The COVID-19 pandemic has had far-reaching effects on Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) worldwide and we are yet to understand the full extent of the impact. Traffic levels have significantly reduced and, with them, ANSP revenue has fallen.
However, Air Traffic Service (ATS) operations continue to support the state and regional response to managing the crisis on a full-time basis. So, ANSPs are faced with the challenges of protecting frontline staff from infection while continuing operations to provide essential services for cargo, repatriation, humanitarian and emergency flights.
Finding ways to adapt – scalable and resilient infrastructure.
To adapt, many ANSPs have already found ways of being flexible by introducing changes to shift patterns to support the health and wellbeing of staff, as well as ensuring appropriate contingency in case of infection. However, this approach to flexibility has only been possible in the reduced demand environment ANSPs are experiencing today. As traffic levels start increasing and a full roster is required, ANSPs will have to look for other ways to boost their operational flexibility.
Real operational flexibility is achieved when new ways of working are supported by an underlying flexible architecture. For example, Hungarocontrol’s remote tower in Budapest has allowed for staff to be divided into a remote tower team and a physical tower team, thus enabling social distancing and introducing resilience in a way not possible with traditional physical tower environments. [1]
The ability to merge sectors has been commonplace for a long time, enabling airspace structures to be adapted to suit changing traffic patterns and staff re-deployment. This is capacity-on-demand within a single operational centre. However, real benefits can be achieved where capacity can be scaled across regions. The Airspace Architecture Study, published in March 2019 [2] outlines this as a priority, highlighting that data-sharing across flight information regions within or across state borders and non-geographic ATCO licencing can enable sectors to be handled by different ACCs. This concept exists within Europe. One example of it already being applied, is the Geneva approach, where depending on direction of wind in relation to the runway the traffic is managed by either DSNA or Skyguide – a truly flexible arrangement supported by infrastructure, but also backed by the operational requirement. Can this be achieved at scale within Europe and would it have helped us in the current crisis?
The pandemic has challenged the current perception of which underlying infrastructure will best support flexible ways of working. Currently air traffic control is performed in large rooms containing many people and much has been said in the past about the need to consolidate into potentially even larger centres to become more flexible. However, COVID-19 has raised understandable fears about being in large ‘public’ spaces, especially indoors, and has fast-tracked trends towards home working – a trend completely at odds with the long-term strategy of consolidating ATC operational centres and the supporting technical systems.
Would it be possible to support working in smaller, more isolated units that could be set up anywhere? This ‘new normal’ flexible way of working may soon be something that controllers also seek, to support their own health and wellbeing in the aftermath of the pandemic. Initial steps towards enabling this approach are already in motion, for example, Indra’s collaboration with Microsoft to move air traffic management to the cloud, which might eventually enable the creation of ATM Data Service Providers (ADSPs). Such an approach will allow ANSPs to decentralise their systems. It also introduces the possibility for ATCOs to provide their service remotely, whilst still retaining the rostering and training benefits of centralising in remote tower centres.
Enaire has already trialled this approach in Spain for remote operational validations with five controllers working from their homes or the ACC using Indra’s iTEC system. Although these were operational validations rather than ATS provision, its success shows potential. The question is how far we can go? Will we be constrained by the importance of close controller communication in the delivery of ATS? Important safety/Human Factors issues would need to be addressed; and of course, there are other risks. It exposes traditionally isolated ATC systems towards operating in a “cloud computing” space – with all of the additional cybersecurity considerations that come with that.
