iata / airlines airport cdm - what needs · pdf fileiata / airlines airport cdm - what needs...

IATA / Airlines

Airport CDM - What needs improvement

Airport CDM Forum

Brussels, 22-23 September 2015

Anthony van der Veldt/IATA

Safety & Flight Operations - European Region

CONTENT

1. Introduction

2. A-CDM reporting mechanism

3. AOs reported issues

4. AOs requirements & solutions

5. Conclusions & Proposed

actions for improvement

Airport CDM Forum Brussels, 22-23 September 2015 2

1. INTRODUCTION


AIRPORT CDM DEPLOYMENT

CDM started end of the 90’s with initially

BCN as champion

Followed by BRU, MUC, FRA, CDG

15 years later arriving at 17 hub airports

Airport CDM provide for dynamic

connection with the NMOC

DPI messages are sent providing more

accurate TTOT to improve en-route

planning of the ATM network and

reducing departure delays


AIRPORT CDM REPOSITORY IATA offered to create evidence based

overview of CDM issues reported by

airlines

Aim to identify

how airports apply Airport CDM

how airlines are using Airport CDM

which airports and which airlines need

improvement

where the NM is able to suggest/request

improvements

where the NM and/or airports can make

improvements in the CDM system


AIRPORT CDM REPORTING TEMPLATE

1. AD name:

2. Flight number / Call sign :

3. Date / Time of reported event/issue:

4. Indicate whether issue is reported by crew or by OCC:

5. Explain issue / complaint:

6. Any special operational circumstances (snow/rwy closure/etc):

7. Impact on the Airline Operation:

8. Recommendation for Improvement:

9. Copy/paste of Dep Planning Info DPI (operational log CHMI):

10. Request for Feedback by concerned Airport


3. AIRLINE REPORTED ISSUES


AOs LOSE CONTROL OF THEIR FLIGHTS

Airport-CDM takes control out of the

hands of AOs, i.e.

Ground Handler (GHA) is determining when

a flight will depart by setting a TOBT

GHA does not have the full picture of the

AOs flight, but the OCCs have

GHA pushing departures has no idea of the

knock-on effects, i.e. potential

En-route delays by pushing a flight into a regulation/scenario,

Loss of conformity to route availability, etc.

How can AOs and GHAs communicate

better before any Delay Message and/or

change to the ATC FP will be made?


CTOT IMPROVEMENTS HARDLY POSSIBLE

GHAs are pushing TOBT towards an already assigned CTOT which has

downsides for the AOs, i.e.:

The nominal delay in the NMOC is

reduced (sometimes up to “0” minutes).

It is almost impossible for the AOs to

receive an CTOT (slot) improvement via

the E-Helpdesk, as the delay is calculated

between TOBT and CTOT

This is highly unfair, as the real delay

must be seen as the difference between

EOBT and CTOT


NON-STANDARD CDM APPLICATIONS

Variability of procedures/standards at A-

CDM airports, e.g.

Call at TOBT or TSAT

Spanish airports require the FP to be filed

initially to match the airport slot (even

when a long delay is anticipated)

No TSAT DPI exchange with NMOC

Various methods of updating TOBT info Some airports do not alert OCC about expected

delay and therefore planning not possible

Automatic EOBT updates by the airport

GVA sends two messages, CDG one

Delivery of Alert information

Different flexibility of ATC staff


INCREASING NUMBER OF CTOTs

AOs are confronted with increasing

volumes of CTOTs at CDM airports, e.g.

at LHR, due to

numerous sectors over or transiting Europe

experiencing ATFM Regulations for a

variety of reasons

increase of network demand

This is affecting departure punctuality and

increases airport congestion (aircraft

waiting for stands, etc.)

Is this due to ATC capacity still lagging

behind traffic growth in many areas?


SOME CDM AIRPORTS CAUSING DELAYS

Some CDM-airports are reportedly

causing unnecessary and unexpected

delays and problems, e.g.

LGW, DUS, BCN…….

Interestingly, other CDM-airports e.g.

FRA, MUC, LHR, BRU……..

