NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - ACC

Transcription

1 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - ANNEX II: CAPACITY EVOLUTION INTRODUCTION ALBANIA TIRANA ARMENIA YEREVAN AUSTRIA VIENNA AZERBAIJAN BAKU BELGIUM BRUSSELS BULGARIA SOFIA CROATIA ZAGREB CYPRUS NICOSIA CZECH REPUBLIC PRAGUE DENMARK COPENHAGEN ESTONIA TALLINN EUROCONTROL MAASTRICHT FINLAND TAMPERE FRANCE BORDEAUX FRANCE BREST FRANCE MARSEILLE FRANCE PARIS FRANCE REIMS FYROM SKOPJE GERMANY BREMEN GERMANY KARLSRUHE GERMANY LANGEN GERMANY MUNICH GREECE ATHENS GREECE MAKEDONIA HUNGARY BUDAPEST IRELAND DUBLIN IRELAND SHANNON ITALY BRINDISI ITALY MILAN ITALY PADOVA ITALY ROME LATVIA RIGA LITHUANIA VILNIUS NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 1

2 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II MALTA MALTA MOLDOVA CHISINAU THE NETHERLANDS AMSTERDAM NORWAY BODO NORWAY OSLO NORWAY STAVANGER POLAND WARSAW PORTUGAL LISBON ROMANIA BUCHAREST SERBIA & MONTENEGRO BELGRADE SLOVAK REPUBLIC BRATISLAVA SLOVENIA LJUBLJANA SPAIN BARCELONA SPAIN CANARIAS SPAIN MADRID SPAIN PALMA SPAIN SEVILLA SWEDEN MALMO SWEDEN STOCKHOLM SWITZERLAND GENEVA SWITZERLAND ZURICH TURKEY ANKARA /ISTANBUL UKRAINE DNIPROPRETROVSK UKRAINE KYIV UKRAINE L VIV UKRAINE ODESA UKRAINE SIMFEROPOL UNITED KINGDOM LONDON UNITED KINGDOM LONDON TC UNITED KINGDOM PRESTWICK NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 2

3 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - INTRODUCTION The following annex provides a detailed analysis of ATC capacity evolution in 213 for s within the ECAC States for which data is available. The source of statistics is the NMOC unless otherwise indicated. The analysis covers: & The chart and data table provide comprehensive information concerning the evolution of traffic and delay from 29 to 213 (where data is available). It includes the following values: Peak day traffic is the number of flight entries to the on the peak day of each year. Summer & Yearly is the daily average number of flight entries during the summer season (May to October inclusive) and over the whole year (January to December). Summer & Yearly Enroute is the average enroute delay per flight (including and special events e.g. industrial action), attributed to the during the summer season (May to October inclusive) and over the whole year (January to December). 213 Realisation of Plan Evolution gives the percentage difference between the total traffic (number of flight entries) in 213 compared to 212, for the summer and the full year. Enroute gives the number of minutes per flight of enroute delay attributed to all causes and also excluding delays attributed to and special events. s are provided for the summer and the full year. per is the delay breakdown to achieve the European delay target of.6 min/flight for the full year, and.85 min/flight in the Summer season, as published in the NOP Offered: ESS or Reverse CASA was used to measure the capacity actually offered by the during the reference periods (3-16 June 213, 8-21 July 213). This is calculated from actual delay (Reverse CASA) or from projected delay (ESS). Projected delay is obtained by increasing the traffic and creating a regulation scheme for the studied using traffic volume capacities and configuration data (sector opening schemes) provided by ANSPs. Plan (increase for Summer 213) is the percentage value provided by ANSPs in the Network Operations Plan This figure represents the ANSP commitment to increasing capacity for Summer 213, when compared to Summer 212. enhancement: planned enablers This information was taken from the local capacity plan in the Network Operations Plan An indication is given as to whether each measure was implemented as planned. Summer 213 Performance Assessment This provides an analysis of the observed performance and of the achievement of the planned capacity increase. performance has been assessed by analysing traffic and delay statistics for each and the evolution of the capacity baseline. Where relevant, other significant factors were also taken into account, such as industrial action or planned major events that resulted in a temporary reduction in capacity. ocation of and for Enroute delay The table lists the reference locations (sectors) causing most of the delay, the number of minutes of enroute delay attributed to each location and the percentage of the total enroute delay. The graph shows the total ATFM enroute delay generated by each, broken down into the 5 most significant given for the delay in 213 compared to 212. Note: The scale on all graphs varies from to - graphs should not be directly compared. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 3

4 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 1. ALBANIA TIRANA & LAAA - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Tirana LAAA Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) The average en-route delay per flight was at zero minutes per flight during Summer 213. (% difference v 212) Year H: 3.1% +3.%...26 B:.6% L: -1.8% +5.8%...38 No 65 (%) Plan +2% Achieved Comments ATS route network improvements benefits from new ATM system Net availability of 3 additional ATCOs (July) STCA No In the system but not active. We are in the testing phase. Implementation of ILS CAT1 procedures Reassessment of sector capacities with CAPAN MET services for upper levels No In 214 MFCR with LIBB Maximum configuration: 4 sectors (3 ENR + 1 APP) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline of 65 was calculated with ESS and represents the capacity delivered during the Summer season in the. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 58 and the peak 3 hour demand was 52. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 4

5 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 2. ARMENIA YEREVAN & UDDD - and en-route ATFM delays Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Yerevan UDDD Evolution (213 v 212) Plan : Sufficient to meet demand Source: STATFOR Enroute (min. per flight) Comments (% difference v 212) Year H: 4.2% -6.4%...5 Summer B: 2.5% +9% L: 1.3% -8.4%...7 No 25 (%) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 12 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 9. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 5

