FF-ICE

Flight and flow information for a collaborative environment

FF-ICE is an ICAO concept that addresses limitations and constraints of the current flight planning mechanism, commonly known as the ICAO 2012 flight plan (FPL2012)

THIS IS PART OF
Optimised operational performance | Network Manager
Network operations

Introduction to FF-ICE

FF-ICE aims to facilitate the transition to a fully collaborative environment where a flight trajectory is shared and optimised during all phases of a flight, known as trajectory-based operations or TBO.

In the first release, FF-ICE/R1, the concept introduces six services for use mainly in the pre-departure phase of flight. Each service is supported by harmonised procedures and standardised messages. They will enable stakeholders to plan, file, update or cancel flights plans, provide data on certain flight events and request and receive flight plan information and data. The second release, FF-ICE/R2, will address post-departure negotiation between airspace users and ATM service providers.

A key innovation within FF-ICE is the concept of the Globally Unique Flight Identifier (GUFI). GUFI provides a unique reference to a specific flight, helping distinguish between similar flights and associate messages to the correct flights.

The first FF-ICE flight plan for an operational flight, anywhere in the world, was filed by Lufthansa to EUROCONTROL NM, for a flight from Munich to Hamburg on 15 December 2022.

FF-ICE provides:

  • the ability to exchange more flight and flow related information (including 4D trajectory and flight specific performance data) in a robust, systematic, and expandable manner. This will facilitate future requirements for both operators and ATM;
  • a systematic collaboration or negotiation procedure between operators and ATM, which facilitates the determination of an optimal route and trajectory.
     

FF-ICE Presentations

Watch our presentation to learn more about FF-ICE:

Watch the FF-ICE presentation during the Flight Dispatcher Days 2025 event and download the presentations:

Play the recording Download the presentations

Watch the FF-ICE webinar on the EUROCONTROL Learning Zone

This webinar provides an introduction to FF-ICE, explains the main changes compared to FPL 2012, the high-level requirements from CP1 and provides an overview of how to start exchanging eFPLs with NM.

Watch the recording

NM implementation of FF-ICE Services

FF-ICE operates within a system-wide information management (SWIM) operational environment in which the main procedures and processes are described in terms of services. The EUROCONTROL Network Manager (NM) provides the following FF-ICE services for the IFPS Zone (IFPZ). Detailed descriptions of these services are available in the SWIM Registry .

  • Filing Service, allowing the submission, update and cancellation of FF-ICE flight plans (eFPLs) that include 4D trajectory information, flight specific performance data, and other FF-ICE data elements, such as the GUFI;
  • Trial Service, that enables airspace users to determine the acceptability/validity of their flight plan and the ATM feedback without actually filing the plan;
  • Flight Data Request Service, which can be used to obtain information about a flight such as the complete flight plan, supplementary flight plan data or the filing status for a flight plan already submitted;
  • Notification Service, allowing users to pass departure and arrival information;
  • Data Publication Service, providing flight data to subscribed users such as flight plans, flight plan updates, flight plan cancellations and so on.

The current NM implementation of FF-ICE is described in the IFPS User Manual (procedures, data items and specific associated errors) and the NM B2B Reference Manual (systems interface specification).

IFPS Users Manual

Version
Wave 2.1
Download

The implementation of FF-ICE flight planning and its adoption within the IFPZ involves an extensive transition period, requiring mixed mode of operations, where FPL2012 (via AFTN/SITA) and eFPL (via NM B2B) will coexist. Consequently, NM will support both modes during this transition period.

 

User steps for FF-ICE implementation

Most users will use the NM B2B services directly, and will therefore require an NM B2B certificate. Some operators using a flight plan service provider to exchange FF-ICE messages may not require an NM B2B certificate, depending on their arrangement. This should be clarified with the service provider.

These are the steps for users requiring an NM B2B certificate:

  1. Obtain a NM B2B PREOPS certificate: As NM provides FF-ICE services via Business-to-Business web services (B2B), a PREOPS certificate issued by NM with FF-ICE capabilities is required to access and use the NM FF-ICE services on the NM test (PREOPS) platform.
  2. Develop and test user application: The NM B2B PREOPS certificate allows users to develop and test their B2B eFPL applications.
  3. Perform the operational validation process: An NM B2B OPS certificate is required to access and use FF-ICE Services on the OPS platform. An NM B2B OPS certificate will be obtained by undertaking the operational validation process.

