D2.8 - R&I state of the art (capacity and work in progress) (M24) WP2 - R&I state of the art

D2.8 - R&I state of the art (capacity and work in progress) (M24) WP2 - R&I state of the art

Document information and history Information Table GA Number Project Acronym Project Coordinator Document Title Document Type Dissemination Level ACS3-GA-2013-605497 CATER Finmeccanica D2.8 R&I state of the art (capacity and work in progress) (M24) R = Report PU = Public Document history Document log Issue Date Comment Author 1 20/02/2016 Semi-final version of the document Marco Molica Colella (CTECH) 2 04/03/2016 No Major Changes Paolo Salvatore (CTECH) 3 08/03/2016 Approved By Coordinator Giuliano D Auria (Finmeccanica) Document Change Record Issue Item Reason for change none Lead beneficiary and Contributors Lead beneficiary Contributors CTECH Marco Molica Colella, Paolo Salvatore Page 2 of 21

Intellectual Property Rights (foreground) This document and its associated tool developed could be protected under intellectual property rights. Basic Glossary RIA Research and Innovation Action IA Innovation Action CSA Coordination and Support Action TRL Technology Readiness Level DRS Disaster Resilience MG Mobility for Growth Page 3 of 21

Foreword Abstract This report describes the work performed in the context of Work-package 2, Task 3 of the European Project Coordination of Air-transport Time Efficiency Research (CATER). In this task a comprehensive knowledge base of what R&I are being undertaken will be compiled by steps. For this purpose, after assessing 235 R&I projects funded by the European Commission in connection to Time Efficiency (TE) for air-transportation in the last Framework programmes, the first two-year period of the new Framework programme Horizon 2020 has been taken as a reference for the analysis. The analysis was for the first time entirely fulfilled with the CASK Cater Search and Knowledge Management ICT tool developed in WP5. It proved successful in helping to easily finding and assessing 41 projects addressing various themes directly or indirectly related to TE, Door-to-Door model, Flightpath 2050 and EU SRIA in order to verify current EU R&I capability in terms of what is being done, by who and at what cost for the EC. As a conclusion: CASK perfectly worked to find 41 projects which have been financed related to Time Efficiency (TE). No project addressed waterborne transport directly, neither infrastructures See Annex Overall 110 M budget were financed in 2014-2015 11 funding scheme were used with the emerging importance of close to market applications thanks to the DRS (Disaster Resilience) and MG (Mobility for Growth) were the most important topics 316 beneficiaries were financed with a large participation of Industries and various size enterprises. A larger variety of type of transports was addressed, but Multimodality advanced modelling requires lower TRL funding schemes and more time to bring products on the market, which is a potential obstacle for the 4h door-to-door journey Goal within 2050: it is clear that currently this goal looks very difficult to reach and hence considerable effort is required, both conceptual, technological but also political in order to ensure that this Goal will be achieved and the required EU capability fulfilled. Page 4 of 21

Table of Contents Document information and history... 2 Information Table...2 Document history...2 Lead beneficiary and Contributors...2 Intellectual Property Rights (foreground)...3 Basic Glossary...3 Foreword... 4 Abstract...4 A. Introduction... 6 B. Work performed... 7 1. Knowledge base...7 I. Assessment/classification methodology...7 II. EU R&I Capability: assessment/classification outcomes and analysis...9 2. Networking tool...16 C. Future work... 17 1. Knowledge base and Networking increase...17 2. EU R&I capability assessment...17 D. Conclusions... 18 E. ANNEXES project list... 19 Page 5 of 21

