CAA SERVICE GOALS 2004
In conjunction with government budget proceedings, parliament
approved and the Council of State set out the following service
and other operational objectives for the CAA:
The aim of the CAA is to provide the airport and air navigation
services needed by the aviation sector as efficiently and
economically as possible whilst promoting safety.
The CAA manages the appropriate supply of services in accordance
with business practice. The CAA provides its services in order
to ensure that the conditions for commercial aviation at its
airports are good and that as few delays to air traffic as
possible occur through the CAA’s own activities.
Finland’s airports and its air navigation system are
maintained and developed as a single entity to meet the demand
for their services.
The CAA is aiming for a profit before balance sheet transfers
of 7.9 million euros.
The Ministry of Transport and Communications set the CAA
the objective of participating in the development of crisis
response capabilities for the aviation sector within the framework
of Nato, in a manner closely agreed with the Ministry of Transport
and Communications’ own response. In regard to this
objective, we can state that a representative of the CAA took
part in a conference on this matter and reported on it to
the Ministry of Transport and Communications.
In addition the Ministry of Transport and Communications
set separate operational objectives for the CAA’s Flight
Safety Authority for 2004. The Flight Safety Authority has
submitted a separate report on these objectives to the Ministry
of Transport and Communications.
Safety of Airport and Air Navigation
Services
No aviation accidents (class AA) or serious incidents (class
A) occurred as a result of CAA actions during 2004. Some serious
incidents are still under investigation and may cause changes
in the seriousness categories, and thus the figures given
below.
CAA safety officials investigated 146 of the cases reported
to it during 2004. It was desired to determine the quality
of CAA actions in these cases irrespective of the cause of
the anomaly or contributory factors. Of these, 18 were incidents
of air safety category B class, compared with 26 in 2003.
The rest concerned various degrees and types of anomalies
or other reported incidents.
The Civil Aviation Administration organisation has been able
to react to every anomalous incident quickly and exhaustively.
The accident investigation unit has not recommended any improvements
in CAA operations in its investigation reports.
The internal system for detecting and reporting anomalous
situations forms the backbone of the CAA’s safety monitoring
system. In order to improve the collection and dissemination
of information the CAA set up a project in November 2004 to
computerise the PHI system during 2005. As part of the project,
in December 2004 the CAA surveyed users’ opinions and
suggestions for improvement after seven years of use
Analysis of the results is continuing.
The safety objectives of the airports and air navigation
system were achieved.
Passenger Security
Security checks on aircraft passengers during the year were
carried out with scrupulous adherence to European Union and
Finnish official regulations. A number of officially required
measures were taken during the year to increase the effectiveness
of the security inspection process. The expansion to the international
terminal at Helsinki-Vantaa Airport (the facilities for passengers
to non-Schengen countries) is estimated to have cost about
4 million euros more because of the regulation structures
and extra equipment that had to be installed to handle passengers
and their luggage.
Despite these stricter measures it was possible to keep the
costs of security inspections to a very reasonable level by
European standards, although overall the security checks at
Finnish airports cost almost 17 million euros a year. The
security inspection charge for a departing passenger based
on cost is 2.71 euros, which is low by international standards.
Air Traffic Delays
According to statistics compiled by the Eurocontrol organisation,
5.7 % of flights over Finnish airspace were delayed because
of restrictions imposed by Air Traffic Control (2.8 % in 2003).
Of these, 94 % were delays of less than 4 minutes. In certain
situations, Air Traffic Control will limit the number of departing
or arriving flights in order to ensure the safe use of capacity.
In Finland in 2004, 65 % of the delays were caused by knock-on
effects from abroad and 35 % were of Finnish origin.
Restrictions imposed by Finnish air navigation services led
to delays to 2.3 % of flights (0.2 % in 2003), with the average
delay to all flights amounting to 22 seconds. The reason for
the rise in the number of delays caused by Finnish air navigation
measures was the lower than normal handling capacity of the
Tampere Area Control Centre. This was a deliberate measure
to facilitate the introduction of a new air navigation system
installed at the end of October 2004 (54 % of delays). As
the system was phased in it was possible gradually to restore
capacity to normal, eliminating all traffic delays caused
by air navigation procedures. Overall, the introduction of
the new system went well. The second most important reason
for the delays (28 %) was that incoming flights to Helsinki-Vantaa
Airport overloaded its capacity during peak hours when the
runway was being repaired during the summer. Technical problems
with various systems caused 11 % of delays while the weather
caused 4 % and undermanning caused 3 %. Despite restricted
operations caused by the introduction of new systems and the
repairs to Helsinki-Vantaa’s auxiliary runway, the delays
caused by Finnish air navigation and airport procedures amount
to only about a third of the European average. Flights in
Finland are punctual.
