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
ATM/CNS PROVISION COSTS (INCLUDING AIS & MAASTRICHT COSTS)
8.5.5 The bulk of total ANS costs (i.e. some 88%) relate to the provision of ATM/CNS. These
costs are largely under the direct control and responsibility of ANSPs. They are linked to
the capacity to be provided for a safe and efficient conduct of traffic demand. ATM/CNS
provision costs form the basis of the ANSP cost-effectiveness benchmarking analysis
presented in Section 8.6 of this chapter.
AERONAUTICAL MET COSTS
8.5.6 Figure 113 shows the trend at European level of MET costs recovered through en-route
charges between 2004 and 2010 for a consistent sample of 28 EUROCONTROL Member
States for which data for a time-series analysis was available
PRR 2009 99 Chapter 8: Cost-effectiveness
8.5.7 At European level, en-route MET
costs, i.e. some 5% of en-route ANS
costs, amounted to some €325M in
2008. It should be noted that the enroute
MET costs decreased by -9% in
real terms between 2004 and 2008.
This is an appreciable contribution to
the en-route ANS cost-effectiveness
improvement. This also indicates that
trends in en-route MET costs can be
decoupled from trends in traffic
growth.
0
100
200
300
400
M€ (2008)
MET costs (M€ 2008) 359 342 328 324 325 328 325
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
-5% -4% -1% 0% 1% -1%
Figure 113: Changes in en-route MET costs at
European level (2004-2010) in €2008
8.5.8 The-9% decrease at European system level is mainly due to decreases in Italy and
Germany (-22% and -35%, respectively) where MET costs represent 15% and 10% of the
total MET costs at European system level, respectively.
8.5.9 It should be noted that the
organisational and operational
responsibility for provision of
MET services varies by State.
In a majority of cases these are
provided by the national MET
institution/authority, however in
several cases MET services are
provided either wholly or
partially by the en-route ATS
provider (see Figure 114).
Among the largest five States,
only Italy has its en-route ATS
provider which is also, albeit
partially, responsible for MET
services.
Lower Airspace
MET services provided internally
Figure 114: Arrangements for provision of MET
services
8.5.10 Figure 115 also shows that the share in en-route MET costs in total en-route national costbase
varies from 13% to 1%. The main drivers for such large differences include:
Differences in MET costs allocation between en-route and terminal ANS;
Differences in policy for charging MET costs to aviation (e.g. subsidies, allocation of
core costs);
Genuine differences in MET infrastructure and levels of MET products and
services44; and,
Genuine cost-effectiveness differences.
44 It should be noted that the UK MET costs includes the cost of the World Area Forecasting Centre (WAFC).
PRR 2009 100 Chapter 8: Cost-effectiveness
9.8%
7.8% 7.7% 7.6%
7.2%
6.5% 6.5%
5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.8% 5.8% 5.6%
4.6%
4.2% 4.1% 4.1% 4.0% 4.0% 3.9% 3.8% 3.6%
1.8% 1.7% 1.5% 1.5%
12.7%
3.5%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
Moldova
Austria
Italy
Cyprus
Turkey
Bulgaria
Switzerland
Malta
Ireland
Slovenia
France
Belgium/Lux.
Greece
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Portugal (FIR Lisboa)
Sweden
Germany
Denmark
Spain Canarias
Hungary
FYROM
Spain Continental
Finland
Slovak Republic
Czech Republic
Albania
Norway
Proportion of MET costs in total en-route costs
Figure 115: Share of en-route MET costs in total en-route national cost base (2008)
8.5.11 As highlighted in the 2004 PRC Report on aeronautical MET costs [Ref. 35], there is a
need to establish a data flow in order to consistently measure MET products and services
at European system level. This would increase transparency and would allow to compute
the MET cost-effectiveness KPI which could be used to compare performance across
MET providers.
EUROCONTROL AGENCY COSTS (EXCLUDING MUAC)
8.5.12 EUROCONTROL Agency costs can be split
into two main categories: the
EUROCONTROL cost base (Parts I and IX,
€531.6M in 2008) and the CRCO costs (Part
II, €18.2M in 2008).
8.5.13 In 2008, the EUROCONTROL Agency cost
base (Parts I and IX) represents 7.8% of
total European en-route ANS costs, which is
lower than in 2007 (8.3%). As indicated in
Figure 116 the relative share of
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
Performance Review Report 2009(73)
