www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | papers@parliament.uk | @commonslibrary

BRIEFING PAPER

Number CBP7889, 30 January 2018

Airspace change and modernisation

By Louise Butcher, Andrew Haylen

Contents: 1. What is airspace? 2. Who manages airspace? 3. Airspace standards and

regulation 4. Airspace change 5. Airspace modernisation 6. Policy progress and

modernisation

2 Airspace change and modernisation

Contents Summary 3

1. What is airspace? 4 1.1 Flight paths 5

2. Who manages airspace? 7 2.1 NATS 7

3. Airspace standards and regulation 10 3.1 International standards 10 3.2 EU 11

Single European Sky 11 Brexit 13

3.3 Domestic 14

4. Airspace change 17 4.1 The CAA and the airspace change process 17 4.2 Old airspace change process to January 2018 (CAP 725) 19

Consultation requirements 19 4.3 New airspace change process from January 2018 (CAP 1616) 20

Consultation requirements 21 4.4 Transition arrangements 23

5. Airspace modernisation 25 5.1 Why is it needed? 25 5.2 What is involved? 25

6. Policy progress and modernisation 28 6.1 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) 28 6.2 Airspace trials 30 6.3 Airspace modernisation consultation & outcome, 2017 31

Appendix 35

Cover page image copyright NATS Press Office – radar screen [via Flickr]

3 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

Summary This paper looks at the structure and management of airspace in the UK and the wider international context. It explains how airspace functions at the moment and proposals to upgrade and improve it, including the EU Single European Sky programme and the UK’s Future Airspace Strategy.

Airspace is a complex thing to understand, the easiest way to think of it is as a motorway network in the sky. Airspace is the volume of space above ground level and extends as far as aircraft can fly. UK airspace contains a network of corridors, or airways. These are usually ten miles wide and reach up to a height of 24,000 feet from a base of between 5,000 and 7,000 feet. Airspace is either considered to be ‘controlled’ or ‘uncontrolled’. In controlled airspace, there is a system of structured routes and aircraft which are managed by air traffic control (ATC) services. By contrast, a large volume of airspace in the UK is uncontrolled and this is where the pilot of the aircraft does not receive a service from the ground but has to “see and avoid” other aircraft and navigate independently.

Three main organisations have responsibility for UK airspace management and design: the Government (largely the Department for Transport) is responsible for overall aviation policy; the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the UK's aviation regulator, is responsible for the planning and regulation of all UK airspace, and at the operational level, NATS is the monopoly provider of en-route air traffic services to aircraft flying in UK airspace.

The current legal and policy framework for airspace is set by Government, in accordance with international and European standards and requirements. Member states of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), including the UK, collaborate on a common regulatory framework and agree international standards on various issues, including the access to and use of airspace. EU laws implement several of ICAO’s resolutions. The main EU initiative in this area is the Single European Sky (SES), launched in 1999 to reform the architecture of European air traffic management. Its implementation is intended to increase the overall efficiency of the European air transport system.

The UK and Ireland is planning to meet the SES requirements through its Future Airspace Strategy, published in June 2011, with a programme to modernise airspace across the UK out to 2030. The biggest changes in the UK are likely to be in the south east of England (whose airspace was designed over 40 years ago) where London’s five big airports and many smaller aerodromes create some of the world’s busiest and most complex skies.

In February 2017 the Department of Transport published a consultation on UK airspace policy reform. In October the Government announced it would proceed with most of the main proposals in the paper included establishing an Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise; providing industry with ways to assess noise impacts and choose between route options to help them manage change more effectively; and bringing compensation policy for airspace changes in line with policy on changes to aviation infrastructure. New Air Navigation Guidance took effect from 1 January 2018 and a new airspace change process began on 2 January under CAP 1616.

Further briefings on aviation-related issues can be found on the dedicated page of the Parliament website.

4 Airspace change and modernisation

1. What is airspace? Airspace is the volume of space above ground level and extends as far as aircraft can fly. UK airspace contains a network of corridors, or airways. These are usually ten miles wide and reach up to a height of 24,000 feet from a base of between 5,000 and 7,000 feet. Controlled airspace can go from ground level to 66,000 feet in some cases, and 'air routes' can have bases down to 3,500 ft.

In the UK, airspace is either considered to be ‘controlled’ or ‘uncontrolled’. In controlled airspace, there is a system of structured routes and aircraft which are managed by air traffic control (ATC) services. They oversee the airspace and monitor the separation of aircraft in order to keep them safe as they head towards their destinations.

By contrast, a large volume of airspace in the UK is uncontrolled. This is where the pilot of the aircraft does not receive a service from the ground but has to “see and avoid” other aircraft and also navigate independently. Most light aircraft and some military and commercial aircraft operate in this airspace. All arrangements for UK airspace follow internationally agreed safety and operational practices and requirements.1

A note on terms

This is a complex policy area. It is important to understand the difference between air traffic control, air navigation service providers, air traffic management and movements and air traffic services:

• ATC: Air traffic control is the service provided by controllers to prevent collisions between aircraft and to expedite and maintain an orderly flow of air traffic.

• ANSP: An air navigation service provider is a public or private entity providing air navigation services for general air traffic (e.g. NATS).

• ATM: Air traffic management is the combination of the airborne and ground-based functions (air traffic services, airspace management and air traffic flow management) to ensure the safe and efficient movement of aircraft during all phases of air operations.

• ATMs: Air traffic movements are the landings or take offs of aircraft engaged in the transport of passengers or freight on commercial terms.

• ATS: Air traffic services are the various flight information services, alerting services, air traffic advisory services and ATC services (area, approach and aerodrome control services).

For a full glossary of relevant terms, see Annex C to the Government’s February 2017 airspace consultation.

1 DfT, UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use of

airspace, CM 9397, 2 February 2017, p17

5 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

1.1 Flight paths Within controlled airspace, commercial aircraft fly within permanent airspace structures, as set out in the UK Integrated Aeronautical Information Package (IAIP). These structures include departure and arrival routes.

A flight path is the actual or planned course of an aircraft. The Government’s February 2017 consultation on its future airspace policy explains how aircraft follow flight paths over the course of a journey:

After take-off from the runway, aircraft will typically follow a pre-defined route up to a given altitude above ground level (usually 4,000 feet). This route is determined by the Standard Instrument Departure procedure (SID), which is a programme on the aircraft’s computer system. Next, the aircraft will be directed or ‘vectored’ … by air traffic controllers until they reach an airway. Airways are high-altitude routes which aircraft follow to their eventual destination.

During landing, aircraft leave their airway and enter a Standard Arrival Route (STAR). They may be ‘held’ in a stack until it is safe to bring them in for landing. Once it is safe, the aircraft are vectored with the assistance of air traffic control to safely approach the runway. For safety reasons, this closing stage requires aircraft to fly in a very straight line on their final approach. An Instrumental Landing System (‘ILS’), is often used to assist with this. It helps pilots to line up with the runway by providing vertical and horizontal guidance, even when they cannot physically see the runway.2

These principles are demonstrated graphically in the diagrams included in the Appendix.3

Air traffic controllers direct aircraft by way of ‘vectoring’. This is the practice of giving a pilot a heading which is a direction to travel towards, as a step on the way to a destination. Controllers give headings depending on a number of factors such as the position of other aircraft, weather etc. An example is given below. It shows a controller giving four separate headings to an aircraft: the first to avoid the storm, the second and third to avoid another aircraft and the fourth to get them back on route.4

2 Ibid., p17 3 Both from Ibid., pp18-19 4 Ibid., p20

6 Airspace change and modernisation

The headings depend to some extent on individual circumstances, but are predominantly determined by location and non-location specific Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) standard procedures.5

5 These are published in the Manual of Air Traffic Services (MATS). Part 1 is standard to

all ANSPs and published by the CAA. It is not location specific, and provides a general set of rules on vectoring for air traffic controllers; Part 2 is an internal document, specific to an individual ANSP (e.g. NATS) and gives location specific instructions; see: CAA, Manual of Air Traffic Services – Part 1, CAP 493, 6th ed., April 2015

7 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

2. Who manages airspace? Three main organisations have responsibility for UK airspace management and design:

• The Government (largely the Department for Transport or DfT) is responsible for overall aviation policy. Its main airspace role relates to the setting of guidance and directions for the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the UK's aviation regulator.

