interaction d1.1 pmp_v2.0

INTERACTION—INnovative TEchnologies and Researches for a new Airport Concept towards Turnaround coordinatION

D1.1 Project Management Plan

November 2013

2


Executive Summary

This document establishes a Project Management Plan (PMP) for the INTERACTION project. It has been implemented by IBC & ALG Project Management Teams and states the way in which Project Management should coordinate the activities of each area of the project.

This document provides the management and planning guides that govern the project execution. These guides will be established through the following elements: project scope, activities to be performed according to the project work plan including the definition and the effort and duration estimation of each one, project schedule, human resources organisation and different management processes.

This PMP is based on the Consortium Agreement [1] and the Description of Work [2] provided to the European Commission in the framework of the FP7 project 605454. Slight changes may be identified within this document with respect to the DoW, particularly in the Working Plan schedule due to coordination between WPs. All modifications have been agreed between all partners.

3


Table of Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 2

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 8

1.1 Contributors ........................................................................................................................................ 8

1.2 Revision status ................................................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Structure of the document .................................................................................................................. 9

1.4 Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................ 9

1.5 Glossary ............................................................................................................................................ 10

2 Management Structure .............................................................................................................................. 11

2.1 Contact details .................................................................................................................................. 11

2.2 Consortium Members ....................................................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 Indra Business Consulting ............................................................................................................ 11

2.2.2 Indra Sistemas .............................................................................................................................. 12

2.2.3 Aegean Airlines............................................................................................................................. 12

2.2.4 Airbus Operations GmbH ............................................................................................................. 12

2.2.5 Athens International Airport .......................................................................................................... 13

2.2.6 Aviapartner Holding ...................................................................................................................... 13

2.2.7 Ingeniería y Economía del Transporte ......................................................................................... 14

2.2.8 Pildo Labs ..................................................................................................................................... 15

2.2.9 ThyssenKrupp ............................................................................................................................... 15

2.2.10 TLD ........................................................................................................................................... 15

2.2.11 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona ......................................................................................... 16

2.2.12 Airbus SAS ............................................................................................................................... 16

2.2.13 Advanced Logistics Group ........................................................................................................ 17

2.3 Management Roles and Governing bodies ...................................................................................... 17

2.3.1 Project Coordinator ....................................................................................................................... 18

2.3.2 Project Manager/Scientific Coordinator ........................................................................................ 19

2.3.3 Administrative Manager ................................................................................................................ 19

2.3.4 Steering Committee ...................................................................................................................... 19

2.3.5 Management Body ....................................................................................................................... 20

2.3.6 WP Manager ................................................................................................................................. 20

2.4 Ethics roles ....................................................................................................................................... 20

2.4.1 Data Controller .............................................................................................................................. 20

2.4.2 Ethics Advisor ............................................................................................................................... 21

3 Work packages, tasks and deliverables description ................................................................................. 22

3.1 WP1 – Project Management ............................................................................................................. 22

3.1.1 Description of work ....................................................................................................................... 22

3.1.2 WP1 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 23

4


3.1.3 WP1 Deliverables and deadlines.................................................................................................. 23

3.1.4 WP1 Leaders and Contributors .................................................................................................... 24

3.2 WP2 – Current Situation Analysis .................................................................................................... 24


3.2.2 WP2 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 26



3.3 WP3: Identify and Propose New Solutions ....................................................................................... 27


3.3.2 WP3 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 28



3.4 WP4 Solutions Design and Tools Development............................................................................... 30


3.4.2 WP4 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 32



3.5 WP5 Concept Validation ................................................................................................................... 33

3.5.1 Description of Work ...................................................................................................................... 33

3.5.2 WP5 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 36



3.6 WP6 Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation of results ..................................................... 37


3.6.2 WP6 Initial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 38



3.7 Deliverables structure ....................................................................................................................... 40

3.7.1 Progress reports elaboration procedures ..................................................................................... 40

3.7.2 Deliverables elaboration procedures ............................................................................................ 40

4 Work plan & schedule ............................................................................................................................... 42

4.1 Project Deliverables .......................................................................................................................... 42

4.2 Project Milestones ............................................................................................................................ 44

4.3 Progress reports ............................................................................................................................... 45

4.4 Project schedule ............................................................................................................................... 46

5 Management procedures .......................................................................................................................... 48

5.1 Management principles .................................................................................................................... 48

5.2 Management procedures and tools .................................................................................................. 48

5.2.1 Project Management Plan ............................................................................................................ 48

5


5.2.2 Communication, monitoring and reporting management ............................................................. 49

5.2.3 Quality management (QM) ........................................................................................................... 50

5.2.4 Milestones management .............................................................................................................. 51

5.2.5 Risk management framework ....................................................................................................... 51

5.2.6 Case of serious disputes .............................................................................................................. 52

5.2.7 Coordination with other European projects and international initiatives....................................... 52

5.3 Risk Management ............................................................................................................................. 52

5.3.1 Risk Identification.......................................................................................................................... 52

5.3.2 Risk Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 52

5.3.3 Risk Handling and Mitigation Actions ........................................................................................... 55

5.3.4 Risk Monitoring and Control ......................................................................................................... 55

5.4 Actions Management ........................................................................................................................ 55

5.5 Knowledge and communication Management ................................................................................. 56

5.5.1 Communication and Dissemination Plan ...................................................................................... 56

6 References ................................................................................................................................................ 57

Annex I List of Members of the Consortium and its Governance Bodies ......................................................... 58

Annex II Risk Register ...................................................................................................................................... 59

6


Index of tables

Table 1: Contributors list ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Table 2: Revision status ..................................................................................................................................... 9

Table 3: Acronyms list ...................................................................................................................................... 10

Table 4: Contact details .................................................................................................................................... 11

Table 5: Project participants ............................................................................................................................. 11

Table 6: WP1 Deliverables ............................................................................................................................... 24

Table 7: WP1 Leaders and contributors ........................................................................................................... 24

Table 8: WP2 Deliverables ............................................................................................................................... 26

Table 9: WP2 Leaders and contributors ........................................................................................................... 27

Table 10: WP3 Deliverables ............................................................................................................................. 29

Table 11: WP3 Leaders and contributors ......................................................................................................... 30



Table 14: First estimation of validation methods .............................................................................................. 34





Table 19: Deliverable list .................................................................................................................................. 44

Table 20: Milestones list ................................................................................................................................... 45

Table 21. Progress Reports.............................................................................................................................. 46

Table 22. Classification of documents related to the project ............................................................................ 50

Table 23: Risks ................................................................................................................................................. 54

Table 24: Current Action Items List .................................................................................................................. 56

Table 25. INTERACTIOM List of Members ...................................................................................................... 58

Table 26. Steering Committee members .......................................................................................................... 58

7


Index of figures

Figure 1: Management Structure ...................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 2: INTERACTION Work Breakdown Structure ...................................................................................... 22

Figure 3: WP1 Initial Plan ................................................................................................................................. 23






Figure 9: Working approach to produce the reports to the EC......................................................................... 40

Figure 10: Working approach to produce a deliverable ................................................................................... 41

Figure 11: Project schedule .............................................................................................................................. 47

Figure 12. Quality Management process ......................................................................................................... 50

8


1 Introduction

This Project Management Plan (PMP) documents the nature of the ALG proposed Project Management techniques and processes and contains the requirements related to the management of all the activities necessary for the development of the INTERACTION project, FP7 - 605454.

INnovative TEchnologies and Researches for a new Airport Concept towards Turnaround coordination -INTERACTION project develops throughout 30 months, starting on 1

st October 2013 and ending on 31

March 2016.

The objective of the INTERACTION is to propose new procedures, technologies and tools for enhancing time-efficient turnaround operations in the airport, by looking for individual improvements in each process separately, as well as a coordinated way with common goals: to minimize the overall turnaround time and to reduce the effects of perturbations that may appear in any of the airport sub processes during the turnaround process. Additionally, INTERACTION will define and validate solutions intended to: increase the quality and comfort of the passenger experience in the Airport; enhance the development, efficiency and quality of the air freight transport; and provide new concepts and technologies to reduce greenhouse gas, pollutant and noise emissions for apron operations. For this purpose a sequence of activities regarding future needs and challenges will be developed proposing solutions structured into the following 5 main knowledge groups:

Airport terminal operations: “Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient passenger and baggage processes”

Air freight operations: “Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient freight operations”

Ramp operations: “Advanced concepts and techniques for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area”

Green concepts: “Green concepts and techniques for apron operations”

New tools developments: “Definition of a new extended information management platform and decision support tools”

The project manager will produce and update the Project Management Plan (PMP) to ensure efficient project coordination, guaranteeing time and resources control, progress reporting to the Commission, project progress meetings organization and use of agreed management procedures. The PMP will include a statement of the management principles to be followed, including the project supervision principles, the technical management practices, the communication management and reporting structure, the quality and risk management, as well as the rest of management activities considered appropriate for presentation and clarification.

The Work Plan as well as the responsible assigned to each role specified within this PMP will be updated throughout the course of the project as and when significant events or progress will require amendment.

1.1 Contributors

Name Organisation Role

Responsibles Joan Miquel Vilardell IBC Project Coordinator

Rubén Martínez ALG Project Manager

Authors Manuel Ausaverri ALG Project Member

Joan Rojas ALG Project Member

Reviewers

Laura Serrano INECO Project Member

Diego Alonso AIB Project Member

Ivan Konaktchiev EC Project Officer

Table 1: Contributors list

9


1.2 Revision status

Date Version Comments

26/11/2013 0.1 Initial version

29/11/2013 1.0 Implementation of changes due to internal review and delivery

to the EC

20/12/2013 2.0

Implementation of changed due to EC review of the document and change of coordination

company name from Europraxis to Indra Business

Consulting. New delivery to EC

Table 2: Revision status

1.3 Structure of the document

This document is structured in the following sections:

Section 1 presents the purpose, structure, contributors and revision status of the document, as well as a the acronyms lists and glossary of terms used in the document;

Section 2 describes the project team and management structures;

Section 3 describes the work packages, tasks and deliverables;

Section 4 describes the work plan and schedule;

Section 5 describes the management procedures.

1.4 Acronyms

Acronym Definition

FP7 Framework Programme 7

INTERACTION INnovative TEchnologies and Researches for a new Airport Concept towards Turnaround coordinatION

IBC Indra Business Consulting

INDRA Indra Sistemas

AEE Aegean Airlines

AID Airbus Operations GmbH

AIA Athens International Airport

AH Aviapartner Holding

INECO Ineco

PLD Pildo Labs

TK ThyssenKrupp

TLD TLD

UAB Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

AIB Airbus SAS

ALG Advanced Logistics Group

10


Acronym Definition

SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research

R&D Research & Development

TITAN Turnaround Integration in Trajectory And Network

WP Work Package

SWP Sub-Work Package

TR Test Review

GSE Ground Support Equipment

PRM Passengers with Reduced Mobility

Table 3: Acronyms list

1.5 Glossary

No new terms identified in this deliverable.

11


2 Management Structure

2.1 Contact details

Role Name Contact details

Project Manager Rubén Martínez Tel: +34 93 430 40 16

E-mail: [email protected]

Table 4: Contact details

2.2 Consortium Members

Participant nº Participant organisation name Country Acronym

1(Coordinator) Indra Business Consulting Spain IBC

2 Indra Sistemas Spain INDRA

3 Aegean Airlines Greece AEE

4 Airbus Operations GmbH Germany AID

5 Athens International Airport Greece AIA

6 Aviapartner Holding Belgium AH

7 Ineco Spain INECO

8 Pildo Labs Spain PLD

9 ThyssenKrupp Germany/Spain TK

10 TLD France TLD

11 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Spain UAB

12 Airbus SAS France AIB

13 Advanced Logistics Group Spain ALG

Table 5: Project participants

2.2.1 Indra Business Consulting

Business Consulting is the strategic and management consultancy of Indra. With over 15 years of experience, we have become one of the leading strategic consulting firms that operate at local, regional and global level.

We have the ability to support the client from the initial strategic formulation until the final operational implementation.

We work in strategic projects for our clients who are leaders in the telecom, media, banking, energy and utilities, tourism and leisure, automotive, transport and operations sectors.

We have developed specific solutions in areas of strategic definition as well as in operational improvement processes such as the capture of efficiencies, change management, business intelligence or people management.

In INTERACTION, Indra Business Consulting will be the coordinator of the project, participating and leading WP1 Project Management. Indra Business Consulting will be supported by ALG in the general tasks of project management providing its expertise in airports and research projects.

12


2.2.2 Indra Sistemas

Indra is a global technology, innovation and talent company. Indra operates in more than 110 countries and has more than 31.000 employees worldwide, focusing on developing innovative solutions that meet the needs of the most demanding clients.

Indra is a leading company in the international market in Air Traffic Management and control systems. Indra has been supplying Air Traffic Management systems around the world for more than 30 years, having supplied over 1.000 Air Traffic Management installations in over 90 countries.

Indra ranks second in Europe by R&D spend, investing close to 500 M€ during the last three years. For example, Indra has entered the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU), as a full partner. Within this initiative, Indra co-leads two of the four technological programmes that will form the SESAR system’s core: air traffic control and management of airport operations. The company is involved in 99 of the 295 planned projects. Thus Indra is present in almost all of the technological development projects within its field, and is becoming more and more recognised as a global ATM (Air Traffic Management) industrial leader.

In INTERACTION, Indra leads WP4 “Solutions Design and Tools Development” and SWP4.2 “Development and Verification of Prototypes of a new integrated information platform and management/decision support tools” including all related tasks regarding Architecture analysis, technical specifications, prototype developments and prototype verifications. In addition Indra will play a relevant role in ensuring coordination with SESAR projects regarding airport operations management systems.

