Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

(1)

IN THE FIELD OF TECHNOLOGY DEGREE PROJECT

VEHICLE ENGINEERING

AND THE MAIN FIELD OF STUDY INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2018,

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

A Multilevel Perspective

KRISTOFFER SEGERSTEN

KEREN ZHAI

(2)

IN

DEGREE PROJECT INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2018,

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

A Multilevel Perspective

KRISTOFFER SEGERSTEN KEREN ZHAI

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(3)

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services: A Multilevel Perspective

by

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2018:385 KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

Industrial Management SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM

(4)

Utmaningar för fjärrstyrda flygtrafiktjänster:

Ett multinivåperspektiv av

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Examensarbete TRITA-ITM-EX 2018:385 KTH Industriell teknik och management

Industriell ekonomi och organisation SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM

(5)

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2018:385

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services: A Multilevel Perspective

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Approved

2018-06-06

Examiner

Pernilla Ulfvengren

Supervisor

Vikash Sinha

Commissioner

Saab Digital Air Traffic Solutions via Implement Consulting Group

Contact person

Anders Adrem;

Johan Klintberg

Abstract

Air traffic services (ATS) play an important role for flight safety. Remote air traffic services (RATS) represent a novel, more digitalized, ATS solution. In some aspects, RATS can be argued to outperform conventional ATS. However, as it entails various sociotechnical obstacles, making RATS the dominant solution for ATS is challenging.

An inadequate awareness of such sociotechnical obstacles potentially impedes the competitiveness of RATS in general and the RATS providers in particular. This study intends to - from a sociotechnical perspective - identify main obstacles as faced by RATS when aspiring to become the dominant solution for ATS. In order to identify such obstacles, an abductive case study has been conducted. Empirical data was primarily gathered by semi-structured interviews with 10 key stakeholders involved, directly or indirectly, with RATS. The study is delimited to principally gather empirics from Sweden and the United Kingdom. Theoretical concepts of Large Technical Systems (LTS) and the Multilevel Perspective (MLP) are employed to understand and analyze the empirical data. The identified obstacles faced by RATS are mapped into the different levels of the MLP. Obstacles have been identified in all levels of the MLP. The most prominent obstacles seem to lay in social aspects of change processes, a proposition-perception gap, and connectivity infrastructure dependency.

Key-words

Remote air traffic services, remote tower, air traffic service, air traffic control, Multilevel Perspective, Large Technical System, sociotechnical obstacles

(6)

Examensarbete TRITA-ITM-EX 2018:385

Utmaningar för fjärrstyrda

flygtrafiktjänster: Ett multinivåperspektiv

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Godkänt

2018-06-06

Examinator

Pernilla Ulfvengren

Handledare

Vikash Sinha

Uppdragsgivare

Saab Digital Air Traffic Solutions via Implement Consulting Group

Kontaktperson

Anders Adrem;

Johan Klintberg

Sammanfattning

Flygtrafiktjänster (ATS) spelar en viktig roll för flygsäkerhet. Fjärrstyrda flygtrafiktjänster (RATS) representerar en ny, i högre grad digitaliserad, lösning för ATS. I vissa

avseenden kan RATS anses prestera bättre än konventionellt utförda flygtrafiktjänster.

Vägen mot ett tillstånd där RATS är den dominerande lösningen för RATS är dock kantad av olika sociotekniska utmaningar. En otillräcklig medvetenhet om dessa utmaningar kan potentiellt minska konkurrenskraften för RATS i allmänhet och för utvecklare av RATS i synnerhet. Denna studie syftar till att, från ett sociotekniskt perspektiv, identifiera utmaningar som RATS står inför i, en situation där RATS ämnar ta steg mot att bli den dominerande lösningen för ATS. För att identifiera sådana utmaningar har en abduktiv fallstudie utförts. Empirisk data samlades huvudsakligen in genom semi-strukturerade intervjuer med 10 intressenter, direkt eller indirekt

involverade, i RATS. Studien är avgränsad till att huvudsakligen samla in empirisk data från Sverige och Storbritannien. Teoretiska ramverk och begrepp beträffande Large Technical Systems (LTS) och Multilevel Perspective (MLP) används för att förstå och analysera empirisk data. De identifierade utmaningarna kopplas till de olika nivåerna i MLP. Utmaningar har identifierats i alla nivåer av MLP, och de mest framstående utmaningarna tycks ligga i sociala aspekter av förändringsprocesser, ett gap mellan proposition och perception, samt ett beroende av uppkopplingsinfrastruktur.

Nyckelord

Fjärrstyrda flygtrafiktjänster, fjärrstyrda torn, flygtrafiktjänster, flygtrafikledning, Multilevel Perspective, Large Technical System, sociotekniska utmaningar

(7)

Acknowledgements

This master’s thesis was conducted at the department of Industrial Engineering and Management faculty at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden, and was performed from January 2018 until June 2018.

We would like to thank our supervisor Vikash Sinha at KTH Royal Institute of Tech- nology, for providing us very valuable and much appreciated advice and guidance.

We would also like to express our sincerest gratitude to the commissioners of this study, Anders Adrem at Implement consulting group and Johan Klintberg at Saab digital air traffic solutions, for giving us the opportunity to embark on this journey, and for always providing us the needed support.

Further, we want to thank all interviewees for dedicating their time to be part of the study and sharing their valuable opinions.

Finally, a special thanks goes out to our families for their support during the course of this work.

Kristo↵er Segersten and Keren Zhai Stockholm, June 2018

(8)

List of figures

Figure 1. Multiple airport usage of the RATS concept...4

Figure 2. RATS supply chain...6

Figure 3. ATC as part of the LTS of aviation (Geels, 2006)...9

Figure 4. Multilevel Perspective (Geels, 2007)...11

Figure 5. Visual representation of the research methodology ...15

Figure 6. Identified obstacles in the MLP...49

(12)

List of tables

Table 1. List of consulted interviewees...17 Table 2. Overview of obstacles...40

(13)

Abbreviations

ANSP - Air Traffic Service Provider ATC - Air Traffic Control

ATM - Air Traffic Management ATS - Air Traffic Service LTS - Large Technical System MLP - Multilevel Perspective RATS - Remote Air Traffic Service RTC - Remote Tower Center

(14)

1 Introduction

Aiming to introduce the study, this chapter provides a background description, the problematization and research question. It also delimits the scope of the study.

1.1 Background

Air traffic services (ATS) are services that facilitate for safe, secure and well-organized movement of aircraft, by regulating as well as assisting air traffic in real-time. Organized ATS has been an important part of aviation since at least the late 1930s, when technology advancements - primarily in aircraft instrumentation and navigation systems - lead to increased flying, in turn yielding more congested airspaces around certain airports (Nolan, 2010). As argued by Gawade and Zhang (2016), technology development has had a prominent impact throughout the history of ATS. Today, significant improve- ments in digital technology o↵er the opportunity to change the way in which ATS is conducted. In conjunction with technological advancements, substantial growth in air traffic is expected over the coming decades (SESAR, 2018), leading to challenges for ATS.

