One Sky for Europe EUROCONTROL © 2003 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) NexSAT NexSAT Steering Group Meeting - 30 October.

‘One Sky for Europe’EUROCONTROL

© 2003 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

NexSAT NexSAT Steering Group Meeting - 30 October 2003

Ed 0.D

Eurocontrol, Brussels30 October 2003

Welcome to the 3rd meeting of the Steering Group for a

New Generation Satellite System(NGSS)




Ed 0.D

Major objectives of this meeting are:

• To increase understand, and get feedback on, the Mission requirements

• To consider technology options• To review the business aspect and consider how to get

stakeholder commitment• We have left time for discussion - we need your feedback

Objectives




Ed 0.D

Item 2 - Acceptance of the Agenda




Ed 0.D

Agenda Overview• Welcome and Introduction• Acceptance of the agenda • Overview of activities since the 2nd meeting• Review of Mission Requirements• Technology review• Roadmap for development and implementation• Discussion of future activities• Any Other Business• Actions• Date of future meetings




Ed 0.D

Item 3 - Overview of Satellite Communication Activities since the first meeting




Ed 0.D

World Radio Conference 2003 (1/2)

• Successful for aviation retention of spectrum global acceptance for Connexion on secondary basis

• Resolution 415 - to study, as a matter of urgency, the current satellite frequency

allocations that could meet aeronautical requirements to support the modernisation of civil aviation telecommunication systems, especially those in developing countries, and to study in particular those radio frequencies that could be used to support both ICAO CNS/ATM systems and other non-aeronautical telecommunication services

this could imply increased use of satellite communication systems




Ed 0.D

World Radio Conference 2003 (2/2)

• Resolution 803 to consider results of ITU-R studies in accordance with

Resolution 222 (WRC-2000) to ensure spectrum availability and protection for the aeronautical mobile satellite (R) service, and to take appropriate action on this subject, while retaining the generic allocation for the mobile-satellite service

• Aviation needs to continue to ensure it has sufficient spectrum in the future in the L-band




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC

• 11th Air Navigation Conference (ANC) looked at all ICAO activity since the last ANC in 1991 many technical systems developed but not all implemented emphasis now on definition of operational concepts need for greater regional harmonisation need for more spectral efficient systems

• A number of Recommendations related to new technology including satellite communication were formulated.




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC• Recommendation 7/4 — Investigation of future technology

alternatives for air-ground communication. ICAO to a) investigate new terrestrial and satellite-based technologies, on

the basis of their potential for ICAO standardisation for aeronautical mobile communications use, taking into account the safety-critical standards of aviation and the associated cost issues;

b) continue evolutionary development of existing standardized ICAO technologies with a view to increasing their efficiency and performance; and

c) assess the needs for additional aeronautical spectrum to meet requirements for increased communications capacity and new applications, and assist States in securing appropriate additional allocations by the ITU.




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC

• Recommendation 7/5 — Standardisation of aeronautical communication systems…..for new aeronautical communication systems, ICAO will: a) continue to monitor emerging communication systems

technologies but undertake standardisation work only when the systems meet all of the following conditions:

– see next slide




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC

• Conditions for standardisation 1) can meet current and emerging ICAO ATM requirements; 2) are technically proven and offer proven operational benefits; 3) are consistent with the requirements for safety; 4) are cost-beneficial; 5) can be implemented without prejudice to global harmonisation

of the CNS/ATM systems; and 6) are consistent with the Global Air Navigation Plan for

CNS/ATM Systems (Doc 9750)




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC

• Recommendation 7/5 continued b) include in Annex 10 provisions ensuring that the introduction of

mandatory carriage of new equipment be based only on appropriate ICAO regional and inter-regional co-ordination; and

c) further limit SARPs for complex aeronautical systems to broad, system-level, functional and performance requirements and better capitalise on the work of other standard-making organisations so as to reduce the complexity/size of technical provisions.

