Volcanic Ash Crisis 2010 Seminar Belgrade 7 th
Volcanic Ash Crisis 2010 Seminar Belgrade, 7 th September 2010 Brian FLYNN EUROCONTROL/CFMU Network Operations European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
It all started on 14 th April … 1. 14 th April – 28 th April 2. European coordination 3. 3 rd May to 23 rd May 4. The next one …? From contingency to crisis
VAAC London - First Volcanic Ash Advisory - 14 th April CFMU activates its volcanic ash contingency procedure • Early warning – issue information on volcanic ash activity • On request of national ATC providers : CFMU applies measures effectively closing airspace • Inform the network e. g. organise teleconferences, help desk Europe enters an ash aviation crisis on Thursday 15 April
Impact on the European traffic (15 April – 21 April) • 54% of flights not operated • More than 100, 000 flights • 1% of annual traffic
Traffic in Europe 14 th to 21 st April 2010
Impact on Airports (traffic) In the area directly affected by the ash – 70% reduction Outside of the area directly affected by the ash – 23% reduction
Impact on Aircraft Operators (traffic) In the area directly affected by the ash – average reduction of 67% Outside affected areas - average reduction of 20% Several airlines lost more than 80% of foreseen traffic
Unlocking the crisis: 19 th April • Coordination – EC & EUROCONTROL – EC – political leadership – EUROCONTROL – network management expertise • EUROCONTROL proposes three options • Teleconference of the EUROCONTROL Provisional Council (AM) & EU Council of Ministers (PM) – option 3
OPTION 3 - NO FLY ZONE - Contaminated Zone - Ash Free Zone EUROCONTROL charts: • to assist states in determining NO FLY ZONE • buffer of 60 NM States to decide on NO FLY ZONE
NEW ROLE FOR EUROCONTROL/CFMU • Early warning – issue information on volcanic ash activity • On request of national ATC providers : CFMU applies measures • Facilitate information exchange e. g. organise teleconferences, help desk • Publish charts to assist states in deciding on NO FLY ZONE • NOP used as central data repository
3 rd May – Volcanic ash procedures restarted… • Closures in UK and Ireland, then Portugal, Spain, Italy, Morocco • 11 th May – UK CAA/Met Office remove the 60 NM buffer following a safety assessment - States retain prerogative to add the 60 NM buffer • 18 th May - UK CAA/Met Office issue a new CHART: black, grey, red • 21 st May – EASA issue a Safety Information Bulletin: • NO FLY ZONE, – ENHANCED PROCEDURES ZONE: GREY AND RED, – NORMAL ZONE
NEW UK MET OFFICE CHART
Daily Number of ATFM Regulations Applied
Hourly number of Exclusions Applied - Tuesday
Crisis – What Crisis • European Aviation market : a € 140 billion business • Air traffic control/management costs € 8 billion for >9 million flights/year • Airlines incurred € 9 billions losses in 2009 because of the economic crisis • • In 2007, delays generated € 1. 3 billion of costs to airlines (2010 – € 1. 7 billion? ). • Flight inefficiencies generate substantial additional fuel burn – estimated at more than € 1 billion per year - and generate some additional 16 million tonnes of CO 2 per year. • The volcanic ash cloud crisis cost airlines € 1. 26 billion in a week
Questions • • Close or advise Who closes – ATS, CAA ………. What scientific criteria? What times to close, notice, duration, reopen? • Network Information Sharing • Managing scarce resources • Role of Network manager
Issues - Dealing with ICAO, States and Regulators • Have we got dramatically different approaches Europe v North America? • What criteria are used to close, restrict airspace, airports? • How, where are these published? • Even if harmonised criteria, application is still at national level • Who decides (CAA, Regulator, ANSP…. )?
Issues - ANSP / FMP / CFMU • Dynamic closures of airspace volumes not yet a functionality of European ATM (responsibility for penetration) • Legal basis of ATFM measures • Unsustainable workload for central unit • Uncertainty regarding periods of closure • Emergency ATFCM Operating Procedures
Issues – AO – Information – Complexity - Tools • Teleconferences chaotic and unmanageable • Teleconferences not secure • Uncertainty regarding periods of closure • NOP Portal pushed to limits • Reading of NOTAM, SIGMET, NOP, etc. • E-mail help line • Airline Representative associations
Issues - Dealing with the Public • Can the “contact your local airline”, go to the airport”, etc. approach continue for major international events. • Who should play and pay for this role – EC, EUROCONTROL, IATA? • Passenger rights
Discussion Points • Crisis cells are not executive bodies. They are there to coordinate, collect and provide advice and information. There should be no duplication or usurping of decisions that are in the competence of states and regulatory agencies. • The concept of safe / unsafe operations based on 6 hourly predictions is not valid. We need to move away from the notion that we can use airspace regulations to solve an air worthiness issue. The objective is to find what sort of conditions aircraft can operate in, i. e. how we can move to option 2 satisfying air worthiness considerations. • Whatever thresholds and guidance are established need to be accepted and applies on a European wide basis.
Final Remarks • Even if the current crisis has passed and more tolerant contamination thresholds have been established we could still have a very major disruption if the volcano were to recommence • How prepared are we for another type of crisis?
- Slides: 28