6 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 3. AUSTRIA VIENNA & LOVV - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Vienna LOVV The average en-route delay per flight for all remained at.3 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 8% for ATC Staffing, 14% for Special event, 1% for Equipment (ATC) and 33% for Weather. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Enhanced sectorization according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Improved operational procedures including FMP/AMC ATS route network improvements Sector configuration management 1 additional controller COOPANS Maximum configuration: 12 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline of 18 was calculated with ESS, showing the capacity offered during the measured period. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 167 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 155. (% difference v 212) Year H: 3.7% -2.3% Summer B: 1.7% +12% L: -.4% -1.2% No 18 (+%) ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LOVVNSL % 213 LOVVNLU % 213 LOVVB5A % 213 LOVVEAL % 213 LOVVSOU % 213 LOVVWHT % Avg daily delay (min) Vienna en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 6

7 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 4. AZERBAIJAN BAKU & UBBA - and en-route ATFM delays Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Baku UBBA Evolution (213 v 212) Data Source: STATFOR Enroute (min. per flight) Plan - Sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments (% difference v 212) Year H: 7.2% -3.6%...13 B: 5.4% L: 4.1% -1.%...11 No 4 (%) Summer 213 performance assessment It is assessed that the capacity offered was enough to meet demand. During the measured period, the average peak 3 was 19 and the average peak 1 hour demand was 33. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 7

8 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 5. BELGIUM BRUSSELS & EBBU - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Brussels EBBU Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H:.7% -1.4% B: -.9% L: -2.% -.6% No 131 (%) The average en-route delay per flight increased from. minutes per flight in 212 to.1 minutes per flight in % of the delays were for the reason ATC Staffing, and 68% for Weather. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Dynamic use of sector configurations Improved ATFCM Procedures using occupancy counts Occupancy counts to be implemented end of 214 Extension of CDR1 opening time New ATCOs to maintain level of controllers Maximum configuration: 7 sectors Maximum configuration: 6 sectors was sufficient for the levels of traffic Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 12 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 19. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EBBUNWC % 213 EBBUEEC % 213 EBBUHLC % 213 EBBUESC % 213 EBBUWLS 1 8.2% 213 EBBUWSC 5 4.% Avg daily delay (min) Brussels en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 8

9 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 6. BULGARIA SOFIA & LBSR - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Sofia LBSR Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 7.3% +2.7%...14 B: 5.5% L: 3.6% +3.5%...2 No 149 (%) The en-route delay per flight remained at zero during Summer 213. Plan - Sufficient capacity to meet demand Achieved Comments ATS route network development and increase of maximum sector configurations available Maximum configuration: Up to 12 sectors No Maximum configuration: 7 sectors was sufficient to cope with traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as last year. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 135 and the peak 3 hour demand was 124. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 9

10 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 7. CROATIA ZAGREB & LDZO - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Zagreb LDZO The average en-route delay per flight decreased from.4 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 26% for and 7% for ATC Staffing. Plan +5% Achieved Comments 5 Additional ATCOs No Optimisation of manpower planning Sectorisation changes Revision of DFL Improved sector opening times Revision of sector capacities according to CAPAN study after change of DFL Enhanced sectorisation according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Optimisation of ATS route network and sectorisation, cross-border DCT routes as part of phased FRA implementation Maximum configuration: 9/1 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured using ESS at 142. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 136, and the average peak 3 hour demand was 121. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LDZON % 213 LDZOULW % 213 LDZOTHW % 213 LDZOULA % 213 LDZOTHN % 213 LDZOHW 8 6.7% Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) No Zagreb en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: 3.3% -.4% B:.8% L: -1.2% +1.9% No 142 (+7%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 1

11 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 8. CYPRUS NICOSIA & LCCC - and en-route ATFM delays Enroute (minutes per flight) Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Realisation of Plan Nicosia LCCC Evolution (213 v 212) The average en-route delay per flight increased from 1.6 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to 2.7 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 28% for Special event, 12% for ATC staffing and 11% for Equipment. Plan +18% Achieved Comments ATS route network and sectorization optimisation June 213: Transition to the new ATM system EUROCAT C No September 213: Transition to TOPSKY as main system New Cyprus TMA implementation No New STARs implemented on a trial basis Operation of a 5th en-route sector (Subject to improvements in HRM) No 4 sectors for extended hours Improve Civil-Military cooperation in the South-East part of the FIR CAPAN study revised capacity figures No flows and complexity changed in the south sectors following the Syrian airspace closure Mature ATFCM function Partly New configurations designed with NMOC and implemented New configurations and minor sector adaptations allowing more flexibility in June Additional ATCOs Maximum configuration: 4/5 sectors No Maximum configuration: 4 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was evaluated to be 48 with ESS/Reverse CASA, based on the traffic and delay situation for the full Summer season. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 55 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 49. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 9.2% +3.2% Summer B: 6.7% +6% L: 4.4% +3.1% (-4%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LCCCS % 213 LCCCE2S1Y % 213 LCCCE2S % 213 LCCCS % 213 LCCCS % 213 LCCCS12W % Avg daily delay (min) Nicosia en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 11

12 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 9. CZECH REPUBLIC PRAGUE & LKAA - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Prague LKAA The average en-route delay per flight increased from zero minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC and 25% for ATC Staffing. Plan +% Achieved Comments Improved flow and capacity management techniques Adaptation of sector opening times depending on available staff Improved ATS route network Additional controllers Enhanced sectorisation according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Minor improvements of system functionalities Night FRA to be implemented spring 213 Maximum configuration of 1 sectors Maximum configuration: CU6A + CL3A sufficient to cover the traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as last year. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 153 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 142. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LKAANET % 213 LKAALM % 213 LKAANLM 7 9.2% 213 LKAASELM 3 4.2% 213 LKAAL 3 4.% 213 LKAAWLM 2 3.3% Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) Prague en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.4% +.6%...16 Summer B:.4% -13% L: -1.3% +2.3% No 161 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 12

