EUNADICS-AV DELIVERABLE (D -N : D5) Report on User Requirements

Transcription

1 EUNADICS-AV DELIVERABLE (D -N : D5) Report on User Requirements File name: EUNADICS-AV_Deliverable_D5.pdf Dissemination level: PU (public) Authors: Florian Lipok Dieter Meinhard Reporting period: Reviewers: Raimund Zopp (Flightkeys) Klaus Sievers (Pilot, Consultant) Mariëlle Mulder (ZAMG) Release date for final review: 14/09/2018 Final date of issue: 02/10/2018 Revision table Version Date Name Comments /July/ /Aug/ /Nov/2017 Florian Lipok, Dieter Meinhard Florian Lipok, Dieter Meinhard Florian Lipok, Dieter Meinhard /Sept/2018 Dieter Meinhard DRAFT version for Internal Review DRAFT version after Internal Review (consortium-internal distribution) FINAL version based on the review by consortium members and Klaus Sievers, finally issued on the 30/Sept/2018 ISSUED FINAL version based on the review by Mariëlle Mulder (ZAMG) Abstract Aviation is one of the key infrastructures of our modern world. Even short interruptions can cause economic damages summing up to the Billion-Euro range (primarily airline s revenues and consequential losses to society). As evident from the past, aviation shows vulnerability with regard to natural hazards and there is a significant gap in the Europe-wide availability of real time hazard measurement and monitoring combined with a near-real-time European data analysis and assimilation system. The project EUNADICS-AV aims to close this gap in data and information availability, enabling all stakeholders in the aviation system to obtain fast, coherent and consistent information. This deliverable describes the results of tasks EUNADICS-AV WP2 T2.1 (Methodological approach, basis for survey) and T2.3 (Surveying the requirements of users in regard to scenarios leading to airborne hazards) and serves as the very basis for setting-up stakeholder-driven EUNADICS-AV information offerings. As a very starting point of the analysis done within the underlying task, an overview of the players identified relevant for EUNADICS-AV is derived, comprising direct EUNADICS-AV users, stakeholders and public initiatives (SWIM). The current situation related to airborne hazards from the perspective of direct EUNADICS-AV users is addressed: starting from the legal framework, the operational environment of airlines and pilots as well as main information sources and data formats when it comes to volcanic eruptions, nuclear accidents and sandstorms/dust storms are described. Related stakeholder challenges and needs faced today are summarised and resulting stakeholder requirements towards EUNADICS-AV offerings are presented. The EUNADICS-AV project has received funding from the European Union s Horizon 2020 research programme for Societal challenges - smart, green and integrated transport under grant agreement no EUNADICS-AV - Contract Number:

2 Executive Summary The context Aviation is one of the key infrastructures of our modern world. Even short interruptions can cause economic damages summing up to the Billion-Euro range. As evident from the past, aviation shows vulnerability with regard to natural hazards and there is a significant gap in the Europe-wide availability of real time hazard measurement and monitoring combined with a near-real-time European data analysis and assimilation system. The project EUNADICS-AV aims to close this gap in data and information availability, enabling all stakeholders in the aviation system to obtain fast, coherent and consistent information. This deliverable describes the results of tasks EUNADICS-AV WP2 T2.1 (Methodological approach, basis for survey) and T2.3 (Surveying the requirements of users in regard to scenarios leading to airborne hazards) and serves as the very basis for setting-up stakeholderdriven EUNADICS-AV information offerings. Stakeholder network As a very starting point of the analysis done within the underlying task, an overview on the players identified relevant for EUNADICS-AV is derived. VAACs SWIM Initiatives EUROCONTROL EACCC ICAO WMO EASA Public bodies and authorities RSMC NMS MWO MET service providers Flow management centre Pilots Airline operation / management centres Atmospheric info provider Airports Ground handling Air traffic controllers Military operation / management centres EUNADICS-AV users As schematically shown in the figure, they are grouped into the following clusters, indicating their role within the context of EUNADICS-AV: Direct users Stakeholders o Atmospheric information providers o Public bodies and authorities Initiatives (SWIM) 2

3 For the direct EUNADICS-AV users, particularly airlines and pilots, the state of the art when it comes to airborne hazards, resulting challenges, needs and requirements are analysed based on desk research and 14 interviews with project-external stakeholders and experts conducted face-to-face and via phone. Legal environment In the case of volcanic eruptions, the Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan (Edition July 2016) grants airspace users the decision whether to fly or not to fly based on their own Safety Risk Assessment. Consequently, most countries do not close their airspace as a default procedure in the event of a volcanic eruption. In Europe only Germany, Croatia, Lithuania, Albania and Bulgaria generally do not allow flight operations in areas of high contamination (flight operations in areas of medium and low contamination are allowed); Cyprus does not allow flight operations in areas of high and medium contamination. As the decision whether to fly or not broadly lies at the airspace user, they can use any source of information without limitation. Currently only limited aviation-specific regulations or guidelines are in place when it comes to nuclear incidents; ICAO Annex 3 contains information on how nuclear release sites should be shown on charts and how information should be promulgated via the SIGMET system. In general, the national authorities of each country are responsible for the regulations of the maximum dose rate of radiation, dealt within the national Radiation Protection Ordinance. Exemplary, the critical values of the Austrian Radiation Protection Ordinance are: Maximum dose rate for single persons: 1 Millisievert per year. It is possible to exceed this limit, as long as the next 5 years the limit of 1 Millisievert is not exceeded. Maximum dose rate for persons occupationally exposed to radiation: 20 Millisievert per year over a period of 12 consecutive months. In exceptional cases, a maximum of 50 Millisievert is permitted, as long as in the 60 following months the effective dose rate of 100 Millisievert is not exceeded. 1 What concerns sandstorms and dust storms, the following recommendation is given in the Amendment 76 to the International Standards and Recommended Practices, Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation (Annex 3 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation) at the fifth meeting of its 198th Session on 27 February 2013: Recommendation. Sandstorm/dust storm should be considered: a) Heavy whenever the visibility is below 200 m and the sky is obscured; and b) Moderate whenever the visibility is: 1) Below 200 m and the sky is not obscured; or 2) Between 200 m and 600 m. Operational environment of airlines The target users for EUNADICS-AV products (distributed potentially via EUMETNET, as indicated in chapter 6) work in the departments Dispatch or Flight Operations (FOC) within an airline, also responsible for performing Safety Risk Assessments and related mitigation 1 Source: Verordnung des Bundesministers für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft über Maßnahmen zum Schutz des fliegenden Personals vor kosmischer Strahlung (Strahlenschutzverordnung fliegendes Personal FlP-StrSchV),

4 plans. Amongst others, flight dispatchers primarily use flight planning software, and the flight operations officers are the main users of ASD (Aircraft Situation Display) products. To schematically describe the way information related to airborne hazards (e.g. volcanic ash information) is actually processed, a representative approach followed by airlines interviewed within their Safety Risk Assessment is given: Information related to airborne hazards are received from VAACs and/or EUROCONTROL (comprising polygons of the area affected and three levels of ash concentration, updated in regular intervals) as well as other information sources (e.g. EVITA and/or data from national MET offices). In case a specific area is closed, a NOTAM is issued by the local authority and distributed via EUROCONTROL. Within the Safety Risk Assessment, the information derived from the different sources are compared and airline dispatchers decide in close interaction with related stakeholders which information is used for planning individual flights; subsequently, the information that is perceived most detailed and reliable is applied. Depending on the system environment used by the respective airline, the information provided by the respective sources is automatically or manually integrated in the flight planning solution and adapted based on the results of the Safety Risk Assessment and corresponding mitigation strategies. Operational environment of pilots Besides airlines, particularly also pilots are seen as users of EUNADICS-AV products. When it comes to airborne hazards, the main information source for preparing a flight are the VAACs and MET Watch Offices for volcanic eruptions; the pre-flight briefing packages received by pilots are up to 25 pages, including ash concentration charts for areas served by VAAC London and Toulouse. While data on volcanic ash is provided, information on SO2 (concentrations) in the areas concerned are lacking, but needed from a pilot s perspective because they cause a bad smell and even can, in the long term, lead to engine damage (blade liberation events). In addition to the information provided, a pilot continuously needs to pay attention to potential hazards but lack the respective (measuring) instruments. Consequently, some of them use further information sources to be better up-to-date before and during a flight. For instance, volcanic-ash charts and related analysis provided by EUMETSAT and CIMSS as well as information / charts from DLR / BIRA-IASB / EUMETSAT for SO2, EVITA, NOAA, Support to Aviation Control Service (SACS, etc. In the case of a nuclear incident, the warning is done in a similar way as it is done for volcanic eruptions; the pilots receive the coordinates of the area affected and use this information in the map used on-board. For Fukushima, the area issued by the MET Watch Office Tokyo was a relatively small region, not considering the wind regime nor the cloud height. Information sources and data formats Currently airspace users can make use of the following information sources for airborne hazards (the first two sources are provided in accordance with ICAO Annex 3, additional sources are listed in alphabetical order): Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers National Meteorological Services 4

