Avionics September 2012

XXXXXXX XXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXSensor Payloads

XXXXXXXXXXXXUASs Flying in the NAS

www.avionicstoday.com

September 2012

XXXXXXX XXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXSensor Payloads

XXXXXXXXXXXXUASs Flying in the NAS


September 2012


September 2012September 2012

Performance-Based

NavigationPotential benefits are huge, but so far uptake rates

have been low for these precision approaches

FUTURE OF GPSWhat’s next for the network?

TEST EQUIPMENTStandards push development

Test your avionics network

ef0ciently and reliablyWith focused support, development processes in electronic net-

working can be implemented in a more time-saving and cost-

effective way:

> Use protocol-specific tools to systematically and reliably

develop your network design.

> Find and avoid errors early in development conveniently

and cost-effectively.

> Validate changes made to the software and the communi-

cation system – quickly and easily – with regression tests.

> Exchange data with colleagues and development partners –

easily, securely and without overhead – whether from

databases, models or test scripts.

> Benefit from a multi-bus tool approach to developing,

testing and implementing gateways.

Improve the efficiency of your overall development process –

from design to testing and analysis – with the practice-proven

tools CANoe and CANalyzer and our comprehensive services.

More information and a demo version of CANoe with

AFDX® / ARINC 664 support: www.avionics-networking.com

Vector Informatik GmbH

Stuttgart, GERMANY

www.avionics-networking.com

Supported bus systems

and protocols:

AFDX® , CAN, IP, Ethernet,

ARINC 429 / 812 / 825 / 826,

CANaerospace, CANopen

AFDX® is an Airbus‘ registered trademark

inside

magazine

www.avionicstoday.com September 2012 Avionics Magazine 3

The editors welcome articles, engineering and technical reports, new product information, and other industry news. All editorial inquiries should be directed to Avionics Magazine, 4 Choke Cherry Rd., Second Floor, Rockville, MD 20850–4024; 301-354-1820; fax: 301-340-8741. email: [email protected]. Avionics Magazine (ISSN-1085-9284) is published monthly by Access Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Rd., Second Floor, Rockville, MD 20850. Periodicals Postage Paid at Rockville, MD, and additional mailing offices. Subscriptions: Free to qualified individuals directly involved in the avionics industry. All other subscriptions, U.S.: one year $99; two years $188. Canada: one year $129; two years $228. Foreign: one year $149; two years $278. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Avionics Magazine, P.O. Box 3092, Northbrook, IL 60065-3092. Change of address two to eight weeks notice requested. Send both new and old address, including mailing label to Attn: Avionics Magazine, Customer services, P.O. Box 3092, Northbrook, IL 60065-3092, or call 847-559-7314. Email: [email protected]. Canada Post 40612608. Return Undeliverable Canadian Addresses to: PitneyBowes, P.O. BOX 25542, LONDON ON N6C 6B2 ©2011 by Access Intelligence, LLC Contents may not be reproduced in any form without written permission.

Printed in U.S.A.

September 2012 • Vol. 36, No. 9


Visit www.avionicstoday.com to begin a

subscription to the digital edition of Avionics.

■ E-Letters

• Review of top developments in the civil and military

aircraft electronics industry

■ Webinars www.aviationtoday.com/webinars

• Driving Innovation: A

Software-Centric Approach

to Avionics Development

• Harnessing the Power of Social Media

in Avionics

• Enhancing Your Flight Operations with Global Voice

and Data Connectivity

• A New Vision: Next Generation

Synthetic Vision Systems

(SVS)

• Internet at 30,000 Feet:

In-Flight Connectivity Trends

and Technologies

Routing RNP .................................... 14

RNP promises more efficient routes and lower operating costs.

But airlines are expressing frustration at the relatively low

take-up rates for the procedures. by James W. Ramsey

commercial

What Will Follow GPS? ....................22

The ubiquitous navigation system has more worldwide users

than ever, but safety and security concerns have insiders look-

ing beyond the current network. by Callan James

industry

product focus

industry

22

Test Equipment ...............................28

Budget cuts and program delays in the U.S. military, in addi-

tion to new industry standards, are pushing the development

of more capable ATE systems. by Ed McKenna

Runtime-Defined Instrument Architecture .....................................38 by Peter Hansen

ef0ciently and reliably

4 Avionics Magazine September 2012 www.avionicstoday.com

also in this issue

Editor’s Note

2015: UAS Odyssey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Software: Charlotte Adams

DO-178C: What’s Next? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

Perspectives: William Ruff

Power Bus Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

Departments

Scan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8New Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52

inside

magazine


Printed in U.S.A.

inside

magazine


Printed in U.S.A.

■ Online Resources

• Aerospace Acronym

Guide

www.aviationtoday.com/av/

acronym/a.html

• White Papers, Tech

Reports

www.aviationtoday.com/at/

otherdocs/

• Aviation Today’s Job

Board

www.aviationtoday.com/

aviationjobs/

Pho

to c

ourt

esy B

oein

g

28

Follow Avionics Magazine on

Twitter and Facebook: twitter.com/AvionicsMag

facebook.com/pages/Avionics-Magazine

Cover photos courtesy Alaska Airlines and FAA

EDITORIAL

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Emily Feliz

301-354-1820

[email protected]

MANAGING EDITOR

Debra Richards

301-354-1877

[email protected]

DIRECTOR, SATELLITE/AVIONICS/DEFENSE ONLINE

Julie Blondeau Samuel

301-354-1770

[email protected]

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Frank Colucci, Ed McKenna,

Robert Moorman, James W. Ramsey, Jean-Michel Guhl,

Frances Fiorino, Charlotte Adams

ADVERTISING & BUSINESS

PUBLISHER

Randy Jones

972-713-9612

[email protected]

SALES MANAGER

Susan Joyce

480-607-5040

[email protected]

DESIGN & PRODUCTION

GRAPHIC DESIGNER Gretchen Saval

PRODUCTION MANAGER Sophie Chan-Wood

301-354-1671

[email protected]

AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT

FULFILLMENT MANAGER George Severine

[email protected]

SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES/BACK ISSUES 847-559-7314

LIST SALES

Statlistics

Jen Felling

203-778-8700

[email protected]

REPRINTS

Wright’s Media

1-877-652-5295

[email protected]

Access Intelligence, LLC

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Don Pazour

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Ed Pinedo

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, HUMAN RESOURCES

& ADMINISTRATION

Macy L. Fecto

DIVISIONAL PRESIDENT

Heather Farley

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT & GROUP PUBLISHER

Joe Rosone

VICE PRESIDENT, PRODUCTION & MANUFACTURING

Michael Kraus

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, CORPORATE AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT

Sylvia Sierra

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT & CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

Robert Paciorek

VICE PRESIDENT FINANCIAL PLANNING AND INTERNAL AUDIT

Steve Barber

VICE PRESIDENT/CORPORATE CONTROLLER

Gerald Stasko


For photocopy or reuse requests:

800-772-3350 or [email protected]

4 Choke Cherry Rd., 2nd Floor

Rockville, MD 20850

Phone: 301/354-2000

Fax: 301/340-3169

Visit us today at www.aviationtoday.com.

For over ten years, Aviation Today has been your Internet-hub for

market intelligence and business resources, offering up-to-the-minute

news and expert analysis in all aspects of the world of aviation.

17279


editor’s noteb y E m i l y F e l i z

2015: UAS Odyssey

The unmanned aviation industry is poised for some

rather explosive growth in the next few years, if

the discussions on the floor of the Association of

Unmanned Vehicles Systems International (AUVSI)

are to be believed. Hundreds of professionals gathered in

Las Vegas last month, displaying airframes of all sizes, pay-

loads of varying capabilities and missions of all sorts, ready

and willing to deploy these systems around the world.

But the roadblock to this explosive growth is FAA,

according to show attendees. FAA, backed by a Congres-

sional mandate to integrate unmanned aircraft systems

(UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS), is tasked

with creating a roadmap, a plan, to give UAS manufactur-

ers and users access to the airspace. A big task to be sure,

and one that is mandated to be complete by 2015. This

integration is a key component of FAA’s multi-billion-dollar

airspace modernization initiative Next Generation Air Trans-

portation System (NextGen).

“We have a fantastic opportunity to lead the world of avi-

ation to get it done,” said David Vos, formerly of Rockwell

Collins, at the convention. “It is quite reasonable to accom-

modate UAS into the NAS by 2015 … 2015 is doable, but it

is not doable at the current pace. But some sort of deadline

is good.”

The current pace isn’t all that quick, as the industry gears

up to move forward with the mandate. The aviation indus-

try knows they need to integrate UASs into the NAS, but

what the integration will look like and what exact steps are

needed to ensure the safety of operators of manned and

unmanned aircraft in the same airspace are unclear. Start

with small UASs? Focus on specific missions? Experts at

AUVSI called on FAA, along with JPDO and other industry

stakeholders, to take the lead on the discussion to figure

out how to move forward. After all, 2015 is not that far away.

The aviation

industry knows they

need to integrate

UASs into the

NAS, but what the

integration will look

like and what exact

steps are needed

to ensure the

safety of operators

of manned and

unmanned aircraft

in the same

airspace are

unclear.

Odyssey


“The advantage of the legislation is that it is forcing function. It is more than

a significant challenge for integration by 2015. But the law doesn’t say full

integration; it just says integration. FAA has to lay out the full plan, the path-

way to get to full integration by the earliest possible date … until you lay that

out you’re not going to be able to say when full integration will occur,” said

Chuck Johnson, manager of the UAS in the NAS project at NASA.

My takeaway from this panel discussion is in theory the industry could

achieve integration, but it’s not going to happen. Technologically speak-

ing, manufacturers are ready, but regulatory hurdles abound. In addition the

industry faces the big task of changing public perceptions of the “drones”

that could darken the airspace, invading our privacy. A deadline is a good

goal to strive for, but at least in this case that goal just isn’t going to happen.

“Full integration by 2015 is a significant challenge that I’m not sure is

achievable,” said Heidi Williams, vice president air traffic services and mod-

ernization for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA).

“The problem with 2015 is the lack of focus ... we’re trying to look at a pic-

ture too big,” said Tom Bachman, vice president, new products and technol-

ogy at AAI Unmanned Aircraft Systems.

The real shame is the suppliers and air frame manufacturers are ready, will-

ing and able to capitalize on heightened interest in the civilian applications

for UAS.

“Civil is a viable market,” said Steve Morrow, president and CEO of Bingen,

Wash.-based Insitu, citing missions in resource management, border patrol

and search and rescue, but “they are all dependent on FAA making a time-

line” for UAS integration into the NAS.

UAS integration will be the one of the topics discussed at this year’s Avion-

ics for NextGen conference, to be held Sept. 18 in Atlantic City, N.J. Other

topics include closing NextGen’s business case, global harmonization and

public-private partnerships. For more information, or to register, visit www.

avionicsfornextgen.com.


industry scan

Airbus on Aug. 2 powered up the XWB MSN1 flight deck for the first time for

electrical testing on its A350 passenger jet.

The France-based airframe manufacturer’s XWB flight deck has six interchange-

able displays. The initial application of electrical power to the aircraft’s front fuse-

lage occurred nearly a year prior to the first scheduled flight test in the summer

2013 for the A350.

Airbus recently delayed the initial A350 flight testing due to delays in building the

composite wing for the aircraft.

“The power-on acts as a dry-run for the ground tests that will take place later on

the complete aircraft,” Martin Fendt, a spokesman for Airbus, told Avionics Maga-

zine. “This allows us to check the quality and completeness of the nose fuselage.”

Airbus expects to achieve the power-on of the entire A350 fuselage later this year.

Airbus Activates

A350 XWB

Pho

to c

ourt

esy A

irb

us


Bulk Wire & Cable Contacts & Crimp Splices Interconnect Solutions

Assemblies Structures Systems

Carlisle Interconnect Technologies is a global provider of high performance bulk cable

and fiber; Aerospace, RF/Microwave and filtered connectors; contacts; cable assemblies;

complex harnesses; integrated installation kits; light-weight ARINC trays; racks and shelf

assemblies to the Aerospace, Defense, Medical, Test/Measurement and Industrial markets.

When Performance Matters...

