Written Assignment 5: Comparing Air Traffic Control Systems
For this activity you are to function as the airport manager. A United Nations delegation will visit your city next month and they want to learn about the differences in air traffic and airspace control between your airport and those of similar-sized cities in their own countries in southeastern Europe. The mayor of your city has recommended you to be the spokesman and to prepare a 5- to 8-minute presentation comparing air traffic and airspace operations at your airport with those at an airport of similar size and operation located in southeastern Europe. The written text for your presentation should run approximately 750 to 825 words, or about 3 pages.)
In your presentation, describe the important air traffic and airspace features of each airport and the differences between the airports. A State Department official has requested that you provide her with a copy of the text of your presentation prior to the meeting.
- Research FAA and ICAO materials related to air traffic control services.
- Develop a presentation as requested above.
- Submit, as your assignment, the written text of your presentation
Written Assignment 5: Comparing Air Traffic Control Systems
Name
Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
Written Assignment 5: Comparing Air Traffic Control Systems
Air Traffic Controller (ATC) is an indispensable part of airports or the airline industry. It works primarily to ensure the safety of aircraft, flight attendants, pilots, and airline passengers by coordinating aircraft movements to maintain safe distances between them (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021). Though ATC serves the same purpose across the board, operations may differ from place to place due to geographical, legal, and climatic conditions variations. This can be seen in the case of the US and countries in Southeastern Europe where Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) techniques show quite distinctive differences, as this paper will elaborate.
The differences in Air Traffic and Airspace Control between the US and the Countries in Southeastern Europe
Both the US and southeastern Europe use similar technology and operational concept to operate Air Navigation systems. However, in the US, there is only one service provider, whereby a universal automation system and a single cooperation procedure on Inter-Centre flow management are used (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2009). According to EUROCONTROL & FAA (2016), a single ANSP operates the US system, while in Europe individual ANSPs are amalgamated to form the European ATM system. Europe has 38 en-route service providers assigned to specific geographical areas. They work independently in their own systems with little incentives or obligation to cooperate on flow management. This may affect the level of coordination ATC and ATFM capacity.
The US CONUS has 20 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) while Europe has 62 ACCs (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016). The US ATM System finds it easier and more actively involved in tactical management of traffic during days of operations than Europe because it is operated by a single ARTCC (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016). The operations of ATC in Europe are further complicated by the coexistence of military ANSPs and civil air navigation service providers. These systems have different scheduling of operations at airports. Such aspects are not found in the US (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2009). In the US, most airports restrict airline scheduling. Airlines also control demand levels and adjust them according to the expected value ofoperating additional flights and the expected cost of delay (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2009). Europe, on the other hand, uses the airport capacity declaration process to control traffic at major airports in the strategic phase.
In Europe, airport slot and capacity agreements are conducted in advance to apply most of the demand/capacity management measures. In the US, demand is managed on the day of operation depending on the present situation. In Europe, aircraft operators are allocated airport slots in advance (months before the actual day). With the airport capacity declaration process, IFR capacity can easily be affected by capacity closure (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2009). As for the US, VFR conditions and airlines control demands, thereby making it more prominent by scheduling airports closer to VFR capacity. Europe and US differ in the hierarchy of traffic management. In Europe, monitoring of traffic and the development of flow measures is done by the Network Manager Operations Centre (NMOC) in Brussels. This process is coordinated by local authorities via the aid of the Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) process (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016).
NMOC coordinates the implementation of the flow measures only if requested by the local Flow Management Positions (FMP). The US hierarchy is much clearer. “Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) units work through the overlying ARTCC which coordinate directly with the ATCSCC in Virginia” (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016). The ATCSCC approves all national traffic management initiatives and also resolves inter-facility issues.
The Important Air Traffic and Airspace Features
EUROCONTROL & FAA. (2009) reports that the US airspace is affected by thunderstorms or convective weather that are more severe and widespread during summers. Such cases demand continental-wide routing and ground holds of the entire traffic flows (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2009). Sequencing tools and procedures are sequenced locally and applied within the state boundaries in Europe because of enough en-route spacing or metering. Balancing of demand and capacity is done using a comparable methodology both in the US and Europe to help in the minimization of ATM system constraints.
They do this by the use of the “ATFM planning and management” process which is airspace planning, and interactive capacity, and collaborative process, where ANSPs, airport operators, Airspace Users (AUs), military authorities, among other stakeholders work together for the improvement of the ATM System performance (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016). AUs can easily optimize their participation in the ATM system with the aid of the CDM process and mitigate the effects of constraints on airport capacity and airspace. The phases involved in this process are ATM planning and ATFM execution (Strategic ATFM, Pre-tactical ATFM, and Tactical ATFM) (EUROCONTROL & FAA, 2016).
Air Traffic Control Systems in Europe and the US differ considerably, though they have some similarities. Airplane operators should understand the differences between them to enhance flexibility. It is widely reported that the US system offers more convenience than the European system considering the way it operates and leanness. However, the European ATC system is as well effective for those who understand it. The above discussion offers some effective highlights that can help beginners to understand the difference.
References
EUROCONTROL & FAA. (2009). U.S./Europe Comparison of ATM-related Operational Performance -Final Report – October 2009. https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2019-05/us-europe-comparison-of-atm-related-operational-performance.pdf
EUROCONTROL & FAA. (2016). Comparison of Air Traffic Management-Related Operational Performance: US/Europe.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2021). Air Traffic Controllers. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/air-traffic-controllers.htm