• The CAA is responsible for the planning and regulation of all UK airspace. Its overarching duty is to maintain a high standard of safety in the provision of air traffic services. This takes precedence over its other objectives, such as securing the most efficient use of airspace, satisfying the requirements of users of all aircraft (commercial aviation, military, and general aviation), and taking account of environmental objectives in line with Government guidance.

• At the operational level, NATS Holdings (formerly National Air Traffic Services) is the monopoly provider of en-route air traffic services to aircraft flying in UK airspace and over the north-east quadrant of the North Atlantic.6 There is competition when it comes to terminal control, etc. There is more information on NATS below.

Other organisations are involved on an international level:

• Under the auspices of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) a common regulatory framework and international standards on various issues, including the access to and use of airspace have been agreed.

• Eurocontrol is the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation. It is an intergovernmental organisation with 41 Member and 2 Comprehensive Agreement States. Its primary objective is the development of a pan-European ATM system.

• Since 2004, air traffic management has been brought under the EU Common Transport Policy, which aims to lay down common rules applicable to international transport originating in, destined for, or passing through the territory of EU Member States. The European Commission is leading on the Single European Sky initiative, which aims to create a harmonised European air traffic management system.

2.1 NATS NATS Holdings Ltd. (NATS, formerly National Air Traffic Services) is an air navigation service provider in the UK, responsible for providing air traffic services primarily within UK and Eastern North Atlantic airspace.

NATS provides air traffic navigation services to aircraft flying through UK controlled airspace and at several UK and international airports, moving over 6,000 flights daily.

6 More on North Atlantic operations can be found in: “North Atlantic Skies – The

gateway to Europe”, NATS blog, 26 June 2014

8 Airspace change and modernisation

NATS was part-privatised in 2001 by the Labour Government. NATS is a public private partnership between:

• the Airline Group, a consortium of six airlines and two other investors, which holds 42%;

• NATS staff who hold 5%;

• UK airport operator Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited (HAHL) with 4%;

• and the Government which holds 49%, and a golden share.

The Airline Group comprises:

• USS Sherwood [the Universities Superannuation Scheme];

• British Airways;

• The Pension Protection Fund (PPF);

• easyJet;

• Virgin Atlantic;

• Lufthansa;

• Thomson; and

• Thomas Cook.7

USS, a pension fund, in turn owns just less than 50% of the Airlines Group.8

Intermittently, there have been calls for the Government to sell the remainder of its shares in NATS. The last time further privatisation was floated was about five years ago. Richard Deakin, then Chief Executive of NATS, was reportedly not in favour of a ‘full privatisation’ of the company.9 The proposal was also criticised by some airlines (for example easyJet) and unions.10 The Labour Party called the proposals “ideologically driven”.11 In July 2012 then Secretary of State for Transport, Justine Greening, announced that, upon consideration, the Government had decided not to go ahead with the sale of any Government shares at the present time:

My Department ran a call for evidence last year to explore the options for the future of the Government’s 49% shareholding in the UK’s air traffic control provider, NATS Holdings plc (NATS).

The responses, along with work done by my officials in conjunction with other stakeholders, highlighted the strategic importance of NATS to the UK and the far-reaching implications of a sale at this time. These include the continued development of the single European sky agenda and the ongoing work on the

7 All of the above from: NATS, Our ownership [accessed 27 March 2017] 8 NATS press notice, “NATS statement on the Airline Group share sale to USS”, 19

November 2013 9 “Air traffic chief voices sale concerns”, Financial Times, 5 July 2010 10 “Proposed sale of air traffic controller angers airlines”, Financial Times, 23 June 2010 11 “Air traffic sell-off plans attacked”, Financial Times, 9 June 2011

Further information on NATS privatisation can be found in HC Library briefing paper SN1309.

9 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

single European sky air traffic management research programme (SESAR).

In parallel, I have considered the potential value that could be realised through a sale of the shares alongside the benefits from receiving dividends from a retained shareholding.

After considering these factors, I have concluded that it is in the best interests of the British taxpayer, the travelling public and the company itself to retain the Government’s shares in NATS at this time.12

12 HC Deb 10 July 2012, c22WS

10 Airspace change and modernisation

3. Airspace standards and regulation

The current legal and policy framework for airspace is set by Government, in accordance with international and European standards and requirements. This section of the paper provides a top-down overview of standards and regulations that influence the way airspace is designed and managed in the UK.

3.1 International standards In order for international aviation to operate as a safe and harmonious system, member states of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), including the UK, collaborate on a common regulatory framework and agree international standards on various issues, including the access to and use of airspace.13

Examples of ICAO policy development

ICAO developed the Balanced Approach which lays down a common framework for managing aircraft noise. The Balanced Approach consists of identifying the noise problem at a specific airport and analysing various measures available to reduce noise through the exploration of various measures which can be classified into four principal elements (reduction of noise at source; land use planning and management; noise abatement operational procedures; and operating restrictions).14 ICAO also developed the Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) performance requirements for aircraft navigating on an ATS route, terminal procedure or in a designated airspace. The aim of this standard is to move away from more traditional and limited ground-based navigation aids to performance-based, non-sensor specific navigation. At the 2007 ICAO General Assembly, States agreed to Resolution 36/23 on the implementation of routes and airport procedures in accordance with ICAO PBN criteria.15

The guiding documents under ICAO are called International Standards and Recommended Practices, known as ICAO Annexes. There are 18 Annexes and three Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS).16

ICAO seeks to ensure the delivery of efficient and comprehensive air navigation services through globally-planned initiatives outlined in its 2013-28 Global Air Navigation Plan and its Aviation System Blocks Upgrade (ASBU) methodology.17 This represents a “rolling, 15-year

13 ICAO) is a UN specialised agency, established in 1944 to manage the administration

and governance of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention); see: ICAO, About ICAO [accessed 14 March 2017]

14 ICAO, Aircraft Noise [accessed 14 March 2017] 15 ICAO, Performance Based Navigation – Overview [accessed 14 March 2017] 16 ICAO, Convention on International Civil Aviation, Annexes 1 to 18 [accessed 14

March 2017]; PANS-OPS, (Doc 8168), Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Aircraft Operations (two vols.) and PANS-TRG, (Doc 9868), Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training both available from ICAO

17 ICAO, 2013–2028 Global Air Navigation Plan, Doc 9750‐AN/963, 4th ed., 2013

11 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

strategic methodology which leverages existing technologies and anticipates future developments based on State/industry agreed operational objectives”.18

Eurocontrol

Eurocontrol is the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation. It is an intergovernmental organisation with 41 Members and 2 Comprehensive Agreement States. Its primary objective is the development of a pan-European ATM system. Eurocontrol helps its Member States run safe, efficient and environmentally-friendly air traffic operations throughout the European region. The aim behind the creation of Eurocontrol was to have an organisation that would be entirely responsible for upper airspace in Europe. ICAO advocated the complete integration of air traffic services, and plans were made for three international Air Traffic Control centres to be set up, to operate in the upper airspace. The Eurocontrol Convention was signed on 13 December 1960 and came into force on 1 March 1963.19 It was subsequently amended in 1981 and 1997.