2.2.3 Aegean Airlines

Aegean Airlines is the largest airline company of Greece, began scheduled passenger operations in May 1999, following the liberalisation of the Greek domestic market. The strategy of the company at its inception and to date is to provide full service, premium quality short and medium haul services. In December 1999, as part of a rapid expansion, Aegean bought Air Greece, while in 2001 the company merged with another Greek carrier Cronus Airlines, a movement that also marked its entry in international routes. In 2005 Aegean reached an agreement with Lufthansa to become its partner in Greece. In 2008 through its gradual expansion of its international network, and its consistent delivery of high quality services Aegean became the largest Greek airline by passenger numbers. On June 30, 2011 Aegean joined Star Alliance. Another important milestone was in 2005 when Aegean reached an agreement with Airbus to fully renew its fleet with new A320 family aircraft. The fleet renewal and improvement process facilitated network expansion and also contributes to the airline’s customer appeal in terms of punctuality, service and comfort. Aegean took the first deliveries in 2007 while since May 2011 the company operates for the first time in its history with a homogeneous fleet consisting of 29 Airbus (A319, A320, A321) with an average age of 3 years.

Aegean has been named “Best Regional Airline Europe” at the SKYTRAX 2011 World Airline Awards and it is the runner-up in the “World’s Best Regional Airline” category, in “Airline Staff Service Excellence for Europe” category as well as in “Best Airline Southern Europe” category. In its 12 year history, Aegean has been awarded six times by the European Regions Airline Association (ERA). Furthermore, the company has been repeatedly awarded by the Athens International Airport as the greatest contributor to the airport’s passenger volume increase. Aegean operates 35 international and 24 domestic routes, without taking into account a significant number of international destinations served by its charter operations. It bases aircraft in Athens, Thessaloniki, Heraklion, Rhodes and Larnaca for scheduled operations.

In INTERACTION, Aegean will lead the validation activities in real operations environment (SWP5.3) and will contribute to several tasks mainly regarding analysing and proposing solutions for passenger and baggage processes and providing their expertise as an airline and as an auto-handling operator.

2.2.4 Airbus Operations GmbH

Airbus Operations GmbH is a subsidiary of Airbus SAS in Germany. Airbus is a leading civil aircraft manufacturer committed to research and innovation (see www.thefuturebyairbus.com) through active participation in the European Framework Programmes. Airbus Company is owned by EADS (European Aeronautic, Defense & Space Company) and is a truly global enterprise of some 57,000 employees. It draws together the skills and expertise of four national entities in France, Germany, UK and Spain with a total of 16 sites in Europe. Airbus is also working in the frame of industrial co-operation and partnerships, with fully-owned subsidiaries, spare parts centres, training centres and field service offices around the world. As of October 2012 has sold over 11,800 aircraft to more than 300 customers/operators and has delivered some

13


7,500 aircraft since it first entered service in 1974. In a highly competitive market Airbus offers a complete product range – from 100 to 555 seats, which is clearly becoming the reference:

Single aisle medium range aircraft: A318, A319, A320 and A321 (respectively 107, 124, 150 and 185 seats), including the Airbus Corporate Jet family (ACJ)

Medium to long-range wide body aircraft: A310 and A300-600 (220 to 266 seats)

Very long range wide body aircraft: A340 (240 to 380 seats) and A330 (253 to 295)

Airbus’ brand new A350 XWB (270 to 350 seats)

Ultra Long Range double-decker A380 (555 seats)

Airbus is an early and leading contributor to the development of aircraft and airport standards and solutions in the Air Transport Industry, through the participation:

In major research projects including: SESAR, E-CAB and ASSET

In international standardization bodies for aircraft ground equipment and operations: ISO TC 20/SC 9, SAE AGE 2, CEN TC 274, IATA GSEE, IATA ASG

Airbus is an early and leading contributor to the development of aircraft and airport standards and solutions in the Air Transport Industry, through the participation: In major research projects including: SESAR, E-CAB and ASSET.

In INTERACTION, Airbus will have an important participation, managing the WP3 “Identify and Propose New Solutions” and leading the activities regarding innovation in the passenger and baggage processes. Airbus also will lead the preliminary design of solutions SWP4.1.

2.2.5 Athens International Airport

Committed to operation and service excellence, safety and user-friendliness, the Athens International Airport “Eleftherios Venizelos” (AIA) has been serving Greece’s capital since the opening date March 28th, 2001 replacing its congested predecessor, and offering to all airlines and passengers a modern, spacious and state-of-the-art environment. AIA is the first major greenfield airport constructed with the participation of the private sector. ‘Athens International Airport S.A.’ is the company responsible for the operation, management and development of the airport for a 30-year concession period initiated in 1996. ‘Athens International Airport S.A.’ is a privately managed company, with the Greek State holding 55% of shares, while private shareholders collectively hold 45%.

AIA’s Airport Services Operation Centre constitutes one of the few facilities in the world that can accommodate airport operations control under a single umbrella. Distinguished as one of the best airports in the world in the first years of operation, AIA maintains one of the best airport terminals in Europe, equipped with state-of-the-art systems, featuring a most user-friendly orientation, comfortable waiting areas, and adhering to the highest cleanliness standards.

The role of the Information Technology & Telecommunications Business Unit (IT&T) of AIA is that of an integrator and operator of reliable, state-of-the-art, cost effective and innovative services to its customers based on its “Common-Use” concept. AIA IT&T Unit has broad experience in integrating ICT solutions for the airport’s operational requirements like Management Information System (MIS), Automatic invoicing services for fuelling companies, etc.

AIA will have a significant participation in INTERACTION focused in leading WP5 “Concept Validation” and SWP5.1 “Validation plan” and participating as operational partner, combined with its IT expertise, in all the activities of the project regarding analysis of the current situation and proposal of solutions for all airport processes.

2.2.6 Aviapartner Holding

Aviapartner is one of the leading independent providers of ground handling services in Europe since 1949. Our company offers ground handling services across 35 airports in 5 European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands.

Aviapartner offers a wide range of services to over 400 passenger and cargo airlines, which means:

provision of services to around 30 million passengers,

14


ramp handling for 300.000 aircraft movements, and

cargo handling for around 1 million tons of cargo each year.

Aviapartner provides airport services since 1949 throughout Europe. Our employees (around 6.000 staff members) share common values which are integrated in our internal policies.

It is Aviapartner's continued ambition to be the leader of quality services to the aviation industry throughout Europe, providing consistent high quality services based on a pro-active attitude. Our quality system is based on continuous monitoring and analysis of key performance indicators with reporting to our customers. It is supported by ISAGO, ISO 9001:2000, Cargo 2000 and the AHM 804 IATA System for Performance Measurement of Service Delivery Standards

Starting with Brussels and Lille, ISO14001 certified since March 2011, and expanding to Amsterdam, Dusseldorf and Milan, Aviapartner is implementing an environmental management system. The full management team is committed to minimise the impact of all Aviapartner's activities on the environment and to comply with all legal and other environmental requirements applicable to their business. Long-term strategic environmental objectives and targets are set with focus on continuously improving the environmental performance. The key points of the environmental strategy are:

Prevent pollution at all levels

Minimise our waste

Reuse or recycle as much as possible

Minimise greenhouse gas emissions

Encourage the use of alternative means of transport and car sharing.

Encourage the adoption of similar principles by our suppliers and other stakeholders

2.2.7 Ingeniería y Economía del Transporte

Ineco (Ingeniería y Economía del Transporte, S.A.) is a Spanish consultancy and engineering firm highly specialised in the transport industry, since its creation in 1968.

The firm’s activities embrace all forms of transport and cover all RTD stages, from feasibility studies to work supervision and control, including facility and infrastructure maintenance. As a consultancy company, Ineco carries out feasibility analyses, economic and financial, market, logistics and operation studies and formulates comprehensive transport plans. On the other hand, as an engineering firm, it covers many speciality areas such as architecture, civil, industrial, telecommunications, aeronautical and systems engineering.

In INTERACTION, Ineco will bring its expertise in airport operations, turnaround and validation. This expertise comes both from our involvement in SESAR, Framework Programme (FP) research projects, in particular TITAN, and daily engineering support to Aena.

Ineco has participated in Air Transport projects for DG-TREN and DG-Research of the European Commission as a team member in RTD projects like LEONARDO, THENA, SOURDINE, OPAL, C-ATM, EPISODE3, RESET, CAATS, AAS, TITAN, The 2050+ Airport. In all of these projects Ineco has a key role in the definition of the operational concepts, environmental and economic assessments and the operational validation activities. In addition, Ineco has provided services to EUROCONTROL within the EATMP Program in airport activities.

Regarding SESAR, Ineco participates as Aena’s affiliate in WP6 “Airport operations” at the management level and in operational projects such as P06.07.02 (A-SMGCS routing and planning functions) or P06.06.02 (Integration of airport/airline/ground handlers ATC processes in ATM).

Ineco participation in INTERACTION will be addressed to lead WP2 and SWP2.1, which cover the activities regarding the current situation analysis in the framework of airport turnaround operations and its associated processes. Ineco will also lead the definition of solutions regarding fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area (SWP3.3). In addition, Ineco will lead SWP 5.5 “Reporting of conclusions from validation”. And finally, Ineco will also provide a very valuable support in the coordination management with other related projects, in particular regarding TITAN project.

15


2.2.8 Pildo Labs

SME founded in 2001, Pildo Labs is an engineering company specialized in delivering top of the edge technology within the aeronautics and space sectors. Our team is multicultural, young, creative, energetic, interdisciplinary and with a solid background in technology. The activity of Pildo Labs is focused within the Aeronautical sector, in which we are recognized as experts in GNSS applied to air navigation within EU market thanks to our leadership since the very beginning in the most strategic projects for the main European bodies in this field. The company has an excellent record in the successful completion of studies and developments for major clients such as EUROCONTROL, ESA, The European Commission, National Air Navigation Service providers and governments; and is, or has been, involved in many European international projects. In addition to the expertise accumulated on Navigation, Pildo Labs is a long term partner of the European Space Agency in signal processing, Radar Altimeter and radar instrument support and development. The company has recently participated in several ESA programmes, as for example in Envisat (as Expert support laboratory performing corrective maintenance and coding of new evolutions) or in Cryosat-2, with the responsibility of calibrating the SAR/Interferometric radar altimeter of the satellite. The company also counts on a R&D services division, responsible for developing new services and products that provide to the company with a strategic position both in our core business within the GNSS industry, and also in other aeronautical and non-aeronautical subsectors. In this sense, one of the products developed by the Pildo Labs R+D division is particularly relevant for the INTERACTION activity, which is, the design, development and flight testing of an Electronic Flight Bag prototype for airlines specially designed to eliminate paperwork and increase productivity of pilots and flight crew.

2.2.9 ThyssenKrupp

ThyssenKrupp is a diversified industrial group which provides innovative products and solutions worldwide that secure sustainable success for our customers. More than 170,000 employees in over 80 countries on all 5 continents are the face of ThyssenKrupp to our customers and partners. ThyssenKrupp is a German corporation. We generate 33% of our consolidated sales on our home market, while customers outside Germany account for the remaining 67%. Outside of Germany, the countries of the EU (29%) and the NAFTA region (16%) are the key foreign regions for our business. The degree of internationalization in our Group is rising constantly. Our more than 550 foreign subsidiaries and associated shareholdings have about 111.000 employees, which means that more than 65% of ThyssenKrupp employees work outside Germany. In fiscal year 2010/2011 ThyssenKrupp generated sales of €49 billion.

ThyssenKrupp Elevator Innovation Center (TKEIC) has global R&D responsibility for the new generation of continuous passenger transportation systems: escalators, moving walks and passenger boarding bridges for airports. The activity is based on R&D projects, individuals and in cooperation with other partners. The centre is formed by a qualified team of 45 people, with a 90% Industrial Engineers staff. TKEIC participates in working groups and forums of innovation: Member of the European Committee for Standardization, Participation in working meetings of Direct Upper Deck Access for the A380.

ThyssenKrupp participation in INTERACTION will be focused in leading the definition and preliminary design of new solutions for green concepts and techniques for apron operations (SWP3.4). ThyssenKrupp will also contribute to various others activities, and in particular regarding the definition and validation of solutions for passenger (de)boarding processes.

2.2.10 TLD

TLD is a leading industrial group specialized in Airport Ground Support Equipment (GSE). Through a very extensive Worldwide Sales and Service network, the company provides its customers a complete range of ground support equipment, designed and assembled in the group's industrial sites located on several continents.

TLD’s customers include Airlines, Airports, Cargo Airlines, Ground Handlers, and Military organizations everywhere in the world.

The company offers a wide range of Ground Support Equipment, consistently reviewed by the engineering teams in order to assure evolution, meeting and adapting to our customers specific requirements. Innovation, performance as well as simplicity, high reliability and low maintenance costs continuously drive TLD’s engineering efforts.

16


With 1200 employees, company’s Headquarter is located in France, while the 6 manufacturing facilities are located in France, Canada, China and USA. They maintain a close contact with customers and provide reactivity and quick responses to market requirements.

All TLD facilities have common organization and management systems aimed at optimizing operational processes, including manufacturing. These sites are linked through a state of the art communications system, sharing engineering, sourcing and information technology resources.

In 2009, TLD has signed with IAI an exclusive contract for the risk sharing development and future production of the TaxiBot tractor.

TLD participation in INTERACTION will be focused on SWP3.3 “Advanced concepts and techniques for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area” and SWP3.4 “Green concepts and techniques for apron operations” and related tasks. TLD will also contribute to various others activities, and in particular designs of solutions for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management.

