1. FCS Technology Investigation Conclusions and Recommendations
Presented at ICAO ACP WGT Meeting,
Montreal, Canada
October, 2007
Prepared by:
ITT: Tricia Gilbert, Jenny Jin, Steve Henriksen
QinetiQ: Phil Platt
NASA: James Budinger

2. Overview Background Approach Evaluation Criteria Technology Screening
Technology Studies
Technology Evaluation
Observations
Conclusions and Recommendations

3. Background
Under EUROCONTROL/FAA Action Plan 17 (AP17), Three themes for Future Communications Study (FCS)
(1) Identification of requirements and operating concepts
(2) Identification of enabling technologies
(3) Development of a future communications roadmap
Joint effort between US team (FAA, NASA, ITT) and European team (EUROCONTROL, France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, UK, and QinetiQ) focused on Theme 2
Technology investigation to identify candidate technologies

4. Approach

5. Approach: U.S. and European Activity

6. Approach: Assessment Methodology
Step 2 Technology Assessment methodology
Presented and updated with comments from European ACP participants with respect to proposed assessment criteria
Two types emerged
Essential
these must be ‘passed’ to be acceptable
Desirable
a set of criteria that help rank the candidate technologies against the key requirements
Ranking
Common technology description template

7. Approach: ITT Methodology

8. Evaluation Criteria

9. Evaluation Criteria – ITT
11 criteria traceable to the COCR and consensus ICAO documents were derived in FCS Phase II
In FCS Phase III, criteria definitions and associated metrics were revised to reflect updates to the COCR and process diagrams to define the evaluation steps were developed

10. Evaluation Criteria: ITT Metrics

11. European Evaluation Criteria
Essential Criteria (Step 2 Assessment)
Spectrum Compatibility
Openness of Standards
Desirable Criteria
RF Robustness
Technical Readiness Level
Flexibility
Ground Infrastructure Cost
Performance Criteria
Capacity
Integrity
Availability
Latency

12. Evaluation Criteria -- European Metrics
Ranking was seen as the best way to compare technologies
A simple scheme without involving complex scoring techniques
4 Classes have been defined each with an acceptance mask
Class 3
Class 4

13. Evaluation Criteria -- Comparison
Criteria Category
European Criteria
US/ITT Criteria
Technical Performance
RF Robustness
Capacity
Integrity
Availability
Latency
Meets ATS Service Requirements
Meets ATS&AOC Requirements
Spectrum Compatibility
Authentication/Integrity
Robustness to Interference
Cost
Openness of Standards
Flexibility
Avionics Cost
Ground Cost
Risk
TRL
Standardization Status
Certification Complexity
Ease of Transition
Scale
Numerical scale between 1 ~ 5

14. Technology Screening

15. Technology Inventory
Technology Family
Candidates
Cellular Telephony Derivatives
WCDMA (US)/UMTS FDD (Europe), TD-CDMA (US)/UMTS TDD (Europe), CDMA2000 3x, CDMA2000 1xEV, GSM/GPRS/EDGE, TD-SCDMA, DECT
IEEE 802 Wireless Derivatives
IEEE , IEEE , IEEE , IEEE
Public Safety and Specialized Mobile Radio
APCO P25, TETRA Release 1, TETRAPOL, IDRA, iDEN, EDACS, APCO P34, TETRA Release 2 (TAPS), TETRA Release 2 (TEDS)
Satellite and Other Over Horizon Communication
SDLS, Swift Broadband (Aero B-GAN), Iridium, GlobalStar, Thuraya, Integrated Global Surveillance and Guidance System (IGSAGS), HF Data Link, Digital Audio Broadcast, Custom Satellite System
Custom Narrowband VHF Solutions
VDL Mode 2, VDL Mode 3, VDL Mode E, VDL Mode 4, E-TDMA
Custom Broadband
ADL, Flash-OFDM, UAT, Mode-S, B-AMC, LDL, AMACS
Military
SINCGARS, HAVEQUICK
Other
APC Telephony
Common Technology Inventory including input from NASA release of RFIs, inputs from ICAO WG-C (now WG-T) ACP members, and literature reviews