3.2 EU The European Commission (EC) is an international observer at ICAO. Since the end of 2005 the EC has had a permanent representative at the ICAO in Montreal. A Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) between the European Union and ICAO was signed on 4 May 2011. The MOC addresses cooperation in the areas of aviation safety, aviation security, air traffic management and environmental protection.20

European laws implement several of ICAO’s resolutions, including the Balanced Approach and the adoption of Performance Based Navigation (PBN). There are also several pieces of environmental legislation such as the European Noise Directive.21

Single European Sky Airspace over Europe has traditionally been highly fragmented, having developed largely around state geographic borders and boundaries. The Transport Select Committee explained in a 2009 report:

International flights currently have to pass through national air traffic zones or “blocks”, before being handed over from one national authority to another. For example, passenger aircraft travelling between Brussels and Rome must pass through nine different air traffic control zones. This system leads to bottlenecks and delays, forcing aircraft to consume more fuel and jeopardising safety. As a consequence, flights in Europe are on average 49 kilometres longer than needed. The European Commission estimates that the fragmentation of Europe's airspace costs €1 billion each year and that shorter, direct routes could save five million tonnes of CO₂ annually.22

18 ICAO, Air Navigation Report, 2016 ed., 19 July 2016, p2 19 Eurocontrol, 1960 – 1970: Building the foundations [accessed 16 March 2017] 20 EC, Co-operation with ICAO [accessed 14 March 2017] 21 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p72 22 Transport Committee, The use of air space (Fifth Report of Session 2008–09), HC 163,

10 July 2009, para 73

Details on SES can be found on the European Commission website.

12 Airspace change and modernisation

The EC sought to tackle this with the introduction of the Single European Sky (SES) initiative.

What is the Single European Sky?

The Single European Sky (SES) is an initiative, launched by the European Commission in 1999, to reform the architecture of European air traffic management (ATM). It puts forward a legislative approach to meet future capacity and safety needs at a European, rather than at local level. Its implementation is intended to increase the overall efficiency of the European air transport system. The Single European Sky ATM Research Programme (SESAR) is a joint venture between the European Commission, Eurocontrol and the aviation industry. SESAR aims at developing a new generation air traffic management system capable of ensuring the safety and fluidity of air transport worldwide over the next 30 years.23

The aim of SES is to modernise air navigation services by improving airspace design and encouraging the deployment of new technologies. The key objectives are to restructure European airspace, create additional capacity and increase the efficiency of the ATM system.24 In practice, the SES should result in reduced flight times (because of shorter flight paths and fewer delays) and, consequently, in reduced flight costs and aircraft emissions.25

The EC adopted SES in 2004, bringing ATM under the EU Common Transport Policy, which sets common rules applicable to international transport originating in, destined for, or travelling within, the territory of Member States.26 SES was intended to create, by 2020, an ATM system designed, managed and regulated in a harmonised way and to sustain European aviation from an ATM viewpoint for the subsequent 30 to 40 years.

A second package, the Single European Sky II (SES II), was adopted in 2009. It is now not likely to be fully implemented until 2030-35.27 In June 2013, the Commission proposed an update to the SES Regulations, named the SES II+ initiative, to further develop some changes brought in by the 2009 SES II package and update other aspects to take account of technical progress.28

The amendments to SES I under SES II introduced a comprehensive EU-wide Performance Scheme; a refocus of the Functional Airspace Blocks to be not just about airspace but service provision in general, and a Network Manager to co-ordinate certain actions at network level. It also extended the competences of European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to air traffic management and thus shifted rulemaking support for

23 Eurocontrol, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) [accessed 16 March 2017] 24 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p72 25 European Parliament, Air transport: Single European Sky, December 2016 26 For more information on the CTP, see: European Parliament, Common transport

policy: overview, October 2016 27 Op cit., Air transport: Single European Sky 28 EC, Single European Sky II [accessed 16 March 2017]

Details on SES II and SES II+ can be found on the European Commission website.

13 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

technical implementing rules, as well as oversight of Member States, from Eurocontrol to the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).29

One of the important SES developments was the creation of Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs). FABs are bottom-up initiatives led by EU Member States, which had to be established by the end of 2012. They aim at an enhanced cooperation between ANSPs and national supervisory authorities to obtain operational efficiency gains through such strategies as common procurement, training and optimisation of air traffic controllers’ resources. Under SES II+ FABS were made more flexible, industry led, and focused on performance. The Commission said that as long as performance targets were met, it would “not try to micromanage the FABs, but rather lets the industry and States devise their own solutions”.30

The UK-Ireland FAB was the first to be established and operationally active, in 2008. Around 90% of North Atlantic air traffic passes through the UK-Ireland FAB. NATS explains its benefits:

In the first four years of operation it delivered over €70m of enabled savings to customers, including 232,000 tonnes of CO2 and 73,000 tonnes of fuel. Major projects have included the first-ever operational trial of cross-border dynamic sectorisation – the tactical switching of air traffic services between providers and a world-first operational trial of cross-border arrival management procedures, slowing down aircraft across borders in order to reduce the time they are required to spend in airport holding stacks.31

While SES has wide support it has not been without its problems and delivery has been slow. In its most recent report on the implementation of SES, published in December 2015, the EC said that the European ATM sector remains fragmented and the costs of its services are comparatively high (the unit cost of air navigation services is particularly high) and that “FAB operational objectives have not been achieved regarding the optimisation of airspace and resources, which in turn generates inefficiencies in the entire European air traffic management system and extra costs of close to €5 billion a year”.32

Brexit As indicated above, much of the legal framework for airspace derives from international institutions, including those of the European Union. On 23 June 2016, the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. The Government states in its 2017 consultation on future airspace strategy, that:

Until exit negotiations are concluded, the UK remains a full member of the European Union and all the rights and obligations

29 EASA develops common safety and environmental rules at the European level. It

monitors the implementation of standards through inspections in the Member States and provides the necessary technical expertise, training and research; see: EASA, About EASA [accessed 16 March 2017]

30 EC, Single European Sky II [accessed 16 March 2017] 31 NATS, UK-Ireland FAB [accessed 16 March 2017] 32 EC, Report… on the implementation and progress of the Single European Sky during

the 2012-2014 Period, COM(2015) 663 final, 16 December 2015, pp3-4

Information on the UK-Ireland Functional Airspace Block can be found in the project’s website.

14 Airspace change and modernisation

of EU membership remain in force. During this period the Government will continue to negotiate, implement and apply EU legislation.33

In a speech on 1 December 2016 the Chief Executive of the CAA, Andrew Haines, discussed the UK’s future relationship with EASA and highlighted the fact that the UK and France provide two thirds of all the rule making input on European Safety Regulation and together undertake close to 90% of EASA’s outsourced activities. He also said that post-Brexit the UK can ”continue to play a very active role in ICAO – indeed strengthening but it is not a substitute for European engagement”.34

3.3 Domestic The UK Government, through the Department for Transport, sets the overall policy framework for aviation in the UK and its main airspace role relates to the setting of guidance and directions for the CAA. It does not determine specific airspace arrangements or decide on particular flight paths or procedures at individual airports.35 However, the Government does:

• approve noise related operating restrictions for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs);36

• assess called-in airspace change proposals, and makes decisions to accept or reject them; and

• approve Noise Action Plans.37

33 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p15 34 CAA, The future of open skies post-Brexit, 1 December 2016 35 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p12 36 NSIPs are large scale developments (relating to energy, transport, water, or waste)

which require a type of consent known as ‘development consent’; for more information see HC Library briefing paper SN6881

37 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use of airspace, p69

15 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

A word on devolution…

Within the UK devolution settlement aviation and airspace are generally reserved matters. However, there are matters connected to airspace, like noise management and monitoring, which are devolved. The Government states in its 2017 consultation on future airspace strategy, that:

While noise policy for aerodromes is a devolved matter in relation to Scotland and Northern Ireland and planning is generally a devolved matter, noise policies proposed in this document, which are based on the Noise Policy Statement for England, shall apply where they are relevant to reserved airspace matters, such as the consideration of noise in airspace changes. … Some of our proposals relate to how noise is managed at individual airports and use of the Government’s powers to set noise controls at airports, as well as controls set through the planning system. As these powers are devolved in relation to Scotland and Northern Ireland and the planning system is also generally devolved, specific proposals … will be for the Devolved Administrations to formulate policy on.38