5 Aviation Weather Center ( Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies ( EUMETSAT ( EVITA/NOP ( NOAA/CIMSS Volcanic Cloud Monitoring web portal ( Support to Aviation Control Service ( Sky Vector Aeronautical charts ( The weather company, WSI ( Information is typically provided in formats used for the communication of meteorological data in the aviation domain. They are briefly described below due to their direct relevance for EUNADICS-AV (in alphabetical order): Airmen's Meteorological Information (AIRMET) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) Pilot Report (PIREP) Satellite images (IR or VIS) Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMET) Significant Weather Chart (SIGWX-CHART) Volcano Observatory Notice for Aviation (VONA) Main stakeholder s challenges today Generally, materials to be measured, related parameters as well thresholds, valid forecasts models and aviation procedures triggered in the case of an event are not available for all airborne hazards considered. Information related to airborne hazards (particularly volcanic ash) is provided from different sources including VAACs, EVITA, met services, national authorities which are not necessarily matching; in different formats (free text, SIGMETs, NOTAMs, polygons, charts, etc.); for large-scale areas (not individual flights) with no / less information on concentrations and no near real-time updates; and sometimes in a too conservative (pessimistic) manner and with lacking precision, depending on the information source and modelling used. Processing of data provided is not standardised the airline / pilot needs to decide on which source they trust according to their experience and the situation faced; has to integrate the selected data into their systems (sometimes manually); and faces information overload (particularly pilots during flight briefing). 5

6 Resulting stakeholder needs and requirements Single source of information: Establishment of one reliable source of airborne hazard information; Brings together all available information and issues the most precise information package (based on satellite products and ground measurements for instance); Acts as a certified organisation stakeholders can trust. System interoperability: Usage of standardized data formats (e.g. XML) and full SWIM compliance; Information is automatically processable by airline systems, particularly standard flight planning software and state-of-the-art briefing services; Data on airborne hazards is publicly available. Information quality: Precise forecasts / indication of forecasts (VAAC and EVITA tend to be too conservative according to selected interview partners / airlines); Information on the type, location, height (more than 3 flight levels) and concentration of the hazard concerned; Provision of probabilistic forecasts; Dynamic information with an update rate of 3-6 hours + push upon changes; Information for single flights. Display of information: Provision of graphical information (e.g. satellite images, high-resolution polygons) related to the current situation and forecasts / ensembles based on aviation maps (it needs to be assured that the information consumes only a small amount of data when transmitted to the aircraft); Usage of hazard icons combined with respective thresholds and actual measurements / forecasts in colour coding; High usability to be immediately self-explanatory in irregular usage contexts. Quantitative requirements (online survey with 7 responders in total): Minimum (not optimum) spatial resolution required for modelling products: o 5km-10km: 2 responders o 10km-20km: 1 responder o 20km-50km:1 responder Preferred resolution / number of horizontal information layers (volcanic ash) o 3 layers are sufficient: 1 responder o 3-5 layers needed: 3 responders o 5-7 layers needed: - o 7 or more layers needed: 1 responder Acceptable update rate for volcanic ash measurements / forecasts: o 6 hours: 1 responder o 5 hours: - o 4 hours: 1 responder 6

7 o 3 hours: 1 responder o 2 hours: 1 responder o 1 hour: 2 responders Interest in a single forecast (giving the best possible estimate of the hazard) or multiple scenario forecasts (giving different possible scenarios of the hazard): o Single forecast: 2 responders o Multiple forecasts: 2 responders o Other: "Single short term forecast for reliable dispatch combined with a multiple long term forecast for planning different course of action based on later development." Excursion - Requirements for satellite products for volcanic ash (Source: VAST project) The following user requirements for satellite products were collected by the VAST project team ( and documented in the publicly available deliverable User Requirements Document, Volcanic Ash Strategic-initiative Team (VAST), 2013 ( The survey distinguishes between operational and research users; below the requirements of operational users towards satellite products are summarised: The internet (84%) and (60%) are preferred as the main delivery mechanisms for ash-related products and alerts. Image files (80%) and GIS formats (48%) are seen as most favourable data formats for receiving volcanic satellite products. The majority (39%) stated that their minimum requirement for spatial resolution of forecast products is between 5 and 10 km. With a minimum spatial resolution of 1 to 2,5 km 87% of users conducted are satisfied. According to the survey responses, there seems to be an acceptance of 70% for any vertical minimum resolution of volcanic hazard observation products. Another 17% would accept a vertical resolution of m. A strong preference (79%) for the geographic latitude longitude coordinate system for observation and forecast products is given. 92% wants to receive error characterisation along with their products; A slight majority of them prefer the error characterisation in units. For most (around 75%) of the users conducted, the minimum acceptable spatial accuracy of satellite-based products (both volcanic cloud dispersion and SO2 retrieval) is less than 10 km. Minimum update frequencies for volcanic cloud dispersion products vary between 30 minutes and 6 hours and for SO2 retrieval products between 60 minutes and 6 hours. Preferences for time elapsed after eruption until the first model forecast product is available vary between 15 minutes and 2 hours and their minimum acceptable update frequency is in the range of 1 hour to 6 hours for the majority of users. 74% of the respondents are in favour of ensemble model forecasts, 26% prefer single mode forecasts. 7

8 Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Setting the scene Methodology and approach Acronyms and abbreviations EUNADICS-AV stakeholder network EUNADICS-AV users Atmospheric information providers Public bodies and authorities Public initiatives Current situation related to airborne hazards from EUNADICS-AV users perspective Legal environment Operational environment of airlines Operational environment of pilots Information sources Information formats Main communication channels User & Stakeholder challenges and needs Overall (O) Volcanic ash (V) Nuclear events (N) Sandstorms (S) Major fires (F) Solar activity (space weather, W) Stakeholder requirements Overall (OR) Volcanic ash (VR) Nuclear emissions (NR) Sandstorms (SR) Major fires (F) Solar activity (space weather, W) Conclusions and recommendations Appendix Stakeholder interview guide

9 List of Figures Figure 1: Methodology and approach Figure 2: The SPIN approach Figure 3: Outcome of Task T Figure 4: EUNADICS-AV stakeholder network Figure 5: KLM Operations Control Centre Figure 6: Areas of responsibility of the VAACs around the world Figure 7: SWIM stakeholder network Figure 8: Implementation roadmap for Enabling Aviation Infrastructure including SWIM Figure 9: National safety risk assessment approach in the case of volcanic eruption (Europe) Figure 10: INES ratings published by IAEA Figure 11: Aircraft operator safety risk assessment procedures directly relevant for EUNADICS-AV Figure 12: Exemplary Safety Risk Assessment worksheet Figure 13: Screenshot Flightkeys 5D Figure 14: Screenshot Sabre Flight Plan Manager Figure 15: Screenshot Jeppesen JetPlan Figure 16: Screenshot Lufthansa Lido/Flight 4D Figure 17: Screenshot Navblue N-Flight Planning Figure 18: Screenshot FlightAware Figure 19: Screenshot Sabre Flight Explorer Figure 20: Screenshot Flightradar Figure 21: Screenshot NOP Figure 22: Screenshot WSI Fusion Figure 23: Procedures to be considered by the flight crew in case of volcanic ash contamination Figure 24: Operational users preferences for volcanic hazard products and services

