AFIS in Europe?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: spain
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFIS in Europe?
Hi there,
spanish ANSP (AENA) is planning to eliminate ATC an introduce AFIS in at least 12 regional airports in order to cut navigation costs. As this service is something completely new for us, I have many doubts about how it works and it’s implementation. I’ve been told AFIS works in some places in Europe so I guess maybe someone could answer a few questions, or at least give me a hint about where to find information about it.
Basicly I’d like to know if there are any kind of limitations for AFIS operations regarding:
- Type of traffic
- Number of movements per hour
- Weather conditions
- Aproach procedures
- Airspace complexity
- Can IFR traffics land on non controlled airports?
- Are there any restrictions on comercial traffics using airports with AFIS?
- Do the insurance companies cover that kind of operations?
- Is there any liabilty claim problems?
- Is AFIS regulated in any legal document (ICAO, Eurocontrol, AIPs, ANSPs...)?
- Any statistics comparing incident rates ATC vs AFIS?
- What is the airlines policy regarding AFIS?
- Does the general public feel confident enough to fly comercial flights to/from non controlled airports?
I would sincerely appreciate any comments about this topic, especially comercial pilot’s opinons about flying to/from this enviroment in Europe.
Thanks for your help.
spanish ANSP (AENA) is planning to eliminate ATC an introduce AFIS in at least 12 regional airports in order to cut navigation costs. As this service is something completely new for us, I have many doubts about how it works and it’s implementation. I’ve been told AFIS works in some places in Europe so I guess maybe someone could answer a few questions, or at least give me a hint about where to find information about it.
Basicly I’d like to know if there are any kind of limitations for AFIS operations regarding:
- Type of traffic
- Number of movements per hour
- Weather conditions
- Aproach procedures
- Airspace complexity
- Can IFR traffics land on non controlled airports?
- Are there any restrictions on comercial traffics using airports with AFIS?
- Do the insurance companies cover that kind of operations?
- Is there any liabilty claim problems?
- Is AFIS regulated in any legal document (ICAO, Eurocontrol, AIPs, ANSPs...)?
- Any statistics comparing incident rates ATC vs AFIS?
- What is the airlines policy regarding AFIS?
- Does the general public feel confident enough to fly comercial flights to/from non controlled airports?
I would sincerely appreciate any comments about this topic, especially comercial pilot’s opinons about flying to/from this enviroment in Europe.
Thanks for your help.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without going into all the nitty-gritty details (which I don't remember off the top of my head anyway) I can tell you that there has been many AFIS aerodromes for several decades in Norway. They function very well. The majority are in the more "remote" areas, and traffic normally consists of scheduled flights with Dash-8's. Some of the IFR approaches have been quite "amusing", with LLZ offset 70 deg's etc, surrounded by mountains thousands of feet above you. But they work, and get the job done. Safely. 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: spain
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for for the reply redbar.
So I guess AFIS works well in Norway and it is compatible with scheduled flights and IFR app.
No doubt it could be an effective solution to many ADs, and if implemented reasonably, it shouldn't necessarily put safety at risk.
I still have some questions though: how does it work in a more complex environment which could eventually include VFRs, IFRs, commercial flights, GA, private flights...? Any restrictions or special requirements? Legal support? Any other examples (maybe UK, France or Germany)?
Any info and opinions will be warmly welcome.
So I guess AFIS works well in Norway and it is compatible with scheduled flights and IFR app.
No doubt it could be an effective solution to many ADs, and if implemented reasonably, it shouldn't necessarily put safety at risk.
I still have some questions though: how does it work in a more complex environment which could eventually include VFRs, IFRs, commercial flights, GA, private flights...? Any restrictions or special requirements? Legal support? Any other examples (maybe UK, France or Germany)?
Any info and opinions will be warmly welcome.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW, there are quite a few AFIS aerodromes in France as well. The examples I can recall are essentially GA and some business aviation. Others, like Perpignan, are ATC during the hours they get the commercial traffic (i.e., the AF from Paris + a couple of FRs from Stansted or wherever) and uncontrolled the rest of the day.
Sorry I can't be of more help. I would have though that most companies' operations manual required them to fly to full ATC destinations, but I'm not qualified to comment.
Sorry I can't be of more help. I would have though that most companies' operations manual required them to fly to full ATC destinations, but I'm not qualified to comment.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- Is AFIS regulated in any legal document (ICAO, Eurocontrol, AIPs, ANSPs...)?
I learnt flying at an aerodrome in Sweden which was ATC until, I believe 17:00 LT, when it became AFIS. We had scheduled IFR traffic, albeit only a few, after that time. My flight school was continuing operating as normal but, IIRC, the AFIS-operator didn't want more than 2 in the traffic circuit (local procedure I believe).