16. Common Technology Screening Results

17. Technology Studies

18. Detailed Technology Studies -- ITT
In-Depth Study Topic
Note 1
L-Band Air/Ground Communication Channel Characterization
Created ray-tracing simulation to develop tap-delay line models of the L-band aeronautical channel ( MHz) supporting evaluation of LDL and P34/TIA-902 2
TIA-902 (P34) Performance Assessment
OPNET simulation of P34 net entry and data transfer performance
MATLAB Simulink® model developed to assess P34/TIA-902 physical layer performance in the defined L-Band A/G channel 3
TIA-902 (P34) Technology Intellectual Property Assessment
Assessment IP impact for patents claimed in P34/TIA-902 standards 4
L-Band Digital Link (LDL) Technology Performance Assessment
MATLAB Simulink® model developed to assess LDL physical layer performance in the defined L-Band A/G channel 5
Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) Functional Assessment
Functional analysis of UMTS/WCDMA network architecture 6
L-Band Technology Cost Assessment for Ground Infrastructure
L-Band business case analysis for an L-Band aeronautical ground infrastructure 7
L-Band Interference Testing
UAT, Mode S interference modeling and simulation using SPW modeling tool for P34 and LDL waveforms
Bench tests conducted to evaluate DME susceptibility to candidate FCS waveforms (based on WCDMA, P34, LDL definitions) 8
Satellite Technology Availability Performance
Evaluation of satellite technology availability performance using fault-tree model of RTCA DO-TBD 9
IEEE e Performance Assessment in Aeronautical C-Band Channel
MATLAB Simulink® modeling of e on the surface environment implementing OU aeronautical C-band channel model

19. Detailed Technology Studies -- Europe
Detailed technology studies were undertaken by various entities in Europe
AMACS was progressed by DSNA (France) and LFV (Sweden). Support was provided by NATS/Helios on performance evaluation
P34 (TIA-902) was investigated by NATS/Helios in terms of performance and compatibility
B-AMC studies were funded by EUROCONTROL through the B-AMC Consortium to define the overall system including performance and compatibility
Review of previous EUROCONTROL activity on WCDMA
Drew on work carried out in the U.S. for LDL
QinetiQ acted as an overall reviewer and applied the evaluation criteria and a critique of each system
Produced the final conclusion in the Step 2 report

20. Technology Evaluations

21. U.S. Technology Evaluations
Develop Concept of Use for the selected technologies (P34, LDL, WCDMA, B-AMC, AMACS)
Each Concept of Use includes:
Applicable technology features/specifications
Functional architecture
Deployment concept for common evaluation scenarios
Deployment frequency band and channelization considerations

22. U.S. Technology Evaluations (2)
Assess technologies using the process diagrams defined for each evaluation criterion

23. U.S. Technology Evaluations (3)
Weight/Rank Criteria (Applying AHP Process)
Rule Set
VOC
Qualitative Ranking
Quantitative Weights

24. U.S. Evaluation Results
* Gray indicates insufficient information at the time of evaluation

25. European Technology Evaluation: AMACS
Essential criteria
Compatibility – studies undertaken indicate that co-site interference may be overcome – affected by duty cycle. Results inconclusive and requires further work
Open standards– it will be developed in an open manner - passed
Desirable
Robustness – designed to have robust physical layer
TRL – 3 – still at early stage of development
Flexibility – as several design options
Ground costs – expected to need more ground sites than VHF hence increased cost
Performance – meets most requirements in APT, TMA, ENR, and AOA.
Air/air performance needs to be considered further

26. European Technology Evaluation: B-AMC
Essential criteria
Compatibility – considerable work undertaken and results show promise as an inlay system. However further work is recommended on the L-band interference models to confirm results - inconclusive
Open standards - it will be developed in an open manner - passed
Desirable
Robustness – design shows good robustness
TRL – 4 – Considerable theoretical studies on the design – draws on earlier B-VHF system
Flexibility – it can be deployed in several ways
Ground costs – estimated as similar to current system
Performance – meets all requirements in APT, TMA, ENR, and AOA
Air/air performance seems OK but needs to be considered further

27. European Technology Evaluation: LDL
Essential criteria
Compatibility – similar to all other L-band interference studies. Results inconclusive and requires further work – inconclusive.
Open standards – expected to be open standard - passed
Desirable
Robustness – designed to be robust
TRL – 4. Draws on VDLM3 design
Flexibility – several data channel options
Ground costs - estimated as similar to current system
Performance – not comprehensively simulated