For more information, visit www.CarlisleIT.com

Airbus Activates

industry scan


COMMERCIAL

GE Buys Austin Digital

GE Aviation acquired Austin Digital, a

privately owned, Texas-based supplier

of flight operations data analysis, which

is designed to “strengthen GE’s services

offerings with integrated solutions for

aviation customers around the world,”

the company said. Financial terms of the

acquisition were not disclosed.

Austin Digital, which employs about 40

people at its Austin, Texas, headquarters,

specializes in facilitating Flight Operational

Quality Assurance (FOQA) for airlines and

business jet operators. ADI uses a propri-

etary suite of tools to analyze digital flight

data and other operational data to improve

safety and efficiency for operators.

“GE is committed to delivering solu-

tions that help our customers operate air-

craft more efficiently, with reduced envi-

ronmental impact,” said Paul McElhinney,

president and CEO, GE Aviation Services.

“The acquisition of Austin Digital brings

some of the best flight operations tech-

nology to GE Aviation’s Services busi-

ness, further expanding our commitment

to deliver results for our customers. We

are delighted that Austin Digital is joining

our team today.”

“This is great news for Austin Digital

employees and our customers,” said Aus-

tin Digital CEO Thom Mayer. “Customers

will continue to benefit from the same

expertise and service for which Austin

Digital is known, while the strength of GE

provides a platform for future innovation

and growth.”

Austin Digital’s capabilities will be inte-

grated into GE’s fuel and carbon manage-

ment program focused on helping cus-

tomers reduce their cost of ownership,

cut fuel consumption and decrease emis-

sions, GE said.

Astronics Buys Max-Viz

Astronics will acquire privately held

Max-Viz, a developer and designer of

Enhanced Vision Systems (EVS) for fixed

and rotary wing aircraft, for $10 million in

cash, the company said in late July. Addi-

tional purchase consideration of up to


$8 million may be paid by Astronics if Max-Viz achieves

certain revenue targets in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

“They are a leading provider of EVS technology hav-

ing earned FAA certification for installation on more than

200 different fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft models

across various manufacturers. We expect that Max-Viz

will continue its growth through innovation, quality and

its solid pipeline of opportunities.”

Founded in 2001 in Portland, Ore., Max-Viz had 2011

revenue of $5.4 million and backlog of $3 million at the

end of 2011, and is projecting 2012 full-year revenue in

the range of $7 million to $8 million. Max-Viz’s EVS prod-

uct line fuses infrared and visible imagery allowing real-

time display to pilots for increased visibility in adverse

weather conditions, such as darkness, precipitation, fog,

dust and smoke.

MILITARY

Simulation Unit Sale

Thales completed the sale of its civil fixed-wing flight

simulation business to L-3 Communications for about

$130 million, the company said in August.

“The business, which is now known as L-3 Link Simula-

tion & Training U.K. Limited, will become a part of L-3’s

existing Link Simulation & Training division, which is part of

L-3’s Electronic Systems Group,” L-3 said in a statement.

The U.K.-based Thales said it will continue to develop its simu-

lation and training business for military and government markets,

as well as rotary-wing aircraft for civil and military markets.

L-3 said it intends to continue to operate the fixed-wing

flight simulation business from the Thales facility in England.

The two companies have also agreed on a partnership

to secure the supply chain of civil components that Thales

may require in the future for its military business activities.

“Thales will continue to develop its military simula-

tion system capabilities, which will remain part of our

key product portfolio. We feel that L-3 Communications

Link Simulation and Training U.K. Ltd will be well posi-

tioned to maximize the potential of the civil simulation

business,” said Marion Broughton, head of Thales U.K.’s

aerospace business.

ww

w.p

ickeri

ng

test.

co

m

RF and MicrowaveSwitching

DC ± 65GHz(200+ PXI Modules)

Pickering Interfaces Inc., Grants Pass, OR. Tel: +1 541 471 0700

(East Coast Regional Office) Woburn, MA. Tel: +1 781 897 1710

E-mail: [email protected]

pickering Pickering Interfaces

When it comes to RF and

Microwave switching, Pickering

continues to offer the largest

range and highest densities

in PXI with over 200 modules

available. We cover all key

switching topologies (SPDT/

Multiplexer/Matrix/Transfer) and

technologies (EMR/Solid-State/

Microwave). These modules

can be used in any PXI chassis,

or Pickering’s 60-102/103 LXI/

Ethernet modular platform.

Combine these solutions with

our 20+ years of experience

and a range of 500+ PXI

modules, and see how we can

address the needs of your next

RF and Microwave test system!

Frequency Range

No of Modules

Relay Type

To 3 GHz 126 EMR

3 to 6 GHz 20EMR & Solid

State

6 to 65 GHz 74 Microwave

3 & 6 GHz

#─"Wﾐ┌;デﾗヴゲ 4EMR & Solid

State


industry scanS. Korea F-16 Avionics

BAE Systems will provide avionics

upgrades for South Korea’s fleet of F-16

aircraft, the company said.

The upgrades will include systems

engineering and integration, software

and electronics engineering, obsoles-

cence management and logistics sup-

port, BAE said. The work will be per-

formed through a contract with the U.S.

Department of Defense Foreign Military

Sales program.

BAE did not disclose the financial

terms of the contract, but the com-

pany estimates that the total estimated

addressable market for F-16 avionics

upgrades is valued at greater than $3

billion for more than 3,000 F-16 aircraft

globally.

“This is a strategic international win for

us, significantly expanding our aircraft

upgrade and modification business,” said

Dave Herr, president of BAE Systems

Support Solutions. “We have extensive

capabilities that span across BAE Sys-

tems, and I am confident that our team

offers the best value to the customer.”

The avionics upgrade package will

include the commercial fire control com-

puter, which has the highest throughput

of any mission computer designed for an

F-16, according to BAE.

“This selection further demonstrates

that we are a leading provider of integra-

tion, avionics and mission computers

for F-16s, and we will continue to offer

our capability to customers across the

globe,” said Gordon Eldridge, vice presi-

dent and general manager of BAE Sup-

port Solutions.

UNMANNED SYSTEMS

First Flight for RQ-21A

Insitu recently completed the first test

flight of the RQ-21A unmanned aircraft

system (UAS).

The test flight occurred at an Insitu

facility in Oregon as part of the 27-month

engineering, manufacturing and devel-

opment (EMD) phase of the U.S. Navy

and U.S. Marine Corps Small Tactical

Unmanned Aircraft System (STUAS) Inte-

grator program. The STUAS was awarded

to Insitu in 2010, and Marines are cur-

rently training with the Integrator UAS,

the modular version of the RQ-21A which

was specifically designed for testing.

“The government-industry team that

achieved the successful first flight of

RQ-21A is absolutely dedicated to deliv-

ering the best technology to the warf-

ighter,” said Ryan Hartman, senior vice

president of Integrator programs at Insitu.

The Navy will consider purchasing a

low-rate initial production version of the

RQ-21A at the end of the EMD phase.

The RQ-21A weighs 135 lbs., a signifi-

cant weight increase over the Insitu Sca-

nEagle UAS, which was used extensively

in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Insitu

said the RQ-21A builds off the ScanEagle

design principles.

“First flight of the RQ-21A marks the

start of a very fast paced integrated

Developmental & Operational test period,

which begins at NAS China Lake later

this month. The Insitu/Government team

is very excited and motivated to deliver

the first expeditionary, multi-intelligence

UAS to the Navy and Marine Corps in this


class. The organic ISR capability this UAS

will provide to the Marine Air Ground Task

Force will be a huge enabler for our Marine

Expeditionary Units and the Navy & Marine

Corps team afloat,” said Col. James E.

Rector, program manager for USMC.

CONTRACTS

➤ Avidyne and the Massachusetts Institute

of Technology (MIT) were awarded a $4 mil-

lion, three-year grant to study Automatic

Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B)

under the FAA’s Airborne Traffic Situational

Awareness with Alerts (TSAA) program.

The TSAA program includes the prototyp-

ing and demonstration of functional hard-

ware, along with the drafting of the industry

standards for conflict detection and alerting

to be adopted by ADS-B vendors, Avidyne,

based in Lincoln, Mass., said.

Initial TSAA research, application devel-

opment and simulations were completed in

2011, and flight tests and refinements are

being accomplished throughout 2012. New

minimum operational performance standards

(MOPS) will be defined in the second half of

2013 and the new Technical Standard Order

is expected to be published and available for

all manufacturers soon after that.

X-48C Test Flight

Boeing completed a successful test flight

of its remotely piloted X-48C blended wing

body (BWB) aircraft at Edwards Air Force

Base in California’s Mojave Desert.

The X-48C is a scale model of a heavy-lift

airplane with a 240-foot wingspan that Boeing

said could be developed in the next 20 years

for aerial refueling and other military applica-

tions. Boeing is working to develop the X-48C

with NASA, Cranfield Aerospace and U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory. The remote-

ly piloted plane is a triangular aircraft that blends the wings with the body.

“Working with NASA, we are very pleased to enter into the next flight-test phase of

our work to explore and validate the aerodynamic characteristics and efficiencies of the

Blended Wing Body concept,” said Bob Liebeck, a senior technical fellow at Boeing.

The X-48C is a modified version of the X-48B, which was tested at NASA’s Dryden

Flight Research Center between 2007 and 2010. Boeing equipped the X-48C with

two 89-pound thrust turbojet engines, which differs from the three 50-pound thrust

engines on the B-model. The development team’s goal with the C model was to create

an airframe noise-shielding configuration that is more fuel-efficient than the B model.

“In our earlier flight testing of the X-48B, we proved that a BWB aircraft can be

controlled as effectively as a conventional tube-and-wing aircraft during takeoffs and

landings and other low-speed segments of the flight regime,” said Liebeck. “With the

X-48C, we will be evaluating the impact of noise shielding concepts on low-speed

flight characteristics.”

Pho

to c

ourt

esy B

oein

g

commercial


By James W. Ramsey

Performance-based navigation (PBN), a key element in FAA’s NextGen

air traffic control modernization initiative, is moving ahead, although at a

somewhat slower pace than some airlines would like.

Satellite-based en-route and approach navigation is being used more

extensively by airlines and business aircraft allowing aircraft to fly more

directly to their destinations, saving time and alleviating airport congestion, while

at the same time reducing fuel burn and emissions.

Although carriers are seeing some economic benefits from flying area naviga-

tion (RNAV) and required navigation performance (RNP) approaches and

Routing RNP

RNP promises more efficient routes and lower operating

costs for operators. But airlines are expressing frustration

at the relatively low take-up rates for the procedures

Pho

to c

ourt

esy A

laska A

irlin

es


departures, some feel they are not being developed as quickly or utilized enough

to make a business case for investing to equip their fleets and train their pilots.

“We’d certainly like to see some faster production than what we’ve got,” says

David Newton, senior manager of NextGen and airspace for Southwest Airlines.

Southwest has been the industry leader since it began RNP operations in Janu-

ary 2011 — flying more than 5,800 approaches at 17 airports it serves with the

majority of its Boeing 737 fleet equipped and all of its pilots trained for RNP.

Even though Southwest has flown more than 5,800 RNP approaches and

departures since starting its program in January 2011, it amounts to only 1 per-

cent of its total operations, Newton said. At the 17 airports it serves that have

Routing RNP

Alaska Airlines, which pioneered RNP, has been flying RNP approaches into 27 airports. In 2011, these approaches saved the airline 210,000 gallon of fuel and $19 million.

RNP approaches, they were used only 6 percent of the time. Pilots requesting

RNP approaches often were not given clearance to use them, he adds.

Southwest is still evaluating whether RNP justifies its business plan of investing

$90 million in cockpit equipment and pilot training, but in another areas it is

paying off.

For its part, FAA maintains it is “on target” in developing these new procedures

on the path to NextGen in 2020. “The whole point is to do everything we can to

facilitate ADS-B (automatic dependent surveillance broadcast) on the path to

NextGen in 2020,” the agency said. Clearing aircraft for approaches at airports

that have RNP as well as standard ILS procedures is complex, FAA said. And

while it would like to bring these benefits along faster, its main priority is always

safety, the agency said.

To date, FAA has approved 305 RNP approaches, which require GPS navigation

equipment on board the aircraft as well as FAA-approved pilot training, and plans

call for 65 more RNP approaches to be approved this fiscal year. In addition, FAA

has approved 297 RNAV routes, with 46 more planned.

