International Business Aviation Council (IBAC)
Communication Navigation Surveillance/Air Traffic Management (CNS/ATM)
Advisory Group (AG)
SECOND MEETING
(Annapolis, 24 - 25 June 2008)
- Introduction
1.1 The Second Meeting of the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) Communications Navigation Surveillance/Air Traffic Management Advisory Group (CNS/ATM AG) was convened with the principal objective of continuing the work of the Group as agreed by the IBAC Planning and Operations Committee. The group focused on the following:
a) finalizing the Terms of Reference for the Advisory Group;
b) CNS/ATM related tours and presentations;
c) reports and updates from FIG 17 and ATMG 31;
d) updates on the web based sites for the CNS/ATM AG; and
e) updated the status of the CNS/ATM AG IOU action list.
1.2 The IBAC Director General Mr. Don Spruston opened the meeting with his welcome remarks and chaired the meeting on the first day as Mr Bill Boucher; the CNS/ATM AG Chairman was unavailable. He also noted that due to circumstances beyond their control, some members of the AG could not attend this meeting.
1.3 Mr. Spruston introduced and thanked Mr. Roy Oishi, who on behalf of ARINC facilitated the meeting location and logistics. Mr. Oishi advised the group on administrative items within the building.
1.4 Mr. Bill Boucher chaired the meeting on day two.
1.5 Mr Brian Bowers was the Secretary for the full meeting. Lists of participants and of contacts are at Appendix A.
1.6 The Group adopted the following agenda:
a) Review and finalize CNS/ATM AG Terms of Reference;
b) Presentations and reports;
c) IBAC members equipage requirements;
d) Input to Groups;
e) IBAC Member Equipage;
f) CNS/ATM on the web;
g) Review and update Action Plan; and
h) Any other business.
- CNS/ATM Advisory Group Terms of Reference
2.1 The group reviewed the Terms of Reference (TOR) item by item. Agreement on the wording was finalized and the TOR will be posted on the appropriate IBAC (http://www.ibac.org/Library/EF2/CNSATM_Adv/csnatm_adv.htm) and NBAA (https://share.nbaa.org/Pages/default.aspx) websites. The TOR are attached as Appendix B.
2.2 During the discussion on the TOR, consideration was given to the membership of the AG as regards IATA participation. The group noted that while IATA has a lot of resources to possibly bring to the table, it was felt that the majority of the international general aviation issues are different from the major carrier’s issues.
2.3 There is already some overlap with IATA in other regional fora whereby IATA and IBAC share roles as observers/participants. IATA is also in attendance at the ICAO air navigation commission where IBAC also attends.
2.4 In future there may be CNS/ATM items of a common concern and the AG would reconsider the role of IATA within the group however for the time being it was felt untimely and unnecessary to extend an invitation to IATA.
2.5 The group felt the TOR effectively covered the work intended for the AG.
- Presentations
3.1 The following presentations were given by the personnel noted:
3.2 Mr. Ross Bowie, NAV CANADA welcomed the opportunity to address the AG. His presentation covered a range of topics but focused on necessary aircraft equipage for the near term. He stated that experience has shown that new technologies take up to two decades to utilize effectively. NAV CANADA intends to take advantage of existing or emerging technology and to encourage equipage today.
3.3 Ross noted that business aviation has always maintained at least two main objectives, access to airspace and harmonization of equipment globally. The operator does not want to be excluded from any airspace. The operator also wants to be able to equip the aircraft so that it can operate effectively and efficiently in all airspace the aircraft is required to fly.
3.4 Ross covered the relative difference between RNAV and PBN whereby PBN is really RNAV with performance requirements.
3.5 There is clear distinction between operations that require performance monitoring and alerting and operations that do not require performance monitoring and alerting.
3.6 As stated during the AG 1, the PBN concept is defined as area navigation based on performance requirements for aircraft that are described in navigation specifications. The Concept incorporates RNAV and RNP and groups them by performance monitoring or non-monitoring.
3.7 Most of the pertinent information referring to PBN is found on the ICAO website (www.icao.int/pbn) which also includes a web based training module.
3.8 Ross expressed the opinion that GPS is the minimum navigation device required to enable performance to meet today’s standards.
3.9 He noted the use of the wide area augmentation system (WAAS) by the FAA and CANADA to obtain additional accuracy, integrity, and availability necessary to enable users to rely on GPS for all phases of flight, from en route through GNSS landing system (GLS) approaches for all qualified airports within the WAAS coverage area.