The conventional configuration of ATS is to have air traffic controllers physically present at towers for ATS, overlooking the airport and its surrounding airspace. Challenging this conventional setting is a solution that has been brought forth in recent years – the Remote air traffic service (RATS). The basic concept of RATS is to supply ATS to one or multiple airports by providing services like communication, navigation, and surveillance from a remote location. This is anticipated to provide improved service capabilities, reduced costs, and improved safety at airports compared to conventional solutions (Adrem and Klintberg, 2018a; Van Beek, 2017).

Although it in certain aspects outperforms conventional ATS, RATS is faced with various sociotechnical related obstacles, making it challenging for RATS to replace conventional ATS (Adrem and Klintberg, 2018a). Seeing ATS as part of the large technical system (LTS) that is aviation, the obstacles faced by RATS may be described from a sociotechnical viewpoint. From such an outset, the multilevel perspective (MLP) constitutes an analytical framework for mapping the obstacles. The usefulness of the MLP in the analysis of LTS has proven large in several case studies, including highway systems (Geels, 2007), electricity systems (Verbong and Geels, 2007) and low-carbon transitions (Geels, 2012), suggesting applicability also for the case of RATS.

Commissioner - Saab Digital Air Traffic Solutions

Saab Digital Air Traffic Solutions (SDATS) was established in 2016 as a joint venture between Saab Group and Luftfartsverket (LFV). Saab Group is a Swedish aerospace and military equipment company, while LFV is the Civil Aviation Administration of Sweden, and the largest air traffic management (ATM) services actor in the country,

(15)

for both civil and military aviation. The purpose of SDATS is described by Micael Jo- hansson (head of Saab business area Surveillance): “[SDATS] will bring together Saab’s world-leading technological know-how and global organisation with LFV’s unique expertise in delivering innovative, digital and certified operational solutions within air traffic control. This will allow the company to serve as a leading partner to guide customers through the entire process for the successful conversion to digital air traffic services”

(Luftfartsverket, 2017).

Saab and LFV have already (in 2015) installed a fully operational RATS system in Ornsk¨oldsvik, Sweden - the world’s first (Saab, 2017). However, the road towards estab-¨ lishing RATS as a widely-accepted solution for ATS is not straightforward, and entails various obstacles (Adrem and Klintberg, 2018a). An investigation of which the obstacles are can therefore facilitate for RATS providers, like SDATS, and other stakeholders to understand the challenges.

1.2 Problematization

Despite o↵ering a variety of benefits compared to conventional ATS, RATS are faced by obstacles when aspiring to become the dominant solution for ATS. An inadequate awareness of these obstacles would potentially impede the competitiveness of RATS technology in general and RATS providers in particular.

1.3 Purpose

The purpose of this study is to gain an understanding of why replacing conventional ATS with RATS is problematic, by identifying main obstacles.

1.4 Research question

To fulfill the research purpose, the following research question may be formulated:

Research Question: From a sociotechnical perspective, which are the main obstacles faced by RATS when aspiring to become the dominant solution for ATS?

1.5 Delimitations

To set a feasible scope of research, this study is subject to three central delimitations.

First, the emphasis is put on identifying main obstacles faced by RATS, and - although serving as a good starting point - the study does not include any solutions to the identified obstacles. Second, the study is delimited to principally gather empirics from Sweden and the United Kingdom. And third, from the system perspective (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015), the attention is primarily focused on the industrial perspective.

(16)

1.6 Contributions

This study contributes to the empirical field of RATS by identifying, from a sociotechnical perspective, main obstacles faced by RATS. The work not only demonstrates the feasibility of the MLP in the field of ATS, but it also provides a new angle of the applicability of the MLP, by using the framework to identify obstacles in its di↵erent levels. Furthermore, the results of the study can be used by RATS providers - or other RATS promoters - as guidance for understanding which sociotechnical challenges are faced. With regards to future research, this study forms a foundation upon which more solution-focused research can be carried out.

1.7 Disposition

The disposition of the report is as follows. Chapter 2 incorporates a description of the system. It contains a brief introduction to the concept of RATS, and then identifies key stakeholders of RATS. The theoretical body of the study is presented in chapter 3, by providing an introduction to the theoretical framing as well as useful concepts for analyzing the obstacles. Chapter 4 then describes how the study has been carried out, motivating and discussing the choices of methodology. Chapter 5 presents the empirical findings, containing both an empirical background from written materials as well as outcomes of interviews. In chapter 6, the empirical findings are analyzed and mapped into the di↵erent levels of the MLP, followed by a conclusion where the research question is answered. Finally, chapter 7 provides discussions of the conclusion of the study, its limitations and suggestions for further studies.

(17)

2 System description

This chapter summarizes, in short, the concept RATS. Further, it identifies and motivates key stakeholders with regards to RATS, serving as an important outset for the empirical data collection.

2.1 Remote Air Traffic Services

The basic concept of RATS is to supply ATS to one or multiple airports from a remote location (Gawade and Zhang, 2016). Contrary to conventional ATS - where air traffic controllers are located at the airport - controllers of RATS are stationed in a remote facility, commonly denoted remote tower center, see Figure 1. RATS as such further incorporates the opportunities of digitalization. A number of benefits with RATS over conventional ATS have been brought forth. Among these are advantages related to cost efficiency, improved system performance, and the ability to provide ATS to multiple airports from one air traffic control centre - facilitating in particular for airports in more rural areas.

Figure 1. Multiple airport usage of the RATS concept.

One of the first steps that would lead towards the development of the technology required for RATS was taken in 1996. In the following years, technology development of similar nature was carried out in parallel by a number of actors, and 2014 saw major steps for commercialization of RATS (Furstenau, 2016). In 2015, the first fully operational

(18)

RATS facility was introduced at ¨Ornsk¨oldsvik Airport in Sweden, provided by SDATS (then Saab and LFV) (Gawade and Zhang, 2016; SVT, 2015). As of 2018, several major actors within the aviation industry are involved in RATS projects, including air navigation service providers (ANSPs) and industry organizations such as SESAR Joint Undertaking. There are a number of providers of RATS technology around the globe.

The major ones include SDATS, Searidge, Avinor, Harris, and Frequentis (Gawade and Zhang, 2016).

