1. Aeronautical Frequency Spectrum Management and ACP WG-F
Loftur Jónasson ICAO
28/03/2017

2. ACP Working Group F (frequency)
Rapporteur: Steve Mitchell, UK NATS
Responsible for the initial development of the draft ICAO Position for WRCs.
Draft Position is reviewed by ANC, then sent to States for comments, reviewed again by the Air Navigation Commission and finally reviewed and adopted by Council, much the same as SARPs.
Develops the draft overall ICAO frequency spectrum policy which covers all spectrum items not addressed in the WRC position.
Policy is then finalized by the Air Navigation Commission and adopted by Council.
Serves as a forum of aviation frequency spectrum experts to assist the ICAO Secretariat in developing material to support the common aviation position during the deliberations of the ITU-R study groups and CPM and of the regional telecommunication organizations.
The ACP Working Group F is responsible for the draft ICAO Position on frequency spectrum. Many of you are probably all fairly familiar with the process… the position is reviewed by the Air Navigation commission, sent to States for comments, reviewed again by the ANC, and finally reviewed and adopted by Council, much the same as SARPs.
Working Group F also develops the overall ICAO frequency spectrum policy, covering all spectrum items not addressed in the position for the ITU World Radiocommunication Conference. The adoption of the policy follows a similar process, it is finalized by the ANC, adopted by the Council, and then included in an updated version of the Frequency Spectrum Handbook.
Working Group F serves as a forum of aviation frequency spectrum experts, assisting the ICAO Secretariat in developing material to support the aviation position during the deliberations of the ITU-R study groups and the WRC Conference Preparatory Meeting, and also the Regional Telecommunication Organizations.
28/03/2017

3. ACP WG-F Recently Completed Work
ICAO Position for WRC-12
Update of the ICAO overall frequency spectrum policy statements
Edition 5 of Doc 9718, the Frequency Spectrum Handbook
Development of numerous input contributions to ITU-R Study Groups in support of ICAO position
Regional Preparatory Workshop for APAC in preparation for WRC- 12
Regional Preparatory Workshop for NAM/CAR/SAM in preparation for WRC-12
Regional Preparatory Workshop for MID in preparation for WRC-12
Here is a list of recently completed work:
This includes the ICAO Position for WRC-12, completed and disseminated through a State Letter in June 2009.
Update of the ICAO Frequency Spectrum Policy at the same time.
A consequential update of Doc 9718, the Frequency Spectrum Handbook, which was then published in June this year.
Development of numerous input contributions to ITU-R Working Parties 5B and 4C, to support and clarify the ICAO Position.
A regional Preparatory Group meeting in the Bangkok Office for Asia/Pacific in preparation for WRC-12
A regional Preparatory Workshop for the Americas in Mexico City in preparation for WRC-12
And a regional Preparatory Seminar in Cairo for the Middle East in preparation for WRC-12
28/03/2017

4. ACP WG-F Work Programme for 2010 - 2012
Continue preparation for WRC-2012
Continue development of input material for ICAO contributions to ITU-R Study groups and WRC preparatory meetings of Regional Telecommunication Organizations.
Two Frequency Spectrum Workshops in the ICAO Regions in Objective:
provide a forum for aviation professionals designated by the States, responsible for the preparation of the WRC-12
Main items at next WRC:
AI 1.3 (UAS)
AI 1.4 (AM(R)S in , and 5GHz bands
AI 1.7 (AMS(R)S access in the L band …
Interference issues and other items which may affect access to spectrum by Civil Aviation
The work programme of Working Group F is currently focused on continued preparation for the World Radiocommunication Conference in 2012.
It includes continued development of input material for potential ICAO contributions to the WRC process
This is the fourth Regional Frequency Spectrum Workshops, we plan to do one final one in the ICAO Dakar Office in September/October this year. These workshops are intended to provide a common forum for the aviation professionals designated by the States, so that we can discuss the pertinent aviation issues on the agenda.
A large portion of time of the ACP WG-F goes into the development of material to support the main items of Aviation interest on the WRC agenda. We will have presentations on these today and tomorrow.
Besides WRC issues, the ACP Working Group F also considers interference issues and other items which can affect aviation spectrum access.
28/03/2017
28/03/2017 4

5. Within the ICAO Secretariat we are sometimes asked, what this spectrum issue is and why we are wasting so much energy and budget on it, whether it shouldn’t be cut in favour of other more important programs.
This picture is an attempt at showing the spectrum dependencies of the ICAO programs.
Whether we are thinking in terms of Required Communications Performance, Required Surveillance Performance or Performance Based Navigation, everything boils down to the use of services which are dependent on continued spectrum availability and access.
This availability and access is in turn dependent on an outside programme, the WRC process, which is run by regulators outside of aviation, hence we need to participate in their program and on their home turf.

