曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙
網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者
naturally look after what they perceive to be
their own interests, which may be defensive
and short-termist. ANSPs, as Hendricks
points out, are powerful lobbyists, and have
the ear of local politicians.
Meanwhile, it is possible that the regional
groupings, in the process of negotiating internal
changes, may achieve on a smaller scale
some of the objectives that Europe, as a much
larger region, requires. But if the basic characteristic
of this local practice is protectionism, it
is a fundamental barrier to progress.
In the end, Europe needs to confi rm at a
high level whether it wants the ATM and environmental
effi ciency conferred by a Single
European Sky. If it does, it needs to provide
the powers at Commission level to do what
it takes to guide governments and ANSPs
along that path, because individual states
will not go there without guidance.
constitutional issues, and often raises legal
and industrial issues. In all cases, proposed
airspace restructuring – unless contained
within national borders – can be at least contentious
and at worst politically diffi cult. It is
a simple reality that signifi cant changes to
Europe’s plural ATM systems remain subject
to political decision-making, with the possible
exception of the UK’s National Air Traffi c
Services, which has been part-privatised.
The need for airspace to be designed
functionally is accepted, and it was adopted
as an objective in 2001. Nothing of that precise
vision, however, has been realised so far,
while various developments that are evolving
at present may not result in FABs of the
type that were originally envisaged. There
are nine groups of neighbouring countries
that are negotiating ATM alliances, but in the
presently proposed form they could still end
up as political rather than functional groupings,
even if fewer in number than the list of
EUROCONTROL Member States.
Rather than considering regional needs for
airspace restructuring to take into account
actual traffi c fl ows and potential demand,
let alone for more environmentally effi cient
routeings, groups of countries with contingent
borders are negotiating to strike alliance
agreements that may or may not lead to
internal airspace redesign within the group.
If they do achieve functional airspace
restructuring internally – and that is not
guaranteed – the problem may still remain
that they will have large external borders
contingent with other groups. So, politically,
rather than functionally, devised borders
would live on. And there is at least a risk,
according to Alex Hendricks, EUROCONTROL’s
deputy director of network development,
that the ineffi ciencies associated with
national fragmentation within Europe’s
airspace may be perpetuated, even if the
number of units involved has been reduced
from 38 to nine.
The groups involved in this proposed
partitioning include:
u NEFAB: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland,
Latvia, Norway, Sweden
u NUAC: Denmark, Sweden
u Baltic FAB: Lithuania, Poland
u FABEC: Belgium, France, Germany,
Luxembourg, Maastricht Upper Area
Control Centre, Netherlands, Switzerland
u FABCE: Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovak
Republic, Slovenia
u DANUBE: Bulgaria, Romania
u BLUE MED: Cyprus, Greece, Italy and
Malta, with Albania, Egypt, Jordan and
Tunisia as observers
Europe needs to
confi rm at a high
level whether it
wants the ATM and
environmental
effi ciency conferred
by a Single
European Sky
we’re not just off the ground
we’re everywhere
Everywhere in the air safety industry – we are there.
Iridium has more equipment installed on aircraft than any other satellite
service provider and is continuously evolving to support the industry
demands of today and into the future.
Iridium is the only communications network capable of offering critical
flight safety communications around the globe, including Polar Regions.
The Iridium network’s high availability, ubiquitous coverage, and
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：
Reaching for the Single European Sky(87)