The setup around AFIS aerodromes in Sweden, dunno if same in Spain, is TIZ/TIA. Class G airspace, no separation services provided. So I believe it's see-and-be-seen.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: spain
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I was considering the possibility of having ATC during the hours when scheduled flights could be expected, leaving AFIS for the rest of the time. Could be a solution. Just as LH2 says, I always thought that airlines manuals would prevent them from operating in AFIS environments.
172_driver, since AFIS does not issue clearances, how could it avoid having more than 2 traffics in the pattern?
Thank you both for your help.
By the way, I finally found a document that somehow deals with the subject:
172_driver, since AFIS does not issue clearances, how could it avoid having more than 2 traffics in the pattern?
Thank you both for your help.
By the way, I finally found a document that somehow deals with the subject:
EAM 5 / GUI 1 EXPLANATORY MATERIAL ON ESARR 5 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL OFFICERS
Page 13 (Aerodrome Control) reads as follows:
One of the air traffic services recognised by ICAO is a flight information service that is independent from an air traffic control or air traffic advisory service. A number of States implement this service at aerodromes that are outside controlled airspace to provide flight information in the interests of safety. This service may be limited to information about the runway in use, circuit direction, pressure settings and meteorological conditions. However, a more comprehensive information service including the provision of traffic information to aircraft entering, leaving or operating in the aerodrome circuit may be required, depending on the traffic levels and
complexity.
complexity.
Any further increase in the level of traffic or a change in the type of operations, for example the introduction of scheduled flights, may require the introduction of controlled airspace and an air traffic control service to meet the required level of safety.
I was hoping to find some kind of clear and mandatory requirements but I just step into such an ambiguous phrasing (may require?). Awfully frustrating...
Any hints?
Any hints?
Last edited by pamplinas; 27th Jan 2010 at 17:20.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Flight Information Service, which is nominally the service provided at airports, is 'defined' within ICAO Annex 11. This document does not go into great detail about the service provided at aerodromes and ICAO did produce a Circular (number 211 - you can find it quite easily online if you Google it) more than 20 years ago which gave guidance to States on how to implement a FIS at an aerodrome.
But these documents will not give you many of the definitive answers that you are looking for. The ICAO material must be interpreted at national level which is where much of the detail you want would be defined. As others have pointed out, a Flight Information Service is provided at many aerodromes across Europe - typically in remote locations with low levels of traffic. However, the way in which aerodrome FIS has been implemented in different states varies greatly.
In the UK you can find some CAA documents which describe how to get a licence and how the service should be provided - search for CAP 410 and CAP 427 - but these are woefully out of date in some respects!
If you can wait that long, in a couple of years EASA will be writing the rules for how air traffic services are done across Europe. I have no doubt that eventually there will be an Implementing Rule which describes exactly what an AFIS can do and where it can be provided.
But these documents will not give you many of the definitive answers that you are looking for. The ICAO material must be interpreted at national level which is where much of the detail you want would be defined. As others have pointed out, a Flight Information Service is provided at many aerodromes across Europe - typically in remote locations with low levels of traffic. However, the way in which aerodrome FIS has been implemented in different states varies greatly.
In the UK you can find some CAA documents which describe how to get a licence and how the service should be provided - search for CAP 410 and CAP 427 - but these are woefully out of date in some respects!
If you can wait that long, in a couple of years EASA will be writing the rules for how air traffic services are done across Europe. I have no doubt that eventually there will be an Implementing Rule which describes exactly what an AFIS can do and where it can be provided.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
172_driver, since AFIS does not issue clearances, how could it avoid having more than 2 traffics in the pattern?
In the UK, airports with AFIS are normally VFR only with no iap's; there are exceptions however if another (IFR) airport can assist with the iap - EGNL is an example - otherwise the pilot should do an iap at another airport so he can carry out a visual approach at the AFIS airport.
As regards the number of aircraft in the circuit, AFIS does not issue 'clearances' thus it is entirely 'pilots discretion'.
There is another service in the UK (Air/Ground Radio abbrieviated to A/G) which provides basic advice such as runway and pressure setting, but AFIS also provides traffic information on other aircraft joining, leaving or transitting the circuit and is also mandated to pass instructions to vehicles and aircraft on the ground.
As regards the number of aircraft in the circuit, AFIS does not issue 'clearances' thus it is entirely 'pilots discretion'.
There is another service in the UK (Air/Ground Radio abbrieviated to A/G) which provides basic advice such as runway and pressure setting, but AFIS also provides traffic information on other aircraft joining, leaving or transitting the circuit and is also mandated to pass instructions to vehicles and aircraft on the ground.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As have been stated, numerous airports in Norway are uncontrolled, ie AFIS. I fly in and out from them regularly, however, keep in mind the following:
-The AFIS guy does not have ATC authority. He will only tell you about other aircraft, and you have to figure out the separation yourself. Quite often the easiest is to talk directly to the other aircraft.