2.2 Stakeholders of the aviation industry

This study looks into the obstacles faced by RATS. According to Schaar and Sherry (2010) and Upham (2003, p.108), several stakeholders - with a variety of objectives - have an interest in airport activities. Di↵erent stakeholders likely see di↵erent obstacles (or at least have di↵erent perspectives on the obstacles), making it reasonable to first investigate which these stakeholders are. Upon reviewing the work done by Schaar and Sherry (2010), Upham (2003, p. 108) and Geels (2006) and the following list of airport stakeholders may be compiled:

• RATS providers

• Federal governments

• Local governments

• Airlines

• Air navigation service providers (ANSP)

• Public travellers (passengers)

• Airport organizations

• Concessionaires (passenger services like food and retail)

• Employees

• Providers of other transport services in the area

• Airport companies (for example Swedavia)

• Financiers (for example investors and bond holders)

• Communities a↵ected (residents in the region, residents that live close to the airport)

• Non-governmental organizations, both pro-aviation and “non-pro-aviation”

• Service providers for air carriers (for example fuel providers)

• Industry organizations (directly by import or indirectly)

(19)

Key stakeholders

With regards to RATS, a number of key stakeholders can be identified out of the above list. In the following, these stakeholders are defined and briefly introduced, and motivations for why they may be considered key are provided. Useful for the motivations is the basic structure of the supply chain of RATS, as is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. RATS supply chain.

RATS provider

As the party that develops the concept of RATS and delivers the solutions, RATS providers are, naturally, key stakeholders. RATS providers are located in the upper end of the supply chain, as is illustrated in Figure 2, and carry out activities such as research and development, production, marketing and sales, services, etc. They are arguably dedicated to increase the usage of RATS.

Air navigation service provider

Following Eurocontrol (2012), ANSPs may be defined as public or private legal entities providing air navigation services on behalf of a company, region or country. ATS is an important part of the services that ANSPs provide airports, and as such, ANSPs are operators of ATS solutions. ANSPs exist in a variety of ownership forms, ranging from governmental departments and state-owned companies, to privately held organizations.

ANSPs are in many cases the direct customers of RATS providers.

(20)

Airport

By providing the physical infrastructure for landing and takeo↵ of aircraft, airport activities are intimately related to ATS operations. RATS, analogously with conventional ATS, comprise of towers for ATS, and airports can thus be considered a key stakeholder of RATS. Airports commonly employ ANSPs for ATS, and are in those cases the direct customer of the ATS operators. In some cases, airports administer ATS internally, in which cases they are the direct customers of RATS.

Federal government

Federal governments commonly work with achieving good accessibility and high quality, safety and sustainability in all modes of transportation, including rail, air, sea and road transportation. They have a more holistic perspective from the point of nationwide interests. With regards to aviation, federal governments often have an overall responsi- bility for national regulation, granting of operational licenses, and the assessment of civil aviation, particularly with regards to safety and security. They also have the right to make sure that authorities, companies, organizations and citizens abide by them (Trans- portstyrelsen, 2018).

Local government

This key stakeholder group includes, for example, municipalities and provinces. The governing organs of such entities have a strong interest in the regional economy, and although the importance varies, airports generally are of significant economical importance for the region by means of business and tourism and, for smaller communities in particular, access to national and global markets (Van Beek, 2017).

Industry organization

The importance of industry organizations can be exemplified by SESAR in Europe and Svenskt Flyg (Swedish Air Transport Society) in Sweden. SESAR (2018) can be described as having the role of coordinating and concentrating research and development activities regarding ATM across the European Union to develop the new generation of ATM. It arguably forms a strong network within the aviation industry, as it involves many large actors of the industry. From a national perspective, Svenskt Flyg (2018) communicates ideas, opinions and knowledge about the commercial aviation and airline industry in Sweden, being “the face of the aviation industry towards the public”.

(21)

3 Theoretical framing

This chapter presents the theoretical body of the study. It intends to provide theoretical concepts relevant for illustrating which the obstacles faced by RATS are. First, the concept of large technical systems is introduced. Then, the main theoretical framework of the study, the multilevel perspective, is described.

3.1 Large technical systems

According to Hughes (1987 p. 51), technical systems are “both socially constructed and society shaping.” He argues that technical systems can be described as consisting of components, some of which are system artifacts. The artifacts, which can be either physical or non-physical, are created by the system builders, for instance computers, electric gen- erators and regulatory laws. Other components of the technical system - for example inventors and managers of organizations - are not created by the system builders, and therefore have degrees of freedom. The artifacts of technical systems are highly inter- dependent, and when one artifact is changed, the others correspond by changing their characteristics accordingly (Hughes, 1987; Markard and Tru↵er, 2006).

Large technical systems (LTS) may, according to Markard and Tru↵er (2006, p. 610), be defined as “... complex and heterogeneous systems of physical structure and complex machinery which (1) are materially integrated, or ‘coupled’ over large spans of space and time ... and (2) support or sustain the functioning of very large numbers of other technical systems ...”. However, they - similarly to Hughes (1987) - acknowledge that technical systems embody also non-physical artifacts. With this definition, examples of LTS include railroad networks, electricity networks and water supply networks. Simi- larly, aviation constitutes a large technical system (Geels, 2006; Knippenberger, 2010).

LTS can be viewed as a set of subsystems. Hughes (1987) stresses that the researcher of a LTS may benefit from delimiting the study accordingly as, naturally, such delimitations allow for a more in-depth analysis and understanding. This approach however, Hughes (1987) argues, renders only a partial, maybe even distorted, understanding of how the system works. With such an approach, one may see RATS as a subsystem of the LTS that is aviation (Geels (2006) identifies, similarly, air traffic control (ATC) as part of the aviation LTS - see Figure 3). However, it is important to acknowledge that having a main focus on ATS entails that less emphasis is put on other parts of the air traffic.

(22)

Figure 3. ATC as part of the LTS of aviation (Geels, 2006).

Seeing RATS as part of a LTS, some characteristics of LTS, as described below, can provide useful concepts and insights for identifying obstacles faced by RATS.

Momentum

An important characteristic of LTS is, as Hughes (1987) argues, that when they grow, LTS acquire momentum. The artifacts of LTS can be seen as mass, which is subject to inertia of motion. The larger the mass, the more it tends to continue along its current path. According to Geels (2007), the momentum of LTS can also be seen as a result of a stabilizing sociotechnical relationship: in LTS with high momentum - which typically holds for mature LTS - interconnections between important components like firms, regulatory bodies, and educational institutions have become well-established, embedding such LTS in society. Discussing the stability of LTS, other authors have presented similar concepts to momentum, such as path-dependence and lock-in (Geels, 2004).

Innovation in LTS

Processes of innovation in LTS tend to be incremental rather than radical (Markard and Tru↵er, 2006). Any novel or di↵erent products must be compatible both with the technical norms as well as the infrastructure of the LTS. For instance, a completely di↵erent locomotive design which outperforms the current locomotives in several performance aspects will still struggle if it cannot run on the existing railways. It is therefore challenging to introduce radical innovations in LTS. Path dependence and stability as well

(23)

as the heavy interdependence between system components pose challenges for radical innovations in LTS (Geels 2004).

