This page covers the different areas of consultation that should be considered during the Planning Phase and is identified by the Activities these consultations are driven by.
Activity 1, Operational Requirements, will require the identification of the Key Partners who could/will influence the implementation.
Key partners are included in the determination of operational requirements. Operational requirements can appear at different levels: The level at which the requirement originates will determine which key partner must be consulted. High level requirements are often set at political level and translated into government policy. Good examples of operational requirements include the addition of a third runway (London Heathrow), the building of a new airport (e.g. Athens for the Olympic Games and Gardemoen to replace Fornebu) where the key partners include captains of industry, political parties and lobbies and environmental movements. An operational requirement to create stable approaches is at an entirely different level. These can stem from a regulatory requirement or from airline operator requirements. Here the key partners have often spoken and triggered the project, and in these key partners may be included the ANSP itself.
Activity 3, Objectives, Scope, Resources and Timescales, is the point at which the Airspace Design Team identify the stakeholders who must be engaged.
The need to consult key partners during the evolution of an airspace change is crucial. During Activity 3, when deciding the project Objectives, Scope and time/resources needed, the airspace design team must have a clear understanding of whom it needs to consult and or coordinate with, and when. Key partners in airspace changes involving ATS Routes, SIDS/STAR and/or IFPs include stakeholders such as adjacent ACCs or providers of ATM/ANS as well as public consultation partners such as airport neighbours as well as environmental lobby groups. In some configurations within providers of ATM/ANS these public consultation matters are not dealt with directly or exclusively by the airspace design team. Often, this will be undertaken through some broader political framework and members of the airspace design team may be called in to provide expert information to the general public. Consultation, irrespective of the partners, can be protracted. Generally, stakeholder consultation with like-professionals tends to be easier because the processes have become increasingly refined. Conversely, however, public consultation has become increasingly difficult over time as the public wants to fly more – and have less aircraft nuisance.
When the need for public consultation was in its infancy, many providers of ATM/ANS were caught unawares by the surprise delays and unexpected stoppage of their projects caused by popular vote or organised public objection. Today, providers of ATM/ANS and or airport operators, airlines and ATM have acquired extensive experience and automatically undertake public consultation and have become better able to gauge the time needed and what is involved in such consultations.
Activity 6, Assumptions, Enablers and Constraints, is the time when the specialists will be called upon to provide key information such that the Airspace Design team can make informed decisions on the project's evolution. Activity 6 marks the end of the Planning Phase.
Key partners in during Activity 6 are the Stakeholders, primarily airline operators, infrastructure managers, data houses, adjacent providers of ATM/ANS, airport operators – effectively, the parties identified in the airspace design team both core and extended team. The involvement of these experts is vital because they are specialists in their particular fields and avoid the making of wrong assumptions about what different enablers can or cannot do, and when they will or can become available. For example, the protracted process of installing a new DME could, without involvement of the infrastructure manager, be completely underestimated. Whilst on the one hand there is a question of order and delivery times, on the other, land has to be found, an access road ensured, security, the site requires construction, electricity provision and the equipment needs calibration. This can take up to 18 months in difficult cases.
In the next phase, Design, a different kind of expertise may be needed from the experts called upon in the Planning phase. Whilst the Planning phase would probably require more strategic-orientated pilots from the AOs to set Agree Operational Requirements (Activity 1), Set Project Objectives (Activity 3) and discuss fleet equipage evolutions as part of this activity, in the Design Phase, flight validation pilots (FVP) could prove a useful addition to the team when undertaking the preliminary procedure design.
The Team should not hesitate to adapt its expertise requirements and representation depending on the Activity and Phase under way. Note that because iterations between Activities are often necessary, adapted expertise applies in those cases as well, i.e., experts may need to be recalled or different specialists from the same field may need to work together.
Do you want to leave?