Further details about NM B2B including the validation process and a certificate request form are available on the dedicated NM B2B webpage:

NM B2B

Network Manager business-to-business web services

More info

Reference documentation

Related regulations

The deployment of FF-ICE/R1 is mandated by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/116 (Common Project 1) by the implementation target date of the 31st of December 2025. The mandate applies to airspace users, ANSPs and NM and further details are provided in the SESAR Deployment Programme.

FF-ICE Use Cases to enable use of FF-ICE services and information as mandated by the CP1 regulation and the SESAR Deployment Programme have been documented and are available on the SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) website.

 

See the regulation Use cases & Information Exchange Requirements

Frequently Asked Questions

1 FAQ - eFPL Elaboration

Differences in acceptance by NM of FPLs and eFPLs may occur on rare occasions. 

As the FPL data is less accurate than that contained in an eFPL, there is more room for interpretation and in many cases the NM system receiving FPLs gives the benefit of the doubt to operators and adjusts the profile to make it compliant with the restrictions.

This is no longer the case with eFPLs that for example indicate precisely where a climb/descent is initiated and terminated. Furthermore, NM take into consideration additional constraints, not taken into consideration by operators (mainly coming from LoAs). As such this may give differences in the result of the evaluation process.

These differences may lead in an FPL being ACK and the eFPL REJ, or vice-and-versa.

Operators are required to include in eFPLs the departure and arrival routes of the flight i.e. the routes connecting the departure and the destination aerodromes to the enroute part of the flight.

The departure and arrival routes may be either a SID or a STAR respectively, at aerodromes where such routes have been published, or a direct (DCT) route, at aerodromes where the use of DCT route is permitted for departure/arrival. Restrictions applicable to the use of SID/STARs and DCT routes for departure and arrival are described in the Annex 3A of the Route Availability Document (RAD). See RAD website.

SIDs and STARs should be included in eFPLs as published within the corresponding national AIPs, including the SID/STAR designator and the list of points that compose the SID/STAR.

Approach procedures shall not be included in eFPLs. The trajectory segment between the Initial Approach Fix (the last point of the STAR) and the destination aerodrome may be included in an eFPL trajectory using the STAR designator as routeDesignatorToNextElement for the last RouteTrajectoryElement of a trajectory. The alongRouteDistance provided for the last RouteTrajectoryElement, corresponding to the aerodrome of destination, may include the length of the approach procedure that is used internally for the flight trajectory calculation by the eFPL originator system (sometimes called “virtual distance”).

Departure/arrival transition routes, including so called "initial climb procedures", that are published at certain aerodromes to connect a SID/STAR to the aerodrome or to the enroute part of the flight may be provided as follows: the points of the SID/STAR preceded or followed, as appropriate, by the points of the transition route as elementStartPoint of a RouteTrajectory element, all points connected using the SID/STAR designator as routeDesignatorToNextElement.

Note: This is a temporary solution put in place while waiting for the concept of departure/arrival transition route to be adopted by ICAO as a type of ATS route and be integrated with route/trajectory conventions that are used for the exchange of flight plan information.

Similar to the ICAO 2012 flight plan, no cruising levels (routeChange) are expected to be provided for level-off segments on a departure/arrival route.

If the flight has OAT portions, the eFPL shall be submitted as described in the IFPS User Manual C.2.1 using the features of the NM extension. See example below:

The trajectory shall contain:

  • The aerodrome of departure with, as routeDesignatorToNextElement:
    • the SID name,
    • or “DIRECT” if the route contains no SID
  • The aerodrome of arrival

The NM FIXM Extension documentation is available on the NM B2B documentation website.

The IATA flight identifier cannot easily be extracted from the ICAO aircraft identification. The best approach to get reliable information is for operators to provide both ICAO and IATA identifiers directly within the eFPL.

Operators and CFSPs are encouraged to include the IATA Flight ID when available in eFPL filing requests and updates.

The eurSpecialHandling provided by the NM extension shall be used.

