Visto che non si riesce ad avere delle risposte concrete alle domande poste ho perso un po' di tempo (ho un po' di giorni off) a cercare dati ; il tutto nel nome della chiarezza,obiettivita' e correttezza d'informazioni.
Fonte:
il primo link PDF scaricabile datato 21/4/06 e' da dove ho attinto alcuni pezzi che lascio qui di seguito, a voi poi la lettura di tutto il documento (per chi ne avesse voglia e tempo):
pagina 7:
Arrival regulations are applied almost daily
at Barcelona, Budapest, Florence, Istanbul,
Milan, Paris-CDG, Prague, Rome, Vienna
and Zurich. This situation is abnormal and
indicates mismatches between scheduling,
airport operations and ATC capacity.
notate che siamo l'unico paese con 3 aeroporti presenti nella classifica dei peggiori.
pag.35
The PRC supports the EUROCONTROL SAFREP report’s recommendations, which
should be implemented as soon as possible. In that connection, specific actions should be
undertaken urgently to assist individual States/ANSPs in meeting their safety reporting
obligations. These actions should address, inter alia, the legal and cultural impediments
to reporting that exist in many States/ANSPs:
• Legal impediments to incident reporting exist in a number of States. In most cases,
these are not insurmountable;
• Cultural impediments to incident reporting exist in many States/ANSPs. The
reporting culture must evolve from “No reporting for fear of being blamed, punished
or even prosecuted” to “Reporting is the basis for permanent safety improvement”.
Il fatto che non si risponda sistematicamente ai safety report e' esattamente cio' a cui ci si riferisce.
pag.41
One late arrival may cause more than one late departure for connecting flights at hub
airports. At some airports, especially at Rome FCO and Paris CDG, outbound departure
delays are considerably higher than arrival delays.
pag.51
One observes major improvements (green arrows) in Maastricht UAC (delay: -78%),
significant improvements in Zurich, Reims and London, and continuous good
performance in Munchen and Rhein ACCS (delay < 0.3 min/flight) in spite of strong
traffic growth29. These achievements are discussed further in § 5.3.14 et seq.
qualcuno parlava di flessibilita' ed efficienza creativa all'italiana?o di rigidita' tedesca?beh il rapporto di eurocontrol parla di dati concreti.
pag.55
Ninety percent of ATFM delays are caused by arrival ATFM delays. A noticeable
exception is Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG)38 where 30% of airport ATFM delay is
caused by departure ATFM regulations. Florence (FLR) applied mostly global regulations
(97%) which is very unusual for a fully coordinated airport and needs immediate action.39
Increases in ATFM delays at Istanbul, Madrid, Budapest, Prague, Milan Malpensa,
Vienna and Florence are driven by ATC/Aerodrome capacity, as shown in Figure 58. At
Munich and Paris-CDG, the increase is related to weather regulations.
Despite its comparatively low traffic volume, Florence (FLR) generated more
ATC/Aerodrome capacity related ATFM delay than Amsterdam (AMS), Frankfurt (FRA)
and Munich (MUC) combined in 2005.
nemmeno a farlo apposta qui si parla di FLR...a voi le conclusioni.
pag.88
Italy and Malta did not provide sufficient information in order to derive a 5-years
trend. However, it should be noticed that for 2005 and 2006, Italy’s objective is to
stabilize its unit rate by drawing financial resources from ENAV’s reserves
(“stabilisation fund”).
sempre tra i migliori...
pag. 103
scaricatevi il grafico che vi mostra i numeri di traffico tra i vari paesi comparati alle percentuali di ritardo dei vari sistemi; scoprirete che nonostante i numeri di traffico gestiti per esempio da UK e Germania siano di parecchio superiori ai nostri i loro ritardi sono esponenzialmente inferiori.
eppure io questa efficienza fantasiosa all'italiana continuo a non vederla.