Meeting Minutes - Airport Collaborative Decision Making

Airport CDM Coordination Group Minutes 02 

2 nd Airport CDM Coordination Group - Minutes 

Brussels, 19-20 November 2008 

Chairman: Lagios Elisabeth EUROCONTROL / AOE 

Hogg Dave EUROCONTROL / AOE 

Secretary: Tuinstra Eugene EUROCONTROL / AOE 

Schmeits Caroline EUROCONTROL / AOE 

OK 

Present: 

Mrs. Banke Rasmussen Nina Integra A/S 

OK Mr Batista Joao L ANA Aeroportos de Portugal 

OK Mr. Bernard-Peyre Lionel EGIS 

OK Mr. Böhme Dietmar DLR 

Air France - Direction du Contrôle 

OK Mr. Boniface Pierre 

des Operations 

OK Mr Branagan Neil Irish Aviation Authority 

OK Mr. Brandes Michael FLIGHT Explorer 

OK Mr Bratlie Svein Avinor 

OK Mr Campbell Paul Nats 

OK Mr Cass Lorne NWA 

OK Mr. Čermák Ladislav ANS Prague 

OK Mr Chang Sing Pang Marc Amsterdam Airport schiphol 

OK Mr. Cheverton Eamonn HPN (BAA) 

OK Mr Church Colin BAA 

OK Mr. Coenen Albert SN Brussels 

OK Mr De Bolle Kris Brussels Airport Company 

OK Mr De Breucker Wim Flightcare 

OK Mr de Nijs Luc NLR 

OK Ms De Rademaeker Karin Aviapartner 

OK Mr. De Rover Cees Jan KLM Royal Dutch Airlines 

OK Mr. De Ruytter Joeri Frequentis GmbH 

OK Mrs. Distler Manuela Fraport AG 

OK Mr Duret Francois GVA Airport 

OK Mr. Eleftheriou Velissarios 

Page 1 of 23 

Aviation Solutions Europe Ltd. 

EUROCONTROL Airport Operations & Environment Division


OK Mr. Evans John AirRadio Ltda 

OK Mr. Fella Heiko DFS 

OK Mr. Geens Luc IACA 

OK Mr. Goni Modrego Eduardo EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr Groppe Matthias Lufthansa 

OK Mrs. Guichard Christine Aeroports de Paris 

OK Mr. Hardy Tim BAA 

OK Mr. Hearnden Len IATA 

OK Mr Herweijer Arie Hitt 

OK Mr. Hesselink Henk NLR 

OK Mr Hilger Stefan Fraport 

OK Mr Hocq Didier Brussels Slot Coordination 

OK Mr. Hodge Derek EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Hogg Dave EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Howarth Graham XPX Consulting 

OK Mrs. Huegel Carol Sensis Corporation 

OK Mr Jirku Juraj Helios 

OK Mrs King Andrea Helios 

OK Mr Koslacz Grzegorz Pansa 

OK Mr. Kucera Martin Prague International Airport 

OK Mr. Kurzweil Libor Prague International Air port 

OK Mrs. Lagios Elisabeth EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Lane Roger EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Leeman Eugene Amsterdam Airport Schiphol 

OK Mr Libby Mark FAA 

OK Mr. Lirola Javier IBERIA L.A.E. DOPS 

OK Mr. Lucas Didier DSNA 

OK Mr Marfurt Eric Skyguide 

OK Mrs Martin-Macho Maria Isabel Iberia 

OK Mr. Matthys Marc Belgocontrol 

OK Mr Mernock Rick Manchester Airport 

OK Mrs. Meyer Maria Christina EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Mongenie Olivier EGIS AVIA 

OK Mr. Moura Marcos Comitato Utenti 

OK Mr Mowery Marshall FAA 

OK Mr. Niemeijer Sander KLM Royal Dutch Airlines 

Page 2 of 23 



OK Mr Niewinsky Jarak Pansa 

OK Mr. Noel Michel private 

OK Mr Opdenberg Emmanuel Aviapartner 

OK Mr Pauwels Wim Hitt 

OK Mrs. Pillan Aline DSNA 

OK Mr Ploeckinger Juergen Austrian Airlines 

OK Mr. Porfiri Stefano SELEX - Sistemi Integrati 

OK Mr Reed Ron SITA Airport Solutions Line 

OK Mr Reid Timothy NWA 

OK Mr Rodrigues Joao NAV 

OK Mr. Rodriguez Gonzalo Indra 

OK Mr Roos Jan-Olof LFV 

OK Mr. Roubicek Jiří Czech Airlines 

OK Mr. Roubicek Tomáš Czech Airlines 

OK Mrs Schmeits Caroline EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr. Sinz Erik DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH 