6. ACP WG-F Programme Watchlist
ACP monitors technical developments in the aviation industry in preparation for future action:
Future Communication Infrastructure
Airport Surface AM(R)S (IEEE e)
Future L-Band communication system (LDACS).
Future AMS(R)S technologies/providers
Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Foreseen frequency spectrum requirements for remote control and sense-and-avoid functions.
WAIC – wireless aircraft intra- communication.
Technical Standards, certification and licensing issues foreseen.
Any Com/Nav/Sur development
Ensure availability of adequate spectrum resources
ACP Working Group F monitors technical developments in the aviation industry, to identify and prepare any action required in the shorter or longer term.
Currently we have three identified enablers for the Future Communication Infrastructure.
The Airport Surfcace Aeronautical Mobile Route System, based on the IEEE e standard. This system is often referred to as ANLE or AeroMACS. Actually, ACP will shortly start a new Working Group to develop the required minimal SARPs and technical material for this system.
Future L-band data communications system or LDACS, you may hear this referred to as LDACS1 and LDACS2 which describe two different technological approaches which are currently under consideration. Before standardization can begin on this system, we need two things: 1- a firm requirement needs to be established, 2- all players must agree on a common approach. This is still very much work in progress.
Thirdly we have Future Aeronautical Satellite technologies and providers, this for instance may include the Iris program currently being pursued by the European Satellite Agency.
For Unmanned Aircraft Systems, even though some spectrum requirements have been established within the ITU for UAS, in reality we are still far away from a clear picture of which technologies and requirements will be needed.
Wireless aircraft intra- communication systems. This item is purely to support the internal wiring of aircraft, for functions essential to the flight of the aircraft, not passenger entertainment and such. The technology discussed here is intended to replace to some extent wiring onboard the aircraft, to reduce weight of the airframe by up to several percent, while for instance also exploring the possibility of increasing safety by the ability to add sensors in locations that are currently inaccessible, and by reducing risk of failures or malfunctions caused by wire chafing and such.
And for any future CNS technology development, availability of adequate spectrum resources has to be ensured in time.
28/03/2017

7. ACP WG-F The spectrum challenges ahead
Overall share of spectrum used by aviation is 10 – 15% of all available spectrum in the range 0 – 15.7 GHz
Pressure on spectrum increasing
Main drivers:
Mobile Phone services
Broadband wireless networking
Many others
High yield to State/government from leasing spectrum to commercial providers
Administrative Incentive Pricing for Spectrum
Philosophy: Estimate the “opportunity cost” of denying alternative users access to the spectrum. Users of the spectrum then pay a license fee equal to this opportunity cost. The intention with AIP is to promote the best social and economic use of the spectrum resource.
Growing concern that AIP may lead to severe safety implications when applied to aeronautical safety spectrum allocations.
This slide switches subjects a bit, to discuss future spectrum issues or challenges.
Overall, if we simply measure the number of MHz used by aviation in the frequency range 0 to 15.7 GHz, then we find that aviation uses a substantial slice of all available spectrum.
On the other hand, there is hugely increasing pressure to get more spectrum access, mainly by the Mobile Phone and Broadband Wireless Networking industries, but just about anyone else is also asking for increased spectrum access.
In recent years, we have seen examples of States leasing spectrum to commercial mobile phone service providers for fees that are in the billions of dollars category.
And then there is administrative incentive pricing or AIP.
The Philosophy behind AIP is to estimate the “opportunity cost” of denying alternative users access to spectrum. The users of the spectrum then pay a licence fee equal to this opportunity cost. The intention with AIP is to promote the best social and economic use of the spectrum, if your use is not economical then there is incentive for you to give it up.
In aviation there is growing concern that AIP may lead to serious safety implications, as there will inevitably be economic pressures that will affect air/ground link availabilities.
28/03/2017

8. ACP WG-F The spectrum challenges ahead
Safety Services (ARNS/AM(R)S/AMS(R)S), unpopular neighbours due to stringent access requirements (6dB safety margin, super primary)
Old/Proven technologies used in aviation CNS systems, spectrum inefficient?
Long lifespan and high cost of aircraft, avionics and ground infrastructure
Technical or equipage SARPs normally not retroactive
Recent aviation updates to the Table of Frequency Allocations in the ITU Radio Regulations have been for increased flexibility of existing allocations.
Yet another switch.
Not only do aviation safety services need quite a bit of spectrum, they are sometimes said to be unpopular neighbours. When we share an allocation with other services, the aeronautical allocation may become a de-facto super primary allocation due to the safety nature of the aeronautical use. Also, when determining required link budgets, adjacent channel immunity or other type of criteria which may affect frequency access for a neighbouring service, aviation often requires an additional safety margin of 6dB.
In aviation we tend use old or proven technologies. Sometimes, as a result, we are accused of being spectrum inefficient, sometimes possibly with a reason.
Aviation is very conservative when it comes to change, this is exacerbated by the long lifespan and high cost of aircraft, avionics and ground infrastructure.
New Technical or equipage SARPS are usually not retroactive. This would require an additional Mandate.
And to end this slide on a positive note, recent aviation updates to the Table of Frequency Allocations in the Radio Regulations have been for increased flexibility of existing allocations through combining aeronautical radionavigation and aeronautical mobile route allocations, under the umbrella of ICAO SARPed systems.
28/03/2017

