eATM Portal

Overall Master Plan Level 3 Implementation Progress

The figure below depicts the Level 3 implementation progress for 2017. A detailed analysis of each objective is provided in the Implementation Objectives (Monitoring) section.

The 2018 report (showing the situation at the end of 2017) is based on the Master Plan Level 3 2017 Implementation Plan that included 50 implementation objectives. Three (3) out of these 50 Objectives are so called “Initial” Implementation Objectives which provide advanced notice to stakeholders but which contain aspects requiring further validation. Therefore they were not yet monitored at local level in 2017 and are not reflected in the consolidated numbers.

Overall, the implementation progress of the Master Plan Level 3 at ECAC level is steady. A very solid baseline is being implemented, paving the way for the deployment of the more advanced functionalities envisaged by the PCP and other SESAR 1 results as well as preparing the ground for the incoming SESAR2020 functionalities. A massive number of Objectives associated to the SESAR Baseline implementation (16 Objectives) are expected to be achieved in 2018/2019 shortly to be followed by the advent of the PCP implementation in the timeframe 2021/2023.

Around 30% of implementation objectives progress on-time, planning the full achievement within prescribed dates. There are around 38% of Level 3 implementation objectives that are either already beyond the initially planned completion dates, or are planned to be delayed. These need to be closely followed by appropriate authorities and mitigation measures need to be put in place. This is particularly important for the items that are identified as important pre-requisites or enablers for the PCP. Without the pre-requisites deployed, there is a risk that major SESAR functionalities will be delayed for implementation (e.g. a delayed deployment of A-SMGCS Surveillance will impact the deployment of more advanced A-SMGCS functionalities).

For 28% of the objectives an estimated completion date cannot be defined at this time. This is mostly because the implementation of these objectives is still in very early planning phases and it is therefore premature to establish implementation trends and fully reliable estimated achievement dates. This 28% also includes the Four (4) “Local” Objectives, a category newly introduced in the 2017 Implementation Plan. These Objectives are addressing solutions considered beneficial for specific operating environments, therefore for which a clear widespread commitment for implementation has not been expressed yet. Typically this is the case for local deployments which may include selected main/core operating environments, subject to positive business cases at local level. As such, these Objectives do not have an associated completion date therefore there is no baseline to assess the estimated achievement date.