VISTA Vision of Integration Satellite Technologies into Aviation Presentation to ICAO ACP WG-C08...

VISTAVision of Integration Satellite

Technologies into AviationPresentation to ICAO ACP WG-C08

Munich, September 20th to 24th

Dr. Jens Federhen

© Air Traffic Alliance

Introduction

0


ESA Study “ATM Systems for 2020+:The expected role of satellites”

• 250K€, 6 months• Very long time horizon

– Assume that a paradigm shift in ATM will have taken place by 2020

– Assumption that specifications valid or under development today will no longer applicable

• Holistic (“systemic”) approach– Consider operational, technical, economical,

and political issues– Consider not only space, but also terrestrial

and airborne world– Consider C, N, and S

• Integrated approach– Include “all” stakeholders concerned (Airlines,

Air Traffic Service Providers, Manufacturing industry, Research bodies; others: Airports, Standardisation bodies, Legal institutions, ...)

• Consequences:– “Free-minded environment”– High level considerations only, i.e. broad but

not detailed– High degree of uncertainty

To be considered when using the word “vision”

• Nevertheless:– Long time period required for development,

validation and deployment– Now is an opportunity not to miss for injecting

views (because of e.g. Single European Sky, SESAME etc.)


Consortium

EurocontrolAdvisor

European Space AgencyCustomer

Air Traffic Alliance

EADS AstriumCo-Prime

Provide Space Know-How

Thales ATMCo-Prime

Provide ATM/CNS Know How

Alcatel SpaceSDLS Review

Lufthansa CargoProvide Airlines Views

DLRProvide Research Views

DFSProvide ATSP Views


Study logic

• Broad Study Topic, Need to include representatives of various stakeholder groups• Short duration, Low budget Study centred around a series of workshops with all experts around one table

Role of satellites in ATM systems for 2020+

Task 1: ATM Methodology & Systems

Baseline until 2012

Task 2: Potential contributions of Space

Systems

Task 3: Vision of an ATM System for 2020+

ATM 2000-2012

KOMWS #1

WS #2

Vision & scenario skeletons

ATM 2012-2020+Trade-Offs,

Integr. Solutions,Standards & Reqs.

Transition schemes,Impact assessment

WS #3

11 SEP 03 17/18 NOV 03 10/11 DEC 03 03/04 MAR 04

TN 1 TN 2 TN 3 FinalRept.


Task 1

1 ATM Methodology & Systems Baseline until 2012


Task 2

2 Potential contributions of Space Systems


Task 2

2a Long-term developments in space systems for ATM


Typical design variables Issues

• Most critical: User link• Bandwidth• Rain attenuation• Global accessibility (Radio

Regulations)• Technology maturity

• GEO vs. Non-GEO

• Imperatives• Cheaper, smaller, lighter, …• Limit number of antennas on

aircraft• Avionics-specific design issues

• Certifiability & Standardisation• Integration with other aircraft

systems

• Satellite antenna• Digital on-board processor

Aircraft avionics (AES)

Satellite orbits & constellations

Frequencies

Satellite payload

Satellite platform

Launch considerations

Long-term developments in space systems for ATM

Messages

• Very difficult regulatory situation!• Only bands <10MHz suitable if service is to be used below clouds

• HF/VHF/UHF (<1GHz): either technically not suited or not accessible• L (1-2GHz): well suited but high density of other services• S (2-4GHz): very similar to L band but little spectrum available for aero satcom• C (4-6GHz): MLS band• X (6-10GHz): blocked by military

• No ideal solution• GEO shortcomings: propagation delay (conceivable for voice, thus need for extra

training; danger of long waiting times for data services, e.g. if protocol requires handshake), echo, no coverage on polar caps

• NGSO shortcomings: very few piggyback options, need for many satellites, poor commercial performance of existing satcom constellations, difficulties to realise regional solutions

• Avionics roadmap is dependent on:• Availability of in orbit satellites and their services• Assessment of airlines and business jet operators wanting those services

• AES drives satellite system design!

• Technologies are mature• No ATM-specific modifications needed• ATM will simply benefit from improvements that happen steadily


Impact of mobility requirement on link performance

Service

Fixed

Land Mobile

Antenna

Ku-Band (11000 MHz)

L-Band (1500 MHz)

HPBW

2.4°

80°

Gain

37.7dBi

7.3dBi

Ca. 30 dBi

(Factor 1000 In power!)

Difference:

Mobility requirement costs 30dBi in link margin (factor 1000 in power)!

