Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) UNITED KINGDOM

EUROCONTROL 

Local Single Sky ImPlementation 

(LSSIP) UNITED KINGDOM 

Year 2014 - Level 1

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET 

LSSIP for the United Kingdom 

Infocentre Reference: 15/01/12-42 

Document Identifier Edition: Year 2014 

LSSIP Year 2014 United Kingdom Edition Date: 18/05/2015 

LSSIP Focal Point – Craig Jiggins 

LSSIP Contact Person - Oscar Alfaro 

Status 

E-mail: 

Craig.jiggins@caa.co.uk 

E-mail: 

oscar.alfaro@eurocontrol.int 

Intended for 

CAA 

SARG/Airspace 

DPS/PEPR 

Working Draft General Public 

Draft Agency Stakeholders 

Proposed Issue Restricted Audience 

Released Issue 

Accessible via: 

Path: 

 

Internet (www.eurocontrol.int) 

Y:\03 LSSIP\1. LSSIP States\United Kingdom (UK) - OA\Year 2014\Released\LSSIP2014 UK 

Released.doc 

LINKS TO REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 

1 LSSIP Guidance Material http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/guidance-material 

2 ESSIP Plan Edition 2014 www.eurocontrol.int/pepr 

3 ESSIP Report 2013 www.eurocontrol.int/pepr 

4 STATFOR Forecasts http://www.eurocontrol.int/statfor 

5 Acronyms and abbreviations http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/glossaries 

6 European ATM Master Plan https://www.atmmasterplan.eu/ 

7 LSSIP Documents http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/lssip 

8 United Kingdom AIP http://www.nats-uk.eadit.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=view&id=5&Itemid=240.ht 

ml 

9 National Performance Plan http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?pageid=11579 

LSSIP Year 2014 United Kingdom 

Released Issue

APPROVAL SHEET 

The following authority has approved the present issue of the LSSIP document and their signature 

confirms the correctness of the reported information and reflects their commitment to implement the 

actions laid down in the European Single Sky ImPlementation (ESSIP). 

A representative of the national regulatory authority has signed on behalf of all the involved contributory 

stakeholders. This arrangement between the signatory authority and the national stakeholders was 

decided at State level. 

Each of the involved stakeholders has provided written confirmation (via e-mail) to the signatory authority 

of the correctness of the information provided. 

Stakeholder / 

Organisation 

Name 

Position 

Date and 

signature 

UK 

Civil Aviation 

Authority 

Phil Roberts 

Head of 

Airspace, Air 

Traffic 

Management 

and Aerodromes 

(AAA) (Safety 

and Airspace 

Regulation 

Group (SARG)) 

7 May 2015 


Released Issue

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1 

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 8 

Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment ................................................................................................... 9 

1.1 Geographical Scope ................................................................................................................. 9 

1.1.1 International Membership ..................................................................................................... 9 

1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s) ................................................................................ 9 

1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation .......................................................................... 10 

1.2 National Stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 11 

1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s) ................................................................................................................ 12 

1.2.2 ANSP .................................................................................................................................. 16 

1.2.3 Airports ............................................................................................................................... 18 

1.2.4 Military Authorities .............................................................................................................. 19 

Chapter 2 - Traffic and Capacity ............................................................................................................ 22 

2.1 Evolution of traffic in the United Kingdom .............................................................................. 22 

2.2 LONDON ENROUTE ACC ..................................................................................................... 23 

2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2010-2019 ................................................................... 23 

2.2.2 Summer 2014 performance ............................................................................................... 23 

2.2.3 Planning Period 2015-2019 - Summer ............................................................................... 24 

2.3 LONDON TERMINAL CONTROL (TC).................................................................................. 26 



2.3.3 Planning Period 2014-2018/19 – Summer ......................................................................... 27 

2.4 PRESTWICK ACC ................................................................................................................. 29 



2.4.3 Planning Period 2015-2019 – Summer .............................................................................. 30 

Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations ........................................................................................ 32 

Chapter 4 - National Projects ................................................................................................................. 34 

4.1 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS)............................................................................................. 38 

4.2 iTEC – interoperability Through European Collaboration - European Flight Data Processing40 

4.3 NERL Roadmap ..................................................................................................................... 40 

4.4 London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) and Northern Terminal Control Area 

(NTCA) Projects ................................................................................................................................. 41 

4.5 Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) .................................................................. 41 

4.6 Space Planes ......................................................................................................................... 42 

4.7 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)/Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) .................. 42 

Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination ....................................................................................................... 43 

5.1 FAB Co-ordination .................................................................................................................. 43 

5.2 FAB Projects .......................................................................................................................... 44 

5.3 Regional cooperation ............................................................................................................. 47 

Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation ........................................................................................ 49 

6.1 State ESSIP Objectives ......................................................................................................... 50 

6.2 Airport-related ESSIP Objectives ........................................................................................... 63 

6.2.1 Birmingham Airport ............................................................................................................ 63 

6.2.2 Manchester Airport ............................................................................................................. 64 

6.2.3 Bristol Airport ...................................................................................................................... 66 

6.2.4 London-Luton Airport ......................................................................................................... 67 

6.2.5 London-Gatwick Airport ...................................................................................................... 68 

6.2.6 London-City Airport ............................................................................................................ 70 

6.2.7 London-Heathrow Airport ................................................................................................... 71 

6.2.8 Newcastle Airport ............................................................................................................... 72 

6.2.9 Nottingham East Midlands Airport ..................................................................................... 73 

6.2.10 Glasgow Airport .................................................................................................................. 74 

6.2.11 Edinburgh Airport ............................................................................................................... 75 

6.2.12 London-Stansted Airport .................................................................................................... 77 

6.3 Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress ............................................ 79 


Released Issue

Annex A – Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process ........................................................................... 80 

Annex B – National Stakeholders Organisation Charts ......................................................................... 82 

Annex C – Glossary of Abbreviations .................................................................................................... 83 


Released Issue

Executive Summary 

National ATM Context 

The United Kingdom remains fully committed to and engaged with the European Commission, the 

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and Eurocontrol in the development of Single European Sky 

(SES) and EASA implementing regulations. This does place a significant resource demand on the UK 

Department for Transport and the UK Civil Aviation Authority, in particular with regard to the ongoing 

development of SES II+, revisions to the SES Performance and Common Charging regulations, 

Standardised European Rules of the Air, Functional Airspace Blocks requirements, Centralised Services 

and the Pilot Common Projects in support of the Air Traffic Management (ATM) Master Plan and SES 

ATM Research (SESAR). 

Traffic and Capacity 

During summer 2014 (May-October), the UK experienced a 2.2% traffic increase compared to the same 

period in 2013. The average summer en-route delay per flight at London Area Control was 0.07 minutes 

per flight; remained at zero minutes for London Terminal Control and Scottish Area Control. Overall 

capacity increase over the period is based upon a number of improvements and activities including 

improved ATFCM including STAM, and a more flexible use of staff. Capacity gains in London Terminal 

Control over the future period will come from a continuation of current improved practices and the London 

Airspace Management Programme (LAMP). Capacity increases in Scottish Area Control will derive from 

traffic and sector management improvements and FRA activities. 

ESSIP Objective Implementation 

1) Any problem in completing objectives due for 2012-2014 

AOP04.1. Manchester (ASP and APO SLoAs) are now reporting as ‘Late’, rather than Not Applicable. 

They will be developing a project plan early 2015 for installation and deployment by Dec 2016. 

London Heathrow (APO SLoAs) are still reporting ‘Late’, the intention is to install transponders to all 

vehicles that have a legitimate reason to enter the runway during the current 5 year regulatory period, and 

completion is anticipated Dec 2018. 

Edinburgh (ASP and APO SLoAs) had previously reported as being ‘Completed’, this has now been 

revised to Late. Edinburgh is examining the business benefit of investing in vehicle transponders in order 

to achieve full A-SMGCS, Level 1 and a decision on this will be made during 2015 with completion 

anticipated Dec 2015. 

No changed from the previous LSSIP. London Gatwick and London Stansted have reported as 

‘Completed’. Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, London City, London Luton and Newcastle have 

reported as ‘Not Applicable’ and are deemed outside the Applicability Area. 

COM10. This Objective is reported as ‘Late’ this cycle with completion anticipated early 2015. There is 

only one SLoA outstanding to enhance AMHS capability. Project L4015 will enable testing with the IAA in order 

to establish appropriate connectivity across the FAB and will enable testing with the IAA in order to establish 

appropriate connectivity across the FAB. 

LSSIP Year 2014 United Kingdom 1 Released Issue

ENV01. Only Glasgow (APO SLoAs) of the UK airports within the applicability area remains as 

outstanding with a progress report of ‘Late’. During 2014 Glasgow conducted trials to improve CDA and 

CCD performance and continues to work closely with their ANSP NATS to understand how the airport 

can improve. Glasgow has some unique terrain on the approach to Runway 23 which makes it more 

difficult for aircraft to complete a CDA therefore NATS works with the airlines to understand the best CDA 

profile achievable. Glasgow actively promotes CDOs through their Flight Safety Committee and will be 

working collaboratively with NATS to ensure that NATS can improve upon the number of CDOs being 

performed. Completion is anticipated Dec 2015. 

London City remains as ‘Not Applicable’ and are outside the Applicability Area. 

All other UK Airports within the Applicability have already reported as ‘Completed’. 

FCM01 and FCM03. Both of these Objectives have been reported as ‘Late’. The majority of the 

outstanding elements of these two Objectives are planned as part of the NATS Strategy with full 

implementation expected circa 2020. 

ITY-ADQ. Whilst this has been reported as Late, the CAA has developed policy and guidance to facilitate 

compliance to the ADQ regulation and anticipates that completion will be reached in line with the due date 

for implementation of data requirements June 2017. 

ITY-COTR. Whilst there has been significant progress made during this cycle with the Completion of 

ASP08 and ASP09 Implementation of ‘Logon Forward’ and ‘Next Authority Notified’ processes, this 

Objective will still be reported as ‘Late’ with an estimated implementation date of March 2015. 

NAV03. Whilst this is being reported as ‘Late’, Jan 2020; there have been substantial achievements 

made during 2014; as well as numerous airspace trials and major projects planned for the next few years. 

Full details contained within Part 6 of this Report. 

2) Plans for completing objectives due for 2015 and 2016 

AOM19. No change to the overall status of this Objective. ASP04: The ASM/ATFCM rolling process has 

been enabled. LARA 2.2 deployment will enable Smart Airspace planning. There is a UK/Ireland FAB 

agreement in place for the UK to provide ‘lead AMC’ service and is anticipated to be ‘Complete’ on time 

Dec 2016. 

AOP05. London Heathrow, Manchester, Edinburgh and London Stansted are all anticipating 

Completion during 2015. 

Birmingham is now reporting as ‘Late’, with anticipated completion Dec 2016; the airport is expecting 

board approval to restart their programme in Q1-2015, with completion early 2016. 

London Luton remain as reporting ‘Late’, with anticipated completion Late 2016; both the airport and 

their ANSP (NATS) are currently reviewing certain elements of CDM to enable Completion late 2016. 

No change for Bristol, Glasgow, London City and Newcastle who are all still reporting as ‘Not 

Applicable’ and are deemed outside the Applicability Area. 

See item 3 for London Gatwick. 

ATC02.5 and ATC02.7. No change this cycle; both Objectives are still reported as ‘Late’. NATS intends 

to introduce both Objectives across both its centres by late 2017. MIL SLoAs remain as Completed for 

ATC02.7. 

ATC12. Remains as ‘Partly Completed’. Fully automated conflict detection and conformance monitoring 

will be provided across all NERL centres through the iTEC Programme between 2016 and 2020. 


ATC16. Completion anticipated for Dec 2015. Aircraft certification will follow requirements contained 

within EO-OPS 1. NATS supports the introduction of ACAS II V7.1 as an improvement to the collision 

avoidance environment, and all procedures and training managers have been briefed. Whilst the UK MoD 

provides guidance and training for its controllers in ACAS, the specifics of TCAS 7.1 are not currently 

captured; a training plan has been instigated to meet this objective by mid-2015. 

ENV02. Bristol, Edinburgh, London City, London Gatwick and London Luton are all still on target to 

Compete within the agreed timescale. 

There has been no change at Glasgow who are still reporting as ‘Not Applicable’ but remain within the 

Applicability Area. Glasgow is committed to reducing environmental impacts through its Sustainability 

Strategy. NATS, with the airport operator and airlines work closely in delivering improvements in 

operational efficiency. Work is underway to formulate an environmental action plan targeting areas such 

as engine ground running, Fixed Electrical Ground Power (FEGP) and single-engine taxi. It is hoped that 

during 2015, significant achievements can be made for Glasgow to remain within the applicability area. 

Birmingham, London Stansted, Manchester and Newcastle have all previously reported as 

‘Completed’. 

See item 3 for London Heathrow. 

FCM05. This Objective remains on target for completion by Dec 2016. Strategic investment planning for 

some aspects of this objective have been completed by NATS, but they recognise that there is a gap in 

their capabilities which are being reviewed under their on-going long term investment plans. Dialogue is 

on-going between NATS and the IAA with a view to approval of a LARA connection with UK in the form of 

the IAA LARA being connected to the Swanwick server. The Military, NATS and the CAA are currently in 

dialogue to establish how to progress the introduction of ASM tools beyond the AMC. 

NAV10. Remains as ‘Partly Completed’, and is on schedule for completion by Dec 2016. During 2014 

Bristol and Exeter Airports introduced LNAV/VNAV and LPV procedures. 

There are a significant number of procedures covered by the EC ACCEPTA funding, including those to 

introduce SBAS at remote Scottish Islands, which are nearing completion with designs now complete and 

validation and safety case approval pending. These procedures should be published in 2015. 

Procedures at Belfast/Aldergrove and Southampton are in a similar position. 

At the end of May 2014, the CAA published CAP 1122, 'Application for Instrument Approach Procedures 

to Aerodromes without an Instrument Runway and/or Approach Control'. This policy and guidance is part 

of a risk based review of our regulations, designed to regularise a number of extant -discrete- procedures. 

The policy has the potential to extend the application of APV to aerodromes previously not served by 

instrument approach procedures and may give access to smaller aerodromes serving both the General 

Aviation and Business Aviation communities. A trial procedure and safety case is being developed for 

Wycombe Air Park/Booker in order to test the guidance through a real project. 

Full details contained within Part 6 of this Report. 

3) Notable changes since the previous cycle 

AOP04.2. Edinburgh and London Heathrow have now amended their progress from ‘Completed’ to 

‘Partly Completed’ and ‘Late’ respectively due to the fact that completion of AOP04.1 is a pre-requisite to 

AOP04.2. 

Manchester (ASP and APO SLoAs) are now reporting as ‘Planned’, rather than Not Applicable. They will 

be developing a project plan early 2015 for Level 1 installation and deployment by Dec 2016 and Level 2 

is anticipated to be operational by Dec 2017. 

No change this cycle for the other UK airports: London Gatwick and London Stansted are ‘Completed’ 

and the remaining six airports (Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, London City, London Luton and 

Newcastle) have reported as ‘Not Applicable’ and are deemed outside the Applicability Area. 

AOP05. London Gatwick has reported as ‘Completed’ during 2014. 


COM09. ‘Completed’. NATS has installed protocol conversion boxes to meet this requirement as the 

planned implementation of iTEC would not have met the required timescales. Even though one of the 

ANSP partners has not yet achieved the capability requirements, NATS has the capability whenever they 

are ready so this is considered as complete. 

ENV02. London Heathrow has reported as ‘Completed’ during 2014. 

INF07 is a new Objective this cycle and is ‘Planned’ for Completion by May 2018. The UK is working 

towards developing a joint and integrated Civil/Military approach for the implementation of eTOD within the State. 

ITY-ACID. is a new Objective this cycle and is ‘Planned’ for Completion by Dec 2018. Whilst the NERL 

Surveillance Data Processing systems are all capable of processing downlink aircraft identification, Mode S 

correlation capability is not anticipated until the introduction of the new iTEC FDP. 

ITY-AGVCS2. Whilst this Objective is still on schedule, there has been a delay to REG02, part 2, the 25% 

conversion target, from the original anticipated date of Dec 2014 to a new date of March/April 2015; which is due to 

aircraft equipage issues and poor response from licensees. 

ITY-FMTP. ‘Completed’ NATS has long met this requirement for all but one partner ANSP, who are still 

not yet able to handle FMTP IPv6. This has been mitigated to date by the specific Bi-Lateral agreement 

that NATS have signed with them and as required by Transition Amendment Regulation (EU) No 

283/2011. 

ITY-SPI. Remains as ‘Partly Completed’, but there has been significant progress made during this cycle 

with the REG and ASP SLoAs reported as Completed. However, three of the four Military SLoAs are still 

being progressed with the overall Completion date anticipated Jan 2019 (still within the date required). 

Any Objectives not covered by the descriptions above are deemed to not have changed dramatically from 

what has been reported within previous cycles and are either already Completed or are not due before 

2016. 

LSSIP 2014 - United Kingdom 

* FOC Date 

█ Planned implementation date 

(see legend at the bottom of the table) 

State-related ESSIP Objectives 

LSSIP 2014 - United Kingdom 

* FOC Date 

█ Planned implementation date 

(see legend at the bottom of the table) 

ATC12 

ATC15 

Implement automated support for conflict detection and 

conformance monitoring 

[E] * 

Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange 

mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic 

AMAN operations 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

ATC16 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 * 

ATC17 

COM09 

Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller 

during Coordination and Transfer 

Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks 

or services to the Internet Protocol (IP) 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

[IDP] * 

COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS * 

COM11 

Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in 

ATM * 

FCM01 Implement enhanced tactical flow management services [E] * 

FCM03 Implement collaborative flight planning 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

FCM04 Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures - phase 1 

[IDP] 

[E] 

FCM05 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

INF04 Implement integrated briefing * 

INF07 Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD) * 

ITY-ACID 

Aircraft identification 

ITY-ADQ 

Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical 

information 

[E] * 

ITY-AGDL Initial ATC air-ground data link services above FL-285 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

ITY-AGVCS2 

ITY-COTR 

Implement air-ground voice channel spacing requirements 

below FL195 * 

Implementation of ground-ground automated co-ordination 

processes 

[E] * 

ITY-FMTP Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) [IDP] * 

ITY-SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability * 

NAV03 Implementation of P-RNAV [E] * 

NAV10 Implement APV procedures 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

SAF10 

Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations 

caused by airspace infringements * 

SAF11 Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions * 

Airport-related ESSIP Objectives 

AOP04.2 

Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and 

Control System (A-SMGCS) Level 2 * 

AOP05 Implement Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) 

[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 

Implement Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) 

techniques for environmental improvements 

[IDP] * 

ENV02 

Implement Collaborative Environmental Management 

(CEM) at Airports * 

EGGD-Bristol 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 


Control System (A-SMGCS) Level1 

[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGGW-London - Luton 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGKK-London - Gatwick 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGLC-London - City 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGLL-London - Heathrow 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 




EGNT-Newcastle 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGNX-Nottingham East Midlands 

ENV01 



EGPF-Glasgow 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[IDP] * 

[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGPH-Edinburgh 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



EGSS-London - Stansted 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 



[E] * 




[IDP] 

[E] * 

ENV01 



[IDP] * 

ENV02 



Understanding the Table 

Objective Completed 

Objective Partly Completed 

Objective Planned 

No Plan 

Missing Data 

Not Applicable (State/Airport does not participate in this obj.) 

Late 

NOTE: The year where the coloured box is placed indicates the ‘Implementation Completion Date’ as stated in the 

ESSIP for each objective. The colour-code indicates the Local progress with respect to this date. 

E= Essential – Master Plan Reference IDP = Interim Deployment Programme 


Introduction 

The Local Single Sky ImPlementation documents (LSSIPs), as an integral part of the ESSIP/LSSIP 

mechanism, constitute a short/medium term implementation plan containing ECAC States’ actions to 

achieve the Implementation Objectives as set out by the ESSIP and to improve the performance of their 

national ATM System. The LSSIP document – Year 2014 describes the situation in the State at the end of 

December 2014. 

The LSSIP documents are structured into 6 chapters to better differentiate the Stakeholder(s) 

accountable for the information contained in each of them: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the ATM institutional arrangements within the State, the 

membership of the State in various international organizations, the organizational structure of the 

main ATM players - civil and military - and their responsibilities under the national legislation. In 

addition, an overview of the Airspace Organization and Classification, the ATC Units, the ATM 

systems operated by the main ANSP are also provided in this chapter. 

Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive picture of the situation of Air Traffic, Capacity and ATFM 

Delay per each ACC in the State. It shows the evolution of Air Traffic and Delay in the last five 

years and the forecast for the next five years. It gives also the achieved performance in terms of 

delay during the summer season period and the planned projects assumed to offer the required 

capacity which will match the foreseen traffic increase and keep the delay at the agreed 

performance level; 

Chapter 3 provides a set of recommendations extracted from the ESSIP Report which are 

relevant to the state/stakeholders concerned. The state reports how they have handled those 

recommendations and the actions taken during the year to address the concerns expressed by 

those recommendations; 

Chapter 4 provides a set of the main ATM national projects which contribute directly to the 

implementation of the ATM MP OIs and/or Enablers and ESSIP related Objectives. The 

description, timescale, progress made and expected contribution to the ATM Key Performance 

Areas are provided by the states per each project included in this chapter; 

Chapter 5 deals with the ATM Regional Coordination. It provides an overview of the FAB 

cooperation and Projects and also all other regional initiatives and Projects which are out of the 

FAB scope. The content of this chapter generally is developed and agreed in close cooperation 

between the states concerned; 

Chapter 6 contains high-level information on progress and plans of each ESSIP Objective. The 

information for each ESSIP Objective is presented in boxes giving a summary of the progress 

and plans of implementation for each Stakeholder. The conventions used are presented at the 

beginning of the section. 

Note: Chapter 6 is completed with a separate document called LSSIP Level 2. This document 

consists of a set of tables organised in line with the list of ESSIP Objectives. Each table contains 

all the actions planned by the four national stakeholders to achieve their respective Stakeholder 

Lines of Action (SLoAs) as established in the ESSIP. 


Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment 

1.1 Geographical Scope 

1.1.1 International Membership 

The UK is a Member of the following international organisations in the field of ATM: 

Organisation 

Since 

ECAC Nov/1955 

Eurocontrol Dec/1960 

European Union Jan/1973 

EASA Sep/2003 

ICAO Apr/1947 

JAA 1989 

NATO Apr/1949 

1.1.2 Geographical description of the FIR(s) 

The geographical scope of this document addresses the London and Scottish FIRs/UIRs and 

associated areas of airspace where provision of ATS has been delegated to NATS. NATS also provides 

air traffic services within the Shanwick Oceanic Control Area (OCA); provision for such services being 

delegated by ICAO to the United Kingdom as a NAT Provider State. The development of such services is 

beyond the scope of this document. 

London Area Control (LAC) Swanwick and the Prestwick Centre (PC) provide Air Traffic Services (ATS) 

in en-route airspace to GAT at and above FL245 within the London and Scottish Upper Information 

Regions (UIR). 

LAC, London Terminal Control (LTC) and PC provide ATS to GAT in both en-route and TMA airspace 

below FL245 within the London and Scottish Flight Information Regions (FIR); the airspace being 

allocated according to operational requirements. 

The London and Scottish FIR/UIRs are surrounded by the FIR/UIRs of 7 States, namely France (Reims, 

Paris, Brest ACCs), Ireland (Shannon ACC), Iceland (Reykjavik ACC), Norway (Stavanger ACC), 

Denmark (Copenhagen ACC), The Netherlands (Amsterdam ACC) and Belgium (Brussels ACC). 

Through airspace delegated from The Netherlands and Belgium to Eurocontrol, the London UIR also 

interfaces with the Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC). 

PC also interfaces with the NAT (North Atlantic) ATS providers of Shanwick OCA and Reykjavik OCA. 

The provision of military area radar services and ATS to OAT in the London and Scottish FIR/UIR is the 

responsibility of RAF (Unit) Swanwick as is the provision of ATS, by arrangement and agreement, to offroute 

GAT within appropriate surveillance coverage and Operational Areas of Responsibility (AoR) being 

designated as appropriate. If the RAF (Unit) Swanwick is for any reason unable to provide a service, 

NATS retains responsibility for the provision of an ATS. Other ATS providers may also provide an 

appropriate ATS within their own AoR. 


1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation 

The following classification of airspace is applied in the UK. 

Flight Level 

UK 

Upper Limit 660 

195 – 660 C 

SFC – 195 

G 

Type of Airspace Structures and Classifications 

Major TMA A C D 

Minor TMA 

E 

CTA A C D 

AWY A C D E 

CTR 

D 


1.2 National Stakeholders 

The main National Stakeholders involved in ATM in the UK, which contribute to the compilation of this 

document, are the following: 

 

 

 

 

 

UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) - National Supervisory Authority and Competent Authority 

National Air Traffic Services (NATS) 

Military Authorities 

Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited, Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), and Manchester Airports 

Group (MAG) 

Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the UK Department for Transport (DfT). 

Their activities are detailed in the following subchapters and their relationships are shown in the diagram 

below. 


1.2.1 Civil Regulator(s) 

1.2.1.1 General information 

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is a public corporation providing independent advice to the DfT and 

regulation of all aspects of the aviation industry. The Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) is a senior 

official of the DfT who represents the UK at the Eurocontrol Provisional Council and Permanent 

Commission. 

An overview of the regulatory bodies in the UK can be seen in the table below: 

Activity in ATM: 

Rule-making 

Safety Oversight 

Organisation 

responsible 

DfT acting on 

recommendations from 

the Civil Aviation 

Authority (CAA), and 

subject to rule-making 

processes at European 

Union level. 

Safety and Airspace 

Regulation Group 

(SARG), CAA. 

UK CAA/SARG (NSA 

as per SES 

Regulations, Competent 

Authority under EASA 

Regulations). 

CAA/SARG (AAA) 

Legal Basis 

The CAA is designated as the NSA by the UK 

Government under the Single European Sky 

(National Supervisory Authority) Regulations 2013 

(Statutory Instrument 2013 No. 2620). 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2620/contents 

/made 

Rule-making powers arise under the Civil Aviation Act 

1982, the Air Navigation Order 2009, the Rules of the 

Air Regulations 2007, and the Air Navigation General 

Regulations 2006. The Rules of the Air Regulations 

2007 are expected to be replaced with new Rules of 

the Air Regulations in March 2015 reflecting the 

implementation of the SERA Regulations on 4 

December 2014. 

The CAA is designated as the NSA by the UK 

Government under the Single European Sky 

(National Supervisory Authority) Regulations 2013 

(Statutory Instrument 2013 No. 2620). 

Under Article 246 of the UK Air Navigation Order 

2009 the CAA is: 

1. The NAA (National Aviation Authority) of the UK for 

the purposes of the Basic EASA Regulation. 

2. The competent authority of the UK for the 

purposes of the EASA Aircraft Certification 

Regulation. 


purposes of the EASA Aircrew Regulation. 

4. The competent authority for the UK for the 

purposes of the EASA Continuing Airworthiness 

Regulation. 


purposes of the EASA Air Operations Regulation, 

except that the Secretary of State is the competent 

authority of the UK for the purposes of Subpart 

RAMP of Part-ARO. 


purposes of the EASA Aerodromes Regulation. 


purposes of the Standardised European Rules of the 

Air Regulation. 


purposes of EUOPS. 

9. The NSA and the competent authority of the UK for 

the purposes of Articles 4 and 27 of the Air Traffic 

Controllers’ Licensing Regulation. 


Enforcement actions in case of 

non-compliance with safety 

regulatory requirements 

CAA 

Air Navigation Order 2009 for Licensing, Approvals 

and Certificates 

SES and EASA legislation for Certifications and 

Designations (under the SES Service Provision, 

EASA BR, Common Requirements and Safety 

Oversight Regulations (under EASA Regulations 

1034/2011 and 1035/2011); ATFM under the SES 

ATFM Regulation; and Interoperability under the 

high-level SES Interoperability Regulation and 

Implementing Rules made under it. 

Airspace 

Economic 

DfT acting on 

recommendations from 

the CAA. 

CAA SARG. 

DfT in the light of advice 

from the CAA /UK CAA 

Markets and 

Competition Group 

(MCG) 

Criminal sanctions for breaches of: 

(1) SES requirements under the Air Navigation 

(Single European Sky) (Penalties) Order 

2013 (Statutory Instrument 2013 No.2874); 

and 

EASA requirements under the Air Navigation Order 

2009 Articles 241(5) and (8) and Schedule 13 Parts 

A, B, Cc and D. 

Both UK and European level regulations. 


Environment DfT/UK CAA. Both UK and European level regulations. 

Security 

Accident investigation 

DfT Transec/UK CAA 

(AAA deals with security 

aspects of the EASA 

Common Requirements 

Regulations for 

ANSPs). The 

compliance monitoring 

and oversight of 

aviation security 

generally is, as at 

February 2014, in the 

process of transferring 

from DfT to CAA. 

Air Accidents 

Investigation Branch 

(AAIB) 


The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is an 

independent part of the DfT and is not part of the 

CAA. Its purpose is to improve aviation safety by 

determining the causes of accidents and serious 

incidents and making Safety Recommendations to 

prevent accidents in the future. 

Civil investigations into combined military and civil 

accidents are conducted in accordance with 

Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 on the investigation 

and prevention of accidents and incidents in civil 

aviation, the Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air 

Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996 

No. 2798) and the (Armed Forces (Service Inquiry) 

Regulations 2008 (SI 2008 No 1651). The 

investigations will be carried out in parallel by 

respective accident investigation organisations of the 

Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) and Military 

Air Accidents Branch (MAAIB). Each organisation will 

provide a Liaison Officer to assist in the process and 

ensure factual data is shared. 


(*) Commission Regulation (EC) 1034/2011. - In line with ICAO Annex 11, Section 2.27, Regulation EC 1034/2011 

requires the monitoring and assessment of the levels of safety achieved against the tolerable levels of safety 

determined for specific airspace blocks. However, those tolerable levels of safety still need to be fully established at 

Community level and are expected to be taken into consideration in the finalisation of EASA’s Opinion No 03/2014 on 

“requirements for service providers and the oversight thereof” – an implementing rule expected to be adopted in June 

2015. 

The UK Secretary of State for Transport has given the CAA Directions – The Civil Aviation Authority 

(Chicago Convention) Directions 2007 - to ensure that the UK discharges its obligations under the 

Convention and after consultation with the CAA. The CAA must (inter alia) ensure that when exercising 

its statutory functions, it acts consistently with the obligations placed on the UK under the Convention; it 

must, in relation to Convention Annexes and PANS, consider whether it is necessary to amend UK 

legislation to ensure appropriate implementation of an ICAO provision; and where implementation of an 

ICAO provision is an EC responsibility, the CAA must assist in the development of the EC measure, 

where appropriate implement in the UK any part of an ICAO provision excluded from the EC measures, 

and assist the EC in determining whether any Difference should be notified to ICAO. 

National ATM Safety Minima are not defined in the UK. However, the CAA’s SARG is engaged in the 

EASA Safety Assessment Task Force to develop related EASA regulations; see EASA Opinion 03/2014. 

The UK CAA has a Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme (under Article 226 of the Air Navigation 

Order 2009), whereby those involved in aviation safety are required to report any hazardous or potentially 

hazardous incidents or defects, with information and guidance in CAP382 

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP382.PDF. 

This will be aligned with EC Regulation 376/2014 on the reporting, analysis and follow up of occurrences 

in civil aviation, the list classifying occurrences to be developed under Article 4(5) thereof and the 

Common Risk Classification scheme to be developed under Article 7(5) by 15 May 2017. 

The CAA receives reports on air traffic control services, navigation and communications equipment, 

airfield facilities and ground occurrences. These reports include, for example, loss of standard separation, 

wake vortex encounters, runway incursions and ground collisions. Each event is recorded on a database 

and coded in order to aid further analysis of trends. The database is used to produce high-level safety 

performance indicators for ATM-related safety occurrences. Safety data is collated and reported to 

Eurocontrol on a six-monthly basis (March and September) for the Annual Safety Report, in accordance 

with Regulations (EU) 996/2010, (EU) 1035/2011 and “national authority” data provision requirements 

under Annex IV of the SES Performance Regulation. For the RP2 period from 1 January 2015, the UK 

and Irish FAB Performance Plan will be proposing not just a FAB just culture target around training, but 

also a FAB NSA policy approach to the just culture issue, 

1.2.1.2 CAA/DGCA 

Following the Public-Private Partnership arrangements for NATS, introduced in 2001, the UK CAA has a 

wholly regulatory relationship with NATS. Indeed there is full separation in the UK between service 

provision and oversight. As the NSA, the CAA's stated aim is to be the 'the most competent and 

respected aviation regulator through an open and fair regulatory regime, and to champion the sustainable 

interests of air travellers and airspace users.' The CAA's current roles that are relevant to this document 

encompass economic regulation, safety regulation and airspace policy. However, the CAA also has an 

environmental strategic objective which is relevant to many elements of sustainable and efficient ATM. 

The function of oversight of aviation security has also transitioned from DfT (Transec) to the CAA during 

2014. 

The Markets and Competition Group (MCG) aims to secure the best sustainable outcome for users of 

air transport services by providing economic regulation and policy advice. Under powers granted in the 

Civil Aviation Act 2012 MCG is responsible for the economic licensing of airport operators meeting a 

competition test of dominance. This replaces the system under which the former Regulatory Policy 

Group (RPG) regulated three “designated” airports (Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted). MCG also 

provides policy advice to the DfT on airports and competition policy. In relation to the NATS En Route plc 

(NERL) ATS Licence, MCG has a key role to play in co-ordinating the licence management function 

across the CAA as well as applying the economic regulatory aspects of the Licence (issued under the 

Transport Act 2000). Within the licence management function, and within the enabling statute (the 

Transport Act 2000), the CAA has an overriding safety duty. 


The Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG) mission is ‘To ensure that risks to civil aviation 

safety are properly controlled’ and to support the CAA’s role ‘to provide best practice regulation and 

expert advice that are independent and enable civil aviation to best meet the needs of its users and 

society in a safe and sustainable manner’. For the purposes of this document, SARG regulates all civil 

ATS providers and UK-registered aircraft operators. SARG also provides specialist advice to the DfT. 

SARG plays a significant role in the work of the Eurocontrol Safety Regulatory Commission (SRC) and is 

instrumental in many aspects of the development of European ATM/ANS safety regulation. SARG is fully 

engaged in the implementation of SES Phase 2+ and the development of EASA ATM Regulations. 

The Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG) is responsible for planning and managing the efficient 

use of the airspace over the UK to meet the needs of all airspace users, taking into account national 

security and environmental issues. Consultation is conducted through the National Air Traffic 

Management Advisory Committee (NATMAC) and its subgroups. The overall airspace strategy is coordinated 

through the Airspace Management Steering Group (AMSG). SARG staff contribute significantly 

to a number of Eurocontrol work streams and domains related to airspace and air navigation issues, such 

as the Network Operations (NETOps) and the Agency Advisory Body (AAB). SARG staff also represents 

the UK in the Civil-Military Interface Committee (CMIC). Policy and technical advice is provided to the 

DfT. SARG and representatives from the CAA’s Policy and Programmes Team (PPT) also represent the 

UK on the Single Sky Committee and its ad-hoc working groups and in rule-making and other working 

groups within EASA. 

Annual Report published: Y CAP1193 – Annual Report and Accounts 2014 

http://lgwmsiis03/caapublications/pubs/CAP1193_Annual_Report_2014_we 

b.pdf 

http://www.caa.co.uk/ 


1.2.2 ANSP 

Name of the ANSP: 

Governance: 

NATS 

Public Private Partnership 

as of 2001 

Ownership: 

- 49% State-owned (Govt retains a 

Golden Share). 

- 51% private-owned (42% by the 

Airline Group (*), 4% by LHR Airports 

Limited and 5% by NATS employees). 

Services provided Y/N Comment 

ATC En-route Y NERL 

ATC Approach Y Provided for those UK Airports detailed in the License as London Approach 

and at specific UK Airports under contractual arrangements with the Airport 

Operator. 

ATC Aerodrome Y Provided at specific UK Airports under contractual arrangements with the 

Airport Operator. 

AIS 

Y 

CNS 

Y 

MET 

Y 

ATCO training 

Y 

Others 

Additional information: 

Provision of services in 

other State(s): 

Y 

Provides ATC Approach/Aerodrome services at Gibraltar and aerodrome 

services at 9 airports in Spain through a partnership with Ferrovial Servicios. 

(*)The Airline Group comprises: BA, Virgin Atlantic, Lufthansa, EasyJet, Thomas Cook Airlines Ltd, Thomson Airways Ltd, Monarch 

Airlines Retirement Benefit Plan Limited and USS Sherwood Limited. 

Annual Report published: Y http://www.nats.aero/news/annual-report-accounts-2014/ 

This is the annual report covering yearly activities of the ANSP. 

www.nats.co.uk 

1.2.2.1 ATC system in use 

According to European Regulation 552/2004 on the Interoperability of the European Air Traffic 

Management Network, Chapter 3 defines the ATS Systems (systems and procedures for air traffic 

services, in particular flight data processing systems, surveillance data processing systems and humanmachine 

interface systems). 

NATS operates different ATS systems for each of its centres and at the airports at which it has 

contractual arrangements; the ATS systems in use at the airports include some common components and 

some differences. 

All of our ATS Systems and their complex sub-systems are in a process of improvement; most systems 

are developed in close cooperation with a variety of different manufacturing companies whilst for others 

NATS is the manufacturer itself. Regardless of the source, NATS Engineering and the respective 

Operations and Services teams are always closely involved in the improvement processes of the NATS 

ATS systems. 

Since the last update, NATS has commenced a major strategic programme aimed at Deploying SESAR. 

This programme aims to deploy a new technology platform by 2018 and deploy new SESAR aligned 

methods of working across the operation by 2020. 


Whilst NATS recognises that plans remain subject to change as operational and business conditions 

alter, an overview of the current plans is as follows: 

EATMN System 

1. Systems and procedures for airspace 

management. 

2. Systems and procedures for air traffic 

flow management. 

3. Systems and procedures for air traffic 

services, in particular flight data processing, 

surveillance data processing and humanmachine 

interface systems. 

4. Communications systems and procedures 

for ground-to-ground, air-to-ground and airto-air 

communications. 

Manufacturer 

NATS with additional Vendor 

Major upgrade 1 Year 

(Recent and Planned)* 

No recent Major upgrade. 

Planned upgrade on-going 2014 to 

2017. 

Major update 2018 to 2020. 

Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2014. 

Planned upgrade 2015 to 2017. 

Multiple External Vendors 

Major upgrade 2013 with further 

changes planned for the period 2016 

to 2019. 



2018. 

5. Navigation systems and procedures. Multiple External Vendors No recent Major upgrade. 


2018. 

6. Surveillance systems and procedures. Multiple External Vendors Major upgrade 2013. 


7. Systems and procedures for aeronautical 

information services. 

8. Systems and procedures for the use of 

meteorological information. 

Multiple External Vendors 

No recent Major upgrade. 




* Note that all dates are provisional and remain subject to alteration depending upon business and operational 

requirements. 

1.2.2.2 ATC Units 

The following Table lists the ACCs, and associated FIRs/UIRs, in the UK airspace, which are of concern 

to this LSSIP. 

ATC Unit Number of sectors Associated FIR(s) Remarks 

En-route TMA 

NATS Swanwick 

(London Area 

Control) 

30 N/A London FIR/UIR 

NATS Swanwick 

(London 

Terminal Control) 

NATS Prestwick 

(PC) 

N/A 21 London FIR 

20 16 Scottish and London 

FIR/UIR 

Note: The number of sectors, as indicated in this Table, is the total number of extant sectors that exist at 

each unit. Sectors may be operated in combined mode where appropriate. 

1 

Upgrade is defined as any modification that changes the operational characteristics of the system (SES Framework Regulation 

549/2004, Article 2 (40)) 


1.2.3 Airports 

1.2.3.1 General information 

Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited owns and runs London Heathrow airport, Heathrow being the largest 

and busiest airport in the UK. Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited is in turn owned by FGP Topco Limited, 

a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A. 

Gatwick Airport has the world’s busiest single-use runway and is the UK’s second busiest airport. The 

airport is owned by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), an Infrastructure owning company that has its 

operational headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut. GIP is also the owner of Edinburgh (fifth busiest 

airport in the UK) and London City Airports (fifteenth busiest airport in the UK). 

Manchester Airports Group (MAG) is now the country’s largest UK owned airport operator. Manchester 

Airport, which is the UK's third busiest airport is wholly owned by the ten local authorities of Greater 

Manchester and is operated by The Manchester Airports Group MAG also operates Stansted airport 

which is the fourth busiest airport in the UK. 

London Luton Airport is owned by Luton Borough Council. In 2013 it was the sixth busiest airport in the 

UK. 

Birmingham Airport is owned by seven Metropolitan Boroughs of West Midlands (49%) and the Airport 

Group Investments Ltd (approx 48%) and the Employees through a share scheme (for the remainder). It 

is currently the seventh busiest airport in the UK. 