OK Mr Spencer Stephen Lockheed Martin 

OK Mrs Stavrati Ourania A.I.A. Air Traffic Services 

OK Mr. Stensjøen Hans Petter AVINOR flysikringsdivisjonen 

OK Mr Suorto Timo Finavia 

OK Mrs. Tinge Linda DAA 

OK Mr. Tuinstra Eugene EUROCONTROL 

OK Mr Tykal Miroslav ANS 

OK Mr Van Buuren Jos Amsterdam Airport Schiphol 

OK Mr Van Leeuwen Eric Amsterdam Airport Schiphol 

OK Mr Veenema Arno Amsterdam Airport schiphol 

OK Mr. Volf Jiří Czech Airlines 

OK Mr. Waltman Henk LVNL 

OK Mr Wehle Klaus DFS/TWR FRA 

OK Mr Zammit Ludgardo EUROCONTROL 

Apologies 

EX Mrs. Santacroce Arianna ENAV 

EX Mr. Behne Jens-Dietrich T Systems 

EX Mrs. Dillen Ann Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium nv 

EX Mr. Erdelyi Joe Aviance 

EX Mr. Duvekot Cees KLM 

Page 3 of 23 



EX Mr Kaler Curt FAA 

EX Mr Vandeputte Jan Flightcare 

EX Cap. Genova Ricardo Iberia 

EX Mr. Saetre Anders AVINOR - Division Regional Airports 

EX Mr. Horton Daniel FAA 

EX Mrs. Pirotta Gabriella Alitalia 

EX Mr Frank Gerald Munich Airport 

EX Mr wetterwik Sven LFV 

EX Mr Aillerie Yannick Aeroport deLyon 

EX Mr Wobmann Jonas Skyguide 

EX Mr. Kanzler Peter Flughafen Munchen GmbH 

EX Mr. Torel Patrick Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium nv 

EX Mr. Suhner Werner Swiss International Airlines 

EX Mr. Brandt Francois Geneva International Airport 

EX Mr. Gammel Andreas UNIQUE 

EX Mrs Oluklu Derya , 

EX Mr. Kerski Manfred Taacs 

EX Mrs. Drappier Christel Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium nv 

EX Mr. Hanbury Joe JFH Assossiates Ltda 

Sea Handling S.p.A Aeroporti di 

EX Mrs. Turri Paola 

Milano (MXP) 

EX Mr. Simons Rohnny Thomas Cook Airlines Belgium nv 

The contact list will be made open to all for bilateral communication. 

DAY 1 

1 Introduction to CG 

1.1 Opening Remarks & Introduction 

The Chair Elisabeth Lagios & Dave Hogg opened the meeting by welcoming all participants to the 

second Airport CDM Coordination Group. 

Page 4 of 23 



1.2 Agenda 

The CG / 02 agenda was accepted with no changes. 

1.3 Minutes 

CG / 01 minutes were approved with no comments received. All outstanding actions from 

previous Coordination Group meeting have been completed. 

1.4 Implementation Progress on Airports 

Most airports had provided EUROCONTROL with Airport CDM implementation status reports for 

their airports (See IP 1) which Dave Hogg introduced and invited any airport representatives to 

verbally add to their reports if required. The EUROCONTROL Airport CDM team additionally 

reported on progress at Airports not represented in the meeting. 

Amsterdam received a formal go decision by COO’s on the 14 th of November, which is 

considered an important step to proceed with implementation after some delay. Earlier a GAP 

analysis had already been conducted, as well as extensive training by Eurocontrol. A CBA is 

considered essential for bigger organisations, as it provides guideline and clarity to all levels 

involved. Implementation is expected to proceed in 2009. A signed MoU is still missing and would 

ensure continued commitment by the airport partners. 

Athens is currently performing TSAT trials using the EUROCONTROL/DLR Departure Manager 

prototype, in order to demonstrate Airport CDM feasibility within ATC. Since the Olympics in 2004 

Airport CDM Information Sharing has been implemented, however the crucial ATC involvement 

has not been established. Further trials will contribute to decision making in 2009 on how to 

proceed. 

Barcelona has paused implementation for some time, however continued development of 

procedures for future message data exchange with the CFMU. Airport CDM implementation is 

expected to pick up momentum early 2009. 

Budapest has implemented a new ATM system recently which had priority. However CDM will 

gain priority in 2009. 

Brussels A MoU has been signed by all partners, which was an important step after some 

setbacks. Live trials with CFMU DPI are expected early December 2008. 

Berlin Brandenburg will be opened in 2012 as the new Berlin airport. Berlin Tegel will not have 

CDM as it will be closed soon. Schonefeld is under consideration. 

Dublin has strategy meetings ongoing, after a successful GAP analysis. Full support is available 

from the stakeholders and implementation is about to commence. However also in Dublin a new 

Page 5 of 23 



ATM system is having priorities over CDM currently. Participation to this CG is considered a 

learning process. 

Frankfurt used the 2007 DMAN project as a learning session. In May 2008 the choice was made 

to implement Airport CDM. A MoU was signed and a Gap Analysis conducted. The Milestone 

process is considered the most vital process to implement, and preparations are ongoing. Close 

coordination takes place with Munich airport, Erik Sinz is the point of contact. DMAN may return 

later in the pre-departure sequencing concept element, once requirements are captured and 

specified. A lesson learned is to implement Airport CDM before DMAN, since DMAN requires 

reliable information from the other concept elements in Airport CDM to function accurately. 

Geneva A MoU is still missing, however the benefits are considered good for ATC and Airport. 

More cooperation from airlines is needed to have all partners on board. A GAP analysis has been 

done in November 2007. Lessons are learned from late delay messages, since dispatchers are 

no longer present in Geneva. A gap exists between Skyguide and Airlines and needs to be 

closed. In the future TSAT and DPI messages are expected to solve that problem. The project is 

managed by two project managers, one IT, one operation related. 

Helsinki will start in 2009 with implementation; preparations are still in an early stage. A MoU is 

expected in January 2009. Benefits are expected to be large for all partners. De-icing is currently 

considered an independent project, since de-icing is applicable minimum six months per year. 

Istanbul is in preparation of implementation after GAP analysis and training. More news is 

expected early 2009. 

