OpenLobby.EU
Explore

International Federation of Air Traffic Safety Electronics Associations

IFATSEA

WHEREAS, Air Traffic Safety Electronics promotes and maintains a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic throughout the world; and WHEREAS, the objects, functions and problems of this essential service to aviation are of similar nature in all countries irrespective of national boundaries; and WHEREAS, these objects, functions and problems can be mastered only by the common effort of all nations, which should be based on close international co-operation and on a continuous exchange of ideas and experience: NOW THEREFORE, it is indispensable that Air Traffic Safety Electronics personnel of all nations be united in a worldwide professional Federation for the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation and for the protection of their common professional interests.

Lobbying Activity

Response to European Partnership for Integrated Air Traffic Management

27 Aug 2019

IFATSEA comments on the proposal for a European Partnership for Integrated Air Traffic Management Subject: Proposal for a Council Regulation for a European Partnership for Integrated Air Traffic Management under Horizon Europe Preamble The text description is describing the evolution from the current SJU. to an institutionalized entity with similar but extended responsibilities The three options provided are not explained on the same basis which are the objectives for the future. Several obvious questions arise towards the proposed evolution: 1) How would be the new Management structure be organized? 2) It is stated that Partnerships under Horizon Europe will significantly reduce the administrative burden for applicants and beneficiaries. But what about the new entity itself? Currently SJU has only technical and operational focus and bureaucracy been virtually nonexistent. However, in the case of an institutionalized entity this would have to run under the usual EC pace and procedures. This may potentially constitute a showstopper in some cases if we are speaking of R&I. 3) The problem definition has some unrealistic objectives. Asking for full flexibility « accommodate airspace capacity demand from anywhere in the network at all times » with a reduction of the cost of ATM services is, in a short to medium term, unrealistic. Questions are also raised if there is there an plan towards an objective for a single system or a small number of ATM systems shared for all European states? 4) So far, we have CNS/ATM systems only for Controlled airspace and this is difficult to manage. The complexity of the CNS/ATM (Sensors network and their Data processing) when dealing with Controlled airspace, Urban airspace and environment and sub-orbital flights, which is a totally new environment and ecosystem (currently only mainly Military deal with it) will be very demanding 5) In the objectives, it is stated the aim is to develop an interoperable and harmonised EU ATM system. What does the notion Harmonized as a notion mean exactly? 6) Is there a risk to end with a monopoly situation for the benefit of the few members of the industry (e.g manufacturers) that would be part of the partnership? 7) In the proposal is also written that the institution could formulate policies or adapt the regulatory framework. This goes far beyond an R&D program. It is not clear what kind of policies the commission is referring to. 8) Address potential negative effects of such policies coming out of such an entity like: a) Social effects, like reduction of jobs in ATM/ANS in order to reduce cost b) Potential risk of cascade system failures across Europe c) Potential creation of monopolies, d) Negative CBAs for the implementation of new technologies in the periphery of Europe 9) The corporate desire for continuous increase in profit pushes the Human out of the service delivery as costly. The new entity must be independent of commercial interests. This balance will be crucial. 10) Human the loop and full automation from 2025 onwards are serious issues. The example of robotized services is already having a devasting effect on employment all around us. Will the Human in the loop be retained when Full automation is in the pipeline? Should other entities of the EU e.g on Employment be included in the Partnership (in the same way Ethical issues are dealt with ?) The EU is serving the European citizens . Conclusions/comments: a. SJU helped drive, fund and coordinate research and develop the needed CNS/ATM technologies serving the Concepts identified by SESAR since its inception. The SESAR Solutions pack that has been developed displays deep understanding of the building elements of the future ATM. The momentum and the context that SESAR has is something that must not be stopped abruptly. This is not explained how it will be addressed. In the case that the decision would be towards Institutionalizing the
Read full response