Glasgow Airport is now owned and operated by AGS Airports Limited. AGS Airports is a partnership 

between Ferrovial and Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) established in 2014 to invest in 

Aberdeen, Glasgow and Southampton airports. It is currently the eighth busiest airport in the UK. 

Bristol Airport is owned by the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. It is currently the ninth busiest airport in 

the UK. 

Newcastle Airport is owned by seven local authorities (51%) and AMP Capital (49%), n Australian based 

investment Management Company. In 2013 it was the tenth busiest airport in the UK. 

Other airports within the UK are operated by private companies or consortia of companies, while only a 

very limited number of airports remain in local government ownership. 

1.2.3.2 Airport(s) covered by the LSSIP 

Airports with ESSIP objective Active ESSIP objectives applicable to the airports 2 

Code 

Airport 

AOP04.1 AOP04.2 AOP05 ENV01 ENV02 

EGBB Birmingham X X 

EGCC Manchester 

EGGD Bristol X X X 

EGGW London Luton X X 

EGKK London Gatwick 

EGLC London City X X X X 

EGLL London Heathrow 

EGNT Newcastle X X X 

EGNX 

Nottingham 

East Midlands 

X X X X 

EGPF Glasgow X X X X 

EGPH Edinburgh 

EGSS London Stansted 

Legend: 

 

Objective applicable to the airport 

X 

Objective not applicable to the airport 

2 With the exception of ESSIP objective AOP03. The applicability area of AOP03 is all ECAC aerodromes. Nonetheless, it is for the 

individual National safety authority to decide upon the strategy of implementation at aerodromes within its State. 


1.2.4 Military Authorities 

The Defence Airspace and Air Traffic Management Organisation (DAATM), Ministry of Defence (MoD) is 

the policyholder for all airspace and airspace management related issues. The Military Aviation Authority 

(MAA) has full oversight of all Defence aviation activity and undertakes the role of the single military 

regulatory authority responsible for regulating all aspects of air safety across Defence, including ATM. 

The MAA develops, promulgates and enforces a regulatory framework to promote an active safety culture 

and assure appropriate standards are being met in the delivery of military air safety through an 

independent end-to-end assurance process. The aim is to enhance the delivery of operational capability 

through continual improvement in military air safety, culture and practice. The MAA, thereby, provides 

assurance to the Secretary of State through the Permanent Under Secretary that high standards of air 

safety are maintained in the conduct of military aviation. Headquarters Air Command (HQ AIR) is the HQ 

responsible for the provision of Air Traffic Services and ATM at both Royal Air Force (RAF) Terminal 

Units (including Army bases where ATS is either provided by RAF staff or contractors) and the Military 

ATCCs. HQ Navy Command is the equivalent organisation for the Royal Navy (RN) ATC, units both 

onshore and embarked. 

The DAATM, HQ AIR and HQ Navy liaise directly with the relevant operational departments at NATS 

ACCs and Airports, and other airports as required. Direct liaison with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) 

Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG), the UK Airspace Regulator, is maintained to progress 

service provision issues. The CAA SARG is also staffed in part by a number of RAF and RN military 

officers on secondment to the CAA. These personnel are employed in a number of Airspace Regulatory 

and Airspace Utilisation roles and provide essential support to the CAA, thus maintaining a joint ethos. A 

close working relationship has been established over the years between civil and military controllers and 

civil and military ATM staff, which is essentially a result of the UK’s Joint & Integrated (J&I) approach to 

the provision of ATS. 

Airspace is shared in the UK; however, NATS mainly provides ATS to aircraft within en-route CAS. The 

Military ATCC is collocated within the Swanwick Civil ACC and provides ATS to aircraft in the UK FIRs 

and UIRs, including radar-crossing services through CAS for military and civilian aircraft. Military 

controllers at the ACC also provide Area Radar services to aircraft from ground level to unlimited altitude 

within radar cover. Terminal ATM is provided by military personnel at RAF and RN airfields, and by 

civilian personnel at airfields where ATS are contracted to civilian companies. Aircraft operators are 

governed by regulations issued by the MAA. Military Terminal ATC units normally provide ATS to aircraft 

arriving at, and departing from their units. Additionally, at specified ATS units, a Lower Airspace Radar 

Service can also be provided up to FL 95, normally within 40nms from the unit. Military controllers do not 

normally provide ATS to aircraft in Terminal Control Airspace, with the exception of RAF Northolt ATC, 

nor normally in airspace within which ATS is delegated to adjacent States. 

ATS provided by Air Defence Units are specifically for Air Defence Training and operational defence of 

the Homeland. Air Defence units are also regulated by HQ AIR and HQ Navy, adhering to MoD policy. 

A J&I ATS are provided by civil and military Air Navigation Service Providers, under policy overseen by 

the Joint Air Navigation Services Council (JANSC). The JANSC is chaired by the SARG Director, CAA 

and includes senior executives from the en-route ANSPs and the MoD. 

The regulatory, service provision and user roles in ATM are detailed overleaf. 


1.2.4.1 Regulatory role 

Regulatory framework and rule-making 

OAT 

OAT and provision of service for OAT governed 

by national legal provisions? 

Level of such legal provision: 

Ministerial Decree through the Defence Council. 

Authority signing such legal provision: 

Permanent Under Secretary of State for Defence. 

These provisions cover: 

Rules of the Air for OAT 

Y 

 

GAT 

Provision of service for GAT by the Military 

governed by national legal provisions? 

Level of such legal provision: 

State Law authorised through the CAA. 

Authority signing such legal provision: 

Secretary of State for Transport and Department for 

Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. 

These provisions cover: 

Organisation of military ATS for OAT Organisation of military ATS for GAT 

OAT/GAT Coordination OAT/GAT Coordination 

ATCO Training ATCO Training 

ATCO Licensing ATCO Licensing 

ANSP Certification ANSP Certification 

ANSP Supervision ANSP Supervision 

Aircrew Training ESARR applicability 

Aircrew Licensing 

Additional Information: This is published through Joint 

Service Publications, ATM Orders and other orders 

contained in the Military Regulatory Publications 

Means used to inform airspace users (other than 

military) about these provisions: 

 

Additional Information: 

Means used to inform airspace users (other than 

military) about these provisions: 

National AIP National AIP 

National Military AIP 

Eurocontrol eAIP 

Other: Flight Information Publications, Websites, 

such as the CAA and Manual of Air Traffic 

Services Part 2 

 

National Military AIP 

Eurocontrol eAIP 

Other: 

Y 

Oversight 

Military Aviation Authority 


OAT 

GAT 

National Supervisory Authority (as per SES reg. 

550/2004) for GAT services provided by the military: 

The Civil Aviation Authority. 



1.2.4.2 Service Provision role 

OAT 

Services Provided: 

Services Provided: Military do not participate, civil 

provide: 

En-Route Provided by Mil and Civil En-Route 

Approach/TMA Provided by Mil and Civil Approach/TMA 

Airfield/TWR/GND Provided by Mil and Civil Airfield/TWR/GND 

GAT 

AIS Provided by Mil and Civil AIS 

MET Provided by Civil MET 

SAR Provided by Mil and Civil SAR 

TSA/TRA monitoring FIS 

Other: 

Distress and Diversion Cell 


VHF and UHF alerting and 

fixing Mil only capability 


Other: 

Military ANSP providing GAT 

services SES certified? 

Certificate issued by: 

n/a If YES, since: Duration of the 

Certificate: 

Additional Information: The UK Military ANSP, operates to an equivalent standard. 

If NO, is this fact reported to the EC in 

accordance with SES regulations? 

n/a 

1.2.4.3 User role 

IFR inside controlled airspace, Military aircraft 

can fly? 

OAT only GAT only Both OAT and GAT 

If Military fly OAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify the available options: 

Free Routing Within specific corridors only 

Within the regular (GAT) national route network Under radar control 

Within a special OAT route system 

If Military fly GAT-IFR inside controlled airspace, specify existing special arrangements: 

Exemption from flow and capacity (ATFCM) measures 

No special arrangements Exemption from Route Charges 

Provision of ATC in UHF 

CNS exemptions: RVSM 8.33 Mode S ACAS 

Others: 

There are military CNS exemptions that allow certain non-equipped military aircraft to 

access controlled airspace. UHF can be provided with notification and agreement. 

1.2.4.4 Flexible Use of Airspace (FUA) 

Military in the UK applies FUA requirements as specified in the Regulation No 2150/2005: 

FUA Level 1 implemented: 



Y 

Y 

Y 

Y 


Chapter 2 - Traffic and Capacity 

2.1 Evolution of traffic in the United Kingdom 

UK - Annual IFR Movements 

3.000.000 

UK - Distribution (Ref. year 2013) 

2.500.000 

2.000.000 

Domestic 

flights 17% 

IFR flights 

1.500.000 

1.000.000 

IFR movements - Actuals 

IFR movements - Baseline forecast 

International 

Dep/Arr 

67% 

Overflights 

16% 

500.000 

IFR movements - High forecast 

IFR movements - Low forecast 

A = Actual 

F = Forecast 

0 

2010 A 2011 A 2012 A 2013 A 2014 F 2015 F 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F 2020 F 

EUROCONTROL Seven-Year Forecast (September 2014) 

IFR flights yearly growth 2011 A 2012 A 2013 A 2014 F 2015 F 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F 2020 F 

H 1.8% 2.9% 3.2% 2.6% 2.8% 2.8% 2.4% 

UK 

B 2.8% -1.4% 0.6% 1.6% 1.9% 2.0% 1.6% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9% 

L 1.4% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 

ESRA08 B 3.1% -2.4% -1.1% 1.8% 2.4% 2.8% 2.3% 2.3% 2.8% 3.1% 

2014 

Traffic in the UK increased by 2.2 % during Summer 2014 (May to October inclusive), when compared to 

the same period during 2013. 

2015-2019 

The STATFOR medium-term forecast (MTF) predicts an average annual traffic growth between 0.7% and 

2.9% during the planning cycle, with an average baseline growth of 1.8%. 


2.2 LONDON ENROUTE ACC 

2.2.1 Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 2010-2019 

EGTTACC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 

IFR flights (Daily Average) 

7000 

6000 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

Enroute Delay (minutes per flight) 

1000 

0.2 

0.1 

0 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

Peak Day Traffic 6014 6180 6028 6040 6206 

Summer Traffic 5408 5499 5426 5534 5655 

Yearly Traffic 4800 4971 4894 4927 5033 

Summer Traffic Forecast 5768 5900 6009 6126 6264 

High Traffic Forecast - Summer 5835 6042 6218 6403 6596 

Low Traffic Forecast - Summer 5691 5741 5785 5841 5907 

Summer enroute delay (all causes) 0.15 0.25 0.09 0.12 0.07 

Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * 0.10 0.18 0.07 0.14 0.05 

0.0 

2.2.2 Summer 2014 performance 

Traffic Evolution 

2014 Capacity Baseline 

En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer 

Ref value 

Actual 

Capacity 

gap 

+2.2 % 410 (+3%) 0.24 0.07 No 

Average enroute delay per flight decreased from 0.12 minutes per flight in Summer 2013 to 0.07 minutes per flight in Summer 

2014 (May to October inclusive). 

Capacity Plan: 4% Achieved Comments 

Traffic Management Improvements 

Yes 

Adaptation of sector configurations to demand 

Yes 

Flexible use of existing staff (including cross-sector training) more 

closely related to sector demand 

Yes 

Improved ATFCM, including STAM 

Yes 

Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between 

sectors / ANSPs 

Yes 

Further benefits from the implementation of iFACTS (Nov 2011) Yes 

FAB dynamic sectorisation Trials 

CPDLC 

UK / Ireland FAB initiatives 

Developing Queue Management programme 

On-going recruitment to maintain agreed business service levels 

Maximum configuration: 23 sectors 

Summer 2014 performance assessment 

The capacity of 410 was calculated with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak hour demand was 410, the peak 3 

hour demand was 371. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 


2.2.3 Planning Period 2015-2019 - Summer 

The planning focuses on the Summer season to reflect the most demanding period of the year from a 

capacity perspective. This approach ensures consistency with the previous planning cycles. 

ACC 

EGTTCTA 

Annual 

Summer 

2014 

baseline 

EGTT 410 

En-route ATFM delay breakdown - Reference Values 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

0.19 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.18 

0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 

Capacity Profiles 

Profiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year) 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

H 410 0% 411 0% 415 1% 421 1% 430 2% 

Ref. 410 0% 411 0% 412 0% 414 0% 420 1% 

L 410 0% 410 0% 410 0% 410 0% 410 0% 

Open 410 0% 411 0% 412 0% 414 0% 420 1% 

C/R 410 0% 411 0% 412 0% 414 0% 420 1% 

Free Route Airspace 

Airspace Management 

Advanced FUA 

Airport & TMA Network 

Integration 

Cooperative Traffic 

Management 

Airspace 

Procedures 

Staffing 

Technical 

Capacity Plan 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

TMA transition 

sectors 

enhancement – 

RNP 

development 



Phased Phased 

implementation implementation 

of TC Airspace of TC Airspace 

Program LAMP Program LAMP 

1A 

1B 

R-LAT 

(Nov 2015) 

CPDLC 


Common 

transition 

altitude for the 

FAB 

Phased 

implementation 

of TC Airspace 

Program LAMP 

2A 

Flexible use of existing staff (including cross-sector training) more closely related to sector 

demand 


Transition to new controller 

working positions 

iTEC 

introduction 

(Winter 17/18) 

Capacity 

Significant Events 

Complexity reduction and improved traffic presentation between sectors / ANSPs 

Rugby World 

Cup 



Athletic World 

Championship 

LAC training for 

Training for transition LAC training for 

LAMP 1B for altitude, new LAMP 2A for 

implementation controller implementation 

Winter 16/17 working Winter 18/19 

positions 

LAC training for 

LAMP 2B for 


Winter 19/20 

Max sectors 23 23 23 23 23 

Capacity increase p.a. 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 

Reference profile 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 

Additional information 

Capacity available from full iFACTS deployment will continue to be gained as traffic 

increases over successive summer seasons. 


EGTTACC - Reference capacity profile and alternative scenarios 

460 

440 

Capacity profile (movements per hour) 

420 

400 

380 

360 

340 

320 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

2015‐2019 Reference Capacity Profile 410 411 412 414 420 

Capacity Profile ‐ Shortest Routes (Open) 410 411 412 414 420 

Capacity Profile ‐ Current Routes 410 411 412 414 420 

Capacity Profile ‐ High 410 411 415 421 430 

Capacity Profile ‐ Low 410 410 410 410 410 

Capacity Baseline 398 410 

2015 ‐ 2019 Plan 418 426 426 426 435 

2015-2019 Planning Period Outlook 

No capacity issues are expected over the planning period in London ACC. 


2.3 LONDON TERMINAL CONTROL (TC) 


EGTTTC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 


5000 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 


1000 

0.2 

500 

0.1 

0 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 









0.0 


En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity 

Traffic Evolution 2014 Capacity Baseline 

Ref value 

Actual 

gap 

+2.8 % 285 (+3%) 0.14 0.02 No 

Average enroute delay per flight remained at zero minutes per flight in Summer 2014. 




Flexible use of existing staff 





Collaborative TMA developments 

TC sector improvements 


Maximum configuration: 22 (14 ENR + 8 APP) 


The ACC capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 285, 3% higher that Summer 2013. During the period June/July, 

the peak hour demand was 282, the peak 3 hour demand was 254. 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 


2.3.3 Planning Period 2014-2018/19 – Summer 



ACC 

EGTTTCTA 

Annual 

Summer 

2014 

baseline 

EGTTT 285 



Advanced FUA 


Integration 


Management 

Airspace 

Procedures 

Staffing 

Technical 

Capacity 


Max sectors 


2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 

0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 



2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

H 285 0% 286 0% 288 1% 292 1% 296 1% 

Ref. 285 0% 285 0% 286 0% 287 0% 289 1% 

L 285 0% 285 0% 285 0% 285 0% 285 0% 

Open 285 0% 285 0% 286 0% 287 0% 289 1% 

C/R 285 0% 285 0% 286 0% 287 0% 289 1% 

Capacity Plan 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

Phased 



Program LAMP 

1A 


Phased 



Program LAMP 

1B 


Common 

transition 


FAB 



Transition to 

new controller 

TBS for EGLL 

working 

positions 

iTEC 

introduction 

(Winter 17/18) 



Phased 



Program LAMP 

2A 


Rugby World 

Athletic World 

Cup 

Championship 

TC training for 

TC training for TC training for transition TC training for 

LAMP 1A to be LAMP 1B to be altitude, new LAMP 2A to be 

implemented implemented controller implemented 

Winter 15/16 Winter 16/17 working Winter 18/19 

positions 

22 

14 ENR + 8 

APP 

22 

14 ENR + 8 

APP 

22 

14 ENR + 8 

APP 

22 

14 ENR + 8 

APP 

TC training for 

LAMP 2B to be 

implemented 

Winter 19/20 

22 

14 ENR + 8 

APP 





EGTTTCTA - Reference capacity profile and alternative scenarios 

320 

300 


280 

260 

240 

220 

200 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 







2015 ‐ 2019 Plan 288 294 294 294 300 


No capacity issues are expected over the planning period in London TC. 

Implementation of LAMP project will deliver improved capacity through traffic systemisation and PBN routes over extended 

period from 2016. 


2.4 PRESTWICK ACC 


EGPXALL - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays 


3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 


500 

0.2 

0.1 

0 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 









0.0 


En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Capacity 

Traffic Evolution 2014 Capacity Baseline 

Ref value 

Actual 

gap 

-0.9 % 225 (0%) 0.26 0.03 No 

The delay per flight remained at zero in Summer 2014. 



Yes 


Yes 


Yes 


Yes 



Yes 

FAB dynamic sectorisation Trials 

CPDLC 



Maximum configuration: 26 sectors 


Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Maximum configuration: 25 sectors is 

sufficient for traffic demand following 

resectorisation 

The capacity baseline of 225 was measured with ACCESS. During the period June/July, the peak 1 hour demand was 204, 

the peak 3 hour demand was 186. 


2.4.3 Planning Period 2015-2019 – Summer 



ACC 

EGPXCTA 

Annual 

Summer 

2014 

baseline 

EGPX 225 



Advanced FUA 


Integration 


Management 

Airspace 

Procedures 

Staffing 

Technical 

Capacity 



2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

0.12 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 

0.18 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.20 



2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

H 225 0% 225 0% 226 0% 227 0% 230 1% 

Ref. 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 226 0% 

L 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 

Open 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 226 0% 

C/R 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 225 0% 226 0% 

Capacity Plan 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 

DCTs 

Phase 1 

DCTs 

Phase 2 

R-LAT 

(Nov 2015) 



CPDLC 

NTCA airspace 

development 

(Manchester 

TMA) 

Common 

transition 


FAB 



iTEC / 

Common work 

station 




FAB dynamic 

sectorisation 

Trials 

Rugby World 

Cup 

Training for 

common work 

station 

Training for 

transition 

altitude 

Max sectors 25 25 25 25 25 





EGPXACC - Reference capacity profile and alternative scenarios 

240 

230 

220 


210 

200 

190 

180 

170 

160 

150 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 







2015 ‐ 2019 Plan 227 229 231 233 235 


No capacity issues are expected over the planning period in Prestwick ACC. 


Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations 

Recommendations issued from the ESSIP Report for 2013 applicable to the United Kingdom are 

presented below along with the corrective actions taken, where applicable. 

Number Recommendation Applicable to 

REC-2013-1 (1) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of FCM01 to 

take corrective measures to reduce the implementation delays. 

DK, EE, MAS, BE, LV, MK, 

CZ, CY, NO, AM, PT, BA, 

UA, TR, UK 

State feedback: The majority of the outstanding elements of FCM01 are planned as part of the NATS Strategy 

with full implementation expected circa 2020. 

REC-2013-1 (4) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of AOP04.1 

to take corrective measures to reduce the implementation delays. 

FR (LFMN), DE (EDDM), 

FR (LFLL), FR (LFML), GR 

(LGTS), BG (LBSF), GR 

(LGAV), IT (LIMC), IT 

(LIML), IT (LIPZ), IT (LIRF), 

FR (LFBO), BE (EBBR), DE 

(EDDL), UK (EGLL), PT 

(LPPT), ES (LEPA), RO 

(LROP), ES (LEBL), PL 

(EPWA), UA (UKBB) 

State feedback: London Heathrow have declared that it is their intention to install transponders to all vehicles 

that have a legitimate reason to enter the runway during the current 5 year regulatory period; this will be 

completed by December 2018. 