London Heathrow BAA is developing a Total Airport Management oriented system for the 

purpose of CDM process integration. A business approach with services and processes is 

developed for Heathrow, with cooperation from Cambridge University and Manchester. The 

landside is clearly an important factor, as well as environmental matters. Launch of the system is 

expected in April 2009. BAA leads the architectural work, where NATS is sub-contractor. 

It was stated by the audience that procedures and concept should go before system 

implementation. Heathrow however proceeds with the business oriented approach for procedures 

and services that can achieve the CDM objectives. 

Later on additional information was provided. Heathrow expects CDM to contribute to adverse 

conditions, as recently many incidents occurred on the airport and status information could help 

to recover from those incidents. CDM is expected also to contribute to planning purposes for all 

partners, as more reliable information contributes to reduce buffering in resource and flight 

planning. Further, a Departure module with TSAT generator will be installed to regulate traffic on 

the airport. Service Level Agreements with partners are prepared how and when to update the 

TOBT. 

Lisbon ATC could not be involved in Airport CDM so far, due to priorities with the new ATM 

system. It is intended to proceed with implementation in 2009. Implementation of A-SMGCS 

Page 6 of 23 



systems is related. A lesson learned is that different partners are not aligning their planning on 

each other, this is why delay occurred. 

Lyon A GAP analysis was conducted in October this year. A presentation will be given to the 

Association of French Speaking (regional) Airports in Mulhouse, on the 5 th of December 2008. 

The wish to implement is growing among French airports, however further steps are expected in 

2009. 

Manchester is about to initiate preparations for implementation, as the airport has formally 

decided to proceed with Airport CDM. As Manchester does not have one base carrier airline, 

work is initiated with AOC to gather the partners for project preparations. Eurocontrol will present 

the Airport CDM concept and potential benefits to the Airport partners in Jan 2009. 

Munich reported that since June 2007 CDM is still working and providing benefits. The MoU has 

been converted into a contract between Munich Airport and DFS. Later on ES will present more 

on the ongoing developments in Munich airport. The Chair praised the Munich CDM team once 

more for the work and commitment in establishing full CDM implementation as part of daily 

operations. 

Oslo A GAP analysis was conducted late 2006. This year the project manager has been 

appointed, and CDM has been communicated to all partners. With this common awareness, the 

MoU is being prepared and will be signed within weeks. A good culture is established and all 

partners are seeing the benefits. All are preparing for integration of planning systems. Some 

delay was caused by investments into a new terminal building. It was concluded that part-time 

project management did not work well, one need a full time manager for this project. 

EUROCONTROL has recently conducted a one day training course in Oslo to familiarise the local 

partners with Airport CDM and potential benefits. 

Palma de Mallorca has received the GAP analysis in September 2008 as part of the 

EUROCONTROL – AENA action plan. Currently this is under consideration. It is expected to 

commence with the project in 2009. Madrid and Barcelona will hopefully follow in 2009.. 

Paris CDG is proceeding well with implementation of Airport CDM. Communication amongst 

partners is increasing, Information Sharing is considered to be successful via intranet web 

services. Procedures are developed and implemented in cooperation with partners; pre-departure 

sequencing will be live end 2009, as well as other concept elements. Also a MoU is being 

prepared by the main partners ADP, DSNA, Air France, and other partners. 

Paris Orly is currently not yet preparing implementation. This is expected to commence in 2009. 

Prague presented the state of Airport CDM in a presentation. 

The airport has effectively one runway operational due to growth and regulations on other 

runways. A new runway is planned to be operational within five years. 

Page 7 of 23 



Airport Capacity Enhancement analysis was performed end 2006. A CBA was conducted early 

2008, and in March 2008 implementation was agreed amongst partners. Technical work is 

conducted in phase 1 of the project; interfacing of existing systems is important for information 

sharing. A PDA function is selected for mobile awareness and inputs for ramp agents, in this 

phase. This will increase TOBT updates and Information Sharing. 

Phase 2 will contain the Pre-departure Sequencing; phase 3 will be the connection with CFMU 

regarding exchange of DPI messages. 

It is stated once more that the project manager must be a full time function. Airport CDM is 

considered to be the key concept in SESAR, and harmonisation of the concept among European 

stakeholders is essential. It is agreed that CDM can also be useful for less constraint airports, as 

the aircraft and foreign carrier can benefit of early information and predictions. 

Milan is facing economical problems and has lost its hub function due to Alitalia relocating to 

Rome. No further CDM steps expected in the short term. A mandate from the governments could 

help the implementation process back on track. 

Rome Fiumincino has done a GAP analysis which was accepted in 2007. Currently; airline 

problems are priority which prevents further progress at the moment. However Airlines and CAA 

are pushing for implementation which is expected to commence in the near future. 

Stockholm Arlanda has rejoined Airport CDM after DMAN trials end 2007. Currently the project 

is under preparation for implementation and expects to restart in 2009. 

Vienna has signed a letter of intent between the main partners after a period of slow down since 

the end of 2007. The convincing of partners took a long time and the first phase of 

implementation has been completed awaiting board approval early 2009 for the commencement 

of full implementation. 

Warsaw has good cooperation between partners, a MoU is agreed and a project manager to be 

appointed soon. Already the airport and ANSP are moving fast forward with implementation, other 

partners following. More progress to report in 2009. 

An extensive overview of all airport progress report can be found on the CDM website www.eurocdm.org. 