A. Introduction In accordance to the Description of Work (DoW) of the project Coordination of Air-transport Time Efficiency Research (CATER), CIAOTECH (CTECH) is responsible for performing a wide ranging search of CORDIS data, public internet sources and R&I players knowledge bases with the objective of compiling a comprehensive knowledge base of what R&I is being undertaken, by whom and to determine what the EU R&I capability is. In this deliverable, after assessing projects by content, funding schemes, budgets and applicants types, the results shall be categorised at a first higher-level and general perspective according to the schema defined in the R&I framework of Task 2.2, including the ACARE SRIA and the Door-to-door process model. A more detailed analysis related to specific R&I frame will be completed in WP4 deliverable Gap analysis between R&I and opportunities/needs (Year II) Page 6 of 21

B. Work performed CIAOTECH used the CASK project platform to examine the last two-years of produced Research in EU in terms of connection to CATER objectives related to TE and 2050 targets intelligence. A map of the 2014-2015 period was built in terms of funding, topics, geography and type of the funded organizations together with their link to TE themes and targets. During the analysis the CASK database has been enriched with the qualified projects to make them easy to retrieve to the community. The community was meanwhile enlarged including authoritative ACARE WG1 members. 1. Knowledge base I. Assessment/classification methodology Differently from the previous analyses (235 projects), no material was provided a priori and the retrieval of relevant projects was entrusted to CASK usage by the analysts. Differently from the previous analyses (235 projects), no material was provided a priori and the retrieval of relevant projects was entrusted to CASK usage by the analysts. As a first step the identification of relevant keywords has been accomplished. Such an analysis was already performed in D2.6, where a set of 26 words was tested to effectively match a similar task (Call Topic analysis). Starting from those keywords and proceeding by trials in CASK a subset has been kept and integrated, reaching the target to recall all the available projects currently available by CORDIS database. This set of keyword is reported in the following table: Keywords Projects % ACARE, SRIA, Flightpath 6 14,63% Baggage, Luggage 6 14,63% Airport, aircraft,travel, Traffic, Harbour, 4 hours, door-to-door 23 56,10% ATM, Air Traffic Management, SESAR 4 9,76% Vertiport, VSTOL, heliport, helicopters 1 2,44% Vehicle 1 2,44% The second step concerned the found-project assessment -in terms of contents - and archiving for analysis and qualification into CASK. In Figure 1 a snapshot of CASK is reported. The project snippets returned by CASK at every query resulted to make easier the distinction among possibly relevant and to-be-discarded projects. Moreover, this phase helped improving or correcting keywords (e.g. cutting those ones mostly linked to other useless topics). Page 7 of 21

The third and last phase concerned the qualification of the projects both to correctly archive it into CASK through its defined Tags and to build relevant statistics. The analysis embraced the topics, the funding, the partners and the connection to TE, D2D, Flightpath 2050 targets, SRIA enablers and R&I frame, building the base of results to be more deeply used into D4.2 (gaps analysis) and D4.3 (recommendations). At the end 41 projects were found to be financed in 2014-2015 and analysed in deep. The assessment of the 41 projects was made using classification parameters in CASK, in turn connected to those delivered through T2.2 on the R&I framework and recently updated in D2.3. Modifications included additional ACARE SRIA R&I needs that were considered relevant to TE and the D2D model process steps that was extracted based on the work of T2.1. On addition, a specific list was implemented within the classification file to include all the ACARE SRIA R&I needs along with a reference number (See also D2.6 and D2.7). Figure 1 - CASK filtered search As already in the past, the assessment of the 41 projects was made on the basis of their abstracts and did not take into account any other information unless the abstract was unclear about the actual aims of the project. Additional information about each project partner budget into the proposal was elaborated starting from the CORDIS open data not directly available in CASK data sheets (which only include the overall funding and cost of the project). Each project was then classified by linking it to the categories below: a) the D2D model process (up to five 3 entries were necessary per project); b) its type of activity (concept, technology, policy, knowledge, infrastructure or other) (only 1 entry); c) its relevance to TE in terms of Type of R&I Need; Page 8 of 21