Under section 66 of the Transport Act 2000 the Secretary of State may give directions to the CAA imposing duties or conferring powers (or both) on it with regard to air navigation in a managed area. The Air Navigation Directions, issued in 2001 and amended in 2004, set out the duties of the CAA to “develop, promulgate, monitor and enforce a policy for the sustainable use of UK airspace and for the provision of necessary supporting infrastructure for air navigation”.39

The CAA, as the national airspace approval and regulatory authority, is responsible for airspace planning in the UK. Section 70(1) of the 2000 Act requires that in exercising its air navigation functions, the CAA must give priority to maintaining a high standard of safety in the provision of air traffic services. This duty overrides the other material factors in section 70. Beyond the overarching and primary safety duty, the CAA’s statutory functions require it to consider a number of material factors, of which securing the most efficient use of airspace is one. In formulating a policy approach for airspace change decisions, the CAA has therefore set out how it balances those material factors in a decision-making framework.40

The CAA is responsible for approving the overall layout of the published airspace structure and any proposed changes to it. As indicated above, it does this in the context of legal requirements which include safety, the environment and the needs of the consumers of aviation services. For example, changes might be needed to enable UK airspace to accommodate more flights, to incorporate new technology, to allow aircraft to fly more direct routes or to keep them away from particular

38 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p15 39 CAA, DAP Guidance: CAA Air Navigation Directions 2001, 4 December 2007, p1 40 CAA, Consultation on proposals for a revised airspace change process, CAP 1389, 15

March 2016, para 6.5

16 Airspace change and modernisation

areas.41 Airspace change is dealt with in more detail in the following section.

Under section 70(2) of the 2000 Act the CAA must take account of any guidance on environmental objectives given to it by the Secretary of State when carrying out its air navigation functions. The current guidance was published in January 2014. It takes into account policy and technical developments, including providing clarity to the CAA and the aviation community on the Government’s environmental objectives relating to air navigation. It sets out the key objectives on improving efficiency in airspace, mitigating the environmental impact of aviation noise (including the altitude based priorities) and reiterates the need to consult local communities when airspace changes are being made at airports.42 The Government has published new draft guidance alongside its 2017 consultation on future airspace policy (see section 6, below).

41 Ibid., para 2.4 42 DfT, Guidance to the Civil Aviation Authority on environmental objectives relating to

the exercise of its air navigation functions, 8 January 2014; following consultation, see: DfT, Consultation on 'Guidance to the civil aviation authority on environmental objectives relating to the exercise of its air navigation functions', 25 June 2013

17 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

4. Airspace change Airspace change – whether temporary or permanent – can have unwelcome impacts for local communities. Over recent years there have been concerns that airports have not properly consulted those who have been affected before implementing change and that the change process itself has not been properly explained.

Changes to airspace design sometimes occur to improve flight efficiency, to reduce delays, or to allow an increase in flights due to airport expansion. Airspace changes can range from modest amendments to upper airspace routes that affect only a small number of stakeholders, through to major changes in low-level airspace that impact a large number of people. Formal airspace changes occur via the CAA but may be planned ahead of a new development.

If a planning decision means that new airspace arrangements will be needed (for example when there is a new runway or amendments to an existing one), the planning process can serve as a precursor to the airspace change process. Final decisions on the structure of the UK’s airspace and detailed route design following new planning decisions go through the CAA’s Airspace Change Process. However, the planning process can consider indicative routes and their potential impacts.43 For example:

…in developing its application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) for its proposed new runway, Heathrow Airport Limited is expected to use indicative airspace arrangements, which will be considered and decided upon by the Secretary of State. Any subsequent consideration of the airspace arrangements for a new runway by the Secretary of State would not revisit what was agreed at the DCO stage, but would examine the further detail that had been developed in light of the planning agreement.44

4.1 The CAA and the airspace change process An ‘airspace change’ is defined as “a change to the notified airspace arrangements in the UK AIP”.45 As the CAA explains, it is normally characterised by one or more of a number of conditions:

• Changes to the ICAO airspace classification either through the creation of a higher classification than currently exists, or in some cases through the removal of existing controlled airspace of Classes A, C, D1 or E;46

• Changes to the lateral or vertical dimensions of existing Controlled Airspace;

43 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p26 44 Ibid, p34 45 CAA, CAA Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process, CAP 725, 15

March 2016, para 6; the AIP is the UK Integrated Aeronautical Information Package 46 For more on this, see: CAA, The Application of ICAO Airspace Classifications in UK

Flight Information Regions, 13 November 2014

18 Airspace change and modernisation

• The introduction of, or changes to, Standard Instrument Departure routes (SIDs),47 Standard Arrival Routes (STARs)48 or Noise Preferential Routes (NPRs)49 within controlled airspace. Standard Departure Routes (SDRs)50 and NPRs where they exist outside controlled airspace are not covered by this Process. However, CAA “strongly recommend[s]” that aerodrome operators adopt the same principles when considering the need for new or amended SDRs and NPRs under these circumstances;

• Introduction of, or significant changes to existing, Holding Patterns;51

• Changes to Area Control Centre (ACC) arrangements resulting in modifications to the existing published ATS route structure. Changes to ACC sector boundaries that have no additional environmental impact over that currently experienced are not normally subject to the Airspace Change Process, unless one of the characteristics described here occurs as a direct consequence of the revised arrangements;

• Delegation of ATS to an adjacent State;

• Changes to the lateral or vertical dimensions of Danger Areas, Restricted or Prohibited Airspace, Temporary Reserved Areas or significant changes in their operational use, other than emergency situations or matters of National Security;

• Changes to existing published terminal patterns and procedures where the net effect results in changes to the lateral dispersion or lowering in altitude of traffic within controlled airspace; and

• Significant changes to the hours of operation of existing airspace structures.52

Anybody can initiate, and thus, sponsor, an airspace change. Sponsors are largely aerodrome operators, the Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) (or a combination of the two); or the regulator (the CAA).

The CAA’s role in airspace change is set out in the guidance. It states that that it:

• Owns, and is fully responsible for, the Airspace Change Process;

47 A SID provides a specified Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) departure procedure that

remains wholly within Controlled Airspace and permits connectivity with the en-route ATS route system; see: CAA, Policy and Guidance for the Design and Operation of Departure Procedures in UK Airspace, CAP 778, 1 November 2012

48 As arriving aircraft begin their descent, they have to leave the Airway structure. At this point they join one of a series of STARs to their destination airport. Each airport has multiple STARs feeding their arrivals; see CAA, Description of Today’s ATC Route Structure and Operational Techniques, CAP 1379, March 2016, pp10-12

49 NPRs seek to reduce the noise impacts of departing aircraft by avoiding, as far as practicable, overflight of noise-sensitive areas in the vicinity of the aerodrome, for more see chapter 6 of op cit., Policy and Guidance for the Design and Operation of Departure Procedures in UK Airspace

50 This term is being phased out in the UK, for an explanation as to why, see ibid., para 1.3

51 ‘Significant’ is determined as a complete re-alignment or re-orientation of the hold or a lowering of the minimum holding altitude. Changes due to magnetic variation do not need to be addressed by means of an airspace change.

52 Op cit., CAA Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process, para 6

19 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

• Provides guidance to a sponsor on the application of the Process and fulfilling the operational, environmental and consultation requirements, but not to assist a sponsor in developing the airspace designs of a formal proposal for submission to the CAA;

• Scrutinises and assesses a sponsor’s formal proposal against the regulatory requirements;

• Approves or rejects the sponsor’s formal proposal and refers that decision to the Secretary of State for Transport where it considers that the proposal represents a ‘significant environmental disbenefit’;

• Must be openly and transparently accountable for the regulatory decision-making; and

• Fulfil its statutory duties and meets the Direction from the Secretaries of State for Transport and Defence for the overall interest of airspace users.53

4.2 Old airspace change process to January 2018 (CAP 725)

As set out in section 4.3, below, a new airspace change process took effect on 2 January 2018. However, there are still a number of applications being processed through the old CAP 725 process. This is explained in detail in the CAA’s CAP 725 document CAA Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process.54

A list of applications being processed through the old CAP 725 process is given on the CAA website. These include proposals affecting Doncaster-Sheffield, Southend, Birmingham, Belfast and Farnborough.