3.2 Multilevel perspective

The multilevel perspective (MLP) can be used for describing the sociotechnical interaction between technical artifacts and di↵erent actors and groups, and can as such be used to analyze LTS. Following Smith et. al (2005), it may be seen as a way to describe how organizations and technologies are part of, and embedded in, wider systems that encompass socioeconomic aspects. Following the reasoning of the MLP, LTS may be analyzed from the perspectives (levels) of sociotechnical landscapes, sociotechnical regimes and technological niches, each describing di↵erent levels of analysis (Geels, 2007). As such, the MLP forms a framework for analyzing the obstacles faced by RATS from a sociotechnical perspective. Figure 4 provides a visual representation of the di↵erent levels and MLP.

Sociotechnical regimes

The sociotechnical regimes represent the meso-level of the MLP. Following Geels (2007), they can be seen as communities of several social groups including engineers, users, pol- icy makers and scientists. Smith et. al (2005, p. 1493) describe regimes as “relatively stable configurations of institutions, techniques and artifacts, as well as rules, practices and networks that determine the ‘normal’ development and use of technologies.” Within regimes are deep-structural rules, guiding actions and behaviors by the social groups of the regime (Geels, 2012). The development trajectories of LTS are to a significant extent governed by the cognitive rules and routines of regimes, since such rules and routines tend to make the system builders look in certain directions when developing the system (Geels, 2004).

Technological niches

Technological niches have been highlighted as the locus for radical innovations that seek to enter regimes (Geels, 2004; 2007). Similarly to regimes, niches consist of networks of social groups. However, their characteristics have clear di↵erences to that of regimes. In niches, the technologies and rules are vague. The characteristics of technologies, functions and meanings of the artifacts is subject to a much higher degree of interpretative flexibility, and dominant designs are commonly not well-established. Within niches, Geels (2007, p. 129) acknowledge “the building of social networks that carry, nurture, and develop novelties; heterogeneous learning processes to improve performance and build a working sociotechnical configuration” as important processes, and also highlights that expectations and visions need to be well articulated as it guides the learning processes and is fundamental for gaining important funding and attention.

(24)

Sociotechnical landscapes

Representing the macro-level, sociotechnical landscapes from the “top” level of the MLP.

They refer to “aspects of the wider exogenous [sociotechnical] environment” (Geels, 2007, p.129). Following Rip and Kemp (1998), sociotechnical landscapes may be described in two inherently linked dimensions. In the literal sense, they represent concrete components such as regional economies, geography and di↵erent kinds of large infrastructure, for example railway networks. Metaphorically, they can be described as the paradigms that influence the view of ourselves, for example cultural beliefs and values. Here, Geels (2007) brings forth globalization and cultural changes as examples of important aspects of sociotechnical landscapes. Landscapes cannot be easily modified by di↵erent actors, since they do not influence them in a direct way, and as such, landscapes constitute gradients for action (Geels, 2004).

Figure 4. Multilevel Perspective (Geels, 2007).

(25)

Seeing RATS as a novelty with the objective to integrate into the incumbent ATS regime, the MLP constitutes a useful tool for understanding and categorizing obstacles that RATS face. Obstacles can arguably be observed both within each perspective, as well as in the interaction between the di↵erent perspectives.

Integrating RATS into the incumbent ATS regime entails a certain change in the regime.

As regimes are such complex configurations of regime members and structural frames, Smith et. al (2005) acknowledge that regime changes chiefly happen through a series of interrelated and complex events. Central for regime change is pressure for change, which may arise from from all levels of the MLP. To describe the extent to which a regime is put under such pressure for change and how well it can cope with this pressure - thus facilitating the illustration of obstacles faced by RATS - Smith et. al (2005 1494) point out two important aspects: Selection pressures and adaptive capacity.

Selection pressure

Selection pressure can be described as the pressure for change exerted in di↵erent ways by various actors. The sociotechnical landscape generates selection pressure under which regimes are forced to adapt. Examples of such selection pressure include emergence of new values (Geels, 2007), macro political changes (Geels, 2007), the media landscape (Geels, 2012) and technology trends such as digitalization (Geels, 2012) - which are generally beyond the control of individual actors (Geels, 2007; 2012), meaning that it, in a sense, represents prerequisites that actors of LTS are obliged to follow. In absence of selection pressure, the developmental trajectory of a regime is unlikely to shift. This view further pleads that di↵erent selection pressures need to act coherently and thereby form a unified pressure - something that often is not the case since they frequently are incoherently oriented. However, selection pressure itself is often not enough to induce change. Instead, Smith et. al (2005) argue that the articulation of selection pressure is vital: Given a unified selection pressure, the pressure then needs to be rendered into a shape that generates a regime response, which may be considered a matter of - through various measures - articulating the need for change. This can be exemplified by Smith et. al (2005, p. 1495), who comment on the example of climate change as selection pressure: “the process of articulating knowledge of environmental pressures is typically as essential as processes of active governance in the e↵ective realization of change in socio-technical regimes.”

Adaptive capacity

The other major component as proposed by Smith et. al (2005) is adaptive capacity, which regards a regime’s resources and capacity to handle selection pressure. One way of perceiving regimes is to view them as being reproduced along their development trajectory, which is subject to selection pressure. Under high selection pressure, the regime must encompass much resources to adapt to the selection pressure, thus protecting the

(26)

regime. The adaptive capacity of a regime is immensely important: Following Smith et.

al (2005), regimes with higher adaptive capacity are more likely to succeed than regimes with lower adaptive capacity. An important aspect of adaptive capacity is that it may explain how niches both can facilitate the substitution and the maintenance of a regime.

On the one hand, external novelties, such as innovations, exert selection pressure on the regime, and as such, a niche - if successful - may challenge the incumbent regime. How- ever, they may on the the other hand also help regimes respond to selection pressure by providing the regime the capabilities and functions needed to satisfy and adapt to changes in social and economic demand.

3.3 Implications

Existent theoretical concepts provide ways of describing the sociotechnical environment for LTS, providing indications about obstacles and opportunities faced by novelties in the technological niches. RATS may be perceived as such a novelty. The obstacles faced by a novel technology when attempting to establishing itself as a dominant design, however, cannot be directly derived from the theoretical concepts. For example, the MLP – although illustrating the interaction between various actors and exogenous environmental factors on di↵erent sociotechnical levels - does not show explicitly which obstacles may arise, neither within the levels nor in the interaction between them. In order to cover this theory inadequacy with regards to the purpose of the study, empirics were collected from several relevant actors and stakeholders, providing di↵erent perspectives useful for – in conjunction with the theoretical concepts – identifying obstacles faced by RATS.