d) the R&I domains (more than one where appropriate); e) the mode of transport (more than one where appropriate); f) the ACARE SRIA Enabler and R&I need (more than one where appropriate). In addition, comments were provided for all Time-Efficiency relevant projects (hereinafter TE-projects) explaining the link to TE. As a general method, the order of multiple entries was meant to correlate with the relevance of the entry for that project. II. EU R&I Capability: assessment/classification outcomes and analysis Beneficiary analysis: The analysis has concentrated on defining and classifying project partners per type of organization, budget and geographical position among others. A summary picture is reported in Table 1. In 2014-2015 41 project related to CATER targets have been financed, involving 316 beneficiaries for an overall figure of around 110 Million. Note that this number is slightly different from the number of organizations because it does not take into account entities working on more than one project at this level. As a general consideration to highlight for classification: Research Institutes are mostly privately owned research centre Lower Sized Companies are private SMEs in the smallest range size involved in innovation Airports have been considered like Mid-Sized enterprises as we intend them, they are usually end-users and testers for solutions, like some of the Major companies involved, which are mainly large aeronautics companies. Every company with a public participation or role is included in No profit entities Every not technical partner e.g. consultancy, commercial, marketing, design, certification bodies are included in Other Table 1 - beneficiary classification 2014-2015 Institution Type Nr of Beneficiares Total Budget Research Institutes 63 26.953.475,57 Lower sized companies 41 13.729.115,31 Mid sized company / Airport 37 13.228.394,11 Major companies / End Users 47 15.094.064,03 No profit entities linked to government/public companies/public authorities / Cities 28 4.944.618,90 University/Polytechnics/High Education schools 44 19.494.870,45 Others( e.g. Consultancy, clusters, associations, Communication, Design, certification bodies) 55 17.318.550,62 As it can be seen, despite Research institutes leads the chart, an overall predominance of Industry is to be reported with 154 beneficiaries 77 of which were small and mid-sized. Page 9 of 21

To complete the stakeholder picture, (Figure 2) funding and home countries were analysed in order to describe the geography of TE in this first period of the H2020 programme. 7 countries are indeed the most winning and funded concerning TE: UK, Italy, Spain, Germany, France, Belgium and The Netherland. Beneficiaries numbers per type 2014-2015 Others( e.g. Conultancy, clusters, associations, University/Politechnic/High Education schools No profit entities linked to government/public Major companies / End Users Mid sized company / Airport Lower sized companies Research Institutes 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Figure 2 Stakeholder analysis per type (upper), geography (middle) and funding (lower) Page 10 of 21

Instead, when it comes to funding, Germany leads the chart probably due to higher salaries other than witnessing a strong R&I capacity. Relation of the 41 project with Topics and Funding Schemes In 2014-2015 the TE research has been widespread among 11 Funding schemes. As a general remark it must be noted that Clean Sky, CP-IP and CP-P schemes addressed the FP7 programme, although started in 2014. Concerning H2020, the larger number of funded projects (14) addressed RIA schemes (100% funding), which usually means lower readiness of technology and distance from the market (TRL). Here 80 Million were collected out of the 110 Million provided by EC. Instead, among the Innovation Actions (Higher TRL and closer to the market application, 70% funding) we find 15 projects including 11 Phase-1 ( 50.000 each) and 3 Phase-2 (Figure 3) The Excellence Science pillar of Horizon 2020 was represented by 3 ERC projects. They were centred on new mobility and multimodal analysis models outmatching current ones. As already highlighted, the combination of schemes, related funding and TRL information shows that most of the projects where RIA, thus earlier stage of technology and with low economic commitment by the partners (usually related to far from market solutions). At his purpose it can be useful to look at the comparison of the average commitment of beneficiaries among the different projects (Figure 4-lower picture). Of course, this also means that the development of needed technologies and application, especially when addressing multimodal travelling and the whole D2D model, is still behind and needs strong incentives. Particularly, the instrument scheme has resulted exceptionally successful among private companies delivering a number of project and feasibility studies centred on Security (focus on protection of Air, Rail, Water hubs) and Mobility application (Traffic management, Airport operations and ground-operators management) see Figure 5 - which must be close to market applications. A remarkable fact is that none of these projects, although connected, was explicitly related to ACARE, SRIA or other direct guidelines at least in their abstract. Figure 3 - Project Vs Funding Scheme; Page 11 of 21

