WORKSHOP ON THE REGULATORY APPROACH FOR DATA LINK SERVICES

1
WORKSHOP ON THEREGULATORY APPROACH FOR DATA
LINK SERVICES
Brussels May 2nd 2006
European Organisation for the Safety of Air
Navigation
2
Agenda

• I Introduction
• II SES mandate
• III Key points for the development of an IR
• IV Overview of the Regulatory Approach
• V Data Link Roadmap
• VI Regulations Specifications
• VII Results of the formal consultation
• VIII The Way Forward
• IX Next steps
• X AOB

3
Introduction

• Background
• Objectives of the Workshop
• Results of the formal consultation
• Proposed way forward
• Next steps

4
II SES Mandate
5
II - SES Mandate

• Justification of the IR
• Improve the interoperability and efficiency of
  the controller/pilot communications
• Provision and use of data link services supported
  by air ground communications

6
II - SES Mandate

• Specific issues
• Objective scope (aircraft to be equipped, data
  link airspace,..)
• Data link services to be used
• Communication infrastructure to be used
• ATC procedures
• General requirements applicable to stakeholders
• Conditions and criteria for temporary exemptions
• Implementation conditions
• For the definition of the RA, consider various
  technical alternatives with their strong and weak
  points, their capability to support current and
  foreseen data link applications
• Availability of spectrum
• Flexibility, evolution of the IR
• Identification of specifications

7
II - SES Mandate

• Material to be used as appropriate
• The Commissions study on ATM/CNS
  interoperability roadmap (Sept 2003)
• The Commissions study on the roadmap for the
  implementation of data link services in the EATM
  (Feb 2003)
• ICAO Chicago Convention and its Annexes
• ESARRs
• EASA JAA documents
• EUROCAE standards
• EUROCONTROL specifications
• ETSI standards

8
III Key points for the development of an
interoperability IR
9
III Key points for the development of an
interoperability IR

• Objectives of the interoperability Regulation
• Interoperability of systems, constituents and
  associated procedures
• Coordinated introduction of new agreed and
  validated concepts of operations or technology
• An IR refines essential requirements
• Subjects for prescription on technical and
  operational matters must be
• Standardised
• Validated
• Compliant with ESARRs
• Business case
• Does not prevent complementary voluntary
  implementation

10
IV Overview of the Regulatory Approach
11
IV Overview of the RA Introduction of the
Regulatory Approach

• First step in the development of the IR
• Objectives of the RA
• Identification of the regulatory coverage in
  terms of subjects for prescription ? Analysis of
  specific issues (EC mandate)
• Definition of Alternatives for the regulatory
  approach
• Impact assessment recommended Alternative

12
IV - Overview of the RARA - breakdown
Regulatory approach
13
IV - Overview of the RA Interoperability
analysis/1

• Interoperability target functional architecture
  for DLS
• HMIs, pilot, controller.
• Data processing systems (Airborne and Ground)
• Communication systems
• Interoperability areas
• Selection of data link services from existing
  standards
• Selection of end to end communication mechanism
  from existing standards
• Selection of air ground communication link from
  existing standards
• Selection of data link ATC procedures
• Identification of subjects for prescriptions in
  the IR addressing interoperability areas of the
  target

14
IV - Overview of the RA Example - Selection
criteria for a/g data link technology
Existence of open, validated standards Interoperab
ility, Safety and Performance
Consistent with EC DL Roadmap Study
Stakeholder support deployment plans
Spectrum planning availability
IR Region Geographical coverage
Availability of products
15
IV - Overview of the RA Interoperability
analysis/2

• Deployment conditions
• Data link EU airspace
• Categories of a/c to be equipped
• Responsibility of stakeholders
• Identification of subjects for prescriptions in
  the IR addressing the deployment of DLS in the
  EATMN EU airspace

16
IV - Overview of the RA Alternatives for the RA

• On the basis of subjects identified in the
  interoperability analysis
• 3 Alternatives are proposed to delineate the
  nature and level of prescriptions, and the
  balance between IR and MoCs
• Impact on stakeholders varies significantly with
  the Alternative considered