13 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 1. DENMARK COPENHAGEN & EKDK - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Copenhagen EKDK Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.1% +3.5%...6 B:.8% L: -1.% +6.4%...1 No 125 (%) Plan 1 % Achieved Comments Continuous improvements on the ATS route network Sector configurations adapted to traffic demand Minor updates of COOPANS Maximum configuration: 4/5 (E) + 3 (W) Maximum configuration: E3W2 was sufficient given the levels of traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 117 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 18. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 13

14 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II ESTONIA TALLINN & EETT - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Tallinn EETT Average enroute ATFM delay decreased from.1 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to minutes per flight in Summer 213. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments Adaptation of sector opening times Evolution (213 v 212) Consolidation of operations with the new ATM system Maximum configuration: 2 (+1 FEEDER) 2 sectors opened Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline of 62 was measured with ESS, indicating the capacity actually offered. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 52 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 45. (% difference v 212) Year H:.% -1.5%...16 Summer B: -2.% -8% L: -4.% -1.2%...22 No 62 (+%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 14

15 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II EUROCONTROL MAASTRICHT & EDYYUAC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Maastricht EDYY UAC Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) The average en-route delay per flight slightly increased from. minutes per flight in 212 to.1 minutes per flight in % of the delays were for the reason ATC and 51% for Weather. Plan +2 % Achieved Comments Dutch Mil Virtual Centre No Implemented October 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: 1.1% +1.9% Summer B: -.4% +6% L: -1.8% +3.1% No 337 (+3%) CPDLC monitoring concept & reduction in verbal coordination Ongoing Management System (TMS) Level 1 Maximum configuration: 19 sectors (Possible if required according to traffic levels - would be achieved by releasing available capacity in the ) 17 sectors sufficient to handle the demand. Brussels group - 6 sectors, DECO group - 5 sectors and Hannover group - 6 sectors. Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS at 337. During the same period, the peak 3 hour demand was 315 and the peak 1 hour was 332. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EDYYDELHI % 213 EDYYBEH % 213 EDYYBWH 2 6.2% 213 EDYYUCE % 213 EDYYDELLO % 213 EDYYLUX % Avg daily delay (min) Maastricht UAC en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 15

16 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FINLAND TAMPERE & EFIN - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Tampere EFIN CTA Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.1% -6.9%...13 Summer B: -4.% +1% L: -4.8% -5.9%...8 No 58 (%) The average en-route delay per remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. Plan : sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments 5 additional controllers New sectorisation with 1 additional sector No Improved flexibility in sector openings Night free route airspace (Dec 212) Enlarge feeder sector OKLOR to Helsinki Maximum configuration: Feeders Maximum configuration: 5 sectors+3 Feeders was sufficient No to cope with traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as last year. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 4 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 33. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 16

17 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FRANCE BORDEAUX & LFBBALL - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Bordeaux LFBB Average enroute delay per flight increased to.5 minutes per flight in Summer 213, mainly due to the strike June 213. per flight industrial action is.1 minutes per flight, well below the reference value. 75% of the delays were for the reason Industrial action, and 16% for ATC. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Improved Airspace Management and ATFCM Procedures Staff deployment / Flexible rostering Improvement of profiles for LFPG arrivals from the south-west (IBBP)-Study for dualization of UN859 ERATO training (from Autumn 213) Maximum configuration: 21 UCESO Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 19 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 178. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute No (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.4% +.7% Summer B: -2.6% +5% L: -3.8% No 21 (%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LFBBUSUD % 213 LFBBRL % 213 LFBBNH % 213 LFBOTMA % 213 LFBBBDX % 213 LFBBL % Avg daily delay (min) Bordeaux en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 17

18 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FRANCE BREST & LFRR - and en-route ATFM delays Enroute (minutes per flight) Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Realisation of Plan Brest LFRR Average enroute delay per flight increased to.5 minutes per flight in Summer 213, mainly due to the strike June 213. per flight industrial action is.2 minutes per flight. 58% of the delays were for the reason Industrial Action (ATC), and 35% for ATC. Plan % Achieved Comments Improved airspace management and ATFM procedures Staff redeployment / flexible rostering Improvement of profiles for LFPG arrivals from the south-west (IBBP)-Study for dualization of UN859 ERATO training (January 213 to March 214) Maximum configuration: 18 UCESO Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 217 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 199. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LFRRFNORD % 213 LFRRMZU % 213 LFRRNGA % 213 LFRRGA % 213 LFRREST 43 5.% 213 LFRRA 35 4.% Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) No Brest en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: -.6% +2.5% B: -1.5% L: -2.9% +3.5% No 26 (%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 18

19 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FRANCE MARSEILLE & LFMM - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Marseille LFMM Average en-route delay per flight increased to.7 minutes per flight in Summer 213. per flight industrial action is.4 minutes per flight. 47% of the delays were for the reason Industrial Action, 35% for ATC, and 16% for Weather. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Improved airspace management and ATFM procedures Staff redeployment / flexible rostering Improvement of LUMAS CDRs availability Provence project Phase 1 Enhanced sector availability during WEs Reorganisation of sectors E and K Stepped implementation of FRA FABEC Maximum configuration: 28 UCESO Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was evaluated to be 237. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 245 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 229. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LFMMWM % 213 LFMMFDZ % 213 LFMMSBAM % 213 LFMMB % 213 LFMMMALY 72 6.% 213 LFMMRAEE % Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) Marseille en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.5% -.6% B: -3.% L: -4.8% +.1% (%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 19

20 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FRANCE PARIS & LFFFALL - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Paris LFFF Average enroute delay per flight decrased from.3 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.2 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 46% for Weather, and 14% for Industrial Action. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Improved airspace management and ATFM procedures Staff redeployment / flexible rostering Improvement of profiles for LFPG arrivals from the south-west (IBBP) IBP 213 (TP/UK/UZ) IRP 213 (transfer) Maximum configuration: 21 UCESO Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 247 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 227. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LFFFUJ % 213 LFFFTE % 213 LFFFLMH % 213 ODILO % 213 LFFFTML % 213 LFFFTNTB % Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) Paris en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H:.7% -3.7% B: -.6% L: -2.4% -3.5% No 268 (%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 2

