Transcript Session 1 Performance Scheme : are we on the right track ? Moderator : Peter Griffiths Chairman of the Performance Review Body.

Session 1
Performance Scheme : are we on the right track ?
Moderator : Peter Griffiths
Chairman of the Performance Review Body
Session 1
Keynote speakers
•
•
Paul Schwach, Deputy DGCA, France
Kay Kratky, Lufthansa Board Member
Round table panelists
•
•
•
•
•
Matthew Baldwin, Director Aviation and International Transport Affairs, EC
Frank Brenner, DFS, Member of the PRB
John Hanlon, ELFAA Secretary General
Jacek Krawczyk, Member of the European Economic and Social Committee
Tom Regan, Irish CAA, NSA Coordination Platform Performance WB Chairman
Session 1
Overall Context
• Will the EU-wide targets for Reference Period 2012-2014 and the
related national/FAB targets be challenging enough to change
ATM?
• The target setting for the Reference Period 2015-2019 should
make the system stronger. How far should it go?
• How to better link the performance scheme with other SES
initiatives such as FABs and SESAR deployment?
• What about human factors? How could they be addressed?
Session 1
Summary of Discussion points
• Will the EU-wide targets for Reference Period 2012-2014 and the
related national/FAB targets be challenging enough to change
ATM?
• The target setting for the Reference Period 2015-2019 should
make the system stronger. How far should it go?
• How to better link the performance scheme with other SES
initiatives such as FABs and SESAR deployment?
• What about human factors? How could they be addressed?
Performance Context
Original Proposals from PRB Sept 2010
Safety
During RP1, States to monitor and publish the following
Safety KPIs:
1)
Effectiveness of safety management;
2)
Application of severity classification;
2.1)
Separation minima infringements;
2.2)
Runway incursions;
2.3)
ATM special technical events;
3)
Implementation of Just Culture.
PRB to work closely with EASA in developing Safety
KPIs and arrangements for the monitoring of safety.
Original Proposals from PRB Sept 2010
€ per service unit (€ 2009)
70
% of horizontal e n route e xte nsion
5,0%
65
4,5%
60
55
4,0%
-0.75%
points
vs.
2009
€ 51
50
3,5%
45
EU-wide target
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
Actual bas eline
States' submissions to June 2010 Enlarged Committee
1,5
2006
2004
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
Actual baseline
2005
3,0%
40
EU-wide target
Current enhancem ent plans (-0.6% points vs . 2009)
En route ATFM delay per flight (min.)
1,3
1,0
0,8
0.5 min.
0,5
0,3
Actual baseline
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
0,0
Current EUROCONTROL target
Current capacity planning
EU-wide target
Proposed target vs. political objective
RP1
70
65
Euro per service unit (2009 prices)
60
€64
€62
€59
€61
€59
€58
If a -3.0% annual decrease in
determined unit rate is achieved between
2009 and 2014 then a -11.6% annual
decrease would be required to achieve
the high level political objective in 2020
€56
55
50
45
40
35
30
€26
25
20
High level political
objective for 2020
expressed in en-route
costs per SU
15
10
5
0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Determined unit rate (State plans June 2010)
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
-3.0% annual decrease in determined unit rate 2009-2014
Key Note Speakers
Paul Schwach Directeur du Transport
Aérien Adjoint au Directeur général de l'aviation
civile
Kay Kratky
Member of the Lufthansa German Airlines Board
Frankfurt & Flight Operations
Limassol – October 11th, 2012
Single European Sky Conference
Performance scheme
Viewed from NSA France
by Paul SCHWACH,
Deputy director general of civil aviation
Director for Air Transport
Direction générale de l’Aviation civile
1
1
Where did we come from
Until 2009 air navigation charges were set on a pure costrecovery principle



Criticized for not providing incentives for performance
Featuring a corrective mechanism that was contracyclic
No « quality » targets
As early as end of 2009, in anticipation of EU regulation
SES2, the Government adopted a decree which

created a NSA for performance: DTA

installed a performance scheme

stopped the corrective mechanisms
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
11
11
1
2
Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008
Steering air navigation performance
DTA was already regulator for airport charges: the
performance scheme for DSNA looked like the
« Contrat de regulation Economique » for ADP
DTA is not in charge of setting the targets, but to
guarantee that performance is correctly planned and
assessed, and that the consultation process is
achieved
Two more specific interventions:
• Setting the traffic forecast
• Finding a compromise on return of equity
Coordinated performance plans on national and
FABEC level

