Home

Results 1 - 10 of 149,362 for similarities. Search took 3.732 seconds.  
Sort by date/Sort by relevance
GCAA has established a permanent Working Group “Call Sign Similarity” whose focus it is to provide an effective platform to discuss and propose solutions for the topic of “Call Sign Similarity/Confusion” involving all aviation stakeholders. (...) DISCUSSION Establishing a National ‘Call Sign Similarity’ Task Force 2.1 Acknowledging that Call Sign Similarity has the potential of being a safety concern, the U.A.E. (...) The goal is to minimize the occurrence a call sign similarity but also how to deal with the occurrence, if a call sign similarity has been identified. 3.
Language:English
Score: 571832 - https://www.icao.int/MID/MIDAN...ll%20Sign%20Simiarity%20TF.pdf
Data Source: un
Only when such a Runway at ADEP or ADES? Similarity Rules - Single C/S (Level Z)  Single C/S similar to …  Similarity to Aerodrome  For C/S with 2-final letters  E.g. (...) Local?  Similarity to Squawk  Values 0001 - 7777  Relevance?  Similarity to VHF frequencies  For flight id of format nnnn  Values 1180 to 1369 (118.0 MHz to 136.9 MHz)  … Similarity Rules - Single C/S (Level Z)  Other similarity in single C/S  Letter visually similar to Digit  E.g.
Language:English
Score: 569283.2 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...15/CSC%20WG1/2-CSS%20Rules.pdf
Data Source: un
Mitigation Measures for Call Sign Confusions and Similarities Call Sign Similarity Rules EUROCONTROL 6 3. Mitigation Measures for Call Sign Confusions and Similarities Call Sign Similarity Tool EUROCONTROL 7 3. Mitigation Measures for Call Sign Confusions and Similarities Call Sign Similarity Performance Monitoring EUROCONTROL - END-
Language:English
Score: 564998.8 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...20list%20of%20WPs-IPs-PPTs.pdf
Data Source: un
The expansion of these airlines contained the adoption of similar flight planning principles used for callsign selection with certain destinations or routes. (...) During the period of the campaign SMS’s were sent to operational staff over a period of 20 days. 2.3.2 Incorporation of similar callsigns within the SZC Emergency & Competency Training (ECT) - During the 2013 & 2014 ECT similar callsigns were incorporated within the simulation exercises to raise awareness of the issues related to similar callsigns. Statistics were captured and distributed to the ATCO’s by SMS: Similar Callsigns: I. 146 Cases of Similar callsigns II. 94 advised – 64% III. 52 not advised – 36% 2.3.3 Local Air Traffic Service Instructions (LATSI) References – Incorporation of procedures associated with callsign confusion: Point 2.9.4 - ’When a sector is manned by an Executive Controller and a Planner, the responsibilities of the Planner are as follows: (i) Point out similar callsigns to the Executive Controller’.
Language:English
Score: 562997.3 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...WP2%20-%20UAE%20Experience.pdf
Data Source: un
The CSC WG developed Draft Safety Enhancement Initiative (SEI) and Detailed Implementation Plans (DIPs) related to call sign similarity/confusion of which DIP 4 item 2 calls for the development of call sign similarity rules and guidance material. (...) The following table provides details on the similarity rules adopted by the MID Region. MID Region Call Sign Similarity Rules Based on the EUROCONTROL - OPS NM18.5 (currently 21 rules implemented in the EUROCONTROL Call Sign Similarity Tool (CSST) OPS as Global recommended rules). The following similarity rules are recommended by the CSS User Group.
Language:English
Score: 562283.84 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...ASG-MID6/WP%2026%20-%20CSC.pdf
Data Source: un
The CSC WG developed Draft Safety Enhancement Initiative (SEI) and Detailed Implementation Plans (DIPs) related to call sign similarity/confusion of which DIP 4 item 2 calls for the development of call sign similarity rules and guidance material. (...) The following table provides details on the similarity rules adopted by the MID Region. MID Region Call Sign Similarity Rules Based on the EUROCONTROL - OPS NM18.5 (currently 21 rules implemented in the EUROCONTROL Call Sign Similarity Tool (CSST) OPS as Global recommended rules). The call sign similarity rules are divided into three categories: Level One, Two and Three.
Language:English
Score: 561815.14 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Documents/2014/RASG-MID4/WP25.pdf
Data Source: un
The following table provides details on the similarity rules adopted by the MID Region. MID Region Call Sign Similarity Rules Based on the EUROCONTROL - OPS NM18.5 (currently 21 rules implemented in the EUROCONTROL Call Sign Similarity Tool (CSST) OPS as Global recommended rules). (...) ABC 224 KF vs ABC 36 KF ABC 36 KF vs ABC 528 KF AG67 Call Sign Similarity Rules General Similarity Rules (Applicable to flights within a single AO schedule, i.e. (...) ATM SG/3-WP/28 APPENDIX D D-3 Instructions Description of the requirement Example Visual Aural Similarity Not to consider same or similar flight numbers when airlines letter designators are visually similar or telephony designators are aurally confusing with respect to other airlines.