Consultation requirements There are seven stages to the Process, as set out in CAP 725. In terms of consultation, often a critical issue for those affected, likely to be, or unsure whether they would be affected by airspace change, CAP 725 states that this should form a key part of stages 2, 3 and 4 (Proposal Development, Preparing for Consultation, and Consultation and Formal Proposal Submission). Specifically, the actions of the change sponsor should be as follows:

• identify stakeholders/consultees, key messages to deliver and the most appropriate methodology to reach all stakeholders (e.g. workshops, pamphlets, open days) and further develop stakeholder/consultee List and consultation plan;

• share their airspace design option(s), consultation list and consultation plan with a focus group and seek for feedback; cover the need for, and the merits of, their design option(s) with the group;

• further develop solutions to the anticipated issues that will arise from the consultation exercise;

53 Op cit., CAA Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process, para 11 54 And the accompanying information pack: CAA, Airspace change process: Information

pack, CAP1465b, 28 October 2016

20 Airspace change and modernisation

• be clear what the design option(s) are, who may be affected and how;

• decide the most appropriate consultation methodology needed to reach all the consultees;55

• ensure that consultation material is developed in accordance with the relevant criteria56 and coordinate the varied events/methodologies;

• seek endorsement from CAA that the consultation material and method are satisfactory;

• consult widely, allowing a minimum of 12 weeks for written consultation at least once during the development of the design. Within this timeframe, the sponsor could run alternative consultation events. It must send a copy of all consultation material to the CAA at the time of distribution;

• submit the ‘record of consultation’ (all receipts, responses, etc.) as part of the Airspace Change Proposal;

• assess the need to modify the design to take account of responses from the consultation exercise; and

• publish feedback to consultees including its decision on the option selected before submitting a formal Airspace Change Proposal to the CAA.57

4.3 New airspace change process from January 2018 (CAP 1616)

A new airspace change process took effect on 2 January 2018. It is explained in detail in the CAA’s CAP 1616 document Airspace Design: Guidance on the regulatory process for changing airspace design including community engagement requirements.

A list of applications being processed through the new CAP 1616 process is given on the CAA website. At time of publication these include proposals affecting Heathrow, Luton and Liverpool.

The CAA launched a review of its process for airspace change in 2016. This was on the back of an independent study of the process conducted in 2015. The independent study, undertaken by Helios, concluded that the existing process was “under strain and could be improved”.58 To that end it proposed a number of changes to the process including:

• greater transparency;

55 In accordance with Annex D 56 Set out in the Government’s Consultation Principles [updated January 2016] and para

3.7 of CAP 725 57 Op cit., CAA Guidance on the Application of the Airspace Change Process, paras 30-

45 58 Helios for CAA, Independent review of the Civil Aviation Authority's Airspace Change

Process, CAP 1356, 8 December 2015, executive summary

21 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

• further stages to be included in the process and tighter control of the process by CAA;

• an Airspace Change Process Oversight Committee for the most significant changes;

• an appeal mechanism; and

• an airspace change portal to hold information on the status of all ongoing.59

The CAA consequently consulted on a number of changes in the spring of 2016 to reform the seven stage process in line with Helios’ recommendations.60 In October 2016 the CAA published the outcome of the consultation and its response. It said that it intended to make a number of changes by the summer of 2017 but that it would not take forward other of Helios’ recommendations, most notably an oversight committee and a formal appeal against a CAA decision.61 It also stated that it would write detailed guidance as to how the process would work in practice and publicly consult on that guidance before introducing the process.62 The guidance was published for consultation on 31 March 2017 and the outcome was published on 13 December.63

CAP 1616 was published in December and came into effect from 2 January 2018.64 It should be read in the context of the Air Navigation Guidance 2017.

Air Navigation Guidance 2017

The Air Navigation Guidance 2017 creates new expectations for the aviation industry in relation to transparency about its ongoing operations, and specifically requirements concerning proactive engagement with local communities about noise impacts. These cover:

• requirements to highlight and explain aircraft operational changes retrospectively through the production of information, and

• proactive expectations to make information available relating to aircraft movements.

The CAA is required by the Government to prepare and publish guidance to help industry meet government expectations in respect of this community engagement, and this guidance (under the heading ‘airspace information’) forms part of CAP 1616.65

Consultation requirements There are seven stages to the Process, as set out in CAP 1616. In terms of consultation, often a critical issue for those affected, likely to be, or unsure whether they would be affected by airspace change, CAP 1616 states that this should form a key part of stages 1, 2 and 3 (Design;

59 Ibid., executive summary 60 CAA, Consultation on amendments to the airspace change proposal process, CAP

1389, 15 March 2016 61 CAA, Outcome of the CAA consultation on proposals for a revised airspace change

process, CAP 1465, 21 October 2016, para 2.2 62 Ibid., para 2.3 63 CAA, Draft airspace design guidance, 31 March 2017 64 CAA, Airspace Design: guidance on the regulatory process for changing airspace

design including community engagement requirements, CAP 1616, 13 December 2017

65 DfT, UK air navigation guidance 2017, 24 October 2017

22 Airspace change and modernisation

Develop and Assess; and Consult). Specifically, the actions of the change sponsor during stages (or ‘gateways’) 1 and 2 should be as follows:

At the ‘Define’ gateway, for all changes the CAA will require evidence from the change sponsor that demonstrates that design principles were arrived at following two-way conversations. This must set out what engagement activity was undertaken (i), and what has happened as a result of that activity (ii).

(i) This will normally include records and minutes of workshops and meetings, with identification of those present and the context and nature of the discussion, and it must cover the range of stakeholders who may be impacted by the potential change. As stakeholders will often require information to aid their understanding of airspace design so as to play a part in development, evidence of how sponsors achieved this should be provided.

(ii) Sponsors must make clear where stakeholders have agreed the principles applied (and which have not if universal agreement is not achieved). Where design principles have not been agreed, objections must be clearly set out and attributed to relevant parties, as well as a clear rationale for the change sponsor’s decision in light of this feedback.

[…] At the ‘Develop and assess’ gateway, the Initial options appraisal must set out impacted audiences, as this information will be a key feature in developing the consultation strategy required during Step 3A and at the ‘Consult’ gateway.66

Stage 3 is the key ‘gateway’ for consultation. This consists of four separate steps: 3A: Consultation preparation; 3B: Consultation approval; 3C: Commence consultation; and 3D: Collate and review responses. Passing the ‘Consult’ gateway will require CAA acceptance of the change sponsor’s consultation strategy, and signifies that the full suite of consultation materials are ready to be made available.67

Finally, at stage 5 (Decide) there is the issue of the public evidence session for Level 1 airspace changes (i.e. a change that will alter traffic patterns below 7,000 feet and for which sponsors must demonstrate a clear consideration of noise impacts). CAP 1616 states:

From the CAA’s perspective, the Public Evidence Session (for Level 1 airspace changes) may be a significant point of stakeholder engagement. When the final proposal is published by the change sponsor, the CAA will also notify stakeholders of the date of the Public Evidence Session – there will be at least four weeks’ notice. The session will be a facilitated evidence-giving session at which representatives will be expected to speak themselves without formality or legal representation, in order to reinforce that information-receiving nature of the session.

Using the portal, interested parties will be able to book five-minute speaking slots on a first-come, first-served basis, to present their views on the airspace change proposal to the CAA decision-maker directly. Representative groups will be able to

66 Op cit., Airspace Design: guidance on the regulatory process for changing airspace

design including community engagement requirements, pp138-9 67 Ibid., para 142

The CAA’s consultation principles are set out in Table C1 of CAP 1616 and encompass audience, approach, materials and length.