21 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FRANCE REIMS & LFEE - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Reims LFEE Average enroute delay per flight slightly increased from.4 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.5 minutes per flight in Summer 213. per flight industrial action is.3 minutes per flight. 41% of the delays were for the reason ATC, 31% for Industrial Action, and 19% for Weather. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Improved airspace management and ATFM procedures Staff redeployment / flexible rostering IRP 213 (transfer) Change DFL from 375 to 365 between K and H (H, E and N) Stepped implementation of FRA FABEC Maximum configuration: 18 UCESO Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured at 192. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 195 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 178. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LFEEHYR % 213 LFEE4EH % 213 LFEEKR % 213 LFEEUXR % 213 LFEE5R % 213 LFEEKN % Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) Reims en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: -.1% +4.1% Summer B: -1.1% +11% L: -2.8% +5.1% No 192 (+8%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 21

22 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II FYROM SKOPJE & LWSS - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Skopje LWSS Evolution (213 v 212) The delays remained at zero during Summer 213. Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 3.4% -1.9%...12 Summer B: 1.% +18% L: -1.5% +1.5%...16 No 59 (%) Plan % Achieved Comments Controller ratings Free route airspace No Postponed to Winter 214/215 Maximum configuration: 4 sectors Maximum configuration: 2 sectors 4 sectors not required during Summer 213 Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period the average peak 1 hour was 38 and the average peak 1 hour was 33. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 22

23 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 2. GERMANY BREMEN & EDWW - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Bremen EDWW Evolution (213 v 212) The yearly traffic decreased by 2.7%. The Average ATFM En-route per Movement was stable at.1 min/flight in Summer 213. The ADM Summer is lower than expected and nearly by the optimum. There no capacity deficit was observed. Planned Measures Achieved Comments The commissioning of the new Berlin airport BER (expansion of Schönefeld) and closure of Berlin Tegel including new airspace structure and implementation of AMAN Enroute (min. per flight) No Summer 213 performance assessment (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.7% -2.7% B: -3.3% L: -5.3% -2.6% No 151 (%) The commissioning is postponed provisionally to 215 The traffic decreased by 2.6% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity was the same as 212. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (51%), ATC (27%) and Weather (2%). A maximum configuration of 14 en-route sectors and 3 en-route/app- sectors (Hamburg, Hannover) and 4 APP/TMA- sectors (Berlin) was available. Only 12 en-route sectors were opened during the whole year. The ALLER LOW sector was combined, the sectors EIDER EAST and MÜRITZ LOW only open for military exercises. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EDWWHAMC % 213 EDWWHEIC % 213 EDWWDBAN % 213 EDWWDBAS % 213 EDWWSOUT 3 3.2% 213 EDWWFRIC 3 3.2% Avg daily delay (min) Bremen en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 23

24 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II GERMANY KARLSRUHE & EDUUUAC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Karlsruhe EDUU Evolution (213 v 212) The yearly traffic growth is 15.3%. The Average ATFM En-route per Movement increased from.1 during Summer 212 to.3 during Summer 213. The significant increase in traffic and the increase of the delay are due to the relocation of the upper airspace from Munich to Karlsruhe end of 212. The ADM Summer is lower than expected and in line with the reference value. There no capacity deficit was observed. Planned Measures Achieved Comments Relocation of Munich Upper airspace to Karlsruhe ( ) Positive effects of the new ATS system (P1/VAFORIT) implemented 212 Reduction of staffing problems Summer 213 performance assessment The realisation was completed successfully on 16./ The traffic growth 17.1% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity increased continuously in 213. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (26%), ATC (23%) and Weather (39%). A maximum configuration of 38 en-route sectors was available. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.% (+15%) +15.3% Summer B:.3% (+15%) +5% L: -1.6% (+15%) +17.1% No 334 (+12%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EDUUALP2C % 213 EDUUALP % 213 EDUUCHI1K % 213 EDUUALP1L 5 6.4% 213 EDUUTGO % 213 EDUUNTM % Avg daily delay (min) Karlsruhe UAC en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 24

25 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II GERMANY LANGEN & EDGG - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Langen EDGG The yearly traffic decreased by 1.7%. The Average ATFM En-route per Movement decreased from.9 min/flight in Summer 212 to.3 min/flight in Summer 213. The ADM Summer is lower than expected and nearly by the reference value. There no capacity deficit was observed. Planned Measures Achieved Comments ATFCM measures to reduce delay in SF1 in cooperation with NMOC and Reduction of staffing problems Upgrade of P1/ATCAS system (PSS) EBG2/8 The realisation was completed successfully on Summer 213 performance assessment The traffic decreased by 1.3% to last year's level. It is assessed that the offered capacity increased continuously in 213. The delays were mainly due to ATC Staffing (36%), ATC (35%) and Weather (25%). A maximum configuration of 23 en-route sectors (including 3 sectors with predominantly military traffic) and 2 en-route/app- sectors (Stuttgart) and 1 APP/TMA- sectors (Düsseldorf, Frankfurt, Cologne/Bonn) were opened. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EDGG % 213 EDGGDLSN % 213 EDGG % 213 EDGGHMM 55 7.% 213 EDGGPAD % 213 EDGGGEHE % Avg daily delay (min) Enroute (min. per flight) Langen en-route delays in 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.5% -1.7% B: -2.5% L: -4.% -1.3% No 254 (+4%) CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 25