2.2.11 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

The Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB) plays a leading role in scientific research. The UAB coordinates a high-profile scientific and technological centre (the Esfera UAB), promotes new business projects, directs and projects its productive activity towards its socio-economic surroundings, and disseminates its newly acquired knowledge. Its main areas of investigation include Environmental Sciences and Technology, Nanotechnology, Microelectronics, Material Science and Engineering, Computer Vision, Artificial Intelligence, Logistics and Intelligent Transport Systems, Experimental Sciences, and Social Sciences among others. 77 Undergraduate courses are available at the UAB, covering a wide range of fields such as humanities and arts, social sciences, health sciences, experimental sciences and technological sciences. Furthermore, the UAB offers a total of 87 doctoral programmes and other postgraduate programmes such as 4 Erasmus Mundus master’s degrees. UAB brings together in its Campus more than 40.000 students and almost 3.000 researchers. The Office for Innovation and Business Creation is also part of the Vice-rectorate for Research and was set up to offer its services to people within the Esfera UAB looking at starting-up a new business. The aim is for a large part of the knowledge developed in the university to be transferred to society at large. So far, 32 spin-offs and 2 incubators for technology-based companies have been created. Main current activities of UAB related with INTERACTION scope are: Active participant in the SESAR research networks HALA! “Towards a higher automation level in ATM” and ComplexWorld “Mastering System Complexity´”, both funded by EUROCONTROL/SJU; PELIKAN: ““Causal Models for air cargo efficient transport using low cost carriers”, funded by CDTI; “Design of new procedures to improve the passenger flow in the terminal area at Barcelona Airport”, funded by AENA; Development of a Causal Simulation Model to determine KPI’s in Palma de Mallorca Airport”, funded by ISDEFE.

In INTERACTION, UAB will participate in various activities of the project and mainly in the definition and design of new algorithms for new performance indicators for processes and resources considering cross relations and in the definition and validation for new concepts for freight operations. Additionally, the UAB will lead the SWP 5.4 “Analysis of validation results”

2.2.12 Airbus SAS

Airbus is a leading civil aircraft manufacturer committed to research and innovation (see www.thefuturebyairbus.com) through active participation in the European Framework Programmes. Airbus Company is owned by EADS (European Aeronautic, Defense & Space Company) and is a truly global enterprise of some 57,000 employees. It draws together the skills and expertise of four national entities in France, Germany, UK and Spain with a total of 16 sites in Europe. Airbus is also working in the frame of industrial co-operation and partnerships, with fully-owned subsidiaries, spare parts centres, training centres and field service offices around the world. As of October 2012 has sold over 11,800 aircraft to more than 300 customers/operators and has delivered some 7,500 aircraft since it first entered service in 1974. In a highly competitive market Airbus offers a complete product range – from 100 to 555 seats.

Airbus is an early and leading contributor to the development of aircraft and airport standards and solutions in the Air Transport Industry, through the participation:

In major research projects including: SESAR, E-CAB and ASSET

In international standardization bodies for aircraft ground equipment and operations: ISO TC 20/SC 9, SAE AGE 2, CEN TC 274, IATA GSEE, IATA ASG

17


In INTERACTION, Airbus will have an important participation, managing the WP3 “Identify and Propose New Solutions” and leading the activities regarding innovation in the passenger and baggage processes. Airbus also will lead the preliminary design of solutions SWP4.1.

2.2.13 Advanced Logistics Group

Advanced Logistics Group (ALG) is an international consulting firm specialized in the study, design and management of transportation and logistics projects, with particularly wide experience in the aviation sector. The firm has significant experience working with both public and private entities, addressing their respective needs and understanding their different perspectives in the execution of projects. In the last five years, ALG has experienced a significant growth rate of 20% annually, resulting in total revenues of 13.5 M€ in 2009. ALG is a consulting company 100% owned by Indra Sistemas, Multinational Corporation which is also a partner of the INTERACTION consortium (see next section 2.2.2). ALG offers transportation and logistics consultancy, combining engineering, business management and technology expertise to develop innovative solutions of international standards. ALG has extensive experience in aviation. Its experience covers the full value chain of the air transport industry, having worked with regulators, administrations, airlines, air navigation providers, airport operators, handling agents and investment groups. ALG has developed an operational prototype of a Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) application, under EUROCONTROL requirements, for its operation in Palma airport, based in the previous CDM implementation at Barcelona Airport. ALG is also involved in the SESAR Program with particular effort in WP6 and WP12 (Airport Operations and systems) and transversal WPs regarding programme architecture, SESAR dissemination and exploitation and Programme Business Case.

ALG will lead WP6 “Dissemination and Exploitation”, will support the Project Coordinator in SPW1.1 and SWP1.3 and will lead SWP1.4. ALG will also be engaged as contributor at various titles in all other project’s work packages, with special attention to the definition of the innovative freight process solutions.

2.3 Management Roles and Governing bodies

The project proposes to set up an organizational structure which complies with the management principles described in section 5 and provides control and decision making mechanisms matched to the degree of complexity of the project.

Figure 1 shows the Management Structure proposed. In the following subsections, the main management roles and governing bodies are described.

18


Figure 1: Management Structure

For each one of the roles specified in Figure 1, Annex I provides information on the current responsible person. Throughout the duration of the project, this list could change so it remains open to further updates.

2.3.1 Project Coordinator

The Project Coordinator is the legal entity acting as the intermediary between the Project Parties and the European Commission. In INTERACTION the project coordinator will be Indra Business Consulting. IBC will be supported by ALG in most of the project coordination and management activities.

The Project Coordinator is responsible for the overall coordination of the project and its external representation. He is the only contact point for the European Commission. His main role will be to ensure the cohesion of the activities and that the objectives are addressed and achieved. The Project Coordinator’s responsibilities include:

Be the interface with the European Commission;

Set up the administrative procedures for the Project;

Monitor the compliance of all Project Parties under the Grant Agreement and the Consortium Agreement;

Keeping the address list of member and other contact persons updated and available;

Calling and drafting the agendas for the Meetings of the main Project Governance bodies (SC and MB);

Preparing the meetings, proposing decisions and reviewing the agenda of Steering Committee and Management Body meetings, chairing the meetings, preparing the minutes of the meetings and monitoring the implementation of decisions taken at meetings;

European Commission

Project Coordinator

WP1 Manager

Sub WP1.1 Manager

Task 1.1.1 Leader

Task … Leader

Sub WP…

WP 2 Manager WP 3 Manager WP 4 Manager WP 5 Manager WP 6 Manager

Administrative Manager

Steering Committee

Partners

Advisory Group

Stakeholders & Experts

Management Body

Project Manager

19


Implementing the decisions taken by the Steering Committee and the Project Governance bodies acting on its behalf;

Transmitting documents and information connected with the Project, including copies of Accession documents and changes of contact information to the Parties;

Facilitating the implementation of the Project tasks in general;

Making day-to-day decisions and carrying out activities required for the appropriate implementation of the Project;

Upon request, providing the Parties with official copies or originals of documents which are in the sole possession of the Coordinator when such copies or originals are necessary for the Parties to present claims;

Coordinating the dissemination of the results of the Project, along with the Members of the MB.

Along with the Administrative Manager, managing the financial contribution of the European Commission;

Receiving and submitting requests for amendments and termination at the initiative of the Consortium in accordance with Annex II to Grant Agreement, Article II.36;

Coordinating the project activities with respect to the agreed Work Plan on a daily basis;

Monitoring of contents and of the timely delivery of deliverables and milestones;

Assessment of major project deliverables;

External liaison and coordination with relevant activities of other EC projects;

Chairing meetings of the Project Steering Committee;

Production of the contractually required reports to the European Commission (including financial statements and related certification);

Solving disputes on technical matters at the operational and system thread levels; and

Supporting the dissemination of the project’s major findings.

2.3.2 Project Manager/Scientific Coordinator

The Project Manager will carry out the day to day activities related to the coordination and management of INTERACTION project. He has also been assigned the role of the Scientific Coordinator, as he is the person responsible for the management of all scientific, technical and technological aspects. The Project Manager will report directly to the Project Coordinator on a periodic basis the scientific and technical as well as management status of the project. This role will be assigned to ALG, under the function of Project Manager.

2.3.3 Administrative Manager

The Administrative Manager is the person appointed by the Project Coordinator from among its own staff, in this case IBC and/or ALG, responsible for assisting the Project Coordinator in all those activities dealing with legal, administrative and financial duties.

2.3.4 Steering Committee

The Steering Committee is the executive body that assists the Project Coordinator and the Project Manager for project control and monitoring activities. It is composed of one person per partner organization. The Steering Committee is chaired by the INTERACTION Project Coordinator, who is the sole contact point between INTERACTION and the EC representatives. The Steering Committee defines strategic orientations and performs project high level monitoring activities.

The Steering Committee will meet every four months to define strategic orientations and perform high level project monitoring activities. The meeting agenda will be adapted to focus on specific issues depending on the project milestones and deliverables. In addition, the Steering Committee will supervise and harmonize all the end-user-oriented activities through the participation of the Dissemination and Exploitation Manager (WP6 Manager). Project orientation and planning shall be reviewed and any important changes shall be agreed at this level. Any partner may call extraordinary Steering Committee meetings on request.

20


The Steering Committee is the ultimate decision-making body of the Project consortium. Members of the Steering Committee are the Project Coordinator, Project Manager, the Administrative manager and at least one person appointed by each of the Project Parties.

2.3.5 Management Body

The Management Body provides day-to-day governance to the Project and permanent assistance to the Steering Committee in the technical and economic aspects of the Project. Members of the Management Body are the Project Coordinator, Project Manager (who chairs the MB meetings), Administrative Manager and all the Work Package Managers (one for each Work Package).

The INTERACTION Management Body is the transversal body that will ensure the link between scientific coordination and the different WPs. It is composed of WP Managers and the Project Manager and it is involved in any works and coordination related to the scientific and technical aspects of the project. All the documents issued by INTERACTION will be reviewed and approved by the Management Body. It will meet every two months (face to face or teleconference) to discuss the main areas regarding scientific & technical coordination which are as follows: operational thread activities; concept definition: operational requirements; system thread activities (feasibility study, architecture); technical specification, prototypes development, and system verification; and, validation activities (validation strategy and plans, validation methods, techniques and environments).

The INTERACTION Management Body will meet every 2 months.

2.3.6 WP Manager

The WP Manager is in charge of coordinating the work performed at the level of his/her WP, thus making sure that WP’s technical objectives and deadlines are being met. The WP Manager will have to report to the Project Manager and the Project Coordinator on a periodical basis. It is his/her special duty to inform the Project Coordinator without delay about any risk of shifting the agreed planning as soon as such risk is noticed and to report to the Project Coordinator any risk of change in the technical activities.

The WP Manager may delegate all or part of the Sub-WP management to a given Sub-WP Manager. The Sub-WP Manager may delegate all or part of Task management to a given Task Leader. Tasks have the finest level of detail in the WBS; their responsibility is normally allocated to a single partner (Task Leader) for the sake of management simplicity.

WP Managers are members of the Management Body. They ensure timely and within budget delivery of WP deliverables. The WP Managers’ responsibilities will include:

Technical leadership of their WP, including technical and effort planning;

Monitoring of timely WP deliverables and milestones;

Risk assessment and control by means of adequate tools and with the support of Task Leaders;

Liaising with other Task Leaders where necessary;

Calling for non-scheduled meetings when required; and

Provision of periodical status reports to the Project Coordinator.

2.4 Ethics roles

Due to potential ethical issues that could arise during the course of the project, the Data Controller, from Indra’s Data Privacy Office, and the Ethics Advisor roles have been defined. The responsibility of the Ethics Advisor role is currently under negotiation.

These two roles will provide guidance for the correct implementation of data gathering, processing and final destruction procedures and will supervise them during their execution, ensuring correct compliance with current legislation and the correct use of all data, and preventing the misuse of any kind of information.

2.4.1 Data Controller

The Data Controller is a legal person, public authority, agency or any other body that, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data; where the purposes and

21


means or processing are determined by national or Community laws or regulations, the controller or the specific criteria for his nomination may be designated by national or Community law.

2.4.2 Ethics Advisor

The Ethics Advisor is an external independent actor who monitors ethical issues and ensures proper compliance with the ethical and legal environment in regard to the FP7 legal framework. The Advisor can also provide guidelines as regard to data merging, exchange, etc.

22


3 Work packages, tasks and deliverables description

As stated in the task description, the activities of the project are structured in 6 Work Packages, which are described in the following sections:

WP1 – Project Management

WP2 – Current Situation Analysis

WP3 – Identify and Propose New Solutions

WP4 – Solutions Design and Tools Development

WP5 – Concept Validation

WP6 – Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation of results

Figure 2: INTERACTION Work Breakdown Structure

3.1 WP1 – Project Management

3.1.1 Description of work

Project Management proposed by IBC is based on the following general approach:

Defining the project coordination structure and related activities:

Defining the work plan, including the project structure decomposing, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), it in WPs, Sub-WPs and tasks;

Identifying inputs and outputs for each WP, Sub-WP and task;

Identifying the leader for each WP, Sub-WP and task;

Defining relevant milestones within the project; and

Identifying and describing expected deliverables and their relation with the project milestones.

Managing and coordination of the project activities. The Project Coordinator will lead and coordinate the different project activities, as well as monitor the work progress.

In order to align management activities with research and scientific ones, ALG will provide support to IBC in this WP. This support will be translated in provision of technical airport and research related management expertise needed in SWP1.1 and SWP1.3 and will lead SWP1.4 due to its experience in the quality and risk management of European airport and research projects.

3.1.1.1 SWP 1.1 Project Management Plan production

The project manager will produce and update the Project Management Plan (PMP) to ensure efficient project coordination, guaranteeing time and resources control, progress reporting to the Commission, project progress meetings organization and use of agreed management procedures. The PMP will include a statement of the management principles to be followed, including the project supervision principles, the technical management practices, the communication management and reporting structure, the quality and risk management, as well as the rest of management activities considered appropriate of presentation and clarification.

ALG will support IBC in the elaboration of the PMP in those sections related to technical management and quality and risk management.

WP2 Current

Situation Analysis

WP3 Identify and

Propose New Solutions

WP4 Solutions

Design and Tools Development

WP5 Concept

Validation

WP1 Project Management

WP6 Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation of Results

23


3.1.1.2 SWP 1.2 Legal, contractual, administrative and financial management

The Project Coordinator will manage and implement the contract with the European Commission and prepare the Consortium Agreement. The Administrative Manager will support the Project Coordinator in all activities dealing with legal, administrative and financial duties; including audit processes and associated reporting.