-The AFIS guy will be able to get you weather, and he will forward IFR clearances from the overhead area control centre. He also has that all vital fire and rescue support team available for you.
-At least in Norway, the AFIS guy does NOT have radar. Apart from the obvious differences in reporting procedures, when you are without ATC, without a guy seeing you on radar, and sometimes without TCAS, you are for all purposes on your own. Brings a whole new meaning to checking and double checking everything, as well as keeping a sharp ear on the radio.
I guess the conclusion is that an AFIS airfield has removed some safety barriers wrt "normal" airports, but it may be acceptable, especially where traffic is light.
And for those fancy procedures in Norway, for those interested, check out for instance this approach into ENRA. Note AD elevation of 229', and then look at surrounding terrain.
-The AFIS guy does not have ATC authority. He will only tell you about other aircraft, and you have to figure out the separation yourself. Quite often the easiest is to talk directly to the other aircraft.
-The AFIS guy will be able to get you weather, and he will forward IFR clearances from the overhead area control centre. He also has that all vital fire and rescue support team available for you.
-At least in Norway, the AFIS guy does NOT have radar. Apart from the obvious differences in reporting procedures, when you are without ATC, without a guy seeing you on radar, and sometimes without TCAS, you are for all purposes on your own. Brings a whole new meaning to checking and double checking everything, as well as keeping a sharp ear on the radio.
I guess the conclusion is that an AFIS airfield has removed some safety barriers wrt "normal" airports, but it may be acceptable, especially where traffic is light.
And for those fancy procedures in Norway, for those interested, check out for instance this approach into ENRA. Note AD elevation of 229', and then look at surrounding terrain.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: spain
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, thank you all for your help.
I've found something else that could reopen de discussion:
http://www.lotniskowswidniku.pl/dek/wymogi.pdf
Air Traffic Control Full ATC: AFIS is not acceptable.
So, it seems RYR has things clear. Any info about other companies?
I've found something else that could reopen de discussion:
http://www.lotniskowswidniku.pl/dek/wymogi.pdf
Air Traffic Control Full ATC: AFIS is not acceptable.
So, it seems RYR has things clear. Any info about other companies?
Australia has had FIS for IFR for a very long time. There is no requirement that limits an instrument approach to a controlled field. In fact the vast majority of IAP aerodromes are non-controlled. Not even an AFIS. You have to talk to the other aircraft to organise who's going to do what and learn to keep a mental map of who might affect you.
Unlike the UK, to fly IFR you must submit a flight plan so none of this 'Now I'm VFR ... now I'm IFR .... now I'm VFR ... now I'm IFR' that can be done in the UK's Class G without notifying ATS.
Unlike the UK, to fly IFR you must submit a flight plan so none of this 'Now I'm VFR ... now I'm IFR .... now I'm VFR ... now I'm IFR' that can be done in the UK's Class G without notifying ATS.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: in the sandpit
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Pamplinas,
Could you tell me exactly which airports have been decommissioned. What are the statistics of these airfields ? (IFR VFR number of passengers).
In France we used to have a rule to decide if an aeronautical study should be undertaken to revise the type of service (ATC or AFIS). I don't know if this rule is still valid ...
coefficient K = I/4000 + M/15000 + PAX/100000
(I = IFR M=IFR+VFR PAX=Passengers)
If K < 1.3 then this airfield should be AFIS
If K > 1.3 then this airfield should be controlled
Could you tell me exactly which airports have been decommissioned. What are the statistics of these airfields ? (IFR VFR number of passengers).
In France we used to have a rule to decide if an aeronautical study should be undertaken to revise the type of service (ATC or AFIS). I don't know if this rule is still valid ...
coefficient K = I/4000 + M/15000 + PAX/100000
(I = IFR M=IFR+VFR PAX=Passengers)
If K < 1.3 then this airfield should be AFIS
If K > 1.3 then this airfield should be controlled
Last edited by mana; 13th Apr 2010 at 15:22.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: in the sandpit
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yearly values for coefficient K in France.
About Spain :
Unsafety aviation, a letter from a Spanish Passenger...
PILAR VILLANUEVA - Barcelona - 22/02/2010
I followed the news lately that have appeared about air traffic controllers. At first it was funny Minister Jose Blanco in his role as Robin Hood. However, the progressive viciousness of his campaign against that group made me assume he was preparing the ground for other interests.