26 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II GERMANY MUNICH & EDMM - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Munich EDMM Evolution (213 v 212) The yearly traffic decreased by 26.5%. The significant decrease in traffic is due to the relocation of the upper airspace from Munich to Karlsruhe end of 212. The Average ATFM En-route per Movement decreased from.5 minutes/flight during Summer 212 compared to.1 minutes/flight in the Summer 213. The ADM Summer 213 was below the reference value. Planned Measures Achieved Comments Relocation of Munich Upper airspace to Karlsruhe ( ) Implementation of C-PDLC procedure (D/-Link Karlsruhe above FL285) Implementation of the TEEGERNSEE sector instead of CHIM Low sector Re-structure airspace FÜSSEN, ZUGSPITZE and STARNBERG sector Summer 213 performance assessment The realisation was completed successfully on 16./ The realisation was completed successfully on The realisation was completed successfully on The realisation was completed successfully on The traffic decreased by 28.8% to last year's level. The delays were mainly due to Weather (95%), ATC (5%). A maximum configuration of 15 en-route sectors and 3 en-route /APP- sectors (Nuremberg, Dresden and Leipzig) and 4 APP/TMA- sectors (Munich) was available. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -.2% (-28%) -26.5% B: -1.9% (-28%) L: -3.5% (-28%) -28.8% No 246 (-14%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EDMMCN % 213 EDMMALB % 213 EDMMKPTH 13 9.% 213 EDMMTRGH % 213 EDMMTEG % 213 EDMMFRKHU 1 7.% Avg daily delay (min) Munich en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 26

27 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II GREECE ATHENS & LGGG - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Athens LGGG The average en-route delay per flight decreased from.3 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC Staffing, 25% for ATC, and 16% for Industrial action. Plan % Achieved Comments Improved ATS route network and airspace management Improved civil/military coordination ATFCM Actions (traffic volume monitoring, traffic management scenarios etc ) OLDI with Nicosia (Athens ready) Evolution (213 v 212) Maximum configuration: 6/7 sectors 7/8 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS, representing the delivered capacity (123). The average demand was 16 (peak 3 hour) and 116 (peak 1 hour). ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) No (% difference v 212) Year H:.7%.% B: -1.1% L: -3.1% +2.6% No 123 (+2%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LGGGMILL % 213 LGGGAL % 213 LGGGKRK % 213 LGGGRDS 9 1.9% 213 LGGGRDSL 9 1.6% 213 LGGGMLST 8 9.5% Avg daily delay (min) Athens en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 27

28 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II GREECE MAKEDONIA & LGMD - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Makedonia LGMD Average en-route delay per flight decreased from.1 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. Plan +% Achieved Comments Improved ATS route network and airspace management Improved civil/military coordination Evolution (213 v 212) ATFCM actions (traffic volume monitoring, traffic management scenarios etc ) Maximum configuration: 3/4 sectors 4 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was measured with ESS, representing the delivered capacity (98). The average demand was 84 (peak 3 hour) and 93 (peak 1 hour). (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.9% -2.3%...26 B:.8% L: -1.% -.3%...36 No 98 (+1%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 28

29 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II HUNGARY BUDAPEST & LHCC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Budapest LHCC Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. (% difference v 212) Year H: 5.5% +2.6%...7 Summer B: 4.2% -4% L: 2.1% +3.1%...12 No 165 (%) Plan +6% Achieved Comments Optimization of airspace structure Ongoing project Recruitment and training of controllers 5 new controllers were licensed in 213 replacing 5 retired ones, 7 trainees start OJT early 214, and no retirement expected New ATM software Continuous upgrades New ATCC building Inaugurated in early 213 Maximum configuration: 1 for Budapest Maximum configuration: 7 sectors were sufficient to cope with traffic demand in Budapest Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was estimated to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period the peak 1 hour demand was 154 and the peak 3 hour demand was 134. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 29

30 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II IRELAND DUBLIN & EIDW - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Dublin EIDW Evolution (213 v 212) Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213 as 212. Plan +2%* Achieved Comments TMA Improvement of route network at Prestwick & London interface (Dec 212) - Point merge and sector split Implementation of Y124 On-going recruitment to maintain staff levels Developing Queue Management programme UK / Ireland FAB initiatives Maximum configuration: 4 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) *Up to 2% additional capacity will be available as a result of TMA 212 and point merge. This will be gradually realised as demand increases in the coming years. The Dublin airport runway capacity will continue to be the main constraint. The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as last year. The peak 1 hour demand was 46 and the peak 3 hour demand was 39. No (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.6% +3.7%...26 B: -3.6% L: -4.7% +4.4%...41 No 59 (+%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 3

31 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II IRELAND SHANNON & EISN - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Shannon EISN Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 212, same as 211. Plan +3% Achieved Comments Extra sectors as required Dynamic sectorisation available Sector capacity re-evaluation (CAPAN) Data Linking On-going recruitment to maintain staff levels UK / Ireland FAB initiatives Evolution (213 v 212) Developing Queue Management programme Maximum configuration: 12 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 1.9% -.1%...5 B:.8% L: -1.% +.8%...9 No 124 (+2%) Maximum configuration: 7 sectors was sufficient to cope with traffic demand The ESS measured baseline of 124 indicates the capacity available during the measured period. The peak 1 hour demand was 99 and the peak 3 hour demand was 91. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 31

32 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II ITALY BRINDISI & LIBB - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Brindisi LIBB Average en-route delay per flight remained at zero, the same as during Summer 212. Plan +% Achieved Comments Sector loads and sector optimisation assessment according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, ENAV s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation Mode S implementation No Planned for implementation in June 214 Free-route implementation program On-going Implementation started 12/12/213 PBN Program Evolution (213 v 212) Maximum configuration: 5 sectors if needed Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 73 and the peak 3 hour demand was 68. No (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.1% -2.7%...1 Summer B: -2.7% +9% L: -4.3% -1.7%...2 No 117 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 32