Figure 4 - Scheme Vs funding (upper); Partners Economic Commitment (lower) Page 12 of 21

Figure 5 - Funded project Vs Topics with highlight on As per the Topics, Figure 5 clearly shows the concentration of the large majority of MG (Mobility for Growth) and DRS (Disaster Resilience). This element also proves to be right the analyses reported in D2.16-D2.18, where H2020 Call for applicants were analysed, individuating in these topics the majority of CATER relevant themes. Type of impact of the 41 projects on TE Figure 6 - Project Vs R&I Types The relevance of projects to TE was assessed based on multiple criteria. The gathered data will be used to complete a detailed match with Type of R&I with Needs and enablers which will be used in D4.2 to complete the Gap Analysis. Page 13 of 21

In this assessment of R&I capability, the relevance of the 41 project is presented starting from a more general point of view and upper levels definition. The first classification for the funded projects has concerned the R&I types. Four types have been considered, as shown in Figure 6 Projects specifically addressing the 4 hours D2D Projects relevant for improving in a directly perceptible manner for the customer Projects relevant for improving in an indirect, transparent manner for the customer Projects not addressing directly TE and D2D neither The general results are very positive both for their contents and for the adopted methodology. Concerning the contents 91 % of the project address TE, directly or transparently Almost 10% out of this 91% addresses directly the whole D2D model - a net increase with respect to previous periods analysis (1%) Only the 9,76 % of projects did not address TE and D2D, yet they are relevant in the analysis because they are linked to general ACARE specific challenges (addressing new clean and more efficient systems, material or components in turn addressing safety and environment) and to SRIA. Concerning the methodology and the CASK usage All the selected results were confirmed to address the targets of the queries Domain activity of the 41 projects The Domain activities of the 41 projects are mostly linked to Technological activities (47,5 projects). With respect to former period a net decrease of these activities has been balanced by an increase in Other activities which is due to the large number of Feasibility studies of s Phase-1 projects. These activities have a small impact in terms of budgets but are to be monitored to follow the continuation of their development into high TRL technology up to the market adoption. A smaller amount is linked to Concepts 5% and Knowledge (12,2 projects). While Policy related projects are only 2,44%, it is most highlighted the absence of Infrastructure related projects. Figure 7 - Domain Activities Page 14 of 21

Type of transport mode of the 41 projects With respect to previous analyses the types of transport are a lot more variegated. Out of the 41 TE-projects Air is the only target just in 17 projects. Indeed the large amount of technologies for faster and safer security checks are dedicated also to rail or water hubs and infrastructures. Rail and Road are specifically addressed in 4 projects. Multimodal transport instead is directly addressed in 12 projects, most of which are related to platform and information systems connecting service providers and end-users and allowing a shorter time Doorto-door. As a general remark, most of projects not addressing Air are related to communication and information technology developments to build a fast-informed network. No project has instead specifically been dedicated to water transport. R&I Capability Summary: Based on the elaborated data the 2014-2015 EC funding had promising effects on the R&I capability related to TE. 41 projects have been financed related at various aspects of TE almost 110 M were funded A larger private companies participation is shown (aggregate 42%) - Figure 8 Multimodality was strongly addressed but no project was dedicated directly to waterborne transport More than 50% of funded project addressed the TE in a transparent for the customer manner, accounting for 64 M. More than 30 % addressed TE in a direct way with 35 M of budget - Figure 9 10 % of the projects addressed directly the 4 hours D2D model Despite most projects have been funded by RIA actions a promising amount of IA due to s aims at developing commercial ready technology to be deployed but none of these projects openly quoted SRIA, ACARE or Flightpath targets at least in the abstract Figure 8 Beneficiary type in percentage Page 15 of 21