Since end of 2014 all vehicles that go airside must now equip themselves with vehicle locators. 

REC-2013-1 (7) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of NAV03 to 


ES, DE, BE, CY, BG, GE, 

LV, AZ, MD, ME, MK, MT, 

HR, IT, RS, UK 

State feedback: The UK has to date introduced RNAV1 (P-RNAV) departure procedures at London Gatwick and 

Birmingham Airports and the first RNAV 1 (P-RNAV) Arrivals have now been introduced at Bristol. 

There are plans in place for the introduction of (RNAV 1 (P-RNAV)) terminal airspace procedures at Luton and 

Newcastle. Also, public consultations were conducted for airspace changes affecting Farnborough and 

Southend. Discussions are currently taking place for changes at Northern England and Scottish airports with 

trials planned for Edinburgh in 2015. 

The largest UK terminal airspace project is the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP). Phase 1a 

plans to introduce Point Merge at London City airport in 2015. In support of Phase 2 (circa 2018) a number of 

Departure Enhancement Project (DEP) trials were conducted during the period at both London Heathrow and 

Gatwick airports. The trials were designed to collect data in support of new concepts including reduced Route 

Spacing, environmental respite and Reduced Divergence Departures to increase departure rates from a single 

runway. All of these trials utilised RNAV 1 (P-RNAV). The RNP 1 departure trial at London Stansted using 

compound Radius to Fix (RF) legs continued and was extended due to limited data collection set. 

During 2014 the CAA conducted a consultation with aviation stakeholders concerning the introduction of an 

RNAV 1 mandate at the following London area airports: Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, London City, 

Southend, Farnborough and Biggin Hill. The resultant AIC (published in December 2014) requires all aircraft 

operators using SIDs, STARs and Runway Transitions into and out of the London airports to be RNAV 1 qualified 

by November 2017 and the airspace to be modified in accordance with RNAV 1 (as a minimum) by winter 2019. 

This later date is consistent with the introduction of LAMP Phase 2 which is the principle justification used for this 

regulatory intervention action. The MoD has agreed that the same conditions and timeframes will be applied to 

RAF Northolt. 

The full implementation date for NAV03 is anticipated at Jan 2020. 

REC-2013-1 

(10) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of ENV01 to 


BA (LQSA), EE (EETN), HR 

(LDZA), BE (EBBR), CZ 

(LKPR), BE (EBAW), BE 

(EBOS), BE (EBLG), IT 

(LIPZ), TR (LTBA), TR 

(LTAI), LU (ELLX), IT 

(LIRF), UK (EGPF), IT 

(LIMC), IT (LIML), NO 

(ENGM), RO (LROP) 


State feedback: During 2014 Glasgow has conducted trials to improve CDA and CCD performance and 

continues to work closely with their ANSP NATS to understand how the airport can improve. Glasgow has some 

unique terrain on the approach to Runway 23 which makes it more difficult for aircraft to complete a CDA 

therefore NATS work with the airlines to understand the best CDA profile achievable. Glasgow actively promotes 

CDOs through their Flight Safety Committee and will be working collaboratively with NATS to ensure that NATS 

can improve upon the number of CDOs being performed. Completion is anticipated Dec 2015. 

REC-2013-1 

(12) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of ITY-ADQ 

to take corrective measures to reduce the implementation delays. 

IE, AL, AT, LT, CZ, SI, PT, 

NO, NL, FR, DE, ES, UK, 

HU 

State feedback: Whilst this has been reported as Late, the CAA has developed policy and guidance to 

facilitate compliance to the ADQ regulation and anticipates that completion will be reached in line with 

the due date for implementation of data requirements June 2017. 

REC-2013-1 

(14) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of FCM03 to 


NO, UK, FR 

State feedback: The majority of the elements of this Objective is planned as part of the NATS 

Strategy with full implementation expected circa 2020. 

REC-2013-1 

(15) 

Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of ITY- 

COTR to take corrective measures to reduce the implementation 

delays. 

AT, BE, DE, DK, BA, ES, IT, 

FR, GE, MT, HR, HU, IE, 

NO, SK, UK, PT, SI 

State feedback: Aspects of this objective are covered by the current NAS Flight Data Processing System. Plans 

are in place to ensure that outstanding aspects will be achieved in due course. 

REC-2013-4 Ensure better planning reliability at local level. All States 

State feedback: UK ANSP (NATS) has taken action to align the contents of its Long Term Investment 

Plans with the ESSIP where this is practical; the impact of this will be to ensure a more consistent 

planning environment. The only exception to this is with regards to the airports at which NATS 

provides the ATS; in these areas planning is the responsibility of the airport owner with ANS inputs. 

REC-2013-5 

The ANSPs should ensure synchronised system evolution between 

neighbouring States. 

All ECAC ANSPs 

State feedback: System evolution is undertaken with consultation with neighbouring States where 

there is seen to be an operational impact or where synchronisation will be of benefit. It is recognised 

though that each ANSP operates according to its own financial and business plans. 

REC-2013-15 

The ANSPs within a FAB should coordinate their system renewal and 

capability evolution more closely in order to deliver larger scale 

performance improvements to customers. 

FAB ANSPs 

State feedback: The UK and Irish ANSPs are both fully committed to the benefits that a FAB 

partnership offers. There is regular dialogue between the ANSPs and both work closely to ascertain 

where coordinated approaches will be beneficial. 


Chapter 4 - National Projects 

Name / Code Description - Scope Schedule Status 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other 

references 

Expected Contribution to the Key Performance 

Areas * 

NATS (UK) 

Airspace 

Developments 

(1) 

Low-level airspace extensions, PBNbased 

route structures and 

reduced/revised holding arrangements 

(predominantly via linear holding 

delivered through Point Merge and 

Tromboning concepts). Enhanced 

capacity benefiting (London) Luton, 

Stansted and City airports. Includes 

extension of controlled airspace to east 

of Daventry that will be dependent upon 

FUA arrangements with the military. 

From: 2006 

To: 2020 

This investment is being 

progressed in two Phases. 

Phase 1 will deliver revised 

arrival and departure routes 

(based on Point merge 

concepts) for Gatwick and 

London City. Phase 2 will 

deploy similar for Heathrow, 

Stansted and Luton. 

ESSIP:NAV03 

OI-Steps: 

AOM-0601, 

AOM-0602 

Other: - 

Capacity: - 

Safety: These benefits are embedded in the 

London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) 

Project, see below. 

Environment: These benefits are embedded in the 



Cost-Efficiency: - 

Airspace 

Developments 

(2) 

Implement wholly revised airspace 

structure between Manchester TMA and 

Dublin to support the implementation of 

Point Merge procedures in the Dublin 

TMA and to provide better connectivity to 

the domestic route structure. 

From: 2010 

To: 2016 

Implemented. 

ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 

Capacity: These benefits are embedded in 

Northern Terminal Control Area (NTCA) Project, 

see below. 

Safety: - 

Environment: These benefits are embedded in 


see below. 

Cost-Efficiency: These benefits are embedded in 


see below. 

Airspace 

Developments 

(3) 

Implement the London Terminal Control 

programme airspace change. Envisaged 

to be 3 or 4 large-scale airspace changes 

planned through to 2020. 

From: 2012 

To: 2020 

Airspace Consultation 

(Phase 1) and Project 

Definition (Phase 2). 

ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 

Capacity: - 

Safety: These benefits are embedded in the 



Environment: These benefits are embedded in the 




Airspace 

Developments 

(5) 

Develop and implement a revised 

Manchester TMA to bring enhanced 

safety and environmental performance. 

From: 2010 

To: 2016 

Project Definition 

ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 

Capacity: These benefits are embedded in 


see below. 



London 

Airspace 

Management 

Programme 

(LAMP) 

LAMP seeks to develop the supporting 

airspace infrastructure and capacity in 

the LTMA in order to accommodate the 

increase in air transport and the ground 

based airport infrastructure 

developments, whilst also supporting 

safety management systems and 

achieving aircraft fuel efficiencies, which 

in turn provide environmental 

improvements. The main changes to be 

introduced by the programme include: 

• A predictable and systemised 

operation in which controllers rely 

on tools to monitor separation and 

trajectory conformance with 

minimal intervention, 

• Raising the Transition Altitude – 

enhancing safety and an enabler 

for wider benefits such as 

Continuous Descent Approaches 

(CDAs) and Continuous Climb 

Departures (CCDs), 

• Introducing CDAs from significantly 

higher levels than today’s 6000’ 

and improved climb profiles through 

CCDs and High Performance 

Departures (HPDs), 

• A P-RNAV route structure – 

enabling additional routes to be 

accommodated in the same volume 

of airspace, 

LAMP and 

NTCA look 

to make use 

of the 

SESAR 

development 

work and are 

in line with 

SES 

aspirations. 

The 

introduction 

of these 

changes is 

likely to be 

implemented 

through a 

phased 

approach 

between 

2015 and 

2020. 

- ESSIP:- 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other 

references 

Other: - Safety: - 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 


Areas * 

Environment: These benefits are embedded in 


see below. 

Cost-Efficiency: These benefits are embedded in 


see below. 

Capacity: - 

Safety: 10 point reduction in the SSE Index. 

Environment: 600 K Tonnes Co2. 




Northern 

Terminal 

Control 

(NTCA) 

3Di-Three 

Dimensional 

Inefficiency 

Score 

Area 

Queue Management to control 

arrival, departure flows – 

integrating airspace change with 

new ATC technologies and 

procedures to achieve efficient 

sequencing on busy runways and 

to reduce holding in the airspace. 

The NTCA project is seeking to develop 

the current airspace within and adjacent 

to the extant Manchester Terminal 

Manoeuvring Area (MTMA). This project 

will work in collaboration with LAMP and 

fundamentally follow a similar generic 

format. The project will seek to achieve 

the same overall changes, as listed 

above, and started delivering early 

deliverables during 2013, NTCA will 

continue to deliver phases in line with 

agreements on timing for Transition 

Altitude changes. Queue Management, 

however, will not feature at 

implementation but the design will be 

expected to accommodate this in the 

future. 

The flight efficiency metric, known as 3Di, 

follows several years of developmental 

work by NATS in consultation with airline 

customers and the UK’s specialist 

aviation regulator, the CAA. The 3Di 

metric will help air traffic control route 

flight paths as close to the environmental 

optimum as possible by accurately 

measuring the efficiency of each flight in 

UK airspace. 

LAMP and 

NTCA look 

to make use 

of the 

SESAR 

development 

work and are 

in line with 

SES 

aspirations. 

The 

introduction 

of these 

changes is 

likely to be 

implemented 

through a 

phased 

approach 

between 

2015 and 

2020. 

- ESSIP:- 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other 

references 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 

Implemented Implemented ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 


Areas * 

Capacity: 5 Flight Per Busy Hour improvements. 

Safety: - 

Environment: 60 K tonnes Co2. 

Cost-Efficiency: 5 FTE. 

Capacity: - 

Safety: - 

Environment: The flight efficiency metric, known as 

3Di, forms the cornerstone of an incentive regime 

which is designed to deliver 600,000 tonnes of CO2 

savings over the 2012-2015 period, worth up to 

£120m in today’s fuel prices. 




By extending existing horizontal flight 

efficiency tracking to include vertical 

elements, 3Di quantifies the benefits 

delivered by air traffic controllers through 

continuous climb departures, cruise 

levels as requested by airspace users 

and continuous descents, as well as 

most direct point-to-point routeings. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other 

references 


Areas * 

The 3Di score combines together the 

inefficiencies calculated within the 

horizontal and vertical dimensions of 

flight: 

- In the horizontal plane it compares the 

actual radar groundtrack against the 

most direct great circle track – within the 

airspace network above the UK. The 

difference between these two distances, 

which describes the ‘additional miles 

flown’, defines the inefficiency in the 

horizontal plane. 

- In the vertical plane the metric 

compares the actual vertical profile 

against the airlines preferred trajectory. 

Vertical inefficiency that results from Air 

Traffic Control interactions has been 

simplified to periods of level flight that 

occur below the airlines’ requested cruise 

level. The vertical inefficiency is defined 

by the amount of flight time spent in level 

flight and the deviation from its requested 

cruise level. Level portions of flight at low 

altitude are more fuel penalising than at 

higher levels. In addition, the more time 

spent in level flight below the requested 

cruise level the more penalising for 3Di. 

- Lastly, because aircraft performance 

and in particular fuel flow rates vary 

across the different phases of flight the 

metric applies different weightings for 



level flight occurring in climb, cruise, and 

descent phases of flight. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other 

references 


Areas * 

All of these factors are then combined to 

give a single 3Di score for each flight in 

NATS airspace above the UK. The metric 

is subject to a regulatory performance 

scheme that includes bonuses and 

penalties for NATS: 

- If NATS is able to reduce the annual 

3Di score for the network below 21 points 

we enter bonus territory (max bonus 

£2.4m for a 3Di of 9). 

- If the 3Di score goes above 27, we risk 

penalty (max penalty £4.8m for a 3Di of 

51). The performance scheme tightens 

by one point in the last year. 

During its first three months in operation, 

3Di has derived an indexed score of 24, 

which is the target set to deliver the 

expected fuel and emissions savings to 

airlines. This score is on track for the 

2012 incentivised performance target set 

by the CAA. Under this scheme, NATS 

stands to be financially rewarded for 

exceeding the target or penalised for 

failing to deliver the expected efficiency 

gains. 

4.1 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) 

The UK’s Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) was developed by the CAA, in cooperation with the Department for Transport, Ministry of Defence, NATS and key aviation 

stakeholders, to address the development of UK airspace to 2030. The strategy is now regarded as a flexible framework or tool kit of options that will assist us in 

determining how the operation, management and regulation of our airspace should evolve depending on the circumstances. FAS will determine the key characteristics 

of a proposed future airspace system and identify the changes required to deliver it, including the policy and regulatory considerations that may need to be made in 

support of these changes. The FAS structure has been particularly successful in driving change through cross industry involvement in improvement activities. 


Due to the size, breadth and complexity of the subject matter, development and deployment of FAS represents a significant undertaking. The strategy provides a unique 

opportunity to set the direction for the UK’s airspace arrangements against a backdrop of expected growth in demand for aviation, SESAR technological advancements 

and international collaboration in the sector. 

An industry stakeholder group has been assembled to develop the FAS implementation plan. The FAS Industry Implementation Group (FASIIG) meets quarterly with 

sub groups addressing Terminal Airspace redesign (including the rollout of PBN in the UK), Airport Efficiency, Queue Management, and Policy and Regulatory issues. 

This process provides the opportunity for all those with a stake in the way we use our airspace to contribute to its strategic direction and understand how any proposed 

changes may affect them. 

The focus of the FAS Deployment Programme during 2014 has concentrated in three areas: 

1) Terminal Airspace Redesign 

The first phase of the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) was designed, consulted on and prepared for regulatory assessment. 

 

 

A mandate was established for the adoption of a RNAV1 navigation standard for all routes to/from key London TMA airports (from 2019) and the 

aircraft that use them (from 2017). 

The concept of operations and key safety arguments in support of a harmonised 18,000ft Transition Altitude (to be implemented in November 

2017) was developed. 

A review was commenced of the rules, policy, guidance and processes that enable large strategic airspace changes with a broad range of 

benefits, disbenefits and trade-off decisions. 

2) PBN Implementation and Arrival Management 

 

 

Two live PBN track keeping and noise abatement trials at Heathrow and Gatwick were completed to establish enhanced route spacing standards 

and refine the approach to providing respite. 

The RNP1 Radius to Fix (RF) departure trial at Stansted was extended to include more aircraft. 

Arrival Management procedures across State boundaries (known as XMAN) were successfully trialled, to share AMAN messages between 

different ANSPs (NATS, MUAC, DSNA and IAA) and enable more inbound holding delays to be absorbed during the en-route phase of flight. 

3) Airport Integration and Throughput 

The UK’s seven largest non A-CDM airports were upgraded to provide Departure Planning Information (DPI) messages to the Network 

Management Operations Centre (NMOC), strengthening the data used to manage traffic flows. 

Requirements were gathered for the procurement of a low cost DPI messaging solution for smaller regional airports to be deployed at up 25 

additional airports from 2015. 

 

A trial at Gatwick demonstrated the potential to reduce the time intervals between successive departures using closely spaced PBN routes to 

enable greater runway throughput. 

A Time Based Separation solution was developed for Heathrow and tested in shadowing mode (to go live in May 2015). 


4.2 iTEC – interoperability Through European Collaboration - European Flight Data Processing 

NATS is replacing its current Flight Data Processing System and the military Flight Data Processing System with iTEC, steering the civil and military operations towards 

commonality and convergence. The iTEC FDP is a trajectory based system which will deliver enhanced ATC tools to the operational users at all NATS En Route units. 

The key elements to the project are as shown below: 

Joint acquisition and development with DFS and AENA of the iTEC product from Indra. 

Minor amendments to the iTEC product to suit the specific needs of UK ATM. 

Changes to the existing NATS systems to interface with the iTEC Product. 

The development and delivery of a strategic HMI and procedures designed to work with iTEC and support the tasks in all NATS En Route units. 

Through a combination of product developments in the ATM marketplace and regular assessments of NATS long-term investment plan (LTIP) and associated 

strategies, NATS have decided that the delivery of a new workstation with its associated controller capabilities and tools is now a realistic opportunity. This offers a 

much more optimal delivery plan yielding greater overall benefits realisation. As such, the iTEC programme has been extended in duration to create the space for the 

deployment and delivery of iTEC and new strategic workstations at each of the units. 

In the meantime significant progress has been made on the iTEC programme and early development of a Controller Working Position based on the current DFS 

operation. NATS have had a number of builds of software delivered from Indra and the product is undergoing numerous verification and validation activities. NATS is 

also working closely with AENA, DFS and LVNL on Methods of Operation within Upper and Lower Airspace. 

The target dates for the delivery of iTEC and the new workstation at each of the NATS units are as follows: 

Prestwick Upper Airspace sectors (PC) - winter 2015/2016. 

PC Lower and Terminal sectors - winter 2018. 

London Terminal Control (TC) and London Area Control (including Military) (AC) - winter 2018. 

It is intended that V1 of iTEC and the workstation for NATS will be delivered within the upper airspace of PC, whilst V2 of iTEC will be delivered within the AC and TC 

deployments as well as the remainder of PC. Once iTEC is fully deployed at all units the current FDP systems and a number of other existing NATS systems will be 

decommissioned to reduce on-going operating costs. NATS is also accelerating its process of ‘Legacy escape’ by 2018 and embarking on a strategy to Deploy SESAR 

concepts across its operations by 2020. 

4.3 NERL Roadmap 

The NATS strategy is to consolidate and rationalise its asset base to reduce operating costs whilst investing in new common systems to safely meet the growth in traffic 

and to ensure regulatory compliance. The programme of changes to achieve this strategy is complex as many inter-dependant projects are running at the same time. 

The NERL Roadmap has been established to deliver the portfolio of investments required. Each project has a cost and a set of benefits. Each project either delivers a 

benefit or is necessary to enable the delivery of a benefit in another project. Each project requires engineering resource to develop and ATC resource to validate and 

train. The roadmap collects all of this information together into specially designed models so that NATS project planners can assess the risks and opportunities as the 

various projects are running. Proposed changes to the plans can be quickly assessed for their impact against either costs or benefits. The Roadmap demonstrates how 

NATS operations will deliver the advanced concepts envisaged by SESAR. 


4.4 London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) and Northern Terminal Control Area (NTCA) Projects 

UK terminal airspace has evolved in a piecemeal fashion over a number of years to accommodate the increasing demand from airlines and multiple closely collocated 

busy airports. This has led to a complex and inefficient airspace environment requiring significant tactical ATC intervention resulting in high flight deck and ATC 

workload. The London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) and the Northern Terminal Control Area (NTCA) projects, in line with the UK CAA Future Airspace 

Strategy, look to modernise and simplify the airspace to provide significant environmental, safety and service improvements. 

LAMP seeks to develop the supporting airspace infrastructure and capacity in the LTMA in order to accommodate the increase in air transport and the ground based 

airport infrastructure developments, whilst also supporting safety management systems and achieving aircraft fuel efficiencies, which in turn provide environmental 

improvements. The main changes to be introduced by the programme include: 

 

 

 

 

 

A predictable and systemised operation in which controllers rely on tools to monitor separation and trajectory conformance with minimal intervention, 

Raising the Transition Altitude – enhancing safety and an enabler for wider benefits such as Continuous Descent Approaches (CDAs) and Continuous 

Climb Departures (CCDs), 

Introducing CDAs from significantly higher levels than today’s 6000’ and improved climb profiles through CCDs and High Performance Departures (HPDs), 

A P-RNAV route structure – enabling additional routes to be accommodated in the same volume of airspace, 

Queue Management to control arrival, departure flows – integrating airspace change with new ATC technologies and procedures to achieve efficient 

sequencing on busy runways and to reduce holding in the airspace. 