33 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 3. ITALY MILAN & LIMM - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Milan LIMM Average en-route delay per flight stayed at zero in Summer 213. Plan +% Achieved Comments Sector loads and sector optimisation assessment according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, Airspace Users, ENAV s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation Mode S implementation Implemented in December 213 Free-route implementation program On-going Implementation started 12/12/213 Activity to optimize the NW Upper Area of Milano UIR Implementation of CDO in LIMC (12/212) and LIML (12/213) according to ENV1 PBN Program Maximum configuration: 17 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 129 and the peak 3 hour demand was 138. (% difference v 212) Year H: -2.7% -5.6%...9 B: -4.% L: -5.5% -5.4%...16 No 164 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 33

34 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II ITALY PADOVA & LIPP - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Padova LIPP Average en-route delay per flight was zero minutes per flight during Summer 213. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Sector loads and sector optimisation according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, Airspace Users, ENAV s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation Sectorisation and configuration revision to optimise ATM and sectors loads according to network needs Implementation of CDO in LIPZ (12/213) according to ENV1 Mode S implementation No Planned for March 214 Free-route implementation program PBN Program Evolution (213 v 212) Maximum configuration: 12/13 sectors Maximum configuration: 13 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 175 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 164. No (% difference v 212) Year H: -.8% -1.2%...1 B: -2.5% L: -4.2% -.6%...17 No 187 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 34

35 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II ITALY ROME & LIRR - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Rome LIRR Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero, the same as during Summer 212. (% difference v 212) Year H: -2.6% -.7%...9 B: -4.3% L: -6.1% -.5%...15 No 244 (%) Plan +1% Achieved Comments Sector loads and sector optimisation according to traffic demand and system enablers implementation Airspace management and ATS route assessment and/or improvements according to network needs, Airspace Users expectations, ENAV s Flight Efficiency Plan and/or BLUEMED FAB implementation Implementation of CDO in LIRF according to ENV1 Mode S implementation Free-route implementation program PBN Program Maximum configuration: 21 sectors if required Maximum configuration: 19 sectors was sufficient to cope with traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the period June/July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 222 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 21. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 35

36 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II LATVIA RIGA & EVRR - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Riga EVRR As in 212, Riga did not generate enroute ATFM delay. Plan: Sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments Additional APP sector Various ATM system improvements Maximum configuration: APP Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was estimated at the same level as in 212. The average peak 1 hour demand was 63 and the peak 3 hour demand was 57 flights during the measured period, indicating that the offered sufficient capacity to meet the demand. (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.1% +1.3%...4 Summer B: -1.4% -7% L: -3.7% +1.5%...3 No 85 (+%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 36

37 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II LITHUANIA VILNIUS & EYVC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Vilnius EYVC In Summer 213, no en route ATFM delay was generated by Vilnius, as in Summer 212. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments Maximum configuration: 3 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 212 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. The peak 1 hour demand was 55 and the peak 3 hour demand was 49 during the measured period. (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.4% +3.9%...5 B: -.8% L: -2.7% +5.2%...8 No 77 (+%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 37

38 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II MALTA MALTA & LMMM - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Malta LMMM Evolution (213 v 212) Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero, as in Summer 212. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Maximum configuration: 2 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) Comments (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.9% +13.%...3 Summer B: 1.4% -11% L:.1% +8.6%...5 No 39 (+%) The capacity baseline was measured with ESS. During June and July, the average peak 1 hour demand was 26 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 22, indicating that the has sufficient capacity to meet the demand with spare capacity in the system. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 38

39 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II MOLDOVA CHISINAU & LUUU - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Chisinau LUUU Evolution (213 v 212) Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero, as in Summer 212. Enroute (min. per flight) Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments New ATM system MAATS Implementation December 213 (% difference v 212) Year H: 7.1% +15.3%...1 Summer B: 4.2% +9% L: 2.1% +19.2%...1 No 4 (%) Increased sector capacities As a result of implementation of New ATM system Reduces longitudinal separation (from ) In accordance with the planning dates, since Maximum configuration: 3 sectors No Maximum configuration: 2 sectors (The third sector is planned for implementing during 214) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with NEVAC. The peak 1 hour demand was 23 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 2, indicating that the has sufficient capacity to meet the demand with spare capacity in the system. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 39

40 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II THE NETHERLANDS AMSTERDAM & EHAA - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Amsterdam EHAA The average en-route delay per flight slightly decreased from.3 minutes per flight during Summer 212 to.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 1% for reason. Plan % Achieved Comments Civil-military co-location ANS and FUA No Temporary for upper airspace (> FL195) only; on hold due to training military ATCos Maximum configuration: 5 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS at 137, representing the delivered capacity. This was sufficient to accommodate the traffic demand, with an average peak 1 hour of 12 during the measured period and an average peak 3 hour of 18. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Evolution (213 v 212) Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EHAACBAS % 213 EHAASECT % 213 EHAASECT3 1.8% Enroute (min. per flight) Avg daily delay (min) (% difference v 212) Year H: 1.4% +1.% B:.2% L: -1.1% +1.6% No 137 (%) Amsterdam en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 4

41 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II NORWAY BODO & ENBD - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Bodo ENBD Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero in Summer 213. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments Flexible rostering of ATC staff Additional controllers Revision of FUA operations Evolution (213 v 212) Maximum configuration: 6 sectors + 1 oceanic Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak hour demand was 46 and the average peak 3 hour demand was 42. No No (% difference v 212) Year H:.2% +1.9%...3 B:.% L: -1.2% +2.7%... No 57 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 41

42 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II NORWAY OSLO & ENOS - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Oslo ENOS Average enroute delay per flight decreased from.8 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to zer minutes per flight in Summer 213. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand Achieved Comments 4 to 5 additional controllers Operations Resource Management system (rostering) Enhanced sector configurations Re-assessment of sector capacities following CAPAN study Revision of FUA operations Evolution (213 v 212) Maximum configuration: 5 (Summer), 7 (Winter) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity offered was measured with ESS at a level of 86, for an average peak demand of 79 (peak 1 hour) and 73 (peak 3 hour). No No No (% difference v 212) Year H: 1.6% +5.7%... B: 1.% L: -.7% +7.4%... No 86 (+28%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 42