3.10 Discussion ensued on the different augmentation systems and a reference is attached as Appendix G.
3.11 ADS-B “out” using the 1090 extended squitter (ES) is being implemented tactically in the Hudson Bay area of Northern Canada in November of 2008. The airspace will however become exclusionary between FL350 and FL400 inclusive in mid 2009 depending on aircraft approvals.
3.12 NAV CANADA does not intend to provide weather and aeronautical information using ADS-B “in” bandwidth, as the FAA is proposing.
3.13 NAV CANADA is intending to use a Multi Lateration (MLAT) system in the “Alberta oil patch” at Fort St John and at Vancouver Harbour because it only requires a transponder on the aircraft equipage side of the equation and is cheaper but more accurate than Radar.
3.14 NAV CANADA is encouraging Controller Pilot Data Link Communication (CPDLC) for use in the Northern Canadian airspace to replace sometimes unreliable HF voice communications. ADS-Contract (C) and CPDLC are being utilized and promoted for greater use on the North Atlantic to enhance safety and reliability in position reporting.
3.15 Mr. Roy Oishi, ARINC arranged a tour of the ARINC campus for the group and a briefing was given on the ARINC Operations Center (AOC).
3.16 The AOC is ARINC’s 24 hour a day, 7 day a week command and control network operation facility. The AOC provides support for nearly 3,000 customers worldwide on “40 plus” services.
3.17 The tour also included the ARINC DirectSM operations room. The following quote is from the ARINC Direct webpage “Flight support services are a suite of web-enabled capabilities, combined with data link services, designed specifically for business aviation. Components of the service include flight planning, flight following, weather briefs, aircraft messaging, and the support of a 24x7 flight coordinator staff from our state-of-the-art flight operations center in Annapolis, Maryland.”
3.18 The script for the ARINC Operations Center (AOC) tour is available in Appendix H.
3.19 Rolf Stefani, ARINC senior director of the Technology Innovation Center gave a couple of impromptu briefings to the group.
3.20 The first presentation focused on the potential use of a low cost portable ADS-B receiver developed in Europe. The equipment can be tied to a Windows XP computer and then becomes an ADS-B ground station. Through the ACARS system the information can be distributed to sites and provide ADS-B coverage with future MLAT enhancement.
3.21 The system, although not as feature rich as true ADS-B, could be used by companies to track their ADS-B equipped aircraft in real time at an affordable price.
3.22 The second briefing covered a flow management tool called “AirPlan enroute”.
3.23 AirPlan enroute is based on patented technology (Attila) which monitors and evaluates fleet assets and business requirements such as scheduling, gate availability, and fuel on board.
3.24 AirPlan enroute benefits airline fleets daily. Generating flight information from aircraft system-wide, it makes calculated decisions to sequence arrivals to achieve the highest on-time rates. The intuitive system always yields to air traffic control (ATC) and is fully compatible with all regulations and procedures.
3.25 MR. Bruce Holmes, DayJet provided a briefing on the DayJet operations and the contents of an FAA-DayJet-Florida DOT Memorandum of Agreement dated June 6, 2008 to “Implement proven technologies throughout Florida as a prelude to national implementation”.
3.26 This is a NextGen early implementation project.
3.27 Bruce spoke as well about the outcomes the DayJet and NextGen collaboration are pursuing. Some of the points covered are as follows:
· RNP/RNAV for networked routes
· ADS-B OUT for fleet management, procedure compliance, and surveillance services
· ADS-B IN for separation, spacing, merging, and offset routing
· Tailored departure and arrival procedures including profile descents
· Common Internet Protocols – for real-time fleet performance optimization
· System Wide Information Management (SWIM) - for accurate and affordable flight planning
· Business case for multi-Lateration with Traffic Information Service-Broadcast (TIS-B) at select locations
· NextGen educational curriculum
· Footprint analysis (Energy, Carbon, Noise)
· Nested Business Cases (Federal, Industrial, State, Local)
3.28 The DayJet Fleet through 2008 will use 12 Eclipse 500’s. The number in revenue service at any one time will vary. The company uses a command information center (CIC) for flight planning, fleet communications, optimization, and data collection.