Potential restrictive effects related to the regulatory framework will be evaluated for each solution defined in order to evaluate the legal feasibility of all solutions resulting from INTERACTION.

Due to potential ethical issues identified during the proposal phase as being likely to impact INTERACTION solutions (mainly prototypes and validations), particular attention will be paid to Greek and European data privacy regulations. The Greek office for data privacy will be contacted once prototypes and validation exercises are more defined in order to have its feedback on the correctness of the validation methods and usage of data as well as to have its approval, should it be needed.

3.1.1.3 SWP 1.3 Project progress reporting to the EC

Progress reporting ensures effective control on project progress by providing the EC representatives with regular feedback on: project progress, including status of milestones, planning, deliverables, status of the different activities, resources consumptions, recognized or potential delays; and risks and issues, including mitigations and contingency plans. The Project Coordinator will receive support from the WP and/or SWP leaders as required in matters related to the different project activities and from ALG in order to contemplate and evaluate potential risks and their mitigation and contingency plans.

Interim Project Reports will be provided every 4 months, and in addition a Final project report will be provided at the conclusion of the project.

3.1.1.4 SWP 1.4 Quality and Risk Management

ALG, with the support of the WP and SWP leaders, will ensure the quality of the project activities and deliverables and will manage the project risks in order to minimize, monitor, and control the undesired events on behalf of IBC.

3.1.2 WP1 Initial Plan

Figure 3: WP1 Initial Plan

3.1.3 WP1 Deliverables and deadlines

Deliverables Deadlines

D1.1 Project Management Plan 30th November 2013

D1.2 Interim Project Report I 31st January 2014

D1.3 Interim Project Report II 31st May 2014

D1.4 Interim Project Report III 30th September 2014

YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

WP1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP1.1 Project Management Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 301

SWP1.2 Legal, contractual, administrative and financial management1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 301

SWP1.3 Project progress reporting to the EC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 301

SWP1.4 Quality and risk management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2013 201620152014

D1.1

D1.2 D1.3 D1.4 D1.5 D1.6 D1.7 D1.8

24



D1.5 Interim Project Report IV 31st January 2015

D1.6 Interim Project Report V 31st May 2015

D1.7 Interim Project Report VI 30th September 2015

D1.8 Interim Project Report VII 31st January 2016

D1.9 Final Project Report 31st March 2016

D1.10 Report on the distribution of the European Union financial contribution between beneficiaries

30 days after receipt of the final payment

Table 6: WP1 Deliverables

3.1.4 WP1 Leaders and Contributors

WP1 Leader: IBC

SWP/Task Leader Contributors

SWP1.1 Project Management Plan production

IBC INDRA; AEE; AID; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB; AIB; ALG

SWP 1.2 Legal, contractual, administrative and financial management

IBC INDRA; AEE; AID; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB; AIB; ALG

SWP 1.3 Project progress reporting to the EC IBC INDRA; AEE; AID; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB; AIB; ALG

SWP 1.4 Quality and Risk Management ALG IBC; INDRA; AEE; AID; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB; AIB

Table 7: WP1 Leaders and contributors

3.2 WP2 – Current Situation Analysis


WP2 Current situation analysis is in charge of:

Characterising and defining the relationship between the different airport processes and sub-processes;

Characterising the different information tools that support the processes’ information management;

Identifying the problems and needs of improvements in the different processes and sub-processes and their impact on different stakeholders; and

Identifying the inefficiencies in the information tools that support the process information management

3.2.1.1 SWP2.1 Characterization of airport processes and their interactions

This section will characterize the current situation of airport processes using the Coloured Petri Net formalism on the following areas divided into six tasks:

T2.1.1 Passenger

T2.1.2 Baggage

25


T2.1.3 Freight

T2.1.4 Ramp & GSE

T2.1.5 The turnaround as a whole

T2.1.6 Process management and information tools

This SWP will tackle the following actions:

Incorporate as a baseline the information identified as an input from other EU projects (WP2).

Analyse the turnaround process [T2.1.1, T2.1.2, T2.1.3, T2.1.4, T2.1.5 and T2.1.6]:

Interaction between the different sub-processes;

Analysis of times depending on the airline business model: with introduction of time buffers to cover the uncertainties in the system;

Information flows;

Describe the turnaround process as a whole and identify the limits of the different sub-processes classified attending to the following areas: passenger, baggage, freight, ramp and GSEs; [T2.1.1, T2.1.2, T2.1.3, T2.1.4 and T2.1.5] Statistical tools based on correlation analysis will be used to adapt the limits between the interacting processes.

Analyse the sub-processes [T2.1.6]:

Information flows: What is needed to run the process and what is provided in terms of information;

Identification of all the actors, their roles and responsibilities;

Analyse the existing systems in the airport supporting information sharing and management between the different stakeholders [T2.1.6].

3.2.1.2 SWP2.2 Identification of inefficiencies and needs for improvement

This SWP is also divided into six tasks:

T2.2.1 Passenger

T2.2.2 Baggage

T2.2.3 Freight

T2.2.4 Ramp & GSE

T2.2.5 The turnaround as a whole


Taking as a baseline the results from SWP2.1, this section will:

Identify the problems and needs for improvements in the different airport processes and sub-processes [T2.2.1, T2.2.2, T2.2.3, T2.2.4 and T2.2.5].

Identify the main problems and inefficiencies in the available airport information systems [T2.2.6].

Identify the main problems encountered in the turnaround as a whole, using the state space analysis tool to formalize structural uncertainties wrongly (known as emergent dynamics) and quantify their impact in the airport KPI’s [T2.2.5].

Develop a series of enquiries to the main turnaround stakeholders to list the problems and necessities they are currently facing. Multicriteria objective functions will be designed to avoid the state space explosion, evaluating only those strategies that could lead to acceptable solutions specified by a weighted combination of metrics representing the stakeholders’ interests. For this purpose, the INTERACTION Advisory Group will play a key role as its members will be interviewed in order to obtain their feedback [T2.2.1, T2.2.2, T2.2.3, T2.2.4, T2.2.5 and T2.2.6].

Define the requirements prioritized and classified based on their potential impact on the achievement of the (target) off-block time [T2.2.1, T2.2.2, T2.2.3, T2.2.4 and T2.2.5].

26






D2.1 General Characterization of airport processes and their interactions 28th February 2014

D2.2 Specific Characterization of airport processes and their interactions 28th February 2014

D2.3 Identification of inefficiencies and needs for improvement 31st March 2014

D2.4 Current Situation Results 31st March 2014



WP2 Leader: INECO


SWP 2.1.: Characterization of Airport Processes and their interactions. Proposed content per process

INECO

T2.2.1 Passenger AEE AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, UAB, AIB, ALG

T2.2.2 Baggage AH AEE, AIA, PLD, TLD, UAB, ALG

T2.2.3 Freight ALG AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, TLD, UAB, AIB

T2.2.4 Ramp & GSE INECO AEE, AIA, AH, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB

T2.2.5 The turnaround as a whole INECO AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

WP2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP2.1 Characterisation of Airport processes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.1 Passenger 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.1.2 Baggage 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.3 Freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.4 Ramp & GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.5 The turnaround as a whole 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.1.6 Process management and information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP2.2 Identification of inefficiencies and needs for improvement1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.2.1 Passenger 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.2.2 Baggage 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.3 Freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.4 Ramp & GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.2.5 The turnaround as a whole 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.2.6 Process management and information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2013 201620152014

D1.2D2.1; D2.2

D2.3; D2.4

27




ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD

SWP 2.2.: Identification of inefficiencies and needs for improvement

AIA

T2.2.1 Passenger AEE AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, UAB, AIB, ALG

T2.2.2 Baggage AIA AEE, AH, PLD, TLD, UAB, ALG

T2.2.3 Freight ALG AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, TLD, UAB, AIB

T2.2.4 Ramp & GSE INECO AEE, AIA, AH, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB

T2.2.5 The turnaround as a whole INECO AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG


ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD


3.3 WP3: Identify and Propose New Solutions


WP3 Identify and Propose new solutions will take as its baseline the work conducted in WP2 to:

Define new technologies processes or systems to achieve the overall targets in 4 areas: airport terminal operations; air freight operations; ramp operations; green operations; and

Define new concepts for the coordinated planning and managing of the airport processes providing support in the strategic decision making

3.3.1.1 SWP3.1 Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

T3.1.1 New and radical concepts for passenger + baggage flow at the airport

T3.1.2 New passenger boarding/deplaning concepts and re-design of airport gates

3.3.1.2 SWP3.2 Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient freight operations

T3.2.1 New and radical concepts for freight flow at the airport

T3.2.2 Evolution in ULDs

3.3.1.3 SWP3.3 Advanced concepts and techniques for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area

T3.3.1 Rationalization of the required number of GSE vehicles on the ramp

T3.3.2 Towards full automation in GSE operations at the airport

3.3.1.4 SWP3.4 Green concepts and techniques for apron operations

T3.4.1 Fully electrical equipment

T3.4.2 Optimization of drinking water loaded into aircraft

T3.4.3 Innovative Concepts for aircraft cabin waste unloading/treatment/recycling

28


3.3.1.5 SWP3.5 Definition of a new extended information management platform and decision support tool

T3.5.1 Integration of the information flows between all processes

T3.5.2 New performance indicators for processes and resources considering cross relations

T3.5.3 Decision making principles for integrated management

T3.5.4 Enhanced real time communication between passenger and airport

As a result of the activities in WP2 previously and based on the identified opportunities for improvement, the works to be developed in this WP3 will be focused on the precise definition of the solutions whose design and development will be carried out in WP4. In every task for each SWP, the concept definition, the operational requirements, the definition of scenarios and use cases will be performed. This will pave the way for WP4.

For each of the solutions, a precise description will be made of the solution scope with a list of operational and functional requirements of the different users involved. A catalogue of requirements will be created, classified by priority. The list of requirements will be completed with the scenario definition and use cases. This will ensure the operational and functional integration of the different solutions in their operating environment. All this will be carried out both for solutions aimed at improving procedures, as well as for those of a technological nature and those requiring the development of information systems. In this process all members of the project will be involved, both partners and members of the advisory group, so that there will be participation from all stakeholders involved in airport processes: passengers, freight, baggage and aircraft. The catalogue of requirements, scenarios and use cases will also be very useful tools used in the validation stage.


The WP3 leader (Airbus) has presented a proposal to advance the WP3 beginning to ensure the correct completeness of all assigned tasks. This proposal is under discussion between all members. If approved, the plan will be updated accordingly.




D3.1 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes

31st August 2014

YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31SWP3.1 AC&T for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T3.1.1 N&RC for passenger + baggage flow at 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T3.1.2 New passenger boarding/deplaning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP3.2 AC&T for time efficient freight operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.2.1 N&RC for freight flow at the airport 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.2.2 Evolution in ULDs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP3.3 AC&Ts for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.3.1 Rationalization of the required number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.3.2 Towards full automation in GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP3.4 Green concepts and techniques for apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.4.1 Fully electrical equipment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.4.2 Optimization of drinking water loaded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.4.3 Innovative Concepts for aircraft cabin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP3.5 Definition of a new extended information management platform and decision support tool 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.5.1 Integration of the information flows 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.5.2 New performance indicators for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T3.5.3 Decision making principles for an 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.5.4 Enhanced real time communication 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2013 201620152014

D3.1

D3.2

D3.3

D3.4

D3.5; D3.6

MS2

AC&T: Advanced Concepts and Techniques N&RC: New and Radical Concepts

29



D3.2 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Time Efficient Freight Operations 31st August 2014

D3.3 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management in the Apron area

31st August 2014

D3.4 Green Concepts and Techniques for Apron Operation 31st August 2014

D3.5 Definition of a New Extended Information Management Platform and Decision Support Tool

31st October 2014

D3.6 Solutions Summary Report 31st October 2014



WP3 Leader: AIRBUS


SWP3.1 Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

AIB

T3.1.1 New and radical concepts for passenger + baggage flow at the airport

ALG INDRA, AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK

T3.1.2 New passenger boarding/deplaning concepts and re-design of airport gates

AIB INDRA, AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, UAB, ALG

SWP3.2 Advanced concepts and techniques for time efficient freight operations

ALG

T3.2.1 New and radical concepts for freight flow at the airport

UAB AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, ALG

T3.2.2 Evolution in ULDs ALG AEE, AID, AIA, AH, TLD, UAB, AIB

SWP3.3 Advanced concepts and techniques for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management in the apron area

AH

T3.3.1 Rationalization of the required number of GSE vehicles on the ramp

AH AEE, AID, AIA, INECO, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T3.3.2 Towards full automation in GSE operations at the airport

AIB AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, TLD, UAB, ALG

SWP3.4 Green concepts and techniques for apron operations

AEE

T3.4.1 Fully electrical equipment TLD AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, AIB, ALG

T3.4.2 Optimization of drinking water loaded into aircraft

AEE AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T3.4.3 Innovative Concepts for aircraft cabin waste unloading/treatment/recycling

AEE AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

30



SWP3.5 Definition of a new extended information management platform and decision support tool

INDRA

T3.5.1 Integration of the information flows between all processes

INECO INDRA, AEE, AID, AIA, AH, PLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T3.5.2 New performance indicators for processes and resources considering cross relations

UAB INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, ALG

T3.5.3 Decision making principles for integrated management

INDRA AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, UAB, ALG

T3.5.4 Enhanced real time communication between passenger and airport

INDRA AEE, AID, AIA, INECO, PLD, AIB, ALG


3.4 WP4 Solutions Design and Tools Development


WP4 will produce preliminary designs, prototypes and tools which fulfil the defined requirements, respond to a feasibility study and which can be evaluated and checked for validation purposes

3.4.1.1 SWP4.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions

T4.1.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

T4.1.2 Preliminary Designs of solutions for time efficient freight operations

T4.1.3 Preliminary Designs of solutions for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management

T4.1.4 Preliminary Designs of solutions for green apron operations

As a result of the activities previously developed in WP3 and based on the precise definition of the solutions, the works to be developed in WP4 will focus on producing preliminary designs, prototypes and tools to fulfil the defined requirements, responding to a feasibility study and which can be evaluated and checked for validation purposes, which will be the subject of WP5. As part of WP4, SWP 4.1, which deals with processes, technologies and concepts, the following tasks will be undertaken:

Development of designs using different tools based on the nature of each of the solutions. Some of the tools used are CAD-CAM, simulation software e.g. CabinSim, ARCport, CAST, Witness, ARENA, etc.