LAMP and NTCA look to make use of the SESAR development work and are in line with SES aspirations. The introduction of these changes is likely to be implemented 

through a phased approach between 2015 and 2020. 

The NTCA project is seeking to develop the current airspace within and adjacent to the extant Manchester Terminal Manoeuvring Area (MTMA). This project will work in 

collaboration with LAMP and fundamentally follow a similar generic format. The project will seek to achieve the same overall changes, as listed above, and started 

delivering early deliverables during 2013; NTCA will continue to deliver phases in line with agreements on timing for Transition Altitude changes. Queue Management, 

however, will not feature at implementation but the design will be expected to accommodate this in the future. 

4.5 Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA) 

The United Kingdom notified the Commission on 13 October 2012 of its intention to not apply the provisions of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 923/2012 

of 26 September 2012 until 4 December 2014. The UK subsequently undertook national consultation regarding its plans for SERA implementation and prepared 

consequential changes to current UK legislation to ensure implementation by 4 December 2014. 

The UK still awaits publication of the Comment Response Documents for EASA NPAs 2014-(05) (SERA Part C) and 2014-09 (Transposition of Amendment 43 to 

Annex 2 to the Chicago Convention on remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) into SERA), and the development by EASA of associated supporting Acceptable 

Means of Compliance and Guidance Material. Planning for domestic implementation of both proposed changes cannot commence until the complete regulatory 

packages and supporting transitional arrangements are known. 


In addition, the UK remains concerned by what appears to be a lack of a fully developed maintenance mechanism to support the upkeep of SERA. There have already 

been two amendments to ICAO Annex 2 that have yet to be incorporated into Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 923/2012, despite their having been 

incorporated into Annex 2 for some time. Furthermore, the UK is monitoring closely the development of EASA’s Part-ATS rulemaking task in order to gain insight into 

how this will relate to the ATS content of SERA (in particular SERA Part C). 

4.6 Space Planes 

The Space Planes project delivered the UK Government Review of Space Plane Certification and Operations Summary report as planned. The full technical report was 

officially launched at Farnborough Air show in July. 

The CAA has now been requested to implement the report recommendations as part of a cross government programme of work with DfT, MOD and UKSA. A CAA 

team has now been established to begin to develop a Space Operations regulatory and operational framework. The aim of which is to have a framework established in 

preparation for operators to apply for licences from some time in 2017. 

4.7 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)/Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) 

As one of the SESAR JU’s nine RPAS ‘demonstration activities’, a tripartite industrial consortium involving NATS, Thales UK and NLR are currently involved in running 

Project CLAIRE in conjunction with the CAA. Project CLAIRE is an ambitious project aimed at operating an RPAS within a non-segregated mixed traffic environment, 

identifying the issues and demonstrating the associated ATM processes required to achieve this. The project is based on an incremental and complimentary series of 

experiments, real time simulations and live flight trials within UK controlled airspace and also across FIR boundaries. A number of ATC radar and aerodrome based 

simulations were completed during 2014, however the live flight’ portions, initially planned to be conducted during October 2014, have been delayed and are currently 

scheduled to take place during April/May 2015. 

The live flights are aimed at validating the synthetic environment programme’s findings and are planned to be conducted using a military RPAS, subject to the 

appropriate clearances/safety cases being obtained. The airspace and ATC elements of this are currently being developed in conjunction with the CAA; many aspects 

of these flight demonstrations are expected to be a European ‘first’. An update on progress with preliminary findings is being provided at a SESAR JU workshop on 23- 

24 February 2015 and the final report is expected by the end of 2015. 


Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination 

5.1 FAB Co-ordination 

5.1.1 The UK-Ireland FAB has been operational since 2008. A substantial amount of work has been undertaken by the ANSPs, the airlines and military participants 

under the management of the joint NATS and IAA ANSP FAB Management Board’, with oversight provided by the joint NSA’s ‘FAB Supervisory Committee’ on behalf 

of the Member States. 

5.1.2 The partnership continues to thrive with collaborative developments to enhance the operational FAB and derive greater efficiencies to FAB airspace users. In 

accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 176/2011 on the establishment and modification of FABs, the UK-Ireland FAB submitted its necessary paperwork to the 

European Commission in March 2012, followed by a consultation meeting with the Commission and other stakeholders on the 24th May 2012, and finally the FAB 

issued a response to the Comment Response Document to the Commission on the 28th November 2012. 

5.1.3 Co-ordination meetings between the FAB partners are held to identify areas of common interest. The LSSIP helps to foster this regional initiative by identifying 

mutually dependent actions. 

5.1.4 This cooperation has been re-endorsed through the signature of a Letter of Intent by NATS and the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) in November 2003. The Letter 

establishes a basis for the two companies to investigate other potential areas of co-operation, including closer coordination on European air traffic management 

developments. This is seen as an essential pre-requisite in the run up to the introduction of the Single European Sky. The two organisations will also explore 

opportunities in the areas of systems investment and support services. 

5.1.5 The principle of the Delegation of Air Traffic Services is applied between the United Kingdom and Ireland in certain areas to enhance the efficiency of 

operations. 

5.1.6. FAB Free Route Airspace assessment. 

5.1.6.1 In order to ensure the implementation of FABs by December 2012, the UK-Ireland FAB established the necessary cooperation mechanisms, e.g. with other 

Member States and third countries being part of FABs. 

5.1.6.2 The UK is represented at FABEC States meetings as a cooperative partner 

5.1.6.3 Both the UK-Ireland FAB NSAs are in discussion with the NSAs of the Denmark/Sweden FAB to explore ways to increased cooperation between the FABs. UK- 

Ireland FAB and FABEC recognise the need for coordination between FAB airspace plans and, as a result NATS takes part in several FABEC working groups, notably 

the Airspace Design Group. This has resulted in discussion over a number of airspace changes around the Dover/Lydd interface and changes to danger areas that will 

benefit airspace users. We will continue to engage with FABEC and assist with the delivery of planned improvements in any way possible. 


5.2 FAB Projects 

5.2.1 The following is a list of some of the major projects and trials undertaken as part of the FAB: 

 

 

April 2012, the FAB completed the implementation of its integrated Network Management function; the Irish and UK FIRs are treated as one continuum and on 

a daily basis, the four ACCs (Dublin, Shannon, Prestwick and Swanwick) participate in network management for all traffic. This development capitalised on the 

FAB projects introduced in 2011, i.e. Daily FAB pre-tactical network brief, and 8-week Strategic Brief. The FAB is working closely with the European Network 

Manger to finalise a direct LOA between the FAB and the NMF. This is delivering a more efficient network, eliminating delays, reducing track miles and co2 

emissions. 

December 2012, the FAB introduced Point Merge at Dublin airport, which allows for increased capacity by sequencing aircraft for landing in an optimal and 

more efficient way This FAB project involved the support of all stakeholders, including both MILs, both NSAs and both ANSPs. Furthermore, on the same day, a 

new conditional air route was introduced for aircraft to fly over the north Wales military training area during early mornings and weekends. 

May 2014, The FAB launched the first-ever operational Dynamic Sectors trial (see FAB projects below) to test the SESAR concept of ‘dynamic sectorisation’. 

During Phase 1 the IAA delivered air traffic control services in airspace over Northern Ireland and further north. The remainder of the objectives of the trial will 

be achieved by December 2015. 

Further information about the FAB can be found at: http://www.ukirelandfab.eu/ 


CAA (UK), IAA (IE), IAA-ATS Provider (IE), NATS (UK) 

Dynamic 

Sectorisation 

Operational 

Trial (DSOT) 

Dynamic Sectorisation Operational Trial 

(DSOT) allowed the FAB partners to test 

new ways of delivering Air Traffic 

Management (ATM) services to our 

airline customers and to gather 

information on efficiencies that could be 

gained through the SESAR concept of 

‘dynamic sectorisation’ Phase 1 

commenced in January 2014 and saw 

the delegation of ATM service provision 

in part of the UK’s Rathlin West sector,to 

the IAA. Air Traffic Controllers from the 

IAA’s Shannon Centre provided an ATM 

service in this part of UK airspace. Phase 

1 was very successful with approximately 

75% of the trial objective being achieved 

and was completed in September 2014. 

A detailed report will be available in early 

2015 trial 

completion 

75% of the objectives have 

been met during phase1 of the 

trial. 

The overall objective of this 

trial is to allow the UK-Ireland 

FAB to gather evidence in 

support of the dynamic 

sectorisation operational 

concept. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 

Other references 

ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 

Other: - 


Areas * 

Capacity: - 

Safety: - 

Environment: Introduction of a trialled route free 

network will contribute to more efficient operations 

for airlines and will help to reduce co2 emissions 

by uploading less fuel. 




2015. 

The DSOT trial will be completed by 31 

December 2015 and lessons learned 

from these trials will enable further cooperation 

in the areas of dynamic 

sectorisation and cross border service 

delivery. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 



Areas * 

XMAN 

Queue Management is a crucial project to deliver optimisation of the FAB airspace and also demonstrates our commitment to working with other FABs. The first stage 

of this is a Cross Border Arrival Management (XMan) trial which began early 2014. During the trial there has been collaboration with the following partners - 

DSNA/MUAC/IAA Shannon & NATS Prestwick to ensure coordination with the FABEC XMAN project. AMAN information will be sent to neighbouring ANSPs via XML 

(Web Based) message. At 350nm from London Heathrow, partners will act on Heathrow delay information if necessary and cruise speed will only be reduced if the 

delay is anticipated to be 10 minutes or more. Initially a speed reduction of between M0.02 and M0.03 will be applied dependent upon various factors. If speed is 

reduced in cruise then the plan considers a maximum speed in the descent of 270kts. The target is to remove a further 2 minutes of stack holding at Heathrow. 

Network Management 

The ANSP partners in the UK - Ireland FAB agreed that the most efficient way to comply with the Network Management IR was to combine this activity into one 

operation carried out by the London FMP in Swanwick. This joint Network Management initiative has been working very well since March 2012 with almost no delay 

being experienced by Customers on the boundary between Irish and UK airspace. This cooperation also allows the IAA to avoid the cost of opening and maintaining a 

flow management position in Shannon, delivering significant savings to the FAB's customers. 

Harmonised 18.000ft Transition Altitude 

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on the 31st January 2012 commenced initial consultation with UK aviation stakeholders on the policy to harmonise the Transition 

Altitude (TA) both inside and outside controlled airspace (CAS) in the London and Scottish Flight Information Regions (FIRs). No specific level was identified in the 

consultation and there was no Concept of Operations (CONOPs) available at that time. 

The UK CAA, NATS, IAA ANSP and IAA Safety Regulation are continuing to work collaboratively towards the introduction of a harmonised 18.000ft Transition Altitude 

across the airspace of both countries. The project has led to the joint identification of change associated risks and potential mitigations, and the development of 

operational procedures that ignore the FIR boundary between the two States. A harmonised rising of the Transition Altitude better facilitates the total redesign of the 

London Terminal Manoeuvring Area whilst preventing the introduction of operational inefficiencies at the FIR boundary. 


Also, in early 2014, the UK, Ireland, the Isle of Man and Norway signed a Letter of Intent committing to their aim of implementing a TA of 18,000ft at the same time. 

In line with the FAS implementation work, the UK is now working towards the implementation of an 18,000’ harmonised Transition Altitude. To that effect, throughout 

2014 the project has been heavily involved in the production of a CONOPs document which aims to meet the requirements of aviation stakeholders both inside and 

outside CAS. The project is currently engaging with aviation stakeholders to ensure that the CONOPs are in the best possible state. The next stage will be the 

production of an Impact Assessment leading up to a second consultation which will focus on the CONOPs. The second consultation is planned to take place between 

November 2015 and February 2016, with implementation planned for Winter 2017/2018. 


5.3 Regional cooperation 

5.3.1 In addition to the FAB initiatives, the UK continues to implement a phased introduction of NTFSR (Night Time Fuel Saving Routes). The initiative introduces 

shorter defined direct routes that provide more optimal profiles. 

5.3.2 NATS are currently undertaking a project to delivery Direct Route Airspace (DRA) into 3 sectors in Prestwick airspace. This will allow airlines to flight plan direct 

point to point through these sectors to achieve reduced fuel burn. Following on from the experience gained during the first phase of the DSOT trial NATS is extending 

the ATM capability that was provided in a part of one sector during DSOT into three full sectors. To facilitate the most direct routings from the Oceanic entry and exit 

points through these sectors the IAA are supporting this activity with the deployment of 3 additional Co-ordination Points (COPs) on the boundary between NATS and 

the IAA. This project is targeting an implementation date of March 2015. 

5.3.3 Over this period and in the future the UK CAA will continue to develop its position regarding the regularisation and rationalisation of airspace classifications 

within the UK FIRs. 


DFS (DE), ENAIRE (ES), LVNL (NL), NATS (UK) 

ITEC- 

FDP/CWP 

NATS (UK) 

Direct Route 

Airspace 

(DRA) 

Investments that will deliver advanced 

systems and tools to provide the platform 

for SESAR-based operations, notably 

ITEC-FDP, ITEC-CWP and allied controller 

safety and productivity tools. This 

investment is being progressed in 

collaboration with the Spanish ANSP 

(AENA), the Dutch ANSP (LVNL) and the 

German ANSP (DFS) to deliver a system 

with a common core to share costs and 

risk and provide a common platform across 

several key European ANSPs. 

Bespoke/additional functionality is only 

being developed where needed to support 

specific operational concepts. Work is ongoing 

to ensure that ITEC-FDP platform is 

fully interoperable with the other main FDP 

system being developed in Europe 

(CoFlight). 

NATS are currently undertaking a project 

to delivery Direct Route Airspace (DRA) 

into 3 sectors in Prestwick airspace. This 

2010 - 

2022 

March 

2015 

Project Definition. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 


ESSIP:ATC12, 

ATC17 

OI-Steps: CM- 

0201, CM-0202, 

CM-0203 

Other: - 

- ESSIP:- 

OI-Steps: - 


Areas * 

Capacity: - 

Safety: - 

Environment: - 


Capacity: - 

Safety: - 



will allow airlines to flight plan direct point 

to point through these sectors to achieve 

reduced fuel burn. Following on from the 

experience gained during the first phase of 

the DSOT trial NATS is extending the ATM 

capability that was provided in a part of 

one sector during DSOT into three full 

sectors. To facilitate the most direct 

routings from the Oceanic entry and exit 

points through these sectors the IAA are 

supporting this activity with the deployment 

of 3 additional Co-ordination Points (COPs) 

on the boundary between NATS and the 

IAA. 

Link with ATM 

Master Plan / 


Other: - Environment: - 


Areas * 

Cost-Efficiency: This will allow airlines to flight plan 

direct point to point through these sectors to 

achieve reduced fuel burn. 


Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation 

Conventions 

Two colour codes are used for each ESSIP Objective ‘box’: 

o 

o 

one colour code is used to show the Objective Scope in the Objective ID cell, and 

another colour code is used to show the Objective Progress in the State and for each 

national stakeholder. 

Obj. ID (*) Obj. Title (By mm/yyyy of overall objective, inc non-State SloAs) Obj. Progress (**) 

State’s high level progress statement 

REG 

(By:mm-yyyy) 

ASP 

(By:mm-yyyy) 

MIL 

(By:mm-yyyy) 

APO 

(By:mm-yyyy) 

REG high level progress statement 

ASP high level progress statement 

MIL high level progress statement 

APO high level progress statement 

State Impl. Date 

APO. Progress (**) 

APO Impl. Date 

ASP. Progress (**) 

ASP Impl. Date 

MIL. Progress (**) 

MIL Impl. Date 

APO. Progress (**) 

APO Impl. Date 

(*) Objective Scope Code: (**) Objective/Stakeholder Progress Code: 

ECAC Completed No Plan 

EU+ Partly Completed Not Applicable 

Multi-N Planned Missing Data 

APT 

Late 


6.1 State ESSIP Objectives 

AOM13.1 

Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic 

(GAT) handling 

Timescales: 

Initial operational capability: 01‐01‐2012 

Full operational capability: 31‐12‐2018 

[IDP] 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2018 

REG 

(By:12-2018) 

ASP 

(By:12-2018) 

MIL 

(By:12-2018) 

The UK has adopted the EUROAT provisions with effect from 1 October 

2011 (the required EUROAT timescale) as the national policy for OAT‐IFR, 

subject to the national variations listed in Annex 4 Country Chapter for 

the United Kingdom submitted to EUROCONTOL on 3 August 2011. 

NATS participates fully in harmonised OAT/GAT handling through shared 

equipment, facilities and mutually agreed procedures. Harmonisation at 

FAB level is ensured by co‐ordination through a FAB Management Board. 

Activity in this area is continually monitored by both NATS and the MoD. 

Current arrangements to harmonise OAT and GAT handling to the 

maximum extent possible within the UK. Further harmonisation across 

the ECAC area is anticipated with the finalisation of the EUROAT project. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2018 

AOM19 

Implement Advanced Airspace Management 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

CIAM Phase 2 is complete, Conditional Route (CDR) design and availability 

is aligned within National constraints. LARA is operational and plans are in 

place to establish the outstanding elements of this objective by the 

deadline. 

For the Military Authority, internal processes aligned and RSA activity 

published through CIAM. Further improvements dependent upon the 

introduction of relevant CDM tools and processes. 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 

AOM21 

Implementation of Free Route Airspace 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2017 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

NATS is in the early stages of scoping the requirements for FRA within its 

airspace; as and when these plans reach a firm stage the appropriate 

actions will be undertaken. 

Planned 

31/12/2017 


AOP03 

Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions 

Timescales: 



The UK CAA chairs an industry wide Runway Incursion Steering Group on the prevention of runway 

incursions. The Steering Group draws its membership from airports, airlines, ANSPs and specialist areas 

from within the CAA Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG). Runway incursion awareness and the 

establishment of runway safety teams are referenced within CAP168, Licensing of Aerodromes, which 

also provides guidance on runway incursion awareness. European Action Plan for the Prevention of 

Runway Incursions (EAPPRI) and ICAO documents are recognised as good practice at UK civil aerodromes 

and used accordingly. The UK CAA has assessed LRSTs at the major UK aerodromes to ensure they have 

considered the recommendations of EAPPRI Edition 2. 

REG 

(By:12-2013) 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

CAA has an ongoing runway incursion awareness and prevention plan 

that encompasses the content of the European Action Plan for the 

Prevention of Runway Incursions and complies with relevant 

recommendations as per ESSIP. (EAPPRI 4.8.3 DAP). 

For the Military Authority inspection, audit and safety management 

processes are encompassed by the Battlespace Management (BM) Safety 

Management Manual and the BM Assurance Manual. 

NATS is actively engaged, along with all stakeholders, in actions aimed at 

preventing runway incursions through a comprehensive programme of 

work packages which are part of the NATS Airport Services Strategic Plan 

for Safety. 

For the Military Authority the continuation of the Assurance process and 

increased communication, audit and formal training form the basis of 

compliance to improve runway safety. 

Gatwick Airport is completed, which includes Recommendation 4.1.3. 

There is a 90m RESA which is CAP 168 compliant, versus ICAO 

recommending a minimum of 240m and has been accepted by the 

CAA/SARG (formerly Aerodrome Standards Division (ASD). 

[IDP] 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

Completed 

31/10/2008 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

Heathrow Airport is completed. 

Manchester Airport is completed. EAPPRI fully implemented and the 

airport has been closely involved in the development of EAPPRI 2. 

Manchester has a Runway Safety Committee that has a process of 

continuous improvement with new initiatives and best practice being 

adopted. 

Stansted Airport is completed. 

For the Military Authority the continuation of the Assurance process and 

increased communication, audit and formal training form the basis of 

compliance to improve runway safety. 

31/12/2013 

ATC02.2 

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Short Term Conflict Alert 

(STCA) ‐ level 2 

Timescales: 



Completed 

‐‐ 30/11/2010 

ASP 

(By:01-2013) 

STCA is fully implemented at NATS en‐route units and accords with the 

principles of the Eurocontrol specification. 

For the Military Authority, STCA is provided through Future Military Area 

Radar Services (FMARS). Where services are provided at collocated ACCs, 

STCA is implemented. 

Completed 

30/11/2010 


ATC02.5 

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Area Proximity Warning ‐ 

level 2 

Timescales: 



‐‐ 31/12/2017 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS intends to introduce Airspace Penetration Warning across both its 

centres by the Summer of 2017 which will enhance our situational 

monitoring capabilities. 