17
IV - Overview of the RA Alternative 1 / Door
open to various technologies

• Data link services (ACM, ACL, AMC, DLIC) (source
  ED-120)
• Communication exchange mechanisms air-ground
  communication link independent from standardised
  communication protocols
• Means of compliance identified within the IR (ATN
  VDL-2 for short term, open to new technology, )
  
• Prescriptions to deploy data link services (EU
  airspace, a/c,..)
• Implementation aspects
• Aircraft ? one of means of compliance identified
  in the IR
• Ground systems ? all means of compliance
  identified in the IR
• ACSPs ? support all means of compliance
  identified in the IR

18
IV - Overview of the RA Alternative 2 / ATN
prescription

• Data link services (ACM, ACL, AMC, DLIC) (source
  ED-120)
• Communication exchange mechanisms based on ATN
  communication protocols (upper and lower layers)
  and air-ground communication link based on VDL-2
• Prescriptions to deploy data link services (EU
  airspace, a/c,..)
• Implementation aspects
• Aircraft ? CPDLC ATN VDL-2
• Ground systems ? CPDLC ATN integrated with FDPS
• ACSPs ? VDL-2 service ATN protocols

19
IV - Overview of the RA Alternative 3 /
ATN/VDL-2 with FANS accommodation

• Data link services (ACM, ACL, AMC, DLIC) (source
  ED-120)
• Communication exchange mechanisms based on ATN
  communication protocols (upper and lower layers)
  and air-ground communication link based on VDL-2
• Prescriptions to deploy data link services (EU
  airspace, a/c,..) and accommodate FANS 1/A
  aircraft
• Implementation aspects
• Aircraft ? CPDLC ATN VDL-2
• Ground systems ? CPDLC ATN FANS integrated
  with FDPS
• ACSPs ? VDL-2 service ATN protocols ACARS
  protocols

20
IV - Overview of the RA IR Alternatives
Alternative 3
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
IR
Services
Services
Services
IR
IR
MoC 1 Eurocontrol Spec At time T1 ATN/VDL M2
Technology Open
ATN/VDL M2
ATN/VDL M2
FANS Acc
MoCMeans of Compliance
21

• V Data-Link Roadmap

22
Why Data Link Now ?
Fewer Misunderstandings
Reduced Controller/Pilot Workload
More ATC Capacity
Kick Start the Future
23
WE MUST IMPLEMENT IN TIME
24
The LINK 2000 Programme

• Implementing En-route Controller Pilot Data LINK
  (CPDLC)
• Baseline ICAO standards
• Forward compatible with new services/technology

ProgrammeObjectives
11 Capacity Increase with 75 flights equipped
Data link to supplement voice
25
LINK Today 2005 - Maastricht
Operational
26
LINK 2007 Germany Join
Operational
27
LINK 2008 Maastricht UAC, Germany, Skyguide,
Italy operational
Operational
1-10
11-20
21-30
Bottleneck?
11-20
21-30
21-30
21-30
21-30
1-10

x-x additional capacity required by summer
2009 relative to 2004
1-10
- source, Network Capacity Plan 2006-2009
28
LINK 2010/2011 Portugal, France, Spain and UK
Operational
11-20
11-20
21-30
21-30
gt30
gt30
21-30
gt30
gt10
1-10
29
Future developments
FUTURE OPS/COM
CASCADE
LINK 2000 Mode S EHS
Airborne Separation Trajectory
negotiation Autonomous Separation

• Strategic Context
• Objectives
• Scope
• Approach

2000gt
2005 gt
2020
2010 gt
30
SESAR Builds on LINK CASCADE
Based on future requirements Building on current
plans
The Longer Term will be Defined
31
VI Regulations Specifications
32
V - Regulations Specifications
IR
SPECIFICATION
CS2
IR 1 (e.g. COTR)
Community Specification (e.g. OLDI)
CS3
IR makes the Spec. binding
IR 2 (e.g. FMTP)
EUROCONTROL Specification
Spec. 1
IR 3 (e.g. DLS Alt. 1)
Specs explicitly identified in the IR
Spec. 2
33
V - Regulations Specifications Eurocontrol
specification

• Document managed under the EUROCONTROL
  Documentation Framework for standardisation of
• Technical matters
• Operational matters
• Organisational matters