23 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

book 10-minute slots. Attendees will not have the opportunity to challenge what other speakers say. Following the Public Evidence Session, the CAA will publish a transcript.

The CAA will not require a sponsor to attend the session, as it is designed to offer third parties the opportunity to speak directly to the decision-maker. The change sponsor may still attend – not to argue its case, but, should the Chair invite it to do so, to offer any clarification that is needed.68

4.4 Transition arrangements As set out above, while all new airspace change applications from 2 January 2018 apply the new process set out in CAP 1616 some applications continue to be processed under CAP 725. The CAA has sought to provide clarity for those applications crossing the 2 January 2018 dividing line:

• any proposal where formal consultation has yet to commence by the time the new process takes effect (and which therefore corresponds to Stage 1, Stage 2 or Steps 3A/3B of Stage 3 in the new process) should adhere to the new process from the date that the new process takes effect, to the extent that this is feasible and reasonable, and

• we will not mandate new elements of the new process for any proposal should formal consultation already have commenced by the time the new process takes effect (and is therefore at Step 3C in the new process or later).

Sponsors who started an airspace change proposal before the new CAA process and associated guidance were adopted should demonstrate to us that they have the new process in mind and have taken it into account, even though we are not requiring the new process be followed for changes that had commenced the Stage 4 consultation (under the old CAP 725 process) before 2 January 2018.

Where the change sponsor is on the cusp of where we draw the line between the old and new process, we will give consideration to requests made to us be flexible in terms of the applicable process as set out above.69

The Air Navigation Guidance 2017 sets out the Government’s transition arrangements:

Although the call-in process will apply to such proposals, the existing airspace change arrangements, including the need to follow the Air Navigation Guidance 2014, would otherwise apply to any change proposal which had already been consulted on at the time of publication of this guidance, although sponsors of such proposals should be encouraged to follow the new arrangements where it is practicable to do so. 29

The CAA is encouraged to consult the SofS if it considers there is any doubt as regards whether the Air Navigation Guidance 2017 may apply to an ongoing airspace change proposal which has yet to be submitted formally to the CAA for approval.70

68 Ibid, paras C52-4 69 CAA, Transitioning to the new airspace change process [accessed 30 January 2018] 70 Op cit., UK air navigation guidance 2017, paras 6.10-11

24 Airspace change and modernisation

25 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

5. Airspace modernisation

5.1 Why is it needed? It is generally accepted that airspace is in need of modernisation, since most of the core infrastructure and procedures supporting landing and take-off, and the location of numerous flightpaths and holding stacks have remained largely unchanged in the UK for over 40 years.71 Since then aviation has undergone huge changes, including a hundred-fold increase in demand.72 The CAA has said that the UK’s airspace system has become “complex and increasingly difficult to manage as it has been changed to meet different demands In order to meet future demand safely and efficiently a radical rethink is required”.73

The impact of antiquated airspace on flight delays was set out by the DfT in a February 2017 report as follows:

In 2015, a lack of airspace capacity resulted in 78,000 minutes of flight delays (equivalent to 54 days of total delay and an average of 9 minutes per delayed flight). These delays, whilst not substantial, are however forecast to grow to 1 million minutes by 2020 if airspace upgrades are not delivered as a matter of urgency (equivalent to 694 days and an average of 15 minutes per delayed flight). At this level, approximately 1 in 10 flights from UK airports would be delayed by more than half an hour with delay 13 times more than that experienced in 2015, an increase of 1200%.

Looking forward to 2030, the NATS analysis predicts that air traffic delays will increase to 5.6 million minutes a year (3,889 days or an average of 26.5 minutes per delayed flight), as traffic grows to an expected 3.25 million flights. If delays reach this level, more than 1 in 3 flights from all UK airports are expected to depart over half an hour late and the average delay would be 72 times more than in 2015, an increase of 7100%.74

5.2 What is involved? Modernisation is a cross-industry initiative involving airlines, airports, air navigation service providers and other aviation stakeholders working together on projects which bring in the use of modern technologies and procedures. Modernisation affects every phase of flight across the en-route, terminal and runway environments.75

The major element underpinning modernisation is switching from traditional ground-based navigation to a satellite-based system, which most modern commercial aircraft are fitted with. This can improve the flight efficiency of aircraft, for example by reducing the separation distances of aircraft and can enable the use of best practice

71 Ibid., para 3.5 72 CAA, Future Airspace Strategy: Deployment Plan, Level 1, iteration 3, version 1.2,

December 2012, p11 73 CAA, Future Airspace Strategy, in focus briefing, May 2011, p1 74 DfT, Upgrading UK Airspace: Strategic Rationale, 2 February 2017, p7 75 Op cit., Future Airspace Strategy: Deployment Plan, p16

26 Airspace change and modernisation

techniques.76 This can also enable airspace controllers to more accurately control the times when planes will be flying overhead, by flying more precise routes on different days.

Current flight paths are typically 1.5km wide. Advanced satellite navigation produces more precision, capable of fitting two aircraft within a single existing flight path.77 What this means in practice, is that more respite may be offered to communities under current flight paths through rotation of paths during different periods of the day. However, concentration can have a significant downside for those living under those paths.78

Noise concentration

Satellite navigation allows aircraft to fly far more accurately than with previous navigation techniques. Overall these more precise flight paths and new operating procedures are expected to see a reduction in the average noise levels per flight. However, the redistribution of noise impacts between different areas will often lead to more disruption for some communities living under flight paths. The effects of new, more frequent or concentrated noise may increase the risks of causing general annoyance, sleep disturbance, lower levels of productivity and health impacts.79 The Government’s current overall objective on aircraft noise is to limit and where possible reduce the number of people in the UK significantly affected. Typically this has meant a priority has been placed on reducing the overall number of people over flown.80 The pros and cons of various approaches to this problem are summarised in chapter 11 of the DfT’s Upgrading UK Airspace: Strategic Rationale, published 2 February 2017.

New technology will also allow aircraft to be constantly tracked from their original departure point and directed to adjust their speed so as to make the best possible use of airspace. For example, an aircraft might be instructed to slow down in its cruise and descent phases to absorb a delay, staying higher for longer and only descending when the airport is ready.81

Modernisation also involves the introduction of improved airspace procedures. For example, procedures would allow for reduced use of holding stacks which would create more airspace and enable aircraft to

76 e.g. a Continuous Descent Approach (CDA), which involves an aircraft descending

towards an airport in a gradual, uninterrupted approach with the engine power cut back; for more see: Eurocontrol, A guide to implementing Continuous Descent, October 2011

77 Heathrow Airport, Modern aircraft and technologies [accessed 29 March 2017] 78 See, e.g. “Flight paths for people on the way?”, HACAN Clearskies blog, 2 April 2016 79 Op cit., Upgrading UK Airspace: Strategic Rationale, para 1.27 80 Ibid., para 11.2 81 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p23

27 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

adopt a smoother and more continuous climb profile, thereby reducing engine noise. 82

With modified airspace and flight paths, modern aircraft can arrive and depart at steeper angles than older aircraft. In addition to reducing the noise footprint, this can reduce CO2 emissions because aircraft reach a fuel-efficient cruising height much sooner in their journey.83

The graphic below, taken from the Governments consultation on future airspace modernisation, shows the benefits of modernisation to aircraft operations:84

It is expected that as airspace modernisation progresses, there will be greater systemisation and that the use of vectoring practices will decline. The DfT explains:

…trials of new navigational technology have shown that intervention by controllers at the early stages of the departure flight path are much reduced, possibly by as much as 90%. So there would be a gradual reduction in the overall amount of vectoring as modern routes are implemented on departures, and the potential realised for much less direct controller intervention on arrivals in the future.85

82 As NATS explains: “holding stacks are the airport’s ‘waiting rooms’ for arriving

aircraft. Whenever aircraft cannot proceed to land immediately, flights enter at the top of the stack – usually at around 11 or 12 thousand feet before gradually spiralling down to 7,000ft.”, from: “Is this the end of stack holding?”, NATS blog, 20 May 2016

