Recording of Digital Communications AEA position and concerns with JAA FRSG WP Vincent De Vroey Manager Operations and ATM Association of European Airlines (AEA) JAA Operations Sectorial Team (Hoofddorp, 1-2 March 2005)

Background March 2001: ICAO Council (162 nd session) adopts an ICAO Annex 6 Standard for recording of datalink communications on the flight recorders. ICAO Annex 6 standard requires recording on flight recorders of all datalink communications to/from the aeroplane (new aircraft: 1 st January 2005 and retrofit aircraft: 1 st January 2007). Many European CAAs raised concerns to the ICAO State Letter. ICAO did not produce a RIA nor provided a justification. At the time of ICAO adoption, there was also no technical standard available nor any means to comply!  Result: an ICAO Standard was adopted which is impractical and unjustified. Very unprofessional way of working!

European Situation on Datalink Recording The AEA consistently opposed the retrofit requirement and asked JAA Member States to file a difference (so far only UK has filed a difference!) The AEA position is to a large extend supported by the JAA CNS/ATM Steering Group, which produced a position paper pp04_11 (11 October 2002) highlighting the technical and economical problems related to the retrofit requirement. JAA Flight Recorder Study Group was tasked to develop a JAR- OPS rule taking into account concerns expressed

JAA FRSG WP (draft JAR-OPS 1.728) The draft JAR OPS considers 3 cases for a/c with MTOW > 5700 Kg : –New type design (1st type certificated) after [1 January 2008] –New built aircraft (1st individual C of A delivered) on or after [1 January 2010] –Retrofit aircraft from [1 January 2012] which are modified on or after the 1 January 2010 to introduce any new or additional digital application type(s) as defined in tables

AEA Concerns on retrofit proposals of FRSG (1) All communications between aircraft and ground can be reconstructed by accessing ground recording (which are themselves mandatory!), which seems more economic means of compliance for existing aircraft Data-link Recording has no direct safety benefit, it is only for accident investigation! Therefore it is not justified to spend huge sums on recorder retrofit ICAO did not produce a RIA before adopting its Standard. Also JAA has not produced a RIA. USA is going to file a difference. If JAA is more stringent, than JAA operators are at a competitive disadvantage for no safety justification!

AEA concerns (2) Architecture of D/L systems of newly delivered airceaft is not able to support D/L recorder > in case of retrofit requirement, there will be huge modifications need to newly delivered aircraft (huge costs!) OEM have to redesign existing D/L systems and computers The proposal considers the case where a new data link application is introduced. However, it should be noted that some States around the world could decide to make a new data link application mandatory. This would, based on the draft JAR-OPS 1.728, therefore also trigger a costly retrofit of recording systems. But even in the case where the new data link application would not be mandatory, the retrofit mandate would slow down the implementation of useful data link services (thereby postponing economic and direct safety benefits of datalink).

AEA Concerns (3) Even with the provisions included in Appendix 1 (i.e. as far as is practicable) there is a risk that an authority would ask an airline to implement the message time stamping which would lead to unrealistic & costly modifications to other aircraft systems like display systems, FMS, etc, The Eurocontrol Link2000+ Programme claimed that retrofit of recorders would undermine the Link2000+ business case (and would thereby undermine the economic and direct safety benefits of datalink). The FRSG therefore proposed to postpone the dates for the retrofit until after the envisaged Eurocontrol Link2000+ Mandate. However, from the airlines point of view this proposal, which seems to fit Eurocontrol, is completely unacceptable since it will not solve the issue and would only postpone the huge costs to comply. In addition it would impact all aircraft types including those types which will be exempted from the Link2000+ mandate (eg longhaul/FANS aircraft)

AEA Concerns (4)  During FRSG meetings, Airbus and Boeing (no information from other manufacturers) told that cost figures used by Eurocontrol in their presentation were far below realistic figures and that real cost will be much higher  The JAA FRSG is not the right forum to decide on whether or not retrofit should be required. JAA OST should decide on this!

Suggested Action of JAA OST JAA OST to make a clear decision to limit the implementation in JAR-OPS-1 to a forward fit policy and to task the JAA FRSG to work accordingly JAA Member States to file a difference from the ICAO Annex 6 retrofit requirement for D/L recording JAA, in co-ordination with FAA, to approach ICAO urging a revision of the Annex 6 Standard eg to remove retrofit for D/L recording For the future: better control ICAO work and suggest improvements to ICAO procedures (including public consultation via NPA, need for RIA etc)