43 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 4. NORWAY STAVANGER & ENSV - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Stavanger ENSV Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 1.6% +6.1% Summer B: 1.% -4% L: -.3% +6.7% No 58 (+%) Average enroute delay per flight increased from zero minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of te delays were for the reason ATC. Planned Increase: +% Achieved Comments Flexible rostering of ATC staff Additional controllers Revision of FUA operations No Not currently a limiting factor Maximum configuration: helicopter Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline of 58 was measured with ESS, indicating the capacity actually offered. During the measured period, the average peak demand was 56 (peak 1 hour) and 5 (peak 3 hour).. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 ENSVSSX % 213 ENSV % 213 ENSVSS 2 3.4% 213 ENSV % 213 ENSVN 1 1.3% Avg daily delay (min) Stavanger en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 43

44 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II POLAND WARSAW & EPWW - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Warsaw EPWW The average en-route delay per flight decreased from.8 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.5 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, 21% for ATC staffing, 13% for and 7% for Equipment. Plan + 3 % Achieved Comments Improved traffic handling through enhanced cooperation FMP/DNM Flexible use of configurations Release of new sector s capacity reference values Maintain number of ATCOs Improved sector configurations and management of configurations Maximum configuration: 8 Sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was measured with ESS / Reverse CASA and represents the capacity actually offered during the measured period. During the same period, the average peak demand was 149 (peak 1 hour) and 141 (peak 3 hour). (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.3% +1.3% B:.4% L: -1.5% +2.3% (+3%) ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 EPWWJ % 213 EPWWG % 213 EPWWD % 213 EPWWTC 9 9.6% 213 EPWWT % 213 EPWWBD % Avg daily delay (min) Warsaw en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 44

45 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II PORTUGAL LISBON & LPPC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Lisbon LPPC Evolution (213 v 212) s decreased from.8 min/flight in Summer 212 to.2 min/flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC capacity, 17% for Industrial action, and 2% for ATC Staffing. Plan +2 % Achieved Comments Improved rostering and sector opening schemes 4 net additional ATCOs Partially 3 net additional ATCOs Free route extension to LECM FIR No Postponed to March 214, Lisbon ready Update traffic volume definition to take new traffic pattern into account in line with the free route extension to LECM FIR No Postponed to March 214 Maximum configuration: 8 sectors (6 ENR+2 TMA) 8 to 9 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline (88) was calculated with ESS and represents the capacity delivered during the Summer season in the. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 9 and the peak 3 hour demand was 81. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H:.% +2.6% B: -1.8% L: -3.8% +3.% No 88 (+6%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LPPCWEST % 213 LPPCNXUPP % 213 LPPCNORTH % 213 LPPCSOUTH % 213 LPPCMAD % 213 LPPCSULEX % Avg daily delay (min) Lisbon en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 45

46 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II ROMANIA BUCHAREST & LRBB - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Bucharest LRBB Average enroute ATFM delay per flight remained at zero in Summer 213, the same as in Summer 212. Planned Increase: sufficient to meet demand ATS route network and sectorisation improvements Maximum configuration: 2 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) Comments 13 sectors sufficient (% difference v 212) Year H: 4.7% +5.7%... Summer B: 3.2% +5% L: 1.2% +7.%... No 183 (%) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. It was calculated with NEVAC, giving the potential capacity of the. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 123 flights and the peak 3 hour demand was 115, indicating that the had sufficient capacity to meet the demand with spare capacity in the system. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 46

47 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SERBIA & MONTENEGRO BELGRADE & LYBA - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Belgrade LYBA En-route delay remained at zero in Summer 213. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Route network Development Improved airspace management Flexible use of staff Civil/military coordination improvement (FUA) No National high-level policy body not established Additional controllers Radar sharing project CPR CCAMS No Postponed for 214 due KFOR Sector Cross border DCTs Evolution (213 v 212) Elementary Mode S implementation Phase 1 No Postponed for 216, with enhanced Mode S Maximum configuration: 12 sectors No Maximum opened configuration: 8 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. The peak 1 hour demand was 137 and the peak 3 hour demand was 124 during the measurement period. (% difference v 212) Year H: 4.% -2.9%...21 Summer B: 2.% -7% L:.1% -.6%...31 No 164 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 47

48 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SLOVAK REPUBLIC BRATISLAVA & LZBB - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Bratislava LZBB The average en-route delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. Plan +3% Achieved Comments Continuous improvements of the route network and sectorisation ATS Route Network v.7 has been implemented in 5/213 Adaptation of sector opening times Sector opening times are optimised on monthly basis Improved flow and capacity management techniques Continuous recruitment to maintain staff levels Enhanced sectorization according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan (partly) No Improved methodology of flow and capacity evaluation has been implemented Staff level is temporarily decreasing. We work constantly on stabilizing and increasing of operational staff level through intensive training We are currently in a process of optimizing sector configuration within FIR borders (W-E configuration) Ops from the new building (Spring 213) Transfer was managed seamlessly Maximum configuration: 5 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) The capacity baseline of 11 was calculated with ESS, representing the capacity offered during Summer 213. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 19 flights, indicating that the offered sufficient capacity to meet demand. The peak 3 hour demand was 96. (% difference v 212) Year H: 6.3% +5.%...22 Summer B: 4.6% -14% L: 2.5% +4.9%...35 No 11 (+2%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 48

49 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SLOVENIA LJUBLJANA & LJLA - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes)..... Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Ljubljana LJLA The average en-route delay per flight remained zero in Summer 213. Plan : Up to +5% Achieved Comments Implementation of new OPS room (March 213) ATS route network and traffic organisation changes Enhanced sectorization according to the FAB CE Airspace Plan Flexible sector configurations Maximum configuration: 4 sectors Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS, representing the delivered capacity (87). The peak 1 hour demand was 75 and the peak 3 hour demand was 67 during the measurement period. (% difference v 212) Year H: 3.6% -4.3%...26 Summer B: 1.2% +4% L: -1.6% -2.1%...37 No 87 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 49