3.29 The operations usually entail four to eight flight segments per aircraft per day for five days per week with average trip length of 300 nm (varies between 150-600 nm). They fly at an average altitude of 21,000 feet (varies between 12,000-28,000 ft).
3.30 The flights operate with two pilots plus three passengers (IFR).
3.31 Mr. Craig Morris, Thane contract support for the FAA Data Communications Program briefed the group. He apologized for Sandy Anderson the Program Manager being unable to attend.
3.32 Data Communications provides bi-directional data exchange between controllers, automated systems and flight crews. It will be used for safety-of-flight air traffic control clearances, instructions, traffic flow management, flight crew requests and reports
3.33 The program will provide automation enhancements for ATC message generation and exchange and a communications link carrying data between aircraft and air traffic managers.
3.34 NextGen requires the Data Communications program. It is necessary to transition FAA from a voice based ATC communications system to data centric NextGen systems.
3.35 It is envisaged that the Data Comm Program will enhance controller productivity and reduce voice communications and related workload. It will automate voice handoffs, will enable higher sector capacity, improve task distribution among controller team members and enable new services
3.36 Many planned functions require air/ground data exchange that cannot effectively be performed using voice. The Data Comm Program will expand ability to use time-based metering, point-in-space routing, etc.
3.37 The program will improve safety by at least reducing voice communications related errors.
3.38 The program will enhance the collaborative ATM measures within the System Wide Information Management (SWIM) framework. It will work with trajectory negotiations, provision of weather, airspace status and NOTAM advisory data.
3.39 The Data Comm Program timeline has been established with a total program deployment date of 2027 with multiple milestones between now and program completion.
3.40 Two of the major issues which the program has to deal with are user equipage and NextGen synchronization.
3.41 Part of the strategy for dealing with user equipage is to begin extensive dialogue with user groups. This is one of the reasons why there is FAA participation in the CNS/ATM AG.
3.42 The other objective will be to ensure NextGen delivers as advertised. So coordination with that group will also be paramount.
3.43 Hyperlinks to the available presentations are attached in Appendix C.
- Reports
4.1 IBAC has a number of representatives who participate on IBAC’s behalf within the international community. The AG noted that each representative should provide a technical report to IBAC and each report that affects the CNS/ATM implementation should be reviewed at the AG meetings.
4.2 Reports were provided to the AG 2 from the FIG 17 and ATMG 31 meetings.
4.3 The Chairman, Mr. Bill Boucher gave a report on the group participation on behalf of IBAC at the FIG 17 meeting in Ayr Scotland, in April 2008.
4.4 The objective was to preserve Global Business Aviation access to FANS airspace in the NAT airspace.
4.5 At a previous FIG meeting the task of identifying the costs of obtaining information related to the rate of aircraft equipage from aircraft database suppliers had been assigned to Portugal. This task was in response to the lack of information received from the airspace user population.
4.6 JP Airlines Fleet can supply the information in excel/delimited format by airline with aircraft type, registration, SELCAL and other information, and will include other important references to aircraft in respect of orders and expected delivery timeframes.
4.7 Considering that it has been shown to be almost impossible to obtain information from the users and that the information is required for planning, especially to determine future communications requirements it was agreed that this be brought to the attention of the NAT IMG. (NOTE: The NAT IMG 32 has accepted the proposal)
4.8 Coordination has taken place between the NAT FCMA and some IGA users to move to official recognition of specified IGA aircraft to utilise the NAT ADS-C WPR system without any interoperability issues. Gulfstream G450 and G550 aircraft operated by NetJets have been participating in a trial to ascertain the operational suitability of using specific aircraft.
4.9 A draft set of success criteria for the ADS WPR trials has been produced and issued to the NAT ANSPs and the IGA companies.
4.10 The FIG 17 endorsed the inclusion of the draft success criteria into the NAT guidance material. The FIG 17 agreed that the Gulfstream aircraft with the software build designated as Certification Delta met the interoperability requirements of the current NAT ADS-C WPR.
4.11 The FIG 17 agreed to recommend to the NAT IMG that Gulfstream aircraft using the Gulfstream software build designated as Certification Delta, or later approved versions, on the Honeywell Primus Epic platform operated by NetJets aircraft be accepted into the NAT FANS service. (NOTE: the NAT IMG 32 has concurred with the FIG 17 recommendation)
4.12 The FIG 17 also agreed on a control mechanism for further IGA operators using the same software / platform to enter FANS service.