Free Routing Airspace in Europe Implementation concepts and benefits for airspace users Lennert Bentrup - City University London Lennert.Bentrup.1@city.ac.uk Max Hoffmann - Lufthansa Systems GmbH & Co. KG Max.Hoffmann@lhsystems.com ICRAT 2016, Philadelphia, 06/21-06/25

How much profit does a ticket generate? How much is left in average after deduction of all costs? Ticket price -16.8% Labour costs -22.1% Taxes and fees 0.9% Profit -25.8% Fuel costs -34.4% Other costs* *Aircraft acquisition, maintenance, etc. How much profit does a ticket generate? Source: Bundesverband der Deutschen Luftverkehrswirtschaft e.V. (BDL), 2015. [Price of tickets - Is flying too cheap?]. (In German) [Redrawn and translated from German]

Free Routing Airspace New concept of flight execution Trajectories not based on a fixed network of waypoints interlinked with airway segments Airspace user chooses trajectories using user-defined segments between published and/or user-defined points Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Example airspace with structural restrictions Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Exemplarily ATS routing options for EGLL-UUDD flight January 2016 Map data: Google, Data SIO; NOAA; U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO, Image Landsat Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Exemplarily FRA routing options for EGLL-UUDD flight January 2016 Map data: Google, Data SIO; NOAA; U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO, Image Landsat Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Advantage of FRA Cost and Fuel savings due to more flight planning opportunities Better usage of prevailing winds More options to avoid expensive airspaces More options to avoid restricted areas Might address capacity problems, too Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Aim of study Estimate benefits that Free Routing Airspace can provide for airspace users with regard to Flight efficiency Costs savings Fuel savings Based on recent and future FR developments in Europe with focus on cost saving potential for different airspace designs Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Agenda Current status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Current status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Development and implementation of FRA initiated and coordinated by EUROCONTROL in 2008 Forms part of common Flight Efficiency Plan [1] Developed in cooperation between IATA, Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), and EUROCONTROL Becomes standard in 2022, above FL310 [2] [1] Source: EUROCONTROL, European Free Route Airspace Developments, Edition 1.0, 16 March 2015 [2] Source: European Commission, 2014, Official Journal of the European Union, Implementing Regulation (EU) No716/2014 – ANNEX 3.3 Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Source: EUROCONTROL, European Route Network Improvement Plan - Part 2 - ARN Version 2015 - 2019 Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Source: EUROCONTROL, European Route Network Improvement Plan - Part 2 - ARN Version 2015 - 2019 Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

No standardized operational requirements Differences can be: Availability Volume availability Time Availability (day, night, 24 hours) Flight planning rules Vertical and Horizontal entry/exit Usage of intermediate (published and unpublished) points for flight planning Min and Max segment length Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Current status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Simulation setup Representative trajectory calculation with Lido/Flight by Lufthansa Systems Designed to find optimized trajectory Minimum Fuel Track (MFT) Minimum Cost Track (MCT) Total costs = Fuel + Time + ATC Minimum Time Track (MTT) Minimum Distance Track (MDT) Traffic Flow Restrictions (TFRs) NOTAMs of airports, airspaces and traffic Weather (current and prognoses) Aircraft performance Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Simulated FRA Europe Map data: US Dept. of State Geographer, Data SIO; NOAA; U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO, Image Landsat Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Simulation setup (cont’d) Single homogenous airspace helps to avoid inefficiencies (cross-border routing restrictions) GND to FL660 Constant weather conditions: ISA STD and June Aircraft: Airbus A320-211 with CFM56 engines and 80% load factor Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Simulation setup (cont’d) Flight sample Top 997 city-pairs by passengers carried in 2014 Source: Eurostat 4 trajectories for each single flight: MFT ATS network MCT ATS network MFT FRA MCT FRA Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Overview of used flight sample configuration NO TFR ISA WX NO UDP NO TFR Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Current status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Ratio of trajectories in FRA with less total costs and less fuel consumption compared to ATS trajectories Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Total costs reduction (percentage) due to FRA trajectories per sample number Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Scenario 4 – The influence of the maximum segment length Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Fuel consumption reduction (percentage) due to FRA trajectories per sample number Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Current status of Free Routing Airspace in Europe Detailed description of used environment for trajectory calculations Presentation of results and discussion what impact different design options have on potential benefits Conclusion and outlook on possible follow-up studies Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Conclusion and Recommendations Expected to provide high benefits For all evaluated scenarios the AU can expect high cost and fuel savings However, different implementations characteristics effect the maximum achievable efficiency Design options have influence, but are not independent of each other. Max segment length does not matter, as long as UDPs are allowed to be used Important step for AU towards improved flight efficiency, in terms of cost and fuel Beneficial for environment Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Conclusion and Recommendations Results calculated in optimum airspace Restrictions should be as many as needed, but as few as possible restrict only if sufficient traffic separation cannot be ensured Airport and sector capacity reaches limits Flights through restricted airspaces are planned Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann

Follow-up studies Follow-up studies could evaluate the effect of Restrictions of already implemented FRA in Europe Regional differences due to different published waypoint densities Influence of different weather Free Routing Airspace in Europe | ICRAT 2016 | L. Bentrup, M. Hoffmann