50 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SPAIN BARCELONA & LECB - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Barcelona LECB Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.6% -.3% B: -3.4% L: -4.9% +.4% (+1%) Average en-route delay per flight slightly decreased from.8 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.7 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC and 14% for Weather. Plan +4% Achieved Comments Partial implementation of SACTA CF2 version (March 213) Optimised sector configurations Additional staff from TWR liberalization process New set of night direct routes Improvement in the interface with LFBB Maximum configuration: 11 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured at 138 with ESS/Reverse CASA. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 136 and the peak 3 hour demand was 129. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LEBLT1E % 213 LECBP1U % 213 LECBMNI % 213 LECBLGU % 213 LECBP1I 6 6.3% 213 LECBCCC 57 6.% Avg daily delay (min) Barcelona en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 5

51 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SPAIN CANARIAS & GCCC - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Canarias GCCC Evolution (213 v 212) Average enroute delay per flight decreased from.2 minutes per flight in Summer 212 to.1 in Summer % of the delays were for ATC, and 9 % for Weather. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Optimised sector configurations Additional staff from TWR liberalization process Minor ATC system upgrades Integration of airports in ATFM operations No Maximum configuration: 9 (5 APP/3+1ENR) Summer 213 performance assessment Maximum configuration Summer: 8 sectors Maximum configuration Winter: 9 sectors The capacity baseline was measured with ESS at 65. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 57 and the peak 3 hour demand was 51. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -4.9% -3.3% B: -5.5% L: -6.6% -3.9% No 65 (+%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 GCCCINB % 213 GCCCRE % 213 GCCCAAC % 213 GCCCIGC % 213 GCCCRC % 213 GCCCRWS % Avg daily delay (min) Canarias en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 51

52 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SPAIN MADRID & LECMALL - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Madrid LECM Evolution (213 v 212) Average enroute delay per flight remained at.2 minutes per flight in Summer % of delays were for the reason ATC, and 32% for Other. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Optimised sector configurations Partial implementation of SACTA CF2 version (April 213) Additional staff from TWR liberalization process New set of night direct routes Maximum configuration: 17 sectors No Maximum configuration: 16 sectors Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS/Reverse CASA at 182. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 18 and the peak 3 hour demand was 169. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -3.2% -4.2% B: -5.% L: -6.3% -3.7% No 182 (-3%) Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LECMBLI % 213 LASNO % 213 LECMASI % 213 LECMTZI % 213 LECMZMU % 213 LECMPAU % Avg daily delay (min) Madrid en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 52

53 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 5. SPAIN PALMA & LECP - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Palma LECP Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -1.2% -1.1% B: -2.9% L: -4.4% -.2% No 92 (%) Average enroute delay per flight decreased from.3 minutes in Summer 212 to.2 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, and 5% for Weather. Plan +2% Achieved Comments Optimised sector configurations Partial implementation of SACTA CF2 version (March 213) Additional staff from TWR liberalization process Maximum configuration: 7 sectors (3 APP + 4 ENR) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS/REVERSE CASA at 92. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 87, the peak 3 hour demand was 77. ocation of and Reasons for Enroute Year Location Avg Daily ER s % of Total ER 213 LECPMXX % 213 LECPIXX % 213 LECPIRX 3 3.3% 213 LECPGOX 2 1.9% 213 LECPIAX 1 1.1% Avg daily delay (min) Palma en-route delays in 213 CAPACITY STAFFING DISRUPTION EVENTS WEATHER NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 53

54 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SPAIN SEVILLA & LECS - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Sevilla LECS Evolution (213 v 212) Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: -3.4% -1.7%...34 B: -4.2% L: -5.6% +.2% No 89 (+%) Average enroute delay remained at.1 minutes per flight in Summer % of the delays were for the reason ATC, and 9% for Weather. Plan +1% Achieved Comments Optimised sector configurations Partial implementation of SACTA CF2 version (March 213) Maximum configuration: 7 (5 + 2 APP) Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ESS at 89. During the measured period, the peak 1 hour demand was 75 and the peak 3 hour demand was 68. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 54

55 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SWEDEN MALMO & ESMM - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Malmo ESMM Average enroute delay per flight was at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. Plan: +1% Achieved Comments Minor updates of COOPANS Evolution (213 v 212) Sector configurations adapted to traffic demand Continuous improvements on the ATS route network Maximum configuration: 4/5 (E) + 3/4 (W) + 2 (L) Summer 213 performance assessment Enroute (min. per flight) (% difference v 212) Year H: 2.6% +1.3%...4 B: 1.% L: -1.4% +2.6%...5 No 124 (%) Maximum configuration: 3/4E + 2L + 3W was sufficient given the levels of traffic demand The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average peak 1 hour demand was 113 and the peak 3 hour demand was 14. NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 55

56 NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II SWEDEN STOCKHOLM & ESOS - and en-route ATFM delays Peak Day Summer Yearly Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) Enroute (minutes per flight) 213 Realisation of Plan Stockholm ESOS Average enroute delay per flight was at zero minutes per flight in Summer 213. Plan: +1% Achieved Comments COOPANS implementation Evolution (213 v 212) Sector configurations adapted to traffic demand Continuous improvements on the ATS route network Enroute (min. per flight) Maximum configuration: 3 (M) + 4 (N) + 4 (S) Maximum configuration: 3M + 2N + 3S was sufficient given the levels of traffic demand Summer 213 performance assessment The capacity baseline was assessed to be at the same level as in Summer 212. During the measured period, the average traffic demand was 79 for the peak 1 hour and 74 for the peak 3 hour. (% difference v 212) Year H:.4% +.7%... Summer B: -.7% +6% L: -2.4% +2.1%... No 112 (%) NM Network Operations Report ANNEX II - 56