The the Military Authority, military processes and procedures facilitate 

the safe control of aircraft in close proximity to the ground therefore 

there is no plan to introduce this item. 

Late 

Late 

31/12/2017 

ATC02.6 

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Minimum Safe Altitude 

Warning ‐ level 2 

(Outside Applicability Area) 

Timescales: 

‐ not applicable ‐ 

‐‐ ‐ 

Due to a lack of operational requirement for this functionality there are 

no plans to implement MSAW in UK en‐route airspace. 

Not 

Applicable 

Not Applicable 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

For the Military Authority, there is also no plan to implement; however, 

we do use radar vector charts, both hardcopy and displayed on the radar 

display, showing safe minimum altitudes within 40 miles of an 

aerodrome. Similarly, we have Area Safe Altitude charts for use outside 

of 40 miles. 

‐ 

ATC02.7 

Implement ground based safety nets ‐ Approach Path Monitor ‐ 

level 2 

Timescales: 



‐‐ 31/12/2017 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS intends to introduce a Glide Path Monitor across both its centres by 

the Summer of 2017 which will enhance our situational monitoring 

capabilities. 

For the Military Authority, all IFR approaches are already monitored on 

the Precision Approach Radar (where installed). No plans to change 

current procedures. 

Late 

Late 

31/12/2017 

ATC12 

Implement automated support for conflict detection and 

conformance monitoring 

Timescales: 



Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2020 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS implemented the iFACTS system in the Swanwick Area Centre in 

November 2011. Fully automated conflict detection and conformance 

monitoring will be provided across all NERL centres through the iTEC 

Programme between 2016 and 2020. 

Partly 

Completed 

iFACTS 31/12/2020 


ATC15 

Implement, in En‐Route operations, information exchange 

mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN 

operations 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/07/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

AMAN has been established and developed in our en‐route airspace 

within Terminal Control; procedures were established for Area Control in 

July 2013. Cross border use of AMAN with neighbouring ANSPs is planned 

for Spring 2014; further development of AMAN is contained within our 

queue management plans. 

Completed 

31/07/2013 

ATC16 

Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 

Timescales: 



Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2015 

REG 

(By:12-2015) 

ASP 

(By:03-2012) 

MIL 

(By:12-2015) 

The European Commission published Commission Regulation (EU) No 

1332/2011 of 16 December 2011 laying down common airspace usage 

requirements and operating procedures for airborne collision avoidance 

on 20 December 2011. Action has subsequently been taken to notify 

industry of the requirement and to amend aeronautical publications 

accordingly. No further action has been taken to date. 

The appropriateness of this Objective is questionable given the origins of 

the Regulation and the fact that the Regulation had not passed into law at 

the time of the Objectives drafting. 

NATS supports the introduction of ACAS II V7.1 as an improvement to the 

collision avoidance environment. Controllers will be notified of the 

changes from V7.0. The current NATS ACAS monitoring programme will 

be utilised to monitor the effect of the V7.1 changes. 

All pilots are introduced to a basic collision warning system during 

Elementary Flying Training, and will be further trained on TCAS II during 

Advanced Flying Training and thereafter on role‐specific types. 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 

Completed 

31/03/2012 

No Plan 

‐ 

ATC17 

Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during 

Coordination and Transfer 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2018 

ASP 

(By:12-2018) 

NATS is currently developing a new system deployment strategy where its 

current legacy systems will be fully replaced by The Strategic System 

comprising iTEC FDP and CWP. This is all due to complete by the 1st 

quarter of 2018. 

Planned 

31/12/2018 


COM09 

Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks or 

services to the Internet Protocol (IP) 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Planned 

‐‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:12-2014) 

NATS has installed protocol conversion boxes to meet this requirement as 

our planned implementation of iTEC would not have met the required 

timescales. 

However the full requirement is for connectivity to be established to all 

our ANSP partners and this has not been possible as some have opted to 

take up the transitional arrangements of Regulation (EU) 283/2011. NATS 

signed some bi‐lateral agreements and the compliance date for the last of 

those is December 2014. 

For the Military Authority, the planned implementation of iTEC would not 

have met the required timescales for MoD therefore NATS has installed 

protocol conversion boxes to meet this requirement. 

Planned 

31/12/2014 

COM10 

Migrate from AFTN to AMHS 

Timescales: 



Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2014 

NATS has deployed an AMHS capability and gateway facilities to AFTN. 

Implementation with some partners is complete; NATS has an active 

project which is working with AFTN & CIDIN international partners to 

transition to AMHS, subject to their readiness to implement. National 

implementation of AMHS end‐systems will be very limited. 

Partly 

Completed 

ASP 

(By:12-2014) 

MoD Capability in Area Radar is provided through NATS. NATS has 

deployed an AMHS capability and gateway facilities to AFTN. There are no 

MoD system planned which make use of extended AMHS functions. 

EUR‐NAM 

A Regional boundary gateway with the USA and Singapore is operational. 

NATS has the capability to gateway to other NAM regions, as and when 

they are in a position to do so. 

EUR 

NATS have implemented an AMHS connection to the NM via PENS and 

further connections are being planned. Portugal and Austria being the 

next States to be connected. Other EUR connections are expected to be 

migrated from CIDIN during 2013/2014. 

31/12/2014 

COM11 

Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM 

Timescales: 



Planned 

‐ 31/12/2020 

ASP 

(By:12-2020) 

NATS plans to have VoIP in use between our centres for ground‐ground 

voice services and between our centres and all airports at which NATS 

provides services. We will implement VoIP between all our centres and 

our radio stations for air‐ground services. 

For the military, when NATS replaces the AC VCS & upgrades the TC & PC 

systems with VoIP compatible systems it is envisaged that these will also 

provide the Military with VoIP capability. 

Planned 

31/12/2020 


FCM01 

Implement enhanced tactical flow management services 

Timescales: 



‐‐ 31/12/2020 

The majority of the elements of FCM01 are planned as part of the NATS 

Strategy with full implementation expected circa 2020. 

Late 

Late 

ASP 

(By:12-2006) 

For the Military Authority, Area Radar Units Completed. 

Although all ATFM messages are received from CNMF, they have to be 

manually processed at Terminal Units to enable accurate presentation of 

information to controllers. This should become part of Project Marshall 

from Nov 2015, but until the winning solution is known, at this point, it is 

not possible to say how or in what timescale it will be achieved as the 

transition phase is not due to complete to 31 Mar 2021. Until then, this 

portion is deemed as No Plan and therefore the Military SLoA is deemed 

Completed. 

31/12/2020 

FCM03 

Implement collaborative flight planning 

Timescales: 



‐‐ 31/12/2020 

ASP 

(By:12-2015) 

Planned as part of the NATS Strategy with full implementation expected 

circa 2020. 

For the Military Authority, IFPLID is utilised in all messages to ETFMS. 

[IDP] 

Late 

Late 

31/12/2020 

FCM04 

Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures ‐ phase 1 

(Outside Applicability Area) 

Timescales: 

‐ not applicable ‐ 

[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2012 

ASP 

(By:12-2015) 

NATS has a comprehensive set of short term ATFCM Measures in place 

which exceed the requirements of this LSSIP objective. They are 

extensively used in our operations and strictly monitored and do not 

exceed 45 minutes duration unless in exceptional circumstances to 

minimise delay. 

Completed 

31/01/2012 


FCM05 

Implementation of interactive rolling NOP 

Timescales: 



[IDP] 

Planned 

‐‐ 31/12/2016 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

This is a new objective in 2013 and therefore the NATS progress is at a 

very early stage. The updating of this objective is difficult due to the 

mixture of protocols and systems. NATS has completed strategic 

investment planning for some aspects of this objective but recognise that 

there is a gap in its capabilities which are being reviewed under our ongoing 

long term investment plans. 

Planned 

31/12/2016 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

The Military is actively engaged with NATS and the CAA to establish how 

to progress the introduction of ASM tools beyond the AMC. 

Airport Coordination Ltd (ACL) sends slot information for the UKs Level 3 

Coordinated Airports to the EUACAs common database. This information 

is then sent daily to DDR. 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

INF04 

Implement integrated briefing 

Timescales: 



Completed 

‐‐ 31/05/2008 

ASP 

(By:12-2012) 

NATS as the UK airspace AIS service provider/manager does not provide 

end‐to‐end briefings. AIS act only as an enabler to the final briefing 

process, which is normally carried out by a 3rd party or agency. 

For the Military Authority, MIL‐EAMS introduced and all Stations have 

Operations sections, which allow for integrated briefing. 

Completed 

31/05/2008 

INF07 

Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD) 

Timescales: 



‐ ‐ 

REG 

(By:05-2018) 

ASP 

(By:05-2018) 

APO 

(By:05-2018) 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

ITY‐ACID 

Aircraft identification 

Timescales: 

Entry into force of the Regulation: 13‐12‐2011 

System capability: 02‐01‐2020 

Possible deferred compliance, only for services provided by 

military units or under military supervision, subject to conditions:: 

02‐01‐2025 

‐ ‐ 

ASP 

(By:01-2020) 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 

‐ 


ITY‐ADQ 

Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information 

Timescales: 

Entry into force of the regulation: 16‐02‐2010 

Article 5(4)(a), Article 5(4)(b) and Article 6 to 13 to be 

implemented by: 30‐06‐2013 

Article 4, Article5(1) and Article 5(2), Article 5(3) and Article 5(4)(c) 

to be implemented by: 30‐06‐2014 

All data requirements implemented by: 30‐06‐2017 

‐ 30/06/2017 

REG 

(By:06-2017) 

ASP 

(By:06-2017) 

APO 

(By:06-2017) 

The UK has developed ADQ policy to facilitate compliance to the ADQ 

regulation. It is planned to publish the policy early 2014 to enable data 

originators and managers 18 months to meet the initial requirements of 

the regulation applicable to new data. 

NATS has been planning to comply with the legal requirement as defined 

in Implementing Rule (EU) No 73/2010; however the lack of published 

Acceptable Means of Compliances (AMCs) prevented our Regulator from 

issuing Policy for the UK on this matter. 

Until the UK Policy is issued we (industry) are unable to commit to comply 

with the requirements, however we are expecting publication of the 

Policy in early 2014 in the form of a new Civil Aviation Publication (CAP 

1054) against which we are planning to reach compliance by July 2015 

which is the 18 month timeframe we have been set by the UK CAA 

following publication of the CAP. 

Please note: 

a) that these dates allow for our implementation to run the old and new 

AIM systems alongside each other for a number of AIRACs; 

b) that our AIM system already operates a safe high quality service and 

that our compliance dates listed below are to the specific legislative 

requirements of (EC) No 73/2010. 

The CAA has developed policy to facilitate airport compliance to the ADQ 

regulation. Upon publication of the Policy in 2014, the CAA remains 

committed to permitting all airports in‐scope of ADQ 18 months to meet 

the initial requirements of the regulation that is applicable to new data. 

Full compliance to the ADQ IR by airports may not be possible prior to 

June 2017 as the establishment of ADQ compliant Instrument Flight 

Procedure data and implementation of ADQ compliant Performance 

Based Navigation may not be feasible within the given time‐frame. 

Late 

Late 

30/06/2017 

Late 

30/06/2017 

Late 

30/06/2017 

ITY‐AGDL 

Initial ATC air‐ground data link services above FL‐285 

Timescales: 

Entry into force of regulation: 06‐02‐2009 

New aircraft capability: 31‐12‐2010 

ATS unit operational capability ‐ Regulation (EC) 29/2009, Annex I, 

Part A: 06‐02‐2013 

Retrofit aircraft capability: 04‐02‐2015 

[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 30/11/2013 

REG 

(By:02-2016) 

ASP 

(By:02-2016) 

MIL 

(By:01-2014) 

Project has delivered core DL Capability. Further FANS development still 

ongoing. 

A project to implement data link services within the UK and meet the 

objectives of the Data Link IR was initiated in October 2010, and it was 

recognised then that there would be a number of technical and resource 

availability challenges to be addressed in order to meet the February 

2013 mandate. Indeed, additional costs have had to be borne to cope 

with additional/unexpected requirements such as complete transition to 

ATC Data Exchange Presentation (ADEXP) format messages. 

Core Data Link functionality has now been deployed. 

Military is compliant with data link services IR. 

Completed 

31/10/2013 

Completed 

30/11/2013 

Completed 

31/12/2009 


ITY‐AGVCS2 

Implement air‐ground voice channel spacing requirements below 

FL195 

Timescales: 

Entry into force: 07‐12‐2012 

New and upgraded radio equipment: 17‐11‐2013 

New or upgraded radios on State aircraft: 01‐01‐2014 

Interim target for freq. conversions: 31‐12‐2014 

All radio equipment: 31‐12‐2017 

All frequencies converted: 31‐12‐2018 

State aircraft equipped, except those notified to EC: 31‐12‐2018 

State aircraft equipped, except those exempted [Art 9(11)]: 31‐12‐ 

2020 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2020 

REG 

(By:12-2018) 

ASP 

(By:12-2018) 

MIL 

(By:12-2020) 

APO 

(By:12-2018) 

Work is progressing with the required phased implementation of 8.33kHzcapable 

radio equipage and frequency channelisation in accordance with 

the Regulation‐s timescales. The identified risk to ITY‐AGVCS2 REG02, 

section 2, the 25% conversion target, is dependent upon external factors 

relating to data requirements of the Eurocontrol International Flight 

Planning System. 

NATS has firm plans in place to achieve this objective, however these are 

dependent upon actions by other stakeholders. Provided that these 

actions are achieved then NATS anticipates meeting the requirements by 

the required date. 

The MoD has plans in place to achieve this objective and will advise both 

the NSA and EC of any instances where it will not be able to comply with 

the dates laid down within the IR. 

One SLoA has been completed. The remaining 3 are partially completed 

but subject to continued oversight by CAA personnel. 

Planned 

31/12/2018 

Planned 

31/12/2018 

Planned 

31/12/2020 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2018 

ITY‐COTR 

Implementation of ground‐ground automated co‐ordination 

processes 

Timescales: 


For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of 

notification and initial coordination processes: 27‐07‐2006 

For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of Revision 

of Coordination, Abrogation of Coordination, Basic Flight Data and 

Change to Basic Flight Data: 01‐01‐2009 

To all EATMN systems in operation by 12/2012 : 31‐12‐2012 

Systems serving ACCs providing services above FL 285 in the 

airspace in Annex I, Part A of Regulation (EC) 29/2009: 06‐02‐2013 

‐‐ 31/03/2015 

ASP 

(By:02-2016) 

MIL 

(By:12-2012) 

Aspects of this objective are covered by the current NAS Flight Data 

Processing System. Plans are in place to ensure that outstanding aspects 

will be achieved in due course. 

The UK MoD does not have current or future plans to implement groundground 

automated co‐ordination processes between Military aerodromes 

and Military Area Controllers. 

Late 

Late 

31/03/2015 


‐ 


ITY‐FMTP 

Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) 

Timescales: 


All EATMN systems put into service after 01/01/09: 01‐01‐2009 

All EATMN systems in operation by 20/04/11: 20‐04‐2011 

Transitional arrangements: 31‐12‐2012 

Transitional arrangements when bilaterally agreed between 

ANSPs: 31‐12‐2014 

‐‐ 31/12/2018 

ASP 

(By:12-2014) 

NATS had the capability to operate TCP/IP Message Protocols in early 

2011 but introduction to service was dependent upon PENS availability. 

PENS became available to NATS in November 2012 so tests were started 

in December 2012 and connectivity/operational service was progressively 

established with our various ANSP partners from January 2013. There is 

one remaining partner ANSP who are as yet unable to handle FMTP IPv6, 

which is catered for by the Transition Amendment (EU) No 283/2011 and 

specific Bi‐Lateral agreement, but we understand they should have the 

capability by December 2014. 

[IDP] 

Late 

Late 

31/12/2018 

MIL 

(By:12-2014) 

There is no military plan for specific FMTP development. This provision 

relies upon the iTEC system introduction by NATS. 

Capability provisions for Military are provided by NATS. 

There is no military plan for specific FMTP development. This provision 

relies upon the iTEC system introduction by NATS. 

Capability provisions for Military are provided by NATS. 

Late 

31/12/2018 

ITY‐SPI 

Surveillance performance and interoperability 

Timescales: 

Entry intro force of regulation: 13‐12‐2011 

ATS unit operational capability: 12‐12‐2013 

New aircraft capability: 08‐06‐2016 

ELS in transport‐type State aircraft : 07‐12‐2017 

EHS and ADS‐B Out in transport‐type State aircraft : 07‐06‐2020 

Ensure training of MIL personnel: 07‐06‐2020 

Retrofit aircraft capability: 07‐06‐2020 

Partly 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2019 

REG 

(By:02-2015) 

ASP 

(By:02-2015) 

MIL 

(By:06-2020) 

The UK regulatory process makes provision for the approval of such 

systems as and when an ANSP chooses to implement it. 

We already use All‐purpose Data stream Replicators (ADR) operationally 

so many of these aspects have already been catered for, the remaining 

element being ASP01 and technical alignment of some of our customers 

to accept UTC. 

The Military is fully committed to both the UK national and European 

Mode S equipage programmes. The MoD reports 6 monthly to NATS and 

annually to the CAA with regards to the Mode S upgrade programme that 

it has implemented. 

Planned 

31/03/2014 

Late 

30/04/2014 

Partly 

Completed 

31/01/2019 


NAV03 

Implementation of P‐RNAV 

Timescales: 



In November 2013, the first permanent RNAV 1 (P‐RNAV) departure procedures (19) were introduced at 

London Gatwick. These procedures were replications of the extant conventional departures and 

followed extensive trials. Trials of RNAV 1 (P‐RNAV) SIDs have also been conducted at London Luton 

Airport, specifically to improve environmental impact through better track‐keeping conformance and 

these procedures should become permanent in 2014 following submission of an Airspace Change 

Proposal (ACP). Other RNAV 1 (P‐RNAV) arrival and departure procedures are either planned or are 

being discussed at a number of other airports around the UK. 

Late 

The largest UK implementation project is the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) for 

which the environmental consultation commenced in October for Phase 1a which plans to introduce 

Point Merge at London Gatwick and London City Airports in 2015. In support of Phase 2 (circa 2018) a 

number of Departure Enhancement Project (DEP) trials have commenced, designed to collect data in 

support of new concepts including, reduced route spacing, environmental respite and split departures to 

increase departure rates from a single runway. All of these trials are utilising RNAV 1 (P‐RNAV). In May 

an RNP 1 departure trial using compound Radius to Fix (RF) legs, commenced. The trial is again designed 

to collect data, but is also demonstrating vastly improved adherence to the extant Noise Preferential 

Routes (NPR) from the two runway ends at Stansted. 

In December the UK CAA Board approved a proposal to Mandate RNAV 1 in the London TMA with 

aircraft equipped by November 2017 and airspace changes introduced by November 2019. A 

consultation process on the scope of the mandate and exemption policies will be conducted in Q1/2014 

with publication of an AIC and Information Notice in mid‐2014. 

Although the core regulations supporting RNAV 1 (P‐RNAV) exist, the UK CAA has had to develop 

supporting implementation policies. These include: SID Replication and NPRs, SID to FL, SID Truncation, 

Fuelling Policy for Linear Holding, Containment Policy and SIDs and STARs outside of CAS. The latter 

policy (under development) is in response to the loss of procedural separation minima based on VOR at 

remote locations where VORs are being decommissioned as part of the UK rationalisation programme. 

31/01/2020 

In the course of implementation of PBN, two major issues have emerged for which further European 

investment and guidance would be beneficial. Instrument Flight Procedure (IFP) design validation is 

heavily dependent upon the good‐will and cooperation of operators and their flight simulator facilities. 

This is largely because of a lack of adequately qualified tools to support the IFP designer. Were such 

desktop tools be available, the task of validating large‐scale airspace changes such as a TMA re‐design, 

would become much easier and cost‐effective. The US procedures use TARGETS and whilst Europe has 

available RVT, this tool requires further development if it is to be of any real use. The other issue is 

Route Spacing in TMAs with a radar environment. The UK CAA has published ‐Basic‐ guidance based on 

published criteria and a Route Spacing Analysis technique. Industry urgently needs 'Enhanced' guidance 

if we are to take advantage of the aircraft performance available from RNAV and especially, RNP. The UK 

is taking the data collected from the DEP trials to investigate the minimum route spacing supported in 

TMA interactions, but a wider European exercise may be necessary to build the confidence necessary to 

meet the ICAO Target Level of Safety (TLS). 

Note 1: Implementation of LAMP Phase 2 is conditional on achieving a raised Transition Altitude (TA) in 

2017. 