10 List of Tables Table 1: List of interviewed stakeholders Table 2: List of acronyms and abbreviations Table 3: List of VACC locations Table 4: Additional maintenance inspections due to volcanic ash encounters Table 5: Approximate radiation intensity levels at different locations at Chernobyl reactor shortly after the explosion Table 6: Summary of main information sources and related message types Table 7: Challenges & user needs for all scenarios Table 8: Challenges & user needs for volcanic ash Table 9: Challenges & user needs for nuclear events Table 10: Challenges & user needs for sandstorms Table 11: Challenges & user needs for space weather Table 12: User requirements for each scenario Table 13: User requirements for volcanic ash Table 14: User requirements for nuclear emissions Table 15: User requirements for sandstorms Table 16: User requirements for space weather

11 1. Introduction 1.1 Setting the scene Aviation is one of the key infrastructures of our modern world. Even short interruptions can cause economic damages summing up to the billion-euro range (primarily airline s revenues and consequential losses to society). As evident from the past, aviation shows vulnerability with regard to natural hazards. Safe flight operations, air traffic management and air traffic control is a shared responsibility of EUROCONTROL, national authorities, airlines and pilots. All stakeholders have one common goal, namely to warrant and maintain the safety of flight crews and passengers. Currently, however, there is a significant gap in the Europe-wide availability of real time hazard measurement and monitoring information for airborne hazards describing what, where, how much in 3 dimensions, combined with a near-real-time European data analysis and assimilation system. This gap creates circumstances where various stakeholders in the system may base their decisions on different data and information. The project EUNADICS-AV aims to close this gap in data and information availability, enabling all stakeholders in the aviation system to obtain fast, coherent and consistent information. The project intends to combine and harmonize data from satellite earth observation, ground based and airborne platforms, and to integrate them into state-of-the art data assimilation and analysis systems. Besides operational data sources, data from the research community are integrated as well. Hazards considered in the project include volcano eruptions, nuclear accidents and events as well as forest fires and sahara dust. The availability of consistent and coherent data analysis fields based on all available measurements will greatly enhances air traffic s capability to respond to disasters effectively and efficiently, minimizing system downtimes and thus economic damage while maintaining the safety of millions of passengers. This deliverable describes the results of tasks EUNADICS-AV WP2 T2.1 (Methodological approach, basis for survey) and T2.3 (Surveying the requirements of users in regard to scenarios leading to airborne hazards) and serves as the very basis for setting-up stakeholderdriven EUNADICS-AV information offerings. 11

12 1.2 Methodology and approach The methodological approach for the survey applied to identify the user requirements related to EUNADICS-AV offerings was set-up in task T2.1 of the EUNADICS-AV WP2 and is summarised in the following figure: Figure 1: Methodology and approach In a first step, the value chain, or in the case of EUNADICS-AV the stakeholder network, was defined together with all project partners. Then, starting from discussions at the kick-off meeting, user scenarios were defined, serving as the basis for assessing the current situation, challenges perceived and resulting user needs and requirements (each need and requirement is defined for a specific user scenario and user group). Scenarios are also directly connected to the EUNADICS-AV WP7 task T7.1 (Identification and definition of appropriate hazard scenarios), evaluating the individual scenarios regarding their impact on aviation. Besides internal information exchanges and the desk research conducted, a survey for identifying EUNADICS-AV user requirements is done based on problem-centred interviews, applying the SPIN approach logic 2. SPIN stands for Situation, Problem, Implication and Need. The following figure shows a representative question for each stage of the interview. Figure 2: The SPIN approach 2 Originally Rackham N.: SPIN Selling, Hampshire,

13 As a result, for each scenario and EUNADIS-AV user, their needs and resulting requirements are identified. The outcome gathered is schematically shown in the following figure: Current Scenarios User Needs User Requirements USER REQ. 1 USER NEED 1 USER REQ. 2 SCENARIO A USER NEED 2 USER REQ. 3 USER NEED 3 USER REQ. 4 END USER 1 SCENARIO B USER NEED 4 SCENARIO C END USER 2,... SCENARIO D,... USER NEED... USER REQ.... Figure 3: Outcome of Task T2.3 Furthermore, the interview approach selected allows to reveal lessons learned, potential barriers, challenges, drivers and gaps, which are important to address. The interview guide followed is presented in the Appendix, chapter 7.1. Stakeholders interviewed are listed in the table below. Organisation Met Office London EUROCONTROL Klaus Sievers Aviation Weather Austrian Swiss Wideroe Airlines Wideroe Airlines Emirates Emirates SAS Jet2 Environment Agency Austria ESA Role Strategic Operations Manager (Government Services) EUROCONTROL Network Manager Pilot Head of Operations Control & Dispatch Head of Operations Control & Hub Management Navigation / Performance Pilot Navigation / Performance Pilot Head of Flight Dispatch Dispatch Head of Operations Control Project development manager, operations control Environmental Sciences Mission Manager for satellite missions / space for 13

14 ICAO Meteorology Panel Civil Aviation Authority Environmental Agency Austria COPERNICUS. Chairman Chief Meteorological Officer Head of Environmental Sciences Table 1: List of interviewed stakeholders Additionally, to set-up a common understanding as well as collect respective stakeholder requirements, project-internal interviews were held with: Markus Kerschbaum, Austrocontrol Andreas Pfoser, Austrocontrol Carl-Herbert Rokitansky, University Salzburg Raimund Zopp, Flightkeys Lucia Mona, CNR Mikhail Sofiev, FMI In addition, the Austrian Air Force (BMVLS, project partner) invited Brimatech to an excursion to the airspace safety operation Daedalus 17 ; during these two days, insights to the Austrian Military air operations and user requirements were gained. Furthermore, Klaus Sievers, a long-experienced pilot who is also part of the EUNADICS-AV advisory board, held a one-day workshop together with Brimatech addressing the following topics: Validation of the EUNADICS-AV stakeholder network; Discussion on the scenario evaluation matrix; Analysis of today s challenges as well as needs and requirements related to EUNADICS-AV form an expert pilot s perspective. In order to keep close contact with the modelling and development work packages of EUNADICS-AV, Brimatech presented preliminary results of the user requirements survey at the WP3 meeting on the 26 th of April in Vienna. After this presentation and a resulting, teaminternal discussion, follow-up questions were addressed in an online survey focusing on quantitative user requirements. 14

15 1.3 Acronyms and abbreviations Acronym 4DWxCube ACARS ACC ADS-B AIM AIRMET AIS ANSP ASD ATC ATFCM ATFM ATM ATS CFSP CIMSS CONOPS EACCC EAD EASA EFB EVITA FAA FIC FIR FL FO FOC GIS ICAO IFR IWXXM KPI MMS MTCD MWO NMS NOAA NOP NOTAM PIREP Explanation 4DWeatherCube MET-GATE Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System Area Control Centre Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast Aeronautical Information Management Airmen s Meteorological Information Aeronautical Information Service Air Navigation Services Provider Aircraft Situation Display Air traffic control Air Traffic Flow and Capacity Management Air Traffic Flow Management Air traffic management Air Traffic Services Computer Flight Planning Service Provider Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies Concept of operations European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell European AIS Database European Aviation Safety Agency Electronic Flight Bag European Crisis Visualisation Interactive Tool for ATFCM Federal Aviation Administration Flight Information Centre Flight Information Region Flight level Flight Object Flight Operational Control / Flight Operations Centre Geographical Information System International Civil Aviation Organization Instrument Flight Rules ICAO Meteorological Information Exchange Model Key Performance Indicator Mission Management System Medium Term Conflict Detection Meteorological Watch Office National Meteorological Services National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Network Operations Plan Notice to Airmen Pilot Report 15

16 RSMC SACS SESAR SIGMET SIGWX- CHART SRA SWIM TCH VAAC VFR VONA WMO WOC XML Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre Support to Aviation Control Service Single European Sky ATM Research Significant Meteorological Information Significant Weather Chart Safety Risk Assessment System-Wide Information Management Type Certificate Holder Volcanic Ash Advisory Center Visual Flight Rules Volcano Observatory Notice for Aviation World Meteorological Organization Wing Operation Centre Extensible Markup Language Table 2: List of acronyms and abbreviations 16