• The intention is that NexSAT fully complies with these Resolutions

• For more information see www.icao.int




Ed 0.D

ICAO 11th ANC

• ESA has produced a video in association with Eurocontrol and industry

• The video was shown on the Eurocontrol stand at the ANC encouraging amount of interest shown which is being followed up

• 10 minute ESA VIDEO

ESA has kindly agreed to make copies of video available




Ed 0.D

ICAO Aeronautical Communications Panel

• Work on satellite communications is the responsibility of 3 relevant Working Groups of the ICAO ACP Working Group M

– maintenance of existing AMSS SARPs

– development of ‘generic’ core NGSS SARPs

– producing a Technical Manual for the existing AMSS Working Group C

– reviewing new candidate technologies including NGSSs

– start to develop Technical Manuals if & when appropriate Working Group F

– Spectrum aspects




Ed 0.D

WG-C outcome - last week

• This was the first meeting to reopen discussion on potential satellite communication systems for several years

• Many papers on satellite communications systems were presented

• General feeling was there seems to be potential for future satellite communication systems but more work was needed to understand capabilities of systems and clarify requirements




Ed 0.D

WG-C outcome - last week

• Next steps are to progress the work through 4 ‘interest groups’ probably operating mainly by email

• Technology Interest Group - led by Philippe Renaud

• Requirements Interest Group - led by Brent Philips, FAA

• Spectrum Interest Group - led by Mike Biggs, FAA

• Institutional matters - led by Kors van den Boogaard, IATA

• Results from the NexSAT project will be fed into these groups




Ed 0.D

EUROCONTROL activities

• Since SG 2 Eurocontrol has - Concentrated on revising the Mission requirements Ensured co-ordination with other activities around the world Defined tasks required to carry out business, and institutional

analysis Initiated activity with IATA on determining AOC requirements

– feedback from the last SG was the presented AOC requirement was low

– it seems difficult to get better information

– we need your help ! - see next agenda item




Ed 0.D

Activities in other regions

• NASA

• Japanese papers Concept of Self-synchronized ADS using Satellite Efficient preemption method on CDMA system




Ed 0.D

Item 4 - Review of Mission Requirements




Ed 0.D

Document Overview

• Developed in response to the NexSAT Steering Group meeting

• Document structure sections 1 and 2 - introduction and background to help put

NexSAT in context section 3 contains the HLMRs and the Communication

Requirements

– particularly important to dimension system

– ATM requirements based on Eurocontrol’s MACONDO study

– AOC will be revised after liaison with IATA and airlines

• Thank you for your comments




Ed 0.D

Definitions

• Mission Requirements used to - to get agreement between stakeholders on requirements provide a link between high level ATM requirements and input to

industry to better understand needs list statements of requirements in terms of coverage, performance,

types of facilities, etc

• They should not preclude any solution - current or future

• They will be used to feed more detailed documents traceable back to requirements




Ed 0.D

Capturing Requirements

Future SATCOM Solution

NGSSfeasibility analysis

and technical solutions

User needs Analysis,Service

Requirements

AccessProtocolsWaveform

Solutions&

Trade-Offs

Future SATCOM Solution

feasibility analysisand technical solutions

User needs Analysis,Service

Requirements

AccessProtocolsWaveform

Solutions&

Trade-Offs

Operational Requirements

Eurocontrol CNS/ATM StrategiesICAO CNS/ATM Strategies

Comminication Requirements (e.g.MACONDO)

Mission Requirements

ATMCommunity

Industry

AOC requirements(airlines, others ?)

AirspaceUsers

NGSS




Ed 0.D

High Level Mission Requirements

• 21 HLMRs covering coverage area (HLMR1) no change to operational concept - not technology driven

(HLMR2) communication types ATS and AOC (HMLR3) no effects on existing users (HLMR4) will be a recognised ICAO system - need ‘buy-in’ from other

states and regions (HLMR5) will have security provisions (HLMR6) connection to IpV6 (ground networks), ATN and may support

ACARS (HLMRs 7, 8, 9)




Ed 0.D

High Level Mission Requirements

Supports voice services and interfaces to ATS voice networks and PSTN (HLMRs 10 and 11)

efficient use of AMS(R)S spectrum (HLMR 12) communication types ATS and AOC (HLMR3) supports priority (HLMR14) supports expected PIAC in coverage airspace types and area -

European predictions included but global figures required (HLMR 14 and 15)

meets safety requirements using recognised system - in Europe Eurocontrol Safety Regulatory Requirement (ESARR) (HLMR16)

Voice and Data Requirements (HLMR 17 to 21)




Ed 0.D

ATS requirement

• ATS requirements have been derived from the EUROCONTROL study ‘Operating Concept of the Mobile Aviation Communication

Infrastructure Supporting ATM beyond 2015’ - nicknamed MACONDO

Compilation of EUROCONTROL Strategies based on ICAO CNS/ATM concepts compatible with ATMCP concepts

From the agreed concept of operations the communication requirements were identified independent of technology




Ed 0.D

Overview of Macondo




Ed 0.D

Macondo• Two main work packages

WP1 established the ATM context in Europe in the 2010-2015 by review of Eurocontrol strategies e.g. ATM2000+ and Operational Concept Document differences with non-European regions were identified - all broadly similar

WP2 defined requirements on future mobile communication infrastructure to accommodate operational communication needs arising from the ATM operational context.