9. ACP WG-F The spectrum challenges ahead
One or two regions have spectrum congestion issues. A global or a regional challenge?
Some arguments for a regional challenge
NextGen and SESAR programmes define regional requirements in the two busiest regions only
Cost with limited benefit in other regions?
Strong demands within a single region for more efficient use of spectrum resource, due to pressures from non-aviation for access to existing aviation spectrum, less pressure in other regions
Some arguments for a global challenge
Due to interregional mobility, global interoperability is required
Pressures on the spectrum resource are mounting in all regions, unlikely that aviation will get new spectrum to cater for new requirements
Spectrum efficiency is a global responsibility
Obviously a bit of both.
One or possibly two regions have real congestion issues within aviation spectrum. Does this make for a global or a regional challenge?
Those that argue for a regional challenge, mainly those outside the affected regions, would say that:
NextGen and SESAR define regional requirements in the two busiest regions only
Equipage would drive cost with limited or no benefit in other regions
There are strong demands in one region for more efficient use of the spectrum resource, mainly due to pressure from non-aviation which is requiring more spectrum access, while there is much less pressure in other regions.
On the other hand, you can also argue that:
We need global interoperability to support interregional mobility.
One region might be ahead of others, but pressures on the spectrum resource are mounting in all regions. It is highly unlikely that aviation will get increased spectrum access to cater for new requirements.
And, spectrum efficiency is a global responsibility.
To sum things up, obviously all the arguments here have validity.
28/03/2017

10. ACP WG-F The spectrum challenges ahead
Spectrum pressure as a driver for future technology development, as well as ATM requirements
Mounting pressures on aviation safety spectrum allocations
New systems tailored for new ATM requirements will be required
Systems will have more stringent spectrum efficiency demands than before
Systems will have to share spectrum with older technology, a challenge on several levels
Older technology will have to be phased out.
To date, global agreement on technology updates or replacements has always been difficult. Can this be changed? How?
To date, the mantra has been: ATM requirements are the driver for the CNS structure requirements. It looks inevitable that spectrum pressure will become an important driver for any future CNS equipage decisions as well.
We have mounting outside and inside pressures on our aviation safety spectrum allocations
It is inevitable that we will need new systems tailored for new ATM requirements, these will have to be found place within existing spectrum, this will be a challenge on several levels.
There will be strict spectrum efficiency demands.
There will probably be tendencies towards consolidating CNS functions.
And there will have to be an active phase out of older technology.
The challenge will be: We all know that aviation has a rather bad track record for any sort of global agreement on technology updates or replacements. Can this be changed, if it can, then how? Will ICAO be empowered with a stronger mandate?
28/03/2017

11. ACP WG-F The spectrum challenges ahead
A paradigm shift needed?
At the 37th Assembly, a common European paper suggested that a detailed spectrum and technology roadmap needs to be developed on a global level in preparation for the 12th Air Navigation Conference
Limited progress to date within the Region in identifying new required future technology enablers, in spite of a large budget internal programme
The Assembly agreed, and noted the following:
Work on identification of global CNS concepts is already included in the current radio frequency spectrum strategy and NextGen/SESAR work programme, however it could positively benefit from a stronger linkage to a long term global CNS implementation plan. The proposed 2012 twelfth Air Navigation Conference should develop a roadmap for CNS equipage transitions to support the spectrum strategy.
No budget requirements were identified
The previous slide seems to indicate that some sort of a paradigm shift is needed.
In any case, during the Assembly last September, we had a paper from this Region proposing that a detailed spectrum and technology roadmap should be developed on a global level in preparation for the 12th Air Navigation Conference.
This unfortunately may be a bit tall order when considering it in the light that the SESAR has had limited outcomes so far in identifying new required future technology enablers, this in spite of a large budget internal or intra-regional program.
The Assembly agreed without discussion on the proposal, but no budget requirements were identified.
28/03/2017

12. Questions/Comments?
28/03/2017