(27)

4 Methodology

This chapter describes and motivates the methods employed to carry out the study, discussing matters such as the choice of research design and data gathering. Further, the chapter discusses reliability, validity, and generalizability.

4.1 Research design

Studying the obstacles for RATS, this research is carried out as an exploratory case study. As argued by Blomkvist and Hallin (2015), a case study facilitates for generating rich empirical data that comparably well captures the real-world complexity. It is also suitable for discovering new dimensions, and is therefore suitable when the purpose is to explain or describe (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). This study adopts a sociotechnical approach, considering several stakeholders involved in complex networks of actors, and therefore demands empirical data from various stakeholders. Denscombe’s (2010 p.55) recommendation of the case study approach when there is interest in providing “an ex- planation that can cope with the complexity and subtlety of real life situations” further suggests the case study to be appropriate: the development of large technical systems may be seen as co-evolutionary processes that take long time to evolve and involve many actors and social groups.

An overview of the process of the work is illustrated in Figure 5. The outset of the study is a knowledge gap in the existing literature within the field of ATS. Previous research has not looked at the obstacles of RATS from the MLP, seeing ATS as part of the large technical system of aviation. This knowledge gap spawns the purpose of the work.

Frequently alternating between reviewing literature and theory, and studying empirical material, the study was carried out in an abductive manner (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). The majority of the literature review was, however, conducted at the early stages of the study in order to gain an overview of the case and form a solid foundation upon which the empirical data collection could be based. The empirical data was primarily collected by semi-structured interviews (as comprehensively elaborated in Chapter 4.2), and as a phenomenon-driven (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015) work, theory is used to cre- ate an understanding of the studied phenomenon, providing a lens through which the empirics are analyzed and contextualized from an academic perspective. Based on the analysis, the research questions are answered and conclusions are drawn.

(28)

Figure 5. Visual representation of the research methodology.

4.2 Empirical data gathering method

The empirical data gathering was conducted in two ways: A literature review and, primarily, semi-structured interviews.

4.2.1 Literature review

The overarching objective of the literature review is to acquire an insight into existing knowledge within the obstacles faced by RATS. Using the funnel model (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015), the literature review started with a broad perspective. The search areas were then continuously narrowed down as the study progressed and the actual aspects of interest became more clear. The specific possible areas where people may have concerns were studied after those areas were identified. Various types of literature were employed, primarily academic papers, documents from institutions, and industry websites.

In order to search for relevant literature, several keywords were frequently used. Ex- amples of such keywords, used either alone or in combination with each other, include

“remote air traffic service”, ”remote air traffic control systems”, ”remote towers”, ”obstacles”, ”challenge”, ”issues”, ”concerns” etc.

4.2.2 Interviews

The main primary sources for empirical material in this study constitutes of interviews with key stakeholders involved - directly and indirectly - in RATS. In addition to inter-

(29)

views with such key stakeholders, one industry expert has also been consulted through an interview. Interviews are useful for gaining an extensive understanding of a phenomenon as well as for finding new, previously undiscovered, dimensions of what is being studied (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). Further, it is highlighted by Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) that interviews e↵ectively help the researcher understand how di↵erent individuals reason. Interviews can therefore be considered a suitable empirical data gathering method in exploratory case studies.

The interviews chiefly provided valuable observations from the di↵erent perspectives of key stakeholders concerned with the obstacles faced by RATS. The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured manner: Question areas - main topics of interest - were defined and considered in advance, and the interview questions were then, as emphasized by Collis and Hussey (2014), aimed at encouraging the interviewee to talk about the main topics of interest, which in this study are the obstacles and related challenges faced by RATS. As suggested fruitful by Blomkvist and Hallin (2015), the question areas were handled in the order that presented itself most suitable during the interview. Once the question areas had been defined, interview questions were formulated and organized in interview guides. The questions were chiefly formulated as open questions - questions of which the answer cannot be a simple word (Collis and Hussey, 2014) - with the intention to encourage the interviewee to deliver developed and thorough answers. Because of the interview structure, emphasis was put on not making the interview guides too detailed or extensive - essentially serving to keep the conversation within the main topics of interest. And, as is the case with semi-structured interviews, many of the questions were created during the course of the interview. The length of the interviews was generally kept between 30 and 40 minutes, varying depending on how familiar the interviewee was with the concept of RATS.

To obtain di↵erent perspectives on aspects of general interest for the theoretical analysis, several questions of a more general nature were asked all interviewees. These questions were, when needed, clarified with examples specifically adapted to the interviewee, encouraging the interviewee to provide developed answers. As all interviewees arguably have specific areas in which they are more knowledgeable, each interviewee was also asked a few questions specific to them, aiming to gain further insights into their area of expertise. All interviews started with questions about the interviewee’s professional background and their current role within their organization. The interviews were ended with a few questions aiming to encourage the interviewee to express relevant aspects that they felt had been left out, and open up for future contact. Examples more general questions include ”how familiar are you with the concept of RATS? ” and ”which would you say are the advantages and disadvantages of RATS? ” while more specific questions were formulated as, for example, ”what are the most important factors that to be in place for your airport to start using RATS? ”

(30)

Interviewees

Table 1 presents an overview of the interviewees. The choice of interviewees is mainly based upon studying literature viewing the aviation industry as a system of stakeholders, making it possible to identify key stakeholders with regards to RATS. The list was then concretized with specific interviewee names with the support of Adrem and Klintberg (2018b).

Table 1. List of consulted interviewees. * Telephone interview.

4.3 Data analysis

In line with Eisenhardt and Graebner’s (2007 p.29) recommendation that for case studies, “the challenge of presenting rich qualitative data is readily addressed by simply presenting a relatively complete rendering of the story within the text”, the story of each interview was rendered in a summarizing manner, and interspersed with interviewee quotations. This process was facilitated by sound recordings from each interview ses- sion, making it possible to listen to the interviews multiple times. After each interview,

(31)

the recording was used to compile a semi-transcription document, where particular attention was paid to the obstacles and challenges as described by the interviewee. The interview stories were then - as suggested by Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) - inter- twined with and mapped to the theoretical concepts. This was done by categorizing the obstacles and challenges suggested by the interviewees and then mapping them into the di↵erent levels of the MLP, utilizing important concepts of LTS and MLP theory.

4.4 Source classification and criticism

The main sources for data collection are semi-structured interviews and review of written materials. In the following, the methodology for classification of sources and source criticism is presented.

4.4.1 Primary and secondary sources

Sources employed for this study have been considered as primary or secondary following the method proposed by Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) - the functional source concept.