Both voice and data communications were considered including the required Quality of Service

Results presented at a Stakeholder Workshop last year and agreed Documents available at

http://www.eurocontrol.int/eatmp/work/mobile_comm.html




Ed 0.D

Homogenous Zones

• Airspace was characterised in general terms by flight phases, shape/density of traffic, ATM application mix.

• Each HZ is a portion of airspace within which ATM operational needs in terms of communication are similar

• The airspace segmentation criteria are: Airspace Density/Traffic Shape Airspace Regime (Managed (MAS), Unmanaged (UMAS), Free Flight

Airspace (FFAS)); COSEP status(On/Off).




Ed 0.D

Homogenous Zones

HZ idAirspace densityand traffic shape

Airspace regime/ COSEP status

HZ-1.1 MAS/ COSEP off

HZ-1.2 MAS/ COSEP on

HZ-1.3

Upper Airspace ECAC CoreArea

FFAS


HZ-2.2 MAS/ COSEP on

HZ-2.3

Upper Airspace ECACPeriphery

FFAS


HZ-3.2Major TMAs

MAS/ COSEP on


HZ-4.2Other TMAs

MAS/ COSEP on


HZ-5.2Major Airports

MAS/ COSEP on


HZ-6.2Other Airports

MAS/ COSEP on

HZ-7.0 Unmanaged airspace UMAS




Ed 0.D

Voice requirements




Ed 0.D

Voice Services

• Hypothesis for voice services No new requirements Decreasing use as primary means No operational evolution is foreseen for voice Same voice operational principles will apply Immediate access to the aircraft under responsibility of the

controller Voice is the Baseline media for TACTICAL exchanges in 2015




Ed 0.D

Voice System Capacity

Hypothesis for voice communication traffic estimation

– In TMA all tactical comms. supported by PARTY-LINE service

– Communication profiles derived from French VOCALISE project

– (channel load 60% at 95% upper bound, average contact 11s)

– Capacity given in number of contacts per hour for the whole ECAC

– Aircraft traffic profile based on Macondo WP1 inputs (PIAC)

– Broadcast traffic not taken into account

– Provision for datalink backup : 5% of nominal load




Ed 0.D

Mapping Voice Services / ATM Functions 2015

Voice Service ATM Functions Homogeneous Zone

Controller-Pilot Emergency exchanges

Tactic exchanges

Strategic exchanges

Information exchanges

TMAs : HZ3.x, HZ4.x

Airports : HZ5.x, HZ6.x

En-route airspace : HZ1.x, HZ2.x

Pilot-Pilot ATC Relay Ground-Air Voice

Auto-information (*)

En-route airspace : HZ1.x, HZ2.x

Unmanaged airspace : HZ7

Broadcast Information Service Airports and TMAs : HZ3.x, HZ4.x,HZ5.x, HZ6.x for legacy services

Notes : Voice is primary means for Emergency and Tactic exchanges(*) AFIS aerodromes outside the AFIS service operation or non-controlled airfield




Ed 0.D

Evolution Scenario Assumptions Hypothesis 2002 :

– Load of 10 contacts per hour per aircraft (Vocalise study)

– in the TMA 90% of the traffic is for tactical exchanges (Vocalise study)

Scenario 2010 :

– Same communication traffic in the TMA for tactical exchanges as in 2002 (communication growth linearly linked to traffic growth)

– 50% of 2002 traffic for Strategic and Information exchanges Scenario 2015 :

– 10% reduction of the tactical exchanges in the TMA

– Residual traffic for Strategic and Information exchanges (5%)




Ed 0.D

Voice Capacity Evolution (Nominal Load)

Voice Profile Evolution

Emergency

Tactical TMA

Strategic, Info

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

2002 2005 2010 2013 2015

Year

Tota

l co

nta

cts

per

hour




Ed 0.D

Voice Capacity Evolution per HZ (2015 vs. 2002)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

En-route Core Area (HZ-1)

En-route Outside CoreArea (HZ-2)

Major TMAs (HZ-3) Other TMAs (HZ-4) Major Airports (HZ-5) Other Airports (HZ-6)