“The whole effort is what can we do now with existing technologies that are on

most aircraft to get some benefits we associate with NextGen. Let’s get started

rather than waiting until 10 years from now hoping that all these things come

available,” Newton said.

A recent FAA contract to ITT Exelis and GE Aviation could help accelerate the


Graphic above depicts the Green Skies of Peru initiative. The GE-designed approach procedures saves an average of 19 track miles, 451 pounds of fuel and 1,420 pounds of CO2 emissions per flight between Lima and Cusco, the company said.

Pho

to c

ourt

esy G

E A

via

tio

n


development of these satellite-based procedures. Under the $2.8 million

contract, the two companies will develop two RNP approaches each into five air-

ports — at Dayton, Ohio; Kansas City, Mo.; Milwaukee, Wis.; Syracuse, N.Y.; and

Anchorage, Alaska.

Except for several rare exceptions provided to GE Aviation, this is the first time

private contractors will be allowed to design RNP approaches to be used by

multiple carriers in the United States. (Previously, contractors such as GE Avia-

tion were permitted by FAA only to design “special” RNPs for use by individual

airlines.) The award ema-

nated from the Systems

Engineering 2020 program,

which the FAA uses to

select companies to work

on parts of NextGen.

“The procedures must

show benefits,” said Ken

Shapero, director of GE

Aviation’s PBN services

group. “As part of the con-

tract, we have to deter-

mine what the benefits

are going to be and then

we have to do a post-

implementation analysis to

verify that.”

GE Aviation, which has

deployed and maintains

350 RNP procedures

throughout the world, will

handle the RNP design and

procedure implementa-

tion, while prime contrac-

tor ITT Exelis is charged

with program management

and controls. The team will

work closely with FAA to

ensure safety and environ-

mental processes.

The two-year program

— the first RNP approach

is planned for Syracuse’s

PBA. PROAIM FLIGHT STATUS

1553 ON TIME

PBA. PRO 429 ON TIME




ON TIMEPBA. PRO FCNOW BOARDING. . .

The leading manufacturer of Avionics Test

& Simulation Products for all applications

Right on Target

PBA.pro software - takes you where you need to be for all

your Avionics Databus Test, Analysis and Simulation needs. AIM Office Contacts:

AIM USA - Trevose, PAtel: 267-982-2600

email: [email protected]

AIM UK - High Wycombetel: +44 1494 446844


AIM GmbH - Freiburgtel: +49 761 45 22 90


AIM GmbH - Münchentel: +49 89 70 92 92 92


www.aim-online.com

The PBA.pro - a Modular, Scalable and

Integrated solution for a wide range of

avionics test applications. From stand

alone Databus Analyzers right up to

Test Benches or Avionics Integration/

Simulation facilities.

PBA.pro - testing for the future - Today!

Get on Board!


Hancock International Airport — could lead to more third-party designed RNPs.

“If it’s successful, there are an additional 50 airports out there that could be in

line for some procedure work by us,” says Ed Sayadian, vice president of air traf-

fic management for ITT Exelis.

RNP in Service

RNP, with its curved flight paths and more direct routing, can reduce the landing

approach by about nine nautical miles, which reduces the landing time by three

minutes and fuel consumption by 250 lbs., compared with conventional ground-

based navigational approaches.

Alaska Airlines, which pioneered RNP flying into Juneau in 1996, has been fly-

ing RNP approaches into 27 airports, and in 2011 these approaches saved the

airline 210,000 gallon of fuel and $19 million, according to Sarah Dalton, director

of airspace and technology. She said there have been more than 1,500 occa-

sions when RNP was used where aircraft would not have been able to get into or

out of those airports.

“Pilots fly RNP approaches into southeast Alaska about 60 percent of the

time, and another 25 to 30 percent of the time fly visual approaches. It has really

become the preferred method for accessing those airports,” Dalton said.

RNP provides “a significant increase in the level of safety, because we are able

to get both vertical and horizontal guidance into our runway ends, and using sat-

ellite navigation we have been able to cut our diversions and cancellations into

these locations in half.”

Via its “Greener Skies over Seattle” program, Alaska Airlines, working with

Boeing and FAA, in June flew satellite-guided passenger operations into Seattle-

Tacoma International Airport.

“The objective (of Greener Skies over Seattle) is to reduce fuel burn and noise

exposure for our operations here in Seattle,” Dalton said. The program began by

flying two standard terminal arrival routes, with flight trials utilizing the FAA-de-

signed RNP procedures due to begin in mid-July and continuing for six months

with other airlines participating, including Horizon Air, US Airways and SkyWest.

Flying RNP procedures will shorten flight paths either 14 or 26 miles, depend-

ing on their approach route whether from the north or south. A turn over Elliott

Bay rather than farther north will reduce jet noise from over-flights for 750,000

Seattle residents in northern neighborhoods, according to the airline.

Dalton says the flight trials will help FAA controllers refine and adapt their pro-

cedures at an airport using both standard ILS and RNP approaches. She says

similar model programs are envisioned for Atlanta, and other locations.

Universal Avionics System’s UNS-1E flight management system has been used

by Alaska’s partner Horizon Air to fly RNP approaches with its Q400s for five

years. Universal said it has provided more than 2,500 of these space-based


augmentation system (SBAS)-enabled flight management systems to the indus-

try, most of them for corporate aircraft. (SBAS, which is used in Europe, is similar

to wide area augmentation system (WAAS) in the United States.)

Universal’s newest system, the UNS-1EW, has been equipped on six of Hori-

zon’s Q400s so far, and last fall, Horizon received special operational approval for

RNP 0.3. This is the first such U.S. authorization obtained for an operator of tur-

boprops, the company said.

Other Q400 operators including Air Canada and WestJet are moving towards

WAAS and will have Universal’s 1EW system aboard, while Canadian North and

First Air — which operate 737s — have Universal’s systems. Corporate aircraft

with these systems include Cessna Citations, Lear Jets, Falcons, Gulfstreams

and KingAirs, along with S-76, 212 and 412 helicopters.

In a similar project, called “Green Skies of Peru,” LAN Airlines last February

flew Latin America’s first continuously guided flight from takeoff to landing using

PBN technology. LAN used the procedure on its Cusco-Lima route, using an RNP

departure from the popular tourist destination, an RNAV airway en route, and an

optimum profile descent (OPD) and an RNP approach into Lima’s Jorge Chavez

International Airport.

In a collaborative effort between LAN, GE Aviation, CORPAC (Peru’s air naviga-

tion service provider) and regulator DGAC, the PBN procedure shortens the dis-

tance by 19 miles, saving 6.3 minutes, reducing fuel burn by 451 pounds (67.5 gal-

lons) and cutting CO2 emissions by 1,420 lbs. per flight, according to GE and LAN.

Since 2011, RNP approaches have been used by LAN to fly into three other cities

in Peru, and it has been working to implement five RNP approaches at Lima.

In another overseas project, GE Aviation announced last May that PBN flight

paths were validated at Jiuzhai Huanglong Airport in the Sichuan Province of

China. GE says in this first public PBN project initiated by a Chinese airport, the

paths will be available to all approved operators. Air China, China Eastern and

Sichuan are expected to be the first three airlines to fly

the procedures.

For Southwest Airlines, which announced in 2009 plans to spend at least $175

million to make its 500-aircraft fleet of Boeing 737s RNP-capable, has also con-

ducted continuous satellite guided flight paths using optimum profile descents,

says Newton.

“Cruising at 35,000 feet, OPD allows very defined windows on descent that

allows us (the throttles) to be at near idle. And then can hook up with an RNP

approach and have a continuous closed trajectory path from cruise all the way to

the runway.

More than 370 of Southwest’s Boeing 737s are approved for RNP, and all new

delivered aircraft, including its new 737-800s, are so equipped, while older non-

equipped aircraft are being retired.


“At Southwest it is really about evolving our automation,” Newton says. He said

a few years ago, pilots flew aircraft like they did in the 1980s. “Now we are using

more modern displays and using more of the automation tools on the aircraft.

The combination of (using) auto-throttles and VNAV is saving us over $1 million

per month.”

With RNP procedures designed at 11 Southwest airports, the airline projects

savings is $16 million a year, with an anticipated savings of more than $60 million

per year once all Southwest airports have efficient RNP procedures.

In June, JetBlue Airways became the first FAA-certified carrier to fly a non-

public RNP AR (approval required) approach into New York’s JFK International

Airport — using runways 13L and 13R with its A320s.

The new “special” RNP procedure will provide shorter flight times for custom-

ers, reduce noise levels and emissions and result in fuel savings up to 120 lbs.

per flight, said Capt. Joe DeVito, manager of flight standards compliance. The

airline began designing and testing these JFK special instrument procedures in

2004 in partnership with the FAA and MITRE Corp. All 2,300 of its pilots have

been certified to fly RNP.

“What is unique about this approach is that it will allow JetBlue to utilize a deci-

sion altitude while in a slight turn to the runway, the first airline in the U.S. to har-

ness this special capability,” DeVito says. The procedure allows for lower landing

minimums, increasing runway utilization at JFK and reducing delays at JFK and

other New York-area airports, he said.

Although curved approaches are common in RNPs, “in all the other procedures

there is a lengthy straight segment after the final turn is completed. You don’t

have that in this special procedure — you are still in the turn when you reach the

decision altitude.”

JetBlue uses Honeywell flight management system (FMS) on both the A320 and

on the Embraer E190. (The airline has 122 A320s and 51 E190s.) DeVito said the

airline was the first Airbus operator in the United States authorized for RNP AR,

and the first to win authorization on the E190.

DeVito said he thinks FAA has been “more aggressive recently in putting these

(RNP) procedures out there” and in contacting the carriers asking where they

would like to see them implemented.

“The whole effort is what can we do now with existing technologies that

are on most aircraft to get some benefi ts we associate with NextGen.

Let’s get started rather than waiting until 10 years from now hoping

that all these things come available.”


www.AvionicsforNextGen.com

September 18, 2012 Sheraton Atlantic City, NJ

AVIONICS FOR NEXTGEN is your once a year opportunity to join colleagues

and professionals from around the aviation community to discuss the challenges and

solutions with the implementation of NextGen technologies.

With your registration you’ll receive:

Take your seat among hundreds of NexGen professionals

and register with VIP Code: AVIONICS today!20805

National Aerospace

Week Event

Gold Sponsor Bronze Sponsor

Opening Keynote Address

Avionics of the Future:

Computing & Human Centered

Design

Bob Smith, Chief Technology

Officer at Honeywell

Aerospace

Find Out:

How far the avionics industry

has come?

How far it has yet to go to further

modernize avionics systems?

Luncheon Keynote

Address

NextGen’s View from the Hill

Congressman Frank

LoBiondo, New Jersey’s

Second District, U.S.

House of Representatives

Find Out:

The NextGen discussion going on inside

the Beltway

From a legislative perspective, what is

the next step for NextGen?

■ A complete conference program that will

delve into the long-term NextGen initiative

■ Countless networking opportunities during

the breakfast, networking breaks, and

Evening Reception

■ Experts who are working directly with the

technologies driving the future of aviation

■ A seat at the Keynote Luncheon

■ Access to table top exhibits featuring

marketing leading companies

■ And More!


By Callan James

It may seem strange, almost unbelievable, that while GPS and its expand-

ing international equivalents have never seemed better, with its world-

wide acceptance growing virtually by the minute throughout almost every

aspect of human life, there are now concerns, including within its Depart-

ment of Defense (DoD) owners, about what should replace it. Yet, just 40

years after its basic concepts were defined by a small group of U.S. military

officers, that is the case today.

Why is that? How did a military positioning aid, initially conceived as

a highly classified American navigation and weapons delivery system,

become transformed into a public utility that, if shut off tomorrow,

could wreak havoc around the world, due to its reach into the most

remote corners of the earth? Tens of millions of words have been

written about the system’s applications, from the mundane to the

totally extraordinary, but only recently have serious concerns been

raised about its limitations.

Ironically, these are a direct result of the system’s original aim of mak-

ing the GPS satellites’ signals extraordinarily difficult to detect and use,

through a combination of very low transmitted signal power and signal

concealment techniques, and this remains true today. Low power was

desirable in any event to assure long battery, hence long orbital life, but

dropping it to -160dBm, a level well below the ambient radio “noise,”

called for unique technology to detect and recover its full characteristics,

while still preventing its use by adversaries.

