delay forecast - eurocontrol...varna lbwr 0% croatia zagreb ldzo 6% cyprus nicosia lccc 12% czech...

EUROPEAN ORGANISATIONFOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION

EUROCONTROL EXPERIMENTAL CENTRE

The information contained i

The views express

FAP Future ATM Profile

capa

Delay Forecast

Based on nationalcity enhancement plans

EEC Note No. 07/03

Project PFE-F-EN

Issued: May 2003

n this document is the property of the EUROCONTROL Agency and no part should bereproduced in any form without the Agency’s permission

ed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the Agency..

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

ReferenceEEC Note No. 07/03

Security ClassificationUnclassified

OriginatorEEC - NCD(Network Capacity and DemandManagement)

Originator (Corporate author) Name/Location :EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreCentre de Bois des BordesB.P.15F-91222 Brétigny-sur-Orge CEDEXFRANCE.Telephone: +33 (0) 1 69 88 75 00

Sponsor Sponsor (Contract Authority) Name/LocationEUROCONTROL AgencyRue de la Fusée, 96B-1130 BRUXELLESTelephone: +32 (0)2 729 9011

Title :

DELAY FORECAST 2003 BASED ON NATIONAL CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PLANS

AuthorsS. Vincent

M. Dalichampt

Date

05/03

Pages

IV+15

Figs

15

Tables

8

Annex

-

References

5

Project

PFE-F-ENSponsor Task No.

-Period

Feb.-March2003

Distribution Statement :(a) Controlled by : Head of NCD(b) Special Limitations (if any) : None(c) Copy to NTIS : No

Descriptors (keywords) :2003, Capacity, ATC, ATFM, delay, CFMU, FAP, Europe, ECAC, performance, capacityshortfall, future scenarios, traffic demand, traffic growth, costs, ROI, ACC, enhancement plans

Abstract :The study uses the capacity growth figures 2002-2003 declared by the ANSPs to estimate thedelay development in the summer 2003.Assumption: STATFOR (Feb. 2003) Traffic growth: Low +1.2%, Medium +2.2%, High +4.3% Airport capacities 2003 as declared to EUROCONTROLTarget: En-route ATFM delay for all flights is lower or equal to 2.1 min. per flight Methodology: Future ATM Profile (FAP)Results: The capacity increase provided by the European air navigation services will be sufficient to meet the target (forecast en-route delay between 0.4 and 0.9

minutes per flight). The 1-minute delay target set for Summer would already beattained in 2003, given that the hypotheses taken are respected.

EEUURROOCCOONNTTRROOLL EExxppeerriimmeennttaall CCeennttrreeNNeettwwoorrkk CCaappaacciittyy aanndd DDeemmaanndd MMaannaaggeemmeenntt-- NNCCDD

EEC: Delay Forecast 2003


iii

Table of Contents

ABBREVIATIONS _______________________________________________________________________ IV

1. INTRODUCTION _____________________________________________________ 1Declared capacity growth 2002 - 2003 _______________________________________ 22. DELAY FORECAST, LOW SCENARIO____________________________________ 42.1 Forecasted Traffic Growth ___________________________________________ 42.2 Delay producing ACCs in summer 2003 ________________________________ 52.3 Delay distribution __________________________________________________ 62.4 Conclusion________________________________________________________ 63. DELAY FORECAST, BASELINE SCENARIO_______________________________ 73.1 Forecasted Traffic Growth ___________________________________________ 73.2 Delay producing ACCs in summer 2003 ________________________________ 83.3 Delay distribution __________________________________________________ 93.4 Conclusion________________________________________________________ 94. DELAY FORECAST, HIGH SCENARIO __________________________________ 104.1 Forecasted traffic growth ___________________________________________ 104.2 Delay producing ACCs in summer 2003 _______________________________ 114.3 Delay distribution _________________________________________________ 124.4 Conclusion_______________________________________________________ 125. CONCLUSION, DELAY FORECAST 2003 ________________________________ 135.1 Delay per ACC ____________________________________________________ 135.2 Delay per flight over ECAC__________________________________________ 145.3 Cost for total year 2003 ____________________________________________ 146. REFERENCES ______________________________________________________ 15