In the functional source concept, the sources are classified based on their function in the study, and no source is in itself considered either primary or secondary. Thereupon, primary sources are sources which consist of self produced empirical material or material which is very closely related to the purpose of the study. For example, empirical material from interviews are primary sources, and so are written materials that are closely aligned with the purpose of this study. Secondary sources consist of information that does not relate to the research in a direct way, focusing on a more wide context of the research fields/topics. For instance, most scientific articles referred in the study are secondary sources. This classification was carried out as it facilitates the understanding of which sources are actually close to the purpose of the study.

4.4.2 Source criticism

Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) bring forth four criteria for evaluating the reliability of empirical sources: Authenticity, Proximity & dependence, Tendency and Representativity.

These criteria served as an outset for the continuous critical source evaluation of the study.

Criticism of literature

The bulk of the literature review is formed by scientific articles. Such articles are generally peer reviewed, which is the widely accepted method for ensuring the quality of scientific work (Bornmann, 2011). However, critical questions have been raised regarding peer review. Critics claim there is little proof that it is e↵ectively ensuring high quality scientific work, and that it does not detect plagiarism accurately (Kelly et al.,

(32)

2014). To ensure that the literature used in the study is credible, Denscombe’s (2009) factors were continuously employed. These factors encourage, among more, judgement of the age of the journal in which the article was published, the entity that published the journal, and how well the article refers to other quality articles.

Criticism of interviews

A major concern during semi-structured interviews is bias. As Saunders et al. (2009) describe it, there are various kinds of bias. The interviewer bias is concerned with di↵erent kinds of behaviour by the interviewer that leads to biased responses by the interviewee. This includes the tone and type of comments, as well as interpretation of the responses, all of which may impose the interviewees own frame of reference. To handle this, the questions were, as much as possible, objectively and openly formulated.

However, to keep the interview within the research scope, it was at times necessary to ask more specific questions which may have steered the interviewee into a certain path.

There is also interviewee bias. The interviewee may be reluctant to reveal and talk about aspects that are of interest to the researcher if they feel that it would lead to sensitive territories (for example, confidential information which they are not empowered to talk about), providing only part of their “full” answer. An additional consideration to take into account is what Saunders et al. (2009) call the willingness to be interviewed. This refers to the phenomenon that certain types of persons may agree to be interviewed, while other types do not. Therefore, the interviews yield results that reflect only a part of the targeted interviewees.

In this study, with empirics gathered from various interviewees spread over Sweden and Europe, it was often not possible to set up face-to-face meetings. The majority of the interviews were therefore conducted via telephone. Novick (2008) claims that although there is often an opinion that face-to-face interviews are better than interviews conducted over telephone, there is not any major evidence proving this. However, the concerns raised about distortion and interpretation (Novick, 2008) of telephone interviews were acknowledged in this study, and as a countermeasure, the interviews were recorded. This entailed that the interviews could be listened to multiple times, minimizing misinterpretations.

(33)

4.5 Research quality

Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) acknowledge validity and reliability as two central concepts when assessing the quality of scientific work. In addition, Collis and Hussey (2014) bring up generalizability as an important aspect.

4.5.1 Validity

Validity can be essentially described as studying the right thing (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). Consequently, in order to achieve validity, the employed literature, theory and methods for data gathering must be consistent with the purpose, problematization and research questions of the study. It also entails that the research questions should be answered.

In order to achieve a high validity, this study was carried out employing the funnel model (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015) in the review of written materials. It started in reading up on the aviation industry in general in order to to obtain an overarching view of the industry, making it possible to compile a list of stakeholders of the aviation industry. This list was then narrowed down, and key stakeholders related to RATS were identified. Di↵erent fields of theory were reviewed and considered before the search area was narrowed down to the MLP on LTS.

Similarly, it is also important to make sure that the empirical material is aligned with the purpose of study (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). In order to achieve high validity in terms of the interviews, interviewee categories were specified according the findings from the review of key stakeholders of the aviation industry. Specific interviewees among these key stakeholders were advised and approached with the support of industry expert Anders Adrem and commissioner CEO Johan Klintberg (2018b). In order to make sure the interviewees are as representative as possible of each stakeholder group, the majority of the interviewees generally occupies executive management positions of the organizations, and thus - arguably - have a more holistic perspective. At the beginning of each interview, the purpose of study was clarified to minimize confusion about the objective of the interview.

4.5.2 Reliability

While validity entails studying the right thing, reliability refers to studying it the right way (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015). One common approach is that the reliability of a study is considered high if the study can generate the same results when repeated (Run- sten, 2017), which can be exemplified with Collis and Hussey’s (2013, p. 53) statement that reliability may be perceived as “the accuracy and precision of the measurements

(34)

and the absence of di↵erences if the research were repeated.” However, for social science research based on qualitative approaches, such as this study, reliability arguably instead becomes a matter of making the presentation of the research process as transparent as possible, and paying attention to the robustness of the ways in which information is gathered.

The majority of the literature used in this study is research articles published in scientific articles, and was obtained through a variety of research databases - ScienceDirect and ResearchGate for example - which were primarily reached through the KTH Primo search engine, as provided by the library of KTH Royal Institute of Technology. How- ever, other kinds of literature, such as documents from RATS providers and politically tied organizations, have also been employed to a limited extent. Documents of this kind may be claimed to not be as reliable as articles of academic journals, as they arguably have not been peer reviewed (see Source criticism) to the same extent and have a commercial or political purpose. To cope with this, such sources have been handled with a critical mind-set and attention has been paid to considering what the objective of the document is as well as who the authors are.

A major component of this study is semi-structured interviews. As pointed out by Saunders et al. (2009), reliability may be a concern in such interviews, as alternative researchers not necessarily achieve similar results. To handle this, dialogical reliability (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015) was strived for as much as possible, meaning that emphasis was put on being objective and impartial in the interpretation of interview answers.

With the purpose of clearly communicating the essence of the interview questions and decrease potential misinterpretation, supplemental questions were prepared to support the main questions when needed.

4.5.3 Generalizability

Generalizability in the context of qualitative (in particular single) case studies generally refers to analytical generalizability. Case studies do not generate any statistical generalizability but, contrary to the situation of many quantitative studies, it is generally not the aim of a case study. Instead, case studies can - if well-conducted - render analytical generalizability, meaning that the results of the study to a certain extent can be applied to other similar cases (Blomkvist and Hallin, 2015).

This study intends to identify obstacles faced by RATS from a sociotechnical perspective by employing a LTS and MLP approach. As such, it analyzes, in part, the aviation industry. With the aviation industry generally being highly globalized - for example following many global standards and practices - the results of the study may be argued to, to a certain degree, be applicable to other countries than Sweden and the United

(35)

Kingdom, even with the majority of the empirics originating from those countries. The results may also be applicable to other cases that partly resemble the RATS case. Such cases could be novelties aiming to establish themselves in other, conservative and safety- oriented, industries, or industries that face a technological shift that entails significant social impact. The methodology may also be generalized: With a case that di↵ers sig- nificantly to the case of this study but carries a similar objective - finding obstacles from a sociotechnical perspective, that is - it is possible to adopt the methodology of this study in order to conduct a fruitful study specific to that case. In that sense, the methodology of the study brings a broader applicability than the results of the study.