17 2. EUNADICS-AV stakeholder network As a very starting point of the analysis done within T2.3 (Surveying the requirements of users in regard to scenarios leading to airborne hazards), an overview on the players identified relevant for EUNADICS-AV is presented below. VAACs SWIM Initiatives EUROCONTROL EACCC ICAO WMO EASA Public bodies and authorities Airports RSMC NMS MWO MET service providers Atmospheric info provider Ground handling Air traffic controllers Figure 4: EUNADICS-AV stakeholder network Flow management centre Pilots Airline operation / management centres Military operation / management centres EUNADICS-AV users As schematically shown in the figure, they are grouped into the following clusters, indicating their role within the context of EUNADICS-AV: Direct users Stakeholders o Atmospheric information providers o Public bodies and authorities Initiatives (SWIM) The respective users and stakeholders are briefly described in the following sections. Furthermore, the state-of-the-art when it comes to airborne hazards, resulting challenges, needs and requirements are analysed form the perspective of EUNADICS-AV direct users in chapters 3, 4 and EUNADICS-AV users The stakeholders addressed within this sub-chapter are seen as users of EUNADICS-AV products, provided potentially via EUMETNET, as indicated in chapter 6. They use the information and services provided by EUNADICS-AV for their operation and are interacting with other stakeholders during their daily business and within crisis situations. The main 17

18 benefit derived form EUNADICS-AV is the improved information level what concerns airborne hazards, both in terms of data on the current situation and forecasts. Airline operation / management centres Within airline operation centres (also known as Integrated Operations Control Centre, Flight Operations Centre, Dispatch and Maintenance Control), flight dispatchers (also known as aircraft dispatcher, airline dispatcher, flight follower or flight operations officer) assist in planning flight paths, taking into account aircraft performance and loading, en-route winds, thunderstorm and turbulence forecasts, airspace restrictions, and airport conditions. 3 Following SESAR, we use the term Flight Operations Centre (FOC) here. The following figure exemplarily shows the KLM-OCC. 4 Figure 5: KLM Operations Control Centre According to EUROCONTROL, main activities of the OCCs comprise: 5 Assisting pilots during flight preparation; Preparing briefing packages for pilots; Monitoring crew duty times and rotations, including sickness; Planning aircraft rotations; Key hub management / coordination; Determining optimum flight trajectories; Cancelling / re-routing of flights for whatever reason (weather, terrorism, etc.); Determining required fuel uplift; 3 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 4 Source: 5 Source: EUROCONTROL, 2017, 18

19 Coordination with maintenance departments; Coordination with ATC; Flight following services; Ensuring passenger connections; Recovering irregularities. By providing a flight following service, dispatchers advise pilots when conditions change. Dispatchers sometimes share responsibility for the operational control, which gives them authority to divert, delay or cancel a flight. Military operation / management centres Military operation centres perform similar tasks as airline operation centres in civil contexts but with a special focus on military actions and their coordination. Main activities include for instance: 6 Planning missions; Blocking airspace to conduct training operations; Performing flights for measurement purposes (e.g. in the event of volcanic ash dispersion); Fulfilling national security tasks. Following SESAR, we use the term Wing Operations Centre (WOC) here. Pilots A pilot is a person who controls the flight of an aircraft and has the final responsibility for safe operation of an aircraft. Amongst other duties like assessing technical problems, attending to passenger needs, leading the flight- and cabin crew, pilots are also responsible for the assessment of meteorological information, with emphasis on evaluating flight options when faced with airborne hazards. In these contexts, the pilot is the ultimate authority for the safe operation of the aircraft and may, in an emergency, deviate from instructions given by air traffic controllers to the extent required to maintain safe operation of their aircraft. For some operational decisions, the pilot shares responsibility with the Flight Control Officer in the FOC. Air traffic controllers Air traffic control (ATC) is a service provided by ground-based controllers who direct aircraft on the ground and through controlled airspace, and can provide advisory services to aircraft in non-controlled airspace. 7 Air traffic control service is a service provided for the purpose of: Preventing collisions o between aircraft, and o on the manoeuvring area between aircraft and obstructions; and Expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of air traffic. (ICAO Annex 11) Air traffic control service is provided 6 Source: Eurocontrol, 2017, 7 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 19

20 to all IFR flights in airspace Classes A, B, C, D and E; to all VFR flights in airspace Classes B, C and D; to all special VFR flights; to all aerodrome traffic at controlled aerodromes. Clearances issued by air traffic control units provide separation between all flights in airspace Classes A and B; between IFR flights in airspace Classes C, D and E; between IFR flights and VFR flights in airspace Class C; between IFR flights and special VFR flights; between special VFR flights when so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority. 8 Flow management centres 9 Air traffic flow management (ATFM) is the regulation of air traffic in order to avoid exceeding airport or air traffic control capacity in handling traffic, and to ensure that available capacity is used efficiently. As a basis, each airport and air traffic control sector has a published maximum capacity. When the respective capacity is exceeded, measures are taken to reduce the traffic. 2.2 Atmospheric information providers The players addressed within this section are seen as stakeholders in the context of EUNADICS-AV offerings. On the contrary, compared to the direct users described in chapter 2.1, they are expected to not directly apply EUNADIS-AV products into their operations but may act as partners for information exchange and cross-validation of data related to airborne hazards. Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers 10 A Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) is a special institution within a weather service. It comprises experts, extensive access to technology as well as communication links to volcano observatories, other VAACs and air traffic control. It is the responsibility of a VAAC to disseminate information on atmospheric volcanic ash clouds and forecast their development. Since 2010, there are nine Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers located around the world, each one focusing on a particular geographical region. Their analyses are made public in the form of Volcanic Ash Advisories (VAA) and often incorporate the results of computer simulation models called Volcanic Ash Transport and Dispersion (VATD). The worldwide network of Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers was set up by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), as part of the International Airways Volcano Watch (IAVW), an international monitoring system managed by the International Airways Volcano Watch Operations Group (IAVWOPSG) which replaced the Volcanic Ash Warnings Study Group (VAWSG). The individual VAACs are run as part of the national weather service of the country where they are based, e.g. the US NOAA or the British Met Office. The VAAC locations are given in the table below. 8 Source: Skybrary, 2017, 9 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 10 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 20

21 Name Part of National Organisation Link Anchorage NOAA Buenos Aires Servicio Meteorológico Nacional Argentina Darwin Bureau of Meteorology London Met Office Montreal Meteorological Service of Canada Tokyo Japan Meteorological Agency Toulouse Météo-France Washington NOAA Wellington Meteorological Service of New Zealand Limited Table 3: List of VACC locations The following figure shows the areas of responsibility of the VAACs mentioned above: 11 Figure 6: Areas of responsibility of the VAACs around the world The VAAC London (co-located with RSMC Exeter) informs selected stakeholders in the aviation sector on the location of the source of a nuclear emission (see also chapter 3.1). As described in chapter 3.3, currently data is provided without information on the vertical extend of the cloud or forecast of the transport direction of the cloud. 11 Source: Skybrary, 2017: 21

22 MET service providers 12 Aviation meteorology (MET) is an essential element of the complex system that constitutes Air Traffic Management (ATM) in its broadest sense. Weather constraints all aspects of ATM operations, e.g. by variations in head and tail-wind components, through changes in pressure and temperature at airports, and in imposing low visibility conditions. Adverse meteorological conditions have the greatest impact on the ATM system, creating disruption and the subsequent problems of disturbed flow rates, lost capacity and induced additional costs. MET service providers, are part of the national Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP). They may be the National Meteorological Service for a state, the military or a public or commercial provider of weather services. Private providers are e.g. Jeppesen (owned by Boeing), Panasonic, and WSI/the Weather Company (owned by IBM). They provide aviation weather, but the legal conditions for use of these weather products differ between countries. Meteorological Watch Office 13 A Meteorological Watch Office (MWO) is an organisation designated to: Maintain watch over meteorological conditions affecting flight operations within its area of responsibility (a FIR or a control area or combinations thereof); Prepare SIGMET and other information related to its area of responsibility; Supply SIGMET information and, as required, other meteorological information to associated air traffic services units (i.e. ACC or FIC); Disseminate SIGMET information; Supply information received on pre-eruption volcanic activity, a volcanic eruption and volcanic ash cloud for which a SIGMET has not already been issued, to its associated ACC/FIC, as agreed between the meteorological and ATS authorities concerned, and to its associated Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre (VAAC) as determined by regional air navigation agreement; and Supply information received concerning the accidental release of radioactive materials into the atmosphere, in the area for which it maintains watch or adjacent areas, to its associated ACC/FIC, as agreed between the meteorological and ATS authorities concerned, and to aeronautical information service units, as agreed between the meteorological and appropriate civil aviation authorities concerned. National Meteorological Service National Meteorological Services (NMS) are national organisations, providing meteorological and hydro-meteorological services, also called weather services of the respective state and their international cooperation. A list of national NMSs is provided here: EIG EUMETNET, a grouping of 31 European NMS that provides a framework to organise co-operative programmes between its members in the various fields of basic meteorological activities, initiated the EUNADICS-AV project initiative. Activities of the group include the 12 Source: Eurocontrol, 2017, 13 Source: Eurocontrol, 2017, 22