Figure 9 - R&I Capability snapshot (Bubble size represents the allocated funding) 2. Networking tool The CASK environment is fully operative and it was used for this deliverable purposes. Registration of users is fully available. The aim off Task 2.3 is also fostering networking with relevant stakeholders through CASK The goal of the provided tool is to create and maintain an informal and far reaching network which be appealing To this aim the contacts and interactions with relevant stakeholders has been kept increasing. At the moment a defined group of 65 members from ACARE WG1 have been registered and it will be proactively involved not only in the use of the platform but also in tuning the analyses to be performed and in the results assessment. A LinkedIn Group was created (see deliverable 2.6), where available all the CASK users are invited to join. The CATER web portal has been also modified, the main modifications allow to: Give a proper separate space to University & Education dissemination materials Highlight news of Technology Watch related to Task 2.4 activities, provided by ALTRAN s IMPA tool Page 16 of 21

C. Future work Further work will continue to be performed on all three aspects of Task 2.3, the knowledge-base, EU R&I capability assessment and the networking tool. 1. Knowledge base and Networking increase CTECH will continue its efforts in: 1) The identification of additional URLs and News relevant to the CATER community. 2) The identification of other relevant material, such as documents, reports, images, etc. 3) The increase of the network on CASK 4) CTECH will continue with maintenance and the development of the CASK Environment. In addition, CTECH will continue to support the management and expansion of the network through WP6. 2. EU R&I capability assessment CTECH will continually asses the EU R&I Capability in case of new significant additions within the knowledge base and relevant information provided by WP3. The main effort will aim at: 1) The update of identification and classification of additional CORDIS projects relevant to TE through CASK. 2) Elaborating results about project beneficiaries, evidencing the champions and most funded entities in EU and their respective fields 3) Finding and Highlighting the star projects among the selected ones in term of TE 4) Monitoring updates in the reference documents provided by the Stakeholders (such as ACARE s SRIA) to update the R&I frame for the assessment Page 17 of 21

D. Conclusions Task 2.3 of the CATER project related to the development of a CATER Knowledge base, the assessment of the EU R&I Capability and the creation of a CATER networking tool. With the CASK completed, CTECH has proceeded with the identification and classification of TE related project in the 2014-2105 two year periods. The projects with relevance to Time-Efficiency have been identified and classified based on their connection to the D2D model process, the R&I domain addressed and the ACARE SRIA R&I needs at multiple levels. Moreover, the funding from EC has been analysed, together with beneficiaries to define who is doing what and at what cost for the EC. As a result, the theme, the budget and the beneficiaries of 41 relevant project were analysed, classified and stored into the CASK knowledge management database. Based on this work an assessment of the EU R&I Capability has been produced able to provide a significant gaps analysis towards the achievement of the ACARE SRIA Challenge 1 Goals linked to mobility and time Efficiency, which will be provided in WP4 D4.2. Finally, CTECH has continued to work on the development and expansion of the CASK network registering 65 ACARE WG1 members. Page 18 of 21

