The evolutionary ‘patterns’ described in para. 7.2, suggest that (especially large) Terminal Airspaces (Stages 1-4) and Terminal Airspace systems (Stage 5) are likely to share certain characteristics.
7.3.1 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
At a general level, shared characteristics (for Stages 1-5) include -
.
areas of high population surrounding the airports serviced by the Terminal Airspace (and/or system). This population provides a substantial part of passenger market;
.
increasing pressure from environmental groups;
.
increasing requirements from diverse airspace users;
.
increasing requirements for noise abatement procedures to be implemented which affect departure and arrival flight profiles and an increasing use of Continuous Descent Approaches (CDA) as a method of environmental mitigation;
.
significant air traffic density and a complex system of Terminal Routes;
.
extensive use of holding areas to sequence traffic;
.
increasing airspace requirements and the resultant ‘encroachment’ of one Terminal Airspace structure on another.;
.
complex sectorisation modules; As regards Stages 4 and 5,
.
airspace designers find it difficult to find sufficient space to place holding patterns; as such, one holding pattern (outside the Terminal Airspaces) may be required to serve two airports which limits the regular flow of traffic two the separate airports;
.
increasingly, complex sectorisation of the Terminal Airspaces serve to constrain flight profiles which may undo environmental mitigation measures already in place;
.
increasing use if made of metering tools to assist pre-sequencing of traffic into the various Terminal Airspaces;
As regards Terminal Airspace systems (Stage 5) in particular –
.
ATC sectorisation is no longer airport-centred i.e. linked to a particular airport, but rather modular to the entire Terminal Airspace System; and
.
The ‘importance’ attached to the Terminal Airspace structure is overtaken by ATC sectorisation of the Terminal Airspace system block.
7.3.2 SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS
At a more specific level, certain characteristics – and trends – can be catalogued in the evolutionary process and an overview of these is provided in tabular form below. Specifically, the Table focuses upon, Terminal Routes, the placement of Holding patterns and the Sectorisation type during the Terminal Airspace’s evolution. Attention is drawn to the fact that this Table deals with examples of evolutionary trends.
Reading Table 7- 1
In this table, the Stages 1-4 (top row) match the Stages in Figure 7- 1 & Figure 7- 2. The shaded cells represent Terminal Airspace X, (therefore Routes, holds, Sectors in Terminal Airspace X), and the white cells refer to the controlled airspace beyond Terminal Airspace X.
T
e
r
m
i
n
a
l
A
i
r
s
p
a
c
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
-
P
a
r
t
C
Because Stage 5 represents the Terminal Airspace system, there is no distinction between the (original) Terminal Airspace (X) and airspace beyond it; as such, only one cell (shaded yellow) is shown. Remarks relating to Stage 5 in Table 7- 1 are stated separately to those related with Stages 1-4.
Note: In Table 7- 1, under Terminal Routes, RV* means that extensive use is likely to be made by ATC of Radar Vectors for both arrivals (ARR) and departures (DEP); ARR RV means that extensive use is likely to be made by ATC of Radar Vectoring for arriving aircraft. RNAV IAP stands for Instrument Approach Procedure based on RNAV, excluding the Final and Missed Approach segment. ATS Routes (beyond X) refers to ATS routes forming part of EUR ARN (and mostly based on B-RNAV in ECAC). In turn, under Sectorisation; Geog. indicates geographic sectorisation; Fn indicates functional sectorisation, and G/F indicates a combination of these two methods.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：EUROCONTROL MANUAL FOR AIRSPACE PLANNING 2(70)