23 operation of observation systems, data processing, the provision of basic forecasting products, research and development and training. 14 Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre 15 A Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre (RSMC) is responsible for the distribution of information, advisories, and warnings regarding the specific program they are a part of, agreed by consensus at the World Meteorological Organization as part of the World Weather Watch. There are eight meteorological centres for distribution of transport, deposition, and dispersion modelling, in the event of an environmental catastrophe that crosses international borders. Commercial Airline Operations System Providers The majority of all airlines access meteorological and other aeronautical information preprocessed through systems provided by 3 rd party industrial providers. These providers act as intermediaries and ensure that the data is as consistent and integrated with other data sources as possible. Since most airlines operate in an international environment with data coming from a wide variety of sources, the task of collecting and combining data from all these diverse sources is of utmost importance to modern airline operations. The increasing level of merging of these information allows automation of many tasks, like avoiding closed areas or selecting suitable alternative airports. Dispatchers, Flight Operation Officers and Pilots interact with these systems to create and retrieve briefing packages including fuelling and load data, route details, tailored NOTAM and weather bulletins and graphical, chart-based information. To an increasing extent, this information isn t printed anymore, but uploaded to so-called EFBs (Electronic Flight Bag) on portable devices that pilots use throughout the flight for information retrieval. The functions include amongst many: electronic charts, weather and NOTAM bulletins, weight and balance calculations and performance calculations. With increasing availability of high-bandwidth connectivity to the cockpit, continuous updates of these applications are ensured. In the context of EUNADICS-AV this means that technically the primary interface has to be established between weather and AIM service providers, CFSPs (computer flight plan service providers) and ASD (aircraft situation display) providers. These work as the central hub for operational information in an airline to collect, check and distribute data and information in an appropriate way. Therefore, the role of these systems in EUNADICS-AV is essential for all stakeholders. 2.3 Public bodies and authorities The players addressed within this section are seen as stakeholders in the context of EUNADICS-AV offerings setting the legal and regulatory frame of aviation operations and procedures as well as the provision and handling of airborne hazard related information. EUROCONTROL 16 The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation, commonly known as EUROCONTROL, is an international organisation working to achieve safe and seamless air traffic management across Europe. Founded in 1960, EUROCONTROL currently has Source: EUMETNET, 2017, 15 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 16 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 23

24 member-states and is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium. Although EUROCONTROL is not an agency of the European Union, the EU has delegated parts of its Single European Sky regulations to EUROCONTROL, making it the central organization for coordination and planning of air traffic control for all of Europe. The EU itself is a signatory of EUROCONTROL and all EU member states are presently also members of EUROCONTROL. The organization works with national authorities, air navigation service providers, civil and military airspace users, airports, and other organisations. Its activities involve all gate-to-gate air navigation service operations: strategic and tactical flow management (ATFM), controller training, regional control of airspace, safety-proofed technologies and procedures, and collection of air navigation charges. Beyond members of the European Union, EUROCONTROL provides most of these services to all members of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), which includes e.g. Turkey, Azerbaijan and Ukraine. EASA 17 The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is an agency of the European Union (EU) with regulatory and executive tasks in the field of civilian aviation safety. Based in Cologne, Germany, the EASA was created on 15 July 2002, and it reached full functionality in 2008, taking over functions of the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA). European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries have been granted participation in the agency. The responsibilities of EASA include the analysis and research of safety, authorising foreign operators, giving advice for the drafting of EU legislation, implementing and monitoring safety rules (including inspections in the member states), giving type-certification of aircraft and components as well as the approval of organisations involved in the design, manufacture and maintenance of aeronautical products. EASA collection of information and links on volcanic ash: EACCC (The European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell) 18 In May 2010, the European Commission (EC) and EUROCONTROL jointly established the European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell (EACCC) to coordinate the management of crisis responses in the European ATM network. The main role of the EACCC is to coordinate the response to those network crisis situations which impact adversely on aviation, in close cooperation with corresponding structures in states. This includes proposing measures and taking initiatives and, in particular, acquiring and sharing information with the aviation community (decision makers, airspace users and service providers) in a timely manner. In accordance with the Network Manager Implementing Rule, the EACCC consists of a single representative of: the EU Member State holding the presidency of the European council the European Commission EASA 17 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 18 Source: Eurocontrol, 2017, 24

25 EUROCONTROL the Network Manager the military the Air Navigation Service Providers Airports Airspace users The representatives of the Network Manager and the Commission co-chair the meetings of the EACCC. Experts may be seconded to the EACCC on a case-by-case basis, depending on the specific nature of the crisis (EACC is responsible for any crisis, disruptions, pandemic, nuclear incidents, terrorist attacks, etc.). The EACCC coordinates with relevant State Focal Points from the early stages of the crisis onwards. Sharing information and linking national contingency plans with others on a network level, as well as coordinating a response with mitigation actions, are essential parts of the EACCC s role in establishing a consistent approach across Europe. ANSPs An Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) is a public or a private legal entity (governmental department, state-owned company or privatised organisation), providing air navigation services. It manages air traffic on behalf of a company, region or country. Depending on the specific mandate, an ANSP provides one or more of the following services to airspace users: Air Traffic Management (ATM) Communications, navigation and surveillance systems (CNS) Meteorological service for air navigation (MET) Search and rescue (SAR) Aeronautical information services/aeronautical information management (AIS/AIM) These services are provided to air traffic during all phases of operations (approach, aerodrome and en-route). The majority of the world's ANSPs are members of the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO). 19 ANSPs are amongst many other tasks responsible for the issuance of NOTAMs. In the context of EUNADIC-AV, the closure of airspaces will be propagated to the aviation community through specific NOTAMs. 19 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 25

26 ICAO 20 The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations. It codifies the principles and techniques of international air navigation and fosters the planning and development of international air transport to ensure safe and orderly growth. Its headquarters are located in the Quartier International of Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The ICAO Council adopts standards and recommended practices concerning air navigation, its infrastructure, flight inspection, prevention of unlawful interference, and facilitation of border-crossing procedures for international civil aviation. ICAO defines the protocols for air accident investigation followed by transport safety authorities in countries signatory to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention). WMO 21 The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is an intergovernmental organisation with a membership of 191 member states and territories and provides access to dust storm forecasts, via its website ( It is a specialised agency of the United Nations. The organisation fosters collaboration between the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services to further the application of meteorology to public weather services, agriculture, aviation, shipping, energy, water resource management and many other economic sectors. The WMO Strategic Plan sets the directions and priorities to guide the activities of members and constituent bodies to enable the improvement of their core information, products and services, to maintain necessary infrastructures and to directly benefit from advancements in science and technology. This plan emphasises amongst others the key priority Aviation meteorological services. 2.4 Public initiatives For the EUNADICS-AV data and product delivery system, the interface to the SESAR/SWIM (System-Wide Information Management) / 4DWxCube MET portal is essential. System Wide Information Management (SWIM) 22 The concept of SWIM covers a change in paradigm on how information is managed along its full lifecycle and across the whole European ATM system. Its implementation is foreseen to enable direct ATM business benefits by assuring the provision of commonly understood quality information delivered to the right people at the right time. Given the transversal nature of SWIM, which goes across all ATM systems, data domains, and business trajectory phases (planning, execution, post-execution) and the wide range of ATM stakeholders, it is not expected that one solution and certainly not one single technology will fit all. The SWIM network is schematically shown in the following figure: 20 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 21 Source: Wikipedia, 2017: 22 Source: Eurocontrol, 2017, and Wikipedia, 2017, 26