Finally, the last day 5, the minister showed what has been zealously preparing: a real decree on emergency procedure that has decreed the liberalization of air traffic control. This fact seems to me more disturbing as they are not talking about any public service but a service in which safety must take precedence over everything. It is obvious that the sole objective of any private enterprise are the benefits. It is enough to read the news to see the problems that have with three or four European countries that have privatized air traffic control: just remember the intermittent blackouts throughout the control system and corresponding United Kingdom chaos lack of investment in equipment, or the latest mid-air collision of aircraft in Switzerland was understaffed.
In Spain, the Minister of Public Works has decided to fire the air traffic controllers from towers. That will begin from the nine towers with less flights. The controllers will be replaced by unskilled personnel without higher education who are going to train for two months instead of two years, and also have not gone through any selection process, then, suspiciously, the deadline for applications was a day and all vacancies were taken inmediately. Interestingly, they have all failed the test of English proficiency, and half in the final examination skills, and this has not prevented the general approval and, therefore, come to give information service, not control!
These "pseudo-controlles" are chosen and trained by a private company, Ineco. I do not go to assessing whether the salaries of controllers are deserved, but I am convinced that this work requires great responsibility and must be done by someone who has been through a tough and strict selection process and has the necessary preparation and temper.
Just ask some sanity to AENA and to the group of controllers to reach a negotiated settlement, and also to the manipulated public opinion to not allow that the government privatize the aviation safety. As usual airline passenger, I'm starting to scare me.
Original Version (Spanish): http://www.elpais.com/articulo/opinion/Inseguridad/aerea/elpepiopi/20100222elpepiopi_9/Tes
About Spain :
Unsafety aviation, a letter from a Spanish Passenger...
PILAR VILLANUEVA - Barcelona - 22/02/2010
I followed the news lately that have appeared about air traffic controllers. At first it was funny Minister Jose Blanco in his role as Robin Hood. However, the progressive viciousness of his campaign against that group made me assume he was preparing the ground for other interests.
Finally, the last day 5, the minister showed what has been zealously preparing: a real decree on emergency procedure that has decreed the liberalization of air traffic control. This fact seems to me more disturbing as they are not talking about any public service but a service in which safety must take precedence over everything. It is obvious that the sole objective of any private enterprise are the benefits. It is enough to read the news to see the problems that have with three or four European countries that have privatized air traffic control: just remember the intermittent blackouts throughout the control system and corresponding United Kingdom chaos lack of investment in equipment, or the latest mid-air collision of aircraft in Switzerland was understaffed.
In Spain, the Minister of Public Works has decided to fire the air traffic controllers from towers. That will begin from the nine towers with less flights. The controllers will be replaced by unskilled personnel without higher education who are going to train for two months instead of two years, and also have not gone through any selection process, then, suspiciously, the deadline for applications was a day and all vacancies were taken inmediately. Interestingly, they have all failed the test of English proficiency, and half in the final examination skills, and this has not prevented the general approval and, therefore, come to give information service, not control!
These "pseudo-controlles" are chosen and trained by a private company, Ineco. I do not go to assessing whether the salaries of controllers are deserved, but I am convinced that this work requires great responsibility and must be done by someone who has been through a tough and strict selection process and has the necessary preparation and temper.
Just ask some sanity to AENA and to the group of controllers to reach a negotiated settlement, and also to the manipulated public opinion to not allow that the government privatize the aviation safety. As usual airline passenger, I'm starting to scare me.
Original Version (Spanish): http://www.elpais.com/articulo/opinion/Inseguridad/aerea/elpepiopi/20100222elpepiopi_9/Tes
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Mana,
With regard to the coefficient K, what is M (IFR + VFR)?
Do you mean total IFR traffic plus total VFR traffic? And do you count this in addition to total IFR traffic?
I.e. field has 6000 IFR and 10000 VFR means:
K = 6000/4000 + 16000/15000 + pax/100000 ?
With regard to the coefficient K, what is M (IFR + VFR)?
Do you mean total IFR traffic plus total VFR traffic? And do you count this in addition to total IFR traffic?
I.e. field has 6000 IFR and 10000 VFR means:
K = 6000/4000 + 16000/15000 + pax/100000 ?
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: indonesia
Age: 31
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi guys,
let me introduce my self..
i'm a cadet of Indonesia Civil Aviation Institute
and now i'm on the final year.
me and my friends have an assignment from my institute to make an AFIS procedure that can be use in our country. And now we need some AFIS procedure from the other country for our information. If all of your country have an AFIS procedure and you have the document, please sent to my email at [email protected]
i really need your help..
thanks for your attention and your help before
let me introduce my self..
i'm a cadet of Indonesia Civil Aviation Institute
and now i'm on the final year.
me and my friends have an assignment from my institute to make an AFIS procedure that can be use in our country. And now we need some AFIS procedure from the other country for our information. If all of your country have an AFIS procedure and you have the document, please sent to my email at [email protected]
i really need your help..
thanks for your attention and your help before
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts