Figure 5- 3: Open & Closed STARs
Note: Neither of these diagrams should be construed as a preference for either Closed or Open STARs. The implications of radio communication failure (RCF) are different depending on whether STARs are open or closed. As such, RCF would have to beconsidered.
T
e
r
m
i
n
a
l
A
i
r
s
p
a
c
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
-
P
a
r
t
C

S
T
R
I
K
I
N
G
T
H
E
B
A
L
A
N
C
E

Figure 5- 4, whilst oriented towards Routes and Holding Areas repeats the theme of a similar diagram in Part A of this document. It has been inserted to draw designers’ attention to the fact that the design of terminal routes and Holds is rapidly becoming a major challenge in Terminal Airspace increasingly constrained by national boundaries, environmental needs and competing user requirements.
Seldom are these competing interests as evident as when seeking to relocate or design new terminal routes and holds at the most suitable place for Air Traffic Management purposes. Frequently, the most appropriate placement of a route for ATC does not necessarily meet the requirements of an adjacent Terminal Airspace and/or environmental or user needs. Thus a trade off is required.
Mindful that sustaining capacity is already a challenge in some ECAC Terminal Airspaces, it is impossible to over-state the need for a collaborative approach between adjacent Terminal Airspaces and between users, ATC and Airport Operators and/or other environmental interest groups when designing terminal routes. ( See Part A, Chapter 2, General Principles). Thus before embarking upon the design of terminal routes and Holding Areas, Terminal Airspace designers require clear directions as to whether, and to what extent, Environmental and User requirements are to be taken into account and when this consultation should occur.

T
e
r
m
i
n
a
l
A
i
r
s
p
a
c
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
-
P
a
r
t
C

In view of the above, it is stressed again that a collaborative approach to design is required. Once the routes and holds have been created and are available for use – as agreed collaboratively between all parties – they should be used in accordance with the conditions agreed by all parties.

Mandatory Consultation Process: In some countries where a mandatory consultation process exists, Terminal Airspace development can be discontinued because of a failure to comply with this consultation process.
5
.
4
G
U
I
D
E
L
I
N
E
S

In this section, Design Guidelines for terminal routes and Holding Areas are described with a view to creating a conceptual design based on certain assumptions, enablers and constraints.
Guidelines related to terminal routes are preceded by an “R” and those to concerning Holding Areas, by an “H”. They are not prioritised.
Whilst, for the most part, the Guidelines for the Design of terminal routes and Holding Areas concentrate upon IFR flights, many of the notions contained in these design guidelines apply equally to terminal routes promulgated for use by VFR flights. This said however, special mention is made of route planning for VFR use where appropriate.
These Design Guidelines are based on three assumptions:
Assumption 1: An air traffic control service is provided and Radar Surveillance is available within the Terminal Airspace;
　
中國(guó)航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：EUROCONTROL MANUAL FOR AIRSPACE PLANNING 2(37)