Conduct feasibility studies and select, whenever possible, the most appropriate alternatives or options

3.4.1.2 SWP4.2 Development and Verification of prototypes of the info platform and mgmt./decision tool

T4.2.1 Architecture analysis

T4.2.2 Technical Specifications

T4.2.3 Prototype Developments

T4.2.4 Prototype Verifications

SWP4.2, which concerns platforms and management/decision tools, includes the following activities:

Feasibility study and architecture analysis. The work will make an assessment to ensure that the available resources, technology and information will fulfil the main purpose of such tool. At this stage, an overall architecture will be delivered indicating the following: which modules will be generated, the

31


expected flows of information regarding available data sources and the relationship with other tools/modules to be generated in other SWPs.

Technical Specifications: The main goal of this task will be the specification of the system requirements, including functional and non-functional ones. These system requirements must specify completely and unequivocally the behaviour of the system in all its areas, as well as including interoperability issues. The specification will be performed taking into account the knowledge provided by the operational experts whose participation is expected in this task. This will allow the production of a baseline requirement set, which reflects the final status of the operational concepts.

Prototype development covering the different solutions: Although the output of this task is the prototype, it does not only imply the software coding phase, but also a number of other activities, which are essential for the success of this task:

The development of the prototype has to be driven by a more detailed set of requirements focused on the system definition (software requirements) and a software architecture design, which will be performed previously to the implementation (software coding).

The software development activities also include internal testing during the development: the unit and integration tests. These tests will be conducted by the development team along the whole development cycle. The unit tests will target a single source code unit (class, package…) in isolation, while the integration tests will test parts of the system in the context of the complete component or sub-system.

Other relevant pieces of work associated with this task are:

The software configuration management, which helps along all the development and integration processes, as well as the generation of system builds (baseline versions of code to be compiled and packaged, and finally used for testing or being released). This activity will be carried out throughout the whole lifetime of this task.

Hardware configuration management

These systems are a very complex software product and are not usually plug-and-play. Their integration involves a process for configuring the platform, installing and starting it up.

Verification: The technical verification of the developed system is an obvious need, in order to reduce the risk of unsuccessful operational validation due to technical problems. It is important to define the scope of the verification activities carried out by this Project. Their aim is to ensure that the produced prototypes actually work and are compliant with the requirements produced in Technical Specification task. Verification will be based on three different subtasks:

Test Case Specification: The goal of this task is the definition of the test cases and scenarios which will be executed on the prototypes developed.

Testing Platform: Previously to the verification test, it will be necessary to check that the platform (external systems, network …) is ready for it.

Execution of test: The execution of the test is the final goal of the verification activities. By conducting the tests defined in Tests Definition, it will be ensured that the prototypes accurately implement the requirements with a high degree of confidence. The output of this task will be a report with the results of the tests, containing the status of each of them (Passed/Partial/Not Passed), along with any other information which might be of interest (i.e. incidences, improvement opportunities, etc).

The procedure for the text execution can be summarized as follows:

1. Tests will be executed following approved Test Procedures. 2. Every time a Test Step is executed, a Test Step Result will be associated with the execution

and recorded 3. In the case of a failure, all possible data relative to the failure shall be obtained in order to be

attached to the specific anomaly. The anomalies will be recorded. 4. Analysis to identify anomalies to be solved. This activity will be performed by Test team,

Software Engineering and SW development team. 5. Anomalies resolution phase will be carried out to fix previous considered anomalies to be

solved. 6. Steps 1 to 3 will be carried out again. 7. While the Product Qualification test is being executed, the Test Report document will be

generated.

32


Test Review (TR): Once the tests are finished, the Test Report is generated and a Test Review (TR) meeting is held to review all actions items, issues and open topics and to agree on the overall results. The Test Report document will be generated with the data, anomalies and actions identified during Product Qualification Testing

Regression Tests: After the Internal Qualification Testing is done, Regression Tests are planned to re-execute the steps which have been verified with an older version. Regression testing ensures that the software does not evolve in a degenerative manner, losing functionality as other bugs are fixed and providing confidence in the current SW version


Figure 6 represents the initial plan, although SWP4.2 period is under discussion, as WP4 leader has proposed some changes that have to be agreed between all affected partners. If approved, the plan will be updated accordingly.




D4.1 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes

31st March 2015

D4.2 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Time Efficient Freight Operations 31st March 2015

D4.3 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management

31st March 2015

D4.4 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Green Apron Operations 31st March 2015

D4.5 Architecture Definition 30th November 2014

D4.6 Technical Specification 31st January 2015

D4.7 Prototype Developed 31st July 2015

D4.8 Results of the Verifications 31st August 2015


YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

WP4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP4.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T4.1.1 PDoS for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.1.2 PDoS for time efficient freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.1.3 PDoS for fleet, mobile vehicles and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.1.4 PDoS for green apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP4.2 Development and Verification of prototypes of the info platform and mgmt./decision tool 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T4.2.1 Architecture analysis 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.2.2 Technical Specifications 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.2.3 Prototype Developments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.2.4 Prototype Verifications 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2013 201620152014

D4.1

D4.2

D4.3

D4.4

D4.5

D4.6

D4.7

D4.8

MS3

MS4

PDoS: Preliminary Design of Solutions

33



WP4 Leader: INDRA


SWP4.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions AIB

T4.1.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

AH INDRA, AEE, AID, AIA, INECO, PLD, TK, AIB, ALG

T4.1.2 Preliminary Designs of solutions for time efficient freight operations

PLD AIA, AH, UAB, ALG

T4.1.3 Preliminary Designs of solutions for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management

TLD AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, TK, UAB

T4.1.4 Preliminary Designs of solutions for green apron operations

TK AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TLD, AIB, ALG

SWP4.2 Development and Verification of prototypes of the info platform and mgmt./decision tool

INDRA

T4.2.1 Architecture analysis INDRA AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T4.2.2 Technical Specifications INDRA AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T4.2.3 Prototype Developments INDRA AID, AH, INECO, PLD, UAB, AIB

T4.2.4 Prototype Verifications INDRA AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, UAB, AIB, ALG


3.5 WP5 Concept Validation

3.5.1 Description of Work

WP5 is in charge of:

To define and develop a validation framework for INTERACTION proposed solutions.

To define a set of activities to validate new concepts, procedures, tools and platform prototype

To perform validation activities adapted to the nature of the proposed solutions. The best-for-purpose technique will be applied: expert groups, gaming sessions, analytical modelling, FTS, shadow mode, etc.

To produce an analysis of the validation results in order to provide the main conclusions.

3.5.1.1 SWP5.1 Validation Plan

Definition of the validation plans and validation exercises according to a validation strategy.

T5.1.1 Validation Plan for specific solutions (SWP4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4): This validation plan will provide information on: Low level validation objectives; Validation scenarios and exercises; Techniques and tools; Exercises planning; Indicators and metrics; and, Analysis specification (e.g. questionnaires, data collection methods).

34


T5.1.2 Validation Plan for prototypes of a new integrated information platform and management/decision support tool (SWP4.5): This validation plan will provide information on: Low level validation objectives; Validation scenarios and exercises; Simulation conditions (samples, actors, roles); Simulation platform (components, configuration, and limitations); Simulation experimental design; Indicators and metrics; Requirements for system data loggings and recordings; Exercises planning; and, Analysis specification (e.g. questionnaires, data collection methods).

A first estimation of the methods used to validate each solution can be found in the table below. This table will be updated with the Validation Plans (T5.1.1 and T5.1.2).

Solutions / Prototypes Workshop Simulations Real trials

Time efficient passenger and baggage processes

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; PLD; TK; UAB

Time efficient freight operations

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; PLD; TLD; UAB

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; PLD; TLD; UAB

Fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; TK; TLD; UAB

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; TK; TLD; UAB

Green apron operations ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; TLD

ALG; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; INECO; TLD

Prototypes ALG; INDRA; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; PLD; TLD

ALG; INDRA; AEE; AIB; AIA; AH; PLD; TLD

Table 14: First estimation of validation methods

The validation Plans will also include the tasks of each partner during validations. Industry partners will validate their prototypes and, together with the university, will set the different conditions for simulations and workshops. Operational Partners will provide most of the information needed for validation, especially the real operational environments. This information will be treated anonymously, taking into account the privacy of passengers, customers of the operational partners. An example of the type of information that will be used from each anonymous passenger is:

Flight number

Origin

Destiny

Class

Times:

Check-in

Security control

Boarding (aircraft gate – aircraft)

Baggage loading/unloading

Cargo loading/unloading

Aircraft cleaning

Boarding bridge connection

GSE deployment

PRM

Irregularities handling (i.e. weather delays, technical problems, AOG situations, etc.)

All this information can be segregated depending on type of flight: domestic, international, charter, load factor.

35


Prototypes and tools tested in real trials will be tested in a platform for real time testing, i.e. the aircraft along with operational personnel who will give their constant feedback on the effectiveness of the solutions. At the end of the testing, workshops will be held with the participation of operational personnel from the involved departments and any discrepancies/ needs for improvement will be analyzed.

3.5.1.2 SWP5.2 Validation of the proposed solutions

T5.2.1 Validation of solutions for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

T5.2.2 Validation of solutions for time efficient freight operations

T5.2.3 Validation of solutions for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management

T5.2.4 Validation of solutions for green apron operations

The operational INTERACTION concept will be evaluated by using gaming as well as FTS, analytical modelling and expert group methodologies. Gaming exercises will be based on the overall validation strategy defined in SWP5.1 and specified through specific validation exercises. Moreover simulation based on gaming, will focus on two aspects:

Exploration and understanding of the relevant solutions; and

Assessment of the operational feasibility of those solutions.

A gaming exercise is a human in the loop activity that can be applied to simulate decision making processes. Experts are ‘around a table’ playing different roles as if they were living real processes (handling agent, airport personnel...). Every role has a particular scope, objectives and strategies during the process and the scenario is running in real-time or slower. Gaming exercises promotes non-routine thinking, thus enabling out-of-the-box thinking. This type of exercise provides clarification of concepts and roles and responsibilities, qualitative assessment of feasibility of concepts, detects bottlenecks and shortcomings and identification of information flows among actors, as well as offering an exploration of the supporting tools’ requirements. In order to obtain useful outcomes from the exercise, participants must have expertise in the topics covered and the platforms used should be adapted to the exercise. The experts should be guided properly through the game in order to avoid turning the exercise into an Expert Group.

In the INTERACTION’s case, the experts involved in the gaming exercise will be mainly members of the Operational Partners using the platforms and being guided by the Industry Partners.

The best-for-purpose technique will be used for each of the solutions proposed. In any case, passengers will not detect any modification in the normal airport activity and no monitoring or tracking of passengers will be carried out. As indicated in section 4, no personal or sensitive data will be gathered from the passengers. For those reasons, there is no need to obtain informed consent from any passenger and no cameras will be used.

3.5.1.3 SWP5.3 Validation of the prototypes

This SWP will validate INTERACTIONS’s prototype through simulations and real environment operations; i.e. monitoring and tracking all airport performance processes (in NO case will passengers be identified, monitored or tracked) and supporting stakeholders in making their daily decisions based on the information shared. Special emphasis will be put on the study of the interfaces and interactions of the different systems linked from the information perspective, namely: passengers flow system, aircraft fleet management system, common information management system, and environment management system.

T5.3.1 Preparation of the validation environment: This task concerns the preparation of the real time and shadow mode trials and the training activities of the users to use the system under validation.

T5.3.2 Execution and support to the validation trials

3.5.1.4 SWP5.4 Analysis of validation results

T5.4.1 Analysis of specific solutions validation results: Analysis of the data collected during SWP5.2 validation activities: Statement of validation objectives; and Results per objective or KPI.

T5.4.2 Analysis of prototypes validation results: Analysis of the data collected during SWP 5.3 validation activities: Report on exercise conditions (e.g. degraded conditions, scenarios); Statement of validation objectives; and Results per objective or KPI.

36


3.5.1.5 SWP5.5 Reporting of conclusions from validation

The validation report will summarize the main validation objectives; review the exercises and the analysis methodology (validation approach); compare measurements against the initial targets; summarise the overall results as well as the final conclusions, the level of maturity achieved by each concept, and the lessons learnt.