4.6 Research ethics

Blomkvist and Hallin (2015, p. 38) summarize ethics in the context of scientific work as a matter of “complying with good praxis regarding scientific work so that nobody will be harmed by your work.” To ensure sufficient ethical consideration throughout the research, this study has continuously employed the three key principles of research ethics described by Denscombe (2009 330): Protection of participants’ interests, Voluntary participation based on informed consent, and Open and honest behavior by the researchers, respecting the the investigation.

The first principle essentially entails that the participants of the study do not come o↵ worse after participating than they were before. In this kind of study, it means that the interests of the participants must be considered in advance of their participation, so that the research can be designed in such a way that it respects the interests of the participants. It also means that the results generated by the participants needs to be considered with regards to personal information. All interviewees who participated in this study were informed about the purpose of the study, and careful consideration was paid to formulating the interview questions (and question areas) such that they were, to as big of an extent as possible, not leading to confidential information. During the interviews, emphasis was also put on trying to sense if the interviewee felt uncomfort- able in terms of talking about sensitive information, so that the discussion could then be navigated in a di↵erent direction or diverged to a more general level.

The second principle is about ensuring that the participants do not feel forced or coerced to take part in the study, and that they are sufficiently informed about the study. All interviewees of this study were reached out to by email, ensuring that a written consent for participation could be obtained. In the interview invitation, the overall purpose and aim of the study was explained along with a motivation for why their participation would be valuable. The answer of the potential participant was always fully respected.

For those accepting to take part in the study, i.e. agreed to be interviewed, each interview started with explaining more comprehensive summary of what the study is about, ensuring that they were adequately familiar with the study.

(36)

The third principle regards being open and tell the truth about the nature of the study, as well as handling the collected data in a fair and unbiased way. To act in such a way, the client of the study was clearly stated in every participation invitation. Major emphasis was put on objectivity and honesty when compiling and analyzing the outcome of the interviews. All interviews were - upon approval of the interviewee, naturally - recorded for the purpose of being able to listen and grasp the contents and nuances of the what the interviewee said, minimizing the risk of misinterpretations. The study was also delimited to such an extent that the experience of the researchers was sufficient for undertaking the study, which was monitored by peer review seminars.

(37)

5 Empirical findings

This chapter presents the challenges for RATS based on other research as well as the outcome of the interviews.

5.1 Empirical background

This subchapter provides an empirical background by summarizing concerns and challenges for RATS that have been brought up in existing literature.

Concerns of air traffic controllers and pilots

As the ultimate operators of the systems, air traffic controllers arguably provide an important perspective on (mainly) potential operational-related obstacles. Gawade and Zhang (2016) investigated which the major concerns of air traffic controllers are. Their findings highlights reduced sensory information, lack of awareness of local airspace con- ditions, physiological impacts, workload changes, specific training and certification requirements etc.

Svensk Pilotf¨orening, the Swedish Air Line Pilots Association, raise, in a press release from 2017, concerns about the readiness among the users of RATS to the major changes that its implementation entails (Svensk Pilotf¨orening, 2017).

Concerns about cyber security

The issue of cyber security has been raised on several occasions. EASA (2017 p.59) argues that “[RATS] relies on IT infrastructure for data exchange to support, amongst others: visual presentation, communications (in particular aeronautical mobile service and surface movement control service) and management of aerodrome

equipment/systems/assets, which may make it vulnerable to potential security threats to computer systems or the data exchanged”, and primarily highlights the RATS vulnerability to loss of visual presentation data and potential interruption of communication with the remote airdrome. EASA’s conclusions spawn the recommendation that air traffic service (including air traffic control) providers should handle cyber security risks vigorously and carry out a dedicated security risk analysis. Similarly, European Cock- pit Association (2014) acknowledge a potential increase in vulnerability, recommending sufficient contingency procedures and precautionary measures to be put in place.

There are signs that the industry recognizes and is concerned with the potential risks associated with cyber security. However, several major actors claim that the magnitude of such risks is under control. For example, NATS airports director Mike Stoller explains that NATS have extensive experience in handling large amounts of operational data, stressing that it is under constant review (International Airport Review, 2017). Former chief executive of London City Airport, Declan Collier, has articulated his confidence

(38)

that the RATS installed at the airport is safe from cyber attacks (The Telegraph, 2017).

Initial investments

A study carried out by PA Consulting Group concluded that a significant obstacle faced by RATS is the required initial investment (Ny Teknik, 2016). This obstacle is described as particularly critical for smaller airports.

5.2 Outcome of interviews

This subchapter presents the findings from the interviews.

5.2.1 Air navigation service provider - Luftfartsverket

Sweden’s - by large margin - largest ANSP, Luftfartsverket (LFV), operates the world’s first fully operational RATS at ¨Ornsk¨oldsvik Airport, as well as the RATS for Sundsvall Timr˚a Airport. The two airports are provided ATS from the remote tower center in the city of Sundsvall. LFV is in the process of constructing a remote tower center in the vicinity of Stockholm Arlanda Airport, from where four Swedish airports will be provided ATS. Having an executive role in LFV, Interviewee A is involved with the construction of this remote tower center, and has significant experience working as an air traffic controller. Interviewee A points to three central obstacles, related to misconceptions, change management, and supporting infrastructure.

Difficulty and complexity

Interviewee A brings forth the difficulty and complexity of handling several processes simultaneously and in the needed order as a significant obstacle faced by RATS. Such processes include that the provider of the RATS need to deliver according to schedule and with sufficient quality, the airports need to be supportive and facilitate for the needed installations, and staffing needs to be increased to handle processes related to change management. Multiple concurrent implementation is complicated by national regulations, as such regulations enforce learnings to be derived from previous imple- mentations. Making the processes more complex is also that ATS of di↵erent airports have traditionally, to some extent, had their own working culture, and di↵erent airport owners means a variety of airport vehicles and moving-patterns of vehicles, as well as airport-specific regulations. Working things through properly to reach the desired quality of everything associated with RATS implementation is of utmost importance.

However, following a lack of man-hours, it has been difficult for LFV to work as much as it should have with this quality, slowing down the implementation.

This process, at least in part, may also be perceived a matter of aligning the network of actors that are involved in RATS implementation. Key for this alignment is each actor’s

(39)

understanding that the implementation process in its entirety does not necessarily move faster if a single actor moves faster, which often is not the case.