A discussion on capacity at FABEC level
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
12
12
Performance at National and FABEC level
DGCA (BE)
Regulation
DSNA (FR)
Accountability
National Performance Plan
2012-2014:
- En route target:
Belgocontrol (BE)
Joint
Regulation
BFS (DE)
DTA (FR)
DSNA (FR)
DGCA (LU)
DGCA (NL)
DFS (DE)
Joint
Accountability
FOCA (CH)
- Cost-Efficiency
- Terminal:
- SAF, CAP, Cost-efficiency
(DUR)
- Additional Indicators (SAF, CAP)
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
MUAC
LVNL (NL)
skyguide (CH)
FABEC Performance Plan
2012-2014 :
- En route targets:
SAF, CAP, ENV
Addit'l Indicators: CAP, ENV,
Consolidated DUR , MME
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
13
13
1
4
What should be achieved in RP1 (en-route)
FABEC Performance plan

Capacity :
0.5 minute / « en-route » flight delay in year 2014

Environment :
Route extension down 5% (2014 / 2011)

National Performance plan

Safety:
Additional quantified safety targets


Cost Efficiency :
En route unit costs : -7% (2014 / 2011) in real
terms
Capacity:
Additional en-route indicators
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
14
14
1
5
Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008
Some thoughts about cost-efficiency
Cost efficiency measured by determined unit rates
depends on costs and traffic: UR=COSTS/TRAFFIC
When traffic is weak, cost-efficiency is difficult to
improve because staff charges cannot react to traffic
variations in the short term
The public status of DSNA puts a lot on pressure on
cost-efficiency when the State Budget is under tension
The risk to cut investments
Are the EU targets an aspirational goal or a collective
commitment ?
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
15
15
1
6
Some suggestions for drawing the way forward
A real assessment of RP1 before setting RP2
If EU targets are not just aspirational goals, but
must become a collective commitment, make them
realistic, based on achievable actions by ANSPs
Take into account investment separately
Rethink of incentives (bonus/malus) for some KPIs
EU guidance on RoE
Terminal charges could be a priority for delivering
cost-efficiency in the short term, with airlines
cooperation
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
16
16
1
7
Conclusion
The SES2 regulation on performance has been
implemented
The ANSPs are under tension
The performance needs a cooperation between
ANSPs et Air carriers, but also with staff
The current performance trend is achievable in a
long term period, with also periods of highly
increasing traffic
A gap above this trend should be expected from FAB
and SESAR
Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012
Direction générale
de l'Aviation civile
17
17
Thank you
for your attention
Direction générale de l’Aviation civile
Where are we today
Environment
4,08%
3,86%
3,33%
IFPU2 Away Day
Examples - Flight Efficiency challenge
CP EBBR_LIMC Real planning
(Sunday 8th April 2012)
Reduction in route length:
City pair Brussels - Milano Malpensa
New route in green (march 2012)
Reduction in difference between flight
planned route and best available
route
Difference between red and green or
blue/green
Capacity
0,7
0,68
0,6
0,5
-0,50
-1,50
Norway
0,04
0,00
-0,02
-0,02
-0,03
-0,04
-0,07
-0,11
-0,14
-0,14
-0,14
-0,16
-0,21
-0,29
-0,30
-0,30
-0,31
-0,42
-0,70
-0,99
Romania
Latvia
Malta
Finland
Lithuania
Ireland
Bulgaria
Italy
FABEC
Czech Republic
DK-SE FAB
United Kingdom
Spain
Hungary
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Poland
Austria
Greece
0,00
Estonia
0,12
0,37
0,50
Portugal Continental
-1,00
Cyprus
1,11
Capacity Target
(January - August 2012)
(Actual vs. Plan)
1,50
1,00
Debate Panelists
Matthew. Baldwin, Director Aviation and International
Transport Affairs, EC
Frank. Brenner, DFS, Member of the PRB
John. Hanlon, ELFAA Secretary General
Jacek. Krawczyk, Member of the European Economic and
Social Committee
Tom. Regan, Irish CAA, NSA Coordination Platform
Performance WG Chairman
Debate