D5.1 Validation Plan for Specific Solutions 31st

May 2015

D5.2 Validation Plan for New Information Platform 31st August 2015

D5.3 Validation Results of Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes Solutions

30th September 2015

D5.4 Validation Results of Time Efficient Freight Operations Solutions 30th September 2015

D5.5 Validation Results of Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management Solutions

30th September 2015

D5.6 Validation Results of Green Apron Operations Solutions 30th September 2015

D5.7 Validation Results of Prototypes in Real Operation Environments 31st January 2016

D5.8 Analysis of Validation Results of Specific Solutions 31st October 2015

D5.9 Analysis of Validation Results of Prototype 29th February 2016

D5.10 Conclusions Report from Validation Activity 31st March 2016


YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.1 Validation Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.1.1 Validation Plan for specific solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.1.2 Validation Plan for prototypes of a new 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.2 Validation of the proposed solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.2.1 VoS for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.2.2 VoS for time efficient freight operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.2.3 VoS for fleet, mobile vehicles and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.2.4 VoS for green apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP5.3 Validation of the prototypes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.3.1 Preparation of the validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.3.2 Execution and support to the validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.4 Analysis of validation results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.4.1 Analysis of specific solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.4.2 Analysis of prototypes validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP5.5 Reporting of conclusions from validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2013 201620152014

D5.1

D5.2

D5.3

D5.4

D5.5

D5.6

D5.7

D5.8D5.9

D5.10

MS5

MS6

MS7

MS8

MS9

MS10

MS11

VoS: Validation of Solutions

37



WP5 Leader: Athens International Airport


SWP5.1 Validation Plan AIA

T5.1.1 Validation Plan for specific solutions (SWP4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4)

AIA AEE, AH, INECO, PLD, TLD, UAB, ALG

T5.1.2 Validation Plan for prototypes of a new integrated information platform and management/decision support tool (SWP4.5)

AIA AEE, AH, INECO, PLD, TLD, UAB, ALG

SWP5.2 Validation of the proposed solutions AEE

T5.2.1 Validation of solutions for time efficient passenger and baggage processes

AIB AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, UAB, ALG

T5.2.2 Validation of solutions for time efficient freight operations

PLD AEE, AID, AIA, AH, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T5.2.3 Validation of solutions for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management

AH AEE, AID, AIA, INECO, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB, ALG

T5.2.4 Validation of solutions for green apron operations

TK AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, TLD, AIB, ALG

SWP5.3 Validation of the prototypes AEE

T5.3.1 Preparation of the validation environment

AIA INDRA, AEE, AID, AH, INECO, PLD, TLD, UAB, AIB

T5.3.2 Execution and support to the validation trials

AEE INDRA, AID, AIA, AH, PLD, TLD, AIB, ALG

SWP5.4 Analysis of validation results UAB

T5.4.1 Analysis of specific solutions validation results

UAB AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, TLD, AIB, ALG

T5.4.2 Analysis of prototypes validation results

UAB INDRA, AEE, AID, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, AIB, ALG

SWP5.5 Reporting of conclusions from validation

INECO AEE, AID, AIA, PLD, UAB, AIB, ALG


3.6 WP6 Communication, Dissemination and Exploitation of results


WP6 is in charge of:

Producing dissemination and exploitation plans

Disseminating relevant results obtained during all project phases to the European community

Producing preliminary CBA (Cost-Benefit Analysis) and BC (Business Case) for INTERACTION results

Defining the INTERACTION way-forward roadmap for future innovation contribution in Europe

38


3.6.1.1 SWP6.1 Communication and dissemination

T6.1.1 Communication and dissemination plan: The Project Coordinator will produce a dissemination plan to include the definition and planning of the dissemination activities.

T6.1.2 Project website: A website with one part open to the public and one internal to the project for continuous exchange of results and information will be set up. The private area will allow sharing of confidential information among partners and facilitating the collaboration of the consortium. The public area will ensure sharing non-confidential project results with interested groups.

T6.1.3 INTERACTION Advisory Group set up and management: An INTERACTION Advisory Group formed by key representatives from Air Transport users and experts will be established to support the project team during project activities. The main function of the board will be to provide the project team with the users’ point of view in the different analysis and tasks performed during the project life, in addition to performing expert reviews on the project deliverables. See section 3.2 for further details on the dissemination activities and advisory group participation

T6.1.4 Dissemination of results in publications, workshops, conferences and exhibitions: This task collects traditional dissemination tools such as the publication of technical and research papers in well-known scientific journals, magazines, newspapers, and the presentation of results at conferences, seminars in the field of airport operations. In addition, this task will organise the project workshops to be performed with the Advisory Group in order to review the different project results achieved in each activity. See section 3.2.2 for further explanation.

T6.1.5 Final conference preparation: The final conference will inform on the results of the project and will show how these results can be taken into the decision-making process for the preparation of future FP work programmes and any other European mechanisms to foster and support innovative airport operations tools and procedures.

3.6.1.2 SWP6.2 Exploitation of the project impact

T6.2.1 Exploitation plan: The exploitation plan will define the activities and milestones for facilitating the market uptake of INTERACTION results.

T6.2.2 Coordination of knowledge: The Project Coordinator will deal with all matters related to access rights, protection of knowledge generated by the project and possible exploitation of results.

T6.2.3 INTERACTION Business Case: As part of the exploitation activities an INTERACTION Business Case is needed in order to make sure that: the investments will bring value to the decision makers; the solutions will meet the expected performance targets; different alternatives and options are identified and properly assessed; and stakeholders are involved in the process and buy-in to the decision.

T6.2.4 Way-forward within EU ATM innovation roadmap: This task will produce an INTERACTION roadmap in order to define how results can be taken into the decision-making process for the preparation of future FP work programmes, in particular future Horizon 2020, and any other European mechanisms to foster and support innovative airport operations tools and procedures. In particular coordination with SESAR programme implementation phase should be considered.



YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

WP6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31SWP6.1 Communication and dissemination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.1 Communication and dissemination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T6.1.2 Project Website 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.3 INTERACTION Advisory Group set up and management1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.4 Dissemination of results in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.5 Final conference preparation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

SWP6.2 Exploitation of the project impact 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.1 Exploitation plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.2 Coordination of knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.3 INTERACTION Business Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.4 Way-forward within EU ATM innovation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

2013 201620152014

D6.1

D6.2

D6.3

D6.4

D4.8 D5.10

39




D6.1 Dissemination Plan 31st

December 2013

D6.2 INTERACTION Website 31st

December 2013

D6.3 Exploitation Plan 31st March 2016

D6.4 INTERACTION Business Case and Roadmap 31st March 2016

D6.5 List of references of all scientific publications relating to foreground Updated after each publication



WP6 Leader: ALG


SWP6.1 Communication and dissemination ALG

T6.1.1 Communication and dissemination plan

ALG AIA, TK, AIB

T6.1.2 Project website ALG INDRA, INECO,

T6.1.3 INTERACTION Advisory Group set up and management

ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB

T6.1.4 Dissemination of results in publications, workshops, conferences and exhibitions

UAB INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, TLD, AIB, ALG

T6.1.5 Final conference preparation ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB

SWP6.2 Exploitation of the project impact ALG

T6.2.1 Exploitation plan INECO INDRA, AIA, PLD, TK, AIB

T6.2.2 Coordination of knowledge ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, PLD, TK, TLD, UAB, AIB

T6.2.3 INTERACTION Business Case ALG INDRA, AEE, AIA, AH, INECO, PLD, TK, TLD, AIB

T6.2.4 Way-forward within EU ATM innovation roadmap

ALG INDRA, AIA, INECO, UAB, AIB


40


3.7 Deliverables structure

Throughout the execution of the project, several technical deliverables and progress reports will be delivered. The procedure for elaborating each type of deliverable is presented in the sections below in order to better coordinate and gather the contribution of different participants.

3.7.1 Progress reports elaboration procedures

The Progress reporting ensures effective control on project progress by providing the EC representatives with regular feedback on different aspects, such as project progress (status of milestones, planning, deliverables, resources consumptions or delays); potential risks and issues, including mitigations and contingency plans.

The Interim Project Reports will be provided every 4 months as well as a final project report at the conclusion of the project.

The Project Coordinator will receive support from the WP and/or SWP leaders in the matters related with the different project activities and from ALG in order to contemplate and evaluate potential risks and their mitigation and contingency plans.

Figure 9 schematizes the methodology for preparing the progress reports. It consists of 4 phases, each one having a person responsible and several actions to be completed:

Phase I (responsible: ALG) - ALG will remind all partners to provide the needed information in order to complete the progress reports to be sent to the EC. The information provided will be detailed before each reporting. The first report will be coordinated through email and ALG will send a first template for the information provision. The subsequent reports will be produced through the INTERACTION intranet

Phase II (responsible: all partners) - all partners will provide the requested progress information to ALG

Phase III (responsible: ALG) - ALG team will produce a progress report draft and will send it to all partners for revision.

Phase IV (responsible: all partners) - All partners will review the draft version sent by ALG and provide their comments to it. ALG will integrate the comments in the report, producing the final version, and will send the final agreed version to the European Commission for approval.

Figure 9: Working approach to produce the reports to the EC

3.7.2 Deliverables elaboration procedures

The person responsible for each deliverable is the individual assigned to this within each Work Package. The leaders as well as all the contributors are responsible for the quality and correctness of the deliverable’s content.

Similar to the progress reports, the deliverable elaboration process can be separated in 4 phases, as presented in Figure 10: Working approach to produce a deliverable

The intermediate deadlines mentioned below are not obligatory. Each WP leader is free to establish its own internal deadlines in line with the official delivery dates. Each phase in Figure 10 is described as:

Phase I (deliverable responsible) – The official responsible of the deliverable will have to prepare an initial version (e.g. D2.1_v0.0), which will be based on the template provided by the Project Coordinator. Some suggestions for this first version content are:

Work plan

Participating partners and their contribution

Required reviewers

Useful inputs from previous work

Specify the required outputs

Phase II Phase IIIPhase I

Information request Information provision Draft elaboration

Phase IV

Document revision

41


Phase II (all contributors) – The deliverable drafting should be finalised at least 3 weeks before the deliverable deadline in order to be reviewed.

Phase III (all contributors) – The deliverable will be checked and all the comments will be included for a forward clarification. This phase should end 1 week before the deliverable deadline.

Phase IV (deliverable responsible) – The responsible partner for completing the deliverable will integrate the comments and recommendations in order to obtain the final version. This final document will be sent to the Project Coordinator for a final review. The Project Coordinator is in charge of sending the deliverable to the European Commission.

Figure 10: Working approach to produce a deliverable

3.7.2.1 Deliverables template

All the deliverables will be produced following a common template provided by the Project Coordinator and agreed among all partners.

This template will include a specific cover page with the INTERACTION logo and key project information, the list of partners, the list of figures and tables, the list of acronyms, an executive summary, the detailed technical progress performed in the task or subtask concerned and the annexes (if any), etc.

3.7.2.2 File naming convention

All the documents elaborated within INTERACTION project should follow a general naming convention for file names:

INTERACTION Dx.y Title_vz.w, where:

Dx.y - represents the deliverable number (where ‘x’ represents the WP number and ‘y’ the deliverable number within that WP)

Title - corresponds to the deliverable title

‘z.w’ - corresponds to the version number of the deliverable, starting at 0.1 and the first delivery to EC being 1.0.

Phase II Phase IIIPhase I

Initiation Preparation Reviewing

Phase IV

Final version

42


4 Work plan & schedule

This section presents the project work plan and schedule. Summary tables with all project deliverables, milestones & meetings and progress reports are presented, together with the project schedule for all Wps and tasks.

4.1 Project Deliverables

All deliverables are identified with a D at the beginning of it being followed by the WP number and finally the deliverable number within the WP.

The nature of the deliverables uses the following code:

R: Report,

P: Prototype,

D: Demonstration,

O: Other

The dissemination levels use the following code:

PU: Public,

PP: Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission services),

RE: Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission services),

CO: Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission services)

ID Deliverable name WP Nature Dissemination

level Delivery date

D1.1 Project Management Plan 1 R PU 30th November 2013 (delayed)

1

D6.1 Dissemination Plan 6 R PU 31st December 2013 (delayed)

1

D6.2 INTERACTION Website 6 O PU 31st December 2013 (delayed)

1

D1.2 Interim Project Report I 1 R CO 31st January 2014

D2.1 General Characterization of Airport Processes and their Interaction

2 R PU 28th February 2014

D2.2 Specific Characterization of Airport Processes and their Interaction

2 R PP 28th February 2014

D2.3 Identification of Inefficiencies and Needs for Improvement

2 R PU 31st March 2014

D2.4 Current Situation Results 2 R PU 31st March 2014

D1.3 Interim Project Report II 1 R CO 31st August 2014

D3.1 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes

3 R PP 31st August 2014

1 These deliverables were due 31st October 2013 but were delayed due to a delay in the Project starting day.

These delays are already absorbed in the project as no other deliverable will be delayed due to this issue.