28. European Technology Evaluation: P34 (TIA-902)
Essential criteria
Compatibility - studies undertaken indicate that co-site interference may be overcome. Results inconclusive and requires further work – inconclusive.
Open standards – patents apply to some standards but can either be overcome – passed.
Desirable
Robustness – designed to have good robustness
TRL – 3 – although COTS changes are required
Flexibility – can be deployed with 3 channel bandwidths (50,100, 150 kHz)
Ground costs - expected to need more ground sites than VHF hence increased cost
Performance – initial results indicate that throughput values can be achieved in small/medium en route airspace using 100/150kHz channels. Further work needed in other airspace volumes.

29. European Technology Evaluation: WCDMA
Essential criteria
Compatibility – requires 2x5 MHz ‘clean’ portion of an increasing crowded band + guard bands. Not practical to deploy based on information available
Open standards
Passed – standards are available
Desirable
Robustness – adequate robustness
TRL – 5 – reasonably mature and can be deployed with little modification
Flexibility – design options were not finally chosen
Ground costs – similar cell size to those of VHF so similar costs
Performance – study showed that performance can be achieved but needs further validation. Different methodology was applied.
Not recommended for the FCI due to difficulty in introduction into the L-band

30. European Technology Evaluation: INMARSAT SBB
Essential criteria
Compatibility
Passed subject to planning meetings and adequate spectrum. Maybe an issue with Iridium
Open standards – not currently available but assumed would if offer to support ATS.
Desirable
Robustness – currently not robust for ATS – minimal link margin
TRL – 7 for ATS
Flexibility – some flexibility due options for channel rates with various antenna gains
Ground costs – not estimated
Performance – performance cannot be guaranteed due to lack of priority and pre-emption. Little performance information available - failed
SBB will reach the end of its lifetime around 2020
Not recommended for the FCI

31. European Technology Evaluation: IEEE 802.16e
Essential criteria
Compatibility – introduced into an under utilised band so compatibility is expected
Open standards – open standards available. Aviation specific variant needed
Desirable
Robustness – good robustness with QoS management
TRL – 6 – mature as WiMAX but need tailoring to aviation use
Flexibility – many design options
Ground costs – not currently covered by VHF systems
Performance – studies showed that performance can be achieved. Needs further validation through practical trials

32. European Evaluation Results
Technology
Class
Frequency band
Application airspace
802.16e 2
C-Band
Airport surface
B-AMC 3
L-Band
Airport surface, TMA, En-route
P34 (TIA-902) 4
L- Band
AMACS
LDL

33. European Evaluation Results (2)
Two technologies have been removed from further consideration
SBB
Does not meet performance requirements
Satellite will reach the end of life by 2020
WCDMA
Need for large “clean” bands in L-Band makes it impractical to deploy
New Satellite Systems
They have not been evaluated due lack of maturity
However, emerging systems have been identified that could be considered as part of the FCI

34. Observations

35. Observations: General
The FCI must support ATS and AOC end-to-end communications including air/ground and air/air
New communication components of the FCI will be supporting primarily data communications
No single technology meets all requirements across all operational flight domains
To meet the diverse range of communications the FCI will be a system of systems comprising the minimum number of technologies required to meet the operational requirements
No COTS technologies have been identified that can be adopted as new components of the FCI without some modification
However, reuse of emerging technology and standards should be considered to the maximum extent possible to reduce risk and shorten development time

36. Observations: VHF Band
Existing technologies providing dedicated voice and data services will be used to their fullest extent
Due to current/planned technologies in the VHF band; future communication services outside the VHF band must be considered but a long-term strategy for VHF should also be addressed
The new communication components introduced into the FCI will reuse emerging technology and standards to the maximum extent possible.