27 Figure 7: SWIM stakeholder network 23 SWIM will use commercial off-the-shelf hardware and software to support a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) that will facilitate the addition of new systems and data exchanges and increase common situational awareness. EUROCONTROL initially presented the SWIM System concept to the FAA in 1997, where it has been under development ever since. In 2005, the ICAO Global ATM Operational Concept adopted the SWIM concept to promote information-based ATM integration. SWIM is now part of development projects in both the United States (Next Generation Air Transportation System, or NextGen) and the European Union (Single European Sky ATM Research). According to the latest edition of the SESAR Master Plan, the introduction of SWIM as an enabling aviation infrastructure for information management is a process taking until Source: SJU%20redesigned.pdf 24 Source: SESAR European ATM Master Plan Level 3, Implementation View, Plan 2016: 27

28 Figure 8: Implementation roadmap for Enabling Aviation Infrastructure including SWIM 4DWeatherCube MET-GATE 25 The 4DWxCube is the technical response to the MET challenges in SESAR. It is a virtual repository of shared consistent aeronautical meteorological information, produced by multiple MET Service Providers and made available to ATM stakeholders via its SWIM compliant MET-GATE, which is the one stop shop for MET information. It accesses consolidated and translated MET information, performs the relevant data collection, selects and provides fitfor-purpose MET information for ATM stakeholders through MET-ATM SWIM services. 26 Within this initiative NMSs, members of EIG EUMETNET are bringing together their expertise to develop a new generation of meteorological observing and forecasting systems for aviation. When considering EUNADICS-AV interfaces with SWIM / 4DWxCube, their implementation roadmaps have to be taken into account. According to experts conducted, in any case EUNADICS-AV output should be available in KML and in IWXXM allowing their usage in flight planning systems. 25 Source: 26 Note that access to the Met-Gate is controlled and restricted. Individuals, like pilots, will not be granted access. Met-Gate is strictly an ATM system, providing data for the use of defined stakeholders. 28

29 3. Current situation related to airborne hazards from EUNADICS-AV users perspective Based on the evaluation of the stakeholders network relevant for EUNADICS-AV in chapter 2 and the identification of airborne hazards most relevant for aviation within WP7, the current environment of EUNADICS-AV direct users is described in the following chapters for the following hazards: volcanic ash, nuclear incident and sandstorm/dust storm. 3.1 Legal environment Volcanic eruptions Since the Eyjafjallajökull outbreak in 2010 in Iceland and the resulting closing of wide areas of the European airspace for days, changes were made in the legal environment of aviation in the case of volcanic eruptions. Until this event, the maxim was Avoid Visible Ash as the answer to the flight of two Boeing 747 into ash clouds in the 1980s 27, which triggered the establishment of the International Airways Volcano Watch (IAVW) and respective ICAO procedures and guidelines. This rule is still valid for the conduct of flights today. Today, according to EUROCONTROL, ash concentrations are grouped in 3 zones with related regulations (for the planning phase): 28 Zone Ash concentration Regulation 3 > 2 mg/m 3 No-fly zone within a radius of 110 km 2 0,2-2 mg/m 3 Increased maintenance intervals 1 < 0,2 mg/m 3 No restrictions Within this context, the Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan (Edition July 2016) grants airspace users the decision whether to fly or not to fly based on their own assessment: The airspace users have (full and final) responsibility for the safety of flight operations in accordance with their Safety Risk Assessment (SRA) as accepted by their State s authority. This includes the decision about operation in airspace where volcanic ash is present or forecast. 29 Consequently, most countries do not close their airspace as a default procedure in the event of a volcanic eruption (marked green in the figure below). In Europe only Germany, Croatia, Lithuania, Albania and Bulgaria generally do not allow flight operations in areas of high contamination (flight operations in areas of medium and low contamination are allowed). Cyprus does not allow flight operations in areas of high and medium contamination. 27 More information: 28 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 29 Source: Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan, Edition July

30 Figure 9: National safety risk assessment approach in the case of volcanic eruption (Europe) 30 As the decision whether to fly or not broadly lies at the airspace user, they can use any source of information without limitation. This shift of responsibility from national or European authorities towards airspace users due the aftermath of the Eyjafjallajökull outbreak is essential for the EUNADICS-AV project, as airspace users are thus the main target users of the EUNADICS-AV products. National constraints In some European countries, only the national authorities are authorized to provide volcanic ash concentrations. In Germany this is the DWD ( Deutscher Wetterdienst ) and in Norway the Norwegian Met Office. This leads to the fact, that if an aircraft flies e.g. from Frankfurt to Oslo, it needs the information from the DWD until the border to Denmark, where the VAAC information is valid until the border of Norway, where the Norwegian Met Office information is valid. Maintenance Whenever an airplane has encountered volcanic ash during flight, specific inspections are required. Depending on ash concentration and exposure time, the required time and effort for the inspection can range between minutes and many hours. The corresponding costs are due to technical inspection time and the possible aircraft downtime. 30 Aviation Crisis Management in Europe, Eurocontrol 2013, 30

31 According to the ICAO manual on Flight Safety and Volcanic Ash (Doc 9974, 2012) an aircraft operator operating in, or near, areas of volcanic ash cloud contamination should: Enhance vigilance during inspections and regular maintenance and make appropriate adjustments to maintenance practices; Have produced a continuing airworthiness procedure to follow when a volcanic ash cloud encounter has been reported or suspected; Ensure that a thorough investigation is carried out of any signs of unusual or accelerated abrasions or corrosion or of volcanic ash accumulation; Cooperate in reporting to TCHs and the relevant authorities its observations and experiences from operations in areas of volcanic ash cloud contamination; Comply with any additional maintenance recommended by the TCH. The following table shows the additional maintenance inspections of a European airline: Table 4: Additional maintenance inspections due to volcanic ash encounters Nuclear incidents Currently only limited aviation-specific regulations or guidelines are in place when it comes to nuclear incidents. According to the ICAO DOC 9691 Manual on Volcanic Ash, Radioactive Material and Toxic Chemical Clouds, accidents at nuclear or chemical facilities, in which hazardous materials are discharged into the atmosphere, present a danger to the general public, including those travelling by air, and are already the subject of detailed emergency procedures in States concerned, and regular international tests of the procedures are made. It is not the purpose of ICAO, therefore, to develop separate procedures for aviation, but to ensure that due account is taken of the special needs of international civil aviation, especially aircraft in flight, in the relevant Annexes to the Convention and in 31

32 international arrangements developed to deal with such emergencies. 31 ICAO Annex 3 contains information on how nuclear release sites should be shown on charts and how information should be promulgated via the SIGMET system (see also chapter 3.3). Guidance on nuclear exposure maxima etc. is not to be found in these documents. Furthermore, the IAEA Joint Radiation Emergency Management Plan of the International 2017 document the following response actions by ICAO in case of a nuclear event: 32 Based on information received from the responsible WMO Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre(s) RSMC(s) and the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre (VAAC) London (co-located with WMO RSMC Exeter), informs/alerts aircraft in flight and aerodromes concerned about atmospheric release; Advises aircraft in flight on possible alternate routes; Activates the IACRNE ad hoc Working Group on Air and Maritime Transportation; Provides advice, on request, to States on the effects of contamination/radiation exposure on airline personnel (including flight crews) and passengers, and the movement of passengers and/or cargo through international aerodromes. National authorities of each country are in general responsible for the regulations of the maximum dose rate of radiation, dealt within the national Radiation Protection Ordinance. Respective regulations deal primarily with radiation workers, which are exposed to a higher amount of radiation than the normal population due to their professional activities. This group includes for instance air crews, health professionals working with radiation or technicians working in the industry. Exemplary, the critical values of the Austrian Radiation Protection Ordinance are given: Maximum dose rate for single persons:1 Millisievert per year. It is possible to exceed this limit, as long as the next 5 years the limit of 1 Millisievert is not exceeded. Maximum dose rate for persons occupationally exposed to radiation: 20 Millisievert per year over a period of 12 consecutive months. In exceptional cases, a maximum of 50 Millisievert is permitted, as long as in the 60 following months the effective dose rate of 100 Millisievert is not exceeded. 33 Additionally, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) reports the following recommended limits. 34 Equivalent dose to the lens of the eye: Limit on dose from occupational exposure: 20 msv per year, averaged over defined periods of 5 years, with no single year exceeding 50 msv Limit on dose from public exposure: 15 msv in a year 31 Source: ICAO DOC 9691 Manual on Volcanic Ash, Radioactive Material and Toxic Chemical Clouds, 2007: 32 Source: IAEA Joint Radiation Emergency Management Plan of the International, 1 st March 2017: 33 Source: Verordnung des Bundesministers für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft über Maßnahmen zum Schutz des fliegenden Personals vor kosmischer Strahlung (Strahlenschutzverordnung fliegendes Personal FlP-StrSchV), Source: ICRP, 2017,_ 32