Signal concealment relied on the then top secret “frequency hopping”

concept, now known as today’s unclassified and widely used spread spec-

trum technology. But the combination of very low power and spread spectrum

continues in use with America’s GPS and compatible foreign systems.

The drawbacks of the system’s low signal power were first made public

by the Department of Transportation’s Volpe Development Center in 2001.

Volpe scientists were cautioning civil GPS users that the system had shown

itself to be vulnerable to interference from more powerful low frequency

transmissions. By 2009, however, interference reports increased signifi-

cantly with the introduction of GPS vehicle tracking systems and the corre-

sponding increase of low-cost portable GPS jamming devices designed to

foil them.

While no statistics are available, there are now estimated to be several

thousand jammers in daily use on U.S. highways, despite their posses-

sion being illegal. Primarily, they are used by long distance truckers, whose

vehicles are usually equipped with remote GPS receivers that can be inter-

Follow

?

rogated by company dispatchers to monitor vehicle locations, which the jammer

negates. But many other uses have been reported, including concealment of

hijacked trucks carrying high value goods, stealing expensive cars and even the

avoidance of vehicle monitoring by suspicious spouses.

In themselves, none of these has so far seriously threatened public safety.

However, vehicle jammers can affect nearby aviation GPS receivers. For exam-

ple, a Category 1 GPS landing guidance system undergoing certification at

Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey suffered frequent shutdowns

during acceptance testing due to jammers operating in vehicles on the adjacent

turnpike. Modifications to improve jamming resistance have reduced the number

of shutdowns at Newark, but Avionics Magazine understands the complete solu-

tion may include moving the system’s four tower-mounted GPS monitor receivers

much further from the turnpike.

Other than at Newark, there have been few reports of GPS interference that

affected aircraft operations. Usually, this is because the majority of current small

jammers have quite short ranges, which aircraft quickly pass through. Neverthe-

less, with the expected increasing use of more powerful jammers, GPS reliability

as a key element of FAA’s NextGen will come under pressure and could even risk

becoming uncertifiable for essential applications such as RNP in restricted terrain

and GPS precision landing guidance, with potential impact on ADS-B position

reports at lower altitudes, and during less critical SBAS procedures. And para-

doxically, while the steadily increasing numbers of compatible foreign navsats is

unquestionably a navigation benefit, their added individual transmissions within

the GNSS band has the undesirable side effect of raising the ambient noise

“floor,” thereby further weakening the satellite signals.

Interestingly, however, the major concern about aircraft GPS interference has

come from the Department of Defense.

“The relatively weak broadcast signal from space can be jammed, precluding

UAS operations. Until onboard systems that do not rely on GPS can be fielded,

assured position, navigation and timing is a critical UAS concern,” according to the

U.S. Air Force’s 2009-2047 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) policy document.

And while this statement only concerned unmanned systems, adversary jam-

ming at long ranges and high altitudes is an equal DoD concern across its air,

land and sea forces, demonstrated by its twice yearly NOTAM’d exercises on the

east and west coasts, where very powerful jammers, emulating U.S. and foreign

jamming technologies, radiate interference signals out to beyond 350 miles, from

ground level to above 40,000 feet.

And now, there’s “spoofing.” While DoD still questions Iran’s December claim

that it spoofed a U.S. Air Force RQ-170 Sentinel reconnaissance aircraft by send-

ing it higher powered false GPS coordinates and directing it to crash land in Iran,

spoofing’s potential threat has long been recognized as a troubling game changer


in military UAV and other operations. Consequently, DoD is studying other, preferably

exclusive, navigation alternatives to completely avoid jamming and spoofing.

GPS Alternatives

➤ Enhanced GPS receiver jamming protection: This is part of the current gov-

ernment/industry receiver standards initiative, following the LightSquared affair.

But total anti-jam protection is impractical and retrofits to current units could be

cost prohibitive. Some corporate aircraft are reported to have installed military

controlled reception pattern antennas (CRPA) that evaluate all incoming signals

throughout 360 degrees and block reception of segments that appear to include

jamming. Unfortunately, jamming is a battle of escalating power and, inevitably,

higher powered ground-based jammers will usually win.

➤ Increased satellite transmitter power: The converse of increased receiver

protection is to increase the transmit power of the GPS satellites. In fact, the next

generation GPS III constellation, with its first launch in 2015, will be able to direct

higher power “spot beams” against areas of the earth’s surface where jammers

have been detected. But increasing the transmit power of the satellites currently

in orbit appears impractical and, even if feasible, would be extremely costly.

➤ Anti-spoofing technology: At present, this does not appear to exist,

although undoubtedly research is underway. Reportedly, the military GPS

M-Code is virtually immune to spoofing due to its strong encryption and there-

fore all M Code-equipped aircraft are protected. However, it is understood that

most non-front line military aircraft use the unencrypted GPS Standard Position-

ing Service (SPS), as do virtually all civil aircraft, and are therefore vulnerable

to spoofing. (It has been suggested that the RQ-170 UAV reportedly hijacked

by Iran would also have been SPS equipped.) Consequently, until anti-spoofing

technology is available, GPS-based back up systems depending on other satnav

constellations, such as Europe’s Galileo, cannot be relied upon for anti-spoofing

protection.

Three anti-jamming and anti-spoofing measures have been proposed.

➤ Inertial reference systems (IRS): IRS does not rely on incoming signals and, in

newer airline aircraft, IRS outputs are generally integrated with GPS via the flight

management system computer. In a jamming situation causing the loss of GPS,

the flight management system would automatically switch to sole IRS guidance

until the GPS data returned and was verified, when GPS guidance would resume.

In a spoofing attack, however, there would be no GPS failure alert, and the only

warning would be an FMS alert of a disparity between the apparently fully opera-

tional GPS and the IRS, showing an increasing divergence from the desired flight

path, unless that path was itself defined by GPS coordinates, and could also be

spoofed. A route defined by lat/long coordinates would not be easily spoofed.

The two main drawbacks to the IRS backup solution are: 1) The cost of an



IRS installation and its FMS integration could put it out of reach for most mid-

size regional and corporate aircraft, and all smaller aircraft; and 2) When the IRS

is “free running” without continuous position updates from GPS, small head-

ing errors accumulate over time, and these tend to increase more rapidly dur-

ing maneuvering, such as during radar vectoring in a terminal area, resulting in

increasing flight path divergence.

➤ Scanning DME plus VOR: This year, FAA proposed this combination as its

solution to GPS jamming. Its appeal lies in the fact that CONUS airspace has

a well established DME and VOR network, although some ground installations

would have to be re-sited to optimize coverage, and up to 50 additional DME

stations would be required to provide sufficient signals to support simultaneous

scanning DME positioning from at least two ground stations, but preferably three,

to avoid fix ambiguities.. DME and VOR would be supplemented by GPS-like

pseudolites and multilateration networks. The drawback here is that scanning

DME avionics are common in newer large aircraft, but much less common in mid-

size airline and corporate aircraft and rarely found in smaller machines.

As well, both DME and VOR are line of sight navigation aids, with FAA’s analy-

sis proposing they not be used in IFR below 5.000 feet. Additionally, with aviation

representing less than 10 percent of the total GPS user community, obtaining

funding for additional facilities dedicated exclusively to aviation might be difficult.

➤ eLoran: eLoran is a modernized derivative of the earlier Loran-C system,

and still employs high-powered, long range, unjammable low frequency signals

extending from the surface to above jet altitudes, transmitted from widely sepa-

rated ground stations. But while Loran-C stations were arranged in user selected

regional groups, eLoran stations operate individually, providing GPS-like “all in

view” operation, where the receiver automatically selects those stations with

optimum fix geometry and performance.

Earlier FAA analysis of eLoran accuracy indicated its potential to support

required navigation performance (RNP) 0.3 throughout the CONUS. However,

eLoran’s major drawback is that no avionics equipment is available or in develop-

ment, although there appears no reason that small, low-cost units could not be

produced.

One critically important benefit of eLoran over the other two backup approach-

es above is that it is one of just three sources — the others are GPS and labora-

tory atomic clocks — of super accurate time signals. Loran timing units frequent-

ly back up GPS time in a variety of critical national infrastructure applications,

including the FAA. The time provision makes eLoran a totally multi-mode, air/

land/sea positioning system.

➤ Current military alternatives: Through the years, DoD has investigated a

number of positioning systems that could support military GPS-denied situations

For example, much work has gone into development of miniaturized IRS units for


UAVs and small aircraft, although commercial reliability levels appear elusive.

Area positioning systems used by the surveying industry have particularly been

evaluated, due to their high accuracy, GPS jamming and spoofing immunity, rapid

set up and breakdown procedures and ease of portability to new areas of con-

cern. Currently, the Australian Locata system is reported to be of interest to DoD.

First, an alternative means to continue operations, even when less efficient, is

essential to safe navigation. But second, and perhaps less appreciated, is that

the knowledge that an alternative system, having different failure paths, will acti-

vate should the primary navaid be disabled, would be a significant deterrent to

an attacker from the start. A backup to GPS would therefore not only enhance

safety, but would also enhance GPS longevity.

The Future

The one certainty is that no credible near-term GPS replacement, offering all that

system’s benefits, is in sight today.

In June, however, the Defense Advanced Research Programs Agency (DARPA)

solicited industry bids for the development and tests of systems proposed for its

conceptual All Source Positioning and Navigation (ASPN) program. This seeks

low cost, robust and seamless navigation solutions for military users on any

operational platform and in any environment, with or without GPS, and would rely

on selectively integrating a wide range of current or future sensor techniques.

Perhaps coincidentally, BAE Systems recently announced its Navigation Via

Signals of Opportunity (NAVSOP), which is claimed to accept signals from GPS

satellites plus ATC, TV, radio, Wi-Fi and cellular communications towers and,

oddly, GPS jammers. NAVSOP’s accuracy is claimed to be “within a few meters.”

“The technology can also reach areas that GPS is unable to penetrate, such as

dense urban areas, deep inside buildings and even underground and underwa-

ter,” the company said.


product focus

Test Equipment

Budget cuts and program delays in the U.S. military,

in addition to new industry standards, are pushing

the development of more capable ATE systems

By Ed McKenna

Boeing said its Reconfigurable Transportable Consolidated Automated Support System supports 639 different Units Under Test (UUT) and is set to host more than 750 UUTs.

Pho

to c

ourt

esy B

oein

g


t P

ressed by tight budgets and program delays, the military is increasingly

looking to upgrade and extend the life of its existing aircraft. Service

life extension programs, such as one announced this year by the Air

Force for some of its F-16s, put pressure not only on those aging plat-

forms but also the support systems, including test equipment, and the

companies that build them.

In response, developers of automated test equipment (ATE) must refine their

technologies to support new requirements for the older aircraft even as they

deploy and upgrade the new standard testers to handle the entire military fleet.

Even with further cutbacks looming including the potential for drastic cuts via

sequestration, existing austerity measures are already taking a toll. “New pro-

gram starts are extremely limited … (and) many programs have either been can-

celled outright or deferred,” said H. Byron Green, senior director test and EW at

AAI Test & Training, based in Hunt Valley, Md.

There has been the much publicized termination of the F-22 and the C-27J

Joint Cargo Aircraft programs, for example, as well as the stretch-out of the

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) schedule. The latter has forced the Air Force to

announce it would “pursue a scalable Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) for

approximately 350 F-16s … (to) ensure the F-16 remains viable and relevant for

future Active and Reserve Component multi-role fighter squadrons until the F-35

arrives in greater numbers.”

For the industry, the JSF delays mean “the demand for everything to support it

is going to be late and spread out over time,” said Dan Walsh, director of market-

ing, aerospace and defense at Teradyne, of North Reading, Mass. “If the govern-

ment slows the rate at which they purchase airplanes, it (eventually) slows down

the rate at which they need testers.”

On the positive side, despite the recession-driven budget cuts, “the avionics

aircraft segment was still the single largest area of weapons systems procure-

ment sector with spending of $29 billion,” said Sujan Sami, measurement and

instrumentation program manager at Frost & Sullivan.

Some of that funding will be going to sustaining and improving older aircraft.

Legacy systems will be “staying in service longer than anticipated with obsoles-

cence upgrades awarded as a stop gap,” said Randy Core, program director of

enterprise test systems, Support and Services at Lockheed Martin Global Train-

ing and Logistics. “Despite this, today’s avionics requirements are outpacing leg-

acy testing capabilities, (and) modern testers must have the capability and archi-

tecture to easily expand to meet the requirements of multiple weapon systems.”