0,00

20,00

40,00

60,00

80,00

100,00

120,00

140,00

160,00

0,1 0,3 0,5 0,7 0,9 1,1 1,3 1,5

Diameter [m]

HP

BW

[°]

1500

11000

MHz1500

11000

MHz0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

30,00

35,00

40,00

45,00

An

ten

na

Gai

n [

dB

i]

(Antenna efficiencies: 55%) • Mobility requirement:• Aircraft cannot stop for data transmission• Manoeuvrability of aircraft (banking) must be maintained

without interrupting satellite link• Low antenna gain cannot simply be compensated by increased

RF power or lower receiver system noise temperatures• High-gain tracking antenna

• Antennas with mechanical pointing mechanisms are large and expensive

• Electrical phase array antennas need more R&D to lower prices

• Mobility has impact on network, too (e.g. handover)


Availability issues

• ATM is particularly sensitive to satellite availability– Single most important issue when considering SatCom for ATM

• A defective satellite in orbit can only be replaced, not repaired.• Satellites are built according to very demanding standards• Experience of the past 20+ years:

– If the satellite begins its operational life satisfactorily it will continue operating satisfactorily for years with none or few service outages.

• Redundancy scenarios– No spare satellite– Ground spare satellite– Cold in-orbit spare satellite– Hot in-orbit spare satellite

Trade-off between cost and dependence on the satellite system


Cabin communications

• Assumption: By 2020, cabin communications systems can be made sufficiently reliable to be used for ATM communications

– physically robust lower network link layers– operational means (firewalls, prioritisation)

• Pro:– Large bandwidth– No additional antenna on-board the aircraft– Cost paid by passengers

• Contra:– Shared business case (Example: Iridium)– Remaining safety & security concerns (however: Current VHF-AM comms are

not secure at all)– Not all aircraft equipped with passenger comm’s: Cargo aircraft, small aircraft– If “Ku-Band”: not working in all weather conditions– Proprietary standards


Inmarsat: History & apparent trends

• Higher antenna gain, higher satellite power level– Physical limit for satellite antenna diameter: about 30 m

• More complex digital processors– Regenerative payload?

>On-board re-modulation of signals prior to onward transmission>Additional 3 dB on link budget>Increased power and added complexity

• Introduction of data (instead of voice) services

Inmarsat 1 (late 1970s)• Low-gain antenna• Transparent transponders• Power: ca. 1kW• Service outages due to

platform

Inmarsat 2 (1980s)• Major advances in

platform (1st Eurostar)• Phased array antenna

(diameter: 1m)• Still backup for Inmarsat 3

Inmarsat 3 (1990s)• Major advances in

payload• 8 spot beams• Higher data rates

Inmarsat 4 (from 2006+)• 200+ spot beams• Digital processor• High-gain antenna (reflector

diameter 9m)


Task 2

2b Long-term developments in ATM


ATM Functional Blocks *)

Trends

More automationMore collaboration4D TrajectoriesADS

Emphasis on capacity“Gate to Gate”More collaboration4D Trajectories

More integrationMore flexibilityMore dynamism

Reduced separation minimaRe-Distribution of responsibilitiesIncreased automationAir/air communications

Increase capacityIntegration with air transport networkCollaborative processesAll weather capabilitiesBetter guidance and control

More integration (SWIM)More collaboration“Better data”

Airspace Organisation

Demand & Capacity Mgmt.

Traffic Mgmt.

Separation Mgmt.

Airport Throughput

Information Mgmt.

Procedure

*) Source: Eurocontrol/AECMA “ATM Master Plan”

Potential Contribution of Space Technologies

• Trajectory negotiation, ADS, and clearances require a data link• Satellite technologies appear well-suited for en-route traffic, particularly in oceanic and remote

areas but possibly in high-density airspace, too• Terrestrial technologies suggested around airports

• Strategic rather than tactical (i.e. before rather than during the flight)> No direct impact on satellite technologies (except possibly FSS for ground-ground)

• Interface to traffic management (4D trajectory negotiation)

• Flexible and dynamic airspace organisation require additional communication• Integration requires uniformity of CNS infrastructure• Satellite technologies appear well-suited for en-route traffic, particularly in oceanic and remote

areas but possibly in high-density airspace, too• Terrestrial technologies suggested around airports

• Greater navigation accuracy enabled through satellite navigation• Highly reliable air/air communications not so well suited for satellite

(better: line-of-sight communications)• Ground-to-air broadcast services to assist separation (e.g. TIS-B) are very well suited for satellite

• Augmented (GBAS) satellite navigation• Most changes on and around airports will not be enabled through satellite technologies • Terrestrial communications means appear better suited (satellite may be backup)• Airport should not be the driver for satellite systems engineering

