IAOPA WORLD ASSEMBLY South Africa

1. IAOPA WORLD ASSEMBLYSouth Africa April 2012 Steve Brown, RTCA Co-Chair

2. NACSC Membership • Steve Brown, NBAA, NACSC Co-Chair • Tom Hendricks, A4A, NACSC Co-Chair

3. NACSC Work Groups • Airspace & Procedures (APWG) • Integrated Capabilities (ICWG) • Business Case & Performance Metrics (BCPMWG) • DataComm (DCTG)

4. NACSC Work Groups • Airspace & Procedures (APWG) • Integrated Capabilities (ICWG) • Business Case & Performance Metrics (BCPMWG) • DataComm (DCTG)

5. Regional Airspace Recommendations Recommendation #1: RNAV off the Ground (ROTG) FAA should validate the safety and capacity benefits of RNAV-Off The-Ground (ROTG) as part of the implementation process. Recommendation #2: Houston Ultra High Sectors RTCA agrees with the Houston Optimization of Airspace and Procedures (OAPM) Study Team and recommends additional analysis of the potential benefits of Houston Center (ZHU) Ultra-High Sector modifications. Recommendation #3: Denver RNAV Implementation Monitor the timeline of the Denver RNAV Implementation project closely and ensure that the expanded scope of the project does not significantly impact the implementation schedule or the realization of operational benefits.

6. Regional Airspace Recommendations Recommendation #4: Chicago Airspace Program (CAP) • Finish design and implementation of the current phase of the CAP within the O’Hare Modernization Project (OMP) time constraints. • Work with the FAA to develop potential airspace and procedures improvements for the Chicago Metroplex to be considered and developed after the CAP is done. Consider use of technology and procedures that have evolved since the original CAP design process began several years ago that could be allowed within the current EIS. • Continue to encourage full stakeholder participation in the development of CAP with the intent of achieving as many optimized procedures as possible within the constraints of the EIS.

7. NACSC Work Groups • Airspace & Procedures (APWG) • Integrated Capabilities (ICWG) • Business Case & Performance Metrics (BCPMWG) • DataComm (DCTG)

8. Metroplex Prioritization Hierarchy

9. Seven Identified Metroplexes • New York • Philadelphia • Chicago • Atlanta • Charlotte • Dallas/Fort Worth • Southern California

10. Commonly Identified Capabilities in All Seven Metroplexes • Surface Management – departure delays, managing runway use • Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) procedures • Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) – internal to FAA • Examine development and implementation priorities

11. Outcomes and Moving Forward • Evaluation of capabilities based on feasibility of implementation and likely benefits • All are designed to assist the FAA in helping to prioritize in a budget-constrained political environment • Industry needs proof of concept/proof of benefit to make investments of their own resources • Need data for high fidelity, quantitative evaluations of benefits/costs & implementation issues associated with deploying operational improvements

12. Regional Deployment MKE ENW UGN PWK ORD RFD DPA MDW ARR LOT GYY IGQ SWF HPN CDW TEB LGA MMU ISP EWR FRG ABE JFK FDK DMW MTN JYO BWI IAD HEF DCA W66 TF-5 View of Metroplex* BOS BOS BED Boston Chicago New York Washington, DC

13. NACSC Work Groups • Airspace & Procedures (APWG) • Integrated Capabilities (ICWG) • Business Case & Performance Metrics (BCPMWG) • DataComm (DCTG)

14. Finding Finding : To understand whether NextGen improvements are having the expected impact, a set of interim targets between now and 2018 will help to measure whether sufficient progress is being made with FAA and stakeholder efforts.

15. Recommendations • Recommendation 1: Executive level metrics to capture NextGen impacts: • Accident Rate • Total Trip Time • Metroplex Capacity • Fuel Efficiency • NAS Cost Efficiency • Recommendation 2: The FAA should continue to work with the NAC to develop an executive level NAS Access metric.

16. The recommended High-Level Metrics complement Messaging on “Energy, Environment & Economy” Energy Environment Economy Metroplex Capacity Fuel Efficiency NAS Cost Efficiency Total Trip Time Fatal Accident Rate SAFETY

17. Notional Marginal Cost vs. Benefit $ Operator Costs GAP: Costs exceed benefits Incentives may be needed to reach this point Operator Benefits NO GAP: Benefits exceed costs Incentives needed if societal / system benefit target is beyond this point GAP: Mass Required for Benefits Percent of NAS Users Equipped

18. NACSC Work Groups • Airspace & Procedures (APWG) • Integrated Capabilities (ICWG) • Business Case & Performance Metrics (BCPMWG) • DataComm (DCTG)

19. SC-214/WG78 Standards Brief History of DataComm Universal agreement to harmonization via ATN B2 2013 2012 Europe PETAL trials US CPDLC trials ICAO established ATN Panel to develop SARPs Europe establishes mandate for Link2000 (ATN) by 2013-2015 2000 1993 Boeing develops FANS 1 to meet the needs of oceanic airlines 1983 ICAO creates Special Committee on FANS which introduced the CNS/ATM concept

20. Network DataComm Mid-Term FANS/ATNB1 Altitude Heading Speed Time Based Metering RNP Fix WX Reroutes IC/TOC Initial Tailored Arrivals VDL-2 ARTCCs VDL-2 TFM Reroutes VDL-0/2 TOWER ATCSCC FANS DCL Digital ATIS

21. Approximately 40% of Controller Workload (‘Hello, Goodbye’ - IC/TOC) A/c in communication with sector A, under control of sector A A/c in communication with sector B, under control of sector A A/c in communication with sector B, under control of sector B X X Transfer of Communications Point Transfer of Control Point Sector B Sector A Sector Boundary

22. Benefits of Basic Controller-Pilot DataComm Moving routine communications from voice digital datalink • FAA stated goals for program: • Align with user needs and provide operational benefits • Meet international commitments • Set path to deliver the future NextGen services

23. RTCA Committee Consensus

24. Minority Opinion • Dissenters present minority position that states: • their view of the issue • why they are unable to join the consensus • their preferred position/action & supporting rationale • a list of those who hold the minority view • The consensus group documents: • why it believes the consensus position is superior • how the minority position has been addressed in the development • The Minority Position Paper is included as a separate part of the final document to FAA