In fact, “the current economic environment has reinforced the need to create

more affordable ATE solutions which can be adapted to support multiple programs

thereby reducing development and sustainment cost,” said Chris Clendenin, direc-

tor of Boeing Defense, Space & Security Support Equipment & Services.


The military services are following this path and pressing ahead with efforts to

meet these requirements by building and deploying a “family” of standardized

automated testers, such as the Navy’s new electronic Consolidated Automated

Support System (eCASS), and the Air Force’s Versatile Depot Automatic Test Sta-

tion (VDATS) programs, using technology from a cadre of major technology pro-

viders including Lockheed Martin, AAI Textron, Boeing and Teradyne.

“The budget changes that have been implemented thus far have had no mea-

surable impact” on these programs, said Walsh. However, “right now the real

question is what will happen with the next round of cuts (which have) … the

potential to change the volume of business and even shift where the focus is in

terms of technology.”

Even without those potentially drastic cuts, the prime drivers in the ATE mar-

ket are “requirements to reduce cost and increase commonality” forcing a “move

toward software-adaptable solutions and the expansion of test requirements for

existing systems,” said Green.

“Customers in a constrained budget environment need to accomplish more

than ever before with their existing systems, which are now expected to accom-

modate a broader array of today’s requirements and to adapt to future ones,”

said Green.

The need to upgrade existing, fielded test systems for current and future

requirements is already spurring new demand “around the testing of specific,

advanced capabilities, such as directed infrared countermeasures (DIRCM) and

digital RF memory DIRCM-based jammers,” said Green. AAI is providing its scal-

able, plug-and-play electronic warfare simulator product line, A2PATS, to address

expressed customer needs for “greater RF fidelity … (and increased) accuracy

and coordinated control of phase, amplitude and time,” said Green. The compa-

ny has recently added to the system, which uses the synthetic source instrumen-

tation technology that forms basis for AAI Test & Training’s RF solution used in

the U.S. Navy’s eCASS program, a file translator “that allows customers to utilize

the vast majority of their legacy threat files on the new system.”

Overall, the sustainment of legacy platforms, however, may not always involve

the use of additional testers but will rely rather on system refinements, said Walsh.

For example, when the Navy upgrades an aircraft now, it requires a “new test pro-

gram be written for their 600 CASS (Consolidated Automated Support System) sta-

tions.” The writer of that program “ends up determining whether the CASS station

is inadequate for testing, and then creates an augmentation specific kit for the test

program.” That fix then “only gets deployed on a minimal basis” to address the lim-

ited numbers systems they need to be able to support.”

In the end, sustainment may boost demand for changes, “but, realistically, unless

there is a wholesale upgrade of the test program, it doesn’t create a huge ground

swell of demand for new test equipment.”


Many of these upgrades are being applied to the “family” of common core or stan-

dardized testers. “These multi-use test systems for multiple weapons platforms are

driving greater flexibility in test system architecture” since they are designed “to eas-

ily expand to meet the requirements” of additional systems, said Core.

The Lockheed Martin LM-STAR tester “along with its system software, Standard Test

Operations and Run-time Manager (STORM) … form the basis for our eCASS,” said

Core. The tester is “configurable and scalable allowing for differing footprints to meet

various applications in both the factory, the depot and in the field at intermediate

sites,” said Core. It also “harmonizes the OEM avionics and the depot of the end-

user, maximizing the investment in test program development, (and) this harmoni-

zation drives tremendous savings and efficiency in sustainment.”

Market Moves

The following are new product and contract announcements made by manufacturers of aerospace test equipment systems and their components.

ɀ EADS North America Test and Services, based in Irvine, Calif., in June introduced the Racal Instru-ments 1257A, RF Interface Units (RFIU) switch system family.

The COTS units, which contain industry-standard interfaces, a rich SCPI command set and IVI drivers, include relay counters to monitor end of life, so the user will know when the relays need to be replaced. The 1257-D development versions of the system are intended for in-house development. EADS North America Test and Services provides the software and hardware building blocks to customize the RF sys-tem to meet the user’s requirements. The user then assembles and confi gures the 1257-D, choosing from a wide variety of qualifi ed RF component manufacturers.

ɀ Aerofl ex, based in Wichita, Kan., in February said its APM-424(V)5 IFF MK XIIA Mode 5 portable test set received full certifi cation from the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) AIMS International Program Of-fi ce to support both AIMS 04-900A Option A (KIV-78) and Option B (KIV-77) crypto appliqués.

With the latest AIMS certifi cation, Aerofl ex’s Mode 5 test set has resolved all previous exceptions, includ-ing support for burst mode interrogators, and is in full compliance with DoD AIMS 03-1000A performance standards for Mark XIIA performance and ICAO Annex 10 international standards for Mode S ELS/EHS performance for ramp testing of IFF transponders and interrogators.

ɀ AIM introduced the PBA.pro-Light, which it calls a “no frills” version of its PBA.pro Databus Test and Analysis Software for Windows or Linux.

“PBA.pro is in use all over the world for a broad range of avionics test and integration applications from simple protocol testing to complete avionics test benches and systems. Many of our clients have shown a keen interest for a ‘no-frills’ version whereby the performance stays the same but a reduced function set is implemented,” said Andy Küchlin, team leader for the PBA.pro project.

ɀ In July Steve Sargeant was named CEO of Geotest-Marvin Test Systems (MTS). “Steve’s impressive background and skills within the military/aerospace world will provide Geotest-MTS with added insight and expertise to address our customer’s current and future test and measurement requirements,” the company said.

www.avionicstoday.com June 2012 Avionics Magazine 33

A Networking Breakfast at NBAA from Honeywell and Avionics Magazine

DATE, TIME

Orange County Convention Center Orlando, Fla.

The Connected Aircraft of the Future

The mobile connectivity market, particularly for airborne customers, is poised for exponential growth in the coming

years. By 2016, it is estimated there will be 10 billion mobile devices in the world, and demand for data traffic is

expected to grow by a factor of 50 for smartphones and a factor of 62 for tablets.

Inmarsat’s GX Aviation Ka-Band satellite network, slated for launch in 2013, will bring the solution needed to deliver the

bandwidth for this exploding demand. The Ka-band spectrum will provide four times the bandwidth compared by alterna-

tive solutions in Ku-band. Operators of business aircraft have many options when it comes to onboard connectivity equip-

ment – what’s the best system for my aircraft, what advantages does Ka-band offer over Ku-band, is there a complete

system to capitalize on these network capabilities?

Industry leader Honeywell, which this year signed an exclusive agreement with Inmarsat to provide global aviation cus-

tomers with in-flight connectivity systems, is in a leading position to deliver airborne connectivity solutions to this rapidly

expanding market.

Discuss these and other questions at the Avionics Magazine Technical Breakfast, sponsored by Honeywell. The event,

which coincides with the National Business Aviation Association’s (NBAA) annual meeting, will explore the satcom services

and capabilities available for business aircraft and the future of airborne satellite services.

Hear from these experts in the field:

Mike Edmonds, Vice President, Services, Marketing & Program Management Honeywell Aerospace

John Broughton, Vice President, Product Management & Partnerships, Honeywell Aerospace

Kurt Weidemeyer, Director of SATCOM, Marketing and Product Management for Honeywell Aerospace

Bill Hafner, TITLE NEEDED, Honeywell Aerospace

INMARSAT

BOEING

For more information, or to register, visit www.aviationtoday.com/honeywell


DATE, TIME













expanding market.









INMARSAT

BOEING



DATE, TIME













expanding market.









INMARSAT

BOEING


A Networking Breakfast at NBAA

from Honeywell and Avionics Magazine


The mobile connectivity market,

particularly for airborne custom-

ers, is poised for exponential

growth in the coming years. By 2016,

it is estimated there will be 10 bil-

lion mobile devices in the world, and

demand for data traffic is expected to

grow by a factor of 50 for smartphones

and a factor of 62 for tablets.

Inmarsat’s GX Aviation Ka-Band satellite

network, slated for launch in 2013, will

bring the solution needed to deliver the

bandwidth for this exploding demand.

The Ka-band spectrum will provide

four times the bandwidth compared to

alternative solutions in Ku-band. Op-

erators of business aircraft have many

options when it comes to onboard con-

nectivity equipment – what’s the best

system for my aircraft, what advantages

does Ka-band offer over Ku-band, is

there a complete system to capitalize

on these network capabilities?

Industry leader Honeywell, which this

year signed an exclusive agreement

with Inmarsat to provide global avia-

tion customers with in-flight connectiv-

ity systems, is in a leading position to

deliver airborne connectivity solutions to

this rapidly expanding market.

Discuss these and other questions

at the Avionics Magazine Techni-

cal Breakfast, sponsored by Honey-

well. The event, which coincides with

the National Business Aviation As-

sociation’s (NBAA) annual meeting,

will explore the satcom services and

capabilities available for business

aircraft and the future of airborne sat-

ellite services.


Mike Edmonds, Honeywell Vice

President, Marketing & Product

Management

John Broughton, Honeywell

Director, Marketing & Product

Management

Kurt Weidemeyer, Honeywell

Director, Marketing & Product

Management

Bill Hafner, Honeywell, Senior

Sales Manager

For more information, visit

www.aviationtoday.com/av/techbreakfast


To date, “we have fielded more than 100 test stations and have plans to build more

than 500 additional LM-STAR and eCASS stations over the next 10 years,” said Core.

This year, the Navy said eCASS completed its Critical Design Review; the program is

scheduled to complete testing and achieve Initial Operating Capability in 2016.

An extensive enhancement of the other major Navy ATE program, the Reconfigu-

rable Transportable CASS (RTCASS) “configuration, entailing modification of more

than 100 stations at 17 sites, was accomplished this past year,” said Clendenin.

“This modification addressed an urgent customer need to expand RTCASS capabili-

ty to transport additional legacy CASS TPS (Testing Procedure Specifications) whose

requirements exceeded the original system design.”

Boeing, the prime contractor, with partners Systems & Electronics Inc., and Tera-

dyne, won the RTCASS contract in 2003 and since have used legacy TPSs to sup-

port more than 600 Units Under Test (UUT), for U.S. Marine Corps aviation platforms

including the E/A-6B Prowler, F/A-18 Hornet, H-1 helicopter, AV-8B Harrier, MV-22

Osprey and the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22 Osprey. With the

latest program enhancement, “the RTCASS currently supports 639 different Units

Under Test and is on a trajectory to host more than 750 UUTs,” he said. “In addition,

a new variant of the RTCASS configuration is in the planning stages to provide depot

repair capability at U.S. Navy Fleet Readiness Centers (FRC).”

As of June, the Air Force had delivered 51 VDATS stations to support depot operations

or about one-third of the stations that are slated to be acquired through fiscal year 2017,

according the Defense Department’s Automatic Test Systems Executive Directorate.

“The Air Force, the most recent service to adopt a (standard tester), is really still

in the process of deploying it,” said Walsh. Teradyne’s digital instruments form the

core of the Air Force VDATS, and the company’s technology is also used on the

Navy’s CASS and RTCASS testers among other programs. The service has “been

successful in deploying it at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, but outside of

Warner, they’ve only got a few machines currently installed.”

A significant amount of work still needs to be done to address the service’s lega-

cy platforms, some dating back to 1960s, Walsh said. “They are experiencing some

growing pains … and are really dealing with educating the other depots on how to

get programs on it and utilize it,” he said. However, their test program sets (TPS)

“re-host effort is on track, so they are making good progress, and the next major

steps are to finalize transition plans outside of WR-ALC.”

The Air Force is a bit different than the Navy since it will be relying on two stan-

dardized testers: VDATS for its legacy fleet and LM-STAR “for its F-35s, F-22s and

some of the systems on its F-16s,” said Walsh. Looking forward, “Lockheed Mar-

tin and the … Air Force are collaborating on the convergence of VDATS and LM-

STAR,” said Core, noting the software for the two systems has “many similarities in

architecture … (and) many of the instruments used in (both) are common and enable

potential collaboration when dealing with obsolescence issues.”