83 Heathrow Airport, Modern aircraft and technologies [accessed 29 March 2017] 84 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use

of airspace, p22 85 Ibid., p31

28 Airspace change and modernisation

6. Policy progress and modernisation

The policy debate to progress modernisation of the UK’s airspace is not new. The Labour Government’s 2003 aviation White Paper recognised the need for a “structured programme for the redesign of UK airspace that would help to protect safety standards and relieve current constraints”.86

The Transport Select Committee, in its 2008-09 report on airspace, acknowledged industry concerns about the lack of progress in developing an “Airspace Master Plan” and recommended:

The CAA should present its framework recommendations for a Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) to the Department for Transport and the industry. This work should explain the nature of the FAS, the benefits to be achieved, how the strategy relates to airport development planning processes, and the impact of the strategy on the Airspace Change Process. It should describe the safeguards required to ensure that the FAS does not pre-empt the requirement for proper consultation on airspace change proposals.87

6.1 Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) The CAA published its Future Airspace Strategy in June 2011 with a programme to modernise airspace across the UK out to 2030.88

Throughout Europe there is a move to restructure European airspace, add capacity, improve safety and increase the overall efficiency of the European air transport network through the Single European Sky (SES) project (see section 3.2, above).

The UK and Ireland is planning to meet the SES requirements through the FAS. The biggest changes in the UK are likely to be in the south east of England (whose airspace was designed over 40 years ago) where London’s five big airports and many smaller aerodromes create some of the world’s busiest and most complex skies.

In collaboration with the Department for Transport, Ministry of Defence and NATS, the CAA produced FAS with a vision to establish “safe, efficient airspace that has the capacity to meet reasonable demand, balances the needs of all users and mitigates the impact of aviation on the environment”.89 FAS proposes four big changes to the UK’s airspace:

Make airspace simpler and more flexible: Moving away from the current rigid structure of routes and different types of airspace. This would allow different users access to the same area of airspace as and when demand dictates – for example during early morning and early evening an area of airspace may be

86 DfT, The Future of Air Transport, Cm 6046, December 2003, para 12.26 87 Transport Select Committee, The use of air space (Fifth Report of Session 2008–09),

HC 163, 10 July 2009, para 35 88 CAA, Future Airspace Strategy for the United Kingdom 2011 to 2030, 30 June 2011 89 Ibid., p8

29 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

assigned to commercial operations when they are busiest. At times of lower demand it could be made more freely available to other users.

Take advantage of the latest technology: Advances in the way aircraft navigate (increased accuracy and more use of satellite navigation) and communicate with controllers (direct data transfer rather than voice communications), tied to new technology for air traffic control (advanced computer tools for controllers) will allow increases in capacity and efficiency.

Introduce more flexible routes: Allow pilots and controllers, using computer tools, to make more direct or flexible routes for aircraft that reduce delays and are more efficient – reducing the amount of fuel burnt and therefore reducing the environmental impact.

Share systems, technology and airspace across Europe: By removing national boundaries in the air, systems that are incompatible and duplicated and procedures that change from country to country, it will allow a more seamless and efficient system for aircraft to use. 90

As described by the CAA, the FAS is “not a blueprint of an airspace design; more a shopping list of technologies and methods to be deployed”.91 The investment required to upgrade UK airspace is almost entirely funded by the aviation industry.92 Key to the success of FAS is the upgrade of aircraft with Performance-Based Navigation (PBN)-compatible systems,93 air traffic control providers introducing new airspace structures, and airlines and airports sharing flight information into the ‘system’.94

DfT says that essentially FAS is based around five key upgrades:

• Remove the fixed structures in the en-route airspace, adding capacity and enabling more direct and free routes;

• Completely redesign the route network in busy terminal airspace to take account of advances in new technology, especially satellite navigation;

• Stream traffic through speed controls in the en-route phase of flight to improve arrival management and reduce the reliance on stack holding in the terminal airspace;

• Redesign airport arrival and departure routes at lower altitudes to allow flights to climb and descend continuously, and better manage the impacts of aircraft noise; and

90 Op cit., Future Airspace Strategy, in focus briefing, pp2-3 91 CAA, Future Airspace Strategy: Overview, 6 July 2016, slide 6 92 Op cit., Upgrading UK Airspace: Strategic Rationale, para 1.20 93 A route system using PBN standards allows more flexible positioning of routes and

enables aircraft to fly them more accurately. This helps improve operational performance in terms of safety and capacity, and also offers the flexibility to attempt to design routes to mitigate the environmental impact of aviation, for more information see: CAA, Airspace Design Guidance: Noise mitigation considerations when designing PBN departure and arrival procedures, CAP 1378, March 2016

94 CAA, In Focus: Updating the UK’s airspace - The Future Airspace Strategy (FAS), November 2012, p2

30 Airspace change and modernisation

• Connect airports into the network to provide and receive accurate information about traffic flows which will better manage ground delays and pinch points across the airspace.95

The FAS Deployment Plan was published in December 2012. This considered the first phase of FAS implementation from 2013 to 2020. The plan was developed with aircraft operators, airports, ANSPs, the military and regulators via the FAS Industry Implementation Group.96 The deployment plan set out “confirmed and proposed investments drawn from the programme plans and strategic ambitions of the key organisations involved”.97

Since January 2013 a cross-industry FAS Coordination and Oversight function has governed implementation of the FAS Deployment Plan. The function is led by NATS and the CAA with representation from airlines, airports, the DfT, MoD and IAA (Irish Aviation Authority) to ensure close management of the dependencies between industry implementation plans and the policy and regulatory enablers.98

6.2 Airspace trials In recent years there have been airspace trials at airports across the south east, including Heathrow, London City and Stansted as part of the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP).99 The first part of LAMP affecting London City Airport and the south coast was implemented in February 2016.100 In addition, Gatwick has undertaken a number of trials of standalone technology/procedure enablers, such as ADNID and routes 2&4. These were particularly controversial with local residents and the proposed changes around the airport were postponed.

There was also a controversial trial at Edinburgh Airport at the end of 2015. Edinburgh was the first of the Scottish airports to trial a new PBN route as part of the plans to modernise Scottish airspace.

Every airspace change trial is different, its aims, conduct, timing and outcomes are determined by the airport involved; the initial trial justification statement and its scope and objectives must be agreed with the CAA. Its consequent initiation plan must also be approved by the CAA. The sponsor must also complete a post-trial analysis and outputs report.101 For short-term, temporary changes (i.e. for trials of 90 days or

95 Op cit., Upgrading UK Airspace: Strategic Rationale, para 1.23 96 The group was formed in 2011 following publication of the FAS to link major airspace

programmes and industry investment plans 97 Op cit., Future Airspace Strategy: Deployment Plan, p4 98 Ibid., para 116 99 All the documentation relating to the London Airspace Consultation, about the

implementation of LAMP can be found on the dedicated website [accessed 29 March 2017]

100 NATS press notice, “LAMP Phase 1a airspace change now live”, 4 February 2016 101 For full details see: CAA, Policy for the Conduct of Operational Airspace Trials, 3 June

2015

Information on airspace trials at Heathrow can be found in section 2 of HC Library briefing paper SN2893.

31 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

less), consultation is not likely to be required, and the change sponsor should agree with the CAA the actual level of engagement.102

6.3 Airspace modernisation consultation & outcome, 2017

In February 2017 the Department of Transport published a consultation on UK airspace policy reform. In the House of Commons the same day the Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, said:

I am publishing proposals to modernise the way UK airspace is managed, which will be consulted on in parallel [with the consultation on a draft National Policy Statement for Heathrow expansion]. By taking steps now to future-proof this vital infrastructure, we can harness the latest technology to make airspace more efficient as well as making journeys faster and more environmentally friendly. The policy principles set out in this airspace consultation will influence decisions taken later in the planning process for a north-west runway at Heathrow. It is therefore sensible to allow members of the public to express views on both these issues at the same time.

