曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
traffic situation, indeed the two are
synonymous. The year 2002 saw the
planned continuation of the implementation
of ETFMS ?the Enhanced Tactical
Flow Management System ?and the first
development of functions within the
software designed to take advantage of
the enhanced data quality that comes
with this system.
In addition, the CFMU has begun the
development of more advanced interface
tools that will enable its stakeholders,
specifically aircraft operators, to interact
with the CFMU system in a more efficient
and user-friendly manner.
Another important contribution towards
the effectiveness of the CFMU抯 role is
collaborative decision-making between all
the players. This inclusive and transparent
process has enabled trust to be built
between the CFMU, aircraft operators
and ANSPs. In 2002, this process was
used extensively to address areas of
congestion.
These developments allow greater efficiency
to be achieved throughout the
entire flow management process. They
will also provide the aircraft operator with
the ability to interact with these processes
and use them to his advantage
without requiring detailed knowledge of
what has already become a very
complex system.
AIR TRAFFIC FLOW MANAGEMENT
The EUROCONTROL Provisional Council
requested that the average delay per
flight during the 2002 summer season
(May-October) should not exceed 3.2
minutes per flight, while handling a 5.3%
traffic increase in the Member States of
the European Civil Aviation Conference
(ECAC) area. Furthermore, the average
delay caused by en-route regulations
shall not exceed 2.5 minutes. This is
known as the 揹elay target?
After the publication of these targets, the
forecast traffic variations were significantly
reviewed. An average delay of 1.4 minutes
per flight was estimated1. Considering
the en-route regulations only, an average
delay of 0.6 minutes was forecast.
This is known as the 揹elay forecast?
The traffic variation from May to October
2002 was ?.8% and the average delay
was 2.5 minutes per flight. The average
delay caused by en-route regulations was
1.8 minutes over the same period.
The results for the summer 2002 period
were greater than the 揹elay forecast?and
the reasons for this should be sought. The
most obvious one was the continuing
problems faced by the UK, but there were
also significant delays at the beginning of
July following the 躡erlingen accident.
There was also some significant industrial
action, in particular that taken on 19 June
by ATCEUC (the Air Traffic Control
European Unions Coordination).
The summer period is known by ATFM
users to be the most congested period of
the year, therefore an annual report will not
add much new information. Nevertheless,
it is important to report on a yearly basis,
primarily for statistical reasons but also to
report comprehensively on ATFM operations.
Nor is the winter period exempt from
special events, such as severe weather
conditions that might impact heavily on
ATFM delays.
Annual traffic growth
The decline in the daily traffic already
observed during 2001 was accentuated in
2002 with a decrease of 1.9% compared
with the previous year. The average of
22,567 flights per day now lies between
the 1999 and 2000 values, although is still
14.8% above the 1997 daily average.
Yearly traffic averages
Yearly traffic variation
Traffic variation since 1997
17,000
19,000
20,000
21,000
18,000
22,000
23,000
24,000
Daily number of flights
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
19,658
20,681
22,064
23,071
23,001
22,567
-5%
0%
5%
10%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
4.8
-0.6
-1.9
6.7
5.2
0%
10%
5%
15%
20%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
14.8
17.0
17.4
12.2
5.2
1- This was based on the assumption of a ?.4% traffic
variation in the ECAC area and the timely implementation of
the capacity increases planned by the air navigation service
providers for summer 2002 (Future ATM Profile model).
40 - 41 I Central Flow Management Unit
Yearly delay per flight
The 2002 average delays are well below
the targets set by the Provisional Council,
with 2.2 minutes instead of 3.2 minutes for
total delay, and 1.5 minutes instead of 2.5
minutes for en-route delay. The traffic
variation is, of course, below expectations
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
EUROCONTROL Annual Report 2002(21)