1.5 Project Developments 

Website 

Caroline Schmeits provided an update by showing the new website on the screen. Outline of the 

new functionality, where to easily find all documentation, what links, and how to make contact 

with the Eurocontrol team was presented. It is expected to be ‘live’ before Christmas 2008. 

Page 8 of 23 



R It was recommended to add some pages that explain “what CDM can do for you”, to 

attract people to read further on the website, and directly see the benefits for themselves. It is 

important that the first click on the website brings the reader on a page that invites him to read 

more. 

Events will be clearly visible on the website, a rough year-agenda will be added for high level 

view of the CDM year. Dated events will be on the news room, and also have a direct link to 

relevant documents. 

Q Why not a forum online? 

A This is difficult to maintain for a small Eurocontrol team. Also some risks are involved 

which we do not wish to consider at this stage. Eurocontrol will however always consider more 

interactivity and is open for improvement of services. 

Q Are the airport progress reports online? 

A Yes, all active airports will have their latest reports online. 

The website address is: www.euro-cdm.org. 

Implementation Manual 

Eugene Tuinstra (ET) provided a verbal overview on the progress of the new Implementation 

Manual. It will contain recent developments such as the Milestone Processes and related Alert 

Messages. Other additional sections involve a high level organisation structure. Also all 

implementation chapters have been thoroughly updated and aligned with best practices or other 

project developments (e.g. SESAR). Finally, the Manual will be having a complete new look, in 

order to reflect change and new spirits. 

The new version is expected to be ready for download before Christmas 2008. The paper version 

of the complete map will be ready early 2009, as printing requires some extra measures. It will be 

decided in the next month how many copies will be delivered to each airport project management. 

All airports were thanked for their contribution to the enhancements of the manual. 

Train the Trainer Course 

This course is a new package to be developed over 2009, with the purpose to instruct local 

airport trainers. Lack of resources within Eurocontrol prevents the team to assist implementation 

at all airports in Europe. Hence support for instructors at local or national level needs to be 

provided through a train the trainer package, for which partners need to provide instructor 

capacity. 

It is important to have short time periods between instructors training and the training by these 

instructors to operational staff at an airport where CDM is implemented. 

Page 9 of 23 



R It is considered the best training when instructors from multiple partners of one airport are 

trained jointly, in order to dispose the culture of one organisation to others, and learn from each 

other. 

R Munich trained them selves during implementation, as they were the pioneer airport to 

implement Airport CDM. 

Marketing & Communication 

Currently a new Marketing Guide is under development by the contracting party Helios. This 

guide is the magazine version of several relevant Airport CDM topics, easy to ready for both 

management and operational staff of airport stakeholders. Aim is to launch the magazine early 

2009, which reflects also a new phase of Airport CDM now that more than 25 airports are 

involved. 

The magazine shows benefits, concept elements, operational impact for staff, and many other 

interesting subjects to motivate people working on airports. During this meeting Helios will contact 

people to provide their view on the current status of the magazine, in order to take their feedback 

on board. 

R A proposal was made to add a checklist for CDM in the centre of the magazine. 

R Another remark was made that the document might not be read by many people, as it is 

too much paper, not readable. A leaflet might be better. 

Comments have been taken on board, however the Eurocontrol team thinks this magazine can 

be readable as it does not contain a long story, but many independent topics interesting for a 

wide range of readers. 

2 Procedures Group & DPI message development 

2.1 Procedures Group Meeting report 

Elisabeth Lagios (EL) explained the importance of the new Generic Milestone processes (IP2) 

document for implementing the Information Sharing and Milestone approach concept elements. 

Changes have been added to reflect the status of the concept, hard requirement statements as 

“should” and “shall” have been replaced by “recommended” and “highly recommended”. 

However, once a mandate from the European Commission may come these statements may be 

reversed. 

The Alert Messages document (IP3) has been slightly revised in the introduction table, which 

was not correctly updated. A remark was received to change the coding of messages, or to align 

with Flight Objects in SESAR. Both documents are reflected in the new Implementation Manual, 

to be released soon. 

The Start-up procedures document (WP1) is still under development in the Procedures Group. 

The same accounts for the Generic AIP text document (WP2). Both documents will be discussed 

Page 10 of 23 



in the next Procedures Group meeting, on the 4th & 5 th of February 2009, which is accessible to a 

limited group of airports. Comments on these documents are welcome from all stakeholders, to 

be received before the 5 th of December 2008. 

R SN Brussels Airlines reflected that EOBT should be the main parameter to be used, not 

TOBT. 

A EOBT contains an uncertainty of a ±15 minutes window, which is the main justification for 

the Airport CDM concept. TOBT is considered the key parameter in Airport CDM, which aims to 

provide more reliability in planning, implemented by many airports, and supported by all partners. 

This way of thinking of SN Brussels Airlines does not reflect the general feeling. Brussels as CDM 

airport should evaluate how to proceed. 

R Feedback from APN and APDSG is aimed at phraseology which must be aligned with 

ICAO. Acronyms in datalink are not allowed these days, and it should be debated how to 

proceed. 

2.2 CFMU DPI message exchange 

This section is combined with 2.3, as there was only one integrated presentation on this subject. 

2.3 CFMU minimum Requirements for DPI implementation 

Marcel Richard (MR) presented the minimum requirements for CFMU to connect an airport with 

DPI messages. The message was that all concept elements of Airport CDM must have been 

implemented successfully, in order to guarantee reliable information and hence reliable 

predictions on TTOT from the airport to CFMU. Further: slot compliance, presence of letter of 

intent or MoU between airport partners is essential before transmission between airport and 

CFMU can occur. 

Once an airport fulfils the requirements, an evaluation trial is planned in order to verify the 

information exchange between airport and CFMU. However, the operational requirements are the 

basis for a decision if and when an airport will be connected, not technical. 

R It was suggested to have a long Stakeholder comment phase for this document, as it 

contains some controversial statements. 

A The document has been created initially for internal purposes, and budget planning and 

resources between Eurocontrol units. The relevance of this document is for future situations when 

we need to make choices between airports that are ready for DPI exchange with CFMU. The 

document is open for discussion and comments. The comment phase will be until 20 January 

2009. 

R The document is not derived in a democratic way, as stakeholders were not involved. 

Amsterdam is opposing chapter 4, and is supported by others, including Munich. The 

performance figures required are too high, and should be reassessed. 

Page 11 of 23 



A Despite this, figures are also guidelines and can be taken flexible. It is understood that 

this communication does not reflect that flexible view. e.g. de-icing conditions may influence slot 

compliance, and in such case not be taken into account for measurements. 

Q Is the main carrier on an airport not in advantage with Airport CDM? In Munich this is the 

case today. Because one airline (Lufthansa) receives adjusted slots, other airlines in Europe lose 

slots due to exchange of slots by CFMU. This way is considered not fair to other airlines. 

A This is the situation today. When more airports implement Airport CDM, this effect will be 

reduced, and all airlines start benefiting from the concept of slot swapping by CFMU. 

Q Who decided on the figure of 95%? It is too rigid. 

A The figure of 95% does not relate compliance, it is the number of traffic on one airport 

that is expected to deliver TOBT to the CDM platform, which then triggers TTOT message to 

CFMU. This explanation is however not understood by all participants. All numbers need 

endorsement in OCG, hence stakeholders can have their say. 

Q Will these figures be evaluated when more airports are involved in exchange with CFMU? 

A Yes, evaluation takes place constantly, and the document should be adjusted 

accordingly. 

R Not just the figures require evaluation; all elements of the document should be discussed. 

A 20 January is the deadline for comments on the Minimum requirements document. 

EUROCONTROL / IATA Flight Efficiency Plan 

3.1 How Airport CDM can help Airlines to survive 

Len Hearden (LH) presented the IATA view on Airport CDM. A first note however was given to a 

statement by SN Brussels Airlines, who rejected the use of TOBT in Airport CDM. The statement 

was noted for the record. Dave Hogg (Chairman) informed all participants that this statement was 

to negative without any substance and should be ignored considering SN Brussels were not 

present to substantiate on the reasons for such a comment. 

LH explained about rising fuel prices (despite the current downturn), dropping seat figures and 

more financial impact on the Airlines today, which is resulting in a plea for more enhanced airport 

operations, such as Airport CDM. 

On the arrival side a new principle should be endorsed: First Scheduled First Served. Arrival 

applications should then be available for slot swapping, where efficiency requires and possibilities 

enable to do so. 

Q What about the very confusing message SN Brussels Airlines just gave to IATA, which 

was loudly presented? 

A IATA is in full support of Airport CDM, and the voice was only from one stakeholder. 

Page 12 of 23 



A SN Brussels Airlines signed the MoU for Brussels airport, so they should be supporting 

CDM in full. Feedback however regarding the TOBT statement will be given to the airline as soon 

as possible, as the confusion is not contributing to the participants and future interested airports. 

Q How does IATA push member airlines to implement and comply with Airport CDM 

procedures? 

A IATA has difficulty in pushing their members via top management. It was agreed to do 

more where possible. 

Q How about the IATA – ACI agreement? 

A ACI involve their members already in close cooperation with EUROCONTROL, as they 

already have an agreement in place. A joint initiative from organisations to their members would 

contribute significantly. 

R Standardisation from a pilot perspective is of key importance, hence pilots will urge their 

airlines bottom-up to proceed with CDM, and so should IATA do from top-down. 

3.2 Pilot experiences on the benefits of Airport CDM 

Matthias Gröppe (MG) presented the pilot perspective on Airport CDM. He pointed out the mixed 

signals they are receiving at different airports, such as Zurich where still POBT is used rather 

than TOBT. 

The role of the pilot in the turn-round process becomes more important due to the reduction of 

ramp agents or dispatchers. Their awareness level may differ between airlines, but generally 

spoken they are supposed to be aware of many small and big processes in and around the 

aircraft. Lufthansa has one process in place to deliver TOBT and updates to the responsible 

persons at the platform, which works already in Munich. 

3.3 Open Session 

Q Are acronyms already filed to ICAO? 

A No, this has not been done yet. Short term action is needed in order to brief ICAO on 

procedure developments and standardisation of acronyms. 

R A generic process for TOBT updates should be applied throughout all airports. 

A True, however the role of the pilot should allow for exception handling, since he is the 

only individual in the loop close to TSAT, in order to update planning. 

R For this already a new TOBT datalink procedure is discussed and agreed in the 

Procedures Group meeting. 

Page 13 of 23 


DAY 2 


FAA Future cooperation 

This session has actually taken place on the first day due to change of schedule. EL introduced 

the guests from FAA, with whom she visited Munich the day before to show how Airport CDM is 

working in Europe. 

4.1 FAA update on CDM & ground delay program in the USA 

Mark Libby (ML) and Marshall Mowery (MM) together with representatives of Delta/North West 

Airlines gave a presentation of the CDM developments in the USA. 