34
V - Regulations Specifications Objectives of
specifications

• Complement, augment ICAO, EUROCAE/RTCA,
  international standards
• LINK Baseline document
• Harmonize Pan-European technical solutions
  neither covered by international standards nor by
  Regulations
• ADEXP (data exchange standard), mil. standards
• Specify Means of Compliance, MoC with SES
  Regulations
• Presumption of conformity with Regulations
  granted for constituents systems implementing
  MoCs

35
V - Regulations SpecificationsHow do we
develop specifications?

• Drafting by a team of experts
• Formal consultation (airspace users, ANSPs, civil
  and military aviation authorities, industry,)
• Review and update based on results of formal
  consultation
• Approval by the EUROCONTROL DG
• Transmission as appropriate to the European
  Commission
• Either as a proposed MOC of a binding nature for
  an SES Regulation
• Or as a proposed Community specification in
  response to a mandate (Article 4(1) b of
  interoperability Regulation)

36
V - Regulations Specifications When do we need
specifications?

• Harmonization of Pan-European systems
• based on existing ICAO, EUROCAE/RTCA
  international standards
• based on common European solution when no
  international standard exists
• Under SES Regulations
• IR EUROCONTROL Spec gt Interoperability of
  systems

37
V - Regulations Specifications Why do we need
a Spec for DL?

• Complement, augment ICAO, EUROCAE/RTCA Standards
• Refinement of Safety and Performance Requirements
• Formatting of messages
• Profiling of communications and applications
• Operational Procedures

38
VI Results of the formal consultation
39
VI Results of the formal consultationDistributi
on of responses
40
VI Results of the formal consultationDistributi
on of responses
41
VI Results of the formal consultationApproach
for the consolidation of comments

• Step 1 Consolidation of comments relating to the
  choice of the alternative
• Step 2 Consolidation of comments on the chapters
  of the main body of the RA
• Step 3 Cross-references of all individual
  comments tabled in Annex B towards consolidated
  items in steps 1 2.

42
VI Results of the formal consultation Step 1 -
Categories of comments

• Categories of comments for each alternative
• Accepted, comments accept the alternative
• Accepted with conditions, comments accept the
  alternative with conditions that do not affect
  the regulatory coverage
• Accepted with reservations, comments accept the
  alternative with reservations that do affect the
  regulatory coverage
• Rejected.

43
VI Results of the formal consultationConsolidat
ed C R on Alternative 1

• Accepted
• 25 responses (60) have accepted Alternative 1
  without any condition or reservation.
• Accepted with conditions
• Relationship between IR and Spec (MoC) needed -
  Agreed
• Avoid fragmentation and proliferation of
  technical solutions - Agreed
• Possibility to accept any new technology
  compliant with mandatory requirements Not
  Agreed (but new MoCs in future)
• MoCs should provide satisfactory level of
  guidance for stakeholders - Agreed

44
Interoperability Alternative 1
Procedures
S P E C T R U M
LRUs
Antennas
CMU/ATSU
CPDLC Service
ATN
VDL2
VHF
Wideband?
Band X
IP?
IRMOC 1
IRMOC 2
IR
VDL2
e.g. Wideband
Procedures
FDP
Front End
ATN
CPDLC Service
IP?
45
Performance RCP Theoretical Approach
RCP End-to-End
Convert
46
VI Results of the formal consultationConsolidat
ed C R on Alternative 1

• Accepted with reservations
• Enlarge the regulatory coverage
• Introduction of more complex and time critical
  DLS Not agreed at this stage
• Introduction of more efficient data
  communications including broadcast functionality
  and industrial solutions (TCP/IP) Not agreed at
  this stage
• Reduce the regulatory coverage
• Specific technology for air ground
  communications should not be mandated in the IR.
  Not agreed
• Rejected Not agreed
• Prescriptions of interoperability, performances
  of DLS independent from technology not realistic
• Evaluation of the IR difficult if all
  technologies are not known
• No need for an IR

47
VI Results of the formal consultationConsolidat
ed C R on Alternative 2

• Accepted
• 3 responses (7) have accepted alternative 2
  without any condition or reservation.
• Accepted with conditions Not agreed
• A revision process of the IR should be defined to
  accommodate new technologies supported by ICAO.
• Accepted with reservations
• No position expressing reservations.
• Rejection
• No position expressing rejection.