43



level Delivery date

D3.2 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Time Efficient Freight Operations


D3.3 Advanced Concepts and Techniques for Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management in the Apron area


D3.4 Green Concepts and Techniques for Apron Operations


D1.4 Interim Project Report III 1 R CO 30th September 2014

D3.5 Definition of a New Extended Information Management Platform and Decision Support Tool

3 R PP 31st October 2014

D3.6 Solutions Summary Report 3 R PU 31st October 2014

D4.5 Architecture Definition 4 R CO 30th November 2014

D1.5 Interim Project Report IV 1 R CO 31st January 2015

D4.6 Technical Specification 4 R CO 31st January 2015

D4.1 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes

4 R CO 31st March 2015

D4.2 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Time Efficient Freight Operations


D4.3 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management


D4.4 Preliminary Designs of Solutions for Green Apron Operations


D5.1 Validation Plan for Specific Solutions 5 R PP 31st

May 2015

D1.6 Interim Project Report V 1 R CO 31st May 2015

D4.7 Prototype Developed 4 P CO 31st July 2015

D4.8 Results of the Verifications 4 R PP 31st August 2015

D5.2 Validation Plan for New Information Platform


D1.7 Interim Project Report VI 1 R CO 30th September 2015

D5.3 Validation Results of Time Efficient Passenger and Baggage Processes Solutions

5 R PP 30th September 2015

D5.4 Validation Results of Time Efficient Freight Operations Solutions


D5.5 Validation Results of Fleet, Mobile Vehicles and Equipment Management Solutions


D5.6 Validation Results of Green Apron Operations Solutions


44



level Delivery date

D5.8 Analysis of Validation Results of Specific Solutions

5 R PP 31st October 2015

D1.8 Interim Project Report VII 1 R CO 31st January 2016

D5.7 Validation Results of Prototypes in Real Operation Environments

5 R PP 31st January 2016

D5.9 Analysis of Validation Results of Prototypes

5 R PP 29th February 2016

D1.9 FINAL Project Report 1 R CO 31st March 2016

D5.10 Conclusions Report from Validation Activity


D6.3 Exploitation Plan 6 R PU 31st March 2016

D6.4 INTERACTION Business Case and Roadmap


D1.10 Report on the distribution of the European Union financial contribution between beneficiaries

1 R PP 30 dd. after payment

D6.5 List of references of all scientific publications relating to foreground

6 R PP Cont. updated

Table 19: Deliverable list

4.2 Project Milestones

Besides the deliverables, a set of milestones have been scheduled, coincident with the project progress meetings:

ID Milestone name Work

package(s) involved

Expected date Means of

verification

MS1 Airport Characterization & Identification Inefficiencies

WP2 30th November 2013

Meeting to ensure that SWP2.2 is coordinated with SWP2.1

MS2 Inefficiencies Identified & Identification of New Solutions

WP2 & WP3

31st January 2014

Meeting to ensure that WP3 is coordinated with WP2

MS3 Defined Concepts and Techniques & Preliminary Design of Solutions

WP3 & WP4

30th June 2014

Meeting to ensure that SWP4.1 is coordinated with SWP3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4

MS4 New Platform Defined &Development and Verification

WP3 & WP4

30th September 2014


45


ID Milestone name Work

package(s) involved

Expected date Means of

verification

MS5 Preliminary Designs of Solutions & Validation Plan

WP4 & WP5

27th February 2015


MS6 Prototype Verified WP4 & WP5

27th February 2015


MS7 Solutions Validation Plan & Validation Activity

WP5 30th May 2015


MS8 Prototype Validation Plan & Validation in Real Operation Environments

WP5 30th May 2015


MS9 Solutions Validation Activity & Analysis of Validation Results

WP5 30th June 2015


M10 Prototype Validation Activity & Analysis of Validation Results

WP5 30th December 2015


M11 Solutions and Prototype Validation & Validation Conclusions

WP5 31st January 2016

Meeting to ensure that SWP5.5 is coordinated with SWP5.2 and 5.3

M12 Validation Conclusions & Final Conference Content

WP5 & WP6

28th February 2016

Meeting to ensure that SWP6.1 coordinated with SWP5.5

Table 20: Milestones list

4.3 Progress reports

Progress reports are included as deliverables of WP1 and will be produced every 4 months.


D1.2 Interim Project Report I 31st January 2014

D1.3 Interim Project Report II 31st May 2014

D1.4 Interim Project Report III 30th September 2014

D1.5 Interim Project Report IV 31st January 2015

46



D1.6 Interim Project Report V 31st May 2015

D1.7 Interim Project Report VI 30th September 2015

D1.8 Interim Project Report VII 31st January 2016

D1.9 Final Project Report 31st March 2016

Table 21. Progress Reports

4.4 Project schedule

Several proposals of modification within WP3 and WP4 duration are under discussion. If approved, the plan will be updated accordingly.

47


Figure 11: Project schedule

YearMonths 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3

WP1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

SWP1.1 Project Management Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 311

SWP1.2 Legal, contractual, administrative and financial management1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 311

SWP1.3 Project progress reporting to the EC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 311

SWP1.4 Quality and risk management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

WP2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

SWP2.1 Characterisation of Airport processes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T2.1.1 Passenger 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.1.2 Baggage 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.3 Freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.1.4 Ramp & GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.1.5 The turnaround as a whole 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.1.6 Process management and information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP2.2 Identification of inefficiencies and needs for improvement1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T2.2.1 Passenger 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.2 Baggage 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.3 Freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T2.2.4 Ramp & GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.5 The turnaround as a whole 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T2.2.6 Process management and information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31SWP3.1 AC&T for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.1.1 N&RC for passenger + baggage flow at 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T3.1.2 New passenger boarding/deplaning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP3.2 AC&T for time efficient freight operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.2.1 N&RC for freight flow at the airport 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.2.2 Evolution in ULDs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP3.3 AC&Ts for fleet, mobile vehicles and equipment management at the apron area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.3.1 Rationalization of the required number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.3.2 Towards full automation in GSE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP3.4 Green concepts and techniques for apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.4.1 Fully electrical equipment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.4.2 Optimization of potable water loaded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.4.3 Innovative Concepts for aircraft cabin 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

SWP3.5 Definition of a new extended information management platform and decision support tool 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T3.5.1 Integration of the information flows 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T3.5.2 New performance indicators for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T3.5.3 Decision making principles for an 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T3.5.4 Enhanced real time communication 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP4.1 Preliminary Designs of solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T4.1.1 PDoS for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T4.1.2 PDoS for time efficient freight 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.1.3 PDoS for fleet, mobile vehicles and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T4.1.4 PDoS for green apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP4.2 Development and Verification of prototypes of the info platform and mgmt./decision tool 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T4.2.1 Architecture analysis 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T4.2.2 Technical Specifications 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.2.3 Prototype Developments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T4.2.4 Prototype Verifications 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.1 Validation Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.1.1 Validation Plan for specific solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.1.2 Validation Plan for prototypes of a new 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.2 Validation of the proposed solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.2.1 VoS for time efficient passenger and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.2.2 VoS for time efficient freight operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30T5.2.3 VoS for fleet, mobile vehicles and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.2.4 VoS for green apron operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.3 Validation of the prototypes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T5.3.1 Preparation of the validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.3.2 Execution and support to the validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.4 Analysis of validation results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.4.1 Analysis of specific solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

T5.4.2 Analysis of prototypes validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30SWP5.5 Reporting of conclusions from validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

WP6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31SWP6.1 Communication and dissemination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.1 Communication and dissemination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T6.1.2 Project Website 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T6.1.3 INTERACTION Advisory Group set up and management1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.1.4 Dissemination of results in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T6.1.5 Final conference preparation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

SWP6.2 Exploitation of the project impact 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.1 Exploitation plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.2 Coordination of knowledge 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31T6.2.3 INTERACTION Business Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

T6.2.4 Way-forward within EU ATM innovation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

2013 201620152014

D1.1

D1.2 D1.3 D1.4 D1.5 D1.6 D1.7 D1.8 D1.9

D6.1

D6.2

D6.3

D6.4

D2.1; D2.2

D2.3; D2.4

D3.1

D3.2

D3.3

D3.4

D3.5; D3.6

D4.1

D4.2

D4.3

D4.4

D4.5

D4.6

D4.7

D4.8

D5.1

D5.2

D5.3

D5.4

D5.5

D5.6

D5.7

D5.8D5.9

D5.10

MS1

MS2

MS3

MS4

MS5

MS6

MS7

MS8

MS9

MS10

MS11

MS12

AC&T: Advanced Concepts and Techniques N&RC: New and Radical ConceptsPDoS: Preliminary Design of SolutionsVoS: Validation of Solutions

48


5 Management procedures

5.1 Management principles

The coordination of this project requires special attention to the management of multi-disciplinary activities in order to define an organization that meets the overall INTERACTION objectives, with the right balance between rigor and flexibility and giving room to innovation and creativity. Special attention must also be paid to the WBS and to the content of every WP in order to ensure the maximum consistency and solidity in the project. Every work package needs to have a very clear definition and a well-defined relationship with the others.

Therefore, the main objective of the management is to ensure that all project-related tasks are performed successfully and comply with contractual requirements. The key features for successful project management are:

A management organization that is matched with the project complexity.

Efficient communications within the organization.

Clear definition of contractual requirements and relationships.

Adequate planning and control procedures.

Comprehensive quality and risk management frameworks.

The scheme proposed relies on two basic rules. On the one hand, the project coordinator will be assigned the combined responsibility of standard management so that this figure may act as the sole contact point between the project and the EC representative during negotiations and progress monitoring. On the other hand, day-to-day data-management activities will be assigned to the Project Manager, and base management practices on producer-consumer relationships will apply between all entities involved. This will enable effective management which will be delegated at all levels: from coordinator to WP managers to Sub WP managers and from Sub WP managers to task leaders.

The framework for control activities in the INTERACTION project will be the Work-Breakdown Structure (WBS) in conjunction with the Gantt chart and Work Packages (WPs) content. In order to achieve efficient project implementation, the structures of the Work Packages and their related tasks have been defined with the aim of minimizing overlap between different activities. This allows the definition of clear responsibilities, roles and objectives for all project resources. WPs are themselves broken down into Sub-WPs and Sub-WPs into tasks. Tasks have the finest level of detail defined in the WBS.

5.2 Management procedures and tools

The previous section 1.3.3 has already presented the proposed activities for WP1 and WP6 respectively regarding Project Management and Dissemination and Exploitation of results. In this section further explanation is given regarding the proposed management procedures and tools and in addition regarding some of the dissemination proposed techniques.

5.2.1 Project Management Plan

The management activities at project level will be enclosed under the Project Management Plan (PMP) to be developed by the Project Coordinator and Project Manager during the first two months of execution of the project. The Project Coordinator will lead the production of the PMP, relying on the other partners’ collaboration and holding several meetings, in which the project organization will be established. In particular, a kick-off meeting will be convened and attended by the EC representative, Project Coordinator and all Members contributing to the project.

General project coordination: General project coordination will be performed in line with an overall “contractual” scheme based on producer-consumer relationships which needs to be set up at a broad level: among entities of a given partner that collectively work on the project; between the project, the external bodies and stakeholder companies; among the partners themselves which agree to comply with these management rules and, in case of conflicts, will have to rely on a consortium agreement and a conflict resolution scheme to be drafted at project starting phase. The coordination between the various partners will be performed at the Steering Committee level and at the Management body level. This coordination will be

49


supported by a project commitment to the (initial and/or revised) project planning (including the agreed milestones), and also by the quarterly project progress reports provided to the EC. The general coordination approach proposed by Indra Business Consulting and ALG includes the following activities:

Defining the project coordination structure and related activities:

Defining the work plan, including the project structure decomposition;

Identifying inputs and outputs for each WP, Sub-WPs and task;

Defining relevant milestones within the project;

Identifying and describing expected deliverables related to these milestones.

Managing and coordination of day to day project activities (performed by themselves and potentially by other members and/or subcontractors). The Project Manager will lead and coordinate the different project activities, as well as monitoring the work progress.

Perform all the legal, administrative and financial activities.

5.2.2 Communication, monitoring and reporting management

Monitoring and reporting will be performed by the Project Coordinator/Manager, WP and Sub-WP managers with the support of all partners, at all levels of the project structure around identified activities, milestones and deliverables. Meeting plans, for the adequate control and monitoring of the project activities will be scheduled on the basis of a defined periodicity at different levels (e.g. monthly meetings/teleconferences with the different working activity leaders). Progress reporting to provide effective control of project progress to the EC representatives will include regular feedback on:

Progress, including status of milestones, planning, deliverables, status of the different activities, resources consumptions, recognized or potential delays,

Risks and issues, including mitigations and contingency plans.

Progress reporting will be supported by the Earned value management (EVM) tool, a project management technique for measuring project performance and progress in an objective manner. EVM has the ability to combine measurements of scope, schedule and cost in a single integrated system. Earned Value Management is able to provide accurate forecasts of project performance problems, which is an important contribution to project management.

It is proposed to open an INTERACTION Extranet at the project start to enable all INTERACTION project members to share and to contribute to the following information sharing such as management and technical reports, deliverables, library of INTERACTION requirements, concepts and strategy. All INTERACTION project-related information that needs to be used and exploited by any project member will be gathered in a unique document repository that will of course be accessible from the web site.

Technical coordination: This activity involves any works and coordination related to the scientific and technical aspects of the project and will be performed by the Scientific Coordinator at Management Body level. The main areas regarding scientific & technical coordination will be the following ones:

Operational concept: define a concept which is in line with users’ expectations and feasible from a scientific and technical perspective;

Prototypes development: ensure that the modelling is developed according to the concept and that the algorithms are suitable for implementation according to the requirements;

Validation activities: ensure that the exercises reproduce faithfully the use cases and that the concept is proven.

The INTERACTION Project Coordinator/Manager believes that apart from the pure management activities, and due to the technical characteristics of the project, it is very important to have the appropriate technical skills and domain knowledge of the project he/she is in charge of. The Project Coordinator/Manager is perfectly aware of this, considering both aspects very important to the success of the project, and provides the most suitable management profiles according to the project characteristics, with the appropriate balancing between the two aspects.

50


5.2.3 Quality management (QM)

The quality management process will define quality objectives, working method, processes review, templates and responsibilities that will be applied on the project. The quality management process will define internal and external processes applicable within the project (between WPs) and, in some cases, between the project and external partner/project/body. Both the Project Coordinator and the Project Manager will be in charge of making sure that any delivery complies with the quality management approach.

ALG follows a Quality Management System (QMS) according to the requirements specified by EN ISO 9001:2008. The approach proposed is based on several quality standards, the ones applying to INTERACTION project development are presented in the next figure:

Figure 12. Quality Management process

Each one of the points mentioned in Figure 12 above is described as follows:

Use of tree-structure for classifying all documents;

Classification of the documents

Contractual documents

Working documents

Deliverables

References

Project Management

Table 22. Classification of documents related to the project

Nomenclature of the documents

Deliverables file naming (see 3.7.2.2);

Format and template

Deliverables template;

Progress reports template;

Minutes of meeting template;

Tree-structure

documents

classification

Nomenclature

Templates

Periodical

coordination

meetings

WP/SWP/

Task

responsible

Project

Coordinator

reviews

Follow the

proposal

and

technical

requirements

Add document

updates, if

required, through

annexes

Progress

Reports each

4 months

51


Support from Production Department for revision related to format and language;

Periodical meetings in order to coordinate the different activities throughout the course of the project

Planned internal meetings of each partner;

Internal meetings within each WP/SWP or task;

Steering Committee meetings

Management Body meetings

Workshops with external stakeholders in order to maintain their needs in line with the INTERACTION solutions proposed (workshops with the Advisory Group);

Assign a person responsible for each WP/SWP and Task;

The Project Coordinator shall review all documents before sending them to the Project Officer;

Develop the project according to the proposal presented and the technical requirements specified;

Once a document has been delivered to the European Commission, it will not be changed afterwards. When updates are required, these will be made in the form of an annex to the previous delivered document;

The Progress Reports will be sent to the Project Officer every 4 months.