ML explained the concept of CDM in USA, which is mostly applied for en-route planning, rather 

than the airport planning. Weather is the main driver for this en-route planning, but also their 

ground-delay program is primarily needed to resolve bad weather situations, demanding change 

of plans. 

A daily teleconference with all main partners (airlines, FAA, Port authorities) from all over the 

USA is executed at the beginning of the morning, in order to identify problem areas or airports in 

the National Air Space (NAS), and how to find appropriate mitigations. These types of massteleconferences 

are repeated throughout the day, in order to update and align partners. Canada 

is involved as well, and soon Mexico will join this way of working. 

A culture of No-Blame has grown over the years due to this communication, which is providing an 

excellent basis for more collaboration on the airport surface. Security of data for competitive 

reasons has been abandoned since all partners came to see the bigger benefits of cooperation 

and sharing that data. Now a need for more surface data sharing is needed, a next step in CDM. 

MM showed the surface problems during a common day on Atlanta airport. Inbound flows are 

hold before entering the terminal area (aprons), due to occupied stands and gates. Outbound 

flows queue near the runway holding point, causing delay and emissions. 

The essence of the concept is that the aprons are managed by Airlines, whereas the runways 

and taxiways are controlled by the FAA (ATC). Flow numbers are modelled by the FAA to predict 

outbound traffic, whereas airlines today do not share information on their actual movements and 

turn-round processes. More information sharing could therefore enhance efficient use of the 

airport infrastructure as a whole. For that reason, and interest into European Airport CDM has 

grown. 

Q Are all airlines included in the daily teleconferences? 

A All can participate and listen in, however this is not compulsory. 

Page 14 of 23 



Post Airport CDM Implementation Performance & Measurement 

EL introduced this session by highlighting her appreciation for the larger airlines and their 

involvement in defining new procedures and participating in data analysis programs in 

Eurocontrol. Especially Munich has been contributing from the beginning and still is the biggest 

example for Airport CDM to other airports. 

5.1 Post Munich Airport CDM Implementation including KPIs 

Erik Sinz (ES) gave a presentation about the current state in Munich, and developments that are 

ongoing to prepare for the future. 

Q What CDM information is provided to foreign airlines, since this is not clear to all carriers 

abroad? 

A The ground handler should inform your airline how to connect to Munich information 

sharing system. Options are available; just decide on how to use them. 

Q What options exist in Munich to swap flights in the pre-departure sequence? 

A The Handling agent can choose to swap flights based on their progress. Star Alliance has 

the possibility with many flights to swap flights in the sequence, based on their priorities. However 

once a flight is swapped or shifted in time, a stabilisation function is needed to avoid too much 

instability for a flight. 

Q How about EOBT and TTOT compliance at Munich airport? 

A The biggest problem is Airport slot SOBT – with flight plan slot EOBT. This check is 

crucial to update one of them. General aviation is not a big problem today; they comply via one 

operations centre with TOBT, which is sufficient. In the worst case the tower can input a TOBT 

via R-T if necessary, which is exceptional. 

Q Why not just apply EOBT? 

A The EOBT remains valid according to ICAO flight plan regulation. TOBT is more crucial 

for FMG and DFS controllers, since it reflects the real state of the aircraft, not just the flight plan 

Q Does Munich have a MoU in place? What are the costs for airlines today? 

A FMG and DFS have a contract in place. All CDM costs are shared by DFS and FMG, 

together they developed SEPL. Airlines and Ground Handlers only have their own costs to bear. 

Q What are the development costs for CDM at Munich? 

A 1 Million EUR in total. FMG can provide you with more detail on costs. 

Q What are the biggest benefits for Munich? 

A Reduced queuing of 1 minute average per flight; reduced taxi times per flight, minimised 

delay at the gate; CFMU providing suiting CTOT slots to flights based on TTOT prediction. 

Page 15 of 23 



R Europe should discuss centralised information sharing, as too many airports develop their 

own type of database and information sharing. One big database would be more convenient for 

airlines which fly to many different airports with as many different systems to log on to. 

A All airlines have access to the CFMU database, which reflect much information. All 

AOC’s have such CFMU terminal, however TOBT not presented in this database. 

R CFMU takes constructive proposals to extend their database with CDM data display. 

A Airlines should discuss TOBT publication within IATA. That would provide a huge benefit 

for airlines to follow their outstation flight progress more easily. 

R However some airlines do not want publication of TOBT in the DPI message, due to 

competition. 

5.2 EUROPEAN Airport CDM Data Analysis 

Andrew Hill presented a proposal for analysis of Airport CDM data of several airports. The 

request was to receive data sets from interested airports. With the analysis of data airports could 

get free reporting on their performance of Airport CDM. Furthermore, European trends could be 

derived from larger datasets. However it was stressed that all airport data would be treated 

confidentially, as was done in other data analysis projects. 

R Heathrow expressed interest; their data could be provided via access to their platform. 

Q Is there a link to the ATMA data analysis project, also performed by Eurocontrol? 

A The scope of ATMA is unclear, however contact is made and coordination with other 

projects will take place. Aim of this project is to feedback performance to airports. 

Q How about the metrics EOBT – SOBT and TOBT – ARDT? 

A All Metrics will be discussed. 

A general conclusion was that Eurocontrol should ensure coordination with other projects, to 

avoid double datasets being sent to different units in Eurocontrol. This was taken on board. 

