1. VISTA Vision of Integration Satellite Technologies into Aviation
Presentation to ICAO ACP WG-C08
Munich, September 20th to 24th
Dr. Jens Federhen

2. Introduction

3. 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Assumption that specifications valid or under development today will no longer applicable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.)

4. Consortium European Space Agency Customer Eurocontrol Advisor
Air Traffic Alliance
EADS Astrium
Co-Prime
Provide Space Know-How
Thales ATM
Co-Prime
Provide ATM/CNS Know How
DLR
Provide Research Views
Alcatel Space
SDLS Review
Lufthansa Cargo
Provide Airlines Views
DFS
Provide ATSP Views

5. 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
TN 1
TN 2
TN 3
Final Rept.
11 SEP 03
17/18 NOV 03
10/11 DEC 03
03/04 MAR 04
Role of satellites in ATM systems for 2020+
KOM
WS #1
WS #2
WS #3
Task 1: ATM Methodology & Systems Baseline until 2012
ATM
Task 2: Potential contributions of Space Systems
ATM
Trade-Offs, Integr. Solutions,
Standards & Reqs.
Task 3: Vision of an ATM System for 2020+
Vision & scenario skeletons
Transition schemes,
Impact assessment

6. Task 1 1
ATM Methodology & Systems Baseline until 2012

7. Task 2 2
Potential contributions of Space Systems

8. Task 2 2a
Long-term developments in space systems for ATM

9. Long-term developments in space systems for ATM
Typical design variables
Issues
Messages
Aircraft avionics (AES)
Imperatives
Cheaper, smaller, lighter, …
Limit number of antennas on aircraft
Avionics-specific design issues
Certifiability & Standardisation
Integration with other aircraft systems
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!
Satellite orbits & constellations
GEO vs. Non-GEO
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
Frequencies
Most critical: User link
Bandwidth
Rain attenuation
Global accessibility (Radio Regulations)
Technology maturity
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
Satellite payload
Satellite antenna
Digital on-board processor
Technologies are mature
No ATM-specific modifications needed
ATM will simply benefit from improvements that happen steadily
Satellite platform
Launch considerations

10. Impact of mobility requirement on link performance
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]
HPBW [°]
1500
11000
MHz
5,00
10,00
15,00
25,00
30,00
35,00
45,00
Antenna Gain [dBi]
(Antenna efficiencies: 55%)
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:
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)
Mobility requirement costs 30dBi in link margin (factor 1000 in power)!

11. 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

12. 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

13. Inmarsat: History & apparent trends
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)
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

14. Task 2 2b
Long-term developments in ATM

15. ATM Functional Blocks *) Potential Contribution of Space Technologies
Procedure
ATM Functional Blocks *)
Trends
Potential Contribution of Space Technologies
Airspace Organisation
More integration
More flexibility
More dynamism
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
Demand & Capacity Mgmt.
Emphasis on capacity
“Gate to Gate”
More collaboration
4D Trajectories
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)
Traffic Mgmt.
More automation
More collaboration
4D Trajectories
ADS
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
Separation Mgmt.
Reduced separation minima
Re-Distribution of responsibilities
Increased automation
Air/air communications
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
Airport Throughput
Increase capacity
Integration with air transport network
Collaborative processes
All weather capabilities
Better guidance and control
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
Information Mgmt.
More integration (SWIM)
More collaboration
“Better data”
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
*) Source: Eurocontrol/AECMA “ATM Master Plan”

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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. Commercial trade-offs
Strict safety requirements
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?
Niche market particularities
High cost pressure

23. Difficulty of open standard for ATM SatCom
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)
Big differences amongst current SatCom systems !
choice?
Satellite
Operators
Service Providers
Hardware Manufacturers
NGSS ?
Users
choice
choice

24. Transition issues 4

25. Conclusions 5

26. Will satellites play a role in ATM systems for 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 …)

27. 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)

28. Thank you for your attention!
Any Questions?
Dr.-Ing. Jens Federhen
Marketing Manager
Air Traffic Alliance
c/o EADS Astrium GmbH
D München
Tel : (0) 89 /
Fax : (0) 89 /
Mobile: (0) 175 /