1. ADQ Implementation Workshop Austro Control – Status and Issues
ATM/AIM-SDM
Robert Wehofer, Manager Static Data Management

2. ADQ Implementation Status at Austro Control
Content
ADQ Implementation Status at Austro Control
System adaptation
Formal arrangement
AIXM 5.1 – a proper origination format?
Originators vs. ADQ
Non ADQ addressed originators
Special case: Cloud breaking procedures
Special case: NOTAM

3. ACG Project „Data quality“ for static data started in 2009
ADQ implementation Status at Austro Control
System adaptation
ACG Project „Data quality“ for static data
started in 2009
More digitalisation and automation
Digital origination formats for external originators
Designer tools for Austro Control originators
Modern database management system
Cartography
AIP production
Workflow management system for documentation („PLX“)

4. ADQ Compliance Checklist
ADQ implementation Status at Austro Control
Formal arrangement
ADQ Compliance Checklist
Generic approach rather than distinct SLA‘s
Standard form with concrete ADQ requirements for all originators
All relevant requirements must be checkmarked

5. Many States target AIXM 5.1 as origination format Reasons:
A proper origination format?
Many States target AIXM 5.1 as origination format
Reasons:
Easy to comply with ADQ Article 4 and 5(1)
Data set specification from Eurocontrol (AIXM 5.1)
But ?!?
How is the acceptance coming from originators?
Do originators understand the AIXM 5.1 specification?
Has anyone of you already seen a full AIP in complete AIXM 5.1 format? (incl. GEN part)
How well do software providers support AIXM 5.1 to cover the full AIP? (incl. GEN part)

6. AIXM 5.1 data set specification
A proper origination format?
AIXM 5.1 data set specification
is of no use for originator (too technical)
should be relevant for originators as well (Article 4)
Several GEN chapters are described by a single entity „RulesProcedures“
What would be the reaction of the originator?
„RulesProcedures. Nice! But which GEN chapters should I supply?“

7. Austro Control approach:
AIXM 5.1
Austro Control approach
Austro Control approach:
AIXM 5.1 only used for exchange between ANSP‘s
Specific origination formats that fit to originators
For ICAO relevant geographic data
Simplified XML format based on AIXM 5.1 (version independent)
Excel format (obstacle owners)
For non geographic data
Unstructured data formats (Word, PDF)
Still comply with Article 5(1) and Article 6
For each originator:
Data product specification with „reduced“ feature catalog

8. Unclear situation for AISP
Originators vs. ADQ
Non ADQ addressed originators
Discrepancy in ADQ
Not all IAIP originators are addressed
But: ADQ applies to whole IAIP (exkl. AIC)
Unclear situation for AISP
How to ensure ADQ compliance for whole AIP?

9. Two possible approaches:
Originators vs. ADQ
Non ADQ addressed originators
Two possible approaches:
Article 6(5): AISP shall define specific requirements to receive data in sufficient quality
What is sufficient quality?
If too high: Originators don‘t care
If too low: AISP is liable if something happens
Article 7(2): AISP annotates not ADQ-compliant data
Paragraph will not be seen only as temporary solution
Austro Control approach:
1) High quality requested => 2) Permanent annotation

10. Two VFR aerodromes in Austria with cloud breaking procedures:
Originators vs. ADQ
Special case: Cloud breaking procedures
Two VFR aerodromes in Austria with cloud breaking procedures:
1000 feet above ground and higher: IFR procedure
Lower than1000 feet: VFR procedure
In theory: VFR aerodromes with cloud breaking procedures are fully addressed by ADQ
VFR aerodromes with cloud breaking procedures have to supply fully ADQ compatible data
But:
Quality of aerodrome data does not affect IFR procedure in any way
ADQ in this case useless, but significantly high costs for ADs
Art. 2(2b) – „operators of those aerodromes, for which IFR procedures have been published“

11. Conclusion by the European Commission
Originators vs. ADQ
Special case: NOTAM
Conclusion by the European Commission
But:
ADQ applies to all NOTAM
Auditors would inspect all NOTAM
Conclusion should be incorporated in the ADQ!!!
Not clear: When does ADQ inhibit a timely distribution of aeronautical information? How to measure? Who is responsible for the decision?
How to deal with temporary obstacles? (e.g. crane for 2 days)
„NOTAM shall comply with ADQ, if ADQ does not inhibit the distribution of aeronautical information necessary to ensure the safety of flight.“

12. Thank you for your attention! Questions /Discussion