5.3 Enhancing TOBT accuracy in EUROPE 

A presentation from ET showed that todays TOBT values are often inaccurate or missing, leading 

to poor TSAT and TTOT calculations. Unawareness, poor CDM implementation, inexperienced 

staff and inaccurate performance analysis were looked at as possible causes. Better staff training 

on CDM, airline evaluation and increased pilot involvement could improve the accuracy of the 

TOBT input locally. The exchange of better practices and a Community specification could help. 

SN Brussels Airlines said that TOBT is becoming as inaccurate as the EOBT. Updating this last 

one is already difficult enough, no need for updating another one with the same value. In Munich 

TOBT is mandatory, but a first service of automatic TOBT is provided. (ES) 

It was remarked that awareness, training and communication are different for every stakeholder 

and that they need to grow together on operational level to improve overall CDM behaviour. 

Page 16 of 23 



With a plea from MG to involve the pilots, it was proposed to have a presentation in a future 

Coordination Group meeting on ‘the Ground Handlers Perspective’. 

Involving CEO’s from AO as from the start, as they are the signers of the MoU, is preferable. 

Eurocontrol has a responsibility to talk to IATA, Pilot -,Ground Handler- and Airline Associations 

to raise more and more awareness. 

5.4 Airport CDM Network gains (Benefit Assessment) 

Maria-Christina Meyer (MCM) and Eduardo Goni (EG) gave a presentation about the potential 

network gains in Europe after Airport CDM has been implemented in 42 airports. This research is 

done based on actual CDM information from Munich airport, and the results are expanded to 

other airports. Benefits are expected in capacity growth per sector, and even a more efficient use 

of airspace and less regulation due to less saturation of sectors. 

The EUROCONTROL DMEAN program manager adds on that for more flight efficiency a network 

approach must be taken to tackle Airspace design, Air routes and Flow management, with 

integration of airports in the network. All the benefits that are expected will reduce the amount of 

needed regulations, which is the result this program aims for. 

Q If the number of saturated sectors decreases, does this imply that also the regulation 

goes down? 

A This cannot be concluded from this research, and must be verified in future work. The 

assumption is anyhow too straight forward, as there is no direct relation between saturation and 

regulation levels. 

Q How is DMEAN communication organised to ANSPs? 

A There is training planned for ANSP and FMP’s, in the near future. 

Q Is this research not too early for conclusions? One feeding airport is not much to base 

these results on? There are big problems with flight level compliance between sectors, too many 

controllers use another flight level to solve conflicts or rerouting, not adhering to the flight plan. 

A Controllers deviating from the flight plan may cause inefficient use of airspace, and 

trigger regulations by CFMU. Due to lack of training of controllers flight predictions made by 

CFMU may not be effective. Controllers should be more aware of their actions with change of 

flight levels. Training is essential. 

R City pair investigation may be very useful for more reliable results. These results are 

preliminary and hence very uncertain. More airports need to implement and operate Airport CDM 

before more results form a basis to conclude on. However the type of research is considered a 

good start. 

R Munich investigated a reduction of ATFM delay of 2.4 minute, which must be taken into 

account. Once the network benefits from Airport CDM, the turn-round process again may benefit 

Page 17 of 23 



from the network predictability. CTOT’s from Airport CDM airports may become completely 

unnecessary in the future. 

DMAN / A-SMGCS and Airport CDM integration 

6.1 DMAN / ASMGCS and Airport CDM integration Concept 

Klaus Haschke and Eugene Tuinstra gave some feedback on the 2 DMAN Workshops from 2008. 

The reason for having an integrated DMAN concept (in Airport CDM and A-SMGCS) is that future 

advanced concepts require a robust basis on Surface Management. The defined Operational 

Concept of DMAN was explained to the Coordination group members and benefits such as 

increased operational efficiency and improved environment were summed. 

Q Can Pre-departure Sequence be implemented without having the DMAN and A-SMGCS 

tools, because this can scare airports, thinking these tools are needed? 

A No DMAN sequence planner will function efficiently without accurate data and 

procedures in place. DMAN and A-SMGCS real time data will on their turn feed the CDM TSAT 

calculation. 

ET clarified the difference between the DMAN system (tool) and departure management, together 

being the concept as it was important to point out the difference. 

Q What is the connection with stand and gate management and how to solve queuing at the 

terminal area when queuing at the RWY is solved by the sequence tool? 

A This should be solved by having Airport CDM process in place together with airport slot 

coordination. TOBT is essential and an accurate input for DMAN and still a flexible tool for 

controllers and Stand and Gate Management. 

Several offers to review the document “Generic Operational Concept for DMAN integration in 

Airport CDM and A-SMGCS” were taken. The document will be released for review end 

December 2008. 

6.2 Brussels CDM / DMAN Trial Report 

Brussels Airport CDM and DMAN evaluation report, hands on experience is also applied on 

Athens airport. The report will be published online soon. 

Future Developments 

7.1 EUROCAE WG/69 & ETSI 

EL explained that the work in EUROCAE WG69 is completed and a list of documents has been 

approved. Based on this work the European Telecommunications Standardisation Institute (ETSI) 

is preparing a Community Specification (CS), which should mandate Airport CDM in Europe 

through the interoperability regulation of the EC Single European Sky. This mandate is essential 

Page 18 of 23 



to push more airports to implement and operate Airport CDM. A draft CS can be expected in 

2009. 

Q Is this CS document public? 

A For those who are participants of the WG69, it is. Registration can be done via the UK 

CAA. 