Voic

e Tra

ffic

Load

(In

dex

100

in 2

002)




Ed 0.D

Voice QoS Parameters

Criticality Level (ICAO) : Distress, Tactical, Strategic, Information

Time axis :

– Connection Establishment Time

– Very Fast (<1s), Fast ( < 10s), Standard (< 20s)

– Latency (recommendation ITU G114 < 400ms) Integrity axis :

– Access control (Functional requirement)

– Jamming resistance (Difficult to specify)

– Audio Performance (Specifies coding schemes, BER) Service Availability

– Very High (>99.9..%), High (> 99%), Standard (> 98%)




Ed 0.D

PARTY LINE Desirable Features Used for Tactical exchanges in TMA Controller managed channel with high speed switch capability Push to Talk operation

Quality of ServiceParameter

TMA Nominal Data Link Backup

Criticality level Distress

Tactical

Strategic

Information

ConnectionEstablishment Time

Latency

Very Fast

TBD

Fast

TBD

Access Control

Jamming Resistance

Protected

YES

Protected

YES

Availability Very High High




Ed 0.D

SELECTIVE Service Desirable Features

Used outside TMA for datalink backup Controller-Pilot exchanges Selective Call (addressed communication)

Quality of Service Parameter Data LinkBackup

Other functions

Criticality level Strategic

Information

Distress

Tactical

Connection EstablishmentTime

Latency

Standard orFast

TBD

Standard

TBD

Access Control

Jamming resistance

Protected

YES

Protected

YES

Availability Standard Very High




Ed 0.D

Data requirements

Data Class of Services

ATC Data

Exchanges

Pilot-Controller Dialog

Pilot-Pilot Dialog

ATM Exchanges

Downlink Information Broadcast

Air-air Surveillance

Flight Information Exchanges

CoS D1-1: Pilot-Controller Emergency Dialog

CoS D1-2: Pilot-Controller Tactical Dialog

CoS D1-3: Pilot-Controller Strategic Dialog

CoS D1-4: Pilot-Controller Information Dialog

CoS D3-1: Medium Flight Information Exchanges

CoS D3-2: Long Flight Information Exchanges

CoS D4-1: ATM Tactical Exchanges

CoS D4-2: ATM Strategic Exchanges

CoS D5-1 : High Frequency Information Broadcast

CoS D5-2: Low Frequency Information Broadcast

CoS v6-1: Air Surveillance Broadcast

CoS 6-2: G/A Surveillance Broadcast

Priority Criticality

Availability

Size

Time

Frequency

Direction & Size

(CoS D2)




Ed 0.D

Data Requirements

• For each concept/airspace scenario I.e. Homogenous Zones the performance requirements have been tabulated

• See Mission Requirements document - Table 3- 5 page 12

• Definition of column headings are in Appendix B - Page 21




Ed 0.D

Outputs of the study for ATS• The resulting requirements are applicable to ANY

communications technology I.e. technology independent

• now there is a need to match satellite communications technology against operational requirements for existing technologies match technology based on demonstrated

performance for new technologies these are targets which need to be achieved

• The aim for new satellite communications is to achieve the as much as possible AT AN ACCEPTABLE COST

• However the performance of new satellite systems is not fully defined yet




Ed 0.D

AOC requirements




Ed 0.D

Confirmation of AOC requirement

• These seem difficult to determine - initial input based on IATA paper was felt to be very low

• Aircraft manufacturers have some concepts related to monitoring the airframe Airbus supplied initial information on future AOC requirements

• Airlines have some concepts for the future Input from airlines via IATA sought

• But the general feeling is that if the communications channel exists it will be used fully !

• Is this a sensible design goal ?




Ed 0.D

AOC requirements

• Voice assumed to continue but decline ?

• Data Link Flight Operations - a few examples of safety and regularity of

flight applications

– ACARS type applications

– future more graphical information exchange

– Electronic flight bag, etc Are all the applications really ‘safety and regularity of flight’

applications? Does this matter ?




Ed 0.D

Summary of ATS requirements

• The Macondo values for requirements have been included in Mission Requirements for around 2015 + now we have to match technology against requirements so far we do not know what a ‘new’ satellite system can achieve indicative figures from SDLS demonstrator are encouraging and

can meet many of the requirement in a trials environment Decision that air to air communications is not appropriate for

satellite communications

– strikethrough in requirements table

• New requirements in other regions of the world ?