Most of the previous points have already been applied, like providing a deliverable template or planning future meetings and workshops. Regular feedback on quality will be given at the Steering Committee level. Each WP manager will be in charge of applying quality rules within his/her WP, as specified in the project quality management process. The following quality goals for the quality management (QM) process shall apply:

Make sure that all standards and planning documents are available;

Make sure that standards appropriately address the criticality of the project;

Make sure that all team staff are familiar with the relevant planning documents and the associated rules and standards;

Verify that the outputs are delivered on time;

Ensure compliance with all relevant standards;

Follow the Quality Management process described in this Management Plan;

In general, monitor the project quality-related aspects to ensure effectiveness of the planned arrangements and compliance by all the project organization with the quality objectives;

Respond to audit requests and collaborate with auditors from the EC on matters related with the project.

5.2.4 Milestones management

INTERACTION milestones have been defined as starting points for each SWP to ensure full coordination with on-going related SWPs. This approach ensures coordination among SWPs and harmonises the maturity level of the outputs exchanged by the SWPs. The proposed mean of verification of each milestone will be a coordination meeting between the SWPs involved in each case. As a result of these meetings a milestone conclusion will be obtained with different statuses possible: Milestone achieved (SWP can start as plan); Milestone non-achieved (pending tasks to be solved before SWP can start). Milestones results will feed the risk management and mitigation actions framework as required, in order to ensure the overall recovery of the potential delays caused by the non-achieved milestones.

5.2.5 Risk management framework

At ALG, risk management is an integral part of every project. Specific processes have been developed to identify, assess, monitor and act upon risks as they arise. INTERACTION Risk management is the responsibility of the Project Manager and will be performed according to the already existing ALG Risk Management procedures which are in compliance with ISO 9001 and with CMMi Level 3. In order to secure the INTERACTION objectives and deliverables, the project will set up a risk management process that identifies risks and mitigation actions. The identification and classification of the risks, their impact on the project, the associated mitigation and contingency plans (with clear action setting, responsibility and schedule) will be prepared by the Project Manager with the WP managers and then reviewed and formalized

52


during the first Steering Committee meeting. The Project Manager will be in charge of making sure that risks are well identified and controlled. Regular feedback on risks will be made at the Steering Committee level. Each WP manager will be in charge of identifying and controlling risks within his/her WP. Identification of risk will be performed in two phases:

Preliminary identification during the proposal phase and initiation of the project;

Continuous updated list during the development of the project.

5.2.6 Case of serious disputes

In case of serious disputes among project partners, conflict resolution procedures will be initiated whereby the coordinator will advise the Steering Committee that it will have to meet in emergency session to discuss the conflict and reach a resolution. The Consortium believes that any conflicts should be resolved as speedily as possible so that within 21 days of notification by the Coordinator of the requirement for an emergency procedure, the Steering Committee will have to meet in session. The meeting will attempt to achieve full consensus on the resolution of the issue but in any case a majority vote will be taken to determine what resolution should be implemented. In circumstances of persistent and serious conflict that may jeopardise the continuation of the project, the Steering Committee will consider its options such as involving the EU Project Officer, seeking external advice followed by a review of the situation and the advice in emergency session for a collective decision in order to implement a final remedy of the issues involved.

5.2.7 Coordination with other European projects and international initiatives

As explained in sections 1.1 and 1.2 the INTERACTION project will propose a new concept and a set of innovative solutions representing progress beyond an existing and expected baseline mainly composed of the outcomes from other European innovation projects and International initiatives. Coordination between INTERACTION and these other projects and initiatives will be established at the required level, depending in each case on the level of relation between the projects in terms of concepts addressed and type of activities to be performed. Considering the scope of the concepts and solutions that INTERACTION will cover, an initial list of projects and initiatives has already been identified: SESAR, TITAN, ASSET, AAS, E-CAB and TASS, and initiatives headed by IATA, ACI and TIACA. Of special relevance is the European programme SESAR, which provides INTERACTION with important elements for the specific part of the baseline on the extension of the airport information sharing platform and the new decision support functions providing alerts and warnings relating to all processes and their interactions. These coordination activities will be headed by IBC, as INTERACTION Coordinator, and together with the contribution of all the partners, in particular those who are also participants in the projects to be coordinated with. Also relevant to INTERACTION is the European 7th FP project TITAN, which was finished by end February 2013, before the start of INTERACTION, and with whom coordination will be ensured by the participation of INECO (coordinator of TITAN). Some TITAN deliverables may be useful for INTERACTION.

5.3 Risk Management

The activities covered by risk management are detailed in the following sections.

Risk management is described in section 5.2.5.

5.3.1 Risk Identification

Risk identification is the first step in the risk assessment process. Risks cannot be managed until they are identified and described in an understandable way.

Each WP Leader is in charge of identifying new risks throughout the course of the project, supported by all contributors. In this way, mitigation actions will be established in advance, which will ensure the correct evolution and coordination of all the activities. For this purpose, a Risk register will be continuously updated in order to be attached to the Interim Project Report sent to the EC.

5.3.2 Risk Assessment

Once the risks are identified, a preliminary quantification provides some prioritization of risks for further evaluation. The risk owner determines the level of risk taking into account the following facts: the “likelihood of occurrence of the event”, the “severity of consequence if the event should occur”, which requires the risk owner to identify what the consequences are and the degree of impact.

53


The table below lists the risks initially identified to the correct execution of the project. These risks are manageable at project level. They are related to the access to background data and information necessary to build the baseline scenarios (i.e. the current environment and the state of the art) and to the integration of results obtained in the different project’s Work Packages.

An updated risk register will be included in the project’s progress reports (see Annex II), by integrating raising risks, changes to the impact or likelihood and evolution of the treatment actions. Within this risk register, all risks will be associated to the affected WP, as each WP leader is in charge of identifying risks and establishing treatment actions.

Risk ID

Risk Description incl. Cause

Impact / Consequence

Likelihood (1...4)

Severity (1…4)

WP/Risk Owner

Treatment Action Status

1 A participant fails to deliver work on time or delivers work of poor quality

Potential delays and poor quality of the final deliverables

2 3 All/ Project Coordinator and WP, SWP and Task leaders

Assurance from all the participants that deadlines and timescales can be met. The work package leader will report progress to each declared goal. In the event of recurrent underperformance, the work task will be reallocated.

open

2 Lack of involvement of the participants in the overall project.

Incomplete information and potential misunderstandings of processes, procedures and selected solutions


All participants are involved in each WP, at least to some extent. This ensures that they are all aware of the progress and results of the project at all times.

open

3 Stakeholders are not sufficiently involved

Potential delays and lack of visibility of real problems and the most suitable solutions


Frequent contact with stakeholders of industry should ensure stakeholder participation. We have already invested in the relationship with stakeholders to prevent this risk occurring.

open

4 Partners in disharmony could cause slippage in delivery time and/or impact the completeness of deliverables

Potential delays and incomplete deliverables


Additional meetings will be held to ensure that communication is established and maintained between the participants. In case of emergency, the Steering Committee will

open

54


hold special meetings to take decisions.

5 INTERACTION solutions are not in line with stakeholders needs

The proposed solutions do not improve the current situation and the aim of this project will not be fulfilled


Three working sessions will be organized with the advisory group composed of expert stakeholders. This will ensure that stakeholders’ needs are taken into account.

open

6 The regulatory framework has restrictive effects on the solutions proposed by INTERACTION

The proposed solutions cannot be implemented


All partners are involved in the airport industry and are experts in dealing with the impacted airport regulatory framework. For this reason, before the design of any solution a regulatory analysis will be performed to ensure that all solutions are aligned with current regulations. This activity is contemplated within SWP1.2.

open

7 Field trials cannot be performed.

The prototype cannot be fully validated and consequently could not be implemented

2 4 WP5/ WP, SWP and Task leaders

Instead of field trials a second real time human-in-the-loop simulation campaign will be performed.

open

8 Difficulties to integrate prototypes and platforms

Potential delays and impossibility of implementation

2 3 WP4, WP5/ WP, SWP and Task leaders

All the stakeholders involved in WP4 and WP5 will participate in the different Sub-WP to ensure integration is straightforward and on time.

open

Table 23: Risks

55


5.3.3 Risk Handling and Mitigation Actions

After risk identification and assessment, the first choice will always be to eliminate the risk, but this action will rarely be achievable. If a risk cannot be eliminated, then it will have to be handled properly. Actions must be taken to keep it to an acceptable level of uncertainty. Mitigation actions need to be foreseen if the risks materialize. Resources and time must be foreseen for this handling process.

5.3.4 Risk Monitoring and Control

The following actions will be put in place for guaranteeing risk monitoring and control:

Checking that execution of the planned actions is having the desired effect on the risks identified;

Watching for the early warning signs that a risk is developing;

Modelling trends, predicting potential risks;

Checking that the overall management of risk is being applied effectively;

Reporting on risk status, especially on risks with extra-project impact;

Risk management control means taking action to ensure that the events of the plan really happen.

5.4 Actions Management

ALG will maintain an Action Item Lists (AIL) recording all actions agreed with the European Commission. The action list will be updated regularly and will be accessible to all project partners as well as to the European Commission focal point via electronic means.

The objective of action item control is not limited to formal administration of recording, monitoring and accounting but has to be concentrated on the satisfaction of the actual information content.

Action items have to be closed in an appropriate and efficient way to avoid further questions from former AIs as well as unnecessary details. Action Items (AI’s) will only be closed and deleted from the action item list by mutual agreement between the originator and the actioner.

The Action Item Control procedure defines how to establish, distribute, monitor, report, and close action items in order to:

Provide a formal mean to establish and agree to action items;

Ensure unique numbering of AI with reference to the relevant minutes;

Allow complete documentation & distribution of agreed AI’s;

Record & monitor & report on status of agreed AI’s;

Track AI’s until satisfactory closure is provided by the originator;

Allow the use of common AI form sheet throughout the project;

Allow the usage of a computer programme to list AI’s.

The Action Item Status report will be provided in conjunction with every progress report. Actions will be tracked in a centralised action list, according to the specific details as outlined in the following table, which constitutes the Action List updated at the day of releasing this document.

The following table presents the current AIL:

56


No Action Origin Resp. Date Status Comments

1 Send Grant Agreement Form A to the European Commission

European Commission

Project Coordinator

Before 25

th

December 2013

Open Gather signatures from all partners

2 Assign persons to the Data controller and external Ethics advisor

European Commission

Project Coordinator

- Open

Table 24: Current Action Items List

5.5 Knowledge and communication Management

Dissemination and exploitation activities are under the Dissemination and Exploitation Manager’s responsibility, described in WP6 (see 3.6). INTERACTION will pay particular attention to achieving a wide impact through the project results. For this reason a set of dissemination and exploitation activities has been planned, in order to increase its potential impact.

5.5.1 Communication and Dissemination Plan

Within WP6, a Communication and dissemination plan will be developed and delivered on 31st December

2013. It will include the definition and planning of all the dissemination activities.

It has to be mentioned that a dedicated public website will be set up before 31st December 2013. It will

consist of one part open to the public and one internal to the project for continuous exchange of results and information. The private area will allow sharing of confidential information among partners and facilitating the collaboration of the consortium. The public area will ensure sharing non-confidential project results with interested groups

All substantial communication actions, including any written material, are subject to approval by all partners. The European Commission will be previously informed of all these actions. Material must be sent for approval to the European Commission only when these dissemination actions will take place outside Europe.

57


6 References

[1] INTERACTION Consortium Agreement, 17th September 2013

[2] INTERACTION Grant Agreement – Annex I Description of Work, 19th September 2013

58


Annex I List of Members of the Consortium and its Governance Bodies

Role Company Person

Project Coordinator IBC Joan Miquel Vilardell

Project Manager ALG Rubén Martínez

Administrative Manager ALG Núria Alsina

Scientific Coordinator ALG Rubén Martínez

WP1 Leader IBC Joan Miquel Vilardell

WP2 Leader INECO Francisco Javier Fernández de Líger

WP3 Leader AIB Diego Alonso Tabares

WP4 Leader INDRA Juan Francisco García

WP5 Leader AIA Nikolaos Papagiannopoulos

WP6 Leader ALG Rubén Martínez

Table 25. INTERACTIOM List of Members

Steering Committee

Company Person

IBC Joan Miquel Vilardell

INDRA Juan Francisco García

AEE Harris Markopoulos

AID Axel Dengler

AIA Nikolaos Papagiannopoulos

AH Maurits Beerepoot

INECO Laura Serrano

PLD Daniel Martinez

TK Javier Sesma

TLD Laurent Decoux

UAB Miquel Angel Piera Eroles

AIB Diego Alonso Tabares

ALG Rubén Martínez

Table 26. Steering Committee members

The INTERACTION Data Controller will be Martin Dacal from the INDRA’s LOPD office.

59


Annex II Risk Register

INTERACTION Risk Register

BEIJING BILBAO BUENOS AIRES CARACAS DUBAI LIMA LISBON LONDON MADRID MEXICO CITY MILANO PARIS RABAT SAO PAULO

Rubén Martínez

[email protected]

www.alg-global.com

BARCELONA Tanger 98, 3ª planta 08018 Barcelona (Spain) Tel: (+34) 93 430 4016 Fax: (+34) 93 363 0623

[email protected]

interaction d1.1 pmp_v2.0

Documents

project schedule

project management plan

interaction project

project scope

fp7 project

project execution

project work plan

management structure