Language:English
Score: 560583.5 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Documents/2017/ATM%20SG3/WP28.pdf
Data Source: un
The CSC WG developed Draft Safety Enhancement Initiative (SEI) and Detailed Implementation Plans (DIPs) related to call sign similarity/confusion of which DIP 4 item 2 calls for the development of call sign similarity rules and guidance material. (...) The following table provides details on the similarity rules adopted by the MID Region. MID Region Call Sign Similarity Rules Based on the EUROCONTROL - OPS NM18.5 (currently 21 rules implemented in the EUROCONTROL Call Sign Similarity Tool (CSST) OPS as Global recommended rules). The call sign similarity rules are divided into three categories: Level One, Two and Three.
Language:English
Score: 558490.33 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...RSC%2004-Call%20sign%20SA,.pdf
Data Source: un
EUROCONTROL Call Sign Similarity Project Call Sign Similarity Performance Monitoring ICAO MID Region 1st Call Sign Confusion Ad-hoc Working Group Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates 16- 18 February 2015 Richard Lawrence Call Sign Similarity Project Manager NMD/NOM/SAF Objectives • Provide visibility of what measures are being adopted by each of the AOs. • Monitor and verify the performance and efficiency of the CSS Tool. • Assist with fine-tuning of the CSS Tool parameters. Operational and Safety Performance Monitoring – Priorities  Priorities based on 2 conditions: Type of report:   Similarity or   Confusion  Status of AOs reporting:   CSS Participating or   CSS Non‐Participating     Applied Principles: Confusion priority over Similarity, and Participating over Non‐Participating   Operational and Safety Performance Monitoring Proposed Priorities  Priority 1:   Call sign confusion reports ‐ both AOs participating  Priority 2:  Call sign confusion reports when one AO is participating and  the other is not participating    Priority 3:  Call sign similarity reports when both AOs are  participating/using the CSS Service/Tool   Priority 4:  Call sign similarity reports when one AO is participating and  other is non‐participating   Priority 5:  Call sign confusion reports when both AOs are non‐ participating (reports may be received via EVAIR).  55 CSS Tool - Performance Monitoring AIRCRAFT OPERATOR CSMC Similarity and Confusion CSST Occurrence Analysis EVAIR Recording and Safety Analysis Notification & Liaison Safety Ops/Safety Ops/Flight Scheduling Liaison EUROCONTROL ANSP ATCO Pilot Similarity & Confusion Reports & Feedback Similarity & Confusion Reports & Feedback Liaison EVAIR – EUROCONTROL Voluntary ATM Incident Reporting  CSST Users 6 0 2 6 25 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No of AOs using the CSST 2008-2014 AOs using the tool ANSP Reporting 7 3 4 9 13 17 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No of ANSPs CSS/C data providers 2008-2014 AO affected 8 104 70 101 351 539 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 A bs ol ut e fig ur es Number of AOs Identified by ANSPs with the CSS/C 2008 - 2014 Aos CSST User v CSST non-User 9 0.00000 5.00000 10.00000 15.00000 20.00000 25.00000 CSS Non Tool Users CSC Non Tool Users CSS Tool Users CSC Tool Users N um be r o f e ve nt s pe r 1 0. 00 0 fli gh ts CSS/C Users and Non Tool users 2009 - 2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Intra – v Inter AO CSS/C 10 14.7 17.6 9 14.2 74.8 85.3 82.4 91 85.8 25.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 CSS/C btw diff AOs % CSS/C within the same AOs % Yearly Percentage of CSS/C within the same and between different AOs  2010 ‐ 2014 Qualitative views  CSST – Users like it!  No complaints about operational safety effectiveness. 11 CSST Endorsement 12 Main Lessons Learnt  Call sign similarity v confusion – be clear  It’s not an exact science!
Language:English
Score: 557256.5 - https://www.icao.int/MID/Docum...20Performance%20Monitoring.pdf
Data Source: un
DISCUSSION 2.1 The project was presented to the RASG-MID/4 Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, 30 March – 1 April 2015. 2.2 The UAE presented during the MIDANPIRG/16 the initiative they had taken to address Call Sign Similarity Mitigation. The GCAA established its UAE National Airspace Advisory Committee (NASAC) Working Group on “Call Sign Similarity” in 2014 to manage and mitigate this challenge and continues to work on and promote the use of alpha numerical call signs. 2.3 The UAE through its NASAC WG ‘Call Sign Similarity’ work published the U.A.E. (...) The denial of landing or departure flight plans with alpha numeric call signs results in the flight having to remain on the commercial call sign for the entire flight which may contribute to incidents of call sign confusion in enroute FIRs of the aircraft flight plan. 2.9 ICAO issued state letter Ref: AN 6/34-16/173 dated June 2016, requesting states to implement MIDANPIRG Conclusion 15/2 and report call sign Similarity cases. 2.10 Reporting of call sign Similarity/confusion continues to be a challenge in the region. (...) ACTION BY THE MEETING 3.1 The meeting is invited to: a) support the CSC initiatives ensuring effective national implementation and cooperation; b) encourage other regions to implement the use of alpha numeric call signs for ATC use c) discuss resolution of airport reluctance to accept ANCS to identify ways to overcome this issue d) take note of and support the work of the UAE e) encourage the set-up of a national ‘Call Sign Similarity Working Group’ f) report call sign similarity to the following email addresses: MIDCSC@icao.int and MENACSSU@iata.org - END -
Language:English
Score: 553870.6 - https://www.icao.int/MID/MIDAN...s/MID17%20and%20RASG7/WP46.pdf
Data Source: un