33 Equivalent dose to the skin (averaged over 1 cm 2 of skin regardless of the area exposed): Limit on dose from occupational exposure: 500 msv in a year Limit on dose from public exposure: 50 msv in a year Equivalent dose to the hands and feet: Limit on dose from occupational exposure: 500 msv in a year Limit on dose from public exposure: - The unit Millisievert expresses the biological effect onto humans. It is advisable to use Millisievert as a unit for any EUNADICS-AV product related to nuclear incidents. As a worst-case reference, approximate radiation intensity levels at different locations at Chernobyl reactor site shortly after the explosion in 1986 are shown in the table below. 35 Location Vicinity of the reactor core 300 Fuel fragments Debris heap at the place of circulation pumps 100 Debris near the electrolysers Water in the Level +25 feedwater room 50 Level 0 of the turbine hall Area of the affected unit Water in Room Sieverts per hour Control room 0,03 0,05 Hydropower Installation 0,3 Nearby concrete mixing unit 0,10 0,15 Table 5: Approximate radiation intensity levels at different locations at Chernobyl reactor shortly after the explosion The dose rates measured in Fukushima were comparable according to respective reports 36 In Tokyo the dose rate was around 0,8 Microsievert per hour (adding up to 7 Millisievert per year). 37 In the event of Fukushima, the Japan Aeronautical Information Service (AIS) Centre issued a NOTAM dated 15/03/2011. A flight prohibited area has been established with a radius of 30 km around the Tokyo Electric Power Company Fukushima No. 1 power-plant. The Japanese authorities have declared an INES rating of 5 for one of the reactors operated by this powerplant. INES is the International Nuclear and radiological Event Scale published by the IAEA 35 Source: Wikipedia, 2017, 36 Source: Source: 33

34 (International Atomic Energy Agency). An INES rating of 5 means an accident with wider consequences than local. 38 The INES ratings are shown in the figure below. 39 Figure 10: INES ratings published by IAEA Within this context, the EANPG Programme Coordinating Group analysed ways towards an Improved contingency planning and readiness for nuclear events, presented by EUROCONTROL 40. NUCLEAR14 41 demonstrated shortcomings in the information, information flow and decision making criteria for states, Network Managers (NM) and users to enable a controlled and harmonised response by all stakeholders involved in case of a nuclear event, especially when effecting airspace. Based on these results there is an immediate need for improved information and improved guidance to enhance the readiness and appropriate response of all aviation stakeholders in case of a nuclear incident or accident and following main recommendations were derived: Recommended action 1: Develop a comprehensive Concept of Operations for ATM in case of a nuclear disaster, in particular regarding information flows and decision making criteria, including radiological parameters for nuclear contamination of airspace and ground level; Recommended action 2: Develop contamination charts linked to decision making criteria that can be used to support Airspace user and ANSP decision making; Recommended action 3: Mandate expert organisations (i.e. RSMCs) to produce the contamination charts as per recommendation 2 and provide them to all stakeholders (including NM) as per the changed information flow in recommendation 1; 38 Source: EASA, Safety Information Bulletin, 22 March 2011, 39 Source: 40 Source: ICAO European and North Atlantic Office, EANPG Programme Coordinating Group, Paris, 13 to 18 October 2015: MISD1-WP10_RAD%20(EANPG%20for%20Radiation)%20Appendix%20A.pdf 41 The Network Manager (NM) and the European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell (EACCC) exercised the network-wide response in case of a nuclear emergency in Europe (NUCLEAR14); This exercise was conducted on November

35 Recommended action 4: Develop a guidance to compose the SIGMETs for nuclear contaminated airspace; Recommended action 6: Define acceptable threshold values and procedures for radioactive contaminated airframes on both health and technical aspects (including aircraft engine); Recommended action 7: Decontamination procedures shall include the levels at which the Airline can perform the decontamination with their existing tools and processes, and at which level help from National Authorities should be sought. Sandstorms and dust storms Sandstorms and dust storms pose a significant hazard for aviation. Not only do they drastically reduce visibility, they also are associated with very strong winds that can seriously affect an aircraft in flight, particularly during take-off and landing. Furthermore, engines can be damaged by ingesting the sand and/or dust. 42 Generally, dust can have similar effects as volcanic ash, especially in modern engines with high hot-section temperatures, causing partial-melting of sand components and their adherence to turbine parts. With sand/dust storms, the erosion effects are, however stronger, potentially reducing engine s lifetime and having detrimental effects on other aircraft systems, too. Emission of sand and dust particles in the air typically have a wind threshold value ranging from about 4 m/s in desert areas to a value close to 10 m/s in semi-arid regions. As a first approximation, and being fully aware that visibility in sandstorms and dust storms may be influenced by the optical characteristics of the aerosols (chemical composition, particle size spectra) and lighting conditions (solar azimuth, background luminance, presence of medium or high cloud), the following thresholds, which are familiar to human observers and automated systems alike, have been suggested in the second meeting of the Meteorological Warnings Group (METWSG), Montréal, 19 to 21 May 2009: VIS < m visibility and gusts of >=20 kt for a "light" sandstorm or dust storm, VIS < m visibility and gusts of >=30 kt for "moderate", VIS < 500 m and gusts of >=40 kt for "heavy" sandstorm or dust storm. Following further discussions, the following recommendation have been included in the Amendment 76 to the International Standards and Recommended Practices, Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation (Annex 3 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation) at the fifth meeting of its 198th Session on 27 February 2013: Recommendation. Sandstorm/dust storm should be considered: a) heavy whenever the visibility is below 200 m and the sky is obscured; and b) moderate whenever the visibility is: 1) below 200 m and the sky is not obscured; or 2) between 200 m and 600 m. The U.S. National Weather Service issues either an advisory or a full-fledged warning. A blowing dust advisory is issued if the visibility is forecast to temporarily decrease to between 1/4 mi (0.4 km) and 1 mi due to wind-borne sand or dust with winds of 25 mph (40 kph) or greater. A dust storm warning is issued if the visibility is expected to drop below 42 Source: and 35

36 1/4 mi frequently, with winds of 25 mph or greater. The criterion of 25 mph is a minimum; winds frequently range from 40 to 60 mph (65 to 95 kph) in a dust storm Operational environment of airlines As mentioned above, airspace users, and thus airlines are seen as the primary users of EUNADICS-AV products - therefore, it is important to highlight the airlines operational procedure and solution environment. Airborne hazard information like information about volcanic ash is processed by airlines in flight planning and situation display software, used as a basis for daily operation in the case sophisticated weather management policies are implemented, and/or is made available to stakeholders including pilots during their briefing. Airline operational procedures related to airborne hazards Usually, the target users for EUNADICS-AV products (distributed potentially via EUMETNET, as indicated in chapter 6) work in the departments Dispatch or Flight Operations within an airline, also responsible for performing Safety Risk Assessments and related mitigation plans, including pilots, flight dispatchers and flight operation officers. Amongst others, flight dispatchers use flight planning software and ASD (Aircraft Situation Display) products and the flight operations officers are the main users of ASD (Aircraft Situation Display) products. Examples of commercial and open software solutions are given below. Safety Risk Assessment and Mitigation Because of the safety risks related to airborne hazards, the timely availability of reliable and consistent information (observations and forecasts) is essential to mitigate their threats. The availability of such information plays an important role for strategic pre-flight planning and tactical in-flight re-planning in assessing the likelihood of encountering airborne hazards. Within this context, the ICAO manual on Flight Safety and Volcanic Ash (Doc 9974, 2012) provides guidance which countries (in which volcanic ash contamination may be a hazard to flight operations) may recommend to operators and regulatory authorities. The underlying assumption is that individual operators are responsible for such operations under the oversight of their respective state regulatory authority. The guiding principle for such operations is the use of a safety risk management approach. ICAO s safety risk assessment process is described in the ICAO Safety Management Manual (SMM) (Doc 9859). Alternative approaches, aligned with an organization s approved Safety Management System, would be equally appropriate. 43 Source: 36