E. ANNEXES project list Project Acronym Programm e Topic Funding Scheme Nr Partn Year Start Year stop Budget Total cost Future Sky Safety H2020 MG-1.4-2014 RIA 32 2015 2019 14.882.994 16.832.874 Dataset 2050 H2020 MG-1.7-2014 RIA 4 2014 2017 1.327.255 1.327.255 RTMGEAR FP7 CLEAN-SKY CLEAN-SKY 2 2014 2016 234.780 314.960 AEROPZT FP7 CLEAN-SKY CLEAN-SKY 5 2014 2016 739.467 739.467 FAMEC FP7 CLEAN-SKY CLEAN-SKY 3 2014 2016 449.998 600.000 ART H2020 DRS-17-2014-1 1 2015 2016 50.000 71.400 SENEX H2020 DRS-17-2014-1 1 2015 2016 50.000 71.400 PASSME H2020 MG-1.3-2014 RIA 12 2015 2018 4.631.212 4.639.086 FLYSEC H2020 DRS-16-2014 RIA 11 2015 2018 4.089.500 4.141.375 Holoscan H2020 DRS-17-2014-1 D3Impact H2020 IT-1-2015-1 Aces H2020 DRS-17-2014 1 2014 2015 50.000 71.429 1 2015 2016 50.000 71.429 1 2015 2017 863.330 1.233.329 ULTIMATE H2020 MG-1.5-2014 RIA 10 2015 2018 3.138.122 3.138.122 Magnum H2020 ERC-CoG-2014 ERC-COG 2 2015 2020 1.975.500 1.975.500 WayTo H2020 ERC-StG-2014 ERC-STG 1 2015 2020 1.336.563 1.336.563 Airport IQ H2020 IT-1-2014 FAST-TRACKs H2020 IT-1-2015-1 Safesky H2020 DRS-17-2014-1 3 2015 2017 1.963.231 2.804.615 1 2015 2016 50.000 71.429 3 2015 2015 50.000 71.429 DARWIN H2020 DRS-07-2014 RIA 9 2015 2018 4.998.896 4.998.896 TIMON H2020 MG-3.5a-2014 RIA 11 2015 2018 5.605.213 5.605.213 SocialCar H2020 MG-7.1-2014 RIA 26 2015 2018 5.384.646 5.953.083 CREATE H2020 MG-5.3-2014 RIA 18 2015 2018 3.870.146 3.981.461 DORA H2020 MG-1.3-2014 RIA 13 2015 2018 4.682.895 4.682.895 SETRIS H2020 MG-9.6-2014 CSA 18 2015 2017 2.999.405 2.999.405 USE-IT H2020 MG-8.2b-2014 CSA 8 2015 2017 955.625 955.625 EuTRavel H2020 MG-7.2a-2014 RIA 17 2015 2017 3.873.993 3.873.993 OPTIMUM H2020 MG-7.1-2014 RIA 19 2015 2018 5.966.186 5.966.186 Aerowash II H2020 IT-1-2014-1 1 2015 2015 50.000 71.429 Page 19 of 21

Project Acronym Programm e Topic Funding Scheme Nr Partn Year Start Year stop Budget Total cost BONVOYAGE H2020 MG-7.2a-2014 RIA 11 2015 2018 4.000.000 4.000.000 IT2RAIL H2020 MG-2.2-2014 RIA 27 2015 2017 WISE H2020 IT-1-2014-1 e-airport H2020 GALILEO-1-2014 ANGELS H2020 IT-1-2014-1 12.000.000 12.025.000 1 2015 2015 50.000 71.429 IA 8 2015 2017 1.907.821 2.586.200 1 2015 2015 50.000 71.429 MIND-SETS H2020 MG-9.2-2014 CSA 8 2014 2017 1.755.559 1.755.559 AERFOR H2020 IT-1-2014-1 TripOD H2020 IT-1-2014-1 1 2015 2015 50.000 71.429 1 2014 2015 50.000 71.429 CONCORDE FP7-JTI CLEAN-SKY 2 2014 2015 374.682 499.576 METAFERW FP7 IDEAS-ERC ERC 1 2014 2019 1.242.162 1.242.162 CONSORTIS FP7 SEC-2012.3.4-5 CP-FP 11 2014 2017 3.953.449 5.132.840 ABC4EU FP7 SEC-2012.3.4-6 CP-IP 15 2014 2017 ACEP H2020 IT-1-2014 12.015.246 16.817.103 1 2015 2017 2.500.000 4.005.477 Page 20 of 21

END OF DOCUMENT Page 21 of 21