Note 2: Completion of NAV03 is dependent upon AIS to AIM compliance, currently not scheduled until 

07/2017. 

NATS has active projects in the London and Northern TMAs that will 

introduce P‐RNAV procedures co‐incident with major airspace, or 

navigation infrastructure changes, as permitted by levels of aircraft 

equipage. 

Late 

ASP 

(By:12-2012) 

During 2013, analysis of flight plans indicates that approximately 90% of 

flights have RNAV1 capability with some airfields having close to 100% 

RNAV1 compliance. 

Controllers are already familiar with RNAV and will be trained at unit level 

prior to P‐RNAV procedures being introduced. 

No current plan to implement RNAV at military aerodromes. 

31/01/2020 


NAV10 

Implement APV procedures 

Timescales: 



The UK continues to move forward with the introduction of APV procedures in accordance with the ICAO 

Assembly Resolution A37‐11. In 2013, Birmingham and Bristol airports introduced APV Baro VNAV 

procedures at all runway ends. APV procedures (Baro and/or SBAS) are being implemented at London 

Stansted, Belfast, Glasgow and Southampton (9 runway ends) with scheduled introduction in 2014/2015. 

The ACCEPTA projects including those to introduce SBAS at remote Scottish Islands is a cause for concern 

in respect of delays in the IFP design and lack of avionic solutions for certain aircraft fleets (Saab 340). 

This is having a knock‐on effect on the UK VOR rationalisation and replacement programmes. 

[IDP] 

Partly 

Completed 

The status of RNAV (GNSS) approach procedures at AIRAC 13/2013 was as follows: 

A total of 17 aerodromes now support 36 LNAV; 20 LNAV/VNAV; and 2 LPV instrument approach 

procedures. Over the next 2 years, a further 60 LNAV; 24 LNAV/VNAV; and 52 LPV instrument approach 

procedures are planned. 

The UK are unlikely to meet the ICAO Resolution of all instrument runway ends by the end of 2016, but 

notes that 3D approaches are available at the majority of runways when considering as well, access to ILS 

procedures. The UK has 122 instrument runway ends with 83 (66%) of them having an ILS procedure. 

Whilst the CAA will continue to promote APV approaches as a means of improving safety where no 3D 

guidance exists or as resilience for existing ILS procedures, it maintains that the final decision has to rest 

with the aerodrome and opposes any form of mandate. 

The CAA has assessed existing LNAV/VNAV procedures and accepted that all procedures may be 

authorised for the use of SBAS equipment, allowing access to suitably equipped aircraft. The 

requirement to have an EGNOS Working Agreement in place at each affected aerodrome has delayed the 

rollout across the UK. 

At the end of October 2013, the CAA launched a public consultation on CAP 1122, 'Application for 

Instrument Approach Procedures to Aerodromes without an Instrument Runway and/or Approach 

Control'. This policy is part of a risk based review of our regulations and has the potential to extend the 

application of APV to aerodromes previously not served by instrument approach procedures. 

Consultation finishes on 31 December 2013 and publication is planned for Spring 2014. 

As the UK gains further exposure to the implementation of APV procedures, cost pressures continue to 

pose the most significant risks. Having committed to have such procedures designed, many sponsors are 

being faced with costs of preparation of navigation data bases for validation purposes ahead of 

publication in the AIP. Finding an operator willing to conduct the IFP ground or flight validation and then 

additional funding for data bases has led to further delays and risk of cancellation. In many cases, the 

data base cost was not budgeted and is not covered by ACCEPTA funding. Pooling of procedures into a 

common data base build is seen as one method of sharing the costs, but coordination of the availability 

of designs across multiple aerodromes with different Approved Procedure Design organisations, is 

proving challenging. 

REG 

(By:04-2016) 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

The CAA applies the applicable regulatory instruments provided by EASA 

for both the airworthiness and operational approval. 

APV implementation is the responsibility of the Airport Operator and will 

be undertaken by individual airports on the basis of a business need. At 

airfields where NATS is the ANSP, NATS is actively encouraging the 

implementation of APV procedures. 

NATS is engaged in the European Commissions TEN‐T and 7th Framework 

and the SESAR projects to develop implementation processes and 

procedures within the UK to assist the early introduction of APV SBAS 

operations. 

NATS and CAA have developed and are continuing to develop additional 

material to assist airport operators in their APV implementation activities. 

31/12/2016 

Completed 

31/12/2010 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2016 


SAF10 

Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations 

caused by airspace infringements 

Timescales: 



The UK CAA‐sponsored combined Regulator/ANSP/MoD/GA Airspace Infringement Working Group 

(AIWG) continues to develop and implement measures aimed at reducing the number of airspace 

infringements within the UK FIRs. It also works to increase awareness of the risks associated with 

infringements and how infringements can be prevented. In this role it supports the joint 

regulator/MoD/industry Airspace Safety Initiative (ASI) and is supported by ASIs Communications and 

Education Programme. 

Although most ongoing AIWG activities predate those contained within the Eurocontrol Action Plan, the 

Eurocontrol Action Plan serves to inform and assist the UK in its infringement‐related activities, including 

the development of the AIWG Action Plan. 

REG 

(By:12-2011) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

MIL 

(By:12-2011) 

The CAA continues to pursue its collaborative airspace infringement 

awareness and prevention initiative that predates the Eurocontrol Action 

Plan. Membership of the CAA‐sponsored joint civil/military Airspace 

Infringement Working Group (AIWG) includes General Aviation sector 

representation. 

NATS has implemented the appropriate parts of the European Action Plan 

‐ Airspace Infringement Risk Reduction. 

Controllers are required to report airspace infringements in accordance 

with Headquarters 1 Group (HQ 1 Gp) Battlespace Management (BM) 

Safety Management System (SMS) policy. Reported airspace 

infringements are investigated and feedback given to ATS providers and 

aircraft operators. 

Completed 

31/12/2010 

Completed 

31/12/2010 

Completed 

30/06/2010 

Completed 

30/11/2009 

SAF11 

Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions 

Timescales: 



NATS works proactively with both the airport operators and the airlines at the airports at which it 

provides the ATC service to ensure that the appropriate parts of the European Action Plan for the 

Prevention of Runway Excursions are implemented. Any incidents of runway excursions are analysed and 

any lessons learned are promulgated across the NATS units for consideration at a local level where 

appropriate, thus this will remain living activity in terms of its development. 

REG 

(By:01-2018) 

ASP 

(By:12-2014) 

APO 

(By:12-2014) 

Most of the Action plan, Part 3.6 recommendations have been 

implemented. Work is on‐going regarding 3.6.5 / 3.6.6 / 3.6.9. 

Review of organisations implementation of EAPPRE planned for Summer 

2014. 

NATS have implemented the applicable measures of the Action Plan 

(Parts 3.1 to 3.3) and report through the appropriate mechanism. 

For the military, MoD will formulate a plan and implement by December 

2014 and will be reported through the appropriate channels when 

complete. 

Review of organisations implementation of EAPPRE planned for Summer 

2014. 

For the military, MoD will formulate a plan and implement by December 

2014 and will be reported through the appropriate channels when 

complete. 

Partly 

Completed 

31/01/2018 

Partly 

Completed 

31/01/2018 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2014 

Planned 

31/12/2014 


6.2 Airport-related ESSIP Objectives 

6.2.1 Birmingham Airport 

AOP05 

Implement Airport Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) 

Timescales: 



EGBB - Birmingham 

[IDP] 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

Birmingham Airport has a Strategic Plan to implement CDM by 

2013/2014. This will be enabled by introduction of Electronic Flight Strips 

(EFS) data and replacement of the Airport Operations Data Base (AODB). 

Birmingham Airport remains fully committed to the CDM process; 

however the development programme has changed as previously advised 

to Eurcontrol, due to a change in ANSP provider. A tender process for 

ANSP provision has been undertaken resulting in the in‐sourcing of ANSP 

provision from NATS to a new wholly owned subsidiary, Birmingham Air 

Traffic Limited. This has resulted in a procedural change freeze during the 

transfer process which impacts on the CDM programme. What it means in 

practical terms is a delay to the implementation of EFPS until Q3/Q4 

2014. Due to the procedural changes related to this system 

implementation, we cannot therefore introduce the Pre‐Departure 

Sequencing and Collaborative Management of Flight Updates until this 

system is live. This would push our overall CDM programme completion 

date to Q2 2015. 

Planned 

31/12/2014 

Planned 

31/12/2014 

ENV01 

Implement Continuous Descent Operations (CDO) techniques for 

environmental improvements 

Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2011 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

CDA achievement rates at Birmingham have increased significantly 

following an airspace change and the installation of ILS. Communities and 

other local stakeholders have responded positively to the improved CDA 

performance. 

CDA is implemented H24 at Birmingham Airport with the exception of 

military flights and aircraft making use of non‐precision approaches. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/01/2011 


ENV02 

Implement Collaborative Environmental Management (CEM) at 

Airports 

Timescales: 




Completed 

‐ 31/12/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

Birmingham Airport, airlines and NATS work closely sharing data and 

agreeing targets for performance improvement. 

Birmingham Airport has had a strong focus on environmental 

performance for many years and has mature environmental mitigation 

measures in place and a high degree of inter agency co‐operation to 

minimise environmental impact both on the ground and within 

Birmingham controlled airspace. The airport is always mindful of new 

environmental initiatives. Its open reporting of environmental impact 

with both partner and community organisations continues. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

6.2.2 Manchester Airport 

AOP04.1 

Implement Advanced Surface Movement Guidance and Control 

System (A‐SMGCS) Level1 

Timescales: 



EGCC - Manchester 

‐ ‐ 

REG 

(By:12-2010) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

APO 

(By:12-2010) 


systems as and when an aerodrome operator chooses to implement it. 

Further progress is subject to a business case by the MAG group. 

Manchester currently has no plans to install A‐SMGCS. Manchester 

currently operates a Surface Movement Radar with Runway Incursion 

Monitoring and Conflict Alert System (RIMCAS) for runway safety 

protection and guidance in Low Visibility Operations. Does not pass a 

local CBA test. 

However Manchester is now aware of the proposed draft Implementing 

Rule for the Pilot Common Project (PCP) where there may be a 

requirement to deploy as the baseline equipment for a 'Top 25' Airport. 

Further analysis will be performed during 2014 following release of the IR. 

Not 

Applicable 


‐ 


‐ 


‐ 


AOP04.2 


System (A‐SMGCS) Level 2 

Timescales: 




‐ ‐ 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

APO 

(By:12-2017) 

Manchester have no plans to implement A‐SMGCS although certain 

elements of A‐SMGCS have been installed. 

Manchester Airports Group are responsible for the business case for any 

additional investment. 

Manchester have enhanced Surface Movement Radar (SMR). 

Surface Movement Radar with Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict 

Alert System (RIMCAS) for runway safety protection and guidance in Low 

Visibility Operations is installed at Manchester. MATS procedure for RIM 

alerts available. 

Manchester has no current plans to install A‐SMGCS. Manchester 

currently operates a Surface Movement Radar with RIMCAS for runway 

safety protection and guidance in Low Visibility Operations. 

However Manchester is now aware of the proposed draft Implementing 

Rule for the Pilot Common Project (PCP) where there maybe a 

requirement to deploy as the baseline equipment for a ‐Top 25‐ Airport. 

Further analysis will be performed during 2014 following release of the IR. 

Not 

Applicable 


‐ 


‐ 

AOP05 


Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

CDM project now underway at Manchester with a defined project plan. 

Steering Group consists of Airport, IT and ANSP. 

Local implementation of CDM is now planned to commence January 

2014. A project MoU has been signed and agreed by all partners and final 

development to upgrade the Airport Operational Database (AODB) will be 

completed by May 2014. Further discussions are taking place with the 

ANSP and software suppliers for the technical development required to 

achieve DPI status. 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2014 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2014 

ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2011 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

CDO is in practice consistently during night operations at Manchester 

Airport and when feasible during day time operations. 

Manchester Airport maximises the use of CDA during night operations. 

Further study into extending CDA to daytime operations had indicated 

that local airspace constraints only permit CDA during periods of lower 

traffic density. A major redesign of the TMA airspace is required in order 

to permit greater use of 24hr CDA. 

Completed 

28/02/2009 

Completed 

31/12/2011 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS is committed to reducing ATM environmental impact and has in 

place a large programme of activity to deliver its ambitious environmental 

targets. In addition to our internal programme of airspace and 

operational environmental efficiency, NATS plays an active role in 

Manchester Airports Collaborative Environmental Management Group. 

NATS is working collaboratively with the airport to review and improve 

airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

Environmental aspects of flight operations have been a focus of existing 

collaborative forums for several years, largely focussed on noise, track 

and CDA. This approach was enhanced with the commencement of 

formal CEM at the beginning of 2010. The CEM group continues to 

provide the focus for a variety of environmental and operational 

initiatives including forthcoming airspace changes and the roll‐out of the 

Sustainable Aviation Departures code of practice. 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

6.2.3 Bristol Airport 

ENV01 



Timescales: 



EGGD - Bristol 

[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS has previously delivered CDA in a limited way due to airspace 

constraints. However, an airspace change which became operational 

December 2012 has enabled CDA from higher levels. NATS is also working 

directly with airlines to deliver improved CDO ‐ with significant success 

during 2013. 

Bristol ANSP supports the implementation CDA procedures at the 

aerodrome, and monitors this using Flight Profile Monitor. Bristol Airport 

also monitors CDA performance using the noise and track keeping system. 

Completed 

31/12/2012 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 



EGGD - Bristol 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2016 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS works closely with the airport operator and airlines at Bristol to 

identify and deliver opportunities for CEM. NATS is working 

collaboratively with the airport to review and improve airspace and 

procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

Bristol Airport has a number of initiatives in place which go some way to 

satisfying the requirements of this objective. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2016 


6.2.4 London-Luton Airport 

AOP05 


Timescales: 



EGGW - London - Luton 

‐ 30/09/2016 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

A‐CDM is not currently in place but is planned. Some elements are being 

reviewed e.g. FUM; DPI and utilisation of interfaces between some 

information infrastructure to enhance information sharing. CBA is being 

undertaken and Luton is observing technology in progress and industry 

solutions. 

A‐CDM is not currently in place, but planned. Some elements are being 

reviewed such as FUM, DPI and utilisation of interfaces between some 

information infrastructures to enhance information sharing. 

[IDP] 

Late 

Planned 

30/09/2015 

Late 

30/09/2016 

ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2011 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

CDAs are delivered for the majority of approaches although, depending 

upon which runway is in use, certain approaches can preclude CDA due to 

airspace constraints. 

London Luton Airport measures and monitors CDA performance and 

feedback is an ongoing practice. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Partly 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS works closely with the airport operator to devise the appropriate 

plans required to support CEM. NATS is working collaboratively with the 

airport and airlines to review and improve airspace and procedure design 

to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

Various groups with various stakeholders are used to progress and 

mitigate impacts of noise as part of the environmental impact of air traffic 

procedures. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 


6.2.5 London-Gatwick Airport 

AOP04.1 



Timescales: 



EGKK - London - Gatwick 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2013 

REG 

(By:12-2010) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

APO 

(By:12-2010) 



A‐SMGCS is not mandated by any European Regulation. Community 

Specifications exist for Levels 1 and 2 but these ETSI standards do not link 

into any Implementing Rule, they act just as means to demonstrate 

compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 contains 

specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. 

NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Gatwick within the limitations as they 

currently exist. 

Gatwick Airport has a fully implemented A‐SMGCS. 

Completed 

31/01/2013 

Completed 

31/07/2007 

Completed 

31/07/2008 

AOP04.2 



Timescales: 




Completed 

‐ 31/12/2008 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

APO 

(By:12-2017) 

NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 2 at Gatwick. 

Installed at Gatwick. 

Completed 

31/07/2007 

Completed 

31/07/2008 


AOP05 


Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Planned 

‐‐ 30/06/2014 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

Following a trial of A‐CDM in 2010 a revised programme and roll out has 

been agreed with full implementation expected Q2 2014. 

Gatwick had started A‐CDM in 2010, and had been due for 

implementation completion in December 2011. The program has changed 

for two reasons; Gatwick separation from BAA IT and the introduction of 

the Airfield Performance Team in January 2011. 

The Gatwick A CDM 55 programme is now in advanced user testing for 

TSAT calculation and DPI transmission to NM. Gatwick intend to go live 

with pan airport use of TSAT calculator from March. Similarly, the 

Gatwick DPI data validation is scheduled to start in March 2014. 

Since forming the airfield performance team we have decided to broaden 

our A‐CDM 55 program to meet both the Eurocontrol A‐CDM network 

requirements but also better support the Gatwick Airfield Performance 

targets. The program now includes in addition to Eurocontrol 

requirement for certification: 

‐ Integration of arrival, departure TSATs, stand allocation 

‐ Time based separation management tools 

‐ Sequencing optimiser for departures 

‐ Turnround performance monitoring and control tools 

‐ Replacement AODB and messaging system 

* The enhanced A‐CDM 55 project was launched 1st November 2011 

* Program Update 13 December 2012 

A‐CDM 55 Phase 1 [Pier 2] complete 

Phase 2 in progress and on track Launch of Operational Projects 28th 

January 2013. 

A‐CDM network integration and DPI exchanging delayed from Q4 2013 to 

Q1 2014. 

Planned 

30/04/2014 

Planned 

30/06/2014 

ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2006 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS has implemented CDA at Gatwick, and delivers a module on the 

techniques associated with its use as part of initial Air Traffic Controller 

training. 

Gatwick Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance and 

feedback to the ANSP, implemented pre‐2007. 

Annual Flight Performance Report contains CDA data and is available to 

the local community via the London Gatwick Airport website. 

This process is now integrated into the current London Airspace 

Consultation due to conclude on the 21st January 2014. The output of 

this public consultation will help inform an Airspace Change Proposal to 

be submitted to the CAA in the Summer of 2014. 

Completed 

31/01/2006 

Completed 

31/12/2006 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 




operational environmental efficiency, NATS plays an active role in Gatwick 

Airports adoption of A‐CDM. NATS is working collaboratively with the 

airport to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce 

noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

This is on hold but under review and Gatwick Airport are looking to see 

the implementation of A‐CDM first before progressing CEM; which will be 

looked at again towards the end of 2014. 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 

6.2.6 London-City Airport 

ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 



EGLC - London - City 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS plays an active role in promoting environmental best practice across 

the aviation industry including at London City. NATS is working 

collaboratively with the airport to review and improve airspace and 


London City Airports Environmental Management Programme forms part 

of the Section 106 Planning Agreement with the London Borough of 

Newham. As part of the Agreement, the systems and processes in place 

to mitigate environmental impact are reported back annually to the Local 

Authority and made available publicly. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Partly 

Completed 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

As part of the Section106 Agreement, London City is required to 

implement the following measures: 

‐ Air Quality Strategy 

‐ Noise & Track Keeping management scheme 

‐ Airline Penalty and credits system 

‐ Wake Turbulence studies and monitoring 

‐ Noise Complaints Scheme 

‐ APU Control 

‐ Restricted operating hours (daily closure 2230‐0630 and 24 

weekend closure period) 

In order to ensure that London City continually progresses its 

environmental programme, it has committed through an updated (2009) 

legal planning agreement with Newham Council, to a range of monitoring 

and mitigation strategies and action plans. 

31/12/2014 


6.2.7 London-Heathrow Airport 

AOP04.1 



Timescales: 



EGLL - London - Heathrow 

‐ 31/03/2016 

REG 

(By:12-2010) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

APO 

(By:12-2010) 








NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Heathrow within the limitations as they 

currently exist. 

Further progress on the equipage of ground vehicles and the training of 

the ground vehicle drivers awaits the final conclusion of the regulatory 

framework for the next 5 year period commencing in April 2014, with 

completion now anticipated for 2016. 

Late 

Completed 

31/01/2013 

Completed 

31/12/2002 

Late 

31/03/2016 

AOP04.2 



Timescales: 




Completed 

‐ 30/06/2007 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

APO 

(By:12-2017) 

NATS utilises A‐SMGCS Level 2 at Heathrow. 

Installed at Heathrow. 

Completed 

31/12/2002 

Completed 

30/06/2007 

AOP05 


Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 30/06/2014 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

CDM is in place at Heathrow. NATS is working closely with airport owner 

and selected airline operators to progress this further. 

A‐CDM was implemented at Heathrow during 2012. Local implementation 

was closely followed by full implementation at the end of May 2012. In 

July 2012 a full reversion took place and Heathrow remained 

disconnected from the network until July 2013 when the airport was 

again fully implemented. 