37 Procedures to be considered by an aircraft operator when conducting a safety risk assessment directly relevant for EUNADICS-AV are: 44 Figure 11: Aircraft operator safety risk assessment procedures directly relevant for EUNADICS-AV An exemplary Safety Risk Assessment worksheet is shown in the figure below. 44 ICAO manual on Flight Safety and Volcanic Ash (Doc 9974, 2012), Appendix 2 45 ICAO manual on Flight Safety and Volcanic Ash (Doc 9974, 2012), Appendix 4 46 Actual safety risk assessments performed are not made public and do not circulate within the aviation / research community. What concerns airborne hazards, they may be based on VAAC, state-provide and/or commercially provided information. 37

38 Figure 12: Exemplary Safety Risk Assessment worksheet To schematically describe the way information related to airborne hazards (e.g. volcanic ash information) is actually processed, a representative approach followed by airlines interviewed is given: Information related to airborne hazards are sourced from VAACs and/or EUROCONTROL (comprising polygons of the area affected and three levels of ash concentration, updated in regular intervals) as well as other information sources (e.g. EVITA and/or data from national MET offices). In the case a specific area is closed, a NOTAM is issued by the local authority and distributed via EUROCONTROL. Within the Safety Risk Assessment, the information derived from the different sources are compared and airline dispatchers decide in close interaction with pilots and related stakeholders which information is used for planning individual flights. Consequently, the information that is perceived most detailed and reliable is applied. Depending on the system environment used by the respective airline, the information provided by the respective sources is automatically or manually integrated in the flight planning solution and adapted based on the results of the Safety Risk Assessment and corresponding mitigation strategies. 38

39 Here, generally two different operational areas are distinguished in case of an airborne hazard, namely: Actions handling the immediate hazard situation itself; and Actions focussing on the recovery from the hazard situation (i.e. returning flight operations to schedule). According to stakeholders interviewed, today the second area mentioned is the costliest part in the event of a hazard situation for the airline and needs careful planning to optimize the process. Activities are based on predictions of the development of the hazard, which typically become rapidly less accurate with an increasing time horizon. As a consequence, reliable predictions are an important requirement towards EUNADICS-AV products. Flight planning software (alphabetical order) Flightkeys 5D (Flightkeys) ( Figure 13: Screenshot Flightkeys 5D Flightkeys 5D is an entirely new system that provides a very high level of integration and automation in a web-based, platform-independent solution. All dispatch tasks like flight planning, flight watch, ASD, weather and NOTAM briefing are very closely integrated with a high-performance cost-based trajectory optimizer. Flightkeys has a partnership with Skyguide, the Swiss ANSP for quality-checked digital NOTAMs to support real-time NavServices. Interfaces to all relevant systems are available, including tight SWIM integration. The first customer will be ARINCDirect, supplying over business jets worldwide with flight planning services. Flight Plan Manager (Sabre Airline Solutions) ( 39

40 Figure 14: Screenshot Sabre Flight Plan Manager The Flight Plan Manager combines data support services - notice to airmen (NOTAMs), weather, airport suitability and airspace restrictions - with real-time alerts. Via a 4-D cost optimization functionality, route, altitude, speed and time are simultaneously analysed to create a flight path that accounts for fuel costs, CO2 emissions and delays. It is used by Austrian Airlines, Swiss, SAS, Turkish, Iberia, United, etc. Jetplan (Jeppesen) ( Figure 15: Screenshot Jeppesen JetPlan 40

41 JetPlan provides commercial airliners with routes based on cost, time, or fuel alternatives. JetPlan complies with global regulatory requirements, including FAA and EU-OPS. It is available as a hosted or local service and can be integrated into airline operations. Additionally, Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) can be provided should an airline wish to write a proprietary interface, or adapt one already in production. Lido/Flight 4D (Lufthansa Systems) ( Figure 16: Screenshot Lufthansa Lido/Flight 4D Similar to the Flight Plan Manager of Sabre, Lufthansa Systems Lido/Flight 4D provides dispatchers with a host of optimization options regarding flight time, fuel consumption or costs of each flight. It calculates the optimum trajectory for each flight, provides an aeronautical database, weather data and NOTAM handling, update all general aeronautical data and provides briefing packages. It is used by Emirates, Lufthansa, British Airways, Air France N-Flight Planning (Navblue) ( 41

42 Figure 17: Screenshot Navblue N-Flight Planning The N-Flight Planning software suite is a multi-tiered and scalable flight plan optimization solution that helps create safe and most cost-effective routes. Aircraft situation display solutions (alphabetical order) Flightkeys 5D (Flightkeys) ( Flightkeys 5D integrates advanced ASD functionality directly into their flight planning system, allowing real-time hazard and conflict warnings, as well as cost-based resolution proposals. FlightAware (FlightAware) ( Figure 18: Screenshot FlightAware FlightAware is a flight tracking data provider and provides aircraft operators and service companies as well as passengers with global flight tracking solutions. FlightAware leverages data from air traffic control systems, from FlightAware's network of ADS-B ground, from Aireon space-based global ADS-B, and using global datalink (satellite/vhf) via every major provider, including ARINC, SITA, Satcom Direct, Garmin, Honeywell GDC, and UVdatalink. FlightAware is privately held and has offices in Houston, New York, and Singapore. 42

43 Flight explorer (Sabre Airline Solutions) ( Figure 19: Screenshot Sabre Flight Explorer Sabre AirCentre Flight Explorer (FE) is a global aircraft tracking, information technology and communications solutions provider to the aviation community. It provides real-time global flight tracking information, reporting and display products and is a decision-support and communications tool. The Flight Explorer flight tracking product was first introduced in 1997 and is (as mentioned by Sabre) the world's leading Aircraft Situation Display (ASD) with an installed base of over systems. Flightradar 24 (Flightradar24 AB) ( Figure 20: Screenshot Flightradar 24 43

44 Flightradar24 is a free global flight tracking service that provides real-time information about aircrafts around the world. The service is currently available online and on ios (iphone, ipad, ipod Touch) as well as Android device. Flightradar24 combines data from several sources including ADS-B, MLAT and radar. It is used by Austrian Airlines. NOP Network Operations Portal (EUROCONTROL) ( Figure 21: Screenshot NOP The NOP Portal is a Collaboration application enabling operational stakeholders to interact and collaborate with the Network Manager Operations Centre (formerly CFMU Operations). It enables a common view of the European ATM network situation to be shared with the whole aviation community. EUROCONTROL's implementation of the NOP addresses the need for a single-entry point to ATM operations, bringing together various EUROCONTROL tools and information services. There is the Public Portal which is available to anyone and a NOP Protected Portal which is restricted to organisations actively engaged in ATFCM operations. It is used by Austrian Airlines. 44

45 WSI Fusion (The Weather Company An IBM Business) ( cts/fusion) Figure 22: Screenshot WSI Fusion WSI Fusion is a flight tracking application that fuses public and proprietary weather information with real-time flight and airspace data into one common view for operational decision-making. It tracks and monitors global flights, facilitates communication with aircrafts and crews and integrates with existing systems. WSI Fusion integrates flight data from multiple sources, including surface (ASDE-X; FAA ASDI: USA, CAN, UK, Oceanic; EUROCONTROL: CFMU/EFD; ADS-B, MLAT internationally; and customer data from ACARS, and SATCOM.) It is used by Emirates. 3.3 Operational environment of pilots Besides airline FOCs, particularly also pilots are seen as users of EUNADICS-AV products. Below the information flow between airlines and pilots in day-to-day as well as in the case of hazardous situations relevant for EUNADICS-AV is outlined. Exchange of information in day-to-day operations Currently, pilots are provided with a briefing package of typically pages by the airline dispatch before a flight. It includes information related to the flight route, fuel and time, weather reports, weather charts, NOTAMS, aircraft technical condition, etc., which have to be analysed within about 15 minutes. Most airlines sub-contract the preparation of the briefing to service providers (e.g. Lido, Sabre, and Jeppesen). Due to the load of information coupled with the limited available processing time, the data can only be viewed to varying degrees according to pilots information. In most detail, information about the route, departure- and arrival airport including possible alternative airports and the weather are assessed upfront, other information is typically reviewed during the flight. En-route, updated information is provided to the pilot via radio or text-based air-ground link, which the pilot then verifies against on-board maps. Traditionally, the presentation of the information is primarily text-based or monochrome graphics and not very user-friendly. However, with the increasing replacement of printed briefings on paper with electronic media on portable devices, coloured maps become more 45