7.2 EUROCONTROL re-organisation (CND) and fit with SESAR 

Collaborative Network Design is the new organisation structure for Eurocontrol, in order to line up 

for the SESAR program. The structure aims to integrate transparency and Partnership, in order to 

reflect the new way of working within the SESAR program. 

CND will contain new execution processes and budgets; more can be read on the SESAR and 

CND websites. 

7.3 Advanced Airport CDM Concept 

An expansion of the Airport CDM concept is being produced as part of future IP2 activity, 

however is still to immature for public delivery. It aims to integrate the landside more, which is 

missing in the current CDM concept. Main objective is to use more information from the landside 

in order to base airside predictions on, in order to improve operational efficiency. 

7.4 Other Business & Date for next meeting 

Airports that wish to be part of the Procedures group meeting can send a mail to the Airport CDM 

team. The Procedures Group meeting will be 4-5 February 2009 in Brussels. Agenda to be 

finalised and distributed soon. 

The Airport CDM team will consider how to provide opportunity for industry to expose to the 

stakeholders in future events. 

Date Next Meeting and other Business 

The 19th and 20 th November 2009 was agreed for the third Airport CDM Coordination Group The 

chair closed the meeting at 15.30 hrs. 

Actions 

ID Description Responsible Due date 

CG01 Comment WP1, WP2 All 05/12/08 

CG02 Comment CFMU minimum All 20/01/08 

requirements for DPI 

implementation. 

Page 19 of 23 



CG03 Comment on “Generic Operational 

Concept for DMAN integration in 

Airport CDM and A-SMGCS” 

Page 20 of 23 

HITT, DLR, NLR 20/01/08 


AGENDA - Airport CDM Coordination Group 


AGENDA FOR THE SECOND MEETING 

Pollux meeting room, Agency HQ 

Starting at 10:00 on 19th November 2008 

Finishing at 15:15 on 20th November 2008 

Chair: Elisabeth Lagios, EUROCONTROL Airport CDM Project Manager 

Co-Chair: Dave Hogg, EUROCONTROL Airport CDM Expert 

Secretary: Eugene Tuinstra, EUROCONTROL Airport CDM expert 

Contact: Caroline Schmeits, EUROCONTROL Airport CDM expert 

Day 1 

Session 1, Introduction to CG 

Chair: Elisabeth Lagios / Dave Hogg 

10:00 1.1 Opening remarks V 

10:10 1.2 Adoption of Agenda V 

10:15 1.3 Approval of minutes and actions Coordination Group 

1 

10:20 1.4 Overview of Airport CDM Implementation in Europe 

(including presentation from Prague airport - 10 

minutes) 

11:40 1.5 Project Developments 

12:30 Lunch 

Airport CDM Website Transition 

Airport CDM Implementation Manual Update 

Train the Trainer 

Airport CDM Marketing & Communication 

Session 2, Airport CDM Procedures Group & DPI Message 

Environment Development 


Page 21 of 23 

EUROCONTROL Airport Operations & Environment Division 

IP1 

V 

V 

V 

V 

P 

EL 

DH 

ET 

DH 

CS 

ET 

EL 

Helios


13:30 2.1 Airport CDM Procedures Group 

Airport CDM Generic Milestone Processes IP2 V EL 

13:40 Airport CDM Generic Alert Messages IP3 V 

EL 

13:50 Airport CDM Start up procedures with Datalink WP1 V EL 

14:00 Airport CDM Harmonised text for AIP WP2 V EL 

14:20 2.2 CFMU / Airport DPI Message exchange including 

de-icing situations 

14:50 2.3 CFMU Minimum Requirements for DPI 

Implementation 

15:10 Coffee break 

Session 

Airport 

Programme 

Update 

3, EUROCONTROL / IATA Flight Efficiency Plan 


15:30 3.1 How Airport CDM can help Airlines survive in these 

critical times 

16:00 3.2 Pilots experiences on the benefits of Airport CDM 

and Perspective on how to enhance TOBT accuracy 

16:30 3.3 Open Session 

17:00 Day 1 Close 

09:30 

10:00 5.1 

Session 4, 

Strategy 

Day 2 

FAA & EUROCONTROL Future Coordination 


4.1 FAA Update on Airport CDM in the US & the ground 

delay programme 

Post Airport CDM Implementation Performance & 

Session 5, 

Measurement 


Post Munich Airport CDM Implementation including 

KPIs 

Page 22 of 23 


P MR 

IP4 P MR/EL 

P 

LH 

P MG 

P ML/MM 

P 

EZ

10:30 5.2 

10:50 5.3 

11:10 5.4 

11:30 Coffee break 


EUROPEAN Airport CDM Data Analysis WP3 P 

Enhancing TOBT accuracy in EUROPE V 

Airport CDM Network gains (Benefit Assessment) P MCM 

Session 6, DMAN / ASMGCS and Airport CDM integration 


12:00 6.1 DMAN / ASMGCS and Airport CDM integration 

Concept 

P 

12:30 6.2 Brussels CDM / DMAN Trial Report V 

13:00 Lunch 

Session 7, Future Developments 


14:00 7.1 EUROCAE WG/69 & ETSI V 

EL 

14:10 7.2 EUROCONTROL re-organisation (CND) and fit with 

SESAR 

P 

PJ 

14:30 7.3 Advanced Airport CDM Concept P 

MB 

15:00 7.4 Other Business & Date for next meeting V 

15:15 FINISH 

Page 23 of 23 


AH 

ET 

KH/ET 

EL

Meeting Minutes - Airport Collaborative Decision Making

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?