Stockholm - Airport Collaborative Decision Making
Stockholm - Airport Collaborative Decision Making
Stockholm - Airport Collaborative Decision Making
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
CDM Task Force 13<br />
13-14th November 2006<br />
AIRPORT CDM<br />
STOCKHOLM-ARLANDA<br />
<strong>Airport</strong> CDM Implementation Status<br />
Petter Holsberg<br />
ATS-Arlanda<br />
1<br />
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
2<br />
19R<br />
01L<br />
08<br />
19L<br />
01R<br />
<strong>Airport</strong> Overview<br />
Problems are some noise complaints and lack of stands in peak<br />
hours<br />
Planned development: New apron and increase of capacity from<br />
80 to 90 MVTS/H in autumn 2007 (independent parallel operations)<br />
26<br />
850 MVTS/D<br />
230 000 MVTS/Y (-2% in 2006)<br />
18 million pax (+5.2% in 2006)<br />
Capacity 80 MVTS/H<br />
75 Airline operators<br />
3 Airline operation centres<br />
4 Handling agents<br />
2 De-icing agents
3<br />
Brief Project History<br />
The local CDM project at Arlanda was established in 2002 together with<br />
EUROCONTROL. The project plan described the following four work<br />
packages;<br />
• WP1 – Analysis of Arlanda operations (report in January 2003)<br />
• WP2 – Identification and selection of common improvements (completed in<br />
December 2003)<br />
• WP3 – Implementation phase (started spring 2004)<br />
• WP4 – Trials and evaluation (has been running in parallel with WP3 and<br />
resulted in a proposed KPI tool)<br />
Partners involved<br />
• <strong>Airport</strong> – LFV Data, Stand allocation unit<br />
• Ground handling 4<br />
• De-icing agents 2<br />
• Airline operators 2<br />
• ANSP 2
4<br />
Brief Project History<br />
Project setup –<br />
SG, stakeholders organized in taskforce. Project plan with<br />
four phases established.<br />
Findings –<br />
Both Arrival and Departure process needs to be improved.<br />
Especially the accuracy of ELDT and the De-icing process.<br />
Main objectives and goals –<br />
Provide a common CDM information platform to all<br />
partners & increase punctuality within the E2E process.
5<br />
WP3 STEPS<br />
STEP STEP 1: 1: Improving Improving the the Arrival Arrival process process<br />
Improve the ETA / RETA accuracy and make it available to all actors<br />
Calculate and create EIBT field in the CDM system<br />
Have the CTOT available in the CDM system<br />
Improve the % of flights with full identification information (IATA and ICAO code, and<br />
registration number)<br />
Implement the TOBT procedure<br />
Implement variable taxi-time<br />
Implement ETOT<br />
Implement DPI-FUM<br />
STEP STEP 2: 2: Improving Improving the the Departure Departure Process Process<br />
STEP STEP 3: 3: Improving Improving De-Icing De-Icing Operations Operations<br />
Implement collaborative de-icing procedure based on estimate and status information such as<br />
the “ready for de-icing time”, “start de-icing”, and “end de-icing”<br />
STEP STEP 4: 4: Improving Improving Runway Runway and and Important Important Information<br />
Information<br />
Implement a “runway configuration” screen and an “important information” screen in the CDM<br />
system<br />
STEP STEP 5: 5: Data Data Quality Quality and and Monitoring Monitoring<br />
Monitoring of KPI's before and after implementation of each previous step<br />
Brief Project History
6<br />
Radar data<br />
Flightplan data<br />
Operator inputs<br />
TWR & ATCC<br />
Downlinked a/c FMS data<br />
ANS System (arrival process)<br />
GIPS modules<br />
SAFIR clients<br />
Input/Output)<br />
CIES<br />
SAFIR<br />
TMS-stand allocation<br />
End Users<br />
Informationflow<br />
<strong>Airport</strong> Systems<br />
DARSA –<br />
measure KPI: s<br />
NDS<br />
NDS clients<br />
(presentation)
7<br />
•Output from CIES is based on Radar data, Flight plans and Operators<br />
input in both Arlanda TWR & ATCC <strong>Stockholm</strong>.<br />
•Main supplier of Arrival data (ETA/RETA) to SAFIR<br />
•CIES calculates Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) for inbound flights<br />
with the precision of +-2 min and creates a stable picture of the<br />
inbound flow approximately 30 min before Actual Time of Arrival (ATA)<br />
CIES tool
8<br />
Improvements
9<br />
Do’s and Don'ts of <strong>Airport</strong> Implementation<br />
What advice can you give other airports intending to implement <strong>Airport</strong> CDM?<br />
Project management<br />
• Create a task force group with all partners<br />
• Make official agreements on participation<br />
• Important to maintain momentum<br />
• Sign commitment contracts between all stakeholders<br />
Publicity – distribute information to all personnel to be involved at the airport<br />
Expert view – University of Lund has for a Doctor's dissertation made an<br />
investigation of the project and will follow up in a couple of years.<br />
After implementation<br />
• Appoint a CDM General who …<br />
• … will lead a User Forum group<br />
• … and evaluate and follow up KPI's<br />
• … and implement improvements of the process
10<br />
How do you measure successes<br />
Benefits & Next Steps<br />
• KPI data is fed into a specific software measuring application<br />
Do you have indication of cost versus benefits of implementing CDM<br />
• EUROCONTROL CBA<br />
How to maintain commitment from the partners<br />
• Needs maintained momentum & official agreements<br />
Present actions<br />
• Platform and network structures are implemented – now testing<br />
Next Steps:<br />
1. Realization of the improvements in the arrival process<br />
2. Continued work on departure process<br />
3. Update CFMU with DPIs and/or TTOT<br />
4. Implement a DMAN tool
11<br />
One key Statement<br />
CDM provides predictable and accurate times to enhance:<br />
The turnaround process<br />
Gate allocation<br />
Adherence to CTOT and update CFMU with DPIs<br />
which leads to<br />
Smooth Airline and <strong>Airport</strong> operations