EEC: Delay Forecast 2003


iv

Abbreviations

ACC Area Control CentreAMOC ATFM Modeling CapabilityATC Air Traffic ControlATFM Air Traffic Flow ManagementATM Air Traffic ManagementATS Air Traffic ServiceANSP Air Navigation Service Providers CASA Computer Assisted Slot AllocationCFMU Central Flow Management UnitCIP Convergence and Implementation ProgrammeCRCO Central Route Charges Officec/d Capacity demand ratioEAM EUROCONTROL Airspace ModelEATMP European Air Traffic Management ProgrammeECAC European Civil Aviation ConferenceMECA Model for the Economic Evaluation of Capacities in the ATM SystemRAMS Reorganized ATC Mathematical SimulatorROI Return on InvestmentSTATFOR Specialist Panel on Air Traffic Statistics and ForecastTACOT TACT Automated Command Tool


EEC: Delay Forecast 2003 1


1. Introduction

The purpose of this study was to forecast the delay during the summer 2003 in each ACC of theECAC area.

The FAP, Future ATM Profile, methodology and tools were used. They can be summarised asfollows:

For each Centre the 2003 capacity baseline was determined using the "Reverse CASA"algorithm. This capacity is defined as the declared capacity which would generate the sameATFM delay as was actually observed, if the ACC were considered as a single elementary sector.The CFMU hourly sector regulations are simplified within FAP in order to apply a constantregulation throughout the day. Unfortunately, the CASA algorithm cannot simply be employedusing an inverse function i.e. given delay figures it cannot provide capacity values. Hence foreach ACC it is necessary to consider the delay which would have been observed for ahypothetical estimate of capacity. The calculated delay is then compared to that which wasobserved and an iterative modification cycle commences until the CASA determined delay withinan ACC for an estimated value of capacity converges to that observed for the day in question.

The STATFOR service processes air traffic statistics at European level (using CFMU and CRCOdata) and produces traffic forecasts. These forecasts take into account the ‘maximum aircraftmovements per year’ at congested airports, as well as different sets of assumptions, e.g.economic growth, airline productivity, and competition from other means of transport. TheSTATFOR forecasts are based on a certain number of “traffic flows” between a number oforigin/destination zones (ODZ). An ODZ corresponds to a major airport or to a group of airports.

The ANSPs capacity forecast growth are then apply to the baselines and a 2003 set of ATFMsimulations are run to forecast the summer 2003 delay per ACC. The ANSPs capacity plans aresummarised overleaf.

ATFMSimulation

20022003ATFM

Simulation

20012002

Traffic ForecastTraffic Forecast20022003 ANSPsANSPs

Capacity plans Capacity plans

++

AirportAirportCapacity PlansCapacity Plans

20022003

+

20022003

Forecast Delay per ACC




Declared capacity growth 2002 - 2003

State ACC ACC code Plan 2003Albania Tirana LAAA 11%Armenia Yerevan UGEE 0%Austria Vienna LOVV 2%Belgium Brussels EBBU 4%Bulgaria Sofia LBSR 0%

Varna LBWR 0%Croatia Zagreb LDZO 6%Cyprus Nicosia LCCC 12%Czech Republic Praha LKAA 15/16%Denmark Copenhagen EKDK 3%Estonia Tallinn EETT 18%Eurocontrol Maastricht EDYY 7%F.R. Yugoslavia Belgrade ZZFinland Rovaniemi EFPS 0%