Ed 0.D

NexSAT versus Requirements

• We are now trying to match technology against safety (ATS and AOC) requirements

• ATS requirements seem better known and appear ‘modest’ but AOC requirements are unclear but feedback suggests they are going to grow significantly - no hard numbers

• NexSAT will be complementary to ground systems but which requirements will it meet ? Decision that air to air communication is not applicable to satellite

communications Need performance information of a NexSAT service to complete

the matching process - taking into account costs




Ed 0.D

Discussion

• Party-line voice is a continuing issue - if voice is only for unusual situations. Is it necessary ?

• AOC requirements appear difficult to capture airframe manufacturers have plans related to the maintenance of

airframe airlines have plans for their own purposes but may be sensitive

– do they classify applications into AOC and AAC ? Do they care ?

• Global requirements are expected through ICAO ACP

• How do we capture longer term requirements ?




Ed 0.D

Longer term requirements

• For a ‘new’ system to be viable it has to have a reasonable life time e.g. 10 to 15 years

• This means considering 2015+ to 2030 +

• What will this timeframe look like ? ESA has launched a long term study that is hoping to help answer

this question




Ed 0.D

Item 5 - Technology Review




Ed 0.D

Role of Eurocontrol

• Working with industry to enable them to understand CNS/ATM requirements to allow industry to develop products to meet the requirements

• Likely that the greatest demand may result from AOC use

• Industry has to be ‘comfortable’ with the business needs Eurocontrol will help in understanding and assist co-ordination Mandatory carriage of new technology is rare - the business case

for equipage has to be obvious. A good solution will sell itself !




Ed 0.D

Operational Improvements

• NexSAT is just enabling technology to allow operation to continue with benefits - when the VHF channel becomes congested new communication

systems will be needed to maintain ATS lower cost communications - communication costs could be

similar to VHF-based systems greater coverage with lower infrastructure costs - could offer a

communication service in areas with limited or no communication coverage




Ed 0.D

Satellite coverage

3-15

Assumption NexSAT (NGSS) will use an existing satellite infrastructure




Ed 0.D

Possible Data and Voice coverage in Europe




Ed 0.D

Data link application are transparent

VDL M2AMSS NexSAT

Aircraft ATN Router

Ground ATN Router

Applications

Applications

Better performanceLower costGreater coverage




Ed 0.D

Voice communications

• Voice requirements will reduce in the future but will still be required

• Should be transparent to users similar operating for ATS with same interface and flexibility AOC should be also be supported




Ed 0.D

Candidate technologies

• Existing AMSS (I.e. Aero H (and I)) are being used to support ATS and AOC applications in low density areas but are perceived as costly and low quality of service

• Other systems Inmarsat Aero systems Swift64, BGAN, etc Boeing Connexion Iridium - Globalstar A new system




Ed 0.D

Inmarsat systems• Aero H,I and L

these are being used to offer ATS (and other services) in several regions of the world

• Swift64 introduced to make better use of Aero H infrastructure for non-safety

applications e.g. passenger services

• BGAN high data rates (up to 432kb/s) but not designed for safety services

• All systems operate in AMSS L-band

• Global infrastructure in place now and will continue to be ? Inmarsat presentation




Ed 0.D

Boeing Connexion

• High -speed Internet in the sky

• Only targeted at non-safety communications I.e. AAC and APC

• Does not operate in ‘protected’ frequency band although obtain global allocation at WRC03 on a secondary basis

• Trials/service underway several airlines e.g. Lufthansa, British Airways, SAS, All-Nippon Airways,……

• Working Paper at ICAO ACP WG-C last week




Ed 0.D

Iridium & Globalstar

• Iridium is being used by aviation for AAC and APC applications but also by FAA in Alaska General Dynamics presentation

• Globalstar avionic product available A product that complies with RTCA DO-262 (NGSS MOPS)




Ed 0.D

A new system ?

• From initial considerations it is believed that no existing system meets all the requirements

• A service that has to have high levels of availability, reliability and continuity required for safety and regularity of flight communications safety must be built into the design process it has to be a world-wide system

• Therefore do we need to design a ‘new’ system ?




Ed 0.D

Supporting safety communications

• What makes supporting aviation safety communications ‘special’ ? based on agreed international standards operates in a privileged radio band - AMS(R)S safety requirements should drive the design process in ground and

aircraft systems

– e.g. avionics have appropriate level of ‘certification’ agreed level of service from the satellite and communications

service providers

– likely to cost more




Ed 0.D

Narrow or Wide band

• ATS requirements - assuming they are correct - seem to be meet by a modest throughput

• AOC requirements are unclear and could be determining factor

• Do we need to consider AAC and APC requirements ?