CAA Efficiency
The efficiency of the CAA’s
main services, i.e. the airport and air navigation services,
is measured by the personnel work-years expended against the
performance of the task.
The efficiency of CAA operations as measured in terms of
personnel years per passenger improved by 9.8 % in 2004 compared
with 2003. The number of flights as measured by working years
also improved by 9.1 %.
The costs of airport services – maintenance and capital
costs – increased from 2003 to 2004 by 4.8 %. The growth
was a result of entering demolition resulting from construction
work as costs, and also an increase in repair and maintenance
work. Since the volume of passengers increased by 10.8 %,
the unit performance cost fell by 5.4 %. The operating profit
on airport services fell by 0.7 million euros.
The cost of air navigation services rose from 2003 to 2004
by 7.8 %. The increase was mainly caused by the adoption of
the Eurocat air navigation system. Since the number of flights
increased by 10.1 % the unit performance cost fell by 2.1
%. Operating profit on air navigation services improved by
2.6 million euros but still remained in the negative.
This will undoubtedly become evident in both its domestic
and international relations. The role of Finnish aviation
authority will transfer to a new body whereas the CAA enterprise
will concentrate on providing services. Both organisations
will continue to require a high level of expertise.
Air Traffic Charges And Airport Opening Times
It has been a long term goal of the CAA to keep price changes
to 70 % of inflation at most. The general level of traffic
fees did not change in 2004. The favourable traffic trend
made it possible to reduce scheduled traffic charges by 10
% in August. Scheduled flights were also supported with discounts
during the summer and in places it was possible to continue
this support until the end of the year. Taking into account
these discounts, there was a change of –2.3 %. in CAA
service charges during 2004.
At the beginning of 2004 the airport air navigation charge
structure was altered to bring unit charges in line with the
standard of air navigation services provided by each airport.
Airports in the highest service category are those providing
radar-based air navigation services round the clock or during
peak traffic periods. These airports are in the main open
all day long.
The next category includes airports providing process-based
approach control services combined with aerodrome control.
These handle somewhat less traffic but are still busy enough
to require stacking procedures. On average these airports
are open 16 hours a day on weekdays and 15 hours a day at
weekends. Although these opening times are designed to cope
with scheduled traffic, the airports in question had to extend
their opening times considerably on 260 days during 2004 because
of last minute timetable changes and various delays.
The third category of airports offer the Flight Information
Service (AFIS), since they handle significantly lower operational
volumes and there is usually no need for stacking. Their hours
of opening are restricted to the minimum and may consist of
several periods of a few hours each. The average opening time
for these airports was six hours a day. Yet even these airports
had to extend their published opening times on more than 150
days.
Passengers’ Views On Service
The CAA regularly surveys passengers’ opinions of
service standards. Polls are carried out twice a year, during
the winter and summer travel seasons. From the results for
2004 we can state that the quality of airport services has
remained high (5.76 on a scale of 1–7). Compared with
the results for 2003 (5.81) this was a shade weaker but the
difference is statistically insignificant.
The service mentality of the staff and security control were
the best-rated factors. The airports with the best overall
ratings were Kajaani, Ivalo, Joensuu and Helsinki-Vantaa.
For the first three of these there has been an extremely positive
change. Renovation work at some airports has impinged on passenger
comfort to some extent (at Jyväskylä Airport, among
others).
Meeting Environmental Targets
The CAA was one of twelve enterprises under the Ministry
of Transport and Communications whose environmental management
systems were assessed by the ministry during the review year.
The evaluation focused on working methods related to these
environmental systems and the possibilities for improving
them, and not on their environmental effects, that is, the
efficacy of these activities.
According to the assessment, the CAA’s strengths were
the clear structure of its environmental system and its active,
centralised environmental organisation. The environmental
steering group, which meets once a month, was regarded as
committed and cooperation with those responsible for environmental
matters at the airports worked well. It was felt that there
was room for development in bringing the environmental management
closer to the overall management system, which would help
in focusing resources. More effective use of auditing and
management reviews were also regarded as essential for the
development of the environmental system. The organisation
of and funding for the CAA’s environmental affairs were
said to be of a good standard for the whole administrative
sector, and these activities were seen to be comprehensive
and well documented.
The environmental requirements set by society are accomplished
through the number and quality of the stipulations set out
in the environmental permits for airports. The CAA continues
its active cooperation with the environmental authorities
during 2004. The CAA had applied for environmental permits
for four airports by the end of the review year, in accordance
with the environmental protection Act (86/2000). A decision
has been made on the need for permits for six other airports
and on the application timetable. The first permit decision
is expected during the spring of 2005 and will concern Tampere-Pirkkala
Airport.
Diagrams:
|