For its part AAI offers up its venerable Joint Service Electronic Combat Systems

Tester (JSECST), “which is currently in use by all four services and many international

customers,” said Green. JSECST “has the capability to not only perform end-to-end

tests of electronic combat systems, but also communications, navigation and many

other installed avionics systems,” said Green. “This greatly expands the value of

already fielded and supported testers.”

UAS Testers

As the builders of the Shadow and Aerosonde unmanned air systems (UAS), AAI has

its eye the unmanned systems as well as the manned platforms. The demand for test

systems “continues to grow right along with the demand for unmanned aircraft sys-

tems (themselves),” he said. Fueling this demand is the growing cost, complexity and

miniaturization of critical UAS subsystems like payloads, data links and communica-

tions equipment,” he said. Add to that “the growing prevalence of radio frequency

(RF) equipment and UAS in the battlefield, along with the forthcoming addition of

the latter to national airspace,” he said. The needs exist, but are undefined and,

therefore, unfunded in the current budget environment,” he said. The key challenges

include increasing cost, complexity and miniaturization apply to UAS of all size.

AAI is not the only company keeping an eye on the unmanned market. “Presently

the UAS market is somewhat unique,” said Core. “As a logistics plan is developed,

testing capabilities for avionics, ground equipment and weapons systems fielded on

reusable vehicles will be needed,” he said, adding Lockheed Martin “is investing in

affordable new technologies that will further enable our test systems to be smaller,

more capable and readily deployable.”

On a more skeptical note, Walsh agrees there is growth in the market but mainly

for small scale UAVs. “If you look at the big ones — the Global Hawks — with the last

budget cuts, (the military is) only buying enough to replace the ones that are wearing

out or they are losing, so the growth is there but … (for) the lower tech product.”

Meanwhile, the new standards, such as PXI, LXI and VXI, as well as synthetic

instrumentation are providing developers with tools to address challenges in new

ways and allow for the integration of new capabilities to the systems. “As new stan-

dards arise, we find it is important to provide an architecture that can integrate new

technologies with existing ones to meet our customers’ testing requirements,” said

Core. eCASS is an example where VXI and PXI are used in the system to meet the

overall system requirements.”

In fact, Lockheed Martin said this year it has integrated PXI modular instrumen-

tation and platform products from National Instruments into the eCASS automated test

equipment family. This PXI-based platform is providing “commercial off-the-shelf solu-

tions for advanced engineering challenges and support for extended life cycle govern-

ment programs,” according to National Instruments.

In the ongoing efforts throughout industry to reduce the footprint of the testing sys-

tems, “the increased capability … of the PXI format offers some real opportunities,” said


Companies

3M Aerospace ............................................................................................................www.3m.com

AAI Corp. .............................................................................................................www.aaicorp.com

Advanced Technical Group ........................................................................................www.a-tg.com

Aero Express ................................................................................................ www.aeroexpress.com

Aeroflex ............................................................................................................... www.aeroflex.com

Aerospace Instrument Support .............................................................................. www.ais-inst.com

Aerosystems International ...................................................................................... www.asiiweb.com

Agilent ................................................................................................................... www.agilent.com

AIM ..................................................................................................................www.aim-online.com

AMETEK ..............................................................................................................www.ametek.com

Astronics Corp. ................................................................................................. www.astronics.com

Avionics Specialist ................................................................................www.avionics-specialist.com

Avtron Manufacturing ..............................................................................................www.avtron.com

BAE Systems ................................................................................................www.baesystems.com

Ballantine Labs ............................................................................................www.ballantinelabs.com

Boeing ..................................................................................................................www.boeing.com

DAC International ....................................................................................................www.dacint.com

C & H Technologies ...............................................................................................www.chtech.com

Cassidian ..........................................................................................................www.cassidian.com

Corelis .................................................................................................................. www.corelis.com

DIT-MCO International Corp. ................................................................................... www.ditmco.com

DMA-Aero/D. Marchiori ..................................................................................... www.dma-aero.com

EADS North America Test and Services ................................................... www.eads-nadefense.com

Embvue ..............................................................................................................www.embvue.com

GE Measurement & Control .................................................................................. www.ge-mcs.com

Georator Corp. ....................................................................................................www.georator.com

Geotest-Marvin Test Systems ........................................................................... www.geotestinc.com

Giga-tronics ....................................................................................................www.gigatronics.com

Honeywell ........................................................................................................ www.honeywell.com

Ideal Aerosmith ......................................................................................... www.ideal-aerosmith.com

ITT Exelis ............................................................................................................ www.exelisinc.com

Laversab ............................................................................................................ www.laversab.com

Lockheed Martin ....................................................................................... www.lockheedmartin.com

MAX Technologies ....................................................................................................www.maxt.com

National Instruments Corp. ............................................................................................ www.ni.com


Clendenin. “On a broader scale, instrumentation continues to provide increased

functional density coupled with inherent application flexibility regardless of the physi-

cal format,” he said. “Devices have more channels and more capability than ever

before, and, in particular the concept of Synthetic Instrumentation allows a device to

have many ‘personalities.’”

Meanwhile, “new regulation standards are also emerging, such as the Future Air-

borne Capability Environment (FACE) Consortium, comprised of approximately 40

avionics manufacturers, military organizations, among others,” said Sami. “These

standards are expected to enhance the quality of products used in critical applica-

tions, such as military and commercial avionics and, in turn, pave the way for future

next-generation ATE.”

“The move to common open architecture and associated standards for avionics

software will speed development of TPSs immediately and potentially allow greater

commonality and reduce development costs in ATE,” said Clendenin. “Common avi-

onics software will allow faster analysis and reuse of test routines between TPSs …

(and) the ATE level advances will occur as legacy interfaces are supplanted by inter-

faces compatible with FACE, which is anticipated to encompass a small subset of

the current universe of legacy interfaces,” he said.

Next month: Displays

Avionics Magazine’s Product Focus is a monthly feature that examines some of the lat-

est trends in different market segments of the avionics industry. It does not represent a

comprehensive survey of all companies and products in these markets. Avionics Prod-

uct Focus Editor Ed McKenna can be contacted at [email protected].

NH Research, Inc. .......................................................................................... www.nhresearch.com

North Atlantic Industries ...............................................................................................www.naii.com

Northrop Grumman ............................................................................... www.northropgrumman.com

Pickering Interfaces .......................................................................................www.pickeringtest.com

RSL Electronics Ltd. ..................................................................................................... www.rsl.co.il

TechSAT GmbH ....................................................................................................www.techsat.com

Tektronix UK Ltd. ......................................................................................................... www.tek.com

Tel-Instrument Electronics ............................................................................. http://telinstrument.com

Teradyne ............................................................................................................www.teradyne.com

Testek ....................................................................................................................www.testek.com

Thales ........................................................................................................... www.thalesgroup.com

VTI Instruments ........................................................................................... www.vtiinstruments.com


By Peter Hansen

Historically, defense and aerospace test programs on large-scale automatic

test equipment (ATE) operated by sequentially applying, measuring and

comparing voltages, currents, waveforms and digital truth tables. This

procedural approach worked well in the past for automating tests that oth-

erwise would be executed manually on a test bench, providing improved

throughput and repeatability. However, this approach can have some drawbacks.

First, it is rare that this sequential approach faithfully reproduces the actual operation

of a Unit-Under-Test (UUT). Second, it

works best with older avionics that can

be readily controlled at a very low level

by external test equipment, a function

that is often not as straightforward in

newer designs.

Today, test systems are no longer

merely measuring voltage and sig-

nals — they are increasingly required

to exchange and analyze large, com-

plex data sets with the UUT at very

high rates. Exchanging this data and

controlling the UUT usually means the

ATE must employ complex protocols on various buses. Command, control and data

exchange are often tightly interwoven in time, placing real-time performance demands

on the ATE. The test equipment must be truly “in the loop” with the UUT as it operates

in a manner similar to the end application. This is a tremendous challenge, and one that

traditional sequential testing methods do not handle well, or quickly.

This data interchange may use one of many low-level digital buses — such as Fibre

Channel — to apply application-specific upper-level processing to the data, and pro-

vide control from high-level Test Program Set (TPS) software that typically runs on a

Windows PC. Achieving fast and predictable real-time behavior while controlling the

process from a Windows PC is an additional challenge placed on the test equipment.

Storing pre-calculated stimulus values and captured response data to disk is rarely a

viable approach in these data-intensive scenarios. The associated batch processing of

the data cannot provide the responsiveness needed for real-time “in the loop” testing;

the quantity and bandwidth of raw stimulus and response data often makes it impracti-

cal. Instrumentation with real-time processing can calculate stimulus values and make

UUT quality assessments on the fly — and that’s the direction that ATE is headed.

Implementing a Complex Bus Solution with


As avionics test requirements have escalated, the internal architecture of test instru-

mentation has become increasingly powerful and configurable. Inflexible hard-wired

logic gave way to microprocessors, programmable logic and now to fully reconfigu-

rable, real-time processors and field programmable gate arrays (FPGA). The current

power and flexibility of these instruments allows them to execute applications that

address the bus interface and upper-level processing requirements of recent designs.

The flexibility also results in equipment that can be reconfigured for a specific test, in

contrast with earlier instruments that were dedicated to a single purpose. Under control

of a specific TPS, this equipment can be categorized as Runtime-Defined Instruments

— the test program specifies what the instrument can do, thus enabling one test instru-

ment to do many things.

This combination of processing elements forms a test subsystem with a three-tier

architecture. A Windows PC controls the high-level flow of the TPS and performs pre-

test setup of the underlying real-time test hardware. Below the PC are one or many flex-

ible instruments that implement the lower two tiers, consisting of real-time processors

in the middle and FPGAs at the bottom. The three tiers are bound together with well-

designed and supported software and firmware interfaces. This arrangement provides

an ideal platform for implementing a UUT-specific test application, whether developed

by the ATE manufacturer, the end-user or a third party.

There are various models for communications protocols. The three-tier architecture of

these Runtime-Defined Instruments, not coincidentally, can be mapped roughly to the

Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model employed by many avionics test depart-

ments, where Tier 1 maps to lower-level protocols, Tier 2 maps to upper-layer protocols

and Tier 3 maps to applications. As in the OSI model, as you descend through the stack

the operations become more complex and demand higher performance.

Why has this model emerged? Before the advent of Runtime-Defined Instru-

ments, test departments were forced to purchase specialized instruments for each

application — for instance, Video over Fibre Channel or Command & Control over

Fibre Channel. This equipment was typically provided by firms that were not neces-

sarily dependable suppliers over the decades of life that are typical for large-scale

test systems, leaving users in the lurch. Additionally, this approach results dozens

of underutilized, single-purpose bus test instruments taking up valuable space.

Historically, the other alternative was to build homegrown test circuitry, typically

located in the Interface Test Adapter (ITA) between the ATE and UUT. Complex ITA

circuitry seemed less expensive than purchasing specialized instruments but has

proven impractical in the long run due to lack of throughput, repeatability, logisti-

cal support, training and documentation.

with a Runtime-Defined Instrument Architecture


Fortunately, the emergence of Runtime-Defined Instruments is eliminating the

need for these types of one-offs, with flexible architectures that enable one subsys-

tem to fit a variety of testing needs and handle various types of high-speed digital

buses. Upper-level and lower-level protocols can be implemented in a variety of

ways. The test equipment

vendor may directly sup-

port standardized buses and

protocols, alleviating the

need for end-users to per-

form these detailed tasks. In

cases where buses are of a

custom nature, an open sys-

tem provides the end-user

full access to system capa-

bilities. Users can be trained

to program or tailor the

systems on their own — an

important feature particularly

for organizations that lever-

age classified custom buses. Test equipment can be configured to individual bus

requirements ranging from physical-layer configuration to low levels of protocol.

Providing local processing on each bus instrument permits real-time data analysis

and interaction with the UUT. Multiple instruments accommodate the real-world

scenario of concurrently operating buses. Streaming data from one bus instrument

to another allows for true closed-loop testing that emulates the in-system behavior

of the UUT such as executing a test Operational Flight Program (OFP).

Three key technologies have matured in the past decade, enabling the cre-

ation of Runtime-Define Instruments: PC-based high-level TPS programming

tools and infrastructure, real-time processors and software, and the speed and

flexibility of FPGAs:

➤ The Windows-based PC offers mature and efficient TPS development tools to

do the high-level setup, control and results processing for multiple concurrently

operating bus instruments. Test standards such as VISA and IVI provide a well-

understood and consistent instrument interface.