• Possibility of new information broadcasting services (traffic situation, NOTAMS, weather, …)• Common & distributed databases updated and synchronised by fixed satellite systems in some

regions of the world


Task 3

3 Vision skeletons of a satellite-enhanced ATM System for 2020+


ATM stakeholders in 2020+

• Today's stakeholder groups likely to still exist in 2020+, yet some will dramatically change the way they operate:

– Trend towards application of commercial rules, corporatisation, privatisation

– Trend towards internationalisation

• Users

– Airlines (passengers & cargo)

– Military aviation

– Business aviation

– General aviation

• Service providers

– ANSPs / ATC service providers

– C, N & S Infrastructure operators

• Airports

• Legal bodies

– Intergovernmental organisations

– National legislation

– National authorities

• Standardisation bodies


ATM/CNS infrastructure for 2020+

• Will still comprise C, N, and S– Dependent surveillance is using C & N– Primary surveillance still required (infrastructure possibly thinned out)

• Will still comprise various C/N/S systems– Interoperability would have positive effect on safety, too

>Some systems may be reliable enough to be “sole” means (depends on RCP, RNP, RSP, RTSP)

>Choice of “primary” means dependent on airspace type and traffic situation– For political reasons, various world regions will not accept to be dependent on

others– Technically, no system is equally suited for different airspaces & traffic patterns


Communications (1)

• Various candidate communications media

– VHF (today sole comm’s means)

– SatCom

– Mode S

– Possibly others, but only as requested by users (airlines)

• No HF any more?

– Polar caps

• “Seamless communications”

– Transparent & automatic choice of

> Communications media

> Frequency

– Pilot and controller should not perceive any difference between the various communications means

ATN-Bild


Communications (2)

• Work Share between terrestrial and satellite communications:– SatCom primary means for basic load air/ground communications

>Oceanic and remote airspace◦ VHF air/air as backup instead of HF ?

>En-route– Terrestrial = primary means for air/ground communications in “hot spots” (TMA)

>Less range and faster access to communication required– Terrestrial (line-of-sight) = primary means for air/air communications

• Possibly not the same conclusion for voice and data link


Communications (3)

• Voice will remain, but used less often than today– Should voice be provided over satellite?

>Why not?>If satellite is there, it could provide a (digital) voice service, too

– Should voice service comprise party line feature?>Technically feasible, user community needs to formulate the requirement


Commercial trade-offs

• Aviation must ensure reasonable data traffic volume for SatCom to reach “critical mass” and ensure commercial viability.

• SatCom system must ensure that operational benefits of satellite technologies must be quantifiable and big enough to justify airline investments in SatCom.

• Further incentives for introduction of satellite services?

Strict safety requirements

Niche market particularities

High cost pressure


Difficulty of open standard for ATM SatCom

choice?

Users

choice

choice

SatelliteOperators

ServiceProviders

HardwareManufacturers

NGSS ?

Big differences amongst current SatCom systems

!

• Open standard ensures

– Interoperability

– Competition amongst service providers and hardware manufacturers

– Choice and attractive prices to end customers

• Particularities of ATM SatCom market

– Small

– Demanding (technically as well as commercially)


Transition issues

4


Conclusions

5


Will satellites play a role in ATM systemsfor 2020 and beyond?

• Yes!– Navigation: No doubts that GNSS will be used– Communications: Some important questions still open, but:

>New operational concepts will require additional (data) communications>Satellites are particularly well-suited for those concepts requiring

◦ Global seamless coverage◦ Additional bandwidth◦ Broadcast capabilities

– Surveillance: ADS will create additional communications demand– Well-balanced integration of terrestrial and satellite technologies is needed

>Must make sense to ATM stakeholders as well as satellite community

More work is needed: (1) define demand and (2) prepare the grounds(systems engineering, standardisation, regulation, commercial …)


What needs to happen next?

• Space community to participate in current and future initiatives to define the ATM system for 2020+

• Find most suitable business model• Find optimum technical solution• Secure spectrum• Advance standardisation• Demonstrate satellite capabilities (e.g. in-flight trials)


Thank you for your attention!

Any Questions?Dr.-Ing. Jens Federhen

Marketing Manager

Air Traffic Alliance

c/o EADS Astrium GmbH

D-81663 München

Tel : ++ 49 (0) 89 / 607 - 29476

Fax : ++ 49 (0) 89 / 607 - 21023

Mobile: ++ 49 (0) 175 / 57 38 678

E-Mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

VISTA Vision of Integration Satellite Technologies into Aviation Presentation to ICAO ACP WG-C08...

Documents

Transcript of VISTA Vision of Integration Satellite Technologies into Aviation Presentation to ICAO ACP WG-C08...