48
VI Results of the formal consultationConsolidat
ed C R on Alternative 3

• Accepted
• 5 responses (12) have accepted alternative 3
  without any condition or reservation.
• Accepted with conditions
• No position expressing reservations.
• Accepted with reservations
• No position expressing reservations.
• Rejection Agreed but Accommodation considered
• CPDLC FANS 1/A CPDLC ATN not equivalent
• Operational procedures not strictly identical
• Accommodation of FANS 1/A implies voice
  readback
• Additional costs with limited benefits

49
FANS Accommodation e.g. MAAS UAC
CMU/ATSU
MCDU/DCDU
VDR
vgs
VDL M2
ACC
CWP
WAN
ATN End System
FDPS
CWP
ATN R
CWP
CWP
50
VI Results of the formal consultationOther
Proposals by stakeholders (1/2)

• Main Characteristics
• High level requirements in the IR, detailed
  requirements in a Specification as proposed in
  Alternative 1 - Agreed
• Obligation of aircraft equipage with multi-mode
  equipment Not Agreed
• Obligation for ANSPs to implement one MoC and
  implementation of additional MoCs on a voluntary
  basis Not Agreed

51
VI Results of the formal consultation Other
Proposals by stakeholders (2/2)
Aircraft

Avionics
MOC1
MOC2
MOC3

• ANSPs Support one MOC
• Aircraft support All MOCs

52
VI Results of the formal consultation Step 2-
Consolidated C R on interoperability analysis

• DCL, D-ATIS not included into the IR
• Clarification of the impact of the IR on FANS
  aircraft
• Prescription of the airspace of application
• Radio spectrum availability
• Relationship between SES IR on DLS and AMC 20-11
• Clarification of procedures applicable to naming
  and addressing items

53
VI - Results of the formal consultationAssessment
of alternative 1

• Separation between high level requirements in the
  IR and detailed requirements in the specification
• Identification of MoCs in the IR
• Avoid fragmentation and proliferation of
  technical solutions
• Accommodation of new technology
• The IR and the specification must be developed in
  parallel and must be kept consistent

54
Alternative 1 ANSPs accommodate all MOCs
ANSP

Flight Data Processing System
MOC1
MOC2
MOC3

• ANSPs Support all MOCs
• Aircraft support (at least) one MOC

55
VI - Results of the formal consultationAssessment
of alternative 2

• No clear boundary between high level requirements
  and detailed requirements refining a technical
  solution compliant with high level requirements
• The IR provides a stable regulatory basis
  prescribing the implementation of a unique
  solution
• The IR is not flexible to allow for new services,
  new technology

56
VI - Results of the formal consultationAssessment
of alternative 3

• No clear boundary between high level requirements
  and detailed requirements refining a technical
  solution compliant with high level requirements
• The IR provides a stable regulatory basis
  prescribing the implementation of a unique
  solution
• The IR is not flexible to allow for new services,
  new technology
• Accommodation of ED 100A services on a wide,
  uniform geographic scale basis generally
  considered as not realistic

57
VII Way Forward
58
VII - The Way Forward (1/2)

• Based on comments received and to ensure
  interoperability of data link services, the
  intended approach is to undertake the parallel
  development of
• An IR containing high level mandatory
  requirements on data-link services, enabling
  technology and deployment in the EATMN
• A EUROCONTROL specification containing the
  detailed mandatory requirements, to be referenced
  in the IR. Technical requirements would describe
  implementation based on ATN/VDL2
• Some issues require further consideration FANS
  aircraft, airspace of applicability, target
  aircraft population, etc.

59
VII - The Way Forward (2/2)

• Structure of IR would allow for recognition in
  due time of other MOCs
• Specifications developed when evidence exists
  that other technical solutions meet IR
  requirements
• Way of recognising new MOCs has to take into
  account need for interoperability
• Note The proposed IR is not intended to limit
  implementation to only those data link services
  identified in the RA. However, at least these
  services shall be implemented. Additional data
  link services may become mandatory in the future.

60
VIII - Next Steps
61
DATA
LINK