Some comments on ESTB static and dynamic DC in Lisboa

1
Some comments on ESTB static and dynamic DC in
Lisboa

• GTEV / IST - Lisboa

2
ESTB DC in Lisboa-outline

• static measurements comparison
• outputs
• performance
• dynamic measurements
• procedure
• doubt on TTC
• performance example
• conclusion ?

3
Static measurements comparison

• comparison between
• NovAtel OEM 3 DL receiver
• Septentrio PolaRx-2
• Rx own output
• with WinGPSAll
• example of September 25th
• Septentrio integrity case

4
Static measurements comparisonHPE - Sep 25
5
Static measurements comparisonVPE - Sep 25
6
Static measurements comparisonHPL - Sep 25
7
Static measurements comparisonVPL - Sep 25
8
Static measurements comparisonSeptentrio
integrity unit ?

• up to 7 August
• Up to 7 August the XPL data file contains the HPL
  and VPL in meters and, normally, both are
  slightly higher than those produced by WinGPSAll
  - report from EUROCONTROL / Victor
  Alvarez-Cotroff
• after 7 August
• From 14 August the values in XPL data file are
  much bigger than those provided by WinGPSAll and
  we assume that the presented values are in feet
  ????

9
Septentrio integrity unit ? horizontal
protection levels
10
Septentrio integrity unit ? vertical protection
levels
11
Dynamic measurements with TTC

• doubts about TTC
• performance example

12
Dynamic measurementsprocedure

• 2 reference stations available
• IST reference station
• AT1 reference station (static DC location)
• example flight ILS calibration in Lisbon
• Truth-reference generation
• Trimble Total Control
• performance analysis

13
Dynamic measurementsexample horizontal path
dE (km)
dN (km)

• example of ILS calibration trajectory at Lisbon
  Airport
• AT1 ref.
• Novatel OEM3 TB Rx
• 30 may 2003

14
Dynamic measurementshorizontal errors single
ref.
North error (m)

latitude (deg)

• IST as ref. station
• correlation

15
Dynamic measurements horizontal errors both ref.
North error (m)

latitude (deg)
ISTAT1 ref. station
16
Dynamic measurementsTTC problem ?

• with single ref. horizontal errors (up to 30m !)
• proportional to distance to reference ?
• verification with a static measurement at AT1
• using standard static procedure
• using dynamic procedure with TTC
• using IST as reference station (5km from AT1)
• using Cascais as reference station (27km from AT1)

17
Dynamic measurementsstatic verification
N,E errors proportional to N,E distance to ref. ?!
18
Dynamic measurementsperformance analysis
19
Dynamic measurementsperformance summary (May
30th)

• HPE / HPL 2.2 / 13.2 m
• VPE / VPL 2.8 / 20.7 m
• HOR - CAT-I 100
• VER - APV-I 100 APV-II 92.1 CAT-I 46.8
  
• no LOI events / no interruption
• limited performance but similar to static results
  of same period

20
reaching some conclusions ?

• Still some doubts on the tools and procedures
  used in this evaluation