37. Observations: Aeronautical L-band (1)
The aeronautical L-band spectrum is a candidate band for supporting a new data link communication capability
This spectrum provides an opportunity to support objectives for future global communication systems; however no evaluated technology in L-band (as defined) fully addresses all requirements and limitations of the operating environment
No one evaluated technology meets all requirements for the defined data link; instead, technology options for an L-band Digital Aeronautical Communication System (L-DACS) have been defined based on evaluations drawing on features of evaluated systems
High-level evaluation of economic feasibility of implementing a L-band ground infrastructure indicates a positive business case can be achieved

38. Observations: Aeronautical L-band (2)
Desirable features for an aeronautical L-band ( [1164] MHz) technology include:
Existing standard for safety application with some validation work performed
Multi-carrier modulation (power efficient modulation for the aeronautical L-band fading environment)
Low duty cycle waveform with narrow-to-broadband channels (more likely to achieve successful compatibility with legacy L-band systems without clearing spectrum)
Adaptable/scalable features (improving flexibility in deployment and implementation, and adaptability to accommodate future demands)
Native mobility management and native IP interface (increasing flexibility and providing critical upper layers compatibility with worldwide data networking standards)

39. Observations: Aeronautical L-band (3)
Two options for a L-band Digital Aeronautical Communication System (L-DACS) were identified
L-DACS Options
Access Scheme
Modulation Type
Originating Technologies
Option 1
FDD
OFDM
B-AMC, TIA 902 (P34)
Option 2
TDD
CPFSK/GMSK type
LDL, AMACS

40. Observations: C-band and Satellite
Aeronautical C-band: [5000 to 5010] MHz, and/or [5010 to 5030] MHz, and/or 5091 to 5150 MHz
There is capacity not utilized; given path loss constraints, this band is most applicable to airport surface use where communication distances are short
802.16e is well matched to the aeronautical surface specific to aeronautical C-band in terms of capability and performance
Aeronautical satellite systems can be applied to large and/or remote geographic areas to provide supplemental coverage to the terrestrial communication infrastructure
Monitoring of specific satellite service offerings/emerging requirements to determine need for common global system is on-going

41. Observations: Applicability of Technologies
The foregoing observations can be summarized to indicate the applicability of technologies against airspace type
Airspace Type
Applicable Technology
Airport Surface
IEEE e
L-DACS may be possible in some areas
Airport, TMA, Enroute
L-DACS
Satellite-based technologies may be possible in some areas
Oceanic/Remote/Polar
Satellite-based
Air/Air

42. Recommendations

43. Recommendations: C-band
Identify the portions of the IEEE e standard best suited for airport surface wireless mobile communications, identify and develop missing required functionalities and propose an aviation specific standard to appropriate standardisation bodies
Evaluate and validate the performance of aviation specific standard wireless mobile communications networks operating in the relevant airport surface environments through trials and test bed development
Propose a channelisation methodology for allocation of safety and regularity of flight services in the band to accommodate a range of airport classes, configurations and operational requirements
Complete the investigation of compatibility of prototyped C-band components with existing systems in the C-band in the airport surface environment and interference with others users of the band

44. Recommendations: Satellite Band
Continue monitoring the satellite system developments and assessment of specific technical solutions to be offered in the timeframe defined in the COCR as these next generation satellite systems become better defined
Update existing AMS(R)S SARPs performance requirements to meet future requirements
In order to support the new AMS(R)S SARPs, consider the development of a globally applicable air interface standard for satellite systems supporting only safety related communications

45. Recommendations: VHF Band
In the long term reconsider the potential use of the VHF for new technologies when sufficient spectrum becomes available to support all or part of the requirements

46. Recommendations: L-band (1)
Define interference test requirements and associated outputs that can be used to determine compatibility of future candidate aeronautical communication technologies with existing aeronautical L-band systems
Pursue detailed compatibility assessment of candidate physical layers for an L-band aeronautical digital link, including interference testing
Pursue definition/validation of technology that is derived or adapted from existing standards for use as an L-band Data-link Aeronautical Communications System (L-DACS) that can be used to initiate an aeronautical standardization effort (and meet ICAO requirements for such an effort)

47. Recommendations: L-band (2)
Complete the investigation of compatibility of prototyped L-DACS components with existing systems in the L-band particularly with regard to the onboard co-site interference and agree on the overall design characteristics
Considering the design trade-offs, propose the appropriate L-DACS solution for input to a global aeronautical standardisation activity
Considering that B-AMC, AMACS and TIA-902 (P34) have provisions to support air to air services, conduct further investigation of this capability as a possible component of L-DACS