Tampere EFES 0%France Bordeaux LFBB 3%

Brest LFRR 3%Marseille LFMM 6%Paris LFFF 7%Reims LFEE 6%

FYROM Skopje LWSS 27%Germany Berlin EDBB 0%

Bremen EDWW 0%Dusseldorf EDLL 0%Frankfurt EDFF 0%Karlsruhe EDUU 0%Munich EDMM 2%

Greece Athinai LGGGMakedonia LGMD

Hungary Budapest LHCCIreland Dublin EIDW 4%

Shannon EISN 13%Italy Brindisi LIBB 0%

Milano LIMM 0%Padova LIPP 1%Roma LIRR 5%

State ACC ACC code Plan 2003Latvia Riga EVRR 0%Lithuania Vilnius EYVC 0%Malta Malta LMMM 0%Moldova Chisinau LUKK 5%Netherlands Amsterdam EHAA 2%Norway Bodo ENBD 0%

Oslo ENOS 5%Stavangar ENSV 0%Trondheim ENTR 0%

Poland Warsaw EPWW 6%Portugal Lisboa LPPC 11%Romania Bucuresti LRBB 0%Slovakia Bratislava LZBBSlovenia Ljubljana LJLA 10%Spain Barcelona LECB 3%

Canarias GCCCMadrid LECM 3%Palma LECP 5%Sevilla LECS 3-6%

Sweden Malmo ESMM 0%Stockholm ESOS 0%Sundsvall ESUN 0%

Switzerland Geneva LSAG 5%Zurich LSAZ 7%

Turkey Ankara LTAA 1%Istanbul LTBB 5%

UK London EGTT 11%Manchester EGCC 2%Scottish EGPX 4%

Ukraine Kharkiv UKHHKyiv UKBVL'viv UKLVOdessa UKOVSimferopol UKFF




The impact of these plans on delays has been studied for the three STATFOR hypotheses intraffic growth over Europe (low, baseline, high). A traffic sample of 55 days was simulated (fromthe 13th of June to the 7th of August).

Capacity growth 2002-2003

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Prah

a

Nic

osia

Lond

on

Zuric

h

Paris

Maa

stric

ht

Mar

seille

Rei

ms

War

saw

Rom

a

Bord

eaux

Mad

rid

Barc

elon

a

Man

ches

ter

Pado

va

Fran

kfur

t

Berli

n

Mila

no

Brin

disi

Brem

en

AC

C c

apac

ity g

row

t h




2. Delay Forecast, Low Scenario

2.1 Forecasted Traffic Growth

Traffic growth data is based on STATFOR low growth estimates, applied to the traffic pattern ofsummer 2002 (55 days, AIRAC cycles 231 and 232). This growth is given for the demand,defined as the three-hour peak (average hourly demand for the three consecutive busiest hoursin the day).

Over Europe, there is an increase of traffic of +1.2% compared to summer 2002.




2.2 Delay producing ACCs in summer 2003

The delay has been computed for the low traffic growth hypothesis predicted by STATFOR, withthe capacities as declared for each ACC. During the week, most of the ACCs would reduce their delay compared to 2002. Only Frankfurtand Milano would exceed 0.5 minute delay per flight.

Delay per flight, weekday

0

1

2

3

4

LIM

M

ED

FF

EG

CC

LIB

B

ED

LL

EG

TT

LSA

Z

ED

WW

LEC

M

ED

YY

LFE

E

LIP

P

LFB

B

LCC

C

LFFF

EP

WW

LIR

R

LKA

A

LEC

B

LFM

M

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast, low

During the weekend, Milano increases its delay, and will have more than one minute per flight.However, most of the ACCs will improve their performance compared to 2002.

Delay per flight, week-end

0

1

2

3

4

5

LIM

M

LFB

B

LSA

Z

LEC

B

LEC

M

LIP

P

LIB

B

LFE

E

LIR

R

LFM

M

LCC

C

ED

YY

EG

TT

EG

CC

ED

FF

LKA

A

EP

WW

LFFF

ED

LL

ED

WW

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast low




2.3 Delay distribution

The following map is presenting the en-route delay distribution over Europe for summer 2003.Delay over Europe is much lower than in 2002 given the low traffic growth hypothesis.