• Can one service support all users ? This was the design philosophy behind the current AMSS.

• What is your opinion ?




Ed 0.D

New or existing system?

• Benefits of a new system tailored to meet the requirements can have new features built in smaller aircraft terminals

• Disadvantage costly development will take a long time need to find a champion

• What is your opinion ?




Ed 0.D

Item 6 - Roadmap for development and implementation




Ed 0.D

Implementation timescale

Timescale 2015

ICAO Process

Technical Development

Flight trials

OPERATIONAL SERVICE

Deployment

Commercial Arrangements

How is this

phase funded ?

Industrial

consortium,

Public body

Inmarsat ?

The service provider

has to start rolling

out the service but

traffic may be low

initially




Ed 0.D

Discussion

• Do we agree that there are opportunities for a ‘better’ satellite communication system?

• Should we investigate new Inmarsat products, Connexion, Iridium, Globalstar ?

• What would it take to make them ‘acceptable’ for safety communications ? Can they be used now for some applications ?

• If a new system is needed the development time will be long so we need to start now must be linked to business and institutional aspects




Ed 0.D

Discussion

• Do we agree that there are opportunities for a ‘better’ satellite communication system?

• If a new system is needed the development time will be long so we need to start now !

• What is a typical industry approach to review of technology requirements ?

• What is necessary to start an industrial development ?




Ed 0.D

Item 7 - Discussion of future activities




Ed 0.D

Discussion of future activities

• Eurocontrol has identified task description for priority work on -

business model institutional aspects mapping operational requirements to physical airspace

• Complementary task descriptions being prepared descriptions of work necessary to clarify these areas is being

prepared




Ed 0.D

Research and developmentof new techniques

ID1.1

Concensuson

NexSAT(s)ID 7

Emerging or existing systemsID1.2

Early trials/demoactivityID1.3

Alternativesolutions (if

any)ID 6

Standardisation ProcessID 5

Pre-operational

ServiceID 13

Initial deploymentincluding flight trials

ID 10.1

Assessment of satellite technologies ID 1

Confirm RequirementsID2

StakeholderRequirements ID2.1

MissionRequirements ID 2.2

Initial Business and Institutional reviewsID 3

Initial Safety considerationsID 4

Form commercialarrangements

ID 8

Equipment development ormodification (Ground and

Aircraft)ID 9

OperationalServiceID 14

In-Service SupportID 15

Safety provisionsID 12

Finalise instituitionalarrangements

ID 11

Validation ID 10




Ed 0.D

Business Aspects

• A ‘new’ Satellite communications system could bring benefits to aviation if it was at an ‘acceptable cost’

• Need ‘buy-in’ form a range of Stakeholders airspace users ATS providers Communications Service providers Satellite Service providers Manufacturing Industry




Ed 0.D

Cost and benefits

• Traditional C-B analysis will be needed to give indicative figures but may not be sufficient ATSPs tend to use CBAs

• Need to identify other business drivers e.g. benefits to early equipage, better operational control, etc

• A range of business options Single or Multiple ATSPs contract directly with SSP Airlines contract directly with SSP ATSPs and Airlines directly with CSP CSP directly with SSP and offer service primarily to support

airline operation




Ed 0.D

Institutional Aspects

• A number of issues have been identified including - standardisation - ICAO, EUROCAE/RTCA, AEEC, etc AMS(R)S spectrum availability - guaranteed amount of spectrum

needed at the right time Service level agreements providers of satellite and communication

services - guarantees Arrangement between satellite service providers needed if

provided by several providers e.g. global and regional/spot Certification and approval




Ed 0.D

Item 7 - Any other business




Ed 0.D

Item 8 - Actions




Ed 0.D

Round table discussion

• How can you provide contributions to the work ?

• What do you consider are the key issues that need addressing ?

• What have we not considered ?

• What would you like to consider at the next Steering Group meeting ?




Ed 0.D

Item 9 - Date of future Meetings




Ed 0.D

Next meeting

• Meetings are held at approximately 6 month intervals

• Proposed next meeting first or second week of June 2004 in Brussels

One Sky for Europe EUROCONTROL © 2003 European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) NexSAT NexSAT Steering Group Meeting - 30 October.

Documents

europe eurocontrol

d eurocontrol

meeting slide

slide slide

european organisation

air navigation conference

agenda slide

airground communication