**Fifth Meeting of the**

**Cross Polar Trans East Air Traffic Management Providers' Working
Group**

(Dallas, Texas, USA, 1-3 April 2008)

**Agenda Item 6: 2008-2009 Cross Polar Work Program**

(Presented by the Federal Aviation Administration)

**Cross Polar Flex Tracks**

[SUMMARY]{.underline}

This working paper proposes the adoption of a system of Cross Polar
"flex" tracks through the Arctic Flight Information Regions between
North America and the Russian Domestic FIR boundaries to achieve both
greater route efficiency and harmonized Air Traffic Management
procedures.

1\. **Introduction**

# 

# A review of the organization of the Cross Polar traffic flow indicates efficiency could be gained through the introduction of a system of flexible Cross Polar tracks. Such a system would maximize the benefits of great circle routings. At least two of the CPWG Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) have experience in using flexible tracks. This paper proposes that a system of wind driven, daily flex tracks be established for the Cross Polar flow from the edge of radar/VHF communications in the Edmonton Flight Information Region (FIR) to the entry points of the Russian Domestic FIRs.

2\. **Discussion**

#  The current organization of the Cross Polar traffic flow incorporates a variety of Air Traffic Management (ATM) methods. At least three of the four FIRs involved utilize different routing schemes. The Canadian FIR provides some east/west fixed routings, i.e. the NCA tracks, for a flight's initial Cross Polar routing but then transitions to a system of point to point navigation. The Anchorage Arctic FIR, providing no fixed routings, establishes routing controls through Notices to Airmen. The Murmansk and Magadan FIRs provide several fixed, mandatory, routings which are designed specifically for the Cross Polar flow.

#  This mixture of routing schemes, while meeting the ATM needs of the individual ANSPs, prohibits operators from taking full advantage of the efficiencies provided by great circle routings. An unbroken great circle route, i.e. from origin to destination, provides *the* most efficient (shortest) route when other considerations are disregarded. ATM requirements however, almost always make such routings unrealistic. The safety implications of crossing air traffic flows leads ANSPs to establish routes based first on safety, then on efficiency. It can be argued that the Cross Polar traffic flow, especially above 70° North Latitude, has limited crossing traffic. Therefore the ANSPs involved should be amenable to creating a Cross Polar route system which maximizes great circle route efficiency.

# For several years now the Federal Aviation Administration, in partnership with the Japan Civil Aviation Bureau, has utilized the Dynamic Ocean Track System Plus (DOTS+) to daily create a system of flexible tracks across the North Pacific. NAV CANADA utilizes a similar flexible track structure for the Trans Polar flow, i.e. the Northern Organized Track Structure (NOR OTS). Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) has been exploring the feasibility of using the DOTS+ to generate daily flexible tracks between the edge of radar/frequency coverage in Canadian airspace to the Russian Domestic FIR boundary fixes for ATS routes G490 (NOTIS), B480 (EDONI), G491 (TIGLA), G226 (RUTIN) and G494 (TURDI).

2.4 The graphic and route details contained in Attachment 1 depict a
DOTS+ generated track between KJFK and position TURDI on route G494 as
it crosses the Magadan/Chokurdakh FIR boundary. This indicates that
DOTS+ is capable of the proposed track generation. A similar generation
from KORD, or another airport, would identify the most beneficial track
"merge" point that would be used to establish the common track leaving
Canadian radar and VHF coverage. The result of this process would then
be published as the TURDI flex track for the day. The process would be
repeated for the other four points; NOTIS, EDONI, etc.

2.5 A special consideration of this process, which must not be
overlooked, is the question of which lateral separation standard the
flex track system would use. As has been noted in previous CPWG
meetings, each of the FIRs currently apply a different lateral
separation standard. In order to resolve this, the flex tracks could
initially be generated using the largest standard, 90 nautical miles,
between flex tracks. In the meantime, the ANSPs could commit to work
towards a single common standard, which could later be applied. The
International Air Transport Association has gone on record as supporting
the adoption of 50 NM based on RNP-10 aircraft equipage as the common
Polar lateral separation standard.

2.6 To support the proposed action, Anchorage ARTCC's Traffic Management
Unit (Anchorage TMU) offers to continue its exploration of the DOTS+
capability and to share the results of that exploration with CPWG
members.

3.  **Recommendation**

3.1 The meeting is invited to note the information and proposal
presented and to:

a\. Recommend that Anchorage TMU continue its efforts to explore the
DOTS+ Cross Polar flex track generation capabilities and to disseminate
its findings to CPWG members;

b\. Adopt the proposal to create a Cross Polar Organized Flex Track
System (CPOFTS) and to set development and implementation timeline
goals; and

c\. Agree that the 50NM lateral separation standard, based on RNP-10
aircraft equipage, is the standard that shall eventually be used in the
CPOFTS system and identify steps and time lines for its implementation.

![](media/image1.wmf){width="5.8125in" height="8.395833333333334in"}

![](media/image2.wmf){width="6.490972222222222in"
height="3.504166666666667in"}