2.4 Conclusion

Traffic growth hypothesis LowTraffic 2002/2003 +1.2%

Delay per flight 2002 2003

En route delay 1.8 0.36

Total delay (en route + airports) 2.5 0.9




3. Delay forecast, Baseline Scenario

3.1 Forecasted Traffic Growth






With the medium Statfor traffic growth hypothesis, the majority of the ACCs will still reduce theirdelays in 2003. Four ACCs will increase their delays, which are Frankfurt, Milano, Manchesterand Dusseldorf, as in the low traffic growth hypothesis. Frankfurt and Milano get over one minutedelay per flight.


0

1

2

3

4

ED

FF

LIM

M

EGC

C

LIB

B

LSAZ

EDL

L

EG

TT

EDW

W

LEC

M

ED

YY

LFE

E

LIP

P

LFB

B

LFFF

LCC

C

LIR

R

LKA

A

EPW

W

LEC

B

LFM

M

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast, medium

During the week-ends, Milano will generate more than one minute delay per flight.


0

1

2

3

4

5

LIM

M

LFB

B

LSA

Z

LEC

B

LECM LIB

B

LFE

E

LIP

P

ED

YY

LIR

R

LFM

M

LCC

C

EGTT

ED

FF

EG

CC

LKA

A

EPW

W

LFFF

ED

LL

EDW

W

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast, medium





The following map is presenting the en-route delay distribution over Europe for summer 2003.Delay is very low all over Europe, and only a two ACCs are presenting delay around one minuteper flight (Milano and Frankfurt). Delay over Europe is much lower than in 2002 given the mediumtraffic growth hypothesis.

ConclusionTraffic growth hypothesis Medium

Traffic 2002/2003 +2.2%







4. Delay Forecast, High Scenario

4.1 Forecasted traffic growth






In the high traffic growth hypothesis, Frankfurt and Milano would generate an increase in delays.They significantly increase their delay compared to 2002, due to the fact that they do not plan anycapacity increase for summer 2002.


0

1

2

3

4

ED

FF

LIM

M

LEC

M

LSA

Z

LIB

B

EG

CC

ED

LL

ED

YY

EG

TT

ED

WW

LFE

E

LFB

B

LIP

P

LFFF

LCC

C

LKA

A

LIR

R

EP

WW

LEC

B

LFM

M

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast, high

During the week-end, the situation is better for Frankfurt, but getting worse for Milano. Bordeauxand Zurich are also over one minute delay per flight.


0

1

2

3

4

5

LIM

M

LFBB

LSA

Z

LEC

B

LFM

M

LEC

M

LFEE

ED

YY

LIB

B

LIR

R

LIP

P

EG

TT

ED

FF

LCC

C

EG

CC

EPW

W

LFFF

LKA

A

EDLL

EDW

W

Dela

y pe

r flig

ht, m

in

2002, observed2003, forecast, high





With the high STATFOR traffic growth hypothesis, some ACCs will have significant delays insummer 2003. However, the situation should be better than in 2002, even with the high trafficgrowth assumption.

4.4 Conclusion

Traffic growth hypothesis HighTraffic 2002/2003 + 4.3%







5. Conclusion, delay forecast 2003

5.1 Delay per ACC

Low STATFOR (+1,2%) Medium STATFOR (+2,2%) High STATFOR (+4,3%)LONDON EGTT 4.00 0.20 0.25 0.44ZURICH LSAZ 1.90 0.28 0.43 0.88MAASTRICHT EDYY 0.90 0.12 0.20 0.48REIMS LFEE 0.70 0.11 0.17 0.39NICOSIA LCCC 0.60 0.06 0.07 0.09MADRID LECM 0.50 0.18 0.28 0.85BORDEAUX LFBB 0.50 0.18 0.25 0.56FRANKFURT EDFF 0.40 0.58 1.01 2.03MARSEILLE LFMM 0.40 0.04 0.05 0.16BRINDISI LIBB 0.40 0.31 0.40 0.58MILANO LIMM 0.40 0.88 1.15 1.95BREMEN EDWW 0.30 0.15 0.20 0.32BARCELONA LECB 0.30 0.12 0.17 0.27PARIS LFFF 0.30 0.02 0.03 0.08PRAGUE LKAA 0.30 0.02 0.03 0.05DUESSELDORF EDLL 0.20 0.20 0.26 0.42MANCHESTER EGCC 0.20 0.38 0.44 0.48PADOVA LIPP 0.20 0.13 0.15 0.24ROMA LIRR 0.20 0.06 0.07 0.14WARSZAWA EPWW 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.04

