive list of criteria for the eligibility shall be consider as an exceptional circumstance and/or significant impact on operational requirement: • Change on wrongly provided: • ATS route designator; • 5LNC; • NAVAID name-code; • Individual control sector/s within an ATC unit; • RAD restriction ID; • FLs; • DCT lower / upper limits; • DCT FL parity; • Major airports (not inclusion of new); • Aircraft type. • Editorial mistakes in Utilisation definition. • In principle as “Last minute” change may not be consider: • New RAD requirement; • Complete change of existing restriction structure for the usage of the restricted object and / or for the combination of elements that define the flow of traffic; • Adding new restricted objects (airport, significant point, etc.). • The NM RAD Team based on its experience, NMOC system verification on potential benefits and in coordination with relevant NRC/s and/or other NMOC Team/s is authorised for proven safety related requirement to make exemption from above provisions and include the proposed change as “Last minute” one.

5. RAD Way Forward RAD Restriction Types - reconsideration and reduction • Simplification of the currently used types of restrictions, remembering the request by the airspace users when RAD was established in 2001 - tell us what you don’t want. • For the usage of the restricted object (significant point, ATS route segment, defined DCT, airspace volume (ATC Unit, AoR of relevant ATC Unit - CTA/UTA, TMA, CTR or individual control sector/s within an ATC unit, etc.)) there are 3 (three) main types of restrictions: • Not available for … Flight planning via restricted object is forbidden for described flow(s). • Only available for … Flight planning via restricted object is allowed exclusively for described flow(s). • Compulsory for … Flight planning via restricted object is the only valid option for described flow(s). • For the combination of elements that define the flow of traffic, there are 2 (two) types of restrictions - inclusive and exclusive: • INCLUSIVE restriction - traffic must meet ALL of the conditions to be subject to the restriction. The implicit logical operator between the listed conditions is an “AND” - Logical Conjunction. • EXCLUSIVE restriction - traffic only needs to meet ONE of the numbered sub-conditions to be subject to the restriction. The implicit logical operator between the numbered conditions is an “OR” - Logical Disjunction. • Shall the above types be reduced and RAD restrictions simplified?

6. RAD Way Forward Dependent Applicability - multiple and volume based • Ability of Operational Stakeholders to process RAD restrictions when the availability of any RAD restricted object is dependent on the availability or non-availability of multiple airspace objects. • Particular attention shall be paid on FRA RAD restrictions particularly based on airspace volumes. Special attention shall be paid on airspace volumes (RSAs, FBZs) being activated via EAUP/EUUP.

7. RAD Way Forward Requested Flight Level - reconsideration of use • Finalisation of RFL usage in RAD and direction on harmonized application in NMOC and Operational Stakeholders systems.

8. RAD Way Forward LoA Vertical Profile Limitations - Soft Traffic Flow Restrictions in RAD • Soft Traffic Flow Restrictions are Flow Restrictions, which are soft processed by NM systems. If a FPL violates such a restriction, a warning is added stating that this FPL is not compliant by incorporating an error message similarly to RAD (Hard Traffic Flow Restriction). • RAD Appendix 6 will not exists while the PTRs will include only restrictions established for counting and addressing through airspaces purpose. • The feature for Soft Traffic Flow Restriction is not used currently in the NM systems. The need to implement further software changes has to be addressed.

9. RAD Network Process The NM RAD Team has a central role in managing the network implementation of the RAD restrictions. As such the following new roles shall be performed by the NM and its RAD Team: • Define network oriented RAD restrictions together with concerned States / FABs / ANSPs, after the provision of clear objective goal and justification for RAD restriction implementation; • Perform assessment of the proposed RAD restrictions and subsequently proposed “Last minute” changes; • Question the need of the request to have new RAD restrictions introduced; • Question the effect and traffic to be impacted with proposed RAD restrictions; • Have a right to accept and right to refuse proposed RAD restrictions in accordance with the justification, assessment results and objective goal of the proposed RAD restrictions; • Request States / FABs / ANSPs to re-evaluate the existing RAD restrictions and if additional justification not provided to ask for that RAD restrictions suppression; • Propose simplification of the RAD restrictions; • Collapse multiple RAD restrictions in one network RAD restrictions with the same effect; • Propose suppression of RAD restrictions not respected on ATC; • Allow exemptions in the “Last minute” changes eligibility criteria. The NM RAD Team will check all new RAD restrictions, amendments and changes versus airspace organisation in the area. Any possible discrepancies will be notified to the States / FABs / ANSPs concerned as soon as possible. If later not adapted, the RAD restriction proposed will not be accepted for the implementation. The final content of any amendment to the RAD shall be positively agreed between the NM RAD Team and State / FAB / ANSP concerned.

10. Recommendation The participants at the RAD Evolution Workshop are invited to: • Consider the content of this paper; • Support the proposed way forward, in particular the new roles for the NM RAD Team.