Partly 

Completed 

30/06/2014 

Partly 

Completed 

30/04/2015 


ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2006 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS has implemented CDA at Heathrow, and delivers a module on the 

techniques associated with its use as part of initial Air Traffic Controller 

training. 

Heathrow Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance and 


Completed 

31/01/2006 

Completed 

31/12/2006 

ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

Heathrow Airport have installed a formal CEM database and NATS is a 

principal partner in the successful delivery of this project. NATS is 

committed to reducing ATM environmental impact and has in place a 

large programme of activity to deliver its ambitious environmental 


operational environmental efficiency, NATS plays an active role in 

Heathrow Airport's adoption of A‐CDM and other collaborative groups on 

operational and environmental efficiency. NATS is working 

collaboratively with the airport and airlines to review and improve 

airspace and procedure design to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

See Level 2 comments. 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 

6.2.8 Newcastle Airport 

ENV01 



Timescales: 



EGNT - Newcastle 

[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2008 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

CDAs for both runways are in place and the procedures are used 

regularly. 

CDAs for both runways are in place and the procedures are used 

regularly. 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Completed 

31/01/2008 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 



EGNT - Newcastle 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2009 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

The Airline Technical Committee ‐ comprising ATC staff and Newcastle 

based airline captains ‐ meets on a quarterly basis with additional 

meetings as required. 

The Airline Technical Committee ‐ comprising ATC staff and Newcastle 

based airline captains ‐ meets on a quarterly basis with additional 

meetings as required. 

Completed 

31/01/2009 

Completed 

31/01/2009 

6.2.9 Nottingham East Midlands Airport 

ENV01 



Timescales: 



EGNX - Nottingham East Midlands 

[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/05/2005 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

East Midlands was one of the first ATC units in the country to develop 

CDAs and have been in operation since May 2005, operating 24/7 and 

compliance statistics are very high. 

As this set of SLoAs for East Midlands has been completed for some time 

an update has not been requested. 

East Midlands has a very strong commitment to environmental issues and 

multilateration track monitoring equipment is used to great effect to 

establish compliance records for individual operators. Statistics are fed to 

operators on a monthly basis, and the Airport recognises/awards airlines 

with the best compliance levels, and those achieving airport percentage 

targets. 

As this set of SLoAs for East Midlands has been completed for some time 

an update has not been requested. 

Completed 

31/05/2005 

Completed 

31/05/2005 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 




operational environmental efficiency, NATS plays an active role in Gatwick 

Airports adoption of A‐CDM. NATS is working collaboratively with the 

airport to review and improve airspace and procedure design to reduce 

noise, fuel burn and emissions. 

This is on hold but under review and Gatwick Airport are looking to see 

the implementation of A‐CDM first before progressing CEM; which will be 

looked at again towards the end of 2014. 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2015 

6.2.10 Glasgow Airport 

ENV01 



Timescales: 



EGPF - Glasgow 

‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS currently delivers CDA operations at Glasgow Airport. Some 

limitations exist due to terrain. A programme of airspace and navigation 

improvements combined with a CDA focus group with airlines is expected 

to deliver further achievement of CDA in the near future. 

Glasgow is currently working closely with its ANSP NATS to understand 

how the airport can improve upon CDAs. Glasgow has some unique 

terrain on the approach to Runway 23 which makes it more difficult for 

aircraft to complete a CDA therefore NATS are working to understand the 

best CDA profile achievable. Glasgow have promotion of CDAs as an 

explicit action in there noise action plan and will be working 

collaboratively with NATS to ensure that they can improve upon the 

number of CDAs being performed. 

[IDP] 

Late 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Late 

31/12/2015 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 



EGPF - Glasgow 

‐ ‐ 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 

NATS, the airport operator and airlines work closely to deliver 

improvements in operational efficiency. NATS is working collaboratively 

with the airport and airlines to review and improve airspace and 


Glasgow is committed to reducing environmental impacts through their 

Airport Sustainability Strategy. Work is underway to formulate an 

environmental action plan targeting areas such as engine ground running, 

FEGP and single‐engine taxi. 

Not 

Applicable 

Completed 

31/12/2011 


‐ 

6.2.11 Edinburgh Airport 

AOP04.1 



Timescales: 



EGPH - Edinburgh 

Completed 

‐ 31/01/2013 

REG 

(By:12-2010) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

APO 

(By:12-2010) 








A‐SMGCS installed at Edinburgh Airport. 

There is a new SMR project underway at Edinburgh Airport. This also 

includes the provision of vehicle transponders and updated SMR Displays 

in the Control Tower so upon completion of this project, A‐SMGCS will be 

fully implemented at Edinburgh (Autumn 2014). 

A‐SMGCS Installed at Edinburgh Airport. 

There is a new SMR project underway at Edinburgh Airport, This also 

includes the provision of vehicle transponders and updated SMR Displays 

in the ATC Control Tower. 

Upon completion of this project (planned during late 2014), A‐SMGCS will 

be fully implemented at Edinburgh Airport. 

Completed 

31/01/2013 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/10/2005 


AOP04.2 



Timescales: 




Completed 

‐ 31/12/2011 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

APO 

(By:12-2017) 

Implementation of A‐SMGCS Level 2 is complete at Edinburgh Airport. 

Air Nova 9000 was installed in 2005; augmented by RIMCAS safety 

alerting system. 

New SMR project underway at Edinburgh Airport, This also includes the 

provision of vehicle transponders and updated SMR Displays in the ATC 

Control Tower. 

This project is expected to be complete during Q4 2014. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/10/2005 

AOP05 


Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

NATS participates in the elements of collaborative decision making 

currently in place at Edinburgh Airport and will work with the airport 

operator as and when the plans for A‐CDM are more fully developed. 

Edinburgh Airport has not yet a defined or approved implementation plan 

or budget for implementation of A‐CDM. Edinburgh Airport is supportive 

of the principles and will be implementing actions were there not a cost 

barrier to implementation. 

Planned 

31/12/2014 

Planned 

31/12/2014 

ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS currently delivers CDA operations at Edinburgh Airport and is 

actively working with the airport operator and airlines to further improve 

CDO achievement. This programme follows a year long trial that NATS led 

at Edinburgh which has given excellent insight into CDO and Edinburgh 

and across airlines. The results and learning from the Edinburgh CDA trial 

are being applied across the UK. 

CDA (+CCD) techniques are fully in place. 

ANSP (NATS) staff are trained in requirements/operation and operating 

airlines are aware of, and are fully committed to, CDA + CCD measures. 

Reports regarding CDA + CCD performance are provided monthly by NATS 

and this information is reported to, and discussed with operator's at 

quarterly Flight Operations and Safety Committee meetings. 

Such information / reports are also shared with local community groups 

via our regular airport newsletter. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Completed 

31/12/2013 


ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Partly 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2014 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 





Edinburgh is actively working with the ANSP and airlines to control 

environmental impact, although no formal agreements are currently in 

place. 

Completed 

31/12/2011 

Partly 

Completed 

31/12/2014 

6.2.12 London-Stansted Airport 

AOP04.1 



Timescales: 



EGSS - London - Stansted 

Completed 

‐ 31/12/2013 

REG 

(By:12-2010) 

ASP 

(By:12-2011) 

APO 

(By:12-2010) 






compliance with essential requirements. CAP670 SUR Section 09 

contains specific requirements for A‐SMGCS. 

NATS introduced A‐SMGCS Level 1 at Stansted in December 2010. 

Stansted Airport completed. 

Completed 

31/01/2013 

Completed 

31/12/2010 

Completed 

31/12/2013 

AOP04.2 



Timescales: 




Completed 

‐ 31/12/2010 

ASP 

(By:12-2017) 

APO 

(By:12-2017) 

A‐SMGCS has been installed at Stansted. 

Installed at Stansted. 

Completed 

31/12/2010 

Completed 

30/06/2010 


AOP05 


Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Planned 

‐ 31/12/2015 

ASP 

(By:01-2016) 

APO 

(By:01-2016) 

Stansted Airport continues to evaluate A‐CDM and subject to cost analysis 

benefit will implement elements. The plan to deliver local airport 

procedures will be reviewed and developed further during 2014, NATS 

will engage in this activity as and when requested by the airport operator. 

Stansted continues to evaluate A‐CDM and subject to cost analysis benefit 

implement elements. The plan to deliver local airport procedures will be 

reviewed and developed further during 2014. 

Planned 

31/12/2015 

Planned 

31/12/2015 

ENV01 



Timescales: 




[IDP] 

Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2010 

ASP 

(By:12-2013) 

APO 

(By:12-2013) 

NATS has implemented CDA at a number of UK airports, including 

Stansted, and delivers a module on the techniques associated with its use 

as part of initial Air Traffic Controller training. 

Stansted Airport CDA techniques, monitoring of performance and 


Completed 

31/01/2006 

Completed 

31/12/2006 

ENV02 


Airports 

Timescales: 




Completed 

‐‐ 31/12/2013 

ASP 

(By:12-2016) 

APO 

(By:12-2016) 





See level 2 comments 

Completed 

31/01/2008 

Completed 

31/12/2013 


6.3 Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress 

Note that the above picture is based on the Preliminary Deployment Programme V0, published in 

December 2014 by the Deployment Manager. The full Deployment Programme is foreseen by end June 

2015. 


Annexes 

Annex A – Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process 

LSSIP Co-ordination 

LSSIP Focal Point for UK Civil Aviation Authority Craig JIGGINS 

LSSIP Contact Person for UK Eurocontrol Oscar ALFARO 

ESSIP Objective Implementation 

ESSIP 

Objective 

EUROCONTROL Objective Owners 

AOM13.1 R. BUCUROIU, O. MROWICKI, C. 

LUCCIOLI (E. REUBER till 02/2015) 

EUROCONTROL 

PEPR Objective 

Coordinator 

National Stakeholder Specialist(s) 

A. DYBOWSKA CAA/SARG – NATS - MoD 

AOM19 G. ACAMPORA, O. MROWICKI A. DYBOWSKA NATS - MoD 

AOM21 R. BUCUROIU A. DYBOWSKA NATS – MoD 

AOP03 

AOP04.1 

AOP04.2 

AOP05 

T. LICU 

P. ADAMSON 

P. ADAMSON 

P. ADAMSON 

P. VRANJKOVIC CAA/SARG – NATS – MoD – Gatwick – 

Heathrow – Manchester – Stansted 

P. VRANJKOVIC CAA/SARG – NATS – Edinburgh – Gatwick – 

Heathrow – Stansted – Manchester 

P. VRANJKOVIC NATS – Edinburgh – Gatwick – Heathrow – 

Stansted – Manchester 

P. VRANJKOVIC NATS – Birmingham – Edinburgh – Gatwick – 

Heathrow – Luton – Stansted – Manchester 

ATC02.2 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT NATS – MoD 

ATC02.5 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT NATS 

ATC02.6 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT NATS 

ATC02.7 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT NATS – MoD 

ATC07.1 P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO NATS 

ATC12 P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO NATS 

ATC15 P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL’ORTO NATS 

ATC16 S. DROZDOWSKI L. DELL’ORTO CAA/SARG – NATS – MoD 

ATC17 S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO NATS 

COM09 L. POPESCU O. ALFARO NATS - MoD 

COM10 Y. EYUBOGLU A. KOKONA NATS - MoD 

COM11 L. POPESCU A. KOKONA NATS - MoD 

ENV01 

ENV02 

C. FABER 

S. MAHONY, A. WATT 

B. HILL NATS – Birmingham – Bristol - East Midlands 

– Edinburgh – Gatwick – Glasgow – 

Heathrow – Luton – Manchester - Newcastle 

– Stansted 

B. HILL NATS - Birmingham – Bristol - Edinburgh – 

Gatwick – Heathrow – London City – Luton – 

Manchester - Newcastle – Stansted 

FCM01 H. KOOLEN O. CIOARA NATS - MoD 

FCM03 S. SMIDT O. CIOARA NATS - MoD 

FCM04 M. RICHARD O. CIOARA NATS 

FCM05 P. MATERN O. CIOARA CAA/SARG (APO) – NATS – MoD 

INF04 P. MATERN A-P. FRANGOLHO NATS - MoD 

INF07 A. PETROVSKY A-P. FRANGOLHO CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – NATS - MoD 


ESSIP 

Objective 

EUROCONTROL Objective Owners 

EUROCONTROL 

PEPR Objective 

Coordinator 

ITY-ACID A. DESMOND-KENNEDY O. CIOARA NATS - MoD 

National Stakeholder Specialist(s) 

ITY-ADQ M. UNTERREINER A-P. FRANGOLHO CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – NATS - MoD 

ITY-AGDL S. DISSING A. KOKONA CAA/SARG – NATS - MoD 

ITY-AGVCS2 J. POUZET O. ALFARO CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – NATS – MoD 

ITY-COTR S. MORTON L. DELL’ORTO NATS - MoD 

ITY-FMTP L. POPESCU O. ALFARO NATS - MoD 

ITY-SPI M. BORELY, R. STEWART O. CIOARA CAA/SARG – NATS - MoD 

NAV03 F. PAVLICEVIC A. KOKONA NATS 

NAV10 R. FARNWORTH A. KOKONA CAA/SARG – NATS 

SAF10 T. LICU I. FEIJT CAA/SARG – NATS - MoD 

SAF11 S. LAWRENCE I. FEIJT CAA/SARG (REG & APO) – NATS – MoD 


Annex B – National Stakeholders Organisation Charts 

An overview of the UK Organisation to Manage Related EATM Matters is shown below. 

Responsible Ministry 

Civil Aviation Authority/ 

Administration 

Provider of Civil Air 

Traffic Services 

Military Authority 

Department for 

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) 

NATS 

Defence Airspace and Air 

Transport (DfT) 

Traffic Management 

(DAATM) 

Great Minster House 

K6 CAA House 

4000 Parkway 

K6 CAA House 

76, Marsham Street 

45-59 Kingsway 

Whiteley, Fareham 

45-59 Kingsway 

London 

London 

Hampshire 

London 

SW1P 4DR 

WC2B 6TE 

PO15 7FL 

WC2B 6TE 

Provisional Council: 

Provisional Council: 

Jonathan Moor 

Mark Swan 

Director General Civil 

Aviation 

Group Director Safety and 

Airspace Regulation (SARG) 

Agency Advisory Body 

(AAB): 

Stuart Lindsey 

Manager Airspace (Airspace, 

ATM and Aerodromes) 

(SARG) 

Agency Advisory Body 

(AAB): 

Alison MacMaster 

Head of International 

Affairs 


Annex C – Glossary of Abbreviations 

(These are unique to the Level One and Level Two UK Reports and are in addition to those contained within the ESSIP Plan 

Abbreviations list, at Annex G) 

AAA Airspace, ATM and Aerodromes (Level One only) 

AAIB Air Accident Investigation Branch (Level One only) 

ACL Airport Co-ordination Limited (FCM05) 

ACP Airspace Change Proposal (ENV01-EGGD/ENV02-EGSS) 

ADR All-purpose Data-stream Replicators (ITY-SPI) 

AF ATM Functionality 

AFDAS Approach Funnel Deviation Alert System (AOP04.2-EGSS) 

AFPEx Assisted Flight Plan Exchange (FCM03) 

AIDU Aeronautical Information Documents Unit (AOP03) 

AIM Aeronautical Information Management (ITY-ADQ/NAV03) 

AIWG Airspace Infringement Working Group (SAF10) 

ANO Air Navigation Order (ATC16) 

AOC Airline Operators Committee (AOP03-EGCC/AOP05-various) 

AODB Airport Operational Database (AOP05-various) 

ARM Airfield Resource Management (AOP03-EGKK) 

ASBU Aviation System Block Upgrade (Level One only) 

ASI Airspace Safety Initiative (SAF10) 

ASP Airport Safety Plan (AOP03) 

ATSD Air Traffic Standards Department (ITY-AGVCS) 

AUC Airport Users Committee (AOP05-EGLL) 

AVSA Adjust Vertical Speed Adjust (ATC16) 

BM Battle Management (AOP03/SAF10) 

CCD Continuous Climb Departures (ENV01-various) 

CMIC Civil-Military Interface Committee (Level One only) 

CTOT Calculated Take Off Time (AOP05-EGKK) 

DAATM Defence Airspace and Air Traffic Management (Level One only) 

DAP Directorate of Airspace Policy (ENV02-EGGW) 

DARS Directorate of Aviation Regulation and Safety (AOP03) 

DfT Department for Transport (Various) 

DGCA Director General, Civil Aviation (Level One only) 

DIO Defense Infrastructure Organisation (AOP03) 

DOV Declaration of Verification (ATC17/COM11/ITY-ACID/ITY-EGVCS) 

EAL Edinburgh Airport Limited (AOP04.1/AOP04.2/AOP05) 

EAMS Extended Air Messaging System (Mil-EAMS) (AOP03/COM10/INF04) 

EDDUS Electronic Data Display Update Systems (ITY-COTR/ITY-FMTP) 

EFS Electronic Flight Strips (AOP05-EGBB) 

ESARR Eurocontrol Safety Regulation Requirement (Contained within the ESSIP Plan abbreviations list) 

EUROAT Eurocontrol Specifications for Operational Air Traffic (AOM13.1) 

FAS Future Airspace Strategy (AOP05-EGLC/ENV01-EGGW) 

FASIIG FAS Industry Implementation Group (AOP05-EGSS, ENV01-EGPF and Level One) 

FEGP Fixed Electrical Ground Power (ENV02-EGPF) 

FLOPC Flight Operations Committee (Various) 

FLOPSC Flight Operations Performance and Safety Committee (Various) 

FMARS Future Military Area Radar Services (ATC02.2/COM11) 

FOC Flight Operations Committee 

FOST Flag Office Sea Training (AOM19) 

FSTA Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft 

GAL Gatwick Airport Limited (AOP03/AOP05) 

GiP Global Infrastructure Partners (Level One Only) 

GLAL Glasgow Airport Limited (ENV02) 

HPD High Performance Departures (Level One only) 

iFACTS interim Future Area Control Tools Support (ATC12) 

iTEC interoperability Through European Collaboration (ATC12/ATC17/COM09/FCM03/ITY-ACID/ITY-COTR/ITY-FMTP) 

JANSC Joint Air Navigation Services Council (Level One only) 


JFC Joint Forces Command (AOP03) 

LAMP London Airspace Management Programme (NAV03) 

LLACC London Luton Airport Consultative Committee (ENV01/ENV02-EGGW) 

LNAV Lateral Navigation (NAV10) 

LRST Local Runway Safety Team (AOP03) 

LTIP Long Term Investment Plan (Level One only) 

MAA Military Aviation Authorities (AOP03) 

MAG Manchester Airports Group (Level One only) 

MARSB MoD Aviation and Regulatory Safety Board (AOP03) 

MCG Markets and Competition Group (Level One only) 

MDS Multistatic Dependency Surveillance (AOP04.1-EGKK/EGLL/EGSS) 

MilAAIB Military Air Accidents Branch (Level One only) 

MOCOR Maturity of Cross Organisational Relationship (ENV02-EGLL) 

MoD Ministry of Defence (Various) 

NATMAC National Air Traffic Management Advisory Committee (Level One only) 

NATS National Air Traffic Services (various) 

NERL NATS En-Route Limited (various) 

NIAL Newcastle International Airport Limited (AOP04.1/AOP04.2) 

NPR Noise Preferential Routes (NAV03) 

NSL NATS Services Limited (Various) 

NTCA Northern Terminal Control Area (ENV01-EGCC) 

NTKWG Noise Track Keeping working Group (ENV02-EGSS) 

OCA Oceanic Control Area (Level One only) 

OTP On Time Performance (AOP05-EGKK) 

PCP Pilot Common Project 

PDP Preliminary Deployment Programme 

RF Radius to Fix (NAV03) 

RIMCAS Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System (Various Airports) 

RISG Runway Incursion Safety Group (AOP03) 

RPAS Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (Level 1 only) 

RPG Regulatory Policy Group (Level One only) 

RTST Runway and Taxiway Safety Team (AOP03-EGLL) 

S-AF Sub ATM Functionality 

SARG Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (Various) 

SERA Standardised European Rules of the Air (AOM13.1) 

SRG Safety Regulation Group (ATC15) 

SUA Special Use Airspace (AOM19) 

TOBT Target Off Block Time (AOP05-EGKK/EGLL) 

TOC Total Organic Carbon (ENV02-EGNT) 

TOMS Tactical Operational Management Systems (FCM01/FCM03) 

TOPG Terminal Operations Performance Group (AOP05-EGGW) 

TSAT Target Start Approval Time (AOP05-EGCC/EGKK/EGLL) 

TUBS Taxiway Unavailable Bar System (AOP03-EGKK)

Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) UNITED KINGDOM

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

Delete template?

Save as template?