Delay forecast - Summer 2003ACC Name ICAO code 2002

Observed delay

Forecast delay per flightSummer 2003

0

1

2

3

4

LON

DO

N

ZUR

ICH

MAA

STR

ICH

T

REI

MS

NIC

OSI

A

MAD

RID

BOR

DEA

UX

FRAN

KFU

RT

MAR

SEIL

LE

BRIN

DIS

I

MIL

ANO

BREM

EN

BAR

CEL

ON

A

PAR

IS

PRAG

UE

DU

ESSE

LDO

RF

MAN

CH

ESTE

R

PAD

OVA

RO

MA

WAR

SZAW

A

En-ro

ute

dela

y in

min

utes

2002 observedHigh (+4,3%)Medium (+2,2%)Low (+1,2%)




5.2 Delay per flight over ECAC

Summer 2002

Observed delay low STATFOR (+1,2%) medium STATFOR (+2,2%) high STATFOR (+4,3%)

1.8 0.36 0.5 0.93

2.5 0.9 1.1 1.7

ECAC

en-route

total (en-route + Airport)

Delay forecast - Summer 2003

Even with the high traffic growth assumption, the Provisional Council target for 2003 will bebettered. Provided that current traffic trends continue and that ANSPs provide the capacityenhancements they committed to, the 1 minute delay target set for Summer 2006 will be reachedearlier.

These results are based on the February 2003 STATFOR traffic forecast, before the start of theconflict in the Gulf. If STATFOR adjusts its figures to take into account the impact of the war, anew delay study should be carried out.

5.3 Cost for total year 2003

Baseline traffic growth (+2.2%)

According to the forecast for 2003 costs declared to the CRCO, there would be a decrease of thecapacity cost per kilometer. The direct cost of delay will also be reduced, leading to a 12%reduction in the total cost per kilometer.

Total year 2002 Total year 2003Forecast

Flights per year (CRCO) 8 228 000 8 412 000 Km controlled (CRCO) 6 583 426 220 6 730 649 169 Capacity Cost (CRCO) 5 254 590 794 5 051 806 877 Capacity cost per km 0,80 0,75 Delays (min) 17 987 563 7 914 528 Delay cost (millions) 719 502 520 316 581 109 Delay cost per km 0,11 0,05 Delay per flight 2,2 0,9 Total cost (capacity+delay) 5 974 093 314 5 368 387 986 Total cost per km 0,91 0,80




6. References

/1/ CODA Delays to Air Transport in EuropeMonthly reportsCentral Office for Delay Analysis (CODA)EUROCONTROL, Brussels

/2/ CFMU ATFM SummariesDaily, Weekly and Monthly reports

Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU)EUROCONTROL, Brussels

/3/ CRCO Executive Information ReportMonthly reportsCentral Route Charges Office (CRCO)EUROCONTROL, Brussels

/4/ A. Marsden Medium-term Capacity Enhancement Targets 2003 - 2006J.-L. Renteux EEC Note 14/01M. Dalichampt EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre

Brétigny sur Orge, France, June 2001

/5/ S. Vincent Delay Forecast 2002M. Dalichampt Based on national capacity enhancement plansJ. Lebreton EEC Note 04/02

EUROCONTROL Experimental CentreBrétigny sur Orge, France, March 2002

delay forecast - eurocontrol...varna lbwr 0% croatia zagreb ldzo 6% cyprus nicosia lccc 12% czech...

Documents