➤ The programming of processors using a Real-Time Operating System (RTOS)

has gone from esoteric to mainstream. Development tools are quickly catching

up with the tools available on Windows.

➤ FPGAs have become larger and faster, allowing them to take on roles formerly

reserved for dedicated hardware. In addition, programming tools are continuously

improving, and a broader range of engineers is becoming trained in their use.

The three-tier processing capability allows the TPS developer to make tradeoffs


between performance and programming time. For example, it’s easiest to

implement a math function on the upper tier (PC); however, the performance is

much greater with the lower tier (FPGA) but at a far higher development cost.

For many applications the real-time processor in the middle tier provides the

best compromise of performance vs. effort. Properly combined and balanced,

this three-tier, multiple-instrument approach forms the basis for accommodating

each of the concurrent UUT buses, combining them into a unified subsystem and

inserting it into both existing and future test stations.

Fibre Channel buses and applications are a good example of the use of three-

tiered Runtime Defined Instruments. Fibre Channel is widely deployed in avion-

ics upgrades for older platforms such as F-18, as well as in the latest aircraft

such as JSF.

Individual Runtime-Defined Instruments could be used in various roles over

Fibre Channel to:

➤ Send and receive video over Fibre Channel using the modern ARINC 818 stan-

dard, or earlier platform-specific arrangements such as FC-AV;

➤ Exchange memory between processors over Fibre Channel using the FC-AE-

RDMA standard;

➤ Use the MIL-STD-1553 protocol over Fibre Channel using FC-AE-1553; and/or

➤ Use the Anonymous Subscriber Messaging (FC-AE-ASM) protocol to transport

command, control, signal processing and sensor and video data used on aircraft

such as JSF.

The common denominator of these Fibre Channel applications is that the

lower-level protocols remain constant and highly standardized, and are best

implemented in the lowest tier (FPGA) of a Runtime-Defined Instrument. Proven

FPGA code is available, and the relatively high cost of developing or procuring it

can be amortized over the many applications that share it. The upper-level proto-

cols such as ARINC 818, FC-AE-RDMA, FC-AE-1553 and FC-AE-ASM are each

implemented using the middle tier — the real-time processor. These protocols

are best developed and debugged in the C-language as opposed to the far more

complex FPGA Verilog/VHDL environments. If the test equipment supplier imple-

ments both the lower-level and upper-level protocols, the end-user can concen-

trate on the test program written on the upper PC tier.

Runtime-Defined Instruments integrated into subsystem are becoming the

optimal approach for addressing the high-speed bus test requirements present in

new aircraft as well as avionics upgrades. This emerging class of test equipment

has been found to offer the highest throughout, lowest TPS development cost

and lowest lifecycle logistics cost.

Peter Hansen is the instrument product line manager, Assembly Test Division, at

Teradyne, based in North Reading, Mass.


new products

New Office

Satcom Direct, of Satellite Beach, Calif.,

opened a new office in Savannah, Ga.

The Satcom Direct Savannah office

includes a business office and a satel-

lite testing and integration lab. Custom-

ers who visit the location have access

to Satcom Direct’s avionics and testing

Flight Tracking Enhancements

ITT Exelis released an enhancement to its aircraft flight tracking and situational

awareness system. Symphony OpsVue v. 1.8 includes diversion management

capabilities and surface surveillance for all 35 of the busiest U.S. airports that use

the Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) runway-safety tool.

The Web-based Symphony OpsVue leverages real-time data from FAA’s NextGen

surveillance system to provide flight tracking and situational awareness to airport and

airline operators. New features and benefits in the latest release include advisories

that alert the user, or a stored list of stakeholders, to any flight diverted to or from a

specified list of airports; advisories that compare the number of active diversions to

a specified airport against its diversion capacity (defined by the user); and diversion-

related fields are available both in SmartTables and for display in the flight data tags,

such as time aircraft was diverted, diversion destination and scheduled destination.

Visit www.exelisinc.com/symphony.


lab, training facility and support ser-

vices for pilots, flight operations and

maintenance staff. Visit www.satcom-

direct.com.

Monitor PMA Approval

Aircraft Cabin Systems,

of Redmond, Wash.,

received FAA Parts Manu-

facturing Authority (PMA)

for its 17-inch Wide Screen

LCD monitor.

The monitor is designed

for bulkhead and/or ceiling

installation. The PMA cov-

ers bulkhead installation

kits consisting of shrouds/

mounting brackets and

cable assemblies to support

the monitor.

Visit www.aircraftcabin-

systems.com.

Flight Info Upgrade

Rockwell Collins enhanced

its Ascend flight information

systems, adding capabili-

ties for the Flight Manager’s

iPad application, as well as

higher levels of integration

between the Ascend Flight

Operations System schedul-

ing and dispatch software

and Ascend Flight Manager

web portal.

The enhancements

include a document man-

agement tool that allows customers

to view and edit a variety of docu-

ments related to the aircraft, airports,

flight legs, training or trips.

Visit www.rockwellcollins.com.

A STACK Certified Supplier

Tel: (949) 859-8800E-mail: [email protected]: www.holtic.com ISO 9001: 2008 Registered

For further information on these and other Holt products contact:

HOLTINTEGRATED CIRCUITS

INC

.

You can download a FREE QR Code Reader

for your Smartphone at

www.mobile-barcodes.com

MIL-STD-1553 Development Kits

Fully Integrated BC/MT/RT solutions

using HI-6130 or HI-6131

p HI-6130 or HI-6131 board with dual transformer-coupled MIL-STD-1553 bus interfaces

p ARM Cortex-M3 microcontroller board with “J-Link On Board” debug interface

p IAR Embedded Workbench® for ARM® evaluation version CD

p Pre-loaded demonstration software with source code

p Power supply, USB cable and software CD

p Two host interface options available: 16-bit parallel (HI-6130) or SPI (HI-6131)

p Dual flash EEPROMS. Optional auto-initialization using pre-loaded software

p Dual transceivers integrated on-chip

p Concurrent multi-terminal operation (BC, MT, 1 or 2 independent RTs)

p 64K bytes on-chip RAM with error detection/ correction option

p Fully programmable Bus Controller with 28 op-code instruction set

p Simple Monitor Terminal (SMT) Mode records commands and data separately, with 16 bit or 48-bit time tagging

p IRIG Monitor Terminal (IMT) Mode supports IRIG-106 Chapter 10 packet format. Complete IRIG-106 data packets including full packet headers and trailers can optionally be generated

softwareb y C h a r l o t t e A d a m s

DO-178C: What’s Next?


Five and a half years down the road of revising the rules for writ-

ing safety-critical code — and three years past the anticipated

deadline — RTCA in December approved the new core document,

DO-178C, and four supplements — a 700-page manifesto that

many in the industry are still trying to sift through.

Updating the two-decade-old DO-178B was necessary to clear up

old ambiguities and make way for new technologies such as model-

based development, object-oriented programming, formal methods and

advanced development tools. A lot has changed in the software world

since 1992, when DO-178B was released, particularly with the advent

of tools that can help verify requirements and generate code. Many of

these tools have been used in the interim period, but there has been no

agreed-upon method of determining what credit they can provide in a

certification project.

The new package is a substantial

improvement from the older guid-

ance. It will confer benefits such

as reducing the amount of manual

verification required to use the new

technologies. But it’s not a perfect

10, and actually probably closer to

a seven, according to some indus-

try insiders.

“It’s actually above average, so there are many more positive than nega-

tive aspects,” said Vance Hilderman, president of Atego-High-Rely, a soft-

ware product and services company and DO-178B/C training consultant.

Excessive Delegation?

There’s a lot of self-interest involved in standards exercises, as each player

tries to save his company’s ox from being gored. The government members

of these committees are expected to exert a balancing influence.

But DO-178C is a different ball game. The new guidance dives into the

low-level intricacies of specifying, designing and writing code instead of

sticking to the high ground of systems and processes. Since FAA isn’t

manned by coding experts, the agency ran the risk of delegating too

The process of writing

DO-178C was like letting chil-

dren decide their own bed-

times and then have Twinkies

for breakfast. Now maybe it’s

time to steer the kids towards

a more healthy diet.


much responsibility to industry “experts” who have a strong incentive to put their own

interests first, implicitly if not explicitly, in this highly competitive, $3 billion market.

According to some observers, that’s what happened, at least to some degree. “I

did not see FAA exercise a lot of control,” says one participant. There’s a perception

among some self-described “peons” that, because of the complexities involved and

the heavy participation of software tool vendors, the playing field, particularly in the

area of model-based development, is a little less level than it used to be. According

to another observer, that’s just part of the game.

Once the committee and its subgroups set off into the weeds, as perhaps they had

to do, it was probably inevitable that the “experts” would play outsized roles. They

know their turf better than the broader-based airframers, integrators, avionics manu-

facturers and regulators do.

The process in some ways was like letting children decide their own bedtimes and

then have Twinkies for breakfast, jokes Hilderman. So now maybe it’s time to steer

the kids towards a more healthy diet.

It may be a good thing that implementation of DO-178C and its supplements will

not be immediate. Although the guidance has been published, it’s still months away

from prime time. Indeed, FAA does

not expect to issue advisory circular (AC 20-115C) and the revision of Order 8110.49

on this subject until sometime next year. Much will depend on

how the certification authorities decide to interpret the material.

FAA still has to educate its employees on DO-178C. Designated engineering repre-

sentatives have to bone up on the material. The agency has to develop check lists for

inspectors and set adoption dates. And perhaps most importantly, FAA will have to

establish a consensus with other certification authorities about practical implementation.

In response to my inquiries, agency officials said they are aware of concerns sur-

rounding the model-based development supplement and are working to address

them. They said they have “every intention of applying a level playing field to all

applicants.”

So there is still time to examine unintended consequences and perhaps add a little

more parity in the safety-critical software development market.

Charlotte Adams has covered embedded electronics and software standardization

issues for more than a decade.

perspectivesb y W i l l i a m R u f f

Most electrical and electronic products deployed on aircraft

must meet strict requirements with respect to power bus

anomalies, such as brown outs, surges, sags, interruptions

and transients. To verify compliance, commercial aircraft

manufacturers publish standards that vendors and subcontractors must

satisfy. For other aircraft, either military MIL-STD-704 or the commercial

RTCA/DO-160 test standard is applied.

Product qualification usually involves the use of programmable AC/

DC power sources that support the voltage, current and frequency range

called for in these test standards, which typically require the application of

specific waveform types and output sequences.

A significant problem for electrical/electronic equipment suppliers is

developing, testing and validating

the AC power bus test regimen for

the unit under test (UUT), which can

be very time consuming and costly.

A specific product model or varia-

tions thereof could be used on sev-

eral different types of aircraft; that

requires qualification under multiple test scenarios. This would include

cases where a new airframe calls for some of the same avionics as an

older model, but testing must simulate a new power bus. To further com-

plicate matters, the power source/simulator manufacturer may also need

to upgrade its products to meet new airframe requirements.

Because of these complications, any organization performing compli-

ance tests must carefully consider both the performance capabilities of

the test equipment that simulates the power bus, and the qualification

process the equipment has been through. Generally, these compliance

test issues can impact any or all of the following organizations:

➤ Aerospace system development labs

➤ Airframe manufacturers

➤ Aircraft electrical/electronic equipment makers

➤ Airline backshops doing overhauls and return-to-service testing

➤ Military depot repair and service shops

Fortunately, the full-blown qualification process may not be required

for articles that are derivatives of existing equipment. For example, an

A significant problem for

electrical/electronic equipment

suppliers is developing, testing

and validating the AC power

bus test regimen for the unit

under test.

Power Bus Testing



FAA Advisory Circular, AC No. 21-16G dated 6/22/2011, modifies the requirements

of RTCA/DO-160 test standards to recognize the realities of equipment operation

under actual environmental conditions and evolving needs of the aviation commu-

nity. In particular, it pertains to applicants using RTCA/DO-160 to seek Technical

Standard Order authorization for airborne equipment. Item 6e of AC 21-16G states:

“When a new application is based on the design of an existing approved article, the

applicant may ask to use environmental test data from the existing article’s environ-

mental qualification, based on similarity between the two articles. This request must

be fully supported with a detailed similarity assessment comparing the changes from

the earlier approved article to the article in the new application. The aircraft certifica-

tion office (ACO) may accept the data if the similarity assessment clearly shows that

the design changes will not adversely affect the environmental qualification.”