The consultation will set out our plans to establish an independent commission on civil aviation noise and bring forward proposals to improve how communities can engage and make sure their voices are heard. To complement this, we are proposing guidance on how noise impacts should be assessed and used to inform decisions on airspace options. These proposals aim to strike a balance between the economic benefits of a thriving aviation sector and its impacts on local communities and the environment.103

This followed community pressure over recent years for the Government to act to prevent significant airspace changes being implemented without either consultation or compensation for those affected on the ground.

The Government’s intent with the consultation was to bring forward a number of benefits:

• Greater clarity and transparency in decision making and the way noise is managed;

• Improvements in the evidence used to inform how airspace decisions are made, particularly the noise impacts;

• Greater focus on industry and communities working together to find ways to manage noise which work best for local circumstances;

• Clarity and consistency in who makes airspace decisions, and why;

• Greater certainty for industry that the airspace change framework provides what they need to deliver beneficial change; and

102 Op cit., Guidance to the Civil Aviation Authority on environmental objectives relating

to the exercise of its air navigation functions, paras 9.10-9.11 103 HC Deb 2 February 2017, cc1182-3

32 Airspace change and modernisation

• Ambitious noise management outside of airspace change, taking advantage of the latest technological developments.104

To this end, the main proposals in the paper were:

• Establishing an Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise to make sure noise impacts are properly and transparently considered;

• Providing industry with ways to assess noise impacts and choose between route options to help them manage change more effectively;

• Bringing compensation policy for airspace changes in line with policy on changes to aviation infrastructure; and

• Offering greater flexibility to three of London’s major airports, so that they can adapt their noise management to the needs of their local communities, as other airports across the UK already can.105

Listed below are some of the key changes proposed in the consultation.106

A new call-in role for the Secretary of State for Tier 1 (permanent structural) changes to airspace. This would be only for airspace changes deemed to be of national importance.107 The power would be at the SofS’s discretion. The only environmental trigger would be the likely noise impact on local communities. Environmental factors other than noise may be important to an airspace proposal, but these would only be a factor in a call-in decision if their impact was expected to be as significant.108

On compensation it proposed four main changes to current policy:

• Change the policy wording to remove the word ‘development’ in terms of when financial assistance towards insulation is expected so that compensation is applicable regardless of the type of change (infrastructure or airspace change);

• Change the policy wording to allow for financial assistance towards insulation in the 63dB LAeq level or above to be applicable regardless of the level of change that causes a property to be in that noise contour level (i.e. remove requirement for a minimum 3dB change);

• Inclusion of additional wording in the policy to encourage an airspace change promoter to consider compensation for significantly increased overflight as a result of the change based on appropriate metrics, which could be decided

104 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and

use of airspace, para 1.14 105 Ibid., para 1.19 106 This list only includes those changes likely to be of most interest to MPs or are of the

most significance. It also excludes the proposed Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise as this is dealt with in some detail in HC Library briefing paper SN261

107 Mirroring in existing powers for land-based planning applications; for more information see HC Library briefing paper SN930

108 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and use of airspace, paras 4.22-4.30

33 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

upon according to the local circumstances and economics of the change proposal; and

• Include a requirement of an offer of full insulation to be paid for by the airport for homes within the 69dB LAeq or more contour, where the home owners do not want to move109

It stated that the purposes of these changes was to incorporate airspace changes into the existing compensation policy “so that compensation policy would be the same for all changes which affect noise impacts regardless of whether they are a result of infrastructure change or a tier 1 or 2 airspace change overseen by the CAA”. It also included some refinements to existing policy with the aim of “making it fairer to those impacted by higher noise levels”.110

On making transparent airspace change proposals, it stated that options analysis should be carried out as part of change processes for airspace, as appropriate. This options analysis would:

… allow communities to understand the options which have been considered, and the evidence that has informed a decision, including on whether single or multiple routes are appropriate in the circumstances. It would bring the appraisal of airspace changes in line with those for Government decisions on transport investment, including airport infrastructure. Options analysis will demonstrate an objective approach, and thereby ensure that the needs of different groups have been treated equally. This is particularly important when some groups are more able to engage with the change process than others. For example, when communities from different socio-economic groups or backgrounds are affected by an airspace change, some groups may have more time and ability to feed in their views than others.111

On assessing the adverse effects of aviation noise, it stated that Government policy “should be interpreted to mean that the number of people experiencing adverse effects as a result of aviation noise should be limited and, where possible, reduced”.112 Adverse effects were considered to be those related to health and quality of life.

On operating restrictions, it proposed two different routes for decisions being taken within the planning process, reflecting how it works elsewhere, with the SofS being the competent authority for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) in England and Wales.113 It did not speak to arrangements in Scotland and Northern Ireland, where this is a devolved issue.

109 Ibid., para 4.45 110 Ibid., para 4.44; more detail is given in paras 4.46-4.50 111 Ibid., para 5.19; more detail on options analysis is given in section 3 of the updated

draft guidance published alongside the consultation: DfT, Air Navigation Guidance: Guidance on airspace & noise management and environmental objectives, 2 February 2017

112 Ibid., para 5.48, see also paras 5.49-5.53 113 Ibid., paras 7.23-7.24; more information on NSIPs can be found in HC Library briefing

paper SN6881

34 Airspace change and modernisation

It proposed that with the exception of operating restrictions (such as night flight limitations)114 at the designated airports of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted all other noise controls and management of NPRs should be devolved to the airports themselves. The paper argued that this would “allow the designated airports to manage noise in the way that best reflects the issues faced by their communities”.115

The consultation closed on 25 May. On 24 October 2017 the Government published its updated Air Navigation Guidance 2017;116 the response to the consultation setting out how the Government intends to proceed; a summary of responses to the consultation;117 and a series of impact assessments.118

The consultation response and policy document stated that it would implement all the key policy changes set out in the consultation with two notable exceptions:

• It will not transfer responsibility for noise controls to the designated airports (Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted); and

• It will not introduce a ‘tier’ system to describe airspace change, but will instead use the terms ‘airspace change’, 'permanent and planned redistribution of air traffic' and 'aircraft operational changes to airspace usage’ to describe the three categories of change (‘airspace change’ being the most serious).119

114 For more information on the night flight regimes at these airports see HC Library

briefing paper SN1252 115 Op cit., UK airspace policy: a framework for balanced decisions on the design and

use of airspace, paras 7.31-7.37 116 See also section 4.3, above 117 OPM Group for DfT, Consultation on UK Airspace Policy: A framework for balanced

decisions on the design and use of airspace: Summary report of consultation feedback, 1 October 2017

118 DfT, UK airspace policy reform impact assessments, 24 October 2017 119 DfT, Consultation Response on UK Airspace Policy: A framework for balanced

decisions on the design and use of airspace, Cm 9520, 24 October 2017, pp7 & 9

35 Commons Library Briefing, 30 January 2018

Appendix

36 Airspace change and modernisation

BRIEFING PAPER Number CBP7889 30 January 2018

About the Library The House of Commons Library research service provides MPs and their staff with the impartial briefing and evidence base they need to do their work in scrutinising Government, proposing legislation, and supporting constituents.

As well as providing MPs with a confidential service we publish open briefing papers, which are available on the Parliament website.

Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available research briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated or otherwise amended to reflect subsequent changes.

If you have any comments on our briefings please email papers@parliament.uk. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing only with Members and their staff.

If you have any general questions about the work of the House of Commons you can email hcenquiries@parliament.uk.

Disclaimer This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties. It is a general briefing only and should not be relied on as a substitute for specific advice. The House of Commons or the author(s) shall not be liable for any errors or omissions, or for any loss or damage of any kind arising from its use, and may remove, vary or amend any information at any time without prior notice.

The House of Commons accepts no responsibility for any references or links to, or the content of, information maintained by third parties. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence.