**THE TWENTY-EIGHTH MEETING OF THE**

**INFORMAL PACIFIC ATC CO-ORDINATING GROUP**

**(IPACG/28)**

(Las Vegas, Nevada, 12-16 May 2008)

Agenda Item 5: Air Traffic Management (ATM) Issues

**Flexibility with Special Use Airspace**

(Presented by IATA)

**[SUMMARY]{.underline}**

Special Use Airspace can compromise the efficient use of airspace by
limiting routings available for commercial aircraft. This inherent
inefficiency is largely due to the traditional nature by which they are
designed affecting costs and environmental impact. Improved coordination
between stakeholders can deliver significant benefits to airlines by
ensuring the maximum use of available airspace is made without
significantly compromising the users of SUA

1.  **Introduction**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  The increase in air traffic has meant that airspace capacity is at
    times tested. Technological advancements have gone some way to
    alleviate the pressure with the advent of reduced separations, ATM
    automation, etc. Airspace design, and utilisation however have
    fundamentally remained unchanged, particularly with regards to
    Special Use Airspace (SUA).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  **Discussion**

    1.  Special Use Airspace was designed to enable "special" operations
        while minimizing impact to ordinary operations. With traditional
        route structures, this methodology worked well allowing SUA to
        be designated as active either H24 or for extended periods. They
        also allow a significant range of altitudes, often encompassing
        all suitable cruising levels.

    2.  Flexible routings however such as UPRs or PACOTs can be severely
        limited by SUA. While ordinary users recognise the necessity of
        SUA, its use must be re-examined to ensure maximum flexibility
        and advantage is available for all airspace users.

    3.  The airspace surrounding Okinawa is an example of an area where
        SUA airspace can make a significant impact to aircraft on
        flexible tracks (in this case PACOTS). Designated SUA in the
        area are generally either active H24 or for an extended period
        (2100-1100 UTC) with altitude bands generally GND-UNL whether it
        is being used or not. PACOTS tracks will generally terminate to
        the east joining traditional routes thereby potentially
        immediately limiting their benefits.

![](media/image1.png){width="6.5in" height="4.802083333333333in"}

![](media/image2.wmf)

4.  Most Flight planning systems restrict the ability to plan through
    SUA therefore accurate figures are difficult to quantify. However
    evidence suggests that savings of 8-10 mins may be achieveable at
    certain times of year. This corresponds to a significant saving in
    fuel, associated reduced emissions and increased payload capacity.

5.  ANSPs must consult with agencies such as U.S. Department of Defense,
    Japanese Self Defense Force and the Canadian Military to discuss
    issues such as location, altitudes and validity periods to maximise
    the efficient use of airspace for all users.

6.  This example is indicative only. Similar situations occur in other
    areas such as off the coast of North America. It is the
    responsibility of ALL ANSPs to review their airspace utilisation
    with appropriate consultation. IATA will offer their support in any
    evaluation of efficiencies that can be gained.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  **Action by the meeting**

    1.  The meeting is invited to:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
a.  Note the information contained within this paper

b.  Review traditional viewpoint towards Special Use Airspace

c.  ANSPs to consult with stakeholders regards SUA to enable maximum
    efficiency for all airspace users.