Air filed flight plans shall be filled using an FPL2012.

EETs have to be provided in the NM FIXM extension and estimatedElapsedTime (cf §D.5.24. NmFlightRouteInformationExtensionType Rules of the NM B2B FF-ICE Services documentation).

Yes, it is possible to submit subsequent messages in ICAO 2012 flight plan format.

Alternating between FF-ICE and FPL2012 procedures is not recommended as it can create complications. In situations where the operators have reverted to FPL2012 procedures, they should not attempt to resume FF-ICE procedures for that flight. In some cases, they may receive rejections as a result of mixed mode submissions.

Please refer to the IFPS User Manual section G.2.

Additionally, continued submission of ICAO 2012 flight plan messages by mandated operators does not comply with the CP1 FF-ICE mandate.

(IFPS User Manual - §C.2.1)

  • If the flight is fully IFR/GAT, i.e without OAT or VFR portions, and contains no planned delay, then the submitter should provide the Trajectory of the flight. Note that the CP1 regulation requires civil general air traffic operating fully under IFR in the mandated areas to provide a 4D trajectory and expanded route in the eFPL.
  • If the flight requires VFR portions or planned delay indication, but has no OAT portions, the submitter should provide the Route as an ordered list of route/trajectory elements.
    An ordered list of route/trajectory elements is a trajectory composed of elements without:
    • alongRouteDistance
    • point4D
  • If the flight has OAT portions, the submitter will have to provide the route description in a routeText.

The new cruising level (and speed, even if not changed) has to be added in a routeChange node of the element that corresponds to the significant point where the change would have been included in the Field 15 route of an FPL2012.

To be noted: cruising level changes should not be provided on SIDs and STARs.

In addition, when a trajectory is provided:

  • The start of a climb will be provided as a 4D Point marked with TCP_VERTICAL as propertyType and a TOP_OF_CLIMB propertyType for the element at the end of the climb.
  • The start of a descent will be provided as a 4D Point marked with TCP_VERTICAL as propertyType and another TCP_VERTICAL property type for the element at the end of the descent.

Example for a climb:

2 FAQ - eFPL Distribution

The implementation of FF-ICE flight planning and its adoption within Europe involves an extensive transition period, during which mixed modes of operation have to be supported.

NM has implemented a translation service, whereby FF-ICE flight plan data is translated to ICAO 2012 flight plan format for distribution to ANSPs within the IFPZ that are not yet FF-ICE enabled. Translated flight plans may be delivered to ANSPs outside of the IFPZ through use of the translation and delivery service. NM also provides a conversion service whereby ICAO 2012 flight plans are converted into their FIXM equivalent.

More information is available in the FPFDE FF-ICE/R1 Mixed Mode Transition Operations document.

Aircraft take-off mass and flight performance data (Climb and Descend profile and speed schedule) are only made available to ASPs (ATM Service providers).

Operators may use the translationRecipient feature and add to the eFPL as per the following example:

The full (updated) FF-ICE flight plan (eFPL) will be distributed via the FF-ICE Publication Service or returned via the FF-ICE Flight Data Request Service.

Does the FLIGHT_PLAN Subscription Topic provide FF-ICE data using FIXM?

No, the FFICE_PUBLICATION topic must be used to receive FF-ICE flight plans (eFPLs).

 If an FF-ICE flight plan (eFPL) is filed and accepted, is the information sent to both FFICE_PUBLICATION and FLIGHT_PLAN topics?

Yes; the eFPL will be published via the FFICE_PUBLICATION using FIXM format, and via the FLIGHT_PLAN topic using NM B2B format.

3 FAQ - Regulatory Requirements

The FF-ICE mandate comes from the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/116 (otherwise known as Common Project 1 or CP1). The requirements are elaborated in the SESAR Deployment Manager’s SESAR Deployment Programme and the Information Exchange Requirements document.

The Common Project 1 regulation mandates general air traffic operating under IFR in the mandated areas (FIRs/UIRs of EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland) to submit FF-ICE flight plans from the 1st of January 2026.

NM provides a flight plan processing and distribution to the IFPZ, including areas not included in the mandate. Therefore, NM will continue to accept FPL2012 flight plans for the foreseeable future.