do not create delay / issues or to a lesser

extent


C-DPI MESSAGES CAUSING NEG. EFFECTS

C-DPI messages for regulated flights

are causing negative effects for AOs

Updated TOBT introduces new TTOT

and a new CTOT which could be later

than the previous CTOT

Only a new TTOT would be sufficient


4. AOs REQUIREMENTS & PROPOSED SOLUTIONS


AOs TO BE MORE INVOLVED IN CDM AO’s (OCCs) must be actively involved in

the A-CDM process

Not only ATC, Airport and GHA

Currently AOs can only watch, at mainly

outstations, what is happening or being

on the phone with GHA trying to sort

things out

Not because their unwillingness to give

away responsibility, but AOs

Better overview when and why a flight

needs to depart at a certain time/routing

Carry the economic risk for their flights –

including EU-261 financial compensations

to pax

\ Airport CDM Forum Brussels, 22-23 September 2015 15

INTRODUCE ADJUSTED FAM* AT NON-CDM A/PS

A-CDM is aimed at providing a better

predictability for the Network

This requires a time difference between

EOBT and TOBT of maximum15 min

If not, TSAT should not be provided

At non-CDM airports FAM for departing

aircraft is 30 min plus taxi time

A 15 min FAM at these airports will

increase predictability and create a level

playing field

* FAM: Flight Activation Monitor


IMPROVE HANDLING OF LAST MINUTE C-DPI

Mitigate the negative effects of last

minute C(ancel)-DPI messages

Through:

Sending CDM warnings to AOs via

email. In this way the AO is

Able to bring the EOBT in line with TOBT

Aware whether an FL update by the

dispatcher is needed .

NMOC to provide a higher priority to T-

DPI messages (following C-DPI) and

these should not be handled as a Delay

message

Brussels, 22-23 September 2015 Airpor t CDM Forum 17

NM TO AVOID CTOT DETERIORATION

NM to take care of regulated flights

that receive last minute slot

deterioration due to local start-up

delay or increased taxi times

Such flights are penalized and

have more than average delay

typically due to inbound arrival

restrictions


A-CDM NEED FOR STANDARDIZATION

Standardization of CDM applications

across CDM airports for OCCs and crew

EOBT/TOBT updating process

TOBT tolerances

DPI messages

Create level playing field between CDM

and non-CDM airports


MISCELLANEOUS AOs REQUIREMENTS Forwarding of TOBT and TSAT to crew

Provide TOBT-TSAT and TTOT with DPI

message in CHMI/NOP

Will create a better view for AOs at CDM

airports than only receiving a late slot due

to an adjusted TOBT by the GHA

TOBT and FP Departure time change be

done with only one message

DLA message should change the TOBT

with DPI exchange when delay is >10 min

Define a IATA sub-delay code for CDM-

related delays

Makes it easier to identify issues with CDM


5. CONCLUSIONS &

PROPOSED ACTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS


NM ISSUING OFFICIAL CDM CERTIFICATE

Create comprehensive CDM checklist

for CDM airports before joining the NM (CDM quality checker)

Resulting in an official Airport CDM

Certificate

Approved by the NM to allow joining

the network


NM - CDM AUTHORITY NM to further develop an AOs

service minded approach, through

Where possible, in cooperation with

local ATC, assist in solving AOs

problems at the gate (to avoid time

waste)

Providing feed back on issues raised

(post ops) to clarify and possibly

take action for improvements

Making Final Network Decisions,

where needed (in case of conflicts)

Re-instate an A-CDM User Meeting


A-CDM IMPROVEMENTS

AOs

Be trained and fully become part of the

CDM process,

Improve communication with GHA

To retain operational control of their flights

NM

Create a single link

FAM to be adjusted at all non-CDM airports

Improve handling of last minute C-DPI’s

Avoid CTOT deterioration

A-CDM standardization


INVESTIGATIONS

Investigate where, why and how

perceived Airport CDM benefits really

occur, locally and at network level.

Discrepancies in local CDM performance

Positive effect (decreasing) CTOTs

Reduced taxi out times

Reduced queuing at runways

Lessons learned to be:

Encapsulated in an evaluation of future

developments

Applied in a business case to target

airports for global prioritization


Brussels, 22-23 September

2015

Airport CDM Forum

Making Decisions Collaboratively

26

AIRPORT-CDM ISSUES REPORTED BY AIRLINES

Main issue would be for non- EU AO

with crews not operating to A-CDM

airports frequently to give a single

handling procedure and the single

platform for A-CDM in/outputs

e.g. via CHMI TOBT change and DLA of

DLA msg changes TOBT at Airport CDM

via DPI).


AIRPORT-CDM ISSUES REPORTED BY AIRLINES

Many airports, e.g. LHR, experience a

high increase of CTOT volumes

Due to numerous sectors over or transiting

Europe experiencing ATFM Regulations for

a variety of differing reasons

Due to increase of network demand

What can be done to minimize such high

delay impact?

Obtaining upfront network modelling impact

assessments

Application of the en-route Demand

Capacity Balancing concept


RECOMMENDED ACTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS

Airport Investigate whether published

delay statistics are (wrongly) based on

the difference between TOBT and CTOT.


RECOMMENDED ACTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS

Display of TOBT/TSAT on the CHMI /

NOP through

DPI messages via Business to Business

(B2B)

EOBT/TOBT update process to be

described clearly and uniformly

To be covered by a SLA between the

Airline and the GHA


iata / airlines airport cdm - what needs · pdf fileiata / airlines airport cdm - what needs...

Documents