Essentially, the same considerations apply to the power source used to simu-

late environmental conditions associated with the aircraft’s AC power bus. In this

case, the similarity assessment must consider two major design areas of the power

source: hardware and firmware. For example, when AMETEK Programmable Power

upgraded its California Instruments SW Series AC/DC power source for compliance

testing on newer aircraft, it was not necessary to re-qualify every aspect of the new

CSW Series. Where its performance would clearly be identical to the earlier design,

it was simply a case of documenting this to reduce testing and verification that

would otherwise have been repeated from the SW qualification.

On the other hand, there were hardware and software changes that required new

qualification testing. For instance, the CSW combines an AC/DC power source with

a high-performance power analyzer and arbitrary waveform generator. This makes

it capable of complex testing at a lower cost than traditional test systems requiring

multiple instruments, such as digital multimeters, power harmonics analyzers and

current shunts or clamps. In addition, a new CPU and firmware meant that code

compatibility could not be guaranteed by a similarity assessment.

Therefore, new qualification tests were documented, and a number of units sup-

plied to users for backward compatibility verification when running actual Test

Program Sets on legacy systems. This made it possible to provide a more sophisti-

cated GUI and several ready-to-run test routines per published standards for both

old and new aircraft, such as RTCA/DO-160, IEC61000-4-11, IEC61000-4-13, Mil-

Std-704F, Airbus A350 (ABD0100.1.8.1), Airbus AMD24C, Boeing B787-0147 and

Watt-Hour Meter Measurements.

William Ruff is vice president, marketing, for AMETEK Programmable Power in San

Diego. He can be reached by email at [email protected].

people


John Hinton

Aircell, based in Broomfield, Colo., named John Hinton region-

al sales manager. He is responsible for assisting business air-

craft operators and aftermarket installation facilities with their

in-flight connectivity needs in the Northeastern United States.

A veteran of the business aviation industry, Hinton comes

to Aircell with knowledge of today’s airborne communications

systems and services. Prior to joining Aircell, he was a princi-

pal sales manager with Rockwell Collins.

Joseph Rivera

Gulfstream appointed Joseph Rivera as director of Interna-

tional Operations. In this position, which is based in Savannah,

Ga., Rivera is responsible for oversight of Gulfstream’s three

international service centers in Beijing; Luton, England; and

Sorocaba, Brazil.

Rivera worked for Gulfstream from 1997 to 2006 before join-

ing Bombardier, where he was the general manager for Bom-

bardier’s Tucson, Ariz., service center. Previously Rivera was general manager

for the Bombardier service center in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Mark Davis

TIMCO Aviation Services, based in Greensboro, N.C., named Mark Davis senior

vice president, MRO sales. Davis will have responsibility for customer accounts

related to the company’s airframe base maintenance business, the TIMCO Lin-

eCare line maintenance and cabin refurbishment network and the TIMCO Engine

Center.

Davis, who has been with TIMCO since 2008, has managed several of TIM-

CO’s key airframe maintenance customer accounts. Prior to joining TIMCO,

Davis spent 30 years with United Airlines, holding a variety of leadership roles

with a focus on vendor-provider relationship management.

Brian Sprecher, Walt Marcy

Greenwich AeroGroup, based in Wichita, Kan., expanded its sales team.

Brian Sprecher has joined the company as mid-south regional manager for

John Hinton

Joseph Rivera


Greenwich’s MROs. Most recently he was aircraft maintenance sales manager at

Landmark Aviation. He will be based in Charleston, S.C.

Additionally, Greenwich AeroGroup named Walt Marcy as MRO avionics sales

manager. With more than 25 years experience, he previously worked for Tulsair

Beechcraft, Duncan Aviation and Haggan Aviation. Marcy will be based at West-

ern Aircraft in Boise, Idaho.

Clark Gordon

Pro Star Aviation, based in Londonderry, N.H., appointed Clark Gordon director

of sales. Gordon will be responsible for implementing new avionics programs and

will support the continued expansion of the company.

Gordon has 30 years of aviation industry experience. He started his career in

product support with Bendix’s General Aviation Avionics Division. He moved into

avionics sales during his tenure with Duncan Aviation then vice president of sales

for TrueNorth Avionics and his most recent position as Pro Star Aviation’s director

of marketing.

Peter Bartolotta

Vancouver, B.C.-based CHC Helicopter hired Peter Bartolotta as chief operating

officer and president of the company’s Helicopter Services division.

A former operations manager at AlliedSignal/Honeywell, Bartolotta joins CHC

from Morrisville, N.C.-based computer firm Lenovo Corp., where he was senior

vice president of global services.

Jeffry D. Frisby

Triumph Group, based in Berwyn, Pa., named Jeffry D. Frisby CEO.

Frisby joined the company in 1998 as president of Frisby Aerospace, upon its

acquisition by Triumph. In 2000, he became group president of the Triumph Con-

trol Systems Group and was later named group president of the Triumph Aero-

space Systems Group upon its formation in 2003. In 2009, Frisby was appointed

president and chief operating officer of Triumph.

people


Thomas L. Hendricks

Thomas L. Hendricks was named president of the National Air Transportation

Association (NATA). He succeeds James K. Coyne, who has served as NATA’s

president since 1994.

Hendricks most recently was senior vice president, safety, security and opera-

tions for Airlines 4 America, where he was responsible for all core airline technical

and operational functions. Hendricks previously worked with Delta Air Lines as

director of line operations and a chief pilot for flight operations.

Chris Maupin

Chris Maupin was named director of FBO services at Jet Aviation’s recently

acquired Houston Hobby Airport FBO.

Prior to joining Jet Aviation, Maupin spent 14 years at Universal Weather and

Aviation where he was a part of the team that opened the first FBO in Mumbai,

India. He is an international planning expert and fuel market analyst.

Fernando Lacerda Da Silva

Bombardier Aerospace appointed Fernando Lacerda Da Silva as sales director of

new aircraft responsible for Brazil.

Fernando joins Bombardier with a 25-year sales career that includes 12 years of

Latin American business aircraft sales experience, as well as previous sales suc-

cesses with Bombardier jets in Brazil.

Lindsay Koster

Mid-Continent Instruments and Avionics, based in Wichita, Kan., added Lindsay

Koster as controller.

Koster, who is a Certified Public Accountant, brings knowledge of public and

private accounting with particular emphasis in the application of accounting prin-

ciples, tax rules and IRS regulations.

www.avionicstoday.com July 2012 Avionics Magazine 51

Subscribe or Renew Today!

Avionics Magazine is your direct link to comprehensive

coverage of the civil and military avionics industry.

Now in its 36th year, Avionics Magazine is the trusted

source of information on the technical, business and

regulatory developments of importance to the industry,

including NextGen, SESAR, Air Tra�c Management

and test and maintenance.

With a subscription to Avionics Magazine you get all of the news

a�ecting manufacturers, airline operators, distributors, air tra�c

managers and others in this important sector. Plus:

Exclusive market intelligence and data …to build your business

and remain competitive

Information on regulations, contracts, plus emerging trends…

to discover new business opportunities

Access to all of the news and information, including article

archives found on AvionicsToday.com – to keep you on top of

business changes

And much more!

4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd FloorRockville, MD 20850 USA+1-301-354-2100 AvionicsToday.com 20036


February 2012

COUNTERING MANPADS Protecting Against Persistent ThreatPRODUCT FOCUSAerospace Connectors

NEXTGEN UPDATESoftware Problems Plague ERAM

Business Aviation in Asia

01_AVS_0212_Cover_p01.indd 1

Subscribe or Renew Your Subscription by going to

Omeda/av.com Today!

September

10-13 Autotestcon 2012, Disneyland Resort, Anaheim, Calif. Visit http://autotestcon.com.

11-16 Berlin Air Show, Berlin Brandenburg Airport, Germany. Visit www.ila-berlin.de.

17-20 Airline Passenger Experience Association (APEX) Expo, Long Beach Convention &

Entertainment Center, Long Beach, Calif. Visit http://apex.aero.

18 Avionics for NextGen, sponsored by Avionics Magazine. Sheraton Atlantic City, N.J.

For registration and sponsorship information, visit www.avionicsfornextgen.com.

25-27 Aircraft Interiors Expo Americas, Seattle Convention Center, Seattle. Visit

www.aircraftinteriorsexpo-us.com.

October

2-5 Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA) Annual Conference and Exposition, Gaylord National

Resort & Convention Center, National Harbor, Md. Visit www.atca.org.

14-18 Digital Avionics Systems Conference, Crowne Plaza Williamsburg at Fort Magruder,

Williamsburg, Va. Visit http://dasconline.org.

22-24 Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting, Walter E. Washington

Convention Center, Washington, D.C. Visit www.ausa.org.

30-Nov. 1 National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) Annual Meeting and Exposition,

Orange County Convention Center, Orlando, Fla. Visit www.nbaa.org.

2013

February

12-14 ATM World Congress, IFEMA, Madrid, Spain. Visit www.worldatmcongress.org.

March

4-7 Heli-Expo 2013, Las Vegas Convention Center, Las Vegas. Visit www.heliexpo.com.

12-14 ATC Global, Amsterdam RAI Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Visit www.atcglobalhub.com.

25-28 Aircraft Electronics Association International Convention and Trade Show, MGM Grand

Hotel and Convention Center, Las Vegas. Visit www.aea.net.

April

calendar


ADVERTISING SALES REPS

Randy Jones

Publisher

+1-972-713-9612

[email protected]

Susan Joyce

Advertising Sales Manager

+1-303-221-2530

[email protected]

BRINGING NEW LIFETO OLDER CABINS

www.emteq.com

EMTEQ offers complete lighting solutions for all aircraft.

One of EMTEQ’s innovative solutions is the eFIT™ cabin lighting system designed for B737NG and A320 aircraft. It provides a refreshed look by using color to accent the cabin and enables your older aircraft to compete with the OEM’s current cabin lighting system. Utilizing existing mounting provisions, connectors and controllers, it is a TRUE plug-n-play system.

EMTEQ: A continued partner for all your lighting, IFE and cabin power needs.

APEX Booth 852

™

16-18 Navy League Sea-Air-Space Exposition, Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center,

National Harbor, Md. Visit www.seaairspace.org.

22-26 AMC/AEEC Joint Meetings, Hilton Walt Disney World Resort, Orlando, Fla. Visit

www.aviation-ia.com.

May

21-23 European Business Aviation Convention and Exhibition (EBACE), Geneva PALEXPO and

Geneva International Airport, Geneva, Switzerland. Visit www.ebace.aero.

June

17-23 Paris Air Show, Le Bourget Exhibition Centre, Paris. Visit www.paris-air-show.com.


vvv-a`qûdkchmb-bnl

Ekx vhsg bnmûcdmbd

A`qûdkc hr ax xntq rhcd-Xnt lnrs khjdkx jmnv tr enq adhmf ` Fqntmc Rtoonqs Sdrs Dptholdms 'FRSD( l`mte`bstqdq enq md`qkx 54 xd`qr+ ` chrsqhatshnm `mc qnsàkd

bdmsdq+ `mc `m `tsgnqhydc qdo`hq rs`shnm enq TR % Dtqnod`m NDLr---

Ats A`qûdkc+ ` Ràdm` sdbgmhbr bnlo`mx+ hr `krn `m hmctrsqx kd`cdq `s oqnuhchmf etkk bnlonmdms rtoonqs oqnfq`lr enq @hqatr+

Andhmf+ Qdfhnm`k ids `mc stqanoqno `hqbqès-

Sgqntfg cdchb`sdc oqnctbs khmdr+ vd oqnuhcd btrsnldqr vhsg s`hknq,l`cd

bnrs,deedbshud rnktshnmr-

Bnlonmdms rdquhbdr@hqkhmd oqnfq`lr

Chrsqhatshnm % QnsàkdrFqntmc Rtoonqs Sdrs Dptholdms

Nmd fqnto+ nmd uhrhnm+ xntq r`shre`bshnm

Bnld `mc uhrhs tr `s MA@@Nbsnadq 2/ fl

Mnudladq 0+ 1/01Annsg 1884

Avionics September 2012

Documents

Transcript of Avionics September 2012