  • From ICAO PANS-ATM Chapter 17 (detailing the minimum requirements for an eFPL):
    • Section 17.4.3.3: “An eFPL message shall include, as a minimum, the GUFI and the flight data items prescribed by the provisions in Annex 2, 3.3.2 and Appendix 2 of this document”.
    • Section 17.4.1.5 says: “The originator of PFP, eFPL or Flight Plan Update messages shall include flight plan version information that allows a recipient to verify that the flight plan version in the message is more recent than previously received, and that no incremental updates were missed”.
  • From the SESAR Deployment Manager Information Exchange Requirements document (detailing specific additional requirements from the CP1 regulation):
    • Civil general air traffic operating under IFR are required to include flight specific performance data (climb & descent speed schedule and performance climb and descent profiles), take off mass, expanded route and 4D trajectory in the FF-ICE flight plan. SESAR Deployment Manager refers to this as a “full eFPL”.
    • For civil general air traffic operating under mixed IFR/VFR, and for state general air traffic operating under IFR or mixed IFR/VFR, the inclusion of flight specific performance data (climb & descent speed schedule and performance climb and descent profiles), take off mass, expanded route and 4D trajectory in the FF-ICE flight plan is optional. SESAR Deployment Manager refers to this as a “light” eFPL.
    • State air traffic operating as operational air traffic or any aircraft operating under full VFR are not required to submit an eFPL.
    • State air traffic includes military, customs and police aircraft.

EUROCONTROL Network Manager and the SESAR Deployment Manager have prepared a specimen aeronautical information circular (AIC) and specimen text for inclusion in AIP ENR 1.10 and 1.11 for publication by the states covered by the FF-ICE mandate.

The AIC includes:

  • Introduction and background
  • Explanation of benefits
  • Requirements and recommendations for operators
  • Compliance requirements for operators
  • Area and date of applicability
  • Applicable operators
  • Reference documentation and where to find more information

Additionally, ICAO Doc 7030 European Region Supplementary Procedures will be updated to include:

  • Details of the FF-ICE mandate and the applicable FIRs/UIRs.
  • Information regarding translation services provided by the EUROCONTROL Network Manager to manage the transition from ICAO Flight Plan 2012 to FF-ICE.
  • Alignment with the FF-ICE procedures detailed in PANS-ATM Chapter 17.

FF-ICE is mandated from the 1st of January 2026 for all general air traffic operating under IFR in the FIR/UIRs of EU Member States, Norway & Switzerland. This includes third country (non-EU) operators.

4 FAQ - General Topics

An FF-ICE webinar has been provided through the EUROCONTROL Aviation Learning Centre (ALC) and a recording of this webinar is available on the EUROCONTROL Learning Zone. 

Depending on feedback received from stakeholders, the ALC may consider future training courses dedicated to FF-ICE.

Separately there are training modules on FF-ICE delivered by ALC as part of various training courses. Further information can be found on the ALC website and by contacting them directly.

FF-ICE services are provided through the EUROCONTROL NM B2B services. To cope with contingency situations, the current deployment architecture of the NM B2B services includes two distinct sites. The NM B2B services are always served by a single site: the primary site in normal conditions, and the contingency site in contingency situations. Full details of the contingency arrangements for B2B services can be obtained by contacting the NM B2B Services.

In the event that B2B services are completely unavailable for any reason, meaning that it will be impossible to exchange FF-ICE message, operators may revert to filing flight plans in ICAO 2012 flight plan format through AFTN.

We recommend that ANSPs maintain support of AFTN. There are a number of reasons for this including:

  • AFTN can be used as a back up to data exchange via B2B
  • Not all operators are mandated to implement FF-ICE and operators will implement in different timeframes. RQP/RQS messages are more suited for ICAO 2012 flight plan than an FF-ICE flight data request message due to the absence of a GUFI
  • Air filed flight plans are not covered by the CP1 mandate and will continue to be received via AFTN.

Contact us

For any further questions, please get in touch with the FF-ICE team using the "Contact us" button on the bottom right of this page.

 

Related links

Consult the IFPS Users Manual
Consult the FIXM User Manual
Back to top

Was this page helpful?