Misconception

Although it from an external viewpoint may seem like RATS entail an increase in technology dependence, Interviewee A emphasizes that the increase is smaller than generally believed, as also conventional ATS is heavily dependent on technology:

“There is a misconception that today’s conventional air traffic control is not dependent on the technology . . . [conventional ATS] is heavily dependent on power, communication lines, radios, radar.”

Another misconception highlighted by Interviewee A is that RATS and conventional ATS often are recognized as two clearly di↵erent systems, and that the way forward is seen as an “either or” path. While there are certain di↵erences, some of which may seem major from an external viewpoint, Interviewee A argues that a significant part of the technology in RATS have already been in use for a long time within conventional ATS, and instead suggests that the term digital ATC is more a more proper description of the future: ATC will become more and more digitalized, closing the gap between RATS and conventional ATS even more - to such an extent that the only di↵erence will be the window.

Supporting infrastructure

Potential obstacles lay in the external infrastructure needed for RATS. An example of such infrastructure is fiber-optical networks for data transmission. Interviewee A consid- ers this to not be a major issue in Sweden. However, in other countries, it may represent a significant obstacle.

5.2.2 Industry organization - SESAR Joint Undertaking

Michael Standar holds the Chief Strategies and External Relations at the SESAR Joint Undertaking. He has a sound basis and understanding of aviation and ATM, both from a global, regional, and local perspective. He works with strategies and external a↵airs, which means that he holds all relationships with externals – like airspace users, professional organizations, airports, and also is responsible for international relationships/partnerships. He is also responsible for all the International Civil Aviation Orga- nization (ICAO) relations. In regards to RATS, Michael describes the role of SESAR:

“Our role is to federate and facilitate development and implementation readiness across all the European stakeholders . . . what we are doing when we are federating and facilitating is to commonly develop and validate operational and technical solutions with

(40)

specifications proving its performance. In this work it also addresses the regulations and standards necessary for successful applications. This is all done through the SESAR Public, Private Partnership of the SESAR Joint Undertaking. If anything need to be done in terms of changes to the ICAO provisions or standard and recommended practices, it is identified in SESAR and forwarded through by the European inputs to the ICAO Secretariat for the evolution of the Global Air Navigation Plan and the Aviation System Block Upgrades.”

The obstacles faced by RATS that Michael brings up are related to misconceptions, social aspects of change and local di↵erences.

Social aspect of change

Michael highlights social obstacles as the primary challenges like in all changes to the current paradigms. While technical aspects are important they are not a hindrance and therefore of smaller significance, and Michael argues that safety and security issues are often used as excuses for not to move,too fast although - from a strictly technical standpoint - there are well-established processes in place for proving that the system is safe and secure. Michael underlines that the power of these kinds of excuses slowing down the process of change is not to be underestimated, as it may lead to unnecessary hurdles for RATS. The social obstacles are partly related to the momentum maintained by conventional ATS, a momentum that is challenging and takes time to change.

Michael agrees that misconceptions regarding safety and security of RATS products is challenging. He notes that one of the main reasons for this misconception is that various important stakeholders are not involved enough in the change process from its early stages, suggesting that “you have to involve people very early in the process. Be- cause the earlier they are involved, the sooner they understand that a change itself is not only good but can be handled because the window of action is wide enough to take all the decisions that need to be taken.”

Situational adaptability

Although there are some commonalities in terms of overall industry trends such as performance increase and cost e↵ectiveness, Michael stresses that Europe contains a large number of States (ECAC 44) and the ATM and airport operational environments, at least in certain aspects like size, traffic density etc., can di↵er considerably, meaning that requirements are di↵erent from one place to another. This further means that the implementation of RATS will benefit from taking an incremental approach based on the needs rather than radical or revolutionary, taking things one by one. Michael argues that for a good and high synergy cross-European implementation, the specific need of each country should be clear and transparent, making it possible to start where there the need is most apparent whilst other can learn and adapt to their needs without losing

(41)

out on safety, interoperability or efficiency.

Threat from virtualization

Michael also raises the implementation of augmented reality and other virtualization technology as the next steps emanating from the original RATS concept. He notes that it is a trend in general, agreeing that if conventional ATS successfully adopts such technology, it increases not only in the safety and efficiency side but also in the competitiveness of conventional ATS.

5.2.3 Industry expert

Mike Fairbanks is a principal with Tailor Airey, a UK-based consultancy specializing in the transportation sector with a main focus on aviation and rail. With some 30 years of experience in the business, Mike has significant experience in working in the aviation industry and has been involved in many ATC projects across the globe. The obstacles identified by Mike are centered around the work culture of the ATC community, financing (at least for smaller airports), as well as operations in terms lack of backup in case of technology malfunction.

Work culture of ATC community

Mike argues that the cultural dimension is an important consideration. Air traffic controllers are generally risk averse and the work culture is a very safe-conscious one, meaning that every change - both small and big - must be clearly safe and secure. As such, the industry progresses in small, conservative, steps. If a radical technology comes about, its implementation is therefore still pushed to be done incrementally, even when a more comprehensive and radical implementation might be beneficial. Another aspect highlighted by Mike lays in the unionization of the ATC community, meaning that the professional sta↵ associations must be engaged and supportive of any changes.

“[The air traffic control community] is cautious about change because it needs to be absolutely sure that the new technology is safe and secure. It highlights the cultural perspective of change. Comprising of highly skilled protagonists, any threat to jobs or to deskilling is a difficult thing to get through. On the other hand, when controllers are convinced of the benefits of change, they are highly supportive.”

This consideration, Mike argues, is twofold. It has a safety and security side, but also an employee-industrial relationship dimension.

Financing

With the aviation industry having moved from being generally more government funded to being much more commercially focused industry, Mike acknowledges that the capital

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

A Multilevel Perspective

KRISTOFFER SEGERSTEN

KEREN ZHAI

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services

A Multilevel Perspective

KRISTOFFER SEGERSTEN KEREN ZHAI

Obstacles for Remote Air Traffic Services: A Multilevel Perspective

by

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Utmaningar för fjärrstyrda flygtrafiktjänster:

Ett multinivåperspektiv av

Kristoffer Segersten Keren Zhai

Utmaningar för fjärrstyrda

flygtrafiktjänster: Ett multinivåperspektiv

Contents

List of figures

List of tables

Abbreviations

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Problematization

1.3 Purpose

1.4 Research question

1.5 Delimitations

1.6 Contributions

1.7 Disposition

2 System description

2.1 Remote Air Traffic Services

2.2 Stakeholders of the aviation industry

3 Theoretical framing

3.1 Large technical systems

3.2 Multilevel perspective

3.3 Implications

4 Methodology

4.1 Research design

4.2 Empirical data gathering method

4.3 Data analysis

4.4 Source classification and criticism

4.5 Research quality

4.6 Research ethics

5 Empirical findings

5.1 Empirical background

5.2 Outcome of interviews